Evaluating gillnetting protocols to characterize lacustrine fish communities

Ecological research and monitoring of lacustrine ecosystems often requires a whole-lake assessment of fish communities. Gillnet sampling offers an efficient means of estimating abundance, biomass and fish community composition. However the choice of gillnet sampling protocol may influence lake characterization via physical properties of the nets and allocation of sampling effort between littoral, benthic and pelagic habitats. This paper compares two commonly used, whole-lake sampling protocols applied across 17 prealpine, subalpine and alpine European lakes ranging widely in size, depth and altitude to determine their relative strength for research and management applications. Effort-corrected estimates of abundance, biomass and species richness were correlated between the protocols and both distinguished the trout-dominated alpine communities from subalpine and prealpine lakes dominated by whitefish and perch. A considerable amount of variance remained unexplained between the two protocols however, which seemed to correspond with differences in the proportion of effort among benthic and pelagic habitats. We suggest that both the European standard (CEN) and vertical (VERT) netting protocols are suitable for assessing ecological status and monitoring changes in lake fish communities through time. However the details of each protocol should be kept in mind when comparing fish communities between lakes. Mesh sizes used in CEN nets produce a more even size frequency distribution, suggesting that this protocol is most appropriate for assessing size structure of fish assemblages. The high proportion of netting effort in benthic habitats shallower than 70 m depth under the CEN protocol means that, particularly in larger lakes, outcomes will be disproportionately influenced by the ecological condition of this habitat. The VERT protocol presumably provides a more accurate estimate of whole-lake CPUE and community composition because effort, in terms of net area, is more evenly distributed across the entire volume of the lake. This is particularly important in large and deep lakes where pelagic habitats occupy a high proportion of the lake volume.

Estimating whole-lake fish catch per unit effort

The European standard for gillnetsampling to characterize lake fish communities stratifies sampling effort (i.e., number of nets) within depth strata. Nets to sample benthic habitats are randomly distributed throughout the lake within each depth strata. Pelagic nets are also stratified by depth, but are set only at the deepest point of the lake. Multiple authors have suggested that this design under-represents pelagic habitats, resulting in estimates of whole-lake CPUE and community composition which are disproportionately influenced by ecological conditions of littoral and benthic habitats. To address this issue, researchers have proposed estimating whole-lake CPUE by weighting the catch rate in each depth-compartment by the proportion of the volume of the lake contributed by the compartment. Our study aimed to assess the effectiveness of volume-weighting by applying it to fish communities sampled according to the European standard (CEN), and by a second whole-lake gillnetting protocol (VERT), which prescribes additional fishing effort in pelagic habitats. We assume that convergence between the protocols indicates that volume-weighting provides a more accurate estimate of whole-lake catch rate and community composition. Our results indicate that volume-weighting improves agreement between the protocols for whole-lake total CPUE, estimated proportion of perch and roach and the overall fish community composition. Discrepancies between the protocols remaining after volume-weighting maybe because sampling under the CEN protocol overlooks horizontal variation in pelagic fish communities. Analyses based on multiple pelagic-set VERT nets identified gradients in the density and biomass of pelagic fish communities in almost half the lakes that corresponded with the depth of water at net-setting location and distance along the length of a lake. Additional CEN pelagic sampling effort allocated across water depths and distributed throughout the lake would therefore help to reconcile differences between the sampling protocols and, in combination with volume-weighting, converge on a more accurate estimate of whole-lake fish communities.