Dietary overlap of invertivorous fishes and macroinvertebrates in the Gila River,
New Mexico
Author(s): Josiah J. Maine, James E. Whitney, and Keith B. Gido
Source: The Southwestern Naturalist, 59(2):292-295.
Published By: Southwestern Association of Naturalists
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1894/N06-RJE-43.1
URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1894/N06-RJE-43.1
BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and
environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published
by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses.
Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of
BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use.
Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries
or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder.
BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research
libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research.
292
vol. 59, no. 2
The Southwestern Naturalist
fish. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Water, Washington, D.C.
CATER, E. 1993. Ecotourism in the Third World: problems for
sustainable tourism development. Tourism Management
14:85–90.
CLESCERI, L. S., A. E. GREENBERG, AND A. D. EATON (editors). 1998.
Standard methods for the examination of water and
wastewater. Twentieth edition. American Public Health
Association, Washington, D.C.
ESTRADA, A., A. MENDOZA, L. CASTELLANOS, R. PACHECO, S. VAN
BELLE, Y. GARCÍA, AND D. MUÑOZ. 2002. Population of the black
howler monkey (Alouatta pigra) in a fragmented landscape in
Palenque, Chiapas, Mexico. American Journal of Primatology
58:45–55.
GORENFLO, L. J., AND K. BRANDON. 2006. Key human dimensions of
gaps in global biodiversity conservation. Bioscience 56:723–
731.
HOUGH, J. L. 1988. Obstacles to effective managment of conflicts
between national parks and surrounding human communities in developing countries. Environmental Conservation
15:129–136.
JACOBSON, S. K., AND R. ROBLES. 1992. Ecotourism, sustainable
development and conservation education: development of a
tour guide training program in Tortuguero, Costa Rica.
Environmental Management 16:701–713.
JAMES, A., K. J. GASTON, AND A. BALMFORD. 2001. Can we afford to
conserve biodiversity? Bioscience 51:43–52.
JUAREZ, A. M. 2002. Ecological degradation, global tourism, and
inequality: Maya interpretations of the changing environment in Quintana Roo, Mexico. Human Organization
61:113–124.
LIU, W., C. A. VOGT, J. LUO, G. HE, K. A. FRANK, AND J. LIU. 2012.
Drivers and socioeconomic impacts of tourism participation
in protected areas. Plos One 7:e35420.
MELETIS, Z. A., AND L. M. CAMPBELL. 2009. Benevolent and benign:
using environmental justice to investigate waste-related
impacts of ecotourism in destination communities. Antipode
41:741–780.
MERRITT, R. W., AND K. W. CUMMINGS. 2008. An introduction to the
aquatic insects of North America. Kendall/Hunt Publishing
Company, Dubuque, Iowa.
NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE. 1998. Stream visual
assessment protocol. United States Department of Agriculture, National Water and Climate Center Technical Note 1:1–
36.
PLACE, S. E. 1991. Nature tourism and rural-development in
Tortuguero. Annals of Tourism Research 18:186–201.
SECRETARIAT OF THE CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY. 2009.
Biodiversity, development and poverty alleviation: recognizing the role of biodiversity for human well-being. Secretariat
of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal, Quebec.
SHEIL, D. 2001. Conservation and biodiversity monitoring in the
tropics: realities, priorities, and distractions. Conservation
Biology 15:1,179–1,182.
STACEY, P. B., A. L. JONES, J. C. CATLIN, D. A. DUFF, L. E. STEVENS,
AND C. GOURLEY. 2006. User’s guide for the rapid assessment of
the functional condition of stream-riparian ecosystems in the
American southwest. Wild Utah Project, Albuquerque, New
Mexico.
Submitted 31 March 2013. Acceptance recommended by Associate Editor
Fredric R. Govedich 11 November 2013.
THE SOUTHWESTERN NATURALIST 59(2): 292–295
DIETARY OVERLAP OF INVERTIVOROUS FISHES AND
MACROINVERTEBRATES IN THE GILA RIVER, NEW MEXICO
JOSIAH J. MAINE,* JAMES E. WHITNEY,
AND
KEITH B. GIDO
Cooperative Wildlife Research Lab, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901 (JJM)
Division of Biology, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506 (JEW, KBG)
*Correspondent: jjmaine@siu.edu
ABSTRACT—The diets of stoneflies (Perlodidae) and hellgrammites (Corydalidae) from the Gila River, New
Mexico, were quantified and compared to diets of three native fishes that also occupy riffle habitats along with
stoneflies and hellgrammites: speckled dace (Rhinichthys osculus); longfin dace (Agosia chrysogaster); desert
sucker (Catostomus clarkii). The highest overlap occurred among corydalids, desert sucker, and longfin dace,
which had diets dominated by amorphous detritus. Speckled dace and perlodids consumed less amorphous
detritus, with nymphs of mayflies and larval black flies dominating their respective diets. Our results suggest
moderate to high overlap of resources among invertivorous fishes and invertebrates. Although we found high
dietary overlap between corydalids and two fishes, it is unclear whether amorphous detritus is a limiting
resource that drives competitive interactions.
