Franz Uiblein

Behavior and habitat selection of deep-sea fishes: a methodologicalperspective
Franz Uiblein1, Fernando Bordes2, Pascal Lorance3, Jørgen G. Nielsen4, David Shale5,
Marsh J. Youngbluth6 & Rupert Wienerroither7,1

1 Institute of Marine Research, P.O. Box 1870 Nordnes, N-5817 Bergen, Norway(Contact e-mail: franz@imr.no)

2 Instituto Canario de Ciencias Marinas, P.O.Box 56, 35200 Telde, Gran Canaria, Spain

3 IFREMER, Déartement Ecologie et Modèes pour l'Halieutique rue de l'îe d'Yeu, B.P. 21105, 44311 Nantes Cedex 03, France

4 Zoological Museum, Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.

5 Flat 12, Beachside Court, 14 Victoria Avenue, Swanage, Dorset, UK

6 Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution, 5600 US 1 North, Fort Pierce, FL 34946, USA

7 Department of Organismic Biology, Ecology and Biodiversity Research Unit, Hellbrunnerstrasse 34, A-5020 Salzburg, Austria

Abstract
The behavior and habitat selection of deep-sea fishes has been studied with various methods. Fiveof the most promising approaches to investigate the behavioral ecology are reviewed: (1) functional
morphology, (2) field sampling, (3) acoustic tracking, (4) in-situ surveillance, and (5) ex-situ
experimentation. Functional morphology, often a “by-product” of taxonomic and systematic studies, isstrongly comparative and correlative, and serves to examine hypotheses on behavioral strategies. Field
sampling with towed gear identifies vertical and horizontal distribution in the water column anddeployments of stationary gear document aggregation and diversity patterns on or close to the seafloor.
With acoustic instruments vertical migrations and segregation patterns can be tracked. In-situ observations
with cameras and attraction devices or from underwater vehicles focus studies on behavior and habitat
selection over small to large-scale intervals and distances, both vertically and horizontally. Ex-situ
behavioral studies of deep-sea fishes brought to the surface have been conducted to a limited extent, mainlyin unpressurized aquaria. An integrated approach which combines various methods would provide a more
complete understanding of behavioral diversity and adaptations to environmental factors.

Introduction
The deep sea, i.e. the vast area of the oceans below 200 m water depth, is largely unexplored andbasic questions related to the evolution of deep-sea organisms are unresolved, e.g., how many species live
there and what are their behavioral habits? Although fishes are among the best studied fauna at greater
depth, their systematics, ecology, and evolution still requires intensified research.

05

About 2700 deep-sea fish species have been described. Koslow et al. (1997) estimated that at leastthat possess light organs like anglerfishes (Ceratoidei) or lanternfishes (Myctophidae). Other fishes aremorphologically less differentiated and more closely related to shallow-water species (= secondary
deep-sea fishes; Andriashev, 1953). Ecologically, deep-sea fishes have been grouped into open-water,Franz Uiblein

another 1000 species exist. Some taxa can be regarded as “ancient” deep-sea dwellers, e.g., those species

pelagic, and bottom-associated, demersal species. Further depth-related subdivision considers also light
penetration (to ca. 1000 m maximally) and bottom topography: mesopelagic (200 -1000 m), bathypelagic(1000 to ca. 3500 m), and abyssopelagic (>3500 m) species in the open water, bathyal (200 to ca. 3500 m;
upper, mid- and lower slope) and abyssal (> 3500 m) species on the bottom. The greatest depth from which
a fish has been collected is 8370 m (Nielsen, 1977).
In recent years novel technologies have provided more frequent access and more detailed records inthe light-reduced and hyperbaric regime of the deep sea, making it possible to answer fundamental
questions about adaptations to extreme conditions. An amazing array of sampling, analyzing, andexploratory methods can now be used to study deep-sea fish behavior. We provide here an overview of thefive most significant approaches: (1) functional morphology, (2) field sampling, (3) acoustic tracking, (4)in-situ surveillance, and (5) ex-situ experimentation. As we hope, this review will stimulate more researchin this field.

(1) Functional morphology
Functional morphology arises often as a “by-product” of taxonomic and systematic studies. The
approach is strongly comparative and correlative emphasizing the testing of hypotheses about behavioral
strategies by investigating the adaptive significance of organism structures in relation to distinct
environmental features.
Functional morphological studies of deep-sea fishes have commonly focused on non-visual
perception and communication modalities based on the comparative examination of chemo-tactile organs
on head, body, fins, or barbels, and the structure of sound-producing organs (e.g., in grenadiers,
Macrouridae, and cuskeels, Ophidiidae; see Marshall, 1979; Carter and Musick 1985; Merrett andHaedrich, 1997). Chemo-tactile sensing facilitates detection of food, predators, or conspecifics in theimmediate surroundings or allows predators to track prey via currents (e.g., Wilson and Smith, 1984; Baird& Jumper, 1995).
Many deep-sea fishes have large otoliths (calcium carbonate structures in the inner ear) that may
have a selective sound-perception function (Paxton, 2000). Differences in otolith form among closely
related species strongly suggest that they permit intraspecific communication. For instance, the two sister
species of the genus Spectrunculus (Ophidiidae), S. crassus and S. grandis, co-occur in the northern
Atlantic at bathyal and abyssal depths (Uiblein et al., 2008). Recent morphological comparisons leading to
the resurrection of S. crassus as a valid species have shown that they clearly differ in otolith shape (Uiblein
et al., 2008). Members of this family have the capability to produce sounds based on “drumming” muscles

06

that connect the swimbladder with modified ribs and the otic capsule (Merrett and Headrich, 1997). Species
differences in hearing capacity and selectivity may relate to the production of species-specific sound signals
Franz Uibleinand social communication in deep-sea fishes much like has been observed in shallow water species (e.g.,Mann et al., 1997; Cruz and Lombarte, 2004; Rountree et al., 2006).

