Geology topics

David L. Ward

Publications and source records attributed to David L. Ward.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2019

An evaluation of sedatives for use in transport of juvenile endangered fishes in plastic bags

Trucks and aircraft typically transport rare or endangered fishes in large unsealed tanks containing large volumes of water (typically hundreds of liters) during conservation efforts. Ornamental fishes, however, are commonly sent by mail in small sealed plastic bags filled with oxygen, minimal water, and a small amount of sedative to reduce weight and overall shipping costs. Our goal was to evaluate if these "minimal water" methods used for shipping ornamental fishes could also be used to safely transport endangered Humpback Chub, Gila cypha , into remote locations within Grand Canyon on foot to eliminate helicopter transportation costs associated with conservation actions. In the laboratory, 20 (mean, M = 193.9 g of fish/L, SD = 37.8) juvenile Bonytail, Gila elegans , or Humpback Chub were placed in plastic bags containing 1 liter of water and pure oxygen for 4, 8, and 12 hours. Treatments contained either no sedative or one of three sedatives: AquaCalm (metomidate hydrochloride), Tricaine-S (tricaine methanesulfonate or MS-222), or Aqui-S 20E (eugenol) to evaluate the effectiveness of minimal water methods for use in fish transport. Aqui-S 20E and the control without sedatives exhibited the highest survival (logistic regression, Aqui-S 20E, P = 0.994, 95% CI [0.978, 0.998]; Control, P = 0.995, 95% CI [0.981, 0.998]), followed by Tricaine-S ( P = 0.933, 95% CI [0.902, 0.955]), and AquaCalm ( P = 0.355, 95% CI [0.307, 0.406]). We also conducted a field trial in which we placed 240 juvenile Humpback Chub in shipping bags ( n = 20 fish/bag/1L of water; M = 143.2 g of fish/L, SD = 9.72) with no sedative or 10.0 mg/L of Aqui-S 20E and transported them by vehicle and on foot. No fish perished during transport, indicating these minimal water methods can be used to safely, and at little expense, transport endangered Humpback Chub into remote locations.

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management↗

USGS2018

What environmental conditions reduce predation vulnerability for juvenile Colorado River native fishes?

The incompatibility of native Colorado River fishes and nonnative warm-water sport fishes is well documented with predation by nonnative species causing rapid declines and even extirpation of native species in most locations. In a few rare instances native fishes are able to survive and recruit despite the presence of nonnative warm water predators, indicating that specific environmental conditions may help reduce predation vulnerability. We experimented with turbidity, artificial blue water colorant, woody debris, rocks, and aquatic vegetation in a laboratory setting to determine if any of these types of cover could reduce predation vulnerability and confer survival advantages for juvenile bonytail Gila elegans, (mean = 70 mm TL), roundtail chub Gila robusta, (mean = 35 mm TL), humpback chub Gila cypha, (mean = 67 mm TL), and razorback sucker Xyrauchen texanus (mean = 74 mm TL). Juvenile native fishes were exposed to predation by adult largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides, smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu, green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus, flathead catfish Pylodictis olivaris, and black bullhead catfish Ameiurus melas, in overnight trials. Turbidity above 500 NTU reduced predation vulnerability by up to 50%, for the sight-feeding predators, but increased predation vulnerability to non-sight feeding predators such as flathead catfish and bullhead catfish. Turbidity was the only treatment which appeared to significantly alter predation mortality of native prey. These results may help to explain recent patterns of wild juvenile razorback sucker recruitment at the inflow of the San Juan River into Lake Powell and the inflow of the Colorado River into Lake Mead. These are both areas of high turbidity where flathead catfish are not currently present but other nonnative sportfish are relatively abundant.

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management↗

USGS2018

Are hatchery-reared Rainbow Trout and Brown Trout effective predators on juvenile native fish?

