SAUGEYE

[JOE]

DO SAUGEYES SPAWN AND IF NOT WHY?

[Youngeye]

Joe,
I think there may have been an article in a recent in-fisherman magazine. If I remember right the right up said something like it is possible for a saugeye to spawn but the success rate was very limited, if anyone else has any concrete evidence, I too would like to hear what you think

[Guest]

I did talk to a park official about this subject.
I know that 2 saugeye's can't reproduce. But, if I remember
correctly, as long as one is a walleye it works. I can't
recall which is the male and which is the female. I think
it only works one way.

[Jim Corey]

Contrary to popular belief, Saugeyes can and do reproduce both with either parent species and with other Saugeyes. The best study done on the subject was done by M.C. Hearn in 1986, titled "Reproductive viability of Walleye-Sauger hybrids". It was published in the Progressive Fish-Culturist 48:149150.(now the North American Aquaculture Journal) Part of the confusion lies in the fact that all Saugeyes are not created equal. Of the eggs resulting from the cross of a male Sauger and a female Walleye (F1 Hybrids), some will turn out to be true Triploid Saugeyes (sterile hybrids), while others from the same egg mass will not develop eggs or even show recognizable gender differences. Still others will develop with the ability to produce viable eggs. In the study done by Hearns, the eggs from Female F1 Hybrids (Saugeyes) were fertilized by milt from male Saugers. The results were 38% "swim-up-fry". This term means that, out of the total eggs produced by this single cross, 38% lived to complete the swim to the surface necessary for Walleye/Sauger/Saugeye fry to break the surface tension of the waters' surface and take that mouthfull of air needed to fill their swim bladders for the first time. They then performed the same experiment with one male and one female F1 Hybrid (Saugeye) and, when Saugeye-to-Saugeye, the % of swim-up-fry was 46%, 8% better than when the Saugeye eggs were fertilized by milt from a parent species. Further confusion is caused when the body of water where the Saugeyes are stocked has no proper spawning habitat. Naturally, no reproduction can take place in such waters. In different bodies of water the survival rate of Walleye fry to adulthood may range from 1% to 10%, depending on predation and other factors. That figure is basically the same for stocked Saugeye fry. With Saugeye, however, only a small percentage of the fish that reach adulthood will be capable of producing viable eggs. Then, of course, if those eggs aren't deposited in the proper spawning areas, under the right conditions, and fertilized with milt from that equally small percentage of male Saugeyes who are virile, the whole point is moot. In the right body of water, with the right conditions, Saugeye can and do reproduce, but in a limited way, and not in a way to sustain a population without stocking. The best source that I know of for information on Saugeye can be gotten from the Ohio State University, Department of BioSciences.

Other studies of interest are:

"Comparative survival, growth, and reproductive development of juvenile Walleye, Sauger, and their hybrids reared under intensive culture conditions." J.A. Malison, D.L. Johnson, and S.A. Schell. 1982 North American Journal of Fisheries Management 2:381-387

"Reproduction of Saugeyes (Fx Hybrids) and Walleyes in Normandy Reservoir, Tennesee." F.C. Fiss, S.M. Sammons, P.W. Betolli, and N. Billington, 1997. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 17:215-219

[JCarp]

Jim - Thanks for the most informative info I've seen on this. I feel a little more comfortable knowing that it is thought the spawning success rate/fertility is pretty low. Always wondered why ODNR kept stocking after acknowledging they weren't sterile. I was concerned about the possible dilution of Ohio River stocks of eyes/sauger with unnaturally high numbers of hybrids washed down from our impoundments, not that I knew enough to have a solid opinion.

I wonder if the "sterile" thing started because someone thought it was easiest way to explain things to the general public?