Fig. 1. Among 50 species of the cuskeel genus Neobythites, family Ophidiidae, 39 (= 78 %) show coloration
patterns. For each of the four different coloration types one species is shown as an example. The numberof species showing the respective color pattern and percentages referring to the total number of coloredspecies is also provided (after Uiblein and Nielsen, 2005).
The shallowest part of the deep sea is still weakly illuminated by downwelling light. Well-developed
eyes should be able to perceive sunlight until a depth of around 1000 m and distinction of contrasting colors
should be possible to ca. 500-600 m depending on water clarity (Clark and Denton 1961). The latter prediction
has been supported by investigations of eyespot (=ocellus) development and ontogenetic niche shifts in theophidiid Neobythites stefanovi (Uiblein et al., 1994; Uiblein and Nielsen, 2005). This species shows typicalcircular to elliptical dark spots surrounded by a contrasting pale ring on the dorsal fin (Nielsen and Uiblein 1993;
Fig. 1). Various functions have been ascribed to ocelli. They may reduce predation risk by, for instance, deterring
visually hunting predators or deflecting their attacks to less vital parts of the body. Alternatively, they may
enhance social communication and species recognition or they may serve several functions simultaneously(Uiblein and Nielsen, 2005).
Neobythites stefanovi occurs on the upper slope of the Northwestern Indian Ocean and the Red Sea andhas one ocellus on the dorsal fin positioned at about mid-body (Nielsen and Uiblein, 1993). In the Red Sea
population, an upward-directed ontogenetic migration from about 800m to less than 600m was detected that07

development of the ocellus (Uiblein et al., 1994; Uiblein, 1996). This observation was interpreted as an

and more illuminated habitats.
A morphological comparison of the N. stefanovi specimens collected in the Gulf of Aden, Indian Ocean,with the generally deeper-occurring population from the adjacent Red Sea revealed a significantly higher ocellus

Franz Uiblein

indication for ocellus antipredator function, as risk from visually hunting predators should increase in shallower

diameter in the latter. The enlarged ocellus should intensify the signaling effect and enhance its visibility to
predators at larger, less illuminated depths (Uiblein, 1995). While this observation fits well with the assumed
antipredator function of the ocellus, a posterior shift in the position of this color structure found in the Gulf ofAden population required alternative interpretations. In a subsequent study of coloration patterns 50 Neobythites
species, 22 species were found to have well-developed ocelli (Uiblein and Nielsen, 2005, Fig. 1). Amongco-occurring species considerable variation in ocellus position and number occurred which suggests a social
communication function that would limit interspecific interactions and hybridization (Uiblein and Nielsen,
2005).
Thus, ocelli in Neobythites may serve two different functions, minimization of predation risk and social
communication for enhancement of species recognition. Direct evidence from in-situ or ex-situ behavioral
observations is however still lacking and further sampling, especially in the Indo-West Pacific, is needed to
improve the understanding of both the ecological function of the coloration and the systematics of this genus.

(2) Field sampling
Field sampling of deep-sea fishes can also reveal important information on behavior. Sampling can be
conducted either with towed gear, such as various types of trawls, or with static gear such as longlines, baited
traps, or gillnets. Sampling with towed pelagic gear generally allows investigating vertical or horizontal
distribution and migration at larger scale, whereas static gear can be applied in studies of smaller scale habitat
selection and aggregation formation.
Sampling with towed gear has helped to define migration patterns as exemplified by studies of thediversity and distribution of pelagic fishes in the area of the Canary Islands (CE Atlantic). The Canary Islands
are typical oceanic islands of volcanic origin with a narrow shelf and a steep slope that enhance spatial
interactions among deep-sea and adjacent shallow-water habitats (Uiblein and Bordes, 1999). A total of 103
pelagic trawl tows during seven cruises from above the island shelf and the slope and from the surface down to
depths of ca. 1000 m resulted in the collection of more than 68000 adult or juvenile fishes belonging to 19
orders, 51 families, 126 genera, and 220 species (Wienerroither 2005, Wienerroither et al., 2009).
By multivariate classification and ordination methods (hierarchical agglomerative clustering andnon-metric multidimensional scaling) four ecologically separable groups could be distinguished with thelanternfish Lepidophanes gaussi being the indicator species for vertically migrating mesopelagic fishes andDiaphus dumerilii for the group of horizontal migrators between oceanic waters and the island shelf(Wienerroither 2005, Wienerroither et al., submitted). Other lanternfishes like Hygophum hygomii formed
aggregations close to the shelf at night. High densities occurred particularly in areas of high productivity and08Franz Uiblein

Fig. 2. Number of individuals of the lanternfish Hygophum hygomii collected during two cruises in the

