Advertisement

Reproduction, growth, and migration of fishes in a regulated lowland tributary: potential recruitment to the river Meuse

  • B. J. A. Pollux
  • P. M. J. Pollux
  • A. Korosi
  • W. C. E. P. Verberk
  • G. van der Velde
Chapter
  • 837 Downloads
Part of the Developments in Hydrobiology book series (DIHY, volume 187)

Abstract

Many European rivers are characterized by a canalized main channel, steep stony embankments, the absence of aquatic vegetation, regulated flow dynamics, reduced hydrological connectivity to the floodplains and a lack of spawning and nursery areas for many fish species. In such regulated rivers, tributaries may be particularly important for recruitment of fish populations in the main channel. This paper describes the reproduction, growth and migration of fishes in the Everlose Beek, a regulated lowland tributary stream of the river Meuse (The Netherlands), using bi-weekly sampling from January to December 2002. A total of 8615 fishes were caught, belonging to 13 different species. The fish species were classified into three groups, viz., residents, migrants and transients, based on the presence of various life-stages in the tributary. Size-frequency data suggest that each group uses the Everlose Beek differently: (i) Stone loach (Barbatula barbatula), Gudgeon (Gobio gobio) and Three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) were resident species using the tributary as a spawning, nursery and adult habitat; (ii) Bream (Abramis brama), Roach (Rutilus rutilus), Rudd (R. erythrophthalmus), Tench (Tinca tinca), and Pike (Esox lucius) were migratory species, using the tributary as a spawning area, as well as a nursery habitat during their first year of growth, but migrating towards the river Meuse typically at a length of 5–15 cm; and (iii) Bleak (Alburnus alburnus), Sunbleak (Leucaspius delineatus), Carp (Cyprinus carpio), Crucian carp (Carassius carassius), and Perch (Perca fluviatilis) were transient species, characterized by an absence of reproduction, and the occurrence in very low densities of >age-1 juveniles and adults only. Lowland tributaries, such as the Everlose Beek, can contribute to the recruitment of particularly migrant species, hence contributing to fish populations of the regulated river Meuse.

Key words

larvae juveniles migration nursery residents transients 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aarts, B. G. W. & P. H. Nienhuis, 2003. Fish zonations and guilds as the basis for assessment of ecological integrity of large rivers. Hydrobiologia 500: 157–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aarts, B. G. W., F. W. B. van den Brink & P. H. Nienhuis, 2004. Habitat loss as the main cause of the slow recovery of fish faunas of regulated large rivers in Europe: the transversal floodplain gradient. River Research and Applications 20: 3–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Admiraal, W., G. van der Velde, H. Smit & W. G. Cazemier, 1993. The rivers Rhine and Meuse in The Netherlands: present state and signs of ecological recovery. Hydrobiologia 265: 97–128.Google Scholar
  4. Akkermans, R. W., 1996. De verspreiding van het Vetje in Limburg. Natuurhistorisch Maandblad 85: 38–41 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  5. Allan, J. D., 1995. Stream Ecology: Structure and Function of Running Waters. Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar
  6. Arlinghaus, R., C. Engelhardt, A. Sukhodolov & C. Wolter, 2002. Fish recruitment in a canal with intensive navigation: implications for ecosystem management. Journal of Fish Biology 61: 1386–1402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bain, M. B., J. T. Finn & H. E. Booke, 1988. Streamflow regulation and fish community structure. Ecology 69: 382–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Balon, E. K., 1975. Reproductive guilds of fishes: proposal and definition. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 32: 821–864.Google Scholar
