Abstract
Length-weight parameters assist in the estimation of a fish’s biomass based upon assessment of length, providing value to many scientific and management applications. Some fish species have many sets of parameters published, while those less commonly studied may have no available information, making it challenging to decide which values to use. To address this, we present a database of quality-controlled length-weight parameters for 1,308 Pacific coral reef fish species from 87 families. The species included are commonly observed in visual censuses of shallow (10 m depth) forereef habitats of the central Pacific. These data were collated from the literature, and were selected based on study sample size, representation of the species’ total length range, and data confidence. The most speciose families, wrasses (Labridae) and damselfishes (Pomacentridae), were most common in our database, though a large proportion of these species remain data-poor. In total, this database serves as a valuable tool for the academic community as well as for partners and managers desiring to learn more about coral reef fish assemblages.
Similar content being viewed by others
Background & Summary
Length and weight are fundamental biological traits for all living organisms. Among many animal taxa, these two characteristics are linked through allometric scaling, which describes how changes in one dimension affect changes in another as an organism grows. First coined by Huxley & Tessier1, allometry can provide a simplification of how animals adjust their shape and physiology as they increase in size, with linked changes in body dimensions affecting an individual’s mobility, energy requirements, and survival strategies1,2. Length-weight relationships (LWR) are frequently modeled through the power function formula
where W represents weight, L is length, and a and b are species-specific constants. This model has broad applications in ecology because it enables scientists to predict various life-history traits and examine how they relate to each other, making it a powerful tool in understanding population dynamics and interspecies interactions3.
In fisheries ecology, LWR are particularly important as they allow fisheries scientists to estimate the weight of a fish based on its length, enabling rapid assessments of fish health and population dynamics without intensive or extractive sampling efforts4,5,6,7. To maintain precision of weight estimation, capturing reliable parameterization of LWR is essential. Notably, LWR are species-specific and can differ based on factors such as body morphology, geographic region, and environmental conditions3,8,9,10, which makes parameter selection an important step of data analysis. Fisheries managers rely on the insights provided by LWR to establish sustainable fishing practices7,11, set regulations12, and monitor the health of aquatic ecosystems13,14, particularly when non-invasive methodologies are utilized.
Among the most common applications of LWR are fish assemblage descriptions based upon underwater visual census (UVC). UVC is a fisheries-independent tool for assessing and monitoring fish assemblages, and generates important data metrics such as fish abundance, biomass, size-structure, biodiversity, and trophic structure. UVC encompasses several different survey techniques (e.g., belt transect surveys, stationary point count (SPC), etc.) in which divers visually identify and estimate the number and size of fish within a given area, often while using SCUBA15,16,17,18,19. Compared to fisheries-dependent studies, UVC is a non-destructive approach which allows for rapid data collection and provides a snapshot view of fish communities at each survey site. On coral reefs, UVC can provide a cost-effective way to quickly survey diverse fish assemblages18. The derived data yield useful ecological insights into the fish assemblages, as well as the potential effects of various disturbances on those assemblages. For example, data on the abundance and size structure of fish populations between fished and unfished systems can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of marine protected areas4,7,20,21. Further, when repeated over time, UVCs can show how coral reef fish communities change in response to events such as coral bleaching, habitat modification, marine protection, and the introduction of invasive species22,23.
While UVC methods excel at capturing the diversity of diurnally active, non-cryptic coral reef fishes, transforming these observational data into meaningful biomass estimates presents significant challenges. The conversion of fish counts and size estimates into biomass relies fundamentally on LWR; however, the extraordinary biodiversity of coral reef ecosystems, with thousands of fish species across the Pacific Ocean alone, has resulted in substantial gaps in available LWR parameters for many species. Researchers often address these data gaps by applying parameters from related species or from different geographic regions, a practice that can introduce significant bias into biomass estimates3,24. While Bayesian approaches have been developed to estimate missing parameters based on taxonomic relationships, these methods may not fully capture the complex ecological and evolutionary factors that influence fish morphology and condition25.
With increasing availability and collection of life history parameters, it is inevitable that global databases (e.g., FishBase26) would expand to include numerous parameters for one species, particularly species with global distributions. As one example, Cephalopholis argus, a common grouper, has ten different sets of a-b values to choose from in the FishBase database as of publication26. While some of these life history parameters are flagged as suspect, the process of choosing the best parameter for any particular species from a given region still elicits many questions, especially with multiple options that all seem equally valid27. How does an individual researcher prioritize among the many options in a reproducible way?
Here we present an empirically derived, quality-controlled database of length-weight parameters for commonly observed coral reef fishes from the tropical Pacific region. We have created an openly available, regionally expansive list of known length-weight parameters for regional partners (e.g., practitioners, resource managers) and the scientific community. Similar efforts to compile and serve species-specific data have proved successful in other scientific disciplines28,29,30. We intend for this database to serve as a powerful resource for the Pacific region, compiling the best available information on fish life history parameters. There are other global fish databases, such as FishBase26,31, which aim to provide comprehensive species-level data for finfish. We do not seek to replace these efforts, but rather to build from them to provide complementary, expert-level curation based on the underlying life history data. To this end, we provide a curated list of length-weight parameters to use for analyses. Additionally, we provide R code for a function that uses length-weight parameters to calculate biomass and generate summary figures from UVC data. One of our motivations in creating this database is to lessen the burden on individual researchers and managers by conducting this curation for the Pacific region. A secondary outcome is increased standardization and comparison between monitoring programs, which are essential for worldwide summaries of the status of coral reefs and their fisheries, such as the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network32.
