An updated checklist of the marine fishes in Lebanon. An answer to Bariche and Fricke (2020): “The marine ichthyofauna of Lebanon: an annotated checklist, history, biogeography, and conservation status”

Zootaxa ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 5010 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-128
Author(s):  
GHAZI BITAR ◽  
ALI BADREDDINE

The recent paper by Bariche & Fricke (2020) presents an updated checklist of the marine fish species in Lebanon including 367 fish species, 70 non-indigenous and 28 new records. According to Bariche & Fricke (2020), the inventory is based on the published scientific papers related to the marine fishes in Lebanon, since Gruvel (1928, 1931), as well as “grey literature, images published in newspapers or on local websites and social media”. However, important scientific papers and published reports, providing important data on marine fishes in Lebanon, were missed. Hereby we cite twelve scientific papers: [Nafpaktitis (1963), Bath (1977), Shiber (1981), Moosleitner (1988), Lakkis et al. (1996), Bariche (2006), Bariche et al. (2006); Bitar et al. (2007), Bariche & Trilles (2008), Bitar (2010), Khalaf et al. (2014), and Bitar (2015) in Zenetos et al. (2015)], twelve national reports [the national report of Abboud Abi Saab et al. (2003) under the framework of a Libano-Franco cooperation, the national report of Majdalani (2005) under the framework of the Ministry of Agricultue (MoA), the two reports in cooperation between the Food Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the National Council for Scientific Research (CNRS) Lelli et al. (2006), and Sacchi & Dimech (2011), and the eight national reports in collaboration with the Ministry of Environment (MoE) and the organizations of: (i) aecid/Tragsa as MoE/aecid/Tragsa (2009), (ii) International Union for Conservaion Nature (IUCN)- Specially Protected Areas Regional Activity Centre (SPA/RAC) as IUCN-SPA/RAC (2017), (iii) the SPA/RAC as Bitar (2008), RAC/SPA-UNEP/MAP (2014), IUCN-SPA/RAC (2017), and SPA/RAC-UN Environment/MAP (2017, 2018a, 2018b), and finally, the book of Lakkis (2013)]. Concerning the publication of Lakkis et al. (1996), and the book of Lakkis (2013), only the valid and confirmed/ or proofed marine fish species were listed in Table 1. While, the questionable/ doubtful marine fish records from those two references were listed in Table 2 and Table 3 (see suppl.file 2, and 3). In this context and based on the Lebanese literature, Bariche & Fricke (2020) missed the reports of 9 species (Table 1). Therefore, the list of marine fish of Lebanon (Bariche & Fricke, 2020) is enriched reaching 376 species, 71 of which are non-indigenous species (See suppl.file 1). In agreement with Zenetos & Galanidi (2020) we state that even the current update may contain errors, as species invasions are dynamic phenomena, where new information continually comes to light, whether from new observations or from re-examination of older material, changes in nomenclature and phylogenetic studies.

2021 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 357-367
Author(s):  
KAZI AHSAN HABIB ◽  
MD JAYEDUL ISLAM

A checklist of the marine fishes of Bangladesh is presented with their scientific, common andBangla or local names. The global IUCN Red List catagories of these species are also provided. Thisinventory of the marine fish species is compiled from different major and valid published scientific papers,reports and books published within last 50 years from 1970 to 2020. The directory covers a total of 740species belonging to 389 Genera of 145 Families and 30 Orders. Among the fish species, 53.38% areexclusively marine and 46.62% are found in both brackish and marine water. Besides, 296 species of fishesare reef associated and 204 of these are recorded from the Saint Martin’s Island. Further, 271 species ofbrakishwater and/or marine fishes are commonly observed in the Sundarbans mangrove ecosystem and itsadjacent sea area. About 7% of the total marine fishes of Bangladesh are identified as threatened as per globalIUCN Red List. However, the conservation status of the marine fish species of Bangladesh has not yet beenassessed locally by IUCN which is essential. The updated checklist will constitute the reference inventory ofmarine fishes of the coastal and maritime area of the country.


2020 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nguyen Manh Hung ◽  
Nguyen Van Ha ◽  
Ha Duy Ngo

In this paper, we updated the list of monogenean species from marine fishes of Vietnam. Taxonomic position of monogenean species were arranged according to the current classification system. A total of 220 monogenean species from 152 marine fish species were listed. Distribution, hosts and references of each species were given. In addition, amendations of taxonomic status of taxa were also updated.  


