DOCSLIB.ORG

Castor Canadensis) Population Fluctuations, and Their Ecological Relationship with Salmonids

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Castor Canadensis) Population Fluctuations, and Their Ecological Relationship with Salmonids Factors Influencing Beaver (Castor canadensis) Population Fluctuations, and Their Ecological Relationship with Salmonids A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Sean M. Johnson-Bice IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE Steve K. Windels, Adviser August 2019 © Sean M. Johnson-Bice 2019 ii Acknowledgments I wish to first thank my advisor and mentor Steve Windels for his continual guidance and patience, and the freedom he granted me to pursue my research interests. I would like to thank my committee members, George Host and Ron Moen, for their commitment and input in the progress of my thesis. Katti Renik and Andy Hafs both contributed significantly to the success of the first chapter, and Katti in particular assisted in writing initial portions of it. My second chapter simply would not have happened without the hard work and knowledge from Jake Ferguson, who conducted the statistical analysis, created two of the figures, and taught me all about Bayesian time series analysis in the process. I would also like to thank and acknowledge the contributions from Tom Gable and John Erb in my second chapter, who both provided tremendous insight and wisdom that greatly contributed to its development. My graduate school experience was a lot more enjoyable with the company of great friends, especially Ryan Steiner, Austin Homkes, Tom Gable, and Bradley Dawson. I also appreciate and acknowledge the financial support provided by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund, as recommended by the Legislative-Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources (project M.L. 2016, Chp. 186, Sec. 2, Subd.03j); the University of Minnesota Duluth Integrated Biosciences Department Graduate Program summer fellowships awarded to me; and a one-semester teaching assistantship from the University of Minnesota Duluth Department of Biology. Part of my funding was also provided by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, administered by the Office for Coastal Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under Award NA18NOS190081 provided to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for iii Minnesota’s Lake Superior Coastal Program. Lastly, I want to thank several family members for their emotional support, including my brothers Alex and Brad Johnson- Bice; my aunt BJ Johnson and uncle Machan Shichi; my grandmother Sally Schofield; and of course my parents, David Bice and Kathleen Johnson, who have provided me with unwavering inspiration and encouragement. iv Dedication I dedicate this thesis to my biggest fans, my parents David Bice and Kathleen Johnson, who have always stood by side while I pursued my personal, professional, and above all, scientific endeavors. v Table of Contents List of tables ..................................................................................................................... viii List of figures ..................................................................................................................... ix Chapter 1: A Review of Beaver–Salmonid Relationships and History of Management Actions in the Western Great Lakes (USA) Region ................................................1 Summary ........................................................................................................................2 Introduction ....................................................................................................................3 History of Salmonids and Beavers in the Western Great Lakes Region .......................5 Review of Beaver Influence on Streams and Salmonids in the Western Great Lakes Region ....................................................................................................................13 Review of Beaver Management on Salmonid Streams in the Western Great Lakes Region ....................................................................................................................34 Management Implications ............................................................................................43 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................47 Tables ...........................................................................................................................51 Figures..........................................................................................................................53 Chapter 2: Factors Influencing Annual Rates of Change in the Number of Beaver Colonies ................................................................................................................55 Summary ......................................................................................................................56 Introduction ..................................................................................................................58 vi Methods........................................................................................................................62 Results ..........................................................................................................................72 Discussion ....................................................................................................................74 Management Implications ............................................................................................78 Tables ...........................................................................................................................80 