Predictions & Data for this entry

Model: abj climate: Cfb, Dfb migrate: Mp phylum:
COMPLETE = 2.5 ecozone: TH food: biCi, biHl, biD class:
MRE = 0.042 habitat: 0iFp, 0iFm, 0iFl gender: D order:
SMSE = 0.004 embryo: Fh reprod: O family:

Zero-variate data

Data Observed Predicted (RE) Unit Description Reference
ab 2 2.103 (0.05146) d age at birth OrteReye2006
am 1.496e+04 1.497e+04 (0.0002443) d life span fishbase
Li 48 47.68 (0.006628) cm ultimate total length fishbase
Wwb 0.00052 0.0005023 (0.03402) g wet weight at birth guess
Wwp 37.2 37.19 (0.0001827) g wet weight at puberty OrteReye2006
Wwi 1500 1524 (0.01592) g wet weight at birth fishbase
Ri 260.7 258.4 (0.009056) #/d max reprod rate OrteReye2006

Uni- and bivariate data

Data Figure Independent variable Dependent variable (RE) Reference
tL time since birth total length (0.07656) LoreCorb2007

Pseudo-data at Tref = 20°C

Data Generalised animal Carassius auratus Unit Description
v 0.02 0.1124 cm/d energy conductance
kap 0.8 0.9576 - allocation fraction to soma
kap_R 0.95 0.95 - reproduction efficiency
p_M 18 17.37 J/d.cm^3 vol-spec som maint
k_J 0.002 0.002 1/d maturity maint rate coefficient
kap_G 0.8 0.8 - growth efficiency

Discussion

  • Males are assumed to differ from females by E_Hp only
  • The high maintenance, compared to other family members, is probably linked to farming selection, to boost production

Facts

  • length-weight: Ww in g = 0.01349*(TL in cm)^3.00 (Ref: fishbase)

Bibliography

Citation