suisun marsh: the role of food and cover in supporting a...
TRANSCRIPT
Suisun Marsh:The role of food and cover in
supporting a fish nurseryDenise Colombano, Amber Manfree, John Durand, Teejay O’Rear, Brian Williamson, Peter Moyle
Bay Delta Science ConferenceSacramento, CA
November 15, 2016
UC Davis Suisun Marsh Fish & Invertebrate Study (1980-present)
GY2 :)
t ~Y1 ' 1 ~
Suisun Buy
Grizzly Bay
Sample Sites
0 Trawl
f
( j
,.._
t \
\
Map 036
Long-term trends
O’Rear and Moyle 2014
60
Shimofuri goby first collected
Drought
Major flood
density I Overb ile c lam reaches high
Suisun Marsh Salinity Control Gates
Shokihaze goby first collected
Siberian prawn reaches high density
Patterns of space use
Manfree 2014
shad
on carp Whtt cat1tsh
SUirry flounder
0
Jun 1992
X
,.
X X
0
Catch fish/hr X No sample
• Snmpte site
• 1 0 10
0 0 100
o·~
Changes in community composition
Rank 1980-1989 2002-20121 Striped Bass Striped Bass
2 Threespine Stickleback Sacramento Splittail
3 Tule Perch Tule Perch
4 Sacramento Splittail White Catfish
5 Longfin Smelt Yellowfin Goby
6 Prickly Sculpin Shimofuri Goby
7 Yellowfin Goby Prickly Sculpin
8 Common Carp Threespine Stickleback
9 Sacramento Sucker Common Carp
10 Shimofuri Goby Black Crappie
Food web utilization
Schroeteret al. 2015
midge
Co rbic
ove rbite
b. shrmp
or . shrmp
S. prawn
SB
SCP
YFG
% of Diet
0 0 Oo
0 io
~======================~
D m )>
<
Conceptual model: Marsh food web transferKneib 2000, Beck et al. 2001
Conceptual model: Marsh food web transferKneib 2000, Beck et al. 2001
Nursery= Greater than average density,
biomass, growth, survival per unit area compared to other areas
Conceptual model: Marsh food web transfer
• Recruitment• Migration• Predation
• Senescence
Kneib 2000, Beck et al. 2001
Conceptual model: Marsh food web transfer
= Trophic transfer to open estuary
Kneib 2000, Beck et al. 2001
1984 1986
Dependence of Fishery Species on Salt
Marshes: The Role of Food and Refuge
Do!'<AW r Bof_..Ctf
LoutJfQfltl C.,nllt!rrltln Man~ Om.somum C lruuun, l.ouwarw 70JU
GULF OF
ME X/CO
i #;#'b
1
The Modification of an Estuary
fllEDSJUC H . NICHOLS, }AMES E. CLOilaN, SAMU'IlL N . LUOMA, DAVID H. PBTBilSON
t N I
0 Leveed or filled marsh
• Exist ing marsh
0 20km
Manfree 2014
Water infrastructure
0 Operating
® Repurposed or non-operational
• Non-operational
0 2.5 5 10 km
Conceptual model: Marsh food web transfer
Focal Species
Photos: Matt Young & Amber Manfree
Sacramento Splittail (Pogonichthys macrolepidotus)
Tule Perch (Hysterocarpus traskii)
Striped Bass (Morone saxitilis)
0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.4
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
CATC
H PE
R M
INU
TE
Sacramento Splittail
0.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.5
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Striped Bass
Age-2+
Age-1
Age-0
0.000.100.200.300.400.500.600.700.80
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
CATC
H PE
R M
INU
TE
Tule Perch
Age-1+
Age-0
n=21,409 n=52,855
n=9,738
Testing the nursery-role hypothesisBeck et al. 2001
1. Identify areas with “disproportionately greater than average” juvenile fish abundance on an annual basis = hotspots
2. Examine site-specific attributes to better understand what explains juvenile fish abundance
0
50
100
Splittail Striped Bass Tule Perch
% Annual Hotspot0
50
100
Splittail Striped Bass Tule Perch
% Annual Hotspot0
50
100
Splittail Striped Bass Tule Perch
% Annual Hotspot
0
50
100
Splittail Striped Bass Tule Perch
% Annual Hotspot
By Region…
0.0
0.5
1.0
% Annual Hotspot
Splittail Striped bass Tule Perch
0.0
0.5
1.0
Denverton Nurse
% Annual HotspotSplittail Striped Bass Tule Perch
0.0
0.5
1.0
Montezuma
% Annual Hotspot
Splittail Striped Bass Tule Perch
0.0
0.5
1.0
SuisunLower Goodyear
% Annual HotspotSplittail Striped Bass Tule Perch
By Slough…
Testing the nursery-role hypothesisBeck et al. 2001
1. Identify areas with “disproportionately greater than average” juvenile fish abundance on an annual basis = hotspots
2. Examine site-specific attributes and their influence on juvenile fish abundance
Biotic Abiotic Landscape
Larval supply Water depth Spatial pattern
Structural complexity Physico-chemical environment (Patch size, shape, connectivity)
Predation (Dissolved oxygen, salinity) Relative location
Competition Disturbance regime (To larval supply, other juvenile
Food availability Tidal regime habitats, adult habitats)
Table. Factors influencing site-specific variability in nursery value
Testing the nursery-role hypothesisBeck et al. 2001
Biotic Abiotic Landscape
Larval supply Water depth Spatial pattern
Structural complexity Physico-chemical environment (Patch size, shape, connectivity)
Predation (Dissolved oxygen, salinity) Relative location
Competition Disturbance regime (To larval supply, other juvenile
Food availability Tidal regime habitats, adult habitats)
Table. Factors influencing site-specific variability in nursery value
Testing the nursery-role hypothesisBeck et al. 2001
Quantifying Emergent VegetationVegetation area to channel area ratio – 100m
increment
Wetland
Corridor
Hypotheses
1. The number of juvenile fish increases with vegetation complexity
2. The number of juvenile fish increases in the presence of mysids
3. The impact of mysid presence on juvenile fish is increased by vegetation complexity
= That is to say that the association between juvenile fish abundance and food availability depends on cover
Hypotheses
1. The number of juvenile fish increases with vegetation complexity
2. The number of juvenile fish increases in the presence of mysids
3. The impact of mysid presence on juvenile fish is increased by vegetation complexity
= That is to say that the association between juvenile fish abundance and food availability depends on cover
Hypotheses
1. The number of juvenile fish increases with vegetation complexity
2. The number of juvenile fish increases in the presence of mysids
3. The impact of mysid presence on juvenile fish is increased by vegetation complexity
= That is to say that the association between juvenile fish abundance and food availability depends on cover
Generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs)
• Multivariate regression• Using more than one predictor to model an outcome• Statistical control to avoid spurious correlations• Multiple causation• Interactions
• Multilevel models• Improved estimates for repeat sampling• Improved estimates for imbalance in sampling• Estimates of variation• Avoid averaging, retain variation• Impute missing values
McElreath et al. 2015
Generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs)
• Multivariate regression• Using more than one predictor to model an outcome• Statistical control to avoid spurious correlations• Multiple causation• Interactions
• Multilevel models• Improved estimates for repeat sampling• Improved estimates for imbalance in sampling• Estimates of variation• Avoid averaging, retain variation• Impute missing values
McElreath et al. 2015
Generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs)
Model exercise:Assess the relative influences of food and cover on juvenile fish abundance and test for interactions
Model structure:
𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽 𝐹𝐹𝐽𝐽𝐹𝐹𝐹 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐽𝐽𝐴𝐴𝐽𝐽 ~ 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝐽𝐽𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝑃𝑃𝐽𝐽 𝜆𝜆𝑖𝑖log 𝜆𝜆𝑖𝑖 = log 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑃𝑃𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝑚𝑚𝐽𝐽𝐽𝐽 + 𝛼𝛼 + 𝛼𝛼𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌𝑌 𝑖𝑖 + 𝛼𝛼𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖𝑆𝑆𝑌𝑌 𝑖𝑖 + 𝛽𝛽1𝑇𝑇𝐽𝐽𝑚𝑚𝑇𝑇𝑖𝑖 + 𝛽𝛽𝑣𝑣𝑉𝑉𝐽𝐽𝑉𝑉𝐽𝐽𝐸𝐸𝐴𝐴𝐸𝐸𝐽𝐽𝑃𝑃𝐽𝐽𝑖𝑖 + 𝛽𝛽𝑚𝑚𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝐹𝐹𝐽𝐽𝐴𝐴𝐹𝐹𝑖𝑖 + 𝛽𝛽𝑣𝑣𝑉𝑉𝐽𝐽𝑉𝑉𝐽𝐽𝐸𝐸𝐴𝐴𝐸𝐸𝐽𝐽𝑃𝑃𝐽𝐽𝑖𝑖 ∗ 𝛽𝛽𝑚𝑚𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝐹𝐹𝐽𝐽𝐴𝐴𝐹𝐹𝑖𝑖