[Jim Corey]

When the ODNR first decided to explore the idea of stocking Saugeyes they had the OSU Bio Sciences people do extensive experimenting in controlled environments like aquaculture ponds,tanks, etc.. The first real effort at stocking was at Pleasant Hill in 1982. They expected that, being hybrids, the offspring would be sterile. There were studies being done on the Kentucky Lake stockings at about the same time but apparently the powers that be in Ohio didn't know of them or disregarded the findings. I find it hard to believe that they weren't aware because much of the data used by OSU was taken directly from prior studies in Kentucky. From what I can find, the OSU people knew by 1882 that Saugeyes were capable of limited reproduction. Their findings were given directly to the ODNR and used as guidelines by the State hatcheries. There may have been more but I was only able to find one radio telemetry study done on Saugeye released into Ohio reservoirs. This study claims that Saugeye were not a risk to downstream habitats and ecosystems because they stayed up near where they came from (reservoir) Only one of the radio tagged fish traveled any distance downstream and it returned eventually to it's starting place. I believe that this study was too small and incomplete and I believe that significant numbers of Saugeyes have entered the river systems. Any time more than ten years ago an angler could expect to catch an occasional naturally occuring crossbreed in the Ohio River. Most anglers didn't know the difference between them and Sauger or Walleye, depending on the individual morphology of the fish caught. Today Saugeyes can comprise the lions share of the catch on some days. I think that the ODNR is a little nervous about admitting that the Saugeyes are breeding in any numbers at all because that would be admitting that they didn't do enough studies and could be considered at fault for the dilution of the Walleye gene pool in the Rivers. The scientific evidence is there but if you ask a Game Warden they will invariablly tell you that Saugeyes are sterile.
A serious effort is on to develop a true Triploid Saugeye, one that is 100% sterile. Methods such as subjecting the eggs or newly hatched fry to elevated water temperatures for controlled time periods and the same with decreased water temps have been tried with moderate success. The best that they have been able to do is by increasing the atmospheric pressure in tanks but even this doesn't produce 100%. The following is a quote from a study titled "Use of Erythrocyte Measurements to Identify Triploid Saugeyes" by Mary Ann R. Garcia-Abiado, Conrad Dabrowski, James E. Christensen, and Serguisz Czesny from the School of Natural Resources, Ohio State University and by Przemyslaw Bajer from the University of Lodz, Poland.

"The production of triploid saugeyes offers possible benefits to stocking programs and to aquaculture. Triploidity induction will prevent fertile diploid saugeyes from contaminating parental stocks and producing second generation hybrids. Extensive saugeye reproduction in the Ohio River (White & Schell 1995), Normandy Reservoir, Tennessee (Fiss et al. 1997), and in the Illinois River (Billington et al. 1997) has compromised the genetic integrity of local and downstream parental stocks by producing second generation hybrids."........"We currently lack a practical technique for fish managers or culturists to use in assessing the success of inducing triploidity in saugeye juveniles for reservoir stocking or grow out."

The proof is there but for some reason the powers that be in our State Fisheries Departments don't want to fess up. Instead they allow the angling public to believe incorrect information, some of which originated in press releases given out by the ODNR when the stockings began, rather than educate the public with factual up to date information.

[JCarp]

Well, I thought you had me convinced that the few fertile F1/F2/backcrosses would basically "breed out" and wouldn't affect the genetic pool in the Ohio River. Now I'm back to concerned.

As far as the no significant downstream migration goes - I've heard a few reports that they aren't uncommon on the Darby...no upstream stockings...had to come from the Scioto. To me it would be a stretch to imagine that significant numbers wouldn't end up in the big river considering the stocking and flush rates on many of the stocked impoundments. Tendencies to migrate upstream or not, we are talking about some huge numbers of fish over the last 15-20 yrs.

Don't know what scares me more. If ODNR didn't know or did. I'm usually a proponent for our fine ODNR, they do a difficult job well, but maybe the jury is still out on this one... Hopefully all those Saugeye your seeing on the Ohio River are all F1 escapee's :) Were they ever stocked in anything that drains north? That might suggest an answer to the question whether they "knew".

Thanks again for all the detail -awesome.
jc

[skipjack]

i fish the ohio river,if the saugeye r not stocked,and theres no breeding tell me why i catch a large number of cigars in the river that r saugeye.
later

[Jim Corey]

I am not running down our ODNR. I agree that they do a great job with limited funds and manpower. I just wish that they would all get on the same page with the information that they give out. On one hand they claim that Saugeyes are a sterile hybrid, even though scientific studies, some of which they themselves commisioned, prove otherwise; while on the other hand, re: your question about the waters that drain North, they won't consider (thankfully) stocking Saugeyes in any water that drains North because of the concern about damaging the Walleye gene pool in Lake erie.

[Jim Ordway]

Jim, thanks for the post. I found the infish article enlightening and your posting even better. I guess the non-reproduction of saugeyes is a fishing myth. On the Rock River in Wisconsin, we have been picking up some nice saugeye lately and I was wondering, with all these fish, if they aren't reproducing. I will have to check with WDNR on this one. Do you have comparisons of the successful percentage of eggs spawned of sauger vs walleye vs saugeye to get an idea if the 38% and 48% are low numbers or actually good?
Thanks for you input,

[Jim Corey]

One thing first. I was wrong earlier in stating that the Pleasant Hill stockings began in 1982. They actually began in 1979.
Jim, the figures of 38% and 46% seem to fall right in the high/normal range for Walleye and Sauger. The % of egg viability can vary greatly even in the same year, from one spawning ground to another, on the same lake. Eschmeyer (1950) reported that 34 and 55 percent of eggs gathered from two different locations on lake Gogebic, Michigan, were viable, while on Cisco and Big Portage Lakes, 17 and 72 percent, respectively, were viable. As an example, the normal range of viable egg percentage for Lake Erie was 20 to 35 percent between 1961 and 1968 (Baker and Scholl, 1969).

[Jim Corey]

Lol, while I'm at it I might as well post this too. It is a problem that is affecting area waters and causing confusion among local anglers.

Saugeye identification:
One of the most common problems with the identification of Saugeyes, Walleyes, and Saugers has to do with the lack of factual information provided to the angling public. Experienced anglers can easily tell the difference between Saugers and Walleyes but when you throw Saugeyes into the equation things can get confusing very quickly. Just as in humans, fish inherit genetic traits from both parents. Although the majority of Saugeye from any one mating of a female Walleye and a male Sauger will end up with the common physical characteristics of Saugeyes that we see in pictures and articles on the subject, there are always some that will favor "Mom" or some that will look more like "Dad".
In one of our area reservoirs, Tappan Lake, Walleye stockings were stopped after 1976 and yearly Saugeye stocking were begun in 1990, with an experimental stocking done in 1986. Annual stockings have averaged from 300,000 to 600,000 fingerlings per year. Anglers today still claim to catch pure Walleyes here on occasion, although the odds against it are staggering. Walleye lifespans at this latitude average from 8 to 12 years, with old fish occasionally reaching 15 years of age. ( These figures are for our inland lakes and may be different for Erie) Even if there were an old female swimming around, genetically uncorrupted, the odds of her eggs being fertilized by another existing pure male Walleye are even more staggering, especially since Walleye spawning habits are not monogamous and several males may fertilize the eggs of any one female. If local anglers see no well defined saddle markings on the fish, they believe that it is a pure Walleye.
In any waters where Walleye and Sauger coexist and have overlapping spawning habitat there will be a naturally ocurring population of Hybrids (Saugeyes). Most estimates for waters like the Ohio and Missouri River systems run about 4% of the total combined species. This 4% poses no threat to the gene pool of either parent species and can be reabsorbed. When the number of Saugeyes is increased dramatically by upstream stocking programs it becomes impossible to prevent eventual contamination of the parental species.
The following is a quote from a study titled "Evaluation of Skin Pigmentation for Identifying Adult Saugers and Walleye-Sauger F1 Hybrids Collected from Lake Sakakawea, North Dakota."
"Correct identification of brood fish from waters where sympatric species hybdidize presents a challenge to fisheries managers and hatchery biologists. Misidentification of brood stock can result in inadvertent hybridization and the failure of hatchery programs."
We are seeing the results of such incorrect identification here in Ohio. Traditional inland Walleye lakes like Seneca and Salt Fork are now being stocked with Saugeyes. When questioned about the reasons for this, the ODNR blames anglers for releasing Saugeyes into the lakes and corrupting the existing Walleye populations. Salt Fork Lake had long been a "Mother Lake", one where hatcheries personell collected female Walleyes to strip eggs for the State hatcheries programs. One of the States largest hatcheries in just below the dam on Seneca lake. Some of the fry and fingerlings from the eggs harvested made their way back into these lakes through stocking programs. The Female Walleyes were identified by morphology (physical characteristics) by the hatcheries personell at the time of capture. Here is another quote from the same study quoted above. It is based on the capture of 143 fish from Lake Sakakawea, 14 of which (10%) turned out, under genetic testing, to be incorrectly identified as Sauger by using physical characteristics.
"In the context of fish culture operations, the consequenses of a 10% error rate can be enormous. We used Hearns (1986) data to show how the genetic composition of the Sauger population of Lake Sakakawea could have been changed if the incorrectly identified fish were used as broodfish. Hearn (1986) crossed two F1 hybrid (Saugeyes) females with Sauger males and produced about 47,000 fingerlings. Of the 14 fish we identified as F1 hybrids eight were females, two were males, and the gender of four could not be determined. Given success comparable to Hearns(1986) about 188,000 fingerlings could be produced from the eight females. Hearn used one male to fertilize three females. Following this protocol, if the male hybrids were used as brood fish, a total of about 580,000 hybrid fingerlings could result."
It seems far more likely that the presence of Saugeyes in lakes like Salt Fork and Seneca stem from misidentification of brood stock and subsequent stocking of hybrids rather than by fish released by a few anglers.

[fish id]

So how do we tell the difference between a saugeye and a walleye? Sounds like the "saddle markings" method is unreliable.

[Jim Ordway]

I had understood the saugeye had the black spots on dorsal (like sauger) and the white spot on the tail,(like walleye).

[fish id]

Maybe Lindy-Little Joe will come out with a pocket DNA analysis kit.

[Jim Corey]

Fish Id, the saddle markings are stiil the way to go if you are identifying Saugeye. The problem comes when a Saugeye doesn't exhibit these characteristics. In other words, if it looks like a Saugeye, then it's a Saugeye, but if it looks like a Walleye, it still MAY be a Saugeye. This should only apply in waters where Walleye coexist with either Sauger or Saugeye. In that case the only way to tell is to get tests done. Send a scale sample to the State.
Jim, as I explained above, if it has the spots on the dorsal and the saddle markings, etc., it's a Saugeye. Walleyes don't carry the genes for those markings. All Saugeye, however, may not carry those genes either, or they may not be dominant in that individual fish.
Yes they can cross a male Walleye and a female Sauger. The reason that they chose to do it the way they do is because the hybrids tend to take on the size of the mother and they wanted the most for their hatchery dollar. Most fisheries biologists didn't expect Saugeye to reach the size they are obviously capable of reaching because usually hybrids don't get as big as the bigger parent. They also didn't expect them to have a very long lifespan. Lifespan in fish is related to their growth rates, and growth rates relate to average water temps/latitude. In a Walleye's Northern range they can live 15 years and up. (I heard of one from Minnesota that tested at 34 years of age. If that is true then that would be a record) In their Southern range(Arkansas, for example), 7 or 8 years seems to be the top end.
Saugeyes have surprised everyone involved with their breeding and stocking. They just don't follow the rules in reproduction or habits. That's one of the reasons that I like 'em so much. The minute you think you have them figured out they do something totally unexpected. I've said before that, to be a successful Saugeye fisherman, you have to be part Bass fisherman, part Walleye fisherman, part Lake Trout fisherman, and 100% crazy!

[Jim Ordway]

This is great stuff. I can't wait to hit the water to do some real time analysis :). Truly, you have cleared up one of those life long mysteries for me. I have heard it repeated many time "saugeye don't reproduce" and unfortunately, I have heard myself say it!!. Thanks again for taking all the time responding to our questions. You beter let that keyboard cool off, I think I smell smoke...
Take care,

[JOE]

THANK YOU FOR ALL THE INFO! ITS THIS BEST COME BACK I HAVE EVER GOT ON WALLEYE CENTRAL. VERY INFORMATIVE

[RANGER]

Jim Corey,

Terrific info - thank you so much for sharing this with us. I have always been told that Saugeye are sterile. I didn't accept this but had no "good" info to base my assumptions on. Your info here is absolutely GREAT!

Thank you!

[tom]

Mr Corey you are a jewel!

[Jim Corey]

Thanks guys but my keyboard is gettin' kinda hot. I'd like for there to be a central location where any angler could go and read the original studies. Then all I'd have to do is post the URL. Boy would that help the blisters on my fingers.