EDP Sciences logo
Subscriber Authentication Point
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 56 (2020) Ann. Limnol. - Int. J. Lim., 56 (2020) 26 Full HTML
Free Access
Issue
Ann. Limnol. - Int. J. Lim.
Volume 56, 2020
Article Number 26
Number of page(s) 8
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/limn/2020025
Published online 10 November 2020

© EDP Sciences, 2020

1 Introduction

There are about 290 freshwater fish in Iran, mostly belonging to the Cyprinidae family (Esmaeili et al., 2017). The cyprinid fish, Coad barb, Capoeta coadi Alwan, Zareian and Esmaeili, 2016, previously included in C. damascina (Valenciennes, 1842) species group, is an abundant endemic fish in the Karun River basin of Iran (Alwan et al., 2016a,b; Keivany et al., 2016). Although many characteristics of the other barbs in Middle East have been studied extensively (Khalaf, 1987; Stoumboudi et al., 1993; Fishelson et al., 1996; Esmaeili et al., 2007; Abdoli and Mostafavi, 2009; Soofiani and Asadollah, 2010; Asadollah et al., 2011; Samaee and Patzner, 2011; Marammazi et al., 2014; Keivany et al., 2015; Razavipour et al., 2015a,b; Asadollah et al., 2017), there are few articles on the biology of this fish in Karun River basin, where it is caught for consumption by locals and is not under any protection law (Siami et al., 2017).

The aim of this study was to determine some growth characteristics of C. coadi including the age and size compositions, length–weight relationship, von Bertalanffy growth model and growth performance index, in Beheshtabad River, a tributary of Karun River in Tigris basin of Chaharmahal-va-Bakhtiari province, Iran, to provide the basic data for its management and conservation in this basin.

2 Material and methods

Beheshtabad River is located approximately 40 km southwest of Shahrekord. Monthly samples were collected from May 2013 to June 2014 using gill nets with different mesh sizes (1‑6 cm, 30 m long, 2 m depth) and a total of 426 specimens were caught. Some environmental factors including water temperature, pH, conductivity (EC) and total dissolved solids (TDS) of water were measured and recorded by a HANNA water quality measuring instrument model HI 98129.

All the procedures were based on the accepted protocol and procedures employed by the Iranian Department of Environment. Fish samples were anesthetized in 1% clove oil, fixed in 10% buffered formalin and transported to the laboratory for further analyses. The fork length (FL) was measured to the nearest 0.1 mm and total weight to the nearest 0.01 g. For sex identification, specimens were dissected and their gonads were examined under a stereomicroscope. For the age determination, 10‑15 scales were taken from above the lateral line, below the anterior part of the dorsal fin and cleaned by 5% KOH. After preparing the scale, age reading was carried out through microscopic examination of annuli (Biswas, 1993). To validate the ageing, opercles were also aged and each structure was read by three people and coincided readings were recorded. Also, the back calculation was performed using the following equation (Johal et al., 2001).(1)

where Ln  = length of the fish at a specific age (mm), L = fish length (mm), Sn  = radius of the annulus, S = total radius of the scale (mm) and a = intercept of the length-scale radius regression equation. Upon examination of the type of relationships between SL and scale diameter, the Fraser-Lee model was used for back-calculating corresponding lengths attained in the previous years of life. This method is believed to describe accurately the linear body–scale relationship, which is given by Ricker (1975), Francis (1990), Holčík (1998) and Klumbs et al. (1999) as(2)

where SLi = the standard length of the fish when annulus i was formed, SL= the standard length at time of capture, Si = the distance from the scale focus to the annulus i, S = the total scale radius, and c is the intercept (correction term) on the length axis of the linear regression between SL and S. The von Bertalanffy growth parameters were calculated using(3)

and(4)

where Lt  = length of fish in cm at age t, L ∞ = asymptotic fish length in cm, e = base of natural log (2.71828), t = fish age (year), t 0 = hypothetical time at which the length of the fish was zero, K= rate at which the growth curve approaches the asymptote, Wt  = weight of the fish in grams at age t, W ∞ = asymptotic weight of the fish in grams and b = a constant in the length–weight relationship (Ricker, 1975; Sparre and Venema, 1998). t 0 (year) and k were estimated using the L ∞ and plotting the equation −ln (1−Lt /L∞ ) against the age (t), where k = regression slope and t 0 = −a/b (von Bertalanffy, 1938). The length–weight relationship (LWR) was calculated by the following formula:(5)

