Differences in diet have implications for potential ecosystem roles of two key rocky reef fish

Abstract The influence of fishes on temperate rocky reef ecosystems is globally recognised, particularly where large predators may structure ecosystems through predation. In South-East Australia, the common Wrasse Achoerodus viridis (Blue Groper) and Sparid Chrysophrys auratus (Snapper) are sympatric rocky reef predators. While their diets are thought to be well understood, this is generally based on gut contents undertaken over limited spatial scales. Stable isotope approaches can provide a time-integrated dietary history. We used Bayesian mixing models (δ¹³C and δ¹⁵N) to examine diets of 45 Blue Groper and 73 Snapper collected across > 1,250 km of coastline. We found that both predators consume filter-feeders likely including mussels, oysters or serpulid polychaete worms based on previous gut contents, shifting to consuming omnivores such as crabs or the problematic sea urchin Centrostephanus rodgersii , and carnivores such as cephalopods, predatory fishes or nereidid polychaetes when large (> 400 mm TL). However, ontogenetic shifts differed, with Blue Groper relying primarily on filter-feeders at all sizes and carnivores/omnivores becoming equally important when large. By contrast, small Snapper relied both on filter-feeders and omnivores/carnivores, relying on omnivores/carnivores when large. Trends varied spatially for Blue Groper more than Snapper, with Blue Groper relying on carnivores/omnivores in the north and filter-feeders in the south, while Snapper relied primarily on carnivores/omnivores throughout. These results highlight species-specific trophic pathways, indicating that these predators ecological role differs markedly throughout their ontogeny. Key to ecological structuring processes affecting temperate rocky reefs, our results suggest large Snapper may impact C. rodgersii populations more than Blue Groper.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Marine Biology
Published
2026-06-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-026-04896-5
Primary Topic
Isotope Analysis in Ecology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Differences in diet have implications for potential ecosystem roles of two key rocky reef fish

Troy F. Gaston, Nathan A. Knott, Jeremy K. Day, Megan J. Huggett et al.
Marine Biology
Isotope Analysis in Ecology
article

Differences in diet have implications for potential ecosystem roles of two key rocky reef fish

Troy F. Gaston, Nathan A. Knott, Jeremy K. Day, Megan J. Huggett, Vincent Raoult
article en

Abstract

Abstract The influence of fishes on temperate rocky reef ecosystems is globally recognised, particularly where large predators may structure ecosystems through predation. In South-East Australia, the common Wrasse Achoerodus viridis (Blue Groper) and Sparid Chrysophrys auratus (Snapper) are sympatric rocky reef predators. While their diets are thought to be well understood, this is generally based on gut contents undertaken over limited spatial scales. Stable isotope approaches can provide a time-integrated dietary history. We used Bayesian mixing models (δ¹³C and δ¹⁵N) to examine diets of 45 Blue Groper and 73 Snapper collected across > 1,250 km of coastline. We found that both predators consume filter-feeders likely including mussels, oysters or serpulid polychaete worms based on previous gut contents, shifting to consuming omnivores such as crabs or the problematic sea urchin Centrostephanus rodgersii , and carnivores such as cephalopods, predatory fishes or nereidid polychaetes when large (> 400 mm TL). However, ontogenetic shifts differed, with Blue Groper relying primarily on filter-feeders at all sizes and carnivores/omnivores becoming equally important when large. By contrast, small Snapper relied both on filter-feeders and omnivores/carnivores, relying on omnivores/carnivores when large. Trends varied spatially for Blue Groper more than Snapper, with Blue Groper relying on carnivores/omnivores in the north and filter-feeders in the south, while Snapper relied primarily on carnivores/omnivores throughout. These results highlight species-specific trophic pathways, indicating that these predators ecological role differs markedly throughout their ontogeny. Key to ecological structuring processes affecting temperate rocky reefs, our results suggest large Snapper may impact C. rodgersii populations more than Blue Groper.

Marine BiologyVol. 173(8)
Griffith University (AU), University of Wollongong (AU), Hunter Water (AU), New South Wales Department of Primary Industries (AU)
Newcastle University, NSW Department of Primary Industries
Life below water
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Isotope Analysis in Ecology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.