Biodiversity & Conservation

, Volume 14, Issue 6, pp 1319–1334

Factors influencing the spatial distribution patterns of the bullhead (Cottus gobio L., Teleostei Cottidae): a multi-scale study

  • M. Legalle
  • F. Santoul
  • J. Figuerola
  • S. Mastrorillo
  • R. Céréghino
Article

Abstract.

We used general linear modelling to assess the influence of environmental variables on the spatial distribution patterns of the bullhead (Cottus gobio) at stream system, site, and microhabitat scales in southwestern France. Bullheads occurred at 67 sites (out of 554 sampling sites), chiefly close to the source, in small and shallow streams. Population density at a site was primarily influenced by thermal conditions. Stream width was negatively related to the probability of presence of bullheads within the stream system, but positively related to local density, showing that bullhead density could increase within a range of stream width, but that wider rivers were unsuitable. Slope was negatively correlated to bullhead’s occurrence and local density, and depth was negatively correlated to local density and microhabitat use, suggesting that bullhead’s shimming performance was weak under greater erosive forces. Therefore, the most significant results suggested that the distribution of populations and individuals was first governed by the suitability of physical and hydraulic habitat, then population dynamics at a site was mainly governed by the thermal regime. Multi-scale studies of factors influencing a species’ distribution thus allow to integrate patterns observed at different scales, and enhance our understanding of interactions between animals and their environment. Such models are essential in the exploratory phase of fundamental and applied investigations, because they help to target further research, and they should influence the measures to be taken in field surveys or conservation plans.

