USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Trout”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 109 records · Page 6Linked to original sources
USGS2004

Spatial partitioning and asymmetric hybridization among sympatric coastal steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus), coastal cutthroat trout (O. clarki clarki) and interspecific hybrids

Hybridization between sympatric species provides unique opportunities to examine the contrast between mechanisms that promote hybridization and maintain species integrity. We surveyed hybridization between sympatric coastal steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) and coastal cutthroat trout (O. clarki clarki) from two streams in Washington State, Olsen Creek (256 individuals sampled) and Jansen Creek (431 individuals sampled), over a 3-year period. We applied 11 O. mykiss-specific nuclear markers, 11 O. c. clarki-specific nuclear markers and a mitochondrial DNA marker to assess spatial partitioning among species and hybrids and determine the directionality of hybridization. F1 and post-F1 hybrids, respectively, composed an average of 1.2% and 33.6% of the population sampled in Jansen Creek, and 5.9% and 30.4% of the population sampled in Olsen Creek. A modest level of habitat partitioning among species and hybrids was detected. Mitochondrial DNA analysis indicated that all F 1 hybrids (15 from Olsen Creek and five from Jansen Creek) arose from matings between steelhead females and cutthroat males implicating a sneak spawning behaviour by cutthroat males. First-generation cutthroat backcrosses contained O. c. clarki mtDNA more often than expected suggesting natural selection against F1 hybrids. More hybrids were backcrossed toward cutthroat than steelhead and our results indicate recurrent hybridization within these creeks. Age analysis demonstrated that hybrids were between 1 and 4 years old. These results suggest that within sympatric salmonid hybrid zones, exogenous processes (environmentally dependent factors) help to maintain the distinction between parental types through reduced fitness of hybrids within parental environments while divergent natural selection promotes parental types through distinct adaptive advantages of parental phenotypes.

Washington↗
USGS2018

Brown trout in the Lees Ferry reach of the Colorado River—Evaluation of causal hypotheses and potential interventions

Over the period 2014–2016, the number of nonnative brown trout (Salmo trutta) captured during routine monitoring in the Lees Ferry reach of the Colorado River, downstream of Glen Canyon Dam, began increasing. Management agencies and stakeholders have questioned whether the increase in brown trout in the Lees Ferry reach represents a threat to the endangered humpback chub (Gila cypha), to the rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) sport fishery, or to other resources of concern. In this report, we evaluate the evidence for the expansion of brown trout in the Lees Ferry reach, consider a range of causal hypotheses for this expansion, examine the likely efficacy of several potential management interventions to reduce brown trout, and analyze the effects of those interventions on other resources of concern. The brown trout population at Lees Ferry historically consisted of a small number of large fish supported by low levels of immigration from downstream reaches. This population is now showing signs of sustained successful reproduction and is on the cusp of recruiting locally hatched fish into the spawning class, based on analysis with a new integrated population model. The proximate causes of this change in status are a large pulse of immigration in the fall of 2014 and higher reproductive rates in 2015–2017. The ultimate causes of this change are not clear. The pulse of immigrants from downstream reaches in fall 2014 may have been induced by three sequential high-flow releases from the dam in November of 2012–2014, but may also have been the result of a unique set of circumstances unrelated to dam operations. The increase in reproduction may have been the result of any number of changes, including an Allee effect, warmer water temperatures, a decrease in competition from rainbow trout, or fall high-flow releases. Correlations over space and time among predictor variables do not allow us to make a clear inference about the cause of the changes. Under a null causal model, and without any changes to management, we predict there is a 36-percent chance the brown trout population at Lees Ferry will not show sustained growth, and will remain around a mean size of 5,800 adults, near its current size; in contrast, we predict there is a 64-percent chance that the population has a positive intrinsic growth rate and will increase 3–10 fold over the next 20 years. A humpback chub population model linked to the brown trout model suggests an increase of brown trout of this magnitude could lead to declines in the minimum adult humpback chub population over the same time period. Forecasts of rainbow trout abundance, however, suggest that increased abundance of brown trout in the Lees Ferry reach does not pose a threat to the rainbow trout fishery there. There are interventions that may be effective in moderating the growth of the brown trout population in the Lees Ferry reach of the Colorado River. Across causal hypotheses, we predict that removal strategies (for example, a concerted electrofishing effort or an incentivized take program targeted at large brown trout) could reduce brown trout abundance by approximately 50 percent relative to status quo management. Reductions in the frequency or a change in the seasonal timing of high-flow releases from Glen Canyon Dam could be even more effective, but only under the causal hypotheses that involve effects of such releases on immigration or reproduction. Brown trout management flows— dam releases designed to strand young fish at a vulnerable stage—may be able to reduce brown trout abundance to some degree, but are not forecast to be the most effective strategy under any causal hypothesis. We predict that the alternative management interventions would have effects on other resource goals as well, and the pattern of these effects differs across causal hypotheses. The removal strategies would incur direct costs (on the order of $7 million over 20 years) and the mechanical removal strategy is unethical from the perspective of several tribes. The strategies that involve reducing the frequency of high-flow releases from Glen Canyon Dam would decrease the ability to transport and store sediment in the ecosystem, potentially undermining goals associated with sandbar building, recreation, and riparian vegetation, but would increase hydropower revenue. Trout management flows would reduce hydropower revenue. From the standpoint of humpback chub, the alternative strategies largely follow the effect on brown trout; when brown trout abundance is reduced, predation pressure decreases, and humpback chub viability is predicted to increase, but the variation in predicted chub viability is not large across strategies or causal hypotheses. To design a response to brown trout, management agencies will need to navigate both the tradeoffs among resources goals and the uncertainty in the causes of the brown trout expansion. Continued monitoring, possibly coupled with new research or experimental management actions that better inform demographic and ecological dynamics, can help to reduce the causal uncertainty.

