Hydrobiologia

, Volume 199, Issue 2, pp 131–142 | Cite as

Temporal shifts in physical habitat of the crayfish, Orconectes neglectus (Faxon)

  • James A. Gore
  • Richard M. BryantJr.
Article
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

A total of 300 samples was collected from February 1985 to August 1986 in a medium order Ozark Mountain stream. Physical habitat measurements of temperature, mean water column velocity, depth, and substrate character were recorded for each of the 25 monthly samples along with length and sex of all individuals of Orconectes neglectus (Faxon). Analysis of habitat utilization and suitability (or preference) was conducted using exponential polynomial models of hydraulic stress models. There appeared to be equal preference for depth over the range measured. Both substrate and velocity preference curves were bimodal with each mode designating certain crayfish size classes. Young-of-the-year were found primarily in cobbled, high velocity areas while adults were found in low velocity, macrophyte beds. Utilization curves for laminar sublayer thichness also reflected size-dependent phenomena where young-of-the-year were found in thin sublayer areas and adults were found primarily in thick sublayers. When separated by time and size, adults were found to occupy higher velocity, cobbled habitats during at least two months. This time period corresponded with the time of egg-bearing and further analysis yielded a time-dependent habitat suitability surface which accounted for this movement pattern. We suggest that the application of these suitability surfaces, which reflect habitat changes during the annual life cycle, will produce more accurate predictions of density and will allow better habitat management decisions under various regulated flow scenarios.