The taxa targeted for inclusion in this database were those identified as the most commonly observed by UVC on forereef habitats of the tropical Pacific. Based upon UVC data collected across 13 Pacific island nations, a list of 1,308 unique fish species was identified representing 87 families. While the most observed families – and thus most represented species in this database – were wrasses (Labridae) and damselfish (Pomacentridae), they were also the taxa which utilized parameters from congeners the most; 126 of 203 Labrids and 93 of 148 Pomacentrids did not have species-specific data (Table S1). The selected length-weight parameters for the taxa included in this database were derived from 91 source publications. These publications spanned 13 biogeographic realms as defined by Costello et al.33, with varying degrees of geographic resolution. While the compiled taxon list was generated from surveys conducted within the Pacific, not all the selected length-weight parameters were derived from studies based in this region. For example, the most suitable set of length-weight parameters for the red lionfish (Pterois volitans) – a species native to the Indo-Pacific – came from research conducted in the tropical Western Atlantic, where the species is considered non-native34. Despite the potential variation in body shape or allometric growth rates between populations of a species across geographic ranges, some length-weight parameters were necessarily selected from outside of the Pacific basin when they represented the most robust data available.
At present, most resource managers and coral reef ecologists rely on scientific manuscripts, technical reports, and online resources such as FishBase26,31 to access length-weight parameters that support individual life history assessments. The compilation of length-weight parameters can be time consuming and can lack data standardization or quality control across data sources. In most cases, each database includes data from a variety of published and online sources – each being unique to an individual or group – making it difficult to identify the source of the original length-weight parameters or validate the resulting estimates of fish biomass included in each project. Furthermore, in some cases length-weight parameters are selected without consideration for data quality or potential sources of error.
Previous efforts to collect and compile length-weight parameters for coral reef fishes have provided an invaluable source of life history information. These often span a range of scientific objectives; some studies collect length-weight parameters across a range of species, while others focus on collecting parameters on a single species11 or a group of species35,36. In some cases, studies rely on empirical data from targeted collections or fisheries-dependent observations, while other efforts use statistical modeling approaches (e.g., Bayesian estimates) to estimate length-weight parameters. The approaches by which resource managers and members of the scientific community interpret and utilize these data can be variable. For example, in the case of ecological or fisheries-independent studies, length-weight parameters are used to estimate the biomass of fishes observed during UVC, and hastily chosen length-weight parameters can result in over- or under- estimated biomass values3,37. It is therefore important to evaluate the sources of length-weight data and choose parameters based on criteria that best support individual project objectives.
Another challenge in the application of LWR is the potential for geographic conditions influencing parameter estimates. For species that realize large amounts of geographic variability in LWR, there can be cause for concern in application of empirical parameters without proper validation or consideration of geographic origin. In some cases, significant variation in LWR have been documented across geographies of the Pacific Ocean, driven by regional oceanographic conditions, biogeographic patterns, and varying anthropogenic pressures38,39. Further, fish populations of the same species may exhibit markedly different length-weight relationships between the geographic regions due to differences in productivity regimes, water temperature, and food availability40,41,42.
The spatial variability in length-weight relationships underscores the critical importance of using locally or regionally appropriate parameters when estimating fish biomass. Failure to account for regional effects can lead to systematic biases in biomass estimates, potentially compromising the accuracy or precision of ecological assessments, fisheries management decisions, and cross-system comparisons. Therefore, researchers must carefully consider the geographic origin of length-weight parameters and their applicability to the system of interest, particularly when conducting large-scale comparative studies across ocean basins. Furthermore, the use of a standardized, citable set of length-weight parameters such as those presented herein allows for more reliable comparisons of coral reef fish biomass across studies.
In this study we identify five criteria that we recommend colleagues should consider when selecting length-weight parameters: (1) Regional differences in length-weight parameters of a species – the life history characteristics of a species are influenced by biotic factors and the biogeographic ranges of most coral reef fishes span across environmental gradients40,41,42; (2) Sample size – efforts to collect length-weight parameters from targeted species can be variable and the number of individual samples included in a study can range from one to hundreds or even thousands of individuals; however, because length-weight parameters are based on scaling relationships and linear regression, smaller sample sizes will have less statistical confidence; (3) Size range across samples – since fish growth rates change with ontogeny, it is important to consider sampling efforts where individuals are collected across the entire range of size classes for a targeted species24,37; (4) Parameters from species vs. from congeners (or similar taxon) – based on available data, the length-weight parameters for a targeted species may be limited or lacking. In these cases, it may be advantageous to select length-weight parameters of a congener or from a species with similar morphometrics if the selection criteria are better met by that species; (5) Empirical data vs. Bayesian estimates – Bayesian point estimates have been found to differ significantly from species-specific, empirically derived LWR, and the posterior distributions of the Bayesian predictions often have large uncertainties around point estimates43. Given that the Bayesian predictions are based on only four different body morphologies, we advocate for the use of robust species-specific LWR when available, or a suitable congener when it is not.
As the field of coral reef ecology advances there is a concerted effort to make use of length-weight parameters to increase our understanding of the structure and function of fishes. We must also recognize opportunities to build upon previous efforts and fill gaps in available life history information, such as leveraging the marine aquarium trade. We found that there was an overrepresentation of length-weight parameters for large-bodied and popular fishery target species. In contrast, some of the most ecologically important (e.g., reef sharks) and numerically abundant (e.g., anthias – Pseudanthias spp. and chromis – Pychnochromis spp.) groups of fishes are lacking length-weight parameters. Other important groups such a coral-associated (e.g., hawkfish – Cirrhitidae) or obligate corallivores (nested within the lower-carnivore group, e.g., butterflyfish – Chaetodontidae) are underrepresented in the literature and there is a need to fill data gaps. Moving forward, we encourage colleagues to contribute to efforts of LWR estimation and share data whenever possible. By working collaboratively, we can continue advancing our understanding of these valuable ecosystems.
Methods
To create a database of nearshore, diurnally active coral reef species for the tropical Pacific, we extracted a taxon list based on the results of UVC surveys conducted by the Sandin Lab to characterize coral reef communities from 13 countries across the region from 2005-2023, which generally targeted forereefs at 10 m depth. Once all scientific names from the compiled taxa were confirmed as valid in the World Register of Marine Species (WoRMS) (last accessed October 2023), this list served as the basis for the length-weight database.
