AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF
Kenneth J. Rodnick for the degree of Master of Science in
Department of Fisheries presented on March 11, 1983
Title: Seasonal distribution and habitat selection by the redside
shiner, Richardsonius balteatus, in a small Oregon stream Redacted for Privacy Abstract approved: Hiram W. Li
Seasonal habitat availability, utilization, and selection byyoung
of the year (<25 mm) and adult (>25 mm) redside shiner, Richardsonius balteatus, were studied for 1 year in sections of Greasy Creek, Benton
County, Oregon. Intensive stream mapping procedures and snorkling observations provided most of the quantitative measures for habitat availability and utilization respectively.
A multivariate discriminant analysis and classification suggested spatial segregation of young of the year and adult redside shiners along gradients of water velocity and depth of the water column.
Throughout the year, young redside shiners occupied shallower water than adults and utilized areas with lower mean water velocities.
Associated with increased winter stream flows and lowered water temperatures (< 100 C), redside shiners were inactive and found in habitats offering the most cover and refuge from current.
Overwintering areas populated by redside shiners included undercut banks, root wads, bank failures, fallen trees, and backwaters. During the transitional period between winter andsummer, adult redside
shiners shifted from overwintering habitats to the fasterwater of the
main channel. Activities related to spawning and aggressive defense
of space accompanied this shift. Young redside shiners continued to
utilize protected margins.
A multivariate discriminant analysis and classification comparing
available and utilized stream habitats provided indices ofhabitat
selection. Both young of the year and adult redside shinerswere
relatively selective in the stream habitats they utilized. The
importance of four physical components (depth, current velocity, substrate composition, and cover forms) varied seasonally and with the life stage considered.
Similar patterns of habitat utilization for redside shinerswere observed in four larger streams and rivers. The availability of large, deep pools was important, new habitat for bothyoung and adult redside shiners during periods of reduced stream flow in larger streams and rivers. SEASONAL DISTRIBUTION AND HABITAT SELECTION BY THE
REDSIDE SHINER, RICHARDSONIUS BALTEATUS, IN A SMALL OREGON STREAM
by
Kenneth J. Rodnick
A THESIS
submitted to
Oregon State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science
Completed March 11, 1983
Commencement June 1983 APPROVED:
Redacted for Privacy Associate Professor of Fisheries, in charge of major Redacted for Privacy
Head of Departmeft of Fisheries and Wildlife
Redacted for Privacy Dean of Gradua School
Date thesis is presented March 11, 1983
Typed by LaVon Mauer for Kenneth J. Rodnick ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to dedicate this manuscript to my parents and family
who have always supported my academic interests and activities.
Dr. Paul Reimers sparked my interests in behavioral research and
the stream ecology of the redside shiners. My undergraduate studies and experiences with Dr. Peter Moyle and Dr. Joseph Cech further developed my background and appreciation for fisheries research in the field and labora*ory.
I would like to extend a special thanks to Dr. Norbert Hartmann,Dr.
James Hall, and Dr. Fred Everest for their helpful ideas and criticisms throughout the study. Concurrent with my research, Gordie
Reeves developed his own research interests concerning the interaction between redside shiners and juvenile salmonids in streams.Gordie assisted with the field work and was a valuable source of observations, comments, and discussion.
I owe much of my personal growth and accomplishments during my graduate program to my major professor, Dr. Hiram Li, and his wife
Judy. They extended themselves well beyond any of my initial expectations. Dr. Li's office door was always open and he was an unlimited source of energy, ideas, encouragement, and criticisms.
This research was funded by Oregon Water Research and Technology through the Water Resources Research Institute Project W93-B-077 ORE and the Cooperative Fisheries Research Unit at Oregon State
University. TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. STUDY AREA 5
III. MATERIALS AND METHODS 9
Sampling Sites 9
Sampling Methods 9
Selection of Habitat Variables 11
Statistical Methods and Analysis 15
IV. RESULTS 18
Summer Habitat Utilization 18
Habitat Discrimination by Life Stages 23
Habitat Selection 23
Winter Habitat Utilization 25
Habitat Discrimination by Life Stages 34
Habitat Selection 34
Transitional Habitat Utilization 35
Habitat Discrimination by Life Stages 41
Habitat Selection 41
General Behavior Patterns 42
V. DISCUSSION 43
VI. LITERATURE CITED 53 LIST OF FIGURES
Figures Page
1. Location of Greasy Creek. 6
2. Location of sampling points in measurements ofstream
habitat availability (mapping). Sampling begins at
the downstream end of the study site andproceeds
upstream. Sampling points occur at 2 m intervals,
both across the stream and moving upstream.
Alternate banks are used as references for each
transect. 12
3. Frequency histograms for utilized and available
depths of the water column during thesummer period. 20
4. Frequency histograms for utilized and available
current during the summer period. 21
5. Mean substrate composition for utilized and available
habitats during the summer period. 22
6. Frequency histograms for utilized and available
depths of the water column during the winter period. 31
7. Frequency histograms for utilized and available
current during the winter period. 32 Figures Page
8. Mean substrate composition for utilized and available
habitats during the winter period. 33
9. Frequency histograms for utilized and available
depths of the water column during the transitional
period. 38
10. Frequency histograms for utilized and available
current during the transitional period. 39
11. Mean substrate composition for utilized and available
habitats during the transitional period. 40 LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Categories used to characterize Greasy Creek
substrate composition. 14
2. Habitat variables measured at summer locations of
redside shiner and corresponding available stream
habitats. 19
3. Variable loadings and unbiased classification results
for habitat discrimination by life stages. 24
4. Variable loadings and unbiased classification results
for habitat selection by young redside shiners. 26
5. Variable loadings and unbiased classification results
for habitat selection by adult redside shiners. 27
6. Stream habitat types selected by redside shiners
during winter periods. 29
7. Habitat variables measured at winter locations of
redside shiner and corresponding available stream
habitats. 30
8. Habitat variables measured during periods of changing
discharge between seasons (transitional habitats). 37 SEASONAL DISTRIBUTION AND HABITAT SELECTION BY THE
REDSIDE SHINER, RICHARDSONIUS BALTEATUS, IN A SMALL OREGON STREAM
INTRODUCTION
The main objective of this study was to examine the spatial and
temporal relationship of the redside shiner, Richardsonius balteatus,
to its stream habitat surroundings. Specific objectives included: 1)
to document and quantify seasonal patterns of habitat utilization by
the redside shiner in streams; 2) to quantify the corresponding habitat availability during different seasons; 3) to develop a multivariate approach to measure habitat selection by the redside shiner in streams.
The redside shiner is a small cyprinid, length to 180mm, occurring in coastal streams of Oregon and Washington, the Columbia
River below Snake River Falls, and the Skeena and Fraser systems of
British Columbia (Scott and Crossman 1973, Wydoski and Whitney 1979).
Because it occupies large lakes, small ponds, moderately fast streams, and irrigation ditches the redside shiner is considered one of the most abundant and widespread freshwater fishes within its range
(Weisel and Newman 1951, Scott and Crossman 1973). Early studies focused on the high varability of anal fin ray counts over its geographic range (Eigenmann 1895). This variation led to numerous subspecies designations. Today just two forms are recognized: R. balteatus (10-24 anal rays) and R. egregius, the Lahontan redside (8 or 9 anal rays) (McPhail and Lindsey 1970). The great variation in 2
anal fin rays has not been correlated with habitat differences and
still remains unresolved.
The redside shiner has been most intensively studied in lakes or
lake systems (Crossman 1959, a,b, Lindsey and Northcote 1961, Scott
and Crossman 1973, Wydoski and Whitney 1979). Relatively little is
known about the biology and behavior of the redside shiner in streams.
Redside shiners have been observed to partition lake resources with
the kamloops trout, Salmo gairdneri, and are suspected of competing with and serving as prey for the kamloops trout (Johannes and Larkin
1961). Unfortunately, non-selective chemical poisoning has been a common management measure to reduce redside shiner numbers in streams without any knowledge of general behavior and distribution in streams.
