Optimizing Electrofishing Sample Duration for Estimating Relative Abundance of Largemouth Bass in Reservoirs

Miranda, Leandro E.; Hubbard, W. D.; Sangare, S.; Holman, T.

doi:10.1577/1548-8675(1996)016<0324:oesdfe>2.3.co;2

Cited by 17 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results also suggest that, in general, with broader scales of application and evaluation (e.g., basin or lake), effects of habitat manipulations on fish populations are likely to be more difficult to detect. Miranda et al (1996) drew similar conclusions regarding size of experimental units as measured by sampling duration for largemouth bass in reservoirs.…”

Section: Fish Utilization Of Transectsmentioning

confidence: 65%

Fish Populations Associated with Habitat-Modified Piers and Natural Woody Debris in Piedmont Carolina Reservoirs

Barwick

Kwak

Noble

et al. 2004

North American Journal of Fisheries Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A primary concern associated with reservoir shoreline residential development is reduction of littoral habitat complexity and diversity. One potential approach to compensate for this is the deployment of artificial‐habitat modules under existing piers, but the benefit of this practice has not been demonstrated. To evaluate the effect of pier habitat modifications on fish populations in two Piedmont Carolina reservoirs, we studied 77 piers located on forty‐seven, 100‐m transects that were modified using plastic “fish hab” modules augmented with brush (brushed habs), hab modules alone (habs), or left unaltered for reference purposes. We sampled fish from all piers and transects during April, July, and October 2001 using a boat‐mounted electrofisher. With few exceptions, catch rates were higher at brushed‐hab piers and piers with habs than at reference piers during all seasons. Similarly, during spring and summer, fish abundance was generally higher on transects containing natural woody debris, brushed habs, and habs than on reference‐developed transects; however, during fall, there were exceptions. Therefore, fish abundance associated with shorelines in these reservoirs appears to be related to the structural complexity of available habitat rather than structure composition. One year after installation, 92% of pier owners responding to a mail survey expressed satisfaction with pier modifications. Supplementing piers with habitat structures is recommended to enhance littoral habitat complexity for fishes in residentially developed reservoirs.

show abstract

Section: Fish Utilization Of Transectsmentioning

confidence: 65%

Fish Populations Associated with Habitat-Modified Piers and Natural Woody Debris in Piedmont Carolina Reservoirs

Barwick

Kwak

Noble

et al. 2004

North American Journal of Fisheries Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This resulted from a reduced level of patchiness and, correspondingly, produced a lower minimum transect number. In an empirical study of largemouth bass sampling, Miranda et al (1996) also found that the number of samples required to reach a given level of precision increased as catch per hour (an indicator of lakewide fish density) decreased and that lake size (as estimated by shoreline length) had little effect on minimum transect number. Similarly, previous studies found that stream length does not significantly influence the effort required to reduce interreplicate variance of CPUE estimates (Lyons 1992;Paller 1995).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The goal of most sampling is to obtain useful, accurate, and precise estimates with the least amount of effort for a given sampling method (Boxrucker et al 1995;Miranda et al 1996). Precision may also be affected by the spatial distribution of the population (location and size of fish patches) and the variability associated with the sampling method (Fiedler 1978;Miranda et al 1996).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Allocating Sampling Effort to Equalize Precision of Electrofishing Catch per Unit Effort

Kershner

Marschall

1998

North American Journal of Fisheries Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.-We used a spatially explicit simulation model to examine the effects of lake shoreline length and lakewide fish density on electrofishing catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE) estimates of fish density. We also tested model predictions regarding the influence of shoreline length and fish density on precision of CPUE estimates by analyzing electrofishing data from Ohio reservoirs for juvenile gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum, which is a schooling fish, and largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides, a more solitary fish. Our goals were to estimate the impact of these factors on variability associated with population estimates derived from CPUE and to determine how these factors influence the minimum number of transects required to sample populations with a reliable degree of precision. Neither ''minimum transect number'' (number of transects sampled per lake in which all of 10 replicate simulations provided density estimates within Ϯ10% of the mean) nor ''minimum variance'' (variance among estimates given 20 transects/estimate) were affected by the size of lake being sampled. However, minimum transect number decreased with lakewide fish density, and minimum variance increased with fish density, particularly when fish were patchily distributed. Our results show that it is reasonable to choose one effort level (i.e., a constant number of transects per lake) for a variety of systems. This constant level of effort can achieve acceptable precision in systems differing in lake shoreline length, fish density, and fish patchiness, except in those systems having extremely low overall fish densities. In this case, more transects may be required.

show abstract

“…sand bar) and therefore sampling times were variable because of different habitat lengths. Variation in CPUE tends to increase with sample time duration (Miranda et al ., 1996). To minimize this effect, only electrofishing samples that were between 0·15 and 0·75 h in duration and trammel net samples between 1·5 and 3·5 h were used in the analysis.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of electrofishing and trammel netting variability for sampling native fishes

Paukert

2004

Journal of Fish Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The variability in size structure and relative abundance (CPUE; number of fish !200 mm total length, L T , collected per hour of electrofishing or trammel netting) of three native Colorado River fishes, the endangered humpback chub Gila cypha, flannelmouth sucker Catostomus latipinnus and bluehead sucker Catostomus discobolus, collected from electrofishing and trammel nets was assessed to determine which gear was most appropriate to detect trends in relative abundance of adult fishes. Coefficient of variation (CV) of CPUE ranged from 210 to 566 for electrofishing and 128 to 575 for trammel netting, depending on season, diel period and species. Mean CV was lowest for trammel nets for humpback chub (P ¼ 0Á004) and tended to be lower for flannelmouth sucker (P ¼ 0Á12), regardless of season or diel period. Only one bluehead sucker >200 mm was collected with electrofishing. Electrofishing and trammel netting CPUE were not related for humpback chub (r ¼ À0Á32, P ¼ 0Á43) or flannelmouth sucker (r ¼ À0Á27, P ¼ 0Á46) in samples from the same date, location and hour set. Electrofishing collected a higher proportion of smaller (<200 mm L T ) humpback chub (P < 0Á001), flannelmouth suckers (P < 0Á001) and bluehead suckers (P < 0Á001) than trammel netting, suggesting that conclusions derived from one gear may not be the same as from the other gear. This is probably because these gears fished different habitats, which are occupied by different fish life stages. To detect a 25% change in CPUE at a power of 0Á9, at least 473 trammel net sets or 1918 electrofishing samples would be needed in this 8 km reach. This unattainable amount of samples for both trammel netting and electrofishing indicates that detecting annual changes in CPUE may not be practical and analysis of long-term data or stock assessment models using mark-recapture methods may be needed to assess trends in abundance of Colorado River native fishes, and probably other rare fishes as well.

show abstract

Optimizing Electrofishing Sample Duration for Estimating Relative Abundance of Largemouth Bass in Reservoirs

Cited by 17 publications

References 10 publications

Fish Populations Associated with Habitat-Modified Piers and Natural Woody Debris in Piedmont Carolina Reservoirs

Fish Populations Associated with Habitat-Modified Piers and Natural Woody Debris in Piedmont Carolina Reservoirs

Allocating Sampling Effort to Equalize Precision of Electrofishing Catch per Unit Effort

Comparison of electrofishing and trammel netting variability for sampling native fishes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About