Canary Islands, Eastern Central Atlantic (after Wienerroither, 2003).
specific hydrological conditions, like eddies and upwellings (Fig. 2; Wienerroither, 2003). Among the group of

typically shelf-associated fishes also some epipelagic species like chub mackerel Scomber colias occurredthat were observed to migrate from the shelf into the oceanic water in opposed direction to the mesopelagic
fishes. Such horizontal migrations can be seen in the context of both foraging and predation-risk avoidance.
Migrations of deep-sea fishes may also serve reproduction. For instance, long-distance horizontal
movements of the lanternfish Diaphus theta in the western North Pacific were tracked by towed bongo-net
and midwater collections of larvae, juveniles, and adults during different seasons (Moku et al., 2003). The
peak abundance of larvae was observed in July in the transition waters between the Oyashio and Kuroshio
fronts. Larvae and juveniles were distributed in transition waters, whereas larger individuals were collectedin the Oyashio and the Western Subarctic waters. These results indicate that this species performs aspawning migration from the Oyashio and Western Subarctic waters into the transition waters crossing the
Oyashio front.
Stationary gear, such as longlines, baited traps, or gillnets, provide insights about small-scale habitat
selection and aggregation formation. For example, during long-line cruises in the area of Lanzarote andFurteventura, Canary Islands, operations at depths between 18 and 1208 m collected a total of 1885 fishes
belonging to 73 species and 38 families (Uiblein et al., 1996, 1998; Lorance et al., 2002). Among different
depth zones clear variations in fish total weight and number, species richness and diversity, and the relative
abundance of single species were found. These results reflect to some extent the particular topography of
the Canary Islands and associated hydrological variability. During two periods, in October 1995 andNovember 1997, an unusually high number of deep-sea cod, Mora moro (Moridae), with advanced gonadal
maturity was collected off eastern Fuerteventura, one of the two islands studied, at around 1000 m depth

09

(Uiblein et al., 1996, 1998). At lesser depths and during other seasons, only a few individuals of thisseasonally restricted spawning aggregation. Males arrived earlier than females at the spawning grounds andthere appeared to be distinct microhabitat preferences related to a specific depth and sites close to a canyon
with local upwelling activity (Fig. 3).

Franz Uiblein

species were caught in the same area. These data strongly suggest the formation of a spatially andFig. 3. Number of deep-sea cod, Mora moro, collected at bottom longline stations at between 800 and 1200

m depth, SE Fuerteventura, Canary Islands, Eastern Central Atlantic. Note the high numbers close
to the entrance of a canyon-like steep topographic structure (after Uiblein et al., 1998).

(3) Acoustic tracking
Acoustic methods including echosounders, sonar, and acoustic tagging allow investigation of
deep-sea fish vertical/horizontal migrations, spatial distribution, and aggregation formation. Acoustic
tagging has been successfully adopted to track migrations of demersal fishes at great depth (e.g., Bagley etal., 1994; Priede and Bagley, 2000). Acoustics has enhanced the understanding of vertical migration
patterns over large depth ranges and deep scattering layer formation (e.g., Opdal et al., 2008).
During the pelagic cruises in the Canary Islands (see also above) acoustics was employed to study the
deep scattering layer formed at ca. 400 to 700 m depths off various islands and the diurnal vertical migrationof organisms related to this layer. In parallel, pelagic trawl samples from both the deep scattering layer and

10

Franz Uiblein

Fig. 4. Echogram taken off SE Fuerteventura, Canary Islands, during late night and morning of 12th April
1997, with vertical position of pelagic trawl tows and drawings of three myctophid species (genus
Lampanyctus) inserted that were collected by both tows (after Bordes et al., 1999; Wienerroither
2003, Bordes et al., 2009).
the surface were taken to track and identify the species undergoing those migrations (Bordes et al., 1999).
For instance, off Fuerteventura, trawl hauls were performed close to the surface late at night and at a depth
overlapping with the continuously formed deep scattering layer after sunrise on 12 April 1997 (Fig. 4; for a
description of acoustic methods used see Bordes et al., 1999). The echogram taken during this period
clearly shows the initially formed shallow scattering layer that after sunrise moves downwards and,
subsequently, later unites with the deep scattering layer. Lanternfishes like the three Lampanyctus species,
L. alatus, L. photonotus, and L. pusillus were collected by both trawl tows, and hence their verticalmigration activity in this area and during this particular time period is defined.
Acoustics can also assist to track horizontal migrations of deep-sea fauna, especially when theshallow scattering layer and the fishes therein reside close to the surface at night, as shown in recent studies
off Oahu, Hawaii (Benoit-Bird and Au, 2006). In this case a towed camera was used to identify the faunalcomponents, but this method did not provide taxonomic resolution like the pelagic trawl-supported study in
the Canaries. The Hawaiian study indicated a horizontal mass migration onto the shelf by mesopelagic
fishes which remained at the surface during the night. Like the Canary Islands, the Hawaiian archipelago isof volcanic origin with narrow platforms and steep slopes thus enhancing the spatial exchange andinteraction between the neritic and oceanic fauna. The forces inciting such horizontal migrations are still11

unknown, but predation, food, or competition may be among the most influential factors. Abrupt

like copepods which may be used as a locally aggregating food resource by shelf-dwelling and mesopelagic
fishes (Bordes et al., 1999; see also chapter 2).

Franz Uiblein

topography around oceanic islands and shallow seamounts may enhance trapping of oceanic zooplankton(4) In-situ surveillance
In-situ studies of deep-sea fish behavior can be performed from both stationary and mobile platforms
that allow direct observation or recording of behavior. Stationary platforms include landers that aresubmerged from ships and equipped with cameras and bait to attract and record scavenging fishes. Thismethod allows observation of elements of foraging behavior such as search, detection, or handling of fooditems (Isaacs and Schwartzlose, 1975, Guennegan and Rannou, 1979, Wilson & Smith, 1984) and estimating
species composition and density (Priede, 1994; Collins et al., 1999; Henriques et al., 2002; King et al., 2007).
Mobile platforms such as underwater vehicles allow tracking fishes and investigating their behavior
over a larger area during vertical or horizontal transects (e.g., Yoklavich et al., 1999; Lorance et al., 2002;
Drazen et al., 2003; Uiblein et al., 2002, 2003, 2006; Lorance et al., 2006; Stein et al., 2006; Uiblein, 2009;
Fig. 5). Prolonged observation of single individuals can be achieved by stopping the vehicle at selected sites orfollowing individuals during forward locomotion. This method can be used, for instance, to investigate
specific movement patterns (Janssen et al., 1986; Moore, 2002), changes in body coloration (e.g., from