RESUMEN—Las dietas de las moscas de la roca (familia Perlodidae) y de la mosca Corydalidae (familia
Corydalidae) del rı́o Gila, Nuevo México, fueron cuantificadas y comparadas con las dietas de tres peces
June 2014
Notes
293
nativos que también ocupan hábitats de rápidos junto con moscas de la roca y moscas Corydalidae: la carpita
pinta (Rhinichthys osculus), el pupo panzaverde (Agosia chrysogaster), y el matalote del desierto (Catostomus
clarkii). La superposición más alta se dio entre la mosca Corydalidae, el matalote del desierto, y el pupo
panzaverde, cuyas dietas estuvieron dominadas por detrito amorfo. La carpita pinta y la mosca de la roca
comieron menos detrito amorfo, con dietas dominadas por ninfas de la mosca de mayo y larvas de la mosca
negra, respectivamente. Nuestros resultados sugieren una superposición de recursos moderada a alta entre los
invertebrados y los peces que comen invertebrados. Aunque encontramos una superposición de la dieta entre
la mosca Corydalidae y dos peces, no está claro si el detrito amorfo es un recurso limitante que impulsa las
interacciones competitivas.
in the diet by spreading contents of guts on 0.25-mm2
grid paper, counting the number of squares occupied
by each group, and dividing it by the total number of
squares occupied by the contents. Dietary data for
speckled dace (Rhinichthys osculus), longfin dace (Agosia
chrysogaster), and desert sucker (Catostomus clarkii) are
from Pilger et al. (2010), who collected these fish from
the same locations as our sites for sampling of
macroinvertebrates during June 2008–2010. These
three species of fish were selected because they occur
in the same riffle habitats as the predaceous macroinvertebrates.
Breadth of the diet of a species was quantified using
Levin’s normalized index (1968), whereas dietary overlap
between species was calculated following Pianka (1973).
To help visualize overlap in contents of the gut, we used
nonmetric multidimensional scaling on a Bray-Curtis
distance matrix. Analysis of similarity calculated with
Bray-Curtis distance matrices was used to test the
statistical significance of dietary overlap among predacious invertebrates and fishes. Type I error rates were
controlled using the Bonferroni adjustment (P = 0.05/
10; a = 0.005). We excluded from analyses dietary items
that occurred in <5% of sampled individuals across all
species and sampling periods.
In total, we analyzed guts of 29 hellgrammites and 57
stoneflies, with guts of 25 hellgrammites and 31 stoneflies
containing measurable contents. Rare taxa were not
included in analyses and included Elmidae (consumed
by both predators), Crambidae (consumed by a stonefly),
and Ceratopogonidae (consumed by a hellgrammite). Six
common (i.e., occurred in >5% of samples) dietary
Macroinvertebrates are potentially important predators
in aquatic ecosystems, impacting density (Wooster,
1994), distribution (Peckarsky and Dodson, 1980), and
herbivory rates (Obernborfer et al., 1984) of their prey.
Fish also are considered important predators of benthic
invertebrates but may be less important in moderating
densities of prey than are predacious macroinvertebrates (Wooster, 1994). Characterizing use of resources
by fish and macroinvertebrates could be useful in
elucidating their differing roles in food webs of streams,
yet, surprisingly, few studies have assessed dietary
overlap between these two important groups (Fuller
and Hynes, 1987). Thus, our objectives were to quantify
the diets of two common predaceous aquatic invertebrates that occur in riffle habitats of the Gila River and
compare them to the diets of native riffle-dwelling
fishes.
