Advertisement

Environmental Biology of Fishes

, Volume 67, Issue 4, pp 369–378 | Cite as

Basin-scale Patterns in the Drift of Embryonic and Larval Fishes and Lamprey Ammocoetes in two Coastal Rivers

  • Jason L. White
  • Bret C. Harvey
Article

Abstract

We studied the distribution and abundance of drifting embryonic and larval fishes and lampreys in the Smith and Van Duzen rivers of northern California, U.S.A. We collected seven fish species in four families and at least one lamprey species in the drift. All taxa drifted almost exclusively at night. Sculpins, Cottus aleuticus and C. asper, outnumbered all other taxa, comprising 63% of the catch in the Van Duzen River and 90% of the catch in the Smith River. We estimated that sculpin drift reached 3×107 individuals h−1 during the relatively high flow period from late winter through early summer. Most sculpin in these two rivers appeared to drift to the estuaries; we estimated 2.5×109 sculpin embryos and larvae reached the Smith River estuary in 1995. In contrast to the sculpins, the patterns in the drift of other taxa suggest limited transport to the estuaries. Suckers, Catostomus occidentalis in the Van Duzen River, C. rimiculus in the Smith River, threespine stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus, and lamprey, Lampetra tridentata and possibly L. richardsoni, drifted at much lower rates and later in the year than sculpins. In the Van Duzen River, drift appeared to serve as a dispersal mechanism for only one of three introduced cyprinids. California roach, Lavinia symmetricus, drifted at low rates throughout the summer while we captured only seven Sacramento pikeminnow, Ptychocheilus grandis, and no speckled dace, Rhynichthys osculus. The information gathered on the drift of early life history phases is germane to both the conservation of native fishes and management of non-indigenous species in coastal rivers.

