The effect of temperature on morphology in Arctic charr

Oliver Hooker
Supervisor: Prof. Colin Adams University of Glasgow

Introduction
Climate change is predicted to raise the average temperature of the Earths surface between 2-5 Co causing an increases in water temperatures. In addition, changes in the form of winter precipitation (from snow to rain) may increase winter flows in rivers and reduce or remove snowmelt meaning lake temperatures increase more sharply in spring. A study by Beacham showed that temperature during early developmental stages in salmon can significantly influence differences in body shape. Growth rates in Arctic charr exposed to two different temperatures was explored to identify if it is proportionate (isometric) or disproportionate (allometric) across the fishes anatomy.
Temperature (C)

16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 dd 0-250 dd 250-600 dd 600-1000 dd 1000-1400 dd

Sample stages

Fig 1; Temperature range exposed to different developmental stage Table 1; Canonical variance analysis results Sample time Mahalanobis distances among groups: Cold v Warm P-values from permutation tests (10000 permutation rounds) for Mahalanobis distances among groups: Cold v Warm <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 Procrustes distances among groups: Cold v Warm P-values from permutation tests (10000 permutation rounds) for Procrustes distances among groups: Cold v Warm <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001

Methods
Eggs from nine pairings of adult fish collected from the River Coulin, Wester Ross , Scotland were used. Eggs were separated upon reaching the eyed stage and then exposed to a warm and cold temperature treatment (Fig 1). Photograph samples used for analysing shape change were taken at 250 degree days (dd), 600dd, 1000dd and 1400dd. A total of eighteen landmarks were digitised on to images Shapes of warm and cold fish were compared using geometric morphometric analysis.

250dd 600dd 1000dd 1400dd

2.2021. 3.3470 8.2317 6.0344

0.0154 0.167 0.0200 0.0141

Results
Canonical variance analysis (CVA) compared shape change between groups and found all sample stages to be significantly different for Mahalanobis distances and Procrustes distances (table 1, fig 2). Classification/misclassification scores from discriminant function analysis measured at 250dd, 600dd, 100dd and 1400dd are given in table 2.
Table 2; Classification/misclassification scores for discriminant function analysis Sample time 250 dd 600 dd 1000 dd 1400 dd Sample Cold Cold Warm Cold Warm Cold Warm Cold Warm Percentage correctly reassigned to priori 55 correct 8 incorrect 87% 8 incorrect 62 correct 89% 41 correct 3 incorrect 93% 1 incorrect 37 incorrect 97% 32 correct 0 incorrect 100% 0 incorrect 29 correct 100% 32 correct 0 incorrect 100% 0 incorrect 29 correct 100% Warm Results T-square: 160.7928, P-value <.0001, Procrustes distance: <.0001, T-square: <.0001 T-square: 256.1518, P-value <.0001, Procrustes distance: <.0001, T-square: <.0001 T-square: 1030.8636, P-value <.0001, Procrustes distance: <.0001, T-square: <.0001 T-square: 1030.8636, P-value <.0001, Procrustes distance: <.0001, T-square: <.0001

Fig 2; Canonical variance (CV) analysis of shape frequency measured at 1400dd. Wireframes represent shape change associated with CV1 and are scaled (-4 left hand wireframe and +4 right hand wireframe) in accordance to axis scale of CV1 to give a true representation of the associated shape change.

Discussion
Polymorphic populations of Arctic charr that are occur living in sympatry primarily arise due to divergences in their foraging choices. Fish that feed on smaller (micro invertebrates) pelagic prey items are larger and characterised by having a narrower head, pointier nose, elongated head and jaw and a compressed more fusiform body. Fish feeding on larger (macro invertebrates) benthic prey items are smaller, having a wider and shorter, more robust head shape, and a deeper, thicker set body. These characteristics are consistent and well documented across sympatric populations of Arctic charr in Scotland and Northern Europe. In this study cooler water fish developed both a head that is more suited to feeding on pelagic prey items and body shape more suited to a pelagic environment, whilst warmer water fish developed a head more suited to feeding on benthic prey items and a body shape more in tune with a benthic habitat (Fig 2). This may have ecological consequences on fish populations at extreme latitudes by influencing the resources a species target and how it uses its habitat.

