Evidence of Food Limitation of Rainbow and Brown Trout in Southern Appalachian Soft-Water Streams

Cada, G.F.; Loar, J.M.; Salé, Michael J.

doi:10.1577/1548-8659(1987)116<692:eoflor>2.0.co;2

Cited by 78 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Besides Sweka (2003), we could locate only one other literature report of scarabaeids as important salmonid prey, and this was anecdotal (Ratcliffe and Ocampo 2002). Unfortunately, a typical approach in descriptive studies of salmonid diets has been to classify all terrestrial organisms into a single, broad category (Cada et al 1987;Forrester et al 1994;Bridcut and Giller 1995;Nakano et al 1999;Mookerji et al 2004). While we previously reported moderate terrestrial taxonomic analysis in a related study (Utz and Hartman 2007), the current study suggests that careful analysis of terrestrial taxonomic detail in fish diets reveals important ecological phenomena.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When taxonomic detail of terrestrial invertebrates is considered relative to nutrient input to streams, ecosystems, and salmonid diet, results suggest that certain organisms are of particular importance while others are of negligible importance (Allan 1981;Nielsen 1992;Wipfli and Gregovich 2002;Utz and Hartman 2007). Despite the notion that a variety of terrestrial organisms may be of critical importance to lotic salmonids, a large number of salmonid diet studies classify all terrestrial organisms into one broad category (Cada et al 1987;Forrester et al 1994;Bridcut and Giller 1995;Mookerji et al 2004). The growing understanding that salmonids may be heavily dependent on certain terrestrial organisms merits more attention to the species composition of terrestrial organisms in their diets.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Appalachia, salmonids must cope with periodically poor feeding conditions (Cada et al 1987;Ensign et al 1990;Sweka 2003;Thome 2004) as well as occasional extreme environmental circumstances, such as drought and flooding (Carline and McCullough 2003;Hakala and Hartman 2004). The low productivity of Appalachian headwater watersheds, coupled with natural environmental variability, may affect the population dynamics and growth patterns of salmonids.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Disproportionate Relative Importance of a Terrestrial Beetle Family (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) as a Prey Source for Central Appalachian Brook Trout

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis and other salmonids in Appalachia typically inhabit headwater watersheds, where food resources may limit growth. We monitored the feeding trends of a brook trout population in central Appalachia over the course of 2 years to determine variation in feeding intensity and important prey items. One terrestrial beetle family, Scarabaeidae, provided a disproportionate amount of energy during the only time of year when brook trout were feeding substantially above maintenance ration. Scarab beetles contributed 39.6% of all energy consumed during May and June of both years, though the number of fish with one or more scarabaeids present in the stomach varied by month (22.2–51.7%). The species composition of scarab beetles consumed suggested that four species are of particular importance. Our findings imply that scarabaeids represent a considerably important prey taxon for brook trout in the region. Considering the foraging habits of the scarabaeid species in question, the phenomenon we witnessed probably occurs throughout Appalachia.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Disproportionate Relative Importance of a Terrestrial Beetle Family (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) as a Prey Source for Central Appalachian Brook Trout

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A limited food base restricts growth rates of brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) in the Appalachian Mountains (Cada et al 1987). The daily ration of brook trout in this region may be below maintenance ration after spawning , particularly during winter (Utz 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Possible Seasonal Population Bottlenecks In Brook Trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) in Central Appalachian Headwater Streams

Webster

Hartman

2007

Journal of Freshwater Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) in the Appalachian Mountains often inhabit low production streams that limit growth. Therefore, we examined seasonal changes in body composition of age-1 and older brook trout to identify critical periods of growth or depletion that may lead to mortality and determined if brook trout in headwater streams reached critical levels of resource depletion over winter. Six streams in the central Appalachian Mountains in West Virginia containing naturally reproducing brook trout were sampled from June 2003 to March 2004 to assess changes in brook trout populations and physiological status. Dry, protein, and fat weights were highest in early summer (June) and decreased through the November/ December sampling period. To better understand trout compositional changes over winter, we starved 40 brook trout in experimental tanks simulating winter conditions and estimated body composition using bioelectrical impedance analysis. We found low rates of fat and protein loss during simulated winter conditions. This, coupled with field estimates of fat and protein levels in wild fish, suggests that brook trout do not likely starve during winter or other times of the year.

show abstract

“…Shah et al [30] reported that the value of K ranged from 0.95 to 1.44 (average K = 1.15 ± 0.111) for Oncorhynchus mykiss Walbaum which is close to unity, indicating that the fish are in excellent conditions. Moreover, Rabe et al [31] found the value of K to be between 0.859 and 1.104 for rainbow trout in Alpine lakes and Cada et al [32] reported condition factors for rainbow trout collected from southern Appalachian streams that ranged from 0.82 to 1.17.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Growth Parameters Evaluation and Identification of Growth Hormone Receptor Gene Polymorphisms in Various Strains of Rainbow Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss

Gorji¹,

Rahmani²

2016

J Aquac Res Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present study, polymerase chain reaction-single strand conformation polymorphism (PCR-SSCP) and restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) methods were compared to analyze the polymorphism of growth hormone receptor (GHR) gene in French, Iranian and Danish strains of Oncorhynchus mykiss. A monomorphic SSCP pattern of AA genotype in the French and Iranian strains and a dimorphic AA and AB genotype in the Danish strain were observed in 3' non-coding regions of GHR gene. In the Danish strain, the AB genotype polymorphism of the GHR gene with its very low frequency (5%) has no effect on the production trait. While, RFLP-Dde1 showed no polymorphism with genetic variation in the location of GHR. Moreover, comparing the condition factors (K) of three different rainbow trout strains showed a significant correlation between the French (1.312 ± 0.13), Iranian (1.245 ± 0.17) and Danish strains (0.763 ± 0.1), respectively (p<0.05). In particular, the French strain obtained a higher K compared to the two others. The length-weight relationship is shown by the following equations W= 0.013 × L 2.921 , W= 0.012 ×L 3.023 and W= 0.007 × L 3.176 for French, Iranian and Danish strains, respectively. With the mean (b= 2.921), the studied French strain exhibited a negative allometric growth b<3 while the Iranian (b=3.023) and the Danish (b=3.176) showed positive allometric growths. Regardless of the underlying mechanism(s) responsible for the different relationships, the results of this study suggested that the AA and AB genotypes polymorphism of the GHR gene are not associated with condition factor and environmental variables can influence condition factor and length-weight relationship of rainbow trout strains in this study.

show abstract

Evidence of Food Limitation of Rainbow and Brown Trout in Southern Appalachian Soft-Water Streams

Cited by 78 publications

References 31 publications

Disproportionate Relative Importance of a Terrestrial Beetle Family (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) as a Prey Source for Central Appalachian Brook Trout

Disproportionate Relative Importance of a Terrestrial Beetle Family (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) as a Prey Source for Central Appalachian Brook Trout

Possible Seasonal Population Bottlenecks In Brook Trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) in Central Appalachian Headwater Streams

Growth Parameters Evaluation and Identification of Growth Hormone Receptor Gene Polymorphisms in Various Strains of Rainbow Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About