Trawl time
Inter-annualvariability
Repeated sampling
Intercept
Seasonality
Vegetation complexity
Mysid presence/ absence Interaction
McElreath 2015, Carpenter et al. 2015, Little & Rubin 2002
GLMM results
Model # Predictor variables Varying Intercepts
SplittaildWAIC Wt Striped Bass
dWAIC Wt Tule perch dWAIC Wt
8 Temp + Vegetation*Mysids Year + Site 0 1 0 1 30.5 0
7 Temp + Vegetation + Mysids Year + Site 58.7 0 1284.1 0 13.3 0.04
6 Temp + Mysids Year + Site 43.1 0 1330.6 0 0 0.96
5 Temp + Vegetation Year + Site 38.3 0 2177.1 0 49.2 0
4 Temp Year + Site 37.3 0 2142.7 0 47.4 0
3 - Year + Site 232.5 0 3523.8 0 13.3 0
2 - Year 2833.8 0 42095.2 0 1196.1 0
1 - - 10898.6 0 67123.7 0 5313.4 0
GLMM results
Model # Predictor variables Varying Intercepts
SplittaildWAIC Wt Striped Bass
dWAIC Wt Tule perch dWAIC Wt
8 Temp + Vegetation*Mysids Year + Site 0 1 0 1 30.5 0
7 Temp + Vegetation + Mysids Year + Site 58.7 0 1284.1 0 13.3 0.04
6 Temp + Mysids Year + Site 43.1 0 1330.6 0 0 0.96
5 Temp + Vegetation Year + Site 38.3 0 2177.1 0 49.2 0
4 Temp Year + Site 37.3 0 2142.7 0 47.4 0
3 - Year + Site 232.5 0 3523.8 0 13.3 0
2 - Year 2833.8 0 42095.2 0 1196.1 0
1 - - 10898.6 0 67123.7 0 5313.4 0
Interaction modelsEstimating variation among parameters by evaluating marginal posterior distributions
McElreath 2015
Parting thoughts and next steps…
1. Suisun Marsh provides rearing habitat for splittail, striped bass and tule perch, the top 3 most abundant species in the marsh
2. Annual hotspots• Splittail: Denverton (38%) and Spring Branch (48%)• Striped bass: Denverton (24%), Spring Branch (24%), Upper Suisun (24%) • Tule perch: Cutoff Slough (38%)
3. Model support for hypothesis #3 that the association between juvenile fish abundance and mysid availability depends on vegetation complexity (positive interaction)
4. Continue to work on modeling approach and predictions
Parting thoughts and next steps…
1. Suisun Marsh provides rearing habitat for splittail, striped bass and tule perch, the top 3 most abundant species in the marsh
2. Annual hotspots• Splittail: Denverton (38%) and Spring Branch (48%)• Striped bass: Denverton (24%), Spring Branch (24%), Upper Suisun (24%) • Tule perch: Cutoff Slough (38%)
3. Model support for hypothesis #3 that the association between juvenile fish abundance and mysid availability depends on vegetation complexity (positive interaction)
4. Continue to work on modeling approach and predictions
Parting thoughts and next steps…
1. Suisun Marsh provides rearing habitat for splittail, striped bass and tule perch, the top 3 most abundant species in the marsh
2. Annual hotspots• Splittail: Denverton (38%) and Spring Branch (48%)• Striped bass: Denverton (24%), Spring Branch (24%), Upper Suisun (24%) • Tule perch: Cutoff Slough (38%)
3. Model support for hypothesis #3 that the association between juvenile fish abundance and mysid availability depends on vegetation complexity (positive interaction)
4. Continue to work on modeling approach and predictions
Parting thoughts and next steps…
1. Suisun Marsh provides rearing habitat for splittail, striped bass and tule perch, the top 3 most abundant species in the marsh
2. Annual hotspots• Splittail: Denverton (38%) and Spring Branch (48%)• Striped bass: Denverton (24%), Spring Branch (24%), Upper Suisun (24%) • Tule perch: Cutoff Slough (38%)
3. Model support for hypothesis #3 that the association between juvenile fish abundance and mysid availability depends on vegetation complexity (positive interaction)
4. Continue to work on modeling approach and predictions
…and supporters
Thanks to research sponsors …
Questions?