CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 8Marine and fisheries researchFish Ecology and Management StudiesFish Biology and Ecology Studies

Integrating prey dynamics, diet, and biophysical factors across an estuary seascape for four fish species

Open access
Arbeider, M, Sharpe, C, Carr-Harris, C, Moore, JW·2019·Marine Ecology Progress Series
DOI 10.3354/meps12896
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

MEPS Marine Ecology Progress Series Contact the journal Facebook Twitter RSS Mailing List Subscribe to our mailing list via Mailchimp HomeLatest VolumeAbout the JournalEditorsTheme Sections MEPS 613:151-169 (2019) - DOI: https://doi.org/10.3354/meps12896 Integrating prey dynamics, diet, and biophysical factors across an estuary seascape for four fish species Michael Arbeider1,*, Ciara Sharpe1, Charmaine Carr-Harris2,3, Jonathan W. Moore1 1Earth to Oceans Research Group, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, British Columbia V5A 1S6, Canada 2Skeena Fisheries Commission, 3135 Barnes Crescent, Kispiox, British Columbia, V0J 1Y4, Canada 3Present address: Fisheries and Oceans Canada, 417 2nd Ave W, Prince Rupert, British Columbia, V8J 1G8, Canada *Corresponding author: marbeide@sfu.ca ABSTRACT: Estuary food webs support many fishes whose habitat preferences and population dynamics may be controlled by prey abundance and distribution. Yet the identity and dynamics of important estuarine prey of many species are either unknown or highly variable between regions. As anthropogenic development in estuaries increases, so does the need to understand how these environments may be supporting economically, culturally, and ecologically important fishes. Here, we examine how important estuary fishes integrate their prey across the seascape and what may influence prey dynamics. Specifically, we surveyed juvenile coho salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch, juvenile sockeye salmon O. nerka, Pacific herring Clupea pallasii, and surf smelt Hypomesus pretiosus diets along with zooplankton abundance in the estuary of the Skeena River (British Columbia, Canada) at a relatively fine scale. We found diets were highly variable, even within a species, but 1 or 2 prey composed most diet contents per species. Juvenile coho salmon primarily consumed terrestrial insects and larval fish, whereas sockeye salmon primarily consumed harpacticoid copepods. In contrast, small pelagic fish (Pacific herring and surf smelt) primarily consumed calanoid copepods, which were the most abundant prey in the environment. We found that certain prey groups were correlated with biophysical factors. For example, calanoid copepod abundance was positively correlated with salinity, whereas harpacticoid copepod abundance was highest over eelgrass sites. Identifying key prey species and how they distribute within the estuary seascape is an integral link in understanding the food-web foundation of fish habitat use in areas under pressure from anthropogenic development. KEY WORDS: Juvenile salmon · Small pelagic fish · Estuary · Diet · Prey · Oncorhynchus · Clupea · Hypomesus Full text in pdf format Supplementary material PreviousNextCite this article as: Arbeider M, Sharpe C, Carr-Harris C, Moore JW (2019) Integrating prey dynamics, diet, and biophysical factors across an estuary seascape for four fish species. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 613:151-169. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps12896 Export citation RSS - Facebook - Tweet - linkedIn Cited by Published in MEPS Vol. 613. Online publication date: March 21, 2019 Print ISSN: 0171-8630; Online ISSN: 1616-1599 Copyright © 2019 Inter-Research.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3354/meps12896

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Other studies that have examined salmon diets across large estuaries have also documented variation in diet composition with distance downstream.

    “Other studies that have examined salmon diets across large estuaries have also documented variation in diet composition with distance downstream (Arbeider et al. 2019;Miller et al. 2020).”

    From Life in the Fast Lane: Feeding and Growth of Juvenile Steelhead and Chinook Salmon in <scp>Main‐Stem</scp> Habitats of the Columbia River Estuary (2022) · cites this paper as Arbeider et al. 2019

    The Introduction reports that juvenile salmon diets varied greatly across the small spatial scale studied in the Skeena River estuary. The paper does not establish that diet composition varied specifically with distance downstream; its reported distance relationship for coho salmon diets is distance from shore (Results, §3.3). (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 73

  1. Brodeur RD, Daly EA, Schabetsberger RA, Mier KL (2007a) Interannual and interdecadal variability in juvenile coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) diets in relation to envi- ronmental changes in the northern California Current. Fish Oceanogr 16: 395-408 · DOI
  2. Brodeur RD, Daly EA, Benkwitt CE, Morgan CA, Emmett RL (2011) Catching the prey: sampling juvenile fish and invertebrate prey fields of juvenile coho and Chinook salmon during their early marine residence. Fish Res 108: 65-73 · DOI
  3. Brooks ME, Kristensen K, van Benthem KJ, Magnusson A and others (2017) glmmTMB balances speed and flex - ibility among packages for zero-inflated generalized linear mixed modeling. The R Journal 9:378-400
  4. Brown C, Laland KN (2003) Social learning in fishes: a review. Fish Fish 4: 280-288 · DOI
  5. Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multi-model inference: a practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer, New York, NY
  6. Buskey EJ, Lenz PH, Hartline DK (2002) Escape behavior of planktonic copepods in response to hydrodynamic dis- turbances: high speed video analysis. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 235: 135-146 · DOI
  7. Carr-Harris C, Gottesfeld AS, Moore JW (2015) Juvenile salmon usage of the Skeena River estuary. PLOS ONE 10: e0118988 · DOI
  8. Chacin DH, Stallings CD (2016) Disentangling fine-and broad-scale effects of habitat on predator-prey interac- tions. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 483: 10-19 · DOI
  9. Chandler GT, Fleeger JW (1987) Facilitative and inhibitory interactions among estuarine meiobenthic Harpacticoid copepods. Ecology 68: 1906-1919 · DOI
  10. Chesson J (1978) Measuring preference in selective preda- tion. Ecology 59: 211-215 · DOI
  11. Clark CW, Levy DA (1988) Diel vertical migrations by juve- nile sockeye salmon and the antipredation window. Am Nat 131: 271-290 · DOI
  12. Cloern JE (1996) Phytoplankton bloom dynamics in coastal ecosystems: a review with some general lessons from sustained investigation of San Francisco Bay, California. Rev Geophys 34: 127-168 · DOI
  13. Cloern JE, Foster SQ, Kleckner AE (2014) Phytoplankton primary production in the world's estuarine-coastal eco- systems. Biogeosciences 11: 2477-2501 · DOI
  14. Croll DA, Marinovic B, Benson S, Chavez FP, Black N, Ter- nullo R, Tershy BR (2005) From wind to whales: tropic links in a coastal upwelling system. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 289: 117-130 · DOI
  15. Cushing DH (1990) Plankton production and year-class strength in fish populations: an update of the match/mis- match hypothesis. In: Blaxter JHS, Southward AJ (eds) Advances in marine biology, Vol 26. Elsevier, New York, NY, p 249-293
  16. Daly E, Brodeur RD, Weitkamp L (2009) Ontogenetic shifts in diets of juvenile and subadult coho and chinook salmon in coastal marine waters: important for marine survival? Trans Am Fish Soc 138: 1420-1438 · DOI
  17. Daly E, Benkwitt CE, Brodeur RD, Litz MN, Copeman L (2010) Fatty acid profiles of juvenile salmon indicate prey selection strategies in coastal marine waters. Mar Biol 157: 1975-1987 · DOI
  18. David V, Selleslagh J, Nowaczyk A, Dubois S and others (2016) Estuarine habitats structure zooplankton commu- nities: implications for the pelagic trophic pathways. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 179: 99-111 · DOI
  19. Duffy EJ, Beauchamp DA, Sweeting RM, Beamish RJ, Bren- nan JS (2010) Ontogenetic diet shifts of juvenile Chinook salmon in nearshore and offshore habitats of Puget Sound. Trans Am Fish Soc 139: 803-823 · DOI
  20. Dunn OJ (1961) Multiple comparisons among means. J Am Stat Assoc 56: 52-64 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Eggers DM (1977) The nature of prey selection by planktiv- orous fish. Ecology 58: 46-59 · DOI
  22. Eggers DM (1982) Planktivore preference by prey size. Ecol- ogy 63: 381-390 · DOI
  23. Emlen JM (1966) The role of time and energy in food prefer- ence. Am Nat 100: 611-617 · DOI
  24. Fujiwara M, Highsmith RC (1997) Harpacticoid copepods: potential link between inbound adult salmon and out- bound juvenile salmon. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 158: 205-216 · DOI
  25. Gibson RN, Ezzi IA (1985) Effect of particle concentration on filter-and particulate-feeding in the herring Clupea harengus. Mar Biol 88: 109-116 · DOI
  26. Godin JGJ (1981) Daily patterns of feeding behaviour, daily rations, and diets of juvenile pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha) in two marine bays of British Columbia. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 38: 10-15 · DOI
