This release includes data used to evaluate the structure and function of the Ross Lake and Diablo Lake food webs. This includes data on zooplankton density and production (zooplankton_density.csv and daphnia_region_production_biomass.csv), lake volume estimates used to expand zooplankton density and production data (lake_volume_estimates.csv), fish sampling (FishSampleEvents.csv), fish biological information including diets, age, and stable isotope analysis (FishFullData_formatted.csv, FishPreyLength.csv), scale back-calculations (salmonid_back_calc.csv, rss_back_calc.csv), fish energy density (calorimetry_processed.csv), stable isotope data for invertebrate end members (si_inverts.csv), and hydroacoustic sampling (ross_ha_densities.csv, diablo_ha_densities.csv). Fish and zooplankton sampling and stable isotope analysis were conducted by the USGS in 2019-2021, and hydroacoustics surveys were conducted in 2021. These data were also combined with fish data (species, size, age) from the National Park Service collected in 2005-2017 to evaluate fish size and age structure across a larger period of time. The bioenergetics model and information on running the model including inputs and outputs from our simulations and a user guide can be found the in FB4.zip folder. Please refer to the associated publications for additional details about data collection and processing.

This tabular data set contains information about the diets of angler-caught Lake Trout (Salvelinus namaycush), Walleye (Sander vitreus), Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), Coho Salmon (O. kisutch), Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar), Steelhead (O. mykiss), Pink Salmon (O. gorbuscha), and Brown Trout (Salmo trutta) captured between April and October of 2017 and 2018 from U.S. waters of Lake Huron. Diet items were identified to lowest taxa, enumerated, measured, and prey biomass determined.

This tabular data set contains information about the diets of angler-caught Lake Trout (Salvelinus namaycush), Walleye (Sander vitreus), Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), Coho Salmon (O. kisutch), Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar), Steelhead (O. mykiss), Pink Salmon (O. gorbuscha), and Brown Trout (Salmo trutta) captured between April and October of 2017 and 2018 from U.S. waters of Lake Huron. Diet items were identified to lowest taxa, enumerated, measured, and prey biomass determined.

These data consist of a multi-trophic, day vs. night, nearshore to offshore transect approach for data collection for this Cooperative Science and Monitoring Initiative effort at two northwestern Lake Huron sites near Hammond Bay and Thunder Bay, Michigan. Zooplankton and Mysis samples were collected monthly from April-October while benthos and prey fish samples were collected seasonally during Spring, Summer, and Fall. Invertebrate taxa (zooplankton, Mysis, benthic macroinvertebrates) were identified, enumerated, and measured using a dissecting microscope. Diet items of the prey fish were processed similarly to the other samples in terms of taxonomy. These data were used to calculate densities of fish prey items and compare that to what the fishes ate for selectivity analysis. The data are in raw form.

These data consist of a multi-trophic, day vs. night, nearshore to offshore transect approach for data collection for this Cooperative Science and Monitoring Initiative effort at two northwestern Lake Huron sites near Hammond Bay and Thunder Bay, Michigan. Zooplankton and Mysis samples were collected monthly from April-October while benthos and prey fish samples were collected seasonally during Spring, Summer, and Fall. Invertebrate taxa (zooplankton, Mysis, benthic macroinvertebrates) were identified, enumerated, and measured using a dissecting microscope. Diet items of the prey fish were processed similarly to the other samples in terms of taxonomy. These data were used to calculate densities of fish prey items and compare that to what the fishes ate for selectivity analysis. The data are in raw form.

This data release includes tabular data files. The dataset consists of four input data tables (Appendices A1-A4) for a Lake Superior EcoPath with EcoSim (EwE; http://ecopath.org) model parameterized to the early 21st century using 2001-2016 collections. The data presented here are primarily intended to development a static ecosystem model representing a snapshot of Lake Superior circa 2005 when the bulk of information was collected. Input data were compiled from multiple federal, state, provincial, and tribal agencies, academic institutions, published reports, theses, and peer review journal articles. This dataset includes results from lake-wide Cooperative Science and Monitoring Initiative surveys (CSMI; CSMI 2020) of Lake Superior undertaken in 2005-06, 2011 and 2016. We provide results of three lake-wide acoustic surveys (2003-2006, 2011 and 2016) that provided biomass estimates (kg/ha) of pelagic prey (cisco, bloater, kiyi and rainbow smelt); the later two (2011 and 2016) were part of the larger CSMI efforts. Our inputs on fish rely heavily on data included in Isaac (2010) who used USGS bottom trawl samples. These trawl data had been included in a previously released data set (Great Lakes Science Center 2019). We include these samples in the current release because we made a QA/QC effort to verify that the results of Isaac (2010) could be reproduced. We found that biomass estimates were close to that reported by Isaac (2010) for most groups (see associated metadata record process step 8 for details), but not exact. We opted to use biomass estimates as reported in Isaac (2010) for four species because his production to biomass (P/B) we’re using in the EcoPath model are explicitly linked to the biomass estimates provided by Isaac (2010). Collectively, these data represent the best available estimates of lake-wide population characteristics (biomass, production, consumption, diet, harvest, etc.) across trophic levels from bacteria to sea lamprey. Readers interested in learning more details about this data compilation and balancing of this Lake Superior ecosystem model should read the associated manuscript (Matthias, et al.), which is noted in the metadata cross reference section. References: Cooperative Science and Monitoring Initiative (CSMI). 2020. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. https://www.epa.gov/great-lakes-monitoring/cooperative-science-and-monitoring-initiative-csmi [accessed 10/82020] Isaac, E.J., 2010. An Evaluation of the Importance of Mysis relicta to the Lake Superior Fish Community. University of Minnesota - Duluth, Duluth, MN. https://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/93161 [accessed 10/8/2020]. Matthias, B.G., T.R. Hrabik, J. Hoffman, M. Seider, D. Yule, M. Sierszen, and P. Yurista. In review. Trophic transfer efficiency in the Lake Superior food web: assessing the impacts of non-native species. Journal of Great Lakes Research. USGS (U.S. Geological Survey), 2019. Great Lakes Research Vessel Operations 1958-2018. (ver. 3.0, April 2019): U.S. Geological Survey data release. Available from: https://doi.org/10.5066/F75M63X0 [accessed 10/8/2020].

This data release includes tabular data files. The dataset consists of four input data tables (Appendices A1-A4) for a Lake Superior EcoPath with EcoSim (EwE; http://ecopath.org) model parameterized to the early 21st century using 2001-2016 collections. The data presented here are primarily intended to development a static ecosystem model representing a snapshot of Lake Superior circa 2005 when the bulk of information was collected. Input data were compiled from multiple federal, state, provincial, and tribal agencies, academic institutions, published reports, theses, and peer review journal articles. This dataset includes results from lake-wide Cooperative Science and Monitoring Initiative surveys (CSMI; CSMI 2020) of Lake Superior undertaken in 2005-06, 2011 and 2016. We provide results of three lake-wide acoustic surveys (2003-2006, 2011 and 2016) that provided biomass estimates (kg/ha) of pelagic prey (cisco, bloater, kiyi and rainbow smelt); the later two (2011 and 2016) were part of the larger CSMI efforts. Our inputs on fish rely heavily on data included in Isaac (2010) who used USGS bottom trawl samples. These trawl data had been included in a previously released data set (Great Lakes Science Center 2019). We include these samples in the current release because we made a QA/QC effort to verify that the results of Isaac (2010) could be reproduced. We found that biomass estimates were close to that reported by Isaac (2010) for most groups (see associated metadata record process step 8 for details), but not exact. We opted to use biomass estimates as reported in Isaac (2010) for four species because his production to biomass (P/B) we’re using in the EcoPath model are explicitly linked to the biomass estimates provided by Isaac (2010). Collectively, these data represent the best available estimates of lake-wide population characteristics (biomass, production, consumption, diet, harvest, etc.) across trophic levels from bacteria to sea lamprey. Readers interested in learning more details about this data compilation and balancing of this Lake Superior ecosystem model should read the associated manuscript (Matthias, et al.), which is noted in the metadata cross reference section. References: Cooperative Science and Monitoring Initiative (CSMI). 2020. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. https://www.epa.gov/great-lakes-monitoring/cooperative-science-and-monitoring-initiative-csmi [accessed 10/82020] Isaac, E.J., 2010. An Evaluation of the Importance of Mysis relicta to the Lake Superior Fish Community. University of Minnesota - Duluth, Duluth, MN. https://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/93161 [accessed 10/8/2020]. Matthias, B.G., T.R. Hrabik, J. Hoffman, M. Seider, D. Yule, M. Sierszen, and P. Yurista. In review. Trophic transfer efficiency in the Lake Superior food web: assessing the impacts of non-native species. Journal of Great Lakes Research. USGS (U.S. Geological Survey), 2019. Great Lakes Research Vessel Operations 1958-2018. (ver. 3.0, April 2019): U.S. Geological Survey data release. Available from: https://doi.org/10.5066/F75M63X0 [accessed 10/8/2020].

This data set includes count, location, and ancillary habitat data for fishes sampled in adjacent reaches of Georgiana Slough, Sacramento River, and Steamboat Slough in the northern Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. It also includes data on the stomach contents of selected individual black basses (Micropterus). Fishes were sampled by boat electrofishing from approximately January-May, 2020-2022, plus gillnetting in 2020. Samples were collected under a stratified random sampling design. Gillnetting involved short duration (~60 minute) sets of monofilament experimental gill nets. Boat electrofishing involved either single or repeated passes along an individual 300 m shoreline transect. Stomach contents data are from fishes that were frozen whole immediately upon collection and later processed in a laboratory.

This data set includes count, location, and ancillary habitat data for fishes sampled in adjacent reaches of Georgiana Slough, Sacramento River, and Steamboat Slough in the northern Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. It also includes data on the stomach contents of selected individual black basses (Micropterus). Fishes were sampled by boat electrofishing from approximately January-May, 2020-2022, plus gillnetting in 2020. Samples were collected under a stratified random sampling design. Gillnetting involved short duration (~60 minute) sets of monofilament experimental gill nets. Boat electrofishing involved either single or repeated passes along an individual 300 m shoreline transect. Stomach contents data are from fishes that were frozen whole immediately upon collection and later processed in a laboratory.

We collected aquatic macroinvertebrate and redband trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss newberrii) diet data in the Oregon portion of the Goose Lake Basin. Data were collected by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and Oregon State University (OSU) to monitor prey communities in the Basin, and to relate observed prey abundances to specific habitat features. Sampling was conducted based on previous survey efforts, using a stratified random subset of sites surveyed by ODFW in 2007 and OSU in 2022-2024. Macroinvertebrate sample processing was carried out by R. Roper and R. Ponce Velez at OSU and diet samples were processed by Aquatic Biology Associates in Corvallis, Oregon. These data are part of a broader, comprehensive monitoring effort in the Basin.