Fig. 5. Vertical distribution of three fish taxa observed during manned submersible dives in Oceanographer
canyon, Gulf of Maine, NW Atlantic, in September 2002 (dives nr. 4471, 4475, 4479) and September
2004 (dive 4779, 4785, 4788). The dark-shadowed horizontal layer indicates the bottom, thelight-shadowed vertical layer designates dives during night-time as compared to daytime (whitebackground) (in part after Uiblein et al., 2006).

12

Table 1. Overview of the categories of behavior and other characteristics of deep-sea fishes based on video
recordings during dives with the manned submersible Nautile in the Bay of Biscay, NE Atlantic.
Franz Uiblein

Behavior/Characteristics (taxa)
Activity level (all)Locomotion behavior (all)Position in water column (all)Disturbance response (all)Swimming speed (Synaphobranchus kaupi)
Coloration (Hoplostethus atlanticus)

Category
Inactive - Active - Arriving disturbed
No locomotion - Station holding - Drifting Forward movement
Attached to bottom - Slightly above bottom Well above bottom (> 1 total length) - Highabove bottom (> 3 total lengths)
No disturbance - At short distance - At far
distance
Body undulations s-1 - Body lengths moved s-1
Entire body whitish - Head whitish, body with
red colour patches - Body and head in“typical” red color

white to red in orange roughy, Hoplostethus atlanticus, see Lorance et al., 2002 and Table 1), or the response tobait (Widder et al., 2005).
In-situ observations with the manned submersible Nautile in the Bay of Biscay, NE Atlantic (Uiblein etal., 2003) have revealed novel insights into the behavioral ecology of deep-sea fishes, their natural habitat use at
small spatial scale, and interspecific variation. Differences between adjacent habitats in activity level, vertical
position above bottom, and locomotion mode (e.g., forward movement, station holding, and drifting, see Table 1)
have been also found as, for instance, in cutthroat eel, Synaphobranchus kaupi, roundnose grenadier,
Coryphaenoides rupestris, and orange roughy, Hoplostethus atlanticus (Fig. 6). In northern cutthroat eel
differences in swimming speed (measured as body undulations s-1 and body lengths moved s-1) among sites were

Fig. 6. Images of selected fish species videotaped for behavioral studies (Uiblein etal., 2003) during submersible dives in the Bay of Biscay, NE Atlantic .

13

discovered, too (Uiblein et al., 2002). These results strongly suggest a high degree of behavioral plasticity inavailability.
All in-situ methods, even deployed cameras without bait (Koslow et al., 1995), create disturbance thatneeds to be carefully investigated in order to document whether they alter naturally occurring behavior (UibleinFranz Uiblein

deep-sea fishes allowing adjustment to small-scale spatial or temporal fluctuations in hydrography and foodet al., 2002; 2003). Interestingly, the detailed analysis of disturbance behavior itself can also provide informationon perceptual and reaction capabilities of deep-sea fishes as well as on non-human induced environmental
influences on behavior (Uiblein & Lorance, 2007; Uiblein, 2009).

(5) Ex-situ experimentation
Experiments under controlled conditions are necessary in order to relate the differential influences ofenvironmental and organism-related factors on fish foraging, predator avoidance, learning, cognition,communication, or social behavior (e.g., Uiblein, 1992; Amorim et al., 2004; Wong et al., 2005). For thispurpose one may study deep-sea fishes either in captivity in the ocean or “ex-situ” after collection on board of avessel or on land. Both normal and pressurized tanks have been used to maintain deep-sea fishes. Unpressurizedtanks are useful for species that occur in shallow water such as vertically migrating mesopelagic fishes (e.g.,lanternfishes) or bottom-associated fishes (e.g., snailfishes, Liparidae, or eelpouts, Zoarcidae) that extend fromthe shelf into the deep sea (e.g., Robison, 1973; McCosker and Anderson, 1976; Sakurai and Kido, 1992).
There is growing evidence from scientific laboratories as well as from public aquaria that deep-sea fishes
can be kept alive for longer periods (e.g., McCosker and Anderson, 1976; Miwa et al., this volume). Reports ofdetailed behavioral observations and successful experimentation are however scarce. Often acclimatizing was
not sufficiently accomplished and virtually no or only few behavioral elements could be studied.
For example, during recent cruises off the Gulf of Maine (e.g., http://at-sea.org/missions/maineevent6/synopsis.html; Uiblein et al., 2006) several fish species were collected with the manned submersible Johnson
Sealink and kept alive in tanks, among them the hatchetfish Argyropelecus aculeatus, the sawtoothed eel
Serrivomer beanii, and the eelpout Melanostigma atlanticum. One specimen of the latter was collected on 5
October 2005 in Oceanographer canyon at 2293 ft, kept in a small glass tank on the RV Seward Johnson I andtransferred to the Woods Hole Aquarium a few days later where it was kept alive and survived for three months(until 16 January 2006). However, the specimen was not observed feeding over the entire period (John Galbraith,personal communication) and most probably died of starvation. Another short-lived specimen collected during
the same cruise was kept just several days on board in a kreisel (Fig. 7). In this container the fish showed typicalcurling-up behavior (Fig. 7) that has been observed in nature. This posture may be interpreted as an antipredator
strategy, as it could serve to mimic the form of a medusa (Robison, 2004) or make detection and / or attacking
more difficult for predators. Alternatively, it might be also a biomechanical phenomenon allowing the fish to
float more easily, or may simply reflect sleeping or resting and drifting.
Another species of the genus Melanostigma, M. pammelas, was kept in captivity for more than a year
(McCosker and Anderson, 1976) and was one of the first deep-sea fish species in which feeding behavior was

14

observed (Belman and Anderson, 1979). Feeding behavior was also observed in the snailfish, Careproctus
rastrinus (Liparidae) (Sakurai and Kido, 1992), and in the robust bathypelagic fangtooth, Anoplogaster cornuta
Franz Uiblein(Anoplogasteridae), which was kept successfully in tanks for several days (Robison, 1973) and fed with shrimps(Childress and Meek, 1973). In the latter study the fangtooth were kept in large containers in a cold room after
transfer from the ship on land. Using dim red light for illumination the fish were stimulated at various body parts
to elicit chemically and/or mechanically mediated feeding responses. Many important parameters like predator
search and prey detection at distance or type, size and behavioral activity of the prey were not investigated.
There have been also successful trials to keep fishes in pressurized tanks after previous decompression orin-situ transfer (e.g., Smiley and Drawbridge, 2007, Miwa et al., this volume). Many of these systems are still
under development (e.g., Damasceno-Oliveira et al., 2004) and often the space provided in the tanks is too small
for fish to show much of their behavioral repertoire. Pressurized experimental chambers have also thedisadvantage of restricted access for manipulations of environmental factors. Decompression over a longer
period with stepwise transfer to decreasing pressure may allow acclimatizing of deep-sea fishes to surface
conditions (St. John, 2003).
Examples of experimental approaches that may be applicable to studies of deep-sea fish behavior comefrom work on cave animals (e.g., Uiblein et al., 1992; Uiblein and Parzefall, 1993; Uiblein 1996a, b, c; Parzefall
1996, 2000). Caves provide light-reduced conditions similar to the deep sea, and some groups of fishes like thecuskeels (order Ophidiiformes) live in both habitats (e.g., Parzefall, 1996, Uiblein, 1996a, b). Experimental
studies of cave animal behavior and habitat selection are very much advanced compared to those of deep-sea
fishes. Particularly interesting are comparisons between so-called secondary and the more adapted primary cavedwellers which provide insights into evolutionary steps animals undergo when adapting to lightless conditions(Uiblein et al., 1992) and choosing between illuminated and dark habitats (Uiblein et al., 1996). That cavebiology has also some relevance for considering ecological and evolutionary processes in the deep-sea has
already been emphasized earlier (Poulsen, 1971; Uiblein, 1996a, b; Uiblein, 2000).

15Franz Uiblein

Fig. 7: Ex-situ glimpses of deep-sea fish behavior were gathered during recent cruises with the RV Seward
Johnson I and II (http://at-sea.org/missions/maineevent6/synopsis.html), after collection of several
species with the Johnson Sealink manned submersible and transfer to on-board keeping systems. The
Atlantic eelpout, Melanostigma atlanticum, was maintained in a Kreisel tank where it displayed elementsof curling-up-and-drifting behavior that have been also observed in nature, serving most probably to
reduce predation risk (photographs of eelpout by David Shale). This figure also shows images of twoother species that were kept in small glass tanks, the hatchetfish Argyropelecus aculeatus and the Bean's
sawtoothed eel Serrivomer beanii. The latter remained in a head-down position over several hours, avertical body orientation that can be also encountered in situ.

Conclusions and outlook
Various methods are currently available for the study of deep-sea fish behavior. Some of these methods
have been used already in combination, e.g., acoustics and sampling (Fig. 4), acoustics and in-situ observation(Benoit-Bird et al., 2003), or in-situ and ex-situ observation (Figs. 5,7). In the future it will be important to reacha higher integration of these various methods to gain a more complete picture of behavioral diversity andadaptation to environmental conditions at large depth, an important prerequisite for further progress in deep-sea
fish behavioral ecology.
Some fish species may prove especially useful for behavioral studies within an integrative approach suchas, for instance, eelpouts of the genus Melanostigma which occur widely distributed from near the ocean surface
to deep-sea bottoms (e.g., Markle and Wenner, 1979; Silverberg et al., 1987; Silverberg and Bossé, 1994;
Robison, 2004; Uiblein et al., 2006; Fig. 5), can be successfully collected in these different habitats, and studied
both in-situ and ex-situ.
As part of an integrative approach, basic taxonomic and systematic work needs to be more actively
pursued. Many collections of deep-sea fishes are still awaiting detailed morphological studies that promise
exciting and often completely new insights into life in the deep sea.

