Nom du corpus

Corpus Systématique Animale

Titre du document

Structure, development and function of the branchial sieve of the common bream, Abramis brama , white bream, Blicca bjoerkna and roach, Rutilus rutilus

Lien vers le document
Springer (journals)
Langue(s) du document
Type de document
Mots-clés d'auteur
  • Cyprinids
  • Eutrophication
  • Zooplankton
  • Filter feeding
  • Gill rakers
  • Retention ability
  • Capacity
  • Comb model
  • Channel model
  • Energy ratio
Nom du fichier dans la ressource
  • Coen van den Berg 1
  • Ferdinand A. Sibbing 1
  • Jan W. M. Osse 1
  • Wim Hoogenboezem 1
  • 1) Department of Experimental Animal Morphology and Cell Biology, Agricultural University, Marijkeweg, 40, 6709, PG Wageningen, The Netherlands

Synopsis: The filter feeding organ of cyprinid fishes is the branchial sieve, which consists of a mesh formed by gill rakers and tiny channels on the gill arches. In order to establish its possible role during growth we measured the following morphological gill raker parameters over a range of sizes in three cyprinid fishes, bream, white bream and roach: inter raker distance, bony raker length, raker width, cushion length and channel width. At any given standard length common bream has the largest inter raker distance, roach the lowest and white bream is intermediate. In the ‘comb model’ of filter feeding the inter raker distance is considered to be a direct measure of the mesh size and retention ability (= minimal size of prey that can be retained) of a filter. For the three species under study there is a conflict between the comb model and experimental data on particle retention. Lammens et al. (1987) found that common bream has a large retention ability whereas roach and white bream have a much smaller one. A new model, the ‘channel model’ (Hoogenboezem et al. 1991) has been developed for common bream; in this model the lateral gill rakers can regulate the mesh size of the medial channels on the other side of the gill slit. The present data indicate that this model is not appropriate for white bream and roach. At any given standard length white bream and roach only reach 70% of the raker length of common bream, which means that in this model the gill slits should to be very narrow during filter feeding. The gill rakers consist of a bony raker and a fleshy cushion. The bony rakers have a rather long needle-like part outside the cushion in bream, but not in white bream and roach which have blunt gill rakers. Blunt gill rakers are not suited to reduce the diameter of the medial channels. The comb model seems more appropriate for white bream and roach, but doubts about the validity of this simple model remain. The sum of the areas of the medial channels is an approximation of the area through which water flows in the filter. This channel area therefore gives an impression of the capacity or flow rate of the filter. With this capacity estimation and an estimation of energy consumption we calculated an energy ratio of filter feeding. The energy ratio decreases with increasing standard length with an exponent close to the expected exponent of -0.40. The energy ratio is highest in bream, intermediate in white bream and lowest in roach.

Catégories Science-Metrix
  • 1 - applied sciences
  • 2 - agriculture, fisheries & forestry
  • 3 - fisheries
Catégories INIST
  • 1 - sciences appliquees, technologies et medecines
  • 2 - sciences biologiques et medicales
  • 3 - sciences biologiques fondamentales et appliquees. psychologie
Catégories Scopus
  • 1 - Life Sciences ; 2 - Agricultural and Biological Sciences ; 3 - Aquatic Science
  • 1 - Life Sciences ; 2 - Agricultural and Biological Sciences ; 3 - Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Catégories WoS
  • 1 - science ; 2 - marine & freshwater biology
  • 1 - science ; 2 - ecology
Identifiant ISTEX

Environmental Biology of Fishes

Année de publication
Présence de XML structuré
Version PDF
Score qualité du texte
  • Poissons
Type de publication
Powered by Lodex 9.3.8