Figures..........................................................................................................................83 Bibliography ......................................................................................................................87 vii List of Tables Table 1.1. Summary of the main effects found from 21 beaver-salmonid studies conducted within the WGL region .........................................................................53 Table 2.1. Summary of the 15 survey routes from northern Minnesota ............................80 Table 2.2. Comparison of three global models evaluating the influence of density- dependent and density-independent factors on growth rates of beaver colonies ...81 Table 2.3. Parameter estimates from the DDcov model ......................................................82 viii List of Figures Figure 1.1. Map showing where beaver–salmonid studies have been conducted in the western Great Lakes region ...................................................................................54 Figure 1.2. Timeline of major events from different management eras and a graph of the approximate beaver population trend from the western Great Lakes (WGL) region (1870–present) .......................................................................................................55 Figure 2.1. Map of the beaver survey study area and location of each route ....................83 Figure 2.2. Graphic depicting how survey routes were digitized by delineating the aircraft’s trajectory based on hand-drawn reference maps ....................................84 Figure 2.3. Composite image of raw (observed) data and model fits for each route ........85 Figure 2.4. Plot of the beta coefficients for the estimates from the full dataset compared to the estimates from the dataset with 1/3 of observations held out .....................86 ix CHAPTER ONE A Review of Beaver–Salmonid Relationships and History of Management Actions in the Western Great Lakes (USA) Region SUMMARY Within the western Great Lakes (WGL) U.S. region (Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin), the ecological impacts that North American beavers (Castor canadensis) have on cold- water streams are generally considered to negatively affect salmonid populations where the two taxa interact. Here, we review the history of beaver-salmonid interactions within the WGL region, describe how this relationship and management actions have evolved over the past century, and review all published studies from the region that have evaluated beaver-salmonid interactions. Our review suggests the impact beavers have varies spatially and temporally, depending on a variety of local ecological characteristics. We found beaver activity is often deleterious to salmonids in low-gradient stream basins, but generally beneficial in high- gradient basins; and ample groundwater inputs can offset the potential negative effects of beavers by stabilizing the hydrologic and thermal regimes within streams. However, there was an obvious lack of empirical data and/or experimental controls within the reviewed studies, which we suggest emphasizes the need for more data-driven beaver-salmonid research in the WGL region. Resource managers are routinely faced with an ecological dilemma between maintaining natural environmental processes within cold-water ecosystems and conducting beaver control for the benefit of salmonids, and this dilemma is further complicated when the salmonids in question are a non-native species. We anticipate future beaver-salmonid research will lead to a greater understanding of this ecologically-complex relationship that may better inform managers when and where beaver control is necessary to achieve the desired management objectives. 2 INTRODUCTION North American beaver (Castor canadensis) activities affect many fish and wildlife species (Rosell et al. 2005, Windels 2017), but of particular interest to resource managers in
Load more

Recommended publications
  • David Schindler, 5 William H. Schlesinger, 6 Daniel Simberloff, 7
    R EPORTS Forecasting Agriculturally Driven Global Environmental Change David Tilman,1* Joseph Fargione,1 Brian Wolff,1 Carla D’Antonio,2 Andrew Dobson,3 Robert Howarth,4 David Schindler,5 William H. Schlesinger,6 Daniel Simberloff,7 Deborah Swackhamer8 During the next 50 years, which is likely to be the final period of rapid agri- cultural expansion, demand for food by a wealthier and 50% larger global population will be a major driver of global environmental change. Should past dependences of the global environmental impacts of agriculture on human population and consumption continue, 109 hectares of natural ecosystems would be converted to agriculture by 2050. This would be accompanied by 2.4- to 2.7-fold increases in nitrogen- and phosphorus-driven eutrophication of terrestrial, freshwater, and near-shore marine ecosystems, and comparable increases in pesticide use. This eutrophication and habitat destruction would cause unprecedented ecosystem simplification, loss of ecosystem services, and species extinctions. Significant scientific advances and regulatory, technolog- ical, and policy changes are needed to control the environmental impacts of agricultural expansion. During the first 35 years of the Green Revolu- ecosystems by the use and release of limiting tion, global grain production doubled, greatly resources that influence ecosystem functioning reducing food shortages, but at high environ- (nitrogen, phosphorus, and water), release of mental cost (1–5). In addition to its effects on pesticides, and conversion of natural ecosys- greenhouse gases (1, 6, 7), agriculture affects tems to agriculture. These sources of global change may rival climate change in environ- 1Department of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, Uni- mental and societal impacts (2, 8).
    [Show full text]
  • Profile of Stephen R. Carpenter
    PROFILE Profile of Stephen R. Carpenter hether you are a fisher- man, a kayaker, or just a lover of the outdoors, the sight—and smell—of a Wscummy, algae-covered lake may not be particularly appealing. For Stephen R. Carpenter, who is all of the above as well as a renowned lake ecologist, the problems associated with this algae buildup, or eutrophication, go far deeper than simple aesthetics. ‘‘Eu- trophication is a significant environmen- tal problem that can impact humans on a recreational, economic, and even pub- lic health level,’’ says Carpenter, ‘‘and it’s likely to intensify in the coming decades due to increases in human pop- ulation, demand for more food, land conversion, and fertilizer use.’’ Carpenter, the S. A. Forbes Professor of Zoology and Halverson Professor of Limnology at the University of Wiscon- sin–Madison (Madison, WI), has studied freshwater ecology for over 30 years. Stephen R. Carpenter and algae on Lake Mendota, WI. His multitude of research interests in- clude eutrophication, aquatic food webs, nutrient cycling, and ecological econom- outdoors at an early age. Carpenter was an aquatic systems ecologist, and ics. Beyond his research and teaching, spent most of his youth in Bethesda, that field really captured my imagination.’’ Carpenter also has, among other activi- MD. ‘‘It was a much smaller place back Carpenter performed undergraduate ties, served on numerous National Sci- then,’’ he says. ‘‘Bethesda was at the research for Fisher, who specialized in ence Foundation (NSF) advisory panels, urban fringe of DC. Everything beyond stream ecology, and Carpenter pub- been President of the Ecological Society that was rural.’’ His father, Richard, was lished his first paper on the primary of America (2001–2002), and served as a chemist, so there was always a lot of production of macrophytes (rooted the Chair of the Beijer Institute of Eco- science discussion in the household.
    [Show full text]
  • Model-Free Forecasting Outperforms the Correct Mechanistic Model for Simulated and Experimental Data
    Model-free forecasting outperforms the correct mechanistic model for simulated and experimental data Charles T. Perrettia,1, Stephan B. Munchb, and George Sugiharaa aScripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093; and bFisheries Ecology Division, Southwest Fisheries Science Center, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Edited by Peter J. Bickel, University of California, Berkeley, CA, and approved January 10, 2013 (received for review September 14, 2012) Accurate predictions of species abundance remain one of the most ARMA time series models have been used extensively in ecology; vexing challenges in ecology. This observation is perhaps unsurpris- recent examples include forecasting quasi-extinction risk (10), ing, because population dynamics are often strongly forced and investigating the effects of climate change on fisheries (11), and highly nonlinear. Recently, however, numerous statistical techni- detecting critical thresholds in ecosystem dynamics (12). SSR ques have been proposed for fitting highly parameterized mecha- methods have been less pervasive in ecology (13, 14), although nistic models to complex time series, potentially providing the they are ubiquitous in many other scientific disciplines for de- machinery necessary for generating useful predictions. Alterna- scribing stochastic nonlinear systems (15). tively, there is a wide variety of comparatively simple model-free Here, we pose a rather conservative challenge and ask whether forecasting methods that could be used to predict abundance. Here a correctly specified mechanistic model, fit with commonly used we pose a rather conservative challenge and ask whether a correctly statistical techniques, can provide better forecasts than simple specified mechanistic model, fit with commonly used statistical tech- niques, can provide better forecasts than simple model-free meth- model-free methods for ecological systems with noisy nonlinear ods for ecological systems with noisy nonlinear dynamics.
