Brown Bullhead as an Indicator Species: Seasonal Movement Patterns and Home Ranges within the Anacostia River, Washington, D.C.

Sakaris, Peter C.; Jesien, Roman V.; Pinkney, Alfred E.

doi:10.1577/t04-086.1

Cited by 28 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, current conditions of liver tumor prevalence are very close to the delisting criterion of 5% under current guidance and within the range found in other AOCs following more active remedial activities. In fact, the current prevalence is very close to the 7 and 8% found in various reference sites in the Great Lakes [18]. Black River and Presque Isle are currently assigned a recovery stage listing status for the TOD BUI.…”

Section: Tumors In Brown Bullhead In the Buffalo Rivermentioning

confidence: 55%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Long‐term trends in liver neoplasms in brown bullhead in the Buffalo River, New York, USA

Laurén

Hinton

Law

et al. 2010

Enviro Toxic and Chemistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Buffalo River area of concern (AOC) was assigned an impaired status for the fish tumors and other deformities beneficial use impairment category by the New York State Department of Environmental Protection in 1989. This was initially based on an inadequately documented brown bullhead (Ameiurus nebulosus) feeding study using river sediment extracts. The presence of liver tumors was subsequently supported by reports of a 19 to 27% prevalence in wild brown bullhead between 1983 and 1988 and a 4.8% prevalence in 1998. However, neither fish size (or age) nor sample locations were given, and histopathological definitions were inconsistent in these previous studies. Therefore, in 2008, we re-evaluated the prevalence of hepatocellular and chloangiocellular tumors (as well as other gross indicators of fish health) in brown bullhead averaging 25 cm in length collected from three reaches of the Buffalo River and recorded our collection sites by global positioning system. Among the 37 fish of appropriate size collected, only three exhibited liver tumors (8%). The tumors were evenly distributed within the three reaches, and only hepatocellular tumors were found. There were no differences in the prevalence of hepatic foci of alteration, body weight, length, or hepatosomatic index among the three reaches, but the conditions factor was significantly lower in fish from reach 2. Natural attenuation of water and sediment quality are the most likely causes for the decrease in liver tumors. The prevalence of liver tumors between 1998 and 2008 in the Buffalo River is similar to that found in recovery-stage AOCs and some Great Lakes reference areas.

show abstract

Section: Tumors In Brown Bullhead In the Buffalo Rivermentioning

confidence: 55%

“…There was no apparent relationship to fish length, and there was no upstream-downstream relationship, insofar as one neoplasm was found in each reach. Studies of the home range of brown bullhead suggest that the fish in the present study are indicative of exposures in their reaches [18].…”

Section: Neoplastic and Nonneoplastic Lesions In The Livermentioning

confidence: 58%

Long‐term trends in liver neoplasms in brown bullhead in the Buffalo River, New York, USA

Laurén

Hinton

Law

et al. 2010

Enviro Toxic and Chemistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies indicate that channel catfish migrate downstream from tributaries to larger rivers during the autumn, move upstream from larger rivers to tributaries during the spring, and have relatively small home ranges within summer months (Dames et al 1989;Pellett et al 1998). Sakaris et al (2005) found that brown bullhead A. nebulosus travel upstream during the spring after an increase in water temperature and have relatively small home ranges (,0.5 km) during the summer. In our study, ictalurid fish displayed an upstream bias in movement direction during the late spring and early summer that was probably associated with spawning.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Fish Passage in a Western Iowa Stream Modified by Grade Control Structures

Litvan

Pierce

Stewart

et al. 2008

N American J Fish Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Grade control structures (GCSs) are commonly used in streams of western Iowa to control bank erosion and channel headcutting but may be barriers to fish passage. From May 2002 to May 2006, we used mark-recapture methods to evaluate fish passage over a total of five GCSs, ranging in slope (run : rise) from 13:1 to 18:1 in Turkey Creek, Cass County, Iowa. Three structures, over which limited fish movement was documented from 2002 to 2004, were modified in the winter of [2004][2005] to facilitate fish passage. Before modification, the majority of recaptured fish were recaptured at the station where they were originally marked; only 1% displayed movement between sites and either upstream or downstream over a GCS. After modification fish passage improved, 14% of recaptured fish displayed movement either upstream or downstream over a GCS. Individuals of four target species-channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus, yellow bullhead Ameiurus natalis, black bullhead A. melas, and creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus-passed over at least one modified structure. The majority of documented movements over GCSs were in the upstream direction and occurred in late spring and early summer, when streamflow was relatively high. Although we documented low numbers of fish passing both upstream and downstream over GCSs, these structures are probably barriers to fish movement during periods of low flow and when there is a structural failure, such as in-channel movement of riprap. Grade control structures are pervasive in western Iowa streams; nearly every low-order stream contains at least one instream structure. To sustain fish populations, management efforts should focus on constructing or modifying GCSs to allow fish passage. RightsWorks produced by employees of the U.S. Government as part of their official duties are not copyrighted within the U.S. The content of this document is not copyrighted. PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLETaylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the "Content") contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis.The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is e...

show abstract

“…Beyond this statistical evidence, there is considerable biological evidence of intrapopulation heterogeneity in movement behaviour of salmonids (e.g. McLaughlin et al 1992;Bradford & Taylor 1997;Brännäs & Eriksson 1999;Steingrímsson & Grant 2003), as well as catfish (Sakaris, Jesien & Pinkney 2005), catostomids (Jeffres et al 2006), cyprinids (Skalski & Gilliam 2000), rivulines (Fraser et al 2001) and sculpins (Petty & Grossman 2004), and many of these studies suggest that individual differences are persistent. Simple models are appealing because they can describe dispersal properties with few parameters and do not require tailoring to system-specific detail.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A field test of simple dispersal models as predictors of movement in a cohort of lake‐dwelling brook charr

Coombs

Rodríguez

2006

Journal of Animal Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary1. Dispersal can be a major determinant of the distribution and abundance of animals, as well as a key mechanism linking behaviour to population dynamics, but progress in understanding dispersal has been hampered by the lack of a general framework for modelling dispersal. 2. This study tested the capacity of simple models to summarize and predict the lake-wide dispersal of an emerging cohort of young-of-the-year brook charr Salvelinus fontinalis , over 12 surveys conducted during a 2-month period. 3. The models are based on two types of dispersal kernel, the normal distribution from a simple diffusion process, and a Laplace distribution depicting exponential decay of the frequency of dispersers away from the point of origin. In all, four models were assessed: one-group diffusion (D1S) and exponential (E1S) models assuming homogeneous dispersal behaviour within the cohort, and two-group diffusion (D2S) and exponential (E2S) models accounting for intrapopulation differences in dispersal between sedentary and mobile individuals. 4. A rigorous cross-validation, based on calibrating the models to the distributions from the first two surveys only and then validating them on the remaining 10 distributions, was used to compare model predictions with observed values for five properties of the dispersal distributions: counts in individual shoreline sections; mean lateral displacement, variance and kurtosis of displacements; and the percentage of long-distance dispersers. 5. Substantial intrapopulation heterogeneity in dispersal behaviour was apparent: 83% of all individuals were estimated to be sedentary and the remainder mobile. Remarkably, the two-group exponential model E2S -calibrated to data from only two surveys conducted 3·5 and 8·5 days after the beginning of emergence -predicted reasonably well all properties of the spatial distribution of the cohort until the end of the study, 7 weeks later. 6. Standardized measures of mobility derived from simple models may lead to better understanding of population dynamics and improved management. Specifically, the ability to accurately predict long-distance dispersal may be critical to assessing population persistence and cohort strength whenever key habitats, such as refugia or productive areas supporting a large proportion of the cohort, are sparsely distributed or distant from the point of origin.

show abstract

Brown Bullhead as an Indicator Species: Seasonal Movement Patterns and Home Ranges within the Anacostia River, Washington, D.C.

Cited by 28 publications

References 38 publications

Long‐term trends in liver neoplasms in brown bullhead in the Buffalo River, New York, USA

Long‐term trends in liver neoplasms in brown bullhead in the Buffalo River, New York, USA

Fish Passage in a Western Iowa Stream Modified by Grade Control Structures

A field test of simple dispersal models as predictors of movement in a cohort of lake‐dwelling brook charr

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About