  9. Balon, E. K., 1981. Additions and amendments to the classification of reproductive styles in fishes. Environmental Biology of Fishes 6: 377–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bãnãrescu, P. M., 1999.Gobio gobio (Linnaeus, 1758). In Bãnãrescu, P. M. (ed.), The Freshwater Fishes of Europe Vol. 5/I Cyprinidae 2 Part I. Aula-Verlag GmbH, Wiebelsheim: 24–46.Google Scholar
  11. Baruš, V., M. Peňáz & K. Kohlmann, 2002. Cyprinus carpio (Linnaeus, 1758). In Bãnãrescu, P. M. & H. J. Paepke (eds), The Freshwater Fishes of Europe Vol. 5/III Cyprinidae 2 Part III. Aula-Verlag GmbH, Wiebelsheim: 85–179.Google Scholar
  12. Borcherding, J., M. Bauerfeld, D. Hintzen & D. Neumann, 2002. Lateral migrations of fishes between floodplain lakes and their drainage channels at the Lower Rhine: diel and seasonal aspects. Journal of Fish Biology 61: 1154–1170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Buijse, A. D., H. Coops, M. Staras, L. H. Jans, G. J. van Geest, R. E. Grift, B. W. Ibelings, W. Oosterberg & F. C. J. M. Roozen, 2002. Restoration strategies for river floodplains along large lowland rivers in Europe. Freshwater Biology 47: 889–907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brylińska, M., E. Bryliński & M. Bnińska, 1999. Tinca tinca (Linnaeus, 1758). In Bãnãrescu, P. M. (ed.), The Freshwater Fishes of Europe Vol. 5/I Cyprinidae 2 Part I. Aula-Verlag GmbH, Wiebelsheim: 248–281.Google Scholar
  15. Calow, P. & G. E. Petts, 1994. The Rivers Handbook: Hydrological and Ecological Principles Vols. 1–2. Blackwell Science Ltd, Oxford.Google Scholar
  16. Cocheret de la Morinière, E., B. J. A. Pollux, I. Nagelkerken & G. van der Velde, 2002. Post-settlement life-cycle migration patterns and habitat preference of coral reef fish that use seagrass and mangrove habitats as nurseries. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 55: 309–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cocheret de la Morinière, E., B. J.A. Pollux, I. Nagelkerken, M. A. Hemminga, A. H. L. Huiskes & G. van der Velde, 2003. Ontogenetic dietary changes of coral reef fishes in the mangrove-seagrass-reef continuum: stable isotopes and gut-content analysis. Marine Ecology Progress Series 246: 279–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Copp, G. H., 1997. Microhabitat use of fish larvae and 0+ juveniles in a highly regulated section of the river Great Ouse. Regulated Rivers: Research & Management 13: 267–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Crombaghs, B. H. J. M., R. W. Akkermans, R. E. M. B. Gubbels & G. Hoogerwerf, 2000. Vissen in Limburgse beken: De Verspreiding en Ecologie van Vissen in Stromende Wateren in Limburg. Stichting Natuurpublicaties Limburg, Maastricht (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  20. De Graaf, G. J., A. F. Born, A. M. K. Uddin & S. Huda, 1999. Larval fish movement in the River Lohajang, Tangail, Bangladesh. Fisheries Management and Ecology 6: 109–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Delmastro, G., 1982. I pesci del bacino del Po. Museo Civico di storia Naturale di Carmagnola, CLESAC, Milano (in Italian).Google Scholar
  22. De Nie, H. W., 1996. Atlas van de Nederlandse Zoetwatervissen. Media Publishing Int, BV, Doetinchem (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  23. Diehl, S. & R. Kornijów, 1998. Influence of submerged macrophytes on trophic interactions among fish and macroinvertebrates. In Jeppensen, E. M. Søndergaard, M. Søndergaard, & K. Christoffersen (eds), The Structuring Role of Submerged Macrophytes in Lakes. Springer-Verlag, New York: 24–46.Google Scholar
  24. Dorenbosch, M., G. van der Velde & B. H. J. M. Crombaghs, 2000. Schepnet versus elektrisch net: een vergelijking tussen twee vismethoden. Natuurhistorisch Maandblad 89: 62–66 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  25. Dynesius, M. & C. Nilsson, 1994. Fragmentation and flow regulation of river systems in the northern third of the world. Science 266: 753–762.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gamito, S., 1998. Growth models and their use in ecological modelling: an application to a fish population. Ecological Modelling 113: 83–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gerking, S. D., 1953. Evidence for the concepts of home range and territory in stream fishes. Ecology 34: 347–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gorman, O. T. & J. R. Karr, 1978. Habitat structure and stream fish communities. Ecology 59: 507–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gozlan, R. E., A. C. Pinder, S. Durand & J. Bass, 2003. Could the small size of sunbleak, Leucaspius delineatus (Pisces, Cyprinidae) be an ecological advantage in invading British waterbodies? Folio Zoologica 52: 99–108.Google Scholar
