, Volume 160, Issue 1, pp 49–61

Spatial and temporal patterns in the contribution of fish from their nursery habitats

  • Paul M. Chittaro
  • Rachel J. Finley
  • Phillip S. Levin
Population Ecology - Original Paper


Because anthropogenic influences threaten the degradation of many ecosystems, determining where organisms live during early life-history stages and the extent to which different areas contribute individuals to adult populations is critical for the management and conservation of a species. Working in Puget Sound, Washington State in the United States, and using a common flatfish (English sole, Parophrys vetulus), we sought to establish (using otolith chemistry) which areas contribute age-0 fish to age-1 population(s), the extent to which this pattern was consistent between two years, and whether this spatial pattern of contribution coincides with surveys of age-0 fish and/or the available area of nearshore habitat. Our study indicated completely different spatial patterns of fish nursery use between the two years of sampling. We highlight that the contribution of individuals from nursery areas is not related to density of recently settled English sole or the available area of nearshore habitat (depth <10 m) in Puget Sound, nor can we draw conclusions based on environmental data (precipitation, water salinity, light transmission, pH, dissolved oxygen, and water temperature). The results of this study highlight (1) the need for assessing the temporal patterns of nursery habitat use, and (2) that, in order to conservatively manage a species and its population(s), it may be necessary to protect several areas that are used intermittently by that species.