We collected nymphs of stoneflies (Perlodidae) and
larval hellgrammite (Corydalidae) from four sites in the
Gila River, New Mexico, in February and June during
2008–2010. Specimens were collected using Surber and
core samplers and stored in 10% formalin. Using a
dissecting scope, we extracted contents of the guts and
identified the remains to family if possible. Due to
difficulty of identifying partially digested remains,
Ephemeroptera and Trichoptera were not identified to
family. Pieces of invertebrates that were not identifiable
were placed in a category of unknown invertebrate, and
nonchitinous organic material was placed in a category
of amorphous detritus. Amorphous detritus represents
organic precipitates in food webs of streams (Bowen,
1984). We determined percentage of area of each taxon
Table 1—Percentage of composition of diet and niche breadth of six dietary categories for two predaceous macroinvertebrates and
three species of riffle-dwelling invertivorous fish in the Gila River, New Mexico.
Dietary category
Taxa
Chironomidae
Ephemeroptera
Simuliidae
Trichoptera
Unknown
invertebrate
Amorphous
detritus
Niche
breadth
Corydalidae
Perlodidae
Agosia chrysogaster
Catostomus clarki
Rhinichthys osculus
Mean
3.3
17.3
1.1
7.0
4.7
6.7
10.7
19.7
36.8
17.6
53.3
27.6
9.8
32.1
2.8
11.3
25.5
16.3
4.0
9.7
3.7
0.5
9.3
5.4
12.0
7.6
16.8
0.1
6.5
10.6
60.1
13.6
38.7
63.5
0.7
35.3
0.42
0.81
0.53
0.36
0.46
294
vol. 59, no. 2
The Southwestern Naturalist
Table 2—Niche overlap of two predaceous macroinvertebrates and three riffle-dwelling invertivorous fish in the Gila River, New
Mexico.
Taxon
Taxon
Corydalidae
Perlodidae
Agosia chrysogaster
Catostomus clarki
Perlodidae
Agosia chrysogaster
Catostomus clarki
Rhinichthys osculus
0.53
0.84
0.99
0.26
0.60
0.58
0.77
0.87
0.65
0.33
FIG. 1—a) Biplot from nonmetric multidimensional scaling
summarizing variation in percentage of dietary item for two
predaceous macroinvertebrate taxa (solid symbols) and three
species of fish (open symbols) in the Gila River, New Mexico,
and b) centroids and ellipses for each taxon based on the mean
and standard deviation of percentage of diet. Number of axes =
2; stress = 0.12. For taxa, AGOCHR = Agosia chrysogaster,
CATCLA = Catostomus clarkii, RHIOSC = Rhinichthys osculus. For
items in the diet, AMORPH = amorphous detritus, CHIRON =
chironomid larvae, EPHEME = ephemeropteran nymphs,
SIMULI = simuliid larvae, TRICHO = trichopteran larvae,
and UNKNOW = unknown macroinvertebrates.
categories were identified: chironomid larvae; ephemeropteran nymphs; simuliid larvae; trichopteran larvae;
unknown invertebrates; amorphous detritus.
All predators relied heavily on ephemeropterans
(Table 1). Further, simuliids represented >5% of the
diet of all predators except longfin dace. Stoneflies had
relatively broad diets (B = 0.81; Table 1) but consumed
more chironomids and simuliids than did other predators. Desert suckers and hellgrammites had relatively
narrow diets (B = 0.36 and 0.42, respectively), predominantly composed of amorphous detritus. A two-axes
configuration for the nonmetric multidimensional scaling yielded a stress value of 0.12, suggesting accurate
presentation of Bray-Curtis dietary relationships in
bivariate nonmetric multidimensional scaling ordination
space (Fig. 1a). Results of analysis of similarity indicated
differences in diet among taxa (P <0.005). Pair-wise
comparisons indicated that diet of hellgrammites did not
differ from the diet of desert sucker (r = 0.07; P = 0.150)
or longfin dace (r = 0.05; P = 0.120; Fig. 1b), but all other
comparisons were different. These results are consistent
with the degree of dietary (niche) overlap found among
these species (Table 2).
These results indicate a high degree of dietary overlap
of hellgrammites with two species of native fish, with
moderate overlap among other taxa. The overlap was
attributed to amorphous detritus, but it is unclear if this
resource is limiting. Nevertheless, all taxa relied heavily
on ephemeropterans and may compete for resources at
some level.
Dietary overlap among native fishes and invertebrates
might have broader implications to the food web of
streams. For example, the presence of nonnative species
might modulate competitive interactions among the
riffle-dwelling taxa evaluated in this study. Nonnative
predators such as smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), and yellow
bullhead (Ameiurus natalis) are present in the community of fishes in the Gila River (Propst et al., 2008) and
consume native fishes and predacious aquatic invertebrates (Pilger et al., 2010). If there is competition
between native fishes and predacious aquatic invertebrates for herbivorous insects such as mayflies, there is
potential for competitive release (Rodriguez, 2006) of
native fishes by nonnative fishes. Manipulative studies
June 2014
Notes
would be necessary to clarify competitive interactions
between co-occurring taxa.
