Age, Growth, and Fecundity of Yellow Perch, Perca flavescens, in Lake Michigan near Ludington, Michigan

Abstract

Yellow perch were studied as a portion of a total environmental baseline study in 1972 before operation of a new pumped storage power plant on the eastern shore of Lake Michigan near Ludington. Of 1,546 perch taken by gill nets, age III (1969 year class) and IV fish contributed 40.1% and 27.4% of the total number, with male fish being taken much more frequently than females in all age classes during spring sampling. Comparative growth and lengthweight data indicated that the perch were generally growing to larger sizes than those reported previously from the Great Lakes. Most fish older than age I were sexually mature and spawned in shallow littoral waters from mid-May to late June. Mature fish spent the summer in the littoral zone and moved to deeper water by late fall. The ratio of ovary weight to body weight was 20-25% before spawning, declined sharply, and increased again in fall. Ninety-six female fish examined for fecundity had a range of 10,654 to 157,594 eggs, and in general, because of the larger sizes of the fish, had greater fecundity than previously reported for other yellow perch. Regression equations were developed for fecundity vs. length (logarithmic), weight (linear), ovarian weight (logarithmic), and age (semi-logarithmic). •Based on a portion of a thesis submitted to the facuky of the Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, at Michigan State University in partial fulfillment for the degree of Master of Science. 2 Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station Journal Article Number 7370. s Present address: Michigan State University, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Great Lakes Research Laboratory, South Lakeshore Drive, Ludington, Michigan 49431. relationships, spawning activity, reproduction, and fecundity, and uses of morphometric measurements as predictors. METHODS The year was arbitrarily divided into the following three periods, which tend to coincide with physical changes in climate at the sampling site: Spring, , with experimental gill nets consisting of seven 15.24-m panels of 25, 51, 64, 76, 102, 114, and 177 mm stretched mesh. Nets were set at five stations near the breakwater and jetties of the Ludington Pumped Storage Power Plant located about 7.5 km SSE of Ludington, Michigan, and at a control station about 7.5 km farther south of the plant. The control station was sufficiently far from the power plant that the effects by plant operation would be negligible. However, after an examination of the data no significant differences were found between stations and data from individual stations were pooled.Weather permitting, the six stations were sampled weekly with the nets set for 24-h periods. Generally, the bottom in the sampling area was composed of sand interspersed 726

Evaluating alternative harvest policies for yellow perch in southern Lake Michigan

“…Rapid growth sometimes allows female yellow perch to become sexually mature at age two (Herman et al, 1964;Brazo et al, 1975;Headley and Lauer, 2008). SSB was calculated based on abundance by length categories of females at the start of the year (reproduction is in spring before growth or substantial mortality), mass-at-length, and the proportion mature at length (Eq.…”

Some aspects of the reproductive biology of perch Perca fluviatilis L. Fecundity, maturation and spawning behaviour

“…(Pearse, 1925;Eddy & Surber, 1960;Muncy, 1962 1972) but the fecundity of Eurasian perch has been more frequently studied (Huitfeld-Kaas, 19 16;Syrovatskaya, 1927;Dryagin, 1948;Konovalova, 1955;Zakharova, 1955;Krasikova, 1958;Shilenkova, 1959;Pihu, 1964;Stehlik, 1968). Fecundity of perch in the Deeside lochs falls within the range reported for yellow perch (3035-109 000) and of Eurasian perch (950-2 10 000) and values are similar to those quoted for absolute fecundity and relative fecundity for most perch populations by Thorpe (19774. Fecundity varies greatly between perch populations (Thorpe, 1977b) and also varies within populations (EvtyukhovaRekstin, 1962;Popova, 1965;Sheri & Power, 1969;Tsai & Gibson, 197 1 ;Brazo et al, 1975). Thorpe (1977b) considered that the variation in a single habitat suggests that differences in food-supply, spawning conditions and degree of exposure to the wind may be responsible.…”

Quantifying inter-population variability in yellow perch sexual size dimorphism

“…Previous studies of yellow perch SSD have found small to large differences in total length between genders of the same age (Brazo et al 1975;Ridgway and Chapleau 1994;Scholten et al 2001;Headley and Lauer 2008;Schoenebeck and Brown 2012). However, these studies were performed over a small spatial scale so that the prevalence of SSD in yellow perch over a larger geographic area remains unknown.…”