16

References
Amorim, M.C.P., M.E. Knight, Y. Stratoudakis and G.F. Turner. 2004. Differences in sounds made by courting
Franz Uibleinmales of three closely related Lake Malawi cichlid species. J. Fish Biol. 65: 1358-1371.
Andriashev, A.P. 1953. Ancient deep-water and secondary deep-water fishes and their importance in azoogeographical analysis. In: Notes on special problems in ichthyology. Moscow, Leningrad: Akad.
Nauk USSR, Ikhiol. Kom. (translation from Ichthyol. Lab., Bureau of Comm. Fisheries, Washington
DC).
Bagley, P.M., A. Smith and I.G. Priede. 1994. Tracking movements of deep demersal fishes in the Porcupine
Seabight, North-East Atlantic Ocean. J. Mar. Biol. Ass. U.K. 74: 473-480.
Baird, R.C. and G.Y. Jumper. 1995. Encounter models and deep-sea fishes: numerical simulations and matelocation problem in Sternoptyx diaphana (Pisces, Sternophychidae). Deep-Sea Res I 42:675-696.
Belman, B.W. and M.E. Anderson. 1979. Aquarium observations on feeding by Melanostigma pammelas (Pisces:
Zoarcidae). Copeia. 1979 (2): 366-369.
Benoit-Bird, K.J., W.W.L. Au, C.D. Kelley and C. Taylor. 2003. Acoustic backscattering by deepwater fishmeasured in situ from a manned submersible. Deep-Sea Research I 50. 221-229.
Benoit-Bird, K.J. and W.W.L. Au. 2006. Extreme diel horizontal migrations by a tropical nearshore resident
micronekton community. Mar. Eco. Prog. Ser. 319. 1-14.
Bordes, F., F. Uiblein, R. Castillo, A. Barrera, J.J. Castro, J. Coca, J. Gomez, K. Hansen, V. Hernandez, N.
Merrett, M. Miya, T. Moreno, F. Perez, A. Ramos, T. Sutton and M. Yamaguchi. 1999. Epiand
mesopelagic fishes, acoustic data, and SST images collected off Lanzarote, Fuerteventura, and Gran
Canaria, Canary Islands, during cruise "La Bocaina 04-97". Inf. Téc. ICCM 5: 1-45.
Bordes, C., F., R. Wienerroither, F. Uiblein, T.M. Moreno, I.C. Bordes, V.G. Hernández and C.C. Méndez. 2009.
Catálogo de especies meso y batipelágicas. Peces, moluscos y crustáceos. Colectadas con arrastre en las
islas Canarias, durante las campañas realizadas a bordo del B/E "La Bocaina". Instituto Canario deCiencias Marinas (ICCM), Gobierno de Canarias, Viceconsejeria de Pesca, 326 pp.
Carter, H.J. and J.A. Musick. 1985. Sexual dimorphism in the deep-sea fish Barathronus manatinus(Ophidiidae). Copeia 1985 (1): 69-75.
Childress, J.J. and R.P. Meek. 1973. Observations on the feeding behavior of a mesopelagic fish (Anoplogaster
cornuta: Beryciformes). Copeia 1973 (3): 602-603.
Clarke, G.L. and E.J. Denton. 1961. Light and animal life. In: Hill, M.N. (ed.), The Sea. Wiley, New York, pp456-468.
Collins, M.A., C. Yau, C.P. Nolan, P.M. Bagley and I.G. Priede. 1999. behavioural observations on the
scavenging fauna of the Patagonian slope. J. Mar. Biol. Ass. U.K. 79: 965-970.
Cruz, A. and A. Lombarte. 2004. Otolith size and its relationship with colour patterns and sound production. J.
Fish Biol. 65: 1512-1525.
Damasceno-Oliveira, A., J. Goncalves, D. Silva, B. Fernandez-Duran and J. Coimbra. 2004. A pressuring system
for long-term study of marine or freshwater organisms enabling the simulation of cyclic vertical17

migration. Sci. Mar. 68 (4): 615-619.

cephalopods on the Gorda Escarpment: a reproductive hot spot. Biol. Bull. 205: 1-7.
Guennegan, Y. and M. Ranou. 1979. Semi-diurnal rhythmic activity in deep-sea benthic fishes in the Bay of
Biscay. Sarsia 64: 113-116.

Franz Uiblein

Drazen, J.C., S.H. Goffredi, B. Schlining and D.S. Stakes. 2003. Aggregations of egg-brooding deep-sea fish andHenriques, C., I.G. Priede and P.M. Bagley. 2002. Baited camera observations of deep-sea demersal fishes of thenortheast Atlantic Ocean at 15-28°N off West Africa. Mar. Biol. 141: 307-314.
Isaacs, J.D. and R.A. Schwartzlose. 1975. Active animals of the deep-sea floor. Scient. American 233: 85-91.
Janssen, J., G.R. Harbison and J.E. Craddock. 1986. Hatchetfishes hold horizontal attitudes during diagonaldescents. J. Mar. Biol. Ass. U.K. 66: 825-833.
King, N., P.M. Bagley and I.G. Priede. 2007. Depth zonation and latitudinal distribution of deep-sea scavenging
demersal fishes of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, 42 to 53°N. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 319: 263-274.
Koslow, J.A., R. Kloser and C.A. Stanley. 1995. Avoidance of a camera system by a deepwater fish, the orange
roughy (Hoplostethus atlanticus). Deep-Sea Research I 42: 233-244.
Koslow, J.A., A. Williams and J.R. Paxton. 1997. How many demersal fish species in the deep sea? A test of amethod to extrapolate from local to global diversity. Biodiversity and Conservation 6: 1523-1532.
Lorance, P., S. Souissi and F. Uiblein. 2002. Point, alpha and beta diversity of carnivorous fish along a depth
gradient, Aquat. Living Resour. 15: 263-271.
Lorance, P., F. Uiblein and D. Latrouite. 2002. Habitat, behaviour and colour patterns of orange roughy
Hoplostethus atlanticus (Pisces: Trachichthyidae) in the Bay of Biscay. J. Mar. Biol. Ass. U. K. 82:
321-331.
Lorance, P., V. Trenkel and F. Uiblein. 2006. Characterizing natural and reaction behaviour of large mid-slope
fish species: consequences for catchability. In: Shotton, R. (Ed). Deep Sea 2003: Conference on the
Governance and Management of Deep-sea Fisheries. FAO Fisheries Proceedings 3(2): 162-164
Mann, D.A., J. Bowers-Atlmann and R.A. Rountree. 1997. Sounds produced by the striped cusk-eel Ophidion
marginatum (Ophidiidae) during courtship and spawning. Copeia 1997 (3): 610-612.
Markle, D.F. and C.A. Wenner. 1979. Evidence of demersal spawning in the mesopelagic zoarcid fish
Melanostigma atlanticum with comments on demersal spawning in the alepocephalid fish
Xenodermichthys copei. Copeia 1979 (2): 363-366.
Marshall, N.B. 1979. Develoments in deep-sea biology. Blandford Press, Poole, Dorset.
McCosker, J.E. and M.E. Anderson. 1976. Aquarium maintenance of mesopelagic animals: a progress report.
Bull. South. Calif. Acad. Sci. 75 (2): 211-219.
Merrett, N.R. and R.L. Haedrich. 1997. Deep-demersal fish and fisheries. Chapman and Hall.
Moku, M., A. Tsuda and K. Kawaguchi. 2003. Spawning season and migration of the myctophid fish Diaphus
theta in the western North Pacific. Ichthyological Research 50: 52-58.
Moore, J.A. 2002. Upside-down swimming behavior in a whipnose anglerfish (Teleostei: Ceratoidei:
Gigantactinidae). Copeia 2002 (4): 1144-1146.

