Temporal and spatial segregation of spawning in sympatric populations of Atlantic salmon, <i>Salmo salar</i> L., and brown trout, <i>Salmo trutta</i> L.

Heggberget, Tor G.; Haukebø, T.; Mork, J.; Ståhl, Gunnar

doi:10.1111/j.1095-8649.1988.tb05477.x

Cited by 63 publications

(65 citation statements)

References 13 publications

(17 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Atlantic salmon and seatrout will normally spawn at areas having a mean water velocity from 20 to 80 cm s À1 (Heggberget et al, 1988;Crisp and Carling, 1989), whereas smaller resident brown with <30 cm length typically will spawn at water velocities from Figure 1. Mean egg survival in nests at the different localities with added gravel.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Addition of spawning gravel—a means to restore spawning habitat of atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.), and Anadromous and resident brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) in regulated rivers

Barlaup

Gabrielsen

Skoglund

et al. 2008

River Research & Apps

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In regulated rivers, canalization and reduced water discharge may lead to loss or impairment of salmonid spawning areas, and thereby negative effects on stock recruitment. We discuss the possibility of mitigating such effects through establishing new spawning areas by addition of gravel. We monitored the occurrence of nests in seven gravel deposition sites in five different Norwegian rivers. The total area covered by each of the depositions spanned from 25 m 2 to 300 m 2 . The areas were examined for nests during a 2-5 year period following the addition of gravel, that is, a total of 27 spawning periods. The fish were found to spawn at all localities and years with the exception of two occasions when gravel was lost during floods. Spawning success measured as egg survival was generally high (>80%). These results show that the additions met the criteria for successful spawning. Nests of Atlantic salmon were found to be aggregated in the area with the highest water current. However, successful nests were also found in areas with added gravel where the water current was much reduced. This unusual selection of spawning site most likely reflects the lack of other, more favourable spawning areas. The results therefore suggest that gravel additions can be successful even if the only available areas are suboptimal with respect to water flow and water depth. Three of the seven localities were unsuitable as the gravel was partly or totally displaced downstream during floods. At two of these localities, nests were probably lost because the floods occurred after the spawning season. This shows that large floods can be a major drawback. Monitoring of the spawning success and displacement of gravel is therefore essential to evaluate the method. Subsequently, stable areas, favoured by the spawners, can be expanded by supplementary addition of gravel. In sum, the results show that the careful addition of gravel areas can be used to provide suitable spawning locations for salmonids in regulated rivers.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nests are placed within restricted boundaries of gravel-size, water depth and water velocity (Heggberget et al, 1988;Crisp and Carling, 1989;Grost et al, 1990;Moir et al, 1998). The availability of gravel suitable for spawning will be determined by hydrological processes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Addition of spawning gravel—a means to restore spawning habitat of atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.), and Anadromous and resident brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) in regulated rivers

Barlaup

Gabrielsen

Skoglund

et al. 2008

River Research & Apps

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This was initially unexpected, as beaver prefer the lower gradient reaches of streams for dam building (McComb et al, 1990; H. Parker, personal observation) and the deeper sections for lodge building (Hartman and Törnlöv, 2006), both of which tend to house finer substrates than the higher gradient sections preferred as spawning habitat by salmon and sea trout (Heggberget et al, 1988). This overlap may have occurred in part because, on high gradient streams, beaver often build dams at pool tails where natural constrictions in the stream channel provide good sites for dam locations (H. Parker, personal observation).…”

Section: Potential Influence Of Beaver On Salmonid Reproductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…This overlap may have occurred in part because, on high gradient streams, beaver often build dams at pool tails where natural constrictions in the stream channel provide good sites for dam locations (H. Parker, personal observation). Pool tails are also commonly used spawning sites for salmon and sea trout (White, 1942;Heggberget et al, 1988;Gibson, 1993). In addition, some degree of overlap occurred because beaver, sea trout and salmon, for unknown reasons, all tended to use the lower reaches of tributaries (Rønning, 2004).…”

Section: Potential Influence Of Beaver On Salmonid Reproductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Low potential for restraint of anadromous salmonid reproduction by beaver Castor fiber in the Numedalslågen River catchment, Norway

