|Scientific Name:||Naso annulatus|
|Species Authority:||(Quoy & Gaimard, 1825)|
Naso herrei Smith, 1966
Priodon annulatus Quoy & Gaimard, 1825
|Red List Category & Criteria:||Least Concern ver 3.1|
|Assessor(s):||Abesamis, R., Clements, K.D., Choat, J.H., McIlwain, J., Myers, R., Nanola, C., Rocha, L.A., Russell, B. & Stockwell, B.|
|Reviewer(s):||Edgar, G. & Kulbicki, M.|
Naso annulatus is widespread in the Indo-Pacific region and is common in parts of its range. It is a targeted food fish in the Philippines and is harvested for food elsewhere in its range. There are no indications of population declines by harvesting. There are no major threats known and it is found in a number of marine protected areas in parts of its range. It is therefore listed as Least Concern.
|Range Description:||Naso annulatus is widespread in the Indo-Pacific and is found from the Red Sea to Natal, eastwards to the Hawaiian Island, Tuamotu Archipelago and Marquesas, northwards to Honshu, Japan, southwards to Lord Howe Island and Norfolk Island. It is also found in the eastern Pacific from Clipperton Island (Robertson and Allen 1996).|
Native:American Samoa (American Samoa); Australia; Brunei Darussalam; Cambodia; China; Christmas Island; Comoros; Cook Islands; Costa Rica (Cocos I.); Disputed Territory (Paracel Is., Spratly Is.); Djibouti; Egypt; Eritrea; Fiji; France (Clipperton I.); French Polynesia; French Southern Territories (Mozambique Channel Is.); Guam; Hong Kong; India; Indonesia; Israel; Japan; Jordan; Kiribati (Gilbert Is.); Macao; Madagascar; Malaysia; Marshall Islands; Mayotte; Micronesia, Federated States of ; Mozambique; Nauru; New Caledonia; Niue; Norfolk Island; Northern Mariana Islands; Palau; Papua New Guinea; Philippines; Samoa; Saudi Arabia; Seychelles; Solomon Islands; South Africa; Sri Lanka; Sudan; Taiwan, Province of China; Tanzania, United Republic of; Thailand; Timor-Leste; Tonga; Tuvalu; United States (Hawaiian Is.); Vanuatu; Viet Nam; Wallis and Futuna; Yemen
|FAO Marine Fishing Areas:||
Indian Ocean – western; Indian Ocean – eastern; Pacific – northwest; Pacific – southwest; Pacific – western central; Pacific – southeast; Pacific – eastern central
|Lower depth limit (metres):||60|
|Upper depth limit (metres):||1|
|Range Map:||Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.|
|Population:||In the central Philippines, density and biomass of herbivorous fish in reserves had positive relationships with duration of reserve protection. Acanthuridae and Labridae (parrotfishes) were the major families that increased in biomass inside reserves with duration of reserve protection. Herbivore biomass inside reserves compared to fished sites was on average higher as years of protection increases. Naso annulatus mean biomass values (kg per 500 m2) recorded in 3 reserves were 0.67 (0.5 to 4 yr of protection), 0.10 (5 to 7 years of protection), 8.16 (8 to 11 years of protection), respectively (Stockwell et al. 2009).
This species is common in Tubbataha, Spratlys and northern Palawan (C. Nanola, S. Conales, Jr. and R. Abesamis pers. comm. 2010). It is uncommon in Guam and Saipan based on fish visual census (J. McIlwain unpub. data) and rare in the Guam and Saipan Acanthurid fishery (<1%) (Guam Division of Aquatic and Wildlife Resources unpub. data, P. Houk unpub. data). It was recorded as occasional in terms of relative abundance in the northern Bismarck Sea, Papua New Guinea (Allen 2009). It is moderately common, usually adjacent to steep outer slopes in Milne Bay Province, Papua New Guinea (Allen 2003). It is uncommon in the American Samoa National Park (National Park of Samoa Checklist of Fishes accessed 21 April 2010).
In Kenya, landings during 1978-2001 for families that are less important in commercial catches (e.g., scarinae and Acanthuridae) showed rising catches (1978-1984) followed by a general decline during the 1990s, but the landings for the scarinae showed a rising trend in recent years (Kaunda-Arara et al. 2003).
|Current Population Trend:||Stable|
|Habitat and Ecology:||
Naso annulatus is found in shallow waters, with large adults typically found on steep drop-offs in more than 25 m, usually in small aggregations (Randall 2001a). It feeds on green filamentous algae as juveniles and gelatinous zooplankton as adults (Choat 1991, Choat and Clements 1998, Choat et al. 2002b). Ontogenetic change in diet tends to occur by at least 20 cm (SL) (Green and Bellwood 2009). Maximum age was 23 years in the Great Barrier Reef (Choat and Robertson 2002a).
The sexes are separate and there is evidence of sexual dimorphism in the caudal knives which are relatively larger in males. The males get the longer caudal filaments (J.H. Choat pers. comm. 2010).
|Use and Trade:||Naso annulatus is collected for food. It is targeted in parts of its range (e.g., Philippines). It is a minor component of the aquarium trade (Global Marine Aquarium Database accessed 19 March 2010).|
There are no major threats known for this species.