  30. Grenouillet, G. & D. Pont, 2001. Juvenile fishes in macrophyte beds: influence of food resources, habitat structure and body size. Journal of Fish Biology 59: 939–959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Grenouillet, G., D. Pont & J. M. Olivier, 2001. Linking zooplankton and juvenile fish assemblages in a large lowland river: influence of submerged macrophytes. Archiv fü r Hydrobiologie 151: 383–404.Google Scholar
  32. Grift, R. E., A. D. Buijse, W. L. T. van Densen, M. A. M. Machiels, J. Kranenbarg, J. G. P. Klein Breteler & J. J. G. M. Backx, 2003. Suitable habitats for 0-group fish in rehabilitated floodplains along the lower river Rhine. River Research and Applications 19: 353–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Grift, R. E., A. D. Buijse, J. G. P. Klein Breteler, W. L. T. van Densen, M. A. M. Machiels & J. J. G. M. Backx, 2001. Migration of bream between the main channel and floodplain lakes along the lower River Rhine during the connection phase. Journal of Fish Biology 59: 1033–1055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jongman, R. H. G., C. J. F. ter Braak & O. F. R. van Tongeren, 1995. Data Analysis in Community and Landscape Ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  35. Jungwirth, M., O. Moog & S. Muhar, 1993. Effects of river bed restructuring on fish and benthos of a fifth order stream, Melk, Austria. Regulated Rivers: Research & Management 8: 195–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Junk, W. J., P. B. Bayley & R. E. Sparks, 1989. The flood pulse concept in river-floodplain systems. Canadian Special Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 106: 110–127.Google Scholar
  37. Jurajda, P., 1995. Effect of channelization and regulation on fish recruitment in a flood plain river. Regulated Rivers: Research & Management 10: 207–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Jurajda, P., 1999. Comparative nursery habitat use by 0+ fish in a modified lowland river. Regulated Rivers: Research & Management 15: 113–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kirjasniemi, M. & T. Valtonen, 1997. Winter mortality of young-of-the-year pikeperch (Stizostedion lucioperca). Ecology of Freshwater Fish 6: 155–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lelek, A. & G. Buhse, 1992. Fische des Rheins-frü her und heute. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (in German).Google Scholar
  41. Maris, M., J. J. Bakhuizen, H. Bakker & B. Peters, 2003. De betekenis van het grens-en zandmaasproject voor de visfauna in de Maas en zijbeken. Natuurhistorisch Maandblad 92: 274–279 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  42. McAleece, N., 1997. Biodiversity Professional Beta 1. The Natural History Museum London and The Scottisch Association for Marine Science, UK.Google Scholar
  43. Molls, F., 1997. Populationsbiologie der Fischarten einer niederrheinischen Auenlandschaft Reproductionserfolge, Lebenszyklen, Kurzdistanzwanderungen. PhD thesis, University of Cologne, Cologne (in German).Google Scholar
  44. Neumann, D.,C. Seidenberg-Busse, A. Petermeier, S. Staas, F. Molls & J. Rutschke, 1994. Gravel-pit lakes connected with the river Rhine as a reserve for high productivity of plankton and young fish. Water Science & Technology 29: 267–271.Google Scholar
  45. Nienhuis, P. H., J. P. Bakker, A. P. Grootjans, R. D. Gulati & V. N. de Jonge, 2002a. The state of the art of aquatic and semi-aquatic ecological restoration projects in the Netherlands. Hydrobiologia 478: 219–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Nienhuis, P. H., A. D. Buijse, R. S. E. W. Leuven, A. J. M. Smits, R. J. W. de Nooij & E. M. Samborska, 2002b. Ecological rehabilitation of the lowland basin of the river Rhine (NW Europe). Hydrobiologia 478: 53–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Nienhuis, P. H., R. S. E. W. Leuven & A. M. J. Ragas (eds), 1998. New Concepts for Sustainable Management of River Basins. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden.Google Scholar