where W = weight of fish (g), L = total length (cm), a = Intercept and b = the slope of the regression line. The strength of LWR was evaluated by means of regression coefficient (r 2). The growth pattern in both sexes was determined using Pauly (1984) model:(6)

where sd ln Lf  = the standard deviation of the natural logarithm of the fork length, sd ln Wt  = the standard deviation of the natural logarithm of the body weight, b = the slope, calculated from the length and weight relationship. Growth performance index (phi-prime index) ϕ ′ was computed from the equation (7) (Munro and Pauly, 1983; Pauly and Munro, 1984).(7)

Condition coefficients were calculated for both sexes using the equation (8) (Ricker, 1975).(8)

W ∞ was estimated by replacing length by L ∞ and b by 3. The condition factor was calculated by Hile (1936) formulae:(9)

where CF = condition factor, W = total body weight (g) and L = total length (cm). The relative length of gut was calculated following Al-Hussaini (1949) as:(10)

where RLG = relative length of gut, Li = gut length (cm) and TL = total length (cm). The feeding intensity was calculated following Desai (1970) as:(11)

where FI = feeding intensity, Wi = gut weight (g) and W = total body weight (g). For estimating the longitudinal growth, the increased length in both sexes was calculated separately. For mass growth, first mean length was transformed to mean weights using the LWR and then the spontaneous growth was calculated by(12)

where r = specific growth, W ( t+1) mean weight of fish at (t + 1) year, Wt  = mean weight of fish at t year and Δt = time difference between t year and t + 1 year which is usually considered one year. For comparisons of two means, t-test, and for multiple comparison of means, one-way ANOVA followed by Duncan posthook test at 95% confidence level was used. Chi square test was used for comparing the sex ratio. Statistical analyses were carried out in SPSS 20 and Excel 2016 computer software.

3 Results

3.1 Physicochemical properties of the water

The mean values ± SD and range for water temperature, pH, conductivity (EC) and total dissolved substances (TDS) are indicated in Table 1.

Table 1

Changes in some environmental factors of Beheshtabad River water from May 2013 to June 2014.

3.2 Length frequency and sex ratio

Amongst the 426 fish examined, 241(56%) were male, 169 (40%) female and 16 (4%) undetermined. The fork length ranged from 8.94 to 42.95 (23.32 ± 6.53 SD) cm and weight ranged between 10.3 and 1255.5 (242.59 ± 213.5) g. The majority of fish were in the range of 19.10−23.00 cm for males and 23.10−27.00 cm for females ( Tab. 2). The maximum age of the population based on scale reading was 7+ years for males and 8+ years for females ( Fig. 1). The overall sex ratio of males to females was 1M:0.7F and Chi-square analysis showed a significant difference from the expected 1:1 ratio (χ 2 = 12.64, P < 0.05).

The smallest mature males and females were in the 11.1–15 and 15.1–19 cm length classes, respectively (The smallest mature male was 11.19 cm and the smallest mature female was 18.50 cm in fork length) (Tab. 2). The mean age at first maturity of C. coadi for males was ≤2 years (all specimens at age 2+ (100%) were mature), and the age at first maturity for females was 3+ years. Females had a wider length range and were larger than the males (p < 0.05) ( Tab. 3 and Fig. 2).

The fork length and body weight in males up to two years were higher than females, but reveresed in older ages (Tab. 3). In all ages the back calculated lengths were higher than the observed lengths ( Tab. 4).

The length−weight relationship for males, females and all individuals was as W = 0.026FL2.826 (r 2 = 0.95), W = 0.0199FL2.920 (r 2 = 0.97) and W = 0.0202FL2.910 (r 2 = 0.97), respectively, indicating a negative allometric growth pattern for the females, males and all fish specimens ( Figs. 3– 5) (Pauly, 1984).

Table 2

Descriptive statistics of length and weight in C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.

thumbnail Fig. 1

Age frequency of males (black) and females (white) of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.
Table 3

Descriptive statistics of length and weight of different ages in C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013. Astrix indicate significant differences.

thumbnail Fig. 2

Length classes of males (black) and females (white) of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.
Table 4

Mean ± SD of back calculated and observed lengths in C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.

thumbnail Fig. 3

Length–weight relationship in males of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.
thumbnail Fig. 4

Length–weight relationship in females of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.
thumbnail Fig. 5

Length–weight relationship in all specimens of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.

3.3 Age, growth and feeding parameteters

The age−length relationships in males, females and all specimens were estimated as Lt  = 56.82[1−e−0.162(t +0.208)], Lt  = 35.97[1−e −0.205(t+0.586)], and Lt  = 62.52 [1−e−0/09( t+1.12)], respectively (Fig. 3). The age–weight relationships in males and females were estimated as Wt  = 1242.85[1−e−0.205( t+0.586)]2.82, Wt  = 3357.5 [1 − e−0.162(t  + 0.208)]2.92 and Wt  = 3402.7 [1 −e −0.09(t +1.12)]2.91, respectively ( Figs. 6 and 7).

The growth performance index was higher in the females, indicating a faster growth in the females ( Tab. 5). The mean condition factor was not significantly different in the two sexes and in different age classes, although it was significantly different in some months (F = 5.62, p < 0.05). The highest value was in August and the lowest in March ( Figs. 8 and 9). The spontaneous growth rate was decreasing as the fish got older ( Tab. 6). The relative length of gut was 5.0 in females and 4.4 in males indicating a herbivourous habit for both sexes. The feeding intensity was 0.5 in females and 0.06 in males indicating a medium feeding condition in both sexes.

thumbnail Fig. 6

Length–age relationship in males (dotted line), females (thin line) and all the specimens (thick line) of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.
thumbnail Fig. 7

Weight–age relationship in males (dotted line), females (thin line) and all the specimens (thick line) of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.
Table 5

von Bertalanffy growth parameters and growth performance index in C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.

thumbnail Fig. 8

Monthly variations in condition factor of males of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013. Similar letters indicate non-significant differences.
thumbnail Fig. 9

Monthly variations in condition factor of females of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013. Similar letters indicate non-significant differences.
Table 6

Comparison of instant growth and condition factor in different ages of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.

4 Discussion and conclusions

The maximum age for C. coadi in this study was 8+ years observed in the females and the most frequent age class was 4+ for males and 3+ for males. Up to the fourth year, both sexes have the same growth rate, but after that, females grow faster. This situation has been observed in other species of Capoeta (Mazaheri, 2008; Asadollah et al., 2011, 2017). Asadollah et al., (2011) reported the maximum age of 10+ for a female C. damascina with a fork length of 49 cm and 1935 g from Zayandehrud River. Soofiani and Asadollah (2010) estimated the age of C. damascina in Hanna Dam as 6+ years and Kheyrandish et al. (2014) as 5+. Growth variation could be due to an adaptation to environmental changes (Nikolsky, 1963) ( Tab. 7).

The length–weight relationship implied that the growth was negatively allometric for both sexes in this study. Asadollah et al. (2011) found a negative allometric growth for females and an isometric growth pattern for the males. Generally, the b value lies between 2.5 and 3.5 (Nikolsky, 1963) and is affected by seasonal, geographical, feeding and environmental conditions. Esmaeili and Ebrahimi (2007) reported an isometric growth pattern for C. damascina from Sirvan River. Patimar and Mohammadzadeh (2010) reported a negative allometric growth pattern for males and an isometric pattern for females of C. fusca Nikolskii, 1897 from eastern Iran.

In this species as in other related species ( Tab. 8), the L∞ was higher in the females. This difference could be due to the higher age at maturity and longer life span of the females. The earlier maturity in the males leads to slower growth of the somatic organs (Wootton, 1998). However, rarely they reach the asymptotic length in the wild, due to natural causes such as predation, diseases and fishing (Biswas, 1993). The growth performance index was higher for males, indicating a faster growth rate for them. In different studies, different results have been achieved. Abdoli et al. (2008) in Gorganrud and Kalkan (2008) in Karakaya Dam reported a higher rate in the females. Higher growth rate means that the fish reaches the asymptotic length faster (King, 1995). These parameters are influenced by temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen and other environmental conditions, thus varying with these factors. Besides, as temperature increases, K is increasing logarithmically and L∞ decreases (King, 1995).

