My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9449
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
9449
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:35 PM
Creation date
5/22/2009 4:46:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
9449
Author
Hawkins, J. A.
Title
Recapture and growth rates of three Colorado River endangered fish species
USFW Year
2003.
USFW - Doc Type
a comparison between electrofishing and non-electrofishing.
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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
each group was based on differences between the means and confidence intervals <br />around those means. <br />RESULTS <br />The database contained 14,714 records for the period 1975 to 2000. These <br />included captures of Colorado pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus lucius, N=8,254), humpback <br />chub (Gila cypha, N=3,723), and razorback sucker (Xyrauchen texanus, N=2,737) and <br />represented 11,463 individual fish and 3,251 recaptures (Table 1). Recapture records <br />represented fish that were recaptured one to 11 times during the period of record. <br />Razorback sucker records included 12 putative razorback sucker X flannelmouth sucker <br />(Catostomus latipinnis) hybrids and humpback chub records included 676 putative <br />humpback chub X roundtail chub (G. robusta) hybrids. A smaller subset of these <br />records was used for each analysis because records were excluded based on <br />previously defined filters or due to incomplete data (e.g. records with fish length not <br />recorded). <br />For all species, recapture rates of fish initially captured by electrofishing <br />displayed minimal differences compared to recapture rates of fish captured by <br />non-electrofishing gears (Table 2). Humpback chub and Colorado pikeminnow caught <br />by electrofishing were recaptured at a rate slightly less than recapture rates of the same <br />species caught by non-electrofishing gears. Recapture rate of razorback sucker <br />showed an opposite trend and was slightly higher for fish initially captured by <br />electrofishing. The differences in recapture rates for the two gear types were minimal <br />6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.