Surgeonfishes show varying degrees of habitat preference and utilization of coral reef habitats, with some species spending the majority of their life stages on coral reef while others primarily utilize seagrass beds, mangroves, algal beds, and /or rocky reefs. The majority of surgeonfishes are exclusively found on coral reef habitat, and of these, approximately 80% are experiencing a greater than 30% loss of coral reef area and degradation of coral reef habitat quality across their distributions. However, more research is needed to understand the long-term effects of coral reef habitat loss and degradation on these species' populations. Widespread coral reef loss and declining habitat conditions are particularly worrying for species that recruit into areas with live coral cover, especially as studies have shown that protection of pristine habitats facilitate the persistence of adult populations in species that have spatially separated adult and juvenile habitats (Comeros-Raynal et al. 2012).
|Conservation Actions:||There are no species-specific conservation measures in place for this species. However, its distribution overlaps several marine protected areas within its range.|
Allen, G.R. 2003. Appendix 5. List of the reef fishes of Milne Bay Province, Papua New Guinea. In: G.R. Allen, J. P. Kinch, S.A. McKenna, and P. Seeto (eds), A Rapid Marine Biodiversity Assessment of Milne Bay Province, Papua New Guinea–Survey II (2000), pp. 172. Conservation International, Washington, DC, USA.
Allen, G.R. 2009. Coral Reef Fish Diversity. In: R. Hamilton, A. Green and J. Almany (eds), Rapid Ecological Assessment: Northern Bismarck Sea, Papua New Guinea. Technical Report of survey conducted August 13 to September 7, 2006. The Nature Conservancy, South Brisbane, Queensland.
Choat, J.H. 1991. Chapter 6. The biology of herbivorous fishes on coral reefs. In: P.F. Sale (ed.), The Ecology of Fishes on Coral Reefs, Academic Press, Sydney.
Choat, J.H. and Clements, K.D. 1998. Vertebrate herbivores in marine and terrestrial environments: a nutritional ecology perspective. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 29: 375-403.
Choat, J.H. and Robertson, D.R. 2002a. Age-based studies on coral reef fishes. In: P.F. Sale (ed.), Coral reef fishes: dynamics and diversity in a complex ecosystem, pp. 57-80. Academic Press, Burlington, San Diego and London.
Choat, J.H., Clements, K.D. and Robbins, W.D. 2002b. The trophic status of herbivorous fishes on coral reefs. 1. Dietary analyses. Marine Biology 140: 613-623.
Comeros-Raynal, M.T., Choat, J.H., Polidoro, B.A., Clements, K.D., Abesamis, R., Craig, M.T., Lazuardi, M.E., McIlwain, J., Muljadi, A., Myers, R.F., Nañola Jr., C.L., Pardede, S., Rocha, L.A., Russell, B., Sanciangco, J.C., Stockwell, B., Harwell, H. and Carpenter, K.E. 2012. The likelihood of extinction of iconic and dominant components of coral reefs: the parrotfishes and surgeonfishes. PLoS ONE http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0039825.
Global Marine Aquarium Database. 2010. Species Trade Details. Available at: http://www.unep-wcmc.org/GMAD/species.cfm. (Accessed: March 19).
Green, A.L. and Bellwood, D.R. 2009. Monitoring functional groups of herbivorous reef fishes as indicators of coral reef resilience – A practical guide for coral reef managers in the Asia Pacific region. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.
IUCN. 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (ver. 2012.2). Available at: http://www.iucnredlist.org. (Accessed: 17 October 2012).
Kaunda-Arara, B., Rose, G.A., Muchiri, M.S. and Kaka, R. 2003. Long-term Trends in Coral Reef Fish Yields and Exploitation Rates of Commercial Species from Coastal Kenya. Western Indian Ocean Journal of Marine Science 2(2): 105-116.
National Park of American Samoa. 2008. Fishes of National Park of American Samoa Checklist of Fishes Family Name Listing. Available at: http://www.botany.hawaii.edu/basch/uhnpscesu/htms/npsafish/family/acanthur.htm. (Accessed: 21 April).
Randall, J.E. 2001a. Surgeonfishes of the world. Mutual Publishing and Bishop Museum Press, Hawai'i, Honolulu, Hawaii.
Reeson, P.H. 1983. The biology, ecology and bionomics of the surgeonfishes, Acanthuridae. In: J.L. Munro (ed.), Caribbean coral reef fishery resources, pp. 178-190.
Robertson, D.R. and Allen, G.R. 1996. Zoogeography of the shorefish fauna of Clipperton Atoll. Coral Reefs 15(2): 121-131.
Stockwell, B., Jadloc, C.R.L., Abesamis, R.A., Alcala, A.C. and Russ, G.R. 2009. Trophic and benthic responses to no-take marine reserve protection in the Philippines. Marine Ecology Progress Series 389: 1-15.
|Citation:||Abesamis, R., Clements, K.D., Choat, J.H., McIlwain, J., Myers, R., Nanola, C., Rocha, L.A., Russell, B. & Stockwell, B. 2012. Naso annulatus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2012: e.T177988A1512439. . Downloaded on 14 February 2016.|
|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|