Estuaries and Coasts

, Volume 42, Issue 3, pp 868–889 | Cite as

Fish Trophodynamics in Tropical Mudflats: a Dietary and Isotopic Perspective

  • Soon Loong Lee
  • Ving Ching ChongEmail author
  • Amy Yee-Hui Then


Unvegetated, open mudflat areas are a dominant feature of tropical coastlines, relatively productive and known to support high ichthyofaunal diversity. However, the mudflat’s food web is poorly characterized, especially the primary production that supports it and the degree of dependence on adjacent mangroves. In this study, we investigated the trophodynamics of vagile fish fauna utilizing a large tropical intertidal mudflat area during high tide in Klang, Malaysia, using stomach content and stable isotope (carbon and nitrogen) approaches. Cluster analysis revealed that 53 major fish species using the mudflats, which comprised mainly of juveniles, can be grouped into eight dietary guilds implying a variable degree of food resource partitioning among species. The dominant guild of “shrimp feeders” and all other guilds prey on shrimps of the families Penaeidae and Sergestidae to varying degrees. These abundant crustaceans constitute the prevalent shared prey resource, ecologically important to the co-existence of many mudflat fishes. Stable isotope analysis revealed four to five trophic levels in a relatively complex food web fueled not only by microphytobenthos but also phytoplankton in highly turbid waters. Close pelagic–benthic coupling due to shallow waters and strong tidal mixing probably sustains the mudflat’s primary production and relatively high number of trophic levels despite the transitory and highly dynamic environment. The mudflat’s autochthonous production and diverse prey resources highlight the importance of this often overlooked coastal habitat especially in supporting the early life stage of diverse fish species and, thus, coastal fisheries.


Stomach contents Stable isotopes Fish feeding guilds Food web Intertidal habitat 



We are grateful to Koh Lay Tung, Abdullah bin Saad, and others for their help in the fish trappings. We also thank UM for logistical and laboratory support.

Funding Information

This work was funded by the Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences (JIRCAS, grant no. 57-02-03-1005) and University of Malaya (UM, grant no. PV003/2012A).


  1. Abdurahiman, K.P., T.H. Nayak, P.U. Zacharia, and K.S. Mohamed. 2010. Trophic organisation and predator-prey interaction among commercially explouted demersal finfishes in the coastal waters of the southeastern Arabian Sea. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 87 (4): 601–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amin, S.M.N., A. Arshad, J.S. Bujang, S.S. Siraj, and S. Goddard. 2009a. Reproductive biology of the sergestid shrimp Acetes indicus (Decapoda: Sergestidae) in coastal waters of Malacca, Peninsular Malaysia. Zoological Studies 48 (6): 753–760.Google Scholar
  3. Amin, S.M.N., A. Arshad, S.S. Siraj, and B.J. Sidik. 2009b. Population structure, growth, mortality and yield per recruit of sergestid shrimp, Acetes japonicus (Decapoda: Sergestidae) from the coastal waters of Malacca, Peninsular Malaysia. Indian Journal of Marine Sciences 38 (1): 57–68.Google Scholar
  4. Amundsen, P.A., H.M. Gabler, and F. Staldvik. 1996. A new approach to graphical analysis of feeding strategy from stomach contents data—Modification of the Costello (1990) method. Journal of Fish Biology 48: 607–614.Google Scholar
  5. Anderson, M.J., R.N. Gorley, and K.R. Clarke. 2008. PERMANOVA+ for PRIMER: Guide to software and statistical methods. Plymouth: PRIMER-E Ltd..Google Scholar
  6. Arapov, J., D. Ezgeta-Balić, M. Peharda, and Ž. Ninčević-Gladan. 2010. Bivalve feeding—How and what they eat? Ribarstvo 68: 105–116.Google Scholar
