Inferring ecological strategies of Psenopsis spp. (Teleostei: Centrolophidae) inhabiting Indian waters from morphological features

References

• Abaad M, Tuset VM, Montero D, Lombarte A, Otero-Ferrer JL, Haroun R. 2016. Phenotypic plasticity in wild marine fishes associated with fish-cage aquaculture. Hydrobiologia. 765:343–358. doi:10.1007/s10750-015-2428-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aguilar-Medrano R, Frederich B, Balart EF, de Luna E. 2012. Diversification of the pectoral fin shape in damselfishes (Perciformes, Pomacentridae) of the Eastern Pacific. Zoomorphology. 132:197–213. doi:10.1007/s00435-012-0178-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aguirre H, Lombarte A. 1999. Ecomorphological comparisons of sagittae in Mullus barbatus and M. surmuletus. Journal of Fish Biology. 55:05–114. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8649.1999.tb00660.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Assis IO, da Silva VE, Souto-Vieira D, Lozano AP, Volpedo AV, Fabré NN. 2020. Ecomorphological patterns in otoliths of tropical fishes: assessing trophic groups and depth strata preference by shape. Environmental Biology of Fishes. 103:349–361. doi:10.1007/s10641-020-00961-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collard M, O’Higgins P. 2002. Ontogeny and homoplasy in the papionin monkey face. Evolution & Development. 3:22–331. doi:10.1046/j.1525-142X.2001.01042.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cruz A, Lombarte A. 2004. Otolith size and its relationship with colour patterns and sound production. Journal of Fish Biology. 65:1512–1525.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Da Silva MA, Perazzo GX, Kavalco KF, Pasa R. 2021. Shape diversity of the fish genus Astyanax Baird & Girard, 1854 (Teleostei, Characidae) in adjacent basins. Biologia. 76:213–221. doi:10.2478/s11756-020-00544-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Busserolles F, Marshall NJ. 2017. Seeing in the deep-sea: visual adaptations in lanternfishes. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, Biological Sciences. 372:20160070. doi:10.1098/rstb.2016.0070.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deepa KP, Kumar KA, Kottnis O, Nikki R, Bineesh KK, Hashim M, Saravanane N, Sudhakar M. 2019. Population variations of Opal fish, Bembrops caudimacula Steindachner, 1876 from Arabian Sea and Andaman Sea: evidence from otolith morphometry. Regional Studies in Marine Science. 25:100466. doi:10.1016/j.rsma.2018.100466.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D’Iglio C, Albano M, Famulari S, Savoca S, Panarello G, Paola DD, Perdichizzi A, Rinelli P, Lanteri G, Spano N, Capillo G. 2021. Intra- and interspecific variability among congeneric Pagellus otoliths. Scientific Reports. 11:16315. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-95814-w.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dinno A. 2015. Nonparametric pairwise multiple comparisons in independent groups using Dunn's test. The Stata Journal. 15:292–300. doi:10.1177/1536867X1501500117.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dornburg A, Sidlauskas B, Santini F, Sorenson L, Near TJ, Alfaro ME. 2011. The influence of an innovative locomotor strategy on the phenotypic diversification of triggerfish (Family: Balistidae). Evolution. 65:1912–1926. doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2011.01275.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dryden IL, Mardia KV. 1998. Statistical shape analysis, vol. 4. Chichester: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Eklöv P, Jonsson P. 2007. Pike predators induce morphological changes in young perch and roach. Journal of Fish Biology. 70:155–164. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8649.2006.01283.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eme D, Anderson MJ, Myers EMV, Roberts CD, Liggins L. 2020. Phylogenetic measures reveal eco-evolutionary drivers of biodiversity along a depth gradient. Ecography. 43:689–702.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FAO. 1984. FAO species identification sheets for fishery purposes. In: Ficher W, Bianchi G, editors. Western Indian Ocean (fishing area 51), vol. 1–4. Rome: Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations.
   Google Scholar
• Friedman ST, Price SA, Hoey AS, Wainwright PC. 2016. Ecomorphological convergence in planktivorous surgeonfishes. Journal of Evolutionary Biololgy. 29:965–78. doi:10.1111/jeb.12837.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Froese R, Pauly D. 2019. FishBase; [accessed 2019 Feb 2]. https://www.fishbase.in/.
