Eco. Env. & Cons. 19 (4) : 2013; pp. (1025-1030)Copyright@ EM InternationalISSN 0971–765X

*Corresponding author’s email: 2*madhu_limnology@yahoo.co.in

Introduction

The success of fishes in terms of their diversity andnumber is to a large extent the measure of their suc-cess in finding adequate food, sometimes in themost unlikely situations. Garra gotyla gotyla(Teleostei: Cyprinidae) under study is considered inthreatened (vulnerable) category (NBFGR, 2010).Study of food and feeding habits of fishes has greatimportance in understanding migration, growth andseasonal variations in conditions etc. Seasonal andregional differences in feeding and dietary changeswith length of fish were evident (Clark, 1985). Thefood and feeding habits of freshwater fish species isa subject of continuous research because it consti-tutes the basis for the development of a successfulfisheries management programmed on fish (Oso etal., 2006). The growth of a fish is influenced by qual-

ity and quantity of food material available and con-sumed (Rajkumar et al., 2007). The first stage in thelife cycle of a fish is completed at the expense offood reserves contained in yolk in the egg. After thecomplete utilization of the yolk, the young fishescommence feeding from its habitat. Lagler (1949)points out; the gut contents only indicate what thefish would feed on and there is need for other datato understand what its natural food. Hynes (1950)briefly reviewed methods of gut analysis in fishes.Majorly to study food and feeding of fishes, onlystomach content were taken into account discount-ing rest of the gut, however, a few workers havetaken into consideration the contents of the wholealimentary canal. The food is less digested in thestomach than in other parts of alimentary canal andso the identification and analysis of the gut contentis comparatively easier while in the stomach

Food and feeding habits of the hill stream fish Garragotyla gotyla (Teleostei: Cyprinidae) in the streams ofSouth-eastern Rajasthan

Kuldeep Singh Gaur1, Vipul Sharma1, M.S. Sharma2* and Bhoopendra Kumar Verma1

1Limnology & Fisheries Research Laboratory, Department of Zoology, UniversityCollege of Science, M.L. Sukhadia University, Udaipur (Rajasthan), India2*Vice-Chancellor University of Kota, Kota (Rajasthan), India

ABSTRACT

Study of food and feeding habits of fishes is of great importance in understanding migration, growth andseasonal variations in conditions. The study was carried out to investigate the stomach contents of Garragotyla gotyla from hill streams and tributaries of the Chambal river situated in South-eastern part (24° 51'53"N to 25° 00' 23"N, 75° 26' 25"E to 75° 35' 52"E) of Rajasthan. Food and feeding habits of Garra gotyla gotylawas studied. It was found to be a herbivorous fish. The food recorded includes algae belonging toChlorophyceae (Volvox sp., Oedogonium sp., Spirogyra sp., Ulothrix sp. and Chlorella sp.), Myxophyceae(Oscillatoria sp.) and Bacillariophyceae (Tabellaria sp., Fragillaria sp., Pinnularia sp., Cymbella sp., Synedra sp.and Navicula sp.). Out of these Oedogonium sp. was the most frequent amongst Chlorophyceae whereas theCymbella sp. was most represented in the Bacillariophyceae.

Key word : Food and feeding habits, Garra gotyla gotyla, Herbivorous fish, Hill streams, Rajasthan.

(Received 7 February 2013; accepted 30 March, 2013)

1026 Eco. Env. & Cons. 19 (4) : 2013

(Philips, 1929; Aflalo and Martson, 1904). An exami-nation of the rectal content may reveal the presenceof items that are excreted without being digested.Fish (1951) examined rectal contents of Tilapiaesculanta, found that the fish do not digest bluegreen and green algae and excrete them undigested.In India an extensive work on food and feeding offishes have been done (Pathani and Das, 1979; Khanand Jhingran, 1975; Selvaraj et al., 2000; Rao and Rao,2000; Bahuguna, 2002; Manoj kumar, 2003; Singh etal., 2004; Mondal and Kairaj, 2010; Kanwal andPathani 2012). Despite this no such literature onqualitative and feeding intensity in gut content ofhill stream fish, Garra gotyla gotyla is available in thesouth-eastern Rajasthan in reference to hill streamsand tributaries of the Chambal River. In Rajasthannotable studies have been done on the food andfeeding of other fish (Ujjania, 2003 and Rajkumar etal., 2007). The present study was made to evaluatethe food and feeding habits of Garra gotyla gotylawhich would immensely help to understand themeasures to be taken to conserve the ecology andaquatic water bodies of the study site.

Materials and Methods

Fish collection site

The samples were collected from the streams, tribu-taries, creeks and brooks of the Chambal river(South-eastern Rajasthan) using nets and traditionalmethods (Fig.1). In all 72 stomachs of various sizegroups were examined. The fingerlings, juvenilesand adults of hill stream fishes were collected fromthe streams. After the collection, specimens werebrought to the laboratory, dissected and digestivetracts were carefully removed from the body cavityand preserved in 5% formalin.

Points (Numerical) Method

Their guts were examined in laboratory and thefood items were expressed as percentage by “Pointsmethod” (Swynerton and Worthington, 1941;Hynes, 1950). Macroscopic and microscopic exami-nation was conducted for qualitative analysis. Incase of bigger specimens i.e. specimens having totallength of more than 12.00 cm, only guts preserved inthe formalin were brought to the laboratory for

Fig. 1. Study area inhabitate streams, tributaries, creeks and brooks of the Chambal river

GAUR ET AL 1027

analysis. The feeding intensity was assessed byclassifying intestinal bulbs as full, 3/4 full, ½ full, ¼full, poor and empty, and were awarded 20, 15, 10,5, 2.5 and 0 points respectively, depending on theamount of food in it.

Results and Discussion

Qualitative analysis

Various food items and their percentage composi-tion found in the gut of Garra gotyla gotyla are de-scribed in Table 1 and Fig. 1. Table 1 shows the per-centage frequency occurrence of each food items indifferent size groups of Garra gotyla gotyla. Amonghills stream fishes some are carnivores, some areherbivores and some are omnivores. The alimen-tary canal is adapted in accordance to a particularfeeding habit of fish. Garra gotyla gotyla is a typicalherbivorous fish having longer and coiled intestine.A longer intestine is found in a fish whose food ispoor in nutritional substance. The poor develop-ment of folds in mucosa is compensated by a longintestine, which sufficiently increases the absorbingsurface. Longer intestine of Garra gotyla gotyla en-sures extraction of maximum nutritional matters.So, a long intestine compensates for poor develop-ment of folds in the mucosa. Garra gotyla gotyla is aherbivorous fish. The fish falls in plankty-herbivorus feeding habits in the water (Nicolsky,

1999) and it indicates presence of intestinal bulb withanterior opening of gall bladder, length of alimentarycanal is always greater than fish length, mouth open-ing of the fish, dietary content is always algae anddetritus matter in the gut contents of the fish (Kanwaland Pathani, 2012).

The food recorded includes algae belonging toChlorophyceae, Myxophyceae, Bacillariophyceaeand Miscellaneous. Ojha (2002) studied food andfeeding habits of Garra lamta. The gut analysis re-vealed that it feeds majorly on algae belonging to thefamilies Chlorophyceae, Xanthophyceae andbacillariophyceae. The important dietary group ofGarra lamta includes (Chlorococcum, Closteriopsis,Closterium and Colacium) of Chlorophyceae, onlyVaucheria of Xanthophyceae. Cymbella andFragillaria were the most common diatoms found.Algae was the major food item for Accrossocheilushexagonolepis fish such as Bacillariophyceae,Chlorophyceae, Euglenophyceae and Myxophyceae(Das and Goswami, 1997). Bacillariophyceae consti-tuted the major food item (46.15%), for Garra gotylagotyla followed by Chlorophyceae (38.44%) andMyxophyceae (13%) shown in Fig. 3. Kanwal andPathani (2012) also observed dominant groupchlorophyceae (30.36 % and 34.98%) followed bybacillariophyceae for Garra lamta fish for two succes-sive years.

Chlorophyceae was represented by Volvox sp.,

Table 1. Percentage frequency occurrence of different food items in various size groups in Garra gotyla gotyla

S.No. Food Items 3 cm – 5 cm 5 cm – 7 cm 7 cm – 9 cm 9cm – 11cm(10) (24) (18) (20)

Chlorophyceae1. Volvox sp. 40(4) 58.33(14) 50(9) 10(2)2. Oedogonium sp. 30(3) 37.5(9) 55.55(10) 60(12)3. Spirogyra sp. – – – 20(4)4. Ulothrix sp. 60(6) 62.5(15) 44.44(8) 15(3)5. Chlorella sp. 30(3) – 11.11(2) 5(1)Myxophyceae6. Oscillatoria sp. 80(8) 83.33(20) 77.77(14) 70(14)Bacillariophyceae7. Tabellaria sp. 60(6) 70.83(17) 50(9) 40(8)8. Fragillaria sp. 100(10) 83.33(20) 77.77(14) 80(16)9. Pinnularia sp. – – 22.22(4) 10(2)10. Cymbella sp. 100(10) 91.66(22) 100(18) 80(16)11. Synedra sp. 20(2) 33.33(8) 27.77(5) 30(6)12. Navicula sp. 50(5) 41.66(10) 66.66(12) 80(16)

Miscellaneous (Unidentified 70(7) 66.66(16) 66.66(12) 70(14)matter, leaves, decayed organic matter)

Figures in bracket indicate the number of fish in which each has occurred.

1028 Eco. Env. & Cons. 19 (4) : 2013

Oedogonium sp., Spirogyra sp., Ullothrix sp. and Chlo-rella sp. Myxophyceae is the characteristic of loticwater bodies but interestingly represented byOscillatoria sp. only. It was found almost equally inall the size groups (3cm-5cm, 5cm-7cm, 7cm- 9cmand 9cm-11cm, Table-1). Spirogyra was dominantgenera in Garra lamta and Mystus montanus. (Kanwaland Pathani, 2012, Das and Goswami, 1997)

The Bacillariophyceae was represented byTabellaria sp., Fragillaria sp., Pinnularia sp., Cymbellasp., Synedra sp. and Navicula sp. Cymbella sp. andFragillaria are the best represented ones in all the sizeof group (Table 1). Bacillariophyceae is the impor-tant food item in the gut contents of Catla catla rep-resent as abundant genera were Fragillaria sp.,Synedra sp., Pinnularia sp., Diatoma and Navicula.

On analysis of the data it can be concluded thatno particular size group has shown exclusiveness toany of the food item excepting Spirogyra sp. The mis-cellaneous food items include unidentified matter,leaves, decayed organic matter, etc.

Feeding intensity and stomach fullness conditionin various month in Garra gotyla gotyla

As far as the feeding intensity is concerned F and ¾F is regarded as active feeding, ½ F as moderatefeeding and ¼ F, Poor and Empty as low feeding.Monthly and seasonal fluctuation showed that allfood items fluctuated in the gut of fish owing to the

availability in the river and preference for fooditems (Pathani and Das, 1979; Sharma, 1988; Gomoset al., 2002; Kanwal and Pathani, 2012). The Table 2and Fig. 3, depicts intensity of feeding (in percent-age) in various months shows that Garra gotyla gotylain period of March to May feeded intensively as67.85 percent specimen showed active feeding, 14.28percent specimens showed medium and only 17.85percent specimen showed low feeding. This may bedue to the fact that this period is proceeding thebreeding season. Mondal and Kaviraj, (2010) foundmaximum feeding intensity in male than female inmonth of April in Indian Shad Gudusia chapra. Theoccurrence of algae and plant content in the gut ofAccrossocheilus hexagonolepsis decreased graduallyfrom April to September- October due to turbulenceof the water and after that percentage of occurrenceincreased until March (Das and Goswami, 1997).

During July to August the feeding intensity felldeeply, only 20.83 percent fishes showed activefeeding, 12.5 percent, moderate and 66.65 percentshowed low feeding. In the period September toNovember the feeding intensity again rose and washigh in 62.71 percent specimen, moderate in 17.85percent and low in 21.42 percent. This is the periodsucceeding spawning thus characterized by highintensity of feeding. Kanwal and Pathani (2012) ob-served poor feeding activity in Garra lamta in theperiod of September due to increased number of fishin the hill stream. The period between December toFebruary showed equipoised intensity of feeding, 40percent showed high, 25 percent medium and 35percent showed low intensity in feeding. Phukan, etal. (2012) observed that feeding intensity is higher infemale than male in January in Gudusia chapra fish.Various researcher such as Jyoti, 1976; Sunder, 1985;Dutta, 1991; Dutta and Malhotra, 1990; Gupta, 1992and Malhotra and Gupta, 1990 studied food andfeeding of many fishes in reference to monthly andseasonal fluctuation and feeding intensity.

