Egyptian Red Sea coast
Article · January 2009
CITATIONS
6
READS
268 1 author:
Mohamed Abu El-Regal King Abdulaziz University 127PUBLICATIONS 569CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Mohamed Abu El-Regal on 29 May 2014.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
Spatial distribution of larval fish assemblages in some coastal bays along the Egyptian Red Sea coast
Mohamed Abu El-Regal
National Institute of Oceanography and Fisheries, Red Sea Branch, Hurghada, Egypt [email protected]
Ichthyoplankton data provide a base for studying population dynamics, stock assessment and fishery management of the major fishery species. In the present work fish larvae were collected from four sites along the Red Sea coast from Hurghada to Shalateen on the southern border of the Egyptian Red Sea in order to study their abundance, diversity and spatial distribution. These sites include National Institute for Oceanography (NIOF) bay at Hurghada, Sharm El-Naga, Abu Dabab and Shalateen. A total of 312 fish larvae comprising 13 families were collected from these sites. The highest number of larvae (156) was collected from Sharm El Naga, whereas the lowest one (7 larvae) was taken from Shalateen. The highest number of species was recorded from NIOF bay at Hurghada, while the lowest one was taken from Shalateen.
key words: Fish, larvae, bays, spatial distribution, Red Sea
Fish eggs and larvae represent the meroplanktonic stages of fishes that are found mainly in the upper 200 meters of the water column and are collected by the planktonic gear. They form a relatively small but vital component of the total zooplankton, as they feed on smaller plankton and are preyed by larger animals (Smith & Richardson, 1977).
Ichthyoplankton includes fish eggs that represent embryonic stage, yolk sac larvae which are a transitional stage between eggs and larvae, and larvae that are the stages prior to acquiring juvenile features. The eggs drift in the ocean along with the water currents.
Most fish larvae have almost no swimming ability initially, however during their development they are active swimmers (Leis & Carson-Ewart, 1997; Kingsford et al.
2002).
Ichthyoplankton data provide a base for research into population dynamics of major fishery species (Smith & Richardson, 1977; Rutherford et al., 1997 and Butler et al., 2003) and information on ichthyoplankton ecology comprise an important component of stock assessment and fishery management plans (Rutherford, 2002). The estimation of egg abundance can be used to estimate the biomass of the spawning fish. Larval abundance could be good index for the success of generations. Data about where and when eggs and larvae are abundant can be used to detect the spawning grounds and the spawning seasons of the commercially important fishes (Smith & Richardson, 1977;
Fuiman, 2002) that could be applied to determine the closing seasons and the closed areas.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
_______________________________________________________________________
The pelagic stage is more likely used to determine the geographical size of fishes than the adult stage (Leis, 1986a). Data about the spatial and temporal distribution of fish larvae could be used for aquaculture of these species that conserves natural reef resources by offering alternatives to wild capture and develops a new source of organisms for the aquarium trade (Hunter, 1984; Fuiman, 2002).
Ichthyoplankton of reef fishes in the Red Sea is poorly studied compared to that in other Indo-Pacific areas such as Great Barrier Reef. This may be largely due to the difficulties in sampling and identification of these small stages. Only very few studies have been carried out on the fish eggs and larvae of reef fishes on Red Sea coast (Abu El- Regal, 1999; Faroukh, 2000; Abu El-Regal, 2008; Abu El-Regal et al., 2008)
This study is a complementary to the previous studies on the Red Sea fish eggs and larvae in other areas along the Red Sea. It aimed to study the abundance, diversity and distribution of ichthyoplankton of reef fishes in four sites along the Red Sea coast from Hurghada to Shalateen on the southern border of the Egyptian Red Sea.
Sampling sites
Four coastal bays, Hurghada, Sharm El-Naga, Abu Dabab and Shalateen, were surveyed for the ichthyoplankton abundance and distribution during sprig season.
Hurghada site
It lies in front of the National Institute of Oceanography and Fisheries (NIOF) at Hurghada at 27º 17' 6"N and 33º 46' 22"E. It was a small area that extends to about150 m seaward and ends with a lagoon of about 5 m depth. The lagoon had a sandy bottom and is covered by algal mats and seagrass.
Sharm El-Naga site
It lies 40 km from Hurghada at 26° 54' 00''N and 33° 57' 46''E. The bay is like a huge pool with a sandy bottom slides down slowly to more than 30 meters and drops off to about 80 meters depth.
