PenallikaJ. Trop. Agric. Sci. 18(1): tS-20(l99:i) ISS;'\!: OI26-(iI2H© Uni\'crsiri Pertani<ln ~I<llay~ia Pre~<;

Selection of Broodstock of Tiger Prawn, Penaeus mOl1odol1 Fabricius, on the Basisof Morphometric Traits

S.K. DAUD and I'. J. ANGFundty of Fisherifs rmd Marine Sciences

Univeniti Pprlallian A'1ala)'sia43400 UPM, Sn-dmlK, Selangor, Malaysia

Keywords: broodstock seleclion, tiger prawn, Pellaeus monodon, morphometric traits

ABSTRAK

PenaCll'i ll1onodon mUlfl1lg dipungut dari prmimn Kf'dah. Pemk, T'prengganu, Johor dan Snbnh. Chimorfomitrik tnpilih dan beral badan bag£. spLiap ekor udang disukal. Udang belina didapati lebih bfsar (P<O. 05)berbanding dengall udang janlan bagi snnua tokasi. Analisis regrp.si t.angkah dnni langkah mmunjukkanbahawalJfll1jang karapas sahaja mrnrukupi unluk mn/pmngkan Ilflrial1s dalam berat harlan bagi udangjantflndan bl'lina. Pcmjang karapas boleh memberikall anggamn yang iPbih tepal bag;, beral badan dau oiPh itu ia boleltdijadi/wl1 sebagai salu kriteria dalam pl'milihan induk. Hublwgan logmitma an/am berat badan dan panjang!JP.nllh, brmt lJadan drm panjang karapas. da1/ antam panjang karapas dan l)(wjang penuh bagi kedufl-d'/l(lsl'ks juga rlikim.

ABSTRACT

kIat'llrl' Pcnaeus monodon were collected from Kednh. Pemk. 7p.rP.1l!5...f{a'fl'll. johore and Sabah walers ini\1ala)'Jia. SeIPcled mmphometrir characters and bod)' weight Wfre measured illdividualiJ. lnl' results showed thatlh" femall's werl' significant(v largl'r (P<O.05) than the males in all !ocations. Stepwise regrl'ssiml analysisindicaiNI that carapace length nlolle is sufficient 10 pxplain the variancp in body weight for male and femaleprawns and can thus be u.sed as a niten'on for Ihe selection of broad.stock. Thl' logarithmic rflatio1lships belwPim

bodJ wei!!ht and lotallength. body weight and carapace length, and between carn/JOee length and total length forboth SfXI'S werf also mlculated.

INTRODUCfION

Penarus 111011000n Fabricius, commonl)' known astiger prawn, i." the main cultured pra\\'TI species inMalaysia. Despite the establishment of hatchel)'and rearing techniques for this species, pmwnbroodstocks used for seed production and selec­tive breeding are still being collected from naturalpopulations.

Morphometric traits can easily be lIsed as aC1itenon for the selection of prawn brood"tock(Lester 1983; Huang ef nL 1990) ,,;thollt killing ordamaging them. Tow length and carapace lengtharc commonly used to estimate the size composi·tion of prawn species (Ramamurthy and~llanickaraja 1978). In addition, somemorphometlic chardcters can give a more aCCl1-

rate estimate of body weight and can be uc;ed forselecting broodsLock on the basis of weight. Rela­tionships betwcen totallcllbrt..h and cardpace length.and total length and weight have been describedfor P. monodon and other prawn species (Hall1962; Kirkegaard el ,<1 1970; Ramamurthy and!\.-fanickardja 1978; Honon and Lester 1982; Lester1983; Goswami et "L 1986; Huner el aL 1988).

The objectives of this study were to estimatethe variability of selected morphomctric traiL'! andto detennine the relationships among the charac­ters in tiger prdwns from different localities.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Samples of wild and mature Penaeus 11Wn{)(lonwere purchac;cd alive from fishermen in five

S.1\.. lJ:\L;lJ :\:\1) KJ. :\NC

differellt arcas, Kedah, Perak. Ten:llgganu,.Iohon.: and Sabah waters.

