I don't understand how crappie would have bust cycles because of being highly fecund. Won't argue for or against it but like to have that thought expanded sufficiently to understand what led you to draw that conclusion.

I do qualify prolific in terms of biomass/acre and number of individuals recruited per/acre. Granted, these numbers would depend on when the census is taken, but I think the first anniversary would be a very good milestone to compare.

Buck and Thoits studied a number of species in monoculture. Crappie were unable to attain standing weights comparable to BG in the same ponds. Removed BG outweighed the standing crops attained by Crappie. BG were in the many tens of thousands in quantity at the end of the census. Crappie standing weights were comparable to LMB (though lower) and the numbers much higher (less cannibalism). In any event, BG were not limited to lesser recruitment though they may well have produced fewer eggs per individual.

**BUMP**

OK, so the first line I wrote above is rather structurally challenged and I apologize for any confusion when I wrote this below.

Quote:
I don't understand how crappie would have bust cycles because of being highly fecund.


What I mean is this:

I don't understand how being highly fecund could be a cause of bust cycles. This attribute should help crappie pull off spawns and yet they often fail. I was asking for clarification as to how this attribute could contribute to busted spawns.

Last edited by jpsdad; 10/04/19 06:57 AM.

It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so - Will Rogers