The movement ecology of fishes

Abstract

Movement of fishes in the aquatic realm is fundamental to their ecology and survival. Movement can be driven by a variety of biological, physiological and environmental factors occurring across all spatial and temporal scales. The intrinsic capacity of movement to impact fish individually (e.g., foraging) with potential knock‐on effects throughout the ecosystem (e.g., food web dynamics) has garnered considerable interest in the field of movement ecology. The advancement of technology in recent decades, in combination with ever‐growing threats to freshwater and marine systems, has further spurred empirical research and theoretical considerations. Given the rapid expansion within the field of movement ecology and its significant role in informing management and conservation efforts, a contemporary and multidisciplinary review about the various components influencing movement is outstanding. Using an established conceptual framework for movement ecology as a guide (i.e., Nathan et al., 2008: 19052), we synthesized the environmental and individual factors that affect the movement of fishes. Specifically, internal (e.g., energy acquisition, endocrinology, and homeostasis) and external (biotic and abiotic) environmental elements are discussed, as well as the different processes that influence individual‐level (or population) decisions, such as navigation cues, motion capacity, propagation characteristics and group behaviours. In addition to environmental drivers and individual movement factors, we also explored how associated strategies help survival by optimizing physiological and other biological states. Next, we identified how movement ecology is increasingly being incorporated into management and conservation by highlighting the inherent benefits that spatio‐temporal fish behaviour imbues into policy, regulatory, and remediation planning. Finally, we considered the future of movement ecology by evaluating ongoing technological innovations and both the challenges and opportunities that these advancements create for scientists and managers. As aquatic ecosystems continue to face alarming climate (and other human‐driven) issues that impact animal movements, the comprehensive and multidisciplinary assessment of movement ecology will be instrumental in developing plans to guide research and promote sustainability measures for aquatic resources.

Impeding access to tributary spawning habitat and releasing experimental fall-timed floods increase brown trout immigration into a dam’s tailwater

“…Our results also suggest there was support for the hypothesis that inhibiting access to primary spawning areas (using a weir) contributed to straying (Thorstad et al 2008). Movement and dispersal are key processes that affect species' survival, recruitment, and population dynamics, including newly invaded habitats (Radinger and Wolter 2014;Rubenson and Olden 2017;Cooke et al 2022). Straying, which is important to maintain genetically diverse and resilient salmonid populations, may increase in frequency when individuals are faced with barriers to spawning habitat access (Thorstad et al 2008).…”

“…Finally, notwithstanding the evidence we provide associating Fall HFEs with Glen Canyon brown trout colonization, the mechanisms ultimately driving upstream movements are also somewhat difficult to discern, given that life histories of fishes may involve cued migratory responses to covarying stream discharge and water temperature (reviewed in Cooke et al 2022). Additional variation in water temperature was associated with Fall HFEs downstream of Glen Canyon Dam (Supplemental Information, Fig.…”

Artificial structure selection by economically important reef fishes at North Carolina artificial reefs

“…First, vessels tend to hold a higher abundance and biomass of marine life compared to other artificial structures (Paxton et al, 2017;Lemoine et al, 2019) and could improve foraging opportunities. Food abundance is known to be a key driver of fish movements (Cooke et al, 2022), and it follows that fishes are more likely to use habitats that increase their chances of finding food. In this region, common prey groups, such as Carangidae, Clupeidae, Haemulidae, and Sparidae can occur in high abundances on vessels (Stephan and Lindquist, 1989;Lemoine et al, 2019) and could lead predatory species, such as those we studied, to select for, move to, and spend more time at vessels over other structures.…”

What acoustic telemetry can and can’t tell us about fish biology

“…While such technologies began as standalone and typically data storage devices (Cooke, Thorstad, et al, 2004), the evolution of transmitting sensors and those integrated within acoustic positioning technologies offer much greater scope to derive detailed data from free-swimming fish without the need for recapture (Cooke et al, 2016;Lennox et al, 2017). Further, rapidly evolving data compression and transfer techniques to embed additional sensor data within the transmitted acoustic signals will serve to deepen our mechanistic understanding of fishes' behaviours as they move through their increasingly human-impacted environments (Cooke et al, 2022).…”