Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-sjtt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-27T14:41:37.862Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Comparison of two point abundance sampling methods to assessyoung roach (Rutilus rutilus L.) microhabitat in the littoral zone of lake Pareloup (France)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2009

S. Brosse
Affiliation:
Centre d'Ecologie des Systèmes Aquatiques Continentaux, UMR C 5576, CNRS, Université Paul Sabatier, 118 Route de Narbonne, F-31062 Toulouse Cedex 04, France
S. Gabas
Affiliation:
Centre d'Ecologie des Systèmes Aquatiques Continentaux, UMR C 5576, CNRS, Université Paul Sabatier, 118 Route de Narbonne, F-31062 Toulouse Cedex 04, France
K. Cever
Affiliation:
Centre d'Ecologie des Systèmes Aquatiques Continentaux, UMR C 5576, CNRS, Université Paul Sabatier, 118 Route de Narbonne, F-31062 Toulouse Cedex 04, France
S. Lek
Affiliation:
Centre d'Ecologie des Systèmes Aquatiques Continentaux, UMR C 5576, CNRS, Université Paul Sabatier, 118 Route de Narbonne, F-31062 Toulouse Cedex 04, France
Get access

Abstract

One of the most frequently used sampling methods used in defining fish microhabitat is the Point Abundance Sampling by Electrofishing (PASE) technique. Nevertheless this method is size-selective and induces escapement behaviour in most fish species. The aim of this study is first to describe a direct visual fish observation method, the Point Abundance Sampling by Scuba diving (PASS), and second, to compare this method with the classical PASE to determine 0+ (i.e. young of the year) roach (Rutilus rutilus,L.) microhabitat in the littoral zone of a mesotrophic lake. The study was undertaken during summer 1998 in lake Pareloup (south-west France). Sampling was performed weekly in two restricted littoral areas of the lake which presented the same environmental and topographical characteristics aiming to compare 0+ roach habitat features obtained using the two sampling techniques (PASE and PASS). The two data matrices obtained (i.e. PASE and PASS) were used to develop microhabitat preference indices for each of the 9 variables as a measurement of habitat use by the 0+ roach vs. habitat availability. Even though 0+ roach occurrence and abundance were found to be similar with both methods, microhabitat profiles revealed different patterns. A significant microhabitat difference between the two sampling methods was found using the non-parametric statistical test of Wilcoxon (Z = -4.20, p < 0.01). We can hypothesise that the differences observed between the two sampling designs were due to an escapement behaviour of 0+ roach. Unlike PASS, using PASE, fish are located in «shelter habitats» such as shallow water and dense vegetation. Such behaviour is caused by the environmental disturbance induced by this sampling method. The study reveals that PASS appears to be more suitable than PASE for the assessment 0+ fish microhabitat.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© Université Paul Sabatier, 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)