Short Communication |
Corresponding author: Yusuke Miyazaki ( miyazaki@shiraume.ac.jp ) Academic editor: Nina Bogutskaya
© 2020 Yusuke Miyazaki, Atsunobu Murase.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Miyazaki Y, Murase A (2019) Fish rubbings, ‘gyotaku’, as a source of historical biodiversity data. ZooKeys 904: 89-101. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.904.47721
|
Methods for obtaining historical biodiversity information are mostly limited to examining museum specimens or surveying past literature. Such materials are sometimes time limited due to degradation, discarding, or other loss. The Japanese cultural art of ‘gyotaku’, which means “fish impression” or “fish rubbing” in English, captures accurate images of fish specimens, and has been used by recreational fishermen and artists since the Edo Period (the oldest known ‘gyotaku’ was made in 1839). ‘Gyotaku’ images often include distributional information, i.e., locality and sampling date. To determine the extent and usefulness of these data, field and questionnaire surveys targeting leisure fishing and boating stores were conducted in the following regions where threatened or extinct fishing targets exist (four regions including the northernmost to the southernmost regions). As a result, 261 ‘gyotaku’ rubbings were digitally copied with their owners’ consents. From these, distributional data were extracted for 218 individuals, which roughly represented regional fish faunas and common fishing targets. The peak number of ‘gyotaku’ stocked at the surveyed shops was made in 2002, while ones made before 1985 were much fewer. The number of ‘gyotaku’ rubbings made in recent years shows a recovery trend after 2011–2012. The present study demonstrates the validity of examining ‘gyotaku’ for historical biodiversity information.
biogeography, citizen science, data mining, fish rubbing, red list
Access to historical biodiversity information is limited, being mainly obtained via museum specimens, past literature, movies, photographs/images and/or other historical materials such as classic monographs (e.g.,
Biodiversity observations have been made not only by researchers but also by citizens, even prior to the recent rise of citizen science projects (
In Japan, many recreational fishers have recorded their memorable catches as ‘gyotaku’ (魚拓), which means fish impression or fish rubbing in English (Fig.
An explanation of fish rubbing (‘gyotaku’, in Japanese). A 1st step – the fish specimen is painted using ink B 2nd step – the specimen is covered with a sheet of paper C the finished image of the fish specimen on the paper. This is known as the direct method of ‘gyotaku’; there is also an indirect method whereby a sheet of paper is placed on the fish specimen, then the sheet is painted by hand using ink. See also
We hypothesized that historical biodiversity data attached to ‘gyotaku’ prints are at risk of being lost, and that the number of ‘gyotaku’ prints is generally declining, being replaced with photographs from digital cameras and/or smart phones. The number of fishing-related shops that are personally managed (rather than the large chain stores) and therefore likely to stock original ‘gyotaku’ prints may be decreasing in recent years due to their owners retiring, an increase in chain store numbers, and/or a decrease in recreational fishers (
In the present study, we attempt to validate these hypotheses by collecting data of ‘gyotaku’ from recreational fishing shops where threatened fish species are distributed according to both the national and regional Red Lists. The potential use of ‘gyotaku’ for historical biodiversity information (
First, preliminary field surveys were conducted at three fishing shops in Miyazaki Prefecture, and one recreational boating shop in Chiba Prefecture where we found ‘gyotaku’ of threatened species were stocked via a reference (
Our questionnaires mainly surveyed three regions of Japan where threatened fish species are distributed according to the national Red List (
An explanation of the aim of our research and an answer sheet, which covered fifteen items for informed consent based on a research ethics review at the first author’s institution, were attached to the questionnaire. In the surveys conducted during July–September 2018, we asked for information on the presence/absence of ‘gyotaku’, and the possibility of copying relevant data. When possible, we conducted field surveys to photograph ‘gyotaku’ in March 2019.
We pooled the collected ‘gyotaku’ data, and statistically analyzed the dataset by a state space model using R v. 3.6.0 (
Of the stores and shops targeted by our second preliminary surveys, none (of six) in the northernmost (Souya) region and three (of ten) in the southernmost (Yaeyama) region stocked ‘gyotaku’ rubbings with distributional information.
Regarding the questionnaires, fourteen surveys were returned unopened due to stores being closed down, and 56 responses were received from others, indicating that the questionnaire response rate was 9.5%. Our field surveys were permitted by nine stores and shops that stocked ‘gyotaku’ rubbings, based on the questionnaire surveys, while 82% of the responses recorded no stock of ‘gyotaku’. This low response rate was possibly caused by us not paying to have the surveys completed and by a high perceived workload to complete the answers.
In total, 261 ‘gyotaku’ rubbings, with 325 printed individual specimens (i.e., a part of ‘gyotaku’ has multiple individuals on a single sheet), were found among the targeted shops (Table
Details of ‘gyotaku’ rubbings surveyed from the shops in the present study.