Arizona↗
USGS2015

Sea lamprey mark type, wounding rate, and parasite-host preference and abundance relationships for lake trout and other species in Lake Ontario

We examined how the frequency of attacks by Sea Lamprey on fishes in Lake Ontario varied in response to Sea Lamprey abundance and preferred host abundance (Lake Trout >432mm). For this analysis we assembled seven data sets. Two fishery independent surveys for Lake Trout: US Geological Survey (USGS)/New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) south shore September gillnet assessment of adult Lake Trout (USGS/NYSDEC SGNS)( Lantry and Lantry 2011); and Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR) monthly June-November community index gillnetting in northeastern Lake Ontario (OMNR CIS) (Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources 2011). One angler survey: NYSDEC April-September Fishing Boat Survey data collected along the south shore for Chinook and Coho salmon, and Rainbow and Brown trout (NYSDEC FBS) ( Lantry and Eckert 2012). Two spawning run datasets: OMNR north shore data including spring spawning runs of Rainbow Trout in the Ganaraska River and electroshocking data for fall spawning runs of Chinook and Coho salmon in the Credit River (Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources 2011); and NYSDEC data from the Salmon River on the southeastern shore including October spawning runs of Chinook and Coho salmon. One Sea Lamprey spawning survey: Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO)/US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) data for spawning-phase Sea Lamprey abundance collected from known spawning streams distributed throughout the Lake Ontario drainage basin (Mullet et al. 2003). One assessment of the abundance of dead Lake Trout: USGS/NYSDEC October-November bottom trawl collection of Lake Trout carcasses (Schneider et al. 1996). Annual patterns in A1, A2 and A3 wound stages did not track well in plots of wounding rates for the USGS/NYSDEC SGNS and correlations between A1 and later stages did not exist. A1 rates were not correlated to either Lake Trout abundance or Sea Lamprey numbers when considered alone, but were strongly correlated to the ratio between Sea Lamprey numbers and Lake Trout abundance (parasite/host ratio). While A2 and A3 rates were correlated to each other, neither was consistently correlated to any of the Lake Trout abundance or Sea Lamprey abundance parameters and sums of A1 to A3 rates did not improve correlations over those for A1 rates considered alone. Our analysis of the strain-specific susceptibility of Lake Trout to attack by Sea Lampreys extended the previous Schneider et al. (1996) analysis of three strains (SUP, CWL, and SEN) and 11 years of data 1982-1992 to an analysis of seven strains (SUP, CWL, SEN, JEN, LEW, ONT, and OXS) and two groups of unmarked fish (1983-1995 and 1996-2010) and included 18 more years of data through 2010. The susceptibility to attack for CWLs and SENs were below SUPs and nearly identical to the earlier values, new values for LEWs were greater than SUPS and values of unmarked Lake Trout prior to 1996 were unexpectedly greater than SUPs. By reexamining the Schneider et al. (1996) regression relationship between A1 wounding on Lake Trout and the incidence of Lake Trout carcasses recovered in fall bottom trawls (including three additional years of data), and substituting A1 wounding rate for total numbers of A1s observed which was used as the independent variable in the previous version, we were able to increase the variance explained by the relationship from an r2 of 0.60 to 0.88. Healing rate of wounds was explored by examining the monthly incidence of A1 and A2 wounds on Lake Trout from the OMNR CIS. Because wounding