Abu Dabab site
It is a big bay surrounded with raised beach from north and south wards. This site is situated at 30 km north Marsa Alam between latitude 25°20\ 14\\ N and longitude 34°
44\ 15\\ E. Abu Dabab is six reefs and roughly translated this set of reefs is known as
"Fathers Steps" or "Fathers Stepping Stones". This site itself is a set of reasonably shallow reefs (15m to the seafloor in most places, or up to 25m on the outside of some of the reefs.
The reefs are colourful with coral gardens and all manner of marine life. Blue spotted rays favour the sand areas whilst large napoleon wrasse cruise the upper reefs. Pods of dolphins have been watched in the bay swimming with divers. The bay is characterized by a vast area of seagrass that harbour the sea dugong
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Shalateen site
Shalateen represents a fishing harbour that is located at 700 km south Hurghada between latitude 23° 09\ 0\\ N and longitude 35° 36\ 51\\ E. Shalateen harbour is very wide and shallow, with narrow beach composed of sand.
The tidal flat is very wide, extends smoothly with very gentle slope seaward. The bottom of the bay floor is sandy and covered with algal flats and seagrass. Coral reefs are found seaward parallel to the shoreline.
Fig.1. Map of the Red Sea and the sampling sites
_______________________________________________________________________
Field procedure
The environmental data as water temperature, salinity, pH, were collected from surface from the investigated sites and they were recorded by Hana instrument Hydro-lab.
Water temperature and salinity were calibrated against protected thermometer and induction salinometer (RS10). The depths recorded by Lowerance X25 instrument (calibrated by vertical wire measurements). The latitude and longitude were recorded by two Global Position System GPS (Magellan, 1000, 5000pro).
The ichthyoplankton was collected with 100 cm mouth diameter plankton net with a mesh size of 0.5mm. Net was towed horizontally parallel to the reef and about 10-50 m away from the reef edge for 10 minutes with a towing speed of 1.5 knots. Samples were taken in the early morning just before sunrise and preserved in buffered 5% formalin solution in seawater on board. Larvae were sorted, measured and identified to the nearest taxa.
Data analysis
The univariate statistics were done in SPSS v.15.0, using ANOVA to determine differences in the numbers of individuals and number of species between sites. All data were tested for homogeneity of variance and where the samples were not homogeneous, data were either logarithmically or square root transformed or the non-parametric Kruskal- Wallis test was used (Zar, 1996; Dytham, 2003). The diversity indices (species richness, evenness and Shannon-Wiener) were calculated using PRIMER v 5 after standardization and square root transformation.
Physical environment
Figure (2) shows comparison between surface water temperature values in the four bays under study. The minimum value was recorded in Abu Dabab, while the maximum one was recorded in Shalateen bay.
On the other hand, the highest value of water salinity was recorded in Shalateen and the lowest one was found in Abu Dabab. The horizontal distribution of water salinity is shown in figure (2). The range of the average values of water salinity 40.65-41.61 in El Shalateen, 40.49-40.64 in Abu Dabab and 40.28-40.74 in Sharm El Naqa.
The Values of pH fluctuated from the lowest of 8.15 at Abu Dabab to the highest of 8.9 at Shalateen. The horizontal distribution of hydrogen ions in the areas under study shows hydrogen ion decreasing in the tidal flat areas.
RESULTS
Fig.2. Physical parameters in the area of study a. Temperature, b. Salinity, c. pH
Fish larvae
A total of 312 fish larvae comprising 13 families were collected from all sites. The highest number of larvae was collected from Sharm El Naga with 156 larvae, whereas the lowest number was taken from Shalateen with only 7 larvae (Fig.3). The analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed that there was a significant difference in the number of larvae and number of species between the four bays. It was indicated by the Turkey’s post hoc test that bays Shalateen and Sharm El-Naga were responsible for these differences.
In the present study five families represent about 93% of all larvae collected. The most abundant family was Tripterygiidae with 181 larvae forming 53%, followed by Clupeidae with 50 larvae (16% of all collected larvae). The 33 mullid larvae formed 10%
of all collected larvae. Serranidae, Apogonidae and Carangidae had the lowest abundance with one larva each. On the other hand, there was a significant difference in the number of species among the four investigated sites (F= 47.870, P <0.01).
