1991
DOI: 10.1080/02705060.1991.9665317
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Diet Selectivity in the Johnny Darter,Etheostoma Nigrum, in Stinking Fork, Indiana

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
7
0

Year Published

1993
1993
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
1
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Because stomach contents were only identified to family, estimates of diet breadth were likely severely underestimated. Prey items identified were consistent with those reported in other studies of darters (Baker 2002, Carney and Burr 1989, Fisher 1990, Johnson and Hatch 1991, Knight and Ross 1994, Rohde and Ross 1987, Strange 1991. Finally, the frequency of empty stomachs for E. chermocki (7.4%) corresponded well with a global average of empty stomachs for diurnal invertivores (10.5 k 1.4 [mean + 1 SE]) (Arrington et al 2002).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 82%
“…Because stomach contents were only identified to family, estimates of diet breadth were likely severely underestimated. Prey items identified were consistent with those reported in other studies of darters (Baker 2002, Carney and Burr 1989, Fisher 1990, Johnson and Hatch 1991, Knight and Ross 1994, Rohde and Ross 1987, Strange 1991. Finally, the frequency of empty stomachs for E. chermocki (7.4%) corresponded well with a global average of empty stomachs for diurnal invertivores (10.5 k 1.4 [mean + 1 SE]) (Arrington et al 2002).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 82%
“…It is well documented that chironomids are very important to darter diets (Wehnes 1973;Schlosser and Toth 1984;Strange 1997). Meanwhile, darters are typically classified as opportunists feeding on an array of benthic invertebrates (Hlohowskyj and White 1983;Strange 1991;Strange 1993), because relative abundances of prey in the diets usually reflect those prey Although darters selected other non-chironomid taxa, like Isonychia sp., simuliids, and ceratopogonids, they fed opportunistically on the most abundantly available prey (i.e., the Chironomidae), causing PS values to be relatively high (near and above 0.60). Phillips and Kilambi (1996) found that Etheostoma spectabile fed exclusively on the family Chironomidae (r i = 99%) and exhibited active selection for chironomids when comparing their availability in the environment (Ivlev's Electivity Index [IE] = 0.03, where values near 0 represent active selection; values near 1.0 represent opportunists).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…As the latter are expected to occupy a higher trophic level, one would normally expect the δ 15 N of darter tissues to be lower as compared to larger fish species. Previous studies have shown both greenside and johnny darters to incorporate similar prey, such as midgefly larvae and chironomids in their diet [ 34 37 ]. So rather than dietary variation, the convergence of δ 15 N darter and trout/bass values may instead suggest a genuine deviation from the expected 3.4‰ trophic fractionation value proposed by Post [ 9 ], although this difference is nonetheless comparatively minor.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As mentioned previously, mussels are omnivorous and their food sources vary depending on their habitat, which likely results in correspondingly strong variations in the δ 13 C of food sources [ 37 ]. For example, mussels may filter-feed on zooplankton and phytoplankton from the open water column in streams, interstitially from the sediment, or pedal feed on bulk fractions of organic matter in sediment [ 21 , 34 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%