DOCSLIB.ORG

Protocol for Monitoring Fish Communities in Small Streams in the Heartland Inventory and Monitoring Network

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Protocol for Monitoring Fish Communities in Small Streams in the Heartland Inventory and Monitoring Network National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Program Center Protocol for Monitoring Fish Communities in Small Streams in the Heartland Inventory and Monitoring Network Natural Resource Report NPS/HTLN/NRR—2008/052 A Heartland Network Monitoring Protocol protecting the habitat of our heritage i ON THE COVER Herbert Hoover birthplace cottage at Herbert Hoover NHS, prescribed fire at Tallgrass Prairie NPres, aquatic invertebrate monitoring at George Washington Carver NM, the Mississippi River at Effigy Mounds NM. ii Protocol for Monitoring Fish Communities in Small Streams in the Heartland Inventory and Monitoring Network Natural Resource Report NPS/HTLN/NRR—2008/052 Hope R. Dodd, David G. Peitz, Gareth A. Rowell, David E. Bowles, and Lloyd W. Morrison National Park Service Heartland I&M Network Wilson’s Creek National Battlefield 6424 West Farm Road 182 Republic, Missouri 65738 August 2008 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Program Center Fort Collins, Colorado The Natural Resource Publication series addresses natural resource topics that are of interest and applicability to a broad readership in the National Park Service and to others in the management of natural resources, including the scientific community, the public, and the NPS conservation and environmental constituencies. Manuscripts are peer-reviewed to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and is designed and published in a professional manner. Natural Resource Reports are the designated medium for disseminating high priority, current natural resource management information with managerial application. The series targets a general, diverse audience, and may contain NPS policy considerations or address sensitive issues of management applicability. Examples of the diverse array of reports published in this series include vital signs monitoring plans; monitoring protocols; "how to" resource management papers; proceedings of resource management workshops or conferences; annual reports of resource programs or divisions of the Natural Resource Program Center; resource action plans; fact sheets; and regularly-published newsletters. Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations and data in this report are solely those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the U.S. Department of the Interior, NPS. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the National Park Service. Printed copies of reports in these series may be produced in a limited quantity and they are only available as long as the supply lasts. This report is also available from the Natural Resource Publications Management website (http://www.nature.nps.gov/publications/NRPM) and the Heartland Inventory and Monitoring website (http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/units/htln) on the Internet or by sending a request to the address on the back cover. Please cite this publication as: Dodd, H.R. , D. G. Peitz, G. A. Rowell, D. E. Bowles, and L. M. Morrison. 2008. Protocol for monitoring fish communities in small streams in the Heartland Inventory and Monitoring Network. Natural Resource Report NPS/HTLN/NRR—2008/052. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. NPS D-79, August 2008 ii Contents Page Figures……………………………………………...……………………………………...………v Tables…………………………………………………………………………...…………...…….v I. Background and Objectives…………………………………………………………………1 Issues Being Addressed and Rationale for Fish Community Monitoring.…………….1 History of Monitoring Fish Communities in Small Streams………….……………....3 Revision of Historic Protocol…………………...……………………………………..3 Monitoring Objectives Addressed by the Protocol……………………………………6 Justification/Rationale for these Objectives…………………………………………...6 II. Sampling Design…………………………………………………………………………….6 Spatial Design…………………………………………………………………………6 Sample Reaches……………..…………………………………………………….7 Historically Sampled Parks...……………………………………………...7 Additional Parks…………………………………………………………...8 Temporal Design……………………………………………………………….…….11 Response Design……………………….……………………………………………11 Fish……………………………………………………………………………….11 Habitat and Water Quality……………………………………………………….12 Rationale for the Sampling Design…………………………………………………..12 III. Field and Laboratory Methods…………………………………………………………...13 Field Season Preparations, Field Schedule, and Equipment Setup…………………..13 Collecting Fish Samples…………………………….……………………………….13 Measuring CORE 5 Water Quality and Physical Habitat……………………………16 Sample Storage and Reference Collection………………...…………………………16 Post Season Procedures…...………………………………………………………….16 IV. Data Management……………………………………………………………………....16 Overview of Database Design…………………………………..……………….16 Data Entry……………………………………………….………….……………18 Data Verification and Editing……………….………….………………………..18 iii Metadata Procedures…………………………..…………………………………19 Database Versions ……………………………………………………………19 Database Security………………………………………………..……………….19 V. Analysis and Reporting…………………………………………………………………20 Metric Calculations for Fish Communities……..…………….………………….20 Data Analysis………..…………………………………………………………...21 Reporting…...…………………………………………………………………….23 VI. Personnel Requirements and Training…………………………………………………24 Roles and Responsibilities………..……………………………………………...24 Qualifications and Training……..……………………………………………….24 VII. Operational Requirements……...…………………………………………………...25 Annual Workload and Field Schedule………………………..………………….25 Facility and Equipment Requirements………………….……..…………………25 Startup Costs and Budget Considerations…………….………...………………..25 VIII. Procedures for Protocol Revision……………………………………………………26 IX. References……………………………………………………………………………26 X. Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)………………….……………….……………36 SOP 1: Preparation for Field Sampling …………………………..……………………36 SOP 2: Training ………………………………………………..………………………41 SOP 3: Documenting CORE 5 Water Quality Variables..……………………………..42 SOP 4: Fish Community Sampling ……………………………………………………44 SOP 5: Physical Habitat Measurements.……………………………………………….59 SOP 6: Measuring Stream Discharge...………………………………………………...73 SOP 7: Equipment Storage and Maintenance after the Field Season………………......78 SOP 8: Data Management………..……………………………………………………..80 SOP 9: Data Analysis………………….………………………………………………..95 SOP 10: Data Reporting……………..…………………………………………………108 SOP 11: Revising the Protocol…..………….…………………………………………111 iv Figures Figure 1. Flow of work diagram for parks sampled by seining under the original prairie fish protocol…….…………………...……………………………………..……………..14 Figure 2. Flow of work diagram for added parks using electrofishing methods……...………..14 Tables Table 1. Revisions and additions made to the original fish protocol. (Peitz and Rowell, 2004)…5 Table 2. List of stream reaches retained for sampling in this protocol along with UTM coordinates (NAD83 (Conus), Zone 14 N) and justification for including each reach. Those reaches shaded in gray will be no longer be monitored because they are often dry during the sampling period...…………………….……………………………………...9 Table 3. Streams sampled at GWCA, EFMO, HEHO, HOSP, PERI, and WICR………....…....10 Table 4. Revisit design and index period for fish monitoring in small streams of HTLN……...11 Table 5. List of stream reaches sampled for fish communities and list of gear used and percent effort by gear for each reach.…………………………………………………………..15 Table 6. Estimated annual costs for conducting fish monitoring in small streams…….………...25 v I. Background and Objectives Issues Being Addressed and Rationale for Fish Community Monitoring Many lotic systems in the United States are in a degraded condition, largely as a result of watershed level land use changes and corresponding water pollution problems (USEPA, 1990). During the last century, large portions of grassland landscapes have been converted to cropland or livestock pasture (Knopf and Samson, 1997) increasing sedimentation, nutrient loading, and other chemical pollution in streams. Nonpoint source pollution from agricultural practices is regarded as the largest long-term threat to streams in the Midwest (USEPA, 1995). Other activities such as logging and urban development also negatively impact water quality by increasing surface water runoff and introducing chemical pollutants and soil from upland areas. These land use changes and resulting water quality alterations modify the natural hydrology and physical habitat of streams, and are exacerbated by flood events. Impacts to stream integrity and habitat include increase in spate intensity, shifts in channel geomorphology and increased bed and bank erosion, altered light penetration and water