A project supported by the European Union's INTERREG IVA Programme managed by the Special EU Programmes Body

Conservation action without good science to underpin it is like alchemy, or faith healing. Both sometimes produce desirable results, but you have no idea why, and mostly they do not (John Lawton, 1997 The science and non-science of conservation biology, OIKOS, 79:3-5).

Conservation Limits of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar)

Julie Miller University of Glasgow Supervisor: Prof. C. Adams Introduction
Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar ) are listed under annexe II of the EU habitats directive. Despite international conservation efforts wild populations are in decline (Prevost et al 2003) Under the EU habitats directive (92/43/EEC) conservation efforts designate important salmon riverine habitat as Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) and these together with the objectives of the Freshwater framework directive (2000/60/EC) seek to protect salmon populations as per the precautionary approach (NASCO 1998). That is, the stocks are managed within safe biological limits, Conservation Limits (CL) The Foyle and its tributaries in Northern Ireland are an important area for Atlantic salmon. The Loughs Agency (LA) manages the system using conservation limits (CL) derived from a model that places assumptions on egg deposition levels, female fecundity and quality of habitat. Similar models are utilised by Loch Lomond Fisheries Trust (LLFT). The trust surveys rivers collecting data on habitat type and fish density at sites.

Figure1 (LHS) & Figure 2 (RHS) both showing the Foyle catchment in Northern Ireland. Figure 2 depicts study sites included in the analysis. The River Roe catchment: light blue, River Finn: dark blue, Mourne: dark green and Faughan: light green

Aim to account for assumptions in the LA model via sensitivity analysis using alternative parameter values from scientific
literature and attempt to quantify, if any, the links between habitat and salmon fry density using LLFT data.

Methods
Loughs Agency model was reviewed using most up to date habitat and GIS information. Sensitivity analysis based on different scenarios of egg deposition (Table 1), habitat quality, fecundity of females (Table 2) and weight was conducted. Fish density and habitat grade data analysed under H0- there is no difference between habitat grade and salmon density Bayesian MCMC technique and LLFT electrofishing/habitat site data were used to identify parameters important for juvenile salmon density, using DIC (Figure 3). Habitat grade then redefines according to results. These was then analysed under H0-there is no difference between habitat grade and salmon density. Fish density and habitat grade analysed using sites sampled at different years under H0-there is no temporal difference between fish density and habitat grade

Table 1: Egg deposition values and corresponding source

Egg Deposition Per m2/Grade 10 6.6 7.4 2.4 4.4 8.0 2.9 4.7 7.4 8.5-10.7

Source

LA

Shearer (1992)

Crozier et al (2003)

Prevost et al (2003)

OMaoildigh et al (2004)

Crozier & Kennedy (1995)

Table 2: Fecundity values and corresponding source

Fecundity Eggs per kg-1 1,000 1,430 10002000 LA Source Shearer (1992) NASCO (1998) Natura 2000
Cowyx & Fraser (2003)

1,100

9921,543

1,878

AST/SNH Crozier & (2012) Kennedy (1995)

Figure 3: Directed Acyclic Graph of Bayes model

Results
The results for the sensitivity analysis suggested that of the 4 rivers the Finn and the Roe either exceeded or fell within the 95% confidence intervals for sensitivity. The Faughan was either at the lower end of the 95% interval or below. On every occasion the Mourne was well below the confidence intervals (Figs. 4 & 5). The H0 that there was no difference between fish density and habitat grade was accepted, , p=0.3761 (Figure 6). Post MCMC analysis habitat was re-graded based on the parameters indicated as increasing the probability of observing the fish counts(Fig.7). Again analysis accepted the H0, p =0.9935. Further analysis on temporal differences between the same habitat and fish density rejected the H0, p = 0.031 ,indicating a temporal difference.
Absolute and mean sensitivity values of CLs (Egg deposition)
10000 9000 8000 Number of Fish 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Mourne Finn River Faughan Roe LA (Absolute values) Sensitivity Fish Numbers (CL) 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Mourne Finn River Faughan Roe LA (Absolute values) Sensitivity

