Geology topics

Robert M. Muth

Publications and source records attributed to Robert M. Muth.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2013

Fish biodiversity sampling in stream ecosystems: a process for evaluating the appropriate types and amount of gear

Because human impacts and climate change threaten aquatic ecosystems, a need exists to quantify catchment-scale biodiversity patterns and identify conservation actions that can mitigate adverse human impacts on aquatic biota. Whereas many traditional aquatic resource questions can be answered by repeatedly sampling a few target species with limited types of gear in the same habitats, sampling fish biodiversity patterns at larger scales requires a different approach. Researchers and managers need to determine the types of sampling gear and amount of effort that provide a representative estimate of biodiversity in a range of habitats across a catchment. Using a randomized block design within a 90-m stream reach that contained the same habitats as the scientific study area, fish assemblages were compared using three different types of gear (minnow traps, backpack electrofishing, and hoop nets) at three levels of effort (one, two, and three mixed-gear units) over four replicate days. A mixture of gear types best quantified fish assemblages. A combination of 10 minnow traps, 20-m of backpack electrofishing, and two hoop nets caught the most species. Additional gear added few new species. Resampling confirmed these results. When researchers and managers initiate sampling on a new stream or river system, they do not know how effective each gear type is and whether their sampling effort is adequate. Although the types and amount of gear may be different for other studies, systems, and research questions, the five-step process described here for making sampling decisions and evaluating sampling efficiency can be applied widely to any system to restore, manage, and conserve aquatic ecosystems. It is believed that incorporating this gear-evaluation process into a wide variety of studies and ecosystems will increase rigour within and across aquatic biodiversity studies.

Massachusetts↗

USGS2011

Seasonal use of a New England estuary by foraging contingents of migratory striped bass

Using acoustic telemetry on migratory striped bass Morone saxatilis in Plum Island Estuary (PIE), Massachusetts, we found that striped bass (335–634 mm total length) tagged in the spring and summer of 2005 ( n = 14) and 2006 ( n = 46) stayed in the estuary for an average of 66.0 d in 2005 and 72.2 d in 2006. Striped bass spent the most time in two specific reaches: middle Plum Island Sound and lower Rowley River. In both years, three different use-groups of striped bass were observed in PIE. Short-term visitors ( n = 24) stayed in the estuary only briefly (range = 5–20 d). Two groups of seasonal residents stayed for more than 30 d, either in the Rowley River ( n = 14) or in Plum Island Sound ( n = 22). Within PIE, the two seasonal-resident use-groups may be foraging contingents that learn how to feed efficiently in specific parts of the estuary. These distinct within-estuary use patterns could have different implications for striped bass condition and prey impact.

Massachusetts↗

USGS2010

Diversity in destinations, routes and timing of small adult and sub-adult striped bass Morone saxatilis on their southward autumn migration

Almost three-quarters of the 46 young adult and sub-adult striped bass Morone saxatilis that were acoustically tagged in Plum Island Estuary, Massachusetts, U.S.A., in the summer of 2006 were detected in one or more southern coastal arrays during their autumn migration. On the basis of the trajectories along which these M. saxatilis moved from feeding to overwintering areas, three migratory groups emerged. After leaving Plum Island Estuary, about half of the fish were detected only in a mid-latitude array, Long Island Sound. The other half of the tagged fish were detected during autumn and winter in a more southern array, the Delaware Estuary. This latter group of fish may have used two routes. Some travelled to the Delaware Estuary through Long Island Sound while other fish may have taken a second, more direct, coastal route that did not include Long Island Sound. Consequently, a seemingly homogeneous group of fish tagged at the same time in the same non-natal feeding location exhibited a diversity of southward movement patterns that could affect population-level processes. These three groups that differed in overwintering location and migration route could be movement contingents with migratory connectivity.

Massachusetts↗

USGS2009

Evaluation of a gastric radio tag insertion technique for anadromous river herring

Anadromous river herring (alewives Alosa pseudoharengus and blueback herring A. aestivalis ), which constitute a historically and ecologically important component of coastal rivers, have declined precipitously throughout the Atlantic seaboard. Suggested causes of river herring decline include commercial fishing and predation by striped bass Morone saxatilis . Although the causes of this recent trend are poorly understood, river herring are especially vulnerable to adverse impacts during their spring spawning migration. Radiotelemetry is an especially useful method for addressing potential problems encountered during the movement of these fish from the ocean to freshwater. In spite of frequent calls for evaluation of telemetry methods, controlled tests of posttagging effects are rare for alosids and virtually nonexistent for anadromous river herring. We developed a protocol for gastric tagging of anadromous river herring, and we used hatchery and field studies to evaluate behavior, tag placement, stress response, and posttagging mortality. We also compared tagger effects and quantified posttagging upstream movements of fish in the field. In controlled hatchery trials, no fish died at 10 min, 1 h, or 14 d posttagging. No tags were rejected, and only 1 of 35 tags ruptured the gut. In field cages, mortality, plasma cortisol, glucose, and chloride measured at 24 h were similar between tagged and untagged fish. In the field, 12 of 14 fish moved upriver after tagging and spent 114 h on average at upriver sites. Using a variety of approaches, we found no evidence that our tagging protocol adversely affected river herring in comparison with untagged fish that were subjected only to handling and holding. Our protocol, evaluated by comparing responses of tagged and untagged fish under controlled conditions, may be useful in future studies that seek to understand causes of decline for anadromous river herring.

Massachuetts↗