2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 260 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOSÉ CARLOS BÁEZ ◽  
CRISTINA RODRÍGUEZ-CABELLO ◽  
RAFAEL BAÑÓN ◽  
ALBERTO BRITO ◽  
JESÚS M. FALCÓN ◽  
...  

In response to a request from the Spanish Ministry of Farming, Fishing, Food, and Environment (Spanish: Agricultura, Pesca, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente) in 2015, a fish expert group was formed to provide a reference list of marine fish species according to five regions (marine demarcations) established by Spanish Law 41/2010 on the protection of the marine environment. The objective of this article was to update and analyse the data compiled in the marine fish species checklist in order to: 1) provide a complete list of marine fish species in the Spanish Exclusive Economic Zone; 2) compare this checklist between bio-geographical areas; and 3) identify possible priority hotspots for their conservation. We applied several indices, such as the total number of species in each area, species richness, and the Biodiversity Conservation Concern index. We discuss gaps in knowledge and the lessons learned for conservation purposes. A total of 1075 marine fishes were reported in Spanish waters. Most of these fish were well determined, whereas a few were treated as uncertain. The marine demarcation with the most species is the Canary Islands with 795 species, followed by the Spanish north coast demarcation with 506 species. However, the marine demarcations with the most species per area are the Spanish coast of the Gulf of Cádiz and the Strait of Gibraltar-Alboran Sea.


2015 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 251-259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Zaman ◽  
M Niamul Naser ◽  
Abu Tareq Mohammad Abdullah ◽  
Nasima Khan

An investigation was carried out on the proximate and mineral contents of widely consumed freshwater small indigenous species (SIS), culture and marine fish species of Bangladesh. Proximate composition (crude protein, fat, ash, moisture, carbohydrate and energy) and selected mineral (Ca, K, Na, Mg, Fe, Zn and Mn) contents were determined eighteen locally available fish species of Bangladesh. Considering proximate composition high protein fishes are Thai Sarpunti 17.5 ± 0.15%, Rui 16.82% ± 0.02; high fat fishes are Thai Pangus 10.03±0.1%, Thai Sarpunti 9.38±0.37%; high Ash contents in Poa 4.78 ± 0.92 %, Ganges Chapila 3.96 ± 0.51%, Thai Sarpunti 3.31 ± 0.14%; high energy found in Thai Sarpunti 157.02 ± 2.61 Kcal/g and Thai Pangus 151.59 ± 2.71 Kcal/g. Considering mineral compositions, Ca rich fishes are Punti 1984.32 ± 1.1 mg, Mola 1267 ± 2.2 mg, Dhela 1717.8 ± 3.1 mg, Chapila 1100.6 ± 1.21 mg, Thai Sarpunti 1373.9 ± 5.32 mg. K rich fishes are Taki 501.47 ± 2.9 mg, Coral 415.24 ± 2.8 mg and Na rich fishes are Thai Sarpunti 780.01 ± 3.8, Ganges Chapila 415.32 ± 2.34 mg, Loitta 497.38 ± 4.21 mg. Trace mineral, Mg is high in Coral 187.98 ± 0.61 mg, Punti 148.16 ± 0.62 mg, Datina 144.05 ± 0.35 mg, Kachki 143.49 ± 0.3 mg fishes, whereas Fe are high in Chapila 15.95 ± 0.03mg, Punti 10.31 ± 0.2, Poa 7.01±0.66 and Zn in Thai Sarpunti 40.20 ± 0.34 mg, Poa 29.32 ± 0.32 mg fishes. Considering Mn, Chapila 6.34 ± 0.04 mg is the highest. This study indicate that small fishes with bones are important source of essential minerals especially Ca. Culture species found to be rich in source of protein, energy and lipids. Marine species exhibit good combination of protein and minerals. This study also encourage to take a culture species like Thai Sarpunti (Barbonymus gonionotus) for its high nutritional meat values and also to consume marine fishes and small fishes with bones for better nourishment. Promotion of the production and consumption of small fishes therefore be encouraged for better nutritional achievement.Bangladesh J. Zool. 42(2): 251-259, 2014


1988 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Sinclair ◽  
T. Derrick Iles

2008 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 641-647 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Coz-Rakovac ◽  
N. Topic Popovic ◽  
T. Smuc ◽  
I. Strunjak-Perovic ◽  
M. Jadan

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document