key words

crayfish Orconectes negelectus habitat hydraulics temporal changes 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bovee, K. D., 1982. A guide to stream habitat analysis using the instream flow incremental methodology. Instream Flow Info. Paper No. 12, U. S. Fish Wildl. Serv., FWS/OBS-82/26.Google Scholar
  2. Bovee, K. D., 1986. Development and evaluation of habitat suitability criteria for use in the instream flow incremental methodology. Instream Flow Info. Paper No. 21, U. S. Fish. Wildl, Serv., Biol. Rpt. 86(7).Google Scholar
  3. Bovbjerg, R. V., 1964. Dispersal of aquatic animals relative to density. Int. Ver. Theor. Angew. Limnol. Verh. 15: 879–84.Google Scholar
  4. Flint, R. W., 1977. Seasonal migration and distribution of the crayfish, Pacifastacus leniusculus, in Lake Tahoe. Am. Midl. Nat. 97: 280–292.Google Scholar
  5. Gore, J. A., 1978. A technique for predicting in-stream flow requirements of benthic macroinvertebrates. Freshw. Biol. 8: 141–151.Google Scholar
  6. Gore, J. A., 1983. Considerations of size related flow preferences among macroinvertebrates used in instream flow studies. pp. 389–397 in: H. I. Shuval (ed.) Developments in Ecology and Environmental Quality, Vol. II, Balaban Int. Publ., Jerusalem.Google Scholar
  7. Gore, J. A., 1987. Development and application of macroinvertebrate instream flow models for regulated flow management. pp. 99–115 in: J. F. Craig and J. B. Kemper (eds.) Regulated Streams: Advances in Ecology, Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  8. Gore, J. A. & R. D. Judy, Jr., 1981. Predictive models of benthic macroinvertebrate density for use in instream flow studies and regulated flow management. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 8: 1363–1370.Google Scholar
  9. Gore, J. A. & H. L. Lindsay, Jr., 1985. Diet and habitat preferences of four co-existing darter species in an Ozark stream. N. Amer. Benthol. Soc., 33rd Ann. Mtg., P. 83.Google Scholar
  10. Gore, J. A. & J. M. Nestler, 1988. Instream flow studies in perspective. Regulated Rivers 2: 93–102.Google Scholar
  11. Graesser, A. & P. S. Lake, 1984. Diel changes in the benthos of stones and of drift in a Southern Australian upland stream. Hydrobiologia 111: 153–160.Google Scholar
  12. Hynes, H. B. N., 1970. The Ecology of Running Waters. Univ. Toronto Press, Toronto, Ont.Google Scholar
  13. Kovalek, W. P., 1978. Relationships between size of stream insects and current velocity. Can. J; Zool. 56: 178–186.Google Scholar
  14. Maude, S. H. & D. D. Williams, 1983. Behaviour of crayfish in water currents: hydrodynamics of eight species with reference to their distribution patterns in southern Ontario. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 40: 68–77.Google Scholar
  15. Momot, W. T., 196. Upstream movement of crayfish in an intermittent Oklahoma stream. Am. Midl. Nat. 75: 150–159.Google Scholar
  16. Morin, A., P. -P. Harper & R. H. Peters, 1986. Microhabitat-preference curves of blackfly larvae (Dipteraa::Simuliidae): a comparison of three estimation methods. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 43: 1235–1241.Google Scholar
  17. Muller, K., 1974. Stream drift as a chronobiological phenomenon in running water ecosystems. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 5: 309–323.Google Scholar
  18. Newbury, R. W., 1984. Hydrologic determinants of aquatic insect habitats. pp. 323–357 in: V. H. Resh & D. M. Rosenberg (eds.) The Ecology of Aquatic Insects, Praeger, New York.Google Scholar
  19. Osborne, L. L., E. E. Herricks &. Alavian, 1985. Characterization of benthic microhabitat: An experimental system for aquatic insects. Hydrobiologia 123: 153–160.Google Scholar
  20. Rabeni, C. F., 1985. Resource partitioning by streamdwelling crayfish: the influence of body size. Am. Midl. Nat. 113: 20–29.Google Scholar
  21. Smith, J. R., 1975. Turbulence in lakes and rivers. Freshw. Biol. Assoc., Sci. Publ. No. 29.Google Scholar
  22. Statzner, B., 1979. Der Obere and Untere Schierenseebach (Schleswig-Holstein). Strukturen und Funktionen in zwei norddeutchen See-Ausfluss-Systemen, unter besonderer Berucksichtigung der Makroinvertebraten. PhD Diss., Univ. Kiel.Google Scholar
  23. Statzner, B., 1981a. The relation between ‘hydraulic stress’ and microdistribution of benthic macroinvertebrates in a lowland running water system, the Schierenseebrooks (North Germany). Arch. Hydrobiol. 91: 192–218.Google Scholar
  24. Statzner, B., 1981b. A method to estimate the population size of benthic macroinvertebrates in steams. Oecologia 51: 157–161.Google Scholar
  25. Statzner, B., 1988. Growth and Reynolds number of lotic macroinvertebrates: a problem for adaptation of shape to drag. Oikos 51: 84–87.Google Scholar
  26. Statzner, B., J. A. Gore & V. H. Resh, 1988. Hydraulic stream ecology: observed patterns and potential applications. J. N. Amer. Benthol. Soc. 7: 307–360.Google Scholar
  27. Statzner, B. & B. Higher, 1986. Stream hydraulics as a major determinant of benthic invertebrate zonation patterns. Freshw. Biol. 16: 127–139.Google Scholar
  28. Vogel, S., 1981. Life in Moving Fluids. The physical biology of flow, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  29. Waters, T. F., 1972. The drift of stream insects. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 17: 233–272.Google Scholar
  30. Watson, D., 1987. Hydraulic effects of aquatic weeds in U. K. rivers. Regulated Rivers 1: 211–227.Google Scholar
  31. Williams, A. B., 1954. Speciation and distribution of the crayfishes of the Ozark Plateau and Oachita Provinces. Univ. Kans. Sci. Bull. 36: 803–918.Google Scholar
  32. Winget, R. N., 1985. Methods for determining successful reclamation of stream ecosystems. pp. 165–192 in: J. A A. Gore (ed.) The Restoration of Rivers and Streams Butterworth, Boston.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • James A. Gore
    • 1
  • Richard M. BryantJr.
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculty of Biological ScienceUniversity of TulsaTulsaUSA
  2. 2.Department of ZoologyOklahoma State UniversityStillwaterUSA

Personalised recommendations