Length-weight parameters were gathered from the literature, primarily through searches on Google Scholar or Web of Science. All length-weight parameter data sources are listed in the ‘Citation Information’ tab within the main data file and cited in this paper34,35,36,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132. FishBase was used to supplement this search and it also served as the primary reference for biological information on each species, including but not limited to biogeographic range, maximum length and weight, diet, and length-to-length ratios. When information was not readily available on FishBase, fish reference books133,134,135 and online literature searches for manuscripts and technical reports provided species and life-history information. As most UVC length estimates are total length (TL), we calculated a conversion from the length measurement of the source publication (if it was done in standard or fork length) to TL using either length-to-length ratios provided on FishBase or through manual calculations.
If there were multiple sources for the length-weight parameters, we developed a process for selecting the most accurate parameters based on the following criteria, listed in order of priority: study sample size, size range of fish measured in the study, and data confidence. For example, if two studies reported the same sample size but one study recorded length values covering 20% of the species length range while the other study recorded values for 60%, the parameters from the study with the greater length range would be selected. Data confidence (r or R2) was used as a tie breaker if all other criteria were equal. Parameters were chosen from the Pacific as much as possible, though studies from outside the Pacific were used when they represented the most robust data available. It is important to note that while much thought and consideration has been given to the parameters included in the database based on the criteria outlined above, our search was not comprehensive and therefore did not necessarily consider all published parameters for every species.
When a species did not have any reliable length-weight parameters available, parameters from a congener which met the above criteria were used. Congeners were selected based on similarity of body morphology and maximum length. In cases where genus or family level parameters were not available in the literature, length-weight parameters were chosen from a species we felt was representative of that taxon, rather than trying to average species-level parameters together83. Given the diversity of fish morphology, we did not feel confident providing these for all families and genera. It is also worth noting that what is representative of a genus or family is regionally specific, and we encourage users of this database to choose these parameters based on what makes sense for their study region.
Trophic designations
We chose to include broad trophic categories for the interested reader, recognizing that many reef fishes have flexible diets which are context-dependent and shift with ontogeny136. The classifications were selected to provide general guidance regarding the trophic position of the species and are not intended to represent the current state of knowledge regarding species-specific diets. We define the classifications as follows: (1) Herbivore/detritivore: the herbivore/detritivore group includes species that derive most of their food through foraging on non-planktonic primary producers. As such, this group includes species that feed primarily on turf algae, coralline algae, and other macroalgae. Further, the group includes species that forage among benthic algae yet derive the bulk of their nutrition from small invertebrates, detritus, or microbes found within the algae; (2) Planktivore: the planktivore group includes species that feed primarily on planktonic organisms. The group principally includes species that feed on zooplankton, though many species also forage opportunistically on phytoplankton, and the group includes species foraging on both allochthonous and autochthonous sources of plankton; (3) Lower-carnivore: the lower-carnivore group includes benthic invertivores and species that feed primarily on small fishes, but do not have as large of a possible prey base as top predators; (4) Top predator: we use a working definition of ‘top predator’ based upon the extent of the potential prey base, following Sandin et al.137, which are principally species of groupers (Serranidae), jacks (Carangidae), and snappers (Lutjanidae), among others; and (5) Sharks: this grouping includes all shark species of the elasmobranch fishes. We have separated this grouping from top predators, as not all sharks are considered top or apex predators138. While trophic designations for this group are particularly controversial and often size-dependent, sharks are often studied or noted for their distinct ecological roles on reefs, and as such, we include them as a separate category.
Data Records
The complete database is publicly available on the University of California San Diego Library Digital Collections website (https://doi.org/10.6075/J02Z15WT)139. The primary data file, ‘Pacific_LW_parameters_V1.xlsx’, contains a quality-controlled, curated set of parameters for each species, which are located on the ‘Length-Weight Parameter Table’ tab. Parameters were selected from the literature based on sample size, representation of species length range, and data confidence. In cases where suitable parameters were not available, a representative species with robust parameters was chosen as a substitute. Detailed citation information, including the biogeographic realm, can be found in the ‘Citation Information’ tab. Updated versions of this database will be made available as new parameters are published and subsequently reviewed by our group.
Technical Validation
The database of life history parameters for Pacific coral reef fishes was curated as described above in methods. All compiled data were inspected to ensure that the data were contained within, and any parameters that could not be traced to a primary source were excluded. Values were input verbatim to the source document, excepting length-to-length ratios calculated manually, which were rounded to the nearest 0.01. After final data compilation, we used the Taxon Match Tool (https://www.marinespecies.org/tutorial_taxonmatch.php) to ensure that taxonomy was consistent with the World Register of Marine Species (WoRMS)140.
Usage Notes
The dataset is hosted via the University of California San Diego Library Digital Collections website (https://doi.org/10.6075/J02Z15WT)139. The UC San Diego Research Data Collections contain research data generated by campus researchers, as supported by the Research Data Curation Program, and are publicly available and searchable to anyone for educational and research use. Notably, the Excel file containing the database additionally includes references to all original sources that were used to compile the length-weight parameters. We therefore encourage users to reference these sources along with this data descriptor when using the selected parameters. We further note that the curated database is an evolving data product, as generation of new length-weight parameters continues, along with further data curation and addition to the database. Given this, we encourage users to access the latest versions of the database files, which will be updated as new, dated versions in the UC San Diego Library Digital Collections. Subsequent versions of the database will be marked with their data of deposition, along with the date at which data curation ceased for a particular version. Each version will have a unique DOI, and for reproducibility we encourage users to cite the DOI of the specific database version used.
Code availability
Though there was no custom code used to generate this database, code to utilize the length-weight parameters presented herein to calculate fish biomass from UVC can be found on Github at https://github.com/aakiona/fish-summarizer/.
References
Huxley, J. S. & Teissier, G. Terminology of Relative Growth. Nature 137, 780–781, https://doi.org/10.1038/137780b0 (1936).
West, G. B., Brown, J. H. & Enquist, B. J. A General Model for the Origin of Allometric Scaling Laws in Biology. Science 276, 122–126, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.276.5309.122 (1997).
Gerritsen, H. D. & Mcgrath, D. Significant differences in the length–weight relationships of neighbouring stocks can result in biased biomass estimates: Examples of haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus, L.) and whiting (Merlangius merlangus, L.). Fisheries Research 85, 106–111, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2007.01.004 (2007).
DeMartini, E. E., Friedlander, A. M., Sandin, S. A. & Sala, E. Differences in fish-assemblage structure between fished and unfished atolls in the northern Line Islands, central Pacific. Mar. Ecol.-Prog. Ser. 365, 199–215, https://doi.org/10.3354/meps07501 (2008).
Sandin, S. A. et al. Baselines and Degradation of Coral Reefs in the Northern Line Islands. Plos One 3, 11, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0001548 (2008).
Zgliczynski, B. J. et al. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: an assessment of coral reef fishes in the US Pacific Islands. Coral Reefs 32, 637–650, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-013-1018-0 (2013).
Zgliczynski, B. J. & Sandin, S. A. Size-structural shifts reveal intensity of exploitation in coral reef fisheries. Ecological Indicators 73, 411–421, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.09.045 (2017).
Tsoumani, M., Liasko, R., Moutsaki, P., Kagalou, I. & Leonardos, I. Length-weight relationships of an invasive cyprinid fish (Carassius gibelio) from 12 Greek lakes in relation to their trophic states. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 22, 281–284, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0426.2006.00768.x (2006).
Jellyman, P., Booker, D., Crow, S., Bonnett, M. & Jellyman, D. Does one size fit all? An evaluation of length–weight relationships for New Zealand’s freshwater fish species. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 47, 450–468, https://doi.org/10.1080/00288330.2013.781510 (2013).
Donovan, M. K., Friedlander, A. M., Demartini, E. E., Donahue, M. J. & Williams, I. D. Demographic patterns in the peacock grouper (Cephalopholis argus), an introduced Hawaiian reef fish. Environmental Biology of Fishes 96, 981–994, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10641-012-0095-1 (2013).
Fairchild, E. A., Wulfing, S. & White, E. R. Lumpfish, Cyclopterus lumpus, distribution in the Gulf of Maine, USA: observations from fisheries independent and dependent catch data. PeerJ 12, e17832, https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.17832 (2024).
Shertzer, K. W., Damiano, M. D. & Williams, E. H. Spawning Potential Ratio Can Provide Reference Points for Fishery Management That Are Robust to Environmental Variability. Fishes 9, 497, https://doi.org/10.3390/fishes9120497 (2024).
Schiettekatte, N. M. D. et al. Biological trade-offs underpin coral reef ecosystem functioning. Nature Ecology & Evolution 6, 701–708, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-022-01710-5 (2022).
Doherty, T. S., Hays, G. C. & Driscoll, D. A. Human disturbance causes widespread disruption of animal movement. Nature Ecology & Evolution 5, 513−+, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-01380-1 (2021).
Bohnsack, J. A. B., Scott, P. A stationary visual census technique for quantitatively assessing community structure of coral reef fishes. (National Marine Fisheries Service, 1986).
Samoilys, M. A. & Carlos, G. Determining methods of underwater visual census for estimating the abundance of coral reef fishes. Environmental Biology of Fishes 57, 289–304, https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1007679109359 (2000).
Colvocoresses, J. & Acosta, A. A large-scale field comparison of strip transect and stationary point count methods for conducting length-based underwater visual surveys of reef fish populations. Fisheries Research 85, 130–141, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2007.01.012 (2007).
Brock, V. A Preliminary Report on a Method of Estimating Reef Fish Populations. Journal of Wildlife Management 18, 297–308 (1954).
Caldwell, Z. R., Zgliczynski, B. J., Williams, G. J. & Sandin, S. A. Reef Fish Survey Techniques: Assessing the Potential for Standardizing Methodologies. PLOS ONE 11, e0153066, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0153066 (2016).
Friedlander, A. M. & DeMartini, E. E. Contrasts in density, size, and biomass of reef fishes between the northwestern and the main Hawaiian islands: the effects of fishing down apex predators. Mar. Ecol.-Prog. Ser. 230, 253–264, https://doi.org/10.3354/meps230253 (2002).
Williams, I. D. et al. Differences in Reef Fish Assemblages between Populated and Remote Reefs Spanning Multiple Archipelagos Across the Central and Western Pacific. Journal of Marine Biology 2011, 1–14, https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/826234 (2011).
Halford, A., Cheal, A. J., Ryan, D. & Williams, D. M. Resilience to large-scale disturbance in coral and fish assemblages on the Great Barrier Reef. Ecology 85, 1892–1905, https://doi.org/10.1890/03-4017 (2004).
McClanahan, T. R. & Graham, N. Recovery trajectories of coral reef fish assemblages within Kenyan marine protected areas. Mar. Ecol.-Prog. Ser. 294, 241–248, https://doi.org/10.3354/meps294241 (2005).
Froese, R. Cube law, condition factor and weight–length relationships: history, meta-analysis and recommendations. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 22, 241–253, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0426.2006.00805.x (2006).
Thorson, J. T., Cope, J. M. & Patrick, W. S. Assessing the quality of life history information in publicly available databases. Ecological Applications 24, 217–226, https://doi.org/10.1890/12-1855.1 (2014).
Froese, R. A. D. P. 344p (ICLARM, Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines, 2000).
Robertson, D. R. Global biogeographical data bases on marine fishes: caveat emptor. Diversity and Distributions 14, 891–892, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00519.x (2008).
Benson, D. A. et al. GenBank. Nucleic Acids Res. 41, D36–D42, https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gks1195 (2012).
Beech, E., Rivers, M., Oldfield, S. & Smith, P. P. GlobalTreeSearch: The first complete global database of tree species and country distributions. Journal of Sustainable Forestry 36, 454–489, https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2017.1310049 (2017).
Harris, T. W. WormBase: a cross-species database for comparative genomics. Nucleic Acids Res. 31, 133–137, https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkg053 (2003).
Humphries, A. T. et al. Measuring the scientific impact of FishBase after three decades. Cybium 47, 213–224, https://doi.org/10.26028/CYBIUM/2023-002 (2023).
Status of coral reefs of the world: 2020 report. (Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) and International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI), 2021).
Costello, M. J. et al. Marine biogeographic realms and species endemicity. Nature Communications 8 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-01121-2 (2017).
Sabido-Itzá, M. M., Aguilar-Perera, A. & Medina-Quej, A. Length–weight and length–length relations, and relative condition factor of red lionfish, Pterois volitans (Actinopterygii: Scorpaeniformes: Scorpaenidae), from two natural protected areas in the Mexican Caribbean. Acta Ichthyologica et Piscatoria 46, 279–285, https://doi.org/10.3750/aip2016.46.4.01 (2016).
Akiona, A. K., Zgliczynski, B. J. & Sandin, S. A. Length–weight relationships for 18 coral reef fish species from the central Pacific. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 38, 118–122, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.14249 (2021).
Peyton, K. A. et al. Length–weight relationships for common juvenile fishes and prey species in Hawaiian estuaries. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 32, 499–502, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.12957 (2016).
Kimmerer, W. et al. Variability in length-weight relationships used to estimate biomass of estuarine fish from survey data. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 134, 481–495, https://doi.org/10.1577/T04-042.1 (2005).
Williams, I. D. et al. Human, Oceanographic and Habitat Drivers of Central and Western Pacific Coral Reef Fish Assemblages. PLOS ONE 10, e0120516, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0120516 (2015).
Zgliczynski, B. J. et al. Foraging consistency of coral reef fishes across environmental gradients in the central Pacific. Oecologia 191, 433–445, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-019-04496-9 (2019).
Pusack, T. J., Benkwitt, C. E., Cure, K. & Kindinger, T. L. Invasive Red Lionfish (Pterois volitans) grow faster in the Atlantic Ocean than in their native Pacific range. Environmental Biology of Fishes 99, 571–579, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10641-016-0499-4 (2016).
Ruttenberg, B. I., Haupt, A. J., Chiriboga, A. I. & Warner, R. R. Patterns, causes and consequences of regional variation in the ecology and life history of a reef fish. Oecologia 145, 394–403, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-005-0150-0 (2005).
Trip, E. L., Choat, J. H., Wilson, D. T. & Robertson, D. R. Inter-oceanic analysis of demographic variation in a widely distributed Indo-Pacific coral reef fish. Mar. Ecol.-Prog. Ser. 373, 97–109, https://doi.org/10.3354/meps07755 (2008).
Akiona, A. K., Zgliczynski, B. J., French, B. J. & Sandin, S. A. Length-Weight Relationships for 15 Coral Reef Fish Species from the Northern Line Islands. Pac. Sci. 78, 399–406, https://doi.org/10.2984/78.4.4 (2024).
Abdurahiman, K., Nayak, T., Zacharia, P. & Mohamed, K. Length-weight relationship of commercially important marine fishes and shellfishes of the southern coast of Karnataka, India. Naga. World Fish Centre Quarterly 27, 9–14 (2004).
Al Kamel, N. A. M., Becheker, A. & Kara, H. M. Length-weight relationship of three commercially important fish species from Mocka water, southern Red Sea, Yemen. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 36, 369–371, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.14012 (2020).
Al Sakaff, H. & Esseen, M. Length-weight relationship of fishes from Yemen waters (Gulf of Aden and Red Sea). Naga 22, 41–42 (1999).
Bae, J. H. et al. Age determination and growth estimates of the white-spotted conger eel, (Brevoort, 1856) in marine waters of South Korea. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 34, 542–549, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.13587 (2018).
Balart, E. F. et al. Length-weight relationships of cryptic reef fishes from the southwestern Gulf of California, Mexico. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 22, 316–318, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0426.2006.00670.x (2006).
Bohnsack, J. A. & Harper, D. E. Length-weight relationships of selected marine reef fishes from the southeastern United States and the Caribbean. (1988).
Bos, A. R., Gumanao, G. S. & Silvosa, M. Twenty-eight additions to the length-weight and length-length relationships of Indo-Pacific fishes from the Davao Gulf, Philippines. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 34, 185–189, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.13525 (2018).
Bouchon-Navaro, Y., Bouchon, C., Kopp, D. & Louis, M. Weight-length relationships for 50 fish species collected in seagrass beds of the Lesser Antilles. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 22, 322–324, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0426.2006.00715.x (2006).
Cabanban, A. S. Some aspects of the biology of Pterocaesio pisang (Bleeker 1985) (Pisces: Caesionidae) in central Visayas M.S. thesis, University of the Philippines (1984).
Choat, J. H. & Axe, L. M. Growth and longevity in acanthurid fishes an analysis of otolith increments. Mar. Ecol.-Prog. Ser. 134, 15–26, https://doi.org/10.3354/meps134015 (1996).
Chu, W. S., Wang, J. P., Hou, Y. Y., Ueng, Y. T. & Chu, P. H. Length-weight relationships for fishes off the southwestern coast of Taiwan. African Journal of Biotechnology 10, 3945–3950 (2011).
Chung, K. C. & Woo, N. Y. S. Age and growth by scale analysis of (Teleostei: Pomacanthidae) from Dongsha Islands, southern China. Environmental Biology of Fishes 55, 399–412, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007571532648 (1999).
Claisse, J. T., Kienzle, M., Bushnell, M. E., Shafer, D. J. & Parrish, J. D. Habitat- and sex-specific life history patterns of yellow tang in Hawaii, USA. Mar. Ecol.-Prog. Ser. 389, 245–255, https://doi.org/10.3354/meps08114 (2009).
Clarke, T. A. & Privitera, L. A. Reproductive biology of two Hawaiian pelagic carangid fishes, the bigeye scad, Selar crumenophthalmus, and the round scad, Decapturus macarellus. Bull. Mar. Sci. 56, 33–47 (1995).
Claro, R. & García-Arteaga, J. P. in Ecología de los peces marinos de Cuba (ed Claro, R.) 545 (Instituto de Oceanologia Academia de Ciencias de Cuba and Centro de Investigaciones de Quintana Roo (CIQRO) 1987).
Cliff, G. & Dudley, S. F. J. Sharks caught in the protective gill nets off Natal, South Africa. 4. The bull shark Carcharhinus leucas Valenciennes. South African Journal of Marine Science 10, 253–270, https://doi.org/10.2989/02577619109504636 (1991).
Coello, D., Herrera, M. & Zambrano, R. Length-weight relationship of 74 fish species caught in the continental coast of Ecuador. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 37, 129–134, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.14113 (2021).
Conand, F. Biology and Phenology of Amblygaster-Sirm (Clupeidae) in New-Caledonia, a Sardine of the Coral Environment. Bull. Mar. Sci. 48, 137–149 (1991).
Cuetos-Bueno, J. & Hernandez-Ortiz, D. Length-weight relationships of six coral reef-fish species from Chuuk, Federated States of Micronesia. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 33, 645–646, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.13339 (2017).
Ding, Y. et al. Length-weight relationship of five coral reef fish from the Weizhou Island, China. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 34, 1253–1254, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.13777 (2018).
Edelist, D. New length-weight relationships and Lmax values for fishes from the Southeastern Mediterranean Sea. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 30, 521–526, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0426.2012.02060.x (2014).
El-Agamy, A. Some observations on the biology of Parupeneus pleurotaenia (Fam. Mullidae) in the Arabian Gulf. Kuwait Bulletin of Marine Science 10, 187–199 (1989).
French, B. J. et al. Length-weight relationships for abundant coral reef fish species from eight islands in French Polynesia. Cybium 48, https://doi.org/10.26028/cybium/2023-035 (2024).
Friedlander, A. M., Donovan, M. K., Stamoulis, K. & Williams, I. D. Meta-analysis of reef fish data in Hawaii: biogeography and gradients of human impacts final report to DAR, fall 2013. (2013).
Froese, R. Length-weight relationships for 18 less-studied fish species. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 14, 117–118, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0426.1998.tb00626.x (1998).
Frota, L. O., Costa, P. A. S. & Braga, A. C. Length-weight relationships of marine fishesfrom the central Brazilian coast. Naga. WorldFish Center Quarterly 27, 20–26 (2004).
Gladston, Y. et al. Length-weight relationship of selected elasmobranch species from north-eastern Arabian Sea, India. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 34, 753–757, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.13680 (2018).
Siple, M. (ed Stable isotopes in Héeia Fishpond) (2017).
González-Sansón, G. et al. Weight-length relationships for 38 fish species of Barra de Navidad coastal lagoon, Jalisco, Mexico. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 30, 428–430, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.12327 (2014).
Grant, R. A. Age and Growth of the Divine Dwarf Goby Eviota epiphanes from O’ahu, Hawai’i B.S. thesis, University of Hawaii at Manoa (2013).
Guabiroba, H. C. & Joyeux, J.-C. Length-weight relationships for reef fishes in a southwestern Atlantic tropical oceanic island. Pan-American Journal of Aquatic Sciences 13, 84–87 (2018).
Gumanao, G. S., Saceda-Cardoza, M. M., Mueller, B. & Bos, A. R. Length-weight and length-length relationships of 139 Indo-Pacific fish species (Teleostei) from the Davao Gulf, Philippines. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 32, 377–385, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.12993 (2016).
Jayaprabha, N., Purusothaman, S. & Srinivasan, M. Length-weight relationship of coral reef associated fishes of Cuddalore, southeast coast of India. International Journal of Marine Science 5, 1–5, https://doi.org/10.5376/ijms.2015.05.0030 (2015).
Zhang, J. et al. Length-Weight Relationship Parameters of Tropical Coral Reef Fishes in the South China Sea. Pakistan Journal of Zoology 52, 821–824, https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjz/20190403040425 (2020).
Kamikawa, K. T. et al. Length-weight relationships for 85 fish species from Guam. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 31, 1171–1174, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.12877 (2015).
Kannan, K. et al. Length-weight relationship of coral reef-associated fishes from Gulf of Mannar and Palk Bay, Southeast Coast of India. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 37, 162–164, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.14102 (2021).
Karuppiah, K. et al. Length-weight relationship of six demersal fish species from Gulf of Mannar, Bay of Bengal, Eastern Indian Ocean. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 37, 367–369, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.14177 (2021).
Kochzius, M. Length-weight relationship of fishes from a seagrass meadow in Negros Oriental, Philippines. Naga 20, 64–65 (1997).
Kohler, N. E., Casey, J. G. & Turner, P. A. Length-Weight Relationships for 13 Species of Sharks from the Western North-Atlantic. Fish. Bull. 93, 412–418 (1995).
Kulbicki, M., Guillemot, N. & Amand, M. A general approach to length-weight relationships for New Caledonian lagoon fishes. Cybium 29, 235–252 (2005).
Kulbicki, M., Mou Tham, G., Thollot, P. & Wantiez, L. Length-weight relationships of fish from the lagoon of New Caledonia. Naga. The ICLARM Quarterly 16, 26–30 (1993).
Letourneur, Y. Length-weight relationship of some marine fish species in Réunion Island, Indian Ocean. Naga. The ICLARM Quarterly 21, 37–39 (1998).
Letourneur, Y., Kulbicki, M. & Labrosse, P. Length-weight relationship of fishes from coral reefs and lagoons of New Caledonia: an update. Naga. The ICLARM Quarterly 21, 39–46 (1998).
Loh, K. H., Shao, K. T. & Chen, H. M. Length-weight relationships for 39 species of moray eel from the waters around Taiwan. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 27, 945–948, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0426.2010.01601.x (2011).
Longenecker, K. & Langston, R. Life history of the Hawaiian blackhead triplefin, Enneapterygius atriceps (Blennioidei, Tripterygiidae). Environmental Biology of Fishes 73, 243–251, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10641-004-5332-9 (2005).
Longenecker, K. & Langston, R. Life History Compendium of Exploited Hawaiian Fishes. (Fisheries Local Action Strategy and Division of Aquatic Resources, Hawaii, 2008).
Longenecker, K. et al. Rapid reproductive analysis and length–weight relations for five species of coral-reef fishes (Actinopterygii) from Papua New Guinea: Nemipterus isacanthus, Parupeneus barberinus, Kyphosus cinerascens, Ctenochaetus striatus (Perciformes), and Balistapus undulatus (Tetraodontiformes). Acta Ichthyologica et Piscatoria 47, 107–124, https://doi.org/10.3750/AIEP/02146 (2017).