Conclusion
To manage salmon populations in the context of the precautionary approach it is necessary to identify areas of uncertainty and assumption in models and populations. As such, sensitivity should be explored to identify potential risk or over caution in management strategies. There is a paucity of empirical studies linking habitat quality with juvenile density, not only in the Foyle system but throughout the wider literature. Management should strive to fill knowledge gaps of population variables on a river by river basis. The complex interplay between salmon and their environment not only presents difficulty in identifying optimal habitat conditions for salmon survival at each life stage but equally for restoring, conserving and protecting salmon habitats for optimum persistence of populations.

Absolute and mean sensitivity values of CLs (Fecundity)

Figure 6: Scatterplot of electrofishing density and habitat grade

Figure 4: Egg deposition sensitivity results with standard error

Figure 5: Fecundity sensitivity results with standard error

Figure 7: Post analysis re-graded scatterplot of fish density and habitat grade

A project supported by the European Union's INTERREG IVA Programme managed by the Special EU Programmes Body
References: Cowx IG & Fraser D (2003). Monitoring the Atlantic Salmon. Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers Monitoring Series No. 7, English Nature, Peterborough. Crozier, W. W., and G. J. A. Kennedy (1995). "The relationship between a summer fry (0+) abundance index, derived from semiquantitative electrofishing, and egg deposition of Atlantic salmon, in the River Bush, Northern Ireland." Journal of Fish Biology 47.6 pp. 1055-1062. Crozier, W. W., et al. (2003). "A coordinated approach towards the development of a scientific basis for management of wild Atlantic salmon in the North-East Atlantic (SALMODEL)." Queens University of Belfast, Belfast. NASCO (1998) North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organisation. Agreement on the adoption of a precautionary approach. Report of the fifteenth annual meeting of the council. CNL(98) 46 pp.4 Maoilidigh, N., et al. (2004): "Application of pre-fishery abundance modelling and Bayesian hierarchical stock and recruitment analysis to the provision of precautionary catch advice for Irish salmon (Salmo salarL.) fisheries." ICES Journal of Marine Science 61.8 pp. 1370-1378. Prvost, Etienne, et al. (2003) "Setting biological reference points for Atlantic salmon stocks: transfer of information from data-rich to sparse-data situations by Bayesian hierarchical modelling." ICES Journal of Marine Science: Journal du Conseil 60.6 pp. 1177-1193. Shearer, W.M (1992). The Atlantic Salmon. Natural history, Exploitation and Future Management, Fishing News Books, Blackwell Science Publications LTD Websites: Figure 1: http://www.fishpal.com/Ireland/Foyle/Map.asp, Atlantic Salmon Trust (AST)/Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH):http://dpea.scotland.gov.uk/Documents/qJ14364/A2971555.pdf

