Spatial and temporal variability of a vendace (Coregonus albula (L.))  population in Lake Pluszne, Poland, based on hydroacoustics and trawl catches

Doroszczyk, L.; Długoszewski, Bronisław; Kanigowska, Ewa; Wiśniewolski, Wiesław; Godlewska, M.

doi:10.1127/1612-166x/2013/0064-0001

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…data). This increase in whitefish during re‐oligotrophication is in sharp contrast to declining levels of vendace in Lake Pluszne, Poland, as this lake became more eutrophic (Doroszczyk et al ., ). In the present study, benthic gillnets generally caught smaller whitefish than the pelagic gillnets (Fig.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Comparing two fish sampling standards over time: largely congruent results but with caveats

Yule

Evrard

Cachera³

et al. 2013

Freshwater Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. We sampled Lake Bourget (surface area = 44 km 2 ) using CEN standard gillnet and provisional standard acoustic survey methods over 3 years (2005, 2010 and 2011) as the fish community responded to re-oligotrophication. A total of 16 species were caught in benthic gillnets and three species in pelagic gillnets. 2. Lake Bourget results were consistent with a recent study (Emmrich et al., Freshwater Biology, 57, 2012, 2436 showing strong correspondence between average biomass-per-unit-effort (BPUE) in standard benthic gillnets and average acoustic volume backscattering when smaller lakes (0.25-5.45 km 2 ) were treated as sample units. 3. The BPUE of whitefish (Coregonus lavaretus), perch (Perca fluviatilis) and roach (Rutilus rutilus) measured by benthic gillnets all declined significantly with increasing bathymetric depth; 93% of nets set at depths >50 m caught zero fish. 4. Pelagic gillnetting indicated that small (<10 cm) perch and small (<12.5 cm) roach occupied the upper pelagic habitat (0-20 m depths) and that whitefish were predominant in deeper pelagic habitat. The acoustic sampling showed fish biomass in the upper pelagic habitat varied significantly by year. Biomass there was highest in 2010 when a strong perch year-class recruited and lowest in 2011 when recruitment levels of perch and roach were both weak. Whitefish biomass in deep pelagic habitat (>20 m) increased significantly after 2005. 5. Both surveys showed whitefish biomass increased significantly during the study, but whitefish ≥25 cm were poorly represented in benthic gillnet catches. Contrary to the acoustic findings, the BPUE of perch and roach in benthic gillnets did not vary significantly over time. This metric is insensitive to changes in size structure in that a high catch of small fish and a low catch of large fish in different years can provide similar average BPUE estimates. 6. We examined correlations between BPUE in benthic gillnets and acoustic methods at fine spatial scales by averaging acoustic backscattering measurements encompassed by buffers of varying size (250-2000 m) around individual gillnets and by averaging samples collected from lake quadrants. Correlations at fines scales were generally poor, and only in 1 year was the quadrant correlation significant. The lack of correlation can be explained, in part, by the two gears sampling different components of the fish community. Conversely, in pelagic habitat, where the fish community was simpler, we found BPUE in pelagic nets to be strongly correlated with acoustic backscattering. 7. With respect to large lakes like Lake Bourget, we hypothesise that the congruence in average biomass measurements provided by these two survey methods occurs because these different community components are responding similarly to a common driver like lake trophic status (or possibly multiple drivers operating in synergy).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Comparing two fish sampling standards over time: largely congruent results but with caveats

Yule

Evrard

Cachera³

et al. 2013

Freshwater Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Aglen [21] defined the cover factor as the ratio of the length of all transects to the square root of the lake area. In order to determine the minimum value of the coverage coefficient in a given lake, which ensures relative stability of the estimated values of fish numbers and their distribution, comparisons of changes in these parameters were carried out while reducing the number of transects [22]. In order to reduce the risk of error, research was also carried out in (three) repetitions according to the same survey routes [23].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Repeatability of Hydroacoustic Results versus Uncertainty in Assessing Changes in Ecological Status Based on Fish: A Case Study of Lake Widryńskie (Poland)

Hutorowicz

2024

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assessments of changes in the ecological state of aquatic ecosystems are always burdened with uncertainty, which results from environmental reasons and poor repeatability of measurement results of elements enabling the assessment. This study determines the uncertainty related to the elements of the assessment of the hydroacoustic structure of fish communities’ (1) vertical target strength distribution (TS) in two-meter layers of water and (2) changes in the area where fish were recorded (which was determined on the basis of maps of their distribution in 2 m deep water layers). The object of this study was a lake (depth: 27 m) in which at the end of June 2016 the O2 concentration was <1.4 mg L−1 below 8 m depth, which resulted in the accumulation of fish to a depth of 6 m. Hydroacoustic acquisition was carried out along transects arranged in the east–west (WE), north–south (NS), and zigzag (ZZ) directions in three repetitions. It was shown that the empirical probability of obtaining statistically different results was 2/9 when (1) Kendall’s τ coefficient, used to determine the similarity of the TS distribution, was less than 0.7—moderate correlation—and (2) fish occurrence areas in two cases (WE and ZZ on the third day of research) in layers 2–4 m and 4–6 m differed statistically significantly from the average area for all repetitions by 10–14% and 56–66% (p < 0.05), respectively. The obtained results indicate quite good repeatability of acoustic measurements; however, in order to reduce the uncertainty, it is recommended that tests be conducted in this type of lake in three series of measurements.

show abstract

“…Hydroacoustic methods offer a nondestructive approach for important aspects of fish assessment, with the additional advantages of a relatively short survey time and relatively low labor costs (Draštík et al ; Guillard et al ; Winfield et al ) and can play an effective role in the assessment of complex fish communities. When combined with limited biological sampling to provide information on species composition and age structure (Emmrich et al ; Doroszczyk et al ; Yule et al ), hydroacoustics has particular potential in the development of a nondestructive, deep water classification tool for environmental monitoring legislation such as the European Union Water Framework Directive which requires assessment of several biological quality elements including fish (European Commission ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Fish hydroacoustic survey standardization: A step forward based on comparisons of methods and systems from vertical surveys of a large deep lake

Draštík

Godlewska

Balk

et al. 2017

Limnology & Ocean Methods

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hydroacoustic methods are routinely used for fish population assessment and monitoring in lakes and reservoirs around the world and are particularly embedded in European and North American lake management. However, the comparability of hydroacoustic results can be difficult to assess due to the large number of variables (sound frequency, sound pulse duration, system manufacturer, analysis method, etc.) that can influence acoustic estimates. This study investigates the effect of variations in analysis method and hydroacoustic system on commonly produced outputs. Volume backscattering strength (Sv), mean target strength (TS), fish abundance, and biomass were estimated using two analysis methods (echo integration and track‐counting) using data recorded from a large, deep lake (Windermere, UK) by four vertically oriented split‐beam systems operating at three sound frequencies (120 kHz, 200 kHz, and 400 kHz). The two analysis methods used produced similar estimates of fish abundance and fish biomass. We therefore concluded that echo integration and track‐counting can be robustly used and outputs justifiably compared under the conditions of the Windermere surveys. In addition, we compared mean Sv, mean TS, fish abundance, and biomass estimates across the four hydroacoustic systems. The only significant result was for abundance estimates, however, the system made a small contribution to the overall variability. All four systems provided similar results for the other metrics, demonstrating that independent hydroacoustic surveys operating within the European Standard can make a major contribution to the assessment and monitoring of fish populations in deep lakes and reservoirs.

show abstract

Spatial and temporal variability of a vendace (Coregonus albula (L.)) population in Lake Pluszne, Poland, based on hydroacoustics and trawl catches

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Comparing two fish sampling standards over time: largely congruent results but with caveats

Comparing two fish sampling standards over time: largely congruent results but with caveats

Repeatability of Hydroacoustic Results versus Uncertainty in Assessing Changes in Ecological Status Based on Fish: A Case Study of Lake Widryńskie (Poland)

Fish hydroacoustic survey standardization: A step forward based on comparisons of methods and systems from vertical surveys of a large deep lake

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About