Magnússon, J. & Magnússon, J. V. ICEIDA/Cape Verde Islands fisheries project: survey of demersal fish resources in the waters off Cape Verde Islands: IV. report: summary of information on species. 114 (Icelandic International Development Agency, 1987).
Manooch, C. S. III & Potts, J. C. Age, growth, and mortality of greater amberjack, Seriola dumerili, from the US Gulf of Mexico headboat fishery. Bull. Mar. Sci. 61, 671–683 (1997).
Marks, K. W. & Klomp, K. D. in Status of coral reefs in the western Atlantic: results of initial surveys, Atlantic and Gulf Rapid Reef Assessment (AGRRA) program Vol. 496 (ed Judith C. Lang) (Atoll Research Bulletin, 2003).
Matthews, T., Gourley, J., Flores, A., Ramon, M. & Trianni, M. Length-weight Relationships for 83 Reef and Bottomfish Species from the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. https://doi.org/10.25923/vh7r-0906 (2019).
Matthews, T. et al. Length-weight Relationships for 71 Reef and Bottomfish Species from Tutuila and Aunu′u, American Samoa. https://doi.org/10.25923/r3wq-ax31 (2019).
Mehanna, S. F. & Farouk, A. E. Length-Weight Relationship of 60 Fish Species From the Eastern Mediterranean Sea, Egypt (GFCM-GSA 26). Frontiers in Marine Science 8, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.625422 (2021).
Motta, F. S., Caltabellotta, F. P., Namora, R. C. & Gadig, O. B. F. Length-weight relationships of sharks caught by artisanal fisheries from southeastern Brazil. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 30, 239–240, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.12234 (2014).
Murty, V. S. Marine ornamental fish resources of Lakshadweep. CMFRI Special Publication 72, 1–134 (2002).
Naranji, M. K., Velamala, G. R. & Kandula, S. Length-weight relationships for 19 Scorpion fishes (Scorpaenidae) from Visakhapatnam coast, India. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 34, 1369–1372, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.13805 (2018).
Nichols, R. S. & DeMartini, E. E. Preliminary estimates of age and growth for the endemic Hawai’ian grouper (Hapu’upu’u, Epinephelus quernus, F. Serranidae) (2008).
Nieto-Navarro, J. T., Zetina-Rejón, M. & Arreguin-Sanchez, F. Length-Weight Relationship of Demersal Fish from the Eastern Coast of the Mouth of the Gulf of California. Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 5, 494–502 (2010).
Palla, H. P. et al. Length-weight relationship of marine fishes from Palawan, Philippines. Palawan Scientist 10, 17–28 (2018).
Park, J. M. & Huh, S. H. Length-Weight Relations for 29 Demersal Fishes Caught by Small Otter Trawl on the South-Eastern Coast of Korea. Acta Ichthyologica Et Piscatoria 45, 427–431, https://doi.org/10.3750/Aip2015.45.4.13 (2015).
Patadiya, D. et al. Length weight relationship and biology of Thryssa setirostris (Broussonet 1782) from the coast of Thoothukudi, Tamil Nadu, India. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of India 63, 49–55 (2021).
Pérez-Matus, A., Carrasco, S. A. & Ospina-Alvarez, A. Length-weight relationships for 25 kelp forest-associated fishes of northern and central Chile. Revista De Biologia Marina Y Oceanografia 49, 141–145, https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-19572014000100016 (2014).
Pombo-Ayora, L., Peinemann, V. N., Coker, D. J. & Berumen, M. L. Length-Weight Relationships for 32 Species of Cryptobenthic Reef Fishes from the Red Sea. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 2024, https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/1454131 (2024).
Rábago-Quiroz, C. H., García-Borbón, J. A., Palacios-Salgado, D. S. & Barrón-Barraza, F. J. Length–weight relation for eleven demersal fish species in the artisanal shrimp fishery areas from the Bahia Magdalena-Almejas lagoon system, Mexico. Acta Ichthyologica et Piscatoria 47, 303–305, https://doi.org/10.3750/AIEP/02186 (2017).
Ralston, S. Length-weight regressions and condition indices of lutjanids and other deep slope fishes from the Mariana Archipelago. Micronesica 21, 189–197 (1988).
Randall, J. E. Contribution to the biology of the whitetip reef shark (Triaenodon obesus). Pac. Sci. 31, 143–164 (1977).
Rejitha, B. & Pillai, P. M. Estimation of length-weight relationship of six coral reef fishes of order Perciformes from Gulf of Mannar, southeast coast of India. International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies 3, 305–307 (2015).
Roos, D. et al. Variation of the relationships between lengths and weights applied to 123 fish species observed at Reunion Island (Indian Ocean). Afr. J. Mar. Sci. 44, 171–180, https://doi.org/10.2989/1814232x.2022.2075936 (2022).
Roul, S. K. et al. Length-weight relationships of three fish species from Kerala waters, south-west coast of India. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 33, 1308–1309, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.13485 (2017).
Roul, S. K. et al. Length-Weight Relationships of Fifty Fish Species from Indian Waters. Thalassas 36, 309–314, https://doi.org/10.1007/s41208-020-00223-x (2020).
Ruiz-Ramírez, S., Lucano-Ramírez, G. & Mariscal-Romero, J. Length-weight relationships of soft-bottom demersal fishes from Jalisco and Colima states, Mexico. Naga. The ICLARM Quarterly 20, 62–63 (1997).
Sala, R. et al. Population dynamics of the yellowstripe scad (Selaroides leptolepis Cuvier, 1833) and Indian mackerel (Rastrelliger kanagurta Cuvier, 1816) in the Wondama Bay Water, Indonesia. 2nd International Symposium on Marine and Fisheries Research 139, https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/139/1/012026 (2018).
Siddique, M. A. M., Arshad, A. & Amin, S. M. N. Length-weight and length-length relationships of two tropical fish Secutor megalolepis (Mochizuki & Hayashi, 1989) and Rhabdamia gracilis (Bleeker, 1856) from Sabah, Malaysia. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 31, 574–575, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.12752 (2015).