_______________________________________________________________________
Fig.3. Abundance of larvae (number of larvae/1000m3) in all sites
In the present study, most of the larvae could be identified either to the family, genus or species level, although, some larvae could not be identified at al. All larvae were referred to as families for the ease of analysis. The highest number of families was recorded in Hurghada where larvae of 9 families were collected, whereas larvae of only one family were taken from Shalateen (Fig.4). Family Tripterygiidae was represented by two types that could not be identified below the genus level. All the other families were only represented by one type. The most abundant families formed about 93% of all larvae collected. Family Tripterygiidae was the most abundant one and forming 60% of all larvae collected followed by Clupeidae (17%) and Mullidae (11%) (Fig.5).
Fig.4. Number of species of fish larvae in all sites
Fig.5. Percentage contribution of the most abundant taxa of fish larvae in all sites
There were significant differences in the species richness among the four bays. The Margalef’s index (species richness) ranged from the lowest value of zero at Shalateen bay to the highest of 2.64 at NIOF. The evenness also varied from zero at Shalateen to 0.82 at Sharm El-Naga. The Shannon-Wiener diversity index attained its maximum at NIOF bay with 1.85 followed by Sharm El-Naga (Fig.6). In order to reveal similarities between species, cluster analysis was performed after removing the very rare species. Apogonidae, Serranidae, and Carangidae were very similar with 100% similarity and they occurred in NIOF bay. Triptrygiidae1 and Clupeidae form another cluster with a similarity of 50%
while Triptrygiidae2 and Mullidae formed another cluster with high similarity. Some taxa such as Blennidae, Serranidae, Gobiesocidae and Scorpaenidae were restricted to NIOF bay and larvae of Mullidae, Bythitidae, Apogonidae, Carangidae and Gerreidae were collected only from Sharm El-Naga (Fig.7). Larvae of Clupeidae and Tripterygiidae occurred in three bays and atherinid larvae were taken from two bays, while larvae of most families were collected from only one site. Distribution of mullid and tripterygiid larvae varied significantly among sites.
_______________________________________________________________________
Fig.6. Diversity indices (Diversity, Evenness and Richness) of fish larvae in all sites
Fig.7. Dendrogram of the larval taxa, using group-average clustering from Bray-Cruits similarities.
Atherinidae Blennidae Hemirhamphidae Gobiesocidae Scorpaenidae Carangidae Serranidae Apogonidae Tripterygiidae2 Mullidae Bythitidae Gerreidae Clupeidae Tripterygiidae1
20 40 60 80 100
Similarity
_______________________________________________________________________
The fauna and flora of the Red Sea, including the fishes, have long attracted the attention of scientists e.g. Gohar (1948), Gohar and Latif (1959), Al-Kholy (1964) and Botros (1971). Recently, Randall, (1983) published his much awaited account of Red Sea reef fish; Ormond and Edwards (1987) studied the fishes of the coral reef in the Red Sea; a comprehensive checklist of the Red Sea species has been published by Goren & Dor (1994). Despite their importance for fisheries management, very few studies are available about the Red Sea reef fish larvae. As it is needed to estimate the size of a spawning stock and to determine the spawning seasons and spawning grounds of the commercial fishes, information is necessarily and urgently needed as a tool to manage the Red Sea fisheries and its coral reefs. The present study has complemented the previous studies on the larvae of the coral reef fishes in the Red Sea: southern Red Sea (Nellen, 1973), Sharm El-Sheikh (Abu El-Regal, 1999), Aqaba (Faroukh, 2001) and Hurghada (Abu El-Regal, 2008, Abu El-Regal et al., 2008). All of these studies aimed to identify the larval fishes in the studied area and to give some notes about their seasonal and regional distribution. During the present study four lagoons were studied in the spring season.
Reports on the larval fishes in the northern Red Sea revealed that the abundance of larvae of coral reef fishes is generally low (El-Sherbiny, 1997; Cuschnir, 1991; Abu El- Regal, 1999; Faroukh, 2001). Temporal distribution of fish larvae could be influenced by many factors that are related to the adult or the larvae. Besides, distribution may be influenced by biological, physical or topographical features in the area. Abu El-Regal et al. (2008) studied the influence of ecological guilds of the adult stages on the dispersal of their larval stages and found that the distribution is affected by the spawning mode but not the habitat of the adult or the depth at which the adult lives. Physical parameters such as temperature and salinity in the Red Sea in general do not vary greatly. So, the spatial distribution is not correlated to the temperature and salinity.
The majority of fish larval species present in the area are also recorded as adults.
However, larvae of many adults recorded in the three coastal bays were absent in the ichthyoplankton samples. Bellwood and Wainwright (2002) stated that 281 species in 40 fish families are known to be reef fishes in the Red Sea. Abu El-Regal (2008) recorded larvae of 25 coral reef fish families at Hurghada of which, 16 families were taken inshore and 22 were taken offshore. Young et al. (1986) recorded 40 fish families as adults in the North West continental shelf of Australia but did not find their larvae in the area. Larvae of many taxa of reef fishes were missing inshore (Miller, 1974, 1979; Watson & Leis, 1974). Leis (1994) stated that there is a possibility of dispersal of pelagic larval phase of coral reef fishes from their natal reef. Many of the missing reef fish larvae inshore can be found 5-12km offshore (Leis & Miller, 1976). The inshore larval assemblages may not be representative of that of the adult fish because the propagules originating from a fish population on a given reef do not settle to this reef but settle to another reef. This may explain the rarity or the absence of true coral reef fish larvae from the area although their adults are common. Some species, such as that of families Chaetodontidae, Scaridae and Lutjanidae have a very short planktonic life and a rapid metamorphosis to adult, and settle to the bottom after hatching (Lowe-McConnell, 1979). In contrast, other groups of reef fishes produce demersal eggs that are attached to the substratum and the larvae never enter the pelagos, for example the Apogonidae and Pomacentridae (Munro et al., 1973). Visual
DISCUSSION
census techniques have shown apogonid and pomacentrid larvae hidden among branches of Acropora corals (personal observation). This may explain the rarity of these fishes in the plankton samples. Pomacanthid larvae are very rare in the present collection and were collected from Giftun island in July. Chaetodontid larvae were missing from Hurghada (present data), Arabian Gulf (Houde et al., 1986) and Sharm El-Sheikh (Abu El-Regal, 1999).
Most larval fish taxa collected during the current study belong to commercially important fish. Mullidae, Lutjanidae, Scaridae, Carangidae, Sphyraenidae, Gerreidae and Serranidae are important constituents of the fishery in the Red Sea in general and in Hurghada in particular. This study presents important information on the spawning seasons of these fishes that form a baseline data concerning the larvae of commercial fishes. This is an essential part in fisheries management. However, the larvae of some fishes whose adults are important constituents of Egyptian fisheries were rare or even absent in the collection. This may be due to the behaviour of the adult or the behaviour of the larvae (Leis, 1991b; Montgomery et al., 2001). Larvae of sparid, mugilid and lethrinid fishes were absent in the ichthyoplankton samples during the period of study and also none was collected from Aqaba or Sharm El-Sheikh. This may indicate that these fishes migrate to areas more favourable for their spawning (Johannes, 1978).
Abu El-Regal, M. A. (1999). Some biological and ecological studies on the larvae of coral reef fishes in Sharm El-Sheikh (Gulf of Aqaba-Red Sea). M.Sc. Thesis. Marine Science Department, Faculty of Science Suez Canal University. 167 pp
Abu El-Regal, M. A. (2008). Ecological studies on the ichthyoplankton of coral reef fishes in Hurghada, Red Sea, Egypt. PhD thesis. Marine Science Dept., Faculty of Science, Suez Canal University, Ismailia, Egypt. PP.225
Abu El-Regal, M. A. and Kon. (2008). First record of paedomorphic fish Schindleria (Gobioidei-Schnidleriidae) from the Red Sea. J. Fish Biol., 72: 1539-1543
Abu El-Regal, M. A.; Ahmed, A. I.; El-Etreby, S. G.; El-Komi, M. and Elliott, M. (2008).
Abundance and diversity of coral reef fish larvae at Hurghada, Egyptian Red Sea. Egypt. J. Aquat. Biol. and Fish., 12(2). 17-33
Abu El-Regal, M. A.; Ahmed, A. I.; El-Etreby, S. G.; El-Komi, M. and Elliott, M. (2008).