The study of patterns of distribution and abundance of organisms is fundamental to ecology (Andrewartha and Birch 1954). Liebig
(1840) found that these patterns are limited by the resource in shortest supply. Shelford (1913) developed the concept of zones of tolerance, whereby the distribution patterns are circumscribed by physiological limits. These patterns are of interest to students of niche analysis, community structure, and to those interested in habitat dynamics. Unfortunately, some of the terminology has been ambiguous in the past because of the interrelatedness of concepts
(Whitaker et al. 1973). The terminology of Whitaker et al. (1973) will be followed. The ecotope comprises niche dimensions (n) and habitat demensions (m). Population density is a response to each set of dimensions. The niche hypervolume is a response by the species to 3 the n variables by which all species in a specific association or community are related. This is identical to the realized niche of
Hutchinson (1958). The habitat hypervolume is formed from the m variables described the physical and chemical environment and is related to a diversities or between habitat comparisons.
Reasons for changes of animal abundance between habitats (Patches) have been proposed by Fretwell and Lucas (1970) and Fretwell (1972) in a formal framework. This framework suggests that animals can assess patch suitabilities and select which patch to occupy from the array that is available. Thus, habitat distributions results from a behavioral phenomenon involving stimuli and responses that is quantified by the number of individuals present in each defined habitat (Frewell 1972, Frazer and Sise 1980). The resulting environmental patchiness and dynamic resource availability have been shown to affect both terrestrial (Dyeser and Shugart 1978) and aquatic
(Frazer and Sise 1980) habitat utilization. Habitat selection by an organism should weight time and energetic expenditures with the environmental factors present (Southwood 1977).
It has been suggested that fishes tend to specialize with respect to specific habitat types and that stream environments are heterogeneous with patches arranged longitudinally (Mendelson 1975,
Gorman and Karr 1978). Unfortunately few studies of stream or lake populations of fishes have documented patterns of habitat utilization with the corresponding availability. The selection process, comparing patterns of utilization and availabilities, such as that examined in 4
predator-prey relationship has not been formally analyzed. There have
been field studies that have investigated temporal variability, including daily and seasonal changes in stream conditions and fish
behavior. Limited studies examining unfavorable winter periods have demonstrated drastic changes in stream environments and habitat utilization by fishes (Chapman and Bjornn 1969, Bustard and Narver
1975). Another consideration is that intraspecific size andage differences can reflect differences in habitat utilization (Gee and
Northcote 1963, Pianka 1976, Matthews and Hill 1979). 5
STUDY AREA
Greasy Creek, a small fourth order stream located 12kilometers
west of Corvallis, Benton County, Oregon, was selected for study
(Figure 1). Greasy Creek is a major tributary to the Marys River
system and originates on the southern slopes of Marys Peak. Starting
at an elevation of 150 meters, Greasy Creek flows eastward13
kilometers through a narrow agricultural valleyto its confluence with
the Marys River near Philomath, elevation 80meters. Total drainage area of the stream is approximately 100 square kilometers (U.S.G.S. topographic map, 7.5 minute).
Greasy Creek is located in the Oregon Coast Rangerain shadow and receives moderate annual precipitation (175-200 centimeters). Most of the precipitation occurs as rainfall between October and May.
Impervious sedimentary formations and shallow soils in theupper watershed provide little volume for water storage and littlecapacity for buffering stream discharge. Streamflow therefore closely follows the rainfall pattern. Mean daily discharge varies from less than 5 cfs in late summer to over 100 cfs during winter freshets (Wiltset al. 1960). Storm events result in mass substrate movement, tree fall, streambank deterioration, formation of debris jams, and high turbidities. In summary, wide fluctuations in streamflow are characteristic during winter months and severe water shortage characterize summer periods. Main channel water temperatures
7
value of 3°C during December and January (personal observations).
Dissolved oxygen is typically at or near saturation values.
Most of lower Greasy Creek is heavily used for irrigation and
various agricultural purposes. Water is withdrawn at several points
and streamside vegetation has been removed in many areas. Livestock
grazing occurs right up to the stream banks, animals are drivenacross
the stream channel, and many feedlots drain directly into thestream.
Stream banks are commonly steep (1-3 meters) and unstablewith constant
erosion creating a dynamic stream course. No fish hatcheries or
impoundments are present on Greasy Creek.
Twelve species of fishes were present in Greasy Creek of which
only five were abundant. The common Greasy Creek fishes included: 1)
the redside shiner, Richardsonius balteatus, 2) the speckled dace,
Rhinichthys osculus, 3) the reticulate sculpin, Cottus perplexus, 4)
the torrent sculpin, Cottus rhotheus, and 5) the cutthroat trout,
Salmo clarki.
Streamside vegetation primarily consisted of red alder, Alnus
rubra, willow, Salix spp., and maple, Acer macrophyllum, with an
understory dominated by salmonberry, Rubus spectabillis, and
blackberry, R. lacinlatum. Aquatic vegetation was limited to small
amounts of filamentous algae and diatoms.
Qualitative observations of redside shiner behavior was conducted
in 4 additional Oregon streams and rivers for comparative purposes.
These systems all had greater discharge values and greater watershed areas than Greasy Creek. They included 2 Willamette Valley streams 8
[the Luckiamute River (Polk County) and Mill Creek (Polk County)] and
2 coastal streams [the Smith River (Douglas County) and the Millicoma
River (Coos County)]. 9
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Sampling Sites
Ten permanent study sites were selected followingan extensive
survey to determine the longitudinal distribution limits of the
redside shiner in Greasy Creek. Each site was chosen to represent
available stream reaches at various distances upstream andconsisted
of a linear and meandering section. Study sites measured
approximately 20 meters in length and were marked by permanent wooden
stakes.
Sampling Methods
Intensive stream surveys were conducted during three different
discharge regimes: 1) summer low flows (August-September 1980), 2)
winter high flows (January-March 1981), and 3) decreasing transitional
flows (May-July 1981).
A variety of techniques was used to locate shiner and quantify
habitat utilization. Summer and transitional habitat utilization was measured by snorkling upstream through study sites. This is a rapid, effective stream survey method that has minimal disruptive effects on
fish behavior (Northcote and Wilkie 1963, Goldstein 1978). A comparison of snorkling and seining techniques demonstrated that reliable estimates of individual fish size and population size could be obtained with snorkling techniques and the different techniques gave similar estimates when used appropriately.Each redside shiner or group of shiners was identified, counted, and placed into groups of 10
<25 mm and >25 mm. A diving glove marked off in 1 cm intervals provided an underwater reference. Underwater visibility was a major factor influencing snorkling and 1 m was considered the minimum value for reliable observation. Snorkling observations were normally conducted between 1000 and 1500 hours to utilize the period of greatest underwater visibility. In addition, diel observations were conducted in order to note changes in habitat utilization and day/night activities. An underwater light and wooden probe were used to search for fish at night and in darkened areas of dense cover.
During the winter period, snorkling observations were limited by poor water clarity, extremely high current velocities, low water temperatures, and the inaccessible nature of refuge areas occupied by fish. Stunning fish by electroshocking and allowing the stream flow to carry them out of refuge areas was considered the only effective sampling technique.
Each redside shiner sighting was considered a data point and shiners were classified as young (<25 mm total length) or adults (>25 mm total length). During snorkling, fish were observed for 1 to 3 minutes to estimate a focal point of occurrence, the location where a fish spends the most time (Wickham 1967, Bovee and Cochnauer 1978).
Focal points were marked with a spark plug attached to a coded wooden buoy, and fish were then displaced downstream. Measurement of particular physicochemical stream components were recorded for each focal site the same day fish were observed. When shiners were not located within the study site boundaries, efforts were made to survey both upstream and downstream from the site until shiners were located. 11
After quantifying habitat utilization for the shiners, systematic
mapping of the total wetted area at each study site was conducted to
determine habitat availability. Variables recorded at each locus
during stream mapping were identical to those recorded during focal
sampling.
Mapping was conducted upstream in a systematic fashion and point
samples were taken at grid intervals of 2 meters (Figure 2). After
each transect, alternate banks were usedas a reference to reduce bank
bias. Mapping of available habitat was conducted less than 24 hours
after focal sampling to ensure that the changes of stream habitat would
be minimal. A minimum of 20 loci were recorded for each site to
adequately represent stream habitat availability. These sampling
techniques required Lhe effort of one or two individuals to collect
the data. Data from focal samples (utilization) and mapping
(availability) collected for each season were separately pooled and
analyzed.
Selection of Habitat Variables
The number of environmental variables that may affect species
distribution is potentially infinite. Three criteria used in the
selection of habitat variables for measurement included: 1) each variable should be related to environmental structure (availability) and be known to influence the animal's distribution (utilization); 2) each variable should be quickly and precisely measurable with non-destructive sampling techniques; and 3) each variable should accurately describe habitats and be highly specific. SAMPLING DIRECTION So.
e-rn 'Ia
4013
I I 49
10 fr .411-- FLOW DIRECTioN
0 2
meters
Figure 2. Location of sampling points in measurements of stream habitat availability (mapping).
Sampling begins at the downstream end of the study site and proceedsupstream. Sampling
points occur at 2 m intervals, both across the stream and movingupstream. Alternate
banks are used as references for each transect. 13
Evidence suggests that substrate composition, depth, and current velocity are three physical components important to the microhabitat specialization of stream fishes (Gorman and Karr 1978). In the present study, substrate composition was visually estimated with an
Aquascope viewing box, and percentages were assigned to categories
(Table 1). Substrate categories A through G correspond to alluvial material of increasing size with category H including organic debris
(leaves, twigs, branches, etc.). The depth of the water column was measured in centimeters with a graduated wooden dowel at each sampling point. Mean velocity was measured four-tenths (0.4) the distance off the bottom, with a Marsh McBirney electronic current meter model 201.
The distribution of stream fishes has also been positively correlated with different forms of cover (Boussu 1954, Butler and
Hawthorne 1968, Lewis 1969, Bustard and Narver 1975). A "presence" notation was recorded when various forms of defined cover were available, and defined as follows: overhead cover was an object
(tree, branch, etc.) above the water surface providing shade between
1000 and 1500 hours; undercut banks were cover under the banks; lastly, surface turbulence was an area with a broken water surface due to irregular instream structures and fast currents.
For each sampling period, air temperature, water temperature, and dissolved oxygen were recorded with a Yellow Springs instrument, temperature/oxygen meter model 54A. All three factors were measured at the beginning of each sampling period. Pilot tests found that they did not vary during the sampling time course. 14
Table 1. Categories used to characterize Greasy Creek substrate
composition.
Categories
A. Sand, silt, or clay
B. Small gravel < 2.5 cm
C. Gravel 2.5 - 7.5 cm
D. Cobble 7.5 - 15.0 cm
E. Rubble 15.0 - 30.0 cm
F. Boulders > 30. 0 cm
G. Bedrock
H. Woody debris leaves, twigs, branches,
etc. 15
Crucial to the measurement of habitat were the assumptions that stream habitats were heterogeneous and one or more of the measured environmental variables would be correlated with and help explain distribution patterns of the shiners.
Statistical Methods and Analysis
To characterize the Greasy Creek habitats utilized by the redside shiner and available habitats, summary statistics including means and
95% confidence intervals were calculated (SPSS 'Frequencies' subprogram). Preliminary examination of the data consisted of plotting univariate frequency histograms for the variables depth,mean current velocity, and substrate composition.
Stream habitat data by their very nature are always multivariate and should be analyzed in that fashion. Multivariate techniques are currently accepted by ecologists (Green 1980). However, these same techniques have been used by the ecologist studying stream fishes only recently. Historically, variables are treated singly as if only each variable were independent. When considering more than one variable for ecological studies, multivariate analysis often represents the most appropriate and powerful approach to describe structure (Green
1974, 1980; Colgan 1978).
Because a large number of variables were recorded during sampling, one objective of the analysis was to reduce the number of interdependent variables, thereby increasing comprehension and interpretation of results. Multivariate analysis of variance, specifically discriminant analysis techniques, were used to determine 16
which variables contributed most effectively to life-stage
differentiation. Discriminant analysis techniques were also used to
compare utilized and available habitat (habitat selection). The
discriminant analysis (Xerox Version, SPSS 602, Nie et al. 1975)
employed was stepwise, incorporating or eliminating variables based on
Wilks lambda, which maximized overall group differences (Klecka 1975).
In this fashion each variable is tested for statistical significance and assigned its relative importance by order of entry. Variables entered early in the analysis account for a considerable amount of between-group differentiation. Ancillary variables tested independently do not discriminate between groups and yet they collectively may provide additional discrimination in thepresence of other variables.
The particular discriminant procedure used was considered
"unbiased" because the computer randomly selected 75% of the original cases from each group for the analysis and ensuing discriminant functions. The remaining cases (25%) were used for classification purposes. Pimentel and Frey (1978) have reviewed the general assumptions and limitations of discriminant analysis and its application to empirical studies. They suggested that discriminant methods are robust from departures from assumptions.
Discriminant classification is a powerful tool for evaluating the effectiveness of the derived discriminant functions (Klecka 1975).
Scores for each data point were calculated with each case being assigned to a group based on these scores. Since the actual group was previously known, the percentage of correct classifications evaluated 17
the resolving power of the discriminant function.A classification
value of 75% was considered sufficient to describe group differences.
Several discriminant functions were generated for each intergroup
analysis and the final determinations were made when the addition of an extra variable did not improve the classification. In summary, the analysis of habitat selection is multivariate and incorporates measurements of both utilized and available habitats. Different sizes of fish and the different stream flow regimes, corresondingto different seasons were considered to obtain a comprehensive view of changing patterns of habitat selection. 18
RESULTS
During the 1 yr study period approximately 60 hrs of snorkling
observations were conducted, accounting for 615 young shiners and 316
adult shiners at focal points in Greasy Creek. During the winter
interval 56 young shiners and 161 adult shiners were located by
electroshocking technique. The overall mapping procedure physically
characterized 3650 square meters of stream habitat.Additional
snorkling observations in the 4 larger streams totaled 18 hrs.
Summer Habitat Utilization
Summer stream habitats were characterized by low stable flows,
clear water, and warm water temperatures in the main channel ranging
from 12.5 to 22.0° C. The majority of the sampling occurred between
15 and 18°C. Corresponding dissolved oxygen values were at ornear
saturation.
The numbers of shiners observed during this period were 327 young
and 125 adult fish. Shiners occurred in all 10 sampling sites
examined. Young shiners were quite uniform in size, ranging from
16-22 mm total length whereas adult fish ranged from 42-110 mm.
The data collected suggest habitat utilization differences
between young and adult shiners (Table 2, Figures 3, 4, 5).Recently emerged shiners and somewhat larger young-of-the-year shiners occupied shallow water areas with minimal water velocity in large aggregations
(mean group size±SD = 18.2±9.2). Young shiners were predominately found associated with very small particle substrates.Adult shiners 19
Table 2. Habitat variables measured at summer locations of redside
shiner and corresponding available stream habitats.
Young shiners Adult shiners Available Variable (n=327) (n=125) (area=1575
Depth 31.4cm ± 6.7 55.7cm ± 8.8 34.3cm ± 2.3 (x ± 95% CI)
Mean Velocity 5.4cm/sec ± 1.7 20.0cm/sec ± 5.5 16.5cm/sec ± 1.7 (x ± 95% CI)
Substrate Composition (% occurrence)
Sand/silt/clay 46.4 23.6 25.1
Small Gravel 17.6 33.3 38.9
Gravel 8.5 21.5 16.2
Cobble 3.6 4.7 4.2
Rubble 1.9 0.0 0.9
Boulders 5.9 4.6 1.8
Bedrock 6.0 2.4 6.0
Woody Debris 10.1 9.9 6.9
Cover Forms (% occurrence)
Instream 100 88 95
Overhead 39 58 54
Undercut Banks 11 25 11
Surface Turbulence 11 46 32 20
SO
12:2 ULM SHINER «260110
45
1 71 SS OS 11a 111a
SS
E22 ADULTSAINER C>25MK)
) VI SS 4I lie 75 SI as 1111 t/SI
svA,T,-45M-ITT
1 1III 4S SS 11 71 el SS 1I1 1 I 11:11 refTtiCOV
Figure 3. Frequency histograms for utilized and available depths of
the water column during the summer period. 21
es 66 69
a 02.rour45v-arcit c 311 es 19 Is Is IIIIIIIIIITI11111 II 6is is Ile t£ 30 36 a 46 102 66 esss7e7sesisseates EZ3ADULT $HDR C,251013 16 IS 4 14111IIIIIIII1 11 i 1016 IS tc 30 36 101 66 01 a 70 76 a a INI 6 AV A.13.401LITT 36 Ja1/1441111 Ii71111;;;;;;41 ftlitMf.,:z4; mezr. . Ittlf I If 6 1sftt0103Staai0 66016776011116131161011 Mut CUPOWIff IrF1.D=111 telVIIEC) Figure 4. Frequency histograms for utilized and available current during the summer period. 22 Young Shiner <25mm Adult Shiner> 25mm Availability Figure 5. Mean substrate composition for utilized and available habitats during the summer period. 23 were located in areas of faster water velocity and deeper water than were young shiner (Table 2, Figures 3, 4). Areas utilized by adults also contained a greater portion of gravel, cobble, undercut banks, and surface turbulence (Table 2). The number of adult fish observed aggregating in a group was typically less than young fish (mean group size±SD = 8.7±5.8). Observations suggest that both young and adult shiners aggregate and feed during most of the day with peak activity occurring at dawn and dusk. Adults were located throughout the water column and on the substrate, whereas young shinerswere found at or near the water surface. Interestingly, most shiner occupied similar stream positions throughout the 24-hr period. Habitat Discrimination by Life Stages The disciminant function incorporated mean water velocity and water column depth at the site of occurrence (Table 3). Adult shiners had higher postiive loadings on both variables, reflecting utilization of faster, deeper water microhabitats. During the classification phase of the discriminant analysis, 93.3% of the data cases not selected for analysis were properly assigned to the respective groups. Overall, the summer microhabitat analysis demonstrated intraspecific spatial separation based on measured environmental variables. Habitat Selection Differentiation between habitats utilized by young shiners and available habitats was related to the mean water velocity, the percent gravel and bedrock present, and the amount of instream cover 24 Table 3. Variable loadings and unbiased classification results for habitat discrimination by life stages. LOADINGS Classification Variables Young / Adults Wilk's Lambda (%) SUMMER Depth 0.115 0.215 0.411 93.3 Mean Velocity 0.120 0.404 WINTER Depth 0.100 0.148 0.763 86.1 TRANSITIONAL Depth 0.503 1.912 Mean Velocity 0.195 0.771 0.323 95.2 Sand/silt/clay 0.863 0.312 Small Gravel 0.354 1.230 25 (Table 4). Loading values suggest young shiners selected slower water areas with less gravel and bedrock, and more instream cover than was generally available. A classification value of 73.5% suggests that the resolution for this discriminant function is adequate but not outstanding. Stream habitats utilized by adult shiners and available habitats were differentiated according to water depth, percent cobble present, and surface turbulence (Table 5). Adult shiner loading values were greater for all the variables compared to available habitats, suggesting selection of deeper stream microhabiatts containing more cobble and surface turbulence. A classification value of 80.8% indicates group differentiation and seletion of specific habitats by adult shiners. Winter Habitat Utilization Marked seasonal changes in stream habitats occurred during the 9-week period January 17-April 19, 1981. Intermittent floods and high stream flows modified previously available habitats and created new habitats by channel expansion and deepening. Winter habitat availability could not be predicted from summer low flow surveys. Main channel water temperatures were quite stable, ranging from 4.5°C to 8.0°C, and dissolved oxygen values were always recorded at or near saturation. Snorkling observations were limited to 1 hr intervals due to the temperature, velocity, and turbidity. Electroshocking proved helpful for locating fish and quantifying the numbers and life stage 26 Table 4. Variable loadings and unbiased classification results for habitat selection by young redside shiners. LOADINGS Classification Variables Young / Available Wilk's Lambda (%) SUMMER Mean Velocity -0.009 0.052 Small Gravel 0.031 0.066 0.722 73.5 Boulders 0.058 0.078 Instream Cover 44.099 41.682 WINTER Turbulence -0.098 3.989 Small Gravel -0.001 0.067 0.385 90.2 Mean Velocity 0.005 0.047 TRANSITIONAL Depth 0.032 0.118 Small Gravel 0.017 0.098 0.430 89.1 Woody Debris 0.087 -0.009 27 Table 5. Variable loadings and unbiased classification results for habitat selection by adult redside shiners. LOADINGS Classification Variables Adults / Available Wilk's Lambda (%) SUMMER Depth 0.175 0.093 Gravel 0.107 0.065 0.638 80.2 Turbulence 2.937 1.957 WINTER Depth 0.137 0.088 Mean Velocity 0.021 0.060 0.466 88.0 Small Gravel -0.043 0.000 TRANSITIONAL Depth 0.198 0.101 0.618 82.8 28 present at a particular site. Focal samples were recorded whenever specific utilization patterns were evident, but sampling difficulties associated with some of the winter habitats prohibited accurate measurements. Adult shiners typically occupied areas of dense and extensive cover, resulting in fewer focal samples than for young shiners (119 versus 222). All observations of shiners were recorded as classes of discrete winter habitat (Table 6). Five study sites were sampled and fish were located in just three of them. When shiners were not located in a chosen sampling section, theywere usually observed a short distance up or downstream in associationwith cover. Both young and adult shiners utilized discrete, non-randomly distributed stream microhabitats, corresponding to increasedstream flows and lowered water temperatures. Young shiners occurred primarily in backwater areas including sidepools and quiet waterareas (Table 6). Adult fish were found associated with a greater variety of habitat types, especially areas where bank failures and backwater areas were present. Both young and adult fish were located in areas with minimal water velocity, containing substrates dominated byvery small particles (sand, silt, or clay) and woody debris (Table 7, Figures 6, 7, 8). All shiner microhabitats were usually associated with both instream and overhead cover forms. Intraspecific differences in habitat utilization were evident as adults utilized deeper areas containing undercut banks and surface turbulence to a greater extent than did young fish (Table 7). Adults were distributed according to the location of root masses and debris 29 Table 6. Stream habitat types selected by redside shiners during winter periods. Numbers (% of total) Young Adults Habitat Types (n=278) (n=280) Undercut banks 0 (0) 21 (7.5) (with tree roots or woody debris) Root wads 0 (0) 36 (12.9) (provided by a fallen tree) Fallen trees 65 (23.4) 16 (5.7) (without root wads present) Bank failure 37 (13.3) 106 (38.0) (with debris accumulation) Backwater areas 176 (63.3) 101 (35.9) (including quiet sidepools) 30 Table 7. Habitat variables measured at winter locations of redside shiner and corresponding available stream habitats. Young shiners Adult shiners Available Variable (n=222) (n=119) (area=1060 m?) Depth 54.8cm ± 2.8 83.0cm ± 4.6 51.3cm ± 3.3 (x ± 95% CI) Mean Velocity 2.2cm/sec ± 0.2 4.1cm/sec ± 0.5 47.8cm/sec ± 4.6 (x ± 95% CI) Substrate Composition (% occurrence) Sand/silt/clay 57.5 63.5 26.8 Small Gravel 0.0 3.5 39.0 Gravel 0.0 2.2 17.3 Cobble 0.0 0.2 4.2 Rubble 0.0 0.0 0.3 Boulders 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bedrock 18.0 5.4 5.1 Woody Debris 24.5 25.2 7.3 Cover Forms (% occurrence) Instream 100 100 99 Overhead 86 92 44 Undercut Banks 14 27 11 Surface Turbulence 0 8 66 31 1O0 2 09 40 99 a 0 10 za29 Mg SO 1111 70 OS 90I 00 110 12A 1701 Of SO 2g 122ADULT SHMIER C >25/Vi LS 16 . 10 1 I 1 I t 1 I a 111 ZS SO 441 CO SO 70 90IOC 110 IS ISO 1414 I AvArlaz_rrr 1 Ell SO 441 OD On 79 SO M 1 011I II 120 170I 41 907111 C CM 2 Figure 6. Frequency histograms for utilized and available depths of the water column during the winter period. 32 12B 10F 22T DUNS WINER C t2SMP1) 2 10 20 30 M WM7008901,0 111012; 170141 ss. es. I or 111 29 SS t0 SO 1110 7 SSIS1 SO 110 128 IX, 140 S 4YA-T4.44121_Try 4 2 111 I0 20 311 41 SO OS 7 SS 1111 10 11 129 13 I110 PF.MI CURRENT M21.01ZM C OVUM Figure 7. Frequency histograms for utilized and available current during the winter period. 33 Young Shiner< 25riri AdultShiner> 25m MDR= 5.46X =POLE 6.2.40 GRAVEL 2.2-2% SMALL ORAVEL 3.5w3A =VT DEBRIS Z5,12511 Availability GRAVEL 17.3.17% 4.24X O.]=0 PEINECCIL7 WOOP7 VESKZI 7.37X MALL GRAVEL 311310 SAND,SILT.OR 28.821X Figure 8. Mean substrate composition for utilized and available habitats during the winter period. 34 in the water colum. Young shiners always occurred near the water surface. For any particular winter microhabitat similar sized shiners were found together, the largest shiners found deepest within cover. Mean group size for young fish was quite large when compared to adult fish (37.0±22.6 versus 7.9±7.5). All adult shiners were inactive, extremely dark in coloration, and appeared thin or emaciated. Shiners remained closely associated with winter microhabitats until streamflows decreased and main channel temperatures rose above 9-10°C. Habitat Discrimination by Life Stages Winter habitats utilized by young and adult redside shiners were distinguished by water column depth (Table 3). Adult shiners had a higher positive loading on the single variable, which reflected utiz(sition of deeper water than young fish. Size specific preferences were inferred from the statistic that 86.1% of the cases were properly classified. Habitat Selection Habitats utilized by young shiners and available habitats were distinguished by the variables surface turbulence, percent small gravel, and mean water velocity (Table 4). Negative loading values suggest that young shiners select areas without turbulence and small gravel. A reduced loading value for mean water velocity indicates a preference for slower water areas than typically available. The 35 classification value of 90.2% denotes group differentiation and strong selection of specific winter habitats by young shiners. Winter habitats utilized by adult shiners and available habitats were differentiated according to water column depth, mean water velocity, and percent small gravel present (Table 5). The corresponding loading values suggest a selection by adult shiners of deeper, slower water areas, containing less small gravel than the mean available stream habiatat. An 88.0% classification value indicates strong selection of specific habitats by adult shiners. Transitional Habitat Utilization The transitional sampling period, occurring from May 10 to July 15, 1981, was characterized by decreasing stream flows and increasing water temperatures following the winter period. April 14 was the first recorded day when temperatures exceeded 10°C in the main channel. The water temperatures ranged from 10.0-17.5°C during this period. Dissolved oxygen values were always recorded at saturation and water clarity was very good (1-2 meter visibility). Sixty-six young shiners and 72 adult shiners were observed and fish occurred in all five sampling sites examined. Size of young shiners ranged from 24-28 mm and most adults exceeded 60 mm in total length. Focal sampling and stream mapping were completed on July 1 and newly emerged young shiners were first seen in shallow margins on July 15. Corresponding to decreased stream flows and elevated water temperatures, shiners were extremely active thoughout the 24 hr period. Differences in habitat utilization and behavior patterns were 36 evident between young and adult shiners. Young shiners inhabited shallow stream margins with very small particle, woody debris dominated substrates, and slow water currents (Table 8, Figures 9, 10, 11). Mean group size was 22.0±17.1 fish. Brightly colored adult shiners occurred in small groups (x = 3.4±2.4 fish) of similar sized fish in deep water columns providing relatively fast water and gravel substrates (Table 8, Figures 9, 10, 11). The presence of overhead cover and cover provided by surface turbulence was also correlated with the adult transitional habitat. During most of June and early July, adults were actively feeding and aggressively interacting in what was interpreted to be spawning behavior.A dominant male shiner would hold a station just downstream froma riffle and physically displace conspecifics downstream using the lateral aspect of hisbody. Parallel swimming, erection of fins, and nipping behaviorwas observed. It could not be discerned whether or not this "displacement behavior" was confined to the male sex. Occasionally a small group of male and female shiners would rapidly swim upstream into shallow, fast moving water Sequential body undulations were performed just above the substrate interstices for a brief period and then fish returned just downstream. No reproductive products were collected during observations. Although "displacement" behavior and apparent spawning was observed during daylight hours, most shiners were located in similar stream positions throughout a 24 hr period. 37 Table 8. Habitat variables measured during periods of changing discharge between seasons (transitional habitats). Young shiners Adult shiners Available Variable (n=66) (n=72) (area=1016 m2) Depth 20.8cm ± 4.5 76.5cm ± 2.8 39.3cm ± 2.7 (x ± 95% CI) Mean Velocity 3.2cm/sec ± 1.1 41.0cm/sec ± 6.2 43.9cm/sec ± 3.8 (x ± 95% CI) Substrate Composition (% occurrence) Sand/silt/clay 63.6 21.9 16.9 Small Gravel 1.4 51.2 51.0 Gravel 6.8 15.3 15.5 Cobble 0.0 2.0 4.0 Rubble 0.0 0.0 1.0 Boulders 0.0 2.5 3.3 Bedrock 0.0 1.3 2.9 Woody Debris 28.2 5.8 5.4 Cover Forms (% occurrence) Instream 100 100 99 Overhead 9 47 34 Undercut Banks 0 14 9 Surface Turbulence 0 71 65 38 ¢22 punWINER ((am, IV ZS 311 1111 r 6 7 El IS 11 13111 ® ADULT vi:rim c>tstam) 16. 113 I 1 I ZIP NI 46 69 9 70 is im 18 AV AZ-ABILITY 4 t. MORN 1. 1101110so ....numem. ...111141110. 411WWWMWW T i T l I 7 I I 1 II VA le 46 68 Si7 SO IStin 11 DETTP1 CCM ) Figure 9. Frequency histograms for utilized and available depths of the water column during the transitional period. 39 0 10 28 318 48 28 8 7 111 NI188 110 its 118 t40 12 1 . I 1 -1 s 1 to 38 40 211 0 ns 88 00 1 110 In 13B 140 4 I II 20 MI 4 20al Ts I I IIVI t 140 Waif cjpeprer Yeal=77 Cf24/8223 Figure 10. Frequency histograms for utilized and available current during the transitional period. 40 Young Shiner <25m.T, SMALL GRAVEL 1.4-1% RAW,s:M. T.OP GRAVEL 6-94% 13.4-71 WOODY OrRIS 28.2..21X Adult Shiner> 25mm SMALL GRA E1,2CIX GRAVEL 16.3-mx rzeraz 2-zx sial_out 2.1.1X SAMD,SILT,OR BEDROCK 21.0..2= 1.7IX MOODY DEBRIS S.110% Availability SMALL ERA GRAVEL 16.6101 COMAE RUSJOILE iSX BOULDER BEDROCK 2.0-3% RAM,S/11,00 WM DEBRIS 6.4EX Figure 11. Mean substratecomposition forutilized and available habitats during the transitional period. 41 Habitat Discrimination by Life Stages Statistical separation of young and adult shiners was based on the variables water depth, percent sand, silt, or clay, percent small gravel, and mean water velocity (Table 3). Loading values for variables reflect young shiner habitats containing shallower, slower water areas, more sand, and less small gravel than adult habitats. The classification value of 92.5% suggests strong intraspecific differences in habitat utilization during the transitional period. Habitat Selection The discriminant analysis for selection indicated that habitats utilized by young shiners were best discriminated from available habitats by the variables depth, percent small gravel, and percent woody debris (Table 4). The corresponding loading values suggest that young shiners prefer shallower areas with more woody debris and less small gravel than the typically available habitat. The classification value of 89.1% denotes strong selection of specific habitats by young shiners. Transitional habitats utilized by adult shiners were differentiated from available transitional habitats by depth of the water column (Table 5). Adult shiner loading values indicate selection of deeper habitats. This single variable discriminant function classified 82.8% of the cases. Selection of specific transitional stream habitats by adult shiners was therefore suggested. 42 General Behavior Patterns Both young and adult redside shiners in Greasy Creek exhibited site tenacity throughout the year. Redside shiners displaced from a focal site by a diver would usually return. Within the four larger streams examined, adult redside shiners did not remain at particular sites during the summer and transitional periods. They would move between different stream microhabitats. Redside shiners in the larger streams utilized similar habitats described for redside shiners in Greasy Creek and habitats not available in Greasy Creek. Large pools with little current present were not available in Greasy Creek and supported large numbers of aggregating young and adult redside shiners in the larger streams. Smaller numbers of adult redside shiners were found in shallow water with substantial currents present. Adult shiners in faster water were usually larger, deeper bodied, and more brillantly colored than adults in large pools. Similar types of winter behavior and habitat utilization was observed for the redside shiner in all of the streams examined. Stream locations occupied by redside shiners often contained similar sized speckled dace and juvenile salmonids. Redside shiners freely mingled with groups of dace and intersepcific distances were small. On the other hand, juvenile salmonids often acted aggressively with adult redside shiners and displaced them from stream territories or feeding stations. 