Quantitative sampling of small fishes in dense vegetation: Design and field testing of portable "pop-nets"

Serafy, Joseph E.; Harrell, Reginal M.; Stevenson, J. Court

doi:10.1111/j.1439-0426.1988.tb00555.x

Cited by 31 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Synodus foetens). Our estimates of total species are higher than those previously reported for the Parsons Island site (Heck & Thoman 1984) and similar to those at tidal fresh sites in Chesapeake Bay (Serafy et al 1988). It appears that fish assemblages at vegetated estuarine sites have fewer species than in higher salinity habitats (Harmelin-Vivien 1983, Stoner 1983, Pollard 1984.…”

Section: Fish Community Structurecontrasting

confidence: 55%

Variations in structure of estuarine fish communities in relation to abundance of submersed vascular plants

Lubbers¹,

Boynton²,

Kemp³

1990

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

144

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fish communities and other ecological variables were sampled for 6 mo (May to October) in successive years (1979, 1980) at vegetated and non-vegetated areas in 2 distinctively different littoral zones (an open bay and a protected cove) of mid-salinity Chesapeake Bay, USA. Fish abundance, biomass and species richness were h~gher in vegetated areas at both sites, and were significantly correlated with macrophyte biomass Diel patterns of fish abundance varied, but highest catches generally occurred at dusk or at night. At one sampling site fish assemblages were dominated by smaller individuals in the vegetated area, suggesting an attraction of juveniles to macrophyte beds for food or refuge from predation. Larger piscivorous fish, which were also caught in greater numbers in vegetated areas, may have been attracted there by higher densities of forage fish. At the cove site the biomass of Paleomonetes sp. was comparable to that of the fish community towards the end of the plant growing season. Benthic infauna were also more abundant in vegetated areas at both sites, and stomach analyses indicated these organisms to be the dominant food resources for common fishes. Diets were generally non-selective in non-vegetated areas while highly selective for epiphytic fauna in macrophyte beds. Fish stomachs were also significantly fuller in vegetated areas, indicating generally greater feeding success. Fish production varied among major species but was higher overall at vegetated areas, following the seasonal patterns of primary production. Most of the differences in fish production between areas were attributable to higher instantaneous growth rates rather than higher biomass. It appears that the greater abundance and species richness of fish assemblages in vegetated areas of this region of Chesapeake Bay resulted from the attractiveness of these habitats as rich sources of preferred foods.

show abstract

Section: Fish Community Structurecontrasting

confidence: 55%

Variations in structure of estuarine fish communities in relation to abundance of submersed vascular plants

Lubbers¹,

Boynton²,

Kemp³

1990

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

144

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is a decided advantage over flumes and block nets, which have walls that block lateral movement of nekton, a n d require organisms to enter the mouths of these devices to be captured (McIvor & Odum 1986, Hettler 1989. Other samplers may require removing vegetation from the sampling area to insure efficient capture of nekton (Zimmerman et al 1984, Rozas & Odum 1987, Serafy et al 1988. Methods that modify the habitat by adding structure or low-tide refugia may also bias density estimates by attracting organisms to the sampling sites.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bottomless lift net for quantitatively sampling nekton on intertidal marshes

Rozas¹

1992

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I describe a 6 n12 bottomless lift net designed to quantitatively sample intertidal, vegetated environments. Major advantages of using the lift net are: (1) requires minimal habitat modification or disturbance in the vic~nity of the sampling area. (2) nets may be oriented in any direction and sampling is not confined to sites near navigable water, (3) estimates of nekton density are easily determined from a known sample area, and (4) nets are relatively inexpensive to construct, operate, and maintain. Net efficiencies ranged from 32 74 for daggerblade grass shrimp Palaemonetes pugio to 93 % for striped mullet Mugil cephalus. The net was used to sample nekton on a Louisiana salt marsh for 8 mo, during which 8229 organisms, 25 species of fishes and 4 species of decapod crustaceans were collected. Numerically dominant species were daggerblade grass shrimp, Gulf killifish Fundulus grandis, sheepshead minnow Cyprinodon variegatus, diamond killifish Adinia xenica, striped mullet, blue crab Callinectes sapidus, brown shrimp Penaeus dztecus, and white shrimp Penaeus set~ferus. The bottomless lift net can be used to compare nekton densities in a variety of intertidal habitats, many of which are difficult or impossible to sample using other methods.

