{"id":{"repo_id":"vcu","oai_identifier":"oai:scholarscompass.vcu.edu:etd-1289"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/vcu/oai:scholarscompass.vcu.edu:etd-1289","repository":{"repo_id":"vcu","name":"Virginia Commonwealth University","base_url":"https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/do/oai/"},"display":{"title":"Evaluation of Brook Trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) Introductions and Re-introductions Into Four Virginia Blue Ridge Mountain Streams","abstract":"Approximately 100 brook trout were transplanted into each of four Virginia streams in September 2008. Garth Run and Kinsey Run were re-introductions, and Wildcat Hollow and Sweet Run were new introductions. Single pass electrofishing (EF) surveys were conducted with a backpack electrofisher five times during the study. Selected trout > 70 mm but < 100 mm and all trout > 100 mm received a Biomark® 134.2 kHz passive integrated transponder (PIT) tag to identify individual fish upon recapture. Trout were present in all streams almost three years post introductions. Catches decreased across the first four surveys. Young of year catch rates severely decreased from June 2009 (n = 77) to June 2010 (n = 7). Adult refuge under low flow conditions and environmental factors such as elevated stream temperatures and drought were determined to be potential limiting factors of brook trout success. Future monitoring is needed to further assess the populations.","abstract_html":"Approximately 100 brook trout were transplanted into each of four Virginia streams in September 2008. Garth Run and Kinsey Run were re-introductions, and Wildcat Hollow and Sweet Run were new introductions. Single pass electrofishing (EF) surveys were conducted with a backpack electrofisher five times during the study. Selected trout &gt; 70 mm but &lt; 100 mm and all trout &gt; 100 mm received a Biomark® 134.2 kHz passive integrated transponder (PIT) tag to identify individual fish upon recapture. Trout were present in all streams almost three years post introductions. Catches decreased across the first four surveys. Young of year catch rates severely decreased from June 2009 (n = 77) to June 2010 (n = 7). Adult refuge under low flow conditions and environmental factors such as elevated stream temperatures and drought were determined to be potential limiting factors of brook trout success. Future monitoring is needed to further assess the populations.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Isel, Michael, III"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Master of Science","degree_level":"Thesis","degree_discipline":"Biology","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Greg Garman"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2011,"date_issued":"2011-12-08T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2011-12-08T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:53:41Z","subjects":["Brook Trout","Biology","Life Sciences"],"languages":[],"rights":["© The Author"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/290"],"render_values":[{"text":"https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/290","href":"https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/290","code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://doi.org/10.25772/FARS-SW08","outbound_label":"DOI","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Greg Garman"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Isel, Michael, III"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2016-12-15T08:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Biology"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Science"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Brook Trout","Biology","Life Sciences"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["© The Author"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://doi.org/10.25772/FARS-SW08","https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/290"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Approximately 100 brook trout were transplanted into each of four Virginia streams in September 2008. Garth Run and Kinsey Run were re-introductions, and Wildcat Hollow and Sweet Run were new introductions. Single pass electrofishing (EF) surveys were conducted with a backpack electrofisher five times during the study. Selected trout > 70 mm but < 100 mm and all trout > 100 mm received a Biomark® 134.2 kHz passive integrated transponder (PIT) tag to identify individual fish upon recapture. Trout were present in all streams almost three years post introductions. Catches decreased across the first four surveys. Young of year catch rates severely decreased from June 2009 (n = 77) to June 2010 (n = 7). Adult refuge under low flow conditions and environmental factors such as elevated stream temperatures and drought were determined to be potential limiting factors of brook trout success. Future monitoring is needed to further assess the populations."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Evaluation of Brook Trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) Introductions and Re-introductions Into Four Virginia Blue Ridge Mountain Streams"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Greg Garman"],"dc:creator":["Isel, Michael, III"],"dc:date.available":["2016-12-15T08:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["Approximately 100 brook trout were transplanted into each of four Virginia streams in September 2008. Garth Run and Kinsey Run were re-introductions, and Wildcat Hollow and Sweet Run were new introductions. Single pass electrofishing (EF) surveys were conducted with a backpack electrofisher five times during the study. Selected trout > 70 mm but < 100 mm and all trout > 100 mm received a Biomark® 134.2 kHz passive integrated transponder (PIT) tag to identify individual fish upon recapture. Trout were present in all streams almost three years post introductions. Catches decreased across the first four surveys. Young of year catch rates severely decreased from June 2009 (n = 77) to June 2010 (n = 7). Adult refuge under low flow conditions and environmental factors such as elevated stream temperatures and drought were determined to be potential limiting factors of brook trout success. Future monitoring is needed to further assess the populations."],"dc:identifier":["https://doi.org/10.25772/FARS-SW08","https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/290"],"dc:rights":["© The Author"],"dc:subject":["Brook Trout","Biology","Life Sciences"],"dc:title":["Evaluation of Brook Trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) Introductions and Re-introductions Into Four Virginia Blue Ridge Mountain Streams"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Biology"],"thesis:degree_level":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Science"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:53:41Z"}