Skip to main content
Log in

Local Movement as a Measure of Habitat Quality in Stream Salmonids

  • Published:
Environmental Biology of Fishes Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Habitat assessments are often based on the premise that spatial variation in population density arises from, and accurately reflects, underlying differences in quality among habitats. Nonetheless, this premise has been criticized on both theoretical and empirical grounds. Habitat quality perhaps is best evaluated by examining behavioural processes which directly influence habitat use. We present an approach based on the assumption that measures of local movement, such as habitat-specific immigration and loss rates, provide useful indicators of habitat quality. A dynamic turnover model was used in conjunction with mark-recapture techniques to estimate movement parameters for brook charr, Salvelinus fontinalis, and Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar, in different stream habitats during the summer. Immigration and loss rates were derived from mark-recapture experiments covering short periods of time (6 days). Movement-based rankings of habitat quality for both charr (pools ≥ glides > riffles) and salmon (riffles > glides > pools) were in agreement with results from earlier studies. Over evaluation periods of up to 65 days, observed abundances were highly variable in time and fluctuated about the equilibrium abundances calculated from movement parameters in the short-term experiments, suggesting that movement-based parameters may be more stable than measures of abundance for evaluating salmonid habitat. Because the approach based on movement behaviour focuses on immigration and loss, two processes that directly generate density differentials between habitats, it provides a more reliable mechanistic basis for understanding habitat selection than do traditional approaches based on density–quality relationships.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References cited

  • Armstrong, J.D., V.A. Braithwaite & F.A. Huntingford. 1997. Spatial strategies of wild Atlantic salmon parr: exploration and settlement in unfamiliar areas. J. Anim. Ecol. 66: 203–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonneau, J.L., R.F. Thurow & D.L. Scarnecchia. 1995. Capture, marking, and enumeration of juvenile bull trout and cutthroat trout in small, low-conductivity streams. North Amer. J. Fish. Manag. 15: 563–568.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bult, T.P., S.C. Riley, R.L. Haedrich, R.J. Gibson & J. Heggenes. 1999. Density-dependent habitat selection by juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in experimental riverine habitats. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 56: 1298–1306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Endler, J.A. 1986. Natural selection in the wild. Princeton University Press, Princeton. 336 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fausch, K.D. 1998. Interspecific competition and juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar): on testing effects and evaluating the evidence across scales. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 55: 218–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fretwell, S.D. & H.L. Lucas. 1970. On territorial behaviour and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds. Acta Biotheor. 19: 16–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, R.J. 1973. Interactions of juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) and brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis (Mitchill)). pp. 181–202. In: M.W. Smith & W.M. Carter (ed.) Proceedings of the International Atlantic Salmon Symposium, International Atlantic Salmon Foundation Special Publication Series 4.

  • Gibson, R.J. 1978. The behavior of juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) with regard to temperature and to water velocity. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 107: 703–712.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, R.J. 1981. Behavioural interactions between coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch), Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar), brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis), and steelhead trout (Salmo gairdneri), at the juvenile fluviatile stages. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish Aquat. Sci. 1029: 1–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, R.J. 1993. The Atlantic salmon in fresh water: spawning, rearing and production. Rev. Fish Biol. Fish. 3: 39–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, R.J., D.E. Stansbury, R.R. Whalen & K.G. Hillier. 1993. Relative habitat use, and inter-specific and intra-specific competition of brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) and juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in some Newfoundland Rivers. pp. 53–69. In: R.J. Gibson & R.E. Cutting (ed.) Production of Juvenile Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar, in Natural Waters Can. Spec. Publ. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 118.