An alternative approach to measuring shape change in fish

Oliver Hooker
Supervisor: Prof. Colin Adams University of Glasgow
Introduction Traditional geometric morphometrics uses a lateral image when analysing shapes in fish. Generating 3D images can be laborious and costly so is often not possible. The result is that only part of the morphological variation is analysed. Valuable data can therefore be missed which may be important especially in the field of evolution and functional ecology. By using images taken from a dorsal approach it may be possible to asses changes that may other wise be missed from a lateral image alone. The ability to distinguish ecomorphs of Arctic charr was explored to asses the efficacy of dorsal analyses and identify any additional information that may be provided. Methods Arctic charr were raised in a controlled environment and exposed to three different diets from first feeding. Fish were fed on either Daphnia, Bloodworm or Gammarus to induce morphological variation amongst groups of individuals. Fish were photographed from a lateral and dorsal view before having landmarks (easily identified from both views) digitised on to images (Fig 1). Variation between and amongst dietary prioris was then analysed using the software MorphoJ. Results Both views differentiated between morphs effectively using canonical variance (CV) analysis (Fig 2 and 3). The dorsal approach accounted for more variation (72%) using the first CV. Comparisons between the three dietary groups showed higher levels of significance using the lateral view for Procrustes distances (Table 1). Significance was lost when comparing Procrustes distances between Daphnia and Gammarus using the dorsal view. Discussion The aerial view was not as sensitive to identifying change between groups. It does however give insight in to other shape changes in the head that otherwise go unnoticed by a lateral view alone. Changes in head width can now be seen which is important when comparing ecomorphs. The angle at which the eyes are set also show a lot of variation which will effect the peripheral view and thus is improtant in foraging efficiency and hunting. Both of these previously undetected changes in shape are important when studying functional ecology. An aerial view approach to geometric morphometrics compliments and adds anatomical information and is therefore important when trying to further our understanding of the effect of ecological drivers on morphology.

Fig 1; Position of landmarks on lateral (upper) and dorsal (lower) images.

Table 1; P values from canonical variance analysis between groups for Mahalanobis and Procrustes distances.

View Comparison Daphnia V Bloodworm Daphnia V Gammarus Bloodworm V Gammarus

Lateral Mahalanobis distance <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001

Lateral Procrustes distance 0.0330* 0.0022** <0.0001***

Dorsal Mahalanobis distance <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001

Dorsal Procrustes distance 0.0414* 0.1571 0.0386*

CV2 39%

CV1 61%

CV2 28%

CV1 72%

Fig 2; Canonical variance (CV) analysis of shape displaying a lateral (left) and dorsal (right) approach. Wireframes and lollipop figures represent shape change associated with CV 1 and 2 and are scaled at 2.5 times the axis scale to aid visualisation

A project supported by the European Union's INTERREG IVA Programme managed by the Special EU Programmes Body

Conservation action without good science to underpin it is like alchemy, or faith healing. Both sometimes produce desirable results, but you have no idea why, and mostly they do not (John Lawton, 1997 The science and non-science of conservation biology, OIKOS, 79:3-5).

Table 2. CVA results from pooled within-group regressions (Residuals & Predictions).

Geometric morphometric analysis of a sympatric population of Brown trout, Salmo trutta (L.)
Martin Hughes
University of Glasgow Introduction
Morphological plasticity is common in salmonids. We examined the morphological differences between a sympatric brown trout population. As the anatomical design of a predatory fish is central in determining which prey species they can consume, we examined whole body morphology of brown trout exploiting different resources. Using geometric morphometrics and multivariate statistics, we examined differences between ferox (piscivorous) and brown (omnivorous) trout. Adult ferox trout are classically described as sizeable trout with a disproportionally large head and jaw with significant teeth. Despite various anecdotal records of ferox trout, morphological differences have yet to be investigated quantitatively. Morphological variation could serve as a basis for genetic work if differentiation between populations were significant enough to suggest segregated reproduction. Identifying juvenile populations of ferox trout may be critical in conserving young cohorts of this potentially vulnerable life history strategy.

Identifying key characteristics in polymorphic brown trout populations to aide practical management strategies
MATERIALS AND METHODS Brown trout were collected from Loch Rannoch, Scotland. Each trout was photographed laterally and landmarked using tpsDig software to generate thin plate spline (TPS) files. Twenty landmarks were digitized for each fish. All computations for statistical analyses and graphical display of the results were carried out using routines written in MorphoJ software for this study. We assessed the effects of allometry in the data by multivariate regression of shape on centroid size. Differences in brown trout forms were based on procrustes distance and between group variation was assessed using canonical variate analysis (CVA). RESULTS A regression was run for each form (brown & ferox), the permutation test for brown trout (n= 29) showed size did not have a significant effect on shape (P = 0.1301) . Similarly for ferox trout (n=26) size had no significant effect on shape (P= 0.1041). Between groups (n=55) size had a highly significant effect on shape (P = <0.001). Therefore for analysis we pooled within-group covariances to remove size effects between ferox and brown trout. Using regression residuals, CVA resulted in a highly significant P-value (P=<0.001) for Procrustes permutation test (Iterations: 10,000). See (Figure 3).

