Pugnose eels, Simenchelys parasiticus (Synaphobranchidae) from the heart of a shortfin mako, Isurus oxyrinchus (Lamnidae)

The body depth of crucian carp, Carassius carassius, increases in the presence of predator fish, thereby decreasing the vulnerability of crucian carp to predation. This phenotypic change is mediated by chemical signals, and is believed to result from a piscivorous diet of predators. We have shown that exposure to a piscivorous predator is insufficient to induce growth changes in crucian carp, since water from northern pike, Esox lucius, fed Arctic charr, Salvelinus alpinus, does not induce a change in crucian carp morphology, while water from pike fed crucian carp does. The determining factor is a chemical signal from the skin of crucian carp, as demonstrated by exposure to skin extracts from conspecifics. We suggest that alarm substances from conspecifics, expressing primer pheromone effects, are the most likely candidates for induction of the phenotypical changes.     

Piscivory and prey selection of four predator species in a whitefish dominated subarctic lake

According to logistic regressions derived for pike Esox lucius and burbot Lota lota , the probability of ingesting fishes in Lake Muddusjärvi, northern Finland, was 50% at 19·3 and 22·1 cm L _T, whereas Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus and brown trout Salmo trutta shifted to piscivory at the lengths of 25·7 and 26·4 cm L _T. The specialist piscivores, pike and burbot, consumed more prey species and took a wider range of prey sizes than Arctic charr and brown trout. The prey length for all predators increased in relationship to predator length. Whitefish Coregonus lavaretus was the dominant prey species in the lake and in the diet of all the piscivorous species. The whitefish population was divided into three forms, of which the slow-growing, and the most numerous densely rakered whitefish form (DR), was selected by all predator species. This form also had the smallest average size and widest habitat range, utilizing both pelagic and epibenthic habitats. Two sparsely rakered whitefish forms (LSR and SSR) occupied only epibenthic habitats and had lower relative densities than DR. These forms, LSR and SSR, had a minor importance in the diet of predator species.     

Piscivory by brown trout Salmo trutta L. and Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus (L.) in Norwegian lakes

Size and frequency of occurrence of prey of brown trout Salmo trutta L. and Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus (L.) were recorded in 13 Norwegian lakes during 1973–1990. Piscivores usually comprised less than 5% of the total population. Arctic charr were less piscivorous than brown trout. Trout and charr became piscivorous at 13 and 16 cm length, respectively. These size thresholds were similar to those of other facultative piscivorous freshwater fish species. When present, three-spined sticklebacks, Gasterosteus aculeatus (L.), were preferred by all length groups of piscivorous brown trout and Arctic charr. Length of prey increased with increasing predator length, and the mean body length of prey was about 33 and 25% of predator length for trout and charr, respectively. Yearlings of charr were not recorded as prey.     

Community structure affects trophic ontogeny in a predatory fish

While most studies have focused on the timing and nature of ontogenetic niche shifts, information is scarce about the effects of community structure on trophic ontogeny of top predators. We investigated how community structure affects ontogenetic niche shifts (i.e., relationships between body length, trophic position, and individual dietary specialization) of a predatory fish, brown trout (Salmo trutta). We used stable isotope and stomach content analyses to test how functional characteristics of lake fish community compositions (competition and prey availability) modulate niche shifts in terms of (i) piscivorous behavior, (ii) trophic position, and (iii) individual dietary specialization. Northern Scandinavian freshwater fish communities were used as a study system, including nine subarctic lakes with contrasting fish community configurations: (i) trout‐only systems, (ii) two‐species systems (brown trout and Arctic charr [Salvelinus alpinus] coexisting), and (iii) three‐species systems (brown trout, Arctic charr, and three‐spined sticklebacks [Gasterosteus aculeatus] coexisting). We expected that the presence of profitable small prey (stickleback) and mixed competitor–prey fish species (charr) supports early piscivory and high individual dietary specialization among trout in multispecies communities, whereas minor ontogenetic shifts were expected in trout‐only systems. From logistic regression models, the presence of a suitable prey fish species (stickleback) emerged as the principal variable determining the size at ontogenetic niche shifts. Generalized additive mixed models indicated that fish community structure shaped ontogenetic niche shifts in trout, with the strongest positive relationships between body length, trophic position, and individual dietary specialization being observed in three‐species communities. Our findings revealed that the presence of a small‐sized prey fish species (stickleback) rather than a mixed competitor–prey fish species (charr) was an important factor affecting the ontogenetic niche‐shift processes of trout. The study demonstrates that community structure may modulate the ontogenetic diet trajectories of and individual niche specialization within a top predator.     

