Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />rt: <br /> <br />., <br />:z <br /> <br />-- <br /> <br />42 <br />always obvious, a "yolk-check" circulus (much darker than others; Figure 11) commonly <br />marked the time of first food intake. Slopes of regressions differed significantly from 1.0 <br />for all treatments, indicating increments were not formed daily (Table 3). An ANCOV A <br />indicated slopes of regression lines also differed from each other based on significant <br />AGE and AGE*FEED interactions (Table 4). However, no significant FEED effect <br />existed. <br />There were significant relationships between otolith size and TL for each <br />treatment (Table 5, Figure 12). Based on analysis of residual plots, the best-fit model <br />was 10~ of saggitiU diameter as a function ofTL. When analyzed by ANCOV A (Table <br />6), treatment intercepts and slopes were significantly different. Regressions for Ad <br />libitum larvae had a shallower slope than others; Starved and Suboptimal larvae did not <br />differ. <br /> <br />Relationships between otolith diameter and age had a different pattern. Again, all <br /> <br /> <br />regressions were significant (Table 7, Figure 13). An ANCOV A indicated significant <br /> <br /> <br />AGE and AGE*FEED interactions (Table 8), which, when incorporated into the model, <br /> <br /> <br />makes FEED non-significant. In this case, the slope for the Ad libitum treatment is <br /> <br /> <br />steeper than either of the other two, indicating well-fed larvae had otoliths which <br /> <br /> <br />increased faster in size relative to the others based on age. <br /> <br />IV. Summary and Discussion <br /> <br /> <br />Both sagitta and lapillus are present at hatching in larval razorback suckers. <br /> <br /> <br />Asterisci do not appear until 14 to 15 d of age, independent of nutritional condition. As <br />