Figure 1. Trout Wireframe

Figure 2. Ferox Wireframe

Figure 3. Canonical Variate Analysis (CVA) pooled within-group regression residuals.

Summary
Preliminary results suggest differences in morphology exist between the sympatric forms of trout examined here in Loch Rannoch.
Although size accounts for a significant amount of variation, each population is still distinguishable after removing size effects. Our initial results suggest ferox trout from Loch Rannoch are morphologically discrete from sympatric brown trout.

A project supported by the European Union's INTERREG IVA Programme managed by the Special EU Programmes Body

Modelling the early life stages of Atlantic salmon to improve conservation limit estimations
Hannele Honkanen
University of Glasgow Introduction
Atlantic salmon has a long history of being the target of commercial and recreational fisheries and while Atlantic salmon as a species is far from extinction due to the numbers of farmed salmon, the wild Atlantic salmon stocks throughout their range are declining with many populations now extirpated (Parrish et al. 1998). Conservation limit (CL) defines the level of spawning stock under which recruitment would begin to decline significantly (Anon, 2011). Knowledge of the species biology and habitat requirements can be linked with habitat data to create a model that predicts the distribution of that species. As salmonids have fairly strict habitat requirements, this can be used to estimate the relationship between the stream habitat and salmonid abundance (Armstrong et al. 2003). Loughs Agency monitors salmonid populations in the Foyle and Carlingford catchments in the border region of Ireland and Northern Ireland and uses a model to estimate the sizes of salmon populations in the rivers. The model includes collected information on redd counts, electrofishing data on juveniles, fish counters and habitat surveys, and is used to estimate river-specific conservation limits and management targets which form the basis of the fishery management in the area.

Improved understanding of the habitat requirements of juvenile Atlantic salmon leading to a revised habitat grading system. Methods
The sampling sites are chosen using the Lough Agency GIS database. Sites are chosen based on the grade and accessibility. Three catchments (Roe, Faughan and Camowen) are sampled. At each site, an electrofishing survey is conducted. After fishing, the fish are anaesthetised and then identified (salmon or trout) and measured. After recovery, fish are returned back to the river. After the electrofishing survey a habitat survey, which measures the area fished, the flow conditions, depth, substrate, cover (instream, bankside and canopy), vegetation and bankside use, is done.

Results so far and future work

A total of 72 sites were surveyed; 27 on Roe, 22 on Faughan and 23 on Camowen. Overall 1983 fish (1605 salmon and 378 brown trout) were caught. Analysis of this data is still ongoing. In the coming months the model will be expanded with additional, long term data sets on Atlantic salmon life history and catch records. The overall aim of the project is to build a comprehensive understanding of the ecology of the Foyle catchment salmon and the factors that drive the population structure.

Aims
Study if there is a relationship between habitat and juvenile salmon abundance, and if so, establish which particular habitat variables (and their potential interactions) are important in creating optimal juvenile habitat. Create a revised habitat grading system for the Loughs Agency, leading to improved conservation limits for their salmon management program. Study the accuracy of the current Loughs Agency habitat grading system. Study the role of suboptimal habitat for salmon productivity.

Summary
In addition to the high fishing pressure at sea, additional reasons explaining the declining Atlantic salmon numbers could be found in the freshwater habitat. Knowledge of the species biology and habitat requirements can be linked with habitat data to create a model that predicts the distribution of that species. Electrofishing and habitat surveys were done on 72 sites in Northern Ireland with the aim to study the relationship between habitat and juvenile salmon abundance.

References: Parrish, D. L., Behnke, R. J., Gephard, S. R., McCormick, S. D., Reeves, G. H. 1998. Why arent there more Atlantic salmon (Salmo sa lar)? Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 55: 281-287. || Anonymous. 2011. Loughs Agency Salmon Management
Strategy || Crozier, W. W., Potter, E. C. E., Prvost, E., Schn, P-J., Maoilidigh, N. (Editors). 2003. A coordinated approach towards the development of a scientific basis for management of wild Atlantic salmon in the North-East Atlantic (SALMODEL). Queens University of Belfast, Belfast. pp. 431. || Armstrong, J.D., Kemp, P.S., Kennedy, G.J.A., Ladle, M., Milner, N.J. 2003. Habitat requirements of Atlantic salmon and brown trout in rivers and streams. Fisheries Research, 62: 143-170.

A project supported by the European Union's INTERREG IVA Programme managed by the Special EU Programmes Body

Life History Strategies of the European eel

James Barry
University of Glasgow Introduction
In the last 30 years, the European eel (Anguilla anguilla) has shown a 90% decrease in the number of juvenile fish found in European waters. There is a large body of evidence from across the EU that European eel populations are continuing to decline and in some areas the populations are now below a sustainable threshold. The vast geographical distribution and the two trans-Atlantic migrations the species makes to mature and reproduce means finding the reasons underpinning this decline have remained elusive. The European Commission has made it a requirement that member states develop plans for the freshwater management of this species. This project aims to investigate inland population dynamics through sampling of eels from sites throughout the study area, with particular interest on trophic morphology, migrations and habitat use in study sites. A complete assessment of eel populations in chosen study sites will be conducted which will improve our understanding of resident populations and will aid in developing a practical eel management plan based on sound scientific principles.

Identify effective conservation measures to aid the restoration of European eel populations

European eel life cycle

Narrow head Insect feeder Broad head Fish feeder

Eel larvae
travel 6000km from spawning grounds, travelling on ocean currents en route to European waterways.

Elver Glass eel

(4-7cm), enter our estuaries from March-June. (7-30cm), migrate into our river and lakes in search of suitable habitat.

Yellow eel
(>30cm), this is the feeding stage. Resident eels begin to condition themselves in preparation for their spawning migration.

Silver eel
(>30cm), leave our rivers and lakes in late Autumn and begin their spawning migration estimated at 6000km in the direction of the Sargasso Sea.

Comparison of broad and narrow head yellow eel specimens (both 48cm)

B N

Position of receivers and Combining SIA, Morphometric detection zones data and Telemetry within Lough Finn

Inner ear bone used for ageing and growth analysis

SIA (Stable Isotope Analysis); C and N stable isotope analyses (SIA) of fish tissue is essential to enable identification of the long term foraging history of populations and individuals. Morphometric analysis; Individual specialisation within a population can lead to the occurrence of discrete morphs. The existence of two morphotypes, broadheaded and narrowheaded, in eels has been observed however little is known about the ecological significance of this variation. Telemetry; will provide insight into the habitat use and movement of eels within the study area.

Fitness consequen ces, Summary narrow head displaying significantl y higher body fat

European eel populations are under serious threat from collapse Using the methods outlined will help answer questions related to the habitat use and trophic ecology of European eels within the study area. Phenotypic response is driven by environment, changes in the ecosystem whether natural or anthropogenic may then also induce shifts in the ratio of both phenotypes. This potential two way relationship between phenotype and ecology suggests that efforts towards conservation may require the assessment of morphological variation within the population and its proximate causes especially if there are fitness related consequences. Evidence gained from this project will be used to set meaningful targets and highlight appropriate management options to aid achieving EU targets for sustainable eel stocks.