  7. Azila, A., and V.C. Chong. 2010. Multispecies impingement in a tropical power plant, Straits of Malacca. Marine Environmental Research 70: 13–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baker, R., A. Buckland, and M. Sheaves. 2014. Fish gut content analysis: Robust measures of diet composition. Fish and Fisheries 15 (1): 170–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barletta, M., and S.J.M. Blaber. 2007. A comparison of fish assemblages and estuarine functional guilds in different habitats of tropical estuaries from the Indo-West Pacific and West Atlantic. Bulletin of Marine Science 80: 647–680.Google Scholar
  10. Bethea, D.M., J.A. Buckel, and J.K. Carlson. 2004. Foraging ecology of the early life stages of four sympatric shark species. Marine Ecology Progress Series 268: 245–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Blaber, S.J.M. 2000. Tropical estuarine fishes: Ecology, exploitation and conservation. Oxford: Blackwell Science.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Blaber, S.J.M. 2007. Mangrove and fishes: Issues of diversity, dependence, and dogma. Bulletin of Marine Science 80: 457–472.Google Scholar
  13. Bouillon, S., P. Chandran Mohan, N. Sreenivas, and F. Dehairs. 2000. Sources of suspended organic matter and selective feeding by zooplankton in an estuarine mangrove ecosystem as traced by stable isotopes. Marine Ecology Progress Series 208: 79–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bouillon, S., N. Koedam, A.V. Raman, and F. Dehairs. 2002. Primary producers sustaining macro-invertebrate communities in intertidal mangrove forests. Oecologia 130: 441–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bray, R.J., and J.T. Curtis. 1957. An ordination of the upland forest communities of southern Wisconsin. Ecological Monographs 27: 325–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bujang, J.S., M.H. Zakaria, and A. Arshad. 2006. Distribution and significance of seagrass ecosystems in Malaysia. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management 9 (2): 203–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Carpenter, K.E., and V.H. Niem. 1998a. FAO species identification guide for fishery purposes. The living marine resources of the Western Central Pacific, volume 1. Seaweed, corals, bivalves and gastropods. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
  18. Carpenter, K.E., and V.H. Niem. 1998b. FAO species identification guide for fishery purposes. The living marine resources of the Western Central Pacific, volume 2. Cephalopods, crustaceans, holothurians and sharks. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
  19. Caut, S., E. Angulo, and F. Courchamp. 2009. Variation in discrimination factors (Δ15N and Δ13c): The effect of diet isotopic values and applications for diet reconstruction. Journal of Applied Ecology 46: 443–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chai, S.Y., V.C. Chong, A. Salleh, and K. Tanaka. 2012. Diel variation of benthic diatom abundance and microphytoplankton biomass on intertidal mudflats of the Matang mangrove estuary, Malaysia. JIRCAS Working Report 75: 49–57.Google Scholar
  21. Chew, L.L., and V.C. Chong. 2011. Copepod community structure and abundance in a tropical mangrove estuary, with comparisons to coastal waters. Hydrobiologia 666 (1): 127–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Chew, L.L., V.C. Chong, K. Tanaka, and A. Sasekumar. 2012. Phytoplankton fuel the energy flow from zooplankton to small nekton in turbid mangrove waters. Marine Ecology Progress Series 469: 7–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Chew, L.L., V.C. Chong, R.C. Wong, P. Lehette, C.C. Ng, and K.H. Loh. 2015. Three decades of sea water abstraction by Kapar power plant (Malaysia): What impacts on tropical zooplankton community? Marine Pollution Bulletin 101 (1): 69–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Chong, V.C., A. Sasekumar, and E. Wolanski. 1996. The role of mangroves in retaining penaeid prawn larvae in Klang Strait, Malaysia. Mangroves and Salt Marshes 1: 11–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Chong, V.C., C.B. Low, and T. Ichikawa. 2001. Contribution of mangrove detritus to juvenile prawn nutrition: A dual stable isotope study in a Malaysian mangrove forest. Marine Biology 138: 77–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Chong, V.C., H.W. Teoh, A.L. Ooi, A.R. Jamizan, and K. Tanaka. 2012. Ingression and feeding habits of fish in Matang coastal mudflats, Malaysia. JIRCAS Working Report 75: 15–24.Google Scholar
