Expulsion of miniature radio transmitters along with eggs of muskellunge and northern pike––a new method for locating critical spawning habitat

  • Rodney B. PierceEmail author
  • Jerry A. Younk
  • Cynthia M. Tomcko
Original Paper
Part of the Developments in environmental biology of fishes 26 book series (DEBF, volume 26)


Identification and protection of critical spawning habitat for muskellunge Esox masquinongy and northern pike Esox lucius is important for preserving the reproductive potential of both species. In this study, we implanted miniature radio transmitters through the oviduct into the egg masses of female muskellunge and northern pike just prior to spawning. This non-surgical procedure was a novel approach for identifying spawning sites when transmitters were expelled with the eggs during egg deposition. Preliminary studies in three lakes showed that muskellunge and northern pike deposited many of the transmitters in likely spawning habitat. An inability to find eggs limited our validation of this method, but nevertheless, a relatively high proportion (70%) of northern pike larger than 690 mm (27.2 inches) expelled transmitters in a previously known spawning area in Willow Lake, Minnesota. Shoreline vegetation in that area consisted primarily of sedges Carex spp., and the adjacent water was shallow with substrate consisting of large mats of water bulrush Scirpus subterminalis. A lower proportion (50%) of muskellunge expelled transmitters in Elk Lake, Minnesota. Water depth at likely spawning sites averaged 1.1 m (3.6 feet) and vegetative cover was variable, but Chara spp. was common to most sites. In Moose Lake, Minnesota, containing sympatric populations of muskellunge and northern pike, 60% of muskellunge and 90% of pike expelled transmitters. Chara spp. beds were the predominant substrate where transmitters were expelled in Moose Lake, but the two species deposited transmitters on deepwater bars (3.7–5.2 m) in addition to shallow near-shore habitat. These results suggest more flexibility in depths used for spawning than typically reported for muskellunge and northern pike.


Egg deposition Oviduct Radio telemetry Spawning sites 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adams NS, Rondorf DW, Evans SD, Kelly JE, Perry RW (1998) Effects of surgically and gastrically implanted radio transmitters on swimming performance and predator avoidance of juvenile chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). Can J Fish Aquat Sci 55:781–787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Becker GC (1983) Fishes of Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin Press, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  3. Bry C (1996) Role of vegetation in the life cycle of pike. In: Craig JF (ed) Pike biology and exploitation. Chapman and Hall, London, pp 45–67Google Scholar
  4. Brynildson C (1958) What℉9s happening to northern pike spawning grounds?. Wisconsin Conserv Bull 23:1–3Google Scholar
  5. Burns DC (1991) Cumulative impacts of small modifications to habitat. Fisheries 16:12–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cross, TK, McInerny MC (1995) Influences of watershed parameters on fish populations in selected Minnesota lakes of the central hardwood forest ecoregion. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Section of Fisheries Investigational Report 441, St. PaulGoogle Scholar
  7. Crossman EJ (1990) Reproductive homing in muskellunge, Esox masquinongy. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 47:1803–1812Google Scholar
  8. Dombeck MP, Menzel BW, Hinz PN (1984) Muskellunge spawning habitat and reproductive success. Trans Am Fish Soc 113:205–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Engel S, Pederson JL Jr (1998) The construction, aesthetics, and effects of lakeshore development: a literature review. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Technical Bulletin 170, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  10. Farrell JM (2001) Reproductive success of sympatric northern pike and muskellunge in an Upper St. Lawrence River Bay. Trans Am Fish Soc 130:796–808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Farrell JM, Werner RG, LaPan SR, Claypoole KA (1996) Egg distribution and spawning habitat of northern pike and muskellunge in a St. Lawrence River marsh, New York. Trans Am Fish Soc 125:127–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Frost WE, Kipling C (1967) A study of reproduction, early life, weight-length relationship and growth of pike, Esox lucius L., in Windermere. J Animal Ecol 361:651–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Haas RC, (1978) The muskellunge in Lake St. Clair. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 11:334–339Google Scholar
  14. Jepsen N., Davis LE, Schreck CB, Siddens B (2001) The physiological response of chinook salmon smolts to two methods of radio-tagging. Trans Am Fish Soc 130:495–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kenow KP, Green WL, Boysen AF (1992) Probe developed for underwater retrieval of radio transmitters. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Research Information Bulletin No. 39. LaCrosse, WisconsinGoogle Scholar
  16. Lebeau B, Pageau G, Crossman EJ (1986) The muskellunge as a multiple spawner: an adaptive strategy for production of a large number of eggs. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 15: 342. Bethesda, MarylandGoogle Scholar
  17. McCarraher DB, Thomas RE (1972) Ecological significance of vegetation to northern pike, Esox lucius, spawning. Trans Am Fish Soc 101:560–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mellas EJ, Haynes JM (1985) Swimming performance and behavior of rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri) and white perch (Morone americana): effects of attaching telemetry transmitters. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 42:488–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Miller LM, Kallemeyn L, Senanan W (2001) Spawning-site and natal-site fidelity by northern pike in a large lake: mark-recapture and genetic evidence. Trans Am Fish Soc 130:307–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Peake S, McKinley RS, Beddow TA, Marmulla G (1997) New procedure for radio transmitter attachment: oviduct insertion. North Am J Fish Manage 17:757–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pierce RB (2004) Oviduct insertion of radio transmitters as a means of locating northern pike spawning habitat. North Am J Fish Manage 24:244–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Radomski P, Goeman TJ (2001) Consequences of human lakeshore development on emergent and floating-leaf vegetation abundance. North Am J Fish Manage 21:46–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Strand RF (1986) Identification of principal spawning areas and seasonal distribution and movements of muskellunge in Leech Lake Minnesota. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 15:62–73 Bethesda, MarylandGoogle Scholar
  24. Werner RG, Klindt R, Jonckheere B (1996) Vegetative characteristics of muskellunge (Esox masquinongy) spawning and nursery habitat in the 1000 Islands section of the St. Lawrence River. Great Lakes Res Rev 2:29–35Google Scholar
  25. Winter JD (1983) Underwater biotelemetry. In: Nielsen LA, Johnson DL (eds) Fisheries Techniques. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland pp 371–395Google Scholar
  26. Zorn SA, Margenau TL, Diana JS, Edwards CJ (1998) The influence of spawning habitat on natural reproduction of muskellunge in Wisconsin. Trans Am Fish Soc 127:995–1005CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rodney B. Pierce
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jerry A. Younk
    • 2
  • Cynthia M. Tomcko
    • 1
  1. 1.Minnesota Department of Natural ResourcesDivision of Fisheries and WildlifeGrand RapidsUSA
  2. 2.Minnesota Department of Natural ResourcesDivision of Fisheries and WildlifeBemidjiUSA

Personalised recommendations