DOCSLIB.ORG

Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, Volume 120, Issue 3 (May 1991) Pp

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, Volume 120, Issue 3 (May 1991) Pp Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, volume 120, issue 3 (May 1991) pp. 368-381. ISSN 0002-8487 DOI: 10.1577/1548-8659(1991)120<0368:STSCFY>2.3.CO;2 http://afs.allenpress.com/perlserv/?request=get-archive http://afs.allenpress.com/archive/1548-8659/120/3/pdf/i1548-8659-120-3-368.pdf © American Fisheries Society Transactions Americane oth f Fisheries Society 120:368-381, 1991 Stocking Threadfin Shad: Consequences for Young-of-Year Fishes DENNIS R. DEVRiES,1 ROY A. STEIN, AND JEFFREY G. MiNER2 Ohio Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit3 and Department of Zoology The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210,USA GARY G. MITTELBACH Kellogg Biological Station, Michigan State University Hickory Corners, Michigan 49060,USA Abstract.— Threadfin shad Dorosoma petenense commonle ar y introduced into reservoiro t s supplement prey availabl piscivorouo et s fishes determino T . earlw eho y life stage threadfif so n shad and their potential competitors and predators interact, we introduced this species into two Ohio lakes—Clark and Stonelick—and evaluated how its young of year influenced young-of-year bluegills Lepomis macrochirus and largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides. After adults were stocked in April, peak abundance of young-of-year threadfin shad occurred in August in both lakes. Bluegills generally spawned earlier than threadfin shad, which apparently reduced competition between young of these species. In Clark Lake, young-of-year threadfin shad did not reduce zoo- plankton populations, but in Stonelick Lake, peak abundance of young-of-year threadfin shad was followed by a precipitous decline in zooplankton. Data on cladoceran birth rates indicated this decline was due to increased predation by threadfin shad. Survival of bluegills to a size at which they move int littorae oth l zone also decline Stonelicn di k Lake, perhaps becaus virtuae th f eo l elimination of zooplankton. Limited survival of bluegills in turn contributed to reduced growth of young-of-year largemouth bass dependent on them as prey. Given that zooplankton declined othee th t r lakeno t ,bu interactione inon s among young-of-year annuall o fishet e sdu y introduced threadfin shad will likely vary among system yearsd san . Nonetheless, introduced threadfin shad could, in some systems in some years, negatively affect growth and recruitment of the very species they were meant to enhance. Manipulation of prey has become a popular described manipulations involving two clupeid technique for increasing production of sport fishes species (gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum and (Ney 1981; Noble 1981,1986; Wydoski and Ben- threadfin shad D. petenense) and four target spe- nett 1981; DeVrie Steid san n 1990). Manipula- cies (white crappie Pomoxis annularis, black crap- tions may involve the introduction of prey to in . nigromaculatus,-P e pi largemouth bass Microp- creas fooe eth d remova e basth r eo planktivoref lo s terus salmoides, and bluegill Lepomis macrochirus) reduco t e competition between the spord man t that resulted in positive, neutral, and negative ef- fishes. Numerous taxa have been used in these fects on the target species. Thus, introducing prey manipulations, including member Athere th f so - for predators or removing presumedly undesirable inidae, Catostomidae, Clupeidae, Coregonidae, competitor increast no y esma adult growt tarf ho - Cyprinidae d Percidaan , e (see referencen i s ge resuly t specie ma othern i t d san , unexpected DeVrie Steid san n 1990). These manipulations, consequences. based primarily on predator-prey interactions be- Because angler interestee sar largn di e fishe th , tween introduced prey and adults of the target spe- adult stag sporf eo t bees fishha n most studiedn i cies, sought to enhance the target sport species. relatio preo nt y manipulations. Other life stages However, enhancemen t alwayno s stha beee nth (larvae, juveniles pre f predator)d o yan s have been result. In a recent review, DeVries and Stein (1990) largely ignored (but see Kirk 1984; Kirk and Da- vies 1987). Because fish often change their diets and habitat thes a s y grow (Werne Gilliad an r m 1 Present address: Department of Fisheries and Allied 1984), species that interact as predator and prey Aquacultures, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama adults a compety sma t earlieea r life stages- Ex . 36849, USA. 2 amples include largemouth bas bluegilld san s (Gil- Present address: Departmen f Zoologyo t , Miami liam 1982 Europead )an n perch Perca fluviatilis University, Oxford, Ohio 45056, USA. 3 The Unit is sponsored jointly by the U.S. Fish and and roach Rutilus rutilus (Persson 1988). Many Wildlife Service, Ohio Departmen f Naturao t - Re l fishes have Limnetic, zooplanktivorous larvae sources, The Ohio State University, and the Wildlife (Werner 1967; Barge Kilambd an r i 1980; Keast Management Institute. 