I ndi\'iclua) prawlls WCrt~ weighed in the laho­ratOl)' to the nearest 0.001 g. Total length andcarapace length were measured using \'erniercalipers to the nearest 0.01 em. All parameterswere based on Chua (1978), Grt:}' f'( aL (1983),and Ahmad aud :\1ah)"am (1986). The propor·lion of carapatT Icng-111 to total length or cal..1·pace leng-th index (%) wa<; calculated by (cara­pace length/total lenglh) x 100. Differences incardpace length iudices among localities andbetween seXes were tesred hy one-"~dY analysis of\'arjancc. Tukey test analysis " ..IS llsed to mea.";·ure dinerences in carapace length index meanvalues among localions. The characters ,,'en: logtransformed to reduce the correlation or meansand \'ariallces (Sokal and Rohlf 1981).

Tile morphomerric characters wel'e allalyscdby stepwise variable selectiou regression methodusing Stalgraphics statistical graphics s}'stel11(STSC, Inc. and Statistical Graphics COI-POl'(\­

tion, USA). Body weight was llsed as a depend­ent variable whik total length and carapacelength were independent variables. The reIa·tioJlships between total length and weight, andhetween carapace length and weight arc dc­scribcrl by the allometric equation, i.e. Y = aX I

"

where X and Yarc independellt and dependentvariables, respectively, and a and b are two con­stan(.<o;. Non-linear regression analysis (Sokal andRohlf 198 I) ,vas performed to detcrmine theserelationships for hoth sexes from differenl loca·tions. Linear regression analysis was also used lO

dcscribe the relationship between carapace1cn~rh and total length. Dara wcrc pooled formales and remalcs 10 provide a common regres·sion equation describing the relationships be·tween the two v,triahles.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The range, mean and coefficient of variationvalues for adult male and adult female shrimpscollecred from the fiyc locations are presented inTable I. Females were significantly larger (P<O.05)than the males, with average bod}' weighL<; of113.54 g and /4.88 g, respectj"el)'. Thischaracteristic Wa.1; also nored in Pmaeus IongisLJlus(Penn 1980), P. lalisu/mfus and P. f'.{wlRnlusHa<o;wel! (Penn and Hall 1974). i\.fale shrimps,howcwr, had less variable and greater cal..tpacelength indices than the females, i.ndicating thalcarctpace length increa<o;cs morc rapidly than lhe

lotal Icnh'1h in males but less 1"1pidly ill fClllalt:s.The coefficieHl of"ariation of the carapace lengthinclict:s r.mgecl between .? ami IH% in 1l1alcs and:1 to 21 % in females. Among the "ariOlL<; loc<\tiUlt<;,males from Sabah had the highest an~rage

carapace lell~lh index (36,46%) and males frolllKcclah the lowest (22.65%) _ Similarly to males,the carapace length index (%) of fi:malcs fromSabah mlS the largest rH).-l~%) and females fromKedah "'ere aLw the smallest (2~.17%).The Tuke.:ytest shows that the carapacc kngth indices offelnales were significantly dint-rent (PdUJ5)i.unong locations. except between thuse.: from.1ohore and PeTak. TlIt, pI..tWnS li'om Johore andPerak could be delivcd from the same population.The differcnce in size of carapace withi.n sexesamong dilfen:lltlocations may be due to diHerelllstocks and different emirolllllcllts (Goswami t'l al.19S6; Huang pI aL 1990).

