Resource partitioning and spatial segregation in native and stocked brown trout, Salmo trutta L., and Arctic charr, Salvelinus alpinus (L.), in a hydroelectric reservoir

Abstract. Habitat use, food and spatial segregation in native and stocked brown trout, Salmo trutta L., and Arctic charr, Salvelinus alpinus (L.), were studied during summer 1989 and 1990 in the hydroelectric reservoir Lake Tunhovdfjorden. There was no difference in habitat use and feeding habits between wild and stocked brown trout. In epibenthic areas brown trout lived chiefly down to 2 Secchi disc units, whereas Arctic charr were most abundant between 1 and 4 Secchi disc units. In pelagic areas the catches were low for both species, and they were chiefly confined to surface waters down to 1 Secchi disc unit. The food segregation between brown trout and Arctic charr was almost complete. Both pelagic and epibenthic Arctic charr fed mainly on cladocerans ( Bosmina longispina and Daphnia galeata ), whereas surface insects of terrestrial origin and Arctic charr were the dominant food items for brown trout. Pelagic Arctic charr were significantly older, larger and more homogeneous in size than epibenthic charr. During calm weather schools of Arctic charr were observed cruising with the dorsal fin above the surface.     

An experimental test of the genetic component of the ontogenetic habitat shift in Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus)

Abstract— Fry of the Arctic charr, Salvelinus alpinus , were experimentally stocked into a small fish-free lake to test the hypothesis that the size-dependent habitat shift from the epibenthic to the pelagic habitat is genetically determined. The charr originated from a nearby lake inhabiting predatory brown trout Salmo trutta. The cohort of stocked charr was investigated for three years. The Arctic charr started to exploit the pelagic habitat in their first summer at a size of 7–9 cm in contrast to about 15 cm in the donor lake. In the next two summers, the pelagic fraction of the cohort increased. The main fraction lived in epibenthic areas, utilizing the same prey as pelagic charr. Water temperature moderated the habitat use of juveniles such that they avoided warm (>16°C) waters and resided in cool, deep areas. The result was consistent with the hypothesis of a tradeoff between feeding benefit and the predation risk producing spatial segregation of Arctic charr and demonstrated that the fish can facultatively respond to predation risk and adjust the size at which they migrate to the pelagic zone to feed on zooplankton.     

The marine temperature and depth preferences of Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) and sea trout (Salmo trutta), as recorded by data storage tags

Eleven Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) (370–512 mm) and eight sea trout (Salmo trutta) (370–585 mm in length) were tagged externally or internally with depth‐ and temperature‐measuring data‐storage tags (DST) before they were released into the sea in the Alta Fjord in north Norway in June 2002. All sea trout were recaptured after they spent 1–40 days at sea, while all Arctic charr were recaptured after 0.5–33 days at sea. On average, trout preferred water about 0.6 m deeper and 1.3°C warmer than Arctic charr. Arctic charr spent >50% of their time between 0 and 1 m depth, while trout spent >50% of their time between 1 and 2 m depth. Both species spent >90% of their time in water no deeper than 3 m from the water surface. However, sea trout dove more frequently and to greater depths (max. 28 m) than Arctic charr (max. 16 m), and these deep dives were most frequently performed at the end of the sea migration. Arctic charr demonstrated a diel diving pattern, staying on average about 0.5 m deeper between 08:00 hours and about 15:00 hours than during the rest of the 24 h, even though there was continuous daylight during the experiments. When comparing data obtained from the DSTs with temperature measurements within the fjord system, the two species were observed to select different feeding areas during their sea migration, the sea trout choosing the inner and warmer parts of the fjord, in contrast to the Arctic charr that preferred the outer, colder parts of the fjord. The observed differences in migration behaviour between the two species are discussed in relation to species preferences for prey and habitat selection, and their optimal temperatures for growth.     

Trophic ecology of brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) in subarctic lakes

In subarctic lake systems, fish species like brown trout are often important predators, and their niche performance is a key characteristic for understanding trophic interactions and food web functioning at upper trophic levels. Here, we studied summer habitat use and stomach contents of brown trout under both allopatric and sympatric conditions in six subarctic lakes to reveal its trophic role, and population‐ and individual‐level niche plasticity. In allopatry, brown trout mainly used the littoral habitat, but also less commonly used the pelagic zone. In sympatry with stickleback, there was always a considerable habitat overlap between the two species. In contrast, sympatric populations of brown trout and Arctic charr generally revealed a distinct habitat segregation. In the sympatric systems, in general, there was a distinct resource partitioning between the trout and charr, whereas the observed diet overlap between trout and stickleback was much larger. Trout modified their individual dietary specialisation between the littoral and pelagic zone, always being lower in the pelagic. Piscivorous behaviour of trout was only found in sympatric systems, possibly contributing to a competitive advantage of trout over charr and stickleback. Hence, the trophic level of trout was strongly related to the fish community composition, with a higher trophic level in sympatric systems where piscivorous behaviour was frequent. These changes in the trophic level of trout linked with the observed food resource partitioning might be an important mechanism in the ecosystem functioning of subarctic lakes to allow coexistence among sympatric‐living fish species.     

Brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) and Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus (L.)) as predators on three sympatric whitefish (Coregonus lavaretus (L.)) forms in the subarctic Lake Muddusjärvi

Abstract  – Brown trout ( Salmo trutta L.) and Arctic charr ( Salvelinus alpinus (L.)) use whitefish ( Coregonus lavaretus (L.)) as their main prey in the subarctic Lake Muddusjärvi. Brown trout dwelled in littoral and pelagic habitat, whereas Arctic charr lived only in epibenthic habitat. Both species shifted to whitefish predation at a length of 20–30 cm. At this size, brown trout fed on larger whitefish than Arctic charr. Whitefish occur in three sympatric forms, differing in their habitat, ecology and morphology. Both the predators preyed primarily upon the small-sized, densely rakered whitefish form (DR), which was the most numerous whitefish form in the lake. DR used both epibenthic and pelagic habitat, whereas two sparsely rakered whitefish forms dwelled (LSR and SSR) only in epibenthic habitat: LSR in littoral and SSR in profundal areas. Sparsely rakered whitefish forms had minor importance in predator diet.     

Long-term variation in piscivory in a brown trout population: effect of changes in available prey organisms

Abstract – The piscivorous behaviour in a brown trout ( Salmo trutta L.) population was studied in four discrete periods over seven decades (1917–94) in the hydroelectric reservoir Tunhovdfjord in Norway established in 1919. Piscivorous brown trout were extremely scarce prior to the introduction of two fish species Arctic charr ( Salvelinus alpinus L.) and European minnow ( Phoxinus phoxinus L.) in the 1920s. Brown trout started eating minnow at 17 cm and Arctic charr at 22 cm of length. In the 1950s, the brown trout predated extensively (60% of analysed trout) on Arctic charr and minnow. During the next four decades, the incidence of piscivorous brown trout declined to 15%, whereas the frequency of brown trout eating Arctic charr remained constant at 10%. The growth pattern, expressed as back-calculated length, demonstrated similarity in three periods (1920s, 1960s and 1990s) and improved growth in the 1950s. The improvement was addressed the impoundment of a reservoir upstream. We did not find any marked change in growth rate due to piscivority, but coefficient of variance of back-calculated lengths indicated significant variation in individual growth in age group ≥6 years from 1950 onwards. We accredit this variation to the rise of piscivorous brown trout.     

Resource partitioning between lake-dwelling Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) parr, brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) and Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus (L.))

Abstract – Resource partitioning between Atlantic salmon parr, brown trout and Arctic charr was studied throughout the ice-free season in a north Norwegian lake. Juvenile salmon and trout (≤160 mm) utilized the littoral zone and juvenile charr the profundal, while adult trout and charr (>160 mm) were found in both. Juvenile salmon and trout had a similar diet, although trichopteran larvae were more important for the trout and chironomid pupae and three-spined sticklebacks for the salmon parr. Small salmon and trout parr (≤120 mm) had a higher diet overlap than larger parr (121–160 mm). The feeding habits of adult trout were similar to that of juvenile trout, but the former took larger prey items. At the population level, both salmon and trout were generalistic feeders with a broad diet, but at the individual level, both species had specialized on a single or a few prey categories. Juvenile charr were segregated from salmon and trout in both habitat and food utilization; they had a narrow diet consisting of chironomids and zooplankton, possibly reflecting their confinement to the profundal habitat which have a low diversity of potential prey. Larger charr also took zoobenthos and sticklebacks in the littoral zone. ^Note     

Habitat utilization of juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.), brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) and Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus (L.)) in two lakes in northern Norway

Abstract— Habitat utilization of juvenile Atlantic salmon, brown trout and Arctic charr was investigated in two lakes in northern Norway during the icefree season. Both the vertical distribution and the distribution among different habitat types were studied by gillnetting with small mesh sized gillnets (8-15 mm) in different habitats. Salmon and trout were predominantly caught in the littoral and sublittoral zones (0-6 m depth). Access to shelter seemed to be the most important factor determining the horizontal distribution of small salmon and trout. Most of these fish were caught in stony or vegetated habitats, while few salmon and trout were caught on sandy locations or in the pelagic zone. In one of the lakes, there were significantly higher catch rates of salmon than of trout in the stony littoral (0-3 m), while in the other lake there were no significant differences in spatial distribution between these two species. Charr were primarily found in the profundal, sublittoral or pelagic zones of the lakes.     

Lake-use by juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) and other salmonids in northern Norway

Abstract– The utilization of lakes, and inlet and outlet streams by juvenile Atlantic salmon ( Salmo salar L.), brown trout ( Salmo trutta L.) and Arctic charr ( Salvelinus alpinus (L.), were investigated in 16 watercourses northern Norway, all known to inhabit salmon stocks. In lakes, fish were caught by small mesh size gill nets, while in rivers fish were caught electrofishing. In the shallow littoral (0-3 m depth) there were juvenile salmon in 15 of 19 investigated lakes, juvenile trout in 17 and juvenile charr in seven. Trout dominated significantly in numbers in the shallow littoral of seven lakes, while salmon and charr dominated in three lakes each. When trout and salmon were frequent in the shallow littoral, charr was usually not present in this habitat, but were found in the profundal zone in most of the lakes. Atlantic salmon parr utilized both shallow and deep lakes, and used both stones and macrophytic vegetation as shelter. The utilization of lakes by salmon parr seemed to be closely related to utilization of small inlet streams for spawning. In most inlet and outlet streams salmon dominated over trout in numbers, while charr were absent. This is the first documentation of lake-use by naturally occurring salmon parr in Scandinavia.     

Changes in the population density of pelagic salmonids in relation to changes in lake enrichment in Windermere (northwest England)

From July 1989 to December 1994, an echo sounder provided monthly estimates, usually for both day and night, of pelagic salmonid densities in the North and South Basins of Windermere, the largest natural lake in England. Sampling was along contiguous transects, three in the North Basin and five in the South Basin. Records for Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) could not be separated from those for brown trout (Salmo trutta), but previous sampling by gill-nets and anglers showed that charr formed over 90% of this mixed population in the North Basin and about 60–75% in the South Basin. Associated with the increasing eutrophication of the lake, there has been a decline in anglers' catches of charr and, since 1984, an increase in brown trout taken in the pelagic zone of the South Basin. The echo-sounder data showed that pelagic salmonid density in the North Basin was about two to five times that in the more eutrophic South Basin in 1989, 1990 and 1991. Since the start, in April 1992, of the reduction of phosphorus discharged from sewage works, this ratio has decreased, especially at night when the highest densities were recorded. This improvement was chiefly due to a significant (P<0.001) increase in the density of small fish (length <20 cm), in both the upper (depth <20 m) and deeper (depth >20 m) water layers. Although a similar improvement has still to be shown in the upper water layer by larger fish above the size limit for removal by angling (20 cm), there has been a significant increase (P<0.01) in the density of these fish in the deeper water layer of the South Basin. The increased density of small fish suggests that the stock available to charr anglers (fish >20 cm at water depths <20 m) should increase in the next few years, especially in the South Basin. It is therefore important to continue the monitoring program and thus ensure that there is advance warning of any marked changes in charr stocks.     