1980; Beard 1982; Mills et al. 1987); where such 368 THREADFIN SHAD EFFECTS ON YOUNG OF YEAR 369 fishe introducee ar s preys da , competthey yma e during both stockings. Poststocking predatory during this life stage with larva f theieo r subse- mortalit largemoute monitores on y; wa d 3 r hdfo quent predators. Because year-class strength is collecte2 bas2 f so Clardn f 10i o 3e k Lakon d ean typicall t earlyse lifn yi e (Gushing 1975; Lasker collecte Stonelicdn i k Lak eated threade eha non - 1975; Ware 1980; Mill Forned san y 1988), inter- fin shad each r additionaFo . l details concerning actions during this critical perio havy dema major collection, transport stockind ,an g procedurese ,se effect sport-fisn so h surviva subsequend lan t har- Buynak et al. (1989) and Austin and Hurley (1989). vest. Thus, interactions at all life stages may de- Sampling methods.— samplee W d during April termine the success of any prey manipulation, the through October in preshad (1987) and shad (1988) overall outcome depending on some combination years. Because threadfin shad cannot overwinter of potential positive and negative effects. in Ohio lakes, any effects they have on resident We quantified how young bluegills responded fish must occur durin growine gth g season after introductioe toth n of threadfi nOhio shatw o dn i stocking. Larval fish (limnetic young-of-year fish demonstratee w lake d san potentiae dth negr fo l - susceptible to the sampling gear) were collected ative effects due to interactions among larvae. Be- offshore once per week in two replicate surface cause young-of-year bluegills are also important tows with a 0.75-m-diameter, 500-/ttm-mesh prer young-of-yeafo y r largemouth bass after ichthyoplankton net towed in the limnetic zone at moving into the littoral zone at a size between 10 1.5 m/s or faster. A flowmeter mounted in the standarm m 5 2 dd lengtan h (Werner 1967; Storck mouth of the net allowed calculation of the total 1978; Werne Hald ran l 1988) alse ,w o determined volume of water filtered. Juveniles were collected hoe offshorwth e interactio f bluegillo n s with biweekl t fouya r (Clark Lake r fivo ) e (Stonelick threadfin shad might indirectly affect growth and Lake) sites in the littoral zone with a 9-m bag seine surviva largemoutf lo h bass. (4-mm mesh) l fisAl h. were preserve- re d dan turnelaboratore th o dt y where they were identi- Methods fied and measured (total length to the nearest mm, Study lakes.— Clar d Stonelican k k lakee ar s up to 50 individuals per species), and their diets shallow, turbid reservoir southwestern si n Ohio. individual0 1 (u o pt r speciespe r datespe ) were Clark Lake Clarn i , k County0 are4 n a f ao s ha , quantified. Diets were quantified from weekly col- shorelinef hectareso m k 5 maximua ,4. , m depth lections of limnetic fish samples and from month- of 2 m, and Secchi depths varying from 25 to 75 ly collections of littoral samples (i.e., from every cm. Stonelick Lake Clermonn i , t Countyn a s ha , other sample date). We identified prey to the low- area of 69 hectares, 16 km of shoreline, a maxi- est taxonomic category possibl were % (>e80 iden- muSecchd an m , ideptm depth4 f ho s o frot 2 m2 tified to genus) and measured them to the nearest . Durin119cm studyr gou , submersed vegetation 0.1 mm. Lengths were converted to biomass by was never abundan eithen i t r lakemergend ean t usf taxon-specifio e c length-dry-weight regres- vegetation occupie shoreline th df abouo f % eo t25 . MittelbachsionG . s(G , unpublished data). Clark Lake (cattails Typha spp.) and 70% of the Integrated zooplankton samples (two tube hauls shorelin Stonelicf eo k Lake (Typha spp wated .an r sampler pe , three replicate sample dater spe ) were willow Justicia americana). Neither lake stratified collected with a 2-m tube sampler (7.30-cm inside thermally, and dissolved oxygen concentrations diameter, 54-/im mesh size; DeVries and Stein fell belo wmg/3 L botto e onlth yf o mwithi m 5 n0. sam1991e th t e)a time larval fish were collected. in Clark Lak Stonelicn beloi d ean m w2 k Lake. Samples were preserved in 5% sucrose formalin Fish communitie botn si h lakes consisted primar- (Haney and Hall 1973) to prevent cladoceran egg illargemoutf yo h bass, white crappies, bluegills, loss. Zooplankton taxa with less than 200 indi- longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis, brown bull- viduals per sample were counted in their entirety; head Ictalurus nebulosus, and common carp Cy- subsamples were take morr nfo e abundant taxa prinus carpio. until at least 200 individuals were counted. At In collaboration with personnel fro Ohie mth o least 20 individuals of each taxon in a sample were and Kentucky Departments of Natural Resources, measured (total body length excluding spines, hel- we stocked adult threadfin shad from Herrington mets caudad an , l rami) wit oculan ha r microme- Lake (Mercer County, Kentucky t densitiea ) f so ter.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arizona Fishing Regulations 3 Fishing License Fees Getting Started
    2019 & 2020 Fishing Regulations for your boat for your boat See how much you could savegeico.com on boat | 1-800-865-4846insurance. | Local Offi ce geico.com | 1-800-865-4846 | Local Offi ce See how much you could save on boat insurance. Some discounts, coverages, payment plans and features are not available in all states or all GEICO companies. Boat and PWC coverages are underwritten by GEICO Marine Insurance Company. GEICO is a registered service mark of Government Employees Insurance Company, Washington, D.C. 20076; a Berkshire Hathaway Inc. subsidiary. TowBoatU.S. is the preferred towing service provider for GEICO Marine Insurance. The GEICO Gecko Image © 1999-2017. © 2017 GEICO AdPages2019.indd 2 12/4/2018 1:14:48 PM AdPages2019.indd 3 12/4/2018 1:17:19 PM Table of Contents Getting Started License Information and Fees ..........................................3 Douglas A. Ducey Governor Regulation Changes ...........................................................4 ARIZONA GAME AND FISH COMMISSION How to Use This Booklet ...................................................5 JAMES S. ZIELER, CHAIR — St. Johns ERIC S. SPARKS — Tucson General Statewide Fishing Regulations KURT R. DAVIS — Phoenix LELAND S. “BILL” BRAKE — Elgin Bag and Possession Limits ................................................6 JAMES R. AMMONS — Yuma Statewide Fishing Regulations ..........................................7 ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT Common Violations ...........................................................8 5000 W. Carefree Highway Live Baitfish
    [Show full text]
  • Status Review and Management Outline for Quality Bluegill and Black Crappie Populations in the Grand Rapids Area
    Status Review and Management Outline for Quality Bluegill and Black Crappie Populations in the Grand Rapids Area. Revised in 2013 By David L. Weitzel Assistant Area Fisheries Supervisor MN DNR, Grand Rapids Area Fisheries Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3 Bass Lake ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 Blackwater, Jay Gould, and Little Jay Gould lakes ...................................................................................... 10 Cut Foot and Little Cut Foot Sioux lakes ..................................................................................................... 18 Deer, Pickerel, and Battle lakes .................................................................................................................. 23 Dixon Lake ................................................................................................................................................... 31 Grave Lake ................................................................................................................................................... 37 Split Hand and Little Split Hand Lakes ........................................................................................................ 41 Sand Lake ...................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Literature Based Characterization of Resident Fish Entrainment-Turbine
    Draft Technical Memorandum Literature Based Characterization of Resident Fish Entrainment and Turbine-Induced Mortality Klamath Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 2082) Prepared for PacifiCorp Prepared by CH2M HILL September 2003 Contents Introduction...................................................................................................................................1 Objectives ......................................................................................................................................1 Study Approach ............................................................................................................................2 Fish Entrainment ..............................................................................................................2 Turbine-induced Mortality .............................................................................................2 Characterization of Fish Entrainment ......................................................................................2 Magnitude of Annual Entrainment ...............................................................................9 Size Composition............................................................................................................10 Species Composition ......................................................................................................10 Seasonal and Diurnal Distribution...............................................................................15 Turbine Mortality.......................................................................................................................18
    [Show full text]
  • Some Factors Affecting Fish Forage Production in Four Arizona Lakes
    Some factors affecting fish forage production in four Arizona lakes Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Bergersen, Eric P. Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 30/09/2021 20:32:03 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/552039 SOME FACTORS AFFECTING FISH FORAGE PRODUCTION IN FOUR ARIZONA LAKES by Eric P. Bergersen A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE WITH A MAJOR IN FISHERY BIOLOGY In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 1 9 6 9 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of re­ quirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his judg­ ment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholar­ ship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author.
    [Show full text]
  • 15 Best Indiana Panfishing Lakes
    15 best Indiana panfishing lakes This information has been shared numerous places but somehow we’ve missed putting it on our own website. If you’ve been looking for a place to catch some dinner, our fisheries biologists have compiled a list of the 15 best panfishing lakes throughout Indiana. Enjoy! Northern Indiana Sylvan Lake Sylvan Lake is a 669-acre man made reservoir near Rome City. It is best known for its bluegill fishing with some reaching 9 inches. About one third of the adult bluegill population are 7 inches or larger. The best places to catch bluegill are the Cain Basin at the east end of the lake and along the 8 to 10 foot drop-offs in the western basin. Red-worms, flies, and crickets are the most effective baits. Skinner Lake Skinner Lake is a 125-acre natural lake near Albion. The lake is known for crappie fishing for both black and white crappies. Most crappies are in the 8 to 9 inch range, with some reaching 16 inches long. Don’t expect to catch lots of big crappies, but you can expect to catch plenty that are keeper-size. The best crappie fishing is in May over developing lily pads in the four corners of the lake. Live minnows and small white jigs are the most effective baits. J. C. Murphey Lake J. C. Murphey Lake is located on Willow Slough Fish and Wildlife Area in Newton County. Following this winter, there was minimal ice fishing (due to lack of ice) and the spring fishing should be phenomenal especially for bluegills.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife Species
    Wildlife Species This chapter contains information on species featured in each of the ecoregions. Species are grouped by Birds, Mammals, Reptiles, Amphibians, and Fish. Species are listed alphabetically within each group. A general description, habitat requirements, and possible wildlife management practices are provided for each species. Wildlife management practices for a particular species may vary among ecoregions, so not all of the wildlife management practices listed for a species may be applicable for that species in all ecoregions. Refer to the WMP charts within a particular ecoregion to determine which practices are appropriate for species included in that ecoregion. The species descriptions contain all the information needed about a particular species for the WHEP contest. However, additional reading should be encouraged for participants that want more detailed information. Field guides to North American wildlife and fish are good sources for information and pictures of the species listed. There also are many Web sites available for wildlife species identification by sight and sound. Information from this section will be used in the Wildlife Challenge at the National Invitational. Participants should be familiar with the information presented within the species accounts for those species included within the ecoregions used at the Invitational. It is important to understand that when assessing habitat for a particular wildlife species and considering various WMPs for recommendation, current conditions should be evaluated. That is, WMPs should be recommended based on the current habitat conditions within the year. Also, it is important to realize the benefit of a WMP may not be realized soon. For example, trees or shrubs planted for mast may not provide cover or bear fruit for several years.
    [Show full text]
  • 4-H-993-W, Wildlife Habitat Evaluation Food Flash Cards
    Purdue extension 4-H-993-W Wildlife Habitat Evaluation Food Flash Cards Authors: Natalie Carroll, Professor, Youth Development right, it goes in the “fast” pile. If it takes a little and Agricultural Education longer, put the card in the “medium” pile. And if Brian Miller, Director, Illinois–Indiana Sea Grant College the learner does not know, put the card in the “no” Program Photos by the authors, unless otherwise noted. pile. Concentrate follow-up study efforts on the “medium” and “no” piles. These flash cards can help youth learn about the foods that wildlife eat. This will help them assign THE CONTEST individual food items to the appropriate food When youth attend the WHEP Career Development categories and identify which wildlife species Event (CDE), actual food specimens—not eat those foods during the Foods Activity of the pictures—will be displayed on a table (see Wildlife Habitat Evaluation Program (WHEP) Figure 1). Participants need to identify which contest. While there may be some disagreement food category is represented by the specimen. about which wildlife eat foods from the category Participants will write this food category on the top represented by the picture, the authors feel that the of the score sheet (Scantron sheet, see Figure 2) and species listed give a good representation. then mark the appropriate boxes that represent the wildlife species which eat this category of food. The Use the following pages to make flash cards by same species are listed on the flash cards, making it cutting along the dotted lines, then fold the papers much easier for the students to learn this material.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Fish Suppliers
    2021 Fish Suppliers A.B. Jones Fish Hatchery Largemouth bass, hybrid bluegill, bluegill, black crappie, triploid grass carp, Nancy Jones gambusia – mosquito fish, channel catfish, bullfrog tadpoles, shiners 1057 Hwy 26 Williamsburg, KY 40769 (606) 549-2669 ATAC, LLC Pond Management Specialist Fathead minnows, golden shiner, goldfish, largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, Rick Rogers hybrid bluegill, bluegill, redear sunfish, walleye, channel catfish, rainbow trout, PO Box 1223 black crappie, triploid grass carp, common carp, hybrid striped bass, koi, Lebanon, OH 45036 shubunkin goldfish, bullfrog tadpoles, and paddlefish (513) 932-6529 Anglers Bait-n-Tackle LLC Fathead minnows, rosey red minnows, bluegill, hybrid bluegill, goldfish and Kaleb Rodebaugh golden shiners 747 North Arnold Ave Prestonsburg, KY 606-886-1335 Andry’s Fish Farm Bluegill, hybrid bluegill, largemouth bass, koi, channel catfish, white catfish, Lyle Andry redear sunfish, black crappie, tilapia – human consumption only, triploid grass 10923 E. Conservation Club Road carp, fathead minnows and golden shiners Birdseye, IN 47513 (812) 389-2448 Arkansas Pondstockers, Inc Channel catfish, bluegill, hybrid bluegill, redear sunfish, largemouth bass, Michael Denton black crappie, fathead minnows, and triploid grass carp PO Box 357 Harrisbug, AR 75432 (870) 578-9773 Aquatic Control, Inc. Largemouth bass, bluegill, channel catfish, triploid grass carp, fathead Clinton Charlton minnows, redear sunfish, golden shiner, rainbow trout, and hybrid striped bass 505 Assembly Drive, STE 108
    [Show full text]
  • Summer Panfish Survey Summary Turtle-Flambeau Flowage, Iron County, 2010
    Summer Panfish Survey Summary Turtle-Flambeau Flowage, Iron County, 2010 The Mercer DNR Fisheries Management Team conducted a fyke netting survey on the Turtle- Flambeau Flowage during June 29-30, 2010 as part of our baseline monitoring program. Nine nets were set overnight, for one night, resulting in 9 net-nights of effort. Primary target species were bluegill, black crappie, and pumpkinseed sunfish. An electrofishing survey conducted by the Mercer team in mid May documented the status of smallmouth bass (summarized in a separate survey summary) but provided a poor sample of panfish, which were not targeted specifically. We believe this netting survey provides better insight into the relative number and sizes of panfish in the Turtle-Flambeau Flowage. Quality, preferred, and memorable sizes referenced in this summary are based on standard proportions of world record lengths developed for each species by the American Fisheries Society. Black Crappie Black Crappie Summer Fyke Netting 14 12 10 8 6 4 Captured 4.2 per net-night ≥ 5” CapturedFish 2 Quality Size ≥ 8” 87% 0 Preferred Size ≥ 10” 66% 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Memorable Size ≥ 12” 13% Length (inches) Bluegill Bluegill Summer Fyke Netting 12 10 8 6 4 Captured 2.6 per net-night ≥ 3” CapturedFish 2 Quality Size ≥ 6” 87% 0 Preferred Size ≥ 8” 9% 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Length (inches) Pumpkinseed Pumpkinseed Summer Fyke Netting 5 4 3 2 Fish CapturedFish 1 Captured 1.1 per net-night ≥ 3” Quality Size ≥ 6” 60% 0 3 4 5 6 7 8 Preferred Size ≥ 8” 0% Length (inches) Summary of Results Panfish were captured at a low rate during this survey.
