Publication Cover
Marine and Coastal Fisheries
Dynamics, Management, and Ecosystem Science
Volume 6, 2014 - Issue 1
1,672
Views
18
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
ARTICLE

Juvenile Steelhead Distribution, Migration, Feeding, and Growth in the Columbia River Estuary, Plume, and Coastal Waters

, , , , &
Pages 62-80 | Received 18 Jul 2013, Accepted 21 Nov 2013, Published online: 15 Apr 2014

Figures & data

Table 1 Numbers of juvenile steelhead that were sampled in marine waters off the coasts of Oregon and Washington during annual May surveys. Counts of steelhead were adjusted by the annual rate of hatchery marking to estimate the numbers of unmarked fish and hatchery fish.

FIGURE 1 Average CPUE (fish/km towed) for hatchery (circles) and unmarked (triangles) juvenile steelhead at each station sampled during National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries’ pelagic trawl surveys in (a) May (1999 and 2006–2011, when broad surveys occurred) and (b) June (1998–2011). The 100- and 200-m isobath lines are shown in light gray.
FIGURE 1 Average CPUE (fish/km towed) for hatchery (circles) and unmarked (triangles) juvenile steelhead at each station sampled during National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries’ pelagic trawl surveys in (a) May (1999 and 2006–2011, when broad surveys occurred) and (b) June (1998–2011). The 100- and 200-m isobath lines are shown in light gray.
FIGURE 2. Annual maps of station CPUE (fish/km towed) for juvenile steelhead collected during National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries’ pelagic trawl surveys off the coasts of Washington and Oregon in 1999–2011. No fish were captured in 1999 or 2005. The numbers of fish captured each year (n) are shown. In 2001 and 2002, additional samples were obtained during a supplemental study near the Columbia River plume front (De Robertis et al. Citation2005); sample sizes from that study are shown in parentheses. The 100- and 200-m isobath lines are shown in light gray.
FIGURE 2. Annual maps of station CPUE (fish/km towed) for juvenile steelhead collected during National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries’ pelagic trawl surveys off the coasts of Washington and Oregon in 1999–2011. No fish were captured in 1999 or 2005. The numbers of fish captured each year (n) are shown. In 2001 and 2002, additional samples were obtained during a supplemental study near the Columbia River plume front (De Robertis et al. Citation2005); sample sizes from that study are shown in parentheses. The 100- and 200-m isobath lines are shown in light gray.
FIGURE 3. Log(x + 0.1)-transformed CPUE (fish/km towed) for juvenile steelhead presented in relation to the surface salinity (‰; at 1 m) measured at the sampling station. The station was considered to be (1) in surface plume waters when salinity at 1-m depth was less than 28‰ or (2) outside of plume waters when salinity was greater than 28‰.
FIGURE 3. Log(x + 0.1)-transformed CPUE (fish/km towed) for juvenile steelhead presented in relation to the surface salinity (‰; at 1 m) measured at the sampling station. The station was considered to be (1) in surface plume waters when salinity at 1-m depth was less than 28‰ or (2) outside of plume waters when salinity was greater than 28‰.

Table 2 Release and recovery information for coded-wire-tagged or PIT-tagged steelhead that were caught in marine waters off the coasts of Washington and Oregon. The mid-Columbia subbasin encompasses locations below the confluence of the Columbia and Snake rivers, including the Willamette and Umatilla rivers; the upper Columbia subbasin includes all tributaries above the confluence of the Columbia and Snake rivers. The Snake River basin includes all tributaries to the Snake River.

Table 3 Size, growth, and residence parameters calculated based on otolith structural and elemental data from 47 juvenile steelhead collected off the coasts of Washington and Oregon. Hatchery fish had adipose fin clips and/or coded wire tags.