  27. Gregory RS, Northcote TG (1993) Surface, planktonic, and benthic foraging by juvenile chinook salmon (Oncorhyn- chus tshawytscha) in turbid laboratory conditions. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 50: 233-240 · DOI
  28. Griffiths D (1973) The food of animals in an acid morland pond. J Anim Ecol 42: 285-293 · DOI
  29. Griffiths D (1975) Prey availability and the food of predators. Ecology 56: 1209-1214 · DOI
  30. Healey MC (1979) Detritus and juvenile salmon production in the Nanaimo estuary: I. Production and feeding rates of juvenile chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta). J Fish Res Board Can 36: 488-496 · DOI
  31. Healey MC (1991) Diets and feeding rates of juvenile pink, chum, and sockeye salmon in Hecate Strait, British Columbia. Trans Am Fish Soc 120: 303-318 · DOI
  32. Hitchcock C, Sober E (2004) Prediction versus accommoda- tion and the risk of overfitting. Br J Philos Sci 55: 1-34 · DOI
  33. Hosack GR, Dumbauld BR, Ruesink JL, Armstrong DA (2006) Habitat associations of estuarine species: compar- isons of intertidal mudflat, seagrass (Zostera marina), and oyster (Crassostrea gigas) habitats. Estuaries Coasts 29: 1150-1160 · DOI
  34. Kennedy LA, Juanes F, El-Sabaawi R (2018) Eelgrass as valuable nearshore foraging habitat for juvenile Pacific salmon in the early marine period. Mar Coast Fish 10: 190-203 · DOI
  35. Labropoulou M, Eleftheriou A (1997) The foraging ecology of two pairs of congeneric demersal fish species: impor- tance of morphological characteristics in prey selection. J Fish Biol 50: 324-340 · DOI
  36. Lannin R, Hovel K (2011) Variable prey density modifies the effects of seagrass habitat structure on predator-prey interactions. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 442: 59-70 · DOI
  37. Lazzaro X (1987) A review of planktivorous fishes: their evo- lution, feeding behaviours, selectivities, and impacts. Hydrobiologia 146: 97-167 · DOI
  38. Leising AW, Yen J (1997) Spacing mechanisms within light- induced copepod swarms. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 155: 127-135 · DOI
  39. Letcher BH, Rice JA (1997) Prey patchiness and larval fish growth and survival: inferences from an individual- based model. Ecol Model 95: 29-43 · DOI
  40. Levings CD (2016) Ecology of salmonids in estuaries around the world: adaptations, habitats, and conservation. UBC Press, Vancouver
  41. Ljungberg P, Hasper TB, Nilsson PA, Persson A (2013) Effects of small-scale habitat fragmentation on preda- tor-prey interactions in a temperate sea grass system. Mar Biol 160: 667-675 · DOI
  42. López Abbate MC, Molinero JC, Guinder VA, Dutto MS and others (2015) Microplankton dynamics under heavy anthropogenic pressure. The case of the Bahía Blanca Estuary, southwestern Atlantic Ocean. Mar Pollut Bull 95: 305-314 · DOI
  43. Macdonald JS, Birtwell IK, Kruzynski GM (1987) Food and habitat utilization of juvenile salmonids in the Campbell River estuary. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 44: 1233-1246 · DOI
  44. Mackas DL, Greve W, Edwards M, Chiba S and others (2012) Changing zooplankton seasonality in a changing ocean: comparing time series of zooplankton phenology. Prog Oceanogr 97-100: 31-62 · DOI
  45. Manzer J (1969) Stomach contents of juvenile Pacific salmon in Chatham Sound and adjacent waters. J Fish Res Board Can 26: 2219-2223 · DOI
  46. Mauchline J (1998) The biology of calanoid copepods. Aca- demic Press, New York, NY
  47. McDevitt-Irwin JM, Iacarella JC, Baum JK (2016) Reassess- ing the nursery role of seagrass habitats from temperate to tropical regions: a meta-analysis. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 557: 133-143 · DOI
  48. Moore JW, Gordon J, Carr-Harris C, Gottesfeld AS, Wilson SM, Russell JH (2016) Assessing estuaries as stopover habitats for juvenile Pacific salmon. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 559: 201-215 · DOI
  49. Moore JW, Carr-Harris C, Gottesfeld AS, MacIntyre D and others (2015) Selling First Nations down the river. Sci- ence 349: 596 · DOI
  50. Morgan CA, Cordell JR, Simenstad CA (1997) Sink or swim? Copepod population maintenance in the Columbia River estuarine turbidity-maxima region. Mar Biol 129: 309-317 · DOI
  51. Nagelkerken I, Sheaves M, Baker R, Connolly RM (2015) The seascape nursery: a novel spatial approach to iden- tify and manage nurseries for coastal marine fauna. Fish Fish 16: 362-371 · DOI
  52. Nakagawa S (2004) A farewell to Bonferroni: the problems of low statistical power and publication bias. Behav Ecol 15: 1044-1045 · DOI
  53. Nohara D, Kitoh A, Hosaka M, Oki T (2006) Impact of cli- mate change on river discharge projected by multimodel ensemble. J Hydrometeorol 7: 1076-1089 · DOI
  54. Osgood G (2016) Historical diets of forage fish and juvenile Pacific salmon in the Strait of Georgia, 1966-1968. Mar Coast Fish 8: 580-594 · DOI
  55. Palmer MA (1988) Dispersal of marine meiofauna: a review and conceptual model explaining passive transport and active emergence with implications for recruitment. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 48: 81-91 · DOI
  56. Perillo GME (1995) Definitions and geomorphologic classifi- cations of estuaries. Dev Sedimentol 53: 17-47 · DOI
  57. Pickard D, Porter M, Olson E, Connors B, Kellock K, Jones E, Connors K (2015) Skeena River estuary assessment: technical report. Pacific Salmon Foundation, Vancouver Pitchford WJ (2001) Prey patchiness, predator survival and fish recruitment. Bull Math Biol 63: 527-546 · DOI
  58. Price M, Glickman B, Reynolds J (2013) Prey selectivity of Fraser River sockeye salmon during early marine mi - gration in British Columbia. Trans Am Fish Soc 142: 1126-1133 · DOI
  59. Schoener TW (1970) Non-synchronous spatial overlap of lizards in patchy habitats. Ecology 51:408-418 · DOI
  60. Selleslagh J, Lesourd S, Amara R (2012) Comparison of macrobenthic assemblages of three fish estuarine nurs- eries and their importance as foraging grounds. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 92: 85-97 · DOI
  61. Selleslagh J, Blanchet H, Bachelet G, Lobry J (2015) Feeding habitats, connectivity and origin of organic matter sup- porting fish populations in an estuary with a reduced intertidal area assessed by stable isotope analysis. Estu- aries Coasts 38: 1431-1447 · DOI
  62. Sharpe C (2017) Abiotic and biotic dimensions of habitat for juvenile salmon and other fishes in the Skeena River estuary. MS thesis, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby
  63. Sheaves M, Baker R, Nagelkerken I, Connolly RM (2015) True value of estuarine and coastal nurseries for fish: in - corporating complexity and dynamics. Estuaries Coasts 38: 401-414 · DOI
  64. Sherwood CR, Jay DA, Bradford Harvey R, Hamilton P, Simenstad CA (1990) Historical changes in the Columbia River Estuary. Prog Oceanogr 25: 299-352 · DOI · Paper page
  65. Sibert J (1979) Detritus and juvenile salmon production in the Nanaimo Estuary: II. Meiofauna available as food to juvenile chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta). J Fish Res Board Can 36: 497-503 · DOI
  66. Sih A, Englund G, Wooster D (1998) Emergent impacts of multiple predators on prey. Trends Ecol Evol 13: 350-355 · DOI
  67. Simenstad CA, Fresh KL, Salo EO (1982) The role of Puget Sound and Washington coastal estuaries in the life history of Pacific salmon: an unappreciated function. In: Kennedy VS (ed) Estuarine comparisons. Elsevier, New York, NY, p 343-364
  68. Sims DW, Southall EJ, Humphries NE, Hays GC and others (2008) Scaling laws of marine predator search behaviour. Nature 451: 1098-1102 · DOI
  69. Steinarsdóttir MB, Ingólfsson A, Ólafsson E (2010) Field evidence of differential food utilization of phytal har - pacticoids collected from Fucus serratus indicated by δ 13 C and δ 15 N stable isotopes. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 88: 160-164 · DOI
  70. Telesh IV, Khlebovich VV (2010) Principal processes within the estuarine salinity gradient: a review. Mar Pollut Bull 61: 149-155 · DOI
  71. Trites RW (1956) The oceanography of Chatham Sound, British Columbia. J Fish Res Board Can 13: 385-434 · DOI
  72. Werner EE, Gilliam JF (1984) The ontogenetic niche and species interactions in size-structured populations. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 15: 393-425 · DOI
  73. Yang LH, Bastow JL, Spence KO, Wright AN (2008) What can we learn from resource pulses? Ecology 89: 621-634 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Arbeider, M., Sharpe, C., Carr-Harris, C., & Moore, J.
Affiliations
Simon Fraser University (CA)
Corresponding author
Arbeider, M
ORCID
Arbeider, M
Venue
Marine Ecology Progress Series
Publisher
Inter-Research Science Center
Published
2019-03-21
Volume
613
Pages
151-169
ISSN
  • 0171-8630 (ISSN-L)
  • 1616-1599
DOI
10.3354/meps12896
OpenAlex
W2915657714
Cited by
8
References
1
Citations by year
2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1
FWCI
0.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Marine Ecology Progress Series (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Simon Fraser University
  • Liber Ero Foundation
  • Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Marine and fisheries research
  • 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
Keywords
fish diet, zooplankton, juvenile salmonids, coho salmon, sockeye salmon, Pacific herring, surf smelt, Calanoida, Harpacticoida, terrestrial insects, fish larvae, salinity, water temperature, estuarine habitat, small pelagic fish

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