A New Approach for Measuring Cover in Fish Habitat Studies

Kinsolving, Alan; Bain, Mark B.

doi:10.1080/02705060.1990.9665250

Cited by 17 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…At each sampling point, nine semi-quantitative and seven quantitative environmental variables were measured: distance from the bank (in m), water depth, slope of bank (depth divided by the distance from the bank), percentage of clay (< 0.05 µm), % silt (< 0.06 cm), % sand (0.06-0.2 cm), % gravel (0.2-6.3 cm) and % pebbles (6.4-25 cm), marne (>25 cm; also known as 'dalle', this is form of hard clay that resembles formed cement), % of roots, number of ligneous structures (see Kinsolving and Bain, 1990), number of overhanging bushes and trees, macrophytes, oxygen concentration, water velocity and water temperature. The distance from the bank and water depth were measured with a graduated dip-net pole.…”

Section: Study Site Materials and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-scale analysis of habitat use during late summer for 0+ fishes in the River Garonne (France)

Gozlan

Mastrorillo²,

Dauba³

et al. 1998

Aquat. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Relationships between environmental variables and 0+fish in the upper River Garonne (France) were studied at different habitat scales during late August 1995. In total, 3911 0+ fish representing 21 species were sampled using point abundance sampling by electrofishing. Fish reproductive function of floodplain channels was evaluated using principal components analysis of 0+ fish distributions (in absence/presence), with distinction of the three main channel types (flowing, partially abandoned and abandoned channels). A descriptive model of microhabitat use and microhabitat profiles of 0+ fish was developed for the more frequently encountered species using canonical correspondence analysis and an electivity index combined with chi-square analysis. Water velocity, water depth and distance from the bank were the most important microhabitat variables, followed by bank gradient and bottom composition. Partially-abandoned channels provide conditions particularly suitable to 0+ fish, with submerged vegetation in these sidechannels serving many of the fishes as refuge and feeding areas. Similarities in microhabitat use were found with respect to 0+ juvenile fish in the Danube flood plain (Slovakia/Hungary), the upper River Rhône (France) and the River Great Ouse catchment (England).

show abstract

Section: Study Site Materials and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-scale analysis of habitat use during late summer for 0+ fishes in the River Garonne (France)

Gozlan

Mastrorillo²,

Dauba³

et al. 1998

Aquat. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Water transparency was measured in cm using a small Secci-type disk (a 6 cmdiameter, weighted, white jar top attached to a centimetre-graduated nylon rope). Ligneous structures (branches, logs, trunks, roots) within the sample area were counted in a manner similar to that described by Kinsolving & Bain (1990) but on a scale of 1-10, with all values over 10 attributed a value of 10. Submerged, floating and emergent macrophytes were measured to the species level as a percentage of the area sampled at the point (i.e.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hierarchical analysis of habitat use by 0+ juvenile fish in Hungarian/Slovak flood plain of the Danube River

et al. 1994

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SynopsisTo address the lack of information on the distribution and habitat use of (k juvenile fishes in the Hungarian1 Slovak flood plain of the middle Danube River, we undertook the first cross-border ichthyological investigation, examining three levels of ecological perception (hydrosystem, macrohabitat, microhabitat) during August 1992 using 'Point Abundance Sampling' by electrofishing. Being that the GabEikovo hydroscheme was about to begin diverting most of the river's discharge away from the flood plain during the winter of 1992, the present investigation represented the last chance to record the distribution and microhabitat use of 0-t fishes within the flood plain. At each sampling point, numerous environmental variables were measured quantitatively, or as percentages. At the hydrosystem level, 25 species of (k fishes were captured in the 1170 point samples collected from 52 sites (27 in Hungary, 25 in Slovakia), ranging from 10 to over 200 mm standard length (i.e. pike Esox lucius). No significant differences were found between the Hungarian and Slovak specimens with respect to standard length (ANOVA, p > 0.31), nor in the relative densities (ind.m-2) of (k fish (Student's t-test: df 24, t = 0.601, p = 0.553). A typology of macrohabitats using principal components analysis of the sites X species data matrix in absencelpresence revealed three groupings of sites: (1) lotic channels, weirs and wing-dams; (2) partially-abandoned channels; (3) abandoned channels; the results corroborated our assumption that weirs of the anabranch systems represent a quasi-lotic refuge for rheophilous 0-1-fishes of the flood plain during late summer. At the microhabitat level, an empirical model of microhabitat use was generated using canonical correspondence analysis and association analysis (based on chi-square probabilities). Water velocity was the most influential variable, with the O+ juveniles ordinated along the first canonical axis according to their increasing rheophily. The second most influential microhabitat variable was water transparency, followed by the percentage abundance of macrophytes and substrate composition.