Hatchery‐reared Rainbow Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss and Brown Trout Salmo trutta are typically fed exclusively on commercially prepared pelleted feeds and have no experience catching or consuming live fish at the time of stocking. Despite this lack of predation experience, it is commonly assumed that stocked Rainbow Trout and Brown Trout will adversely impact native fish populations by preying upon juvenile native fish. We evaluated the relative predation effectiveness of wild‐caught Rainbow Trout (210–389 mm TL) and Brown Trout (185–313 mm TL) compared with hatchery‐reared Rainbow Trout (198–321 mm TL) and Brown Trout (196–290 mm TL). We used Bonytail Gila elegans (60–85 mm TL), Humpback Chub Gila cypha (24–59 mm TL), and Roundtail Chub Gila robusta (40–65 mm TL) as prey in overnight predation trials conducted in the laboratory from 2013 to 2016. After 14 d in a captive setting, wild Rainbow Trout and Brown Trout consumed >70% of prey in trials with no cover, while hatchery‐reared fish consumed <30% of prey. In addition, we evaluated if the predation ability of hatchery fish would improve over time by feeding them Fathead Minnows Pimephales promelas , rather than pelleted feed, for up to 30 d. Predation success of Rainbow Trout and Brown Trout increased by an average of 28% and 21%, respectively, after 14 d of eating exclusively fish. Rainbow Trout tested after 30 d of eating fish increased in their ability to catch and eat small prey by an average of 29%. The predation effectiveness of hatchery‐reared fish appears to improve with experience eating live fish. Although stocking Rainbow Trout and Brown Trout does increase the number of predators present in natural systems, the relative predation threat posed by hatchery‐reared fish may be less than that of wild fish, especially in locations where stocked fish do not persist. Lack of experience in catching fish and the effects of captive rearing practices and environments on both physiology and behavior all likely contribute to reduced predation effectiveness of hatchery Rainbow Trout and Brown Trout.

North American Journal of Fisheries Management↗

USGS2018

Key morphological features favor the success of nonnative fish species under reduced turbidity conditions in the lower Colorado River Basin

As a result of anthropomorphic alterations to the lower Colorado River basin and other southwestern rivers, water turbidity has been greatly reduced and introduced, nonnative fishes thrive in these waterways. To quantify key morphological features that may allow nonnative fishes to displace native fishes, we compared eye diameter (a proxy for visual acuity) and maximum anatomical gape (a proxy for maximum prey size) in native and nonnative fishes of the lower Colorado River basin. In general, nonnative fishes have larger eyes and larger gapes relative to native fishes. Native invertivorous and piscivorous fishes may be at a particular disadvantage when compared with nonnative species from the same trophic guild because native midwater predators have proportionally smaller eyes and mouths. In the historically turbid conditions of the Colorado River, native fish likely had a limited ability to use vision to locate prey and avoid predators. Similarly, native fishes could not identify potential food items from a distance in turbid waters so suction‐based prey capture (where the predator is in close proximity to the prey) may have been favored over ram‐based prey capture (where fish swim from a distance to overtake prey). Many nonnative fish species have a large eye diameter and maximum anatomical gape; these features likely facilitate their ability to visually identify and capture large, elusive prey. These results suggest that the large eyes and large gapes of nonnative fishes make them superior predators and competitors in the clear, anthropomorphically altered southwestern rivers of the USA.

Lower Colorado River Basin↗

USGS2018

Can data from disparate long-term fish monitoring programs be used to increase our understanding of regional and continental trends in large river assemblages?

Understanding trends in the diverse resources provided by large rivers will help balance tradeoffs among stakeholders and inform strategies to mitigate the effects of landscape scale stressors such as climate change and invasive species. Absent a cohesive coordinated effort to assess trends in important large river resources, a logical starting point is to assess our ability to draw inferences from existing efforts. In this paper, we use a common analytical framework to analyze data from five disparate fish monitoring programs to better understand the nature of spatial and temporal trends in large river fish assemblages. We evaluated data from programs that monitor fishes in the Colorado, Columbia, Illinois, Mississippi, and Tallapoosa rivers using non-metric dimensional scaling ordinations and associated tests to evaluate trends in fish assemblage structure and native fish biodiversity. Our results indicate that fish assemblages exhibited significant spatial and temporal trends in all five of the rivers. We also document native species diversity trends that were variable within and between rivers and generally more evident in rivers with higher species richness and programs of longer duration. We discuss shared and basin-specific landscape level stressors. Having a basic understanding of the nature and extent of trends in fish assemblages is a necessary first step towards understanding factors affecting biodiversity and fisheries in large rivers.

PLoS ONE↗

USGS2017

Does bioelectrical impedance analysis accurately estimate the condition of threatened and endangered desert fish species?

Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is a nonlethal tool with which to estimate the physiological condition of animals that has potential value in research on endangered species. However, the effectiveness of BIA varies by species, the methodology continues to be refined, and incidental mortality rates are unknown. Under laboratory conditions we tested the value of using BIA in addition to morphological measurements such as total length and wet mass to estimate proximate composition (lipid, protein, ash, water, dry mass, energy density) in the endangered Humpback Chub Gila cypha and Bonytail G. elegans and the species of concern Roundtail Chub G. robusta and conducted separate trials to estimate the mortality rates of these sensitive species. Although Humpback and Roundtail Chub exhibited no or low mortality in response to taking BIA measurements versus handling for length and wet-mass measurements, Bonytails exhibited 14% and 47% mortality in the BIA and handling experiments, respectively, indicating that survival following stress is species specific. Derived BIA measurements were included in the best models for most proximate components; however, the added value of BIA as a predictor was marginal except in the absence of accurate wet-mass data. Bioelectrical impedance analysis improved the R 2 of the best percentage-based models by no more than 4% relative to models based on morphology. Simulated field conditions indicated that BIA models became increasingly better than morphometric models at estimating proximate composition as the observation error around wet-mass measurements increased. However, since the overall proportion of variance explained by percentage-based models was low and BIA was mostly a redundant predictor, we caution against the use of BIA in field applications for these sensitive fish species.

Transactions of the American Fisheries Society↗

USGS2017

Long-term fish monitoring in large rivers: Utility of “benchmarking” across basins

In business, benchmarking is a widely used practice of comparing your own business processes to those of other comparable companies and incorporating identified best practices to improve performance. Biologists and resource managers designing and conducting monitoring programs for fish in large river systems tend to focus on single river basins or segments of large rivers, missing opportunities to learn from those conducting fish monitoring in other rivers. We briefly examine five long-term fish monitoring programs in large rivers in the United States (Colorado, Columbia, Mississippi, Illinois, and Tallapoosa rivers) and identify opportunities for learning across programs by detailing best monitoring practices and why these practices were chosen. Although monitoring objectives, methods, and program maturity differ between each river system, examples from these five case studies illustrate the important role that long-term monitoring programs play in interpreting temporal and spatial shifts in fish populations for both established objectives and newly emerging questions. We suggest that deliberate efforts to develop a broader collaborative network through benchmarking will facilitate sharing of ideas and development of more effective monitoring programs.

Colorado River, Columbia River, Illinois River, Mi↗

USGS2017

Scientific monitoring plan in support of the selected alternative of the Glen Canyon Dam Long-Term Experimental and Management Plan