43 DISCUSSION Redside shiners were distributed over a variety of Greasy Creek habitats and exhibited different behaviors depending on the size of the fish, the array of habitats available, and seasonal shifts in habitat availability. Both young of the year and adult redside shiners were selective in the stream habitats they utilized throughout the year of study. This was concluded from the unbiased classification values following the discriminant analysis.Variables with the greatest statistical significance in distinguishing utilized from available habitat varied with the season and life stage considered. Throughout the year depth of the water column was the most important variable in describing habitat selection by adult redside shiners. A wider variety of variables including depth, water velocity, substrate composition, and cover types described habitat selection by young redside shiners, depending on the sampling season considered. The habitat selection analysis for young redside shiners during the summer period resulted in the lowest classification value. This suggests that habitat usage was the most similar to habitat availability. However, the value of 73.5% may be indicative of some habitat specialization. These results are especially interesting because young of the year redside shiner utilized similar stream habitats throughout the year regardless of the array of habitat types available. The changing availability of stream microhabitats through seasons resulted in the variety of selection variables chosen for analysis. 44 The discriminant analysis and classification indicated that depth of the water column and mean velocity were the most critical variables distinguishing young and adult redside shiner habitats.Although additional size divisions could have been made, it appears that the 25-mm division reflected major intraspecific differences for redside shiner habitat utilization and behavior. This pattern is similar to the ontological shifts in habitats utilized by juvenile salmonids,one from slow, shallow water to faster deeper water (Everest and Chapman 1972, Stein, et al. 1972). Because fish size is a major determinant of propulsive efficiency and defines swimming capabilities, total body length places an absolute limit on the current velocity thatcan be occupied (Webb 1975). A larger fish with greater swimming capabilities can successfully occupy a wider range of available current velocities than smaller fish. Based on an estimated maximum swimming speed of 10 body lengths per second for cyprinids (Blaxter 1969), a juvenile redside shiner (20 mm in length) could occupy current velocities up to 20 cm per second whereas an adult (75 mm in length) might occur in water flowing up to 75 cm per second. Observations of redside shiner behavior and habitat utilization in larger streams suggests that life stage differences may not be as evident as in Greasy Creek. The pools of larger streams contained all sizes of redside shiners aggregating together. These observations justify the importance of measuring the habitat availability that corresponds to distribution. Habitat distribution may vary between streams due to differences in habitat availability. Therefore, the 45 results from Greasy Creek may not be applicable because selection patterns may differ as availability changes. Winter stream conditions and the corresponding changes in behavior of redside shiners demonstrated that environmental variability isan important factor influencing distribution. Physicochemical changes including reduced water temperatures and increased current velocities coincided with redside shiners shifting habitat locationsto suitable refuge areas and greatly reducing activity. Temperature has a profound effect on fish performance and behavior (Fry 1964). Low temperatures result in decreased standard and active metabolic rates as measured by oxygen consumption and swimming performance (Brett 1964). Personal observations in the field and in laboratory streams suggest that 9-10° C marked the upper threshold for drastic reductions in redside shiner activity. Similar cold-induced overwintering behavior by stream salmonids has been demonstrated in the field (Allen 1941, Chapman and Bjornn 1969, Bustard and Narver 1975), and in the laboratory (Hartman 1965, Mason 1966, Everest and Chapman 1972). kedside shiners used similar types of winter habitat in Greasy Creek, Oregon, occupied by juvenile coho salmon, Oncorhynchus kisutch, and steelhead trout, Salmo gairdneri, in Carnation Creek, British Columbia (Bustard and Narver 1975). These were areas characterized by the presence of upturned root wads, logs, debris piles, and slack water. Only rubble substrates were not available during winter for redside shiners in Greasy Creek because of the large amounts of imbedded sediments present. Most of the winter habitats used by the redside shiners were not available during the summer low flow period. 46 Few backwater areas were included in the permanent study sitesbecause selection of the study sites occurred during the summer low flow period. It was noted, however, that the backwater areas were extremely important overwintering habitat for redside shiners, juvenile salmonids, and many other stream fishes. Backwater areas were quite different both physically and chemically than the main stream channel. Minimal water currents, a shallow water column,a wider daily temperature flux, and a small substrates characterized most of the backwater areas sampled. How these factors relate to the selection of backwater areas during the winter period needs further investigation. Presumably, overwintering in habitats associated with cover enhances survival by reducing displacement, physical trauma, and losses to predation. During the transitional period between winter and summer, adults move from habitats of slack water and dense cover to the faster water of the main channel. This shift is accompanied by activities related to spawning and aggressive defense of personal space during feeding. Adults displayed a diverse repertoire of agonistic behavior similar to those observed by Kalleberg (1958) for juvenile Atlantic salmon, S. salar: nipping, chasing, fin erection, and physical displacement. Juvenile redside shiners meanwhile continued to utilize protected areas near stream margins. Observations during different periods of the diel cycle revealed that the redside shiner occupied very similar habitats during the 24 hr period. This was not the case for several other species in Greasy Creek. During summer and transitional sampling periods, cutthroat 47 trout, S. clarki, was found in slow, backwater areas near densecover at night and in fast water during the day. Sandrollers, Percopsis transmontana, and largescale suckers, Catostomus macrocheilus, foraged in the open channel at night but sought refuge in undercut banks and in areas of dense cover during the day. The importance of nocturnal refuges for salmonids and sandrollers has been documented by previous studies (Chapman and Bjornn 1969, Gray and Dauble 1979) In summation, changes in habitat availability and habitat utilization should be examined temporally as well as spatially. Unfortunately most stream habitat studies do not consider the temporal aspect and therefore provide partial descriptions. Habitat usage is considered selective if componentsare used disproportionately to their availability (Ivlev 1961, Sale 1974, Johnson 1980). Conversely, if components are used in similar proportions to availability, usage is considered non selective and describes a generalist's behavior. The process of habitat selection depends on the entire milieu of physicochemical factors present. If differential selection exists then choice must be based on available resources (Rosenzweig 1981). Past studies relating distribution of stream fishes with habitat variables have not measured the availability of habitats (Binns and Eiserman 1979, Orth and Maugham 1982). The relative abundance of fishes provides an index of suitability and distribution is considered a fixed pattern when related to habitat variables. As demonstrated in the present study there are more inclusive assumptions pertaining to habitat selection: 1) habitats differ in availability, 2) habitats 48 differ in basic suitability, and 3) individuals utilize the most suitable habitats available to them (Fretwell and Lucas 