Search for: All records

Despite low species diversity and primary production, trophic structure (e.g., top predator species, predator size) is surprisingly variable among Arctic lakes. We investigated trophic structure in lakes of arctic Alaska containing arctic char Salvelinus alpinus using stomach contents and stable isotope ratios in two geographically-close but hydrologically-distinct lake clusters to investigate how these fish may interact and compete for limited food resources. Aside from different lake connectivity patterns (‘leaky’ versus ‘closed’), differing fish communities (up to five versus only two species) between lake clusters allowed us to test trophic hypotheses including: (1) arctic char are more piscivorous, and thereby grow larger and obtain higher trophic positions, in the presence of other fish species; and, (2) between arctic char size classes, resource polymorphism is more prominent, and thereby trophic niches are narrower and overlap less, in the absence of other predators. Regardless of lake cluster, we observed little direct evidence of arctic char consuming other fishes, but char were larger (mean TL = 468 vs 264 mm) and trophic position was higher (mean TP = 4.0 vs 3.8 for large char) in lakes with other fishes. Further, char demonstrated less intraspecific overlap when other predators were present whereas niche overlap was up to 100% in closed, char only lakes. As hydrologic characteristics (e.g., lake connectivity, water temperatures) will change across the Arctic owing to climate change, our results provide insight regarding potential concomitant changes to fish interactions and increase our understanding of lake trophic structure to guide management and conservation goals. 

Polymorphism facilitates coexistence of divergent morphs (e.g., phenotypes) of the same species by minimizing intraspecific competition, especially when resources are limiting. Arctic char (Salvelinussp.) are a Holarctic fish often forming morphologically, and sometimes genetically, divergent morphs. In this study, we assessed the morphological and genetic diversity and divergence of 263 individuals from seven populations of arctic char with varying length‐frequency distributions across two distinct groups of lakes in northern Alaska. Despite close geographic proximity, each lake group occurs on landscapes with different glacial ages and surface water connectivity, and thus was likely colonized by fishes at different times. Across lakes, a continuum of physical (e.g., lake area, maximum depth) and biological characteristics (e.g., primary productivity, fish density) exists, likely contributing to characteristics of present‐day char populations. Although some lakes exhibit bimodal size distributions, using model‐based clustering of morphometric traits corrected for allometry, we did not detect morphological differences within and across char populations. Genomic analyses using 15,934 SNPs obtained from genotyping by sequencing demonstrated differences among lake groups related to historical biogeography, but within lake groups and within individual lakes, genetic differentiation was not related to total body length. We used PERMANOVA to identify environmental and biological factors related to observed char size structure. Significant predictors included water transparency (i.e., a primary productivity proxy), char density (fish·ha^‐1), and lake group. Larger char occurred in lakes with greater primary production and lower char densities, suggesting less intraspecific competition and resource limitation. Thus, char populations in more productive and connected lakes may prove more stable to environmental changes, relative to food‐limited and closed lakes, if lake productivity increases concomitantly. Our findings provide some of the first descriptions of genomic characteristics of char populations in arctic Alaska, and offer important consideration for the persistence of these populations for subsistence and conservation.

 

Changes in seasonality associated with climate warming (e.g. temperature, growing season duration) are likely to alter invertebrate prey biomass and availability in aquatic ecosystems through direct and indirect influences on physiology and phenology, particularly in arctic lakes. However, despite warmer thermal regimes, photoperiod will remain unchanged such that potential shifts resulting from longer and warmer growing seasons could be limited by availability of sunlight, especially at lower trophic levels. Thus, a better understanding of warming effects on invertebrate prey throughout the growing season (e.g. early, peak, late) is important to understand arctic lake food‐web dynamics in a changing climate.

Here, we use a multifaceted approach to evaluate prey availability to predators in lakes of arctic Alaska. In a laboratory mesocosm experiment, we measured different metrics of abundance for snails (Lymnaea elodes) and zooplankton (Daphnia middendorffiana) across three time periods (early, mid‐ and late growing season) and across three temperature and photoperiod treatments (control, increased temperature and increased temperature × photoperiod). Additionally, we used generalised additive models and generalised additive mixed‐effects models to relate long‐term empirical observations of zooplankton biomass (1983–2015) to observed temperature regimes in an arctic lake. We then simulated zooplankton biomass for the warmest temperature observations across the growing season to inform likely zooplankton biomass regimes under future change.

We observed variable responses by snails and zooplankton across experiments and treatments. Early in the growing season, snail development was accelerated at multiple life stages (e.g. egg and juvenile). In mid‐season, in accordance with warmer temperatures, we observed significantly increasedDaphniaabundances. However, in the late season,Daphniaappeared to be limited by photoperiod. Confirming our experimental results, our models of zooplankton biomass showed an increase of nearly 20% in warmer years. Further, these model estimates could be conservative as the consumptive demand of fishes may increase in warmer years as well.

Overall, our results highlight the importance of interactive effects of temperature and seasonality. Based primarily on temperature, we can readily predict the response of fish metabolism in warmer temperatures. However, in this context, we generally require a better understanding of climate‐driven responses of important invertebrate prey resources. Our results suggest invertebrate prey biomass and availability are likely to respond positively with climate change based on temperature and seasonality, as well as proportionally to the metabolic requirements of fish predators. While further research is necessary to understand how other food‐web components will respond climate change, our findings suggest that the fish community at the top of arctic lake food webs will have adequate prey base in a warming climate.