Geology topics

Kirk Young

Publications and source records attributed to Kirk Young.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2026

Integrating mark-recapture, catch, and expert habitat assessments to quantify recent increases in humpback chub abundance over a 200 km long river segment of the Colorado River in western Grand Canyon

Humpback chub, Gila cypha, were historically distributed throughout large portions of the Colorado River basin and were federally listed in 1967. In the Grand Canyon segment of the Colorado River, located below Glen Canyon Dam, chub abundances continued to decline through the early 2000s. Recently, catch has increased substantially, especially in the western Grand Canyon. Here, we integrate mark-recapture and catch data of subadult and adult humpback chub, with expert assessments of habitat suitability and an underlying model of spatial autocorrelation, to estimate abundance in western Grand Canyon from 2010 to 2024, a time of rapid population increase and expansion. Our model suggests that adult abundance grew ∼160 fold during this 15-year period, with a median adult population abundance of 70 000 (40 000–200 000; 95% credible interval) in 2024. Our approach identifies years with high population growth and indicates that the spatial distribution has changed over time. We test the sensitivity of our results to movement into sampling reaches during sampling with baited hoop nets. Despite rapid population growth, the resilience of humpback chub in western Grand Canyon is unknown.

Arizona↗

USGS2025

Genetic structure of an expanding population of Humpback Chub in Grand Canyon

Objective Humpback Chub (HBC) Gila cypha in Grand Canyon declined in abundance and distribution over the latter part of the 20th century but have substantially increased in abundance and distribution over the past two decades. Although previous genetic work suggested that HBC in Grand Canyon belong to one genetic group, here we evaluate the genetic structure of HBC in Grand Canyon to determine whether relic populations in western Grand Canyon may have contributed unique variation to the recent population expansion or whether differences in behavior linked to migration in eastern Grand Canyon may promote assortative mating and heretofore unrecognized population structure. Methods Using fin clips collected from 167 individual HBC representing four sampling sites within Grand Canyon, we extracted DNA and developed data sets consisting of approximately 20,000 anonymous genomic loci. We quantified patterns of genetic diversity, and we accounted for outlier single-nucleotide polymorphisms to ensure that our interpretations of genetic patterns were not misled by adaptive processes and did not mask adaptively important genetic variation. Results Despite behavioral variation and the possibility that individuals with unique genetic variation survived in isolated warmwater sites within western Grand Canyon, HBC were not differentiated by sampling site or by differences in migratory behavior. Heterozygosity and nucleotide diversity were consistently high among sampling sites, and inbreeding coefficients were close to zero. Conclusions The HBC in Grand Canyon constitute a single genetic population. Our results do not preclude a genetic basis to migratory behavior, but our data suggest that this trait does not lead to assortative mating. Furthermore, while HBC may have survived in discontiguous warmwater refugia in western Grand Canyon during decades when the main stem was too cold for spawning, our data did not reveal any noticeable spatial variability in HBC genetics in the main stem after the recent HBC population expansion.

Arizona↗

USGS2015

A laboratory evaluation of tagging-related mortality and tag loss in juvenile humpback chub

We quantified tag retention, survival, and growth in juvenile, captive-reared Humpback Chub Gila cypha marked with three different tag types: (1) Biomark 12.5-mm, 134.2-kHz, full duplex PIT tags injected into the body cavity with a 12-gauge needle; (2) Biomark 8.4-mm, 134.2-kHz, full duplex PIT tags injected with a 16-gauge needle; and (3) Northwest Marine Technology visible implant elastomer (VIE) tags injected under the skin with a 29-gauge needle. Estimates of tag loss, tagging-induced mortality, and growth were evaluated for 60 d with each tag type for four different size-groups of fish: 40–49 mm, 50–59 mm, 60–69 mm, and 70–79 mm TL. Total length was a significant predictor of the probability of PIT tag retention and mortality for both 8-mm and 12-mm PIT tags, and the smallest fish had the highest rates of tag loss (12.5–30.0%) and mortality (7.5–20.0%). Humpback Chub of sizes 40–49 mm TL and tagged with VIE tags had no mortality but did have a 17.5% tag loss. Growth rates of all tagged fish were similar to controls. Our data indicate Humpback Chub can be effectively tagged using either 8-mm or 12-mm PIT tags with little tag loss or mortality at sizes as low as 65 mm TL.

North American Journal of Fisheries Management↗