1970).Fishes may therefore occur in high densities in areas that are suboptimal, but the best of that which is available. If stream habitats are subject to dynamic flux, factors influencing habitat selection will change as witnessed by seasonal changes in habitat selection. Von Uexkull (1921) suggests that each animal has its own "Merkwelt" (perceptual world), which is different from its environment as the investigator perceives it. The design of the field work and the type of data analysis are considered the most important steps to ecological research (Colwell and Futuyma 1971). Conceptual difficulties will typically occur because of the potentially infinite number of environmental variables. Numerous physical, chemical, and biological variables have been identified as major determinants of the distribution and abundance of stream fishes (Chapman and Bjornn 1969, Krebs 1978). Discussion of habitat is generally restricted to a small number of variables in order to increase the comprehension of objectives and interpretation of results. Univariate statistics brings some quantitative analysis to ethology but results in single variables representing behavioral responses and assumes uncorrelated variables (Colgan 1978). Previous studies have suggested that physicochemical variables do not act independently and together they influence the behavior pattern of fishes (Gorman and Karr 1978, Matthews and Hill 1979). Measured habitat variables are typically correlated both conceptually and statistically (Dueser and Shugart 1978). An obvious example is the 49 positive correlation between current velocity and substrateparticle size (Moon 1939). Univariate analysis is therefore an incomplete method because it cannot account for correlations betweenstream variables. A multivariate discriminant function analysis providesan objective basis for weighting the relative importance of each variable to group differentiation (Klecka 1975). Unbiased classification based on the derived discriminant function provides a measure ofgroup dissimilarity. Multivariate model assumptions (1. unequalmean vectors, 2. homogeneous variance-covariance matrices, and 3. multivariate normal distribution) are identitical to univariate assumptions except the ways in which multivariate assumptionscan be violated increases greatly with the number of included variables (Morrison 1976, Green 1980). Assumption 1 and assumption 2 were violated in every analysis except adult redside shiner selection during the transitional period. According to Green (1971), this violation usually occurs with ecological data.Assumption 3 could not be tested. Both the assumption of homoscedasticity and multivariate normality are quite restrictive for application of ecological data (Green 1971). Consequences of not satisfying multivariate assumptions are difficult to interpret. For that reason, the descriptive results and conclusions for the present study identified relevant discriminant variables alone and did not involve predictions based on discriminant functions and coefficients. The goal of this type of analysis should not be to predict fish occurrence on habitat quality from the derived discriminant functions. 50 The type of multivariate analysis conducted during the present study can detect and quantify differences between groups of multivariate data. The groups of data that were compared included distributional data for young and adult redside shiner (habitat utilization for life stages) and the data for available habitats (habitat selection). These analysis should provide insights to the critical variables that should be measured to quantify and understand habitat utilization and habitat selection in future studies of redside shiners. The discriminant analysis could also be used to compare distributional data for different species of fishes or stream habitats differing in a spatial or temporal fashion. The analytical results of this study suggest that four components of stream habitat (depth, current velocity, substrate composition, and various forms of cover) acting alone or together provided enough information to describe the seasonal habitats of the redside shiner, to differentiate habitats occupied by different life stages, and to document the degree of habitat selection occurring. This was adequate to describe the habitats of Greasy Creek, but should not be considered an exhaustive list. The numbers of redside shiners in Greasy Creek were less than those observed in larger streams and reported for lake systems in British Columbia (Grossman 1959a, Lindsey and Northcote 1963). The availability of large deep pools and lake-like habitats may be limiting in Greasy Creek and other small streams. Within the larger streams examined, adult shiners exhibited both aggregating behavior associated with pools and territorial behavior associated with faster, shallower water. Young shiners in larger streams 51 occupied both stream margins and large pools with adults. The large streams may be considererd an intermediate environment between the small stream and the lake where redside shiners may exhibit behaviors and utilize microhabitats specific to small stream and lake environments. Several questions remain to be resolved. The redside shiner has been observed to utilize habitats differentially froma comparison of distribution patterns and patterns of habitat availability. Some hypotheses have been proposed concerning this selectiveuse, but it is not evident whether the reasons are physiologically based or involve ecological processes. Limitations in swimming capacity as mediated by size are suspected to be important in limiting young of the year shiners to streamside margins but, habitat suppression by adults, predator avoidance by protective substrate countershading (Seghers 1973), and distribution of food are all possible explanations for selective use of habitat. Observations of aggressive behavior by adult redside shiners provides ecological evidence that choice was involved concerning habitat occupation during summer and transitional periods. During winter, the relationship between ecological and physiological factors governing adult distribution is unclear. A series of experiments similar to those performed by Matthews and Hill (1978) on the red shiner, Notropis lutrensis, are needed to examine these factors. In summary, this study is autecological and is incomplete because species distributions cannot be explained completely by physicochemical factors. Biological factors including interactions among species, competition, and predation may exclude 52 fishes from habitats which are physiologically tolerable. The multivariate approach described in the present study can incorporate biological variables such as the presence of other species, interspecific densities, or interspecific distance. The biological variables would be weighted along with physicochemical variables asosociated with stream habitats. Interspecific interactions between the redside shiner and other stream fisheswere observed and could have influenced habitat selection. The aggressive behavior of juvenile salmonids towards adult redside shiners might excludethe redside shiners from a favorable stream location. By aggregating with groups of speckled dace, both young and adult redside shiner might reduce the probability of being preyed upon and increase the chances of locating food sources.. Additional stream observations and laboratory "removal" experiments should help evaluate the importance of biological interactions to redside shiner habitat selection. These biological interactions can be incorporated to define the ecotope which describes the full range of adapatations to external factors concerning both niche and habitat (Whitaker et al. 1973). Expansion of the present model to incorporate niche parameters is the nextstep for greater comprehension of habitat selection by the redside shiner. 53 LITERATURE CITED Allen, K.R. 1941. Studies on the biology of the early stages of the salmon (Salmo salar). 3. Growth in the Thurso River system, Caithness. Journal of Animal Ecology 10:273-295. Andrewartha, H.G., and L.C. Birch 1954. The distribution and abundance of animals. Uinversity of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, USA. Binns, N.A., and F.M. Eiserman. 1979. Quantification of fluvial trout habitat in Wyoming. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 108:215-228. Blaxter, J.H.S. 1969. Swimming speeds of fish. FAO Fisheries Report 62 Volume 2:69-100. Boussu, M.F. 1954. Relationship between trout populations and cover on a small stream. Journal of Wildlife Management 18:229-239. Bovee, K.D., and D. Cochnauer. 1977. Development and evaluation of weighted criteria, probability-of-use curves of instream flow assessment,: fisheries. United States Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Services Program FWS/OBS-77/63. Brett, J.R. 1964. The respiratory metabolism and swimming performance of young sockeye (Oncorhynchus nerka). Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 22:405-409. Bustard, D.R., and D.W. Narver. 1975. Aspects of winter ecology of juvenile coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) and steelhead trout (Salmo gairdneri). Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 32:667-680. 54 Butler, R.L., and V.M. Hawthorne. 1968. The reactions of dominant trout to changes in overhead artificial cover. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 97:37-41. Chapman, D.W., and T.C. Bjornn. 1969. Distribution of salmonids in streams with special reference to food and feeding. Pages 153-176 in Northcote (1969). Colgan, P.W. 1978. Quantiative ethology. John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York, USA. Colwell, R.K., and D.J. Futuyman. 1971. On the measurement of niche breadth and overlap. Ecology 52:567-576. Crossman, E.J. 1959a. Distribution and movements of a predator, the rainbow trout, and its prey, the redside shiner in Paul Lake, British Columbia. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 16:247-267. . 1959b. A predator-prey interaction in freshwater fish. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 16:269-281. Dill, D.B., E.F. Adolph, and C.G. Wilbur, editors. 1964. Adaptation to the environment (Handbook of physiology), Section 4. American Physiological Society, Washington, D.C., USA. Dueser, R.D., and H.H. Shugart. 1978. Microhabitats in a forest-floor small mammal fauna. Ecology 59:89-98. Eigenmann, C.H. 1895. Leuciscus balteautus (Richardson), a study in variation. American Naturalist 29:10-25. Everest, F.H., and D.W. Chapman. 1972. Habitat selection and spatial interaction by juvenile chinook salmon and steelhead in two Idaho 55 streams. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 29:91-100. Fraser, D.F., and T.E. Sise. 1980. Observations on stream minnows in a patchy environment: a test of a theory of habitat distribution. Ecology 61:790-797. Fretwell, S.D. 1972. Populations in a seasonal environment. Princeton University Press. Princeton, New Jersey, USA. , and H.L. Lucas, Jr. 1970. On territorial behavior and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds. I. Theoretical development. Acta Biotheoretica XIX:16-36. Fry, F.E.J. 1964. Animals in aquatic environments: fishes. Pages . 715-728 in Dill et al. (1964). Gee, J.H., and T.G. Northcote. 1963. Comparative ecology of two sympatric species of dace (Rhinichthys) in the Fraser River system, British Columbia. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 34:729-761. Goldstein, R.M. 1978. Quantitative comparison of seining and underwater observations for stream fishery surveys. The Progressive Fish-Culturist 40:108-111. Gorman, 0.T., and J.R. Karr. 1978. Habitat structure and stream fish communities. Ecology 59:507-515. Gray, R.H., and D.D. Dauble. 1979. Biology of the sand roller in the central Columbia River. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 108:646-649. Green, R.H. 1971. A multivariate approach to the Hutchinsonian niche: bivalve molluscs of central Canada. Ecology 52:543-556. 56 . 1974. Multivariate niche analysis with temporally varying environmental factors. Ecology 55:73-83. . 1980. Multivariate approaches in ecology: the assessment of ecologic similarity. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 11:1-14. Hartman, G.F. 1965. The role of behavior in the ecology and interaction of underyearling coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) and steelhead trout (Salmo gairdneri). Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 22:1035-1081. Hutchinson, G.E. 1958. Concluding remakrs, Cold Springs Harbor Symposium. Quantitative Biology22:415-427. Ivlev, V.S. 1961. Experimental ecology of the feeding of fishes. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut, USA. Johannes, R.E., and P.A. Larkin. 1961. Competition for food between redside shiners (Richardsonius balteatus) and rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri) in two British Columbia lakes. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 18:203-220. Johnson, D.H. 1980. The comparison of usage and availability measurements for evaluating resource preference. Ecology 61:65-71. Kalleberg, H. 1958. Observations in a stream tank of territoriality and competition in juvenile salmon and trout (Salmo salar L. and S. trutta L.). Institute Freshwater Research Drottningholm 39:55-98. Klecka, W.R. 1975. Discriminant analysis. Pages 434-467 in Nie et al. (1975). 57 Krebs, C.J. 1978. Ecology: the experimental analysis of distribution and abundance. Harper and Row, New York, New York, USA. Lewis, S.L. 1969. Physical factors influencing fish populations in pools of a trout steam. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 98:14-19. Liebig, J. 1840. Chemistry in its application to agriculture and physiology. Taylor and Walton, London. Lindsey, C.C., and T.G. Northcote. 1963. Life history of redside shiners, Richardsonius balteatus, with particular reference to movements in and out of Sixteenmile lake streams. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 20:1001-1030. Mason, J.G. 1966. Behavioral ecology of juvenile coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) in stream aquaria with particular reference to competition and aggressive behavior. Doctoral dissertation. Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. Matthews, W.J., and L.G. Hill. 1979. Age-specific differences in the distribution of redside shiners, Notropis lutrensis, over physicochemical ranges. American Midland Naturalist 101:366-372. May, R.M. editor. 1976. Theoretical ecology principles and applications. W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. McPhail, J.D., and C.C. Lindsey. 1970. Freshwater fishes of northwestern Canada and Alaska. Fisheries Research Board of Canada Bulletin 173. 58 Mendelson, J. 1975. Feeding relationships among species of Notropis (Pisces: Cyprinidae) in a Wisconsin stream. Ecological Monographs 45:199-230. Moon, H.P. 1939. Aspects of the ecology of aquatic insects. Transactions of the British Society of Entomology 6:39-49. Morrison, D.F. 1976. Multivariate statistical methods. McGraw Hill, New York, New York, USA. Nie, H.N., C.H. Hull, J.G. Jenkins, K. Steinbrener, and D.H. Bent. 1975. Statistical package for the social sciences. McGraw Hill, New York, New York, USA. Northcote, T.G. editor. 1969. Symposium on salmon and trout in streams. H.R. MacMillan lectures in fisheries, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. , and D.W. Wilkie. 1963. Underwater census of stream fish populations. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 92:146-151. Orth, D.J., and 0.E. Maughan. 1982. Evaluation of the incremental methodology for recommending instream flows for fishes. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 111:413-445. Pianka, E.R. 1976. Competition and niche theory. Pages 114-142 in May (1976). Pimentel, R.A., and D.F. Frey. 1978. Multivariate analysis of variance and discriminant analysis. Pages 249-274 in Colgan (1978). Rosenzweig, M.L. 1981. A theory of habitat selection. Ecology 62:327-335. 59 Sale, P.F. 1974. Overlap in resource use and interspecific competition. Oecologia 17:245-256. Scott, W.B., and E.J. Crossman. 1973. Freshwater fishes of Canada. Fisheries Research Board of Canada Bulletin 184. Seghers, B.H. 1973. An analysis of geographic variation in the antipredatory adaptations of the guppy, Poecilia reticulata. Doctoral dissertation. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. Shelford, V.E. 1913. The reactions of certain animals to gradients of evaporating power and air. A study in experimental ecology. Biological Bulletin 25:79-120. Southwood, T.R.E. 1977. Habitat, the templet for ecological strategies? Journal of Animal Ecology46:337-365. Stein, R.A., P.E. Reimers, and J.D. Hall. 1972. Social interactions between juvenile coho (Oncorhynchus kisutch) and fall chinook salmon (0. tshawytscha) in Sixes River, Oregon. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 29:1737-1748. UexiCiill, J. Von. 1921. Umwelt and Innenvelt der tiere. Berlin. Webb, P.W. 1975. Hydrodynamics and energetics of fish propulsion. Bulletin of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 190. Weisel, G.F., and H.W. Newman. 1951. Breeding habits, development and early life history of Richardsonius balteatus, a northwestern minnow. Copeia 1951:187-194. Whittaker, R.H., S.A. Levins, and R.B. Root. 1973. Niche, habitat, and ecotope. American Naturalist 197:321-338. 60 Wickham, M.G. 1967. Physical microhabitat of trout. Master's thesis. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA. Willis, R.A., M.D. Collins, and R.E. Sams. 1960. Survey reports of the Willamette River and its tributaries, Part II. Contract number 178. Fish Commission of Oregon, Clackamas, Oregon, USA. Wydoski, R.S., and R.R. Whitney. 1979. Inland fishes of Washington. University of Washigton Press, Seattle, Washington, USA.