Introduction The purpose of this document is to describe a strategy by which monitoring and research data in the natural and social sciences will be collected, analyzed, and provided to the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), its bureaus, and to the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program (GCDAMP) in support of implementation of the Glen Canyon Dam Long-Term Experimental and Management Plan (LTEMP) (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2016a). The selected alternative identified in the LTEMP Record of Decision (ROD) (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2016b) describes various data collection, analysis, modeling, and interpretation efforts to be conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center (GCMRC), partner agencies, and cooperators that will inform decisions about operations of Glen Canyon Dam and management of downstream resources between 2017 and 2037, the performance period of the LTEMP. General data collection, analysis, modeling, and interpretation activities are described in this science plan, whereas specific monitoring and research activities and detailed study plans are to be described in the GCDAMP’s triennial work plans (TWPs) to be developed by the Bureau of Reclamation and GCMRC with input from partner agencies and cooperators during the LTEMP period, which are to be reviewed and recommended by the GCDAMP and approved by the Secretary of the Interior. The GCDAMP consists of several components, the primary committee being the Adaptive Management Work Group (AMWG). This Federal advisory committee is composed of 25 agencies and stakeholder groups and is chaired by the Secretary of the Interior’s designee. The AMWG makes recommendations to the Secretary of the Interior concerning operations of Glen Canyon Dam and other experimental management actions that are intended to fulfill some obligations of the Grand Canyon Protection Act of 1992. The Technical Work Group (TWG) is a subcommittee of the AMWG and provides technical advice to the AMWG. It is composed of technical and science representatives from the same agencies and stakeholder groups who serve on the AMWG. GCMRC is the primary science provider to the GCDAMP and also coordinates many aspects of the science performed by cooperators and partner agencies. The Science Advisors Program provides independent science reviews and advice at the request of the GCDAMP. The plan proposed here necessarily depends on (1) the protocol for decision-making and the requirements for scientific data reporting described in the LTEMP ROD, (2) the priorities of the GCDAMP as directed by the LTEMP ROD (see Department of the Interior, 2016b, section 6.1), (3) the priorities for monitoring and research in the conservation measures section of the Biological Opinion for the LTEMP (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2016b, LTEMP ROD attachment E), (4) the priorities for resource management and information needs established by Federal and State resource-management agencies within the GCDAMP, (5) scientific understanding about the linkage between the status of those resources and operations of Glen Canyon Dam, and (6) the need to resolve existing scientific uncertainties about the linkage between dam operations and the condition of resources. We note that resource-management prioritization is fundamentally a policy decision charged specifically to DOI for the Colorado River in Glen and Grand Canyons, as outlined most recently in the LTEMP ROD, and is not the responsibility of the GCMRC. However, it is the responsibility of the GCMRC to describe the nature of scientific understanding, the nature of scientific uncertainty, and the risk of making resourcemanagement decisions in the face of existing scientific uncertainty. The goals of science activities in the next 20 years are to inform operational decisions regarding Glen Canyon Dam operations described in the LTEMP ROD, resolve remaining scientific uncertainties, and to monitor resource trends that are affected entirely, or in part, by dam operations.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2016

Effects of turbidity on predation vulnerability of juvenile humpback chub to rainbow and brown trout

Predation on juvenile native fish by introduced rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss and brown trout Salmo trutta is considered a significant threat to the persistence of endangered humpback chub Gila cypha in the Colorado River in Grand Canyon. Diet studies of rainbow and brown trout in Glen and Grand canyons indicate that these species eat native fish, but impacts are difficult to assess because predation vulnerability is highly variable depending on the physical conditions under which the predation interactions take place. We conducted laboratory experiments to evaluate how short-term predation vulnerability of juvenile humpback chub changes in response to changes in turbidity. In overnight laboratory trials, we exposed hatchery-reared juvenile humpback chub and bonytail Gila elegans (a surrogate for humpback chub) to adult rainbow and brown trout at turbidities ranging from 0 to 1,000 formazin nephlometric units. We found that turbidity as low as 25 formazin nephlometric units significantly reduced predation vulnerability of bonytail to rainbow trout and led to a 36% mean increase in survival (24–60%, 95% CI) compared to trials conducted in clear water. Predation vulnerability of bonytail to brown trout at 25 formazin nephlometric units also decreased with increasing turbidity and resulted in a 25% increase in survival on average (17–32%, 95% CI). Understanding the effects of predation by trout on endangered humpback chub is important when evaluating management options aimed at preservation of native fishes in Grand Canyon National Park. This research suggests that relatively small changes in turbidity may be sufficient to alter predation dynamics of trout on humpback chub in the mainstem Colorado River and that turbidity manipulation may warrant further investigation as a fisheries management tool.

