[1]

Bangladesh Economic Review. 2023. Bangladesh Economic Review 2023. Ministry of Finance, Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh, Dhaka. https://mof.gov.bd/pages/static-pages/694032aa35ce18e1c05602bc
[2]

Hasan MR, Hossain MY, Mawa Z, Hossain MAR. 2022. Reproductive biology of Heteropneustes fossilis in a wetland ecosystem (Gajner Beel, Bangladesh) in relation to eco-climatic factors: suggesting a sustainable policy for aquaculture, management and conservation. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences 29(2):1160−1174

doi: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2021.09.050
[3]

Parvin MF, Hossain MY, Sarmin MS, Rahman O, Tanjin S, et al. 2022. Reproductive performance of Asian stinging catfish Heteropneustes fossilis (Bloch 1794) in the Ganges River, NW Bangladesh, in relation to environmental factors. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 29(28):42822−42836

doi: 10.1007/s11356-022-18816-9
[4]

Islam MA, Hossain MY, Rahman MA, Rahman O, Sarmin MS, et al. 2021. Some biological aspects of Asian stinging catfish, Heteropneustes fossilis (Bloch, 1794) (Teleostei: Siluriformes) in a wetland ecosystem. Iranian Journal of Ichthyology 8(1):52−61
[5]

Sohel AM, Shahjahan M, Hossain MK, Sumi KR, Hossain MS, et al. 2023. Effects of multispecies probiotics on growth, hematology, and gut health of stinging catfish (Heteropneustes fossilis) in biofloc system. Water 15(14):2519

doi: 10.3390/w15142519
[6]

Shamsuddin M, Hossain MB, Rahman M, Kawla MS, Shufol MBA, et al. 2022. Application of biofloc technology for the culture of Heteropneustes fossilis (Bloch) in Bangladesh: stocking density, floc volume, growth performance, and profitability. Aquaculture International 30(2):1047−1070

doi: 10.1007/s10499-022-00849-z
[7]

Nushy NH, Zafar A, Khatun M, Rohani F, Rana M. 2020. Comparative growth performance assessment of Shing (Heteropneustes fossilis) feeding with prepared and commercial diet. Journal of Aquaculture & Marine Biology 9(1):10−13

doi: 10.15406/jamb.2020.09.00270
[8]

Riquet F, Fauvelot C, Fey P, Grulois D, Leopold M. 2022. Hatchery-produced sandfish (Holothuria scabra) show altered genetic diversity in New Caledonia. Fisheries Research 252:106343

doi: 10.1016/j.fishres.2022.106343
[9]

Frost LA, Evans BS, Jerry DR. 2006. Loss of genetic diversity due to hatchery culture practices in barramundi (Lates calcarifer). Aquaculture 261(3):1056−1064

doi: 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2006.09.004
[10]

Kincaid HL. 1983. Inbreeding in fish populations used for aquaculture. Aquaculture 33(1-4):215−227

doi: 10.1016/0044-8486(83)90402-7
[11]

Mahalder B, Mahmud MN, Basori MR, Seba MIJ, Shammi MABH, et al. 2025. Climate-resilient aquaculture: recirculatory aquaculture systems–based seed production for Heteropneustes fossilis in Bangladesh. Aquaculture, Fish and Fisheries 5(3):e70066

doi: 10.1002/aff2.70066
[12]

Chaturvedi CS, Singh RK, Raju KD, Ambulkar RS, Pandey AK. 2015. Induced breeding and larval rearing of stinging catfish, Heteropneustes fossilis (Bloch), under controlled conditions in Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India. Journal of Experimental Zoology 18:645−649
[13]

Frankham R, Ballou JD, Briscoe DA. 2018. Introduction to Conservation Genetics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511808999
[14]

Allendorf FW, Luikart GH, Aitken SN. 2012. Conservation and the genetics of populations. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
[15]

Monir MS, Rahman S. 2015. Effect of stocking density on growth, survival and production of shing (Heteropneustes fossilis) fingerlings under nursery ponds in northern region of Bangladesh. International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies 2(3):81−86
[16]

Rahman MA, Hasan MR, Hossain MY, Islam MA, Khatun D, et al. 2019. Morphometric and meristic characteristics of the Asian stinging catfish Heteropneustes fossilis (Bloch, 1794): a key for identification. Jordan Journal of Biological Sciences 12(4):467−470
[17]

Rahman S, Monir MS, Mou MH. 2014. Culture potentials of stinging catfish shing (Heteropneustes fossilis) under different stocking densities in northern region of Bangladesh. Trends in Fisheries Research 3(2):1−6
[18]