Parker

Rønning

2007

River Research & Apps

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After a long absence, beaver Castor fiber are rapidly returning to Europe. Their dam-building and tree-felling behaviour may have consequences for salmon Salmo salar and sea trout Salmo trutta management. In 2003 we investigated the parallel use of stream sections by beaver, sea trout and salmon and determined the potential hindrance that beaver dam-building presented for reproducing salmon and sea trout along 65 km of the Numedalslågen River and tributaries, a major Norwegian catchment. We also surveyed landowner attitude to having beaver on salmon and sea trout streams. Most salmon spawned in the river and most sea trout in 51 tributaries. Nine of these tributaries also hosted spawning salmon. 15 (29%) of the 51 tributaries with spawning sea trout and six (67%) of the nine with spawning salmon had intermittently been occupied by beaver. Though beaver preferred to colonize the same sections of stream used for spawning, only 15% of the stream length navigable by salmon and sea trout on the 51 tributaries had actually been used by beaver, and only three colonies were occupied autumn 2003 (1 colony/25.0 km). Five dams were functioning during autumn 2003 on the 51 tributaries (1 dam/14.3 km). These potentially hindered sea trout and salmon from reaching 18% and 3%, respectively of their potential spawning habitat, though all dams were low ( 0.5 m). Though the autumn density of occupied beaver colonies along the river (1 colony/2.5 km) was 10.0 times the density on the 51 tributaries, no dams were built on the river. Thus most salmon reproduction in the catchment was unhindered by beaver. Nine of 14 landowners were unequivocally positive about having beaver together with salmon and sea trout. We conclude that the presence of beaver on similar catchments will likely have only an insignificant negative impact on the reproduction of sea trout and salmon.

show abstract

“…Factors influencing redd success include water flow and resultant water quality in the incubation environment and probability of redd scour, burial, or disturbance by later-arriving spawning individuals (Shumway et al 1964;Chapman 1988;. The ranges of habitat characteristics selected vary among species and individuals associated with differences in body size and therefore physical capability (Witzel and MacCrimmon 1983;Heggberget et al 1988;Kondolf and Wolman 1993;Fukushima and Smoker 1998). Because desirable habitat characteristics are temporally stable over short time frames, the locations of salmonid spawning areas may be somewhat static (Hoopes 1971;Fukushima 1994;Fukushima and Smoker 1998).…”

Section: Chum and Fall Chinook Salmon Spawning Habitat Usementioning

confidence: 99%

Grays River Watershed and Biological Assessment, 2006 Final Report.

May¹,

Geist

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThe Grays River Watershed and Biological Assessment was funded to address degradation and loss of spawning habitat for chum salmon (Onchorhynchus keta) and fall Chinook salmon (Onchoryhnchus tshawytscha). In 1999, the National Marine Fisheries Service listed lower Columbia River chum salmon as a threatened Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA). The Grays River watershed is one of two remaining significant chum salmon spawning locations in this ESU. Runs of Grays River chum and Chinook salmon have declined significantly during the past century, largely because of damage to spawning habitat associated with timber harvest and agriculture in the watershed. In addition, approximately 20-25% of the then-remaining chum salmon spawning habitat was lost during a 1999 channel avulsion that destroyed an important artificial spawning channel operated by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). Although the lack of stable, high-quality spawning habitat is considered the primary physical limitation on Grays River chum salmon production today, few data are available to guide watershed management and channel restoration activities. The objectives of the Grays River Watershed and Biological Assessment project were to 1) perform a comprehensive watershed and biological analysis, including hydrologic, geomorphic, and ecological assessments; 2) develop a prioritized list of actions that protect and restore critical chum and Chinook salmon spawning habitat in the Grays River based on comprehensive geomorphic, hydrologic, and stream channel assessments; and 3) gain a better understanding of chum and Chinook salmon habitat requirements and survival within the lower Columbia River and the Grays River.The watershed-based approach to river ecosystem restoration relies on a conceptual framework that describes general relationships between natural landscape characteristics, watershed-scale habitat-forming processes, aquatic habitat conditions, and biological integrity. In addition, human land-use impacts are factored into the conceptual model because they can alter habitat quality and can disrupt natural habitatforming processes. In this model (Figure S.1), aquatic habitat-both instream and riparian-is viewed as the link between watershed conditions and biologic responses. Based on this conceptual model, assessment of habitat loss and the resultant declines in salmonid populations can be conducted by relating current and historical (e.g., natural) habitat conditions to salmonid utilization, diversity, and abundance. In addition, assessing disrupted ecosystem functions and processes within the watershed can aid in identifying the causes of habitat change and the associated decline in biological integrity. In this same way, restoration, enhancement, and conservation projects can be identified and prioritized.A watershed assessment is primarily a landscape-scale evaluation of current watershed conditions and the associated hydrogeomorphic riverine processes. The watershed ass...

show abstract

Temporal and spatial segregation of spawning in sympatric populations of Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L., and brown trout, Salmo trutta L.

Cited by 63 publications

References 13 publications

Addition of spawning gravel—a means to restore spawning habitat of atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.), and Anadromous and resident brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) in regulated rivers

Addition of spawning gravel—a means to restore spawning habitat of atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.), and Anadromous and resident brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) in regulated rivers

Low potential for restraint of anadromous salmonid reproduction by beaver Castor fiber in the Numedalslågen River catchment, Norway

Grays River Watershed and Biological Assessment, 2006 Final Report.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About