Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-mzp66 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T20:53:28.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Comparison of fish assemblages between the Sea of Marmara and the Aegean Sea (north-eastern Mediterranean)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Cetin Keskin*
Affiliation:
Istanbul University, Department of Marine Biology, Fisheries Faculty, 34470 Laleli, Istanbul, Turkey
Francesc Ordines
Affiliation:
Instituto Español de Oceanografía, Centre Oceanogràfic de les Balears, Moll de Ponent s/n 07015 Palma, Spain
Beatriz Guijarro
Affiliation:
Instituto Español de Oceanografía, Centre Oceanogràfic de les Balears, Moll de Ponent s/n 07015 Palma, Spain
Enric Massutí
Affiliation:
Instituto Español de Oceanografía, Centre Oceanogràfic de les Balears, Moll de Ponent s/n 07015 Palma, Spain
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: C. Keskin, Istanbul University, Department of Marine Biology, Fisheries Faculty 34470 Laleli, Istanbul, Turkey email: seahorse@istanbul.edu.tr
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The demersal fish assemblages of the south-western Sea of Marmara and the north-eastern Aegean Sea were examined in relation to their biogeographical and environmental conditions. Sampling was carried out during bottom trawl surveys conducted during five periods between June 2006 and August 2007. A total of 40 hauls were processed, including 16 in the Sea of Marmara (38–74 m deep) and 24 in the north-eastern Aegean Sea (63–401 m deep). A total of 47,940 individuals, from 91 species and 47 families were collected. Cluster analysis of catch data indicated that there were three assemblages, one in the shelf of the Sea of Marmara and two in the Aegean Sea (<100 and >200 m depth). The numerical abundance and biomass of fish, mean fish weight, mean species richness, diversity and evenness were compared between these assemblages. Multivariate analysis was used to test differences in environmental conditions between areas, and relationships between species and environmental variables were explored by using redundancy analysis. In addition to bathymetric differences, differences in both diversity and species composition were observed between shelf assemblages in the two nearby areas. The distinct biogeographical, environmental characteristics (depth, dissolved oxygen and temperature) and fishing pressure are discussed as the main factors which could explain the differences detected.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2011

INTRODUCTION

Most studies in fisheries biology have focused on the main species targeted by fishing operations. However, this single-species approach is restrictive for multi-species fisheries, such as the Mediterranean bottom trawl fishery (Caddy, Reference Caddy1999). Studying the fish assemblage structure in relation to environmental variables and the characterization of seasonal changes are among the suggested new approaches in the study of exploited populations (Gislason et al., Reference Gislason, Sinclair, Sainsbury and O'Boyle2000).

Demersal fish and epifaunal assemblages on circalittoral soft bottoms have been extensively studied in the Mediterranean Sea, especially in the western basin (e.g. Demestre et al., Reference Demestre, Sánchez and Abelló2000; Biagi et al., Reference Biagi, Sartor, Ardizzone, Belcari, Belluscio and Serena2002; González & Sánchez, Reference González and Sánchez2002; Colloca et al., Reference Colloca, Cardinale, Belluscio and Ardizzone2003; Massutí & Reñones, Reference Massutí and Reñones2005). Although most of these works have been focused on the analysis of depth related trends, some geographical and seasonal distribution studies have also been conducted (Abelló et al., Reference Abelló, Carbonell and Torres2002; Massutí et al., Reference Massutí, Gordon, Moranta, Swan, Stefanescu and Merrett2004; Gaertner et al., Reference Gaertner, Bertrand, de Sola, Durbec, Ferrandis and Souplet2005; Moranta et al., Reference Moranta, Quetglas, Massutí, Guijarro, Hidalgo and Diaz2008). Information on such assemblages in the eastern Mediterranean is more limited, although they have been described for the southern Adriatic (Ungaro et al., Reference Ungaro, Marano, Vlora and Martino1998, Reference Ungaro, Marano, Marsan, Martino, Marzano, Strippoli and Vlora1999), the Ionian Sea (D'Onghia et al., Reference D'Onghia, Tursi, Maiorano, Matarrese and Panza1998; Madurell et al., Reference Madurell, Cartes and Labropoulou2004) and the southern (Kallianiotis et al., Reference Kallianiotis, Sophronidis, Vidoris and Tselepides2000) and northern Aegean Sea (Labropoulou & Papaconstantinou, Reference Labropoulou and Papaconstantinou2000).

Depth has been reported as the main factor influencing large scale faunal changes over the continental shelf and slope, and both physical (e.g. sediment and characteristics of water masses) and biological factors (resource availability, predator–prey relationships and interspecific competition) have been discussed as underlying causes responsible for this zonation (e.g. Haedrich et al., Reference Haedrich, Rowe and Polloni1980; Bianchi, Reference Bianchi1992; Carney, Reference Carney2005). The local conditions in such factors, as well as fishing activities, can also determine regional differences of demersal assemblages (e.g. Moranta et al., Reference Moranta, Quetglas, Massutí, Guijarro, Hidalgo and Diaz2008). It is especially relevant in areas such as the eastern Mediterranean with its particular environmental conditions, e.g. extremely oligotrophic, elevated deep water temperature and high salinity (Stergiou & Pollard, Reference Stergiou and Pollard1994).

The aim of the present paper is to compare the demersal fish assemblages between the Sea of Marmara, a small inland sea connecting the Mediterranean and the Black Seas where no information on this matter exists, and the most eastern part of the Mediterranean in the Aegean Sea. These areas are connected by the Dardanelles Strait, a biological corridor 62 km long with an average width of 4 km and maximum depth of 167 m. The observed differences are discussed in relation to the distinct environmental conditions in both areas.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study is based on several scientific surveys carried out on the continental shelf in the south-western part of the Sea of Marmara and the continental shelf and upper slope of the north-eastern Aegean Sea (Figure 1), on-board the RV ‘Yunus-S’ (31.8 m, 202 GT, 510 HP). During these surveys, sampling of demersal (and some pelagic) fish species and hydrographic conditions were undertaken.

