Effects of water quality and habitat on composition of fish communities in the Upper Colorado River Basin

Deacon, Jeffrey R.; Mize, Scott V.

doi:10.3133/fs12297

Cited by 16 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The impact of physical factors has been widely investigated, focusing on both in‐stream and landscape‐level factors (Gorman & Karr, 1978; Fausch et al. , 1990; Allan & Johnson, 1997; Deacon & Mize, 1997; Jones et al. , 1999; Kilgour & Barton, 1999; Davies, Norris & Thoms, 2000; Johal et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These factors are related to the biological, chemical, geographic and physical attributes of a stream and its watershed. The impact of physical factors has been widely investigated, focusing on both in-stream and landscape-level factors (Gorman & Karr, 1978;Fausch et al, 1990;Allan & Johnson, 1997;Deacon & Mize, 1997;Jones et al, 1999;Kilgour & Barton, 1999;Davies, Norris & Thoms, 2000;Johal et al, 2001;Joy & Death, 2002;Sutherland, Meyer & Gardiner, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Influence of stream geomorphic condition on fish communities in Vermont, U.S.A.

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Evaluations of stream geomorphic condition may increase our understanding of the composite effects of human-induced habitat change on fish communities. Using systematic sampling of 44 reaches spread across 26 rivers in Vermont from 2002 through 2004, we tested the hypothesis that stream reaches in reference geomorphic condition would support fish assemblages that differed in diversity and productivity from fish communities found in reaches of poorer geomorphic condition. 2. At each study reach, we sampled the fish community, identified the morphological unit according to common stream classification systems and then evaluated the extent of deviation from reference geomorphic condition using a regionally adapted geomorphic assessment methodology. 3. We used principal component analysis (PCA) and linear regression to build exploratory models linking stream geomorphic condition to fish community characteristics. 4. Our results suggest that geomorphic condition significantly influences fish community diversity, productivity and condition. Geomorphic condition was a significant factor in all of our fish community models. In conjunction with additional reach characteristics, geomorphic condition explained up to 31% of the total variance observed in models for species diversity of fish communities, 44% of the variance in assemblage biomass and 45% of the variance in a regional index of biotic integrity. 5. Our work builds on single-species evidence that geomorphic characteristics represent important local-scale fish-habitat variables, showing that stream geomorphic condition is a dominant factor affecting entire fish communities. Our results enhance our understanding of the hierarchy of factors that influences fish community diversity and organisation and support the use of geomorphic condition assessments in stream management.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of stream geomorphic condition on fish communities in Vermont, U.S.A.

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cut stream banks resulting in wider and shallower streams also were more common in cropland streams (Deacon and Mize, 1997;Mize et al, 2008;Allan and Castillo, 2007), and likely a contributing factor in explaining the greater sediment deposition. Overall, the increased sedimentation and associated impacts in cropland streams degraded in-stream habitats (e.g., Diana et al, 2006).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of conservation wetlands on stream habitat, water quality and fish communities in agricultural watersheds of the lower Mississippi River Basin

Shrestha

Farrelly

Eggleton

et al. 2017

Ecological Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tWetland conservation programs (e.g., Wetland Reserve Program and Conservation Reserve Program) have been implemented throughout the Mississippi River Basin to reduce environmental impacts from agricultural activities. However, there is limited information on the overall effectiveness of these programs on improving stream ecological conditions. To address this issue, replicate streams from southeastern Arkansas draining watersheds containing predominately croplands (n = 4, termed "cropland") and created wetlands (n = 4, termed "wetland") were monitored monthly from August 2012 through July 2013. Although repeated-measures analyses of variance (ANOVA) detected many significant time × stream type interactions, several habitat parameters and total habitat scores exhibited a general improvement in wetland streams. Some water quality conditions were better in wetland streams (e.g., lower turbidity, total suspended solids, and nutrient) compared to cropland streams. The time (season) effect was significant (p < 0.05) for 13 of the 14 water quality parameters measured, meaning that water quality varied seasonally. Among the water quality parameters measured, three (water temperature, pH, and turbidity) exhibited significant (p < 0.05) time × stream type interaction, meaning that the stream type effect was not consistent through time (seasons). Fish community sampling collected 6543 specimens from 12 species during the study period; 4410 and 2133 fish specimens were collected from cropland and wetland streams, respectively. Fish community metrics such as species diversity, species evenness, and species richness index were not significantly (p > 0.05) greater in wetland streams. Overall, the conservation wetlands in the Lower Mississippi River Basin appear to have significantly improved stream habitat and moderately improved water quality, though no significant fish community effect was detected.

show abstract

“…Fish were not present in French Gulch downstream from the mined area to the mouth of the stream in 1995 and 1996 (Deacon and Mize, 1997;Deacon and Stephens, 1998). Cadmium and zinc were elevated in brown trout at Blue River near Breckenridge (site 85), downstream from French Gulch (Deacon and Stephens, 1998).…”

Section: Analysis Of Water Quality In the Blue River Watershed Colormentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of water quality in the Blue River watershed, Colorado, 1984 through 2007

Bauch¹,

Miller²,

Yacob³

2014

Scientific Investigations Report

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effects of water quality and habitat on composition of fish communities in the Upper Colorado River Basin

Cited by 16 publications

References 8 publications

Influence of stream geomorphic condition on fish communities in Vermont, U.S.A.

Influence of stream geomorphic condition on fish communities in Vermont, U.S.A.

Effects of conservation wetlands on stream habitat, water quality and fish communities in agricultural watersheds of the lower Mississippi River Basin

Analysis of water quality in the Blue River watershed, Colorado, 1984 through 2007

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About