9545 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

habitat types sampled. And their frequency of occurrence was not significantly different than expected based on the distribution of effort. A similar analysis incorporating the total number of chubs collected by habitat type indicates there was some preference occurring; assuming greater densities means preference (Table 8). In this analysis, more chubs were collected in backwaters than was expected despite the disproportionate sampling that occurred there. Chubs were under-represented in all other incidentally sampled habitats. In Figure 9, a graphical representation of the statistical test just described, preference appears relatively minor. Roundtail chubs above the canyon are using backwaters and perhaps selecting slightly for them, but backwaters are readily available and other low velocity habitats are not. Table 7. Multinomial analysis for use of habitats by YOY Gila spp. in the Above Canyon sub-reach (Colorado RK 204 - 199.4), Utah. Data collected in July and August, 1992, 1994, and 1996 J and July -Sept., 1993 and 1995. HABITAT TYPE N= Obs. % of Hab. Type Obs. # of habs w/YOY chubs Exp. # of habs w/YOY chubs Chi-square factor. BW 48 78.7 29 29.12 0.00 SH 2 3.3 2 1.22 0.50 EMB - - - - - PO 1 1.6 1 .59 0.28 IP 5 8.2 1 3.03 1.36 F-r - - - - - SC 5 8.2 4 3.03 0.3 ] Overall Chi-square = 2.45; p=0.66; df=4 Table 8. Multinomial analysis for habitat preference by YOY Gila spp. based on actual numbers of fish collected by habitat type in the Above Canyon sub-reach (Colorado RK 204 - 199.4), Utah. Data collected in July and August, 1992, 1994, and 1996 and July -Sept., 1993 and 1995. HABITAT TYPE N= Obs. % of Hab. Type No. of YOY chubs/ habitat type Exp. # of YOY chubs/ habitat type Chi-square factor. BW 48 78.7 1314 lO6S 56.6$ SH 2 3.3 2 45 40.87 EMB - - - - - PO 1 1.6 2 22 17.9 IP 5 8.2 3 111 105.35 FT - - - - - SC 5 8.2 36 111 50.92 Overall Chi-square = 271.73; p=0.00; df=4 10