4.1 Article

Performance of Diploid and Triploid Rainbow Trout Stocked in Idaho Alpine Lakes

Journal

NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF FISHERIES MANAGEMENT
Volume 31, Issue 1, Pages 124-133

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1080/02755947.2011.561163

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Increased growth, improved survival, and genetic protection of wild stocks have been suggested as benefits of stocking triploid (i.e., sterile) salmonids for recreational fisheries. We examined the return rates and growth of mixed-sex diploid (2N), mixed-sex triploid (3N), and all-female triploid (AF3N) rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss across 28 alpine lakes. Equal numbers of each treatment group were stocked in 2001 and 2003 and sampled 3-4 years later. During 2004 and 2005, a total of 75 2N and 36 3N marked rainbow trout were recaptured. Taken together, the 2N fish accounted for an average of 0.68 of the total marked fish caught, and the combined proportions of test fish (including netting and angling) differed significantly between the test groups and were consistent across survey years. During 2006 and 2007, a total of 60 2N, 31 3N, and 208 AF3N marked rainbow trout were recaptured. The mean length of the test fish was similar between test groups within sampling years. Overall, the return of 3N rainbow trout to alpine lakes in Idaho was low compared with that of 2N trout, whereas AF3N trout appeared to return in higher proportions than both of the other groups. The triploid stocks studied in this evaluation did not show any growth advantages over the duration of the study. Study design limitations may have contributed in part to some of the differences in the number of 2N and 3N rainbow trout captured. However, our results suggest that fisheries managers should consider all-female triploid rainbow trout as a low-risk option for maintaining alpine lake fisheries while minimizing the impact on native stocks.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available