Skip to main content Accessibility help
Hostname: page-component-5959bf8d4d-km8cc Total loading time: 0.38 Render date: 2022-12-08T07:52:41.446Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": false } hasContentIssue true

The reproductive biology of two epibenthic species of Antarctic nototheniid fish of the genus Trematomus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2008

Mario La Mesa*
ISMAR-CNR, Istituto di Scienze Marine, Sede di Ancona, Largo Fiera della Pesca, 60125 Ancona, Italy
Vincenzo Caputo
Istituto di Biologia e Genetica, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Ranieri 65, 60131 Ancona, Italy
Joseph T. Eastman
Department of Biomedical Sciences, College of Osteopathic Medicine, Ohio University, Athens, OH 45701-2979, USA


Trematomus eulepidotus and T. loennbergii are two of the most common epibenthic fish in the waters of the High Antarctic continental shelf. Since the reproductive biology of these species has not been studied in the Ross Sea, we provide a macroscopic and histological analysis of the reproductive effort and gonadal development in both sexes. Most samples were collected during benthic trawl surveys in the south-western Ross Sea in the 1996 and 1997 summer seasons. The aim of the study was to define the reproductive characteristics of these two sympatric species and to examine the hypothesis that different reproductive strategies mitigate interspecific competition. We found that, in common with most Antarctic notothenioids, both species possess a suite of similar reproductive strategies including delayed sexual maturity, prolonged gametogenesis, group-synchronous oocyte maturation, a single spawning event per year and iteroparity. Both species show a comparable reproductive effort in terms of potential fecundity with between 2000 and 20 000 eggs per female per season. Nevertheless, the two species exhibited a considerable difference in the timing of the breeding season, spawning in summer (T. eulepidotus) and in autumn (T. loennbergii). This gives rise to a mismatch in the time of appearance of larvae in the environment and probably leads to reduced competition.

Biological Sciences
Copyright © Antarctic Science Ltd 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)


Andriashev, A.P. 1970. Cryopelagic fishes of the Arctic and Antarctic and their significance in polar ecosystems. In Holdgate, M.W., ed. Antarctic ecology, vol 1. London: Academic Press, 297304.Google Scholar
Beccari, N. & Mazzi, V. 1972. Manuale di tecnica microscopica. Milano: Vallardi, 366 pp.Google Scholar
Billard, R. 1986. Spermatogenesis and spermatology of some teleost fish species. Reproduction Nutrition Development, 26, 877920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brenner, M., Buck, B.H., Cordes, S., Dietrich, L., Jacob, U., Mintenbeck, K., Schröder, A., Brey, T., Knust, R. & Arntz, W. 2001. The role of iceberg scours in niche separation within the Antarctic fish genus Trematomus. Polar Biology, 24, 502507.Google Scholar
Crim, L.W. & Glebe, B.D. 1990. Reproduction. In Schreck, C.B. & Moyle, P.B., eds. Methods for fish biology. Bethesda: American Fisheries Society, 529553.Google Scholar
Dearborn, J.H. 1965. Reproduction in the nototheniid fish Trematomus bernacchii Boulenger at McMurdo Sound, Antarctica. Copeia, 3, 302308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeWitt, H.H. 1971. Coastal and deep-water benthic fishes of the Antarctic. In Bushnell, V.C., ed. Antarctic map folio series, folio 15. New York: American Geographical Society, 110.Google Scholar
DeWitt, H.H., Heemstra, P.C. & Gon, O. 1990. Nototheniidae. In Gon, O. & Heemstra, P.C., eds. Fishes of the Southern Ocean. Grahamstown: JLB Smith Institute of Ichthyology, 279331.Google Scholar
Donnelly, J., Torres, J.J., Sutton, T.T. & Simoniello, C. 2004. Fishes of the eastern Ross Sea, Antarctica. Polar Biology, 27, 637650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duhamel, G., Kock, K.H., Balguerias, E. & Hureau, J.C. 1993. Reproduction in fish of the Weddell Sea. Polar Biology, 13, 193200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eastman, J.T. 1985. Pleuragramma antarcticum (Pisces, Nototheniidae) as food for other fishes in McMurdo Sound, Antarctica. Polar Biology, 4, 155160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eastman, J.T. 1993. Antarctic fish biology: evolution in an unique environment. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 322 pp.Google Scholar
Eastman, J.T. & Hubold, G. 1999. The fish fauna of the Ross Sea, Antarctica. Antarctic Science, 11, 293304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ekau, W. 1988. Ecomorphology of nototheniid fish from the Weddell Sea, Antarctica. Berichte für Polarforschung, 51, 1140.Google Scholar
Ekau, W. 1989. Egg development of Trematomus eulepidotus Regan, 1914 (Nototheniidae, Pisces) from the Weddell Sea, Antarctica. Cybium, 13, 213219.Google Scholar
Ekau, W. 1990. Demersal fish fauna of the Weddell Sea, Antarctica. Antarctic Science, 2, 129137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ekau, W. 1991. Reproduction in high Antarctic fishes (Notothenioidei). Meeresforschung, 33, 159167.Google Scholar
Ekau, W. & Gutt, J. 1991. Notothenioid fishes from the Weddell Sea and their habitat, observed by underwater photography and television. Proceedings NIPR Symposium on Polar Biology, 4, 3649.Google Scholar
Everson, I. 1977. The living resources of the Southern Ocean. Rome: FAO GLO/SO/77/1, 1156.Google Scholar
Everson, I. 1984. Fish biology. In Laws, R.M., ed. Antarctic ecology, vol. 2. London: Academic Press, 491532.Google Scholar
Gutt, J. & Ekau, W. 1996. Habitat partitioning of dominant high Antarctic demersal fish in the Weddell Sea and Lazarev Sea. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 206, 2537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holden, M.J. & Raitt, D.F.S. 1974. Manual of fisheries science. 2. Methods of resource investigation and their application. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper, 115, 1211.Google Scholar
Hubold, G. 1992. Ecology of Weddell Sea fishes. Berichte für Polarforschung, 103, 1157.Google Scholar
Hureau, J.C. 1994. The significance of fish in the marine Antarctic ecosystems. Polar Biology, 14, 307313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kartas, F. & Quignard, J.P. 1984. La fécondité des poissons téléostéens. Paris: Masson, 121 pp.Google Scholar
Kellermann, A. 1990. Catalogue of early life stages of Antarctic notothenioid fishes. Berichte für Polarforschung, 67, 45136.Google Scholar
Klingenberg, C.P. & Ekau, W. 1996. A combined morphometric and phylogenetic analysis of an ecomorphological trend: pelagization in Antarctic fishes (Perciformes: Nototheniidae). Biological Journal of the Linnaean Society, 59, 143177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kock, K.-H. 1989. Reproduction in fish around Elephant Island. Archiv für Fischereiwissenschaft, 39, 171210.Google Scholar
Kock, K.-H. 1992. Antarctic fish and fisheries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 359 pp.Google Scholar
Kock, K.-H. & Kellermann, A. 1991. Reproduction in Antarctic notothenioid fish - a review. Antarctic Science, 3, 125150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
La Mesa, M., Caputo, V. & Eastman, J.T. 2006. Gametogenesis and reproductive strategies in some species of the Antarctic fish genus Trematomus (Nototheniidae) from Terra Nova Bay, Ross Sea. Polar Biology, 29, 963970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