Keywords

Bullhead Conservation Distribution patterns General linear modelling Habitat Streams 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Andreasson, S. 1971Feeding habits of a bullhead (Cottus gobio L. Pisces) populationReport Institute of Freshwater Research Drottningholm51530Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bain, M.B., Finn, J.T., Booke, H.E. 1988Steamflow regulation and fish community structureEcology69382392Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Begon, M., Harper, J.L., Townsend, C.R. 1996Ecology: Individuals, Populations and Communities, 3rd ednBlackwell ScienceOxfordUKGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bomassi, P., Brugel, C. 2000L’état des connaissances sur les populations en Auvergne des espèces de l‘ichtyofaune inscrites à l’annexe 2 de la directive ‘habitats’. Rapport du Conseil Supérieur de la PêcheDélégation Régionale AuvergneLempdes, France511Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cobb, D.G., Flannagan, J.F. 1990Trichoptera and substrate stability in the Ochre RiverManitobaHydrobiologia2062938Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cobb, D.G., Galloway, T.D., Flannagan, J.F. 1992Effects of discharge and substrate stability on density and species composition of stream insectsCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences4917881795Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Crawley, M.J. 1993Glim for EcologistsBlackwell ScienceOxfordUKGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Décamps, H., Fortuné, M., Gazelle, F., Pautou, G. 1988Historical influence of man in the riparian dynamics of a fluvial landscapeLandscape Ecology1163173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Degerman, E., Sers, B. 1993A study of interactions between fish species in streams using survey data and the PCA-hyperspace techniqueNordic Journal of Freshwater Research68513Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Degerman, E., Sers, B. 1994The effect of lakes on the stream fish faunaEcology of Freshwater Fish3116122Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    De Lury, D.B. 1947On the estimation of biological populationsBiometrics3145167Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Downhower, J.F., Lejeune, P., Gaudin, P., Brown, L. 1990Movements of the chabot (Cottus gobio) in a small streamPolskie Archiwum Hydrobiologii37119126Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Englbrecht, C.C., Freyhof, J., Nolte, A., Rassmann, K., Schliewen, U., Tautz, D. 2000Phylogeography of the bullhead Cottus gobio (Pisces: Teleostei: Cottidae) suggests a pre-Pleistocene origin of the major central European populationsMolecular Ecology9709722PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gabler, H.-M., Amundsen, P.-A., Herfindal, T. 2001Diet segregation between introduced bullhead (Cottus gobio L.) and Atlantic salmon parr (Salmo salar L.) in a sub-Arctic riverArchiv für Hydrobiologie151609625Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gaudin, P. 1981Eco-éthologie d’un poisson benthiquele chabotCottus gobio L. (Cottidae): distribution, alimentation et rapports avec la truiteSalmo trutta LUniversité Claude-BernardLyon, FrancePh.D. ThesisGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gaudin, P., Caillère, L. 1990Microdistribution of Cottus gobio L. and fry of Salmo trutta L. in a first order streamPolskie Archiwum Hydrobiologii378193Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gaudin, P., Caillère, L. 2000Experimental study of the influence of presence and predation by sculpin, Cottus gobio L., on the drift of emergent brown troutSalmo trutta LArchiv für Hydrobiologie147257271Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gittings, T., O’Keefe, D., Gallagher, F., Finn, J., O’Mahony, T. 1998Longitudinal variation in abundance of a freshwater pearl mussel Margaritifera margaritifera population in relation to riverine habitatsBiol. Environ. Proc. R. Irish Acad.98B171178Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gorman, O.T., Kar, J.R. 1978Habitat structure and stream fish communitiesEcology59507515Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Grossman, G.D., Dowd, J.F., Crawford, M. 1990Assemblage stability in stream fishes: a reviewEnvironmental Management14661671Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Guan, R.Z., Wiles, P.R. 1997Ecological impact of introduced crayfish on benthic fishes in a British lowland riverConservation Biology11641647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hänfling, B., Helleman, B., Volckaert, F.A.M., Carvalho, G.R. 2002Late glacial history of the cold-adapted freshwater fish Cottus gobiorevealed by microsatellitesMolecular Ecology1117171729PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Harris, J.H., Silveira, R. 1999Large-scale assessments of river health using an index of biotic integrity with low-diversity fish communitiesFreshwater Biology41235252Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hastie, L.C., Boon, P.J., Young, M.R. 2000Physical microhabitat requirements of freshwater pearl mussels, Margaritifera margaritifera (L)Hydrobiologia4295971Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hastie, L.C., Cooksley, S.L., Scougall, F., Young, M.R., Boon, P.J., Gaywood, M.J. 2003Characterization of freshwater pearl mussel (Margaritifera margaritifera) riverine habitat using River Habitat Survey dataAquatic Conservation Marine Freshwater Ecosystems13213224Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hellawell, J.M. 1978Biological Surveillance of RiversWater Research CenterStevenage Laboratory, UK332Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Holcík, J. 2003Changes in the fish fauna and fisheries in the Slovak section of the Danube River: a reviewAnnals of Limnology39177195Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Inoue, M., Nunokawa, M. 2002Effects of longitudinal variations in stream habitat structure on fish abundance: an analysis based on subunit-scale classificationFreshwater Biology4715941607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jørgensen, L., Amundsen, P.A., Gabler, H.M., Halvorsen, M., Erkinaro, J., Niemelä, E. 1999Spatial distribution of Atlantic salmon parr (Salmo salar L.) and bullhead (Cottus gobio L.) in lotic and lentic habitats of a diversified watercourse in northern FennoscandiaFish. Res.41201211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kainz, E., Gollmann, H.P. 1989Beiträge zur Verbreitung einiger Kleinfischarten in ö sterreichischen FließgewässernOesterreichs Fischerei42204207Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Keith, P., Allardi, J. 2001Atlas des poissons d’eau douce de FranceVol. 47Patrimoines NaturelsParis387Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Koli, L. 1969Geographical variation of Cottus gobio L. (Pisces, Cottidae) in Northern EuropeAnnales Zoologici Fennici6353390Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kontula, T., Väinölä, R. 2001Postglacial colonization of Northern Europe by distinct phylogeographic lineages of the bullheadCottus gobioMolecular Ecology1019832002PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kruk, A., Penczak, T. 2003Impoundment impact on populations of facultative riverine fishAnnals of Limnology39197210Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Larsen, D.P., Omernik, J.M., Hugues, R.M., Rohm, C.M., Whittier, T.R., Kinney, A.J., Gallant, A.L., Dudley, D.R. 1986Correspondence between spatial patterns in fish assemblages in Ohio streams and aquatic ecoregionsEnvironmental Management10815828Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lavandier, P., Décamps, H. 1984

