Predictions & Data for this entry

Model: abj climate: MA migrate: Mo phylum:
COMPLETE = 2.5 ecozone: MI, MPW food: bjPz, jiCi class:
MRE = 0.062 habitat: 0jMp, jiMr gender: D order:
SMSE = 0.010 embryo: Mp reprod: O family:

Zero-variate data

Data Observed Predicted (RE) Unit Description Reference
ab 6 6.47 (0.07839) d age at birth guess
am 4015 4002 (0.003245) d life span fishbase
Lp 51.9 51.54 (0.006841) cm fork length at puberty for females fishbase
Li 97 95.42 (0.0163) cm ultimate fork length fishbase
Wwb 0.00032 0.0003219 (0.005983) g wet weight at birth PhilJaya2017
Wwp 1766 1772 (0.003514) g ultimate wet weight fishbase
Wwi 1.124e+04 1.124e+04 (0.0001285) g ultimate wet weight fishbase
Ri 2521 2528 (0.003076) #/d max reprod rate PhilJaya2017

Uni- and bivariate data

Data Figure Independent variable Dependent variable (RE) Reference
tL_f Data for females, males time since birth fork length (0.1058) CappMarr2013
tL_m Data for females, males time since birth fork length (0.09834) CappMarr2013

Pseudo-data at Tref = 20°C

Data Generalised animal Lutjanus johnii Unit Description
v 0.02 0.01653 cm/d energy conductance
p_M 18 6.634 J/d.cm^3 vol-spec som maint
k_J 0.002 0.0003819 1/d maturity maint rate coefficient
k 0.3 0.3018 - maintenance ratio
kap 0.8 0.9522 - allocation fraction to soma
kap_G 0.8 0.798 - 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 = 0.01479*(TL in cm)^2.96 (Ref: fishbase)

Bibliography

Citation