Fig. 1. Map of the study areas: north-eastern part of the Mediterranean (A), the south-western Sea of Marmara and the north-eastern Aegean Sea (B), showing the sampling stations. The 50, 100, 200 and 500 m isobaths are also shown.

Study area

The Sea of Marmara has a large continental shelf, especially in its southern part, with an average and maximum depths of around 500 and 1400 m, respectively. A two layered flow regime exists in the area, as a result of water exchange between the Mediterranean and the Black Sea. Black Sea waters (7–24°C and 22–26 psu) enter through the Bosphorus Strait in the upper layer (20–25 m), with a renewal time of about 5–6 months. Below there are the sub-halocline waters of the Marmara basin, which possess near constant temperatures (14.5–15.0°C) and higher salinity of 38.5–38.6 psu, with a renewal time of about 6–7 years, produced by the Mediterranean inflow via the Dardanelles undercurrent. Dissolved oxygen concentration declines with depth, from saturated levels at 30–50 m, being nearly exhausted in sub-halocline waters during August and September (Beşiktepe et al., Reference Beşiktepe, Ozsoy and Unluata1993). In the south-western Sea of Marmara, muddy bottoms are predominant, given the detrital inputs by rivers (e.g. Algan et al., Reference Algan, Balkıs, Çağatay and Sarı2004).

The North Aegean Sea is separated from the South Aegean by the Cyclades Islands. It is characterized by a wide shelf in the northern part and the North Aegean Trough, which extends from south-west to north-east (Kourafalou & Barbapoulos, Reference Kourafalou and Barbopoulos2003) and reaches 1600 m depth. Black Sea waters, flowing from the Dardanelles, are the most significant water mass input into the North Aegean Sea. These massive waters of 8.8–25°C and 31.8–38.3 psu affect the uppermost layer (20–30 m depth) and are modified, moving westward and southward, by mixing with the intermediate waters of Levantine origin, a warm and highly saline water originating from the South Aegean to the Levantine basins, extending down to 350–400 m depth (Theocharis & Georgopoulos, Reference Theocharis and Georgopoulos1993; Tokat, Reference Tokat2006; Pazi, Reference Pazi2008). Below there are very dense North Aegean Deep Waters (13.3°C and 39 psu). No anoxic events have been reported in this area. In the north-eastern Aegean Sea, biogenic and terrigenous sandy bottoms are dominant on the shelf, while the slope is characterized by silt and clay sediments (Sarı & Çağatay, Reference Sarı and Çağatay2001).

Sampling

Data collection was carried out during five periods: June and October 2006, and March, June and August 2007. Fish were collected with a bottom trawl net, with a 16 mm cod-end mesh size and an estimated vertical and horizontal opening of about 2 and 19.4 m, respectively. During each haul, the physical and chemical parameters were recorded in the water column, using a CTD SBE-19 SEACAST Profiler equipped with oximeter.

A total of 40 hauls were conducted during daylight hours: 16 in the Sea of Marmara at depths of 38–74 m, and 24 in the Aegean Sea at depths of 63–401 m (Table 1). Trawl duration ranged from 15–60 minutes, and mean towing speed was about 2.4 knots. The position at the start and the end of each trawl was recorded using a Global Positioning System (GPS). All samples were sorted, counted, weighted and identified to species level. Catches were standardized to a swept area (km2) in accordance with the methodology most commonly employed in studies of demersal megafaunal assemblages in the Mediterranean (e.g. Bertrand et al., Reference Bertrand, de Sola, Papaconstantinou, Relini and Souplet2002).

Table 1. Sampling stations and hauls characteristics, with total number of species (S), abundance (A; individuals/km2) and biomass (B; kg/km2) of pelagic and demersal fish caught during the five surveys developed in the south-western Sea of Marmara (SM) and the north-eastern Aegean Sea (AS).

Data analysis

A standardized abundance data matrix of demersal fish species was created. In this matrix, species appearing only in one sample or considered as pelagic (e.g. Fischer et al., Reference Fischer, Bauchot and Schneider1987) were removed (see Results). Data were log(x + 1) transformed, and cluster analysis and non-metric multidimensional scaling (MDS) were applied in order to identify fish assemblages. The Bray–Curtis index was used as a between-haul similarity measure. The unweighted pair-group method with arithmetic mean (UPGMA) was used as the clustering algorithm. Similarity percentage analysis (SIMPER) was used to determine which species characterize the groups detected. All these analyses were carried out using the PRIMER package (Clarke & Warwick, Reference Clarke and Warwick2001).

The mean values of abundance (individuals.km−2), biomass (kg.km−2), mean fish weight (kg), species richness, Shannon–Wiener diversity index (H′; Shannon & Weaver, Reference Shannon and Weaver1949) and evenness (J′; Pielou, Reference Pielou1969) were estimated for each assemblage detected in the cluster analysis. Differences between groups for these indices were examined using a t-test.

Measures of depth (m), temperature (°C), salinity (psu) and dissolved oxygen (mg/l) were taken for each haul location by conductivity–temperature–depth casts. Depth profiles were plotted for these variables. The environmental conditions near the bottom were estimated by considering the values of temperature, salinity and dissolved oxygen within the 5 m water column above the bottom. Multi-variate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used to test for differences in these parameters between the continental shelves of the two study areas. A t-test was performed to identify which variables caused the differences. Prior to parametric tests, the data were checked for the assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variances. When these assumptions were not met, data were log-transformed.