Influence of ecological guilds of coral reef fishes on the distribution of their larval near coral reefs at Hurghada, Egyptian Red Sea. Egypt. J. Aquat. Biol. and Fish., 12(2). 35-50
Al-Kholy, A. (1964). Red Sea Fisheries. General Egyptian Organization of Aquatic Resources. Cairo. 345 pp.
Bellwood, R. D. and Wainwright, P.C. (2002). The history and biogeography of fishes on coral reefs. In: Sale, P.F. (Ed), Coral reef fishes: dynamics and Diversity in a complex ecosystem. Academic press, San Diego. Pp 5-32.
Botros, G.A. (1971). Fishes of the Red Sea. Oceanography and Mar. Biol. An Annual Review. 9:221-348
REFERENCES
_______________________________________________________________________
Butler, J.L.; Jacobson, L.D.; Barnes, J.T. and Moser, H.G. (2003). Biology and population dynamics of cowcod (Sebastes levis) in the southern California Bight. Fish. B:
NAA 120:25-46.
Cuschnir, A. (1991). Taxonomic diversity, biological and ecological Interspecific Relationships, and Annual cycle of Distribution of Ichthyoplankton in the Northern end of the Gulf of Elat (Red Sea). Ph.D. Thesis, University of Tel- Aviv, Israel.
Dytham, C. (2003). Choosing and using statistics. A biologist’s guide. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, 248pp.
El-Sherbiny, M. M. (1997). Some ecological studies on zooplankton studies in Sharm El- Sheikh area (Red Sea). M. Sc. Thesis. Mar. Sci. Dept. Fac. Sci. Suez Canal Univ., Egypt. 151 pp.
Froukh, T.J. (2001). Studies on taxonomy and ecology of some fish larvae from the Gulf of Aqaba. M.Sc. Thesis. Fac. of Graduate Studies. Univ. of Jordan. 103 pp.
Fuiman, L. (2002). Special considerations of fish eggs and larvae. In: Fuiman, L.A., Werner, R.G. (Eds.), Fishery Science. The Unique Contributions of Early Life Stages. Fishery Blackwell Publishing. pp.206-221.
Gohar, H.A.F (1948). On the relation between fish and anemone with a description of eggs of Amphiprion bicinctus (Rüppell). Publication of the Marine Biological Station, Al-Ghardaqa, Red Sea. 6, 35-44.
Gohar, H.A.F. and Latif, F.A. (1959). Morphological studies on some scarid and labrid fishes. Publ. Mar. Biol. Station., Al-Ghardaqa, Red Sea, 10: 145-190.
Goren, M. and Dor, M. (1994). An updated checklist of the fishes of the Red Sea CLOFRESII. Israel Academy for Sciences and Humanities. The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities. Jerusalem, 120 pp.
Johannes, R. E. (1978). Reproduction strategies of coastal marine fishes in the tropics.
Envir. Biol. Fish., 3: 141-160.
Leis, J.M. (1986a). Vertical and horizontal distribution of fish larvae near coral reefs at Lizard Islands, Great Barrier Reef. Mar. Biol., 90:505-516
Leis, J. M. (1991a). The pelagic stage of reef fishes: The larval biology of coral reefs.. In:
Sale, P. F. The ecology of fishes on coral reefs. Academic press, INC. Pp 183- 230
Leis, J. M. (1991b). Vertical distribution of fish larvae in the Great Barrier Reef lagoon, Australia. Mar. Biol., 109: 7-166.
Leis, J. M. (994) Coral Sea atoll lagoons: closed nurseries for the larvae of coral reef fishes. Bull. Mar. Sci., 54(1): 6-227.
Leis, J. M. and Miller, J. M. (1976). Offshore distributional patterns of Hawaiian fish larvae. Mar. Biol., 36(3): 359-367
Leis. J. M. and Carson-Ewart, B. M. (1997). In situ swimming speeds of the late pelagic larvae of some Indo-Pacific coral reef fishes. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 159:165-174.
Lowe-McConnell, R. H. (1979). Ecological aspects of seasonality in fishes of tropical waters. Symp. Zool. Soc. London, 44: 219-241
Miller, J. M. (1974). Nearshore distribution of Hawaiian marine fish larvae: effects of water quality, turbidity and currents. In: “The Early Life History of Fish” (J. H.
