Advertisement

Oecologia

, Volume 169, Issue 3, pp 733–742 | Cite as

Habitat exclusion and reduced growth: a field experiment on the effects of inter-cohort competition in young-of-the-year brown trout

  • Rasmus KasperssonEmail author
  • Johan Höjesjö
  • Torgny Bohlin
Population ecology - Original research

Abstract

Competition during the juvenile phase is a key process for regulating density in organisms with high fecundity. Juvenile density-dependent bottlenecks may become even more pronounced if several cohorts compete, but this has received relatively limited attention in previous literature. We performed a manipulation experiment in seven coastal streams to investigate the presence of inter-cohort competition, using habitat selection, body-size and density of newly emerged (age-0) brown trout (Salmo trutta) as response variables. The trout population (age ≥1 fish) was estimated using electro-fishing prior to the emergence of fry (April–May) and was either removed (manipulated sections) or maintained (control sections). Age-0 habitat selection was examined in June while density and body-size was evaluated in October (end of the growth season). We found that age-0 trout selected habitats that were located further from riffles (nursery habitats) in the absence of age ≥1 trout, suggesting a niche overlap between cohorts in the habitat dimension and, hence, that both inter-cohort competitive interactions and ontogenetic preference may influence habitat utilisation in the wild. Furthermore, we also found age-0 body-size to be significantly larger in manipulated sections and negatively related to its own density. We argue that competition from older cohorts influence the availability of age-0 feeding territories at the critical phase of emergence with secondary negative effects on age-0 growth. These results not only have implications for understanding the mechanisms of density dependence but can also provide valuable knowledge to the management of salmonid populations and their habitats in the wild.

Keywords

Dominance Distribution Growth Interference Stream Survival 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank K. Höglind, R. Lagergren and L. Molander at the Swedish County Administrative Board Region Västra Götaland, P.E. Jacobsen at the Swedish Game Fisheries Association and N. Åberg for providing valuable help with selecting suitable streams and data on stream characteristics. B. Adriaenssens, Dan Arvidsson, Daniel Andersson, L. Andersson, S. Brockmark, C. Dellefors, J.I. Johnsson, A. Karlsson, A. Kullgren, F. Laursen, R. Lagergren, H. Lord, A. Norrby and P. Waldeck provided valuable help during the field work. R. Kaspersson was financially supported from the Helge Ax:son Johnson foundation and Wilhelm and Martina Lundgren foundation. All handling of fish in this experiment was approved by the Ethical Committee for Animal Research in Göteborg (license 199/2002). We are grateful to Neil Metcalfe and two anonymous referees for valuable comments to an earlier version of this paper.

Supplementary material

442_2012_2248_MOESM1_ESM.doc (1.2 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 1236 kb)

References

  1. Armstrong JD, Nislow K (2006) Critical habitat during the transition from maternal provisioning in freshwater fish, with emphasis on Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and brown trout (Salmo trutta). J Zool 269:403–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Armstrong JD, Kemp PS, Kennedy GJA, Ladle M, Milner NJ (2003) Habitat requirements of Atlantic salmon and brown trout in rivers and streams. Fish Res 62:143–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bakker TCM, Sevenster P (1983) Determinants of dominance in male sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus L.). Behaviour 86:55–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Begon M, Harper JL, Townsend CR (1996) Ecology: individuals, populations and communities. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  5. Bohlin T (1977) Habitat selection and intercohort competition of juvenile sea-trout Salmo trutta. Oikos 29:112–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bohlin T, Hamrin S, Heggberget TG, Rasmussen G, Saltveit SJ (1989) Electrofishing: theory and practice with special emphasis on salmonids. Hydrobiologia 173:9–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bohlin T, Dellefors C, Faremo U (1996) Date of smolt migration depends on body-size but not age in wild sea-run brown trout. J Fish Biol 49:157–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bohlin T, Sundström LF, Johnsson JI, Höjesjö J, Pettersson J (2002) Density-dependent growth in brown trout: effects of introducing wild and hatchery fish. J Anim Ecol 71:683–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bremset G, Berg OK (1999) Three-dimensional microhabitat use by young pool-dwelling Atlantic salmon and brown trout. Anim Behav 58:1047–1059PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brotons L, Orell M, Lahti K, Koivula K (2000) Age-related microhabitat segregation in willow tit Parus montanus winter flocks. Ethology 106:993–1005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Claessen D, de Roos AM, Persson L (2000) Dwarfs and giants: cannibalism and competition in size-structured populations. Am Nat 155:219–237PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Clark DB, Gibbons JW (1969) Dietary shifts in the turtle Pseudemys scripta (Schoepff) from youth to maturity. Copeia 4:704–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Copp GH, Peňáz M (1988) Ecology of fish spawning and nursery zones in the flood plain, using a new sampling approach. Hydrobiologia 169:209–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Crowley PH, Dillon PM, Johnson DM, Watson CN (1987) Intraspecific interference among larvae in a semivoltine dragonfly population. Oecologia 71:447–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dellefors C, Faremo U (1988) Early sexual-maturation in males of wild sea trout, Salmo trutta L, inhibits smoltification. J Fish Biol 33:741–749CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Edeline E, Haugen TO, Weltzien FA, Claessen D, Winfield IJ, Stenseth NC, Vollestad LA (2009) Body downsizing caused by non-consumptive social stress severely depresses population growth rate. Proc R Soc Lond B 277:843–851CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Einum S, Sundt-Hansen L, Nislow KH (2006) The partitioning of density-dependent dispersal, growth and survival throughout ontogeny in a highly fecund organism. Oikos 113:489–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eitam A, Blaustein L, Mangel M (2005) Density and intercohort priority effects on larval Salamandra salamandra in temporary pools. Oecologia 146:36–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ekman JB, Askenmo CEH (1984) Social rank and habitat use in willow tit groups. Anim Behav 32:508–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Elliott JM (1967) Food of trout (Salmo trutta) in a dartmoor stream. J Appl Ecol 4:59–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Elliott JM (1994) Quantitative ecology and the brown trout. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  22. Fausch KD (1998) Interspecific competition and juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar): on testing effects and evaluating the evidence across scales. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 55(Suppl 1):218–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Girard IL, Grant JWA, Steingrimsson SO (2004) Foraging, growth, and loss rate of young-of-the-year Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in relation to habitat use in Catamaran Brook, New Brunswick. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 61:2339–2349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Grant JWA, Imre I (2005) Patterns of density-dependent growth in juvenile stream-dwelling salmonids. J Fish Biol 67:100–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Griffiths SW, Armstrong JD (2002) Kin-biased territory overlap and food sharing among Atlantic salmon juveniles. J Anim Ecol 71:480–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hamrin SF, Persson L (1986) Asymmetrical competition between age classes as a factor causing population oscillations in an obligate planktivorous fish species. Oikos 47:223–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Heggenes J (1988) Effect of experimentally increased intraspecific competition on sedentary adult brown trout (Salmo trutta) movement and stream habitat choice. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 45:1163–1172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Heggenes J, Borgstrøm R (1988) Effect of mink, Mustela vison Schreber, predation on cohorts of juvenile Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L. and brown trout, S. trutta L., in three small streams. J Fish Biol 33:885–894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hill J, Grossman GD (1993) An energetic model of microhabitat use for rainbow trout and royside dace. Ecology 74:685–698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hjelm J, Persson L (2001) Size-dependent attack rate and handling capacity: Inter-cohort competition in a zooplanktivorous fish. Oikos 95:520–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hughes NF, Dill LM (1990) Position choice by drift-feeding salmonids: model and test for Arctic grayling (Thymallus arcticus) in subarctic mountain streams, interior Alaska. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 47:2039–2048CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Imre I, Grant JWA, Cunjak RA (2005) Density-dependent growth of young-of-the-year Atlantic salmon Salmo salar in catamaran brook, New Brunswick. J Anim Ecol 74:508–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jenkins TM, Diehl S, Kratz KW, Cooper SD (1999) Effects of population density on individual growth of brown trout in streams. Ecology 80:941–956CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Johnsson JI, Nöbbelin F, Bohlin T (1999) Territorial competition among wild brown trout fry: Effects of ownership and body size. J Fish Biol 54:469–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jones GP (1987) Competitive interactions among adults and juveniles in a coral reef fish. Ecology 68:1534–1547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kaspersson R, Höjesjö J (2009) Density-dependent growth rate in an age-structured population: a field study on stream-dwelling brown trout Salmo trutta. J Fish Biol 74:2196–2215PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Keddy PA (2001) Competition. Kluwer, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Koivula K, Lahti K, Orell M, Rytkönen S (1993) Prior residency as a key determinant of social dominance in the willow tit (Parus montanus). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 33:283–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. L’Abée-Lund JH, Langeland A, Saegrov H (1992) Piscivory by brown trout Salmo trutta (L.) and Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus (L.) in Norwegian lakes. J Fish Biol 41:91–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lobon-Cervia J (2007) Density-dependent growth in stream-living brown trout Salmo trutta L. Funct Ecol 21:117–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lonzarich DG, Quinn TP (1995) Experimental evidence for the effect of depth and structure on the distribution, growth, and survival of stream fishes. Can J Zool 73:2223–2230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mäki-Petäys A, Muotka T, Huusko A, Tikkanen P, Kreivi P (1997) Seasonal changes in habitat use and preference by juvenile brown trout, Salmo trutta, in a northern boreal river. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 54:520–530Google Scholar
  43. Nilsson PA, Huntingford FA, Armstrong JD (2004) Using the functional response to determine the nature of unequal interference among foragers. Proc R Soc Lond B 271:S334–S337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nislow KH, Folt C, Seandel M (1998) Food and foraging behavior in relation to microhabitat use and survival of age-0 Atlantic salmon. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 55:116–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Nislow KH, Folt CL, Parrish DL (1999) Favorable foraging locations for young Atlantic salmon: application to habitat and population restoration. Ecol Appl 9:1085–1099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Nordwall F, Näslund I, Degerman E (2001) Intercohort competition effects on survival, movement, and growth of brown trout (Salmo trutta) in Swedish streams. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 58:2298–2308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rosenfeld JS, Boss S (2001) Fitness consequences of habitat use for juvenile cutthroat trout: energetic costs and benefits in pools and riffles. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 58:585–593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Samhouri JF, Steele MA, Forrester GE (2009) Inter-cohort competition drives density dependence and selective mortality in a marine fish. Ecology 90:1009–1020PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schultz ET, Conover DO (1997) Latitudinal differences in somatic energy storage: adaptive responses to seasonality in an estuarine fish (Atherinidae: Menidia menidia). Oecologia 109:516–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Smith JM, Parker GA (1976) Logic of asymmetric contests. Anim Behav 24:159–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sol D, Santos DM, Cuadrado M (2000) Age-related feeding site selection in urban pigeons (Columba livia): experimental evidence of the competition hypothesis. Can J Zool 78:144–149Google Scholar
  52. Szabo AR (2002) Experimental tests of intercohort competition for food and cover in the tidepool sculpin (Oligocottus maculosus Girard). Can J Zool 80:137–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Vehanen T, Mäki-Petäys A, Aspi J, Muotka T (1999) Intercohort competition causes spatial segregation in brown trout in artificial streams. J Fish Biol 55:35–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Webster MS (2004) Density dependence via intercohort competition in a coral-reef fish. Ecology 85:986–994CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Werner EE (1994) Ontogenetic scaling of competitive relations: size-dependent effects and responses in two anuran larvae. Ecology 75:197–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wootton RJ (1999) Ecology of teleost fishes. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rasmus Kaspersson
    • 1
    Email author
  • Johan Höjesjö
    • 1
  • Torgny Bohlin
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of GothenburgGöteborgSweden

Personalised recommendations