DOCSLIB.ORG

Threatened and Endangered Species List

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Threatened and Endangered Species List Effective April 15, 2009 - List is subject to revision For a complete list of Tennessee's Rare and Endangered Species, visit the Natural Areas website at http://tennessee.gov/environment/na/ Aquatic and Semi-aquatic Plants and Aquatic Animals with Protected Status State Federal Type Class Order Scientific Name Common Name Status Status Habit Amphibian Amphibia Anura Gyrinophilus gulolineatus Berry Cave Salamander T Amphibian Amphibia Anura Gyrinophilus palleucus Tennessee Cave Salamander T Crustacean Malacostraca Decapoda Cambarus bouchardi Big South Fork Crayfish E Crustacean Malacostraca Decapoda Cambarus cymatilis A Crayfish E Crustacean Malacostraca Decapoda Cambarus deweesae Valley Flame Crayfish E Crustacean Malacostraca Decapoda Cambarus extraneus Chickamauga Crayfish T Crustacean Malacostraca Decapoda Cambarus obeyensis Obey Crayfish T Crustacean Malacostraca Decapoda Cambarus pristinus A Crayfish E Crustacean Malacostraca Decapoda Cambarus williami "Brawley's Fork Crayfish" E Crustacean Malacostraca Decapoda Fallicambarus hortoni Hatchie Burrowing Crayfish E Crustacean Malocostraca Decapoda Orconectes incomptus Tennessee Cave Crayfish E Crustacean Malocostraca Decapoda Orconectes shoupi Nashville Crayfish E LE Crustacean Malocostraca Decapoda Orconectes wrighti A Crayfish E Fern and Fern Ally Filicopsida Polypodiales Dryopteris carthusiana Spinulose Shield Fern T Bogs Fern and Fern Ally Filicopsida Polypodiales Dryopteris cristata Crested Shield-Fern T FACW, OBL, Bogs Fern and Fern Ally Filicopsida Polypodiales Trichomanes boschianum Bristle-fern T OBL, Rocky seeps Fern and Fern Ally Lycopodiopsida Isoetales Isoetes melanopoda Blackfoot Quillwort E OBL, Wet fields Fern and Fern Ally Lycopodiopsida Isoetales Isoetes tennesseensis Hiwassee Quillwort E OBL, Rocky riverbanks Fern and Fern Ally Lycopodiopsida Lycopodiales Lycopodiella alopecuroides Foxtail Clubmoss T OBL, Wet acidic barrens Fern and Fern Ally Filicopsida Polypodiales Thelypteris simulata Bog Fern E-P FACW, Acidic marshes and bogs Fish Actinopterygii Acipenseriformes Acipenser fulvescens Lake Sturgeon E Fish Actinopterygii Acipenseriformes Scaphirhynchus albus Pallid Sturgeon E LE Fish Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cycleptus elongatus Blue Sucker T Fish Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinella caerulea Blue Shiner E LT Fish Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinella monacha Spotfin Chub T LT,XN, PXN Fish Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Erimonax monachus Spotfin Chub T LT Fish Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Erimystax cahni Slender Chub T LT Fish Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Fundulus julisia Barrens Topminnow E Fish Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Notropis albizonatus Palezone Shiner LE Fish Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Notropis buccatus Silverjaw Minnow T Fish Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Phoxinus cumberlandensis Blackside Dace T LT Fish Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Phoxinus saylori Laurel Dace E State Federal Type Class Order Scientific Name Common Name Status Status Habit Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Ammocrypta clara Western Sand Darter T Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Etheostoma aquali Coppercheek Darter T Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Etheostoma boschungi Slackwater Darter T LT Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Etheostoma brevirostrum Holiday (=ellijay) Darter T Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Etheostoma cinereum Ashy Darter T Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Etheostoma corona Crown Darter E Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Etheostoma ditrema Coldwater Darter T Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Etheostoma forbesi Barrens Darter E Etheostoma blennioides Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes gutselli Tuckasegee Darter E Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Etheostoma percnurum Duskytail Darter E LE,XN Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Etheostoma pseudovulatum Egg-mimic Darter E Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Etheostoma sp. D Jewel Darter (Doration) E LE Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Etheostoma striatulum Striated Darter T Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Etheostoma susanae Cumberland Johnny Darter E Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Etheostoma trisella Trispot Darter T Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Etheostoma wapiti Boulder Darter E LE, XN Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Percina antesella Amber Darter E LE Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Percina jenkinsi Conasauga (=reticulate) Logperch E LE Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Percina macrocephala Longhead Darter T Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Percina tanasi Snail Darter T LT Fish Actinopterygii Perciformes Percina williamsi Sickle Darter T Fish Actinopterygii Siluriformes Noturus baileyi Smoky Madtom E LE,XN Fish Actinopterygii Siluriformes Noturus sp. 4 Chucky Madtom E Fish Actinopterygii Siluriformes Noturus sp. 3 Saddled Madtom T Fish Actinopterygii Siluriformes Noturus flavipinnis Yellowfin Madtom E LT,XN Fish Actinopterygii Siluriformes Noturus munitus Frecklebelly Madtom T Fish Actinopterygii Siluriformes Noturus stanauli Pygmy Madtom E LE Flowering Plant Liliopsida Alismatales Sagittaria brevirostra Short-beaked Arrrowhead T OBL, Swamps and floodplains Flowering Plant Liliopsida Alismatales Sagittaria graminea Grassleaf Arrowhead T OBL, Ponds and stream margins Flowering Plant Liliopsida Arales Symplocarpus foetidus Skunk-cabbage E OBL, Swamps and bogs OBL, Margins of ponds, bogs, and Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cummelinales Xyris ambigua Coastal Plain Yelow-eyed Grass E ditches Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cummelinales Xyris fimbriata Fringed Yellow-eyed Grass E OBL, Acidic ponds State Federal Type Class Order Scientific Name Common Name Status Status Habit Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cummelinales Xyris laxifolia var. iridifolia Wide-leaved Yellow-eyed Grass T Pond margins and marshes Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cummelinales Xyris tennesseensis Tennessee Yellow-eyed Grass E LE Seeps, Springs Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Carex alopecoidea Foxtail Sedge E-P Wet meadows and swamps Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Carex barrattii Barratt's sedge E OBL, swamps Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Carex bromoides ssp. montana Blue Ridge Brome Sedge T FACW, mountain bogs and seeps Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Carex buxbaumii Brown Bog Sedge T OBL, Swamps Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Carex chapmanii Chapman's Sedge T FACW, wet woods Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Carex comosa Bristly Sedge T OBL, swamps Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Carex lacustris Lake-bank Sedge T OBL, alluvial woods Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Carex muskingumensis Muskingum Sedge E-P OBL, wet woods OBL, Alluvial forests and upland Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Carex pellita Wooly Sedge E pastures Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Carex sterilis Sterile Sedge E-P OBL, wet calcareous woods Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Carex utriculata Beaked Sedge T OBL, acidic swamps Dichanthelium ensifolium ssp. Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales curtifolium Short-Leaved Panic Grass E Boggy areas Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Eleocharis equisetoides Horse-tail Spike-rush E OBL, Pond edges and open wetlands Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Eleocharis intermedia Matted Spike-Rush E FACW, Wet areas Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Eriophorum virginicum Tawny Cotton-grass E OBL, Bogs Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Fimbristylis puberula Hairy Fimbristylis T OBL, Wet prairies and woods Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Glyceria nubigena Smoky Mountains Mannagrass T OBL, Mountain Balds and open seeps Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Muhlenbergia torreyana Torrey's Dropseed E FACW, Oak barren bogs Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Rhynchospora alba White Beakrush E-P