We thank the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish and
the Department of Education Graduate Assistance in Areas of
National Need fellowship for funding to conduct this research.
D. L. Propst, Y. M. Paroz, E. Gilbert, and J. Rogosch provided
assistance collecting dietary data, and A. D. L. Mota-Peynado
translated the abstract into Spanish.
LITERATURE CITED
BOWEN, S. 1984. Evidence of a detritus food chain based on
consumption of organic precipitates. Bulletin of Marine
Science 35:440–448.
FULLER, R., AND H. HYNES. 1987. Feeding ecology of three
predacious aquatic insects and two fish in a riffle of the Speed
River, Ontario. Hydrobiologia 150:243–255.
LEVINS, R. 1968. Evolution in changing environments. Princeton
University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
OBERNBORFER, R., J. MCARTHUR, J. BARNES, AND J. DIXON. 1984. The
effect of invertebrate predators on leaf litter processing in an
alpine stream. Ecology 65:1325–1331.
295
PECKARSKY, B., AND S. DODSON. 1980. Do stonefly predators
influence benthic distributions in streams? Ecology
61:1275–1282.
PIANKA, E. R. 1973. The structure of lizard communities. Annual
Reviews in Ecology and Systematics 4:53–74.
PILGER, T. J., K. B. GIDO, AND D. L. PROPST. 2010. Diet and trophic
niche overlap of native and nonnative fishes in the Gila River,
USA: implications for native fish conservation. Ecology of
Freshwater Fish 19:300–321.
PROPST, D. L., K. B. GIDO, AND J. A. STEFFERUD. 2008. Natural flow
regimes, nonnative fishes, and native fish persistence in
arid-land river systems. Ecological Applications 18:1236–
1252.
RODRIGUEZ, L. F. 2006. Can invasive species facilitate native
species? Evidence of how, when, and why these impacts occur.
Biological Invasions 8:927–939.
WOOSTER, D. 1994. Predator impacts on stream benthic prey.
Oecologia 99:7–15.
Submitted 14 December 2013. Acceptance recommended by Associated
Editor Robert J. Edwards 17 March 2014.
THE SOUTHWESTERN NATURALIST 59(2): 295–297
TWIGS OF CAPE WILD-PLUM (CYRTOCARPA EDULIS) USED IN
CONSTRUCTION OF NESTS BY VERDINS (AURIPARUS FLAVICEPS) IN
XEROPHYTIC SCRUBLAND OF BAJA CALIFORNIA SUR, MEXICO
GUILLERMO ROMERO-FIGUEROA,* VÍCTOR ORTIZ-ÁVILA,
AND
E. ALEJANDRO LOZANO-CAVAZOS
Universidad Autónoma Agraria Antonio Narro, Calzada Antonio Narro No. 1923, C.P. 25315, Buena Vista, Saltillo, Coahuila,
México
*Correspondent: grfigueroa04@yahoo.com
ABSTRACT—During spring 2008, 12 empty nests built by verdins (Auriparus flaviceps) were collected from
xerophytic scrubland in Baja California Sur, Mexico. Percentages of materials used to build nests (based on
mass) were estimated, and the species of trees or shrubs with nests were determined. Trees and shrubs within a
5-m radius of the plant with a nest were identified. Material used by verdin for nests was primarily twigs of cape
wild-plum (Cyrtocarpa edulis; average 97.6%), an endemic of Baja California Sur.
RESUMEN—Durante la primavera del 2008, 12 nidos vacı́os de Auriparus flaviceps fueron colectados en el
matorral xerofito en Baja California Sur, México. Las especies de árboles y arbustos con nidos se identificaron
y se estimó el porcentaje (basado en la masa) del material con que estaban construidos los nidos. Se
registraron las especies de árboles y arbustos en un radio de 5 m de la planta con un nido. Las ramitas del
ciruelo cimarrón (Cyrtocarpa edulis), una especie endémica de Baja California Sur, constituyeron la mayor parte
de los nidos (promedio 97.6%).
Selection of particular materials for construction of nests
by birds may result from experience and by availability of
material with adequate characteristics for structure of
nests (Mennerat, 2009). Availability of material for nests
can vary across types of habitat and within the same
habitat depending on the vegetative association. Several
studies have shown that particular material for building
nests and composition can offer advantages, such as those