Geology ReportsSearch

Geology topics

Steven R. Hogler

Publications and source records attributed to Steven R. Hogler.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Mark-recapture models accurately predict growth trajectories of known-age Muskellunge in Green Bay, Lake Michigan

Length-at-age data are commonly used to describe growth of fish, and obtaining these data typically involves estimating ages from calcified structures (e.g., fin spines or rays, otoliths, or cleithra). Verifying the accuracy of age and growth estimates for long-lived fish is often difficult because known-age fish are not available for all ages in a population. Mark–recapture methods offer nonlethal alternatives for estimating growth of fish that do not require age data. However, few studies have compared growth trajectories estimated from mark–recapture data with trajectories estimated using the standard von Bertalanffy growth function (VBGF) incorporating length-at-age data from known-age fish. We used a robust data set of Muskellunge Esox masquinongy sampled from Green Bay, Lake Michigan, during 1990–2018 to compare growth trajectories estimated from three mark–recapture models and a VBGF fitted to length-at-age data from known-age individuals. Growth trajectories estimated with mark–recapture models were similar to trajectories estimated with a VBGF using known-age fish. Our results suggest that using recapture of tagged fish provides a viable alternative for describing Muskellunge growth trajectories compared with using ages estimated from calcified structures, where incorrect age estimates represent an additional source of error.

Wisconsin

Stock structure, dynamics, demographics, and movements of walleyes spawning in four tributaries to Green Bay

To test assumptions related to the current conceptual model for walleye Sander vitreus management in Green Bay, we evaluated whether: 1) spawning aggregations in the Fox, Menominee, Oconto, and Peshtigo rivers represent genetically distinct stocks; 2) population dynamics and demographics vary among walleye spawning at these locations; 3) walleye spawning in these rivers contribute to the fishery in northern Green Bay, and 4) walleye spawning in these rivers exhibit spawning site fidelity or if they stray among rivers. Genetic differentiation among the four tributaries was low and sex-specific total length (TL), mean TL at age 5, and age-class diversity were generally similar among rivers and observed differences were not consistent. Movements of walleye inferred from angler tag returns suggest that walleye spawning (and tagged) in the four tributaries typically remain within southern Green Bay; however, this assertion may be confounded by the distribution of angling effort that provides tag recoveries. Straying rates among rivers ranged from 0 to 23% and were likely sufficient to preclude genetic differentiation among stocks. Collectively, results suggest that walleye spawning in the Fox, Menominee, Oconto, and Peshtigo rivers do not function as separate stocks and do not significantly contribute to the fishery outside of southern Green Bay. The primary assumption of the current conceptual model that remains to be tested is whether the walleye fishery in southern Green Bay is supported primarily by fish spawning in these four rivers, or if there are substantial contributions from fish spawning at other unknown locations.

Wisconsin