The sex ratio of Coad barb in Beheshtabad River was 1M:0.7F. Gharacheh (2008) in a Qanat of southern Isfahan and Stoumboudi et al. (1993) in Jordan River reported similar results. This ratio for C. damascina in other areas were in favour of females (Mazaheri, 2007; Soofiani and Asadollah, 2010; Asadollah et al., 2011). Differences in sex ratio might be related to the interspecific differences in adapted population of a species to different ecological conditions, different date and time of capture, fishing gear, location, growth rates and mortalities in males and females, migration of mature fishes from the region and different behavioral pattern in males and females (Qasim, 1966; Pitcher and Hart, 1982; Fishelson et al., 1996; Keivany and Soofiani, 2004; Soofiani et al., 2006; Asadollah et al., 2011; Keivany et al., 2012; Abbaszadeh et al., 2013; Ghanbarzadeh et al., 2013, 2017; Tabatabaei et al., 2014; Keivany and Daneshvar, 2015; Kiani et al., 2016).

The mean condition factor was higher in the females and occurred in September; for C. damascina in Zayandehrud River it occurred in June (Asadollah et al., 2017). The condition factor is an indicator of interaction between biological and non-biological factors on the fish physiology and used to compare different populations in different conditions and life cycles (Bagenal and Tesch, 1978). In general, this fish is a herbivour species with a medium feeding intensity and a relatively slow growing rate.

Table 7

Results of different studies on the age, weight, length of different Capoeta damascina species group.

Table 8

Results of different studies on the growth parameters of different Capoeta damascina species group.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Mr. M. Aalipour, Ms. S.S. Martazavi and Dr. S. Asadollah for their help in field work. There is no conflict of interest for this study. This research was financially supported by Isfahan University of Technology.

