Back

Thermal preference influences depth use but not biomass of predatory fishes in response to lake morphometry

Bartley, T. J.; Guzzo, M. M.; Cazelles, K.; Verville, A.; McMeans, B. C.; McCann, K. S.

2019-12-03 ecology
10.1101/572925 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Top predators responses to environmental conditions shape food web architecture and influence ecosystem structure and stability. Yet the impacts of fundamental properties like ecosystem size and morphometry on top predators behaviour are poorly understood. We examined how lake morphometry impacts the behaviour (inferred by depth use) of three key fish top predators--the cold-adapted lake trout, the cool-adapted walleye, and the warm-adapted smallmouth bass-- which can each strongly impact local food web structure. We used catch-per-unit-effort data from nearly 500 boreal lakes of Ontario, Canada to evaluate the role of thermal preference in dictating mean depth of capture and biomass index in response to lake morphometry. We found evidence that thermal preferences influence how species depth use and biomass changed with lake size, proportion of littoral area, and maximum lake depth, although we found no relationship with lake shape. However, found no strong evidence that lake morphology influences these species biomasses, despite theory that predicts such a relationship. Our results suggest that some aspects of lake morphometry can alter habitat accessibility and productivity in ways that influence the behaviour and biomass of these top predator species depending on their thermal preferences. Our results have implications for how lake food webs expand and contract with lake morphometry and other key abiotic factors. We argue that several key abiotic factors likely drive top predator depth use in ways that may shape local food web structure and play an important role in determining the ultimate fate of ecosystems with environmental change.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.