    [Show full text]
  • Invasive Species of the Pacific Northwest
    Invasive Species of the Pacific Northwest: Green Sunfish Lepomis cyanellus Derek Arterburn FISH 423: Olden 12.5.14 Figure 1: Adult Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus . Photo from http://www.freshwater-fishing- news.com/fish-species-north -america/green-sunfish/ Classification Lepomis cyanellus may have a few teeth, Order: Perciformes which can be found on the tongue. Family: Centrarchidae Additional distinguishing marks are the 7-12 Genus: Lepomis parallel diffused dark bars running ventral to Species: cyanellus dorsal along the side of L. cyanellus, and the bluish-green pattern. The bluish-green Identification coloration takes place on the mainly black/dark brown/olive body, composed of Adult Green Sunfish, Lepomis ctenoid scales, which fades to a lighter cyanellus, commonly reach a total length of ventral color. The dark sides of L. cyanellus 31cm, with juveniles ranging from 12-15cm. are contrast with a yellow/cream ventral Adult Green Sunfish have been known to coloration (Cockerell 1913). The thick reach a maximum weight of one kilogram caudal peduncle is without an adipose fin, (2.2lbs). L. cyanellus is a deep bodied, and the peduncle runs to a rounded, slightly laterally compressed species, with a lateral forked, homocercal caudal fin. The paired line running from the operculum to the fins on Lepomis cyanellus are derived in caudal peduncle. The posterior of the orientation. The Green Sunfish has lateral operculum has a characteristic dark spot placement of the pectoral fins with vertical relatively the same size as the eye, and the insertion, anterior pelvic fins, and spines same size spot may also be found at the base found on the anal and dorsal fins.
    [Show full text]
  • Humboldt Bay Fishes
    Humboldt Bay Fishes ><((((º>`·._ .·´¯`·. _ .·´¯`·. ><((((º> ·´¯`·._.·´¯`·.. ><((((º>`·._ .·´¯`·. _ .·´¯`·. ><((((º> Acknowledgements The Humboldt Bay Harbor District would like to offer our sincere thanks and appreciation to the authors and photographers who have allowed us to use their work in this report. Photography and Illustrations We would like to thank the photographers and illustrators who have so graciously donated the use of their images for this publication. Andrey Dolgor Dan Gotshall Polar Research Institute of Marine Sea Challengers, Inc. Fisheries And Oceanography [email protected] [email protected] Michael Lanboeuf Milton Love [email protected] Marine Science Institute [email protected] Stephen Metherell Jacques Moreau [email protected] [email protected] Bernd Ueberschaer Clinton Bauder [email protected] [email protected] Fish descriptions contained in this report are from: Froese, R. and Pauly, D. Editors. 2003 FishBase. Worldwide Web electronic publication. http://www.fishbase.org/ 13 August 2003 Photographer Fish Photographer Bauder, Clinton wolf-eel Gotshall, Daniel W scalyhead sculpin Bauder, Clinton blackeye goby Gotshall, Daniel W speckled sanddab Bauder, Clinton spotted cusk-eel Gotshall, Daniel W. bocaccio Bauder, Clinton tube-snout Gotshall, Daniel W. brown rockfish Gotshall, Daniel W. yellowtail rockfish Flescher, Don american shad Gotshall, Daniel W. dover sole Flescher, Don stripped bass Gotshall, Daniel W. pacific sanddab Gotshall, Daniel W. kelp greenling Garcia-Franco, Mauricio louvar
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Supplemental Pellet Feeding and Threadfin Shad Addition on Stable Isotope Signature and Potential Influence on Fish Growth in Recreational Fishing Ponds
    Supplemental Pellet Feeding Henderson et al. Evaluation of Supplemental Pellet Feeding and Threadfin Shad Addition on Stable Isotope Signature and Potential Influence on Fish Growth in Recreational Fishing Ponds Hugh K. Henderson1, School of Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Aquatic Sciences, Auburn University, AL 36849 Russell A. Wright, School of Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Aquatic Sciences, Auburn University, AL 36849 Dennis R. DeVries, School of Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Aquatic Sciences, Auburn University, AL 36849 Matthew J. Catalano, School of Fisheries, Aquaculture, and Aquatic Sciences, Auburn University, AL 36849 David C. Glover, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Carterville Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office, 9053 Route 148, Suite A, Marion, IL 62959 Abstract: Pond enhancements such as adding pelleted feed or stocking threadfin shad (Dorosoma petenense) are sometimes used in the management of pond fisheries, but their relative impacts on growth and reproduction at multiple levels of the food web are not often fully evaluated. We used stable isotope analysis to indicate the contribution of pelleted feed to bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus) reproduction and growth, and ultimately to largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) growth in the presence and absence of threadfin shad via two different approaches: a pond experiment and sampling of established ponds. Bluegill growth and reproductive metrics increased with increased rates of pelleted feed provided. Bluegill nitrogen signature decreased with pelleted feed in the small pond experiment, suggesting feeding at a lower trophic level with increased feed. Largemouth bass nitrogen signature results showed similar trends to that of bluegill, although not statistically significant. In established ponds, pelleted feed appeared to alter the carbon isotopic signatures of both bluegill and largemouth bass independent of threadfin shad presence.
    [Show full text]