Winter ecology of Arctic charr (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Salvelinus alpinus</Emphasis>) and brown trout (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Salmo trutta</Emphasis>) in a subarctic lake,Norway

We studied habitat choice, diet, food consumption and somatic growth of Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) and brown trout (Salmo trutta) during the ice-covered winter period of a subarctic lake in northern Norway. Both Arctic charr and brown trout predominantly used the littoral zone during winter time. Despite very cold winter conditions (water temperature <1°C) and poor light conditions, both fish species fed continuously during the ice-covered period, although at a much lower rate than during the summer season. No somatic growth could be detected during the ice-covered winter period and the condition factor of both species significantly declined, suggesting that the winter feeding rates were similar to or below the maintenance requirements. Also, the species richness and diversity of ingested prey largely decreased from summer to winter for both fish species. The winter diet of Arctic charr <20 cm was dominated by benthic insect larvae, chironomids in particular, and Gammarus lacustris, but zooplankton was also important in December. G. lacustris was the dominant prey of charr >20 cm. The winter diet of brown trout <20 cm was dominated by insect larvae, whereas large-sized trout mainly was piscivorous, feeding on juvenile Arctic charr. Piscivorous feeding behaviour of trout was in contrast rarely seen during the summer months when their encounter with potential fish prey was rare as the small-sized charr mainly inhabited the profundal. The study demonstrated large differences in the ecology and interactions of Arctic charr and brown trout between the winter and summer seasons.     

Arctic charr in sympatry with burbot: ecological and evolutionary consequences

The trophic niche and parasite infection of Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) were explored in two lakes with sympatric burbot (Lota lota) and two lakes without burbot in subarctic Norway. The CPUE of burbot and charr were similar in one lake, but burbot had a low population density in the other. Burbot were benthivorous in both lakes. Other co-occurring species like brown trout (Salmo trutta), Atlantic salmon parr (Salmo salar), grayling (Thymallus thymallus) and minnow (Phoxinus phoxinus) were also benthivores. At high densities, benthivorous burbot forced the whole Arctic charr population to utilise mainly the limnetic trophic niche. In contrast, at low burbot density or without burbot present, Arctic charr were primarily benthivorous in the littoral zone. Thus, a clear interactive segregation in diet was observed between Arctic charr and burbot at high burbot densities. There was also a high predation pressure from burbot on young Arctic charr along the benthic zones. The extensive use of zooplankton as prey caused a high parasite infection pressure of copepod transmitted Diphyllobothrium spp. larvae, with the potential for high negative impact on the Arctic charr population. As the benthivore trophic niche was occupied by burbot, the ecological opportunities for polymorphism with benthivorous ecotypes or morphs of Arctic charr were probably prevented. Therefore, the sympatry with burbot seems to have large ecological and evolutionary consequences for this Arctic charr population compared with neighbouring lakes where burbot is absent.     

Food borne parasites as indicators of trophic segregation between Arctic charr and brown trout

The habitat and diet choice and the infection (prevalence and abundance) of trophically transmitted parasites were compared in Arctic charr and brown trout living sympatrically in two lakes in northern Norway. Arctic charr were found in all main lake habitats, whereas the brown trout were almost exclusively found in the littoral zone. In both lakes the parasite fauna reflected the niche segregation between trout and charr. Surface insects were most common in the diet of trout, but transmit few parasites, and accordingly the brown trout had a relatively low diversity and abundance of parasites. Parasites transmitted by benthic prey such as Gammarus and insect larva, were common in both salmonid host species. Copepod transmitted parasites were much more common in Arctic charr, as brown trout did not include zooplankton in their diets. Parasite species that may use small fish as transport hosts, were far more abundant in piscivorous fish, especially brown trout. The seasonal dynamics in parasite infection were also consistent with the developments in the diet throughout the year. The study demonstrates that the structure of parasite communities of charr and the trout is highly dependent on shifts in habitat and diet of their hosts both on an annual base and through the ontogeny, in addition to the observed niche segregation between the two salmonid species.     