   Google Scholar
• Frost SR, Marcus LF, Bookstein F, Delson E. 2003. Cranial allometry, phylogeography, and systematics of large-bodied papionins (primates: cercopithecinae) inferred from geometric morphometric analysis of landmark data. The Anatomical Record. 275:1048–1072. doi:10.1002/ar.a.10112.
   Google Scholar
• Gaemers PA, Poulsen JY. 2017. Recognition and distribution of two North Atlantic Gadiculus species, G. argenteus and G. thori (Gadidae), based on otolith morphology, larval pigmentation, molecular evidence, morphometrics and meristics. Fishes. 2:15. doi:10.3390/fishes2030015.
   Google Scholar
• Gauldie RW, Crampton JS. 2002. An eco-morphological explanation of individual variability in the shape of the fish otolith: comparison of the otolith of Hoplostethus atlanticus with other species by depth. Journal of Fish Biology. 60:1204–1221. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8649.2002.tb01715.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• George AB, Westneat MW. 2019. Functional morphology of endurance swimming performance and gait transition strategies in balistoid fishes. Journal of Experimental Biology. 222:jeb194704. doi:10.1242/jeb.194704.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerking SD. 2014. Feeding ecology of fish. USA: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Gierl C, Reichenbacher B. 2015. A new fossil genus of Gobiiformes from the Miocene characterized by a mosaic set of characters. Copeia. 103:792–805. doi:10.1643/CI-14-146.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Granados-Amores E, Granados-Amores J, Zavala-Leal OI, Flores-Ortega JR. 2020. Geometric morphometrics in the sulcus acusticus of the sagittae otolith as tool to discriminate species of the genus Centropomus (Centropomidae: Perciformes) from the southeastern Gulf of California. Marine Biodiversity. 50. doi:10.1007/s12526-019-01030-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gupta D, Dwivedi AK, Tripathi M. 2018. Taxonomic validation of five fish species of subfamily Barbinae from the Ganga river system of northern India using traditional and truss analyses. PLoS One. 13:e0206031. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0206031.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haedrich RL. 1967a. A new species of Psenopsis (Stromateoidei, Centrolophidae) from Indo-Malayan waters. Japanese Journal of Ichthyology. 14:187–196.
   Google Scholar
• Haedrich RL. 1967b. The stromateoid fishes: systematics and a classification. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology. 135:31–139.
   Google Scholar
• Haedrich RL. 1986. Suborder stromateoidei. In: Smith MM, Heemstra PC, editors. Smiths’ sea fishes. Grahamstown: J.L.B. Smith Institute of Ichthyology; p. 580–594.
   Google Scholar
• Hammer O, Harper DAT, Ryan PD. 2001. PAST: paleontological statistic software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontologia electronica. 4:9. https://palaeo-electronica.org/2001_1/past/past.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Hari MS, Kathrivelpandian A, Bhavan SK, Sajina AM, Gangan SS, Abidi JF. 2019. Deciphering the stock structure of Chanos chanos (Forsskål, 1775) in Indian waters by truss network and otolith shape analysis. Turkish Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 20:103–111. doi:10.4194/1303-2712-v20_2_03.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hebert PD, Gregory TR. 2005. The promise of DNA barcoding for taxonomy. Systematic Biology. 54:852–859. doi:10.1080/10635150500354886.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helland P, Vøllestad LA, Freyhof J, Mehner T. 2009. Morphological differences between two ecologically similar sympatric fishes. Journal of Fish Biology. 75:2756–2767. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8649.2009.02476.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaramillo AM, Tombari AD, Dura VB, Santamalia RME, Volpedo AV. 2014. Otolith eco-morphological patterns of benthic fishes from the coast of Valencia (Spain). Thalassas. Revista de Ciencias del Marina. 30:57–66.
   Google Scholar
• Jørgensen HBH, Pertoldi C, Hansen MM, Ruzzante DE, Loeschcke V. 2008. Genetic and environmental correlates of morphological variation in a marine fish: the case of Baltic Sea Herring (Clupea harengus). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 65:389–400. doi:10.1139/f07-177.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelley JL, Evans JP. 2018. Phenotypic assortment by body shape in wild-caught fish shoals. The Science of Nature. 105:53. doi:10.1007/s00114-018-1581-x.
   Google Scholar
• Klingenberg CP. 2011. MORPHOJ: an integrated software package for geometric Morphometrics. Molecular Ecology Resources. 11:353–357. doi:10.1111/j.1755-0998.2010.02924.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klingenberg CP. 2016. Size, shape, and form: concepts of allometry in geometric morphometrics. Development Genes and Evolution. 226:113–137. doi:10.1007/s00427-016-0539-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar KVA, Deepa KP, Hashim M, Vasu C, Sudhakar M. 2017a. Relationships between fish size and otolith size of four bathy-demersal fish species from the south eastern Arabian Sea, India. Journal of Applied Ichthyology. 33:102–107. doi:10.1111/jai.13250.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar KVA, Nikki R, Oxona K, Hashim M, Sudhakar M. 2017b. Relationships between fish and otolith size of nine deep-sea fishes from the Andaman and Nicobar waters, North Indian Ocean. Journal of Applied Ichthyology. 33:1187–1195. doi:10.1111/jai.13467.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar KVA, Tuset VM, Hashim M, Sumod KS, Sudhakar M, Otero-Ferrer JL, Lombarte A. 2017c. Functional approach reveals low niche overlap among common deep-sea fishes from the south-eastern Arabian Sea. Deep Sea Research I. 119:16–23. doi:10.1016/j.dsr.2016.11.011.
   Google Scholar
• Layman CA, Langerhans RB, Winemiller KO. 2005. Body size, not other morphological traits, characterizes cascading effects in fish assemblage composition following commercial netting. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 62:2802–2810. doi:10.1139/f05-183.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenth RV. 2016. Least-squares means: the R package lsmeans. Journal of Statistical Software. 69:1–33. doi:10.18637/jss.v069.i01.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linde M, Palmer M, Gómez-Zurita J. 2004. Differential correlates of diet and phylogeny on the shape of the premaxilla and anterior tooth in sparid fishes (Perciformes: Sparidae). Journal of Evolutionary Biology. 17:941–952. doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2004.00763.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lleonart J, Salat J, Torres GJ. 2000. Removing allometric effects of body size in morphological analysis. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 205:85–93. doi:10.1006/jtbi.2000.2043.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lombarte A. 1992. Changes in otolith area: sensory area ratio with body size and depth. Environmental Biology of Fishes. 33:405–410. doi:10.1007/BF00010955.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lombarte A, Cruz A. 2007. Otolith size trends in marine fish communities from different depth strata. Journal of Fish Biology. 71:53–76. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8649.2007.01465.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lombarte A, Fortuño JM. 1992. Differences in morphological features of the sacculus of the inner ear of two hakes (Merluccius capensis and M. paradoxus, gadiformes) inhabits from different depth of sea. Journal of Morphology. 214:97–107. doi:10.1002/jmor.1052140107.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lombarte A, Palmer M, Matallanas J, Gómez-Zurita J, Morales-Nin B. 2010. Ecomorphological trends and phylogenetic inertia of otolith sagittae in Nototheniidae. Environmental Biology of Fishes. 89:607–618.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lychakov DV, Rebane YT. 2000. Otolith regularities. Hearing Research. 143:83–102. doi:10.1016/s0378-5955(00)00026-5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maderbacher M, Bauer C, Herler J, Postl L, Makasa L, Sturmbauer C. 2008. Assessment of traditional versus geometric morphometrics for discriminating populations of the Tropheus moorii species complex (Teleostei: Cichlidae), a Lake Tanganyika model for allopatric speciation. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research. 46:153–161. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0469.2007.00447.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magnhagen C, Heibo E. 2001. Gape size allometry in pike reflects variation between lakes in prey availability and relative body depth. Functional Ecology. 15:754–762. https://www.jstor.org/stable/826725.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marcus LF. 1993. Some aspects of multivariate statistics for morphometrics. In: Marcus LF, Bello E, Garcia-Valdecasas A, editors. Contributions to morphometrics. Madrid: Monografiasdel Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales 8; p. 95–130.
   Google Scholar
• Meloro C, Raina P, Piras P, Barbera C, O’Higgins P. 2008. The shape of the mandibular corpus in large fissiped carnivores: allometry, function and phylogeny. Zoological Journal of Linnean Society B. 154:832–845. doi:10.1111/j.1096-3642.2008.00429.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mille T, Mahe K, Cachera M, Villanueva MC, de Pontual H, Ernande B. 2016. Diet is correlated with otolith shape in marine fish. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 555:167–184. doi:10.3354/meps11784.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mindel BL, Neat FC, Trueman CN, Webb TJ, Blanchard JL. 2016. Functional, size and taxonomic diversity of fish along a depth gradient in the deep sea. PeerJ. 4:e2387.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montana CG, Winemiller KO. 2013. Evolutionary convergence in Neotropical cichlids and Nearctic centrarchids: evidence from morphology, diet, and stable isotope analysis. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society B. 109:146–164. doi:10.1111/bij.12021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montanini S, Stagioni M, Valdrè G, Tommasini S, Vallisneri M. 2015. Intra-specific and inter-specific variability of the sulcus acusticus of sagittal otoliths in two gurnard species (Scorpaeniformes, Triglidae). Fisheries Research. 161:93–101. doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2014.07.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montgomery J, Pankhurst NW. 1997. Sensory physiology. In: Randall DJ, Farrell AP, editors. Deep-Sea fishes. San Diego and London: Academic Press; p. 325–349.
   Google Scholar
• Nama S, Bhushan S, Ramteke KK, Jaiswar AK, Srihari M. 2022. Stock structure analysis of Yellow striped goatfish Upeneus vittatus (Forsskal, 1775) based on truss morphometric analysis along the Indian coast. Iranian Journal of Fisheries Science. 21:93–103. doi:10.22092/ijfs.2022.125851.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson JS, Grande TC, Wilson MVH. 2006. Fishes of the world. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons. 707 pp.
   Google Scholar
• Neves FM, Monteiro LR. 2003. Body shape and size divergence among populations of Poecilia vivipara in coastal lagoons of south-eastern Brazil. Journal of Fish Biology. 63:928–941. doi:10.1046/j.1095-8649.2003.00199.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ohlberger J, Staaks G, Holker F. 2007. Effects of temperature, swimming speed and body mass on standard and active metabolic rate in vendace (Coregonus albula). Journal of Comparative Physiology B. 177:905–916. doi:10.1007/s00360-007-0189-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olivier D, Parmentier E, Frédérich B. 2016. Insight into biting diversity to capture benthic prey in damselfishes (Pomacentridae). Zoologischer Anzeiger. 264:47–55. doi:10.1016/j.jcz.2016.07.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parin NV, Piontrovskiy AS. 2004. Stromateoid fishes (Suborder Stromateoidei) of the Indian Ocean (species composition, distribution, Biology and fisheries). Journal of Ichthyology. 44:33–62.
   Google Scholar
• Parisi-Baradad V, Lombarte A, García-Ladona E, Cabestany J, Piera J, Chic O. 2005. Otolith shape contour analysis using affine transformation invariant wavelet transforms and curvature scale space representation. Marine and Freshwater Research. 56:795–804. doi:10.1071/MF04162.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pettersson LB, Hedenström A. 2000. Energetics, cost reduction and functional consequences of fish dimorphism. Proceedings of the Royal Society B. 267:759–764. doi:10.1098/rspb.2000.1068.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Popper AN, Ramcharitar J, Campana SE. 2005. Why otoliths? Insights from inner ear physiology and fisheries biology. Marine and Freshwater Research. 56:497–504. doi:10.1071/MF04267.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Development Core Team. 2017. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.Rproject.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Rajeeshkumar MP, Kumar KVA, Otero-Ferrer JL, Lombarte A, Hashim M, Saravanane N, Sanjeevan VN, Murthy MVR, Tuset VM. 2020. Differentiating morpho-functional patterns of the five most common deep-sea benthic anglerfishes (Lophiiformes) from Andaman and Nicobar Islands (eastern Indian Ocean). Scientia Marina. 84:369–384. doi:10.3989/scimar.05081.20A.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rohlf FJ. 2002. Tps small, version 1.19. Stony Brook, NY: State University of New York.
   Google Scholar
• Rohlf FJ. 2004. TPS Dig 2.26 and TPS relative Wards Software. State University of NewYork at Stony Brook.
   Google Scholar
• Rohlf FJ, Marcus LF. 1993. A revolution in morphometrics. Trends in Ecology and Evolution. 8:29–132. doi:10.1016/0169-5347(93)90024-J.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rohlf FJ, Slice D. 1990. Extension of the procrustes method for the optimal superposition of landmarks. Systematic Zoology. 39:40–59. doi:10.2307/2992207.
   Google Scholar
• Rowiński PK, Mateos-Gonzalez F, Sandblom E, Jutfelt F, Ekström A, Sundström LF. 2015. Warming alters the body shape of European perch Perca fluviatilis. Journal of Fish Biology. 87:1234–1247. doi:10.1111/jfb.12785.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadighzadeh S, Tuset VM, Valinassab T, Dadpour MR, Lombarte A. 2012. Comparison of different otolith shape descriptors and morphometrics in the identification of closely related species of Lutjanus spp. From the Persian Gulf. Marine Biology Research. 8:802–814. doi:10.1080/17451000.2012.692163.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadighzadeh Z, Otero-Ferrer JL, Lombarte A, Fatemi MR, Tuset VM. 2014a. An approach to unraveling the coexistence of snappers (Lutjanidae) using otolith morphology. Scientia Marina. 78:353–362. doi:10.3989/scimar.03982.16C.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadighzadeh Z, Valinassab T, Vosugi G, Motallebi AA, Fatemi MR, Lombarte A, Tuset VM. 2014b. Use of otolith shape for stock identification of John's snapper, Lutjanus johnii (Pisces: Lutjanidae), from the Persian Gulf and the Oman Sea. Fisheries Research. 155:59–63. doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2014.02.024.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sánchez-González JR, Nicieza AG. 2017. Phenotypic convergence of artificially reared and wild trout is mediated by shape plasticity. Ecology & Evolution. 7:5922–5929. doi:10.1002/ece3.3156.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singleton M. 2002. Patterns of cranial shape variation in the Papionini (Primates: Cercopithecinae). Journal of Human Evolution. 42:547–578. doi:10.1006/jhev.2001.0539.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith MM, Heemstra PC. 1986. Smith’s sea fishes. Johannesburg: Macmillan. 1047 p.
   Google Scholar
• Sreekanth GB, Chakraborty SK, Jaiswa AK. 2016. Stock structure analysis of Japanese threadfin bream, Nemipterus japonicus (Bloch, 1791) along the Indian coast based on truss network analysis. Indian Journal of Geo-Marine Sciences. 46:1836–1841. http://nopr.niscair.res.in/handle/123456789/42601.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stransky C, MacLellan SE. 2005. Species separation and zoogeography of redfish and rockfish (genus Sebastes) by otolith shape analysis. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 62:2265–2276. doi:10.1139/f05-143.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strauss RE, Bond CE. 1990. Taxonomic methods: morphology: methods for fish biology. Bethesda, Maryland: American Fisheries Society.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas S, Rohit P. 2006. A new record of the stromateoid fish Psenopsis intermedia (Piontrovskiy, 1987) from Indian waters. Indian Journal of Fisheries. 53:127–130.