The results of stepwise.: \':.1riable selcctionregression analysis for male and female pr'i.1WnSfrom five locations arc sho"'n in Table 2. IIImales, thc GH..lpace length was the first variahlein stepwise regression analysis in Perak andKeclah populations, accounting for 79.4% and72.4%. respectively, of the Yari;ltion in bodyweight. Total length became the first entercdvariahle in the regression analysis ill Sabah,Tel'enggallll and Johore male shrimppopulations, explaining 77.8%, 61.8% and 61.0%of the yariation in body weight, respectively.Conversely, among females, carapace length waslhe first v"ariahle to enter the regression step inPcrak andJohorc populations, explaining 9!l.6%and 79.7% of the "ariations in hod)' weighl,rcsp(;c:th'Cly. The total length \,'as the first en­tered '~Jriahle in srcp"isc regressions of Sabah,Kcd<lh and Tcrengganu female populations thatexplained 82.8H%, HO.l:>% and 7-1. 7%, respec·lively, of the '~driance in body weight.

This smdy indicates that carapace leugthalone is sufficienl to explain the variance inborly weight for male (65.4%) and female(73.H%) prdwns although a combination of twoor three '''lriab1es at a time gi,·es a more accu­rate estimation of body weight.

From the analysis of variance, there weresignificant diflerenccs (P<0.05) in length he·tween sexes for all locations. Therefore, rheregression analyses for males and females wercdone sepal"o.tely.

Table :1 descrihes the logarithmic I'elalion­ships hetween body weight (''''') and lotal lenglh

lti PERTA:'\l1\.AJ. TROP..\GRlc' SCI. VO!.. IH "0. 1 199:",

TABLE 2Rallgt·, 1I1(:Ull alld codliciclll or variation (CV) of lotal lenglh (TI.), carapace 1t.'lIg!ll (el.). !>t1dy weigh I (\'Vr) and carapan> length index (C:I.. I.)

for l11ale (f\.t) and fellml(~ (F) P('JIfIPIH mmwdon col1ectt:o from dill('n: II I regiolls ill :vlalaysia

TABLE 1R'llIg-c. meall ann coellif:ient of\"<lriatillll «:V) Ill" IOlallcllA"lh en,), carapace 1('11A"lh «:1.),1>(1(1) wci,.;-Ill (\\-1") ;HlIl carapace length index «:1 .. I.)

for male (M) and female: (F) l'fl/(lI'Il.\ lIIollodnll col1cclcd J'mlll diJft'ITIH rt.'g-iolls ill Malap;ia

Variahle Sex Kcdah P<:rak Tcn'llgg;\llll .Jllllon.: Sal);l11

Range Me-all CV Range ~[ean CI' Range .\kan C\' Rang!' ~kan CY Rallg:l' \!l';\1\ CI'

\-1 (N=46) M (N=!I5) \1 (N=H9) ~I I:->=H,,) M I:->=I;H)F (~=~~) F (l':=li) F C\'=!ifl) F 1:->=111) F 1:->=:1:1)

'1'1. .\Ialc J(i.2-2!'d~ 211.n fl,I2 IR2·;?H.9 2~J4 0.10 1:1.3-:l6.0 2·U2 0.12 IH.H·2Ii.2 22.R4 CJ.l17 lH.I-2(i3 ~n.·H'; IUli(Cill ) Female Irl,6-27.7 2~.20 O.I~ 2::\.5-27..; 20.73 0.01\ ] 7.3-:~{l.H 2H.;n 0.14 2~L~l·2fi. J 2:U';9 0.0:1 20.;i-27,fl 2:Ui:~ 0.07

CI. ~'fah: 3.5-5.6 -l.fiH II.! 0 fi.i-lO.t H.09 O.OH -1.0-95 7.02 11.211 11.1-8.S 7,.11 n.07 n.fi.IO.1I H.IH 0.09(elll) Fcmale 4.0-6.l{ !l.36 0.12 7.:1-H..7 R27 O.(ji 3.7-10.9 7.41 (J.IH H.7-H.5 7.67 0.117 (;.'1-1 O.~ Ri)\) 11.09

\\rr ~'Iak' 29.:)-104.1 57.01 0.2H 4i.9-I!{O.·' 72.70 0.23 :n.:'l-26J.2 79.HO 11.-10 ·11. 7-!10. 7 1)2.12 0.17 :'l2.o.1:n.H XI~IH 0.2;\(~) Fcmak' 415-132,4 HI.92 0.21l 5:;.2-101..l X:,.O:) O..lO 49.1-265.1 I~U4 0.40 !l2.!l-H~.H 6:1.94 0.15 li2.2-J.l35 !l!).:,7 11.21

Cl.. I. Malt· 19.2-27.9 22.:,7 1J.(~1 27.H--lII.I ~\4.ll:1 O.Oti 20.1-39.2 2H. 71i II.IH 2~U).:n.o 32A3 (l.lIS :~:U-ll.l 31iAlI 0.06(r,) Fcmale 19.Y-27.9 2~.10 O.OH 27.11-:1-1.0 3Ui.. O.OH 12.2-35.9 26.13 0.21 2H,I..:l5.0 32.11 0.0:; :lO.7-4lJ.7 %.3H 0.0.:1

gr.;-~

'"C:"'>-

"1::

"~-<!2

"z9

.~

::r.

"

V;u'ialJle

lo~ CL

log 1'1.

Kc<lah Pcrak T(·rl·llg~.lIIU .Jtlhore Sahah

Sex b R h IF h R' b IF h R'

Male 2.422 11.724 2511 n.794 l.:l7:; 0.£)01 1.74H 05H·1 1.9·11 05H4Fenlalc I.S~~ 11.771 :~.:l5j-j n.9:,() 2.II~H O.lillO 1.75ti 0.797 I. 77S 0.67:1COlllhinerl 2.200 n.798 ~.!lfiH 0.794 l.!l:~ 1 IUi2H I.7-1H (J.(104 1.~1:17 O.(i:l2

Male l.!)-IH (U>~IJ 1.ll·I:~ 0.57:l UJI{(i O.lilH [.H-m 0.610 2.9~7 O.77KFClllak 1.781 O.HWl O.·Hl9 0.0 II 2.79!1 0.7-17 1.1 :~!J t1.62:\ 2.7:\H O.H2HOUllbincd :l.mIO fl.7llH 1.1>0-1 n547 :l.4~4 n.liH9 I.X-Hi O.li 13 2.~!11 lJ.Hml

'"'":::

zCT.

"5o"'"d;o..,~

""~~::;:;=:"<:

"S'"~'"Br.or.

S.K. DAUD AND KJ. ANG

TABLE 3Relations of log body weight (W) In log- IOlal leng-th (L) in male and fcmall: uf

Prnal'lH 1110"00011 from different locations

1,OCiUioll Sex log-W=loga+ b logL COfn::lationcoefficient (r)

Kt:clah Male lo~ W = -O.H09 + 1.94M log L 0.H3FClllak log \V = -0.518 + 1.781 log l. 0.90

Pt'rak Male log "V = ·OAtH + 2.511 log L O.S!lFcmaJc log W = ·1.149 + :~.:~56Iog L 0.98

Tt'rcllg"g<lnll i\iralc log W = ·(J,Hfi9 + 1.986 log L 0.79Female.: log W = ·1.95~) + 2.799 log L O.AI)

.Johorc Male 10K \\' = ·().719 + 1.849 log L 0.78Felllale log W = -1.128 + 2.139 log L 0.79

Sahah Male lug W ::: -2.101 + 2.9H7 log L 0.90Female log W = -1.7t)g + 2.738 log L 0.91

Combinerl Male.: log W = -o.t)7) + 1.899 log L 0.62female lug W = -0.513 + 1.741 log 1. 0.04

(L) in male and female pr<.Hvns. Non-linear re­gression equations of' log \V::: log a + b log L areshown for each l<H.:ation (Table 3). The relation·ships between bod)' weight and total length formales and females in all locations were csti·mated as log W = -0.513 + 1.741 log L and log W= -0.671 + 1.899 log L, respectively. The ,,,,Ioes nfcoefficient ';b" of the weighHotal length rela·tionships show considcmble variation, rangingfrom 1.899 to 2.987 in males and from 1.741 to

3.356 in females. The "b" value was significantlysmaller (P<O.05) than :1.0 for males. ]n contrast,"I)" value in P. dunranlm was significantly greatertitan 3.0 for both sexes as reponed by Kutkuhn(1962). However, Fontaine and Neal (1971)found that the "b" value for P. d1wmrulrl maleswas not different from 3.0 (P>0.05).

The logarithmic relationships between bodywcight (W) and carapace length (L(~) for bothmales and females from each location arc alsodescribed by the llOn·linear regression equationof log W = log a + b log LeO' (Table 4). For alllocations, the relationships between bod)' weightand carapace length for males and females wereestimated as lo~ \\' = ·0.019 + 2.10 log L. a, and101( W = -O.OH3 + ~.~13 log Lcar, respectively.

Table 5 shows the logarithmic relationshipsbetween carapace length (L~,..> and total length

(L) for male and female prawns from eachlocation as log Lear = log a + b tog L. For alllocatiolls, the linear relationships between cara·pace length and LOtal length for males andfemales were describcd as L = -0.561 + 1.042

,~r

log L, respectively.The results show that carapace length in­

cre~l<;ed linearly with the total length althoughcarapace length docs not grow allometricall)'with body weight. However, body weight is cor·related more with carapace length for both maleand female prawns, l' = 0.81 and r = O.Rfi,respectively (Table 4) compared with total lengthwith r = 0.64 and I' = 0.62 for males and females,respectively (Table 3). Carapace length is a con·siderably more stable size reference dimension(Rhodes and Holdich 1984) and this may con·tribute to its good correlation with body weight.Total length measurement is rather varied ac·cording to the length of the roStrum, which iseasily dam.aged, thus affecting the accuracy ofthis measurement.

This sllIdy indicates that campace lengthcan be ll,;ed as a single v.\Iiable to explain alarge proportion of the \'"dnance in body weight.This is in accordance with the measurementused by Hall (1962). Thll'\ this variable can beregarded as an important criterion for choosing

I~ PERTANIKAj. TROP, AGRIe. SCI. VOL 1H NO. I \1)9:1

SELECTION OF llROODSTOCK OF PJ::NAf;n'j MONO/JON FABRICIUS

TAIII.E 4Rclalionship of lo~ bodr weighl (W) 10 log GlrapaCc length (I.,,,,) in male and kmalc of

Pmal'lL5 monodon froUl different locations

Location St-x log 'V = log ;,1 + b log L

Ked:lh Male log- 'V = 0.1::\::\ + 2.422 log- L,a,female log VI' = 0.577 + l.H:~:~ log L'dr

Perak Male log- W = 0.418 + 2.511 log L,_."Female log VI' = 1.149 + :~.356 log T.,""

Tereng-gallll ;\'Iale log W = (J.-lil + 1.575 log Lm

femah~ log \V = n.IOI + ~.028 log L,a.

Johore \1<lle log W = 0.273 + 1.748 10K Lm

Female log '·V = 0.265 +- 1.756 log Lm

Sabah ~-Jale log W = O.lo:; + 1.941 log L...,Fem<lle log W = O.~40 + 1.775 log L,,,

<:ombined \-l<lle log W = ().(J8:~ +- 2.213 log l.n.Female log W = 0.019 + 2.100 log Lw

Correlationcoefficient (r)

11.8;;11.88

O.R9O.!IH

11.7111.81

O. i611.89

O.iliO.H2

0.81;11.81

TABl.E :>Relationship of log carapace lcnglll (L,,,r) to log total length (1..) in male and female of Pmu('l/-S lIIonndon

from different lacations

l.ocatioll Sex log L,a. = log a + b log L CorrelatiOiIcodficiCnl (r)

Kedah Male log Ln, :: -0.11 () + 0593 log L 0.72Female log L,_n = ·O.3~9 +- 0.775 log L 0.82

Peral;. 1\'lale log 1..m

= n.lll + 0583 log L 0.7fiFemale log I..~, = 0.741 + 0.124 log I. lUI

Terengganu Male log Ln

, = -0..1 7G + 0.953 lo~ I. U.51Female log L•., = 0.101 +- 2.029 log 1.. O.HI

.luh()I"(..' Male log L,~. = ·0.164 + O.7til log L 0.74Female log L,,,, = -0.388 + 0.92--1 101-{ L 0.67

Sabah Male 101-{ I.,a, = OAHI) + 1.035 log l. 0.78Female log L,., = -0.700 + 1.190 log L O.Hli

Combincd Malc log 1..u , == O.OR4- + 054H log L (J.37Female log L

m= -0.:>61 + 1.042 lo~ L 053

PERTANIKAJ. TROP. AGRIe. SCI. VOL 18 NO. I 199~ 19

S.I\.. lJAUD AND KJ. ANC

hroodstock ill :-:.ckni\'(~ breeding programmes ufP. 11/01/0d01l.

ACKNOW1£DGEMENTSThe authors wish 10 thank Univcrsiti Pertanian:\1alaysia for thl' usc oft;Kilities and the MalaysianGo\'crnmenl for pro\'iding research g-rant IRPAI-07-05-0i3 (50~~67). Thank~ are also due to

Faul.iah Ahmad and 1\"01;7..:\ Hanm for theirtech nical assislance.

REFERE 'CESA.mIAIl, A.T. alld .\1.1. .M.\IIY.\:\L 1986. Pancluan

~1l'11g'l'Il;d.pa~ti Jenis-jellis Uclang LalitDagang;.\Il di ;\lalayslCl. Kuala Lumpur: Depart·lIll'nl of Fisheries. ,\Iillistry of Agliculum:.

On \. C\\'. 1~17H. (.iHll1llPlrinl Prawns nJ PPllillSlIlarj\(aln)·sin. Kuab Ltllnpllr, Depanlllem of Fi..~h­

eril:s. ~·Iinistr~· of Ag-I·icultHr<'.

FO'\T:\l:\E. C.T. and RA. NE:\t.. 1971. I.ellgth- wei~htrelations for Ihn:e COIllJllt'ITially importantPen;wid shrimp of thc GHlf of \Iexico. TrailS.A 1111'1'. FiJIt . .)0(. 3: f)84-f)8fi.

C:()~\r:\\ll, C., S.C:. D:\L\1. alld S.c. Cos\I".\;\n. 1986.Preliminary studies on prawn. Pnwf'lts 1Ilf'r­

guii'/Isis, for sl'!cclion of hrooclstock in gcneticimprm'cllll'llt programs. Aqll([(ultul"l> 53: -ll-4H.

GREY, D.L., \V. 1hl.l. and A. B:\KEK. 19H:I. A GuidI' 10

tlu" AllSlmlitm n"J/llfid Prawm. Darwin: :\Iorth­el'll Territory Department of Primary Produc­t iOIl.

II \1 I. D.:":.F. 19j)~. ObwnJfllitms on 1ftI' 1·(1x01l011l.\· and

Uinlogl' oj Somt' /lld(J·H't'.~t·Pa{/fi( Pf'Jlfleidflt'(CnIS1o(f'a, lJt'mpodn). Col. OtT. Fish. Puhl. No.17. l.ondon. H;\fSO.

Hwrr(J:'\. S.£. and LJ. l.r.STER. 19H~. UlilizingllIorphomclric and population g-cnctic chua indomestication of Penaeid shrimp. Pror. H'odd

Mmirl//I.."'·or. 13.

Hl -\~{,. C ..\1., ~I.Y. T:-..-\.l and I.e. LIAn. 1990.

.\lorpho11lClric smdies Oil choice of broodslockfor gClletic impron'mcnt in PnUlf'll_~ j.H'ni(illalIU.

Ill: PrtJ(et'dill~ ')I'(ond .:him! Fi.shnit's Ffll1ll/l.

cd. R. Hirano and I. Hau)'ll, p. :l2:~-.12().

t\lanila: The A'iian FislwI"ies Socicty.

(-Il':-\ER,.J.V., G.V. Ll~IlQ\'IST and H. KO:'\O:\:E:\:. I~IHS.

Comparison of lllorpholo~1'and edible lissucsof two imponam commercial cr<lylishc:s. thenoble crayrl.~h. iislants nsla{l/s Linllc, and Ihcred swamp cfa}1ish, Pro({fmbant.~ clarkii (Girarci)(Decapoda. Astacidae and Cambaridae).flqll(JCUltW"l' 68: -t::'-57.

KJRH{~-\.:\.RO, I.. DJ. Tnl:\ and R.H. \Y.-\I.I\ER. 1970.

Synopsis of hiological data on rhe banaui.lprawn Pf'1lfU'1H JIlf'1guif'1lsiJ de Man. 18HR FisJwr­ips ,\)·lwj}.~i.\· . .\in. S. i\lelboume. CSIRO Fisher·ies and Gn.:anogrJ.phy.

Kl·Tl\t·H:\:,j.H. 196~. Dynamics ora Pcnaeid shrimpPOPUIi.llioll and management illlpliGlliollS.(1.s. FiJh Wildl. .)pnl. Fl:t;h. Rull. 65(2): :H:{..:t~H.

LES I"F.R, LJ 19H~. Dcn:loping a select in' hreedingprogram for Penacid shrimp maricn]lurc.Aqll(Jof!lurl' 33: 41-:')0.

PE:\:S, .J.W. 19HO. OhsCJ'vations Oil 1t'll~lh-,,'cight

relationships and dislribulioll of lhe n:d SPOIking: prawn, Pnw('llS IOIlp;1J/Y/lls Kuho. in West­ern Australian waters. ,lusl. J. ,\far. Fn'.\J/l/lfllf'/"Res. 31: ;)47-::'.~2.

PE.".", .J.\,\'. and N.C. H-\I.l., H174. iv[orpho!llctricdata relating to comllH.:rcial prawn.~ fro III

Shark Bay, Western Australia. Fish. JU'.I. Bill/.\\'i'.I'I. AIl.I'I. :-':0. Fl.

R-\.\IAm·RTIIY, S. and ,\.1. :"l-\:\:ICI\:\R:\I:\. 1978. Rehuionbetween tail and total lengths ilnd rotal andCll<ipa<:e !eng-ths for lhree cOllll1len:ial spt:ciesof Pt:llaeid prawns ill Illdia. Judirl1l J. 1'1.~1t.

25(2): 2~3-2~7.

RIIOIIt.s, G.P. and D.M. HOI.lllClI. 1!IH-l.Lcngth-weig-hl relationship, 1ll1lSCll: pmdtl('·

lion and proximate COJllPOSilioll of frcshwatercr.l~ii<;h ...llt",'rojJnt(ll/lnbill.~ !}(tllijlt'.\' (Lerl'­houllct). Aqll{/(Illturr 37: 107-12~t

SO".-\I, R.R. and F:J. ROIIl.F. 1981. Bio11/('/1)'. 2nd cdn.SaIl Fnmciscn: Freeman.

(Rl'rt'il'f"ti /lJ.funp /993)

PERTANUi,:\j. "fRO!'. AeRIe. SCI. \'01.. IB NO. I l~j9:l