In conclusion, the study area is witnessing loss ofstreams and vegetation at a rapid pace also a threat-

Table 2. Intensity of feeding (in percentage) in various months in Garra gotyla gotyla

S.No. Months (2007-2008) No. of Fish F=20 ¾ F=15 ½ F=10 ¼ F=5 Poor=2.5 Empty=0

1. March to May 28 35.71(10) 32.14(9) 14.28(4) 10.71(3) 7.14(2) –2. July to August 24 8.33(2) 12.5(3) 12.5(3) 29.16(7) 33.33(8) 4.16(1)3. September to November 28 32.14(9) 28.57(8) 17.85(5) 10.71(3) 10.71(3) –4. December to February 20 20(4) 20(4) 25(5) 15(3) 15(3) 5(1)

Figures in bracket indicate the number of fishes.

Fig. 2. Occurrence of different food items (percentage) inGarra gotyla gotyla fish.

GAUR ET AL 1029

ened status has been afforded to this fish by IUCNtherefore this study may be of immense importancefor conservation of this fish. The importance of theknowledge about food and feeding habits of fish inunderstanding its fish biology has been well estab-lished and sometimes rate of feeding has a bearingon the spawning (breeding) of the fish. The naturesof food composition of fish also throw light on thepossible habitats it frequents. It has been observedthat in the case of Garra gotyla gotyla that the food ofjuveniles may be different from that of the adults.Thus, it becomes necessary that the different agegroups should be studied separately to ascertaindifferences in food and feeding ecology. Hence, thecorrect knowledge of the relationship between theGarra gotyla gotyla and food organism is essential forthe production, conservation, exploitation of the fishstocks and maintenance of ecology of stream.

References

Aflalo, F. G. and Martson, R. B. 1904. British Salt WaterFishes, London.

Bahugun, S. N. and Badoni, A. K. 2002. Qualitative andquantitative productivity of fish food from threeimportant tributaries of river Alaknand. HimalayanJournal of Environment and Zoology, 16(2): 56-60.

Das Balendra, K. R. and Goswami Umesh, C. 1997. Foodspectrum and feeding intensity of Accrossocheilushexagonolepis (McClelland), an enedemic rheophilicteleost of commercial importance of AssamHimalayas. Indian Journal of Fisheries. 44(3): 295-300.

Clark, M. R. 1985. The food and feeding of seven fish spe-cies from the Campbell Plateau, New Zealand. NewZealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research, 19:339-363.

Dutta, S. P. S. 1991. Food and feeding habits of Rasborarasbora (Ham.) inhabiting Gadigarh stream, Jammu.Geobios New Reports. 10(2): 135-137.

Dutta, S. P. S. and Malhotra, Y. R. 1990. Food and feedingecology of four Puntus sp. from Gadigarh stream,

Fig. 3. Stomach fullness during different month in Garragotyla gotyla

Jammu. Journal Hydrobiologia, 6(1): 11-17.Fish G R. 1951. Digestion in Tilapia esculenta. Nature, 167

(4257): 900-901.Gomos, A. M. Yilmaz and Polat, N. 2002. Relative impor-

tance of food items in feeding of Chondrostomaregium Heckel, 1843, and its relation with the timeof annulus formation. Turkish Journal of Zoology, 26:271-278.

Gupta, A. 1992. Feeding biology and some aspects of ecologyof fishes inhabiting lake, Mansar. Ph.D. Thesis. Univer-sity of Jammu, Jammu.

Hynes, H. B. N. 1950. The food of the freshwater sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus and Pygosteus pungitisis)with a review of methods used in studies of the foodof fishes. Journal of Animal Ecology, 19: 36-58.

Jesu Arockia Raj, A., Haniffa, M. A., Seetharaman, S. andSingh, S. P. 2004. Food and feeding habits of an en-demic catfish Mystus montanus (Jerdon) in RiverTambaraparani. Indian Journal Fisheries, 51(1): 107-109,

Jyoti, M. K. 1976. Seasonal variations in food and feedinghabits of some lacustrine fishes of Kashmir. JournalInland Fisheries Society of India, 8: 24-32.

Kanwal, B. P. S. and Pathani, S. S. 2012. Food and FeedingHabits of a Hill Stream Fish, Garra lamta (Hamilton-Buchanan) in some Tributaries of Suyal River,Kumaun Himalaya, Uttarakhand (India). Interna-tional Journal of Food and Nutrition Science, 1(2): 16-22.

Khan, H. A. and Jhingran, V. G. 1975. Synopsis of biologi-cal data on the Rohu, Labeo rohita (Hamilton, 1822).Fishery Synopsis, FAO, Rome.

Lagler, K. F. 1949. Studies in Freshwater Fish Biology. AnnArbor, Michigan.

Malhotra, Y. R. and Gupta, A. 1990. Seasonal fluctuationsin food and feeding of Puntius conchonius inhabitinglake Mansar, Jammu. Journal Freshwater Biology, 2(2):147-51.

Manoj kumar, P. P. 2003. Observations on the food andfeeding habits of Otolithes cuvieri (Trewavas) offVeraval. Inland Journal of Fisheries Society, 50(3): 379-385.

Mondal, D. K. and Kaviraj, A. 2010. Feeding and reproduc-tive biology of Indian Shad Gudusia chapra in twofloodplain lakes of India. Electronic Journal of Biology,6: 98-102.

NBFGR. 2010. Threatened Fresh Water Fishes of India. NBFGRPublication, army printing press, Lucknow, (U.P)India. 11 pp.

Nikolsky, G. V. 1999. Ecology of Fishes. Allied ScientificPublishers, Bikaner, India.

Ojha, J. 2002. Biology of Hillstream Fishes. Narendra Publish-ing House, Delhi.

Oso, J. A, Ayodele, I.A. and Fagbuaro, O. 2006. Food andfeeding habits of Oreochromis niloticus (L.) andSarotherodon galilaeus (L.) in a Tropical Reservoir.World Journal of Zoology. 1(2): 118-121.

1030 Eco. Env. & Cons. 19 (4) : 2013

Pathani, S. S. and Das, S. M. 1979. A note on food and feed-ing habits of the common Kumaun lake fish Puntiusconchonius (Ham.). Environmental India, 2(11): 105-106.

Philips, J. S. 1929. A report on food of trout – Fish Bull. NewZealand Marine Department., 2 : 1-31.

Phukan, B., Baishya, S., Sharma, P., Rajbongshi, A. andRahman, A. 2012. Food and feeding habits ofGudusia chapa (Hamilton, 1822) from silinga beel oflower reaches of Subansiri river in Assam, N-E In-dia. Environment and Ecology, 30(3): 578-580.

Raj Kumar, Sharma, B. K, and Sharma, L. L. 2007. Food andFeeding Habits of Catla Catla (Hamilton - Buchanan)From Daya Reservoir, Udaipur, Rajasthan. IndianJournal of Anim. Research, 41 (4) : 266-269.

Rao, L. M. and Prasad, N. H. K. D. 2002. Comparative stud-ies on the food and feeding habits of Therapon jarbua(Forskal) in relation to aquatic pollution. Indian Jour-nal of Fisheries, 49(2) : 199-203.

Rao, L. M. and Rao, S. P. 2002. Food and feeding habits ofGlosogobius giuris from Gosthani estuary. Inland Jour-nal of Fish., 49(1): 35-40.

Selvaraj, C. 2000. Ecology Based Fishery Management inThirumoorthy Reservoir. Central Inland FisheriesResearch Institute Bulletin., 95: 42.

Sharma, R. C. 1988. Food feeding habits of mahaseer Tortor (Ham.) of Garhwal Himalaya. Matsya, 12-13: 93-100.

Sunder, S. 1985. Food and feeding habits of Puntiusconchonius (Ham). from Dal Lake, Kashmir. Geobios,4: 131-136.

Swynerton, G. H. and Worthington, E. B. 1941. Note on thefood of fish in Hawes water (Wesmoland). Journal ofAnimal Ecology, 9:183-187.

Ujjania, N. C. 2003. Comparative performance of Indian Ma-jor Carps (Catla catla, Labeo rohita and Cirrhinusmrigala) in southern Rajasthan. Ph.D. Thesis. CentralInstitute of Fisheries Education (ICAR) Mumbai.