See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/330213563

Diet composition and food habits of demersal and pelagic marine fishes from
Terengganu waters, east coast of Peninsular Malaysia

Article · July 2004

CITATIONS READS

59 761

3 authors, including:

Zainudin Bachok
Universiti Malaysia Terengganu
124 PUBLICATIONS 1,602 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Zainudin Bachok on 08 January 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 articles

Diet composition and food habits of

demersal and pelagic marine fishes from
Terengganu waters, east coast of Peninsular
Malaysia
Z. Bachok, M.I. Mansor and R.M. Noordin

Abstract
Fish stomachs from 18 demersal and pelagic fishes from the coast of Terengganu in Malaysia were examined.
The components of the fishes’ diets varied in number, weight, and their frequency of occurrence. The major
food items in the stomachs of each species were determined using an Index of Relative Importance. A
“conceptual” food web structure indicates that fish species in the study area can be classified into three
predatory groups: (1) predators on largely planktivorous or pelagic species; (2) predators on largely
benthophagous or demersal species; and (3) mixed feeders that consume both pelagic and demersal species.

Introduction even in its most casual and anecdotal understanding the biology of predator
form, can yield incidental but immediately and prey species as well as being useful
Changes in the populations of marine valuable information since predators for stock- and ecosystem-level analyses.
fishes have prompted researchers to are often better sampling devices than
examine and assess their stocks. In the most commercial fishing gears (Caddy Materials and methods
past decade, the management of marine and Sharp 1986). Information on the
resources has usually been defined on food habits of marine fishes, such as the Demersal and pelagic fish specimens
the basis of a single-species model that predator-prey relationships, is useful in (Table 1) were obtained from the fish
has been used to develop multi-species order to assess the role of marine fishes landing complex of Pulau Kambing, Kuala
models of exploited fish populations, in the ecosystem. Terengganu, Malaysia (Figure 1) from
which provide insight into the fluctuation January 1993 to June 1994. The samples
of the marine resources (Gulland 1991). There are only a only a few studies that were selected randomly and then stored
The study of the feeding behavior of describe stomach content analysis of in boxes containing ice to slow any
marine fishes is necessary for fish stock marine fishes from the South China Sea bacterial digestion process in the fish
assessment and ecosystem modeling. and east coast of Malaysia. Khalijah and stomachs and make it easier to identify
For example, methods of multi-species Salleh (1985), Chan and Liew (1986) the prey. The fish samples were taken to
virtual population analysis (Sparre 1991; and Mohsin et al. (1987) studied the a laboratory for further analysis.
Bulgakova et al. 2001) and the ECOPATH stomach contents of communities
II ecosystem model (Christensen and of small demersal fish. These studies The total length and fresh weight of the
Pauly 1993) need information on the did not include the moderate to individual specimens were measured.
dietary composition of fishes. large fish species. The present study The ventricle of the fishes was split
was conducted for both commercial open to determine the sex and then the
Predator pressure is a pervasive influence demersal and pelagic fishes from the fish guts were removed and cut open.
on the evolution of populations and on Terengganu waters on the east coast All food items in the stomachs were
the structure and function of nearly all of peninsular Malaysia in order to identified to the most precise taxonomic
marine communities and ecosystems determine their dietary compositions level, i.e., genera, whenever possible
(Duffy and Hay 2001). Paine (1969) and food habits. Since there is little (Fischer and Bianchi 1984; Lin 1992).
coined the term ‘keystone’ for species published information on the diets of The total number, wet weight, and
that have strong community impacts fish from the South China Sea near frequency of occurrence of each prey
that are disproportionate to their peninsular Malaysia, the results of item in the stomach of the fishes were
abundance. Stomach content analysis, this study are also aimed at better recorded.

NAGA, WorldFish Center Quarterly Vol. 27 No. 3 & 4 Jul-Dec 2004 41

articles

specialist. For example, in the stomachs

of demersal species, of the 36 prey items,
64 and 44 percent of them were found
in Rachycentron canadum and Lutjanus
gibbus, respectively. Of the 20 items in the
pelagic species, 70 percent were found
in Coryphaena hippurus and 40 percent in
Scomberomorus commerson. This suggests
that these species utilize a broad range
of prey items. On the other hand, the
low number of different food items in
Auxis thazard thazard, Carangoides ferdau,
Euthynnus affinis, Sphyraena jello and
S. obtusata (Table 3) suggests that they are
more selective in their diets and specialize
on particular food items.

