Openness of Fish Habitat Matters: Lake Pelagic Fish Community Starts Very Close to the Shore

Fish communities differ significantly between the littoral and the pelagic habitats. This paper attempts to define the shift in communities between the two habitats based on the European standard gillnet catch. We sampled the benthic and pelagic habitats from shore to shore in Lake Most and Římov Re...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Karlos Moraes, Allan T. Souza, Mojmír Vašek, Daniel Bartoň, Petr Blabolil, Martin Čech, Romulo A. dos Santos, Vladislav Draštík, Michaela Holubová, Tomáš Jůza, Luboš Kočvara, Kateřina Kolářová, Josef Matěna, Jiří Peterka, Milan Říha, Zuzana Sajdlová, Marek Šmejkal, Lobsang Tsering, Jan Kubečka
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: MDPI AG 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/ef21501be07847409900704af25bcf7e
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
Descripción
Sumario:Fish communities differ significantly between the littoral and the pelagic habitats. This paper attempts to define the shift in communities between the two habitats based on the European standard gillnet catch. We sampled the benthic and pelagic habitats from shore to shore in Lake Most and Římov Reservoir (Czech Republic). The 3 m deep pelagic nets were spanned across the water body at equal distances from two boundary points, where the depth was 3.5 m. The benthic community contained more fish, more species, and smaller individuals. The mild sloped littoral with a soft bottom attracted more fish than the sloping bank with a hard bottom and less benthos and large <i>Daphnia</i>. The catch of the pelagic nets was dominated by eurytopic fish—rudd (<i>Scardinius erythrophthalmus</i>) and roach (<i>Rutilus rutilus</i>) in Most and bleak (<i>Alburnus alburnus</i>) in Římov. With the exception of one case where overgrown macrophytes extended the structured habitat, the largest shift from the benthic to the pelagic community was observed only in the first pelagic gillnet above the bottom depth of 3.5 m. Open water catches were relatively constant with small signs of decline towards the middle of the lake. The results indicate that the benthic gillnet catch is representative of a very limited area and volume, while most of the volume is dominated by the pelagic community. This has important consequences for the assessment of the community parameters of the whole lake following the European standards for gillnet sampling design.