  • Gowan, C., M.K. Young, K.D. Fausch & S.C. Riley. 1994. Restricted movement in resident stream salmonids: a paradigm lost? Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 51: 2626–2637.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gowan, C. & K.D. Fausch. 1996. Mobile brook trout in two high-elevation Colorado streams: re-evaluating the concept of restricted movement. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 53: 1370–1381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, J.W.A. & D.L.G. Noakes. 1988. Aggressiveness and foraging mode of young-of-the-year brook charr, Salvelinus fontinalis (Pisces: Salmonidae). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 22: 435–445.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, B.C. & A.J. Stewart. 1991. Fish size and habitat depth relationships in headwater streams. Oecologia 87: 336–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hearn, W.E. 1987. Interspecific competition and habitat segregation among stream-dwelling trout and salmon: a review. Fisheries 12: 24–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heggenes, J., Å. Brabrand & S.J. Saltveit. 1990. Comparison of three methods for studies of stream habitat use by young brown trout and Atlantic salmon. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 119: 101–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isbell, L.A., J.D. Pruetz & T.P. Young. 1998. Movements of vervets (Cercopithecus aethiops) and patas monkeys (Erythrocebus patas) as estimators of food resource size, density, and distribution. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 42: 123–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellner, C.J., J.D. Brawn & J.R. Karr. 1992. What is habitat suitability and how should it be measured? pp. 476–488. In: D.R. McCullogh & R.H. Barrett (ed.) Wildlife 2001: Populations, Elsevier, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacCrimmon, H.R., T.A. Dickson & R.J. Gibson. 1983. Implications of differences in emergent times on growth and behaviour of juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and brook charr (Salvelinus fontinalis) in sympatric stream populations. Naturaliste Can. (Rev. Ecol. Syst.) 110: 379–384.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mather, M.E. & R.A. Stein. 1993. Using growth/mortality tradeoffs to explore a crayfish species replacement in stream riffles and pools. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 20: 88–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNicol, R.E. & D.L.G. Noakes. 1984. Environmental influences on territoriality of juvenile brook charr, Salvelinus fontinalis, in a stream environment. Env. Biol. Fish. 10: 29–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNicol, R.E., E. Scherer & E.J. Murkin. 1985. Quantitative field investigations of feeding and territorial behaviour of young-of-the-year brook charr, Salvelinus fontinalis. Env. Biol. Fish. 12: 219–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, D.W. 1988. Habitat-dependent population regulation and community structure. Evol. Ecol. 2: 253–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakano, S. 1995. Individual differences in resource use, growth and emigration under the influence of a dominance hierarchy in fluvial red-spotted masu salmon in a natural habitat. J. Anim. Ecol. 64: 75–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okubo, A. 1980. Diffusion and ecological problems: mathematical models. Springer-Verlag, New York. 254 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Power, G. 1980. The brook charr, Salvelinus fontinalis. pp. 141–204. In: E.K. Balon (ed.) Charrs, Salmonid Fishes of the genus Salvelinus, Perspective inVertebrate Science 1, DrW. Junk Publishers, The Hague.

    Google Scholar 

  • Railsback, S.F., R.H. Lamberson, B.C. Harvey & W.E. Duffy. 1999. Movement rules for individual-based models of stream fish. Ecol. Modell. 123: 73–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Randall, R.G. 1982. Emergence, population densities, and growth of salmon and trout fry in two New Brunswick streams. Can. J. Zool. 60: 2239–2244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez, M.A. 1995. Habitat-specific estimates of competition in stream salmonids: a field test of the isodar model of habitat selection. Evol. Ecol. 9: 169–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenzweig, M.L. 1981. A theory of habitat selection. Ecology 62: 327–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, R.L. & J.H. Gee. 1964. Movements of young Atlantic salmon in a small stream. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 21: 27–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, D.J. & R.G. Templeton. 1976. Movement of brown trout Salmo trutta L. in a chalk stream. J. Fish Biol. 9: 411–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, J.A. & K.A. Rose. 1997. Effects of individual habitat selection in a heterogeneous environment on fish cohort survivorship: a modelling analysis. J. Anim. Ecol. 66: 122–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Horne, B. 1982. Niches of adult and juvenile deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus) in serial stages of coniferous forest. Ecology 63: 92–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Horne, B. 1983. Density as a misleading indicator of habitat quality. J. Wildl. Manage. 47: 893–901.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wankowski, J.W.J. & J.E. Thorpe. 1979. Spatial distribution and feeding in Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L. juveniles. J. Fish Biol. 14: 239–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winker, K., J.H. Rappole & M.A. Ramos. 1995. The use of movement data as an assay of habitat quality. Oecologia 101: 211–216.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marco A. Rodríguez.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bélanger, G., Rodríguez, M.A. Local Movement as a Measure of Habitat Quality in Stream Salmonids. Environmental Biology of Fishes 64, 155–164 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016044725154

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016044725154

Navigation