The composition of the diet indicated

N that the fully adult fishes were
carnivores feeding on small marine
animals, mainly teleosts. Cephalopods,
crustaceans, echinoderm and molluscs
also contributed to the diet (Table 3).
However, it is important to recognize the
actual complexity of the situation because
species may feed at different levels in the
food chain at different stages of their life
cycle. For instance, Landry (1997) found
that fully adult codfish are predators on
herring, but when they are small (<50 cm
long) they feed on copepods and
other planktonic crustaceans. The food
preference of predatory fishes is very
complex and is influenced by many factors
Figure 1. Location of Peninsular Malaysia and Pulau Kambing fish landing complex. such as prey accessibility and mobility,
prey abundance, prey energy content,
prey size selection and seasonal changes
The dietary components for each species easily identified because of their size. (Nieland 1980; Hart and Ison 1991;
studied were expressed as a percentage of Some fish stomachs, however, were empty. Stergiou and Fourtouni 1991; Brewer
numerical composition (CN), percentage of For Auxis thazard thazard, Carangoides and Warburton 1992; Barry and Ehret
gravimetric composition (CW) and percent- ferdau, Caranx sexfasciatus, Euthynnus 1993). This should be kept in mind when
age of frequency of occurrence (F) (Hyslop affinis, Sphyraena jello and S. obtusata, 30 interpreting the data presented here.
1980). The most important food item was to 41 percent of the stomachs examined
determined by using the Index of Relative were empty. For the other species, 22 to The percentages by number (CN), weight
Importance (IRI) of Pinkas et al. (1971): 30 percent of stomachs examined were (CW) and frequency of occurrence (F) gave
empty. A total of 44 prey items (Table 2) information on the main prey items in
IRI = (CN + CW) x F were found in the stomachs of the fish the diet (Table 3). The high frequency of
sampled. Thirty-six prey items were found occurrence of a certain prey item in fish
Results and discussion in the stomach of demersal species, while diets (e.g., trout sweetlip in Lutjanus gibbus,
20 items were identified within pelagic bigeye scad in Rachycentron canadum, tuna
The species of marine fishes selected for species. in Coryphaena hippurus, torpedo scad in
study are given in Table 1. It was possible Scomberomorus commerson) does not
to count and weigh all food items in the The fishes’ feeding habits fell in the mean that the given food types are of
stomach and most of the prey items were spectrum between generalist and nutritional importance to the consumer.

42 NAGA, WorldFish Center Quarterly Vol. 27 No. 3 & 4 Jul-Dec 2004

 articles

Table 1. List of marine fishes selected for dietary composition studies from waters off Terengganu on the east coast of
Peninsular Malaysia.
No. of Size range Weight range
Groups/family/species Common name Ratio (M/F)
samples (cm) (kg)
DEMERSAL FISH
ARIIDAE
Arius oetik Sea catfish 71 1.62 18.0 - 69.0 0.1 - 5.0
HAEMULIDAE
Plectorhinchus pictus Trout sweetlip 56 17.5 17.5 - 57.0 0.2 - 3.1
LUTJANIDAE
Lutjanus gibbus Humpback snapper 111 0.76 21.0 - 111.0 0.2 - 7.5
Lutjanus malabaricus Malabar blood snapper 125 0.49 34.0 - 64.0 0.5 - 5.2
Lutjanus sanguineus Humphead snapper 113 2.06 21.0 - 74.0 0.8 - 4.2
Pristipomoides filamentosus Crimson jobfish 181 1.27 17.0 - 155.0 0.3 - 4.9
RACHYCENTRIDAE
Rachycentron canadum Cobia 98 0.97 33.0 - 139.0 0.9 - 1.5
SPHYRAENIDAE
Sphyraena jello Pickhandle barracuda 17 0.86 55.0 - 100.0 0.6 - 4.2
Sphyraena obtusata Obtuse barracuda 52 1.56 21.0 - 88.0 0.3 - 1.5
PELAGIC FISH

CARANGIDAE
Carangoides ferdau Blue trevally 38 1.0 - 5.6
0.75 42.0 - 62.0
Caranx sexfasciatus Bigeye trevally 43 0.3 - 3.8
1.58 37.0 - 70.0
CORYPHAENIDAE
Coryphaena hippurus Common dolphinfish 171 0.52 47.5 - 106.0 0.7 - 9.0
ISTIOPHORIDAE
Makaira indica Black marlin 32 1.20 106.8 - 241.5 15.0 - 31.2
Istiophorus platypterus Indo-Pacific sailfish 13 2.33 110.0 - 211.0 26.0 - 27.8
SCOMBRIDAE
Auxis thazard thazard Frigate tuna 47 1.14 31.0 - 43.0 0.6 - 1.3
Euthynnus affinis Kawakawa 79 1.62 33.0 - 45.0 0.6 - 1.4
Scomberomorus commerson Barred Spanish mackerel 80 0.43 20.0 - 103.0 0.8 - 9.4
Thunnus tonggol Longtail tuna 112 2.44 32.0 - 61.0 0.3 - 3.2

They may be consumed with great data regardless of the size of different 1980-1991). In addition, Coryphaena
regularity but in very small quantities prey types. If the investigation aims to hippurus, Istiophorus platypterus, Makaira
(Table 3). On the other hand, the study measure the contribution of a prey to indica and Rachycentron canadum are
showed that prey items that were small in the predator’s nutrition, then percentage potentially important for sport fishing
size (e.g., anchovy, ponyfish and sergestid by weight is a fully adequate indicator. activities (Booth 1994). The prey of the
shrimp) were eaten in greater numbers, In this study, the use of the Index of fishes examined (Table 2) have also been
while the large size prey (e.g., bigeye Relative Importance (IRI) was found to commercially exploited and some have
scad, round scad and threadfin bream) be more useful in describing the relative been found at the major fish landing
were eaten in fewer numbers. However, importance of a prey species. sites in this area (SEAFDEC 1980-1990);
comparing their weight gave the opposite Round scad (Decapterus spp.), for example,
result (Table 3). Percentage by number The fish species investigated in this study contributed around 10 percent of the total
overemphasizes the importance of (Table 1) are commercially important. marine catches or 17 percent of the small
smaller prey since they weigh so much Arius oetik, Lutjanus gibbus, L. malabaricus, pelagic catches. According to data from
less than larger prey, but percentage by L. sanguineus, Pristipomoides filamentosus the Department of Fisheries, Malaysia
weight overemphasizes the importance of and Plectorhinchus pictus are a major (1980-1991), the catches decreased
large prey (Pinkas et al. 1971; George and component of demersal resources, while from 35 300 t in 1981 to 14 400 t in
Hadley 1979; Hyslop 1980). Bowen (1983) Auxis thazard thazard, Euthynnus affinis, 1991. Studies conducted in temperate
suggests that if the investigation aims to Scomberomorus commerson and Thunnus and tropical seas have revealed that the
determine the impact of the predator on tonggol are among the dominant pelagic removal of marine consumers (herbivores
a prey’s population dynamics, then the fishes on the east coast of Peninsular or predators) often causes profound
percentage by number will provide useful Malaysia (Department of Fisheries Malaysia changes in community organization, habitat

NAGA, WorldFish Center Quarterly Vol. 27 No. 3 & 4 Jul-Dec 2004 43

articles

Table 2. List of prey found in the stomach of fishes from Terengganu waters. more, the food web can be expanded by
including the previous data available on
Groups/family Common name Scientific name
dietary composition of prey species (e.g.,
TELEOST Chong 1973; Khalijah and Salleh 1985;
ARIIDAE Sea catfish Arius oetik Chan and Liew 1986; Mohsin et al. 1987).
BALISTIDAE Triggerfish Abalistes spp.
The conceptual food web structure indi-
BALISTIDAE Filefish Monacanthus spp.
BELONIDAE Needlefish Tylosurus spp. cates that three basic predatory groups
CARANGIDAE Yellowtail scad Atule mate may be recognized: (1) predators on
CARANGIDAE Torpedo scad Megalaspis cordyla largely planktivorous or pelagic species;
CARANGIDAE Bigeye scad Selar crumenophthalmus
(2) predators on largely benthophagous
CARANGIDAE Yellowstripe scad Selaroides leptolepis
CARANGIDAE Round scad Decapterus spp. or demersal species; and (3) predators on
CLUPEIDAE Sardine Dussumieria spp. both pelagic and demersal species.
DASYATIDAE Pale-edged stingray Dasyatis zugei
ENGRAULIDAE Anchovy Stolephorus spp.
Overholtz et al. (1991) studied the impact
EXOCOETIDAE Flyingfish Exocoetus spp.
FISTULARIDAE Cornetfish Fistularia spp. of predatory fish, marine mammals and
GERREIDAE Silver-biddy Gerres spp. seabirds on the pelagic fish ecosystem
HAEMULIDAE Trout sweetlip Plectorhinchus pictus of the northeastern USA and found that
HEMIRAMPHIDAE Dussumier's halfbeak Hyporamphus spp.
predatory fish, primarily spiny dogfish, had
LEIOGNATHIDAE Ponyfish Leiognathus spp.
LEIOGNATHIDAE Splendid ponyfish Leiognathus splendens caused most of the predation mortality in
LUTJANIDAE Bigeye snapper Lutjanus lutjanus the system, followed by marine mammals
MURAENESOCIDAE Conger eel Muraenesox spp. and seabirds. Furthermore, Kitchell et al.
NEMIPTERIDAE Threadfin bream Nemipterus spp.
(1994) showed that at the community and
PARALICHTHYIDAE Flounder Pseudorhombus spp.
PLOTOSIDAE Catfish eel Plotosus spp. population scales, prey selection by preda-
PRIACANTHIDAE Purple-spotted bigeye Priacanthus tayenus tors alters habitat selection behaviors of
SCIAENIDAE Croaker Johnius spp. prey species as well as their abundance,
SCOMBRIDAE Indian mackerel Rastrelliger spp.
size distribution, life histories and the
SCOMBRIDAE Tuna Thunnus spp.
SIGANIDAE Rabbitfish Siganus spp. consequent effects on their own prey.
SILLAGINIDAE Silver sillago Sillago sihama Therefore, both direct and indirect preda-
SPHYRAENIDAE Barracuda Sphyraena spp. tion effects are important aspects that
SYNODONTIDAE Greater lizardfish Saurida tumbil
can give guidelines for the management of
TETRAODONTIDAE Pufferfish Chelonodon spp.
TRICHIURIDAE Ribbonfish Trichiurus spp. marine resources in this region.
CRUSTACEAN
PENAEIDAE Penaeid shrimps Penaeus spp.
Acknowledgements
PORTUNIDAE Crab Portunus spp.
SCYLLARIDAE Flathead locust lobster Thenus orientalis The authors extend their gratitude to
SERGESTIDAE Sergestid shrimp Acetes spp. the Director General of the Fisheries
SQUILLIDAE Mantis shrimp Squilla spp. Department, Malaysia, Dato’ Hashim
MOLLUSC Ahmad, and the Head of MFRDMD,
MYTILIDAE Mussel Unidentified En Ibrahim Salleh, for supporting this
STRUTHIOLARIDAE Snail Unidentified research. They also thank Prof. Makoto
CEPHALOPOD Squid Unidentified Tsuchiya for valuable advice on the
ECHINODERM manuscript and all MFRDMD members
HOLOTHURIOIDAE Sea cucumber Unidentified for technical assistance during the study.
OPHIUROIDEA Brittle star Unidentified
References
structure and ecosystem processes (Duffy ters was used to illustrate the predator-
and Hay 2001). Furthermore, Pauly et al. prey food web (Figure 2). The fishes and Barry, J.P. and M.J. Ehret. 1993. Diet, food
(1998) showed that current fishing efforts their prey items were classified into 26 preference, and algal availability for
have a global impact and that the mean groups in order to reduce the complexity fishes and crabs on intertidal reef
trophic level of animals harvested from of the figure. Although only the stomach communities in southern California.
the sea is decreasing. contents of 18 fish species were analyzed, Environ. Biol. Fish. 37:82-92.
the results are representative of the key Booth, G. 1994. Modern fishing’s game fish
The information on the dietary composi- commercial fish communities, especially records and rules. Federal Publishing
tion of the fishes from the Terengganu wa- those at the higher tropic level. Further- Company Pty. Ltd. Inc.

