Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 1 Characterization of the fish composite samples by number of fish, age and length ranges, and trophic level (TL; calculated from δ15N)

From: A field study in support of the monitoring of priority substances in German freshwater fish: derivation of fillet-to-whole fish conversion factors

SpeciesSample codeNumber of fish (remark)dAge (range) [years]Length range [cm]TL for whole fish (δ15N based)c
Weser
 Chub 1bW-C164 ± 1 (3–4)24.5–31.53.2
 Chub 2W-C27 (≤ 30.0 cm)5 ± 0 (5–5)27.5–30.03.2
 Chub 3W-C36 (> 30.0 cm)5 ± 0 (5–5)31.5–33.53.3
 Roach 1W-R16 (Schweringen)2 ± 0 (2–2)14.5–16.03.3
 Roach 2aW-R29 (Schweringen)3 ± 0 (3–4)15.5–17.03.2
 Perch 1bW-P19 (random)3 ± 1 (3–4)16.0–21.03.5
 Perch 2bW-P29 (random)3 ± 0 (3–4)16.5–21.03.4
Elbe
 Roach 1bE-R1124 ± 1 (3–5)14.0–24.03.1
 Roach 2E-R266 ± 0 (6–6)24.0–30.53.1
 Bream 1E-B195 ± 1 (5–6)26.5–30.03.2
 Bream 2E-B2910 ± 1 (8–11)47.0–51.02.9
 Perch 1aE-P1114 ± 1 (3–4)15.0–18.53.5
Moselle
 Chub 1aM-C16 (Kenn)4 ± 1 (3–4)23.0–28.52.9
 Chub 2aM-C2103 ± 0 (3–4)23.5–27.53.0
 Roach 1aM-R183 ± 0 (3–3)18.5–19.03.0
 Roach 2bM-R285 ± 0 (4–5)26.0–29.03.1
 Perch 1aM-P174 ± 0 (3–4)16.5–18.03.9
 Perch 2M-P298 ± 1 (6–9)c25.5–30.53.8
Havel
 Roach 1bH-R175 ± 0 (4–5)21.0–27.03.3
 Roach 2H-R2137 ± 1 (6–8)c25.5–32.03.2
 Bream 1H-B1107 ± 1 (6–8)26.0–33.02.9
 Bream 1H-B21013 ± 2 (11- 15)42.0–50.03.1
 Perch 1bH-P1104 ± 0 (4–4)17.0–23.03.8
 Perch 2H-P267 ± 1 (6–8)25.0–30.04.0
Lake Starnberg
 Roach 1bS-R17 male4 ± 1 (3–5)15.0–23.03.5
 Roach 2bS-R27 female4 ± 1 (3–5)14.0–23.03.1
 White fish 1bS-W1134 ± 0 (3–4)25.5–30.03.4
 White fish 2S-W275 ± 0 (5–5)28.5–32.03.6
 Perch 1bS-P1114 ± 1 (3–4)12.5–16.03.6
 Perch 2S-P29ca. 8 (7–9)c21.5–26.03.6
Baltic Sea lagoon
 Roach 1bK-R112 female5 ± 1 (4–5)21.0–26.03.0
 Roach 2aK-R26 male4 ± 0 (4–5)20.5–22.03.1
 Bream 1K-B18 (random)6 ± 1 (5–7)c34.5–39.52.8
 Bream 2K-B28 (random)6 ± 1 (5–7)35.5–40.52.9
 Perch 1bK-P194 ± 0 (4–4)19.5–21.03.3
 Perch 2K-P2116 ± 1 (5–6)c22.5–24.53.4
  1. aFulfills age and length criteria according to the RAKON Working Paper [7]
  2. bFulfills age criterion according to [7]
  3. cAge determination not possible for all fish
  4. dRemarks: random—fish of the same age, randomly assigned to two different composite samples; Schweringen—fish were sampled about 10 km downstream of the main location; Kenn—fish were sampled about 15 km upstream of the main location