References

  • Abbaszadeh A, Keivany Y, Soofiani NM, Falahatimarvast A. 2013. Reproductive biology of the greater lizardfish, Saurida tumbil (Bloch, 1795), in Bushehr coastal waters of Iran. Turk J Zool 37: 717–722. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Abdoli A, Mostafavi H. 2009. Preliminary investigation of some biological characteristics of Capoeta damascina in Daleki and Shahpour rivers, Boushehr Province, Southern Iran. Research Project, Tehran, Institute of Environmental Sciences, Shahid Beheshty University. 57 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Abdoli A, Rasooli P, Mostafavi H. 2008. Length–weight relationships of Capoeta capoeta capoeta (Gueldenstaedt, 1772) in the Gorganrud River, South Caspian Basin. J Appl Ichthyol 24: 96–98. [Google Scholar]
  • Al-Hussaini AH. 1949. On the functional morphology of the alimentary tract of some fish in relation to differences in their feeding habits: anatomy and histology. J Cell Sci 3: 109–139. [Google Scholar]
  • Alwan N, Esmaeili HR, Krupp K. 2016a. Molecular phylogeny and zoogeography of the Capoeta damascina species complex (Pisces: Teleostei: Cyprinidae). PLoS ONE 11: 1–25. [Google Scholar]
  • Alwan NH, Zareian H, Esmaeili HR. 2016b. Capoeta coadi, a new species of cyprinid fish from the Karun River drainage, Iran based on morphological and molecular evidences (Teleostei, Cyprinidae). ZooKeys 572: 155. [Google Scholar]
  • Asadollah S, Soofiani MN, Keivany Y, Shadkhast M. 2011. Reproduction of Capoeta damascina (Valenciennes, 1842), a cyprinid fish, in Zayandeh-Roud River, Iran. J Appl Ichthyol 27: 1061–1066. [Google Scholar]
  • Asadollah S, Soofiani NM, Keivany Y, Hatami R. 2017. Age and growth of the Mesopotamian Barb, Capoeta damascina, in Central Iran. J Fish Sci Technol 16: 511–521. [Google Scholar]
  • Bagenal T, Tesch F. 1978. Age and growth. In: Bagenal F. (ed.). Methods for assessment of fish production in fresh waters. IBP Handbook 3. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications. [Google Scholar]
  • Birecikligil S, Çiçek E. 2011. Length‐weight relationships for 16 freshwater fishes caught in tributaries of Euphrates and Orontes rivers in Gaziantep (southeastern Anatolia, Turkey). J Appl Ichthyol 27: 1131–1132. [Google Scholar]
  • Biswas P. 1993. Manual of Methods in Fish Biology. South Asian Publisher put Ltd., pp.105–107. [Google Scholar]
  • Desai VR. 1970. Studies on the fishery and biology of Tor tor (Hamilton) from river Narmada. J Inland Fish Soc Ind 2: 101–112. [Google Scholar]
  • Esmaeili HR, Ebrahimi M. 2007. Length–weight relationships of some freshwater fishes of Iran. J Appl Ichthyol 22: 328–329. [Google Scholar]
  • Esmaeili HR, Mehraban H, Abbasi K, Keivany Y, Coad BW. 2017. Review and updated checklist of freshwater fishes of Iran: Taxonomy, distribution and conservation status‏. Iran J Ichthyol 4: 1–114. [Google Scholar]
  • Esmaeili HR, Teimory A, Hojat Ansari T. 2007. Scale structure of cyprinid fish Capoeta damascina (Valenciennes in Cuvier and Valenciennes, 1842) using scanning electron microscope (SEM). Iran J Sci Technol 31: 255–262. [Google Scholar]
  • Fishelson L, Gren M, Van Vuren J, Manelis R. 1996. Some aspects of the reproduction biology of Barbus spp., Capoeta damascina and their hybrids (Cyprinidae, Teleostei) in Israel. Hydrobiology 317: 79–88. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Francis RIIC. 1990. Back-calculation of fish length: a critical review. J Fish Biol 36: 883–902. [Google Scholar]
  • Ghanbarzadeh M, Soofiani NM, Keivany Y, Asadollah S, Taghavi Motlagh SA. 2013. Determination of growth parameters of the king soldier bream (Argyrops spinifer), using the back-calculation method and otolith reading data in coastal waters of Bushehr Province, Persian Gulf. Iran Fish Sci J 21: 75–84. [Google Scholar]
  • Ghanbarzadeh M, Keivany Y, Soofiani NM. 2017. Population dynamics of the sparid fish, Argyrops spinifer (Teleostei: Sparidae) in coastal waters of the Persian Gulf. Iran J Sci Technol 41: 313–319. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Gharache M. 2008. On the biology of Capoeta damascina in qanat of southern Isfahan Province central Iran. BSc Project. Gonbad Higher Education Center, Gonbad, Iran, 75 pp. [Google Scholar]
  • Hasankhani H, Keivany Y, Raeisi H, Pouladi M, Soofiani NM. 2013. Length–weight relationships of three cyprinid fishes from Sirwan River, Kurdistan and Kermanshah provinces in western Iran. J Appl Ichthyol 29: 1170–1171. [Google Scholar]
  • Hile R. 1936. Age and growth of the cisco, Leucichthys artedi (Le Sueur), in the lakes of the northeastern highlands, Wisconsin. US Government Printing Office. [Google Scholar]
  • Holčík J. 1998. Ichtyológia [Ichthyology]. Bratislava: Príroda, 310 pp. [Google Scholar]
  • Johal MS, Esmaeili HR, Tanadon KK. 2001. A comparison of back-calculated lengths of silver carp derived from bony structures. J Fish Biol 59: 1483–1493. [Google Scholar]
  • Kalkan E. 2008. Growth and Reproduction Properties of Capoeta trutta (Heckel, 1843) in Karakaya Dam Lake. Turk J Zool 32: 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  • Keivany Y, Daneshvar E. 2016. Contribution to the knowledge of the feeding and growth biology of the Iranian cichlid, Iranocichla hormuzensis . Zool Ecol 26: 104–109. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Keivany Y, Soofiani NM. 2004. Contribution to the biology of Zagros tooth-carp, Aphanius vladykovi, in central Iran (Cyprinodontidae). Environ Biol Fish 71: 165–169. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Keivany Y, Zare P, Kalteh L. 2012. Age, growth and reproduction of the female Kutum, Rutilus kutum (Kamensky, 1901) (Teleostei: Cyprinidae), in Gorgan-Rud Estuary, Northern Iran. Res Zool 2: 7–14. [Google Scholar]