Ice-cover effects on competitive interactions between two fish species

1. Variations in the strength of ecological interactions between seasons have received little attention, despite an increased focus on climate alterations on ecosystems. Particularly, the winter situation is often neglected when studying competitive interactions. In northern temperate freshwaters, winter implies low temperatures and reduced food availability, but also strong reduction in ambient light because of ice and snow cover. Here, we study how brown trout [Salmo trutta (L.)] respond to variations in ice-cover duration and competition with Arctic charr [Salvelinus alpinus (L.)], by linking laboratory-derived physiological performance and field data on variation in abundance among and within natural brown trout populations. 2. Both Arctic charr and brown trout reduced resting metabolic rate under simulated ice-cover (darkness) in the laboratory, compared to no ice (6-h daylight). However, in contrast to brown trout, Arctic charr was able to obtain positive growth rate in darkness and had higher food intake in tank experiments than brown trout. Arctic charr also performed better (lower energy loss) under simulated ice-cover in a semi-natural environment with natural food supply. 3. When comparing brown trout biomass across 190 Norwegian lakes along a climate gradient, longer ice-covered duration decreased the biomass only in lakes where brown trout lived together with Arctic charr. We were not able to detect any effect of ice-cover on brown trout biomass in lakes where brown trout was the only fish species. 4. Similarly, a 25-year time series from a lake with both brown trout and Arctic charr showed that brown trout population growth rate depended on the interaction between ice breakup date and Arctic charr abundance. High charr abundance was correlated with low trout population growth rate only in combination with long winters. 5. In conclusion, the two species differed in performance under ice, and the observed outcome of competition in natural populations was strongly dependent on duration of the ice-covered period. Our study shows that changes in ice phenology may alter species interactions in Northern aquatic systems. Increased knowledge of how adaptations to winter conditions differ among coexisting species is therefore vital for our understanding of ecological impacts of climate change.     

Temporal variability in marine feeding of sympatric Arctic charr and sea trout

The marine feeding pattern of anadromous brown trout (sea trout) Salmo trutta and Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus was studied during June to August in 1992–1993 and 2000–2004 in a fjord in northern Norway. In general sea trout fed proportionally more on fishes than on crustaceans and insects (81, 1 and 18% by mass, respectively) by comparison with Arctic charr (52, 25 and 22% by mass, respectively). Herring Clupea harengus dominated the total fish diet of both species, but the Arctic charr also fed significantly on gadoids and sandlance Ammodytes spp. While sea trout became virtually all piscivorous at fork lengths ( L _F) ≥250 mm, the Arctic charr was ≥400 mm L _F before shifting totally to a fish diet. Despite annual variation in diet and forage ratios, there was a clear shift in diet from 1992–1993 to 2000–2004. Sandlance and different crustaceans constituted most of the diet during the initial period with a shift towards gadoids and especially herring during the latter period. This shift seemed to be associated with a high abundance of herring larvae during the latter sampling period, indicating a preferential selection on herring when present, particularly by sea trout. Furthermore, an index indicated dietary overlap in years with intensive feeding on herring of both species, and usually differences in the trophic ecology during years feeding mostly on other prey species. In combination, it was hypothesized that the two species reflect the type of marine prey present within a fjord system over time, and therefore provide an index of variation in the production and biological diversity of their potential prey within fjords.     

Piscivory and cannibalism in Arctic charr

Piscivory and cannibalism in Arctic charr, Salvelinus alpinus , were studied in three lakes in northern Norway: Guolasjavri, which contains only charr, Takvatn, where Arctic charr coexist with three-spined sticklebacks, Gasterosteus aculeatus and brown trout, Salmo trutta , and Stuorajavri, where whitefish, Coregonus lavarelun dominate a fish community containing six species. The prevalence of piscivory in the Arctic charr populations generally increased with increasing predator size. In all three lakes, many charr larger than 20 cm were piscivorous, but the extent of piscivory and cannibalism varied. The greatest prevalence of cannibalism was found in Guolasjavri, where 27% of charr greater than 20 cm in length had fed upon smaller conspeciflcs. In Takvatn, 5% of charr larger than 20 cm were cannibalistic, and an additional 9% had eaten three-spined sticklebacks. In Stuorajavri, up to 74% of the charr greater than 20 cm had eaten whitefish but cannibalism was not recorded. The possible role of cannibalism in population regulation within Arctic charr populations is considered.     

Effects of Fish-farm Activity on the Limnetic Community Structure of Brown Trout, Salmo trutta, and Arctic Charr, Salvelinus alpinus

Establishment of four fish-farms during the period 1971 to 1994 in the oligotrophic lake Skogseidvatnet affected Arctic charr, Salvelinus alpinus, but not brown trout, Salmo trutta. From 1971 to 1987, an increase in mean individual size of Arctic charr was recorded, while the mean individual size of brown trout remained stable. Arctic charr were found to use deeper benthic areas than brown trout. Approximately 8% of the Arctic charr population (>26cm), were found to switch to waste food from fish-farms, resulting in a novel feeding habitat for the species. They were, however, found in gillnets distant from the fish farm cages, indicating high mobility. The habitat segregation between the two species can most likely be explained by selective differences and asymmetric competition with brown trout as the dominant species. Based on the present results, changes in the Arctic charr population may be due to increased food availability and due to a new habitat use as a waste food feeder. The reason for the brown trout population to have remained stable with respect to mean size, growth pattern and habitat use, may be due to a different diet choice than Arctic charr in this lake. Brown trout were found to feed mainly on terrestrial insects, while Arctic charr fed mainly on zooplankton and on waste food.     

Pelagic marine feeding of Arctic charr and sea trout

In a fjord in northern Norway, both immature and maturing individuals (170–500 mm fork length) of anadromous Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus and anadromous brown trout (sea trout) Salmo trutta were captured up to 5000 m offshore. Both species had a high feeding intensity and an almost exclusive piscivorous diet, with herring Clupea harengus as the dominant prey, an apparently opportunistic response to a high density of small‐sized herring in the pelagic zone.     

Habitat utilization by sympatric arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus L. and brown trout Salmo trutta L. in Lake Atnsjø, south-east Norway

SUMMARY. 1. Habitat utilization, as well as inter- and intraspecific relations of different size groups of arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus (L.)) and brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) in Lake Atnsjø, south-east Norway, were investigated by analysing food and spatial niches from monthly benthic and pelagic gillnet catches during June-October 1985.
2. Small individuals (150–230 mm) of both arctic charr and brown trout occurred in shallow benthic habitats. However, they were spatially segregated as arctic charr dominated at depths of 5–15 m and brown trout at depths of 0–5 m.
3. Larger (>230 mm) arctic charr and brown trout coexisted in the pelagic zone. Both species occurred mainly in the uppermost 2-3 m of the pelagic, except in August, when arctic charr occurred at high densities throughout the 0–12 m depth interval. On this occasion, arctic charr were segregated in depth according to size, with significantly larger fish in the top 6 m. This was probably due to increased intraspecific competition for food.
4. The two species differed in food choice in both habitats, Arctic charr fed almost exclusively on zooplankton, whereas brown trout had a more variable diet, consisting of surface insects, zooplankton. aquatic insects and fish.
5. The data suggest that the uppermost pelagic was the more favourable habitat for both species. Large individuals having high social position occupied this habitat, whereas small individuals lived in benthic habitat where they were less vulnerable to agonistic behaviour from larger individuals and less exposed to predators. The more aggressive and dominant brown trout occupied the more rewarding part of the benthic habitat.     

