首页> 外文OA文献 >Habitat Suitability Criteria for Zuni Bluehead Sucker Catostomus discobolus yarrowi and Navajo Nation Genetic Subunit Bluehead Sucker Catostomus discobolus and Comparing Efficiency of AFS Standard Snorkeling Techniques to eDNA Sampling Techniques
【2h】

Habitat Suitability Criteria for Zuni Bluehead Sucker Catostomus discobolus yarrowi and Navajo Nation Genetic Subunit Bluehead Sucker Catostomus discobolus and Comparing Efficiency of AFS Standard Snorkeling Techniques to eDNA Sampling Techniques

机译:Zuni Bluehead抽油器Catostomus discobolus yarrowi和Navajo民族遗传亚基Bluehead抽油器Catostomus discobolus的栖息地适宜性标准以及AFS标准浮潜技术与eDNA采样技术的效率比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

I quantified habitat selection for the endangered Zuni Bluehead Sucker Catostomus discobolus yarrowi and the Navajo Nation Genetic Subunit (NNGS) Bluehead Sucker Catostomus discobolus - a recent taxon described from genetic information. Both taxa are found in northern Arizona and New Mexico border regions. I examined fish [≥50 millimeters (mm) total length (TL)] selection of microhabitat conditions (i.e., water velocity, substrate size, overhead cover, water depth, instream cover, and mesohabitat conditions [i.e., pool, run riffle], during summer base flow conditions for NNGS Bluehead Suckers, and during both summer base flow and high spring flow conditions for Zuni Bluehead Suckers in six streams). Electrofishing, seining, and snorkeling were used to evaluate fish occupancy. From this information, I developed stream specific habitat suitability criteria (HSC) and then generalized HSC for each taxon, and tested transferability of the generalized HSC to individual streams. Zuni Bluehead Suckers and NNGS Bluehead Suckers occupied similar habitats: low velocity pools; sand, silt, and pebble substrate; high percent of instream cover; and water temperatures ranging from 2-21°C. However, Zuni Bluehead Suckers selected for low (0-25%) overhead cover where as NNGS Bluehead Sucker selected for high (0-75%) overhead cover. This was likely due to the source of instream cover–aquatic macrophytes that required sunlight in the Zuni Bluehead Sucker streams, and large woody debris falling from overhead branches in the NNGS Bluehead Sucker streams. Suggestions for managers includes maintaining existing cover or artificially construct additional instream cover; promote overhead cover (e.g., maintaining large trees along streams) and pool mesohabitats. In addition to this work I also tested the new method of environmental DNA (eDNA) to further help conservation efforts for these taxa. Environmental DNA has typically been used to detect invasive species in aquatic environments through water samples. I compared the efficacy of eDNA methodology to American Fisheries Society standard snorkeling surveys to detect presence of a rare fish species. My study site included three streams on the Navajo Nation in northern Arizona and northern New Mexico containing Navajo Nation Genetic Subunit Bluehead Sucker Catostomus discobolus and the Zuni Bluehead Sucker Catostomus discobolus yarrowi. To determine sample sites, I first divided entire wetted area of streams into 100-m consecutive reaches. I systematically selected 10 of those reaches for snorkel and eDNA surveys. Water samples were taken in 10-m sections within each 100-m reach, and fish presence via snorkeling was noted in each 10-m section as well. Water samples were collected at the downstream starting point of each reach, and continued upstream in each section 5 to 8 m ahead of the snorkeler. A qPCR was run on each individual water sample in quadruplicate to test for sucker presence or absence. I was able to positively detect both species with eDNA sampling techniques in two out of three streams. Snorkeling resulted in positive detections of both species in all three streams. In streams where fish were detected with eDNA sampling, snorkeling detected fishes at 11-29 sites per stream, where as eDNA detected fish at 3-12 sites per streams. My results suggested that AFS standard snorkeling was more effective at detecting target fish species than eDNA. To improve eDNA sampling, the amount of water collected and tested should be increased. Additionally, filtering water on site may improve eDNA techniques for detecting fish. Future research should focus on standardizing eDNA sampling to provide a widely operational sampling tool similar to electrofishing, netting, and hydroacoustics.
机译:我量化了濒临灭绝的Zuni Blueuck Sucker Catostomus discoboly yarrowi和Navajo Nation遗传亚基(NNGS)Bluehead Sucker Catostomus discobolus的栖息地选择,这是根据遗传信息描述的最新分类。这两个分类单元都位于亚利桑那州北部和新墨西哥州的边界地区。我检查了鱼类[总长度(TL)≥50毫米(mm)]的微生境条件(例如,水速,底物大小,高架覆盖,水深,河道内覆盖度和中生境条件(例如,水池,浅滩))的选择, NNGS Bluehead抽油机的夏季基本流量条件,以及Zuni Bluehead抽油机的6条流的夏季基本流量和高弹簧流量条件。电钓,围网和浮潜被用来评估鱼类的占有率。根据这些信息,我制定了溪流特定的栖息地适应性标准(HSC),然后针对每个分类单元进行了广义HSC,并测试了广义HSC对各个溪流的可转移性。 Zuni Bluehead Suckers和NNGS Bluehead Suckers占据了类似的栖息地:低速池;沙子,淤泥和卵石基质;河流覆盖率高;水温在2-21°C之间。但是,Zuni Bluehead Sucker选择了低(0-25%)的间接费用,而NNGS Bluehead Sucker选择了高(0-75%)的间接费用。这很可能是由于上游盖层水生植物的来源,这些水生植物需要Zuni Bluehead Sucker流中的阳光,以及大的木屑从NNGS Bluehead Sucker流中的高处分支掉落。对管理人员的建议包括保持现有的掩护或人为地构建额外的插播掩护;促进高架覆盖物(例如,沿河维护大树)并池中栖动物。除这项工作外,我还测试了环境DNA(eDNA)的新方法,以进一步帮助保护这些分类单元。环境DNA通常已用于通过水样本检测水生环境中的入侵物种。我将eDNA方法的功效与美国渔业协会标准的浮潜调查进行了比较,以检测稀有鱼类的存在。我的研究地点包括亚利桑那州北部和新墨西哥州北部的纳瓦霍族的三股溪流,其中包含纳瓦霍族遗传亚基的蓝头吸盘Catostomus discobolus和祖尼蓝头的吸盘Catostomus discobolus yarrowi。为了确定样本位置,我首先将溪流的整个湿润区域分成100米连续的河段。我系统地选择了其中10个进行浮潜和eDNA调查。在每100米的范围内,在10米的区域中采集水样,并且在每10米的区域中,也通过浮潜记录鱼的存在。在每个河段的下游起点处收集水样,并在浮潜者之前5至8 m的每个区域继续向上游。对每个单独的水样进行qPCR一式四份,以测试是否存在抽油器。我能够使用eDNA采样技术在三分之二的流中积极检测这两种物种。浮潜导致在所有三个流中对两种物种的阳性检测。在通过eDNA采样检测到鱼的溪流中,浮潜以每条溪流11-29个位点检测到鱼,而eDNA则在每个溪流3-12个位点检测到鱼。我的结果表明,AFS标准浮潜比eDNA能够更有效地检测目标鱼类。为了改善eDNA采样,应增加收集和测试的水量。另外,现场过滤水可以改善用于检测鱼类的eDNA技术。未来的研究应集中在标准化eDNA采样上,以提供类似于电钓鱼,捕网和水声技术的可广泛操作的采样工具。

著录项

  • 作者

    Ulibarri Roy M.;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2016
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 en_US
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号