Movements of selected minnows between the lower Yellowstone River and its tributaries

Abstract

Reduced population connectivity has been implicated as a cause of decreased distributions and abundances of many Great Plains fishes. However, scant empirical evidence quantifying movement and relating the contribution of spatial linkages to population abundances and resilience exists. We used otolith microchemistry analysis to characterize the movements of western silvery minnows (Hybognathus argyritis Girard, 1856), flathead chubs (Platygobio gracilis (Richardson, 1836)), and sand shiners (Notropis stramineus (Cope, 1865)) between the Yellowstone River and its tributaries. Sixty-nine percent of western silvery minnows, 65% of flathead chubs, and 42% of sand shiners moved between the Yellowstone River and tributaries. Mean total number of interchanges was highest among western silvery minnows (4.8 interchanges/mover), intermediate among flathead chubs (4.3 interchanges/mover), and lowest among sand shiners (1.4 interchanges/mover; P < 0.01). Natal movements were rare, but juvenile movements were common and frequent among all three species. Movements between main-stem and tributary habitats are probably prominent facets of the life cycles of other Great Plains minnows. Therefore, connectivity among such habitats should be a high conservation priority to enhance the long-term viability of such fishes.

Network connectivity contributes to native small‐bodied fish assemblages in the upper Mississippi River system

“…Reaches within the UMRS are connected longitudinally through both upstream and downstream fish movements. This result coincides with other studies showing that for medium to large-bodied fishes, longitudinal connectivity was important for life-long movements (Pachla et al, 2022;Pracheil et al, 2019;Tripp et al, 2014) even in dammed rivers and small-bodied fishes in at least the juvenile life stage in smaller river systems (Duncan et al, 2021). Previously, only large-bodied fishes were known to pass through lock and dam chambers or spillways in both upstream and downstream directions and migrate throughout the UMRS (Finger et al, 2020;Tripp et al, 2014), but our evidence indicates that small-bodied fishes are also capable of long-distance upstream and downstream move- lower (e.g., Wisconsin, Meramec, Chippewa Rivers) or higher (i.e., Minnesota and Missouri Rivers) Sr:Ca than the bounds of the models, but we cannot say with certainty due to the inappropriateness of extrapolating models (Hanh, 1977).…”

“…Small-bodied fishes have smaller home ranges (Minns, 1995) and theoretically do not have as much capacity for long-distance active movements, especially in fast-flowing, high-discharge systems (Ward et al, 2002). However, available evidence indicates that small-bodied fishes can make relatively frequent life-long movements among tributaries and mainstem rivers, especially during juvenile stages (Duncan et al, 2021), and move both upstream and downstream in highly connected but not in anthropogenically modified reaches (Vivancos et al, 2021), indicating that smallbodied fishes use connectivity, but their use may be context dependent. Information regarding pre-juvenile movement patterns is also lacking.…”

Diverse portfolios: Investing in tributaries for restoration of large river fishes in the Anthropocene

“…Emerging research indicates widespread use of tributaries by large river fishes across a broad spectrum of life history strategies and a range of large rivers. Specifically, analyses of natal origins indicate both mainstem and tributary recruitment and rearing-and movement between the systems-contribute to mainstem populations of a wide range of species including channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus; Spurgeon et al, 2018), western silvery minnow (Hybognathus argyritis), flathead chub (Platygobio gracilis; Duncan et al, 2021), humpback chub (Gila cypha; Hayden et al, 2013), and winter-run Chinook salmon (Phillis et al, 2018). Therefore, consideration of migratory behaviors and specific requirements for different life stages, such as spawning substrate, nursery habitats, and overwintering conditions (Galat and Zweimüller, 2001) in addition to life history strategy may be informative of tributary use and the importance of connectivity between mainstem and tributary systems.…”

Effects of flow recession regime on stranding of Rio Grande silvery minnow suggests that conservation actions must overcome evolutionary traps

“…Many small fishes are short-lived and highly mobile, with low recapture rates of marked fish potentially hindering inferences, particularly on the movements of individual fish or evaluating specific abiotic factors (Platania et al, 2020;Archdeacon, Gonzales & Thomas, 2022;Steffensmeier et al, 2022). As in this study, many inferences on movement rely on population-level changes (Hoagstrom, Brooks & Davenport, 2008;Walters et al, 2014;Ruppel et al, 2020), but other methods, such as otolith microchemistry (Chase et al, 2015;Duncan, Bramblett & Zale, 2021), genetic analyses of parentage (McBaine, Hallerman & Angermeier, 2022), or the use of tagged hatchery fish (Archdeacon & Remshardt, 2012;Platania et al, 2020) are beginning to allow a more complete understanding of movement behaviour of these small fishes at different temporal and spatial scales. Within the pelagic broadcastspawning minnows of North America, long-distance movements are evident (Archdeacon & Remshardt, 2012;Ruppel et al, 2020;Steffensmeier et al, 2022), but observations of synchronized movements are rarely reported (Archdeacon et al, 2018).…”