Use of oviduct-inserted acoustic transmitters and positional telemetry to estimate timing and location of spawning: a feasibility study in lake trout, Salvelinus namaycush

Animal Biotelemetry

Thomas R Binder³  Christopher M Holbrook¹  Scott M Miehls¹  Henry T Thompson¹  Charles C Krueger² 

[1] United States Geological Survey, Hammond Bay Biological Station, 11188 Ray Rd, Millersburg, MI 49759, USA

[2] Center for Systems Integration and Sustainability, Michigan State University, 1405 South Harrison Road, 115 Manly Miles Building, East Lansing, MI 48823, USA

[3] Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, Hammond Bay Biological Station, 11188 Ray Rd, Millersburg, MI 49759, USA

关键词: Detection probability;    Transmitter retention;    Spawning behavior;    Gymnovarian;    Changepoint analysis;    Acoustic telemetry;   

Others  :  1082150
DOI  :  10.1186/2050-3385-2-14

 received in 2014-05-29, accepted in 2014-08-11,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Oviduct-inserted transmitters have shown promise for determining precise location of spawning in fishes. Use of traditional manual tracking to locate expelled oviduct transmitters is laborious and accurate estimates of time of transmitter expulsion require frequent surveys. We tested the feasibility of using oviduct-inserted transmitters with positional telemetry to estimate time and location of spawning in lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush). Three assumptions were tested: (1) oviduct transmitters remain within fish until spawning, (2) oviduct transmitters are expelled with the eggs during spawning, and (3) time and location of oviduct transmitter expulsion can be accurately determined.

Results

In the laboratory, 39 of 44 (89%) lake trout retained an oviduct transmitter until end of the spawning period and all premature transmitter expulsions occurred before maturation. Natural spawning in the laboratory was not feasible; however, of 35 ripe trout that retained transmitters, 31 (89%) expelled their transmitter with eggs when subjected to manual stripping. Ability to position transmitters with a telemetry array at known spawning sites in Lake Huron (North America) was poor when oviduct transmitters were placed in the substrate compared to transmitters suspended 1 m above substrate - 78% of transmitters in substrate could not be positioned. However, in simulations, time and location of spawning were determined with reasonable accuracy by double-tagging trout with one transmitter that is expelled with the eggs during spawning while another transmitter remains in the fish. Accuracy of estimated time and location of transmitter spatial separation varied with distance traveled from spawning site and swimming speed, and was dependent on transmission delay.

Conclusions

Our results satisfied the three assumptions of oviduct tagging and suggested that oviduct transmitters can be used with positional telemetry to estimate time and location of spawning in lake trout and other species. In situations where oviduct transmitters may be difficult to position once expelled into substrate, pairing oviduct transmitters with a normal-sized fish transmitter that remains in the fish is recommended, with spawning inferred when the two tags separate in space. Optimal transmitter delay will depend on expected degree of spawning site residency and swim speed.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Binder et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Mills EL, Leach JH, Carlton JT, Secor CL: Exotic species and the integrity of the Great Lakes. Bioscience 1994, 44:666-676.
• [2]Vitousek PM, D’Antonio CM, Loope LL, Rejmánek M, Westbrooks R: Introduced species: a significant component of human-caused global change. New Zeal J Ecol 1997, 21:1-16.
• [3]Hermoso V, Clavero M, Blanco-Garrido F, Prenda J: Invasive species and habitat degradation in Iberian streams: an analysis of their role in freshwater fish diversity loss. Ecol Appl 2011, 21:175-188.
• [4]Eby LA, Crowder LB, McClellen CM, Peterson CH, Powers MJ: Habitat degradation from intermittent hypoxia: impacts on demersal fishes. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 2005, 291:249-261.
• [5]Casatti L, Langeani F, Ferreira CP: Effects of physical habitat degradation on the stream fish assemblage structure in a pasture region. Environ Manage 2006, 38:974-982.
• [6]Wilson SK, Fisher R, Pratchett MS, Graham NAJ, Dulvy NK, Turner RA, Cakacaka A, Polunin NVC, Rushton SP: Exploitation and habitat degradation as agents of change within coral reef fish communities. Glob Change Biol 2008, 14:2796-2809.
• [7]Roessig JM, Woodley CM, Cech JJ Jr, Hansen LJ: Effects of global climate change on marine and estuarine fishes and fisheries. Rev Fish Biol Fisher 2004, 14:251-275.
• [8]Ficke AD, Myrick CA, Hansen LJ: Potential impacts of global climate change on freshwater fisheries. Rev Fish Biol Fisher 2007, 17:581-613.
• [9]Farrell AP, Hinch SG, Cooke SJ, Patterson DA, Crossin GT, Lapointe M, Mathes MT: Pacific salmon in hot water: applying aerobic scope models and biotelemetry to predict the success of spawning migrations. Physiol Biochem Zool 2008, 81:697-709.
• [10]Goodyear CS, Edsall TA, Ormsby Dempsey DM, Moss GD, Polanski PE: Atlas of the spawning and nursery areas of Great Lakes fishes, Volume 5. Washington, DC: Lake Huron. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 1982. FWS/OBS-82/52
• [11]Eiler JH, Nelson BD, Bradshaw RF: Riverine spawning by sockeye salmon in the Taku River, Alaska and British Columbia. Trans Amer Fish Soc 1992, 121:701-708.
• [12]Bégout Anras ML, Cooley PM, Bodaly RA, Anras L, Fudge RJP: Movement and habitat use by whitefish during spawning in a Boreal lake: integrating acoustic telemetry and geographic information systems. Trans Amer Fish Soc 1999, 128:939-952.
• [13]Flavelle LS, Ridgway MS, Middel TA, McKinley RS: Integration of acoustic telemetry and GIS to identify potential spawning areas for lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush). Hydrobiologia 2002, 483:137-146.
• [14]Espinoza M, Farrugia TJ, Webber DM, Smith F, Lowe CG: Testing a new acoustic telemetry technique to quantify long-term, fine-scale movements of aquatic organisms. Fish Res 2011, 108:364-371.
• [15]Biesinger Z, Bolker BM, Marcinek D, Grothues TM, Dobarro JA, Lindberg WJ: Testing autonomous acoustic telemetry positioning system for fine-scale space use in marine animals. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 2013, 448:46-56.
• [16]Pierce RB: Oviduct insertion of radio transmitters as a means of locating northern pike spawning habitat. N Am J Fish Manage 2004, 24:244-248.
• [17]Pierce RB, Younk JA, Tomcko CM: Expulsion of miniature radio transmitters along with eggs of muskellunge and northern pike - a new method for locating critical spawning habitat. Environ Biol Fish 2007, 79:99-109.
• [18]Skovrind M, Christensen EAF, Carl H, Jacobsen L, Møller PR: Marine spawning sites of perch Perca fluviatilis revealed by oviduct-inserted acoustic transmitters. Aquat Biol 2013, 19:201-206.
• [19]Andrews KS, Tolimieri N, Williams GD, Samhouri JF, Harvey CJ, Levin PS: Comparison of fine-scale acoustic monitoring systems using home range size in demersal fish. Mar Biol 2011, 158:2377-2387.
• [20]Hansen MJ: Lake trout in the Great Lakes: Basinwide stock collapse and binational restoration. In Great Lakes fisheries policy and management: a binational perspective. Edited by Taylor WW, Ferreri CP. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press; 1999:417-454.