La Mesa, M., Vacchi, M., Castelli, A. & Diviacco, G. 1997. Feeding ecology of two nototheniid fishes, Trematomus hansoni and Trematomus loennbergii, from Terra Nova Bay, Ross Sea. Polar Biology, 17, 6268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lannoo, M.J. & Eastman, J.T. 2000. Nervous and sensory system correlates of an epibenthic evolutionary radiation in Antarctic notothenioid fishes, genus Trematomus (Perciformes; Nototheniidae). Journal of Morphology, 245, 6779.3.0.CO;2-W>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lisovenko, L.A. 1987. Reproductive biology of Antarctic fish in relations to conditions of their habitat. In Skarlato, O.A., Alekseev, A.P. & Liubimova, T.G., eds. Biological resources of the Arctic and Antarctic. Moscow: Nauka, 337357. [in Russian].Google Scholar
Loeb, V.J., Kellermann, A., Koubbi, P., North, A.W. & White, M.G. 1993. Antarctic larval fish assemblages: a review. Bulletin of Marine Science, 53, 416449.Google Scholar
Murua, H., Kraus, G., Saborido-Rey, F., Witthames, P.R., Thorsen, A. & Junquera, S. 2003. Procedures to estimate fecundity of marine fish species in relation to their reproductive strategy. Journal of Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Science, 33, 3354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ni, I.H. & Sandeman, E.J. 1984. Size at maturity for Northwest Atlantic redfishes (Sebastes). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 41, 17531762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
North, A.W. & White, M.G. 1987. Reproductive strategies of Antarctic fish. In Kullander, S.O. & Fernholm, B., eds. Proceedings of the V Congress of European Ichthyologists, 1985. Stockholm, 381390.Google Scholar
Pakhomov, E.A. 1997. Feeding and exploitation of the food supply by demersal fishes in the Antarctic part of the Indian Ocean. Journal of Ichthyology, 37, 360380.Google Scholar
Permitin, Y.E. & Tarverdieva, M.I. 1978. Feeding of fishes of the families Nototheniidae and Channichthyidae in the South Orkney Islands. The Soviet Journal of Marine Biology, 4, 619622.Google Scholar
Roshchin, E.A. 1991. Aspects of the life cycle of Trematomus eulepidotus (Nototheniidae) in the Indian Ocean sector of the Antarctic. Journal of Ichthyology, 31, 111.Google Scholar
Sanchez, S., Dettaï, A., Bonillo, C., Ozouf-Costaz, C., Detrich, H.W. III & Lecointre, G. 2007. Molecular and morphological phylogenies of the Antarctic teleostean family Nototheniidae, with emphasis on the Trematominae. Polar Biology, 30, 155166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwarzbach, W. 1988. Fish fauna of the eastern and southern Weddell Sea: geographic distribution, feeding, and trophic position of the various species. Berichte für Polarforschung, 34, 194.Google Scholar
Shandikov, G.A. & Faleeva, T.I. 1992. Features of gametogenesis and sexual cycles of six notothenioid fishes from East Antarctica. Polar Biology, 11, 615621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shust, K.V. 1987. Distribution and important biological aspects of abundant Antarctic notothenioid species. In Skarlato, O.A., Alekseev, A.P. & Liubimova, T.G., eds. Biological resources of the Arctic and Antarctic. Moscow: Nauka, 296320. [in Russian].Google Scholar
Targett, T.E. 1981. Trophic ecology and structure of coastal Antarctic fish communities. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 4, 243263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vacchi, M., Williams, R. & La Mesa, M. 1996. Reproduction in three species of fish from the Ross Sea and Mawson Sea. Antarctic Science, 8, 185192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vacchi, M., Greco, S. & La Mesa, M. 1999a. The coastal fish fauna of Terra Nova Bay, Ross Sea. In Faranda, F., Guglielmo, L. & Ianora, A., eds. Ross Sea ecology. Berlin: Springer, 457468.Google Scholar
Vacchi, M., La Mesa, M. & Greco, S. 1999b. Summer distribution and abundance of larval and juvenile fishes in the western Ross Sea. Antarctic Science, 11, 5460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanella, F.A., Calvo, J., Morriconi, E.R. & Aureliano, D.R. 2005. Somatic energy content and histological analysis of the gonads in Antarctic fish from the Scotia Arc. Scientia Marina, 69 (Sup. 2), 305316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Molen, S. & Matallanas, J. 2004. Reproductive biology of female Antarctic spiny plunderfish Harpagifer spinosus (Notothenioidei: Harpagiferidae), from Îles Crozet. Antarctic Science, 16, 99105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, R.A. & Selman, K. 1981. Cellular and dynamic aspects of oocyte growth in teleosts. American Zoologist, 21, 325343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, R.A. & Selman, K. 1990. Ultrastructural aspects of oogenesis and oocyte growth in fish and amphibians. Journal of Electron Microscopy Techniques, 16, 175201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
West, G. 1990. Methods of assessing ovarian development in fishes: a review. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research, 41, 199222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wöhrmann, A.P.A. 1998. Aspects of eco-physiological adaptations in Antarctic fish. In di Prisco, G., Pisano, E. & Clarke, A., eds. Fishes of Antarctica: a biological overview. Milan: Springer, 119128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The reproductive biology of two epibenthic species of Antarctic nototheniid fish of the genus Trematomus
Available formats

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

The reproductive biology of two epibenthic species of Antarctic nototheniid fish of the genus Trematomus
Available formats

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

The reproductive biology of two epibenthic species of Antarctic nototheniid fish of the genus Trematomus
Available formats

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *