Estimating Fish Abundance in Stream Surveys by Using Double-Pass Removal Sampling

Heimbuch, Douglas G.; Wilson, Harold T.; Weisberg, Stephen B.; Voslash, Jon H.; Lstad,; Kazyak, P.

doi:10.1577/1548-8659(1997)126<0795:efaiss>2.3.co;2

Cited by 33 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, multiple passes are still preferable to single-pass sampling as this improves native species detection (Gladman et al 2010), and a large percentage of individuals will be vulnerable to capture only after being disturbed by initial sampling efforts. if estimates of population size are required for stream reaches, the likelihood of failure could be reduced by pooling data from randomly distributed sampling sites and applying unbiased removal-type estimators (Heimbuch et al 1997). in this study, we did not estimate detection probabilities for native crayfish.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Effectiveness of stream sampling methods in capturing non-native Rusty Crayfish (<em>Orconectes rusticus</em>) in Ontario

Reid

Devlin

2014

Can Field Nat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reid, Scott M., and Jane devlin. 2014. Effectiveness of stream sampling methods in capturing non-native Rusty Crayfish (Orconectes rusticus) in Ontario. Canadian Field-Naturalist 128(2): 111-118.Habitat alteration and species introductions have contributed to the decline of native crayfish in Ontario. although lake populations of crayfish in Ontario are monitored, there is no corresponding program for streams. We used removal-based sampling to evaluate the efficacy of three sampling techniques (backpack electrofishing, hand capture, and seining) to characterize native and non-native crayfish populations in six streams in the Kawartha lakes region and five streams in the Muskoka/Haliburton lakes region. all types were effective at detecting non-native Rusty Crayfish (Orconectes rusticus). Rusty Crayfish were collected from 65% of samples, constituted 90% of the total catch, and were the only species present in 30% of streams. Compared with other methods, electrofishing was more likely to capture additional crayfish species. Removal-based sampling was not a reliable approach for estimating capture probability and population size. Failure of the removal model was due to increases in the number of crayfish captured after the first pass or too few individuals collected. Mean capture probabilities for electrofishing (0.30) and hand capture (0.31) did not result in reliable population estimates. Compared with seining, electrofishing and hand capture resulted in more sexually active males (fewer sexually inactive males) and more small (< 25 mm carapace length) individuals. For each method, there were differences in capture probability among length classes. a combination of electrofishing and seining (with multiple passes) would maximize species detection, permit sampling of a range of habitat types, and be easily integrated into existing stream fish surveys.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Effectiveness of stream sampling methods in capturing non-native Rusty Crayfish (<em>Orconectes rusticus</em>) in Ontario

Reid

Devlin

2014

Can Field Nat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Relative abundance, C 1 , seems to be an adequate measure of river fish diversity (Libosvarsky 1966;Zalewski 1983Zalewski , 1985Heimbuch et al 1997;Bravo et al 1999;Meador et al 2003). In an earlier study conducted in a stream, Chmielewski et al (1973) found that the first run efficiency was low for some species, but this could have resulted from the imperfect equipment available at that time.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of electrofishing efficiency in a stream under natural and regulated conditions

Penczak

2008

Aquat. Living Resour.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Sampling efficiency (p), estimated from the Zippin depletion model and the percentage of fish obtained during first runs (single-pass electrofishing), which is also named relative abundance (C 1 ), calculated as the ratio of C 1 to estimated density for a site (C e ), were analysed in five contiguous sites in a small lowland stream in Poland over 23 years. The sampled reach was unregulated during the first decade of the study period, but regulated by weirs and sluices in the latter 13 years. The sites were populated with 17 fish species during this period. Sampling efficiency p calculated for all species did not differ significantly between the five sites in any given year, between benthic and non-benthic species, or between the natural and regulated periods. Differences in p were only observed between some species. C 1 differed significantly between large and small species and, except for roach, was not dependent on the number of runs. Results indicate a high stability of both sampling indices in this small stream, despite changes in channel morphology after regulation: information which could be useful for future sampling research in streams.Key words: Lowland stream / Natural / Regulated / Electrofishing efficiency / Relative abundance Résumé -Evaluation de l'efficacité de la pêche électrique en rivière en conditions naturelles et en débit régulé. L'efficacité de l'échantillonnage (p), estimée à partir du modèle de Zippin et le pourcentage de poissons obtenu durant les premiers passages, appelé aussi abondance relative (C 1 ), calculée comme le rapport de C 1 à la densité estimée pour un site (C e ), ont été analysés en cinq sites contigus, dans une petite rivière de plaine, en Pologne, sur une période de 23 ans. Le bief échantillonné était non-régulé durant les dix premières années de l'étude, puis régulé au moyen de barrages et chenaux, les treize années suivantes. Les sites étaient peuplées de 17 espèces de poissons durant cette période. L'efficacité p calculée pour toutes les espèces ne diffère pas entre les cinq sites et quelle que soit l'année, entre espèces benthiques ou non-benthiques, ou entre les périodes de régulation ou non. Des différences de p sont seulement observées entre quelques espèces. C 1 diffère significativement entre grandes et petites espèces, à l'exception du gardon, sans être dépendant du nombre de passages. Les résultats indiquent une grande stabilité des deux indices d'échantillonnage dans cette rivière, en dépit du changement de morphologie du cours d'eau après la régulation : des informations qui peuvent être utiles pour de futurs travaux relatifs à l'échantillonnage des cours d'eau.

show abstract

“…Although two-pass depletion sampling is frequently used to conduct population estimates (Heimbuch et al 1997), the technique is often biased and prone to failure if the number of fish collected during the second pass is greater than or equal to the number of fish captured during the first pass (Pollock 1991). Accordingly, Riley and Fausch (1992) advocated that a minimum of three passes should be conducted when the depletion method is used, while Peterson and Cederholm (1984) recommended use of mark-recapture population estimates.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Abundance, Survival, and Growth of One Wild and Two Domestic Brown Trout Strains Stocked in Michigan Rivers

Wills

2006

N American J Fish Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.-Stocking is commonly practiced to create, sustain, or enhance fisheries, but comprehensive evaluations of stocking success are rare. I assessed the relative abundance, survival, and growth of three strains of brown trout Salmo trutta that were stocked as sympatric populations into six rivers to evaluate relative stocking performance from 1997 to 2000. Stocked brown trout from wild broodstock were initially smaller but were more abundant and had higher survival and growth rates than fish from two domestic strains. However, on average, the densities and biomass of all stocked brown trout were lower than the densities and biomass of unclipped resident brown trout. Fisheries managers must consider the performance of individual stocked brown trout strains, as well as the performance of stocked brown trout in general, when implementing or reviewing brown trout stocking programs.

show abstract

Estimating Fish Abundance in Stream Surveys by Using Double-Pass Removal Sampling

Cited by 33 publications

References 7 publications

Effectiveness of stream sampling methods in capturing non-native Rusty Crayfish (<em>Orconectes rusticus</em>) in Ontario

Effectiveness of stream sampling methods in capturing non-native Rusty Crayfish (<em>Orconectes rusticus</em>) in Ontario

Evaluation of electrofishing efficiency in a stream under natural and regulated conditions

Comparative Abundance, Survival, and Growth of One Wild and Two Domestic Brown Trout Strains Stocked in Michigan Rivers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About