Understanding the functional role of habitat structure to predation on Southern Pygmy Perch

ContactsDr Amina Price
Dr Rick Stoffels
Funding BodyMurray Local Land Services (MLLS) with support from the Australian Government and its National Landcare Programme and in-kind contributions from MDFRC
Duration2015 - 2016


The Southern pygmy perch (Nannoperca australis) is a small-bodied fish species that historically was widely distributed throughout the Murray and lower Murrumbidgee systems. The species has experienced dramatic declines in range and abundance over the least twenty years and is now listed as endangered in NSW and South Australia. In NSW, there are only three known populations, two of which are located in the Murray Catchment near Holbrook and Albury. Currently, management of the two Murray populations is focused on maintaining the limited number of existing populations with a view to establishing new populations via translocations to suitable habitats in the future.

It is generally thought that aquatic plants (macrophytes) are a critical habitat feature for Southern pygmy perch. However, robust evidence for this is lacking and there is anecdotal evidence of self-sustaining Southern pygmy perch populations occurring in habitats with little or no macrophytes. It is not currently known whether Southern pygmy perch are associated specifically with macrophytes, or whether other structural habitat types, such as sticks, branches and logs, can fulfil the same functional requirements.


The present project were to determine whether:

  1. Southern pygmy perch preferentially select structured habitats over open ones and if so, to assess whether they show a preference for macrophyte habitats over woody habitats.
  2. Observed patterns of habitat selection vary when a predator (Redfin perch) is visible.
  3. The activity levels/metabolic rates of Southern pygmy perch differ when the fish are in structured versus open habitats.
  4. Observed patterns in activity levels/metabolic rate among habitats vary when a predator (Redfin perch) is visible.

The scientific knowledge delivered by this project will give managers an improved ability to:

  • manage habitat in order to better support existing populations, and
  • identify suitable translocation sites based on structural habitat availability


  • Southern pygmy perch demonstrated a statistically significant preference for structured habitats (macrophytes and wood) as compared to unstructured habitats.
  • Macrophyte habitat patches were selected by a significantly greater number of Southern pygmy perch than woody habitat patches.
  • Habitat selection was not influenced by the presence of Redfin perch.
  • Metabolic rates were significantly higher when macrophytes were present than when they were absent. This is indicative of higher rates of movement when the fish are in macrophyte habitats.
  • Metabolic rates were not influenced by the presence of Redfin perch.