scholarly journals The dynamics of the chinook salmon stock in Kamchatka River with regard to the fishery dynamics

Author(s):  
Olga V. Zikunova
2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 114-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas E. Olson ◽  
Michael Paiya

Abstract We evaluated growth and survival of spring Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha reared at varying densities at Warm Springs National Fish Hatchery, Oregon. For three consecutive brood years, density treatments consisted of low, medium, and high groups in 57.8-m3 raceways with approximately 16,000, 24,000, and 32,000 fish/raceway, respectively. Fish were volitionally released in both the autumn and spring to mimic the downstream migration timing of the endemic wild spring Chinook salmon stock. Just prior to the autumn release, the rearing density estimate was 4.24 kg/m3 for the low-density group, 6.27 kg/m3 for the medium-density group, and 8.42 kg/m3 for the high-density group. While weight gain did not differ among density treatments (P  =  0.72), significant differences were found in median fork length (P < 0.001) for fish reared at different densities. Fish reared at high density exhibited the highest on-hatchery mortality rate during two brood years; however, differences in mortality rate among densities were not significant (P  =  0.20). In one brood year, adult recovery rates appeared to support the hypothesis that lower initial densities improved postrelease survival (P < 0.01). All rearing densities utilized in this evaluation were relatively low and may partially explain why more differences were not readily apparent among density groups. In addition, the volitional release was a confounding factor in our study because we were unable to quantify the number of fish released in the autumn.


Author(s):  
K.I. Aitukaev ◽  
◽  
V.I. Karpenko ◽  
O.V. Zikunova ◽  
◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 274-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
David J. Teel ◽  
Brian J. Burke ◽  
David R. Kuligowski ◽  
Cheryl A. Morgan ◽  
Donald M. Van Doornik

1992 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 81-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
ML Kent ◽  
J Ellis ◽  
JW Fournie ◽  
SC Dawe ◽  
JW Bagshaw ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 655 ◽  
pp. 185-198
Author(s):  
J Weil ◽  
WDP Duguid ◽  
F Juanes

Variation in the energy content of prey can drive the diet choice, growth and ultimate survival of consumers. In Pacific salmon species, obtaining sufficient energy for rapid growth during early marine residence is hypothesized to reduce the risk of size-selective mortality. In order to determine the energetic benefit of feeding choices for individuals, accurate estimates of energy density (ED) across prey groups are required. Frequently, a single species is assumed to be representative of a larger taxonomic group or related species. Further, single-point estimates are often assumed to be representative of a group across seasons, despite temporal variability. To test the validity of these practices, we sampled zooplankton prey of juvenile Chinook salmon to investigate fine-scale taxonomic and temporal differences in ED. Using a recently developed model to estimate the ED of organisms using percent ash-free dry weight, we compared energy content of several groups that are typically grouped together in growth studies. Decapod megalopae were more energy rich than zoeae and showed family-level variability in ED. Amphipods showed significant species-level variability in ED. Temporal differences were observed, but patterns were not consistent among groups. Bioenergetic model simulations showed that growth rate of juvenile Chinook salmon was almost identical when prey ED values were calculated on a fine scale or on a taxon-averaged coarse scale. However, single-species representative calculations of prey ED yielded highly variable output in growth depending on the representative species used. These results suggest that the latter approach may yield significantly biased results.


Author(s):  
Katherine W. Myers ◽  
Colin K. Harris ◽  
Curtis M. Knudsen ◽  
Robert V. Walker ◽  
Nancy D. Davis ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
John W. Beeman ◽  
Tobias J. Kock ◽  
Russell W. Perry ◽  
Steven G. Smith
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document