  48. Nikolsky, G. V., 1963. The Ecology of Fishes. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
  49. Nilsson, C., R. Jansson & U. Zinko, 1997. Long-term responses of river-margin vegetation to water-level regulation. Science 276: 798–800.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Northcote, T. G., 1978. Migratory strategies and production in freshwater fishes. In Gerking, S. D. (ed.), Ecology of Freshwater Fish Production. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford: 326–259.Google Scholar
  51. Nunn, A. D., I. G. Cowx & J. P. Harvey, 2002. Recruitment patterns of six species of cyprinid fishes in the lower River Trent, England. Ecology of Freshwater Fish l1: 74–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Persson, L. & L. B. Crowder, 1998. Fish-habitat interactions mediated via ontogenetic niche shifts. In Jeppensen, E. M. Søndergaard, M. Søndergaard & K. Christoffersen (eds), The Structuring Role of Submerged Macrophytes in Lakes. Springer-Verlag, New York: 3–23.Google Scholar
  53. Petts, G. E. & C. Amoros, 1996. Fluvial Hydrosystems. Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar
  54. Pinder, A. C., 2001. Keys to larval and juvenile stages of coarse fishes from fresh waters in the British Isles Freshwater Biological Association. Scientific Publication 60: 1–136.Google Scholar
  55. Pollux, B. J. A., A. Korosi, W. C. E. P. Verberk & P. M. J. Pollux, 2004. Voortplanting, groei en migratie van vissen in de Everlose beek. Natuurhistorisch Maandblad 93: 1–8 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  56. Raat, A. J. P., 2001. Ecological rehabilitation of the Dutch part of the River Rhine with special attention to the fish. Regulated Rivers: Research & Management 17: 131–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Reichard, M., P. Jurajda & M. Ondrackova, 2002. Interannual variability in seasonal dynamics and species composition of drifting young-of-the-year fishes in two European lowland rivers. Journal of Fish Biology 60: 87–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Robinson, A. T., R. W. Clakson & R. E. Forrest, 1998. Dispersal of larval fishes in a regulated river tributary. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 127: 772–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Rozas, L. P. & W. E. Odum, 1988. Occupation of submerged aquatic vegetation by fishes: testing the roles of food and refuge. Oecologia 77: 101–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Schiemer, F., 1985. Die Bedeutung Von Augewä ssern als Schutzzonen fü r die Fishfauna. Oesterreichische Wasserwirtschaft 37: 239–245.Google Scholar
  61. Schlosser, I. J., 1991. Stream fish ecology: a landscape perspective. BioScience 41: 704–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Simons, J. H. E. J., C. Bakker, M. H. I. Schrop, L. H. Jans, F. R. Kok & R. E. Grift, 2001. Man-made secondary channels along the river Rhine (The Netherlands); results of post-project monitoring. Regulated Rivers: Research & Management 17: 473–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Staas, S. & D. Neumann, 1994. Reproduction of fish in the lower river Rhine and connected gravel-pit lakes. Water Science & Technology 29: 311–313.Google Scholar
  64. Staas, S. & D. Neumann, 1996. The occurrence of larval and juvenile 0+ fish in the Lower River Rhine. Archiv fü r Hydrobiologie Supplement 113, Large Rivers 10: 325–332.Google Scholar
  65. Steinberg, L., 1992. Fische unserer Bäche und Flüsse. Verbreitung, Gefährdung und Schutz in Nordrhein-Westfalen, Ministerium für Umwelt, Raumordnung und Landwirtschaft des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen, Düsseldorf (in German).Google Scholar