Canonical analysis was used to explore the relationships between fish species and the environmental variables. The species included in the analysis were those appearing within the 75% of similarity contribution to the shelf assemblages detected in both the north-eastern Aegean and south-western Marmara Seas. Before the application of direct gradient (canonical) analyses, the length of gradient of the response variables, which were the log-transformed standardized abundances per haul of selected fish species, was assessed by means of detrended correspondence analysis. The resulting gradients were short (below 2.5 SD units), and consequently a linear ordination method was used by applying redundancy analysis (RDA). The explanatory variables considered were depth, temperature, salinity and dissolved oxygen of water near the bottom. In RDA it is possible to specify co-variables (partial RDA), which allows testing of the effect of a particular explanatory variable after the variation explained by the co-variables is factored out. Details of the models used are found in Table 2. The significance of the explanatory variables was assessed by means of the Monte Carlo permutation-based test (Manly, Reference Manly1991). A tri-plot diagram with species, samples and environmental variables was created for the partial RDA with depth as co-variable. Salinity was found to be not significant and was removed from the final model.

Table 2. Description of the redundancy analysis models used to test for the effects of explanatory variables. In all cases 999 unrestricted permutations were conducted to test the significance of the variables. DO, dissolved oxygen (mg/l).

RESULTS

A total of 47, 940 individuals (2393.5 kg), belonging to 91 species (47 families) were collected from the 40 hauls analysed (Table 3). In the Sea of Marmara, a total of 44 species (27,138 ind., 1028.4 kg) were collected, of which Merlangius merlangus, Merluccius merluccius and Serranus hepatus were the most frequent species between 38 and 72 m depth, followed by Raja clavata, Gobius niger and Arnoglossus laterna. Catches in the Aegean Sea comprised 83 species, 20,802 individuals and 1365.0 kg. Merluccius merluccius and Lophius budegassa were the most frequent species, with large bathymetric ranges (63–401 m), while Eutrigla gurnardus, Serranus cabrilla and Lepidotrigla cavillone were most frequent in the shallower parts (<100 m depth) and Phycis blennoides and Coelorinchus caelorhincus abundant at depths >100 m.

Table 3. Fish species caught in the south-western Sea of Marmara and north-eastern Aegean Sea. Total number of individuals (N), total weight (W, kg), depth-range (D, m), the frequency of appearance (F, percentage of hauls in which the species was captured within this depth-range), number of hauls (n). The asterisks indicate species removed for the analysis (*, species caught in only one sample; **, pelagic species).

Considering the whole catch, M. merlangus was the most important species in the Sea of Marmara, both in terms of number of individuals and weight, followed by Trachurus trachurus and S. hepatus, in terms of abundance, and by R. clavata and M. merluccius, in terms of biomass (Table 3). In the Aegean Sea, the most important species in terms of abundance were Gadiculus argenteus, Mullus barbatus and C. caelorhincus, whereas in terms of biomass they were Micromesistius poutassou, M. merluccius, Scyliorhinus canicula, M. barbatus and L. budegassa (Table 3).

Cluster analysis indicated that the samples could be attributed to three main groups (Figure 2A). The first discernible cluster comprised deep-water samples (177–395 m) from the Aegean Sea (ASL: Aegean Sea Slope). The remaining shallow water samples were distinct between the Aegean Sea (69–100 m depth, ASH: Aegean Sea Shelf) and Sea of Marmara (SM, 38–72 m). The MDS confirmed the presence of these three groups of samples (Figure 2B).

According to the results of the SIMPER analysis (Table 4), the average similarity of the SM group was 61%, with M. merlangus, S. hepatus, M. merluccius, G. niger, A. laterna and E. gurnardus the main contributors to this similarity. The average similarity of the ASH group was 52%, and S. hepatus, Citharus linguatula, M. merluccius, M. barbatus, L. budegassa and L. cavillone were the main contributors. The ASL group (the average similarity = 61%) comprised mainly Lepidorhombus boscii, C. caelorhincus, P. blennoides, Argentina sphyraena, L. budegassa, M. merluccius and Trigla lyra. The average dissimilarities between the three groups were as follow: 60.6% between SM and ASH; 82.7% between SM and ASL; 78.4% between ASH and ASL.

Fig. 2. Dendrogram (A) and two-dimensional non-metric multidimensional scaling ordination (B) based on fish standardized species abundance. Labels show the mean depths (m) and sampling period (JL06: July 2006; O06: October 2006; M07: March 2007; J07: June 2007 and A07: August 2007) for each sample. The samples were divided into three groups associated with bathymetric strata and areas. SM: 38-72 m in the south-western Sea of Marmara; ASH: 68-100 m in the north-eastern Aegean Sea; AS: 177-395 m in the north-eastern Aegean Sea.

Table 4. Similarity percentage analysis results showing the mean abundance (A; individuals/km2), average within-group similarity (SIM), the percentage contribution to the similarity (SIM%), standard deviation of similarity (SIM/SD), the percentage contribution to within-group similarity (SIM%), and the accumulated SIM% (ΣSIM%). SM, shelf in the south-western Sea of Marmara; ASH, shelf in the north-eastern Aegean Sea; ASL, upper slope in the north-eastern Aegean Sea.

The comparisons for the ecological parameters between the assemblages detected revealed that the average values of abundance, biomass and mean fish weight were not significantly different. By contrast, mean species richness, diversity and evenness in SM were lower than in ASH (Table 5).

Table 5. Mean values and standard errors of the abundance (individuals/km2), biomass (kg/km2), fish weight (kg), species richness (number of species; total species richness also shown), diversity and evenness indices for shelf groups resulting from the cluster analysis, and results of the t-test. SM, shelf in the south-western Sea of Marmara; ASH, shelf in the north-eastern Aegean Sea; n.s., not significant; SE, standard error; *P < 0.01; **P < 0.001.

