Skip to main content

Table 2 Data from the expected (‘fishmove’) and observed (‘fishmove.estimate’) output from R for prairie chub movement distance and rate in the Red River, Salt Fork Red River, and Pease River in the Red River Basin of Texas and Oklahoma, USA during 2019 and 2020

From: Paradigm versus paradox on the prairie: testing competing stream fish movement frameworks using an imperiled Great Plains minnow

River

Movement

Movement

2019

2020

Metric

Component

Expected

Observed

Expected

Observed

Pooled

Distance

Stationary

2.1 (0.7–5.8)

158.6 (131.7–185.6)

3.3 (1.26–8.7)

242.8 (197.8–287.8)

Pooled

Distance

Mobile

42.5 (19.5–94.9)

2169 (1647–2691)

75.6 (35.8–159.3)

1391 (1115–1668)

Red

Distance

Stationary

0.8 (0.3–2.2)

235.9 (147.5–324.4)

2.4 (1.0–5.7)

254 (195.2–312.8)

Red

Distance

Mobile

12.6 (5.6–28.1)

1879.6 (878.6–2881)

50.2 (25.7–98.4)

1029 (617.4–1441)

Salt Fork

Distance

Stationary

1.7 (0.7–4.2)

116 (89.1–142.9)

2.7 (1.8–6.4)

227 (150.6–303.4)

Salt Fork

Distance

Mobile

32.3 (16.0–65.4)

1629 (1202–2056)

57.7 (30–111)

1790 (1234–2346)

Pooled

Rate

Stationary

0.9 (0.3–2.7)

8.6 (6.9–10.2)

1.0 (0.3–3.0)

21.2 (14.5–27.9)

Pooled

Rate

Mobile

13.7 (5.6–33.7)

739.8 (619.8–859.8)

15.0 (6.2–36.5)

258.2 (212.9–303.6)

Red

Rate

Stationary

0.6 (0.1–1.7)

5.1 (2.8–7.3)

0.7 (0.25–2.1)

20.1 (15.1–25.1)

Red

Rate

Mobile

8.5 (3.6–19.9)

947 (597.2–1297)

10.5 (4.6–23.8)

176.4 (127.1–225.6)

Salt Fork

Rate

Stationary

0.7 (0.2–2.0)

9.5 (7.6–11.5)

0.8 (0.3–2.2)

46.4 (39.7–53.1)

Salt Fork

Rate

Mobile

10.1 (4.4–23.0)

755.5 (602.7–908.2)

11.2 (5.0–25.2)

410.1 (364.8–455.5)

  1. The pooled data (2019 n = 94 recaptures, 2020 n = 119) represents the Pease (2019 n = 7, 2020 n = 4), Red (2019 n = 12, 2020 n = 62), and Salt Fork (2019 n = 75, 2020 n = 53) rivers combined. We did not analyze the Pease River alone due to insufficient sample size. Distance (meters), Rate (meters per day). Values are fitted means (95% confidence intervals)