Niche segregation of coexisting Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) and brown trout (Salmo trutta) constrains food web coupling in subarctic lakes

1. Generalist fish species are recognised as important couplers of benthic and pelagic food‐web compartments in lakes. However, interspecific niche segregation and individual specialisation may limit the potential for generalistic feeding behaviour. 2. We studied summer habitat use, stomach contents and stable isotopic compositions of the generalist feeder Arctic charr coexisting with its common resource competitor brown trout in five subarctic lakes in northern Norway to reveal population‐level and individual‐level niche plasticity. 3. Charr and trout showed partial niche segregation in all five lakes. Charr used all habitat types and a wide variety of invertebrate prey including zooplankton, whereas trout fed mainly on insects in the littoral zone. Hence, charr showed a higher potential to promote habitat and food‐web coupling compared to littoral‐dwelling trout. 4. The level of niche segregation between charr and trout and between pelagic‐caught and littoral‐caught charr depended on the prevailing patterns of interspecific and intraspecific resource competition. The two fish species had partially overlapping trophic niches in one lake where charr numerically dominated the fish community, whereas the most segregated niches occurred in lakes where trout were more abundant. 5. In general, pelagic‐caught charr had substantially narrower dietary and isotopic niches and relied less on littoral carbon sources compared to littoral‐caught conspecifics that included generalist as well as specialised benthivorous and planktivorous individuals. Despite the partially specialised planktivorous niche and thus reduced potential of pelagic‐dwelling charr to promote benthic–pelagic coupling, the isotopic compositions of both charr subpopulations suggested a significant reliance on both littoral and pelagic carbon sources in all five study lakes. 6. Our study demonstrates that both interspecific niche segregation between and individual trophic specialisation within generalist fish species can constrain food‐web coupling and alter energy mobilisation to top consumers in subarctic lakes. Nevertheless, pelagic and littoral habitats and food‐web compartments may still be highly integrated due to the potentially plastic foraging behaviour of top consumers.     

Timing an ontogenetic niche shift: responses of emerging salmon alevins to chemical cues from predators and competitors

Ontogenetic niche shifts are ubiquitous in nature. However, in most species little is known about phenotypic plasticity in the timing of shifts and in the associated characters. Following a period of endogenous feeding on yolk, salmonid alevins emerge from their gravel nests into the open water and start feeding exogenously. We studied, by using replicated artificial nests, whether the responses of emerging Atlantic salmon ( Salmo salar ) alevins to chemical cues from two piscivorous fish predators and conspecific competitors are plastic. We hypothesised that the alevins should delay emergence in response to predator cues, whereas cues from competitors should induce earlier emergence. We found that chemical cues from predatory burbot ( Lota lota ) delayed emergence, whereas cues from brown trout ( S. trutta ) tended to induce earlier emergence. The earlier emergence in response to trout cues was associated with a smaller body size and more yolk resources remaining at emergence, but burbot cues did not alter these traits. Predator cues also influenced the daily pattern of emergence: more alevins emerged during the morning in the burbot treatment, and fewer alevins emerged during the afternoon in the trout treatment. Chemical cues from conspecific competitors had no effect on emergence patterns. The results indicate that salmon alevins exhibit flexible ontogenetic niche shifts in the timing of emergence in response to predator cues, and that the responses are predator-specific. As timing of emergence is a major determinant of territory acquisition, these responses are likely to have an impact on later fitness of the fry.     

Cannibalism in Arctic charr: do all individuals have the same propensity to be cannibals?

By comparing large Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus , which had shown a persistent cannibalistic response varying from zero to very high in succeeding laboratory trials, with their individual cannibalistic behaviour after release into a natural lake inhabited by small Arctic charr, it was found that all Arctic charr had the potential to become cannibalistic, irrespective of their laboratory behaviour. More specifically, Arctic charr that never fed on prey fishes when offered them in the tank experiments turned to cannibalism when released in the lake, highlighting the potential difficulties in extrapolating laboratory results to natural settings. This was also true for naive fish that had no prior experience of eating live food. Since no significant increase in the number of prey consumed during each of the succeeding laboratory trials was found, and naive fish showed a response under natural conditions similar to that of their counterparts, the training of the Arctic charr (or experience or learning) probably had no effect upon the piscivorous or cannibalistic response after stocking. Thus, the study appeared to demonstrate that most variations in cannibalism in Arctic charr was simply a function of environmental conditions, depending on the density of conspecifics v . alternative prey, and the relative size difference between predator and prey, rather than any genetic influence.     

Ferox Trout (Salmo trutta) as `Russian dolls': complementary gut content and stable isotope analyses of the Loch Ness foodweb

1. Conventional collection methods for pelagic fish species (netting, trawling) are impractical or prohibited in Loch Ness, U.K. To investigate trophic relationships at the top of the Loch Ness food web, an alternative strategy, angling, provided samples of the top predator, the purely piscivorous ferox trout ( Salmo trutta ).
2. The gut contents of these fish provided further samples of prey-fish, and subsequent examination of prey-fish guts revealed their dietary intake, analogous to the famous nested `Russian dolls'. Each trophic level separated by gut content analysis provided further complementary samples for stable isotope analysis and thus information on the longer term, assimilated diet.
3. Ferox trout exhibited considerable cannibalism to supplement a diet of Arctic charr ( Salvelinus alpinus ). However, conspecifics stemmed from a lower isotopic baseline in relation to charr, so ferox trout exhibited a lower trophic level than predicted (4.3) by using the δ¹⁵N values. Charr displayed dietary specialisation with increasing length, and isotopic values supported by the gut data placed the charr at a trophic level of 3.5. The isotope data also indicated that charr carbon was primarily autochthonous in origin.     

Habitat use and life history of brown trout (Salmo trutta) and Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) in some low acidity lakes in central Norway

Habitat utilization and the life history of browntrout Salmo trutta and Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus were investigated in fivesympatric populations and five allopatric brown troutpopulations in Høylandet catchment, a atmosphaericlow deposition area in Mid Norway. There was asignificant inverse correlation in abundance ofepibenthic Arctic charr and brown trout in theselakes, indicating that the latter species is dominant.The largest numbers of sympatric brown trout andArctic charr were caught in epibenthic habitat. In twolakes, brown trout to some extent also occurredpelagically, while pelagic individuals of Arctic charrwere found in all five lakes. The main food items forboth epibenthic and pelagic brown trout wereterrestrial surface insects and chironomid pupae.Zooplankton was the primary food item for Arctic charrin both habitats. Although the age distribution wasvery different in the populations, neither speciesseem to suffer from recruitment failure. There was nosignificant difference in survival rates betweensympatric populations of brown trout and Arctic charr.We found a significant inverse correlation betweenepibenthic catches of brown trout and the mean weightof 4+ fish, the most abundant age group. However, ifusing weight data for three-year-old fish, no suchrelationship was found for Arctic charr. Brown troutand Arctic charr reached asymptotic lengths of197–364 mm and 259–321 mm, respectively. Both speciestypically reached sexual maturity at age 2–3, and nomaturation-induced mortality was evident. We concludethat fish populations in Høylandet lakes areregulated throughout their lifes by inter- andintraspecific competition.     

Takvatn Through 20 Years: Long-term Effects of an Experimental Mass Removal of Arctic Charr, Salvelinus Alpinus, From a Subarctic Lake

Between 1984 and 1989, the experimental removal of 31 tons (666000 fish) of stunted Arctic charr, Salvelinus alpinus, from Takvatn in northern Norway, had strong effects on the populations of Arctic charr, brown trout, Salmo trutta, and three-spined sticklebacks, Gasterosteus aculeatus. The littoral catch per unit effort (CPUE) of charr had decreased by 90% in 1990 and then increased to about 50% of the initial level by 1994 while the pelagic CPUE had decreased to zero. Growth in both charr and trout greatly improved when the charr density had decreased, and large fish of both species appeared in the catches. These large fish became predators on small charr in the littoral zone. The incidence of trout increased from below 1% to 15% from 1988 to 1999 after a brief peak at 30% in 1992 and 1993. The charr population attained a bimodal size distribution and did not return to the stunted state during the 10 years following the intensive fishing period. The mass removal experiment showed that it is possible to change the structure of a charr population by intensive fishing. Predation on small charr from cannibals and large trout was probably essential for maintaining the new population structure. An increase in the growth of young charr from 1995 to 1997 was related to a high consumption of Daphnia and Eurycercus. Rapid changes in the growth of charr followed the density fluctuations in sticklebacks, which show large annual variations in this system; the rapid changes in charr growth were probably caused by variations in the competition intensity for cladoceran prey between young charr and sticklebacks. Twenty years of data has provided important information, but even more time is needed to follow the long-term trends in northern lakes such as Takvatn.     

Effects of temperature and a piscivorous fish on diel winter behaviour of juvenile brown trout (Salmo trutta)

相似文献