44 NAGA, WorldFish Center Quarterly Vol. 27 No. 3 & 4 Jul-Dec 2004

 articles

Table 3. Percentage Index of Relative Importance (IRI), percentage numerical Bowen, S.H. 1983. Quantitative
composition (CN), percentage gravimetric composition (CW), and percentage description of the diet, p. 325-336. In
frequency of occurrence (F) of prey items in the diet of demersal and pelagic fishes L.A. Nielson and D.L. Johnson (eds.)
from Terengganu waters. Fisheries Techniques. An. Fish Sor.
Species Prey % IRI CN CW F Bethesda, Maryland.
DEMERSAL FISHES Brewer, D.T. and K. Warburton. 1992.
Arius oetik Ponyfish 62.55 19.26 32.95 29.73 Selection of prey from a seagrass/
Crab 16.60 2.96 10.89 2.70 mangrove environment by golden lined
Sergestid shrimp 9.66 74.07 14.63 2.70 whiting, Sillago analis (Whitley). J. Fish
Squid 6.69 0.74 19.74 8.11 Biol. 40:257-271.
Conger eel 1.17 0.25 10.49 8.11
Flathead locust lobster 1.08 0.74 2.58 2.70 Bulgakova, T., D.Vasilyev and N. Daan. 2001.
Sea cucumber 1.05 0.49 4.31 8.11 Weighting and smoothing of stomach
Penaeid shrimp 0.82 0.99 1.51 29.73 content data as input for MSVPA with
Mussel 0.27 0.25 2.22 2.70 particular reference to the Barents
Indian mackerel 0.10 0.25 0.67 5.41
Sea. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 58:1208-1218.
Lutjanus gibbus Squid 90.02 52.46 41.25 2.38
Ponyfish 2.23 11.48 3.21 2.38 Caddy, J.F. and G.D. Sharp. 1986. An
Indian mackerel 1.81 3.28 8.68 4.76 ecological framework for marine
Silver-biddy 1.77 6.56 10.95 4.76 fishery investigations. FAO Fisheries
Penaeid shrimp 0.89 4.92 0.92 7.14 Technical Paper 283. FAO, Rome.
Greater lizardfish 0.88 3.28 5.41 7.14
Ribbonfish 0.38 3.28 4.28 2.38 Chan, E.H. and H.C. Liew. 1986.
Yellowstripe scad 0.33 1.64 4.82 2.38 Characteristics of an exploited
Pufferfish 0.30 1.64 4.39 2.38 tropical shallow-water demersal fish
Threadfin bream 0.28 1.64 3.82 2.38 community in Malaysia, p. 349-352.
Conger eel 0.27 1.64 3.78 2.38
Torpedo scad 0.27 1.64 3.72 2.38 In J.L. Maclean, L.B. Dizon and L.V.
Sliver whiting 0.23 1.64 2.85 2.38 Hosillos (eds.) The first Asian Fisheries
Trout sweetlip 0.13 1.64 1.00 45.24 Forum. Asian Fisheries Society, Manila,
Sardine 0.12 1.64 0.68 7.14 Philippines.
Flathead locust lobster 0.09 1.64 0.24 2.38
Chong, B.J. 1973. Studies on the taxonomy
Lutjanus malabaricus Ponyfish 42.26 70.97 29.08 14.29
Squid 23.28 12.90 5.47 14.29 and distribution of Ikan Kembung,
Threadfin bream 16.92 3.23 36.84 14.29 Rastrelliger spp. in west Malaysia. Malay.
Round scad 11.52 6.45 20.82 14.29 Agri. 49(2):143-153.
Bigeye snapper 6.02 6.45 7.79 42.86
Christensen,V. and D. Pauly. 1993. A
Lutjanus sanguineus Round scad 94.15 66.67 89.00 62.50
guide to the ECOPATH II software
Squid 4.75 16.67 9.51 18.75
Crab 0.57 8.33 1.10 6.25 system (version 2.1). ICLARM, Manila,
Flathead locust lobster 0.27 4.17 0.29 6.25 Philippines.
Penaeid shrimp 0.26 4.17 0.10 6.25 Department of Fisheries Malaysia. 1980-
Plectorhinchus pictus Sergestid shrimp 27.34 54.55 3.61 13.33 1993. Annual Fisheries Statistics of
Round scad 26.23 3.64 52.17 6.67
Malaysia.
Crab 19.14 9.09 18.05 26.67
Penaeid shrimp 17.92 14.55 4.51 13.33 Duffy, J.M. and M.E. Hay. 2001. The ecology
Ponyfish 6.39 12.73 14.44 6.67 and evolution of marine consumer-
Mantis shrimp 1.28 1.82 3.61 20.00 prey interaction, p. 131-157. In M.D.
Mussel 0.85 1.82 1.81 6.67
Bertness, S.D. Gaines and M.E. Hay
Brittle star 0.85 1.82 1.81 6.67
Pristipomoides Ponyfish 90.03 90.32 65.28 44.44
(eds.) Marine community ecology.
filamentosus Purple-spot bigeye 7.09 4.84 19.66 22.22 Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland.
Squid 1.96 1.61 11.90 11.11 Fischer, W. and G. Bianchi. 1984. FAO
Crab 0.48 1.61 1.71 11.11 species identification sheets for fishery
Rabbitfish 0.44 1.61 1.44 11.11
purposes: Western Indian Ocean
Rachycentron canadum Rabbitfish 73.51 49.90 33.14 1.74
Round scad 7.59 0.66 13.63 11.30
(Fishing Area 51).Vol. I–V. FAO, Rome.
Sergestid shrimp 6.55 40.77 3.66 3.48 George, E.L. and W.F. Hadley. 1979. Food
Filefish 5.39 6.90 13.38 7.83 and habitat partitioning between
Catfish eel 3.78 0.32 9.53 1.74 rock bass (Ambloplites rupestris)
Squid 1.43 0.30 6.61 1.74
Crab 0.82 0.28 3.68 0.87
and smallmouth bass (Micropterus
Croaker 0.23 0.15 1.81 0.87 dolomicui) young of the year. Trans.
Tuna 0.19 0.06 2.12 0.87 Amer. Fish. Soc. 108:253-261.
continued >