OBL, Bogs Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Rhynchospora capillacea Horned Beakrush E-P OBL, Limestone creek banks Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Rhynchospora chalarocephala Loose-headed Beakrush T OBL, Wet Barrens Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Rhynchospora latifolia Giant White-Top Sedge E-P FACW+, Wet Barrens Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Rhynchospora perplexa Obscure Beak-rush T OBL, Marshes, wet barrens Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Rhynchospora rariflora Few-flowered Beak-rush E OBL, Swamps and bogs Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Rhynchospora wrightiana Wright's Beakrush E-P OBL, Wet pine barrens Flowering Plant Liliopsida Cyperales Trichophorum cespitosum Tufted Club-rush E Mountain Bogs Flowering Plant Liliopsida Eriocaulales Eriocaulon decangulare Ten-angle Pipewort E OBL, Acidic wetlands State Federal Type Class Order Scientific Name Common Name Status Status Habit Flowering Plant Liliopsida Eriocaulales Lachnocaulon anceps Bog-buttons E-P OBL, Acidic open wetlands Flowering Plant Liliopsida Liliales Heteranthera limosa Blue Mud-plantain T OBL, Mud flats Flowering Plant Liliopsida Liliales Iris brevicaulis Lamance Iris E OBL, Bottomlands Flowering Plant Liliopsida Liliales Iris fulva Copper Iris T OBL, Bottomlands Flowering Plant Liliopsida Liliales Iris prismatica Slender Blue Flag Iris T OBL, Wet barrens Flowering Plant Liliopsida Liliales Lachnanthes caroliana Carolina Redroot E OBL, Acidic wetlands and barrens Flowering Plant Liliopsida Liliales Lilium canadense Canada Lily T FAC/FACW, Rich woods and seeps Flowering Plant Liliopsida Liliales Melanthium virginicum Virginia Bunchflower E OBL, Wet woods and fields Flowering Plant Liliopsida Liliales Schoenolirion croceum Yellow Sunnybell T OBL, Wet areas in glades Flowering Plant Liliopsida Liliales Triantha racemosa Coastal False-asphodel E OBL, Wet barrens Flowering Plant Liliopsida Liliales Zigadenus leimanthoides Death-camas
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Species Status Assessment Report for the Barrens Darter (Etheostoma Forbesi)
    Species Status Assessment Report for the Barrens Darter (Etheostoma forbesi) Version 2.0 Acknowledgements: This Species Status Assessment would not have been possible without the research and assistance of Dr. Richard Harrington, Yale University Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Dr. Hayden Mattingly and his students, Tennessee Tech University School of Environmental Studies, Dr. John Johansen, Austin Peay State University Department of Biology, and Mark Thurman, Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................................... 3 Chapter 2: Biology and Life History ........................................................................................... 4 Taxonomy ................................................................................................................................ 4 Genetic Diversity ..................................................................................................................... 5 Morphological Description ...................................................................................................... 5 Habitat ..................................................................................................................................... 6 Lifecycle .................................................................................................................................. 7 Population Needs ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CRAYFISH IDENTIFICATION with DICHOTOMOUS KEYS As The
    CRAYFISH IDENTIFICATION WITH DICHOTOMOUS KEYS As the name implies, a dichotomous key includes a series of paired choices called couplets. Each couplet contains alternative identification characteristics that allow you to advance step by step through the key, until you reach an endpoint (species). Once you reach your endpoint, read through the associated species account, and review the range map to make sure it fits what you found. If after reviewing the account and the map, you think you reached the species in error, go back to the key, and think about where you had to make a difficult decision on which way to proceed in the key. Then, try the opposite choice to see if it leads you to a better answer. When starting out, using dichotomous keys can be frustrating. Sometimes the characteristics presented in the key are straightforward, while other times the differences are extremely subtle. Seldom will every characteristic presented in a couplet match your specimen exactly. Be patient, choose the “best” answer, and as mentioned above, be ready to try alternative routes within the key. Keep in mind also that the photo included within a given species account represents a single, clean individual. There will often be variability in color and size depending on the sex and age class of the individual you are attempting to identify. You will see a good example of this when you are using one of the keys where Cambarus latimanus is present. The common name of this species is Variable Crayfish, and the name is fitting. This species is so variable that in some keys it appears in two places.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Funding (Total $2,552,481) $15,000 2019
    CURRICULUM VITAE TENNESSEE AQUARIUM CONSERVATION INSTITUTE 175 BAYLOR SCHOOL RD CHATTANOOGA, TN 37405 RESEARCH FUNDING (TOTAL $2,552,481) $15,000 2019. Global Wildlife Conservation. Rediscovering the critically endangered Syr-Darya Shovelnose Sturgeon. $10,000 2019. Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency. Propagation of the Common Logperch as a host for endangered mussel larvae. $8,420 2019. Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency. Monitoring for the Laurel Dace. $4,417 2019. Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency. Examining interactions between Laurel Dace (Chrosomus saylori) and sunfish $12,670 2019. Trout Unlimited. Southern Appalachian Brook Trout propagation for reintroduction to Shell Creek. $106,851 2019. Private Donation. Microplastic accumulation in fishes of the southeast. $1,471. 2019. AZFA-Clark Waldram Conservation Grant. Mayfly propagation for captive propagation programs. $20,000. 2019. Tennessee Valley Authority. Assessment of genetic diversity within Blotchside Logperch. $25,000. 2019. Riverview Foundation. Launching Hidden Rivers in the Southeast. $11,170. 2018. Trout Unlimited. Propagation of Southern Appalachian Brook Trout for Supplemental Reintroduction. $1,471. 2018. AZFA Clark Waldram Conservation Grant. Climate Change Impacts on Headwater Stream Vertebrates in Southeastern United States $1,000. 2018. Hamilton County Health Department. Step 1 Teaching Garden Grants for Sequoyah School Garden. $41,000. 2018. Riverview Foundation. River Teachers: Workshops for Educators. $1,000. 2018. Tennessee Valley Authority. Youth Freshwater Summit $20,000. 2017. Tennessee Valley Authority. Lake Sturgeon Propagation. $7,500 2017. Trout Unlimited. Brook Trout Propagation. $24,783. 2017. Tennessee Wildlife Resource Agency. Assessment of Percina macrocephala and Etheostoma cinereum populations within the Duck River Basin. $35,000. 2017. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Status surveys for conservation status of Ashy (Etheostoma cinereum) and Redlips (Etheostoma maydeni) Darters.
    [Show full text]
  • New Alien Crayfish Species in Central Europe
    NEW ALIEN CRAYFISH SPECIES IN CENTRAL EUROPE Introduction pathways, life histories, and ecological impacts DISSERTATION zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades Dr. rer. nat. der Fakultät für Naturwissenschaften der Universität Ulm vorgelegt von Christoph Chucholl aus Rosenheim Ulm 2012 NEW ALIEN CRAYFISH SPECIES IN CENTRAL EUROPE Introduction pathways, life histories, and ecological impacts DISSERTATION zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades Dr. rer. nat. der Fakultät für Naturwissenschaften der Universität Ulm vorgelegt von Christoph Chucholl aus Rosenheim Ulm 2012 Amtierender Dekan: Prof. Dr. Axel Groß Erstgutachter: Prof. Dr. Manfred Ayasse Zweitgutachter: Prof. apl. Dr. Gerhard Maier Tag der Prüfung: 16.7.2012 Cover picture: Orconectes immunis male (blue color morph) (photo courtesy of Dr. H. Bellmann) Table of contents Part 1 – Summary Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1 Invasive alien species – a global menace ....................................................................... 1 “Invasive” matters .......................................................................................................... 2 Crustaceans – successful invaders .................................................................................. 4 The case of alien crayfish in Europe .............................................................................. 5 New versus Old alien crayfish .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species Listing Deadline Complaint