intensity varied between years and monthly sample size was frequently low, the ratio of A2 to A1s wounds was used to index how wounds accumulated or disappeared from the Lake Trout populations across seasons. The A2/A1 ratio decreased between June/July and October. A simple wounding model for Lake Trout was constructed to simulate the pattern of ratios by inflicting wounds on the population each month according to a predetermined distribution and including parameters for lethality (fixed distribution) and healing rate of A1 and A2 wounds (discretely varied between simulations). The best simulated representation (ratio size and monthly pattern) of the OMNR CIS data came from an A1 healing rate of 0.5 months and an A2 rate of 2 months. To examine whether alternate hosts provided reliable data to index damage caused by Sea Lampreys we compared September values of abundance and A1 wounding rates on Lake Trout, Sea Lamprey abundance, and the parasite/host ratio with NYSDEC Creel data for observations of Sea lampreys attached to sport-caught salmonids and to wounding observations for salmonids sampled in OMNR and NYSDEC spawning run assessments. Attachment frequency on NYSDEC Creel Chinook Salmon, Brown Trout, and Rainbow Trout were strongly correlated to all measures of Lake Trout abundance and wounding and to the parasite/host ratio. Chinook Salmon and Coho Salmon wounding observations for the NYSDEC Salmon River spawning run assessments and Rainbow Trout from the OMNR Ganaraska River spawning run assessment were strongly correlated to wounding measures for nearly all salmonids and to the parasite/host ratio.

Lake Ontario↗
USGS2019

Growth, condition, and trophic relations of stocked trout in southern Appalachian mountain streams

Stream trout fisheries are among the most popular and valuable in the United States, but many are dependent on hatcheries to sustain fishing and harvest. Thus, understanding the ecology of hatchery‐reared trout stocked in natural environments is fundamental to management. We evaluated the growth, condition, and trophic relations of Brook Trout Salvelinus fontinalis , Brown Trout Salmo trutta , and Rainbow Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss that were stocked in southern Appalachian Mountain streams in western North Carolina. Stocked and wild (naturalized) trout were sampled over time (monthly; September 2012–June 2013) to compare condition and diet composition and to evaluate temporal dynamics of trophic position with stable isotope analysis. Relative weights ( W r ) of stocked trout were inversely associated with their stream residence time but were consistently higher than those of wild trout. Weight loss of harvested stocked trout was similar among species and sizes, but fish stocked earlier lost more weight. Overall, 40% of 141 stomachs from stocked trout were empty compared to 15% of wild trout stomachs ( N = 26). We identified a much higher rate of piscivory in wild trout (18 times that of stocked trout), and wild trout were 4.3 times more likely to consume gastropods relative to stocked trout. Hatchery‐reared trout were isotopically similar to co‐occurring wild fish for both δ 13 C and δ 15 N values but were less variable than wild trout. Differences in sulfur isotope ratios (δ 34 S) between wild and hatchery‐reared trout indicated that the diets of wild fish were enriched in δ 34 S relative to the diets of hatchery‐reared fish. Although hatchery‐reared trout consumed prey items similar to those of wild fish, differences in consumption or behavior (e.g., reduced feeding) may have resulted in lower condition and negative growth. These findings provide critical insight on the trophic dynamics of stocked trout and may assist in developing and enhancing stream trout fisheries.

