DOCSLIB.ORG

TABLE 2 Freshwater Mussels and Snails Recorded on Cahaba River

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
TABLE 2 Freshwater Mussels and Snails Recorded on Cahaba River UNITED STATES FISH AND WilDLIFE SERVICE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION STATEMENT Within the spirit and intent of the Council on Environmental Quality's regulations for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and other statutes, orders, and policies that protect fish and wildlife resources, I have established the following administrative record and determined that the proposed Habitat Management Plan for Cahaba River National Wildlife Refuge in Bibb County, Alabama: Check One: is a categorical exclusion as provided by 516 OM 2, Appendix 1 and 516 OM 6, Appendix 1, Section 1.4 A (4). No further NEPA documentation will therefore be made. x is found not to have significant environmental effects as determined by the attached Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact. is found to have significant effects and, therefore, further consideration of this action will require a notice of intent to be published in the Federal Register announcing the decision to prepare an EIS. is not approved because of unacceptable environmental damage, or violation of Fish and Wildlife Service mandates, policy, regulations, or procedures. is an emergency action within the context of 40 CFR 1 506.1 1. Only those actions necessary to control the immediate impacts of the emergency will be taken. Other related actions remain subject to NEPA review. Other Supportinq Documents: Endangered Species Act, Section 7 Consultation, 2007 Siqnature Approval: ~-=SU1 c 1t/7 ':;/'f/tl; (1) Originator Date (2)£Se'gionalEnvironmental °0~/C77ate Coordinator ~~--- --~\b~ (3) RegiOnal~ N gional Director, Date Southeast RegionWRS, ~ate outheast Region CAHABA RIVER NATIONAL WILDLIFEREFUGE ~ ~ iii !l!m~.~ , ~ .~-~: ... ;:;:p Cf -'"' ~, - .~ :E' . ~ HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN ;5#1 4 1t~f 0/~:h 7 ~7YJ ~ .sfU6? (1) RefugeManager Date (2) Refuge SUDervisor ~ ~ MountainLongleafNWR Area 2 ~c4 )1; f/ c7 (3) Resource Management Date (4YChief - Divisionof Refuges SoutheastRegion FISH&~ 8EBVJCE ~ -w ~ May 2007 1.0 Introduction.................................................................................................................. 2 1.1 Planning Process................................................................................................................................2 1.2 Cahaba River National Wildlife Refuge .......................................................................................... 3 1.3 Refuge Vision ..................................................................................................................................... 4 1.4 Biodiversity ........................................................................................................................................ 4 1.5 Habitat Management Plan................................................................................................................ 5 2.0 Environmental Setting and Background ...................................................................... 7 2.1 Location.............................................................................................................................................. 7 2.2 Management Units............................................................................................................................. 7 2.3 Physical Features............................................................................................................................... 7 2.3.1 Geology ........................................................................................................................................ 7 2.3.2 Topography................................................................................................................................... 8 2.3.3 Hydrology..................................................................................................................................... 8 2.3.4 Soils............................................................................................................................................... 8 2.4 History of Refuge Lands ................................................................................................................... 9 2.4.1 Prehistoric Land Use (Native American to 1814)......................................................................... 9 2.4.2 Historical Land Use (1814-2002) ............................................................................................... 10 2.4.3 Refuge (2003-Present)................................................................................................................. 11 3.0 Resources of Concern ................................................................................................ 12 3.1 Refuge Natural Communities .......................................................................................................... 12 3.1.1 Terrestrial Communities .............................................................................................................. 12 3.1.2 Mountain Longleaf Pine Forest Region...................................................................................... 13 3.1.3 Natural Community Descriptions............................................................................................... 15 3.1.4 Aquatic Communities ................................................................................................................. 24 3.1.5 Biota ........................................................................................................................................... 26 3.2 Federally Listed Species.................................................................................................................. 32 3.3 Exotic Species.................................................................................................................................... 37 4.0 Habitat Management Goals........................................................................................ 42 5.0 Habitat Management Strategies and Objectives ........................................................ 44 GOAL 1 ................................................................................................................................................... 45 Participate in regional and cooperative efforts for water quality improvement and ecological restoration of the Cahaba River aquatic system.................................................................................. 45 GOAL 2 ................................................................................................................................................... 