Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMESICK, CARL FREDERICK.*
dc.creatorMESICK, CARL FREDERICK.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-31T18:50:26Z
dc.date.available2011-10-31T18:50:26Z
dc.date.issued1984en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/187752
dc.description.abstractThe hypothesis that Arizona and brown trout regulate their numbers through the emigration of all individuals that are in excess of resources was tested experimentally. Different amounts of food and cover were provided to mixed sizes of trout in artificial stream channels with escape routes. The number of both species of trout that became resident generally varied in direct proportion to the amount of cover present; the numbers that established residency in either species stabilized in response to cover levels within 6 days. Emigratory behavior was much slower in response to food than to cover. The smallest Arizona trout showed the greatest decrease in numbers that established residency after being starved for 10 days; however they did not increase their numbers when food was increased above 30 g/day. Arizona trout over 14 cm SL and brown trout over 11 cm SL showed no change in the number of residents whether they were fed or starved for 69 days. There were consistent numbers of both species within 2 cm size intervals that became resident, suggesting that each size class independently regulates its numbers to its own resources. The small inter-replicate variance in numbers of trout that became resident at different levels of resources supports the hypothesis that Arizona and brown trout use emigration as a behavioral mechanism for self-regulation of numbers. The numbers of trout that became resident in channels with coexisting species were close to those observed in single species tests wherein resources were the same; immigrant brown trout were able to induce emigration in resident Arizona trout whereas immigrant Arizona trout seldom displaced resident brown trout. Therefore, theories concerning self-regulation of population numbers should be expanded to include an interspecific mechanism. Management practices such as stocking programs, habitat manipulation and multi-species fisheries can be ineffective unless the ramifications of population regulation are included in their design.
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherThe University of Arizona.en_US
dc.rightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.en_US
dc.subjectBrown trout.en_US
dc.subjectTrout -- Behavior -- Arizona.en_US
dc.subjectFish populations -- Arizona.en_US
dc.subjectFishes -- Behavior -- Arizona.en_US
dc.titleEMIGRATORY BEHAVIOR OF ARIZONA AND BROWN TROUT AS A MEANS TO REGULATE POPULATION NUMBERS IN RESPONSE TO ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES (COMPETITION, CARRYING, CAPACITY).en_US
dc.typetexten_US
dc.typeDissertation-Reproduction (electronic)en_US
dc.identifier.oclc691379615en_US
thesis.degree.grantorUniversity of Arizonaen_US
thesis.degree.leveldoctoralen_US
dc.identifier.proquest8424908en_US
thesis.degree.disciplineRenewable Natural Resourcesen_US
thesis.degree.disciplineGraduate Collegeen_US
thesis.degree.namePh.D.en_US
refterms.dateFOA2018-06-14T16:57:22Z
html.description.abstractThe hypothesis that Arizona and brown trout regulate their numbers through the emigration of all individuals that are in excess of resources was tested experimentally. Different amounts of food and cover were provided to mixed sizes of trout in artificial stream channels with escape routes. The number of both species of trout that became resident generally varied in direct proportion to the amount of cover present; the numbers that established residency in either species stabilized in response to cover levels within 6 days. Emigratory behavior was much slower in response to food than to cover. The smallest Arizona trout showed the greatest decrease in numbers that established residency after being starved for 10 days; however they did not increase their numbers when food was increased above 30 g/day. Arizona trout over 14 cm SL and brown trout over 11 cm SL showed no change in the number of residents whether they were fed or starved for 69 days. There were consistent numbers of both species within 2 cm size intervals that became resident, suggesting that each size class independently regulates its numbers to its own resources. The small inter-replicate variance in numbers of trout that became resident at different levels of resources supports the hypothesis that Arizona and brown trout use emigration as a behavioral mechanism for self-regulation of numbers. The numbers of trout that became resident in channels with coexisting species were close to those observed in single species tests wherein resources were the same; immigrant brown trout were able to induce emigration in resident Arizona trout whereas immigrant Arizona trout seldom displaced resident brown trout. Therefore, theories concerning self-regulation of population numbers should be expanded to include an interspecific mechanism. Management practices such as stocking programs, habitat manipulation and multi-species fisheries can be ineffective unless the ramifications of population regulation are included in their design.


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
azu_td_8424908_sip1_m.pdf
Size:
1.187Mb
Format:
PDF
Description:
azu_td_8424908_sip1_m.pdf

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record