show abstract

“…But only a few complex and labor-intensive buoyant drop-and pop-nets with floating frames are usable at depths of 2 to 5 m (Mosely and Copeland 1969;Larson et al 1986;Serafy et al 1988). The major disadvantages of these systems are the need for divers to set or to clear the traps, the additional bottom structure (pop-nets) that can attract or repel organisms, and the long equilibration time (hours to a day) after setting.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Enclosure traps, including drop-traps (Kahl 1963;Kushlan 1974;Gilmore et al 1978;Pihl and Rosenberg 1982;Pihl Baden and Pihl 1984;Nellbring 1985), drop-nets (Hellier 1958;Mosely and Copeland 1969;Kjelson et al 1975;Adams 1976), buoyant pop-nets (Larson et al 1986;Serafy et al 1988;Dewey et al 1989;Connolly 1994), lift-nets (Higer and Kolipinski 1967;Rozas 1992), and throw-traps (Kushlan 1981;Jacobsen and Kushlan 1987;Chick et al 1992;Jordan et al 1997), provide instantaneous samples and are considered to be the most efficient sampling devices for small fishes and invertebrates in shallowwater habitats less than 1.5 m deep (Kushlan 1981;Jordan et al 1997). But only a few complex and labor-intensive buoyant drop-and pop-nets with floating frames are usable at depths of 2 to 5 m (Mosely and Copeland 1969;Larson et al 1986;Serafy et al 1988).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of an enclosure drop trap and a visual diving census technique to estimate fish populations in eelgrass habitats

Bobsien

Brendelberger

2006

Limnology & Ocean Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In shallow vegetated aquatic habitats exceeding 2 m depth, conventional methods to determine fish abundances are of limited success. In this study, the sampling qualities of 2 methods for investigating the fish community associated with the eelgrass Zostera marina were tested: a newly developed enclosure drop trap (ET) operated from the water surface and a visual diving strip transect technique. The construction and the sampling procedure of the enclosure trap are described in detail. Both sampling procedures were performed simultaneously at the same eelgrass sampling site at depths between 2 and 5 m. The comparison revealed deficiencies in relative catch efficiency for both methods. Limitations with respect to bottom-dwelling forms are obvious for the ET and with respect to the Syngnathidae and Gasterosteidae for the visual diving census. Abundance estimates of pelagic, schooling species were highly variable with both methods. Correction coefficients for the different behavioral categories of eelgrass fish were calculated. The fish species composition showed good agreement between the 2 methods, but the number of species on each sampling occasion was consistently higher in the ET catches. The length class frequency distributions estimated by the divers corresponded approximately with direct measurements of fish from the ET catches. The methods complemented one another and can be recommended for simultaneous deployment to get accurate quantitative estimates of eelgrass fish populations. The relative capture efficiency of the enclosure trap can be incorporated to improve abundance measurements of small fish in Zostera marina beds without the help of divers.

show abstract

Quantitative sampling of small fishes in dense vegetation: Design and field testing of portable "pop-nets"

Cited by 31 publications

References 19 publications

Variations in structure of estuarine fish communities in relation to abundance of submersed vascular plants

Variations in structure of estuarine fish communities in relation to abundance of submersed vascular plants

Bottomless lift net for quantitatively sampling nekton on intertidal marshes

Comparison of an enclosure drop trap and a visual diving census technique to estimate fish populations in eelgrass habitats

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About