Evaluating the Effectiveness of Otolith Shape Analysis for Population Discrimination in Chub, <i>Squalius cephalus</i> (Leuciscidae)
JOURNAL OF ICHTHYOLOGY, 2026 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
- Basım Tarihi: 2026
- Doi Numarası: 10.1134/s0032945226600357
- Dergi Adı: JOURNAL OF ICHTHYOLOGY
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, BIOSIS, Zoological Record, Natural Science Collection (ProQuest), Biological Science Database (ProQuest), Earth, Atmospheric, & Aquatic Science Collection (ProQuest)
- Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet
Özet
Otoliths are calcified structures located in the inner ear of teleost fish. Exhibiting a unique morphology, otoliths provide valuable data for studies on fish morphology, morphometry, and ecology, contributing to the assessment of intraspecific or interspecific variation. The aim of this study is to investigate inter-population variation in Squalius cephalus in the Middle Black Sea Region of T & uuml;rkiye by analyzing the morphometric and shape variability of asteriscus and lapillus otoliths. A total of 400 S. cephalus specimens (40 specimens per location) were caught from ten freshwater sources in Samsun Province. Shape indices (form factor, aspect ratio, circularity, roundness, rectangularity, and ellipticity), elliptic Fourier analysis, and wavelet analysis were applied to both the right asteriscus and lapillus of each specimen. Principal component analysis and canonical discriminant analysis were performed to discriminate among S. cephalus samples. Of the three otolith-based methods used to determine variation among S. cephalus populations, wavelet analysis showed a slightly higher overall classification success rate (asteriscus 32.5%; lapillus 33.5%) than the other methods. A one-way PERMANOVA showed significant differences among all sampling locations for both the asteriscus and the lapillus (p = 0.0001). These results indicated that some differences existed among certain samples; however, the generally low classification success rates indicated that these differences were not strong enough to produce a distinct overall separation among all samples.