Sivadas, M. et al. Assessment of the fishery and stock of striped bonito, Sarda orientalis (Temminck and Schlegel, 1844) along Kerala coast with a general description of its fishery from Indian coast. Indian Journal of Fisheries 59, 57–61 (2012).
Smallwood, C. B., Tate, A. & Ryan, K. L. Weight-length summaries for Western Australian fish species derived from surveys of recreational fishers at boat ramps. 151 (Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Western Australia, 2018).
Sri Hari, M., Sreekanth, G. B., Dhanya, M. & Jaiswar, A. K. Length-weight relationship of 11 fish species from tropical estuarine ecosystem along the central west cost of India. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of India 61, 110–113, https://doi.org/10.6024/jmbai.2019.61.1.2070-17 (2019).
Stevens, J. D. & Lyle, J. M. Biology of three hammerhead sharks (Eusphyra blochii, Sphyrna mokarran and S. lewini) from northern Australia. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 40, 129–146 (1989).
Taskavak, E. & Bilecenoglu, M. Length-weight relationships for 18 Lessepsian (Red Sea) immigrant fish species from the eastern Mediterranean coast of Turkey. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 81, 895–896, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025315401004805 (2001).
Taylor, B. M., Hamilton, R. J., Almany, G. R. & Choat, J. H. The world’s largest parrotfish has slow growth and a complex reproductive ecology. Coral Reefs 37, 1197–1208, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-018-1723-9 (2018).
Tsikliras, A. C. & Dimarchopoulou, D. Filling in knowledge gaps: Length-weight relations of 46 uncommon sharks and rays (Elasmobranchii) in the Mediterranean Sea. Acta Ichthyologica Et Piscatoria 51, 249–255, https://doi.org/10.3897/aiep.51.65858 (2021).
Uchiyama, J. H. & Kazama, T. K. Updated weight-on-length relationships for pelagic fishes caught in the Central North Pacific Ocean and bottomfishes from the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (2003).
Unnikrishnan, R. M. et al. Length-weight relationships of indigenous live baitfish captured in nearshore lagoons of Agatti Island (Lakshadweep), India. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 38, 123–125, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.14250 (2022).
Velamala, G. R., Naranji, M. K., Netto-Ferreira, A. L. & Kondmudi, R. B. Length-Weight Relationships for 16 Snapper Fishes from Visakhapatnam Coast, India. Thalassas: An International Journal of Marine Sciences 36, 75–78, https://doi.org/10.1007/s41208-019-00174-y (2020).
Velázquez-Abunader, I., Brulé, T., Cabrera, M. A. & López-Rocha, J. A. Length-weight relationships of four finfish commercial species from the southern Gulf of Mexico. Latin American Journal of Aquatic Research 49, 369–375, https://doi.org/10.3856/vol49-issue2-fulltext-2505 (2021).
Wambiji, N. et al. Morphometric relationship and condition factor of Siganus stellatus, S. canaliculatus and S. sutor (Pisces: Siganidae) from the Western Indian Ocean Waters. South Pacific Studies 29, 1–15 (2008).
Wang, J. Q. et al. Length-weight relationships of 45 fish species in the Min River Estuary, East China Sea. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 32, 131–133, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.12910 (2016).
Wetherbee, B. M., Crow, G. L. & Lowe, C. G. Biology of the Galapagos shark, Carcharhinus galapagensis, in Hawai’i. Environmental Biology of Fishes 45, 299–310, https://doi.org/10.1007/Bf00003099 (1996).
Yagi, M. et al. Length-weight relationships of 22 fish species from the East China Sea. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 31, 252–254, https://doi.org/10.1111/jai.12648 (2015).
Yanagawa, H. Length-weight relationship of Gulf of Thailand fishes. Naga, The ICLARM Quarterly 17, 48–52 (1994).
Randall, J. E. Reef and shore fishes of the South Pacific. University of Hawai’i Press, Honolulu (2005).
Allen, G., Steene, R., Humann, P. & Deloach, N. Reef fish identification: tropical Pacific. (Singapore: D2Print Pte Ltd; ISBN 1-878348-36-1, 2005).
Myers, R. F. Micronesian reef fishes: a practical guide to the identification of the coral reef fishes of the tropical central and western Pacific (1991).
Kimirei, I. A. et al. What Drives Ontogenetic Niche Shifts of Fishes in Coral Reef Ecosystems? Ecosystems 16, 783–796, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-013-9645-4 (2013).
Sandin, S. A., French, B. J. & Zgliczynski, B. J. Emerging insights on effects of sharks and other top predators on coral reefs. Emerging Topics in Life Sciences 6, 57–65, https://doi.org/10.1042/etls20210238 (2022).
Roff, G. et al. The ecological role of sharks on coral reefs. Trends in ecology & evolution 31, 395–407 (2016).
Akiona, A. K. et al. Pacific fish length-weight parameter database - Version 1. In Fish Length-Weight Parameters. UC San Diego Library Digital Collections. https://doi.org/10.6075/J02Z15WT (2025).
Costello, M. J. et al. Global Coordination and Standardisation in Marine Biodiversity through the World Register of Marine Species (WoRMS) and Related Databases. Plos One 8, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0051629 (2013).
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to Ed DeMartini and Alan Friedlander, whose early efforts to compile a list of parameters set the stage for this database, and to the Waitt Institute for their support. A.K.A. was funded by a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship, the UC San Diego Tribal Membership Fellowship, and a San Diego ARCS Foundation Scholarship.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
The original idea was conceived by S.A.S. and B.J.Z. All authors contributed to length-weight parameter collection and curation. A.K.A., S.A.S. and B.J.Z. developed the summarizer function. Manuscript writing was led by A.K.A. and B.J.Z. but was performed, edited, and approved by all authors.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Akiona, A.K., Zgliczynski, B.J., Agarwal, M.M. et al. A database of life history parameters for Pacific coral reef fish. Sci Data 12, 1425 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-025-05788-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-025-05788-x