18

Nielsen, J.G. 1977. The deepest living fish, Abyssobrotula galatheae. A new genus and species of oviparous
ophidioids (Pisces, Brotulidae). Galathea Report 2: 21-48.
Franz Uiblein

Nielsen, J.G. and F. Uiblein. 1993. Tiefenwasser-und Tiefseefische aus dem Roten Meer. XVI. A new species of
Neobythites from the NW Indian Ocean and the Red Sea. Senckenbergiana marit. 23: 109-113.
Opdal, A.F., O.R. Godø, O.A. Bergstad and Ø. Fiksen. 2008. Distribution, identity, and possible sustaining mesoand bathypelagic scattering layers on the northern Mid-Atlantic Ridge. Deep-Sea Res. 11: 45-58.
Parzefall, J. 1996. Behavioural and morphological changes caused by light conditions in deep-sea andshallow-water habitats. In Uiblein, F., Ott, J. and M. Stachowitsch (Eds.), Deep-sea and extreme
shallow-water habitats: affinities and adaptations. Biosystematics and Ecology Series. 11:91-122.
Parzefall, J. 2000. Tiefsee-und Höhlenbewohner im Vergleich. In: Uiblein, F, (Ed.), Tiefsee und Höhlen. Leben
im Dunkel. Filander Verlag, Fürth, 181-206.
Paxton, J.R. 2000. Fish otoliths: do sizes correlate with taxonomic group, habitat and /or luminescence? Phil.
Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 355: 1299-1303.
Poulson, T.L. 1971. Biology of cave and deep-sea organisms. National Speleological Society Bulletin 33: 51-61.
Priede, I.G. 1994. Tracking of scavenging fishes in the abyss. Endeavour 18 (2): 74-79.
Priede, I.G. and P.M. Bagley. 2000. In situ studies on deep-sea demersal fishes using autonomous unmanned
lander platforms. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Annu. Rev. 38:357-392.
Robison, B.H. 1973. A system for maintaining midwater fishes in captivity. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can 20 (1):126-128.
Robison, B.H. 2004. Deep pelagic biology. J.Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 300: 253-272.
Rountree, R.A., R.G. Gilmore, C.A. Goudey, A.D. Hawkins, J.J. Luczkovich and D.A. Mann. 2006. Listening
tofish: applications of passive acoustics to fisheries Science. Fisheries 31 (9): 433-446.
Sakurai, Y. and K. Kido. 1992. Feeding behaviour of Careproctus rastrinus (Liparidae) in captivity. Jpn. J.
Ichthyology 39: 110-113.
Silverberg, N. and L. Bossé. 1994. Additional observations of endobenthic behaviour in the early life history of
Melanostigma atlanticum (Zoarcidae) in muddy bottom sediments of the Laurentian Trough, eastern
Canada. Env. Biol. Fish. 39: 43-49.
Silverberg, N., H.M. Edenborn, G. Ouellet and P. Béland. 1987. Direct evidence of a mesopelagic fish,
Melanostigma atlanticum (Zoarcidae) spawning within bottom sediments. Environm. Biol. Fish. 20 (3):
195-202.
Smiley, J.E. and M.A. Drawbridge. 2007. Techniques for live capture of deepwater fishes with special emphasison the design and application of a low-cost hyperbaric chamber. J. Fish Biol. 70: 867-878.
Stein, D.L., J.C. Drazen, K.L. Schlining, J.P. Barry and L. Kuhnz. 2006. Snailfishes of the central California
coast: video, photographic and morphological observations. J. Fish Biol. 69: 970-986.
St. John, J. 2003. Is oyur fish “bent” and will it survive? SPC Live Reef Fish Information Bulletin 11: 31-35.
Uiblein, F. 1992. Food searching decisions in four cyprinid species. Env. Biol. Fish. 33: 47-52.

19

Uiblein, F. 1995. Morphological variability between populations of Neobythites stefanovi (Pisces: Ophidiidae)

Uiblein, F. 1996a. Anpassungsprozesse bei der Besiedlung lichtreduzierter Lebensräume: verhaltensbiologische,ökologische und morphologische Untersuchungen an höhlenbewohnenden Salamandern undTiefseefischen. Habilitation thesis in ten publications, University of Salzburg.