  27. Clarke, K.R. 1993. Non-parametric multivariate analyses of changes in community structure. Australian Journal of Ecology 18: 117–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Clarke, K.R., and R.N. Gorley. 2006. PRIMER V6; user manual/tutorial. Plymouth: PRIMER-E.Google Scholar
  29. Clarke, F.J.K., and A.L.M. Pessanha. 2015. Diet and ontogenetic shift in habitat use by Rhinosardinia bahiensis in a tropical semi-arid estuary, north-eastern Brazil. Journal of Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 95 (1): 175–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Clarke, K.R., and R.M. Warwick. 2001. Change in marine communities: An approach to statistical analysis and interpretation. 2nd ed. Plymouth: PRIMER-E.Google Scholar
  31. Claudino, M.C., P.C. Abreu, and A.M. Garcia. 2013. Stable isotopes reveal temporal and between-habitat changes in trophic pathways in a southwestern Atlantic estuary. Marine Ecology Progress Series 489: 29–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Cortés, E. 1997. A critical review of methods of studying fish feeding based on analysis of stomach contents: Application to elasmobranch fishes. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 54: 726–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Davis, A.M., M.L. Blanchette, B.J. Pusey, T.D. Jardine, and R.G. Pearson. 2012. Gut content and stable isotope analyses provide complementary understanding of ontogenetic dietary and trophic relationships among fishes in a tropical river. Freshwater Biology 57: 2156–2172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. DOF. 2010. Annual fisheries statistics, 2010. WismaTani: Department of Fisheries, Ministry of Agriculture and Agrobased Industry.Google Scholar
  35. DOF. 2016. Annual fisheries statistics, 2010. WismaTani: Department of Fisheries, Ministry of Agriculture and Agrobased Industry.Google Scholar
  36. Du, G.Y., J.H. Oak, H. Li, and I.K. Chung. 2010. Effect of light and sediment grain size on the vertical migration of benthic diatoms. Algae 25 (3): 133–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Dubois, S., L. Barillé, and B. Cognie. 2009. Feeding response of the polychaete Sabellaria alveolata (Sabellariidae) to changes in seston concentration. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 376: 94–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Eeo, J.J., V.C. Chong, and A. Sasekumar. 2017. Cyclical events in the life and death of an ephemeral polychaete reef on a tropical mudlflat. Estuaries and Coasts 40 (5): 1418–1436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Elliott, M., K.L. Hemingway, M.J. Costello, S. Duhamel, K. Hostens, M. Labropoulou, S. Marshall, and H. Winkler. 2002. Links between fish and other trophic levels. In Fisheries in estuaries, ed. M. Elliott and K.L. Hemingway, 124–216. Oxford: Blackwell Science.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Elliott, M., A.K. Whitfield, I.C. Potter, S.J. Blaber, D.P. Cyrus, F.G. Nordlie, and T.D. Harrison. 2007. The guild approach to categorizing estuarine fish assemblages: A global review. Fish and Fisheries 8: 241–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Franca, S., M. Pardal, and H. Cabral. 2008. Mudflat nekton assemblages in the Tagus estuary (Portugal): Distribution and feeding patterns. Scientia Marina 72 (3): 591–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Froese, R., and D. Pauly. 2018. FishBase. World Wide Web electronic publication. Accessed 19 Apr 2018.