  • Keivany Y, Aalipour M, Siami S, Mortazavi SS. 2015. Length–weight relationships for three species from Beheshtabad River, Karun River Drainage, Iran. Iran J Ichthyol 2: 299–301. [Google Scholar]
  • Keivany Y, Nasri M, Abbasi K, Abdoli A. 2016. Atlas of inland water fishes of Iran. Tehran, Iran: Iran Department of Environment Press, 218 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Khalaf G. 1987. Le cycle sexuel de Capoeta damascina (cyprinidae) dans les cours d'eau libanaisu.‏ Cybium 11: 395–401. [Google Scholar]
  • Kheyrandish A, Abdoli A, Abdoli L. 2014. Age and growth of Capoeta damascina (Valenciennes in Cuvier and Valenciennes 1842) in Daleki River of Boushehr province. J Anim Res 26: 425–434. [Google Scholar]
  • Kiani F, Keivany Y, Paykan-Heyrati F. 2016. Age and growth of king nase, Condrostoma regium (Cyprinidae), from Bibi-Sayyedan River of Semirom, Isfahan, Iran‏. Iran J Fish Sci 15: 1214–1223. [Google Scholar]
  • King M. 1995. Fisheries Biology, Assessment and Management. Fishing News Books, 341 p. [Google Scholar]
  • Klumbs RA, Bozek MA, Frie RV. 1999. Proportionality of body to scale growth: validation of two back-calculation models with individually tagged and recaptured smallmouth bass and walleyes. Trans Am Fish Soc 128: 815–831. [Google Scholar]
  • Marammazi M, Zakeri M, Ronagh MT, Kochanian P, Haghi M. 2014. Diet and feeding indices of small scale sardeh fish (Capoeta damascina) in Sezar River (Lorestan province). J Anim Res 27: 405–416. [Google Scholar]
  • Mazaheri Z. 2007. Age and growth of Capoeta damascina in Zayande-Roud River Isfahan Province, Central Iran. Isfahan: Isfahan University of Technology. 85 pp. [Google Scholar]
  • Munro JL, Pauly D. 1983. A simple method for comparing growth of fishes and invertebrates. ICLARM Fishbyte 1: 5–6. [Google Scholar]
  • Nikolsky GV. 1963. The ecology of fishes. London: Academic Press, 352 pp. [Google Scholar]
  • Patimar R, Mohammadzadeh B. 2010. On the biological characteristics of Capoeta fusca (Nikolskii, 1897) in eastern Iran. J Appl Ichthyol 27: 873–878. [Google Scholar]
  • Pauly O. 1984. Fish population dynamics in tropical waters: a manual for use with programmable calculators. ICLARM Stud Rev 8: 1–325. [Google Scholar]
  • Pauly D, Munro JL. 1984. Once more on the comparison of growth in fish and invertebrates. ICLARM Fishbyte 2: 1–21. [Google Scholar]
  • Pitcher TJ, Hart PJB. 1982. Fisheries ecology. UK: Croom Helm. [Google Scholar]
  • Qasim SZ. 1966. Sex ratio in fish populations as a function of sexual differences and growth rate. Curr Sci 35: 140–142. [Google Scholar]
  • Razavipour P, Eagderi S, Poorbagher H, Keivany Y. 2015a. Phenotypic plasticity of the Tuini fish, Capoeta damascina, (Actinopterygii: Cyprinidae) populations in Iranian part of Tigris basin using geometric morphometric approach. J Anim Res 28: 170–179. [Google Scholar]
  • Razavipour P, Eagderi S, Poorbagher H, Javanshir Khooi A, Keivany Y. 2015b. Comparative study of morphological characteristics of Tuini fish (Capoeta damascina) in inland water of Iran using geometric morphometric method. J Fish 68: 79–90. [Google Scholar]
  • Ricker WE. 1975. Computation and interpretation of biological statistics of fish populations. Bull Fish Res Bd Can 191: 1–382. [Google Scholar]
  • Samaee SM, Patzner RA. 2011. Morphometric differences among populations of Tuini, Capoeta damascina. (Teleostei: Cyprinidae), in the interior basins of Iran. J Appl Ichthyol 27: 928–933. [Google Scholar]
  • Siami S, Keivany Y, Farhadian O. 2017. Reproductive characteristics of Siahmahi, Capoeta damascina (family Cyprinidae), in Beheshtabad River, Tigris basin. Sri Lanka J Aquat Sci 22: 21–27. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Soofiani MN, Asadollah S. 2010. Some aspects of the growth and reproduction of (Capoeta damascina Valenciennes, 1842) from the Hanna Wetland, Semirum. Iran Fish Sci J 18: 145–156. [Google Scholar]
  • Soofiani NM, Keivany Y, Shooshtari AM. 2006. Contribution to the biology of the lizardfish, Saurida tumbil (Teleostei: Aulopiformes), from the Persian Gulf. Zool Mid East 38: 49–56. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Sparre P, Venema SC. 1998. Introduction to tropical fish stock assessment part 1. Manual FAO Fisheries paper technical paper No. 306. 1. Italy. [Google Scholar]
  • Stoumboudi MT, Villwock W, Sela J, Abraham M. 1993. Gonadosomatic index in Barbus longiceps, Capoeta damascina and their hybrid (Pisces, Cyprinidae) versus spermatozoan index in the parental males. J Fish Biol 43: 865–875. [Google Scholar]
  • Tabatabaei SN, Hashemzadeh-Segherloo I, Abdoli A, Milani M, Mirzaei M. 2014. Age and growth of spirlins, Alburnoides eichwaldii and A. namaki, from the Caspian, Kavir and Namak basins of Iran. Iran. J Ichthyol 1: 266–273. [Google Scholar]
  • Von Bertalanffy L. 1938. A quantitative theory of organic growth. (Inquiries on growth laws. I I). Hum Biol 10: 182–213. [Google Scholar]
  • Wootton RJ. 1998. Ecology of teleost fishes, 2nd ed, Fish and Fisheries Series, no. 24 Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 404p. [Google Scholar]

