Richard D. Zweifela | Search USGS

USGS2017

Spatial and temporal genetic analysis of Walleyes in the Ohio River

Previous genetic analyses have shown that Walleyes Sander vitreus in the upper Ohio River comprise two distinct genetic strains: (1) fish of Great Lakes origin that were stocked into the Ohio River basin and (2) a remnant native strain (Highlands strain). Resource agencies are developing management strategies to conserve and restore the native strain within the upper reaches of the Ohio River. Hybridization between strains has impacted the genetic integrity of the native strain. To better understand the extent and effects of hybridization on the native strain, we used mitochondrial DNA and microsatellite markers to evaluate the spatial (river sections) and temporal (pre- and poststocking) genetic diversity of Ohio River Walleyes. Contemporary Lake Erie Walleyes and archival museum specimens collected from the Ohio River basin were used for comparison to contemporary Ohio River samples. Although there was evidence of hybridization between strains, most of the genetic diversity within the Ohio River was partitioned by basin of origin (Great Lakes versus the Ohio River), with greater similarity among river sections than between strains within the same section. Results also suggested that the native strain has diverged from historical populations. Furthermore, notable decreases in measures of genetic diversity and increased relatedness among native-strain Walleyes within two sections of the Ohio River may be related to stocking aimed at restoration of the Highlands strain. Our results suggest that although the Highlands strain persists within the Ohio River, it has diverged over time, and managers should consider the potential impacts of future management practices on the genetic diversity of this native strain.

Ohio River↗

USGS2009

Hatch Timing Variations Among Reservoir Gizzard Shad Populations: Implications for Stocked Sander spp. Fingerlings

Growth and survival of stocked Sander spp. fingerlings can be influenced by timing of stocking in relation to the peak in density of larval gizzard shad Dorosoma cepedianum. However, coordinating stockings to coincide with peaks in gizzard shad density is difficult due to temporal variation in spawn timing among reservoirs. We used weekly estimates of larval gizzard shad density and length distributions to identify dates of peak hatching and peak total density in Ohio reservoirs and to explore the influence of spring water temperature regimes on timing of peak larval density. Gizzard shad density peaked over 21–32 d among reservoirs but generally varied by 12 d or less among years for any given population. Density peaks were driven by hatching, as larvae smaller than 10 mm accounted for a majority of the gizzard shad collected on the peak date. Peaks in gizzard shad density corresponded to water temperatures of 17–22°C and occurred most frequently when water temperatures had been stable or rising. Reservoirs in the southern portion of the state were 2–5°C warmer than northern reservoirs throughout the spring; thus, gizzard shad spawning and date of peak larval density were earliest in southern reservoirs and became progressively later for populations in more northerly reservoirs. Historical stocking dates for fingerling walleyes S. vitreus and saugeyes (sauger S. canadensis × walleye) in Ohio reservoirs indicated that southern reservoirs were often stocked after the expected peak in gizzard shad density and northern reservoirs were stocked before the peak. A statewide approach to stocking that incorporates latitudinal variations in gizzard shad hatch timing whereby southern reservoirs are stocked earliest would better align stockings with peak gizzard shad density, potentially improving survival of fingerling walleyes and saugeyes.

North American Journal of Fisheries Management↗