This readme.txt file was generated on <2025.01.10> by Recommended citation for the data: Link, D., M.R. Verhoeven, H.K. Masui, J.K.R. Nelson, G.J.A. Hansen. 2025. Fish abundance training data in support of: Climate-driven declines in abundance across thermal guilds in fish communities of 11,000 temperate lakes. Retrieved from the Data Repository for the University of Minnesota (DRUM). https://doi.org/10.13020/v27d-a349 ------------------- GENERAL INFORMATION ------------------- 1. Title of Dataset Fish abundance training data in support of: Climate-driven declines in abundance across thermal guilds in fish communities of 11,000 temperate lakes 2. Author Information Principal Investigator Contact Information Name: Gretchen Hansen Institution: University of Minnesota Address: 135 Skok Hall, 2003 Upper Buford Circle, Saint Paul, MN 55108 Email: ghansen@umn.edu ORCID: 0000-0003-0241-7048 Associate or Co-investigator Contact Information Name: Denver Link Institution: University of Minnesota Address: 135 Skok Hall, 2003 Upper Buford Circle, Saint Paul, MN 55108 Email: linkx168@umn.edu ORCID: 0000-0001-5596-6417 Associate or Co-investigator Contact Information Name: Michael Verhoeven Institution: University of Minnesota Address: 135 Skok Hall, 2003 Upper Buford Circle, Saint Paul, MN 55108 Email: verh0064@umn.edu ORCID: 0000-0002-6340-9490 Associate or Co-investigator Contact Information Name: Holly Kundel Masui Institution: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Address: 520 Lafayette Road N, Saint Pual, MN 55155 ORCID: 0000-0002-5154-4150 Associate or Co-investigator Contact Information Name: Jenna Nelson Institution: Three Rivers Park District Address: 3000 Xenium Lane North, Plymouth, MN 55441 ORCID: 0000-0003-2960-8485 3. Date published or finalized for release: 2025-01-10 4. Date of data collection: 1940-2023 5. Geographic location of data collection (where was data collected?): 7 Midwestern states of the USA: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, South Dakota, Wisconsin 6. Information about funding sources that supported the collection of the data: This work was supported by the U.S. Geological Survey Midwest Climate Adaptation Science Center Grant No.G20AC00096 for data assemblage by collaborators at the University of Minnesota. Original fish data were collected by individual state agency natural resource departments. 7. Overview of the data (abstract): Anticipating and planning for changes in biological communities due to climate warming presents numerous challenges, particularly in projecting how species abundance relationships will respond to future thermal conditions. In this study, we use regional fisheries-independent catch data to train a novel physiologically guided model that predicts fish abundances under warming scenarios in over 11,000 lakes across the Midwestern U.S. The dataset includes catch-per-effort data for eight sport fish species (cisco, northern pike, walleye, black crappie, yellow perch, smallmouth bass, largemouth bass, and bluegill sunfish) from 6,805 lakes, 46,287 surveys, and spanning 81 years (1940–2023) across seven states. We selected survey gear types for each state and species based on agency recommendations and survey documentation to ensure accurate representation of relative abundance. Rigorous data screening was performed to eliminate anomalies that could bias abundance estimates. Each survey location is linked to National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) identifiers, enabling integration with landscape-level environmental covariates. These data were used in a companion study to inform a joint species physiologically guided abundance model to project future species abundances across the region. -------------------------- SHARING/ACCESS INFORMATION -------------------------- 1. Licenses/restrictions placed on the data: CC BY-SA 4.0 Public Domain Dedication (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/) 2. Links to publications that cite or use the data: Custer, C.A., J.S. North, E.M. Schliep, M.R. Verhoeven, D. Link, G.J.A Hansen, T. Wagner. Climate-driven declines in abundance across thermal guilds in fish communities of 11,000 temperate lakes. In Prep. 3. Was data derived from another source? If yes, list source(s): Data are derived from individual state agency fisheries data. State agency data were obtained from direct communication with staff. Original state agency data and data collation scripts can be provided upon request. The complete data and processing information describing this effort will be available on a future Science Base Repository. 4. Terms of Use: Data Repository for the U of Minnesota (DRUM) By using these files, users agree to the Terms of Use. https://conservancy.umn.edu/pages/policies/#drum-terms-of-use --------------------- DATA & FILE OVERVIEW --------------------- 1. File List A. Filename: all_state_cpue_6Feb24 Short description: Survey level catch-per-effort for 8 sport fish species with survey information -------------------------- METHODOLOGICAL INFORMATION -------------------------- 1. Description of methods used for collection/generation of data: These data were collected by state agencies, following standardized sampling protocols that were often adapted for regional and local purposes (Bonar et al., 2009). The authority for the details of the methods of field sampling and collection lies with the natural resource agency for the state from which a given datum was generated. Most of the data here were collected for the purposes of monitoring gamefish populations at an individual waterbody level. We have obtained, processed, and organized for re-purpose within a landscape-scale study. Bonar, Scott A., Hubert, Wayne A., and Willis, David W. 2009. Standard Methods for Sampling North American Freshwater Fishes. American Fisheries Society. https://doi.org/10.47886/9781934874103 2. Methods for processing the data: Data were identified and obtained directly from individual state agencies through communication with agency staff. Agency provided data were collated to unify formats and data features, then summarized to generate the catch per unit effort (CPUE) values presented herein. Because agency data often included data not suitable for use in CPUE, filtering strategies were developed in consultation with state agencies to ensure that only surveys providing valid measures of relative abundance for each survey-species combination were retained. The filtering process involved defining inclusion criteria, such as survey types, gear specifications, time periods, and minimum amount of effort, in order to exclude non-representative abundances of the species of interest. Scripts used for data aggregation and filtering are available upon request, along with documentation of the original data structure and filtering parameters. The collated data from which these CPUE data were calculated will be available in a future Science Base repository. 