Show simple item record

Comparison of sleds versus plankton nets for sampling fish larvae and eggs

dc.contributor.authorMadenjian, C. P.en_US
dc.contributor.authorJude, David J.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2006-09-08T20:48:48Z
dc.date.available2006-09-08T20:48:48Z
dc.date.issued1985-05en_US
dc.identifier.citationMadenjian, C. P.; Jude, D. J.; (1985). "Comparison of sleds versus plankton nets for sampling fish larvae and eggs." Hydrobiologia 124(3): 275-281. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/42869>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0018-8158en_US
dc.identifier.issn1573-5117en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/42869
dc.description.abstractFish larvae and fish eggs were sampled from the inshore waters of eastern Lake Michigan from 1978 through 1980, using a benthic sled and a plankton net towed within 0.5 m of the lake bottom. Differences between estimates of ichthyoplankton abundance based on the benthic sled and those based on the plankton net towed near bottom were examined along with interactions between gear, bottom depth, and time of day. Time of day was determined to be an important factor in comparing these two gear, but data were inconclusive as to the effect of depth on gear differences. Abundance of fish eggs calculated using sled tow data was significantly higher than that for the plankton net. For nighttime collections, density of alewife Alosa pseudoharengus larvae sampled in the plankton net significantly exceeded that for the sled, whereas density of spottail shiner Notropis hudsonius larvae based on sled data was significantly higher than that based on the plankton net for day sampling. Overall, the plankton net appeared to be adequate for sampling abundance of alewife larvae, while the sled was preferred for sampling fish eggs, spottail shiner larvae, and the following less common, but apparently demersal larvae: trout-perch Percopsis omiscomaycus , johnny darter Etheostoma nigrum , ninespine stickleback Pungitius pungitius , and slimy sculpin Cottus cognatus .en_US
dc.format.extent493397 bytes
dc.format.extent3115 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherKluwer Academic Publishers; Springer Science+Business Mediaen_US
dc.subject.otherLife Sciencesen_US
dc.subject.otherEcologyen_US
dc.subject.otherHydrobiologyen_US
dc.subject.otherFish Larvaeen_US
dc.subject.otherSampling Devicesen_US
dc.subject.otherGreat Lakesen_US
dc.subject.otherGear Efficiencyen_US
dc.titleComparison of sleds versus plankton nets for sampling fish larvae and eggsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelEcology and Evolutionary Biologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelNatural Resources and Environmenten_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelScienceen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumGreat Lakes Research Division, University of Michigan, 48109, Ann Arbor, MI, U.S.A.en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumGreat Lakes Research Division, University of Michigan, 48109, Ann Arbor, MI, U.S.A.en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumcampusAnn Arboren_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/42869/1/10750_2004_Article_BF00015245.pdfen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00015245en_US
dc.identifier.sourceHydrobiologiaen_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.