S. Blaxter, ed), pp. 217-231. Springer-Verlag, New York.
Miller, J. M. (1979). Larval fish distribution. In” An atlas of common nearshore fish larvae of the Hawaiian Islands” (J.M. Miller, W. Watson and J.M. Leis), Misc.
rep. 80-02,pp 105-152. Univ. of Hawaii Sea Grant program, Honolulu, Hawaii.
Montgomery, J. C.; Nicholas, T. and Haine, O.S. (2001). Active habitat selection by presettlement reef fishes. Fish and Fisheries, 2: 261-277.
Munro, J. L.; R. Thompson; V. C. Gaut. (1973). The spawning seasons of Caribbean reef fishes. J. Fish. Biol., 5:69-84.
Nellen, W. (1973). Kinds and abundance of fish larvae in the Arabian Sea and the Persian Gulf In: B. Zeitzschel. Ed. The biology of the Indian Ocean. New York. 523 pp.
Verlag. 415-430
Ormond, R.F. and Edwards, G.A. (1987). Red Sea Fishes. Red Sea (Key Environments) (eds. By A. J. Edwards and S. M. Head), pp. 251-287. Pergamon Press, Oxford.
Randall, J. (1986). Red Sea Reef Fishes. IMMEL Publishing, London. 192 pp.
Watson, W. and Leis, J. M. (1974). Ichthyoplankton of Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii: A one-year study of fish eggs and larvae. Tech. Rep.-Univ. Hawaii Sea Grant Program TR- 75-01:1-78.
Young, P. C.; Leis, J. M. and Hausfeld, H. F. (1986). Seasonal and spatial distribution of fish larvae in waters over the North West Continental Shelf of Western Australia.
Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 31: 209-222.
Zar, J. H. (1996). Biostatistical analysis. Fourth Edition. Prentice Hall International (UK), London
ناجلخلا ضعبب كامسلأا تاقريل ىناكملا عيزوتلا ىرصملا رمحلأا رحبلا لحاس ىلع ةيلحاسلا
لاجرلا وبأ دمحم
دياصملا و راحبلا مولعل ىموقلا دھعملا –
رمحلأا رحبلا عرف -
ةقدرغلا – رصم
مانيد ثا حبلأ ةي ساسا تا نايب ةد عاق نو كت و ديا صملا مي ظنت ى ف ًار يبك ارود كام سلأا تا قري ب علت ة يكي
ةيدا صتقلاا كام سلأا تاعمتجم و ،
ا نو كت نو تكنلابويتكلاا ة ئيبب ة صاخلا تا مولعمل )
كام سلأا تا قري و ضي ب ًانوكم (
دياصملا ميظنتو ىكمسلا نوزخملا ريدقتل ًاماھ .
ىنا كملا عيزوتلاو ةفاثكو عونت ةسارد فدھب ةساردلا هذھ تيرجأ دق و
رايتخا مت دقو ىرصملا رمحلأا رحبلا لحاس دادتما ىلع كامسلأا تاقريل قدرغلا ى ھ ع قاوم4
ة ) ىمو قلا د ھعملا ما مأ
راحبلا مولعل (
ر محلأا ر حبلا بو نجب نيتلا ش و م لع ى سرم لام ش با بدوبأ جيلخ و ةقدرغلا بونج ةقانلا مرش جيلخو
عيبرلا لصف للاخ .
دقو اھتاحتف نوتكنلاب ةكبش مادختساب تاقريلا عمج مت 500
نوركيم . ع مج م ت ة ساردلا للا خ ن م
312 لثمت ةقري 13
ي اھمظعم ةلئاع ةيناجرملا باعشلا كامسلأ ىمتن
. ة قانلا مرش ةقطنمب تاقريلا نم ددع ربكا لجس
نيتلا ش ى قطنمب تا قريلاو عاو نلأا ن م دد ع ل قا لج س ا منيب ة قدرغلا ة قطنم ن م عاو نلأا ن م ددع ربكاو .
هذ ھ ر بتعت
ة ليلقلا تا ساردلا ن م ة ساردلا خيرا تلا م ھف ى ف ة غلابلا ا ھتيمھأ م غر ةير صملا ها يملاب كام سلأا تا قري لوا نتت ى تلا
ةيداصتقلاا كامسلأل ىكمسلا نوزخملا ريدقت و دياصملا ميظنت ىف كلذك و كامسلأل ىعيبطلا .
ARABIC SUMMARY
View publication stats
