2,500 research outputs found
Competition for Open-Access Resources: A Class Exercise that Demonstrates the Tragedy of the Commons
Open-access resources, such as fisheries, often suffer from overexploitation due to competition among individuals. To
help students appreciate this phenomenon, we developed a laboratory exercise that uses a computer model of a commercial
fishery to illustrate the inevitability of overexploiting open-access resources. Our model contained two identical populations
that were fished simultaneously: one on an individual, competitive basis and the other on a collective, cooperative
basis. Both populations were governed by identical relationships for recruitment and catch-per-effort, and had constant
growth and natural mortality rates. Competition within the individually-run fishery invariably led to population collapse
whereas the cooperative group usually maintained sustained yields. This exercise demonstrated that optimal resource
use was impossible in a purely competitive fishery and helped students understand fish population biology and commercial
fishing strategies. The exercise can show how changes in regulations or population parameters influence yields from a
fishery. It can be adapted for use in workshops and other professional settings, even for participants with little background
in fisheries.This work was supported in part by the Ohio State University, Department of Zoology, and
by the University of Wisconsin Sea Grant
Institute under grants from the National
Sea Grant College Program, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, and from the State of Wisconsin.
Federal grant NA84AA-D-00065,
project R/GB-24
Direct and Indirect Effects of Fish Predation on the Replacement of a Native Crayfish by an Invading Congener
In Ohio streams, the crayfish Orconectes rusticus is replacing O. sanborni, and herein we test how predators
influence this replacement. In a field survey, crayfish were scarce when fish were abundant, suggesting that predators can adversely affect these prey. In laboratory experiments, we examined underlying mechanisms for this inverse relationship; specifically, we tested how crayfish species, adult aggression, and habitat heterogeneity influenced the predator-prey interaction. In a laboratory stream, smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu) ate
similar numbers of equal-sized O. rusticus and O. sanborni, but when sizes mimicked those in the field (i.e., O. rusticus 4 mm > O. sanborni), fewer O. rusticus were eaten. Fish also reduced juvenileactivity and behaviors whereas adult aggression increased the frequency of these risky responses. More affected by adult crayfish, O. sanborni should suffer disproportional predation where adults and juveniles interact. Thus, fish predators should increase replacement rates and adult aggression should further accelerate this process. Manifested through
crayfish size, both indirect and direct predator effects contribute to the replacement of O. sanborni by O. rusticusA National Science Foundation Dissertation Improvement Grant, a Sigma Xi Grant-in-Aid, and the Ohio Cooperative Fish and Wildlife
Research Unit provided funding
Competition between Larval Fishes in Reservoirs: The Role of Relative Timing of Appearance
Funding for this project was provided by National Science Foundation grants DEB 9407859 and DEB 9107173 to R.A.S and Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration, project F-69-P, administered jointly by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Ohio
Division of Wildlife. A Presidential Fellowship from The Ohio State University supported J.E.G. during part of this research.In small, hypereutrophic reservoirs (100 mg total phosphorus/L), larval
gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum and threadfin shad D. petenense (henceforth, shad) reach high densities in the limnetic zone, virtually eliminate zooplankton, and perhaps compromise success of other planktivorous larvae, such as bluegill Lepomis macrochirus. Because relative timing of appearance of shad and bluegills probably influences their relative success, we quantified densities of fish larvae and zooplankton during spring through summer in three reservoirs across 8 years (1987–1994), and we conducted three hatchery experiments with varying larval appearance times
and gizzard shad densities in plastic bags (1 m3). When shad were abundant in reservoirs, bluegill abundance often peaked either at the same time (36% of reservoirs and years combined) or after (40% of reservoirs and years combined) shad peaks. When gizzard shad were placed in bags 2
weeks before bluegills (N = 1 experiment), they depleted zooplankton, reducing growth (~0.075 g · g-1· d-1) but not survival of bluegills. In experiments (N = 2) in which both species were added simultaneously, zooplankton declined only slightly with gizzard shad, and there was little effect
on bluegill growth (~0.21 g · g-1· d-1) and survival; in general, gizzard shad growth declined with time and increasing gizzard shad density. Based on experiments, bluegill success should vary among reservoirs and years as a function of their appearance relative to gizzard shad. In reservoirs,
zooplankton availability and bluegill abundances were consistently low during years when gizzard shad dominated reservoir fish assemblages. Because gizzard shad probably reduce bluegill success in hypereutrophic Ohio reservoirs, management strategies that reduce gizzard shad should improve bluegill success
Influence of Larval Gizzard Shad (Dorosoma cepedianum) Density on Piscivory and Growth of Young-of-Year Saugeye (Stizostedion vitreum x S. canadense)
Abstract in English and French.Growth and survival of young-of-year saugeye (Stizostedion vitreum x S. canadense) (stocked into Ohio reservoirs to create sport fisheries) are probably influenced by prey availability, variations in which may
account for historically documented variability in stocking success. Because saugeye switch from a diet of
zooplankton to fish once stocked, we sought to determine experimentally if saugeye size and available ichthyoplankton,
i.e., larval gizzard shad (Borosoma cepediaraum), affected this switch and whether piscivory improved saugeye growth. In an enclosure experiment, saugeye (33.9 mm TL) immediately switched to
piscivory when exposed to ichthyoplankton densities of 20 and l00m^-3, growing faster when more gizzard shad were available. In another enclosure experiment, saugeye 30-49 mm TL consumed 14-mm gizzard shad. In ponds (N = 4 ponds-treatment-1) containing zooplankton and chironornids, we compared
saugeye growth with and without larval gizzard shad and found, as in the first enclosure experiment, that piscivory improved saugeye growth. Neither saugeye size nor ichthyoplankton density influenced
how quickly saugeye switched to piscivory. We conclude that managers should stock saugeye >=30 mm 1-2 wk before peak ichthyoplankton densities to improve saugeye growth and survival by enhancing
opportunities for exploitation of young-of-yeas gizzard shad.This work was funded by the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Program (F-57-R, Evaluation of Fish Management Techniques),
administered jointly by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Ohio Division of Wildlife
Behavior of fish predators and their prey: habitat choice between open water and dense vegetation
Behavior of largemouth bass, Micropterus salmoides, and northern pike, Esox lucius, foraging on fathead minnows,
Pimephales promelas, or bluegills, Lepomis macrochirus, was quantified in pools with 50% cover (half the pool had
artificial stems at a density of 1000 stems n^-2). Both predators spent most of their time in the vegetation. Largemouth
bass searched for bluegills and ambushed minnows, whereas the relatively immobile northern pike ambushed all
prey. Minnows were closer to predators and were captured more frequently than bluegills. Even when minnows
dispersed, they moved continually and eventually wandered within striking distance of a predator. Bluegills
dispersed in the cover with predators. Bass captured the few bluegills that strayed into the open and pike captured
those that approached too closely in the cover. The ability of predators to capture prey while residing in habitats
containing patches of dense cover may explain their residence in areas often considered to be poor ones for foraging.Funding for this project was provided by Dingell-Johnson project F-57-R administered through the Ohio Division of Wildlife
- …