东、黄海大黄鱼种群划分与地理隔离分析
作者:
作者单位:

中国水产科学研究院 东海水产研究所, 农业部海洋与河口渔业重点开放实验室, 上海 200090

作者简介:

陈佳杰(1983–), 男, 实习研究员; 研究方向: 海洋渔场学. E-mail: chen_jiajie83@126.com

基金项目:

国家973计划项目(2010CB428705); 我国近海海洋综合评价项目(908-02-01-03).


Analysis of population division and geographical isolation of Lari-michthys crocea in the East China Sea and Yellow Sea
Author:
Affiliation:

Key Laboratory of Marine and Estuarine Fisheries Resources and Ecology, Ministry of Agriculture, East China Sea Fisheries Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Fisheries Sciences, Shanghai 200090, China

  • 摘要
  • | |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • | |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    以往研究认为, 大黄鱼(Larimichthys crocea)可划分为3个种群, 其中在东黄海, 浙江的岱衢洋大黄鱼和福建的官井洋大黄鱼被认为分属于两个不同的种群。本研究根据中国大陆10多个主要渔业公司19711982年间的大黄鱼捕捞统计资料, 从地理隔离、数量动态和海洋水文方面, 重新审视了东黄海大黄鱼种群划分问题, 为大黄鱼种群划分和大黄鱼资源兴衰的研究提供科学依据。研究表明: 东海北部外海和东海南部近海是大黄鱼主要的两个越冬场, 其中闽东温台水域的大黄鱼产量在东海南部近海产量占主导地位。东海南部近海大黄鱼地理分布表明, 从温台渔场到闽东渔场大黄鱼的越冬场在空间分布上具有连续性, 而官井洋大黄鱼正是闽东渔场大黄鱼的主体部分。由此可以认为: 官井洋所在的闽东渔场的大黄鱼和东黄海大黄鱼同属于东黄海大黄鱼种群。这一结论通过3个旁证得到印证: 其一, 大黄鱼标志放流结果显示, 1959年4月21日在连江县北茭洋东32 m深的地方(26°21′5″N、119°50′E)重捕到浙江水产实验所于1958年5月20日在岱衢洋寨子山东偏北大黄鱼产卵场放流的1尾雄性大黄鱼, 因此, 闽东渔场的大黄鱼和岱衢洋是相互混栖的同一群体; 其二, 东海沿岸流和台湾暖流终年影响着闽浙近海, 难以形成大黄鱼种群隔离、种群分化所需要的海洋学条件; 其三, 官井洋大黄鱼春夏之交产卵, 与岱衢洋和猫头洋大黄鱼相似, 而与粤东和粤西大黄鱼在912月产卵完全不同。本研究旨在为大黄鱼资源的研究提供依据。

    Abstract:

    It was formerly believed that there were 3 populations of Larimichthys crocea distributed in the China Sea. Among these, individuals in the waters of Daiquyang, Zhejiang province and Guanjingyang were thought to belong to different populations. We reviewed the delineation of populations of L. crocea in the East China Sea and Yellow Sea based on a suite of methodologies, including geographical isolation, population dynamics, and ocean hydrology, so as to provide a rigorous basis for the division and to improve our ability to track declines in a given population. We used catch statistics of L. crocea from 1971 to 1982 from several major fishing companies. We identified two over-wintering grounds in the northern offshore and the southern near-shore regions of the East China Sea. The over-wintering resources in the Mindong-Wentai fishing grounds played a dominant role in the southern near-shore region of the East China Sea. The Guanjingyang L. crocea population overwintered in the waters of Mindong. Given this, the Guanjingyang L. crocea population was assigned to the East China Sea & Yellow Sea population. Two additional lines of evidence support this assignment. First, during a mark recapture study, a male large yellow croaker that was tagged at Daiquyang on May 20, 1958 was caught in Lianjiang (26°21′5″N, 119°50′E, 32 meters) on April 21, 1959. Thus, the populations in both Mindong and Daiquyang waters should be the same population with mutual inhabitation. Second, the East China Sea coastal current and the Taiwan Warm Current affect the coastal waters of Fujian and Zhejiang year round. Therefore oceanographic conditions are unlikely to cause population isolation.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
    网友评论
    网友评论
    分享到微博
    发 布
引用本文

陈佳杰,徐兆礼.东、黄海大黄鱼种群划分与地理隔离分析[J].中国水产科学,2012,19(2):310-320
CHEN Jiajie, XU Zhaoli. Analysis of population division and geographical isolation of Lari-michthys crocea in the East China Sea and Yellow Sea[J]. Journal of Fishery Sciences of China,2012,19(2):310-320

复制
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 在线发布日期: 2012-03-26
文章二维码