Keywords

Pseudorasbora parva, Topmouth gudgeon, Morphometries properties, Süreyyabey dam lake

Introduction

Turkey is an extremely diverse region in terms of fauna and zoogeography [1]. Turkey is also rich in biodiversity of freshwater fish [2]. Topmouth gudgeon, Pseudorasbora parva is a small cyprinid and a greatly invasive species in Europe [3]. This species is known to have environmental tolerance to low oxygen, organic pollution, and even concentrations of pesticides that are fatal to other fish species [4]. The life story flexibility of successful invaders may also be related to their potential for huge morphological plasticity [5,6]. P. parva has a negative effect on the fish fauna through competition spawning area, food and other resources [7]. P. parva’s natural area is East Asia [8]. It has been found first time in Turkish Thrace region [9].

P. parva has large populations due to its high reproductive capacity [10]. The presence of the internal waters of Turkey has been reported by many researchers [9-16]. Fishermen who hunted for commercial purposes to hunt Atherina boyeri have also been found to hunt Aphanius marassantensis and P. parva species in the region surveyed. Several studies deal with the morphology P. parva [5,17-19].

There are many studies on various features of P. parva at national and international [5,15,19-21]. There have been no studies on Süreyyabey Dam Lake. Located in inland water resources in Turkey, the life cycle of fish species and determination of biological characteristics are important.

In this paper, the first occurrence of Pseudorasbora parva from Süreyyabey Dam Lake in Yeşilırmak Basin is reported. This paper describes the area where this fish was found and its morphometric data of the population was documented.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Süreyyabey Dam Lake is located approximately 82 km northeast of Yozgat (35°28' N and 35°33' N latitudes and 39°55' E and 40°03' E longitudes) (Figure 1). Süreyyabey Dam, Yozgat province on the Çekerek Creek, was constructed for irrigation, energy and flood control. The area of lake is 4134 km2 with a rock body fill type dam. The Cekerek River, one of the most important branches of Yesilirmak, is located between the Deveci Mountains (1892 m) and Dagni Mountain (1755 m) [22].

Figure 1: Map of Süreyyabey Dam Lake

Fish specimens were captured by commercial fisherman from Süreyyabey Dam Lake in 2016 (Figure 2). Sex determination was based on external coloration of individuals. The samples were preserved in 4% formaldehyde solution and transported to the laboratory; weight was measured to the nearest 0.01 g and total and standard length to the nearest 0.01 mm. In total, thirty two morphometric characters of samples were measured. These characteristics were standard length, fork length, total length, body weight, head length, preorbital distance, eye diameter, postorbital distance, head depth, predorsal distance, prepelvic distance, preanal distance, pectoral fin- pelvic fin distance, pelvic fin-anal fin distance, body depth, dorsal fin (anterior end) – anal fin distance, dorsal fin (posterior end) – anal fin distance, postdorsal distance, postanal distance, caudal peduncle length (dorsal), caudal peduncle length (ventral), caudal peduncle depth, dorsal fin base length, anal fin base fin length, pectoral fin length, pelvic fin length, caudal upper lobe length, caudal fork length, caudal lower lobe length, dorsal fin length, anal fin length and gape. The SL of 47 individuals ranged from 35 mm to 55 mm. The TL of individuals was between 41 cm and 68 cm, and W ranged between 1.0 g and 3.46 g subsequently.

Figure 2: Photo of P. parva

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this research, thirty two morphometric characters were examined and the minimum, maximum, mean, standard deviation values are given in Table 1. Measurements and counts of the 47 specimens are given in Table 1. Total lengths and weights of the examined specimens ranged 4.10 cm and 6.80 cm; 1.00 g and 3.46 g respectively.

Table 1: Morphometric characters of P. parva specimens.

In this study we found difference even between populations from the other water systems. The top mouth gudgeon is considered to be a species with great morphological variability [18,21]. Standard Length (SL) of 47 individuals ranged from 3.50 cm to 5.50 cm. The SL of the whole top mouth gudgeon population ranged from 9.26 mm to 81.89 mm in Lichenskie Lake [21]. For the length – weight relationships, fork lengths between 2.4 cm and 11.8 cm [23]. The length of the specimens caught in Kuchki Pond varied from 27.8 mm to 58.1 mm, weight varied from 0.4 g to 3.2 g [24].

The difference may be caused by differences in morphological features of the species and habitats. In general, top mouth gudgeon populations show considerable variation in external morphology, which is not only evident in European populations but also in its native range [25]. It would be expected that populations from different latitudes and/or habitats show significant morphological variability, but differences were also found between populations from the same region [5]. This variability can be expressed not only in the formation of different adult phenotypes but also in the manner with which the phenotypes are achieved. In general, the temperature regime has a considerable influence on life histories and extreme temperatures are known to affect various traits, from morphology [26].

P. parva indivuduals prefers wide, varied environments with abundant food sources, in shallow regions and regions with dense vegetation [27]. It was reported that P. parva transmits fatal disease to native fish fauna, limits the reproduction of the endangered native fish species, and influences the decline of native fish species [10].

In this paper, we report first occurrence from Süreyyabey Dam Lake in Yeşilırmak basin. This paper describes the area where this fish were found and recorded morphometric data of the population. Findings obtained in this study are very important because the previous studies about the morphometric properties of P. parva have not been found. It is considered that the data obtained in this study will also contribute to future studies.

REFERENCES

1. Bogustkaya NG (1992) A Revision of Species of the Genus Pseudophoxinus (Leuciscinae, Cyprinidae) from Asya Minor. M Hamburg Zool Mus Inst 89: 261-290.
2. Freyhof J, Ekmekçi FG, Ali A, Khamees AR, Özuluğ M, et al. (2014) The Status and Distribution of Freshwater Biodiversity in the Eastern Mediterranean. In: Smith KG, Barrois V, Darwall WRT, Numa C (eds.). Freshwater fishes, Cambridge, UK, Malaga, Spain and Gland, Switzerland, pp. 19-42.
3. Gozlan RE, Pinder AC, Shelley J (2002) Occurrence of the Asiatic cyprinid Pseudorasbora parva in England. Journal of Fish Biology 61(1): 298-300.
4. Allen Y, Kirby S, Copp GH, Brazier M (2006) Toxicity of rotenone to topmouth gudgeon Pseudorasbora parva for eradication of this non-native species from a tarn in Cumbria, England. Fish Manag Ecol 13: 337-340.
5. Záhorská E, Kováč V, Falka I, Beyer K, Katina S, et al. (2009) Morphological variability of the Asiatic cyprinid, topmouth gudgeon Pseudorasbora parva, in its introduced European range. J Fish Biol 74: 167-185.
6. Novomeská A, Katina S, Copp GH, Pedicillo G, Lorenzoni M, et al. (2013) Morphological variability of black bullhead Ameiurus melas in four non-native European populations. Journal of Fish Biology 82: 1103-1118.
7. Ekmekçi FG, Kırankaya ŞG, Gençoğlu L, Yoğurtçuoğlu B (2013) Present Status of Invasive Fishes In Inland Waters of Turkey and Assessment Of The Effects Of Invasion. İstanbul Uni. Journal of Fisheries & Aquatic Sciences 28(1): 105-140.
8. Banarescu PM (1999) Gobio (Cuvier, 1816) In the Freshwater Fishes of Europe. Vol. 5/I: Cyprinidae 2/I (Banarescu, P.M., ed.), Wiebelsheim: Aula-Verlag, pp. 33-36.
9. Erk’akan F (1984) Trakya Bölgesinden Türkiye İçin Yeni Kayıt Olan Bir Balık Türü Pseudorasbora parva (Pisces Cyprinidae). Doğa Bilim Dergisi 8(3): 350-356.
10. Ekmekçi FG, Kirankaya ŞG (2006) Distribution of an invasive fish species, Pseudorasbora parva (Temminck & Schlegel, 1846) in Turkey. Turkish Journal of Zoology 30: 329-334.
11. İlhan A, Balık S (2008) Fish fauna of the inland waters in Western Black Sea Region. Ege Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, Vol. 25(1).
12. İlhan A, Sarı HM (2013) Fish fauna and fisheries activities in Lake Marmara. Ege Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, Vol. 30(4).
13. Özuluğ M, Saç G, Gaygusuz Ö (2013) New distribution areas for invasive Gambusia holbrooki, Carassius gibelio ve Pseudorasbora parva (Teleostei) from Turkey. Istanbul Uni J Fish Aqua Sci 28(1): 1-22.
14. Tarkan AS, Marr SM, Ekmekçi FG (2015) Non-native and translocated freshwater fish species in Turkey. Fishmed 3: 1-28.
15. Benzer S, Benzer R, Gül A (2016) Artificial neural networks application for biological systems: the case study of Pseudorasbora parva. St. Kliment Ohridski University Press Sofia. Developments in Science and Engineering, Chapter, pp. 49-59.
16. Bakaç İ, Yalçın Özdilek Ş, Ekmekçi FG (2017) First record for invasive Topmouth gudgeon Pseudorasbora parva (Temminck and Schlegel, 1846) from Gökçeada (Çanakkale). Ege Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 34(4): 459-462.
17. Barus V, Kux Z, Libosvarsky J (1984) On Pseudorasbora parva (Pisces) in Czechoslovakia. Folia Zoologica 33: 5-18.
18. Kotusz J, Witkowski A (1998) Morphometrics of Pseudorasbora parva [Schlegel, 1842][Cyprinidae: Gobioninae], a species introduced into the Polish waters. Acta Ichthyologica et Piscatoria 2(28): 3-14.
19. Patimar R, Baensaf S (2011) Morphology, growth and reproduction of the nonindigenous topmouth gudgeon Pseudorasbora parva (Temmick Schlegel, 1846) in the wetland of Alma-Gol, Northern Iran Russian, Journal of Biological Invasions 4: 108-113.
20. Wildekamp RH, Van Neer W, Küçük F, Ünlüsayin M (1997) First record of the eastern Asiatic gobionid fish Pseudorasbora parva from the Asiatic part of Turkey. Journal of Fish Biology 51(4): 858-861.
21. Záhorská E, Švolíková K, Kováč V (2013) Do invasive populations of topmouth gudgeon (Pseudorasbora parva, Temminck and Schlegel) from disturbed and undisturbed habitats follow different life histories?. International Review of Hydrobiology 98(2): 61-70.
22. Anonymous (1970) Yeşilırmak Havzası Toprakları, Köy İşleri Bakanlığı, Toprak Su Genel Müdürlüğü, Havzo nu: 14, Raporlar Serisi: 29. Ankara.
23. Britton JR, Davies GD, Brazier M, Pinder AC (2007) A case study on the population ecology of a topmouth gudgeon (Pseudorasbora parva) population in the UK and the implications for native fish communities. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 17(7): 749-759.
24. Boltachev AR, Danilyuk ON, Pakhorukov NP, Bondarev VA (2006) Distribution and certain features of the morphology and biology of the stone moroco Pseudorasbora parva (Cypriniformes, Cyprinidae) in the waters of Crimea. Journal of Ichthyology 46(1): 58-63.
25. Gozlan RE, Britton JR, Cowx I, Copp GH (2010) Current knowledge on non‐native freshwater fish introductions. Journal of fish biology 76(4): 751-786.
26. Sumer S, Kovac V, Povz M, Slatner M (2005) External morphology of Slovenian population of pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus (L.) from a habitat with extreme thermal conditions. J Appl Ichthyol 21: 306-311.
27. Kapusta A, Bogacka-Kapusta E, Czarnecki B (2008) The significance of stone moroko, Pseudorasbora parva (Temminck and Schlegel), in the small-sized fish assemblages in the littoral zone of the heated Lake Licheńskie. Archives of Polish Fisheries 16(1): 49-62.