Affiliation:
1. S.L. Wolf, R.C. Shields Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Fisheries Experiment Station. 1465 W 200 N, Logan, Utah 84321
2. S.A. Tolentino Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Bear Lake Field Office, 371 West Marina Drive, P.O. Box 231, Garden City, Utah 84028
Abstract
Abstract
We used bomb calorimetry to quantify the energy density of three Prosopium fish species endemic to Bear Lake, Utah–Idaho, that we collected in 2020–2021: Bear Lake Whitefish Prosopium abyssicola, Bonneville Whitefish Prosopium spilonotus, and Bonneville Cisco Prosopium gemmifer. We found that mean ± standard deviation wet weight energy densities were 6,312 ± 760 J/g for Bear Lake Whitefish; 5,301 ± 778 J/g for Bonneville Whitefish; and 4,743 ± 443 J/g for Bonneville Cisco. We built linear mixed models and found relationships between energy density and dry matter ratio (i.e., ratio of dried weight to wet weight of a fish) for all three species, suggesting that the energy density of future samples collected in Bear Lake could potentially be determined from comparisons between the dried and wet weight of fishes belonging to these species. Our results are useful for future bioenergetics modeling with these three Bear Lake endemic species and potentially with others species in related genera that share similar feeding, behavior, and life-history traits.
Publisher
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Subject
Nature and Landscape Conservation,Animal Science and Zoology,Ecology,Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Reference34 articles.
1. Anthony
JA
,
RobyDD,
TurcoKR.
2000.
Lipid content and energy density of forage fishes from the northern Gulf of Alaska.
Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology248:53–78.
Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-0981(00)00159-3 (November 2022)
2. Baltasar
RQ
,
CraneDP,
BurgeEJ.
2021.
Effects of frozen storage on fish wet weight, percent dry weight, and length revisited.
North American Journal of Fisheries Management41:1744–1751.
Available: https://doi.org/10.1002/nafm.10691 (November 2022)
3. Bates
D
,
MaechlerM,
BalkerB,
WalkerS.
2015.
Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4.
Journal of Statistical Software67:1–48.
Available: https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 (November 2022)
4. Bonar
SA
,
HubertWA,
WillisDW.
2009.
Standard methods for sampling North American freshwater fishes.
Bethesda, Maryland:
American Fisheries Society.
5. Burnham
KP
,
AndersonDP.
2002.
Model Selection and inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. 2nd edition.
New York:
Springer-Verlag.