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.     

Behavioural responses of naive Arctic charr young to chemical cues from salmonid and non-salmonid fish

The ability to distinguish among chemical cues from multiple predators is of key adaptive value for many prey fish. We examined the attractiveness and repulsiveness of chemical stimuli from different coexisting fish species fed on different diets on the behaviour of hatchery reared Arctic charr young in a Y-maze fluviarum, where the charr could choose between two sides either with control water or stimulus water with fish odour. We used stimuli from (1) matching sized conspecifics, large (2) Arctic charr, (3) salmon, (4) brown trout and (5) brown trout fed on Arctic charr fry. Other salmonids were given pellet food. Additional fish odour treatments included piscivorous (6) pike and (7) burbot. In the control trials both sides received control water. Arctic charr young were expected to respond adaptively to the stimuli from coexisting piscivorous fish. The charr most strongly preferred water with the odour of their matching sized conspecifics, which was the only fish odour they were familiar with before the experiments. They also showed significant preference for other salmonid odours, even though these fish are potential predators on small charr. Chemical stimuli from pike and burbot, on the contrary, were strongly avoided, and burbot odour even prevented the charr to swim and enter the lateral halves of the fluviarum. Moreover, odour from brown trout fed on Arctic charr fry was avoided when compared to stimuli from trout fed on pellets. Although the Arctic charr young were completely naive regarding piscivores, the fact that they could distinguish between different predator taxa and diets on the basis of chemical cues only reflects the long coevolutionary history of these fish populations.     

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.     

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.     

Diel food selection of pelagic Arctic charr, Salvelinus alpinus (L.), and brown trout, Salmo trutta L., in Lake Atnsjø, SE Norway

Patterns of diel food selection in pelagic Arctic charr, Salvelinus alpinus (L.) and brown trout, Salmo trutta L. were investigated in Lake Atnsjo, SE Norway, by gillnet sampling during July-September 1985. Arctic charr feed almost exclusively on zooplankton both day and night, while brown trout had a diurnal shift in diet. For this species zooplankton made up a considerable part of the diet in the daytime, while at night the diet consisted mainly of surface insect and chironomid pupae. Both species had a selective feeding mode on zooplankton during the day and night. Arctic charr had a higher gill raker number and a denser gill raker spacing compared with brown trout. Still, the differences in prey size between the two species were small. We argue that the observed differences in food selection between Arctic charr and brown trout can be explained by differing abilities to detect food items under low light conditions.     

Diet of Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus (L.)) and brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) in sympatry in two high altitude alpine lakes

Lake Pisses and Lake Labarre are two oligotrophic high altitude alpine lakes that have sympatric populations of Arctic charr and brown trout. These two lakes have similar morphometric, physical and chemical characteristics. The zooplanktonic and benthic fauna show little diversity. But the density of benthos (Chironomidae) and zooplankton is higher in Lake Pisses. The fish fauna of Lake Pisses is slightly more abundant than that of Lake Labarre, althought in both lakes fish density is low. A study of the diet of the two species revealed differences. In Lake Pisses, where the food supply is better, Arctic charr takes exclusively pelagic and benthic prey, whereas in Lake Labarre it also takes exogenous prey and thus comes into competition with trout. Length and body weight growth rates for Arctic charr are higher in Lake Pisses than in Lake Labarre. For trout, maximum length recorded was in Lake Pisses. The results show that the abundance of Chironomidae favours coexistence of the two species in Lake Pisses and confirm that, in the face of shortage of food, Arctic charr is better adapted than trout. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Prey orientation in piscivorous brown trout

Piscivorous brown trout Salmo trutta change their feeding behaviour depending on prey species, prey size and number of prey eaten. In trout which had eaten fish recently, most had one fish in their stomach, but up to 16 prey fish were found. Individuals of the small-sized minnow Phoxinus phoxinus were swallowed chiefly tail first, whereas individuals of the larger Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus were taken both head and tail first. The largest charr were swallowed head first. In stomachs containing more than one fish prey, prey orientation was likely to be mixed. For all three types of prey orientation (i.e. tail first, head first and mixed), significant and positive correlations existed between prey length and predator length. The maximum prey size eaten tail first or in mixed orientation was about 70–85% of the size of prey eaten head first, indicating morphological advantages in eating the prey head first.     

Annual variability in the life-history characteristics of brown trout (Salmo trutta) and Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) in a subalpine Norwegian lake

The annual variability in growth and life history traits of brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) and Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus (L.)) in Lake Atnsjøen, a Norwegian subalpine lake, was studied over a period of 13 years (1985–1997). The extent to which life-history characteristics recorded on one occasion can be regarded as representative for the population was explored. We found inter-cohort variation in growth for both species; estimates of asymptotic length (L _∞) in ten cohorts ranged between 225–305 mm (CV = 10.5%) for brown trout and 273–301 mm (CV = 4.1%) for Arctic charr. However, this variation was much lower than inter-population variation for brown trout based on single samples from 169 populations (CV = 24.6%). In Lake Atnsjøen, annual growth increment correlated highly with the number of days warmer than 7?°C (R ²=0.60–0.89) for brown trout, and days warmer than 10?°C (R ²=0.40–0.58) for Arctic charr. Females of Arctic charr were younger at sexual maturity than males, while no such difference was found in brown trout. Generally speaking, early maturing individuals of both species grew faster, particularly from age-2 and onwards, than immature individuals. Early maturing individuals, however, were smaller at maturity than those maturing one year older. Age and size at maturity were significantly correlated with asymptotic lengths only in Arctic charr females.     

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.     

Marine food and diet overlap of co-occurring Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus (L.), brown trout Salmo trutta L. and Atlantic salmon S. salar L. off Senja,N. Norway

Summary Stomach contents analyses and other biological information of Arctic charr (Savelinus alpinus (L.)), brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) and small Atlantic salmon (S. salar L.) caught 1982–85 close to the Åelv estuary (69°N) on the island of Senja, N. Norway are presented, and extracts of a 1975–85 fishing log given. this appears to be the first case study of the feeding habits of all three European anadromous salmonids in marine sympatry, and also one of very few reports on the marine food of the Arctic charr from Europe. The general feeding habits of the charr were similar to that found in N. Canada. Pelagic fish (herring, sand-eel) seem to be preferred. Plankton (crab megalopae, krill) and hyperbenthos (amphipods, mysids) are also taken, especially when suitable fish are scarce. In 1985 high herring densities provided superabundant food, and diet overlap between charr, trout and salmon was high. Salmonid nursery rivers are abundant in N. Norway and during summer the three species coexist in a near-shore, surface-oriented pelagic guild of fishes. The salmon seems to be a relatively specialized piscivore, while the trout takes a wider range of fish and also invertebrate prey. The charr probably is the most euryphagous of the three, being able to exploit the more marginal parts of the prey resources of their common habitat.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Lake bathymetry and species occurrence predict the distribution of a lacustrine apex predator

This study examined the abiotic and biotic characteristics of ecosystems that allow expression of a life history called ferox trout, the colloquial name given to brown trout Salmo trutta adopting a piscivorous life history strategy, an apex predator in post‐glacial lakes in northern Europe. One hundred and ninety‐two lakes in Scotland show evidence of currently, or historically, supporting ferox S. trutta; their presence was predicted in logistic models by larger and deeper lakes with a large catchment that also support populations of Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus.     

Seasonal dietary shifts enhance parasite transmission to lake salmonids during ice cover

Changes in abiotic and biotic factors between seasons in subarctic lake systems are often profound, potentially affecting the community structure and population dynamics of parasites over the annual cycle. However, few winter studies exist and interactions between fish hosts and their parasites are typically confined to snapshot studies restricted to the summer season whereas host‐parasite dynamics during the ice‐covered period rarely have been explored. The present study addresses seasonal patterns in the infections of intestinal parasites and their association with the diet of sympatric living Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) and brown trout (Salmo trutta) in Lake Takvatn, a subarctic lake in northern Norway. In total, 354 Arctic charr and 203 brown trout were sampled from the littoral habitat between June 2017 and May 2018. Six trophically transmitted intestinal parasite taxa were identified and quantified, and their seasonal variations were contrasted with dietary information from both stomachs and intestines of the fish. The winter period proved to be an important transmission window for parasites, with increased prevalence and intensity of amphipod‐transmitted parasites in Arctic charr and parasites transmitted through fish prey in brown trout. In Arctic charr, seasonal patterns in parasite infections resulted mainly from temporal changes in diet toward amphipods, whereas host body size and the utilization of fish prey were the main drivers in brown trout. The overall dynamics in the community structure of parasites chiefly mirrored the seasonal dietary shifts of their fish hosts.     

Effects of Partially Anadromous Arctic Charr (Salvelinus alpinus) Populations on Ecology of Coastal Arctic Lakes

Little research has been conducted on effects of iteroparous anadromous fishes on Arctic lakes. We investigated trophic ecology, fish growth, and food web structure in six lakes located in Nunavut, Canada; three lakes contained anadromous Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) whereas three lakes did not contain Arctic charr. All lakes contained forage fishes and lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush; top predator). Isotope ratios (δ¹³C, δ¹⁵N) of fishes and invertebrates did not differ between lakes with and without anadromous Arctic charr; if anadromous Arctic charr deliver marine-derived nutrients and/or organic matter to freshwater lakes, these inputs could not be detected with δ¹³C and/or δ¹⁵N. Lake trout carbon (C):nitrogen (N) and condition were significantly higher in lakes with Arctic charr (C:N = 3.42, K = 1.1) than in lakes without Arctic charr (C:N = 3.17, K = 0.99), however, and ninespine stickleback (Pungitius pungitius) condition was significantly lower in lakes with Arctic charr (K = 0.58) than in lakes without Arctic charr (K = 0.64). Isotope data indicated that pre-smolt and resident Arctic charr may be prey for lake trout and compete with ninespine stickleback. Linear distance metrics applied to isotope data showed that food webs were more compact and isotopically redundant in lakes where Arctic charr were present. Despite this, lake trout populations in lakes with Arctic charr occupied a larger isotope space and showed greater inter-individual isotope differences. Anadromous Arctic charr appear to affect ecology and feeding of sympatric freshwater species, but effects are more subtle than those seen for semelparous anadromous species.