early life history freshwater Cottus Lampetra Catostomus introduced species 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Armstrong, A.V. & M.L. Brown. 1985. Propensity to drift downstream among various species of fish. J. Freshwater Ecol. 3: 3-17.Google Scholar
  2. Araujo-Lima, C.A.R.M. & E.C. Oliveira. 1998. Transport of larval fish in the Amazon. J. Fish Biol. 53 (Suppl. A): 297-306.Google Scholar
  3. Balon, E.K. 1999. Alternative ways to become a juvenile or a definitive phenotype (and on some persisting linguistic offenses). Environ. Biol. Fish. 56: 17-38.Google Scholar
  4. Brown, L.R., S.A. Matern & P.B. Moyle. 1995. Comparative ecology of prickly sculpin, Cottus asper, and coastrange sculpin, C. aleuticus, in the Eel River, California. Environ. Biol. Fish. 42: 329-343.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, L.R. & P.B. Moyle. 1997. Invading species in the Eel River, California: successes, failures, and relationships with resident species. Environ. Biol. Fish. 49: 271-291.Google Scholar
  6. Clifford, H.F. 1972. Downstream movements of white sucker, Catostomus commersoni, fry in a brown-water stream of Alberta. J. Fish. Res. Board of Canada 29: 1091-1093.Google Scholar
  7. Copp, G.H. & B. Cellot. 1988. Drift of embryonic and larval fishes, especially Lepomis gibbosus (L.), in the Upper Rhone River. J. Freshwater Ecol. 4: 419-424.Google Scholar
  8. Flecker, A.S., D.C. Taphorn, J.A. Lovell & B.P. Feifarek. 1991. Drift of characin larvae, Bryconamericus deuterodonoides, during the dry season from Andean piedmont streams. Environ. Biol. Fish. 31: 197-202.Google Scholar
  9. Gadomski, D.M. & C.A. Barfoot. 1998. Diel and distributional abundance patterns of fish embryos and larvae in the lower Columbia and Deschutes rivers. Environ. Biol. Fish. 51: 353-368.Google Scholar
  10. Gale, W.F. & H.W. Mohr, Jr. 1978. Larval fish drift in a large river with a comparison of methods. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 107: 46-55.Google Scholar
  11. Harvey, B.C. 1991. Interaction of abiotic and biotic factors influences larval fish survival in an Oklahoma stream. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 48: 1476-1480.Google Scholar
  12. Harvey, B.C., White, J.L. & R.J. Nakamoto. 2002. Habitat relationships and larval drift of native and nonindigenous fishes in neighboring tributaries of a coastal California river. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 131: 159-170.Google Scholar
  13. Johnston, T.A., M.N. Gaboury, R.A. Janusz & L.R. Janusz. 1995. Larval fish drift in the Valley River, Manitoba: influence of abiotic and biotic factors, and relationships with future year-class strengths. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 52: 2423-2431.Google Scholar
  14. Kennedy, T.B. & G.L. Vinyard. 1997. Drift ecology of western catostomid larvae with emphasis on Warner suckers, Catostomus warnerensis (Teleostei). Environ. Biol. Fish. 49: 187-195.Google Scholar
  15. Krejsa, R.J. 1967. The systematics of the prickly sculpin, Cottus asper Richardson, a polytypic species. Part II. Studies on the life history, with especial reference to migration. Pac. Sci. 21: 414-422.Google Scholar
  16. Marchetti, M.P. & P.B. Moyle. 2000. Spatial and temporal ecology of native and introduced fish larvae in lower Putah Creek, California. Environ. Biol. Fish. 58: 75-87.Google Scholar
  17. Mason, J.C. and Machidori, S. 1976. Populations of sympatric sculpins, Cottus aleuticus and Cottus asper, in four adjacent salmon-producing coastal streams on Vancouver Island, B.C. Fish. Bull. 74: 131-141.Google Scholar
  18. Misatano, D.A. 1977. Species composition and relative abundance of larval and post-larval fishes in the Columbia River estuary, 1973. Fish. Bull. 75: 218-222.Google Scholar
  19. Moyle, P.B. 2002. Inland Fishes of California. University of California Press, Berkeley. 502 pp.Google Scholar
  20. Muth, R.T. & J.C. Schmulbach. 1984. Downstream transport of fish larvae in a shallow prairie river. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 113: 224-230.Google Scholar
  21. Næsje, T.F., B. Jonsson & O.T. Sandlund. 1986. Drift of cisco and whitefish larvae in a Norwegian river. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 115: 89-93.Google Scholar
  22. Pearcy, W.G. & S.S. Myers. 1973. Larval fishes of Yaquina Bay, Oregon: a nursery ground for marine fishes? Fish. Bull. 72: 201-213.Google Scholar
  23. Potter, I.C. 1980. Ecology of larval and metamorphosing lampreys. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 37: 1641-1657.Google Scholar
  24. Robinson, A.T., R.W. Clarkson & R.E. Forrest. 1998. Dispersal of larval fishes in a regulated river tributary. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 127: 772-786.Google Scholar
  25. Stoeckel, J.A., D.W. Schneider, L.A. Soeken, K.D. Blodgett & R.E. Sparks. 1997. Larval dynamics of a riverine metapopulation: implications for zebra mussel recruitment, dispersal, and control in a large-river system. J. North Am. Benthol. Soc. 16: 586-601.Google Scholar
  26. Tyus, H.M. & G.B. Haines. 1991. Distribution, habitat use, and growth of age-0 Colorado squawfish in the Green River Basin, Colorado and Utah. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 120: 79-89.Google Scholar
  27. Villa, N.A. 1985. Life history of the Sacramento sucker, Catostomus occidentalis, in Thomes Creek, Tehama County, California. Calif. Fish Game 71: 88-106.Google Scholar
  28. White, J.L. & B.C. Harvey. 2001. Effects of an introduced piscivorous fish on native benthic fishes in a coastal river. Freshwater Biol. 46: 987-995.Google Scholar
  29. Winnell, M.H. & D.J. Jude. 1991. Northern large-river benthic and larval fish drift: St. Marys River, USA/Canada. J. Great Lakes Res. 17: 168-182.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jason L. White
    • 1
  • Bret C. Harvey
    • 2
  1. 1.ArcataU.S.A.
  2. 2.U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, dPacific Southwest Research Station, Redwood Sciences LaboratoryU.S.A

Personalised recommendations