    Case 1:16-cv-00503 Document 1 Filed 03/16/16 Page 1 of 25 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY, ) 378 North Main Avenue ) Tucson, AZ 85701, ) Civil No: 16-00503 ) Plaintiff, ) COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY ) AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF v. ) ) SALLY M.R. JEWELL, Secretary of the ) Interior, U.S. Department of the Interior ) 1849 C Street NW ) Washington, DC 20240, ) ) and ) ) U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, ) 1849 C Street NW ) Washington, DC 20240, ) ) Defendants. ) ______________________________________ ) INTRODUCTION 1. Plaintiff Center for Biological Diversity (“Center”) brings this action under the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1544 (“ESA”), to challenge the Secretary of the Interior’s (“Secretary”) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (“FWS”) (collectively, “Defendants” or “FWS”) failure to make mandatory findings on whether nine highly-imperiled species should be listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA. 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(3)(B). These species are: alligator snapping turtle (Macrochelys temminckii), Barrens topminnow (Fundulus julisia), beaverpond marstonia (Marstonia castor), California spotted owl (Strix occidentalis occidentalis), Canoe Creek pigtoe (Pleurobema athearni), foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii), Northern Rockies fisher (Martes pennanti), Virgin River spinedace Case 1:16-cv-00503 Document 1 Filed 03/16/16 Page 2 of 25 (Lepidomeda mollispinis mollispinis), and wood turtle (Macrochelys temminckii). Each of these species is experiencing steep population declines and ongoing threats to its existence. 2. To obtain federal safeguards and habitat protections, the Center and/or other conservation groups submitted to FWS petitions to list each of these nine species as “endangered” or “threatened” pursuant to the ESA.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Diversity and Population Structure in the Barrens Topminnow
    Conserv Genet DOI 10.1007/s10592-017-0984-0 RESEARCH ARTICLE Genetic diversity and population structure in the Barrens Topminnow (Fundulus julisia): implications for conservation and management of a critically endangered species Carla Hurt1 · Bernard Kuhajda2 · Alexis Harman1 · Natalie Ellis1 · Mary Nalan1 Received: 5 January 2017 / Accepted: 22 May 2017 © Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017 Abstract The Barrens Topminnow (Fundulus julisia) with drainage boundaries. Results from AMOVA analysis has undergone a rapid and dramatic decline. In the 1980s, also suggest low levels of genetic connectivity between at least twenty localities with Barrens Topminnows were isolated populations within the same drainage. Here we known to exist in the Barrens Plateau region of middle Ten- propose two distinct evolutionary significant units (ESUs) nessee; currently only three areas with natural (not stocked) and two management units that reflect this population sub- populations remain. The long-term survival of the Barrens structure and warrant consideration in future management Topminnow will depend entirely on effective management efforts. and conservation efforts. Captive propagation and stocking of captive-reared juveniles to suitable habitats have suc- Keywords Conservation genetics · Microsatellites · cessfully established a handful of self-sustaining popula- Mitochondrial DNA · Endangered species · Fundulus tions. However, very little is known about the genetic com- julisia position of source and introduced populations including levels of genetic diversity and structuring of genetic vari- ation. Here we use both mitochondrial sequence data and Introduction genotypes from 14 microsatellite loci to examine patterns of genetic variation among ten sites, including all sites The Barrens Topminnow (Fundulus julisia) is one of with natural populations and a subset of sites with intro- the most critically endangered fish species in the east- duced (stocked) populations of this species.
    [Show full text]
  • C:\Fish\Eastern Sand Darter Sa.Wpd
    EASTERN SAND DARTER STATUS ASSESSMENT Prepared by: David Grandmaison and Joseph Mayasich Natural Resources Research Institute University of Minnesota 5013 Miller Trunk Highway Duluth, MN 55811-1442 and David Etnier Ecology and Evolutionary Biology University of Tennessee 569 Dabney Hall Knoxville, TN 37996-1610 Prepared for: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 3 1 Federal Drive Fort Snelling, MN 55111 January 2004 NRRI Technical Report No. NRRI/TR-2003/40 DISCLAIMER This document is a compilation of biological data and a description of past, present, and likely future threats to the eastern sand darter, Ammocrypta pellucida (Agassiz). It does not represent a decision by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) on whether this taxon should be designated as a candidate species for listing as threatened or endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act. That decision will be made by the Service after reviewing this document; other relevant biological and threat data not included herein; and all relevant laws, regulations, and policies. The result of the decision will be posted on the Service's Region 3 Web site (refer to: http://midwest.fws.gov/eco_serv/endangrd/lists/concern.html). If designated as a candidate species, the taxon will subsequently be added to the Service's candidate species list that is periodically published in the Federal Register and posted on the World Wide Web (refer to: http://endangered.fws.gov/wildlife.html). Even if the taxon does not warrant candidate status it should benefit from the conservation recommendations that are contained in this document. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS DISCLAIMER...................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Fate of Stocked Barrens Topminnows Fundulus Julisia (Fundulidae) and Status of Wild Populations
    The Fate of Stocked Barrens Topminnows Fundulus julisia (Fundulidae) and Status of Wild Populations A Final Report Submitted To Mr. Richard Kirk Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency Nashville, Tennessee By Cory Goldsworthy, M.S. Tennessee Cooperative Fishery Research Unit Phillip W. Bettoli, Ph.D. U.S. Geological Survey Tennessee Cooperative Fishery Research Unit Tennessee Technological University Cookeville, Tennessee August 2005 Executive Summary 1. Barrens topminnow Fundulus julisia populations have declined precipitously since the species was described in 1982. Propagation and reintroductions have been the primary means of recovery since 2001, but the reintroductions have been generally unsuccessful in creating self-sustaining populations. 2. Biotic and abiotic factors affecting 17 stocked Barrens topminnow populations were examined from 2003 to 2005 and the status of wild populations was described. Populations of stocked and wild topminnows and introduced-exotic Western mosquitofish Gambusia affinis were estimated using the Zippin removal-depletion technique. Lighted larval traps were deployed at eight reintroduction sites and the type locale to determine whether topminnows could reproduce in the presence of mosquitofish. The thermal environment and aquatic flora were also described at reintroduction sites. 3. The density of mosquitofish at reintroduction sites ranged from zero to 66 fish per m2. Annual mortality of stocked Barrens topminnows ranged from 45 to 100%. Annual mortality of stocked topminnows was not related to mosquitofish density, nor the minimum, maximum, or average temperatures recorded at each site. 4. The adjusted mean weights (i.e., robustness) of Barrens topminnows did not differ in the presence or absence of mosquitofish, suggesting interspecific competition for food was not occurring.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Geological Survey of Alabama Calibration of The
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF ALABAMA Berry H. (Nick) Tew, Jr. State Geologist WATER INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM CALIBRATION OF THE INDEX OF BIOTIC INTEGRITY FOR THE SOUTHERN PLAINS ICHTHYOREGION IN ALABAMA OPEN-FILE REPORT 0908 by Patrick E. O'Neil and Thomas E. Shepard Prepared in cooperation with the Alabama Department of Environmental Management and the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Tuscaloosa, Alabama 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ............................................................ 1 Introduction.......................................................... 1 Acknowledgments .................................................... 6 Objectives........................................................... 7 Study area .......................................................... 7 Southern Plains ichthyoregion ...................................... 7 Methods ............................................................ 8 IBI sample collection ............................................. 8 Habitat measures............................................... 10 Habitat metrics ........................................... 12 The human disturbance gradient ................................... 15 IBI metrics and scoring criteria..................................... 19 Designation of guilds....................................... 20 Results and discussion................................................ 22 Sampling sites and collection results . 22 Selection and scoring of Southern Plains IBI metrics . 41 1. Number of native species ................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment December 2003
    Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment December 2003 Ouachita Ecoregional Assessment Team Arkansas Field Office 601 North University Ave. Little Rock, AR 72205 Oklahoma Field Office 2727 East 21st Street Tulsa, OK 74114 Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment ii 12/2003 Table of Contents Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment............................................................................................................................i Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................................................iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..............................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................3 BACKGROUND ...........................................................................................................................4 Ecoregional Boundary Delineation.............................................................................................................................................4 Geology..........................................................................................................................................................................................5 Soils................................................................................................................................................................................................6
    [Show full text]