Shops surveyed | Region | Shop style | The number of | |||
‘gyotaku’ | individuals printed | distributional data1 | species (potential)2 | |||
A | Hokkaido | Tackles and bait shops | 23 | 23 | 20 | 4 |
B | Hokkaido | Tackles and bait shops | 11 | 11 | 11 | 9 |
C | Hokkaido | Tackles and bait shops | 44 | 53 | 37 + 8 | 8 |
D | Hokkaido | Tackles and bait shops | 4 | 4 | 3 + 1 | 4 |
E | Hokkaido | Tackles and bait shops | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Sub-total in the Hokkaido area | 83 | 92 | 71 + 9 | 18 | ||
F | Tokyo Bay | Tackles and bait shops | 27 | 31 | 31 | 17 |
G | Tokyo Bay | Tackles and bait shops | 22 | 23 | 16 + 3 | 8 |
H | Tokyo Bay | Tackles and bait shops | 9 | 9 | 7 + 1 | 8 |
I | Tokyo Bay | Ship shops | 39 | 41 | 32 | 7 |
J | Tokyo Bay | Ship shops | 9 | 15 | 4 | 6 |
Sub-total around the Tokyo Bay area | 106 | 119 | 90 + 4 | 32 | ||
K | Miyazaki | Tackles and bait shops | 12 | 12 | 10 | 4 |
L | Miyazaki | Tackles and bait shops | 8 | 8 | 6 + 1 | 3 |
M | Miyazaki | Tackles and bait shops | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 |
Sub-total in the Miyazaki area | 26 | 26 | 21 + 1 | 9 | ||
N | Yaeyama | Tackles and bait shops | 10 | 11 | 10 | 4 |
O | Yaeyama | Tackles and bait shops | 8 | 8 | 8 | 6 |
P | Yaeyama | Tackles and bait shops | 28 | 69 | 21 | 18 |
Sub-total in the Yaeyama area | 46 | 88 | 39 | 21 | ||
Total | 261 | 325 | 221 + 14 | 68 |
The observed species compositions reflected the biogeography of the regions (Table
The composition of the species name given for various individual ‘gyotaku’.
Species | Number of Individual(s) | Remarks | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hokkaido | Tokyo Bay | Miyazaki | Yaeyama | ||
Loliginidae | |||||
Sepia esculenta Hoyle, 1885 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
Sepioteuthis lessoniana Férussac, 1831 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | |
PISCES | |||||
Cyprinidae | |||||
Carassius cuvieri Temminck & Schlegel, 1846 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |
Cyprinus carpio Linnaeus, 1758 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |
Tribolodon hakonensis (Günther, 1880) | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Plecoglossidae | |||||
Plecoglossus altivelis altivelis (Temminck & Schlegel, 1846) | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Salmonidae | |||||
Hucho perryi (Brevoort, 1856) | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Oncorhynchus keta (Walbaum, 1792) | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Oncorhynchus masou masou (Brevoort, 1856) | 18 | 1 | 1 | 0 | |
Oncorhynchus mykiss (Walbaum, 1792) | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |
Salmo trutta Linnaeus, 1758 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Salvelinus leucomaenis leucomaenis (Pallas, 1814) | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Sebastidae | |||||
Sebastes cheni Barsukov, 1988 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
Sebastes schlegelii Hilgendorf, 1880 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Sebastiscus marmoratus (Cuvier, 1829) | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
Sebastes sp. | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ‘Soi’ or ‘Mazoi’ in Japanese |
Platycephalidae | |||||
Platycephalus sp. 2 sensu Nakabo (2002) | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | |
Serranidae | |||||
Epinephelus lanceolatus (Bloch, 1790) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
Niphon spinosus Cuvier, 1828 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
Plectropomus leopardus (Lacepède, 1802) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | |
Centrarchidae | |||||
Micropterus salmoides (Lacepède, 1802) | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |
Lateolabracidae | |||||
Lateolabrax japonicus (Cuvier, 1828) | 0 | 7 | 8 | 0 | |
Latidae | |||||
Lates japonicus Katayama & Taki, 1984 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | |
Carangidae | |||||
Caranx ignobilis (Forsskål, 1775) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12 | |
Caranx melampygus Cuvier, 1833 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
Caranx sp. | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | ‘Gāra’ in Japanese |
Pseudocaranx dentex (Bloch & Schneider, 1801) | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
Seriola lalandi Valenciennes, 1833 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |
Seriola rivoliana Valenciennes, 1833 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
Sparidae | |||||
Acanthopagrus latus (Houttuyn, 1782) | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | |
Acanthopagrus schlegelii (Bleeker, 1854) | 1 | 12 | 6 | 0 | |
Acanthopagrus sivicolus Akazaki, 1962 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | |
Pagrus major (Temminck & Schlegel, 1844) | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | |
Lethrinidae | |||||
Lethrinus nebulosus (Forsskål, 1775) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | |
Branchiostegidae | |||||
Branchiostegus japonicus (Houttuyn, 1782) | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
Oplegnathidae | |||||
Oplegnathus fasciatus (Temminck & Schlegel, 1844) | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | |
Oplegnathus punctatus (Temminck & Schlegel, 1844) | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | |
Sciaenidae | |||||
Argyrosomus japonicus (Temminck & Schlegel, 1844) | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | |
Sillaginidae | |||||
Sillago japonica Temminck & Schlegel, 1843 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
Sillago parvisquamis Gill, 1861 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
Rachycentridae | |||||
Rachycentron canadum (Linnaeus, 1766) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
Coryphaenidae | |||||
Coryphaena hippurus Linnaeus, 1758 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | |
Kyphosidae | |||||
Kyphosus cinerascens (Forsskål, 1775) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
Girellidae | |||||
Girella leonina (Richardson, 1846) | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | |
Girella punctata Gray, 1835 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 0 | |
Haemulidae | |||||
Plectorhinchus cinctus (Temminck & Schlegel, 1843) | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
Labridae | |||||
Cheilinus undulatus Rüppell, 1835 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
Semicossyphus reticulatus (Valenciennes, 1839) | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Scaridae | |||||
Calotomus japonicus (Valenciennes, 1840) | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
Hexagrammidae | |||||
Hexagrammos otakii Jordan & Starks, 1895 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | |
Siganidae | |||||
Siganus guttatus (Bloch, 1787) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | |
Scombridae | |||||
Katsuwonus pelamis (Linnaeus, 1758) | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |
Thunnus albacares (Bonnaterre, 1788) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
Sphyraenidae | |||||
Sphyraena barracuda (Edwards, 1771) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | |
Trichiuridae | |||||
Trichiurus sp. | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ‘Tachiuo’ in Japanese |
Istiophoridae | |||||
Istiophorus platypterus (Shaw & Nodder, 1792) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
Pleuronectidae | |||||
Kareius bicoloratus (Basilewsky, 1855) | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Pleuronectes herzensteini (Jordan & Snyder, 1901) | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Pleuronectes schrenki (Schmidt, 1904) | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Verasper moseri Jordan & Gilbert, 1898 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Paralichthyidae | |||||
Paralichthys olivaceus (Temminck & Schlegel, 1846) | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | |
Monacanthidae | |||||
Stephanolepis cirrhifer (Temminck & Schlegel, 1850) | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | |
NO NAME GIVEN* | 19 | 55 | 2 | 46 |
Three species targeted in leisure fishing and listed as threatened species in the Japanese national Red List. A Hucho perryi (Brevoort, 1856) from a shop in Hokkaido B Sillago parvisquamis Gill, 1861 from a shop facing Tokyo Bay C Lates japonicus Katayama & Taki, 1984 from a shop in Miyazaki Prefecture.
Species belonging to other families such as Salmonidae and Pleuronectidae, which originate in cold waters, were mostly recorded from Hokkaido rather than the other surveyed regions (Table
We also obtained a statistically estimated result using a state space model (Fig.
Currently, the oldest ‘gyotaku’ material is a collection of the Tsuruoka City Library made in 1839 (
In conclusion, distributional data related to fish diversity records were able to be mined from ‘gyotaku’. However, this method is time limited with respect to data rescue from the general public. The volume of data obtained in this study is too small to analyze statistically from the perspective of ecology, biogeography, or other similar disciplines. Additionally, validation of the identifications sourced from the ‘gyotaku’ is required via taxonomic evaluations. This could be done by examining the external morphology captured in the printed image and possibly by trying to obtain biological material from the print for molecular analysis (i.e., based on the residuum of dried DNA on the sheet). Overall, further research is required into the use of ‘gyotaku’ rubbings for acquiring historical biodiversity data.
We express our deepest gratitude to O. Adachi (Casting Shinagawa Seaside Branch), H. Egami (Egami Tsuriguten), Y. Hayasaka (Yokohama Sao-no-Shioyoshi), M. Kinjou (Yaeyama Tsurigu), K. Miyagi (Miyagi Tsuriguten), S. Shimabukuro (Umi-no-Sougou Super Shima), S. Yoshino (Funayado Yoshinoya), and other all staff of the fishing shops and stores for their kind cooperation, and to G. Yearsley (Ellipsis Editing, Australia) for English technical editing of the manuscript. We also thank Y. Nagashima (Uonofu), and Y. Ogawa (Tatsumi Publishing) for guiding to the leisure fishing shops and stores, and K. Naoe and J. Yamaide (zukan.com, Inc.) for setting up the database. This research was partly supported by the JSPS KAKENHI Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B) (No. 16K16225).
The attributional information of the ‘gyotaku’ materials observed by the present study
Data type: species data
Explanation note: Although the identifications of each individual have not still validated via scientifc evaluations, the scientific names are provisional based on the fish names given by creaters with our suggestions.