49 Protect, restore and enhance the Cahaba River aquatic environment adjacent to the refuge ........ 49 GOAL 3 ................................................................................................................................................... 51 Provide an ecosystem management strategy for uplands that restores and maintains the mosaic cover of native pine and hardwood forest. ........................................................................................... 51 GOAL 4 ................................................................................................................................................... 53 Reestablish a recurring fire regime through prescribed burning to approximate conditions occurring in presettlement forests......................................................................................................... 53 GOAL 5 ................................................................................................................................................... 57 Restore longleaf pine and associated upland communities, where possible, to a condition that can be maintained through prescribed burning. ........................................................................................ 57 GOAL 6 ................................................................................................................................................... 60 Manage wetland, streamside and hardwood forests as a component of the mountain longleaf pine ecosystem................................................................................................................................................. 60 GOAL 7 ................................................................................................................................................... 61 Manage the refuge as part of the regional landscape, while minimizing forest fragmentation and disturbed edge habitat within the refuge boundaries.......................................................................... 61 GOAL 8 ................................................................................................................................................... 64 i Inventory, protect and manage rare, endangered, threatened and sensitive species and natural communities. ........................................................................................................................................... 64 GOAL 9 ................................................................................................................................................... 67 Inventory and control exotic and invasive species............................................................................... 67 GOAL 10 ................................................................................................................................................. 70 Maintain and restore native
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Part IV: Scoring Criteria for the Index of Biotic Integrity to Monitor
    Part IV: Scoring Criteria for the Index of Biotic Integrity to Monitor Fish Communities in Wadeable Streams in the Coosa and Tennessee Drainage Basins of the Ridge and Valley Ecoregion of Georgia Georgia Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Resources Division Fisheries Management Section 2020 Table of Contents Introduction………………………………………………………………… ……... Pg. 1 Map of Ridge and Valley Ecoregion………………………………..……............... Pg. 3 Table 1. State Listed Fish in the Ridge and Valley Ecoregion……………………. Pg. 4 Table 2. IBI Metrics and Scoring Criteria………………………………………….Pg. 5 References………………………………………………….. ………………………Pg. 7 Appendix 1…………………………………………………………………. ………Pg. 8 Coosa Basin Group (ACT) MSR Graphs..………………………………….Pg. 9 Tennessee Basin Group (TEN) MSR Graphs……………………………….Pg. 17 Ridge and Valley Ecoregion Fish List………………………………………Pg. 25 i Introduction The Ridge and Valley ecoregion is one of the six Level III ecoregions found in Georgia (Part 1, Figure 1). It is drained by two major river basins, the Coosa and the Tennessee, in the northwestern corner of Georgia. The Ridge and Valley ecoregion covers nearly 3,000 square miles (United States Census Bureau 2000) and includes all or portions of 10 counties (Figure 1), bordering the Piedmont ecoregion to the south and the Blue Ridge ecoregion to the east. A small portion of the Southwestern Appalachians ecoregion is located in the upper northwestern corner of the Ridge and Valley ecoregion. The biotic index developed by the GAWRD is based on Level III ecoregion delineations (Griffith et al. 2001). The metrics and scoring criteria adapted to the Ridge and Valley ecoregion were developed from biomonitoring samples collected in the two major river basins that drain the Ridge and Valley ecoregion, the Coosa (ACT) and the Tennessee (TEN).
    [Show full text]
  • Diets and Diet Overlap of Nonindigenous Gobies and Small Benthic Native Fishes Co-Inhabiting the St. Clair River, Michigan
    J. Great Lakes Res. 27(3):300–311 Internat. Assoc. Great Lakes Res., 2001 Diets and Diet Overlap of Nonindigenous Gobies and Small Benthic Native Fishes Co-inhabiting the St. Clair River, Michigan John R. P. French III1 and David J. Jude2,* 1U.S. Geological Survey Biological Resources Division Great Lakes Science Center 1451 Green Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105 2Center for Great Lakes and Aquatic Sciences University of Michigan 501 East University Ave. Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-1090 ABSTRACT. Round gobies (Neogobius melanostomus), after successfully reproducing in the early 1990s, decimated populations of mottled sculpins (Cottus bairdi) and possibly logperch (Percina caprodes) in the St. Clair River. Studies were conducted during 1994 to determine whether diets of round and tubenose (Proterorhinus marmoratus) gobies overlapped with those of native forage fishes. In the nearshore zone (depth ≤ 1 m), round and tubenose gobies, logperch, and rainbow darters (Etheostoma caeruleum) of similar sizes (total lengths < 75 mm) consumed mainly small-sized macroinvertebrates (dipterans, Caenis, and amphipods) during June 1994. Logperch and rainbow darters were present in the nearshore zone only during this month. At the crest of the channel slope (depth = 3 m), round gobies and northern madtoms (Noturus stigmosus) ate mostly ephemeropteran nymphs (Hexagenia and Baetisca), while predation on zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) and other mollusks by round gobies was mini- mal. Northern madtoms did not feed on mollusks. Diet overlap between round gobies and native fishes was not observed at the channel slope (depth = 5 m and 7 m) due to heavy predation on mollusks by round gobies. Young-of-the-year (YOY) round gobies migrated to deeper water in autumn and became prey of mottled sculpins and northern madtoms.
    [Show full text]
  • 1997 State and Regional Reports
    1997 Report of Region 1 - Northeast Dr. Moxostoma, otherwise known as Bob Jenkins of Roanoke College, has about 14 manuscripts planned on this group. One of the earliest will be a synthesis of anatomy and a key to the 30- species Moxostoma group. He studied nearly all species in 1996 to have comparable amounts of data (much new) for all taxa. The tentatively named Carolina redhorse, new species, clearly is sister to the golden redhorse, M. erythrurum. It is known only from the Carolinas. Five specimens are known from the Pee Dee drainage, all from the Fall Zone (at Blewett Falls Dam) to the middle coastal plain (I-95 bridge). This species is extremely rare in the Pee Dee River, such that it seems not useful to purposefully search for it there. All of the large amount of boat- shocking conducted in the Pee Dee River during 1992-96 (in search of the robust redhorse) yielded two of the four river specimens; the other two were taken in 1979-89. The other Pee Dee drainage specimen is a juvenile from the lower reach of a Fall Zone tributary in 1961. From the Cape Fear drainage, by early 1996 four specimens were known from and near the Fall Zone, from upper Cape Fear and lower Deep and Haw rivers. In two days of May 1996, Wayne Starnes, Gerald Potter, NCWRC personnel with two shockerboats and Jenkins captured 12 Carolina redhorses. They also saw them spawning. Jenkins and Starnes will author the analysis of the two-species erythrurum group. Jenkins and Starnes also plan to complete the systematic study, started with the late Ernie Lachner, of the Atlantic slope barbeled species of Cyprinella.
    [Show full text]
  • * This Is an Excerpt from Protected Animals of Georgia Published By
    Common name: CONASAUGA LOGPERCH Scientific Name: Percina jenkinsi Thompson Other Commonly Used Names: none Previously Used Scientific Names: Percina caprodes Family: Percidae Rarity Ranks: G1/S1 State Legal Status: Endangered Federal Legal Status: Endangered Description: A large darter reaching a maximum of 140 mm (5.5 in) in total length, the Conasauga logperch has a conical snout and narrow vertical bars on the sides. Eight dark bars extend ventrally below the lateral line, and narrower half- and quarter-length bars separate these primary bars. The width of these primary bars is always much less than the lighter colored space between the primary bars and the half-length bar. There is a dark bar extending below the eye, a large spot at the base of the caudal fin, and light banding on the dorsal and caudal fins. Similar Species: This fish is distinguishable from the co-occurring Mobile logperch (Percina kathae) in lacking a red or orange band on the first dorsal fin and by having numerous, narrow vertical bars overlying the tan upper body. The width of the primary bars in the Mobile logperch is usually equal to or a little greater than the tan spaces between the primary bar and the secondary bar. Habitat: The Conasauga logperch inhabits riffles and runs in the main channel of the Conasauga River, generally occurring at water depths greater than 0.5 m (1.6 ft) with swift current (often greater than 0.5 m/sec or 1.6 ft/sec) over cobble and gravel. Diet: Aquatic invertebrates. Life History: The Conasauga logperch often finds its prey by using its conical "pig-like" snout to turn over rocks on the stream bottom (a behavior also employed by other species of logperches, Percina spp.).