  66. Stott, B., 1961. Movement of coarse fish in rivers. Nature 190: 737–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Stott, B., 1967. The movements and population densities of roach (Rutilus rutilus (L.)) and gudgeon (Gobio gobio (L.)) in the River Mole. Journal of Animal Ecology 36: 407–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Vandelannoote, A., R. Yseboodt, B. Bruylants, R. Verheyen, J. Coeck, C. Belpaire, G. Van Thuyne, B. Denayer, J. Beyens, D. De Charleroy, J. Maes & P. Vandenabeele, 1998. Atlas van de V1aamse beeken riviervissen. Water-EnergikvLario (WEL), Wijnegem (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  69. Van den Brink, F.W.B., 1994. Impact of hydrology on floodplain lake ecosystems along the lower Rhine and Meuse. PhD thesis, University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen.Google Scholar
  70. Van den Brink, F. W. B., G. van der Velde, A. D. Buijse & A. G. Klink, 1996. Biodiversity in the lower Rhine and Meuse River-Floodplains: its significance for ecological river management. Netherlands Journal of Aquatic Ecology 30: 129–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Van der Velde, G., F. W. B. van den Brink, M. van der Gaag & P. J. M. Bergers, 1990. Changes in numbers of mobile macroinvertebrates and fish in the river Waal in 1987, studied by sampling the cooling-water intakes of a power plant: first results of a Rhine biomonitoring project. In Kinzelbach, R. & G. Friedrich (eds), Biologie des Rheins. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart: 325–342.Google Scholar
  72. Vannote, R. L., G. W. Minshall, K. W. Cummins, J. R. Sedell & C. E. Cushing, 1980. The river continuum concept. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 37: 130–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Verdonschot, P. F. M. & R. C. Nijboer, 2002. Towards a decision support system for stream restoration in the Netherlands: an overview of restoration projects and future needs. Hydrobiologia 478: 131–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Vriese, F. T., S. Semmekrot & A. J. P. Raat, 1994. Assessment of spawning and nursery areas in the River Meuse. Water Science & Technology 29: 297–299.Google Scholar
  75. Ward, J. V., 1989. The four-dimensional nature of lotic ecosystems. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 8: 2–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Ward, J. V. & J. A. Stanford, 1995. Ecological connectivity in alluvial river ecosystems and its disruption by flow regulation. Regulated Rivers: Research & Management 11: 105–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Ward, J. V., K. Tockner, D. B. Arscott & C. Claret, 2002. Riverine landscape diversity. Freshwater Biology 47: 517–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Welcomme, R. L., 1995. Relationships between fisheries and the integrity of river systems. Regulated Rivers: Research & Management 11: 121–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Wolter, C. & R. Arlinghaus, 2003. Navigation impacts on freshwater fish assemblages: the ecological relevance of swimming performance. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 13: 63–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Wolter, C., 2001. Conservation of fish species diversity in navigable waterways. Landscape and Urban Planning 53: 135–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer2006 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. J. A. Pollux
    • 1
    • 2
  • P. M. J. Pollux
    • 2
  • A. Korosi
    • 3
  • W. C. E. P. Verberk
    • 4
    • 5
  • G. van der Velde
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Plant-Animal Interaction, Centre for LimnologyNetherlands Institute of EcologyMaarssenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Aquatic Ecology & Environmental BiologyInstitute for Wetland and Water Research,RadboudUniversity NijmegenNijmegenThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of Cellular Animal PhysiologyRadboud University NijmegenNijmegenThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Bargerveen FoundationNijmegenThe Netherlands
  5. 5.Department of Animal Ecology & EcophysiologyInstitute for Wetland and Water Research, Radboud University NijmegenNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations