Trophic Interactions and Consumption Rates of Subyearling Chinook Salmon and Nonnative Juvenile American Shad in Columbia River Reservoirs
Abstract
We used a large lampara seine coupled with nonlethal gastric lavage to examine the diets and estimate consumption rates of subyearling Chinook Salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha during July and August 2013. During August we also examined the diet and consumption rates of juvenile American Shad Alosa sapidissima, a potential competitor of subyearling Chinook Salmon. Subyearling Chinook Salmon consumed Daphnia in July but switched to feeding on smaller juvenile American Shad in August. We captured no juvenile American Shad in July, but in August juvenile American Shad consumed cyclopoid and calanoid copepods. Stomach evacuation rates for subyearling Chinook Salmon were high during both sample periods (0.58 h−1 in July, 0.51 h−1 in August), and daily ration estimates were slightly higher than values reported in the literature for other subyearlings. By switching from planktivory to piscivory, subyearling Chinook Salmon gained greater growth opportunity. While past studies have shown that juvenile American Shad reduce zooplankton availability for Chinook Salmon subyearlings, our work indicates that they also become important prey after Daphnia abundance declines. The diet and consumption data here can be used in future bioenergetics modeling to estimate the growth of subyearling Chinook Salmon in lower Columbia River reservoirs. Received July 27, 2016; accepted November 22, 2016 Published online February 1, 2017
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Higher July caloric intake was likely due to highly nutritious prey including Trichoptera, Hemiptera, and Hymenoptera replacing some amphipods in the Welch and Whites Island's diets, and fish and insects replacing cladocerans in Campbell Slough diets.
“Higher July caloric intake was likely due to highly nutritious prey including Trichoptera, Hemiptera, and Hymenoptera replacing some amphipods in the Welch and Whites Island’s diets, and fish and insects replacing cladocerans in Campbell Slough diets”
From Subyearling Chinook salmon diets in Lower Columbia River estuarine habitats (2025) · cites this paper as [55]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Subyearling Chinook salmon diets in Lower Columbia River estuarine habitats
Accola, K., Cordell, J., Oxborrow, B., Toft, J. D., Suzumura, A., & Grote, J. (2025) · PLOS One · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0325939 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Haskell, C. A., Beauchamp, D. A., & Bollens, S. M.
- Affiliations
- Washington State University Vancouver (US)
- Western Fisheries Research Center (US)
- Corresponding author
- Haskell, Craig A.
- Venue
- Transactions of the American Fisheries Society
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2017-02
- Volume
- 146
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 291-298
- ISSN
- 0002-8487 (ISSN-L)
- 1548-8659
- OpenAlex
- W2583610614
- Cited by
- 16
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4
- FWCI
- 1.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Transactions of the American Fisheries Society (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Geological Survey
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Fish Ecology and Management Studies
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Aquatic Science › Fish Biology and Ecology Studies
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Aquatic Science › Aquaculture Nutrition and Growth
- Keywords
- Oncorhynchus tshawytscha, Alosa sapidissima, trophic interactions, diet, consumption rate, daily ration, Daphnia, copepods, bioenergetics modeling
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review