    [Show full text]
  • Laboratory Operations Manual Version 2.0 May 2014
    United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water Washington, DC EPA 841‐B‐12‐010 National Rivers and Streams Assessment 2013‐2014 Laboratory Operations Manual Version 2.0 May 2014 2013‐2014 National Rivers & Streams Assessment Laboratory Operations Manual Version 1.3, May 2014 Page ii of 224 NOTICE The intention of the National Rivers and Streams Assessment 2013‐2014 is to provide a comprehensive “State of Flowing Waters” assessment for rivers and streams across the United States. The complete documentation of overall project management, design, methods, quality assurance, and standards is contained in five companion documents: National Rivers and Streams Assessment 2013‐14: Quality Assurance Project Plan EPA‐841‐B‐12‐007 National Rivers and Streams Assessment 2013‐14: Site Evaluation Guidelines EPA‐841‐B‐12‐008 National Rivers and Streams Assessment 2013‐14: Non‐Wadeable Field Operations Manual EPA‐841‐B‐ 12‐009a National Rivers and Streams Assessment 2013‐14: Wadeable Field Operations Manual EPA‐841‐B‐12‐ 009b National Rivers and Streams Assessment 2013‐14: Laboratory Operations Manual EPA 841‐B‐12‐010 Addendum to the National Rivers and Streams Assessment 2013‐14: Wadeable & Non‐Wadeable Field Operations Manuals This document (Laboratory Operations Manual) contains information on the methods for analyses of the samples to be collected during the project, quality assurance objectives, sample handling, and data reporting. These methods are based on the guidelines developed and followed in the Western Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (Peck et al. 2003). Methods described in this document are to be used specifically in work relating to the NRSA 2013‐2014.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to the Fish of Turkey Creek
    An Identification Guide to the Fishes of Turkey Creek Preserve, Jefferson County, Alabama Dr. R. Scot Duncan Department of Biology Birmingham-Southern College Box 549022 900 Arkadelphia Rd. Birmingham, AL 35254 USA Ph: (205) 226-4777 Email: [email protected] 2 Fishes collected at Turkey Creek, Jeff. Co, AL. List provided by Dr. Mike Howell of Samford University. Cyprinidae: Semotilus atromaculatus - creek chub Campostoma oligolepis - fine-scale stoneroller Notropis stilbius - silverstripe shiner Luxilus chrysocephalus - striped shiner Cyprinella venusta - blacktail shiner Fundulidae: Fundulus olivaceus - blackspotted topminnow Poeciliidae: Gambusia affinis - mosquitofish Catostomidae: Hypentelium etowanum - Alabama hogsucker Moxostoma duquesnei - black redhorse Moxostoma erythrurum - golden redhorse Percidae: Percina nigrofasciata - Blackbanded darter Percina kathae - Mobile logperch Etheostoma stigmaeum - Speckled darter Etheostoma jordani - Bluebreast darter (now Etheostoma douglasi) Etheostoma whipplei - Eastern Redfin darter *Etheostoma chermocki - Vermilion darter ^Etheostoma phytophilum - Rush darter *Etheostoma nuchale - Watercress darter (introduced by Dr. Howell during 1986 from Roebuck Springs) Centrarchidae: Lepomis cyanellus - Green sunfish Lepomis macrochirus - Bluegill Lepomis microlophus - Redear sunfish Micropterus salmoides - Largemouth bass Micropterus punctulatus - Spotted bass Micropterus coosae - Redeye bass Cottidae: Cottus carolinae – Banded Sculpin * listed by U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service as Endangered ^ a candidate species for Federal listing as endangered 3 Description of Fish Families: Use these descriptions and the pictures to determine to which family your specimen belongs. Then study the images and descriptions of species in that family to identify your specimen. Family: Cyprinidae (Minnows). These active small fish are often swimming at or near the surface. They often are found in shallow riffles with rocky or stone bottom. Many species of “shiners” are in this family.
    [Show full text]
  • Stream Design and Assessment Tools for the Piedmont of Alabama, USA
    Water 2016, 8, 161 S1 of S7 Supplementary Materials: Development of Ecogeomorphological (EGM) Stream Design and Assessment Tools for the Piedmont of Alabama, USA Brian Helms, Jason Zink, David Werneke, Tom Hess, Zan Price, Greg Jennings and Eve Brantley Table S1. Fish species encountered in 2011 sampling. Family Species Common Name Anguillidae Anguilla rostrata American Eel Catostomidae Erimyzon oblongus Creek Chubsucker Hypentelium etowanum Alabama Hog Sucker Minytrema melanops Spotted Sucker Moxostoma duquesnei Black Redhorse Moxostoma erythrurum Golden Redhorse Moxostoma poecilurum Blacktail Redhorse Centrarchidae Ambloplites ariommus Shadow Bass Lepomis auritus Redbreast Sunfish Lepomis cyanellus Green Sunfish Lepomis gulosus Warmouth Lepomis macrochirus Bluegill Lepomis megalotis Longear Sunfish Lepomis miniatus Spotted Sunfish Micropterus coosae Redeye Bass Micropterus henshalli Alabama Spotted Bass Micropterus salmoides Largemouth Bass Cottidae Cottus carolinae Banded Sculpin Cottus tallapoosae Tallapoosa Sculpin Cyprinidae Campostoma oligolepis Largescale Stoneroller Cyprinella callistia Alabama Shiner Cyprinella gibbsi Tallapoosa Shiner Cyprinella venusta Blacktail Shiner Hybopsis lineapunctata Lined Chub Luxilus chrysocephalus Striped Shiner Lythrurus bellus Pretty Shiner Macrhybopsis storeriana Silver Chub Nocomis leptocephalus Bluehead Chub Notropis ammophilus Orangefin Shiner Notropis baileyi Rough Shiner Notropis stilbius Silverstripe Shiner Notropis texanus Weed shiner Notropis xaenocephalus Coosa Shiner Phenacobius catostomus
    [Show full text]
  • NRSA 2013/14 Field Operations Manual Appendices (Pdf)
    National Rivers and Streams Assessment 2013/14 Field Operations Manual Version 1.1, April 2013 Appendix A: Equipment & Supplies Appendix Equipment A: & Supplies A-1 National Rivers and Streams Assessment 2013/14 Field Operations Manual Version 1.1, April 2013 pendix Equipment A: & Supplies Ap A-2 National Rivers and Streams Assessment 2013/14 Field Operations Manual Version 1.1, April 2013 Base Kit: A Base Kit will be provided to the field crews for all sampling sites that they will go to. Some items are sent in the base kit as extra supplies to be used as needed. Item Quantity Protocol Antibiotic Salve 1 Fish plug Centrifuge tube stand 1 Chlorophyll A Centrifuge tubes (screw-top, 50-mL) (extras) 5 Chlorophyll A Periphyton Clinometer 1 Physical Habitat CST Berger SAL 20 Automatic Level 1 Physical Habitat Delimiter – 12 cm2 area 1 Periphyton Densiometer - Convex spherical (modified with taped V) 1 Physical Habitat D-frame Kick Net (500 µm mesh, 52” handle) 1 Benthics Filteration flask (with silicone stopped and adapter) 1 Enterococci, Chlorophyll A, Periphyton Fish weigh scale(s) 1 Fish plug Fish Voucher supplies 1 pack Fish Voucher Foil squares (aluminum, 3x6”) 1 pack Chlorophyll A Periphyton Gloves (nitrile) 1 box General Graduated cylinder (25 mL) 1 Periphyton Graduated cylinder (250 mL) 1 Chlorophyll A, Periphyton HDPE bottle (1 L, white, wide-mouth) (extras) 12 Benthics, Fish Vouchers HDPE bottle (500 mL, white, wide-mouth) with graduations 1 Periphyton Laboratory pipette bulb 1 Fish Plug Microcentrifuge tubes containing glass beads
    [Show full text]
  • Pteronotropis Welaka), with NOTES on the OCCURRENCE of the IRONCOLOR SHINER (Notropis Chalybaeus), in ALABAMA, 2007
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF ALABAMA Berry H. (Nick) Tew State Geologist WATER INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM Patrick E. O’Neil Director STATUS SURVEY OF THE BLUENOSE SHINER (Pteronotropis welaka), WITH NOTES ON THE OCCURRENCE OF THE IRONCOLOR SHINER (Notropis chalybaeus), IN ALABAMA, 2007 OPEN-FILE REPORT 0712 By J. Brett Smith, Thomas E. Shepard, Patrick E. O’Neil, E. Anne Wynn, and Cal C. Johnson Prepared in cooperation with Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Division of Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries Tuscaloosa, Alabama 2008 CONTENTS Page Abstract..................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction............................................................................................................................... 1 Acknowledgments..................................................................................................................... 5 Study area.................................................................................................................................. 5 Methods..................................................................................................................................... 6 Results and discussion .............................................................................................................. 6 Conclusions............................................................................................................................... 11 References cited.......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Diversity, Distribution, and Conservation Status of the Native Freshwater Fishes of the Southern United States by Melvin L
    CONSERVATION m Diversity, Distribution, and Conservation Status of the Native Freshwater Fishes of the Southern United States By Melvin L. Warren, Jr., Brooks M. Burr, Stephen J. Walsh, Henry L. Bart, Jr., Robert C. Cashner, David A. Etnier, Byron J. Freeman, Bernard R. Kuhajda, Richard L. Mayden, Henry W. Robison, Stephen T. Ross, and Wayne C. Starnes ABSTRACT The Southeastern Fishes Council Technical Advisory Committee reviewed the diversity, distribution, and status of all native freshwater and diadromous fishes across 51 major drainage units of the southern United States. The southern United States supports more native fishes than any area of comparable size on the North American continent north of Mexico, but also has a high proportion of its fishes in need of conservation action. The review included 662 native freshwater and diadromous fishes and 24 marine fishes that are significant components of freshwater ecosystems. Of this total, 560 described, freshwater fish species are documented, and 49 undescribed species are included provisionally pending formal description. Described subspecies (86) are recognized within 43 species, 6 fishes have undescribed sub- species, and 9 others are recognized as complexes of undescribed taxa. Extinct, endangered, threatened, or vulnerable status is recognized for 28% (187 taxa) of southern freshwater and diadromous fishes. To date, 3 southern fishes are known to be extinct throughout their ranges, 2 are extirpated from the study region, and 2 others may be extinct. Of the extant southern fishes, 41 (6%) are regarded as endangered, 46 (7%) are regarded as threatened, and 101 (15%) are regarded as vulnerable. Five marine fishes that frequent fresh water are regarded as vulnerable.
    [Show full text]
  • Fall 98 Pdf Version Part 1
    S o M any F ishes, S o L ittle T ime: A Report from the 1998 NANFA A nnual M eeting in C hattanooga ~~~~~~~ by C hristopher S charpf 1107 Argonne Drive, Baltimore, MD 21202, [email protected] To paraphrase Charles Dickens, “It was the best of Six Terrific Speakers, Six Terrific Talks times, it was the best of times.” In every way possible, the 1998 NANFA Day one began at 8:00 am in the Board Room of Annual Meeting, June 5-7 in Chattanooga, Tennessee the Tennessee Aquarium’s IMAX® Theater building. —dubbed Fish Heads ’98 by organizer Casper Cox— We mingled over coffee and breakfast, most of us was the best annual meeting NANFA has ever had. meeting for the first time fellow NANFA members It was also the biggest. Twenty-two NANFA mem- we knew only from over the phone or E-mail. I bers were in attendance (including two from as finally got to meet Maurice (Scott) Mettee, with far away as Arizona), as well as a half-dozen whom I collaborated (via E-mail) on an article spouses, guests and special invitees. It was a on pygmy sunfishes (American Currents,Feb. fun-filled, educational weekend of fish, fellow- 1998). He autographed my copy of his won- ship, fish, food, and more fish. derful book, Fishes of Alabama and the Mobile The only negative comment to be heard Basin. David Etnier autographed his book, was that there wasn’t enough time to see and the definitive Fishes of Tennessee. do everything to its fullest.
    [Show full text]
  • ALABAMA MOCCASINSHELL Scientific Name: Medionidus
    Alabama moccasinshell (Medionidus acutissimus) 47 mm (1 inches). Conasauga River, Bradley Co., Tennessee. Photo by Jason Wisniewski, GA DNR. Specimen provided by the McClung Museum courtesy of Gerry Dinkins. Common Name: ALABAMA MOCCASINSHELL Scientific Name: Medionidus acutissimus Lea Other Commonly Used Names: none Previously Used Scientific Names: none Family: Unionidae Rarity Ranks: G2/S1 State Legal Status: Threatened Federal Legal Status: Threatened Description: Shell profile is subrhomboidal to elliptical in outline. Shell is rather delicate with a maximum length of approximately 55 mm (2¼ inches). Anterior margin broadly rounded while posterior margin is pointed and terminates near the posterioventral margin. Ventral margin is straight to slightly arcuate. Umbos positioned anterior of the middle of the valves and elevated slightly above the hingeline. Posterior ridge is sharply developed with well developed corrugations present on the posterior slope. The periostracum dull to glossy and yellow to green with fine irregularly shaped dark rays radiating from the umbo to the margin of the shell. Pseudocardinal teeth are short and triangular while lateral teeth are slightly curved. Umbo cavity shallow. Nacre color varies from white to salmon. Similar Species: Coosa moccasinshell (Medionidus parvulus). The Alabama moccasinshell and Coosa moccasinshell may be difficult to distinguish from one another. However, the Alabama moccasinshell typically has more pointed posterior terminus as well as a more angular posterior ridge than Coosa moccasinshell. Habitat: Typically occupies medium streams to large rivers with gravel substrates and swift flowing shoal areas. Diet: The diets of unionids are poorly understood but are believed to consist of algae and/or bacteria. Some studies suggest that diets may change throughout the life of a unionid with juveniles collecting organic materials from the substrate though pedal feeding and then developing the ability to filter feed during adulthood.
    [Show full text]