The vertical profiles showed that the variability of the values of temperature (T), dissolved oxygen (DO) and salinity (S) decreased with increasing depth, except in the case of DO in SM (Figure 3). The temperature near the bottom ranged from 14.4 to 16.3°C in the Sea of Marmara and from 13.7 to 16.2°C in the Aegean Sea, salinity from 37.9 to 38.8 psu in the Sea of Marmara and 38.6 to 39 psu in the Aegean Sea, and dissolved oxygen from 0.8 to 7.3 mg/l in the Sea of Marmara and from 6.5 to 7.7 mg/l in the Aegean Sea. MANOVA showed differences in the mean values of the environmental parameters between SM and ASH (Wilks' lambda = 0.237, P < 0.001) (Table 6). The t-test results showed that mean value of dissolved oxygen (t = 7.707, df = 28; P < 0.001) and salinity (t = 4.740, df = 28; P < 0.001) near the bottom, and depth (t = 5.918, df = 28; P < 0.001), were significantly higher in the ASH than in SM, whereas the mean values of temperature near the bottom were not significantly different between the two geographic areas studies (t = –0.832, df = 28; P = 0.412).

Fig. 3. The vertical profiles of the water temperature, salinity and dissolved oxygen for each sample from 38 to 72 m depth in the south-western Sea of Marmara, and from 68 to 395 m depth in the north-eastern Aegean Sea.

Table 6. Total mean values (±standard error) of the environmental variables on the continental shelf areas, and their mean (±standard error), minimum and maximum values by sampling period. DO, dissolved oxygen (mg/l); T, temperature (°C); S, salinity (psu); D, depth (m).

The RDA showed that dissolved oxygen, depth and temperature had a significant effect on the distribution of fish species. These variables explained 39.0% of the total variance of the selected species. Partial RDA models revealed that dissolved oxygen was the most important variable, and explained 10.4% of the total variance, whereas temperature and depth explained 9.7% and 7.4% of the total variance, respectively (Table 7). The RDA tri-plot, with depth as co-variable, showed that samples were continuously distributed along the dissolved oxygen and temperature gradients (Figure 4), although for this last variable two high extreme value samples and one low extreme value sample were present. Most of species abundances were positively correlated with dissolved oxygen, whereas M. merlangus, A. laterna, G. niger and Lesueurigobius friesii were negatively correlated with this variable. On the other hand the abundances of A. laterna, M. merlangius, R. clavata, C. linguatula, E. gurnardus and M. merluccius were positively correlated with temperature, whereas L. friesii, L. budegassa, S. cabrilla, Trachinus draco and S. canicula were negatively correlated to this variable. The short length of the arrows for S. hepatus and L. cavillone indicated that the abundances of these species were poorly explained by the variables in the model.

Fig. 4. Redundancy analysis tri-plot for fish species, samples and environmental variables. Alat, Arnoglossus laterna; Clin, Citharus linguatula; Egur, Eutrigla gurnardus; Gnig, Gobius niger; Lfrie, Lesuerogobius friesii; Lcav, Lepidotrigla cavillone; Lbud, Lophius budegassa; Mmerlang, Merlangius merlangus; Mmerluc, Merluccius merluccius; Mbar, Mullus barbatus; Shep, Serranus hepatus; Rcla, Raja clavata; Scan, Scyliorhinus canicula; Tdra, Trachinus draco. DO and T are the dissolved oxygen and temperature near the bottom, respectively.

Table 7. Results of the redundancy analysis model. The explained variance (EV%), the F statistic and the significance (P value) are indicated. DO, dissolved oxygen (mg/l); T, temperature (°C); S, salinity (psu); D, depth (m).

DISCUSSION

The North Aegean Sea and the Sea of Marmara are among the major bio-geographical sectors in the northernmost Mediterranean Sea. A decrease in species richness has been reported between both areas, from west to east (Garibaldi & Caddy, Reference Garibaldi and Caddy1998; Bianchi, Reference Bianchi2007). This is due to the barrier effect of different topography, morphology and hydrological conditions along the Turkish Straits System (Dardanelles, Sea of Marmara and Bosphorus). The high contrast of temperature and salinity between the North Aegean Sea and the Sea of Marmara and the existence of a two-layer flow structure of water masses along the Turkish Straits System, with sharp horizontal and vertical temperature and salinity contrasts, very strong vertical mixing and hydraulic adjustment processes along this system and oxygen stress (Beşiktepe et al., Reference Beşiktepe, Sur, Ozsoy, Latif, Oguz and Unluata1994), restrict the expansion of some Mediterranean species into the Sea of Marmara, more than the south-western expansion of Black Sea species. In this sense, 12 out of the 47 endemic species from the Black Sea are also present in the Sea of Marmara, whereas only 6 reach the Aegean Sea.

Our results support these biogeographical considerations, as clear differences were observed in the demersal fish species richness between both areas (83 in the Aegean Sea and 44 in the Sea of Marmara). Although almost all the species are also common in the rest of the Mediterranean Sea, M. merlangus and S. sprattus, two abundant species in the Black Sea which are considered as cold water relics originating from North Atlantic (Zaitsev & Öztürk, Reference Zaitsev and Öztürk2001), were more abundant in the Sea of Marmara.

