8142

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 8142
• Author: Horn, M. J.
• Title: Nutritional Limitation of Recruitment in the Razorback Sucker ‎(
• USFW Year: 1996.
• Copyright Material: NO

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

Page

Figure 38. Canonical variate one vs. canonical variate 2 represented by means of

canonical coefficients for each feeding treatment for larval razorback suckers.

Canonical variate one explains 92% of the observed variation between treatments,

canonical variate two explains 8% of the variation. ..................... 200

Figure 39. SL(mm) vs. Canonical variate one for razorback sucker larvae. Most of the

variation in SL is associated with the Ad libitum larvae. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 I

Figure 40. Canonical variate one versus canonical variate two for a nine-way

discriminant analysis for razorback sucker larvae. Canonical variate one explains

79% of the sample variation and primarily separates treatments. Canonical variate

2 represents 9.5% of the variation and helps separate age groups within
treatments. Points are means for each treatment*time group at age 14 d (1), 17 d
(2) and 22 d (3). ................................................. 202
Figure 41. SL(mm) versus canonical variate one for the 9-way discriminant function for
razorback sucker larvae. Much of the variation along canonical variate one is
associated with the three age classes of Ad libitum larvae. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
Figure 42. Relative warp one represented as a thin-plate spline for ex = 0, for positive and
negative displacement along the warp axis in razorback sucker larvae. Vectors
indicate net movement of the landmarks in the positive direction. .......... 204
Figure 43. Relative warp two represented as a thin-plate spline for ex = 0, for positive and
negative displacement along the warp axis in razorback sucker larvae. Vectors
indicate net movement of the landmarks in the positive direction. ..........205

xxvii