Laserfiche WebLink
952 <br />OSMUNDSON ET AL. <br />TABLE 4.-Diets of Colorado squawfish (400-550 mm <br />total length) during spring 1994. Values are overall vol- <br />umes of each food item as a percentage of total volume <br />(100%) and are averages from all fish containing food (see <br />text); UI = unidentified; MOD = miscellaneous organic <br />debris. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />omponent <br />Reach <br /> <br />Lower Upper <br />(N = 16) (N = 17) Habitat <br /> <br />Back- <br />waters Channel <br />(N = 30) (N = 9) <br />UI fish parts 23.6 35.8 30.2 20.8 <br />UI fish 24.5 2.9 11.5 11.5 <br />Fathead minnow 27.2 28.2 35.3 27.6 <br />Red shiner 0.0 11.1 6.8 0.0 <br />Sand shiner 13.7 0.0 1.3 25.1 <br />Roundtail chub 9.3 0.0 3.3 5.8 <br />Green sunfish <br />Lepomis cyanellus 0.0 5.8 3.3 0.0 <br />White sucker 0.0 10.9 6.2 0.0 <br />Annelids 0.9 0.7 1.0 0.7 <br />MOD 0.8 4.5 1.0 8.6 <br />significantly higher than in all other strata, and <br />stratum 6 CPUE was higher than that in stratum 5. <br />Diet <br />The modified Seaburg stomach sampler proved <br />effective in removing stomach contents from Col- <br />orado squawfish smaller than about 550 mm. For <br />larger adults, the method was abandoned due to <br />persistent difficulties associated with (1) handling <br />the fish while attempting to manipulate the flush- <br />ing tube, (2) passing tubes of sufficient length and <br />diameter (to encapsulate large prey) down the <br />esophagus, and (3) producing sufficient flushing <br />pressure with the squeeze bulb for forcing items <br />through the large tubes. Efforts to encourage large <br />fish to regurgitate their stomach contents by using <br />tartar emetic (after Jernejcic 1969) were also aban- <br />doned because of apparent stress to the fish. <br />Diets of Colorado squawfish 400-550 mm cap- <br />tured in the upper reach were similar to those of <br />fish captured in the lower reach and were similar <br />between fish captured from main channel and <br />backwater habitats (Table 4). Fish in stomach sam- <br />ples were generally small: lengths of fathead min- <br />nows, the most common prey, averaged 51 mm <br />(SL) whereas roundtail chub and white sucker av- <br />eraged 85 and 70 mm (SL), respectively. Of stom- <br />achs containing identifiable fish (N = 27), 63% <br />contained one fish; 26% contained two or three <br />fish; 4% contained five fish; and 7% contained six <br />or seven fish. Feeding rate may be reduced in this <br />species prior to spawning: significantly more (test <br />of proportions, P = 0.002) sampled fish 400-550 <br />mm (TL) had empty stomachs from 26 May to 20 <br />June (93%, N = 14) than fish sampled before 26 <br />May (41%, N = 58) in the early spawning year of <br />1994. Percentages of empty stomachs before 26 <br />May were similar (P > 0.05) between lower (38%, <br />N = 26) and upper reaches (44%, N = 32). <br />Temperature <br />Annual thermal units for growth decreased in <br />an upstream direction as expected (Table 5). As a <br />percentage of thermal units in stratum 1, thermal <br />units in stratum 3 were 93%; in stratum 5, 81%, <br />in stratum 6, 71%; in stratum 7, 62%; at Cameo, <br />54%; and at Rulison, 42%. Thermal units de- <br />creased between sites in strata 1 and 3 by an av- <br />erage of 0.08 units/rkm; between strata 3 and 5 <br />sites by 0.17/rkm; between strata 5 and 6 sites by <br />0.15/rkm; between strata 6 and 7 sites by 0.23/ <br />rkm; between stratum 7 and Cameo sites by 0.24/ <br />TABLE 5.-Total annual thermal units for Colorado squawfish growth at seven temperature-monitoring stations along <br />the Colorado River. Bold italics indicate missing values that were estimated. Missing values for stratum 1 were estimated <br />by using the relationship between thermal growth units there and at the stratum 3 or stratum 5 sites; missing values for <br />strata 3 and 6 were estimated from stratum 5 values; missing values for the Rulison (R) site were estimated from the <br />Cameo (C) site values. No thermograph was located in stratum 7 during the 1992-1996 period; all yearly totals are <br />estimates based on the relationship between thermal growth units there and at the Cameo site (a ratio of 1.165:1) <br />developed during 1986-1991 (not shown); Rkm = river kilometers upstream of the confluence with the Green River. <br /> <br /> <br />Stratum <br />or site Location <br /> <br /> <br />Rkm <br /> <br /> <br />992 <br /> <br /> <br />993 <br />Year <br /> <br />1994 <br /> <br /> <br />995 <br /> <br /> <br />996 <br /> <br /> <br />ean (SE) <br />1 87.4 100.9 68.3 97.6 53.1 85.2 81.0 (9.0) <br />3 158.2 85.3 53.5 96.7 47.2 77.2 72.0 (7.5) <br />5 214.6 73.6 46.2 87.4 39.2 65.9 62.5 (7.5) <br />6 264.7 63.9 41.3 75.9 34.6 59.4 55.0 (8.8) <br />7 292.8 60.4 34.0 68.8 29.7 49.3 48.4 (9.4) <br />C 321.4 51.9 29.2 59.1 25.5 42.3 41.6 (6.4) <br />R 369.9 40.4 22.8 46.6 19.1 33.8 32.5(5.2)