Laserfiche WebLink
t <br /> velocity, or water depth. The other two factors that were analyzed were time and <br /> treatment (acclimated vs. not-acclimated fish). The analyses wereperformed on SPSS <br /> (version 8.0) using the "General Linear Model -General Factorial" model. Type three, <br /> sums of squares were used and no data transformations were needed to meet the <br /> assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variances. <br /> <br /> The movement patterns of the razorback suckers were analyzed with three 2-factor <br /> ANOVAs (SPSS version 8.0). The analyses were performed to determine the following <br /> questions: <br /> 1. Was the total distance that razorback suckers traveled since release dependent either <br />upon the time since release or treatment? <br /> <br /> 2. Was the rate of razorback movements (km/day) dependent either upon the time since <br />release or treatment? <br /> <br /> 3. Was the direction of a fish's travel (+/-km/day, + =upstream, - =downstream) <br /> dependent either upon the time since release or treatment? <br /> Type three, sums of squares were used to compute the F-statistics for,the ANOVAs. Data <br /> used for the total distance ANOVA was not transformed. Average daily movement data <br /> were Iog transformed. Data for the directed average daily movements were power 1.5 <br /> transformed. Data still did not meet the assumptions of homogeneity of variance or <br /> normality, but were modestly improved over non-transformed data (Appendix 3). In <br /> addition, the transformed data increased the power of the ANOVA models for both <br /> average daily movements (0.901 ~ 0.999) and directed movements (0.829 ~ 0.843). <br /> RESULTS <br /> Individual Movements -Distance From Release Point <br /> All 15 razorback suckers that were placed into the backwater at Millard Bottom (Green <br /> River RK 54) actively swam within the flooded canyon mouth prior to their eventual <br /> release. The water in the backwater was turbid, so visual observations of the suckers' <br /> daily activities were impossible, however, each fish's position within the backwater was <br /> determined via telemetry on six separate occasions during the acclimation period. The <br /> backwater had four distinct regions: the inflow (4), the outflow (1), and two interior <br /> regions (3 and 4) delineated by bends in its channel. Razorback movements within the <br /> backwater are presented in Table 2. Initially, only 20% (9 of 45 contacts) of the fish were <br /> positioned next to the blocking net, but during the day before the net was removed 43% <br /> (16 of 37 contacts) were found near the blocking net. <br /> Two fish escaped during this period of acclimation (Table 2). This occurred after heavy <br /> 8 <br />1 <br />