    Estaragne

    Whitton, B.A. eds. Ecology of European RiversBlackwell Scientific PublicationsOxfordUK237264
    Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Lobb, M.D., Orth, D.J. 1991Habitat use by an assemblage of fish in a large warmwater streamTransactions of the American Fishery Society1206578Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lobon-Cervia, J., Dgebuadze, Y., Utrilla, C.G., Rincon, P.A., Granado-Lorencio, C. 1996The reproductive tactic of dace in central Siberia: evidence for temperature regulation of the spatio-temporal variability of its life historyJournal of Fish Biology4810741087Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mastrorillo, S., Lek, S., Dauba, F., Belaud, A. 1997The use of artificial neural networks to predict the presence of small-bodied fish in a riverFreshwater Biology38237246Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Mills, C.A., Mann, R.H.K. 1983The bullhead Cottus gobio a versatile and successful fishAnnual Report of the Freshwater Biology Association517688Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Morris, D.W. 1987Ecological scale and habitat useEcology68362369Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Newall, P.R., Magnuson, J.J. 1999The importance of ecoregion versus drainage area on fish distributions in the St. Croix River and its Wisconsin tributariesEnviron. Biol. Fish.55245254Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Newbold, J.D., Sweeney, B.W., Vannote, R.L. 1994A model for seasonal synchrony in stream mayfliesJournal of the North American Benthological Society13318Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Pedroli, J.-C., Zaugg, B., Kirchhofer, A. 1991Atlas de distribution des poissons et cyclostomes de SuisseCentre Suisse de cartographie de la fauneNeuchâtel, Switzerland155Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Pianka, E.R. 1978Evolutionary Ecology, 2nd edHarper and RowNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Poulet, N. 2000Impact de la fragmentation des cours d’eau sur la morphologie des poissons. Cas de la vandoise rostrée (Leuciscus leuciscus burdigalensis) du Viaur. D.E.A reportUniversité Toulouse IIIFranceGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Pusey, B.J., Arthington, A.H., Read, M.G. 1993Spatial and temporal variation in fish assemblage structure in the Mary Riversouth-eastern Queensland: the influence of habitat structureEnviron. Biol. Fish.37355380Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Rathert, D., White, D., Sifneos, J.C., Hughes, R.M. 1999Environmental correlates of species richness for native freshwater fish in Oregon, USAJournal of Biogeography26257273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Roussel, J.M., Bardonnet, A. 1997Diel and seasonal patterns of habitat use by fish in a natural salmonid brook: an approach to the functional role of the riffle-pool sequenceBulletin Français de la Pêche et de la Pisciculture346573588Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Roussel, J.M., Bardonnet, A. 2002The habitat of juvenile brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) in small streams: preferences, movements, diel and seasonal variationsBulletin Français de la Pêche et de la Pisciculture365–366435454Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Roussel, J.M., Bardonnet, A., Claude, A. 1999Microhabitat of brown trout when feeding on drift and when resting in a lowland salmonid brook: effects on Weighted Usable AreaArchiv für Hydrobiologic146413429Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    SAS Institute Inc.1996SAS System for Mixed ModelsSAS Institute Inc.Cary, North CarolinaGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    SAS Institute Inc.2000SAS/STAT® Software: User’s GuideSAS Institute Inc.Cary, North CarolinaGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Schiemer, F., Spindler, T. 1989Endangered fish species of the Danube river in AustriaRegul. River. Res. Manage.4397407Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Seber, G.A.F., Le Cren, E.D. 1967Estimating populations parameters from catches large to relative populationsJournal of Animal Ecology36631643Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Strayer, D.L., Ralley, J. 1993Microhabitat use by an assemblage of stream-dwelling unionaceans (Bivalvia), including two rare species of AlismodontaJournal of the North American Benthological Society12247258Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Vannote, R.L., Sweeney, B.W. 1980Geographic analysis of thermal equilibria: a conceptual model for evaluating the effect of natural and modified thermal regimes on aquatic insect communitiesAmerican Naturalist115667695Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Volckaert, F.A.M., Hänfling, B., Hellemans, B., Carvalho, G.R. 2002Timing of the population dynamics of bullhead Cottus gobio (Teleostei: Cottidae) during the pleistoceneJournal of Evolutionary Biology15930944Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Ward, J.V., Stanford, J.A. 1979

    Ecological factors controlling stream zoobenthos with emphasis on thermal modification of regulated streams

    Ward, J.V.Stanford, J.A. eds. The Ecology of Regulated StreamsPlenum PressNew York3555
    Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Welton, J.S., Mills, C.A., Pygott, J.R. 1991The effect of interaction between the stone loach Noemacheilus barbatulus (L.) and the bullhead Cottus gobio (L.) on prey and habitat selectionHydrobiologia22017Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Welton, J.S., Mills, C.A., Rendle, E.L. 1983Food and habitat partitioning in two small benthic fishes, Noemacheilus barbatulus (L.) and Cottus gobio LArchiv für Hydrobiologie97434454Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Wright, J.F.Sutcliffe, D.W.Furse, M.T. eds. 2000Assessing the Biological Quality of Fresh Waters: RIVPACS and Other TechniquesFreshwater Biological AssociationAmblesideUKGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Legalle
    • 1
  • F. Santoul
    • 1
  • J. Figuerola
    • 2
  • S. Mastrorillo
    • 1
  • R. Céréghino
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratoire d’Ecologie des HydrosystèmesUMR 5177, Université Paul SabatierToulouse Cedex 04France
  2. 2.Estacion Biologica de DonanaAvenida de Maria Luisa s/n, Pabellon del PeruSevillaSpain

Personalised recommendations