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management↗

USGS2015

Effects of water temperature and fish size on predation vulnerability of juvenile humpback chub to rainbow trout and brown trout

Predation on juvenile native fish by introduced Rainbow Trout and Brown Trout is considered a significant threat to the persistence of endangered Humpback Chub Gila cypha in the Colorado River in the Grand Canyon. Diet studies of Rainbow Trout and Brown Trout in Glen and Grand canyons indicate that these species do eat native fish, but impacts are difficult to assess because predation vulnerability is highly variable, depending on prey size, predator size, and the water temperatures under which the predation interactions take place. We conducted laboratory experiments to evaluate how short-term predation vulnerability of juvenile native fish changes in response to fish size and water temperature using captivity-reared Humpback Chub, Bonytail, and Roundtail Chub. Juvenile chub 45–90 mm total length (TL) were exposed to adult Rainbow and Brown trouts at 10, 15, and 20°C to measure predation vulnerability as a function of water temperature and fish size. A 1°C increase in water temperature decreased short-term predation vulnerability of Humpback Chub to Rainbow Trout by about 5%, although the relationship is not linear. Brown Trout were highly piscivorous in the laboratory at any size > 220 mm TL and at all water temperatures we tested. Understanding the effects of predation by trout on endangered Humpback Chub is critical in evaluating management options aimed at preserving native fishes in Grand Canyon National Park.

Transactions of the American Fisheries Society↗

USGS2015

A laboratory evaluation of tagging-related mortality and tag loss in juvenile humpback chub

We quantified tag retention, survival, and growth in juvenile, captive-reared Humpback Chub Gila cypha marked with three different tag types: (1) Biomark 12.5-mm, 134.2-kHz, full duplex PIT tags injected into the body cavity with a 12-gauge needle; (2) Biomark 8.4-mm, 134.2-kHz, full duplex PIT tags injected with a 16-gauge needle; and (3) Northwest Marine Technology visible implant elastomer (VIE) tags injected under the skin with a 29-gauge needle. Estimates of tag loss, tagging-induced mortality, and growth were evaluated for 60 d with each tag type for four different size-groups of fish: 40–49 mm, 50–59 mm, 60–69 mm, and 70–79 mm TL. Total length was a significant predictor of the probability of PIT tag retention and mortality for both 8-mm and 12-mm PIT tags, and the smallest fish had the highest rates of tag loss (12.5–30.0%) and mortality (7.5–20.0%). Humpback Chub of sizes 40–49 mm TL and tagged with VIE tags had no mortality but did have a 17.5% tag loss. Growth rates of all tagged fish were similar to controls. Our data indicate Humpback Chub can be effectively tagged using either 8-mm or 12-mm PIT tags with little tag loss or mortality at sizes as low as 65 mm TL.

North American Journal of Fisheries Management↗

USGS2015

Effectiveness of backpack electrofishing for removal of non-native fishes from a small warm-water stream

Electrofishing is commonly used when renovating small streams to remove nuisance fishes but the likelihood of complete eradication of unwanted species, particularly warm-water fishes, is unknown. In October of 2008, we electrofished Bonita Creek, a small stream with base flows (<0.56 m 3 /s) in southern Arizona, and then treated the stream with rotenone to kill all of the remaining fish and quantify the effectiveness of single and multiple-pass electro fishing. Six, 100-m transects were electro fished on three consecutive days followed by a single treatment with rotenone. Fish caught using electrofishing were identified, counted and removed from each transect daily and then compared to numbers of dead fish collected during the subsequent rotenone application. Electrofishing effectiveness was highly variable among transects. Single-pass electrofishing caught an average of 23% (95% CI=5 to 40%) of the fish present, and three-pass electrofishing on consecutive days caught on average 55% (95% CI=28 to 83%) of the fish in each transect. Native Arizona fishes were more susceptible to electrofishing (77 % captured) than non-native species (54% captured), though native fish were rare. Transects in Bonita Creek averaged 3.6±1.5 m wide and 0.25±0.20 m deep (max depth 1.2 m). Bonita Creek is a small first-order stream which exhibits ideal conditions for backpack electrofishing, yet we captured a relatively small percentage of the fish present. This suggests that complete removal of non-native warm-water fishes using backpack electrofishing is not likely to be successful, especially in larger more complex streams.

Journal of the Arizona-Nevada Academy of Science↗

USGS2015

Could high salinity be used to control bullfrogs in small ponds?

We examined survival of bullfrog ( Rana catesbeiana ) eggs and tadpoles at 3 ppt and 6 ppt salinity in the laboratory to determine if low-level salinity could be used to eradicate bullfrogs from small ponds that contain native fishes. Bullfrog eggs and tadpoles <10 days old experienced 100% mortality when held at 6 ppt salinity for 10 days. Bullfrog tadpoles 10–15 days old experienced significantly reduced survival when exposed to salinity of 6 ppt for 10 days. Older bullfrog tadpoles (>9 months old) appeared unaffected by 14 days of 6 ppt salinity. Salinity of 3 ppt did not impact survival of bullfrog tadpole eggs or tadpoles at any of the life stages we tested. Adding salt to ponds in the early spring to increase salinity to 6 ppt may be a cost effective way to eradicate bullfrogs from small ponds without harming native fishes.

Journal of the Arizona-Nevada Academy of Science↗

USGS2013

Behaviors of southwestern native fishes in response to introduced catfish predators

Native fishes reared in hatcheries typically suffer high predation mortality when stocked into natural environments. We evaluated the behavior of juvenile bonytail Gila elegans, roundtail chub Gila robusta, razorback sucker Xyrauchen texanus, and Sonora sucker Catostomus insignis in response to introduced channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus and flathead catfish Pylodictis olivaris. Our laboratory tests indicate these species did not inherently recognize catfish as a threat, but they can quickly (within 12 h) change their behavior in response to a novel predator paired with the sight and scent of a dead conspecific. Chubs appear to avoid predation by swimming away from the threat, whereas suckers reduced movement. Effects of antipredator conditioning on survival of fish reared in hatcheries is unknown; however, our results suggest some native fish can be conditioned to recognize introduced predators, which could increase poststocking survival.

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management↗

USGS2013

An evaluation of liquid ammonia (ammonium hydroxide) as a candidate piscicide

Eradication of populations of nonnative aquatic species for the purpose of reintroducing native fish is often difficult because very few effective tools are available for removing aquatic organisms. This creates the need to evaluate new chemicals that could be used as management tools for native fish conservation. Ammonia is a natural product of fish metabolism and is naturally present in the environment at low levels, yet is known to be toxic to most aquatic species. Our objective was to determine the feasibility of using liquid ammonia as a fisheries management tool by evaluating its effectiveness at killing undesirable aquatic species and its persistence in a pond environment. A suite of invasive aquatic species commonly found in the southwestern USA were introduced into two experimental outdoor ponds located at the Rocky Mountain Research Station in Flagstaff, Arizona. Each pond was treated with ammonium hydroxide (29%) at 38 ppm. This target concentration was chosen because previous studies using anhydrous ammonia reported incomplete fish kills in ponds at concentrations less than 30 ppm. Water quality was monitored for 49 d to determine how quickly the natural bacteria in the environment converted the ammonia to nitrate. Ammonia levels remained above 8 ppm for 24 and 18 d, respectively, in ponds 1 and 2. Nitrite levels in each pond began to rise approximately 14 d after dosing with ammonia and stayed above 5 ppm for an additional 21 d in pond 1 and 18 d in pond 2. After 49 d all water in both ponds was drained and no fish, crayfish, or tadpoles were found to have survived the treatment, but aquatic turtles remained alive and appeared unaffected. Liquid ammonia appears to be an effective tool for removing many problematic invasive aquatic species and may warrant further investigation as a piscicide.

