Radiocarbon in otoliths of tropical marine fishes: Reference Δ14C chronology for north Caribbean waters

• Published in: PloS one 2021-05, Vol.16 (5), p.e0251442-e0251442
• Main Authors: Shervette, Virginia R, Overly, Katherine E, Rivera Hernández, Jesús M
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Age; Age determination; Biology and Life Sciences; Carbon 14; Chronology; Chronometers; Conservation; Coral reef habitats; Coral reefs; Earth Sciences; Ecology and Environmental Sciences; Ecosystem services; Editing; Environmental information; Estimates; Fish; Fish conservation; Fisheries; Fishing; Introduced fish; Laboratory animals; Marine ecosystems; Marine fish; Marine sciences; Marine systems; Marine technology; Measuring instruments; Medicine and Health Sciences; Otoliths; People and places; Reef fish; Regions; Resource conservation; Reviews; Shallow water; Time series; Tropical fish
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0251442

Reef fishes support important fisheries throughout the Caribbean, but a combination of factors in the tropics makes otolith microstructure difficult to interpret for age estimation. Therefore, validation of ageing methods, via application of Δ14C is a major research priority. Utilizing known-age otolith material from north Caribbean fishes, we determined that a distinct regional Δ14C chronology exists, differing from coral-based chronologies compiled for ageing validation from a wide-ranging area of the Atlantic and from an otolith-based chronology from the Gulf of Mexico. Our north Caribbean Δ14C chronology established a decline series with narrow prediction intervals that proved successful in ageing validation of three economically important reef fish species. In examining why our north Caribbean Δ14C chronology differed from some of the coral-based Δ14C data reported from the region, we determined differences among study objectives and research design impact Δ14C temporal relationships. This resulted in establishing the first of three important considerations relevant to applying Δ14C chronologies for ageing validation: 1) evaluation of the applicability of original goal/objectives and study design of potential Δ14C reference studies. Next, we determined differences between our Δ14C chronology and those from Florida and the Gulf of Mexico were explained by differences in regional patterns of oceanic upwelling, resulting in the second consideration for future validation work: 2) evaluation of the applicability of Δ14C reference data to the region/location where fish samples were obtained. Lastly, we emphasize the application of our north Caribbean Δ14C chronology should be limited to ageing validation studies of fishes from this region known to inhabit shallow water coral habitat as juveniles. Thus, we note the final consideration to strengthen findings of future age validation studies: 3) use of Δ14C analysis for age validation should be limited to species whose juvenile habitat is known to reflect the regional Δ14C reference chronology.