Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science

Volume 40 Article 14

1986 Age and Growth of Redear Sunfish Lepomis microlophus (Gunthur), from Bob Kidd Lake Rex R. Roberg University of Arkansas, Fayetteville

Thoniot .T Prabhakaran University of Arkansas, Fayetteville

Raj V. Kilambi University of Arkansas, Fayetteville

Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas Part of the Zoology Commons

Recommended Citation Roberg, Rex R.; Prabhakaran, Thoniot .;T and Kilambi, Raj V. (1986) "Age and Growth of Redear Sunfish Lepomis microlophus (Gunthur), from Bob Kidd Lake," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 40 , Article 14. Available at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol40/iss1/14

This article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able to read, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 40 [1986], Art. 14 AGE AND GROWTH OF REDEAR SUNFISH, LEPOMIS MICROLOPHUS (GUNTHUR), FROM BOB KIDDLAKE REX R. ROBERG, THONIOT T. PRABHAKARAN and RAJ V. KILAMBI Department of Zoology University of Arkansas Fayetteville, AR 72701

ABSTRACT

Total lengths (62-285mm) and body scales from 75 redear sunfish collected byelectroshocking from BobKiddLake during October and November 1985 were used for this study. The length-frequency distribu- tionyielded five however, the body scale analysis revealed eight The total length — age groups, = + age groups. scale radius relationship was estimated as, TL 17.98 0.92 Sr. Lengths attained at earlier ages were estimated by the Fraser-Lee method and the Bertlanffy growth model was fitted to the lengths for ages five through ten, and the resulting equation, L, = 295 [1 - exp — 0.29 (t - 1.83)], estimated lengths similar to the back- calculated lengths (r = 0.98).

= INTRODUCTION where, L, = length at age t,Loo = maximum attainable size, K rate = constant (coefficient ofcatabolism), and t0 age at which length is zero. The redear sunfish (Lepomis microlophus) is a large, hard-fighting panfish that can be harvested in great numbers at certain times of the year, and is a popular sport-fish in Arkansas and other states. Studies RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ongrowth are integral to sound management ofredear populations and - although numerous studies on redear growth have been conducted in The total length (TL) scale radius (Sr)relationship for 75 redear other states (Finnell, 1954; King,1955; Louder and Lewis, 1957; Schoff- sunfish, ranging in length from 62 to 285mm, was estimated as: man, 1938; Swingle, 1965; Tharratt, 1966), none have been done in = + = Arkansas. This paper describes the age and growth of redear sunfish TL 17.98 0.92 S r;(r 0.96) from Bob Kid Lake, Arkansas, and, to the best of the authors' knowledge, represents the first published study ofredear age and growth Back-calculated lengths at earlier annuli, when plotted on a Walford in Arkansas. graph, revealed a line that increased inslope for fish less than 160mm long, and then decreased for larger fish. This has been reported for centrarchids from the warmer parts ofeastern North America (Ricker, STUDY AREA 1975). The increased slope is often caused by selection for fast grow- ing younger fish. A way to avoid this bias is to use lengths calculated Bob Kidd Creek was impounded in 1975 to create an 81 ha reservoir from scale annuli of older fish to represent the younger ones (Ricker, withan average depth of4.2 m, and a maximum depth of13.3 m. Bob 1975). Therefore, Fraser-Lee estimates of lengths at previous annuli KiddLake is located 5.4 km north of Prairie Grove on Arkansas State from fish ofages 5-10 were fittedby the Bertalanffy growth equation as: Highway 62, and is owned, operated, and managed by the Arkansas = - - - Game and Fish Commission. Six thousand redear fingerlings were Lt 295 [1 exp 0.29 (t 1.83)] stocked in Bob KiddLake on 20 September 1979, 6,800 fingerlings on 20 October 1980 and 5,000 yearlings on 23 October 1980 (Fourt, Pers. Analysis of the length-frequency distribution of all the 180 redear Comm.). by the probability method (Harding, 1949) revealed five age gruops (age group I, 61-100mm; age group II, 101-130mm; age group III, 131-16Omm; age group IV,161-200mm; the two large fish in an age MATERIALSAND METHODS group V).The scale analysis yielded eight age groups representing ages 1-6, 10, and 11 (Table 1). The length-frequency distribution also showed During October and November 1985, 180 redear sunfish were col- modal increases with increased fish length up to 160mm. The small lected witha boat-mounted 230 volt AC electroshocker. Allredear were sample size for fish over 160mm long, as well as the slow growth of measured for total length tothe nearest millimeter. A scale sample was older fish(causing overlap of age groups) made the length-frequency removed from the body ofeach fishat the tip ofthe apposed leftpec- distribution unreliable for fish over 160mm. Age determinations by the toral fin.Scales were mounted between two glass slides and photocopied scale analysis were verified for redear sunfish under 160mm long by at a magnification of 41X with a microfiche copy machine, as de- the increase in the number of scale annuli withincrease in fish length scribed by Kilambi and Galloway (1986). The scales that were too large (Table 1) and agreement ofage estimates by the scale annuli and length- for a 41Xmagnification werephotocopied at 20X. These photocopies frequency distribution. Hence, the scale analysis was considered to wereused for allage and growth determinations. Scale measurements estimate correctly the ages ofthe larger redear sunfish. Furthermore, (mm) were recorded from the focus to each annulus, and to the right the lengths estimated by the Bertalanffy growth model and by back corner margin of the anterior field(scale radius). A subsample of 75 calculations using Fraser-Lee method (Table 2) were in agreement (r fish,— representing all size groups, was used to determine the total length = 0.98) indicating the suitability of this model to describe growth of scale radius relationship. The lengths of fish at previous ages were redear from the Bob KiddLake. estimated by the Fraser-Lee method (Carlander, 1982), and the data Comparison of growth of Bob Kidd Lake redear with the growth were analyzed by the Bertalanffy growth model (Ricker, 1975) ofredear from lakes inother states (Table 3) revealed a slightly slower (1961) = - - - growth rate inBob KiddLake. Houser and Grinstead found that Lt Loo [1 esp K (t to)] a reduction of the bluegill population in Rod and Gun Club Lake,

40 Proceedings Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol.XXXX,1986 Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 1986 40 Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 40 [1986], Art. 14

Rex R. Roberg, Thoniot T. Prabhakaran and Raj. V.Kilambi

Table 1. Age group frequencies in relation to length-frequency distribu- Table 3. Comparison of growth rates of redear from Bob Kidd with tion of redear sunfish from Bob Kidd Lake. growth rates of populations from other states.

length Total Number of annuli locality and Reference 1 2 3 4 '> 6 7 a 9 10 11 aqe 6 and below range (irni) 123456789 10 11 Bob Kicld L.,/\P 53 78 107 1)5 168 207 237 251 25H 266 259 31 (Present Study) Sub-prison I.., OK 49 09 119 155 35 (Finnell, 1954) Hiwassee L., OK 86 117 170 208 240 38 (King, 1955) 61- 70 5 Murphysboro L., IL 46 94 1)2 165 188 259 34 (louder and Lewis, 1957) 216 Reel Tout L.,TO - 110 15J 175 189 207 24 71- 80 11 (Sc-hofftian, 1938) Folsom L., CA 48 124 191 224 59 81- 90 11 miarrett. 1962) Spear I,., IN 41 91 147 182 208 41 91-100 11 1 (Ricker, 1955| Harris L., Fl 112 147 18J 198 224 251 207 2H. 28 101-110 7 (Preonun and llulah, 1953) 111-120 97 lakes, ponds, streams 38 79 117 161 20) 218 36 1 (slowest rates) (Jenkins al., 1955) 121-130 2 1 et 131-140 5 141-150 6 FINNELL, J. C. 1954. Comparison of growth rates of fishes in 151-160 6 1 Stringtown Sub-prison Lake prior to, and three years after drain- 161-170 1 ing and restocking. Proc. Okla. Acad. Sci. 35:30-36. 171-180 1 181-190 1 FREEMAN, B. O., and M. T. HUISH. 1953. A summary of a fish 191-200 1 1 population control investigation conducted in two Florida lakes. Fla. Game Freshwater Fish. Comm. 109 pp. 261-270 1 281-290 1 HARDING, J. P. 1949. The use ofprobability paper for the graphical analysis ofpolymodal frequency distributions. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U. K. 28:141-153. Total 5 3333 11 18 5 1 11 HOUSER, A.,and B. GRINSYEAD. 1961.The effects of black bull- head catfish and bluegill removals onthe fish population ofa small Table 2. Average back-calculated lengths of redear sunfish from Bob lake. Proc. S.E. Assoc. Game Fish Comm. 15:193-200. Kid Lake. JENKINS, R., R. ELKIN,and J. FINNELL. 1955. Growth rates of ¦U>lal l<*in|lhdm) at annulus six sunfishes in Oklahoma. Okla. Fish. Res. Lab. Rep. 59:1-46. Numlx.. /Vje yroup or finh I 2 1 4 S f. 7 n 9 10 11 KILAMBI,R. V., and M. L. GALLOWAY. 1986. Usefulness of microfiche reader/printer for studying fish scales. Proc. Ark.Acad. I 5 4/ Sci. 40: 11 )3 r)l 74

HI II) 50 7r> 97 KING, J. E. 1955. Growth rates of fishes of Lake Hiwassee, Okla-

IV 17 r>6 112 106 1 II) homa, after two years ofattempted population control. Proc. Okla. V 5 49 9U IIG 119 1r>9 Acad. Sci. 34:53-56. VI 1 6,! 95 116 141 1f>2 171 LOUDER, D. E., and W. M.LEWIS. 1857. Study of a stocking of VII {) redear and bluegill in southern Illinois. Prog. Fish-Cult. 19:140-141. VIII 0 IX 0 RICKER, W. E. 1975. Computation and interpretation of biological *X I 69 11)1) 141 177 21111 2J9 201 271 270 280 statistics of fish populations. Bull.Fish. Res. BdCan. 191 ,382 pp. XI I 02 82 120 149 179 207 22) 212 241 251 209 1939. Age and growth of the red-eared Weighted r SCHOFFMAN, R. J. sun- moan 0 I 78 107 LI5 L6fl 207 2 17 2'>1 2 >8 266 2 r.9 fish in Reelfoot Lake. J. Tenn. Acad. Sci. 14:71.

SWINGLE, W. E. 1965. Length-weight relationships of Alabama was followedby increase inredear growth rate. The an abun- fishes. Auburn Univ. Ag.Exp. Stn. Zool. Ent. Ser. Fish. 3:1-87. ince of bluegill in an Alabama pond was found todepress the growth te of redear (Elrod, 1971). We found bluegill to be more abundant THARRATT, R. C. 1962. The age and growth of centrarchid fishes an redear sunfish in Bob Kidd Lake. This could be responsible for Eklahoma, in Folsom Lake, California. Calif. Fish and Game. 52:4-16. e relatively low growth rate of redear sunfish in Bob Kidd Lake.

LITERATURE CITED

F. O. 1982. Standard intercepts forcalculating lengths from scale measurements for some centrarchid and percid fishes. fARLANDER,Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 111:332-336.

J. H. 1971. Dynamics of fishes in an Alabama pond sub- rLROD,jected to intensive angling. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 100:757-768.

Academy Science, XXXX, http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol40/iss1/14Proceedings Arkansas of Vol. 1986 41 41