temperature regimes. Although protecting riparian corridors may help mitigate some of these problems (Peterjohn and Correll, 1984; Osborne and Kovacic, 1993; Stauffer et al., 2000), changes in land use practices within the watershed can overwhelm localized protection of stream corridors (Richards et al., 1996; Roth et al., 1996; Wang et al., 1997; Weigel et al., 2000). Because processes occurring in the entire watershed and the riparian areas are not independent of each other (Doppelt et al., 1993), improving or maintaining stream integrity through partial protection of the watershed or stream corridor can be difficult and, in certain situations, impractical. The National Park Service (NPS) has mandated that park managers establish baseline data or “vital signs” and long-term monitoring programs for the natural resources found within their parks. Monitoring
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • Aspects of the Life History of the Slender Madtom Noturus Exilis in Northeastern Oklahoma (Pisces: Ictaluridae)
    Adr's Aspects of the Life History of the Slender Madtom Noturus exilis in Northeastern Oklahoma (Pisces: Ictaluridae) STEPHEN P. VIVES Department of Zoology, University of Wisconsin, Madison 53706 ABSTRACT: The ictalurid, Noturus exilis, was studied from 13 February 1981 to 23 May 1982 in Flint and Cloud creeks in northeastern Oklahoma. Current speed, depth and substrate type in areas occupied by N. exilis were compared with frequency distributions of habitat availability. Noturus exilis were selective in their choice of cur- rent speed and substrate type; however, depths were used in the same proportion they were available. Slender madtoms in Flint Creek consumed ephemeropteran naiads and dipteran larvae most frequently by number (57.8% and 25.9%, respectively) and these organisms also occurred in proportionally more stomachs (66.1% and 57.6%, respectively). Compared with N. exilis in Green Creek, Illinois (studied by R.L. Mayden and B.M. Burr): (1) Flint Creek N. exilis were smaller at a given age; (2) Flint and Cloud creek N. exilis had a higher percentage of females that were mature in their 1st summer of life (age 0 + ); (3) Flint and Cloud creek N. exilis had signifi- cantly fewer ova per gram adjusted body weight, and (4) Cloud Creek N. exilis had significantly larger ova and Flint Creek N. exilis nearly so. INTRODUCTION Several life history studies have been published recently on the ictalurid genus No- turus. These studies have increased our knowledge of N. albater (Mayden et al., 1980), N. elegans (Burr and Dimmick, 1981), N. exilis (Mayden and Burr, 1981), N.
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution Changes of Small Fishes in Streams of Missouri from The
    Distribution Changes of Small Fishes in Streams of Missouri from the 1940s to the 1990s by MATTHEW R. WINSTON Missouri Department of Conservation, Columbia, MO 65201 February 2003 CONTENTS Page Abstract……………………………………………………………………………….. 8 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………… 10 Methods……………………………………………………………………………….. 17 The Data Used………………………………………………………………… 17 General Patterns in Species Change…………………………………………... 23 Conservation Status of Species……………………………………………….. 26 Results………………………………………………………………………………… 34 General Patterns in Species Change………………………………………….. 30 Conservation Status of Species……………………………………………….. 46 Discussion…………………………………………………………………………….. 63 General Patterns in Species Change………………………………………….. 53 Conservation Status of Species………………………………………………. 63 Acknowledgments……………………………………………………………………. 66 Literature Cited……………………………………………………………………….. 66 Appendix……………………………………………………………………………… 72 FIGURES 1. Distribution of samples by principal investigator…………………………. 20 2. Areas of greatest average decline…………………………………………. 33 3. Areas of greatest average expansion………………………………………. 34 4. The relationship between number of basins and ……………………….. 39 5. The distribution of for each reproductive group………………………... 40 2 6. The distribution of for each family……………………………………… 41 7. The distribution of for each trophic group……………...………………. 42 8. The distribution of for each faunal region………………………………. 43 9. The distribution of for each stream type………………………………… 44 10. The distribution of for each range edge…………………………………. 45 11. Modified
    [Show full text]
  • Species Status Assessment Report for the Frecklebelly Madtom (Noturus Munitus)
    Species Status Assessment Report for the Frecklebelly Madtom (Noturus munitus) Version 1.2 Credit: B.H. Bauer August 2020 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Southeast Region Atlanta, GA ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This document was prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Frecklebelly Madtom Species Status Assessment Team: Michael Marshall (Texas A&M Natural Resources Institute), Evan Collins (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Alabama Ecological Services Office), and Nicole Rankin (USFWS, South Atlantic-Gulf and Mississippi Regional Office). We would also like to recognize and thank the following individuals who provided substantive information, photographs, and insights for our Species Status Assessment. Thank you to Matthew Wagner (Mississippi Museum of Natural Science), Brett Albanese (Georgia Department of Natural Resources), Mary Freeman (U.S. Geological Service, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center), Matthew Duplessis (Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries), Daniel Schwarz (USFWS Private John Allen National Fish Hatchery), Steven Rider (Alabama Division of Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries), and David Neely (Tennessee Aquarium Conservation Institute). Additionally, valuable input into the analysis and reviews of a draft of this document were provided by Anakela Popp (Georgia Department of Natural Resources), Bernard Kuhajda (Tennessee Aquarium Conservation Institute), Peggy Shute (Conservation Fisheries, Inc), Amy Carson (USFWS, Mississippi Ecological Services Field Office), and Erin Rivenbark (USFWS, South Atlantic-Gulf and Mississippi Regional Office). We appreciate their input and comments, which resulted in a more robust status assessment and final report. SSA Report – Frecklebelly Madtom ii August 2020 SUMMARY OF VERSION UPDATES The changes from version 1.0 (December 2019) and version 1.1 (March 2020) are minor and do not change the assessment of risk.
    [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]
  • Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater And
    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]
  • Noturus Eleutherus)
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 12-2017 Aspects of the Physiological and Behavioral Defense Adaptations of the Mountain Madtom (Noturus eleutherus) Meredith Leigh Hayes University of Tennessee, Knoxville, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Behavior and Ethology Commons, and the Biology Commons Recommended Citation Hayes, Meredith Leigh, "Aspects of the Physiological and Behavioral Defense Adaptations of the Mountain Madtom (Noturus eleutherus). " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2017. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/4968 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Meredith Leigh Hayes entitled "Aspects of the Physiological and Behavioral Defense Adaptations of the Mountain Madtom (Noturus eleutherus)." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Wildlife and Fisheries Science. J. Brian Alford, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Gerald Dinkins, Jeffrey Becker, J. R. Shute Accepted for the Council: Dixie L. Thompson Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) Aspects of the Physiological and Behavioral Defense Adaptations of the Mountain Madtom (Noturus eleutherus) A Thesis Presented for the Master of Science Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Meredith Leigh Hayes December 2017 ii Copyright ã by Meredith Hayes Harris All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Business Plan NFWF Native Black Bass Keystone Initiative Feb
    A Business Plan for the Conservation of Native Black Bass Species in the Southeastern US: A Ten Year Plan February 2010 Executive Summary Conservation need : The southeastern US harbors a diversity of aquatic species and habitats unparalleled in North America. More than 1,800 species of fishes, mussels, snails, turtles and crayfish can be found in the more than 70 major river basins of the region; more than 500 of these species are endemic. However, with declines in the quality and quantity of aquatic resources in the region has come an increase in the rate of extinctions; nearly 100 species have become extinct across the region in the last century. At present, 34 percent of the fish species and 90 percent