Precision of Hard Structures Used to Estimate Age of Mountain Whitefish (<i>Prosopium williamsoni</i>)

Watkins, Carson J.; Ross, Tyler J.; Hardy, Ryan S.; Quist, Michael C.

doi:10.3398/064.075.0102

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Sampling was conducted using boat-mounted, pulsed-DC electrofishing and a VVP-15 model control box (Smith-Root, Inc., Vancouver, Washington). All Mountain Whitefish were measured for TL to the nearest millimeter, and scales were collected posterior to the insertion of the left pectoral fin from 10 fish per 1-cm length-group during each year (Watkins et al 2015b). After drying, scales were pressed onto acetate slides, and the resulting impressions were viewed with a microfiche reader via the methods of Dauble and Gray (1977).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response of Fish Population Dynamics to Mitigation Activities in a Large Regulated River

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extensive water development in large rivers has precipitated many negative ecological effects on native fish populations. Mitigation for such development often focuses on restoring biological integrity through remediation of the physical and chemical properties of regulated rivers. However, evaluating and defining the success of those programs can be difficult. We modeled the influence of mitigation‐related environmental factors on growth and recruitment of two ecologically important native fish species (Largescale Sucker Catostomus macrocheilus and Mountain Whitefish Prosopium williamsoni) in the Kootenai River, Idaho. Artificial nutrient (phosphorus) addition best predicted the variability in annual growth of both species. Nutrient addition was positively related to Largescale Sucker growth but negatively related to Mountain Whitefish growth. The best model explained 82% of the annual variability in incremental growth for Largescale Suckers and 61% of the annual variability for Mountain Whitefish. Year‐class strength of Largescale Suckers was not closely related to any of the environmental variables evaluated; however, year‐class strength of Mountain Whitefish was closely associated with nutrient addition, discharge, and temperature. Most research has focused on biotic assemblages to evaluate the effects of mitigation activities on fishes, but there is an increased need to identify the influence of rehabilitation activities on fish population dynamics within those assemblages. Here, we demonstrate how fish growth can serve as an indicator of rehabilitation success in a highly regulated large river. Future fish restoration projects can likely benefit from a change in scope and from consideration of an evaluation framework involving the response of population rate functions to mitigation. Received October 31, 2016; accepted March 13, 2017 Published online May 11, 2017

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response of Fish Population Dynamics to Mitigation Activities in a Large Regulated River

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Scales have been shown to outperform sectioned otoliths and pectoral fin rays for Mountain Whitefish Prosopium williamsoni (Watkins et al. ), but most studies have concluded that scales are less reliable for use in aging salmonids. For example, otoliths have provided improved (i.e., more accurate) age estimates compared to scales for Rainbow Trout (Hining et al.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The number in each box corresponds to the number of observations at each point and the dashed line represents exact agreement 504 observed in this study. Scales have been shown to outperform sectioned otoliths and pectoral fin rays for Mountain Whitefish Prosopium williamsoni (Watkins et al 2015), but most studies have concluded that scales are less reliable for use in aging salmonids. For example, otoliths have provided improved (i.e., more accurate) age estimates compared to scales for Rainbow Trout (Hining et al 2000), Columbia River Redband Trout O. mykiss gairdneri , Arctic Char Salvelinus alpinus (Baker and Timmons 1991), and Lake Trout (Sharp and Bernard 1988).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy and Precision of Age Estimates Obtained from Three Calcified Structures for Known‐Age Kokanee

Branigan

Meyer

Wahl

et al. 2019

N American J Fish Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Kokanee Oncorhynchus nerka growth is often density dependent; thus, proper management of kokanee populations necessitates an understanding of population dynamics using age structure data. To date, no calcified structures have been validated for kokanee. We compared the accuracy (i.e., the percentage of reconciled age estimates that matched the known ages of fish) and precision (i.e., the percentage of fish for which complete agreement was achieved on age estimates among all readers) of aging estimates for scales, sectioned otoliths, and sectioned pectoral fin rays from 455 known‐age kokanee (ages 0–4) collected from five lentic waters in Idaho. Across all waters combined, mean weighted accuracy and precision were similar for scales (86% and 70%, respectively), fin rays (83% and 65%), and otoliths (82% and 65%), with no significant differences between structures. However, among water bodies, accuracy and precision of each calcified structure varied considerably. For example, scales were the most accurate and precise structure and otoliths were the least accurate and precise structure at one water body, while otoliths were the most accurate and precise structure and scales were the least accurate structure at two water bodies. Fin rays were the least precise structure at four of the five study waters, but were the least accurate structure for only one water body. Individual reader accuracy was most affected by fish age and water body, and older fish (age 3 and older) were consistently assigned incorrect ages regardless of the water body or the calcified structure. Taken collectively, all three structures produced satisfactory aging accuracy and precision for kokanee, but no structure was unequivocally best; at any individual water body, annual growth and local environmental conditions appeared to influence the readability of calcified structures.

show abstract

“…To a lesser extent, other structures such as pelvic or dorsal spines (DeFaveri et al, ; Gambling & Reimchen, ; Reimchen, ) and gill covers (Mukhomediarov, ; Patimar et al, ; Yershov & Sukhotin, ) have also been used for aging G. aculeatus . Worryingly, studies conducted in other fish species have shown that there may be large discrepancies in age estimates depending on which structure was used for the analysis (Baudouin et al, ; Elzey et al, ; Hüssy et al, ; Khan et al, ; Sotola et al, ; van der Meulen et al, ; Watkins et al, ; Zhu et al, ; Zymonas & McMahon, ). Two recent G. aculeatus studies have analysed several structures (DeFaveri & Merilä, ; DeFaveri et al, ), but no study has formally compared the age estimates from different structures and their reliability in G. aculeatus .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aging three‐spined sticklebacksGasterosteus aculeatus: comparison of estimates from three structures

Yurtseva

Noreikienė

Lajus

et al. 2019

Journal of Fish Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to assess the accuracy and reliability of age estimates from calcified structures in the three-spined stickleback Gasterosteus aculeatus, we evaluated intra and inter-reader repeatability from three structures: otoliths, gill covers and pelvic spines). Average age estimates were also compared between the structures. The overall intra-reader repeatability of age estimates were highest for otoliths (69%), lowest for gill covers (53%) and intermediate for spine cross-sections (63%). Although four of the seven readers had the highest intra-reader repeatability score for spine cross-sections, the inter-reader variance in this structure was much higher than in others. Otoliths were the easiest in terms of their pre-analysis treatment and exchange of materials (as digital images) between readers. In addition, otoliths are more well-studied compared with the other structures with respect to their development through ontogenesis; hence, age estimates based on otoliths should be the most reliable. Therefore, our recommendation is that whenever possible, analysis of otoliths should be the preferred approach for aging G. aculeatus. K E Y W O R D Sage, Gasterosteus aculeatus, gill cover, otolith, pelvic spine, repeatability

show abstract

Precision of Hard Structures Used to Estimate Age of Mountain Whitefish (Prosopium williamsoni)

Cited by 6 publications

References 20 publications

Response of Fish Population Dynamics to Mitigation Activities in a Large Regulated River

Response of Fish Population Dynamics to Mitigation Activities in a Large Regulated River

Accuracy and Precision of Age Estimates Obtained from Three Calcified Structures for Known‐Age Kokanee

Aging three‐spined sticklebacksGasterosteus aculeatus: comparison of estimates from three structures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About