What can you tell be about the Wisconsin Bioenergetics Model? I am particularly interested in its use in marine fisheries?
The Wisconsin Bioenergetics Model (also called the Wisconsin model or Fish Bioenergetics model) is a widely used physiological framework for estimating fish growth, food consumption, and energy allocation based on an energy-balance approach.
It originated from pioneering work by James F. Kitchell and collaborators at the University of Wisconsin–Madison Center for Limnology (notably Kitchell et al. 1977). It builds on earlier energy-partitioning concepts (e.g., Winberg, Brett, and others). The model was further developed and popularized through Wisconsin Sea Grant software packages, becoming a standard tool in fisheries research and management. (LINK)
Core Structure
The model rests on a balanced energy budget (typically expressed in energy units such as joules, often converted from mass or oxygen consumption):
C = R + text{SDA} + F + U + G]
(or rearranged to solve for growth (G) or consumption (C)), where:
– (C) = consumption (energy intake from prey),
– (R) = respiration/metabolism (standard + active),
– SDA = specific dynamic action (cost of digestion/processing food),
– (F) = egestion (fecal losses),
– (U) = excretion (urinary/nitrogenous losses),
– (G) = growth (somatic + reproductive energy gain). (LINK)
Key features include temperature- and size-dependent functions for maximum consumption and respiration rates, activity multipliers, prey and predator energy densities, and diet composition. Users typically input observed growth (to back-calculate consumption) or observed/estimated consumption rates (to predict growth), along with temperature regimes and other environmental factors. It can scale from individuals to populations by incorporating abundance and mortality.
Software Versions
– Early microcomputer versions (e.g., Model 2 in 1992 by Hewett & Johnson).
– Fish Bioenergetics 3.0 (1997, Hanson et al.): Popular Windows-based package with parameters for dozens of species; widely distributed via Wisconsin Sea Grant.
– Fish Bioenergetics 4.0 (FB4) (released ~2017–2018 by Deslauriers et al., with ongoing updates): Open-source R-based application with a Shiny graphical user interface. It includes ~105 parameter sets for ~72–73 aquatic species (fish and some invertebrates), supports custom parameters, habitat-dependent functions (e.g., dissolved oxygen, salinity), batch simulations, behavioral thermoregulation, and integration into larger models. Available at fishbioenergetics.org. (LINK)
The software is designed to be adaptable; parameters can be modified or developed for new species via laboratory or field data (or meta-analysis when direct studies are impractical). Primary Uses
It is heavily applied in freshwater systems (especially the Great Lakes) for questions about predator–prey dynamics, growth potential, carrying capacity, climate impacts on growth/consumption, nutrient recycling, and management scenarios (e.g., effects of sea lamprey control or stocking). It has been evaluated and refined for species such as lake trout, walleye, lake whitefish, and various salmonids, sometimes with adjustments for bias in respiration or energy-budget balancing algorithms. (LINK)
Use in Marine Fisheries
Although originally developed for Great Lakes (freshwater) fishes, the model is general and explicitly noted as useful for marine biologists. Manuals and reviews describe its applicability to stream, river, lake, or other environmental variables, and parameters/models exist for a range of marine and anadromous species. Applications have appeared in marine-oriented journals (e.g., ICES Journal of Marine Science, Marine Biology, Marine Ecology Progress Series, Estuarine and Coastal Shelf Science). (LINK)
Examples of marine or marine-relevant applications and parameterizations include:
– Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua): Used to compare growth conversion efficiency and consumption demand between regions such as Georges Bank and the Gulf of Maine, linking temperature, diet, and growth performance.
– Clupeids: Atlantic menhaden (Brevoortia tyrannus), Baltic herring (Cl): Parameters and evaluations covering freshwater, estuarine, and marine phases; used in growth, consumption, and predator–prey studies.
– Broader uses: Cohort dynamics in marine fishes, climate-change projections of marine ecosystem productivity and distribution (where the Wisconsin energy-budget approach is one of the main bioenergetics frameworks alongside dynamic energy budget models), and incorporation of factors such as salinity. (LINK)
FB4 explicitly allows users to add or modify parameters and incorporate habitat functions (including salinity), making it suitable for marine conditions. While freshwater applications remain more numerous, the framework’s mechanistic basis (temperature- and size-dependent physiology) supports its use for marine fisheries questions involving growth potential, prey demand, early life history, and responses to environmental change.