Foraging mode variation in three stream‐dwelling salmonid fishes

Despite long‐standing interest in foraging modes as an important element of animal space use, few studies document and compare individual foraging mode differences among species and ecological conditions in the wild. We observed and compared foraging modes of 61 wild Arctic charr, Salvelinus alpinus, 42 brown trout, Salmo trutta, and 50 Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar, in their first growing season over a range of habitats in 10 Icelandic streams. We found that although stream salmonids typically sit‐and‐wait to ambush prey from short distances, Arctic charr were more mobile during prey search and prior to prey attack than Atlantic salmon, whereas brown trout were intermediate. In all three species, individuals that were mobile during search were more likely to be moving when initiating attacks on prey, although the strength and the slope of this relationship differed among species. Arctic charr also differed from salmon and trout as more mobile individuals travelled longer distances during prey pursuits. Finally, coupled with published data from the literature, salmonid foraging mobility (both during search and prior to attack) clearly decreased from still water habitats (e.g., brook charr), to slow‐running waters (e.g., Arctic charr) to fast‐running waters (e.g., Atlantic salmon). Hence, our study suggests that foraging mode of young salmonids can vary distinctly among related species and furthers our understanding of the behavioural mechanisms shaping the geographical distribution of wild salmonids.     

Selective segregation in intraspecific competition between juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and brown trout (Salmo trutta)

Interactive segregation has been suggested as the ruling competition mechanism determining niche and niche segregation between juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and brown trout (Salmo trutta). Results from allopatry–sympatry observations of habitat use in both nature and in experiments were contrary to predictions derived from the interactive segregation hypothesis. Habitat use parameters under natural conditions such as distance to shore for Atlantic salmon parr were nearly identical in allopatric (mean ± SD; 3.2 ± 1.4 m) and sympatric (3.3 ± 1.4 m) situations. Occupied water depths largely reflected available water, but water depths <15 cm were avoided by salmon parr. Under experimental conditions, habitat use of allopatric salmon was density independent and salmon size had only minor effects, with smaller fish being more likely to occur in the shallow. Habitat use of salmon in sympatry with trout did not differ from allopatric salmon habitat use, and only salmon size had minor effects on depth choice – occurrence of trout or fish density had no effect. Allopatric trout was in general more frequent in the shallow habitat than salmon. Habitat use of sympatric trout was affected by the occurrence of salmon and trout size, resulting in a higher use of the shallow habitats for small trout. To conclude, selective segregation has a dominant role in salmon habitat use (not affected by trout occurrence), whereas a mixed situation occurs in trout habitat use with elements of interactive segregation when competing with Atlantic salmon (affected by salmon occurrence).     

Spatial niche variability for young Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and brown trout (S. trutta) in heterogeneous streams

Abstract– Habitat is important in determining stream carrying capacity and population density in young Atlantic salmon and brown trout. We review stream habitat selection studies and relate results to variable and interacting abiotic and biotic factors. The importance of spatial and temporal scales are often overlooked. Different physical variables may influence fish position choice at different spatial scales. Temporally variable water flows and temperatures are pervasive environmental factors in streams that affect behavior and habitat selection. The more frequently measured abiotic variables are water depth, water velocity (or stream gradient), substrate particle size, and cover. Summer daytime, feeding habitats of Atlantic salmon are size structured. Larger parr (>7 cm) have a wider spatial niche than small parr. Selected snout water velocities are consistently low (3–25 cm. s^?1). Mean (or surface) water velocities are in the preferred range of 30–50 cm. s^?1, and usually in combination with coarse substratum (16–256 mm). However, salmon parr demonstrate flexibility with respect to preferred water velocity, depending on fish size, intra- and interspecific competition, and predation risk. Water depth is less important, except in small streams. In large rivers and lakes a variety of water depths are used by salmon parr. Summer daytime, feeding habitat of brown trout is also characterized by a narrow selection of low snout water velocities. Habitat use is size-structured, which appears to be mainly a result of intraspecific competition. The small trout parr (<7 cm) are abundant in the shallow swift stream areas (<20–30 cm depths, 10–50 cm. s^?1 water velocities) with cobble substrates. The larger trout have increasingly strong preferences for deep-slow stream areas, in particular pools. Water depth is considered the most important habitat variable for brown trout. Spatial niche overlap is considerable where the two species are sympatric, although young Atlantic salmon tend to be distributed more in the faster flowing and shallow habitats compared with trout. Habitat use by salmon is restricted through interspecific competition with the more aggressive brown trout (interactive segregation). However, subtle innate differences in behavior at an early stage also indicate selective segregation. Seasonal changes in habitat use related to water temperatures occur in both species. In winter, they have a stronger preference for cover and shelter, and may seek shelter in the streambed and/or deeper water. At low temperatures (higher latitudes), there are also marked shifts in habitat use during day and night as the fish become nocturnal. Passive sheltering in the substrate or aggregating in deep-slow stream areas is the typical daytime behavior. While active at night, the fish move to more exposed holding positions primarily on but also above the substrate. Diurnal changes in habitat use take place also in summer; brown trout may utilize a wider spatial niche at night with more fish occupying the shallow-slow stream areas. Brown trout and young Atlantic salmon also exhibit a flexible response to variability in streamflows, wherein habitat selection may change considerably. Important topics in need of further research include: influence of spatial measurement scale, effects of temporal and spatial variability in habitat conditions on habitat selection, effects of interactive competition and trophic interactions (predation risk) on habitat selection, influence of extreme natural events on habitat selection use or suitability (floods, ice formation and jams, droughts), and individual variation in habitat use or behavior.     

Patterns of Tetracapsuloides bryosalmonae infection of three salmonid species in large,deep Norwegian lakes

Proliferative kidney disease (PKD), caused by the myxozoan endoparasite Tetracapsuloides bryosalmonae, is of serious ecological and economical concern to wild and farmed salmonids. Wild salmonid populations have declined due to PKD, primarily in rivers, in Europe and North America. Deep lakes are also important habitats for salmonids, and this work aimed to investigate parasite presence in five deep Norwegian lakes. Kidney samples from three salmonid species from deep lakes were collected and tested using real-time PCR to detect PKD parasite presence. We present the first detection of T. bryosalmonae in European whitefish in Norway for the first time, as well as the first published documentation of the parasite in kidneys of Arctic charr, brown trout and whitefish in four lakes. The observed prevalence of the parasite was higher in populations of brown trout than of Arctic charr and whitefish. The parasite was detected in farmed, but not in wild, charr in one lake. This suggests a possible link with a depth of fish habitat and fewer T. bryosalmonae-infected and PKD-affected fish. Towards a warmer climate, cold hypolimnion in deep lakes may act as a refuge for wild salmonids, while cold deep water may be used to control PKD in farmed salmonids.     

Trophic interactions between introduced lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush) and native Arctic charr (S. alpinus) in a large Fennoscandian subarctic lake

Introduced fishes may have major impacts on community structure and ecosystem function due to competitive and predatory interactions with native species. For example, introduced lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush) has been shown to replace native salmonids and induce major trophic cascades in some North American lakes, but few studies have investigated trophic interactions between lake trout and closely related native Arctic charr (S. alpinus) outside the natural distribution of the former species. We used stomach content and stable isotope analyses to investigate trophic interactions between introduced lake trout and native Arctic charr in large subarctic Lake Inarijärvi in northern Finland. Both salmonids had predominantly piscivorous diets at >280 mm total length and were mainly caught from the deep profundal zone. However, lake trout had a more generalist diet and showed higher reliance on littoral prey fish than Arctic charr, whose diet consisted mainly of pelagic planktivorous coregonids. According to length at age and condition data, lake trout showed slightly faster growth but lower condition than Arctic charr. The results indicate that introduced lake trout may to some extent compete with and prey upon native Arctic charr, but currently have only a minor if any impact on native fishes and food web structure in Inarijärvi. Future monitoring is essential to observe potential changes in trophic interactions between lake trout and Arctic charr in Inarijärvi, as well as in other European lakes where the two salmonids currently coexist.     

Atlantic salmon Salmo salar L., brown trout Salmo trutta L. and Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus (L.): a review of aspects of their life histories

Abstract – Among the species in the family Salmonidae, those represented by the genera Salmo, Salvelinus, and Oncorhynchus (subfamily Salmoninae) are the most studied. Here, various aspects of phenotypic and life‐history variation of Atlantic salmon Salmo salar L., brown trout Salmo trutta L., and Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus (L.) are reviewed. While many strategies and tactics are commonly used by these species, there are also differences in their ecology and population dynamics that result in a variety of interesting and diverse topics that are challenging for future research. Atlantic salmon display considerable phenotypic plasticity and variability in life‐history characters ranging from fully freshwater resident forms, where females can mature at approximately 10 cm in length, to anadromous populations characterised by 3–5 sea‐winter (5SW) salmon. Even within simple 1SW populations, 20 or more spawning life‐history types can be identified. Juveniles in freshwater can use both fluvial and lacustrine habitats for rearing, and while most smolts migrate to sea during the spring, fall migrations occur in some populations. At sea, some salmon undertake extensive oceanic migrations while other populations stay within the geographical confines of areas such as the Baltic Sea. At the other extreme are those that reside in estuaries and return to freshwater to spawn after spending only a few months at sea. The review of information on the diversity of life‐history forms is related to conservation aspects associated with Atlantic salmon populations and current trends in abundance and survival. Brown trout is indigenous to Europe, North Africa and western Asia, but was introduced into at least 24 countries outside Europe and now has a world‐wide distribution. It exploits both fresh and salt waters for feeding and spawning (brackish), and populations are often partially migratory. One part of the population leaves and feeds elsewhere, while another part stays as residents. In large, complex systems, the species is polymorphic with different size morphs in the various parts of the habitat. Brown trout feed close to the surface and near shore, but large individuals may move far offshore. The species exhibits ontogenetic niche shifts partly related to size and partly to developmental rate. They switch when the amount of surplus energy available for growth becomes small with fast growers being younger and smaller fish than slow growers. Brown trout is an opportunistic carnivore, but individuals specialise at least temporarily on particular food items; insect larvae are important for the young in streams, while littoral epibenthos in lakes and fish are most important for large trout. The sexes differ in resource use and size. Females are more inclined than males to become migratory and feed in pelagic waters. Males exploit running water, near‐shore and surface waters more than females. Therefore, females feed more on zooplankton and exhibit a more uniform phenotype than males. The Arctic charr is the northernmost freshwater fish on earth, with a circumpolar distribution in the Holarctic that matches the last glaciation. Recent mtDNA studies indicate that there are five phylogeographic lineages (Atlantic, Arctic, Bering, Siberian and Acadian) that may be of Pleistocene origin. Phenotypic expression and ecology are more variable in charr than in most fish. Weights at maturation range from 3 g to 12 kg. Population differences in morphology and coloration are large and can have some genetic basis. Charr live in streams, at sea and in all habitats of oligotrophic lakes, including very deep areas. Ontogenetic habitat shifts between lacustrine habitats are common. The charr feed on all major prey types of streams, lakes and near‐shore marine habitats, but has high niche flexibility in competition. Cannibalism is expressed in several cases, and can be important for developing and maintaining bimodal size distributions. Anadromy is found in the northern part of its range and involves about 40, but sometimes more days in the sea. All charr overwinter in freshwater. Partial migration is common, but the degree of anadromy varies greatly among populations. The food at sea includes zooplankton and pelagic fish, but also epibenthos. Polymorphism and sympatric morphs are much studied. As a prominent fish of glaciated lakes, charr is an important species for studying ecological speciation by the combination of field studies and experiments, particularly in the fields of morphometric heterochrony and comparative behaviour.     

A test for interaction between brown trout (Salmo trutta) and inanga (Galaxias maculatus) in an artificial stream

Abstract –  The interaction between brown trout ( Salmo trutta ; fork length (FL) range 255–390 mm) and inanga ( Galaxias maculatus ; FL range 55–115 mm) was tested during summer through autumn in an artificial stream consisting of a single run-riffle-pool sequence with a natural food supply. Each experimental trial lasted for 15 days, and consisted of two brown trout and 50 inanga collected fresh from a nearby stream, with each species given prior residence in four replicate tests, totalling eight trials in all. In addition, two control trials (each 10 days), with 50 inanga in each, were run. Brown trout almost exclusively occupied the pool, whereas inanga occupied all habitat types, although in different proportions, when tested with and without brown trout. The proportion of inanga in the pool was appreciably lower in the experimental trials with brown trout than in the control trials with no brown trout; prior residence had no significant effect on inanga habitat use. Mortality of inanga attributable to predation by brown trout ranged from 0 to 40% with a mean of 14.5 ± 4.7%. The results suggest that habitat use and survival of inanga populations in small streams can be adversely affected by brown trout.     

Dietary plasticity of Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) facilitates coexistence with competitively superior European whitefish (Coregonus lavaretus)

Abstract – Habitat use and diet of Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) coexisting with European whitefish (Coregonus lavaretus) and grayling (Thymallus thymallus) were studied in one deep and two relatively shallow subarctic lakes in northern Norway. Stomach content and stable isotope analyses revealed clear and temporally stable resource partitioning between the species in all three lakes. Arctic charr had a wide and flexible trophic niche and was the only piscivorous species. In contrast, whitefish and grayling had remarkably stable planktivorous and benthivorous niches, respectively. In the deepest lake, Arctic charr together with grayling mainly utilised littoral benthos, while piscivory was more prevalent in Arctic charr in the two shallower lakes. In one of the shallow lakes, whitefish was apparently relegated to the inferior profundal niche because of dominance of the littoral by grayling. Our results suggest that Arctic charr may not necessarily need an extensive profundal zone as a refuge, but can coexist with whitefish if a third competing fish species like grayling occurs in the littoral habitat or if profitable small prey fish are available. The study demonstrates that strong dietary plasticity of Arctic charr is instrumental in the observed coexistence with the commonly competitively superior whitefish.     

Assessing the food web impacts of an anadromous Arctic charr introduction to a sub‐Arctic watershed using stable isotopes

Anadromous Arctic charr, Salvelinus alpinus (L.), was introduced to a sub‐Arctic river–lake system near the village of Kujjuuaq, Nunavik, and the stable isotope values and diets of key resident fish species were used to assess changes in feeding patterns. Stable isotope values for most species did not differ significantly between the pre‐ and post‐introduction periods, with observed shifts being within the bounds of expected natural variation. Lake chub, Couesius plumbeus (Agassiz), were the single species to show a difference between study periods, with a small but significant increase in δ¹⁵N. No significant post‐introduction changes were seen in lake trout, Salvelinus namaycush (Walbaum), omnivory or in any of the assessed quantitative food web metrics. Gut contents of major fish species similarly showed significant temporal overlap between the pre‐ and post‐introduction periods, and there was no significant change in species' weight–length relationships. The minor ecological impact was interpreted in relation to the availability of open niches exploitable by ecological generalists such as Arctic charr. The explanation accords with the known habitat and feeding flexibility of Arctic charr and the ecological immaturity of sub‐Arctic lakes known to have driven adaptive variation among Arctic charr. Findings suggest that anadromous Arctic charr may be introduced at moderate densities to other sub‐Arctic watersheds without major negative food web consequences for other resident fish species.     

Competitive interactions between native and exotic salmonids: a combined field and laboratory demonstration

Abstract –  We studied the impact of two exotic salmonid species (brook trout, Salvelinus fontinalis and rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss ) on native brown trout ( Salmo trutta fario ) habitat, growth and survival. Habitat selection and vertical distribution between young-of-the-year of the three species were examined in a stream aquarium under different sympatric and allopatric combinations. In addition, similar species combinations were introduced in a Pyrenean mountain stream (southwest France) in order to extend laboratory results to growth and apparent survival. Both laboratory and field results indicated that rainbow trout significantly affected native brown trout habitat selection and apparent survival. On the contrary, brown trout habitat, growth and apparent survival were hardly affected by brook trout. These results support the idea that rainbow trout negatively influence native brown trout, and that competition could influence the outcome of fish biological invasions in freshwater ecosystems.