    [Show full text]
  • Noaa's Ecological Forecasting
    NOAA’S ECOLOGICAL FORECASTING Ecological forecasts use measurements of the physical and biological environment to predict ecological conditions that can impact natural resources, people, communities, and economies. NOAA aims to deliver accurate, relevant, timely, and reliable ecological forecasts that power the blue economy and build climate resilience. These products and services are made available to coastal resource managers, private industry, and the public. Harmful algal blooms (HABs) Forecasts Hypoxia Forecasts HABs occur in every state and are changing in Hypoxia (low oxygen) has dramatically increased in U.S. frequency, toxicity, and duration. Both toxic and non- coastal systems, with large “dead zones” in Lake Erie, toxic HABs threaten human and marine mammal Chesapeake Bay, and Gulf of Mexico occurring annually. health, drinking water, tourism, commercial and The consequences of such large dead zones include recreational fisheries, and aquaculture. Short-term massive fish kills, loss of fisheries habitat, and economic HAB forecasts predict the intensity, location, and losses in commercially and recreationally valuable fishies. trajectory of blooms, and respiratory health risks of In Lake Erie, hypoxic water reaching the water intake for HABs in some areas. Longer-term forecasts predict cities along the coast can affect water treatment, the severity of HABs for the bloom season in a potentially impacting approximately 2 million residents. particular region. Scenario forecasts are used to test NOAA hypoxia forecasts aim to provide coastal managers the impact of changing environmental conditions, and stakeholders with the information needed to take such as nutrient pollution and climate change, on HAB proactive action to mitigate the impacts of an ongoing occurrence over multi-year time scales.
    [Show full text]
  • Applying Algorithmic Accountability Frameworks with Domain-Specific Codes of Ethics: a Case Study in Ecosystem Forecasting for Shellfish Toxicity in the Gulf of Maine
    Applying Algorithmic Accountability Frameworks with Domain-specific Codes of Ethics: A Case Study in Ecosystem Forecasting for Shellfish Toxicity in the Gulf of Maine Isabella Grasso David Russell Abigail Matthews [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Clarkson University Clarkson University University of Wisconsin-Madison Potsdam, New York Potsdam, New York Madison, Wisconsin Jeanna Matthews Nicholas R. Record [email protected] [email protected] Clarkson University Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Potsdam, New York Sciences East Boothbay, Maine ABSTRACT CCS CONCEPTS Ecological forecasts are used to inform decisions that can have · Social and professional topics → Codes of ethics; · Applied significant impacts on the lives of individuals and on the health computing → Environmental sciences; · Human-centered com- of ecosystems. These forecasts, or models, embody the ethics of puting → Walkthrough evaluations; their creators as well as many seemingly arbitrary implementation choices made along the way. They can contain implementation KEYWORDS errors as well as reflect patterns of bias learned when ingesting Algorithmic accountability, ethics, ecology, forecasting datasets derived from past biased decision making. Principles and frameworks for algorithmic accountability allow a wide range of ACM Reference Format: stakeholders to place the results of models and software systems Isabella Grasso, David Russell, Abigail Matthews, Jeanna Matthews, and Nicholas into context. We demonstrate how the combination of algorithmic R. Record. 2020. Applying Algorithmic Accountability Frameworks with accountability frameworks and domain-specific codes of ethics help Domain-specific Codes of Ethics: A Case Study in Ecosystem Forecast- answer calls to uphold fairness and human values, specifically in ing for Shellfish Toxicity in the Gulf of Maine.