Cite this article as: Keivany Y, Siami M. 2020. Age and growth of a newly described barb, Capoeta coadi (Cyprinidae), in Beheshtabad River, Tigris basin. Ann. Limnol. - Int. J. Lim. 56: 26

All Tables

Table 1

Changes in some environmental factors of Beheshtabad River water from May 2013 to June 2014.

In the text
Table 2

Descriptive statistics of length and weight in C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.

In the text
Table 3

Descriptive statistics of length and weight of different ages in C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013. Astrix indicate significant differences.

In the text
Table 4

Mean ± SD of back calculated and observed lengths in C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.

In the text
Table 5

von Bertalanffy growth parameters and growth performance index in C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.

In the text
Table 6

Comparison of instant growth and condition factor in different ages of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.

In the text
Table 7

Results of different studies on the age, weight, length of different Capoeta damascina species group.

In the text
Table 8

Results of different studies on the growth parameters of different Capoeta damascina species group.

In the text

All Figures

thumbnail Fig. 1

Age frequency of males (black) and females (white) of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.
In the text
thumbnail Fig. 2

Length classes of males (black) and females (white) of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.
In the text
thumbnail Fig. 3

Length–weight relationship in males of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.
In the text
thumbnail Fig. 4

Length–weight relationship in females of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.
In the text
thumbnail Fig. 5

Length–weight relationship in all specimens of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.
In the text
thumbnail Fig. 6

Length–age relationship in males (dotted line), females (thin line) and all the specimens (thick line) of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.
In the text
thumbnail Fig. 7

Weight–age relationship in males (dotted line), females (thin line) and all the specimens (thick line) of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013.
In the text
thumbnail Fig. 8

Monthly variations in condition factor of males of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013. Similar letters indicate non-significant differences.
In the text
thumbnail Fig. 9

Monthly variations in condition factor of females of C. coadi in Beheshtabad River in 2013. Similar letters indicate non-significant differences.
In the text

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.