   Google Scholar
• Tuset VM, Lombarte A, Assis CA. 2008. Otolith atlas for the western Mediterranean, north and central eastern Atlantic. Scientia Marina. 72:7–198. doi:10.3989/scimar.2008.72s17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuset VM, Piretti S, Lombarte A, González JA. 2010. Using sagittal otoliths and eye diameter for ecological characterization of deepsea fish: Aphanopus carbo and A. intermedius from NE Atlantic waters. Scientia Marina. 74:807–814. doi:10.3989/scimar.2010.74n4807.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuset VM, Imondi R, Aguado G, Otero-Ferrer JL, Santschi L, Lombarte A, Love M. 2015. Otolith patterns of rockfishes from the Northeastern Pacific. Journal of Morphology. 276:458–469. doi:10.1002/jmor.20353.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuset VM, Otero-Ferrer JL, Gómez-Zurita J, Venerus LA, Stransky C, Imondi R, Orlov AM, Ye Z, Santschi L, Afanasiev PK, et al. 2016a. Otolith shape lends support to the sensory drive hypothesis in rockfishes. Journal of Evolutionary Biology. 29:2083–2097. doi:10.1111/jeb.12932.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuset VM, Farré M, Otero-Ferrer JL, Vilar A, Morales-Nin B, Lombarte A. 2016b. Testing otolith morphology for measuring marine fish biodiversity. Mar Freshwater Res. 67:1037–1048. doi:10.1071/MF15052.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuset VM, Olivar MP, Otero-Ferrer JL, López-Pérez C, Hulley PA, Lombarte A. 2018. Morpho-functional diversity in Diaphus spp. (Pisces: Myctophidae) from the central Atlantic Ocean: ecological and evolutionary implications. Deep Sea Research I. 138:46–59. doi:10.1016/j.dsr.2018.07.005.
   Google Scholar
• Tuset VM, Jurado-Ruzafa A, Otero-Ferrer JL, Santamaría MTG. 2019. Otolith phenotypic variability of the blue jack mackerel, Trachurus picturatus, from the Canary Islands (NE Atlantic): implications in its population dynamic. Fisheries Research. 218:48–58. doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2019.04.016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor MD, Fowler AM, Suthers IM. 2020. Insights into fish auditory structure–function relationships from morphological and behavioural ontogeny in a maturing sciaenid. Marine Biology. 167:1–11. doi:10.1007/s00227-019-3619-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valentin AE, Penin X, Chanut JP, Sevigny JM, Rohlf FJ. 2008. Arching effect on fish body shape in geometric morphometric studies. Journal of Fish Biology. 73:623–638. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8649.2008.01961.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venu S, Kurup BM. 2002a. Distribution and abundance of deep-sea fishes along the west coast of India. Fishery Technology. 39:20–26.
   Google Scholar
• Volpedo A, Echeverrı́a DD. 2003. Ecomorphological patterns of the sagitta in fish on the continental shelf off Argentine. Fisheries Research. 60:551–560. doi:10.1016/S0165-7836(02)00170-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Volpedo AV, Tombari AD, Echeverría DD. 2008. Eco-morphological patterns of the sagitta of Antarctic fish. Polar Biology. 31:635–640. Doi:10.1007/s00300-007-0400-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wainwright PC. 2007. Functional versus morphological diversity in macroevolution. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics. 38:381–401. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.38.091206.095706.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warrant E. 2000. The eyes of deep-sea fishes and the changing nature of visual scenes with depth. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. 355:1155–1159. doi:10.1098/rstb.2000.0658.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb PW. 1984. Body form, locomotion and foraging in aquatic vertebrates. American Zoologyst. 24:107–120. doi:10.1093/icb/24.1.107.
   Google Scholar
• Willis SC, Winemiller KO, Lopez-Fernandez H. 2005. Habitat structural complexity and morphological diversity of fish assemblages in a Neotropical floodplain river. Oecologia. 142:284–295. doi:10.1007/s00442-004-1723-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yedier S. 2021. Otolith shape analysis and relationships between total length and otolith dimensions of European barracuda, Sphyraena sphyraena in the Mediterranean Sea. Iranian Journal of Fisheries Sciences. 20:1080–1096. http://jifro.ir/article-1-4620-en.html.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yedier S, Bostanci D. 2021. Intra-and interspecific discrimination of Scorpaena species from the Aegean, Black, Mediterranean and Marmara seas. Scientia Marina. 85:197–209. doi:10.3989/scimar.05185.018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yedier S, Bostanci D. 2022. Molecular and otolith shape analyses of Scorpaena spp. in the Turkish seas. Turkish Journal of Zoology. 46:78–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhuang L, Ye Z, Zhang C. 2015. Application of otolith shape analysis to species separation in Sebastesspp. from the Bohai Sea and the Yellow Sea, northwest Pacific. Environmental Biology of Fishes. 98:547–558. doi:10.1007/s10641-014-0286-z.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar