|Scientific Name:||Lutjanus analis (Cuvier, 1828)|
|Red List Category & Criteria:||Near Threatened ver 3.1|
|Assessor(s):||Lindeman, K., Anderson, W., Carpenter, K.E., Claro, R., Cowan, J., Padovani-Ferreira, B., Rocha, L.A., Sedberry, G. & Zapp-Sluis, M.|
|Contributor(s):||Steell, M. & Tishler, M.|
|Facilitator/Compiler(s):||Elfes, C., Linardich, C. & Polidoro, B.|
This species is widely distributed and fished throughout its range. It can form spawning aggregations making it very vulnerable and juveniles are harvested in some many regions amplifying the impacts of overfishing. In the US South Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico, the most recent assessments indicate there are declines of over 60% in commercial landings, however, recent assessments conclude the stock is not currently overfished and that overfishing is not occurring. Other countries show moderate to high declines in catch landings. In Cuba, total catch decreased by 40% since the 1980s over three generation lengths (24 to 66 years, based on estimates from eight to 22 years based on differing entry parameters). Spawning aggregation sizes have declined in Cuba and few major sites are in marine protected areas. It is heavily exploited in many areas and considered overfished in regions of Brazil and Colombia. Regional reductions in landings are wide and substantial yet extended landings databases are not widely available. It is consistent with the information that is available to estimate that the species has undergone at least 20% declines in biomass over 30 to 60 years and it is listed as Near Threatened. Based on past reductions and ongoing fishing levels, further declines could be expected; this could make this species Vulnerable in the future. It is recommended that precautionary management measures be taken including appropriate fisheries data collection to better understand the population structures and the targeted protection of regionally important spawning aggregations.
|Previously published Red List assessments:|
|Range Description:||This western Atlantic species is distributed from Cape Hatteras, North Carolina south along the U.S. coast, Bermuda, the Bahamas, in the Gulf of Mexico from the Florida Keys north to Tampa, off the Mississippi Delta region, and from Texas (Corpus Christi) south along Mexico to Cuba, throughout the Caribbean Sea, and along South America to Santa Catarina, Brazil (Cervigón 1993, B. Anderson pers. comm. 2011). Its depth range is one to 95 m (Thompson and Munro 1974, Allen 1985).|
Native:Anguilla; Antigua and Barbuda; Aruba; Bahamas; Barbados; Belize; Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba (Saba, Sint Eustatius); Brazil; Cayman Islands; Colombia; Costa Rica; Cuba; Curaçao; Dominica; Dominican Republic; French Guiana; Grenada; Guadeloupe; Guatemala; Guyana; Haiti; Honduras; Jamaica; Martinique; Mexico; Montserrat; Nicaragua; Panama; Puerto Rico; Saint Barthélemy; Saint Kitts and Nevis; Saint Lucia; Saint Martin (French part); Saint Vincent and the Grenadines; Sint Maarten (Dutch part); Suriname; Trinidad and Tobago; Turks and Caicos Islands; United States; Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of; Virgin Islands, British; Virgin Islands, U.S.
|FAO Marine Fishing Areas:|
Atlantic – western central; Atlantic – southwest; Atlantic – northwest
|Range Map:||Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.|
|Population:||The species is prized in warmer Florida state waters and recreational fishing accounted for more fishing mortality in Florida than commercial or headboat fisheries (O’Hop et al. 2015). Commercial landings in the US South Atlantic range from a minimum of 7.6 mt in 2007 to a peak of 131.4 mt in 1973, and reflect a 76% decline over a three generation length estimate of 24 years, from 68.7 mt in 1990 to 16.3 mt in 2013 (NMFS 2015a). For the southeast coast of Florida, coincident with a 50% decline in effort, combined landings of 11 reef fish species from the headboat fishery in southeast Florida declined by 85% between 1990-2006 (Ault and Franklin 2011). While landings of L. analis declined by 92%, from about 25 mt in 1990 to 2 mt in 2006, it is unclear if the decline in landings is due solely to the decline in effort (Ault and Franklin 2011). Biomass declined to a low in 1994 and then increased to 9570 mt in 2006 (Table 5, Figure 3, SEDAR 2008). Estimated recreational landings from the Atlantic coast of the US peaked in 2008 at 772,798 individuals with 2014 landings at 280,281 individuals (NMFS 2015b). In 2013, the SEDAR Update Assessment of L. analis in both the US South Atlantic and GOM concluded that maximum fishing mortality threshold was 0.18 per year (defined as fishing mortality rate associated with a spawning potential ratio of 30%) and using prior SAFMC and GMFMC protocols, Mutton Snapper was not considered overfished or to be undergoing overfishing (O’Hop et al. 2015). Older assessments from the 1990s indicated that the spawning stock ratio was above the criterion for overfishing established by the SAFMC (Huntsman et al. 1992, 54% in Ault et al. 1998). For US federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico, commercial landings of L. analis increased steadily from 1950 through the mid-1980s, to a peak of 164.5 mt in 1987, with a decline to 66.3 mt in 2013 (NMFS 2015a), representing a decline of 60% over 27 years. Estimated recreational landings from the GOM peaked in 1984 with 319,964 individuals, in 2014 256,391 individuals were reported (NMFS 2015b).This species is caught as bycatch in commercial fisheries that target L. campechanus (Red Snapper) in the Mexican waters of the Gulf of Mexico. It is sold in the domestic markets of mainly Mexico City and Guadalajara (SAGARPA 2012). Juveniles are extensively caught in the shrimp fishery, but no official statistics are available at this time. Landings of mixed snapper species in Mexico have fluctuated but appear relatively stable from 1970s to 1996, with little data after these years (INP 2000).|
Lutjanus analis is historically one of the most targeted species by commercial and recreational fisheries off Cuba. Catch was relatively stable until the early 1990s when a major decline began due to reduced commercial effort, intense subsistence fishing, and historical overexploitation of spawning aggregations (Claro et al. 2009). Total landings decreased from 1,326 mt in 1987 to 645 mt in 2010, a 51% decline over 24 years. Traditionally, about 50% of the landings were from Archipelago Sabana-Camaguey, north-central Cuba. Ranging from small to major declines, evidence suggests that spawning aggregations have decreased in size (Claro et al. 2009). Landings in northeastern Cuba were relatively stable from 1970s to 1995, but by 2010 catches declined over 50% from more than 400 mt to 145 mt, with stable or increasing effort. Recreational and subsistence fishing also increased during this period. The Puerto Rican and the US Virgin Islands population managed by the Caribbean Fishery Management Council considers Mutton Snapper current stock exploitation status as not undergoing overfishing, and stock biomass status was not overfished. The majority of landings are from the trap and/or pots, and hook and line fishery. Through the 23 year time series from 1983 to 2005, commercial catches declined 50% (SEDAR 2007, Table 2). Removals from hook and line gear accounted for some 46% of the removals across all years, while pots or traps accounted for about 28.5% (SEDAR 2007). In Colombia, this species can be second only to L. synagris in importance to the lutjanid fishery (Acero and Garzon 1985). The species is fished with many gears in Venezuela (Cervigon 2003).
In east Brazil, a stock assessment conducted by Klippel et al. (2005) estimated that the stock was moderately overexploited. For the northeastern coast, the stock is considered to be overexploited at 20% above the recommended level (Fredou et al. 2009). In northeast Brazil, L. analis is one of the most common snappers, both in abundance and catch, and has been deemed as being overexploited with low resiliency (Begossi et al. 2012). This species was considered exploited by artisanal hand-line fleets in the state of Pernambuco, Brazil (Gomes de Mattos and Maynou 2009). In the Abrolhos Reef system, the species was reported but ranked below <0.1 in percentage of total biomass (Francini-Filho 2008). In Rio de Janeiro, L. analis are harvested as juveniles, detrimental to stock structure for slow-growing species (Begossi et al. 2012).
|Current Population Trend:||Decreasing|
|Habitat and Ecology:||This species occurs over reef, seagrass and rubble bottoms. It occurs in continental shelf areas as well as in clear waters around islands (Cervigón et al. 1992). Early life stages can be found among a variety of structural habitat types including settlement stages in seagrasses. Large adults are usually found among rocks and coral while juveniles occur over sandy, vegetated (usually Thalassia) habitats (Starck 1971, Cervigón 1993). This species can form small diurnal aggregations that disband during the night (Allen 1985). The juvenile usage of several backreef habitats in comparison to congeners is reviewed in Nagelkerken (2009). |
Lutjanus analis is a carnivorous trophic generalist and uses a great variety of prey. Juvenile stages feed on mainly crustaceans, whereas those 6 cm or larger consume post-larval and juvenile fish (Sierra and Popova 1997). Adults feed during the day as well as at night. The main prey are bony fishes, crustaceans, molluscs and echinoderms (Allen 1985). Mutton Snappers aggregated at the La Parguera, Puerto Rico, shelf edge during night time the week following the full moon of April and May of 2003 at an average depth of 20-40 m over rocky coralline bottoms and sandy bottoms with abundant gorgonians (Esteves 2005).
Individuals have been observed in spawning condition in the US Caribbean from February through July (Erdman 1976), and have been reported in spawning condition by anglers from April through September in east central Florida (Tishler Meadows 2012). Spawning aggregations are documented from Belize (Heyman and Kjerve 2008) with a sharp reduction in landings and fishing effort in the late 1980s (Grandados-Dieseldorff et al. 2013). In Cuba, spawning aggregations occur on several shelf regions between May and August in depths of 20-40 m (Claro and Lindeman 2003). A well-known spawning aggregation site at Riley’s Hump has received management attention (see Conservation section). Multiple potential aggregation sites have been identified in Bahia, Brazil (França and Olavo 2015).
Acoustic tracking of one individual of L. analis near no-take marine reserves in the Dry Tortugas, Florida, estimated a home range of about 7.5 km2 (Farmer and Ault 2011). While this suggests that subpopulations separated by 100 km or less may be able to respond independently to disturbances, there may be limited exchange between the subpopulation in the Gulf of Mexico and the wider Caribbean Sea. Ocean circulation modelling suggest a low probability of snapper larval connectivity between western Caribbean (particularly from the south coast of Cuba) to US waters (Paris et al. 2005).
Size at 50% maturity was estimated at 33 cm FL and 41 cm FL for males and females, respectively, off Puerto Rico (Figuerola and Torres Ruiz 2001) and at 50 cm FL in Cuba (Claro 1981). For the US Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Mutton Snapper stock assessment (O’Hop et al. 2015), the following life history values were used: longevity - 40 years; age at 50% maturity - 3.7 years. Additionally, in the US Gulf of Mexico, longevity was observed at 14.5 years, with age at sexual maturity 3.1 years (SERO 2010). For the US Caribbean stock of Mutton Snapper, age of sexual maturity was estimated at three years (SEDAR 2007). Using these different estimates, generation length for this species was estimated to be eight to 22 years. Maximum size is approximately 94 cm and is common to 50 cm (Ault et al. 1998, Anderson 2002).
|Generation Length (years):||8-22|
|Use and Trade:||This is an important commercial, recreational and artisanal species. Often marketed as Red Snapper (Lutjanus campechanus), the Mutton Snapper is a high-priced species and whole fish sell for 6-8 US$ per pound in St. Croix and Puerto Rico, and Mutton Snapper fillets may sell for as much as US $12 per pound in Miami seafood markets (SEDAR 2007). In Rio Grande do Norte in Brazil, Cunha et al. (2012) found Mutton Snapper to be the tenth most abundant reef fish taxon to be exported on fishery markets. Cheek and throat tissue from larger Mutton Snapper can be considered gourmet items.|
|Major Threat(s):||This valuable species is caught with hook and line, seines, gill nets, bottom longlines, traps and spears by divers (Allen 1985). Spawning aggregations are targeted by fishers throughout its range. This species is prized by recreational anglers along Florida's east coast where the majority of landings occur from Cape Canaveral, Florida, through the Florida Keys. The species is popular with spearfishermen in many areas. This species is also subject of a commercial fishery mainly harvested with hook-and-line or spearfishing gear (Burton 2002). Mutton Snapper form spawning aggregations with a high degree of site fidelity (Domeier and Colin 1997) and as such are vulnerable to capture and overexploitation. Juveniles of this species are taken by shrimp trawl bycatch and the shallow vegetation used for settlement and juvenile grow-out can be impacted by coastal construction activities.|
This species was ranked as Vulnerable in a 1996 IUCN Red List (Huntsman 1996). Additional information has become available since and the IUCN criteria for Red List rankings have evolved with a greater emphasis on data that can specifically demonstrate population or biomass declines over three generation lengths.
The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council established that both commercial and recreational fisheries for Mutton Snapper require a limited access permit, a 16" TL size limit, and a restriction of 10 fish per person per day or per trip (whichever is more restrictive) during the months of May and June. In addition, some gear restrictions apply and there are annual catch limits on both sectors. The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Gulf FMC) also establishes regulations for the recreational Mutton Snapper fishery of 16" TL size limit; fishing is permitted year-round, but a maximum of 10 fish are permitted per person per day within the snapper aggregate. In 1992, the Gulf of Mexico Management Council imposed a two month spawning season closure (May and June). Such an intensive fishery likely removes an excessive number of fish that would likely be reproductively active for longer than was previously thought (up to 29 years; Burton 2002). The establishment of the Tortugas Ecological Reserve was in part focused on protecting the Mutton Snapper spawning aggregation at Rileys Hump in the Lower Florida Keys using fisher outreach (Lindeman et al. 2000, Cowie-Haskell and Delaney 2003) and enforcement support including an advanced, high speed vessel (M/V Peter Gladding). Field research subsequent to the closure of Riley’s Hump suggests some population recovery may be occurring (Burton et al. 2005, A. Acosta pers. comm. 2014). In Cuba, the use of set nets has been banned since 2008 and long bottom trawls since 2012 over the entire shelf. In commercial and recreational fisheries, the minimum catch size is 25 cm FL, which allows a substantial catch of juveniles (Claro et al. 2009). Heyman and Kjerfve (2008) documented a consistent Mutton Snapper aggregation at an important multi-species aggregation area in Gladden Spit, Belize. There was a sharp reduction in landings and fishing effort in the late 1980s at this site during rapid growth in the tourism industry and during a shift in fisher livelihoods (Grandados-Dieseldorff et al. 2013). Annual CPUE, individual sizes and sex ratios have been relatively stable from 1999-2011, indicating persistence of the fishery and an absence of overfishing, at least at this site, which corresponds with consistent engagement with the fisher community. In Puerto Rico, there is a mandatory commercial license and permit requirement, and a temporal closure during the spawning season in state waters April-May and US federal waters from April-June. In the US Virgin Islands, there is a closed season from April-June in US federal waters (Russell et al. 2012).
Acero, A. and Garzón, J. 1985. Los pargos (Pisces: Perciformes: Lutjanidae) del Caribe Colombiano. Actualidades Biológica 14 (53): 89-99.
Allen, G.R. 1985. FAO species catalogue. Snappers of the world. An annotated and illustrated catalogue of lutjanid species known to date. FAO, Rome, Italy.
Anderson, W.D., Jr. 2002. Lutjanidae - Snappers. In: K.E. Carpenter (ed.), The living marine resources of the western Atlantic. Vol. 2. Bony fishes pt. 2 (Opistognathidae to Molide) sea turtles and marine mammals, pp. 1479–1504. FAO, Rome.
Ault, J., Bohnsack, J. and Meester, G. 1998. A retrospective (1979-1996) multispecies assessment of coral reef fish stocks in the Florida Keys. Fisheries Bulletin 96(3): 395-414.
Ault, J.S. and Franklin, E.C. 2011. Fisheries Resource Status and Management Alternatives for the Southeast Florida Region. Report to Florida DEP. Miami Beach, FL.
Begossi, A., Lopes, P. and Silvano, R. 2012. Co-Management of Reef Fisheries of the 1 Snapper-Grouper Complex in a Human Ecological Context in Brazil. In: G.H. Kruse, H.I. Browman, K.L. Cochrane, D. Evans, G.S. Jamieson, P.A. Livingston, D. Woodby and C.I. Zhang (eds), Global Progress in Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management, Alaska Sea Grant, University of Alaska Fairbanks.
Burton, M.L. 2002. Age, growth and mortality of mutton snapper, Lutjanus analis, from the east coast of Florida, with a brief discussion of management implications. Fisheries Research 59(1): 31-41.
Burton, M.L., Brennan, K.J., Muñoz, R.C. and Parker Jr, R. 2005. Preliminary evidence of increased spawning aggregations of mutton snapper (Lutjanus analis) at Riley’s Hump two years after establishment of the Tortugas South Ecological Reserve. Fishery Bulletin 103(2): 404-410.
Carson, E.W., Saillant, E., Renshaw, M.A., Cummings, N.J. and Gold, J.R. 2011. Population structure, long-term connectivity, and effective size of mutton snapper (Lutjanus analis) in the Caribbean Sea and Florida Keys. Fishery Bulletin 109(4): 416-428.
Cervigon, F. 1993. Los Peces Marinos de Venezuala. Fundacion Cientifica Los Roques, Caracas, Venezuala.
