NOTE LaPlante Brood size and parturition in Zalembius rosaceus 



625 



mesh size of the net were present in winter collections, 

 probably aborted by females stressed during capture. 

 The number of embryos (/! = 51) present in the winter 

 collections was higher than would be expected if they 

 had been aborted by females having shown evidence 

 of complete abortions (n=7). Therefore, pink seaperch 

 have length-specific brood sizes as observed in other 

 surfperches, and this finding is supported by the more 

 reliable fall data from the present study. 



Mean brood size for pink seaperch in the present study 

 was higher than previously reported for the species. 

 Goldberg and Ticknor (1977) reported that females had 

 an average brood size of 3.5, which was similar to mean 

 brood sizes obtained for winter collections in this study; 

 however, according to arguments already presented, win- 

 ter data likely resulted in an underestimation of brood 

 size. Both mean and maximum fall brood sizes (max=10) 

 were greater than winter brood sizes and greater than 

 the brood size in samples examined in Goldberg and 

 Ticknor 's (1977) study. If brood size estimates in the 

 Goldberg and Ticknor (1977) study included females 

 collected in winter, the authors probably underestimated 

 brood size, as well. The mean brood size of pink seap- 

 erch is similar to that of other deep water fishes (Koslow 

 et al., 2000) but is considered relatively small compared 

 to other embiotocids (reviewed in Baltz, 1984). 



An unexpected result from the present study was evi- 

 dence that large female pink seaperch have an earlier 

 breeding schedule than small females. Reproductively 

 active females in fall were larger on average than win- 

 ter females (Fig. 1), indicating that large females left 

 breeding sites earlier or that small females arrived at 

 breeding sites later. Although greater temporal resolu- 

 tion of changes in size distribution would have been 

 desirable, further evidence for size-dependent breeding 

 was apparent from 'female- and embryo-size relations. 

 In both fall and winter, embryos in large females were 

 larger than embryos in small females (Fig. 2B), which 

 would be expected if the reproductively active females 

 in fall bred earlier than those in winter. An alterna- 

 tive explanation for the positive relationship between 

 female size and embryo size would be that embryos in 

 large females develop faster than those in small females 

 because of greater maternal investment. I did not have 

 sufficient data on embryo development because this was 

 not the focus of my study; however, it is a hypothesis 

 that warrants further investigation. Delayed breed- 

 ing by smaller females of pink seaperch is a pattern 

 observed in other surfperches (Eigenmann and Ulrey, 

 1894; Hubbs, 1921; Schultz, et al., 1991) and may arise 

 from both energetic limitations on the time of repro- 

 duction and fitness advantages accrued by postponing 

 reproduction and diverting additional energy towards 

 growth (Schultz, et al., 1991). 



Acknowledgments 



Fish were collected in accordance with permits issued 

 to California State University at Long Beach, South- 



ern California Coastal Water Research Project, and the 

 County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles. This work 

 was supported by the California State University at Long 

 Beach (CSULB) and Southern California Coastal Water 

 Research Project (SCCWRP). R. Flores, T. McSparren, 

 and K. Mickey (all of CSULB) provided invaluable discus- 

 sions and laboratory and field assistance. I am grateful to 

 M. J. Allen (SCCWRP), J. Cross (SCCWRP), K. Mickey, 

 E. T. Schultz, and two anonymous reviewers for comments 

 and suggestions on earlier drafts of this manuscript. 



Literature cited 



Allen, M. J. 



1982. Functional structure of soft-bottom fish communi- 

 ties of the southern California shelf. Ph.D. diss., 603 p. 

 Univ. California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA. 



Bagenal, T. B. 



1978. Aspects of fish fecundity. /» Ecology of freshwater 

 fish production (S. D. Gerking, ed.), p. 75-101, Wiley 

 and Sons, New York, NY. 

 Baltz, D. M. 



1984. Life history variation among female surfperches 

 (Perciformes: Embiotocidae). Environ. Biol. Fish. 10: 

 159-171. 

 Baltz, D. M., and E. E. Knight. 



1983. Age-growth reproductive characteristics and 

 seasonal depth distribution of the spotfin surfperch, 

 Hyperprosopon anale. California Fish and Game 69: 

 97-104. 



Eigenmann, C. H., and A. B. Ulrey. 



1894. A review of the Embiotocidae. Bull. U.S. Fish. 

 Comm. 12:382-400. 

 Eschmeyer, W. N., E. S. Herald, and H. Hammann. 



1983. A field guide to Pacific Coast fishes of North 

 America. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston. MA. 

 Goldberg, S. R., and W. C. Ticknor. 



1977. Reproductive cycle of the pink seaperch, Zalembius 

 rosaceus (Embiotocidae). Fish. Bull. 75:882-884. 

 Hubbs, C. L. 



1921. The ecology and life-history of Amphigonop- 

 terus aurora and of other viviparous perches of Cali- 

 fornia. Biol. Bull. (Woods Hole). 40:181-209. 

 Koslow, J. A., G. W. Boehlert, J. D. M. Gordon, R. L. Haedrich, 

 P. Lorance, and N. Parin. 



2000. Continental slope and deep-sea fisheries: impli- 

 cations for a fragile ecosystem. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 57: 

 548-557. 

 Miller, D. J., and R. N. Lea. 



1972. Guide to coastal marine fishes of California. Fish. 

 Bull. 157:1-235. 

 Schultz, E. T. 



1993. Sexual size dimorphism at birth in Microme- 

 trus minimus (Embiotocidae): a prenatal cost of 

 reproduction. Copeia 1993:456-462. 

 Schultz, E. T., L. M. Clifton, and R. R. Warner. 



1991. Energetic constraints and size-based tactics: the 

 adaptive significance of breeding-schedule variation in 

 a marine fish (Embiotocidae: Micrometrus minimus). 

 Am. Nat. 138:1408-1430. 

 Tarp, H. F. 



1952. A revision of the family Embiotocidae (the surf- 

 perches). Fish. Bull. 88:4-99. 