  43. Gandhi, V. 2002. Studies on the food and feeding habits of cultivable butterfish Scatophagus argus (Cuv. and Val.). Journal of the Marine Biological Association of India 44: 115–121.Google Scholar
  44. Gosling, E.M. 2003. Bivalves molluscs: Biology, ecology and culture. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Guarini, J.M., G.F. Blanchard, C. Bacher, P. Gros, D. Gouleau, and C. Bacher. 2000. Dynamic model of the short-term variability of microphytobenthic biomass on temperate intertidal mudflats. Marine Ecology Progress Series 195: 291–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hajisamae, S., L.M. Chou, and S. Ibrahim. 2003. Feeding habits and trophic organization of the fish community in shallow waters of an impacted tropical habitat. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 58: 89–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Heithaus, M.R. 2004. Predator-prey interactions. In Biology of shark and their relatives, ed. J.C. Carrier, J.A. Musick, and M.R. Heithaus, 487–521. Boca Raton: CRC.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Hindell, J.S., and G.P. Jenkins. 2004. Spatial and temporal variability in the assemblage structure of fishes associated with mangroves (Avicennia marina) and intertidal mudflats in temperate Australian embayments. Marine Biology 144 (2): 385–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Hussey, N.E., M.A. MacNeil, B.C. McMeans, J.A. Olin, S.F. Dudley, G. Cliff, S.P. Wintner, S.T. Fennessy, and A.T. Fisk. 2014a. Rescaling the trophic structure of marine food webs. Ecology Letters 17: 239–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Hussey, N.E., M.A. MacNeil, B.C. McMeans, J.A. Olin, S.F. Dudley, G. Cliff, S.P. Wintner, S.T. Fennessy, and A.T. Fisk. 2014b. Corrigendum to Hussey et al. (2014). Ecology Letters 17: 768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Hyslop, E.J. 1980. Stomach content analysis—A review of methods and their applications. Journal of Marine Biology 17: 411–429.Google Scholar
  52. Jepsen, D.B., and K.O. Winemiller. 2002. Structure of tropical river food webs revealed by stable isotope ratios. Oikos 96: 46–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Jesus, B., V. Brotas, M. Marani, and D. Paterson. 2005. Spatial dynamics of microphytobenthos determined by PAM fluorescence. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 65: 30–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Johnson, W.S., and D.M. Allen. 2005. Zooplankton of the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts: A guide to their identification and ecology. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Laegdsgaard, P., and C. Johnson. 2001. Why do juvenile fish utilise mangrove habitats? Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 257: 229–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Laffaille, P., E. Feunteun, C. Lefebvre, A. Radureau, G. Sagan, and J.-C. Lefeuvre. 2002. Can thin-lipped mullet directly exploit the primary and detritic production of european macrotidal salt marshes? Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 54: 729–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Lee, S.Y. 1995. Mangrove outwelling: A review. Hydrobiologia 295: 203–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Lee, C.W., and C.W. Bong. 2008. Bacterial abundance and production, and their relation to primary production in tropical coastal waters of Peninsular Malaysia. Marine and Freshwater Research 59 (1): 10–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Lee, S.L., V.C. Chong, and T. Yurimoto. 2016. Ichthyofauna on a tropical mudflat: Implications of spatial and temporal variability in assemblage, structure and abundance. Estuaries and Coasts 39: 1543–1560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Leh, M. U. C., and A. Sasekumar. 1984. Feeding ecology of prawns in shallow waters adjoining mangrove shores. In Proceedings of the Asean Symposium on Mangrove Environment, 321–353. University of Malaya and UNESCO Kuala Lumpur.Google Scholar
  61. Libralato, S., F. Pranovi, K.I. Stergiou, and J.S. Link. 2014. Trophodynamics in marine ecology: 70 years after Lindeman. Marine Ecology Progress Series 517: 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Link, J.S., and H.L. Browman. 2014. Integrating what? Levels of marine ecosystem-based assessment and management. ICES Journal of Marine Science 71 (5): 1170–1173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Mariana, A. 1993. The biology of Acetes in the Klang Strait water, Straits of Malacca. M.Sc. thesis, University of Malaya.Google Scholar
  64. Marsitah, I., and V.C. Chong. 2002. Population and feeding ecology of Parapenaeopsis sculptilis (Heller, 1862) in Klang Strait, Peninsular Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Science 21: 61–68.Google Scholar
