IntroductionCarangid resource is comprised of many species varying in size as small as the Seleroides leptolepis measuring 18 cm to as big as the leather jacket Chorenemus Iyson measuring 200 cm, The maximum size of the smallest species [Caranx kalla] is 16 cm fork length and that of the largest species[Caranx ignobilis) is 146 cm fork length (Smith-vaniz1984).The carangids are pelagic fishes widely distributed in the Indo-Pacific region and their importance in the Indian fishery is highly significant. Among the pelagic fishery resources, carangids constitute the fourth important resource and rank next to oil sardine, ribbonfishes and mackerel.

The Family Carangidae have been reported of 140 species under 25 genera worldwide. The carangids are categorized under main sub groups as black pomfrets, queen fishes, trevallies, scads, horse mackerel, leather jacket and pompanos. As many as 62 species have been observed and reported along the Indian coast. They occur abundantly in shallow waters upto 60m depth along both the coasts supporting fisheries almost round the year particularly along Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Karnataka. The commercial fishery is supported mainly by Megalaspis cordyla, Decapterus russelli, Alepes djedaba, Atule mate, selar crumenophthalmus. Selaroides leptolepis, Caranx spp., Carangoides spp..Scomberoides spp. and Trachinotus spp.The carangid species are mostly schooling fishes {Alectis spp. are generally solitary) and some are largely continental in distribution and occur primarily in brackish environment (especially young ones) while others are oceanic pelagics. The larger species of Trachinotus, Seriola and Caranx are highly regarded as sport fish (FAO, 1984).The maximum annual landings was 1,96,868 t in 1995 and the average annual landings during 2008-10 was 1,64,066. From the decadal averages, it can be seen that there was almost three fold increase in landings during 1981-90 and it further doubled during 1991-2000.T. V. Sathianandan et al.

BiologyGenerally, almost all the species exhibit faster growth and have a short life span varying from 2 to 6.6 years. Owing to their faster growth, could be noticed that most of the carangids spawn twice in a prolonged spawning season and the recruitment vary. Most species along the west coast and the northeast coast indicate peak spawning activity during the summer months prior to the southwest monsoon and those along the southeast region spawn intensively during the pre-northeast monsoon season. The species are piscivorous and prefer to feed mostly on fishes like anchovies, sardines, Thrissocles spp. Apogon spp. silverbellies and ribbonfish among fishes, squids and cuttlefishes among molluscs and prawns and crabs among the crustaceans. The young ones prefer to feed more on prawns, squids and anchovies and the adult mostly on fishes, prawn, molluscs and crabs. Rao et al. (1977) observed that species of horse-mackerel are fast swimmers, highly schooling and migratory. The migration of D. russelli has been reported by Bapat et.al. (1982) and stated that the fish probably migrates to the deeper waters after attaining the penultimate stage of maturity. The size and age of maturity, in the case of M.cordyla, Sreenivasan (1978) observed that both the sexes attain maturity at a minimum length of 250 mm and 50% become mature at 270 mm when it attains 1 year of age. But according to Reuben et al (1992) the size and age of first maturity are 250 mm and 1.8 years respectively. According to Murty (1991) D.russelli attains first maturity at 150 mm when the fish is 0.88 year of age whereas Reuben et al (1992) are of opinion that the fish matures at the size of 137 mm when it is 1.36

years old along the east coast and the northwest coasts Indicating a slower growth rate, and 1.03years along the southwest coast. Sreenlvasan (1978) Megalaspis Cordyla 91854 to 324292 from vizhinjam,spawning season from Apr.-Feb. And peak: May to Aug at the length of 270mn 1.0 Year. Murty(1991) Decapterus russelli fecundity 16388 to 107640 Kakinda, spawning season from Dec. to Aug.at the length of 150mm.