In short, the Wisconsin Bioenergetics Model is a flexible, physiologically grounded tool that has expanded well beyond its Great Lakes origins and is actively applied and further developed for marine species and ecosystems. For the latest parameters, software, and documentation, the official FB4 site (fishbioenergetics.org) is the primary resource.
Follow up Question:
Do you have any cases where it was used by NOAA in the New England or Mid Alantic waters?
Yes, there are documented applications of the Wisconsin Bioenergetics Model (or closely related Wisconsin-style energy-budget approaches) in New England and Mid-Atlantic waters, including work that draws on NOAA/Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) data or addresses NOAA-managed stocks. Direct in-house NOAA authorship is less common than university or collaborative efforts that rely on NOAA survey data, temperatures, or stock contexts, but the model has been applied to key species in these regions. (LINK)
New England (Georges Bank / Gulf of Maine)
The clearest example is a 2007 study that applied the Wisconsin Bioenergetics Model to Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) on Georges Bank and in the Gulf of Maine during 2004.
– It used the model’s energy-balance approach (daily time step) with field data on gut contents, growth by age, and diet energy content to estimate consumption demand, specific growth rates, and growth conversion efficiency.
– Key findings: Overall growth performance was significantly lower on Georges Bank than in the Gulf of Maine. Monthly consumption demand and growth rates were higher on Georges Bank; warmer temperatures there approached upper thermal tolerances for cod and likely reduced growth efficiency. Gulf of Maine conditions were more homogeneous.
– Temperature data came from the National Marine Fisheries Service / NEFSC (Woods Hole). The work explicitly notes that few bioenergetics models existed at the time for U.S. Northeastern Continental Shelf species (in contrast to the Great Lakes) and frames results in the context of cod stock declines and food-web dynamics on these NOAA-managed grounds.
This is one of the stronger direct applications of the Wisconsin framework to New England continental-shelf waters.
Mid-Atlantic (including Chesapeake Bay)
Wisconsin-style bioenergetics models have been used more extensively in estuarine and coastal Mid-Atlantic systems, particularly Chesapeake Bay (a major Mid-Atlantic focus for NOAA and partners):
-Hartman & Brandt (1995 applied bioenergetics models to the dominant Chesapeake Bay piscivores—striped bass (Morone saxatilis), bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix), and weakfish (Cynoscion regalis)—using site-specific diets, growth, and energy densities. They quantified predatory demand relative to prey supply (especially Atlantic menhaden, bay anchovy, and spot) and evaluated the Bay’s suitability as a production area versus nursery. (LINK)
– Related work developed or calibrated bioenergetics (including Wisconsin-framework) models for Atlantic menhaden(Brevoortia tyrannus) in Chesapeake Bay, linking growth and consumption to primary production, temperature, and chlorophyll. These have been used to estimate population consumption relative to phytoplankton production and regional growth potential. (LINK)
Bluefish parameters from the Hartman & Brandt lineage also appear in later individual-based and foraging–bioenergetics models applied in Mid-Atlantic and Northeast contexts.
Broader NOAA Context
NOAA repositories host the Fish Bioenergetics software packages themselves, and NEFSC ecosystem modeling (e.g., energy budgets, Atlantis-type models, State of the Ecosystem reports, and climate-vulnerability work for the Northeast U.S. Shelf) frequently incorporates or builds on bioenergetics principles. Recent NOAA-linked papers discuss advancing bioenergetics approaches (including the Wisconsin energy-budget formulation) for climate projections on marine ecosystems, including Northeast Shelf species. (LINK)
In summary, the strongest explicit “Wisconsin model” case in New England waters is the Mateo (2007) Atlantic cod study on Georges Bank and the Gulf of Maine (leveraging NEFSC data). In the Mid-Atlantic, Wisconsin-style applications are well established for Chesapeake Bay piscivores and menhaden. These support questions about growth efficiency, predatory demand, and environmental effects on NOAA-managed fisheries. If you need details on a specific species or paper, I can dig further.