Franz Uibleinfrom the deep Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 124: 23-29.

Uiblein, F. 1996b. Behavioural and morphological plasticity in facultative cave dwellers and secondary deep-sea
fishes: adaptive steps into the dark. Mém. Biospéol., 22: 211-214.
Uiblein, F. 1996c. Constraints and exploratory windows in light-reduced marine habitats. In: Uiblein, F., J. Ott
and M. Stachowitsch (Eds.): Deep-sea and extreme shallow-water habitats: affinities and adaptations.
Biosystematics and Ecology Series, 11: 165-182.
Uiblein, F. (Ed.). 2000. Tiefsee und Höhlen. Leben im Dunkel. Filander, Fürth.
Uiblein, F., J.P. Durand, C. Juberthie and J. Parzefall. 1992. Predation in caves: the effects of differential prey
mobility and darkness on the foraging behaviour of two salamanders, Euproctus asper and Proteus
anguinus. Behav. Process., 28: 33-40.
Uiblein, F. and J. Parzefall. 1993. Does the cave salamander Proteus anguinus detect mobile prey by mechanicalcues? Mém. Biospéol., 20: 261-264.
Uiblein, F., W. Klausewitz and J.G. Nielsen. 1994. Depth dependent morphological variation in two ophidiiform
fishes from the deep Red Sea: evidence for species-specific structure in vertical distribution. Cybium 18:
15-23.
Uiblein, F., S. Engelke and J. Parzefall. 1995. Trade-off between visual detectability and nutrient content in patch
choice of the Pyrenean salamander Euproctus asper. Ethology, 101: 39-45.
Uiblein, F., F. Bordes and R. Castillo. 1996. Diversity, abundance, and depth distribution in demersal deep-water
fishes off Lanzarote and Fuerteventura, Canary Islands. J. Fish Biol. 49A: 75-90.
Uiblein, F., F. Bordes, R. Castillo and A. Ramos. 1998. Spatial distribution of shelf-and slope-dwelling fishes
collected by bottom longline off Lanzarote and Fuerteventura, Canary Islands. Mar. Ecol. 19: 53-66.
Uiblein, F. and F. Bordes. 1999. Complex trophic interactions around ocean islands. Ocean Challenge, 9 (2):15-16.
Uiblein, F., P. Lorance and D. Latrouite. 2002. Variation in locomotion behaviour in northern cutthroat eel(Synaphobranchus kaupi) on the Bay of Biscay continental slope. Deep-Sea Research I 49: 1689-1703.
Uiblein, F., P. Lorance and D. Latrouite. 2003. Behaviour and habitat utilization of seven demersal fish specieson the Bay of Biscay continental slope, NE Atlantic. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 257: 223-232.
Uiblein, F. and J.G. Nielsen. 2005. Ocellus variation and possible functions in the genus Neobythites (Teleostei,
Ophidiidae). Ichthyological Research, 52(4): 364-372.
Uiblein, F., M. Youngbluth, C. Jacoby, F. Pagès, M. Picheral and G. Gorsky. 2006. In situ observations ofdeep-water fishes in four canyons off the Georges Bank, NW Atlantic. In: Shotton, R. (Ed). Deep Sea
2003: Conference on the Governance and Management of Deep-sea Fisheries. FAO Fisheries
Proceedings 3 (1): 98-106.

20

Uiblein, F. and P. Lorance. 2007. Deep-sea fish behavioral responses to disturbance by underwater vehicles.
Proceedings of the IEEE Oceans Conference, 30th Sept. - 4th Oct, Vancouver.
Franz Uiblein

Uiblein, F., J.G. Nielsen and P.R.Møller. 2008. Systematics of the ophidiid genus Spectrunculus (Teleostei,
Ophidiiformes) with resurrection of S. crassus. Copeia 2008 (3):,
Widder, E.A., B.H. Robison, K.R. Reisenbichler and S.H.D. Haddock. 2005. Using red light for in situ
observations of deep-sea fishes. Deep-Sea Research I 52: 2077-2085.
Yoklavich, M.M., H.G. Greene, G.M. Caillet, D.E. Sullivan, R.N. Lea and M.S. Love. 2000. Habitat associationsof deep-water rockfishes in a submarine canyon: an example of a natural refuge. Fish.Bull. 98: 625-641.
Wienerroither, R.M. 2003. Species composition of mesopelagic fishes in the area of the Canary Islands, Eastern
Central Atlantic. Informes Técnicos del Instituto Canario de Ciencias Marinas, 9: 1 - 110.
Wienerroither, R.M. 2005. Meso-and bathypelagic fishes of the Canary Islands: an annotated species list, species
composition, and biogeographic distribution. PhD thesis, University of Salzburg.
Wienerroither, R.M., F. Uiblein, F. Bordes and T. Moreno, submitted: Composition, distribution, and diversity ofpelagic fishes around the Canary Islands. Marine Biology Research.
Widder, E.A., B.H. Robison, K.R. Reisenbichler and S.H.D. Haddock, 2005: Using red light for in situ
observations of deep-sea fishes. Deep-Sea Res. I 52: 2077-2085.
Wilson R.R. and K.L. Smith. 1984. Effect of near-bottom currents on detection of bait by the abyssal grenadierfishes Coryphaenoides spp., recorded in situ with a video camera on a free vehicle. Mar. Biol. 84 (1):83-91.
Wong, B.B.M., H.S. Fisher and G.G. Rosenthal. 2005. Species recognition by male swordtails via chemical cues.
Behav. Ecol. 16: 818-822.

21