My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7908
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
7908
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/11/2009 11:32:57 AM
Creation date
8/10/2009 4:22:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
7908
Author
Valdez, R. A. and R. J. Ryel.
Title
Life History and Ecology of the Humpback Chub (
USFW Year
1995.
Copyright Material
NO
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
363
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
<br />12 . Executive Summary <br /> <br />to occupy relatively higher velocities and utilize <br />local supplies of food. <br /> <br />Adults in Cataract Canyon were frequently observed <br />moving to large eddies during runoff or when drift <br />volume was high to feed on entrained materials <br />(Valdez 1990). Adults in postdam Grand Canyon <br />may be largely restricted to recirculating eddies as <br />areas of sufficient food supplies with low velocity. <br /> <br />The character of these large recirculating eddies may <br />be changed from predam conditions as a result of <br />nearly 90% sediment retention in Lake Powell, and <br />subsequent scouring of sediments from the river <br />channel downstream of the dam. Because adult <br />humpback chub in Grand Canyon may prefer eddies, <br />the volume of sand in the channel. and thus in <br />eddies, may be important for shaping fish habitat <br />and hydraulic characteristics. These relationships <br />and resulting effects to the fish are not well <br />understood. Possibly, some expansion zones <br />contain less sand today than predam and may be <br />more effective at entraining drifting material. <br /> <br />FOOD HABITS <br /> <br />Adult humpback chub in the Colorado River in <br />Grand Canyon ate primarily simuliids, introduced <br />freshwater amphipods (Gammarus lacustris), <br />chironomids, other aquatic invertebrates (i.e., <br />primarily beetles) and terrestrial insects (i.e., <br />primarily ants). The algae, Cladophora glomerata. <br />also made up a significant portion of gut volume, <br />but it was not determined if this item was consumed <br />incidentally or selected by the fish and of nutritional <br />benefit as observed for rainbow trout (Liebfried <br />1988). The major food items (excluding <br />Cladophora) of the LCRI aggregation were <br />amphipods (45% by volume) and simuliids (40%), <br />and the major items of the Middle Granite Gorge <br />aggregation were simuliids (49%) and terrestrial <br />invertebrates (30%, primarily ants and beetles) (Fig. <br />12). Johnson's electivity indices indicate that <br />simuliids, chironomids, and amphipods were <br />conswned in approximately the same proportions as <br />available in the drift in both areas, while terrestrial <br />invertebrates were lower in numbers in drift samples <br />than in guts. This disparity is attributed to the <br />irregular occurrence of terrestrial invertebrates <br />washed into the mainstem by floods; these events <br />may not be represented by periodic drift sampling, <br />Although Cladophora composed the greatest volume <br /> <br />Final Report <br /> <br />in drift, with increasingly greater amounts in a <br />downstream direction, this algae was absent from <br />guts of Middle Granite Gorge fish, but composed <br />24% of gut volume of LCRI fish. <br /> <br />Seasonal diet of adult humpback chub was distinct. <br />The diet in spring was primarily amphipods (51%), <br />simuliid larvae (24%), and terrestrial invertebrates <br />(23%); summer diet was simuliids (47%), <br />amphipods (30%), terrestrial invertebrates (14%), <br />andchironomids (7010); and fall diet was amphipods <br />(44%) and simuliids (44%). The relative abundance <br />of amphipods and chironomids in gut contents was <br />approximately the same as respective seasonal <br />abundances in drift. but electivity indices indicated <br />selection for terrestrials and other aquatic <br />invertebrates in all seasons. Terrestrial <br />invertebrates were difficult to monitor in drift <br /> <br />Little Colorado River Aggregation <br />n= 128 <br /> <br />OIh Aqua!. Terrestrial <br />er IC Invertebrates <br />Invertebrates 940/< <br />0.3% ' 0 <br />SE=O,1 ~ SE=2.7 <br /> <br />Gammarus <br />44,8% <br />SE=5.1 <br /> <br /> <br />Simuliids <br />40,3% <br />SE=4.6 <br /> <br />Chironomids <br />5.3% <br />SE=2.1 <br /> <br />Middle Granite Gorge Aggregation <br />n=24 <br /> <br />T errestria/ <br />Invertebrates <br />29.6% <br />SE=7,3 <br /> <br /> <br />Simuliids <br />49.1% <br />SE=7.5 <br /> <br />Other Aquatic <br />Invertebrates <br />6.3% <br />SE=1.5 Gammarus <br />10.4% Chironomids <br />SE=5.1 4.6% <br />SE=1.6 <br /> <br />Fig. 12. Volumetric composition of invertebrates <br />(excluding Cladophora) found in stomach contents <br />of adult humpback chub from the Little Colorado <br />River aggregation and the Middle Granite Gorge <br />aggregation during 1992-93. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.