Predictions & Data for this entry

Model: abj climate: MA migrate: Mo phylum:
COMPLETE = 2.5 ecozone: MI, MPW food: bjPz, jiCi class:
MRE = 0.074 habitat: 0jMp, jiMr gender: D order:
SMSE = 0.014 embryo: Mp reprod: O family:

Zero-variate data

Data Observed Predicted (RE) Unit Description Reference
ab 5 5.174 (0.03484) d age at birth guess
am 4015 3994 (0.005261) d life span fishbase
Lp 20.1 19.95 (0.007675) cm fork length at puberty for females fishbase
Li 35 34.39 (0.01743) cm ultimate fork length fishbase
Wwb 0.00032 0.0003222 (0.007029) g wet weight at birth guess
Wwp 113.4 113.9 (0.004183) g ultimate wet weight fishbase
Wwi 582 583.7 (0.002869) g ultimate wet weight fishbase
GSI 0.012 0.01218 (0.015) - gonado somatic index GranAbde2011

Uni- and bivariate data

Data Figure Independent variable Dependent variable (RE) Reference
tL_f Data for females, males time since birth fork length (0.1224) GranAbde2011
tL_m Data for females, males time since birth fork length (0.1189) GranAbde2011

Pseudo-data at Tref = 20°C

Data Generalised animal Lutjanus ehrenbergii Unit Description
v 0.02 0.02153 cm/d energy conductance
p_M 18 28.16 J/d.cm^3 vol-spec som maint
k_J 0.002 0.001672 1/d maturity maint rate coefficient
k 0.3 0.31 - maintenance ratio
kap 0.8 0.9959 - allocation fraction to soma
kap_G 0.8 0.8014 - growth efficiency
kap_R 0.95 0.95 - reproduction efficiency

Discussion

  • males are supposed to differ from females by {p_Am} only

Facts

  • weight-length relationship: Ww in g = 0.01622*(TL in cm)^2.95 (Ref: fishbase)

Bibliography

Citation