Laboratory evaluation of two bioenergetics models applied to yellow perch: identification of a major source of systematic error

Bajer, Przemyslaw G.; Whitledge, Gregory W.; Hayward, Robert; Zweifel, Richard D.

doi:10.1046/j.1095-8649.2003.00040.x

Cited by 41 publications

(74 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Sensitivity analyses have demonstrated that for most species, including perch, consumption and respiration parameters are decisive for the model's output (Kitchell et al 1977;Bartell et al 1986;Horppila and Peltonen 1997). In a recent evaluation of bioenergetic models for yellow perch Perca flavescens, Bajer et al (2003) found strong evidence of deficiencies in estimates of the metabolic rate.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Respiration Rates of Eurasian Perch Perca fluviatilis and Ruffe: Lower Energy Costs in Groups

Schleuter¹,

Haertel‐Borer²,

Fischer³

et al. 2007

Trans Am Fish Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.-The effect of group size on the routine metabolic rate and activity of the two shoaling percids, Eurasian perch Perca fluviatilis and ruffe Gymnocephalus cernuus, was studied by using twin-flow intermittent respirometry and time-lapse video techniques. In both species, we found a clear group effect. In isolated fish, oxygen consumption was as much as twice that in groups of eight fish, with intermediate values in groups of four fish. The routine metabolic rate was highest during twilight in both species, irrespective of group size. Eurasian perch consumed more oxygen and were more active during the day than during the night, whereas the oxygen consumption and activity of ruffe were higher during the night than during the day. With increasing group size, the differences between day and night decreased and the diel cycle was less pronounced. Individual fish may benefit from the presence of conspecifics through a calming effect that reduces their energetic costs. We advise that the social behavior of a species be more thoroughly considered when planning behavioral, growth, and respiration experiments. Because bioenergetic model parameters for many species are based on data gained from isolated fish, we conclude that without considering group size the results of bioenergetic modeling may be seriously biased.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Respiration Rates of Eurasian Perch Perca fluviatilis and Ruffe: Lower Energy Costs in Groups

Schleuter¹,

Haertel‐Borer²,

Fischer³

et al. 2007

Trans Am Fish Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The yellow perch bioenergetics model (Hewett and Johnson 1992), upon which the walleye bioenergetics model (Kitchell et al 1977) is based, has undergone numerous evaluations (Hewett and Johnson 1992;Karås and Thoresson 1992;Hanson et al 1997;Schaeffer et al 1999;Bajer et al 2003). The results from each iteration highlight the importance of a multifaceted approach to bioenergetics model evaluations.…”

Section: Bioenergetics Model Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seasonal Consumptive Demand and Prey Use by Stocked Saugeyes in Ohio Reservoirs

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community structure and species composition may be strongly influenced by predator-prey interactions resulting from and leading to episodes of population abundance or scarcity. We quantified diets of stocked saugeyes (female walleye Sander vitreus × male sauger S. canadensis) and estimated biomass of their primary prey, gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum, in three Ohio reservoirs at quarterly intervals during July 2002-July 2003 to determine whether saugeye consumptive demand could exceed the supply of available gizzard shad prey, resulting in a shift to alternative prey. We incorporated water temperature and saugeye diet composition, growth, and mortality into walleye bioenergetics models, which allowed us to compare estimated prey-specific consumption rates by saugeyes with gizzard shad standing stocks estimated with acoustics. Spring and summer were critical seasons. During spring, gizzard shad biomass was low, saugeye consumptive demand was low, and saugeyes consumed primarily alternative prey. During summer, when age-0 gizzard shad became available as prey, saugeyes consumed similar proportions of gizzard shad and alternative prey. Saugeye cumulative consumptive demand in summer was high and approached the gizzard shad standing stock. However, during fall and winter, gizzard shad supply was adequate to support high (fall) or declining (winter) saugeye consumptive demand. Across reservoirs and seasons, saugeyes consumed alternative prey to varying degrees, primarily sunfishes Lepomis spp., yellow perch Perca flavescens, logperch Percina caprodes, and minnows Pimephales spp. Seasonal asynchrony between saugeye consumptive demand and gizzard shad biomass during spring and summer indicated that a saugeye population with high survival, growth, and consumptive demand will opportunistically increase use of prey other than gizzard shad. The manner in which saugeye predation quantitatively influences these prey species could not be assessed. However, overexploitation of gizzard shad prey appears to be unlikely at current saugeye population sizes, particularly considering the opportunistic use of alternative prey and the high reproductive potential of gizzard shad.

show abstract

“…Bioenergetics models are commonly used to predict impacts of changes in species composition or temperature regimes on fish growth, mortality, consumption or nutrient cycling (see [1,12] for examples). To compare the general and Wisconsin bioenergetics models, we examined simulated impacts of climate change on rainbow trout growth using both the general and Wisconsin bioenergetics models.…”

Section: Evaluating Growth Predictions With Climate Changementioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, as with all *Address correspondence to this author at the Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C. V6T 1Z4, Canada; Tel: 604-822-0046; Fax: 604-822-8934; Email: b.vanpoorten@fisheries.ubc.ca models, there are misgivings about bioenergetics models related to parameter uncertainty [2,19] and model structure [12,20,21]. One drawback of these models is the use of laboratory estimates from other populations or closely related species as parameter inputs for use in estimating growth and consumption of a population of interest [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bioenergetics models generally and the Wisconsin model specifically have been extensively tested using laboratory [12][13][14] and field experiments [15][16][17] as well as by combining several different methods such as growth and contaminant concentrations [18]. However, as with all *Address correspondence to this author at the Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Estimation of Bioenergetics Parameters for Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Using Capture-Recapture Data with Comparison to Estimates from a Laboratory-Based Model

Poorten¹,

Walters²

2010

TOFISHSJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bioenergetics models provide estimates of growth and consumption in fish and other animals. These estimates can then be used to infer metabolic and population-level consequences of various natural or human-induced environmental perturbations to fish populations. Most existing models utilize parameter values and functions derived from laboratory experiments on similar, closely related populations or species. However, the use of parameters from other species has long been criticized and recent work suggests that certain metabolic rates can vary substantially between closely related species and geographically separated populations of the same species. We evaluate a new model framework (termed the general bioenergetics model) which estimates bioenergetics parameters from length-increment and length-at-age data taken from the same population being modelled. Estimates of growth and consumption from this general model are compared with the commonly used "Wisconsin" bioenergetics model in terms of model fit and predictions resulting from simulated climate warming. Growth estimates using the general bioenergetics model were slightly higher than that of the Wisconsin model but consumption estimates were similar. Both models made similar predictions about effect of climate warming, although there was a consistent difference between model estimates of growth. The findings of this study add weight to the notion that metabolic information through bioenergetics models can be estimated from the population, although further validation should be conducted.

show abstract

Laboratory evaluation of two bioenergetics models applied to yellow perch: identification of a major source of systematic error

Cited by 41 publications

References 34 publications

Respiration Rates of Eurasian Perch Perca fluviatilis and Ruffe: Lower Energy Costs in Groups

Respiration Rates of Eurasian Perch Perca fluviatilis and Ruffe: Lower Energy Costs in Groups

Seasonal Consumptive Demand and Prey Use by Stocked Saugeyes in Ohio Reservoirs

Estimation of Bioenergetics Parameters for Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Using Capture-Recapture Data with Comparison to Estimates from a Laboratory-Based Model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About