NAGA, WorldFish Center Quarterly Vol. 27 No. 3 & 4 Jul-Dec 2004 45

articles

< continued
Rachycentron canadum Bigeye scad 0.14 0.04 2.27 26.09
Threadfin bream 0.08 0.02 2.71 0.87
Gulland, J.A. 1991. Some problems of
Pale-edged stingray 0.07 0.02 2.29 15.65 management of shared stocks. FAO
Fusilier 0.04 0.06 0.70 0.87 Fisheries Technical Paper. No 206. FIRM/
Ribbonfish 0.04 0.08 1.29 0.87 T206. FAO, Rome.
Flounder 0.04 0.04 0.62 2.61
Purple-spotted bigeye 0.03 0.06 1.02 6.09
Hart, P.J.B. and S. Ison. 1991.The influence of
Sea catfish 0.02 0.02 0.67 6.09 prey size and abundance, and individual
Sardine 0.01 0.02 0.39 0.87 phenotype on prey choice by the
Penaeid shrimp 0.01 0.08 0.31 0.87 three-spined stickleback, Gasterosteus
Snail 0.01 0.15 0.02 4.35
Mussel 0.00 0.06 0.01 0.87
aculeatus L. J. Fish Biol. 38:359-372.
Mantis shrimp 0.00 0.02 0.10 1.74 Hyslop, E.J. 1980. Stomach content analysis:
Flathead locust lobster 0.00 0.02 0.03 1.74 A review of methods and their
Yellowstripe scad 88.99 75.00 70.88 75.00 application. J. Fish Biol. 17:411-422.
Sphyraena jello
Bigeye scad 11.01 25.00 29.12 25.00 Khalijah, S.D. and M.M.T. Salleh. 1985.
Ponyfish 51.51 57.14 12.24 66.67 Stomach contents of selected demersal
Sphyraena obtusata
Squid 48.49 42.86 87.76 33.33
species from South China Sea, p. 187-
PELAGIC FISHES
192. In A.K.M. Mohsin, M.M.I. Ibrahim
Auxis thazard thazard Anchovy 51.67 95.45 40.81 33.33
and M.A. Ambak (eds.) Ekspedisi
Squid 48.33 4.55 59.19 66.67
Matahari ‘87. Universiti Pertanian
Carangoides ferdau Filefish 98.83 90.24 90.43 90.00
Indian mackerel 1.17 9.76 9.57 10.00 Malaysia, Serdang.
Caranx sexfasciatus Filefish 96.68 96.99 77.79 63.64 Kitchell, J.F., L.A. Eby, X. He, D.E. Schindler
Round scad 2.66 1.50 15.30 18.18 and R.A.Wright. 1994. Predator-prey
Croaker 0.61 0.75 6.92 9.09 dynamics in an ecosystem context. J.
Squid 0.06 0.75 0.80 9.09
Fish Biol. 45(Supplement A):209-226.
Coryphaena hippurus Round scad 85.54 29.31 52.47 10.20
Filefish 9.56 50.74 8.69 9.52
Landry, M.R. 1997. A review of important
Bigeye scad 3.40 3.47 16.24 1.36 concepts in the trophic organization
Triggerfish 0.62 3.57 9.82 3.40 of pelagic ecosystems. Helgolander
Indian mackerel 0.40 1.05 5.94 0.68 Wissenschaften Meeresuntersuchungen
Pufferfish 0.19 7.56 0.88 1.36
Rabbitfish 0.08 1.37 0.32 1.36
30:8-17.
Sardine 0.06 0.42 1.26 0.68 Lin, H.S. 1992. Coral reefs of Malaysia.
Yellowtail scad 0.06 0.21 2.25 2.72 Tropical Press Sdn. Bhd.
Tuna 0.05 0.32 1.85 61.90 Mohsin, A.K.M., S. Hayase, M.A. Ambak,
Yellowstripe scad 0.04 1.68 0.05 2.04
Needlefish 0.00 0.11 0.11 2.72
S.M.M. Zaki and A.H.T. Khan. 1987.
Purple-spot bigeye 0.00 0.11 0.09 1.36 Feeding habits of fishes found in the
Squid 0.00 0.11 0.03 0.68 EEZ off Sarawak, p. 145-143. In A.K.M.
Euthynnus affinis Anchovy 56.87 71.43 42.31 50.00 Mohsin and M.M.I Ibrahim (eds.)
Indian mackerel 43.13 28.57 57.69 50.00 Ekspedisi Matahari ‘87. Universiti
Istiophorus platypterus Anchovy 70.71 63.64 22.16 45.45 Pertanian Malaysia, Serdang.
Round scad 23.08 8.36 51.64 21.21
Squid 3.34 3.27 5.42 6.06 Nieland, H. 1980. Experiments on whether
Rabbitfish 1.79 21.45 11.16 3.03 schooling by their prey affects the
Bigeye scad 0.73 2.91 3.72 3.03 hunting behaviour of cephalopods and
Dussumier’s halfbeak 0.34 0.36 5.91 21.21 fish predators. J. Zool. 174(4):149-167.
Makaira indica Anchovy 64.30 82.09 13.94 33.33 Overholtz,W.J., S.A. Murawski and K.L.
Bigeye scad 22.48 10.45 34.32 8.33
Flyingfish 6.60 2.99 16.72 25.00 Foster. 1991. Impact of predatory
Yellowtail scad 4.71 1.49 26.66 16.67 fish, marine mammals and seabirds
Round scad 1.27 1.49 6.10 8.33 on the pelagic fish ecosystem of the
Squid 0.63 1.49 2.26 8.33 northeastern, USA. ICES Mar. Sci. Symp.
Scomberomorus Round scad 51.53 26.67 41.11 12.00
193:198-208.
commerson Sardine 22.89 26.67 15.48 4.00
Indian mackerel 11.00 16.67 8.64 16.00 Paine, R.T. 1969. A note on trophic
Torpedo scad 7.81 10.00 13.96 28.00 complexity and community stability.
Yellowstripe scad 2.88 6.67 6.58 4.00 Amer. Nat. 103:91-93.
Squid 1.81 6.67 1.67 8.00
Pauly, D.,V. Christensen,V. Dalsgaard, R.
Barracuda 1.25 3.33 8.13 20.00
Purple-spotted bigeye 0.84 3.33 4.43 8.00 Froese and F.Torres Jr. 1998. Fishing
Thunnus tonggol Filefish 87.79 64.86 75.72 61.90 down marine food webs. Science 279:
Anchovy 9.98 32.75 13.41 21.43 860-863.
Squid 2.23 2.39 10.87 16.67

