ABSTRACT1. Man-made barriers such as dams affect the movement of aquatic species, reducing gene flow and genetic variability. Such encroachments may also lead to selective changes in life history and behaviour. Hydropower construction worldwide has fragmented many previously continuous fish habitats, leading to loss of populations and production. It is therefore important to assess potential impacts on habitats before such developments begin.2. Here, the potential ecological and evolutionary consequences of planned hydropower development on two migratory salmonid fishes -brown trout (Salmo trutta) and European grayling (Thymallus thymallus) -were assessed, combining telemetry with population genetics. Almost 200 fish were radio-tagged and tracked weekly between March and November. Using microsatellite markers, the genetic population structure was assessed and the number of migrants among different river sections identified for both species.3. Overall, both species displayed extensive within-and between-river movement, with larger home ranges in grayling than in trout. Regular movements between distinct spawning, feeding and wintering areas were common. These vital habitats were often located within areas of planned hydropower development.4. Both species exhibited significant population genetic structuring within the study area, with waterfalls acting as impassable barriers to upstream gene flow for grayling. The structuring was more developed for trout than for grayling. However, downstream gene flow was common, resulting in a highly admixed trout population below a waterfall.5. The large-scale movement patterns and extensive connectivity of the system indicate that habitat fragmentation and changes in water flow will adversely affect both species, but most strongly the trout. The reduction in water flow over large and productive stretches of the river might select for less migratory genotypes in both species. The loss of particular genotypes may reduce the biocomplexity of the system and overall population resilience.

The causes, effects and extent of minnow Phoxinus phoxinus introductions in Norway are reviewed to assess why the introductions have had severe effects, especially where brown trout Salmo trutta is the only fish species present. The natural distribution of minnow in Norway was mainly restricted to low altitude localities in the south‐eastern part of the country and in some northern areas. The distribution area expanded considerably throughout the 1900s, especially in mountain areas, due in part to the use of minnows as live bait for angling. Although minnow densities do not seem unusually high in the relatively complex fish communities of its native range, the species can achieve very high population densities when introduced to communities with few fish species, such as in the numerous recently invaded lakes where brown trout was the only fish species present. The dense minnow populations in these lakes appear to have led to reduced recruitment and growth rates in the brown trout, with abundances on average 35% lower in lakes where minnow has been introduced. The success of minnow in harsh habitats demonstrates their phenotypic and ecological plasticity, but also implies that their original distribution in Norway was restricted by early immigration history and not by environmental limitations. This suggests that human‐assisted spread of the species could have strong adverse effects in Scandinavia lakes of low fish species richness.

No abstract

Minnows Phoxinus phoxinus, studied 30 years after the first record of the species in the subalpine Lake Øvre Heimdalsvatn, Norway, ≥55 mm LT, were estimated to have densities of c. 4.7 kg ha−1 (120 000 fish) in June 1999 and 2.1 kg ha−1 (63 000 fish) in June 2000. The population was characterized by low individual growth, delayed age of maturity and lived longer when compared to values reported in a previous study in the early phase of its establishment, and other values reported in the literature. Most minnows reached sexual maturity at 4–5 years and >55 mm LT. Although the estimated annual survival of minnows >55 mm was low (S=0.2), ages up to 13 years were recorded. Despite a moderate increase in the population size during the last 20 years, the present reduction in individual growth, followed by delayed age of maturity, suggested the existence of density‐dependent effects on the population dynamics of the minnows. The minnows were restricted to the littoral zone and near bottom areas. A vertical or horizontal expansion in habitat use was probably prevented by the presence of piscivorous brown trout Salmo trutta.

Stable coexistence of Arctic charr and whitefish does occur in a number of native lake fish communities in Scandinavia. Even so, whitefish introductions into Arctic charr lakes have resulted in serious decline and possibly local extinction of Arctic charr. In this article, we analyze the habitat use and diet of the two species in five Norwegian lakes differing in basin shape and environmental conditions. In two of the lakes, both species are native, and appear to live in a relatively stable coexistence. Here, whitefish mainly occupy the littoral and upper pelagic zone, while Arctic charr live in the deeper habitats. Diets are generally quite different in terms of the zooplankton species eaten. In the three other lakes, either whitefish or both species have been introduced. In the shallowest lake, habitat segregation is similar to that seen in the pristine lakes, although Arctic charr appears to be on the brink of extinction. In the remaining two lakes, however, Arctic charr dominates, and occurs in higher numbers than whitefish in all the habitats. Our observations indicate that coexistence of the two species in oligotrophic and relatively pristine lakes requires an extensive profundal zone to serve as a refugium for Arctic charr. If the littoral zone is rendered inaccessible or unprofitable for whitefish due to dominance of a third competitor or predator, or as a result of lake regulation, then Arctic charr may be the dominant species.