Environmental Biology of Fishes

, Volume 78, Issue 4, pp 307–316 | Cite as

The environmental preferences of three species of Australian freshwater fish in relation to the effects of riparian degradation

  • Susan King
  • Kevin Warburton
Original Paper


To assess the likely effects on three coexisting species of Australian freshwater fish of riparian loss, we examined the temperature, light, and habitat preferences of each species in relation to commonly documented effects of riparian degradation on stream environments. Such effects include reduced shade, instream structure, and water depth and increased temperature and invasive instream vegetation. Xiphophorus helleri, Gambusia holbrooki, and Melanotaenia duboulayi differed significantly in mean swimming depth, preferences for light and habitat, and in their patterns of behavioural change through the day. Values of interspecific spatial overlap (25–58%) indicated that the overall environmental preferences of G. holbrooki, X. helleri, and M. duboulayi were reasonably distinct. Habitat alterations associated with riparian removal are likely to favour the exotic species G. holbrooki over the native species M. duboulayi, but the results for X. helleri suggest that not all poeciliid␣species are strong indicators of degraded conditions.


Light Habitat Spatial overlap 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



We would like to thank Greg Skilleter, John Kirkwood, and anonymous referees for their helpful suggestions on this study.


  1. Arthington AH, Marshall CJ (1999) Diet of the exotic mosquitofish, Gambusia holbrooki, in an Australian lake and potential for competition with indigenous fish species. Asian Fish Sci 12:1–16Google Scholar
  2. Arthington AH, Milton DA, McKay RJ (1983) Effects of urban development and habitat alterations on the distribution and abundance of native and exotic freshwater fish in the Brisbane region, Queensland. Aust J Ecol 8:87–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Backhouse GN, Frusher DJ (1980) The crimson-spotted rainbowfish, (Castelnau 1878). Vic Nat 97:144–148Google Scholar
  4. Baltz DM, Vondracek B, Brown LR, Moyle PB (1987) Influence of temperature on microhabitat choices by fishes in a Californian stream. Trans Am Fish Soc 116:12–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brandt SB, Magnuson JJ, Crowder LB (1980) Thermal habitat partitioning by fishes in Lake Michigan. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 37:1557–1564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown LR (1989) Temperature preferences and oxygen consumption of the three species of sculpin (Cottus) from the Pit River drainage, California. Environ Biol Fish 26:223–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bunn S, Davies P, Kellaway D, Prosser I (1998) Influence of invasive macrophytes on channel morphology and hydrology in an open tropical lowland stream, and potential control by riparian shading. Freshwater Biol 39:171–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carlson J, Andrus C, Froehlich H (1990) Woody debris, channel features, and macroinvertebrates of streams with logged and undisturbed riparian timber in northeastern Oregon, USA. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 47:1103–1111Google Scholar
  9. Casterlin ME, Reynolds WW (1977) Aspects of habitat selection in the mosquitofish Gambusia affinis. Hydrobiologia 55:125–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davies P, Nelson M (1994) Relationship between riparian buffer width and the effects of logging on stream habitat, invertebrate community composition and fish abundance. Aust J Mar Freshwater Res 45:1289–1305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dilworth T (2001) Bio-geomorphology: is there a linkage between riparian vegetation and patterns in fluvial geomorphology? Third Australian Stream Management Conference, pp 181–184Google Scholar
  12. Edwards R (1995) The ecological basis for the management of water quality. In: Harper DM, Ferguson AJD (eds) The ecological basis for river management. Wiley Publishers, England, pp 135–146Google Scholar
  13. Elliott JM (1995) The ecological basis for management of fish stocks in rivers. In: Harper DM, Ferguson AJD (eds) The ecological basis for river management. Wiley Publishers, England, pp 323–337Google Scholar
  14. Fennessy M, Cronk J (1997) The effectiveness and restoration potential of riparian ecotones for the management of nonpoint source pollution, particularly nitrate. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 27:285–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hartman KJ, Vondracek B, Parrish DL (1992) Diets of the emerald and spottail shiners and potential interactions with other Western lake Erie planktivorous fishes. J Great Lakes Res 18:43–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hattori A, Warburton K (2003) Microhabitat use by the rainbowfish Melanotaenia duboulayi in a subtropical Australian stream. J Ethol 21:15–22Google Scholar
  17. Hetrick N, Brusven M, Meehan W, Bjornn T (1998) Changes in solar input, water temperature, periphyton accumulation, and allochthonous input and storage after canopy removal along two small Salmon streams in southeast Alaska. Trans Am Fish Soc 127:859–875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jones DEB, Helfman GS, Harper JO, Bolstad PV (1999) Effects of riparian forest removal on fish assemblages in southern Appalachian streams. Conserv Biol 13:1454–1465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kennard MJ, Arthington AH, Pusey BJ, Harch BD (2005) Are alien fish a reliable indicator of river health? Freshwater Biol 50:174–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McDowall R (1996) Freshwater fishes of south-eastern Australia. Reed, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  21. Merrick JR, Schmida GE (1984) Australian freshwater fishes. Biology and Management. Merrick, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  22. Moffatt DB, Voller J (2002) Fish and fish habitat of the Queensland Murray-Darling basin. Department of Primary Industries, QueenslandGoogle Scholar
  23. Murphy M, Heifetz J, Johnson S, Koski K, Thedinga J (1986) Effects of clear-cut logging with and without buffer strips on juvenile salmonids in Alaskan streams. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 43:1521–1533Google Scholar
  24. Neill WH, Magnuson JJ (1974) Distributional ecology and behavioural thermoregulation of fishes in relation to heated effluent from a power plant at Lake Monona, Wisconsin. Trans Am Fish Soc 103:663–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Penczak T, Agostinho AA, Okada EK (1994) Fish diversity and community structure in two small tributaries of the Parana River, Parana State, Brazil. Hydrobiologia 294:243–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Platell ME, Potter IC, Clarke KR (1998) Do the habitats, mouth morphology and diets of the mullids Upeneichthys stotti and U. lineatus in coastal waters of south-western Australia differ? J Fish Biol 52:398–418Google Scholar
  27. Pusey B, Arthington AH (2003) Importance of the riparian zone to the conservation and management of freshwater fish: a review. Mar Freshwater Res 54:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pusey B, Kennard M, Arthington AH (2004). Freshwater fishes of north-eastern Australia. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, 684 ppGoogle Scholar
  29. Ross ST (1986) Resource partitioning in fish assemblages: a review of field studies. Copeia 1986:352–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sánchez-Gonzáles S, Ruiz-Campos G, Contreras-Balderas S (2001) Feeding ecology and habitat of the threespine stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus microcephalus, in a remnant population of northwestern Baja California, México. Ecol Freshw Fish 10:191–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Schoener TW (1970) Nonsynchronous spatial overlap of lizards in patchy habitats. Ecology 51:408–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Vought L, Pinay G, Fuglsang A, Ruffinoni C (1995) Structure and function of buffer strips from a water quality perspective in agricultural landscapes. Landscape Urban Plan 31:323–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Weatherley N, Ormerod S (1990) Forests and the temperature of upland streams in Wales: a modeling exploration of the biological effects. Freshw Biol 24:109–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Winkler P (1979) Thermal preference of Gambusia affinis affinis as determined under field and laboratory conditions. Copeia 1979:60–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zaret TM, Rand AS (1971) Competition in tropical stream fishes: support for the competitive exclusion principle. Ecology 52:336–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Integrative BiologyUniversity of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations