Evaluating Laboratory-Derived Thermal Criteria in the Field: An Example Involving Bonneville Cutthroat Trout

Effects of biotic and abiotic factors on the distribution of trout and salmon along a longitudinal stream gradient

“…In the Logan River, however, it is unlikely that the replacement of cutthroat trout in some reaches and tributaries by brown trout can be attributed to temperature alone, as the maximum daily average summer temperature in the Logan River is well below their upper thermal tolerance limit (24.2°C; . In addition to these experimental results, field studies indicated that Bonneville cutthroat trout in a Wyoming stream neither moved nor experienced mortality in spite of water temperatures as high as 27°C (Schrank et al 2003). Thus we suspect that higher temperatures at low-elevation sections of the Logan River, relative to high and middle sections, are not a limiting factor for the distribution of the native cutthroat trout population in this system.…”

“…Models which attempt to understand this distribution, when physical barriers are missing, include explanations of restricted upstream movement based on physical limitations (Moyle and Light 1996) and those based on some combination of species interactions and environmental variables (Dunson & Travis 1991). Limitations in the distribution of salmonid populations as a result of thermal constraints have been firmly established (Keleher & Rahel 1996, Dickerson & Vinyard 1999, Schrank et al 2003, and competition is a key biotic factor influencing the distribution of salmonids in such streams (Fausch 1988, Nakano 1995. Differences in abiotic factors (e.g., temperature) along an altitudinal gradient thus may regulate these types of biotic interactions, where the interaction is then expressed in the form of competition mediated by an abiotic variable (De Sato & Rahel 1994, Taniguchi et al 1998.…”

Distribution and movement of domestic rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss, during pulsed flows in the South Fork American River, California

“…Radio-tracking studies of rainbow trout, brown trout, bulltrout (Salvelinus confluentus), and cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki) under natural flow regimes are consistent in their findings that individual trout tend to remain in a small home area, generally <1 km, during non-spawning periods (Clapp et al 1990;Young 1996Young , 1998Knouft and Spotila 2002;Ovidio et al 2002;Schrank et al 2003;Aarestrup et al 2005;Popoff and Neumann 2005;Hojesjo et al 2007), but that they may move longer distances (e.g., 3-63 km) during migrations to spawning habitat (Bailey et al 1978;Meyers et al 1992;Brown and Mackay 1995;Swanberg 1997;Ovidio et al 1998;Burrell et al 2000;Hilderbrand and Kershner 2000;Meka et al 2003;Arnekleiv and Roenning 2004;Bahr and Shrimpton 2004;Bettinger and Bettoli 2004;Muhlfeld and Marotz 2005;Venman and Dedual 2005). In the South Fork American River rainbow trout would be expected to spawn in spring, as high winter flows recede.…”

Fulton's body condition factor K correlates with survival time in a thermal challenge experiment in juvenile Lahontan cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki henshawi)

“…The data available on temperature tolerance in cutthroat trout subspecies show that cutthroat trout can tolerate high temperatures if exposure is not chronic (Schrank et al, 2003;Meeuwig et al, 2004). Bonneville cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii utah) tracked during the summer months did not emigrate from warm stream reaches or experience higher mortality rates, despite the presence of maximum daily water temperatures as high as 27 1C (Schrank et al, 2003).…”