Nursery habitat Otolith chemistry English sole Puget Sound 


  1. Anderson MJ (2001) A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Aust Ecol 26:32–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson MJ (2003) XMATRIX: a FORTRAN computer program for calculating design matrices for terms in ANOVA designs in a linear model. Department of Statistics, University of Auckland, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson MJ (2004) DISTLM v.5: a FORTRAN computer program to calculate a distance-based multivariate analysis for a linear model. Department of Statistics, University of Auckland, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  4. Beck MW, Heck KL, Able KW, Childers DL, Efleston DB, Gillanders BM, Halpern B, Hays CG, Hoshino K, Minello TJ, Orth RJ, Sheridan PF, Weinstein MP (2001) The identification, conservation, and management of estuarine and marine nurseries for fish and invertebrates. Bioscience 51:633–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bellwood DR, Hughes TP, Folke C, Nystrom M (2004) Confronting the coral reef crisis. Nature 429:827–833PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bolton JL, Stehr CM, Boyd DT, Burrows DG, Tkalin AV, Lishavskaya TS (2004) Organic and trace metal contaminants in sediments and English sole tissues from Vancouver Harbour, Canada. Mar Environ Res 57:19–36PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borde AB, Thom RM, Rumrill S, Miller LM (2003) Geospatial habitat change snalysis in Pacific Northwest coastal estuaries. Estuaries 26:1104–1116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown J (2006) Using the chemical composition of otoliths to evaluate the nursery role of estuaries for English sole Pleuronectes vetulus populations. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 306:269–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bruland KW (1983) Trace elements in sea-water. In: Riley JP, Chester R (eds) Chemical oceanography. Academic, New York, pp 157–220Google Scholar
  10. Campana SE (1999) Chemistry and composition of fish otoliths: pathways, mechanisms and applications. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 188:263–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chittaro PM, Fryer BJ, Sale PF (2004) Discrimination of French grunts (Haemulon flavolineatum, Desmarest, 1823) from mangrove and coral reef habitats using otolith microchemistry. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 308:169–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Costanza R, d’Arge R, de Groot R, Farber S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Limburg K, Naeem S, O’Neill R, Paruelo J, Raskin RG, Sutton P, van den Belt M (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387:253–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Crook D, Gillanders BM (2006) Use of otolith chemical signatures to estimate carp recruitment sources in the mid-murray river, Australia. River Res Appl 22:871–879CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Crowe SA, Fryer BJ, Samson IA, Gagnon JE (2003) Precise isotope ratio determination of common Pb using quadrupole LA-ICP-MS with optimized laser sampling conditions and a robust mixed-gas plasma. J Anal At Spectrom 18:1331–1338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dahlgren CP, Kellison GT, Adams AJ, Gillanders BM, Kendall MS, Layman CA, Ley JA, Nagelkerken I, Serafy JE (2006) Marine nurseries and effective juvenile habitats: concepts and applications. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 312:291–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Day WE (1976) Homing behavior and population stratification in central Puget Sound English sole (Parophrys vetulus). J Fish Res Board Can 33:278–282Google Scholar
  17. de Pontual H, Geffen AJ (2002) Otolith microchemistry. In: Panfili J, de Pontual H, Troadec H, Wright PJ (eds) Manual of fish sclerochronology. Ifremer, Plouzane, France, pp 243–303Google Scholar
  18. Dove SG, Kingsford MJ (1998) Use of otoliths and eye lenses for measuring trace-metal incorporation in fishes: a biogeographic study. Mar Biol 130:377–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dulvy NK, Sadovy Y, Reynolds JD (2003) Extinction vulnerability in marine populations. Fish Fish 4:25–64Google Scholar
  20. Elsdon TS, Gillanders BM (2003) Reconstructing migratory patterns of fish based on environmental influences on otolith chemistry. Rev Fish Biol Fisher 13:219–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Emmett R, Lianso R, Newton J, Thom R, Hornberger M, Morgan C, Levings C, Copping A, Fishman P (2000) Geographic signatures of north American west coast estuaries. Estuaries 23:765–792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Farrell J, Campana SE (1996) Regulation of calcium and strontium deposition on the otoliths of juvenile tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus. Comp Biochem Phys A 115A:103–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Forrester CR (1969) Results of English sole tagging in British Columbia waters. Pac Marine Fisheries Comm Bull 7:1–10Google Scholar
  24. Forrester GE, Swearer SE (2002) Trace elements in otoliths indicate the use of open-coast versus bay nursery habitats by juvenile California halibut. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 241:201–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fowler AJ, Campana SE, Jones CM, Thorrold SR (1995) Experimental assessment of the effect of temperature and salinity on elemental composition of otoliths using Laser Ablation ICPMS. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 52:1431–1441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fryer BJ, Jackson SE, Longerich HP (1995) The design, operation and role of the Laser-Ablation Microprobe coupled with an Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometer (LAM-ICP-MS) in the Earth Sciences. Can Mineral 33:303–312Google Scholar
  27. Geffen AJ, Pearce NJG, Perkins WT (1998) Metal concentrations in fish otoliths in relation to body composition after laboratory exposure to mercury and lead. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 165:235–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gillanders BM (2002) Temporal and spatial variability in elemental composition of otoliths: implications for determining stock identity and connectivity of populations. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 59:669–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gillanders BM, Kingsford MJ (1996) Elements in otoliths may elucidate the contribution of estuarine recruitment to sustaining coastal reef populations of a temperate reef fish. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 141:13–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gillanders BM, Kingsford MJ (2003) Spatial variation in elemental composition of otoliths of three species of fish (Family Sparidae). Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 57:1049–1064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gunderson DR, Armstrong DA, Shi YB, McConnaughey RA (1990) Patterns of estuarine use by juvenile english sole (Parophrys vetulus) and dungeness crab (Cancer magister). Estuaries 13:59–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hamer PA, Jenkins GP, Gillanders BM (2003) Otolith chemistry of juvenile snapper Pagrus auratus in Victorian waters: natural chemical tags and their temporal variation. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 263:261–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hamer PA, Jenkins GP, Gillanders BM (2005) Chemical tags in otoliths indicate the importance of local and distant settlement areas to populations of a temperate sparid, Pagrus auratus. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 62:623–630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hughes JE, Deegan LA, Wyda JC, Weaver MJ, Wright A (2002) The effects of Eelgrass habitat loss on estuarine fish communities of southern New England. Estuaries 25:235–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hutchinson I (1988) Estuarine marsh dynamics in the Puget Trough—implications for habitat management. In: Proceedings of the first annual meeting on Puget Sound research. Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, Seattle, WA, pp 455–462Google Scholar
  36. Johnson LL, Sol SY, Lomax DP, Nelson GM, Sloan CA, Casillas E (1997) Fecundity and egg weight in english sole, Pleuronectes vetulus, from Puget Sound, Washington: influence of nutritional status and chemical contaminants. Fish Bull 95:231–249Google Scholar
  37. Johnson LL, Landahl JT, Kubin LA, Horness BH, Myers MS, Collier TK, Stein JE (1998) Assessing the effects of anthropogenic stressors on Puget Sound flatfish populations. J Sea Res 39:125–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Johnson LL, Sol SY, Ylitalo GM, Hom T, French B, Olson OP, Collier TK (1999) Reproductive injury in english Sole (Pleuronectes vetulus) from the Hylebos Waterway, Commencement Bay, Washington. J Aquat Ecosys Stress Recovery 6:289–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Johnson LL, Lomax DP, Myers MS, Olson OP, Sol SY, O’Neill SM, West J, Collier TK (2008) Xenoestrogen exposure and effects in English sole (Parophrys vetulus) from Puget Sound, WA. Aquat Tox 88:29–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kennedy B, Folt C, Blum J, Chamberlain C (1997) Natural isotope markers in salmon. Nature 387:766–767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kennedy BP, Klaue A, Blum JD, Folt CL, Nislow KH (2002) Reconstructing the lives of fish using Sr isotopes in otoliths. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 59:925–929CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kennish M (2002) Environmental threats and environmental future of estuaries. Environ Conserv 29:78–107Google Scholar
  43. Krygier EE, Pearcy WG (1986) The role of estuarine and offshore nursery areas for young English sole, Parophrys vetulus Girard, of Oregon. Fish Bull 84:119–132Google Scholar
  44. Laroche JL, Richardson SL, Rosenberg AA (1982) Age and growth of a pleuronectid, Parophrys vetulus, during the pelagic larval period in Oregon coastal waters. Fish Bull 80:93–104Google Scholar
  45. Laroche WA, Holton RL (1979). Occurence of 0-age English sole, Parophrys vetulus, along the Oregon coast: an open coast nursery area? Northwest Sci 53:94–96Google Scholar
  46. Lassuy DR (1989) Species profiles: life histories and environmental requirements of coastal fishes and invertebrates (Pacific Northwest) english sole. Biol Rep. U.S. Fish Wildl Serv. 2(11.101). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, TR EL-82–4, 17ppGoogle Scholar
  47. Leslie HM (2005) A synthesis of marine conservation planning approaches. Conserv Biol 19:1701–1713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Levin PS, Stunz GW (2005) Habitat triage for exploited fishes: Can we identify essential “Essential Fish Habitat?”: Connectivity in the life cycles of fishes and invertebrates that use estuaries. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 64:70–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. McArdle BH, Anderson MJ (2001) Fitting multivariate models to community data: a comment on distance-based redundancy analysis. Ecology 82:290–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Millar RB (1987) Maximum likelihood estimation of mixed stock fishery composition. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 44:583–590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Millar RB (1990a) Comparison of methods for estimating mixed stock fishery composition. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 47:2235–2241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Millar RB (1990b) A versatile computer program for mixed stock fishery composition estimation. Canadian Technical Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, p 13Google Scholar
  53. Musick JA, Harbin MM, Berkeley SA, Burgess GH, Eklund AM, Findley L, Gilmore RG, Golden JT, Ha DS, Huntsman GR, McGovern JC, Parker SJ, Poss SG, Sala E, Schmidt TW, Sedberry GR, Weeks H, Wright SG (2000) Marine, estuarine, and diadromous fish stocks at risk of extinction in North America (exclusive of Pacific salmonids). Fisheries 25:6–30Google Scholar
  54. Nicholls H (2004) Marine conservation: sink or swim. Nature 432:12–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Nosengo N (2003) Fertilized to death. Nature 425:894–895PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rice CA (2006) Effects of shoreline modification on a northern Puget Sound beach: microclimate and embryo mortality in surf smelt (Hypomesus pretiosus). Estuar Coasts 29:63–71Google Scholar
  57. Rooper CN, Gunderson DR, Armstrong DA (2003) Patterns in use of estuarine habitat by juvenile English sole (Pleuronectes vetulus) in four eastern North Pacific estuaries. Estuaries 26:1142–1154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Rosenberg AA (1982) Growth of juvenile english sole, Parophrys vetulus, in estuarine and open coastal nursery grounds. Fish Bull 80:245–252Google Scholar
  59. Ruckelshaus M, Essington T, Levin PS (2009) How science can inform ecosystem-based management in the sea: Examples from Puget Sound. In: McLeod KL, Leslie HM (eds) Ecosystem-based management for the Oceans: applying resilience thinking. Island, Washington, DC (in press)Google Scholar
  60. Sampson DB, Al-Jufaily SM (1999) Geographic variation in the maturity and growth schedules of English sole along the U.S. west coast. J. Fish Biol 54:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Schmitten RA (1999) Essential fish habitat: opportunities and challenges for the next millennium. Am Fish Soc Symp 22:3–10Google Scholar
  62. Schroeder WH, Anlauf KG, Barrie LA, Lu JY, Steffen A, Schneeberger DR, Berg T (1998) Arctic springtime depletion of mercury. Nature 394:331–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. StatSoft Inc. (2001) STATISTICA (data analysis software system), version 6. http://www.statsoft.com. StatSoft Inc., Tulsa
  64. Thom RM (1987) The biological importance of pacific northwest estuaries. N W Environ J 3:21–42Google Scholar
  65. Thorrold SR, Jones CM, Swart PK, Targett TE (1998) Accurate classification of juvenile weakfish Cynoscion regalis to estuarine nursery areas based on chemical signatures in otoliths. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 173:253–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Thorrold SR, Latkoczy C, Swart PK, Jones CM (2001) Natal homing in a marine fish metapopulation. Science 291:297–299PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Vanderklift MA, Jacoby CA (2003) Patterns in fish assemblages 25 years after major seagrass loss. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 247:225–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. West J, O’Neill S, Lippert G, Quinnell S (2001) Toxic contaminants in marine and anadromous fish from Puget Sound,Washington: results from the Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program Fish Component, 1989–1999. Technical Report FTP01–14.Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia,WAGoogle Scholar
  69. White DB, Stickney RR (1973) A manual of flatfish rearing. Technical report series number 73–7. Georgia Marine Science Center, University system of Georgia, Skidaway Island, Georgia, 40ppGoogle Scholar
  70. Yamashita Y, Otake T, Yamada H (2000) Relative contributions from exposed inshore and estuarine nursery grounds to the recruitment of stone flounder, Platichthys bicoloratus, estimated using otolith Sr:Ca ratios. Fish Oceanogr 9:316–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Yoklavich M (1982) Growth, food consumption, and conversion efficiency of juvenile English sole (Parophrys vetulus). In: Caillet GM, Simenstad CA (eds) Gutshop ‘81: fish food habit studies. Washington Sea Grant Publication (WSG-WO-82-2), pp 97–105Google Scholar

Copyright information

© GovernmentEmployee: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul M. Chittaro
    • 1
  • Rachel J. Finley
    • 1
  • Phillip S. Levin
    • 1
  1. 1.National Marine Fisheries ServiceNorthwest Fisheries Science CenterSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations