Geospatial modeling of the Birch River: Distribution of Carmine Shiner (Notropis percobromus) in Geomorphic Response Units (GRU)

Abstract

Carmine Shiner (Notropis percobromus) is a threatened cyprinid with a limited distribution in Canada occurring only in a few tributaries in the Winnipeg River watershed in southern Manitoba. The Geomorphic Response Unit (GRU) method was used to identify potential critical habitat of Carmine Shiner. The GRU method is a promising geospatial modeling technique that allows the identification of river reaches that exhibit similar geomorphic structure and provides a link between the hydrological regime and species habitat preference. Carmine Shiner catch data from June and July 2011, Geographic Information System (GIS), and multivariate‐derived GRUs were used to characterize possible Carmine Shiner spawning sites in the Birch River. Results indicate that immature Carmine Shiner (58%) prefer geomorphically variable reaches while mature Carmine Shiner (50%) prefer low‐sinuosity reaches punctuated by increases in slope. Identifying spatial patterns in the distribution of Carmine Shiner during spawning has the potential to increase understanding of habitat requirements and can aid in management efforts for this threatened species.

Using a Geospatial Model to Relate Fluvial Geomorphology to Macroinvertebrate Habitat in a Prairie River—Part 2: Matching Family-Level Indices to Geomorphological Response Units (GRUs)

“…The study succeeded in showing that instream habitats can be pinpointed and related to the GRUs, but the GRUs proved to be too large to capture the high variability of the macroinvertebrate community. The GRU model has worked well in relation to more mobile fish species [11][12][13], but GRUs may be too coarse a resolution for the more sessile macroinvertebrate population. Part 1 of the series focused on the typology scale, which seemed to be a better fit for macroinvertebrates [17].…”

Geospatial Modeling of River Systems

“…It is possible that reduced flows have some influence on fish distributions necessitating the use of refugia that may or may not reflect typical habitat preferences [90]. If the geomorphological features are delineated after the construction of barriers or other dramatic changes in connectivity we can expect a geospatial model to account for any changes to channel pattern and related habitat features that may result.…”

Assessment of connectivity in a water‐stressed wetland (Kaabar Tal) of Kosi‐Gandak interfan, north Bihar Plains, India

“…Their model demarcated HRUs on the basis of physiographic features. Ecological studies have also used the response unit concept, termed Geomorphic Response Unit (GRU) (Lindenschmidt and Long, ; Carr et al , ; Carr et al , ) ‘to identify river reaches exhibiting similar hydrological and geomorphological processes and provides a link between the hydrological regime and habitats of fish species’ (Carr et al , , pp. 130).…”