    [Show full text]
  • Outstanding Challenges in the Transferability of Ecological Models
    UC Davis UC Davis Previously Published Works Title Outstanding Challenges in the Transferability of Ecological Models. Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4r97d4np Journal Trends in ecology & evolution, 33(10) ISSN 0169-5347 Authors Yates, Katherine L Bouchet, Phil J Caley, M Julian et al. Publication Date 2018-10-01 DOI 10.1016/j.tree.2018.08.001 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California TREE 2418 1–13 Review Outstanding Challenges in the Transferability of Ecological Models 1,2, ,y 3,y 4,5 4,5 Katherine L. Yates , * Phil J. Bouchet, M. Julian Caley, Kerrie Mengersen, 6 1 7 8 9 Christophe F. Randin, Stephen Parnell, Alan H. Fielding, Andrew J. Bamford, Stephen Ban, 10 11 12 13 14 A. Márcia Barbosa, Carsten F. Dormann, Jane Elith, Clare B. Embling, Gary N. Ervin, 15 16 17 18,19 20 Rebecca Fisher, Susan Gould, Roland F. Graf, Edward J. Gregr, Patrick N. Halpin, 21 22 23 24 Risto K. Heikkinen, Stefan Heinänen, Alice R. Jones, Periyadan K. Krishnakumar, 25 26 20,27 28,23 Valentina Lauria, Hector Lozano-Montes, Laura Mannocci, Camille Mellin, 29 30 31 32 Mohsen B. Mesgaran, Elena Moreno-Amat, Sophie Mormede, Emilie Novaczek, 33 20 34 35 Steffen Oppel, Guillermo Ortuño Crespo, A. Townsend Peterson, Giovanni Rapacciuolo, 20 13 36 36,37 38 Jason J. Roberts, Rebecca E. Ross, Kylie L. Scales, David Schoeman, Paul Snelgrove, 39 40 41 12 42,43 Göran Sundblad, Wilfried Thuiller, Leigh G. Torres, Heroen Verbruggen, Lifei Wang, 44 45 46 47,48 Seth Wenger, Mark J.
    [Show full text]
  • July 21, 2020 Theory Working Group Call
    July 21, 2020 Theory Working Group Call Attendees: Amanda Gallinat, Jody Peters, Anna Sjodin, Christy Rollinson, Mike Dietze, Kathryn Wheeler, Glenda Wardle, John Foster, Michael Stemkovski, Abby Lewis Agenda: 1. Peter Adler needs to step down as the Theory Working Group chair. He will continue to provide input and follow discussions, when possible, but does not have the time to join the calls. Does anyone else want to lead/co-lead the group? a. Glenda, Christy, Abby, Amanda are all potential options b. Jody and Mike to follow up with all 4 about options 2. Update from Anna and Gretchen about their forecasting, prediction, and projection vocab analyses. n=106 respondents to the survey a. Figures b. Conceptual Diagram c. Given the survey data/figures, Anna and Gretchen came up with two ideas for forecast definitions, based on interpretation of the survey data. Anna/Gretchen are happy to have them edited, or a new definition created, by the Theory group. i. A forecast is an estimate, and the associated uncertainty of that estimate, about the future state of a system. ii. A forecast is an estimate about the state of a system in the future, or in a different space, and the uncertainty associated with that estimate. d. What is not considered in these definitions or is there something that didn’t come up in the surveys that would be helpful to ecological forecasting. e. Novel conditions may be a way to combine forecasting to future time/space. Is “novel conditions” too vague? No analog could be another option. Out of sample prediction.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Forecasting Initiative 2019 Conference Speaker & Poster
    Ecological Forecasting Initiative 2019 Conference Speaker & Poster Abstracts May 13-15, 2019 AAAS Headquarters 1200 New York Ave, NW Washington, DC 20005 @eco4cast #efi2019 The Ecological Forecasting Initiative (EFI) is a broad, interdisciplinary effort aimed at promoting the use of forecasts to understand, manage, and conserve ecosystems and the services they provide. The EFI 2019 meeting is aimed at bringing together scientists, agencies, industry, and stakeholders to build a community of practice and advance research, applications, and collaboration around near-term (subdaily to decadal) ecological forecasts. EFI2019 is sponsored by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Frederick S. Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer-Range Future at Boston University, and the National Science Foundation’s Office of International Science and Engineering. @ecoforecast #efi2019 Speaker Abstracts Session 1: Theory and Synthesis Monday, May 13 9:00 am S1.1: Keynote Ecological forecasting: the role of observations in models David Schimel1 [email protected] 1NASA JPL [abstract] 2 @ecoforecast #efi2019 Session 1: Theory and Synthesis Monday, May 13 9:00 am S1.2: Lightning Talk Understanding the uncertainties in estimating post-fire recovery of biomass using the Ecosystem Demography (EDv2.2) model Karun Pandit1, Hamid Dashti1, Nancy F. Glenn1, Alejandro N. Flores1, Kaitlin C. Maguire2, Douglas J. Shinneman2, Gerald N. Flerchinger3, Aaron W. Fellows3 [email protected] 1Boise State University; 2U.S. Geological Survey; 3ARS Frequent wildfires in the sagebrush-steppe ecosystems in the Western United States lead to heavy biodiversity loss, and changes in vegetation composition. It is debated in literature whether fires are beneficial or not for maintaining sagebrush ecosystems, it is essential that we understand the impact of these fires in terms of recovery time and potential changes in vegetation composition.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ecological Forecast Horizon, and Examples of Its Uses and Determinants
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/013441; this version posted March 29, 2015. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. The Ecological Forecast Horizon, and examples of its uses and determinants 1,2 2 Petchey, Owen L. [email protected] Pontarp, Mikael1,10 [email protected] 1 4 Massie, Thomas M. [email protected] Kéfi, Sonia3 [email protected] 1 6 Ozgul, Arpat [email protected] Weilenmann, Maja1 [email protected] 1 8 Palamara, Gian Marco [email protected] Altermatt, Florian1,2 [email protected] 4 10 Matthews, Blake [email protected] Levine, Jonathan M.5 [email protected] 6 12 Childs, Dylan Z. [email protected] McGill, Brian J.7 [email protected] 8 14 Schaepman, Michael E. [email protected] Schmid, Bernhard1 [email protected] 2,5 16 Spaak, Piet [email protected] Beckerman, Andrew P.6 [email protected] 1 18 Pennekamp, Frank [email protected] Pearse, Ian S.9 [email protected] 20 1 University of Zurich, Institute of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies, Zurich, 22 Switzerland 2 Eawag: Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, Department of Aquatic 24 Ecology, Dübendorf, Switzerland 3 Institut des Sciences de l’Evolution, Université de Montpellier, CNRS, IRD, EPHE, CC065,
    [Show full text]
  • Ecosystem Science Capabilities Required to Support NOAA's
    Ecosystem Science Capabilities Required to Support NOAA’s Mission in the Year 2020 S. A. Murawski and G. C. Matlock (editors) U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service – National Ocean Service NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-74 July 2006 Ecosystem Science Capabilities Required to Support NOAA’s Mission in the Year 2020 S. A. Murawski and G. C. Matlock (editors) NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-74 July 2006 U.S. Department of Commerce Carlos M. Gutierrez, Secretary National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Vice Admiral Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Jr., USN (Ret.) Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere National Marine Fisheries Service Dr. William T. Hogarth, Assistant Administrator for Fisheries National Ocean Service John H. Dunnigan – Assistant Administrator for Ocean Service Suggested Citations: Murawski, S.A., and G.C. Matlock (editors). 2006. Ecosystem Science Capabilities Required to Support NOAA’s Mission in the Year 2020. U.S. Dep. Commerce, NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-F/SPO-74, 97 p. Individual sections: Carter, G., P. Restrepo, J. Hameedi, P. Ortner, C. Sellinger, J. Stein, and T. Beechie, 2006. Freshwater Issues. pp. 29-39. In: S.A. Murawski and G.C. Matlock (editors). Ecosystem Science Capabilities Required to Support NOAA’s Mission in the Year 2020. U.S. Dep. Commerce, NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-F/SPO-74, 97 p. A copy of the report may be obtained from: National Marine Fisheries Service Office of Science and Technology 1315 East-West Highway, 12th Floor Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 or National Ocean Service National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science 1305 East West Highway, Room 8110 Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 Or Online at: http://spo.nmfs.noaa.gov/tm/ Overview: Commission on Ocean Policy’s report Ecosystem Science Capabilities (USCOP, 2004), and the Required to Support NOAA’s Administration’s response to that report in the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Joint Segregation of Biochemical Loci in Salmonidae
    JOINT SEGREGATION OF BIOCHEMICAL LOCI IN SALMONIDAE. 11. LINKAGE ASSOCIATIONS FROM A HYBRIDIZED SALVELINUS GENOME (S. NAMAYCUSH x S. FONTZNALZS) * BERNIE MAY, MARK STONEKING AND JAMES E. WRIGHT, JR. Department of Biology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802 Manuscript received September 11, 1979 Revised copy received April 7, 1980 ABSTRACT The results of more than 300 painvise examinations of biochemical loci for joint segregation in brook trout (Salvelinus fontimlis) and in the hybrid- ized genome of lake trout (S. namaycush) x brook trout are summarized. Nineteen loci have been assigned to the following eight linkage groupings on the basis of nonrandom assortment, including cases of both classical linkage and pseudolinkage: ODH with PMI with PGI-3, PGI-2 with SDH, ADA-I with AGP-2, AAT-(1,2) with AGP-I with MDH-I, MDH-3 with MDH-4, LDH-3 with LDH-4, IDH-3 with ME-2 and GUS with CPK-I. Pseudolinkage (an excess of nonparental progeny types) was observed only for male testcross parents. The results suggest that this phenomenon involves homeologous chromosome arms as evidenced by the de novo association of presumed dupli- cate loci in each case. Classical linkage has not been found for the five pairs of duplicate loci examined in Salvelinus, suggesting that not all of the eight metacentrics in the haploid complement involve fusions of homeologous chromosomes. Females consistently showed a greater degree of recombination. is accepted by most authors that the Salmonidae (trouts, salmons, chars, ':raylings and whitefishes) are the derivatives of a tetraploid lineage. It is clear from extensive inheritance and population studies of biochemical loci that (1) segregation is strictly disomic (BAILEYet al.
    [Show full text]
  • Wisconsin Fishing.. It's Fun and Easy!
    Wisconsin Fishing.. it's fun and easy! To use this pamphlet, follow these 5 easy steps: Restrictions: Be familiar with What's New on page 4 and the License Requirements 1 and Statewide Fishing Restrictions on pages 8-11. Trout fishing: If you plan to fish for trout, please see the separate inland trout 2 regulations booklet, Guide to Wisconsin Trout Fishing Regulations, 2019-2020, available online, from your license distributor, or any DNR Service Center. Special regulations: Check for special regulations on the water you will be fishing 3 in the section entitled Special Regulations-Listed by County beginning on page 28. Great Lakes, Winnebago System Waters, and Boundary Waters: If you are 4 planning to fish on the Great Lakes, their tributaries, Winnebago System waters or waters bordering other states, check the appropriate tables on pages 64–76. Statewide rules: If the water you will be fishing is not found in theSpecial Regulations- 5 Listed by County and is not a Great Lake, Winnebago system, or boundary water, statewide rules apply. See the regulation table for General Inland Waters on pages 62–63 for seasons, length and bag limits, listed by species. ** This pamphlet is an interpretive summary of Wisconsin’s fishing laws and regulations. For complete fishing laws and regulations, including those that are implemented after the publica- tion of this pamphlet, consult the Wisconsin State Statutes Chapter 29 or the Administrative Code of the Department of Natural Resources. Consult the legislative website - http://docs. legis.wi.gov - for more information. For the most up-to-date version of this pamphlet, go to dnr.wi.gov search words, “fishing regulations.
    [Show full text]