Responses of several fish species to pH gradients

Abstract

The responses of 11 fish species to a continuous pH gradient (usually pH 4–10) were observed to obtain information on avoidance–preference behavior. Under uniform pH conditions, all species were found most frequently near the ends of the apparatus, particularly near the inflow. Imposition of a pH gradient altered the distribution for most species, with the region of lowest pH usually being avoided. Estimated low pH avoidance thresholds were 4.1 for yellow perch, 4.5 for white sucker, 4.7 for brook charr, 5.1 for banded killifish, 5.2 for Arctic charr, 5.4 for common shiner and blacknose dace, 5.5 for threespine stickleback, 5.7 for creek chub, and 5.9 for rainbow trout. Preferred pH ranges were usually 5–7 to 7–9. The distribution of rainbow trout in calcium gradients was not significantly different from that in uniform calcium conditions. Avoidance thresholds of the various species were generally similar to pH levels limiting natural distributions as derived from various lake and stream surveys.

Valorization of various sources of rabbit manure in agro-piscicultural system in Benin (West Africa): dynamics and effect of mineralization upon quality of fresh water

“…1e), and consequently that of zooplankton when phytoplankton biomass is not so high to cause growth inhibition (Liady et al 2015 and references there in). Indeed, the extent of pH preferences for fish is usually 5-7 to 7-9 (Peterson et al 1989). Our findings were like those obtained by Bokossa et al (2014a).…”

Preference behavior of silver catfish, Rhamdia quelen, juveniles in waters with pH gradients: laboratory experiments

“…Fish in the wild may respond to several environmental factors (Gunn & Noakes, 1986), and laboratory experiments may separate and clarify these responses (Peterson et al, 1989). Previous study demonstrated that uninfected silver catfish juveniles at water hardness of 24 mg CaCO 3 L -1 preferred the 7.0-7.6 pH range (Riffel et al, 2012).…”

“…Several others species also showed preference to a specific pH (Peterson et al, 1989). Japanese fat minnows (Phoxinus lagowski) presented avoidance behavior and their swimming region shifted from pH 6.0 to 7.0 immediately after decreasing pH and during the exposure to acidic water their swimming activity clearly decreased (Nakamura, 1986).…”

“…The usual pH range for fish growth is 6.0 to 9.0; lower pH can occur due to the presence of acidic cations, humic and fulvic acids, and more alkaline pH can be due to high levels of carbonate and other ions (Parra & Baldisserotto, 2007). Water quality may elicit a preference or avoidance response in fish (Kroon & Housefield, 2003), and several studies have demonstrated that fish preferred a specific pH (Jones et al, 1985;Nakamura, 1986;Peterson et al 1989;Åtland & Barlaup 1996;Åtland, 1998;Ikuta et al, 2003;Kroon & Housefield, 2003, Kroon, 2005, Scott et al, 2005, Riffel et al, 2012.…”

A fluviarium with controlled water quality for preference—avoidance experiments with fish and invertebrates

“…Behavioral research into the role of chemoreception in fish has expanded to include potential environmental stressors, such as temperature (Richardson et al 1994), acidification (Jones et al 1985a(Jones et al , 1985bPeterson et al 1988), turbidity (Cyrus and Blaber 1987;Boubée et al 1997), and aquatic pollutants (Brown et al 1981). This work has built on the knowledge and expertise gained from behavioral research on individual recognition (Olsén 1989;Olsén and Winberg 1996), schooling (Keenleyside 1955), homing in salmonids (Cooper and Hirsch 1981;Erkinaro et al 1999), reproductive behavior (Liley and Stacey 1983;Olsén et al 1998), and alarm substance (Pfeiffer 1981).…”