  65. Masson, H., and J.F.K. Marais. 1975. Stomach content analyses of mullet from the Swartkops Estuary. Zoologica Africana 10 (2): 193–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. McCutchan, J.H., W.M. Lewis Jr., C. Kendall, and C.C. McGrath. 2003. Variation in trophic shift for stable isotope ratio od carbon, nitrogen and sulfur. Oikos 102: 378–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. McLusky, D.S., and M. Elliot. 2004. The estuarine ecosystem: Ecology, threats and management. 3rd ed. Oxford: OUP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Mérona, B., G.M. Santos, and R.G. Almeida. 2001. Short term effects of Tucuruí dam (Amazonia, Brazil) on the trophic organization of fish communities. Environmental Biology of Fishes 60: 375–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Middelburg, J.J., C. Barranguet, H.T.S. Boschker, P.M.J. Herman, T. Moens, and C.H.R. Heip. 2000. The fate of intertidal microphytobenthos carbon: An in situ 13C-labeling study. Limnology and Oceanography 45: 1224–1234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Mohsin, A.K.M., and M.A. Ambak. 1996. Marine fishes and fisheries of Malaysia and neighbouring countries. Serdang: University Putra Malaysia.Google Scholar
  71. Moore, J.W., and B.X. Semmens. 2008. Incorporating uncertainty and prior information into stable isotope mixing models. Ecology Letters 11: 470–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Morrison, M.A., M.P. Francis, B.W. Hartill, and D.M. Parkinson. 2002. Diurnal and tidal variation in the abundance of the fish fauna of a temperate tidal mudflat. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 54 (5): 793–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Mortillaro, J.M., M. Pouilly, M. Wach, C.E.C. Freitas, G. Abril, and T. Meziane. 2015. Trophic opportunism of central Amazon floodplain fish. Freshwater Biology 60: 1659–1670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Muñoz, A.A., and F.P. Ojeda. 1997. Feeding guild structure of a rocky intertidal fish assemblage in central Chile. Environmental Biology of Fishes 49: 471–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Nagelkerken, I., and G. van der Velde. 2002. Do non-estuarine mangroves harbour higher densities of juvenile fish than adjacent shallow-water and coral reef habitats in Curaçao (Netherlands Antilles)? Marine Ecology Progress Series 245 (Sutherland 1996): 191–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. National Hydrographic Centre. 2018. Tide tables Malaysia. Malaysia: Royal Malaysian Navy.Google Scholar
  77. Newell, R.I.E., N. Marshall, A. Sasekumar, and V.C. Chong. 1995. Relative importance of benthic microalgae, phytoplankton, and mangroves as sources of nutrition for penaeid prawns and other coastal invertebrates from Malaysia. Marine Biology 123: 595–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Oczkowski, A., E. Markham, A. Hanson, and C. Wigand. 2014. Carbon stable isotope as indicators of coastal eutrophication. Ecological Applications 24 (3): 457–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Ooi, A.L., and V.C. Chong. 2011. Larval fish assemblages in a tropical mangrove estuary and adjacent coastal waters: Offshore-inshore flux of marine and estuarine species. Continental Shelf Research 31: 1599–1610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Pardo, S.A., K.B. Burgess, D. Teixeira, and M.B. Bennett. 2015. Local-scale resource partitioning by stingrays on an intertidal flat. Marine Ecological Progress Series 533: 205–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Parnell, A.C., R. Inger, S. Bearhop, and A.L. Jackson. 2010. Source partitioning using stable isotopes: Coping with too much variation. PLoS One 5 (3): e9672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Phillips, D.L., R. Inger, S. Bearhop, A.L. Jackson, J.W. Moore, A.C. Parnell, B.X. Semmens, and E.J. Ward. 2014. Best practices for use of stable isotope mixing models in food-web studies. Canadian Journal of Zoology 92: 823–835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Pinkas, L., M.S. Olipham, and I.L.K. Iversor. 1971. Food habits of albacore, bluefin tuna and bonito in California waters. Fisheries Bulletin of California 152: 1–105.Google Scholar
  84. Polis, G.A., and D.R. Strong. 1996. Food web complexity and community dynamics. American Naturalist 147: 813–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Post, D.M. 2002. Using stable isotopes to estimate trophic position: Models, methods and assumption. Ecology 83: 703–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Potier, M., F. Marsac, V. Lucas, R. Sabatie, J.P. Hallier, and F. Ménard. 2004. Feeding partitioning among tuna taken in surface and mid-water layers: The case of yellowfin (Thunnus albacares) and bigeye (T. obesus) in Western Tropical Indian Ocean. Western Indian Ocean Journal of Marine Science 3 (1): 51–62.Google Scholar
  87. Ramarn, T., V.C. Chong, and Y. Hanamura. 2012. Population structure and reproduction of the mysid shrimp Acanthomysis thailandica (Crustacea: Mysidae) in a tropical mangrove estuary, Malaysia. Zoological Studies 51 (6): 768–782.Google Scholar
