Even-Odd Year Differences in Walleye Year-Class Strength Related to Mayfly Production

Ritchie, Beverlee J.; Colby, Peter J.

doi:10.1577/1548-8675(1988)008<0210:eoydiw>2.3.co;2

Cited by 29 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…During this period, YOY walleye were rarely found in habi- tats that provided little or no cover. The utilization of heavily vegetated habitats was opposite to our predictions, as previous research had suggested that young walleye prefer more open habitats (Savoie 1983;Ritchie and Colby 1988;Lane et al 1996) and should avoid vegetation to reduce the threat of largemouth bass predation (Santucci and Wahl 1993). It is possible that previous researchers who classified YOY walleye as habitat generalists may have missed the short time period where young walleye utilized high cover areas, as it occurred immediately after the pelagic phase and the fish were residing in areas difficult to sample using most traditional sampling gear.…”

Section: Habitat Usecontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…YOY walleye completely abandoned the middepth vegetated habitat and moved to shallower habitats with less available cover. The move to areas with reduced cover fits the traditional view of YOY walleye habitat selection (Savoie 1983;Ritchie and Colby 1988;Lane et al 1996), but the selection of primarily shallow water (<2 m depth) suggests that YOY walleye may not be as affected by high light levels as older individuals (Ryder 1977). Other studies have found YOY walleye at depths of up to 10 m by the fall (Raney and Lachner 1942), and while the intensive component of this study ended in August, periodic SCUBA observations that extended into October indicated that most YOY walleye were still in shallow, low-cover habitats at that time.…”

Section: Habitat Usementioning

confidence: 64%

“…For example, studies on riverine populations have shown that YOY walleye are very flexible in their early habitat choice (Leis and Fox 1996) and that these generalist tendencies continue until late summer. YOY walleye were almost ubiquitous in a Bay of Quinte survey by Savoie (1983), although sandy sites produced the greatest numbers in other Ontario lakes (Ritchie and Colby 1988). The only trend that is apparent in these studies is that YOY walleye are not typically found in heavily vegetated sites, probably because such sites are used by ambush predators such as largemouth bass (Santucci and Wahl 1993).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 80%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Biotic influences on habitat selection by young-of-year walleye (Stizostedion vitreum) in the demersal stage

Pratt¹,

Fox²

2001

Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The influence of prey availability and predation risk on the distribution of young-of-year (YOY) walleye (Stizostedion vitreum) was investigated by comparing species associations with the relative abundance of YOY walleye across nine habitat types using an underwater visual assessment technique. During the early demersal period (mid-June to mid-July), YOY walleye were found primarily in areas of high macrophyte cover at 2-5 m depth. YOY walleye abundance was positively correlated with the abundance of prey fishes at this time. YOY walleye shifted to low-cover, shallow areas during the late demersal period (mid-July to late August), and the significant prey associations disappeared. Although the selected habitats are considered to have low predation risk, the distribution of YOY walleye was not related to our index of predator abundance in either time period. YOY walleye were not observed in three of the nine habitat types, suggesting that active habitat selection was occurring. High macrophyte cover and prey availability appear to be the major factors influencing habitat selection during the early demersal period. Although our results do not demonstrate the functional significance of the shift of YOY walleye into shallow water, we hypothesize that these habitats are selected as refugia from particular predators such as adult walleye.Résumé : Une comparaison des associations d'espèces et de l'abondance des jeunes Dorés (Stizostedion vitreum) de l'année (YOY) dans neuf types d'habitat à l'aide d'une technique d'inventaire visuel sous-marin a permis d'évaluer l'influence de la disponibilité des proies et du risque de prédation sur la répartition des dorés YOY. Au début de la phase démersale (mi-juin à mi-juillet), les dorés YOY se retrouvent principalement dans des zones à forte couverture de macrophytes à une profondeur de 2-5 m; à cette période, leur abondance est en forte corrélation avec la densité des poissons qui leur servent de proies. Plus tard dans la phase démersale (mi-juillet à la fin d'août), les dorés YOY se déplacent vers des zones peu profondes à faible couverture végétale et l'association significative avec les proies disparaît. Bien que les habitats étudiés semblent présenter un faible risque de prédation, la répartition des dorés YOY n'est pas reliée à notre indice d'abondance des prédateurs ni à l'une ni à l'autre des périodes. Les dorés YOY n'ont pas été observés dans trois des neuf types d'habitat, ce qui laisse croire qu'il existe une sélection active des habitats. Une forte couverture de macrophytes et la disponibilité des proies semblent être les facteurs déterminants du choix de l'habitat durant la première période démersale. Bien que nos résultats n'expliquent pas la signification fonctionnelle du déplacement des dorés YOY vers les eaux moins profondes, nous posons l'hypothèse que ces habitats sont choisis comme refuges contre certains prédateurs, comme les dorés adultes.[Traduit par la Rédaction] Pratt and Fox 1069