Partial migration: Why Do Some Brown Trout (Salmo trutta) Become Migratory (Sea) Trout?
Jessica Fordyce
University of Glasgow Introduction
Brown trout demonstrate partial migration (where some individual of a species within a population migrate, while others do not) as they have two different life- history strategies where some brown trout remain resident and others migrate to sea (Figure 1) (Dringle and Drake, 2007). The environmental trigger(s) which promotes a migratory life history are poorly understood (Klemetsen et al, 2003). The leading theory is that food availability is the driving force for partial migration in brown trout as low food availability would promote a migratory life history as a low growth rate is known to trigger migratory behaviour in brown trout (Hendry et al, 2003; Wysujack et al, 2009). There have been many studies which have examined gene flow between sympatric populations of resident and migratory brown trout but with differing results (Ferguson, 2006). Some have demonstrated that there is gene flow and others have show that there is none (Jonsson, 2006; Antunes et al, 1999). Resident brown trout show great differences in both phenotypic and genetic structuring within and between populations (Charles et al. 2006; Antunes et al, 1999). Aims: Determine if food availability is the environmental trigger which promotes a migratory life history in brown trout Establish if there is gene flow between sympatric populations of migratory and resident brown trout Determine the population structure of brown trout both phenotypically and genetically on a large, medium and fine-scale

Understanding the environmental trigger(s) which promote partial migration in brown trout and their population structure

Methods
The sites chosen for this project were located around the Foyle catchment, Northern Ireland (Figure 2). The sites were surveyed by electrofishing in April/May for migratory brown trout and July- September for resident brown trout. Data collected from each brown trout was: genetic sample, scale sample, weight, length and a photo. To determine if food availability is the environmental trigger for migration, 6x 30 second kick samples were collected from each of the 5 sites where migratory brown trout were recorded.

Figure 2: This map shows where the sites are which were surveyed. Blue points are where resident brown trout were collected and purple points are where migratory and resident brown trout were collected. Figure 1: This demonstrates the differences between a resident and migratory brown trout. On the left is a resident brown trout and on the right is a migratory brown trout.

Results and Future work

A total of 61 migratory brown trout genetic samples were collected from 5 sites and 1574 resident brown trout genetic samples were collected from 26 sites. From these genetic samples both the population structure will be established and whether there is gene flow between sympatric populations of migratory and resident brown trout. Furthermore, invertebrate kick samples were collected to determine if food availability is the trigger for partial migration in brown trout.

Summary
There are many gaps in the knowledge regarding brown trout ecology with regards to partial migration and their population structure. Once the driving forces of partial migration are understood, better management practices can be implemented to increase migratory brown trout numbers. By determining the population structure of brown trout it is possible to conserve genetically and phenotypically distinct populations which is critical to manage a species (Charles et al, 2006).

Acknowledgements: Thank you to the Atlantic Salmon Trust who have helped fund this project References: Antunes. A., Apostolidis. A., Berrebi. P., Duguid. A., Ferguson. A., Garcia- Marin. J., Guyomard. R., Hansen. M., Hindar. K., Koljonen. M., Laikre. L., Largiader. C., Martinez. P., Nielsen. E., Palm. S., Ruzzante. D., Ryman. N. And Triantaphyllidis. C., 1999. Conservation Genetic Management of Brown Trout (Salmo trutta) in Europe. Available at: http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/boise/publications/BTWorkshop/Conservation%20genetics%20of%20BrnT%Europe.pdf [accessed 06/05/2012]; Charles. K., Roussel. J-M., Lebel. J-M., Baglinire. J-L. and Ombredane. D., 2006. Genetic Differentiation Between Anadromous and Freshwater Resident Brown Trout (Salmo trutta L): Insights Obtained from Stable Isotope Analysis. Ecology of Freshwater Fish. 15, pp. 225-263.; Dingle. H. and Drake. V., 2007. What is Migration? BioScience. 57(2), pp. 113-121.; Ferguson. A., 2006. Genetics of Sea Trout with particular reference to Britain and Ireland. Sea Trout: Biology, conservation and management. Chapter 12, pp: 157-182. Published by Blackwell publishing limited (oxford); Hendry. A., Bohlin.T., Jonsson. B. and Berg. O., 2003. To Sea or Not to Sea? Evolution Illuminated: Salmon and their Relatives. chapter 3, pp. 92-125. Oxford University Press. ; Jonsson. B., 2006. Life History of Anadromous Trout. Sea Trout: Biology, conservation and management. Chapter 14, pp: 196-223. Published by Blackwell publishing limited (oxford); Klemetsen. A., Amundsen. P., Dempson. J., Jonsson. B., Jonsson. N., O'Connell. M. Mortensen. E., 2003. Atlantic salmon Salmo salar L., Brown trout Salmo trutta L. and Arctic charr Salvelinus alpinus (L.): a Review of Aspects of Their Life Histories. Ecology of Freshwater Fish. 12, pp. 1-59.; Wysujack. K., Greenberg. L., Bergman. E. and Olsson. I., 2009. The Role of the Environment in Partial Migration: Food Availability Affects the Adoption of a Migratory Tactic in Brown Trout Salmo trutta. Ecology of Freshwater Fish, 18(1), pp.5259.

