How Marine-Derived Nutrients Benefit Both

Natural and Model Stream Systems

Kurt M. Samways1 and Margaret Q. Guyette2

1University of New Brunswick, Canadian Rivers Institute, Department of Biology, Fredericton NB. 2Department of Wildlife Ecology, University of Maine, Orono, ME.

Marine-derived Nutrients: Ecosystem Needs

Many stream ecosystems throughout northeastern North America are nutrient limited

Marine-derived Nutrients: Ecosystem Needs

Migrating fish move essential materials across ecosystem boundaries.

Many stream ecosystems throughout northeastern North America are nutrient limited

https://sites.google.com/site/kenaipeninsulawetlandwiki/wetlands-and-series/and-marine-derived-nutrients-mdn

Marine-derived Nutrients: Ecosystem Needs

Allochthonous nutrient and carbon inputs can be the primary driver of stream productivity

Many stream ecosystems throughout northeastern North America are nutrient limited

https://sites.google.com/site/kenaipeninsulawetlandwiki/wetlands-and-series/and-marine-derived-nutrients-mdn

The Majority of MDN studies have focused on Pacific

northwest ecosystems

Photo: Brittany Graham

Chinook Chinook

Coho

Chinook Chinook Chinook

Coho

Chinook

Coho

Chinook

Steelhead Coho

Chinook

Coho

Chinook

Coho

Chinook

Coho

Chinook

Coho

Chinook

Pink

Chum

Coho

Chinook Chinook Chinook Chinook

Sockeye

Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) in western

North America

Semelparous

(except steelhead)

Carcasses

Excretory Products

Eggs

Spring, late summer

and fall runs

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, NOAA, Georgia Strait Alliance

Tomcod

Brook Trout

Anadromous fish in the Atlantic Alewife

Blueback

herring

American

shad

Shortnose sturgeon

Rainbow smelt

Striped bass

Atlantic salmon

Sea lamprey

Iteroparous

(except sea lamprey)

Diverse life histories

and spawning event

timing

Diverse freshwater

habitats

Atlantic sturgeon

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, NOAA

Excretory Products

Eggs

Marine-derived Nutrients Impact Freshwater

Productivity

1967 2012

1SW

MSW

Change in Marine Nutrient Loading

Total

Adult salmon returns in the St. John River at the Mactaquac Dam

1967 2012

1SW

MSW

1181

1271

Change in Marine Nutrient Loading

Total 2452

Adult salmon returns in the St. John River at the Mactaquac Dam

1967 2012

1SW

MSW

1181

1271 128

81

Change in Marine Nutrient Loading

Total 2452 201

Adult salmon returns in the St. John River at the Mactaquac Dam

1967 2012

1SW

MSW

1181

1271

57 Kg * Total N 610 Kg

128

81

* Total P 8 Kg 0.5 Kg

Change in Marine Nutrient Loading

* Calculations are based on excretory products and gametes only, no mortality

Total 2452 201

Adult salmon returns in the St. John River at the Mactaquac Dam

1967 2012

Cows 915 85

Change in Marine Nutrient Loading

Number of cows/amount of manure to produce the equivalent amount of nutrients

Manure 62.25 tonnes 5.75 tonnes

Objective

Compare effects of marine-derived nutrient inputs from natural and supplemental sources on stream productivity

Doctor’s

Brook

Knoydart

Brook

Indiantown

Brook

Oromocto

River

Cross Creek

Rocky Brook

100 km

N

New Brunswick

Study Areas – Natural Anadromous Populations

Anadromous Species

• Smelt

• Alewife

• Lamprey

• Salmon

Kingsbury Plantation Piscataquis County Maine

Study Area – Nutrient Addition Study

• 4 Streams

• Carcass Analog

– BioOregon Product

– Fall Chinook salmon (hatchery)

– ~10%N, 2.2%P

– Free of pathogens

• Density

– 0.10 kg/m2

• Timing

– “Lamprey”: July

δ1

5N

δ13C

Freshwater

Marine

Stable Isotopes as Ecological Tracers

High

Low

High Low

δ1

5N

δ13C

Freshwater

Marine

Stable Isotopes as Ecological Tracers

High

Low

High Low

d1

5N

( ‰

)

d13C ( ‰ )

Carcass Analog

Control

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

-30 -25 -20 -15

May 6

May 14

May 24

June 16

Smelt eggs

d13C ( ‰ )

d1

5N

( ‰

)

Control Sites

Incorporation of MDN into the Freshwater Food Web

by Macroinvertebrates

Natural System Model System

July 13

August 24

July 27 June 23

Productivity Responses to Marine-Derived Nutrients

Invertebrates

Primary Productivity (Biofilm)

Fish Growth/Health

Area With MDN Area Without MDN

Sm

elt R

ive

r A

lew

ife

Riv

er

Differences in Invertebrate Abundance – Natural System

Differences in Invertebrate Abundance – Model System

Co

nd

itio

n F

acto

r (g

·cm

–3 ×

10

0)

