Colby D. Denison, Amy Cottrell, Troy M. Farmer, Dewayne A. Fox, David M. Hood, William C. Post, Gregory Sorg, Ellen Waldrop, Brandon K. Peoples
{"title":"在大皮迪河双产卵大西洋鲟鱼的季节迁徙线索不同","authors":"Colby D. Denison, Amy Cottrell, Troy M. Farmer, Dewayne A. Fox, David M. Hood, William C. Post, Gregory Sorg, Ellen Waldrop, Brandon K. Peoples","doi":"10.1002/tafs.10431","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Objective We investigated environmental variables associated with spawning migration behavior for a dual‐spawning population of endangered Atlantic Sturgeon Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus in the Great Pee Dee River, South Carolina. Methods From 2016 to 2021, 147 Atlantic Sturgeon were captured, implanted with acoustic transmitters, and monitored using a stationary array of 40 receivers located every 5–20 km along a 302‐km section of the Great Pee Dee River from the river mouth at Winyah Bay to the first movement barrier at Blewett Falls Dam, North Carolina. Result We observed 47 Atlantic Sturgeon attempting 74 spring migrations and 39 Atlantic Sturgeon attempting 76 fall migrations across 4 years of telemetry observations (2018–2021). Mixed‐effects models indicated that discharge interacted with water temperature to affect both migration initiation and upriver movement, and these interactions differed between the spring and fall runs. Spring runs were cued by rising temperatures and high river discharge, whereas fall runs were cued by falling temperatures and low discharge. Within migrations, spring‐run fish migrated further upriver when discharge was falling, and fall‐run fish moved further upriver when discharge was rising. Overall, fall‐run sturgeon migrated significantly further upriver than spring‐run sturgeon. Conclusion Differences in migratory behavior between the two runs suggest potentially unique adaptations to ambient river conditions during the respective spawning seasons. Identifying the environmental factors that drive—and thereby limit—Atlantic Sturgeon migrations in the Great Pee Dee River informs regional recovery efforts and highlights the importance of studying and managing this species at the population level.","PeriodicalId":23214,"journal":{"name":"Transactions of The American Fisheries Society","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Seasonal migration cues differ for dual spawning Atlantic Sturgeon in the Great Pee Dee River\",\"authors\":\"Colby D. Denison, Amy Cottrell, Troy M. Farmer, Dewayne A. Fox, David M. Hood, William C. Post, Gregory Sorg, Ellen Waldrop, Brandon K. Peoples\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/tafs.10431\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Objective We investigated environmental variables associated with spawning migration behavior for a dual‐spawning population of endangered Atlantic Sturgeon Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus in the Great Pee Dee River, South Carolina. Methods From 2016 to 2021, 147 Atlantic Sturgeon were captured, implanted with acoustic transmitters, and monitored using a stationary array of 40 receivers located every 5–20 km along a 302‐km section of the Great Pee Dee River from the river mouth at Winyah Bay to the first movement barrier at Blewett Falls Dam, North Carolina. Result We observed 47 Atlantic Sturgeon attempting 74 spring migrations and 39 Atlantic Sturgeon attempting 76 fall migrations across 4 years of telemetry observations (2018–2021). Mixed‐effects models indicated that discharge interacted with water temperature to affect both migration initiation and upriver movement, and these interactions differed between the spring and fall runs. Spring runs were cued by rising temperatures and high river discharge, whereas fall runs were cued by falling temperatures and low discharge. Within migrations, spring‐run fish migrated further upriver when discharge was falling, and fall‐run fish moved further upriver when discharge was rising. Overall, fall‐run sturgeon migrated significantly further upriver than spring‐run sturgeon. Conclusion Differences in migratory behavior between the two runs suggest potentially unique adaptations to ambient river conditions during the respective spawning seasons. Identifying the environmental factors that drive—and thereby limit—Atlantic Sturgeon migrations in the Great Pee Dee River informs regional recovery efforts and highlights the importance of studying and managing this species at the population level.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23214,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transactions of The American Fisheries Society\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transactions of The American Fisheries Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/tafs.10431\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"FISHERIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transactions of The American Fisheries Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/tafs.10431","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"FISHERIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Seasonal migration cues differ for dual spawning Atlantic Sturgeon in the Great Pee Dee River
Abstract Objective We investigated environmental variables associated with spawning migration behavior for a dual‐spawning population of endangered Atlantic Sturgeon Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus in the Great Pee Dee River, South Carolina. Methods From 2016 to 2021, 147 Atlantic Sturgeon were captured, implanted with acoustic transmitters, and monitored using a stationary array of 40 receivers located every 5–20 km along a 302‐km section of the Great Pee Dee River from the river mouth at Winyah Bay to the first movement barrier at Blewett Falls Dam, North Carolina. Result We observed 47 Atlantic Sturgeon attempting 74 spring migrations and 39 Atlantic Sturgeon attempting 76 fall migrations across 4 years of telemetry observations (2018–2021). Mixed‐effects models indicated that discharge interacted with water temperature to affect both migration initiation and upriver movement, and these interactions differed between the spring and fall runs. Spring runs were cued by rising temperatures and high river discharge, whereas fall runs were cued by falling temperatures and low discharge. Within migrations, spring‐run fish migrated further upriver when discharge was falling, and fall‐run fish moved further upriver when discharge was rising. Overall, fall‐run sturgeon migrated significantly further upriver than spring‐run sturgeon. Conclusion Differences in migratory behavior between the two runs suggest potentially unique adaptations to ambient river conditions during the respective spawning seasons. Identifying the environmental factors that drive—and thereby limit—Atlantic Sturgeon migrations in the Great Pee Dee River informs regional recovery efforts and highlights the importance of studying and managing this species at the population level.
期刊介绍:
Transactions of the American Fisheries Society is a highly regarded international journal of fisheries science that has been published continuously since 1872. It features results of basic and applied research in genetics, physiology, biology, ecology, population dynamics, economics, health, culture, and other topics germane to marine and freshwater finfish and shellfish and their respective fisheries and environments.