Many studies have reported depth as the main factor determining faunal changes in the Mediterranean (e.g. Kallianiotis et al., Reference Kallianiotis, Sophronidis, Vidoris and Tselepides2000, Reference Kallianiotis, Vidoris and Sylaios2004; Labropoulou & Papaconstantinou, Reference Labropoulou and Papaconstantinou2000; Masutí & Reñones, 2005; Moranta et al., Reference Moranta, Quetglas, Massutí, Guijarro, Hidalgo and Diaz2008). In the present study, depth and also area appeared as important factors. Samples carried out on the upper slope were separated from those on the shelf, and within this last depth stratum, two geographical groups could be defined corresponding to samples carried out in the Aegean Sea and the Sea of Marmara. Fish assemblages from the continental shelf and slope from the North Aegean Sea were more similar to those in the Thracian Sea and the Central Aegean Sea, than to those in the southern part of the North Aegean trough (Kallianiotis et al., Reference Kallianiotis, Vidoris and Sylaios2004; Labropoulou & Papaconstantinou, Reference Labropoulou and Papaconstantinou2004), whereas the shelf of the Sea of Marmara was more similar to the Black Sea (Eryılmaz & Meriç, Reference Eryılmaz and Meriç2005).

Oceanographic characteristics, especially temperature and salinity, and bottom type play an important role for structuring assemblages on the continental shelf of the Aegean Sea (Stergiou et al., Reference Stergiou, Christou, Georgopoulos, Zenetos and Souvermezoglou1997). In the present study, dissolved oxygen and temperature have been identified as important factors affecting fish assemblages on the shelf areas. However, salinity did not show any influence, probably due to a common effect of the Mediterranean waters below 40 m depth for both areas. Merlangius merlangus and the small-sized species S. hepatus, L. friesii, G. niger and A. laterna were more abundant in the south-western Sea of Marmara, in which dissolved oxygen was lower than in the north-eastern Aegean Sea. Merlangius merlangus can tolerate low levels of oxygen saturation (Pihl Reference Pihl, Rylands and Tyler1989; Baden et al., Reference Baden, Loo, Pihl and Rosenberg1990; Petersen & Phil, Reference Petersen and Pihl1995) and in some areas its distribution has been fround to be negatively correlated with dissolved oxygen (Marshall & Elliott, Reference Marshall and Elliott1998). In the Black Sea, this species is distributed between 35 and 100 m depth (Çiloğlu et al., Reference Çiloğlu, Şahin, Gözler and Verep2002), being more abundant at 40–90 m depth, where it finds enough dissolved oxygen and a suitable temperature (Kara et al., Reference Kara, Kaya, Benli, Mater and Güven1999). Moreover, the population of M. merlangus was mostly composed of small specimens (mean fish weight was 48 and 35 g for the Aegean and Marmara Seas). The apparent affinity for hypoxia of these small-sized species and small individuals of large ones could be interpreted in terms of a sheltering strategy, as it seems that larger and potential predator species try to avoid such hypoxic areas (most of them being positively correlated to dissolved oxygen concentration). For example, the tolerance to hypoxia of coral gobies has been related to a reduced risk of predation and the potential losing of vital habitat space (Nilsson et al., Reference Nilsson, Hobbs, Munday and Östlund-Nilsson2004). The type of bottom could be another factor affecting the composition of fish assemblages in the two continental shelf areas. Fish inhabiting the south-western Sea of Marmara were species characteristic of muddy bottoms (e.g. L. friesii), while those in the north-eastern Aegean Sea have been related to sandy or muddy–sand bottoms (Demestre et al., Reference Demestre, Sánchez and Abelló2000; Calloca et al., Reference Colloca, Cardinale, Belluscio and Ardizzone2003; Ordines & Massutí, Reference Ordines and Massutí2009).

The mean abundance, biomass and mean fish weight of the two shelf assemblages did not show significant differences. However, diversity was significantly lower in the south-western Sea of Marmara than in the north-eastern Aegean Sea, and the inverse pattern was observed for evenness, revealing that the demersal ichthyfauna of the south-western Sea of Marmara was less homogeneous than that in the north-eastern Aegean Sea. In this sense, in the south-eastern Sea of Marmara, two species (M. merlangus and S. hepatus) accounted for nearly half of the total demersal fish abundance.

Diversity can be affected by different factors, such as the decrease of water quality (Guidetti et al., Reference Guidetti, Fanelli, Fraschetti, Terlizzi and Boero2002 and references therein), hypoxia (Keister et al., Reference Keister, Houde and Breitburg2000) and fishing pressure (i.e. Jennings et al., Reference Jennings, Greenstreet and Reynolds1999; Labropoulou & Papaconstantinou, Reference Labropoulou and Papaconstantinou2005), among others. The fishing exploitation can also affect the size-structure of these communities, by harvesting larger individuals and increasing the relative importance of small ones in the fish populations (Pauly et al., Reference Pauly, Christensen, Dalsgaard, Froese and Torres1998). The illegal fishing exploitation has dramatically reduced the abundance of commercial fish species during the last decades (Zengin & Mutlu, Reference Zengin, Mutlu, Öztürk, Kadıoğlu and Öztürk2000) and degenerated ecological conditions in the Sea of Marmara (Okuş et al., Reference Okuş, Yüksek, Uysal and Orhon1997). Hence, fishing pressure could be another reason to explain the lower diversity and higher importance of small-sized species and small individuals of large ones in the south-western Sea of Marmara with respect to the north-eastern Aegean Sea, where also some zones banned for bottom trawling have been established (e.g. Saros Bay; see Figure 1). This last area is important as reproduction and nursery grounds for demersal and pelagic resources (Coker et al., Reference Coker, Turkoglu and Satilmis2008), thus contributing to maintain more equilibrium in structured shelf assemblages.

As the main conclusion, our study supported the biogeographical differences between the Sea of Marmara and the Aegean Sea, in terms of demersal fish assemblages in the continental shelf areas, as a consequence of different geo-morphological, oceanographic and fishing impact conditions. The identification of these assemblages, and the main environmental causes affecting them, can be of great importance for fisheries management and the sustainability of regional fisheries in the area.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work was supported by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK, grant number 105Y039). The authors would like to acknowledge with thanks the research team of the project and crew of RV ‘Yunus-S’ for their help during the sampling study of the project. We would like to thank all members of the Centre Oceanogràfic de les Balears (Instituto Español de Oceanografía) for their valuable helps during the evaluation of this manuscript. The authors thank Professor B. Öztürk for his scientific comments. We also thank PhD student Volkan Demir for his technical help on the manuscript.

