Environmental Biology of Fishes

, Volume 42, Issue 4, pp 329–343 | Cite as

Comparative ecology of prickly sculpin, Cottus asper, and coastrange sculpin, C. aleuticus, in the Eel River, California

  • Larry R. Brown
  • Scott A. Matern
  • Peter B. Moyle
Article

Synopsis

We documented species' distributions, size structure of populations, abundance in mainstem and tributary streams, habitat use, and diets of prickly sculpin, Cottus asper, and coastrange sculpin, C. aleuticus, in the Eel River drainage of California, to determine the processes allowing coexistence of these very similar fishes. We observed prickly sculpins at 43 sites and coastrange sculpins at 34. The species co-occurred at 26 sites. Young-of-year coastrange sculpins were only observed within 42 km of the ocean, but young-of-year prickly sculpins were present throughout the species range. Mean, maximum, and minimum lengths of coastrange sculpins were positively correlated with distance from the ocean but no significant relationships were found for prickly sculpins. Absolute abundance of both species was highest in mainstem habitat (prickly sculpins = 0.6 sculpins m−2 and coastrange sculpins = 0.4 sculpins m−2) . Tributary densities of both species tended to be less than 0.1 sculpins m−2. The species inhabited very similar habitats and had very similar diets. Coastrange sculpin populations in upstream areas were maintained by immigration from downstream areas in contrast with prickly sculpin populations that produced young-of-year fish throughout their range. Densities were probably not high enough for interspecific interactions to be important. The factors limiting the upstream distribution of the species may include high water temperatures, stability of the stream bed, and behavior of the fish. In the past, the range of sculpins within the Eel River drainage probably fluctuated with changing physical conditions. Recent introductions of exotic species that compete with and prey upon sculpins, and ongoing human activities in the drainage could result in major reductions in the distribution and abundance of one or both species.

Key words

Fishes Cottidae Distribution Habitat use Diet Life history Amphidromous Size structure 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References cited

  1. Anderson, C.A. 1985. The structure of sculpin populations along a stream size gradient. Env. Biol. Fish. 1 3: 93–102.Google Scholar
  2. Andreasson, S. 1972. Distribution of Cottus poecilopus Heckel and C. gobio L. (Pisces) in Scandinavia. Zool. Scripta 1: 69–78.Google Scholar
  3. Baltz, D.M., P.B. Moyle & N.J. Knight. 1982. Competitive interactions between benthic stream fishes, riffle sculpin, Cottus gulosus, and speckled dace, Rhinichthys osculus. Can. J. Fish. Aquat.Sci. 39: 1502–1511.Google Scholar
  4. Broadway, J.E. & P.B. Moyle. 1978. Aspects of the ecology of the prickly sculpin, Cottus asper Richardson, a persistent native species in Clear Lake, Lake County, California. Env. Biol. Fish. 3: 337–343.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, L.R. 1989. Temperature preferences and oxygen consumption of three species of sculpin (Cottus) from the Pit River drainage, California. Env. Biol. Fish. 26: 223–236.Google Scholar
  6. Brown, L.R. 1991. Differences in habitat choice and behavior among three species of sculpins (Cottus), in artificial stream channels. Copeia 1991: 810–819.Google Scholar
  7. Daniels, R.A. 1987. Comparative life histories and microhabitat use in three sympatric sculpins (Cottidae: Cottus) in northeastern California. Env. Biol. Fish. 19: 93–110.Google Scholar
  8. Erman, D.C., E.D. Andrews & M. Yoder-Williams. 1988. Effects of winter floods on fishes in the Sierra Nevada. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 45: 2195–3000.Google Scholar
  9. Finger, T.R. 1982. Interactive segregation among three species of sculpins (Cottus. Copeia 1982: 680–694.Google Scholar
  10. Hartman, G.F. & C.A. Gill. 1968. Distribution of juvenile steelhead and cutthroat trout (Salmo gairdneri and S. clarki clarki) within streams of southwest British Columbia. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 25: 33–48.Google Scholar
  11. Harvey, B.C. 1986. Effects of suction gold dredging on fish and invertebrates in two California streams. N. Amer. J. Fish. Manage. 6: 401–409.Google Scholar
  12. Hunter, J.G. 1959. Survival and production of pink and chum salmon in a coastal stream. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 16: 835–886.Google Scholar
  13. Ikusemiju, K. 1975. Aspects of the ecology and life history of the sculpin, Cottus aleuticus (Gilbert), in Lake Washington. J. Fish Biol. 7: 235–245.Google Scholar
  14. Kubicek, P.F. 1977. Summer water temperature conditions in the Eel River system, with reference to trout and salmon. Masters Thesis, Humboldt State University, Arcata. 200 pp.Google Scholar
  15. Lee. D.S., C.R. Gilbert, C.H. Hocutt, R.E. Jenkins, D.E. McAllister & J.R. Stauffer, Jr. 1980. Atlas of North American freshwater fishes. North Carolina State Mus. Nat. Hist., Raleigh. 854 pp.Google Scholar
  16. Lisle, T.E. 1982. The recovery of stream channels in north coastal California from recent large floods. pp. 31–42. In: K.A. Hashagen (ed.) Habitat Disturbance and Recovery, Proceedings of a Symposium, California Trout Inc., P.O. Box 2046, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  17. Mason, J.C. & S. Machidori. 1976. Populations of sympatric sculpins, Cottus aleuticus and Cottus asper, in four adjacent salmon-producing coastal streams on Vancouver Island, B.C. U.S. Fish. Bull. 74: 131–141.Google Scholar
  18. Matheson, R.E. Jr. & G.R. Brooks, Jr 1983. Habitat segregation between Cottus bairdi and Cottus girardi: an example of complex inter- and intraspecific resource partitioning. Amer. Midl. Nat. 110: 165–176.Google Scholar
  19. McLarney, W.O. 1968. Spawning habits and morphological variation in the coastrange sculpin, Cottus aleuticus, and the prickly sculpin, Cottus asper Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 97: 46–48.Google Scholar
  20. Morgan, C.R. & N.H. Ringler. 1992. Experimental manipulation of sculpin (Cottus cognatus) populations in a small stream. J. Freshwater Ecol. 7: 227–232.Google Scholar
  21. Moyle, P.B. 1976. Inland fishes of California. University of California Press, Berkeley. 405 pp.Google Scholar
  22. Moyle, P.B. 1977. In defense of sculpins. Fisheries 2: 20–23.Google Scholar
  23. Schoener, T.W. 1970. Non-synchronous spatial overlap of lizards in patchy environments. Ecology 51: 408–418.Google Scholar
  24. Shapovalov, L. & A.C. Taft. 1954. The life histories of the steelhead trout (Salmo gairdneri gairdneri) and silver salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch). Calif. Dept. Fish and Game. Fish Bull. 98: 1–375.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Larry R. Brown
    • 1
  • Scott A. Matern
    • 1
  • Peter B. Moyle
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Wildlife and Fisheries BiologyUniversity of CaliforniaDavisU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations