DOCSLIB.ORG

Regionalization of the Index of Biotic Integrity for Texas Streams

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Regionalization of the Index of Biotic Integrity for Texas Streams Gordon W. Linam Leroy J. Kleinsasser Kevin B. Mayes River Studies Report No. 17 Resource Protection Division Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Austin, Texas June 2002 Table of Contents List of Tables.........................................................................................................................................................iii List of Figures....................................................................................................................................................... iv Executive Summary........................................................................... ................................................................... v Methods ................................................................................................................................................................2 Site Selection.....................................................................................................................................................2 Fish Sampling....................................................................................................................................................3 Data Analysis.....................................................................................................................................................4 Results ..................................................................................................................................................................5 Regionalization............................................................................. .....................................................................5 Ecoregion 24 - Southern Deserts ................................................................................................................. 6 Ecoregions 25 and 26 - Western High Plains and Southwestern Tablelands .............................................. 6 Ecoregions 27, 29, and 32 - Subhumid Agricultural Plains........................................................................... 7 Ecoregion 30 - Central Texas Plateau.......................................................................................................... 7 Ecoregion 31 - Southern Texas Plains ......................................................................................................... 7 Ecoregions 33 and 35 - South Central and Southern Humid, Mixed Land Use Region ............................... 7 Ecoregion 34 - Western Gulf Coastal Plain .................................................................................................. 8 Metric Development...........................................................................................................................................8 Ecoregion 24 - Southern Deserts ............................................................................................................... 11 Ecoregions 25 and 26 - Western High Plains and Southwestern Tablelands ............................................ 11 Ecoregions 27, 29, and 32 - Subhumid Agricultural Plains......................................................................... 12 Ecoregion 30 - Central Texas Plateau ....................................................................................................... 14 Ecoregion 31 - Southern Texas Plains ....................................................................................................... 15 Ecoregions 33 and 35 - South Central and Southern Humid, Mixed Land Use Region ............................. 15 Ecoregion 34 - Western Gulf Coastal Plain ............................................................................................... 18 Discussion ..........................................................................................................................................................18 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................................23 References..........................................................................................................................................................24 i Appendix A. Site Descriptions....................................................................................................................A1 Appendix B. Guidelines for Applying the Index of Biotic Integrity Metrics ................................................ B1 Appendix C. Fish Species and Abundance in Selected Least Disturbed Reference Streams within Ecoregion 24 (Southern Deserts) ...........................................................................................................C1 Appendix D. Fish Species and Abundance in Selected Least Disturbed Reference Streams within Ecoregions 25 and 26 (Western High Plains and Southwestern Tablelands) ........................................D1 Appendix E. Fish Species and Abundance in Selected Least Disturbed Reference Streams within Ecoregions 27, 29, and 32 (Subhumid Agricultural Plains) .................................................................... E1 Appendix F. Fish Species and Abundance in Selected Least Disturbed Reference Streams within Ecoregion 30 (Central Texas Plateau) ....................................................................................................F1 Appendix G. Fish Species and Abundance in Selected Least Disturbed Reference Streams within Ecoregion 31 (Southern Texas Plains)................................................................................................... G1 Appendix H. Fish Species and Abundance in Selected Least Disturbed Reference Streams within Ecoregions 33 and 35 (South Central and Southern Humid, Mixed Land Use Region) ........................H1 Appendix I. Fish Species and Abundance in Selected Least Disturbed Reference Streams within Ecoregion 34 (Western Gulf Coastal Plain) ............................................................................................. I1 Appendix J. Classification of Texas Freshwater Fishes into Trophic and Tolerance Groups ................... J1 Appendix K. List of Introduced Fish Species in Texas Waters .................................................................K1 ii List of Tables TABLE 1.—Comparison of metrics developed for each Texas ecoregion or ecoregion aggregrate.......................9 TABLE 2.—Fish species collected from the Southern Deserts (Ecoregion 24) ....................................................11 TABLE 3.—Scoring criteria developed to assess stream fish assemblages in the Southern Deserts (Ecoregion 24).............................................................................................................................................. 12 TABLE 4.—Fish species collected from the Southwestern Tablelands (Ecoregion 26)........................................12 TABLE 5.—Scoring criteria developed to assess stream fish assemblages in the Western High Plains and Southwestern Tablelands (Ecoregions 25 and 26) ...................................................................................... 13 TABLE 6.—Fish species collected from the Subhumid Agricultural Plains (Ecoregions 27, 29, and 32) ............13 TABLE 7.—Scoring criteria developed to assess stream fish assemblages in the Subhumid Agricultural Plains (Ecoregions 27, 29, and 32) ............................................................................................................. 14 TABLE 8.—Fish species collected from the Central Texas Plateau (Ecoregion 30) ............................................15 TABLE 9.—Scoring criteria developed to assess stream fish assemblages in the Central Texas Plateau (Ecoregion 30) ............................................................................................................................................. 16 TABLE 10.—Fish species collected from the Southern Texas Plains (Ecoregion 31) .........................................16 TABLE 11.—Scoring criteria developed to assess stream fish assemblages in the Southern Texas Plains (Ecoregion 31).............................................................................................................................................. 17 TABLE 12.—Fish species collected from the South Central and Southern Humid, Mixed Land Use Region (Ecoregions 33 and 35) ................................................................................................................................ 17 TABLE 13.—Scoring criteria developed to assess stream fish assemblages in the South Central and Southern Humid, Mixed Land Use Region (Ecoregions 33 and 35) ............................................................ 19 TABLE 14.—Fish species collected from the Western Gulf Coastal Plain (Ecoregion 34)................................. 20 TABLE 15.—Scoring criteria developed to assess stream fish assemblages in the Western Gulf Coastal Plain (Ecoregion 34) .................................................................................................................................... 20 TABLE 16.—Comparison of statewide versus regional index of biotic integrity scoring criteria results when applied to least disturbed reference streams .............................................................................................. 21 TABLE 17.—Comparison of statewide versus regional index of biotic integrity scoring criteria results when applied to Texas Natural Resource
Recommended publications
  • Thermal Toxicity Literature Evaluation

    Thermal Toxicity Literature Evaluation

    Thermal Toxicity Literature Evaluation 2011 TECHNICAL REPORT Electric Power Research Institute 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338 • PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813 USA 800.313.3774 • 650.855.2121 • [email protected] • www.epri.com Thermal Toxicity Literature Evaluation 1023095 Final Report, December 2011 EPRI Project Manager R. Goldstein ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338 ▪ PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813 ▪ USA 800.313.3774 ▪ 650.855.2121 ▪ [email protected] ▪ www.epri.com DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY THE ORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW AS AN ACCOUNT OF WORK SPONSORED OR COSPONSORED BY THE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC. (EPRI). NEITHER EPRI, ANY MEMBER OF EPRI, ANY COSPONSOR, THE ORGANIZATION(S) BELOW, NOR ANY PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM: (A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, (I) WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT, INCLUDING MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR (II) THAT SUCH USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OR INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS, INCLUDING ANY PARTY'S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, OR (III) THAT THIS DOCUMENT IS SUITABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR USER'S CIRCUMSTANCE; OR (B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRI OR ANY EPRI REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM YOUR SELECTION OR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT OR ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT.
  • Indiana Species April 2007

    Indiana Species April 2007

    Fishes of Indiana April 2007 The Wildlife Diversity Section (WDS) is responsible for the conservation and management of over 750 species of nongame and endangered wildlife. The list of Indiana's species was compiled by WDS biologists based on accepted taxonomic standards. The list will be periodically reviewed and updated. References used for scientific names are included at the bottom of this list. ORDER FAMILY GENUS SPECIES COMMON NAME STATUS* CLASS CEPHALASPIDOMORPHI Petromyzontiformes Petromyzontidae Ichthyomyzon bdellium Ohio lamprey lampreys Ichthyomyzon castaneus chestnut lamprey Ichthyomyzon fossor northern brook lamprey SE Ichthyomyzon unicuspis silver lamprey Lampetra aepyptera least brook lamprey Lampetra appendix American brook lamprey Petromyzon marinus sea lamprey X CLASS ACTINOPTERYGII Acipenseriformes Acipenseridae Acipenser fulvescens lake sturgeon SE sturgeons Scaphirhynchus platorynchus shovelnose sturgeon Polyodontidae Polyodon spathula paddlefish paddlefishes Lepisosteiformes Lepisosteidae Lepisosteus oculatus spotted gar gars Lepisosteus osseus longnose gar Lepisosteus platostomus shortnose gar Amiiformes Amiidae Amia calva bowfin bowfins Hiodonotiformes Hiodontidae Hiodon alosoides goldeye mooneyes Hiodon tergisus mooneye Anguilliformes Anguillidae Anguilla rostrata American eel freshwater eels Clupeiformes Clupeidae Alosa chrysochloris skipjack herring herrings Alosa pseudoharengus alewife X Dorosoma cepedianum gizzard shad Dorosoma petenense threadfin shad Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Campostoma anomalum central stoneroller
  • Fishes of New Mexicoi

    Fishes of New Mexicoi

    Threatened and Endangered Fishes of New MexicoI BY DAVID L. PROPST ILLUSTRATED BY W. HOWARD BRANDENBURG MAPS BY AMBER L. HOBBES ◆ EDITED BY PAUL C. MARSH TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 1 1999 NEW MEXICO DEPARTMENT OF GAME AND FISH STATE OF NEW MEXICO: Gary E. Johnson, Governor STATE GAME COMMISSION: William H. Brininstool, Chairman ◆ Jal Gail J. Cramer ◆ Farmington Steve Padilla ◆ Albuquerque Dr. William E. Schuler ◆ Albuquerque George A. Ortega ◆ Santa Fe Bud Hettinga ◆ Las Cruces Stephen E. Doerr ◆ Portales DEPARTMENT OF GAME AND FISH: Gerald A. Maracchini, Director CONSERVATION SERVICES DIVISION: Andrew V. Sandoval, Chief $10.00 1999 Threatened and Endangered FISHES of New Mexico ◆ 1 Propst, D.L. 1999. Threatened and endangered fishes of New Mexico. Tech. Rpt. No. 1. New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, Santa Fe, NM. 84 pp. Cover by NoBul Graphics, Albuquerque, NM. Design and production by Janelle Harden, The Studio, Albuquerque, NM. Publication and printing supported by the Turner Foundation, Atlanta, GA. In part, a contribution of Federal Aid in Fish and Wildlife Restoration., Project FW–17–RD. Contents may be reprinted if credit is given to the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish. Complete copies may be purchased for $10.00 U.S. (see address below). Make checks payable to “New Mexico Department of Game and Fish.” Conservation Services Division New Mexico Department of Game and Fish P.O. Box 25112 Santa Fe, NM 87504 (505) 827-7882 2 ◆ New Mexico Department of Game and Fish FORWARD Threatened and Endangered Fishes of New a major concern. Over half of the rivers in New Mexico Mexico by Dr.
  • BIOLOGICAL FIELD STATION Cooperstown, New York

    BIOLOGICAL FIELD STATION Cooperstown, New York

    BIOLOGICAL FIELD STATION Cooperstown, New York 49th ANNUAL REPORT 2016 STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK COLLEGE AT ONEONTA OCCASIONAL PAPERS PUBLISHED BY THE BIOLOGICAL FIELD STATION No. 1. The diet and feeding habits of the terrestrial stage of the common newt, Notophthalmus viridescens (Raf.). M.C. MacNamara, April 1976 No. 2. The relationship of age, growth and food habits to the relative success of the whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis) and the cisco (C. artedi) in Otsego Lake, New York. A.J. Newell, April 1976. No. 3. A basic limnology of Otsego Lake (Summary of research 1968-75). W. N. Harman and L. P. Sohacki, June 1976. No. 4. An ecology of the Unionidae of Otsego Lake with special references to the immature stages. G. P. Weir, November 1977. No. 5. A history and description of the Biological Field Station (1966-1977). W. N. Harman, November 1977. No. 6. The distribution and ecology of the aquatic molluscan fauna of the Black River drainage basin in northern New York. D. E Buckley, April 1977. No. 7. The fishes of Otsego Lake. R. C. MacWatters, May 1980. No. 8. The ecology of the aquatic macrophytes of Rat Cove, Otsego Lake, N.Y. F. A Vertucci, W. N. Harman and J. H. Peverly, December 1981. No. 9. Pictorial keys to the aquatic mollusks of the upper Susquehanna. W. N. Harman, April 1982. No. 10. The dragonflies and damselflies (Odonata: Anisoptera and Zygoptera) of Otsego County, New York with illustrated keys to the genera and species. L.S. House III, September 1982. No. 11. Some aspects of predator recognition and anti-predator behavior in the Black-capped chickadee (Parus atricapillus).
  • Darter Reproductive Seasons Author(S): Clark Hubbs Reviewed Work(S): Source: Copeia, Vol

    Darter Reproductive Seasons Author(S): Clark Hubbs Reviewed Work(S): Source: Copeia, Vol

    Darter Reproductive Seasons Author(s): Clark Hubbs Reviewed work(s): Source: Copeia, Vol. 1985, No. 1 (Feb. 11, 1985), pp. 56-68 Published by: American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists (ASIH) Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1444790 . Accessed: 10/01/2012 14:26 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists (ASIH) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Copeia. http://www.jstor.org 56 COPEIA, 1985, NO. 1 changes in kinosternid turtles. J. Herpetol. 6:183- . 1938. Seasonal changes in the testes of the 189. musk turtle Sternotherusodoratus L. J. Morphol. 63: MCPHERSON, R. J., AND K. R. MARION. 1981. Sea- 301-317. sonal testicular cycle of the stinkpot turtle (Ster- SAINTGIRONS, H. 1982. Reproductive cycles of male notherus odoratus) in central Alabama. Herpetolog- snakes and their relationships with climate and fe- ica 37:33-40. male reproductive cycles. Herpetologica 38:5-16. MITCHELL, J. C. 1982. Population ecology and de- SPEAT, R. H. 1973. Seasonal variation in the tubular mography of the freshwater turtles Chrysemyspicta and interstitial areas of the testes in Sternothaerus and Sternotherusodoratus.
  • The Life History of the Slough Darter, Etheostoma Gracile (Pisces, Percidae)

    The Life History of the Slough Darter, Etheostoma Gracile (Pisces, Percidae)

    • 7iz THE LIFE HISTORY OF THE SLOUGH DARTER, ETHEOSTOMA GRACILE (PISCES, PERCIDAE) Marvin E. Braasch Philip W. Smith ILLINOIS NATURAL HISTORY SURVEY Biological Notes No. 58 Urbana, Illinois • June, 1967 State of Illinois Department of Registration and Education NATURAL HISTORY SURVEY DIVISION THE LIFE HISTORY OF THE SLOUGH DARTER, ETHEOSTOMA GRACILE (PISCES, PERCIDAE) Marvin E. Braasch and Philip W. Smith SEVERAL STUDIES HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED pore, but in the female the genital pore is distinctly on reproductive habits of darters (for a summary, see larger than the anal pore. Winn 1958) . However, a detailed life-history study The small young of the species can be readily dis- is not available for any of the eight species and sub- tinguished from juveniles of other darters occurring species of the subgenus Hololepis. The subgenus is an with them by the distinctly reddish eye, three small ecologically distinctive group of which all members typi- caudal spots, and pronounced upward flexure of the cally inhabit swamps, sloughs, and low-gradient streams groove for the lateral line. in the Coastal Plain and Mississippi River valley. The species was described by Girard (1859:103) as A surprising amount of ecological information has, Boleosoma gracile (type-locality Rio Seco, Fort Inge, nevertheless, been assembled by Hubbs & Cannon (1935) Uvalde County, Texas) and, until Bailey (1951) re- and especially by Collette (1962) through remarkably duced many nominal genera to subgeneric rank, was thorough reviews of others' published observations and variously placed in the genera Boleosoma, Boleichthys, through inferences drawn from morphology. This paper Poecilichthys, and Hololepis. Poecilichthys butlerianus on the slough darter, Etheostoma gracile (Girard) , the Hay, 1882 (type-locality Big Black River, Yazoo County, westernmost member of the subgenus, substantiates many Mississippi) (1882:61) and Poecilichthys palustris Gil- of Collette's (1962) inferences and supplies some miss- bert, 1884 (type-locality Switz City swamp, Greene ing details.
  • Sabine Lake Galveston Bay East Matagorda Bay Matagorda Bay Corpus Christi Bay Aransas Bay San Antonio Bay Laguna Madre Planning

    Sabine Lake Galveston Bay East Matagorda Bay Matagorda Bay Corpus Christi Bay Aransas Bay San Antonio Bay Laguna Madre Planning

    River Basins Brazos River Basin Brazos-Colorado Coastal Basin TPWD Canadian River Basin Dallam Sherman Hansford Ochiltree Wolf Creek Colorado River Basin Lipscomb Gene Howe WMA-W.A. (Pat) Murphy Colorado-Lavaca Coastal Basin R i t Strategic Planning a B r ve Gene Howe WMA l i Hartley a Hutchinson R n n Cypress Creek Basin Moore ia Roberts Hemphill c ad a an C C r e Guadalupe River Basin e k Lavaca River Basin Oldham r Potter Gray ive Regions Carson ed R the R ork of Wheeler Lavaca-Guadalupe Coastal Basin North F ! Amarillo Neches River Basin Salt Fork of the Red River Deaf Smith Armstrong 10Randall Donley Collingsworth Palo Duro Canyon Neches-Trinity Coastal Basin Playa Lakes WMA-Taylor Unit Pr airie D og To Nueces River Basin wn Fo rk of t he Red River Parmer Playa Lakes WMA-Dimmit Unit Swisher Nueces-Rio Grande Coastal Basin Castro Briscoe Hall Childress Caprock Canyons Caprock Canyons Trailway N orth P Red River Basin ease River Hardeman Lamb Rio Grande River Basin Matador WMA Pease River Bailey Copper Breaks Hale Floyd Motley Cottle Wilbarger W To Wichita hi ng ver Sabine River Basin te ue R Foard hita Ri er R ive Wic Riv i r Wic Clay ta ve er hita hi Pat Mayse WMA r a Riv Rive ic Eisenhower ichit r e W h W tl Caddo National Grassland-Bois D'arc 6a Nort Lit San Antonio River Basin Lake Arrowhead Lamar Red River Montague South Wichita River Cooke Grayson Cochran Fannin Hockley Lubbock Lubbock Dickens King Baylor Archer T ! Knox rin Bonham North Sulphur San Antonio-Nueces Coastal Basin Crosby r it River ive y R Bowie R B W iv os r es
  • Endangered Species

    Endangered Species

    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
  • Fishes of South Dakota

    Fishes of South Dakota

    MISCELLANEOUS PUBLICATIONS MUSEUM OF ZOOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, NO. 119 Fishes of South Dakota REEVE M. BAILEY AND MARVIN 0. ALLUM South Dakota State College ANN ARBOR MUSEUM OF ZOOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN JUNE 5, 1962 MISCELLANEOUS PUBLICATIONS MUSEUM OF ZOOLOGY, UNIVERSITY 01; MICHIGAN The publications of the Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan, consist of two series-the Occasional Papers and the Miscellaneous Publications. Both series were founded by Dr. Bryant Walker, Mr. Bradshaw H. Swales, and Dr. W. W. Newcomb. The Occasional Papers, publication of which was begun in 1913, serve as a medium for original studies based principally upon the collections in the Museum. They are issued separately. When a sufficient number of pages has been printed to make a volume, a title page, table of contents, and an index are supplied to libraries and indi- viduals on the mailing list for the series. The Miscellaneous Publications, which include papers on field and museum tech- niques, monographic studies, and other contributions not within the scope of the Occasional Papers, are published separately. It is not intended that they be grouped into volumes. Each number has a title page and, when necessary, a table of contents. A conlplete list of publications on Birds, Fishes, Insects, Mammals, Mollusks, and Reptiles and Amphibians is available. Address inquiries to the Director, Museum of Zoology, Ann Arbor, Michigan No. 13. Studies of the fishes of the order Cyprinodontes. By CARL L. HUBBS. (1924) 23 pp., 4 pls. ............................................. No. 15. A check-list of the fishes of the Great Lakes and tributary waters, with nomenclatorial notes and analytical keys.
  • ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES

    ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES

    ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES Tables STEPHEN T. ROSS University of California Press Berkeley Los Angeles London © 2013 by The Regents of the University of California ISBN 978-0-520-24945-5 uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 1 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 2 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 1.1 Families Composing 95% of North American Freshwater Fish Species Ranked by the Number of Native Species Number Cumulative Family of species percent Cyprinidae 297 28 Percidae 186 45 Catostomidae 71 51 Poeciliidae 69 58 Ictaluridae 46 62 Goodeidae 45 66 Atherinopsidae 39 70 Salmonidae 38 74 Cyprinodontidae 35 77 Fundulidae 34 80 Centrarchidae 31 83 Cottidae 30 86 Petromyzontidae 21 88 Cichlidae 16 89 Clupeidae 10 90 Eleotridae 10 91 Acipenseridae 8 92 Osmeridae 6 92 Elassomatidae 6 93 Gobiidae 6 93 Amblyopsidae 6 94 Pimelodidae 6 94 Gasterosteidae 5 95 source: Compiled primarily from Mayden (1992), Nelson et al. (2004), and Miller and Norris (2005). uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 3 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 3.1 Biogeographic Relationships of Species from a Sample of Fishes from the Ouachita River, Arkansas, at the Confl uence with the Little Missouri River (Ross, pers. observ.) Origin/ Pre- Pleistocene Taxa distribution Source Highland Stoneroller, Campostoma spadiceum 2 Mayden 1987a; Blum et al. 2008; Cashner et al. 2010 Blacktail Shiner, Cyprinella venusta 3 Mayden 1987a Steelcolor Shiner, Cyprinella whipplei 1 Mayden 1987a Redfi n Shiner, Lythrurus umbratilis 4 Mayden 1987a Bigeye Shiner, Notropis boops 1 Wiley and Mayden 1985; Mayden 1987a Bullhead Minnow, Pimephales vigilax 4 Mayden 1987a Mountain Madtom, Noturus eleutherus 2a Mayden 1985, 1987a Creole Darter, Etheostoma collettei 2a Mayden 1985 Orangebelly Darter, Etheostoma radiosum 2a Page 1983; Mayden 1985, 1987a Speckled Darter, Etheostoma stigmaeum 3 Page 1983; Simon 1997 Redspot Darter, Etheostoma artesiae 3 Mayden 1985; Piller et al.
  • Aquatic Fish Report

    Aquatic Fish Report

    Aquatic Fish Report Acipenser fulvescens Lake St urgeon Class: Actinopterygii Order: Acipenseriformes Family: Acipenseridae Priority Score: 27 out of 100 Population Trend: Unknown Gobal Rank: G3G4 — Vulnerable (uncertain rank) State Rank: S2 — Imperiled in Arkansas Distribution Occurrence Records Ecoregions where the species occurs: Ozark Highlands Boston Mountains Ouachita Mountains Arkansas Valley South Central Plains Mississippi Alluvial Plain Mississippi Valley Loess Plains Acipenser fulvescens Lake Sturgeon 362 Aquatic Fish Report Ecobasins Mississippi River Alluvial Plain - Arkansas River Mississippi River Alluvial Plain - St. Francis River Mississippi River Alluvial Plain - White River Mississippi River Alluvial Plain (Lake Chicot) - Mississippi River Habitats Weight Natural Littoral: - Large Suitable Natural Pool: - Medium - Large Optimal Natural Shoal: - Medium - Large Obligate Problems Faced Threat: Biological alteration Source: Commercial harvest Threat: Biological alteration Source: Exotic species Threat: Biological alteration Source: Incidental take Threat: Habitat destruction Source: Channel alteration Threat: Hydrological alteration Source: Dam Data Gaps/Research Needs Continue to track incidental catches. Conservation Actions Importance Category Restore fish passage in dammed rivers. High Habitat Restoration/Improvement Restrict commercial harvest (Mississippi River High Population Management closed to harvest). Monitoring Strategies Monitor population distribution and abundance in large river faunal surveys in cooperation
  • Fish Survey for Calhoun, Gordon County, Georgia

    Fish Survey for Calhoun, Gordon County, Georgia

    Blacktail Redhorse (Moxostoma poecilurum) from Oothkalooga Creek Fish Survey for Calhoun, Gordon County, Georgia Prepared by: DECATUR, GA 30030 www.foxenvironmental.net January 2018 Abstract Biological assessments, in conjunction with habitat surveys, provide a time-integrated evaluation of water quality conditions. Biological and habitat assessments for fish were conducted on 3 stream segments in and around Calhoun, Gordon County, Georgia on October 3 and 5, 2017. Fish, physical habitat, and water chemistry data were evaluated according to Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GADNR), Wildlife Resources Division (WRD) – Fisheries Section protocol entitled “Standard Operating Procedures for Conducting Biomonitoring on Fish Communities in Wadeable Streams in Georgia”. All of the water quality parameters at all sites were within the typical ranges for streams although conductivity was somewhat high across the sites. Fish habitat scores ranged from 80 (Tributary to Oothkalooga Creek) to 132.7 (Oothkalooga Creek). Native fish species richness ranged from 6 species (Tributary to Oothkalooga Creek) to 17 (Oothkalooga and Lynn Creeks). Index of biotic integrity (IBI) scores ranged from 16 (Tributary to Oothkalooga Creek; “Very Poor”) to 34 (Lynn Creek; “Fair”). Overall, the results demonstrate that Oothkalooga and Lynn Creeks are in fair condition whereas the Tributary to Oothkalooga Creek is highly impaired. Although the data are only a snapshot of stream conditions during the sampling events, they provide a biological characterization from which to evaluate the effect of future changes in water quality and watershed management in Calhoun. We recommend continued monitoring of stream sites throughout the area to ensure that the future ecological health of Calhoun’s water resources is maintained.