  88. R Core Team. 2017. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.
  89. Reise, K. 1985. Tidal flat ecology. An experimental approach to species interactions. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Riak, K.M., A. Ismail, A. Arshad, and A.R. Ismail. 2003. Intertidal macrobenthic fauna: The food resources for migratory shorebirds in Kapar and Pantai Remis, Selangor, Malaysia. Malaysian Applied Biology Journal 32 (1): 51–60.Google Scholar
  91. Rodelli, M.R., J.N. Gearing, P.J. Gearing, N. Marshall, and A. Sasekumar. 1984. Stable isotope ratios as a tracer of mangrove carbon in Malaysian ecosystems. Oecologia 61: 326–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Ross, S.T. 1986. Resource partitioning in fish assemblages: A review of field studies. Copeia 2: 352–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Stanley, S.M. 1970. Relation of shell form to life habits in the Bivalvia. The Geological Society of America Memoir 125: 1–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Stock, B. C., and B. X. Semmens. 2016. MixSIAR GUI user manual. Version 3.1. Accessed 18 Nov 2017.
  95. Sweeting, C.J., J. Barry, C. Barnes, N.V.C. Polunin, and S. Jennings. 2007. Effects of body size and environment on diet-tissue δ15N fractionation in fishes. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 340: 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Tanaka, K., Y. Hanamura, V.C. Chong, S. Watanabe, A. Man, M.K. Faizul, M. Kodama, and T. Ichikawa. 2011. Stable isotope analysis reveals ontogenetic migration and the importance of a large mangrove estuary as a feeding ground for juvenile John’s snapper Lutjanus johnii. Fisheries Science 77 (5): 809–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Teoh, H.W., and V.C. Chong. 2013. Shell use and partitioning of two sympatric species of hermit crabs on a tropical mudflat. Journal of Sea Research 86: 13–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Teoh, H.W., S.L. Lee, V.C. Chong, and T. Yurimoto. 2016. Nutrient (N, P, Si) concentration and primary production on a perturbed tropical coastal mudflat. Environmental Earth Sciences 75: 1147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Then, A. Y. H. 2008. The trophodynamics of the fish community in Matang mangrove estuaries and adjacent coastal waters, Peninsular Malaysia. M.Sc. thesis, University of Malaya.Google Scholar
  100. Travis, J., F.C. Coleman, P.J. Auster, P.M. Cury, J.A. Estes, J. Orensanz, C.H. Peterson, M.E. Power, R.S. Steneck, and J.T. Wootton. 2014. Integrating the invisible fabric of nature into fisheries management. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 111 (2): 581–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Tse, P., T.H.M. Nip, and C.K. Wong. 2008. Nursery function of mangrove: A comparison with mudflat in terms of fish species composition and fish diet. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 80 (2): 235–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Ubertini, M., S. Lefebvre, A. Gangnery, K. Grangeré, R. Le Gendre, and F. Ovain. 2012. Spatial variability of benthic-pelagic coupling in an estuary ecosystem: Consequences for microphytobenthos resuspension phenomenon. PLoS One 7 (8): e44155. Scholar
  103. Vander Zanden, M.J., and W.W. Fetzer. 2007. Global patterns of aquatic food chain length. Oikos 116: 1378–1388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Vander Zanden, M.J., and J.B. Rasmussen. 2001. Variation in δ15N and δ13C trophic fractionation: Implications for aquatic food web studies. Limnology and Oceanography 46: 2061–2066.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Varghese, S.P., V.S. Somvanshi, and R.S. Dalvi. 2014. Diet composition, feeding niche partitioning and trophic organisation of large predatory fishes in the eastern Arabian Sea. Hydrobiologia 736: 99–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Voβ, M., and U. Struck. 1997. Stable nitrogen and carbon isotopes as indicator of eutrophication of the Oder river (Baltic Sea). Marine Chemistry 59: 35–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Zagars, M., K. Ikejima, A. Kasai, N. Arai, and P. Tongnunui. 2013. Trophic characteristic of a mangrove fish community in Southwest Thailand: Important mangrove contribution and intraspecies feeding variability. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Sciences 119: 145–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Coastal and Estuarine Research Federation 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Soon Loong Lee
    • 1
  • Ving Ching Chong
    • 1
    Email author
  • Amy Yee-Hui Then
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Biological Sciences, Faculty of ScienceUniversity of MalayaKuala LumpurMalaysia

Personalised recommendations