Cervigon, F., Cipriani, R., Fischer, W., Garibaldi, M., Hendrickx, M., Lemus, A., Marquez, R., Poutiers, J., Robaina, G. and Rodriguez, B. 1992. Fichas FAO de identificación de especies para los fines de la pesca. Guía de campo de las especies comerciales marinas y de aquas salobres de la costa septentrional de Sur América. FAO, Rome.
Claro, R. and Lindeman, K.C. 2003. Spawning aggregation sites of snapper and grouper species (Lutjanidae and Serranidae) on the insular shelf of Cuba. Gulf and Caribbean Research 14(2): 91-106.
Claro, R. and Lindeman, K.C. 2008. Biología y manejo de los pargos (Lutjanidae) en el Atlántico occidental. Available at: http://www.redciencia.cu/cdoceano. (Accessed: February 2015).
Claro, R., de Mitcheson, Y.S., Lindeman, K.C. and García-Cagide, A.R. 2009. Historical analysis of Cuban commercial fishing effort and the effects of management interventions on important reef fishes from 1960–2005. Fisheries Research 99: 7–16.
Cowie-Haskell, B.D. and Delaney, J.M. 2003. Integrating science into the design of the Tortugas ecological reserve. Marine Technology Society Journal 37(1): 68-81.
Domeier, M.J. and Colin, P.L. 1997. Tropical reef fish spawning aggregations: defined and reviewed. Bulletin of Marine Science 60: 698-726.
Erdman, D.S. 1976. Spawning patterns of fishes from the northeastern Carribean. Agriculture and Fisheries Contribution Offical Publication Special Service 7(2): 1.
Esteves, R.F. 2005. Dispersal of reef fish larvae from known spawning sites in La Parguera. Univ. Puerto Rico, Mayaguez.
Farmer, N.A. and Ault, J.S. 2011. Grouper and snapper movements and habitat use in Dry Tortugas, Florida. Marine Ecology Progress Series 433: 169-184.
Figuerola, M. and Torres, W. 2001. Aspectos de la biología reproductiva de la sama (Lutjanus analis) en Puerto Rico y recomendaciones para su manejo. Departamento de Recursos Naturales y Ambientales de Puerto Rico, Informe final de Proyecto.
Franca, A.R. and Olavo, G. 2015. Indirect signals of spawning aggregations of three commercial reef fish species on the continental shelf of Bahia, east coast of Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Oceanography 63(3): 289-301.
Francini-Filho, R.B. and Moura, R.L. 2008. Dynamics of fish assemblages on coral reefs subjected to different management regimes in the Abrolhos Bank, eastern Brazil. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 18(7): 1166-1179.
Fredou, T., Ferreira, B.P. and Letourneur, Y. 2009. Assessing the stocks of the primary snappers caught in Northeastern Brazilian reef systems. 1: Traditional modelling approaches. Fisheries Research 99(2): 90-96.
Freitas, M.O., de Moura, R.L., Bastos, Francini-Filho, R.B. and Minte-Vera, C.V. 2011. Spawning patterns of commercially important reef fish (Lutjanidae and Serranidae) in the tropical western South Atlantic. Scientia Marina 75(1): 135-146.
Gomes de Mattos, S.M. and Maynou, F. 2009. Virtual population analysis of two snapper species Lutanus analis and Lutjanus chrysurus caught off Pernambuco state, northeastern Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Oceanography 57(3): 229-242.
Granados-Dieseldorff, P., Heyman, W.D. and Azueta, J. 2013. History and co-management of the artisanal mutton snapper (Lutjanus analis) spawning aggregation fishery at Gladden Spit, Belize, 1950–2011. Fisheries Research 147: 213–221.
Heyman, W.D. and Kjerfve, B. 2008. Characterization of multi-species reef fish spawning aggregations at Gladden Spit, Belize. Bulletin of Marine Science 83(3): 531-551.
Huntsman, G. 1996. Lutjanus analis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 1996: e.T12416A3341192. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.1996.RLTS.T12416A3341192.en. (Accessed: January 2016).
Huntsman, G.R., Potts, J., Mays, R.W., Dixon, R.L., Willis, P.W., Burton, M.L. and Harvey, B. 1992. A stock assessment of the snapper-grouper complex in the U.S. South Atlantic based on fish caught in 1990. South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, Charleston, South Carolina.
INP (Instituto Nacional de la Pesca). 2000. Carta Nacional Pesquera, Mexico.
IUCN. 2016. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2016-1. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. (Accessed: 30 June 2016).
Klippel, S., Olavo, G., Costa, P.A.S., Martins, A.S. and Peres, M.B. 2005. Avaliação dos estoques de lutjanídeos da costa central do Brasil: Análise de coortes e modelo preditivo de Thompson e Bell para comprimentos. In: P.A.S Costa, A.S. Martins and G. Olavo (eds), Pesca e potenciais de exploração de recursos vivos na região central da Zona Econômica Exclusiva brasileira,, pp. 83-98. Museu Nacional, Rio de Janeiro.
Lindeman, K.C., Pugliese, R., Waugh, G.T. and Ault, J.S. 2000. Developmental patterns within a multispecies reef fishery: management applications for essential fish habitats and protected areas. Bulletin of Marine Science 66(3): 929-956.
Nagelkerken, I. 2009 . Evaluation of nursery function of mangroves and seagrass beds for tropical decapods and reef fishes: patterns and underlying mechanisms. In Ecological connectivity among tropical coastal ecosystems. Springer , Netherlands.
NMFS. 2015. Annual Commercial Landing Statistics. Available at: annual_landings.html. (Accessed: June 2015).
NMFS. 2015b. Recreational Fisheries Statistics Division. Available at: http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st1/recreational/queries/. (Accessed: June 2015).
O’Hop, J., Muller, R.G. and Addis, D.T. 2015. Stock assessment of mutton snapper (Lutjanus analis) of the U.S. South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico through 2013. FWC Report IHR 2014-005.
Paris, C.B., Cowen, R.K., Claro, R. and Lindeman, K.C. 2005. Larval transport pathways from Cuban snapper (Lutjanidae) spawning aggregations based on biophysical modeling. Marine Ecology Progress Series 296: 93-106.
Rezende, S.M., Ferreira, B.P. and Fredou, F. 2003. A Pesca de Lutjanídeos no Nordeste do Brasil: Histórico das Pescarias, Características das Espécies e Relevância Para o Manejo. Bol. Tec. Cient. do CEPENE 11(1): 257-270.
Russell, M., Luckhurst, B. and Lindeman, K.C. 2012. Management of spawning aggregations. In: Y. Sadovy de Mitcheson and P. Colin (eds), Reef Fish Spawning Aggregations: Biology, Research and Management, pp. 371-404. Springer Press.
Secretaria De Agricultura, Ganaderia, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca Y Alimentacion. 2012. Status of the Fisheries of Mexico. Diario Oficial.
SEDAR. 2007. SEDAR 14 Stock Assessment Report Caribbean Mutton Snapper. Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review. SEDAR, North Charleston, SC.
SEDAR. 2008. SEDAR 15A Stock Assessment Report 3 (SAR3) South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Mutton Snapper. Southeast Data, Assessment and Review. South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, North Charleston, SC.
SERO. 2010. Species groupings for Gulf Reef Fish FMU. SERO‐LAPP‐2010‐01, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, NOAA, St. Petersburg, FL..
Sierra, L.M. and Popova, O.A. 1997. Relaciones tróficas de los juveniles de cinco especies de pargo (Pisces: Lutjanidae) en Cuba. Rev. Biol. Trop 44(45): 499-506.
Starck, W.A. II. 1971. The biology of the grey snapper, Lutjanus griseus (Linnaeus), in the Florida Keys. In: W.A. Starck, II and R.E. Schroeder (eds), Investigations on the gray snapper, Lutjanus griseus. Studies in Tropical Oceanography, pp. 11-150. Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Miami Press, Miami.
Thompson, R. and Munro, J.L. 1974. The biology, ecology and exploitation and management of the Carribean reef fishes. Part V. Carangidae (jacks). Research Report Zoology Department of the University of the West Indies.
Tishler Meadows, M. 2012. Spawning Indicators of Snappers (Lutjanidae) on the East Coast of Florida Determined from Commercial and Recreational Fisher Surveys. Master’s Thesis, Florida Institute of Technology.
|Citation:||Lindeman, K., Anderson, W., Carpenter, K.E., Claro, R., Cowan, J., Padovani-Ferreira, B., Rocha, L.A., Sedberry, G. & Zapp-Sluis, M. 2016. Lutjanus analis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T12416A506350.Downloaded on 21 March 2018.|
|Feedback:||If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown on this page, please provide us with feedback so that we can correct or extend the information provided|