Production trends

During the last five decades the carangid production in India has been showing annual fluctuations. The annual landings varied from 6122 tonnes in 1950 to 196871 tonnes in 1995 at an annual average of 51899 tonnes and successively decreased to 1.11 lakh t in 2000, which was constituted 1.06% (in 1950) to 8.25% (in 1995) and 4.3% (in 2000) of the total all India marine fish landings. The average landings(tonnes) of 2001-2005, 2006-2010, 2008-2010 was reported as 129852, 151085 and 164006 respectively and its percentage of total landings was 5.23, 4.93 and 5.06 respectively. The landings of 2010 and 2011 was 167427 and 230653 tonnes respectively (CMFRI annual 2011-12). The fishery showed a steady but slow progress till 1980 and thereafter it improved slightly. From 1986 onwards a marked increase in production could be noticed. The average annual landings during 1950-55 and thereafter in different decades from 1956 to 1995 were worked out and the results indicate that during 1950-55 the average catch was 11262 tonnes. In the 1956-65 period it increased to 23885 tonnes, showing a 112% rise. During 1966-75 it increased to 24674 tonnes, which was 3.3% more than that of the previous decade. In 1976-85 and 1986-95 the increases were to the tune of 59.1% and 267.3% compared to their preceding decades and the average landings were 39247 and 144164 tonnes respectively, where as in 1996-2000 the landing decreased to 1.11 lakh t. A tremendous increase in the fishery could be noticed since 1985 and it could mainly be due to the mechanization of country crafts initiated in 1980s and the intensification of trawling

operations including multi-day fishing being practiced subsequently. These factors enabled to extend the fishing areas to distant and hitherto unexploited grounds. The introduction of ringseine in the coastal fishery also could have helped in enhancing the production from this sector.During 1956-1995 the west coast of India was the major contributor (69.6%) to the all-India average annual carangid catch. The contributions from the east coast and Island territories were 29.6% and 0.7% respectively. The trend of the contribution by these regions to the fishery in different decades showed a decline for the east coast (from 52.9% In 1956-65 to 18.3% In 1986-95) and an increase for the west coast (from 47.1% in 1956-65 to 80.8% in 1986-95) andthe Island territories (from 0.3% in 1966-75 to 0.9% in 1986-95). A major portion of the production along the east coast (94.8%) came from the southern states comprising Andhra Pradesh, Puduchery and Tamil Nadu and 83.1% of the west coast production came from Kerala, Karnataka and Goa.

Table ; Decadal average landings (1950-2010)

Period Average landings (tonnes) % of total landings1950-1960 18254 2.781961-1970 22785 2.741971-1980 28552 2.271981-1990 85916 5.051991-2000 149604 6.212001-2010 140468 5.06

State wise contribution (1998-2000) :

Kerala contributes the highest ie. 40.2% of all India carangid production, followed by Tamil Nadu (16.5%), Karnataka (12.5%), Maharashtra (8.1),Andhra Pradesh (7.2%), Gujarat (6.4%), Goa (5.2%), Orissa (1.2%), Pondicherry (0.9%), West Bengal (0.6%), Andaman and Nicobar Islands (0.5%) and Lakshadweep (0.1%).

kerela 40%

Tamil Nadu17%

Kar-nataka13%

Maha-rashtra

8%

Andhra pradesh

7%

Gujarat6%

Goa5%

Odisha1%

Puducherry1%

West Bengal1% Andaman & Nicobar

1% Lakshadweep0%

kerela Tamil NaduKarnatakaMaharashtraAndhra pradeshGujaratGoaOdishaPuducherryWest BengalAndaman & NicobarLakshadweep

State wise contribution.

Group species contribution

Among the four major groups the most dominant is the scads forming about 40% f o l l o w e d b y t h e h o r s e mackerel 13%, leatherjackets 5% and the rest 42% by other carangids during 1983-2000.

Scad40%

horse mackerel13%

leather jacket5%

other

42%

Scadhorse mackerelleather jacketother

Group wise contribution.

