Laserfiche WebLink
<br />200 THANS, Al\1Elt FISH, SOc., 1%9, NO.2 <br />T.~IILI: 5,-Mclln clI/curated totallen~th,j and increments, Colorado chub, Green River, 1964 1966 <br /> \ <br /> Mean Number Mean calculated length (mm) al annulus <br />A~c lolal length of <br />J,:'TOllp Tnxon1 (ml11) lish 2 3 4 5 6 7 <br />I 65 80 49 <br />II 114 81 51 93 <br />III 165 56 55 96 143 <br />IV rt 230 16 59 114 166 210 <br /> bl 323 5 62 113 1~3 2,54 <br />V rt C)""l'- 13 62 113 173 218 260 <br />-'1 <br /> hi 341 39 fi3 106 15\! 237 314 <br />VI TI 334 11 64 114 175 229 272 31.5 <br /> hi 36::! 20 6.1 lO'l 183 288 332 353 <br />VII rl 357 <) 62 112 In 224 270 308 340 <br /> hi 379 3 6.1 13(; 2(;0 34\! 357 367 373 <br /> <br />----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <br /> <br />HOllnc.hail <br />Crand I\\'crng:l' It.'llJ.:lh .55 !)\! 1.5(; 2]8 267 312 340 <br />Number 01 fish 2(;6 186 lO,5 4\! 33 20 9 <br />Average Ieng-th increment 5.5 44 52 48 44 41 32 <br />A\'erag~ cakulatcd weight (g)~ I 9 34 94 174 282 367 <br />n()n~1ail <br />Grand average length 5.'; 100 ISH 25H 322 355 373 <br />r\umbt"f of fish. - 28.1 20-1 1::!3 67 (;2 23 3 <br />A \'crage length increment 55 43 55 8\l 63 20 6 <br />Av~ragc calculated weight (g)2 1 S 31 129 240 315 364 <br />1 rt = roundlail; bt = bonylail. <br />~ Call'11lated from length-weight equalitlll. <br /> <br />and was used for back-calculations of length. <br />Colorado chubs of all age groups from 0 to <br />VII were taken (Table 5). The Colorado chub <br />was treated as one taxon through its third <br />year of life since fish in this size range could <br />not be classified as either roundtail or bony. <br />tail. Above age III the two subspecies were <br />morphologica lIy distinct, and bonyta ils were <br />longer than roundtails at successive ages <br />I Figure 6), After the third year of life the <br />Illlll)'lail grew faster than the roundtail and <br />added ils largest lenglh increment during the <br />fourth year after which the increments de- <br />l'n~ased ahruptly. ^nnual growth increment <br />(Iellglh) for the roul\lltail was greatest dur- <br />ing the first year and decreased gradually <br />in the following years. No difference in <br />growth rate in length was observed between <br />sexes, Considerable variability was observed <br />among calculated lengths at the same annulus <br />for bolh subspecies, A "goodness of growth" <br />test (Hill', PHI) indicated slower growth in <br />post. impoundment years (1963-1%5) for <br />both roundtails and bony tails (Table 4). <br />Most rapid growth occurred in 1962 when <br />lite I'erl'cnlage dl'vial ion frolll the lI1ean an. <br />nual increment for the roundtail and bony tail <br />was +9.4 and +7.0, respectively. Poorest <br />growth was in ] 965 when percenlage devia. <br />tion for the two forms was -13,3 and -7,6, <br />respectively, <br /> <br />Within-season growth of age groups I-III <br />was described by a length-frequency analysis <br />(Figure 7) , Y oung-of-the-year fish were <br />longer in 1966 than those at the same dates <br />in 1964. and 1965, probahly due to an earlier <br />spawning period that year. <br />Growth of yearlings began in late May <br />and ceased in October. The growth pallern <br />was similar in 196.}' and 1965, with the 19M <br />fish having slightly longer mean lengths <br />throughout Ihe season, In June, ]966, year. <br />ling chubs wen: smaller tllan those at cor- <br />responding times of the previous two years. <br />hnt they grew fasln and were longer hy the <br />end of the SLJmnH'r than yearlings of the two <br />prevIOus years, <br /> <br />LEXGTH.WEIGIIT HELATlO!\SllIl' <br /> <br />Colorado Squaw/ish <br /> <br />A linear regression was filled to Colorado <br />squawfish length.weight data by the method <br />of least squares: <br /> <br />log W = -S,-1l77 + 3.126 log L <br /> <br />whcn~ L = total hocly ],:nglh in millimc'lers <br />and \V = weight in grams. The regression co- <br />efficient of 3.126 was significantly higher <br />Ihan ~,O U kst, Jll levcll, indicating that <br />the weip:ht of the squawfish increased slightly <br />faster than the !:ube of its length. <br />