Data
Data Table
In the data table, each row represents a site that was sampled in 2014 in the Red Deer Watershed, Alberta. The columns represented by different colors correspond to the different types of information. The green columns are the descriptive data, including the sample unites (site), year and name; red column represents the seconds accrued on the electrofisher which is used to estimate the "Catch Per Unit Effort" (CPUE) ; blue columns corresponds to species abundance data (individuals and total abundance) in CPUE or the response variables; the orange columns includes both habitat and environmental data which are the predictor variables. In some cases Prussian Carp (PRCR ) will be used as a predictor variable in the context of whether it has an impact on other fish species.
2005 and 2014 Data
From left to right: streams with no Prussian Carp in 2005 and 2014, streams with no Prussian carp in 2005 and low in 2014 and streams with no Prussian carp in 2005 and high in 2014. In 2005 the main species included Brook Stickleback and Fathead Minnow with a small number of White Suckers present. In 2014 species there was a decrease in Brook Stickleback and fat head minnow abundance, but an increase in Lake Chub, Longnose Dace and White Sucker. **** NEED LATIN NAMES***
A non-metric multidimensional scaling technique used to show changes in species community from 2005 and 2014.The black dots represent 2005 data. The green arrows represent sites that had no Prussian carp in 2014 and the red arrows had Prussian carp in 2014. The width and length of the arrows corresponds to the number of Prussian carp captured at each site and the strength of the relationship, respectively. Sites with or without carp appear to be moving in similar direction.
In this graph, Lake chub, White Sucker, Longnose Dace, Longnose Sucker and Prussian Carp appear to be strongly correlated with each other as they are moving in the same direction. Fathead minnow appears to have a weak correlation with the other species and Brook stickleback has a weak negative correlation.
In this graph, Lake chub, White Sucker, Longnose Dace, Longnose Sucker and Prussian Carp appear to be strongly correlated with each other as they are moving in the same direction. Fathead minnow appears to have a weak correlation with the other species and Brook stickleback has a weak negative correlation.
2014 Data Only
Scatterplots of Prussian Carp and habitat and environmental variables showing positive correlations with aquatic vegetation (p-value=0.0001792, R2= 0.4190), dissolved oxygen (p-value=0.1718, R2= 0.05124) , sandy substrate (p-value=0.1765, R2= 0.04753) and electrical conductivity (p-value=0.02185, R2= 0.1537) and a negative correlation with turbidity (p-value=0.3321, R2= 0.02768), average depth (p-value=0.3873, R2= 0.02206) , gravel (p-value=0.6058, R2=0.007077), flow (ft/s) (p-value=0.5965, R2=0.009146).
Bar graphs representing species abundance and composition between sites that had no, low and high Prussian Carp in 2014 compared to the same streams that had no Prussian carp in 2005. Fat head minnow are the most abundant followed by White Sucker in streams with no and high Prussian Carp. In streams with low Prussian Carp, Lake Chub an White Sucker are the most abundant species. Brook Stickleback remains the relatively the same abundance of the three categories.
**Take out CPUE for last two graphs**
**Take out CPUE for last two graphs**
NMDS shows little distinction between defined groups: no, low and high Prussian carp abundance (look up color correspondence) . Lake Chub, Longnose Dace, Longnose Sucker have a strong positive correlated with each other but only slightly correlated to White Sucker and Prussian Carp. Brook Stickleback is only slightly correlated with Lake Chub, Longnose Dace, Longnose Sucker, and Fat Head Minnow is uncorrelated . Prussian carp has a relatively strong positive correlation with White Sucker and a weakly positive relationship with all the other species. Most species are moving in the same direction.