Cadrin SX. 2014. Morphometric landmarks. In Stock identification methods. Amsterdam: Elsevier. pp. 153–172 doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-397003-9.00006-0
[19]

Pattanayak M, Mallick N, Sahu P, Mohapatra SK, Roy S, et al. 2024. Unveiling otolith shape variation: geometric morphometric analysis of three croaker species (Acanthuriformes: Sciaenidae). Proceedings of the Indian National Science Academy 92:139−146

doi: 10.1007/s43538-024-00379-7
[20]

Tripathy PK, Seth JK, Dixit PK. 2022. Geometric morphometric analysis of flatfishes of Gopalpur-on-Sea, Odisha coast, India. Proceedings of the Indian National Science Academy 88(1):90−103

doi: 10.1007/s43538-021-00061-2
[21]

Parvez I, Mahajebin T, Barman TR, Khan N, Chhanda MS, et al. 2020. Evaluation of body shape variation of indigenous and exotic Anabas testudineus (Bloch, 1792) in Bangladesh by geometric morphometric analyses. AACL Bioflux 13(5):2852−2858
[22]

Seth JK, Barik TK, Mishra SS. 2019. Geometric morphometric approach to understand the body shape variation in the pony fishes (Leiognathidae) of Odisha Coast, India. Iranian Journal of Ichthyology 6(3):208−217
[23]

Rohlf FJ. 2015. The TPS series of software. Hystrix 26(1):9−12

doi: 10.4404/hystrix-26.1-11264
[24]

Cadrin SX, Friedland KD. 1999. The utility of image processing techniques for morphometric analysis and stock identification. Fisheries Research 43(1-3):129−139

doi: 10.1016/S0165-7836(99)00070-3
[25]

Ahmmed MK, Ahmmed F, Kabir KA, Faisal M, Ahmed SI, et al. 2017. Biochemical impacts of salinity on catfish, Heteropneustes fossilis (Bloch, 1794), and possibility of their farming at low saline water. Aquaculture Research 48(8):4251−4261

doi: 10.1111/are.13246
[26]

Chakraborty BK, Nur NN. 2013. Growth and yield performance of chingi, Heteropneustes fossilis and koi, Anabas testudineus in Bangladesh under semi-intensive culture systems. International Journal of Agricultural Research, Innovation and Technology 2(2):15−24

doi: 10.3329/ijarit.v2i2.14010
[27]

Zelditch ML, Swiderski DL, Sheets HD, Fink WL. 2012. Geometric morphometrics for biologists: a primer. 2nd Edition. London, UK: Academic Press. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-778460-1.X5000-5
[28]

Wimberger PH. 1992. Plasticity of fish body shape. The effects of diet, development, family and age in two species of Geophagus (Pisces: Cichlidae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 45(3):197−218

doi: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.1992.tb00640.x
[29]

Webb PW. 1984. Body form, locomotion and foraging in aquatic vertebrates. American Zoologist 24(1):107−120

doi: 10.1093/icb/24.1.107
[30]

Solomon SG, Okomoda VT, Ogbenyikwu AI. 2015. Intraspecific morphological variation between cultured and wild Clarias gariepinus (Burchell) (Clariidae, Siluriformes). Fisheries & Aquatic Life 23(1):53−61

doi: 10.1515/aopf-2015-0006
[31]

Swain DP, Riddell BE, Murray CB. 1991. Morphological differences between hatchery and wild populations of coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch): environmental versus genetic origin. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 48(2):251−262

doi: 10.1139/f91-210
[32]

Langerhans RB. 2008. Predictability of phenotypic differentiation across flow regimes in fishes. Integrative and Comparative Biology 48(6):750−768

doi: 10.1093/icb/icn092
[33]

Cadrin SX. 2000. Advances in morphometric identification of fishery stocks. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 10(1):91−112

doi: 10.1023/A:1008939104413
[34]

Franssen NR, Harris J, Clark SR, Schaefer JF, Stewart LK. 2013. Shared and unique morphological responses of stream fishes to anthropogenic habitat alteration. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 280:20122715

doi: 10.1098/rspb.2012.2715
[35]

Klingenberg CP. 2010. Evolution and development of shape: integrating quantitative approaches. Nature Reviews Genetics 11(9):623−635

doi: 10.1038/nrg2829
[36]

Bookstein FL. 1992. Morphometric tools for landmark data: geometry and biology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511573064