FIGURE 4. Composition of the diet consumed by juvenile steelhead off the coasts of Oregon and Washington, 2000–2011. Fish prey taxa are shown in color, whereas other taxa are shown in grayscale. The “other” category includes arachnids, cirripedes (barnacle larvae), mysids, polychaetes, isopods, and gelatinous material. The “other teleosts” category includes clupeids, gadids, salmonids, osmerids, and other unidentified fish (including fish tissue and parts). Unidentified crustacean parts and material, fish scales, unidentified material, plant material, and plastic were excluded from the analysis. See Appendix Table A.1 for common names of taxa.
FIGURE 4. Composition of the diet consumed by juvenile steelhead off the coasts of Oregon and Washington, 2000–2011. Fish prey taxa are shown in color, whereas other taxa are shown in grayscale. The “other” category includes arachnids, cirripedes (barnacle larvae), mysids, polychaetes, isopods, and gelatinous material. The “other teleosts” category includes clupeids, gadids, salmonids, osmerids, and other unidentified fish (including fish tissue and parts). Unidentified crustacean parts and material, fish scales, unidentified material, plant material, and plastic were excluded from the analysis. See Appendix Table A.1 for common names of taxa.
FIGURE 5. Cluster analysis using the similarity profile (SIMPROF) procedure, which identified three groupings of yearly average diets for juvenile steelhead collected off the coasts of Washington and Oregon.
FIGURE 5. Cluster analysis using the similarity profile (SIMPROF) procedure, which identified three groupings of yearly average diets for juvenile steelhead collected off the coasts of Washington and Oregon.
FIGURE 6. Annual means (±SE) of feeding intensity (weight of prey expressed as a percentage of total body weight) for hatchery (marked; filled circles) and unmarked (open circles) steelhead sampled in the ocean off the coasts of Oregon and Washington (main panel) and in the Columbia River estuary (inset) from 2000 to 2011. Horizontal lines are the overall means across all years for marked steelhead and unmarked fish. An asterisk indicates a significant difference between marked and unmarked fish in that year and habitat. Ocean data are not shown for 2003 or 2005 because too few fish were captured during those years.
FIGURE 6. Annual means (±SE) of feeding intensity (weight of prey expressed as a percentage of total body weight) for hatchery (marked; filled circles) and unmarked (open circles) steelhead sampled in the ocean off the coasts of Oregon and Washington (main panel) and in the Columbia River estuary (inset) from 2000 to 2011. Horizontal lines are the overall means across all years for marked steelhead and unmarked fish. An asterisk indicates a significant difference between marked and unmarked fish in that year and habitat. Ocean data are not shown for 2003 or 2005 because too few fish were captured during those years.
FIGURE 7. Annual means (±SE) of (a) FL, (b) body condition residual (condition index), and (c) insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) for hatchery (marked; filled circles) and unmarked (open circles) steelhead caught in the ocean (main panels) or in the Columbia River estuary (insets). Horizontal lines are the overall means across years for hatchery steelhead and unmarked fish. An asterisk indicates a significant difference between hatchery and unmarked fish in that year and habitat; “n/a” means that too few data were available to test for significance.
FIGURE 7. Annual means (±SE) of (a) FL, (b) body condition residual (condition index), and (c) insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) for hatchery (marked; filled circles) and unmarked (open circles) steelhead caught in the ocean (main panels) or in the Columbia River estuary (insets). Horizontal lines are the overall means across years for hatchery steelhead and unmarked fish. An asterisk indicates a significant difference between hatchery and unmarked fish in that year and habitat; “n/a” means that too few data were available to test for significance.

Table 4 Biological characteristics of ocean-caught juvenile steelhead in relation to capture distance from shore averaged in 8-km blocks. For each biological characteristic (FL, condition index, etc.), we tested for differences between 8-km blocks; for a given variable, values without a letter in common were significantly different (ANOVA: P < 0.05). No significant among-block differences in FL or insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) were found for unmarked fish.

FIGURE 8. Means (±SE) for the relationship between capture site distance from shore (km) and the (a) mean FL, (b) body condition residual (condition index), (c) insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1), and (d) percent feeding intensity for hatchery (filled circles) and unmarked (open circles) steelhead juveniles. Distances offshore were rounded to the nearest 8-km station for ease of visualizing the patterns. Sample sizes of hatchery and unmarked fish are shown above or below the symbols.
FIGURE 8. Means (±SE) for the relationship between capture site distance from shore (km) and the (a) mean FL, (b) body condition residual (condition index), (c) insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1), and (d) percent feeding intensity for hatchery (filled circles) and unmarked (open circles) steelhead juveniles. Distances offshore were rounded to the nearest 8-km station for ease of visualizing the patterns. Sample sizes of hatchery and unmarked fish are shown above or below the symbols.