References

REFERENCES

Abelló, P., Carbonell, A. and Torres, P. (2002) Biogeography of epibenthic crustaceans on the shelf and upper slope off the Iberian Peninsula Mediterranean coasts: implications for the establishment of natural management areas. Scientia Marina 66 (Supplement 2), 183198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Algan, O., Balkıs, N., Çağatay, M.N. and Sarı, E. (2004) The sources of metal contents in the shelf sediments from the Marmara Sea, Turkey. Environmental Geology 46, 932950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baden, S.P., Loo, L.O., Pihl, L. and Rosenberg, R. (1990) Effects of eutrophication on benthic communities including fish: Swedish west coast. Ambio 19, 113122.Google Scholar
Bertrand, J.A., de Sola, L.G., Papaconstantinou, C., Relini, G. and Souplet, A. (2002) The general specifications of the MEDITS Surveys. Scientia Marina 66, 917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beşiktepe, S., Ozsoy, E. and Unluata, U. (1993) Filling of the Marmara Sea by the Dardanelles lower layer inflow. Deep-Sea Research I 40, 18151838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beşiktepe, S.T., Sur, H.I., Ozsoy, E., Latif, M.A., Oguz, T. and Unluata, U. (1994) The circulation and hydrography of the Marmara Sea. Progress in Oceanography 34, 285334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bianchi, G. (1992) Study of the demersal assemblages of the continental shelf and upper slope off Congo and Gabon, based on the trawl surveys of the RV ‘Dr Fridtjof Nansen’. Marine Ecology Progress Series 85, 923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bianchi, C.N. (2007) Biodiversity issues for the forthcoming tropical Mediterranean Sea. Hydrobiologia 580, 721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biagi, F., Sartor, P., Ardizzone, G.D., Belcari, P., Belluscio, A. and Serena, F. (2002) Analysis of demersal assemblages off the Tuscany and Latium coast (north-western Mediterranean). Scientia Marina 66 (Supplement 2), 233242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caddy, J.F. (1999) Fisheries management in the twenty-first century: will new paradigms apply? Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 9, 143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carney, R.S. (2005) Zonation of deep biota on continental margins. Oceanography and Marine Biology: an Annual Review 43, 211278Google Scholar
Çiloğlu, E., Şahin, C., Gözler, A.M. and Verep, B. (2002) Vertical distribution and ratio of whiting fish (Merlangius merlangus euxinus Nordmann, 1840) in the total catch on the Eastern Black Sea Coasts. Ege University Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 19, 303309.Google Scholar
Clarke, K.R. and Warwick, R.M. (2001) Change in marine communities: an approach to statistical analysis and interpretation. 2nd edition.Plymouth: PRIMER-E.Google Scholar
Coker, T., Turkoglu, M. and Satilmis, H.H. (2008) Seasonal distribution of some fish eggs and larvae, and potential contribution of some large scale pelagic fish Species in Saros Bay, Turkey. Çanakkale Values Symposiums (ÇIDS), Gelibolu Bulletin Book, 27–28 August 2008. Gelibolu, Çanakkale, Turkey. pp. 329330. [In Turkish.]Google Scholar
Colloca, F, Cardinale, M, Belluscio, A. and Ardizzone, G.D. (2003) Structure and diversity of demersal assemblages in the central Mediterranean Sea. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 56, 469480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D'Onghia, G., Tursi, G., Maiorano, P., Matarrese, A. and Panza, M. (1998) Demersal fish assemblages from the bathyal grounds of the Ionian Sea (middle-eastern Mediterranean). Italian Journal of Zoology 65 (Supplement), 287–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demestre, M., Sánchez, P. and Abelló, P. (2000) Demersal fish assemblages and habitat characteristics on the continental shelf and upper slope of the north-west Mediterranean. Journal of Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 80, 981988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eryılmaz, L.S. and Meriç, N. (2005) Review of fish fauna of the Sea of Marmara. Journal of the Black Sea/Mediterranean Environment 11, 153178.Google Scholar
Fischer, W., Bauchot, M.L. and Schneider, M. (eds) (1987) Fiches FAO d'identification des espèces pour les besoins de la pêche. Méditerranée et mer Noire. Zone de pêche 37, Vertébrés. Rome: FAO 2, pp. 7611529.Google Scholar
Gaertner, J.C., Bertrand, J.A., de Sola, L.G., Durbec, J.P., Ferrandis, E. and Souplet, A. (2005) Large spatial scale variation of demersal fish assemblage structure on the continental shelf of the NW Mediterranean Sea. Marine Ecology Progress Series 297, 245257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garibaldi, L. and Caddy, J.F. (1998) Biogeographic characterization of Mediterranean and Black Sea faunal provinces using GIS procedures. Ocean and Coastal Management 39, 211227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gislason, H., Sinclair, M., Sainsbury, K. and O'Boyle, R. (2000) Symposium overview: incorporating ecosystem objectives within fisheries management. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57, 468475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
González, M. and Sánchez, P. (2002) Cephalopod assemblages caught by trawling along the Iberian Peninsula Mediterranean coast. Scientia Marina 66, 199208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guidetti, P., Fanelli, G., Fraschetti, S., Terlizzi, A. and Boero, F. (2002) Coastal fish indicate human-induced changes in the Mediterranean littoral. Marine Environmental Research 53, 7794.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haedrich, R.L., Rowe, G.T. and Polloni, P.T. (1980) The megabenthic fauna in the deep sea south of New England, USA. Marine Biology 57, 165179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, S., Greenstreet, S.P.R. and Reynolds, J.D. (1999) Structural changes in an exploited fish community: a consequence of differential fishing effects on species with contrasting life histories. Journal of Animal Ecology 68, 617627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kallianiotis, A., Sophronidis, K., Vidoris, P. and Tselepides, A. (2000) Demersal fish and megafaunal assemblages on the Cretan continental shelf and slope (NE Mediterranean): seasonal variation in species density, biomass diversity. Progress in Oceanography 46, 429455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kallianiotis, A., Vidoris, P. and Sylaios, G. (2004) Fish species assemblages and geographical sub-areas in the North Aegean Sea, Greece. Fisheries Research 68, 171187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kara, O.F., Kaya, M., Benli, H.A. and Mater, S. (1999) The productivity and hydrographic properties of the trawl areas of the Middle and Eastern Black Sea. In Güven, K.C.(ed.) The Black Sea Symposium Ecological Problems and Economical Prospects, 16–18 September 1999 Istanbul, Turkey. Istanbul: The Black Sea Foundation, pp 205222.Google Scholar