North Carolina↗
USGS2017

Earning their stripes: The potential of tiger trout and other salmonids as biological controls of forage fishes in a western reservoir

Maintaining a balance between predator and prey populations can be an ongoing challenge for fisheries managers, especially in managing artificial ecosystems such as reservoirs. In a high-elevation Utah reservoir, the unintentional introduction of the Utah Chub Gila atraria and its subsequent population expansion prompted managers to experimentally shift from exclusively stocking Rainbow Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss to also stocking tiger trout (female Brown Trout Salmo trutta × male Brook Trout Salvelinus fontinalis ) and Bonneville Cutthroat Trout O. clarkii utah (hereafter, Cutthroat Trout) as potential biological control agents. We measured a combination of diet, growth, temperature, and abundance and used bioenergetic simulations to quantify predator demand versus prey supply. Utah Chub were the predominant prey type for tiger trout, contributing up to 80% of the diet depending on the season. Utah Chub represented up to 70% of the total diet consumed by Cutthroat Trout. Although Utah Chub dominated the fish biomass in the reservoir, we still estimated abundances of 238,000 tiger trout, 214,000 Cutthroat Trout, and 55,000 Rainbow Trout. Consequently, when expanded to the population level of each predator, tiger trout and Cutthroat Trout consumed large quantities of Utah Chub on an annual basis: tiger trout consumed 508,000 kg (2,660 g/predator) of the standing prey population, and Cutthroat Trout consumed an estimated 322,000 kg (1,820 g/predator). The estimated combined consumption by Cutthroat Trout and tiger trout exceeded the estimate of Utah Chub annual production. As such, our results suggest that the high rates of piscivory exhibited by Cutthroat Trout and tiger trout in artificial lentic ecosystems are likely sufficient to effectively reduce the overall abundance of forage fishes and to prevent forage fishes from dominating fish assemblages. Collectively, this research provides the first documented findings on tiger trout ecology and performance, which will aid managers in designing and implementing the best stocking strategy to optimize sport fish performance, control undesirable forage fish, and enhance and maintain angler satisfaction.

Utah↗
USGS1995

Ebb and flow of encroachment by nonnative rainbow trout in a small stream in the southern Appalachian Mountains

Brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis is the native salmonid species of streams in the southern Appalachian Mountains. The present distribution of this species, once widespread from headwaters to lower reaches of large streams, is restricted to mostly headwater areas. Changes in the distribution of native brook trout in the presence ofˈ nonnative rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss have been documented in Great Smoky Mountains National Park. When rainbow trout were first found in a tributary (Rock Creek) in the park in 1979, a study was begun to assess changes through time in distribution and abundance of rainbow trout in Rock Creek and to compare the brook trout and rainbow trout associations in Rock Creek with associations found in other park streams. Abundance of brook trout was low in the downstream sections of Rock Creek in 1979–1993. Brook trout abundance was highest in the steep‐gradient, pool‐dominated headwater section which was only 2 km from the confluence of Rock Creek and Cosby Creek. Rainbow trout were present in low densities in Rock Creek during the same period. Although rainbow trout were most abundant in the lower stream sections and never found in the headwater section, adult and age‐0 rainbow trout were found in the middle section in 1988. Rainbow trout were absent in the middle section in 1991, but one large adult rainbow trout was present in the section in 1992 and 1993. Floods, freshets, and periods of low stream discharge appeared to play an important role in the distribution and population structure of rainbow trout in Rock Creek. The lower portion of Rock Creek was poor trout habitat because the sections were dominated by cobble–rubble substrate and shallow riffle areas. Stream habitat appeared to be better suited for brook trout than for rainbow trout in the steep‐gradient upstream sections which were dominated by boulder‐cobble substrate and deep pools. The results of this study suggest that encroachment by rainbow trout can exhibit considerable ebb and flow in steep‐gradient tributaries in the park, and they suggest substantial evolutionary adaptation by brook trout to the hydrological conditions in the Rock Creek drainage.

North Carolina, Tennessee↗