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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Impaired littoral energy pathways cause a shift to pelagic resources by fish in recovering lake food webs

Fish communities may increase in biomass and productivity due to energy subsidies from the littoral invertebrate community. In lakes recovering from acidification and metal contamination, such as those in Sudbury, Ontario, Canada, impaired benthic invertebrate communities (i.e., low diversity with higher abundance of small‐bodied taxa) allowed a critical test of the role of these littoral pathways on fish diet. We compared fish abundance, diversity, diet and biomass in eight recovering and eight reference lakes and related availability of the main littoral and pelagic invertebrate groups to fish diet regime using stable isotope analysis. A Bayesian mixing model (MixSIR) was used to estimate diet likelihood, and convex hull analysis was used to estimate trophic niche space of fish communities. Fish biomass did not differ between impaired and reference lakes despite substantial differences in potential diet. Fish depended strongly on littoral benthos in the reference lakes but consumed more pelagic food in the impaired lakes. The trophic niche of the focal, most common fish species (i.e., yellow perch, smallmouth bass, pumpkinseed and brown bullhead) was larger in the impaired lakes. We attributed these differences to low diversity at the highest trophic levels of fish communities in the impaired lakes as well as to depauperate benthic invertebrate communities. In contrast to the food webs of most temperate lakes, fish in impaired lakes preyed less on littoral invertebrates yet still managed to maintain a reference lake level of biomass standing crop by relying more on pelagic resources – macro zooplankton such as Chaoborus.     

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.     

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     

Lack of trophic polymorphism despite substantial genetic differentiation in sympatric brown trout (Salmo trutta) populations

Sympatric populations occur in many freshwater fish species; such populations are typically detected through morphological distinctions that are often coupled to food niche and genetic separations. In salmonids, trophic and genetically separate sympatric populations have been reported in landlocked Arctic char, whitefish and brown trout. In Arctic char and brown trout rare cases of sympatric, genetically distinct populations have been detected based on genetic data alone, with no apparent morphological differences, that is “cryptic” structuring. It remains unknown whether such cryptic, sympatric structuring can be coupled to food niche separation. Here, we perform an extensive screening for trophic divergence of two genetically divergent, seemingly cryptic, sympatric brown trout populations documented to remain in stable sympatry over several decades in two interconnected, tiny mountain lakes in a nature reserve in central Sweden. We investigate body shape, body length, gill raker metrics, breeding status and diet (stomach content analysis and stable isotopes) in these populations. We find small significant differences for body shape, body size and breeding status, and no evidence of food niche separation between these two populations. In contrast, fish in the two lakes differed in body shape, diet, and nitrogen and carbon isotope signatures despite no genetic difference between lakes. These genetically divergent populations apparently coexist using the same food resources and showing the same adaptive plasticity to the local food niches of the two separate lakes. Such observations have not been reported previously but may be more common than recognised as genetic screenings are necessary to detect the structures.     

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.     

Polar light regime and piscivory govern diel vertical migrations of planktivorous fish and zooplankton in a subarctic lake

Abstract –  Seasonal variation in light intensity has strong impacts on invertebrate and vertebrate habitat selection creating trade-offs between foraging gain and risk of death. Diel vertical migration (DVM) has received a particularly interest, but multitrophic level studies in lakes under polar light regime have not been conducted. Here, we examined habitat selection of pelagic zooplankton, planktivores and piscivores in subarctic Lake Muddusjärvi with polymorphic whitefish ( Coregonus lavaretus (L.)). Seasonal change in light was hypothesized to be the most important abiotic factor inducing DVM, whereas predation was considered as an ultimate biotic factor. During period of mid-night sun in June, no DVM was observed at any trophic level, whereas during normal day and night light in September planktivores and zooplankton migrated. DVM was top-down controlled, where piscivorous brown trout ( Salmo trutta L.) used pelagic habitat continuously inducing DVM of its main prey, pelagic whitefish morph, which cascaded to reverse DVM of zooplankton. Top-down control of lower trophic level DVMs by piscivores might be more general pattern in lakes than previously considered.     

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.     

Food resource partitioning of Arctic charr, Salvelinus alpinus (L.) and three-spined stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus L., in the littoral zone of lake Takvatn in northern Norway

The food resource partitioning of Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus L.) and three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus L.) were investigated in the littoral zone of lake Takvatn in northern Norway in the ice-free period June–November. Charr and sticklebacks had different feeding habits. Sticklebacks ate several small benthic prey items that were never eaten by charr, and the sticklebacks' diet were dominated by the benthic microcrustaceans Chydoridae and Ostracoda, chironomid larvae and stickleback eggs. Small charr (<17 cm) consumed a wide spectrum of chironomid pupae, terrestrial insects and zooplankton. Intermediate (17–20 cm) and small charr had quite similar feeding habits, while large charr (>20 cm) frequently ate both benthos, pelagic and terrestrial food. The diet overlap between small charr and sticklebacks was never larger than 0.6 (Schoener's index). The segregation in feeding habits indicates that small charr and sticklebacks are segregated in microhabitat when they are both in the littoral zone.     

Resource use of crucian carp along a lake productivity gradient is related to body size,predation risk,and resource competition

Generalist fish species can feed on a wide resource spectrum and across trophic levels depending on resource availability and trophic interactions. Crucian carp (Carassius carassius) represents a good candidate species to investigate variation in the trophic ecology of generalist fish as it can be found in highly variable fish communities and its resource use is well documented. In this study, we explored the trophic ecology of crucian carp at the individual and population levels using stable isotope and gut content analysis. We tested if trophic resource use varied according to lake productivity, predation risk, intra- and interspecific competition, or individual fish size. We found that crucian carp resource preference was highly variable among and within lakes. In predator-free lakes, small crucian carp occurred in high densities, showed increased interindividual specialisation, and relied mainly on pelagic zooplankton. In presence of predators, large crucian carp occurred in low densities and included greater proportions of benthic macroinvertebrates in their diet. This shift in resource use was further favoured in productive, shallow lakes where littoral prey were probably abundant. Resource partitioning was an important factor determining crucian carp niche use, as fish had higher trophic position in absence of other cyprinids. Crucian carp showed highly dynamic resource use and food preferences in response to variable environmental conditions. Overlooking complex diet preferences of generalist fish may lead to an oversimplification of freshwater community dynamics.     

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.     

Resource use of native and stocked brown trout Salmo trutta L., in a subarctic lake

Habitat use, food composition and growth of stocked and native brown trout, Salmo trutta L., were studied in the subarctic Lake Muddusjärvi in northern Finland. Stocked brown trout and native brown trout preferred littoral and pelagic areas. Trout were stocked in October. In June stocked trout fed primarily on invertebrates while native fish were piscivorous. From July onwards the composition of the diet of both stocked and native trout was similar and consisted almost entirely of small‐sized whitefish. Brown trout were already piscivorous at a length of about 20 cm. The mean length of prey consumed was about 12 cm. Mean length‐at‐age was similar from the second year in the lake despite of the larger size of stocked fish during the first year in the lake.     

Habitat use, size and age structure in sympatric brown trout (Salmo trutta) and Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) stocks: resistance of populations to change following harvest

Abstract– Habitat use and population dynamics in brown trout Salmo trutta and Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus were studied in an oligotrophic lake over a period of 10 years. Previous studies showed that the species segregated by habitat during summer. While brown trout occupied the surface water down to a depth of 10 m, Arctic charr were found deeper with a maximum occurrence at depth 10–15 m. Following the removal of a large number of intermediate sized fish in 1988–89, habitat segregation between the species broke down and Arctic charr were found in upper waters, while brown trout descended to deeper waters. The following year, both species were most frequently found in surface waters at depths of 0–5 m. During the last four years, the species reestablished their original habitat segregation despite another removal experiment of intermediate-sized fish in 1992–1994. The removal of fish resulted in an increased proportion of large (≥ 25 cm) fish in both species. Furthermore, the charr stock responded by reduced abundance and increased size-at-age. The results revealed plasticity and strong resistance to harvest populations of brown trout and Arctic charr. This is probably due to internal mechanisms of intraspecific competition within each population, which result in differential mortality among size classes.     

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.     

Generalist feeding strategies in Arctic freshwater fish: A mechanism for dealing with extreme environments

Generalist feeding strategies are favoured in stressful or variable environments where flexibility in ecological traits is beneficial. Species that feed across multiple habitat types and trophic levels may impart stability on food webs through the use of readily available, alternative energy pools. In lakes, generalist fish species may take advantage of spatially and temporally variable prey by consuming both benthic and pelagic prey to meet their energy demands. Using stomach content and stable isotope analyses, we examined the feeding habits of fish species in Alaska's Arctic Coastal Plain (ACP) lakes to determine the prevalence of generalist feeding strategies as a mechanism for persistence in extreme environments (e.g. low productivity, extreme cold and short growing season). Generalist and flexible feeding strategies were evident in five common fish species. Fish fed on benthic and pelagic (or nektonic) prey and across trophic levels. Three species were clearly omnivorous, feeding on fish and their shared invertebrate prey. Dietary differences based on stomach content analysis often exceeded 70%, and overlap in dietary niches based on shared isotopic space varied from zero to 40%. Metrics of community‐wide trophic structure varied with the number and identity of species involved and on the dietary overlap and niche size of individual fishes. Accumulation of energy from shared carbon sources by Arctic fishes creates redundancy in food webs, increasing likely resistance to perturbations or stochastic events. Therefore, the generalist and omnivorous feeding strategies employed by ACP fish may maintain energy flow and food web stability in extreme environments.     

Habitat use of lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush) following species introduction

Abstract – Although introductions of prey species have the potential to significantly alter habitat use by top predatory fish, this aspect has rarely been directly quantified. Introduction of yellow perch (Perca flavescens), a littoral–pelagic prey species, to a small boreal lake previously dominated by littoral cyprinids provided a unique opportunity to examine how a change in forage base influenced habitat use by the sole top predator, lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush). We monitored lake trout pelagic and spatial distribution using acoustic telemetry before (2001) and after (2008) the introduction of perch to determine whether habitat use reflected a deeper, offshore prey community. After accounting for differences in water temperature and dissolved oxygen concentrations between years and the inclusion of a control lake, our data suggest that lake trout habitat use changed after the introduction of yellow perch. Lake trout, on average, were 1.4 m deeper (P < 0.01), reduced their use of littoral habitat by 55% (P = 0.03) and experienced a 71% decrease in home range size (P < 0.01), consistent with a greater offshore habitat overlap between predator and prey after the introduction of yellow perch. This study illustrates how introduced prey species may have a significant influence on habitat use by top predatory fish, while also showing the importance of using direct measurements to quantify behavioural changes.     

Individual feeding specialisation of a naïve vs. veteran predators

Abstract – We explored the incidence of individual feeding specialisation among a naïve predator (non‐native rainbow trout postsmolts) and two native experienced predators (sea‐run Arctic charr and sea‐trout) in a subarctic Norwegian fjord. Interindividual foraging niche stability was obtained by combining information on stomach contents (recent dietary niche) with trophically transmitted parasite infestation (time‐integrated historical dietary niche) of individual predators. Individual fish showed a high degree of resource specialisation as prey items such as gammarids and small fish (both potential intermediate host of parasites) rarely co‐occurred in stomachs. In both naïve and veteran predators, positive associations between the intensity of a specific parasite species and the occurrence of their respective intermediate host (gammarids or fish) in the stomachs of individual predators demonstrated temporally interindividual feeding specialisations. Several behavioural phenotypes clearly co‐existed in both naïve and veteran predator populations, including gammaridivore (benthic feeders), piscivore (pelagic feeders) or insectivore (pleuston feeders) individuals. The likely mechanism of this observed interindividual resource specialisation in the non‐native naïve predators involves a behavioural component of which rapid learning seems to be a key factor.