show abstract

Section: Habitat Usecontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Habitat Usementioning

confidence: 64%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 80%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Biotic influences on habitat selection by young-of-year walleye (Stizostedion vitreum) in the demersal stage

Pratt¹,

Fox²

2001

Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As zebra mussels colonize soft sediments, they have the potential to affect the foraging success of a range of species. In particular, juveniles of some species (e.g., yellow perch, walleye, sturgeon) utilize soft sediment zoobenthos for food during critical growth periods (Ritchie and Colby 1988;Scott and Crossman 1973;Beamish et al 1998). Negative effects on already threatened or endangered species such as the lake sturgeon may have important implications for conservation and reintroduction programs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Zebra mussels affect benthic predator foraging success and habitat choice on soft sediments

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The introduction of zebra mussels ( Dreissena spp.) to North America has resulted in dramatic changes to the complexity of benthic habitats. Changes in habitat complexity may have profound effects on predator-prey interactions in aquatic communities. Increased habitat complexity may affect prey and predator dynamics by reducing encounter rates and foraging success. Zebra mussels form thick contiguous colonies on both hard and soft substrates. While the colonization of substrata by zebra mussels has generally resulted in an increase in both the abundance and diversity of benthic invertebrate communities, it is not well known how these changes affect the foraging efficiencies of predators that prey on benthic invertebrates. We examined the effect of zebra mussels on the foraging success of four benthic predators with diverse prey-detection modalities that commonly forage in soft substrates: slimy sculpin ( Cottus cognatus), brown bullhead ( Ameirus nebulosus), log perch ( Percina caprodes), and crayfish ( Orconectes propinquus). We conducted laboratory experiments to assess the impact of zebra mussels on the foraging success of predators using a variety of prey species. We also examined habitat use by each predator over different time periods. Zebra mussel colonization of soft sediments significantly reduced the foraging efficiencies of all predators. However, the effect was dependent upon prey type. All four predators spent more time in zebra mussel habitat than in either gravel or bare sand. The overall effect of zebra mussels on benthic-feeding fishes is likely to involve a trade-off between the advantages of increased density of some prey types balanced against the reduction in foraging success resulting from potential refugia offered in the complex habitat created by zebra mussels.

show abstract

“…Use of the Ponar will lead to more accurate density estimates of burrowing mayfly nymphs and possibly other benthos that are important to food webs, fish energetics, and monitoring of habitat quality (Fremling 1964, Harris et al 1987, Haywood and Margraf 1987, Ritchie and Colby 1988, Reynoldson et al 1989, Kolar et al 1997, Madenjian et al 1998, Ohio Lake Erie Commission 1998). As pollution-abatement programs continue, burrowing mayfly nymphs will undoubtedly return to sediments in other areas of the Great Lakes where they were once abundant but have been absent for decades.…”

Section: Sampler Recommendationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of 5 benthic samplers to collect burrowing mayfly nymphs (Hexagenia spp.:Ephemeroptera:Ephemeridae) in sediments of the Laurentian Great Lakes

Schloesser

Nalepa

2002

Journal of the North American Benthological Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Even-Odd Year Differences in Walleye Year-Class Strength Related to Mayfly Production

Cited by 29 publications

References 13 publications

Biotic influences on habitat selection by young-of-year walleye (Stizostedion vitreum) in the demersal stage

Biotic influences on habitat selection by young-of-year walleye (Stizostedion vitreum) in the demersal stage

Zebra mussels affect benthic predator foraging success and habitat choice on soft sediments

Comparison of 5 benthic samplers to collect burrowing mayfly nymphs (Hexagenia spp.:Ephemeroptera:Ephemeridae) in sediments of the Laurentian Great Lakes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About