A project supported by the European Union's INTERREG IVA Programme managed by the Special EU Programmes Body

Assessing the toxicity of biocides on the American Signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus) to aid eradication in Scotland
Sinead O Reilly
University of Glasgow Introduction
The Signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus) is one of the most widely distributed non-indigenous crayfish species. Now established in 21 countries in the EU. Introduced to supplement crayfish stocks, aquaculture and scientific research, pet trade and accidentally. Arrived in Scotland in the mid 1980s, it is now established in several catchments e.g. Clyde, with up to 174km invaded. It is also present in several large and small lochs e.g. Loch Ken & Loch Tay . Can also be found in small quarry ponds and garden ponds. Its impacts to Scottish freshwaters ecosystems and biodiversity are of great concern. Its having a negative impact on native species such as salmonids, molluscs and benthic macrophytes . With its broad range of diet including fish, detritus, macrophytes, invertebrates is impacting on the freshwater food web, competing for shelter, causing physical disruption of habitat by burrowing resulting in erosion and sedimentation. It is also a carrier of the chronic crayfish plaque , a disease fatal to the white clawed crayfish. Listed on the Species Action Framework (SAF) by the Scottish Government as one of the five invasive non-native species of concern in Scotland Current eradication methods, both biological, physical and mechanical have been unsuccessful with the exception of biocides. Previous work with the biocide Pyblast may have been overused. Toxicity values for field application may be more accurately predicted in the laboratory.

Investigate the acute toxicity of the biocide Pyblast used to eradicate signal crayfish Project Outline
The fundamental objective of this study is to obtain reliable LC50 concentrations of the selected biocides on the crayfish in a series of laboratory experiments. The LC50 is the concentration that is lethal to 50% of the organism in a toxicity test to help predict the effects of a toxin and define the maximum allowable toxicant concentrations. Determine the 48hr LC50 of Pyblast on hatchlings, immature and mature adults in a 48hr exposure in the laboratory. Carry out analytics on selected concentrations used before, during after exposure to compare the actual concentrations, to the concentrations believed to be used in the tests. Perform range tests on the toxicity of a select number of sea lice chemicals, Emamectin benzoate, Azamethiphos and Deltamethrin, on adult signal crayfish. Find an acute toxicity range on the Killer shrimp Dikerogammarus villosus (an invasive species not in Scotland) using Pyblast.

Summary
The Signal crayfish is present in Scotland since 1980s and is currently in over 174km of catchment and spreading. Its presence is having a huge negative impact on the Scottish freshwater ecosystem and biodiversity Biocide treatment is a successful method used to eradicate the species By calculating the correct LC50 to be applied to the field, it will reduce both economic and environmental costs.

A project supported by the European Union's INTERREG IVA Programme managed by the Special EU Programmes Body