46 NAGA, WorldFish Center Quarterly Vol. 27 No. 3 & 4 Jul-Dec 2004

 articles

Figure 2. A “conceptual” food web structure constructed from the food relationships between marine
fishes and their prey in Terengganu waters, east coast of Peninsular Malaysia.

The predators and prey were grouped into:

(1) Black marlin (Makaira indica) and sailfish (Istiophorus platypterus); (2) Red snapper (Lutjanus gibbus, L. malabaricus and L. sanguineus) and jobfish (Pristipomoides
microlepis); (3) Mahi mahi (Coryphacna hippurus); (4) Barred spanish mackerel (Scomberomorus commerson); (5) Black kingfish (Rachycentron canadus); (6) Tuna
(Auxis thazard, Euthynnus affinis and Thunnus tonggol); (7) Catfish (Arius utik and Plotosus canius); (8) Barracuda (Sphyraena jello and S. obtusata); (9) Jack (Carangoides
ferdau and Caranx sexfasciatus); (10) Silver conger eel (Muraenesox cinerus) and ribbonfish (Trichiurus spp.); (11) Sweetlip (Plectorhinchus pictus); (12) Croaker
(Johnius spp.), purple-spotted bigeye (Priacanthus tayenus), rosy snapper (L. lutjanus) and threadfin bream (Nemipterus spp.); (13) Flyingfish (Exocoetus spp.) and
dussumier’s halfbeak (Hyporamphus spp.); (14) Lizardfish (Saurida tumbil) and silver-whiting (Sillago sihama); (15) Stingray (Dasyatis zugei); (16) Small pelagic (Atule
mate, Decapterus spp., Megalaspis cordyla, Sardinella spp., Selar crumenophthalmus, Selaroides leptolepis and Rastrelliger spp.); (17) Flounder (Psettodes spp.); (18)
Pufferfish (Diodon spp.); (19) Ponyfish (Leiognathus spp.), rabbitfish (Siganus spp.) and silver-biddy (Gerres spp.); (20) Filefish (Monacanthus spp.) and triggerfish
(Abalistes spp.); (21) Anchovy (Stolephorus spp.); (22) Squid; (23) Shrimp/prawn (Acetes spp., Penaeus spp. and Squilla spp.) and lobster (Thenus orientalis); (24)
Crab (Portunus spp.); (25) Mollusc (snail and mussel); and (26) Echinoderm (sea cucumber and brittle star).

Pinkas, L., M.S. Olipham and I.L.K. Iverson.

1971. Food habits of albacore, bluefin Z. Bachok is from the Laboratory of
tuna and bonito in Californian waters. Ecology and Systematics, Faculty of Science,
California Fish Game 152:1-105. University of the Ryukyus, Senbaru 1,
SEAFDEC (1980-1990). Fishery statistical Nishihara, Okinawa 903-0213, Japan.
bulletin for the South China Sea area. M.I. Mansor is from the Marine Fishery
SEAFDEC, Kuala Terengganu. Resources Development and Management
Sparre, P. 1991. Introduction to Department (MFRDMD), Southeast Asian
multispecies virtual population analysis. Fisheries Development Center (SEAFDEC),
ICES Mar. Sci. Symp. 193:12-21. 21080 Chendering, Kuala Terengganu,
Stergiou, K.I. and H. Fourtouni. 1991. Food Malaysia. R.M. Noordin is from Fisheries
habits, ontogenetic diet shift and Research Institute, 11960 Batu Maung,
selectivity in Zeus faber Linnaeus, 1758. Penang, Malaysia.
J. Fish Biol. 39:589-603. Email: [email protected]

NAGA, WorldFish Center Quarterly Vol. 27 No. 3 & 4 Jul-Dec 2004 47

View publication stats