• [21]Muir AM, Krueger CC, Hansen MJ: Re-establishing lake trout in the Laurentian Great Lakes: past, present, and future. In Great Lakes fisheries policy and management: a binational perspective. 2nd edition. Edited by Taylor WW, Lynch AJ, Leonard NJ. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press; 2013:533-588.
• [22]Ruzycki JR, Beauchamp DA, Yule DL: Effects of introduced lake trout on native cutthroat trout in Yellowstone Lake. Ecol Appl 2003, 13:23-37.
• [23]Koel TM, Bigelow PE, Doepke PD, Ertel BD, Mahony DL: Nonnative lake trout results in Yellowstone cutthroat decline and impacts to bears and anglers. Fisheries 2005, 30:10-19.
• [24]Martinez PJ, Bigelow PE, Deleray MA, Fredenberg WA, Hansen BS, Horner NJ, Lehr SK, Schneidervin RW, Tolentino SA, Viola AE: Western lake trout woes. Fisheries 2009, 34:424-442.
• [25]Marsden JE, Casselman JM, Edsall TA, Elliott RF, Fitzsimons JD, Horn WH, Manny BA, McAughey SC, Sly PG, Swanson BL: Lake trout spawning habitat in the Great Lakes - a review of current knowledge. J Great Lakes Res 1995, 21(Suppl 1):487-497.
• [26]Muir AM, Blackie CT, Marsden JE, Krueger CC: Lake charr Salvelinus namaycush spawning behaviour: new field observations and a review of current knowledge. Rev Fish Biol Fisher 2012, 22:575-593.
• [27]Henderson NE: The urinary and genital systems of trout. J Fish Res Board Can 1967, 24:447-449.
• [28]Ganguly S: Reproductive biology in fishes and its diversified physiological mechanisms. Int J Sci Env Tech 2013, 2:401-403.
• [29]Killick R, Eckley I: changepoint: an R package for changepoint analysis. R package version1.1.1; 2014. [http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=changepoint webcite]
• [30]Crossin GT, Cooke SJ, Goldbogen JA, Phillips RA: Tracking fitness in marine vertebrates: a review of current knowledge and opportunities for future research. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 2014, 496:1-17.
• [31]Chisholm IM, Hubert WA: Expulsion of dummy transmitters by rainbow trout. Trans Amer Fish Soc 1985, 114:766-767.
• [32]Marty GD, Summerfelt RC: Pathways and mechanisms for expulsion of surgically implanted dummy transmitters from channel catfish. Trans Amer Fish Soc 1986, 115:577-589.
• [33]Esteve M, McLennan DA, Gunn J: Lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush) spawning behaviour: the evolution of a new female strategy. Environ Biol Fish 2008, 83:69-76.
• [34]Binder TR, Thompson HT, Muir AM, Riley SC, Marsden JE, Bronte CR, Krueger CC: New insight into the spawning behavior of lake trout, Salvelinus namaycush, from a recovering population in the Laurentian Great Lakes. Environ Biol Fish 2014. doi:10.1007/s10641-014-0247-6
• [35]Peake S, McKinley RS, Beddow TA, Marmulla G: New procedure for radio transmitter attachment: oviduct insertion. N Amer J Fish Manage 1997, 17:757-762.
• [36]Simpfendorfer CA, Heupel MR, Collins AB: Variation in the performance of acoustic receivers and its implication for positioning algorithms in a riverine setting. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 2008, 65:482-492.
• [37]Welsh JQ, Fox RJ, Webber DM, Bellwood DR: Performance of remote acoustic receivers within a coral reef habitat: implications for array design. Coral Reefs 2012, 31:693-702.
• [38]Heupel MR, Semmens JM, Hobday AJ: Automated acoustic tracking of aquatic animals: scales, design, and deployment of listening station arrays. Mar Freshwater Res 2006, 57:1-13.
• [39]Clements S, Jepsen D, Karnowski M, Schreck CB: Optimization of an acoustic telemetry array for detecting transmitter-implanted fish. N Amer J Fish Manage 2005, 25:429-436.
• [40]Zamora JCL, García-Berthou E: Preliminary telemetry data on the movement patterns and habitat use of European catfish (Silurus glanis) in a reservoir of the River Ebro, Spain. Ecol Freshwater Fish 2007, 16:450-456.
• [41]Voegeli FA, Lacroix GL, Anderson JM: Development of miniature pingers for tracking Atlantic salmon smolts at sea. Hydrobiologia 1998, 371/372:35-46.
• [42]Smith F: Understanding HPE in the VEMCO positioning system (VPS). Halifax, NS: VEMCO; 2013.
• [43]Codling EA, Plank MJ, Benhamou S: Random walk models in biology. J Roy Soc Interface 2008, 5:813-834.
• [44]Gurarie E, Andrews RD, Laidre KL: A novel method for identifying behavioural changes in animal movement data. Ecol Lett 2009, 12:395-408.
• [45]Madon B, Hingrat Y: Deciphering behavioral changes in animal movement with a “multiple change point algorithm-classification tree” framework. Front Ecol Evol 2014, 2:1-9.