North American Journal of Fisheries Management↗

USGS2013

Standardized methods for Grand Canyon fisheries research 2015

This document presents protocols and guidelines to persons sampling fishes in the Grand Canyon, to help ensure consistency in fish handling, fish tagging, and data collection among different projects and organizations. Most such research and monitoring projects are conducted under the general umbrella of the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program and include studies by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), National Park Service (NPS), the Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD), various universities, and private contractors. This document is intended to provide guidance to fieldworkers regarding protocols that may vary from year to year depending on specific projects and objectives. We also provide herein documentation of standard methods used in the Grand Canyon that can be cited in scientific publications, as well as a summary of changes in protocols since the document was first created in 2002.

Grand Canyon↗

USGS2012

Relationship between fish size and upper thermal tolerance

Using critical thermal maximum (CTMax) tests, we examined the relationship between upper temperature tolerances and fish size (fry-adult or subadult lengths) of rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss (41-200-mm TL), Apache trout O. gilae apache (40-220-mm TL), largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides (72-266-mm TL), Nile tilapia Oreochromis niloticus (35-206-mm TL), channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus (62-264 mm-TL), and Rio Grande cutthroat trout O. clarkii virginalis (36-181-mm TL). Rainbow trout and Apache trout were acclimated at 18°C, Rio Grande cutthroat trout were acclimated at 14°C, and Nile tilapia, largemouth bass, and channel catfish were acclimated at 25°C, all for 14 d. Critical thermal maximum temperatures were estimated and data were analyzed using simple linear regression. There was no significant relationship (P > 0.05) between thermal tolerance and length for Nile tilapia (P = 0.33), channel catfish (P = 0.55), rainbow trout (P = 0.76), or largemouth bass (P = 0.93) for the length ranges we tested. There was a significant negative relationship between thermal tolerance and length for Rio Grande cutthroat trout (R 2 = 0.412, P < 0.001) and Apache trout (R 2 = 0.1374, P = 0.028); however, the difference was less than 1°C across all lengths of Apache trout tested and about 1.3°C across all lengths of Rio Grande cutthroat trout tested. Because there was either no or at most a slight relationship between upper thermal tolerance and size, management and research decisions based on upper thermal tolerance should be similar for the range of sizes within each species we tested. However, the different sizes we tested only encompassed life stages ranging from fry to adult/subadult, so thermal tolerance of eggs, alevins, and larger adults should also be considered before making management decisions affecting an entire species.

Transactions of the American Fisheries Society↗

USGS2012

Salinity of the Little Colorado River in Grand Canyon confers anti-parasitic properties on a native fish

Water in the Little Colorado River within Grand Canyon is naturally high in salt (NaCl), which is known to prohibit development of external fish parasites such as Ich ( Ichthyophthirius multifiliis ). The naturally high salinity (>0.3%) of the Little Colorado River at baseflow may be one factor allowing survival and persistence of larval and juvenile humpback chub ( Gila cypha ) and other native fishes in Grand Canyon. We compared salinity readings from the Little Colorado River to those reported in the literature as being effective at removing protozoan parasites from fish. In laboratory tests, 10 juvenile roundtail chub ( Gila robusta ; 61–90 mm TL) were randomly placed into each of 12, 37-L aquaria filled with freshwater, water obtained from the Little Colorado River (0.3% salinity), or freshwater with table salt added until the salinity reached 0.3%. Roundtail chub was used as a surrogate for humpback chub in this study because the species is not listed as endangered but is morphologically and ecologically similar to humpback chub. All roundtail chub infected with Ich recovered and survived when placed in water from the Little Colorado River or water with 0.3% salinity, but all experimental fish placed in freshwater died because of Ich infection. The naturally high salinity of the Little Colorado River at baseflow (0.22%–0.36%), appears sufficiently high to interrupt the life cycle of Ich and may allow increased survival of larval and juvenile humpback chub relative to other areas within Grand Canyon.

Arizona↗