1.15

1.2

1.25

1.3

1.35

1.4

MDN Inputs

Control

June July Aug Sept Oct

Lamprey Spawning

Changes in Body Condition of Atlantic Salmon Parr in

the Presence of MDN

Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov

Fis

h M

ass

(g)

0.0

0.4

0.8

1.2

1.6

2.0

2.4

Treatment

Control

(0+ Parr)

Natural System Model System

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

10.00

MDN Inputs

Control

Oct 6 Nov 22 Dec 9 Dec 29 Jan 25

% L

ipid

Total Lipid Composition in Salmon Parr

Spawning Period

Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov

% T

ota

l L

ipid

by W

et

Mass

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

Control

Treatment

% L

ipid

Carcass Analog Addition

Natural System Model System

(0+ Parr)

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

Omega 6 Fatty Acids – Natural System

5.00

8.00

11.00

14.00

MDN Inputs

Control

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

MDN Inputs

Control

Oct 6 Nov 22 Dec 9 Dec 29 Jan 25

Oct 6 Nov 22 Dec 9 Dec 29 Jan 25 Oct 6 Nov 22 Dec 9 Dec 29 Jan 25

% L

ipid

Brain Gonad

Muscle

% L

ipid

Spawning Period

To

tal C

hlo

rop

hyll

Ab

un

dance

(μ

gcm

-2)

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

Sept Oct Nov Dec

Changes in Productivity - Biofilm Abundance

with Anadromous Fish Spawning

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

May July Sept Nov

Spawning Period

Atlantic Salmon Spawning Rainbow Smelt Spawning

MDN Inputs

Control

Natural System

Changes in Productivity - Biofilm Abundance

with Anadromous Fish Spawning

Model System

1800

1350 900 450 0

No

. In

div

idu

als/

Bas

ket

Ch

loro

ph

yll a

(μ

g

cm

-2)

4

3

2

1

0

% C

han

ge in

Co

nd

itio

n

5

0

-5

-10

-15

C LC HC LF HF CF

C LC HC LF HF CF

C LC HC LF HF CF

Wipfli et. al 2010 (Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 139)

C = Control LC = Low Carcass HC = High Carcass LF = Low Fertilizer HC = High Fertilizer CF = Low Carcass & Low Fertilizer

Fertilizer Additions Do Not have the Same Ecological

Effects as Carcasses

Biofilm Invertebrates Salmon Parr

Point Source vs. Pulsed Nutrient Inputs

Point Source Nutrient Addition Pulsed Nutrient Addition

What is the Research Question ?

• To restore rivers to their

natural state

• Recovery of a single

species (i.e. salmon)

Current Nutrient State

What is the Research Question ?

• To restore rivers to their

natural state

• Recovery of a single

species (i.e. salmon)

Current Nutrient State

d15

N

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

9.5

10.0

10.5

11.0

April June Aug Oct Dec

Smelt

Alewife

Lamprey

Atlantic Salmon

MD

N In

th

e Sy

stem

Timing of Nutrient Additions

What is the Research Question ?

• To restore rivers to their

natural state

• Recovery of a single

species (i.e. salmon)

Current Nutrient State

d15

N

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

9.5

10.0

10.5

11.0

April June Aug Oct Dec

Smelt

Alewife

Lamprey

Atlantic Salmon

MD

N In

th

e Sy

stem

Timing of Nutrient Additions

Location

What is the Research Question ?

• To restore rivers to their

natural state

• Recovery of a single

species (i.e. salmon)

500m Affected Range

water

flow

Nutrient Subsidies Have a Relatively Small Effect Range

11 km Section

11 km Section of the Little Southwest Miramichi

Otter Brook (~4.2 km Long)

What is the Research Question ?

• To restore rivers to their

natural state

• Recovery of a single

species (i.e. salmon)

Current Nutrient State

d15

N

7.0

7.5

8.0

8.5

9.0

9.5

10.0

10.5

11.0

April June Aug Oct Dec

Smelt

Alewife

Lamprey

Atlantic Salmon

MD

N In

th

e Sy

stem

Timing of Nutrient Additions

Type of Nutrient Subsidy

Location

Summary

• Anadromous fish bring nutrients and other constituents to freshwater ecosystems • MDN/nutrient subsidies inputs result in increased productivity at various trophic levels • Increased productivity is better “quality” with the incorporation of essential fatty acids • Nutrient additions need to be strategic based on specific restoration goals • Nutrient additions are designed to be used in concert with other restoration techniques

Acknowledgements

Photo credit R. Cunjak

Cynthia Loftin and Joseph Zydlewski, USGS Maine Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit USFWS Craig Brook National Fish Hatchery Maine Department of Natural Resources Bureau of Searun Fisheries and Habitat Rick Cunjak SINLAB, Mactaquac Biodiversity Facility, St. Andrews Biological Station Cunjak Lab