Keister, J.E., Houde, E.D. and Breitburg, D.L. (2000) Effects of bottom-layer hypoxia on abundances and depth distributions of organisms in Patuxent River, Chesapeake Bay. Marine Ecology Progress Series 205, 4359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kourafalou, V.H. and Barbopoulos, K. (2003) High resolution simulations on the North Aegean Sea seasonal circulation. Annales Geophysicae 21, 251265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labropoulou, A. and Papaconstantinou, C. (2000) Community structure of deep-sea demersal fish in the North Aegean Sea (Northeastern Mediterranean). Hydrobiologia 440, 281296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labropoulou, A. and Papaconstantinou, C. (2004) Community structure and diversity of demersal fish assemblages: the role of fishery. Scientia Marina 68 (Supplement 1), 215226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labropoulou, A. and Papaconstantinou, C. (2005) Effects of fishing on community structure of demersal fish assemblages. Belgian Journal of Zoology 135, 191197.Google Scholar
Madurell, T., Cartes, J.E. and Labropoulou, M. (2004) Changes in the structure of fish assemblages in a bathyal site of the Ionian Sea (eastern Mediterranean). Fisheries Research 66, 245260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manly, B.F.J. (1991) Randomization and Monte Carlo methods in biology. New York: Chapman & Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, S. and Elliott, M. (1998) Environmental influences on the fish assemblage of the Humber estuary, UK. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 46, 175184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Massutí, E., Gordon, J.D.M., Moranta, J., Swan, S.C., Stefanescu, C. and Merrett, N.R. (2004) Mediterranean and Atlantic deep-sea fish assemblages: differences in biomass composition and size-related structure. Scientia Marina 68, 101115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Massutí, E. and Reñones, O. (2005) Demersal resource assemblages in the trawl fishing grounds of the Balearic Islands (western Mediterranean). Scientia Marina 69, 167181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moranta, J., Quetglas, A., Massutí, E., Guijarro, B., Hidalgo, M. and Diaz, P. (2008) Spatiotemporal variations in deep-sea communities off the Balearic Islands (western Mediterranean). Journal of Marine Systems 71, 346366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nilsson, G.E., Hobbs, J-P., Munday, P.L. and Östlund-Nilsson, S. (2004) Coward or braveheart: extreme habitat fidelity through hypoxia tolerance in a coral-dwelling goby. Journal of Experimental Biology 207, 3339. doi:10.1242/jeb.00713.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Okuş, E., Yüksek, A., Uysal, A. and Orhon, V. (1997) Marmara Denizi'nde ekonomik demersal balıklarının stok tayini projesi 1992–1995 Kesin Raporu. İ.Ü. Deniz Bilimleri İşletmeciliği Enstitüsü, TÜBİTAK-DEBAG-116/G, 206 pp. [In Turkish.]Google Scholar
Ordines, F. and Massutí, E. (2009) Relationships between macro-epibenthic communities and fish on the shelf grounds of the western Mediterranean. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 19, 370383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pauly, D., Christensen, V., Dalsgaard, J., Froese, R. and Torres, Jr. F.C. (1998) Fishing down marine food webs. Science 279, 850863.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pazi, I. (2008) Water mass properties and chemical characteristics in the Saros Gulf, Northeast Aegean Sea (Eastern Mediterranean). Journal of Marine Systems 74, 698710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersen, J.K. and Pihl, L. (1995) Responses to hypoxia of plaice, Pleuronectes platessa, and dab, Limanda limanda, in the south-east Kattegat: distribution and growth. Environmental Biology of Fishes 43, 311321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pielou, E.C. (1969) An introduction to mathematical ecology. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Pihl, L. (1989) Effects of oxygen depletion on demersal fish in coastal areas of the south-east Kattegat. In Rylands, J.S. and Tyler, P.A. (eds) Proceedings of the 23rd European Marine Biology Symposium Swansea, Wales, 5–9 September, 1998, School of Biological Sciences, University of Wales. Fredensborg, Denmark: Olsen & Olsen, pp. 431439.Google Scholar
Sarı, E. and Çağatay, M.N. (2001) Distributions of heavy metals in the surface sediments of the Gulf of Saros, NE Aegean Sea. Environment International 26, 169173.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shannon, C.E. and Weaver, V. (1949) A mathematical theory of communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Stergiou, K.I. and Pollard, D.A. (1994) A spatial analysis of the commercial fisheries catchesfrom the Greek Aegean Sea. Fisheries Research 20, 109135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stergiou, K.I., Christou, E.D., Georgopoulos, D., Zenetos, A. and Souvermezoglou, C. (1997) The Hellenic Seas: physics, chemistry, biology and fisheries. Oceanography and Marine Biology: an Annual Review 35, 415538.Google Scholar
Theocharis, A. and Georgopoulos, D. (1993) Dense water formation over the Samothraki and Limnos plateaux in the North Aegean Sea (Eastern Mediterranean Sea). Continental Shelf Research 13, 919939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tokat, E. (2006) Saros Körfezi Hidrolojik ve Biyolojik Su Özellikleri (Hydrological and biological water properties of the Saros Bay). MSc thesis Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir, Turkey. [InTurkish.]Google Scholar
Ungaro, N., Marano, C.A., Vlora, A. and Martino, M. (1998) Space–time variations of demersal fish assemblages in the south-western Adriatic Sea. Vie et Milieu 48, 191201.Google Scholar
Ungaro, N., Marano, C.A., Marsan, R., Martino, M., Marzano, M.C., Strippoli, G. and Vlora, A. (1999) Analysis of demersal species assemblages from trawl surveys in the south Adriatic sea. Aquatic Living Resources 12, 177185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaitsev, Y. and Öztürk, B. (2001) Exotic fish species in the Marmara, Black, Azov and Caspian Seas. İstanbul, Turkey: Turkish Marine Research Foundation.Google Scholar
Zengin, M. and Mutlu, C. (2000) Marmara Denizi'ndeki Balıkçılığın Son Durumu ve Stokların Geleceğine İlişkin Öneriler (The resent state of the fisheries and suggestions related to the future of the stocks at the Marmara Sea). In Öztürk, B., Kadıoğlu, M. and Öztürk, H. (eds) Marmara Denizi 2000 Sempozyumu Bildiriler Kitabı, İstanbul,11–12 Kasım 2000. TÜDAV 5, pp 441–425. [InTurkish.]Google Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Map of the study areas: north-eastern part of the Mediterranean (A), the south-western Sea of Marmara and the north-eastern Aegean Sea (B), showing the sampling stations. The 50, 100, 200 and 500 m isobaths are also shown.

Figure 1

Table 1. Sampling stations and hauls characteristics, with total number of species (S), abundance (A; individuals/km2) and biomass (B; kg/km2) of pelagic and demersal fish caught during the five surveys developed in the south-western Sea of Marmara (SM) and the north-eastern Aegean Sea (AS).

Figure 2

Table 2. Description of the redundancy analysis models used to test for the effects of explanatory variables. In all cases 999 unrestricted permutations were conducted to test the significance of the variables. DO, dissolved oxygen (mg/l).

Figure 3

Table 3. Fish species caught in the south-western Sea of Marmara and north-eastern Aegean Sea. Total number of individuals (N), total weight (W, kg), depth-range (D, m), the frequency of appearance (F, percentage of hauls in which the species was captured within this depth-range), number of hauls (n). The asterisks indicate species removed for the analysis (*, species caught in only one sample; **, pelagic species).

Figure 4

Fig. 2. Dendrogram (A) and two-dimensional non-metric multidimensional scaling ordination (B) based on fish standardized species abundance. Labels show the mean depths (m) and sampling period (JL06: July 2006; O06: October 2006; M07: March 2007; J07: June 2007 and A07: August 2007) for each sample. The samples were divided into three groups associated with bathymetric strata and areas. SM: 38-72 m in the south-western Sea of Marmara; ASH: 68-100 m in the north-eastern Aegean Sea; AS: 177-395 m in the north-eastern Aegean Sea.

Figure 5

Table 4. Similarity percentage analysis results showing the mean abundance (A; individuals/km2), average within-group similarity (SIM), the percentage contribution to the similarity (SIM%), standard deviation of similarity (SIM/SD), the percentage contribution to within-group similarity (SIM%), and the accumulated SIM% (ΣSIM%). SM, shelf in the south-western Sea of Marmara; ASH, shelf in the north-eastern Aegean Sea; ASL, upper slope in the north-eastern Aegean Sea.

Figure 6

Table 5. Mean values and standard errors of the abundance (individuals/km2), biomass (kg/km2), fish weight (kg), species richness (number of species; total species richness also shown), diversity and evenness indices for shelf groups resulting from the cluster analysis, and results of the t-test. SM, shelf in the south-western Sea of Marmara; ASH, shelf in the north-eastern Aegean Sea; n.s., not significant; SE, standard error; *P < 0.01; **P < 0.001.

Figure 7

Fig. 3. The vertical profiles of the water temperature, salinity and dissolved oxygen for each sample from 38 to 72 m depth in the south-western Sea of Marmara, and from 68 to 395 m depth in the north-eastern Aegean Sea.

Figure 8

Table 6. Total mean values (±standard error) of the environmental variables on the continental shelf areas, and their mean (±standard error), minimum and maximum values by sampling period. DO, dissolved oxygen (mg/l); T, temperature (°C); S, salinity (psu); D, depth (m).

Figure 9

Fig. 4. Redundancy analysis tri-plot for fish species, samples and environmental variables. Alat, Arnoglossus laterna; Clin, Citharus linguatula; Egur, Eutrigla gurnardus; Gnig, Gobius niger; Lfrie, Lesuerogobius friesii; Lcav, Lepidotrigla cavillone; Lbud, Lophius budegassa; Mmerlang, Merlangius merlangus; Mmerluc, Merluccius merluccius; Mbar, Mullus barbatus; Shep, Serranus hepatus; Rcla, Raja clavata; Scan, Scyliorhinus canicula; Tdra, Trachinus draco. DO and T are the dissolved oxygen and temperature near the bottom, respectively.

Figure 10

Table 7. Results of the redundancy analysis model. The explained variance (EV%), the F statistic and the significance (P value) are indicated. DO, dissolved oxygen (mg/l); T, temperature (°C); S, salinity (psu); D, depth (m).