My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7362
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
7362
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:30 PM
Creation date
5/20/2009 9:31:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
7362
Author
Karp, C. A. and H. M. Tyus.
Title
Habitat Use, Spawning, and Species Associations of Humpback Chub,
USFW Year
1989.
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
collected in Split Mountain Canyon. As with humpback chubs, roundtail <br />chubs were most abundant (N=1,085, 73%) in the upper 44.8 km of Yampa <br />Canyon. Mature roundtail chub were most often captured in shoreline runs <br />and riffles but were also taken in eddies and pools. Roundtail chubs in <br />breeding condition (N=240; including 116 males, 5 females, and 119 <br />tuberculate but unripe fish) were more darkly colored than humpback chub <br />and exhibited a more robust tuberculation and more brilliant orange <br />coloration. Patterns of tuberculation were similar between the two chubs. <br />Ripe male roundtail chubs averaged 344 mm TL (N=116, range 292-419 mm TL) <br />and 329 g (N=100, range 190-652 g) and ripe females averaged 360 mm TL <br />(N=5; range 343-380 mm TL) and 363 g (N=3, range 276-478 g). Tuberculate <br />but unripe fish averaged 351 mm TL (N=119; range 264-447 mm TL) and <br />weighed about 364 g (N=77, range 140-844 g). <br />As with humpback chub, ripe roundtail chub were also collected during <br />declining spring runoff following peak flows (Figure 2). Roundtail and <br />humpback chub in breeding condition were collected syntopically on 13 <br />occasions. Although this suggested some overlap in use of shoreline eddies <br />during spring runoff, ripe females of both species were never syntopic. <br />Channel catfish and the common carp were the most abundant <br />introduced fishes captured in DNM (Table 2). A total of 1,153 juvenile and <br />adult channel catfish and 1,321 common carp were captured in shoreline <br />eddies, pools, runs, and riffles during spring runoff, 1987 to 1989. <br />Although most fish were captured in Yampa Canyon (channel catfish: N=853, <br />74%; common carp: N=865, 65%), catch-per-unit-effort data indicated both <br />species were most abundant in Split Mountain Canyon (Table 2). More <br />channel catfish were captured angling than any other fish species,.and it <br />11
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.