show abstract

“…More recently, an effort has been made to produce more objective measurement methods and distributions of data compatible with other hydraulic variables (i.e. continuous variables) used in traditional models (KINSOLVING and BAIN, 1990). By counting the surfaces of submerged objects in a vertical plane, these authors quantified three cover parameters as follows: cover density (non-zero planes), complexity (mean number of surfaces counted) and heterogeneity (variance in surface counts).…”

Section: Cover Assessment Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nature and Functions of Cover for Riverine Fish.

Allouche¹

2002

Bull. Fr. Pêche Piscic.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review attempts to assess the nature and the role of cover for riverine fish assemblages. Although early identified as a key factor for fish distribution, especially for salmonids, cover (i.e. woody debris, undercut banks, boulders, turbidity...) still remains the variable least considered in the studies of fish habitat relationships. This is mainly due to the diversity of ecological functions of cover structures in fish assemblages. Cover structures are structuring components of fish habitat and contribute to the biological productivity of streams. But, at the individual scale, cover fulfils three main functions: protection against predators, visual isolation reducing competition, and hydraulic shelter. In fact, the use of cover by fish results from a trade-off between the costs and the benefits associated with its use. Although the relationships between fish and cover appear extremely complex and context-specific, a growing body of evidence highlights the potential role of cover for management purposes.Key-words : cover, shelter, riverine fish, fish habitat. NATURE ET FONCTIONS DU COUVERT POUR LES POISSONS LOTIQUES. RÉSUMÉCet article décrit la typologie ainsi que les fonctions du couvert pour les poissons lotiques. Identifié très tôt comme un facteur explicatif de la distribution des poissons, principalement chez les salmonidés, le couvert (i.e. débris ligneux, sous-berges, blocs, turbidité...) demeure néanmoins la variable la moins considérée dans l'étude des relations habitat-poissons. Ceci s'explique notamment par les fonctions écologiques très diverses que le couvert remplit vis-à-vis des assemblages piscicoles. Les structures pourvoyeuses de couvert sont des agents structurants de l'habitat piscicole et contribuent à la productivité biologique des cours d'eau. Au niveau du microhabitat du poisson, le couvert remplit trois fonctions majeures : anti-prédation, isolation visuelle limitant la compétition, et abri hydraulique. En fait, l'utilisation du couvert par les poissons résulte d'un compromis entre les coûts et les bénéfices associés d'où l'extrême complexité de cette relation qui semble plutôt spécifique à un contexte donné. Malgré les difficultés d'extrapolation, de nombreux travaux mettent en évidence la signification écologique ainsi que l'utilisation potentielle du couvert pour une gestion optimale des ressources piscicoles.Mots-clés : couvert, abri, poissons lotiques, habitat piscicole.

show abstract

A New Approach for Measuring Cover in Fish Habitat Studies

Cited by 17 publications

References 16 publications

Multi-scale analysis of habitat use during late summer for 0+ fishes in the River Garonne (France)

Multi-scale analysis of habitat use during late summer for 0+ fishes in the River Garonne (France)

Hierarchical analysis of habitat use by 0+ juvenile fish in Hungarian/Slovak flood plain of the Danube River

Nature and Functions of Cover for Riverine Fish.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About