Craft and gear (1998-2000)

The group has emerged as one of the important resources especially in mechanized sector, but also exploited by motorized and non-mechanized sector Carangids are extensively exploited by a multitude of gears like trawls, drift gill nets, bottom set gillnets, hooks & line, purse seine, ring seine, shore seine, boat seine, bag nets, etc. The small-mechanised trawl is the most effective gear in exploiting the carangids along both the coasts.Gill net(25-40 mm mesh), drift net(50-80mm,80-120mm mesh),boat seine(10-15mm mesh),trawl net(15-20mm mesh), seine net (25-30mm mesh) in the north east coast and purse seine (10-12mm mesh) in the southwest coast. Although carangids are not the target species in any of this gears , but they form a good component in the catchs of these gears.However, the trawls (68%), gill nets (11.3%), hooks & line (10.8%), purse seine (8.3%) and boat seine (1.5%) appear to exploit the carangids more effectively than the other gears .

trawl nets68%

gill nets11%

hook & lines11%

purse seine8%

boat seine2%

trawl netsgill netshook & linespurse seineboat seine

Craft and gear wise contribution.

Observations reveal that except at Veraval in Gujarat where a perceptible increase was recorded in the landings of carangids, in all other centres like Mangalore, Kochi, Vizhinjam, Tuticorin and Kakinada the production either showed a declining trend or a general decline with fluctuation during 1998-2000.

Species composition in the catch by different gears

The non-selective trawls mostly exploited scads such as Decapterus dayi (43.5%), D. macrosoma (6.7%), Selar crumenophthalmus (8.9%), Horse mackerel M. Cordyla (6.9%), trevally Caranx para (9.8%), C. Carangus (3.6%), Selaroides leptolepis (1.5%) and the remaining 19.1% is constituted by a number of other species.Gill net landings the dominant species were Megalaspis cordyla (37.3%),Carangoides gymnostethus (6.2%), Caranx sexfasciatus (4%), Scomberoides spp. (8.1%), Elagatis bipinnulata (3.1%), S. crumenophthalmus (2.8%), Scomberoides tala (1.7%) Alepes djedaba (0.7%) and the rest 36.1% by other species collectively.The purse seine landed very few species of carangids and in that A. Djedaba was the dominant species (42.7%) followed by C.para (16%), D.macrosoma (16%) and M.cordyla (2.4%).

Comparatively the occurrence of more number of species at Tuticorin may be attributed to the unique biodiversity supported by 21 coral islands in the Gulf of Mannar. In general the small sized scads Decapterus spp, Horse mackerel M. cordyla and big eye scad S. crumenophthalmus constitute a fishery all along the Indian coast.

Population dynamics and stock assessment

Sivakami et al. (1996) reported that the potential yield ofcarangid along the EEZ of India is around 94971 tonnes. Studies on the population dynamics and stock assessment of carangidspecies are very few and are limited to those by Murty (1991) on D.russelli from Kakinada; Reuben et al (1992) on 8 species namely M.cordyla, D.russelli (both from 3 regions viz. east, north-west & south-west); C.carangus. S.leptolepis (from Tamil Nadu and Puduchery region), A.atropus (from north-west coast); A.kalla (from south-west coast), and A.djedaba and A.mate (from Kerala coast); Kasim and Hamsa (1994) on C.leptolepis and C.carangus(from Tuticorin). Among the studied species, four of them viz. S. leptolepis at Tuticorin, D.macrosoma and S. crumenophthalmus at Kakinada and C. para at Mangalore are underfished. C. carangus is underfished along the Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry coast and optimally fished off Tuticorin. A. atropus is optimally fished from the northwest region. Species like M. cordyla is partially underfished along both east and west coasts. However, there appear to be overfishing of the species off Veraval and southwest region. D. russelli indicatedoverexploitation off Kakinada. Others like A. kalla along the southwest, and A. djedaba and Atule mate along the Kerala coasts are over fished.

The concentration of nearly 90% of the mechanized vessels operation within 50m depth has caused a perceptible change in the succession of small pelagics in place of other larger species. The stocks of larger long living species with slow growth rates have declined and on the contrary the population of small, short lived, fast growing species have increased.Carangid being a group constituted more diverse species of small in size and faster growth (Sreenivasan, 1978, 1982; Kagwade, 1971; Reuben et aI., 1992; Kasim and Ameer Hamsa, 1994; Kasim, 1999 a & b) the production of this resource continued to increase and may be expected to increase further. Previous reports on the exploitation rates of S. leptolepis, C. carangus and D. russelli along east coast, A. kalla, A. djedaba, M. cordyla and A. Mate along the west coast indicate that these species have been under fished during 1981-88 (Reuben et aI., 1992; Kasim and Ameer Hamsa, 1994). Present study also indicate that C. para, D. macrosoma and S. crumenophthalmus are underfished and M. cordyla and D. russellii are fished just above the optimum level. This shows that there is scope to increase the production of the former three species. However, this expectation does not seem to be true owing to the ever-increasing fishing pressure on these resources. The fishery indicates either a saturation point or declining trend in some of the regions

Conservation and management

The available information on the population characteristics and stock assessment on some commercially important species have shown that most of them are optimally or under-exploited. Over exploitation exists only in the case of S.leptolepis and C.carangus along Tamil Nadu coast; A.atropus along the north-west coast and A.djedaba along the Kerala coast. Otherwise, the carangids as a whole is an under exploited resource with great potential. Regulation of gillnet effort and mesh size has been recommended for the horse mackerel fishery as it exerts heavy fishing pressure on fishes of higher size groups, especially above 240 mm size.Deployment of different gears in India reveals that almost all of them are employed with specific aim to exploit certain target species such prawns by trawl net, seerfishes, tunas and billfishes, sharks, barracudas and pomfrets are the target species of drift gill net and hooks & line. The purse seine and ring seine target the major pelagic resources like mackerel and oil sardines along the southwest coast and in respect of dol net it is the Bombayduck. Many carangid species form only a by-catch in almost all the gears except in small meshed drift gill nets, boat seine and shore seine. The landings by these gears are negligible.The production trend of carangids also exhibits stagnation during the late 1990s as in the case of many other important fishery resources. Major pelagic fishery resources like oil sardine, mackerel, Bombay-duck and ribbonfishes are sustained by more or less single species. Whereas, carangid fishery is sustained by many fast growing species with short life span and that provides them better scope to compete with other resources in the process of species succession. In the event of a decline or absence or replacement of one or more species due to over exploitation by target fishing or any other human and natural interference, the fast growing species tend to fill the vacuum created in the food web. The resource comprised of many such fast growing small species may be expected to rightly fulfil the above requirements. This may be one of the reasons for a continued increase in the over all carangid production in India. However, when certain fishery regulatory measures either on the effort reduction or mesh size regulation for increasing the size at first capture in order to ease the higher fishing pressure are implemented, the same will be equally beneficial to carangid resource also. The carangids as a whole is an optimally or under exploited resource with great potential.This suggests that there is scope for further increase in carangid production owing to impending increase in the effort input in future, as the effort or gear regulations are yet to be implemented in India in spite of over-exploitation of certain fishery resources.

References:

CMFRI, 2012. Annual Report 2011-2012. Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute, Cochin.

Mohamad Kasim. H. Status of the Fishery and Resource Characteristics of Carangids along the Indian Coasts. The Seventh lndian Fisheries Forum Proceedings, 2005. Kochi. p. 7-14.

Mohamad Kasim. H. Carangids. STATUS OF EXPLOITED MARINE FISHERY RESOURCES OF INDIA, CMFRI, Cochin. p, 66-75.

Radhakrishnan Nair. P.N., 2000. Carangid resources of India. Marine Fisheries Research and Management. p. 317-348..

Rekha J. Nair*, K.K. Joshi, Somy Kuriakose and P.M. Geetha. A Study on the Diversity of Carangid Resources off Cochin, Kerala. Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute. Cochin.

REUBEN'.S, H M KASIM~S. SIVAKAMI', P N RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR4 , K N KURUP-',M SIVADAS" A NOBLE7. K V SOMASEKHARAN NAIR' and S G RAIEY. Fishery, biology and stock assessment of carangid resources from the Indian seas. Indian Journal of Fisheries 39 (3,4) : 195-234, September, December 1992.

Sathianandan. T. V , J. Jayasankar, Somy Kuriakose, K . G. Mini and Wilson T. Mathew. Indian Marine fishery resources: Optimistic present , challenging future. Indian J. Fish., 58(4) : 1-15, 2011.