3. Instrument- or software-specific information needed to interpret the data: Excel, R 4. Standards and calibration information, if appropriate: NA 5. Environmental/experimental conditions: NA 6. Describe any quality-assurance procedures performed on the data: NA 7. People involved with sample collection, processing, analysis and/or submission: Multiple State Agencies (sample collection), Denver Link (processing, analysis, submission), Michael Verhoeven (processing, analysis, submission), Holly Masui (processing, analysis), Jenna Nelson (processing, analysis), Gretchen Hansen (processing, analysis, submission). ----------------------------------------- DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: all_state_cpue_6Feb24.csv ----------------------------------------- These data originate from fisheries surveys conducted by state agencies across seven Midwestern states: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, South Dakota, and Wisconsin. The reported values are retained as provided by each agency. The columns sampling_method and total_effort_1_units exhibit subtle variations both within and across states. No standardization was applied, as the supported code and manuscript use the data as reported. Potential users should familiarize themselves with the sampling_method values and aggregate them as appropriate. An example of how these methods were combined across states is available in the cited DOI. 1. Number of variables: 17 2. Number of cases/rows: 371,846 3. Missing data codes: Code/symbol NA Definition: Not applicable or data not available 4. Variable List A. Name: state Description: state from which survey information exist Values: Illinois Indiana Iowa Michigan Minnesota South Dakota Wisconsin B. Name: lake_id Description: State-level lake identification. Identification systems are unique within each state. Values are reported as character strings. Leading 0s are not included in states that have a set number of digits. C. Name: lake_name Description: State-level lake identification. Values are reported as character strings. D. Name: nhdhr_id Description: NHD high res. The ids have a mix of characters and some can include special characters, such as "{" and "}". See citation for more detail: Buto, S.G., and Anderson, R.D., 2020, NHDPlus High Resolution (NHDPlus HR)---A hydrography framework for the Nation: U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2020-3033, 2 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/fs20203033. E. Name: county Description: county within each state where the survey was conducted F. Name: date Description: Date at which the effort within the survey was completed and/or relevant. Values take the form of MM/DD/YYYY. In cases with NA dates, values were not provided by the fisheries agency. All NA dates are accompanied with a valid month and year (see month and year column). G. Name: month Description: month of which the effort within the survey was completed and/or relevant. Values are numeric ranging from 1-12. H. Name: year Description: year of which the effort within the survey was completed and/or relevant. Values are numeric. I. Name: sampling_method Description: state specific sampling gear used to complete the survey Values: AFS std frame net AFS std gill net Boat electrofishing AC (Day) Boat electrofishing DC (Day) boat shocker (day) boat shocker (night) boat shocker (night, AC) boat shocker (night, DC) boom_shocker boomshocking DC Boat Shocker Day DC Boat Shocker Day 2 Netters dc nighttime electrofishing experimental gill net frame net (std 3/4 in) Fyke Netting Unspecified fyke_net Gill net - 125 ft experimental Gill net - 250 ft experimental gill net std exp Gill Net Unspecified inland_gill_net large frame net large_mesh_fyke_net single throat frame net spring night EF-LMB Standard 3/4-in mesh, double frame trap net sets Standard gill net sets Standard gill nets, set shallow in stratified assessment standard trap net Standard Vertical Gillnet std exp gill net std frame net (3/8 inch) Trap net Trap net 0.5 in bar mesh trap_net vertical_gill_net J. Name: total_effort_ident Description: An identifying grouping variable that distinguishes surveys (unique lake, sampling method, and year combinations). The column is a character string but contains numbers and some special characters such as “-” or “.”. This column does not hold any numeric value and is meant to identify unique surveys. K. Name: total_effort_1 Description: The total amount of effort associated with a survey. Users should note that units and precision vary between sampling methods, please consult the total_effort_1_units column. L. Name: total_effort_1_units Description: Unit associated with the total effort listed in total_effort_unit_1 Values: hours minutes net-nights net-night lifts minute seconds net nights M. Name: species_1 Description: the species for which count applies Values: black_crappie bluegill cisco largemouth_bass northern_pike smallmouth_bass walleye yellow_perch N. Name: count Description: the total number of fish for the given species within the survey/total effort ident O. Name: cpue Description: the count for the given species divided by the effort of the survey P. Name: lat_unspec Description: latitude of the survey Q. Name: lon_unspec Description: longitude of the survey