Laserfiche WebLink
FEEDING BY LARVAL RAZORBACK SUCKERS 351 <br />TABLE 4.-Continued. <br /> <br /> <br />Common and <br />species name Con- <br />tainer <br />volume <br />(L) <br /> <br />Time <br />(d) Stock <br />density <br />(num- <br />ber/L) <br /> <br /> <br />ood Food <br />density <br />(num- <br />ber/L) <br />Food items <br />per fish <br />(number/d) <br />Sur- <br />vival <br />N <br /> <br /> <br />uthority <br /> 6,000 1,500 37 <br /> 3,000 750 20 <br />Striped bass 28 Zooplanktone -650 63 Geiger et al. <br />Moron saxatilis -250 46 (1985) <br />Striped bass 8 24 0.32 Anemia 5,000 15,625 90 Eldridge et al. <br />Moronesaxatilis naupliid 1,000 3,125 85 (1981) <br /> 500 1,562 75 <br /> 100 312 55 <br /> 10 31 30 <br />Razorback sucker 3.9 50 2.6 Artemia 1,000 1,154 88 Papoulias and <br />Xyraucken texanus naupliit 500 577 90 Minckley <br /> 100 115 80 (1990) <br /> 50 58 82 <br /> 10 12 28 <br /> 5 6 12 <br />a Food adjusted once per day. <br />b Average food available per day. <br />c New food added twice per day. <br />d New food added once per day. <br />e Ten-day-old larvae stocked into 0.04-hectare ponds at 371,000 fry/hectare <br />rNew food added three times per day, <br />zorback sucker larvae in Lake Mohave ate cla- <br />docerans most abundantly, along with rotifers and <br />copepods (Marsh and Langhorst 1988). <br />Direct applications of our pond data to situa- <br />tions in nature are speculative; however, reser- <br />voirs on the lower Colorado River generally are <br />low in zooplankton (Table 5) and oligo- or me- <br />sotrophic in productivity (Paulson et al. 1980). <br />Lake Mohave has variable but higher primary <br />productivity than most reservoirs due to inflows <br />of nutrient-rich hypolimnetic water from Lake <br />Mead (Priscu 1978; Priscu et al. 1982). Spatially, <br />annual mean zooplankton densities in Lake Mo- <br />have tend to be lowest at stations near inflow of <br />hypolimnetic water from Lake Mead and highest <br />in the body of the lake (Cottonwood Basin) to near <br />Davis Dam (Table 5; Paulson et al. 1980); razor- <br />back sucker larvae are concentrated in Cotton- <br />TABLE 5.-Historic zooplankton concentrations for three Colorado River reservoirs <br /> <br /> <br />Year im- <br />Lake pounded <br /> <br /> <br />tudy year Zooplankton <br />(number/L) <br />Yearly Spring <br />average average <br /> <br /> <br />ocation <br /> <br /> <br />ethod <br /> <br /> <br />uthority <br />Mead 1935 1975-1976 41.0 Lakewide 0-45 m depth Burke (1977) <br /> 1977-1978 -33.8 At dam 0-40 m depth Paulson et al. (1980) <br /> 1978-1979 37.4 Lakewide 20 m horizontal, McCall (1980) <br /> 0-20 m vertical <br /> 1981-1982 25.2 35.4 Lakewide Wilde (1984) <br />Havasu 1938 1982-1983 82.7 49.1 Lakewide Baker and Paulson <br /> (1983b) <br />Mohave 1954 1977-1978 29.0 Lakewide 0-40 m depth Paulson et al. (1980) <br /> 1977-1978 45.5 Cottonwood Cove 0-40 m depth Paulson et al. (1980) <br /> 1977-1978 1.8 Below Hoover Dam To bottom Paulson et al. (1980) <br /> 1982 -35.0 26.3 Cottonwood Cove 0-40 m depth Paulson et al. (1980) <br /> 1985 1.5 Cottonwood Cove Surface Marsh and <br /> Langhorst (1988) <br /> 1985 0.4 Cutoff bay Surface Marsh and <br /> Langhorst (1988)