Spatial and temporal variation in habitat and fish community characteristics in a Kansas Flint Hills stream

Abstract

Four locations (i.e., mouth, lower midreach, upper midreach, and headwater) were sampled bimonthly for two years in a Kansas, Flint Hills stream. Principal components 1 (PCI; depth, width, substrate) and 2 (PC2; velocity, water temperature, conductivity) accounted for 70% of the variation in habitat variables. Principal component 1 varied more spatially than temporally, and PC2 exhibited the opposite pattern. Species diversity varied spatially with the highest values at the upper midreach and mouth and lowest in the headwaters. Species diversity also varied temporally with highest values in summer months and lowest in late fall and early spring. Catch per unit effort (C/o varied temporally and spatially by trophic guilds and species. In general, C/f values were highest in late fall and early spring and were lowest in early and mid summer. Fixed spatial variation (i.e., spatial difference independent of temporal factors) was higher than ephemeral spatial variation (i.e., spatial variation that varies temporally) for species with specialized feeding habits. Conversely, ephemeral spatial variation was highest for fish species with generalized feeding habits. These data indicate that standardizing reaches and dates are important if habitat, species diversity, and C/f data will be used in managing stream ecosystems.Un resumen en espaiiol se incluye detras del texto principal de este articulo.

Military Training Effects on Terrestrial and Aquatic Communities on a Grassland Military Installation

“…Stream reaches in watersheds that experienced high military training use were dominated by silt-tolerant species and trophic generalists. These results are important because fish communities dominated by trophic generalists and tolerant species are not characteristic of high-quality Flint Hills streams (Tripe andGuy 1999, Schrank et al 2001) and generally indicate a decline in aquatic ecosystem health. In addition, the federally endangered Notropis topeka was only found in reaches with low training use in the watershed and a low proportion of silt substrate, suggesting the importance of watershed recovery for sensitive species.…”

“…The streams of Fort Riley are typical of streams in the Flint Hills, having relatively steep gradients with eroded limestone and shale forming the dominant substrate (Metcalf 1966). Due to the lack of intensive rowcrop agriculture and other large-scale anthropogenic disturbances, most Flint Hills streams have well-developed pool-riffle sequences and large substrates (Tripe and Guy 1999). In addition, Flint Hills streams support the most diverse fish fauna in the Kansas River Basin (Metcalf 1966), and in many streams, the fauna includes threatened and endangered species, such as Notropis topeka.…”

Seasonal and diel variation in the fish assemblage of a Neotropical delta in southern Brazil

“…Furthermore, it has been demonstrated that many fish feed with greater intensity during the periods before and after their reproductive season (BARBIERI et al, 1982;SCHLOSSER, 1982;HARTZ et al, 1996;TRIPE & GUY, 1999).…”

Determinants of Fish Assemblage Structure in Northwestern Great Plains Streams

“…In addition, the spatial position within a drainage can greatly influence fish assemblages (Horwitz 1978;Evans and Noble 1979;Matthews 1986;Schlosser 1987;Bhat 2004). The spatiotemporal variation of fish assemblages has been evaluated in warmwater streams in the Midwest (Schlosser 1987), the coastal plains (Adams et al 2004), and the central and southern Great Plains Meador and Matthews 1992;Williams et al 1996;Tripe and Guy 1999;Ostrand and Wilde 2002;Thornbrugh and Gido 2010), and large rivers in the Great Plains (Barko et al 2004;Pegg and McClelland 2004). However, no attempts have been made to describe how fish assemblages in northwestern Great Plains streams vary spatially and temporally or to determine which abiotic factors are important in explaining this spatiotemporal variation.…”

“…Most studies on the spatiotemporal variation of stream fish assemblages have focused on one stream, one stream and a few of its tributaries, or multiple sites within a stream network (Schlosser 1987;Meador and Matthews 1992;Williams et al 1996;Tripe and Guy 1999;Ostrand and Wilde 2002). However, we are aware of no studies that have assessed the role of watershed size on the spatiotemporal variation of fish assemblages in multiple streams that flow directly into the same river.…”