of the mussels in peril nationwide are found in the southeast. In addition, the southeast contains more invasive, exotic aquatic species than any other area of the US, many of which threaten native species. The diversity of black bass species (genus Micropterus ) mirrors the freshwater fish patterns in North America with most occurring in the southeast. Of the nine described species of black bass, six are endemic to the southeast: Guadalupe bass, shoal bass, redeye bass, Florida bass, Alabama bass, and Suwannee bass. However, many undescribed forms also exist and most of these are in need of conservation measures to prevent them from becoming imperiled. Furthermore, of the black bass species with the greatest conservation needs, all are endemic to the southeast and found in relatively small ranges (Figure 1). In an effort to focus and coordinate actions to conserve these species, local, state and federal agencies, universities, NGOs and businesses from across the region have come together in partnership with the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to develop the Southeast Native Black Bass Keystone Initiative.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Status Assessment Report for the Carolina Madtom (Noturus Furiosus) Version 1.1
    Species Status Assessment Report for the Carolina Madtom (Noturus furiosus) Version 1.1 November 2018 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 4 Atlanta, GA This document was prepared by Sarah McRae (USFWS-Raleigh Field Office) with assistance from Erin Rivenbark (USFWS-Region 4), Beth Forbus (USFWS-HQ), and the Carolina Madtom SSA Technical Advisory Team (Tyler Black-NC Wildlife Resources Commission, Judith Ratcliffe- NC Natural Heritage Program, Bryn Tracy-NC Division of Water Resources, and Chris Wood- NC Wildlife Resources Commission). Valuable peer reviews of a draft of this document were provided by Tom Gerow (NC Forest Service), Tom Kwak (NC State University), Tim Savidge (Three Oaks Engineering), and Wayne Starnes (retired). We appreciate the time and effort of those dedicated to learning and implementing the SSA Framework, which resulted in a more robust assessment and final report. Suggested reference: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2018. Species status assessment report for the Carolina Madtom (Noturus furiosus). Version 1.1. November, 2018. Atlanta, GA. Carolina Madtom SSA Report Page ii November 2018 Summary of Version Updates The change from version 1.0 (April 2017) and 1.1 (November 2018) was minor and did not change the SSA Analysis for Carolina Madtom. The change was: 1) Removed mention of SmithEnvironment Blog in Section 4.6 under Regulatory Reform in North Carolina. Carolina Madtom SSA Report Page iii November 2018 Species Status Assessment Report For Carolina Madtom (Noturus furiosus) Prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This species status assessment (SSA) reports the results of the comprehensive status review for the Carolina Madtom (Noturus furiosus (Jordan and Meek 1889)), documenting the species’ historical condition and providing estimates of current and future condition under a range of different scenarios.
    [Show full text]
  • Of the BC Wildlife Act *Note: This List Is to Be Used As a Guidance Document and Therefore May Not Include All Species
    Species Lister Under Schedule 3 of the Controlled Alien Species Regulation of the BC Wildlife Act *Note: This list is to be used as a guidance document and therefore may not include all species. Group Common name Family Genus Species (1) Channidae Chel Snakehead Channidae Channa amphibeus Northern Snakehead Channidae Channa argus Chinese Snakehead, Chinafish Channidae Channa asiatica Orangespotted Snakehead Channidae Channa aurantimaculata Bangka Snakehead Channidae Channa bankanensis Baram Snakehead Channidae Channa baramensis Barca Snakehead Channidae Channa barca Rainbow Snakehead Channidae Channa bleheri Burmese Snakehead Channidae Channa burmanica Bluespotted Snakehead Channidae Channa cyanospilos Malabar Snakehead Channidae Channa diplogramma Dwarf Snakehead Channidae Channa gachua Inle Snakehead Channidae Channa harcourtbutleri NA Channidae Channa hoaluensis NA Channidae Channa longistomata Splendid Snakehead Channidae Channa lucius Blotched Snakehead, Snakehead Mullet Channidae Channa maculata Emperor Snakehead Channidae Channa marulioides Bullseye Snakehead Channidae Channa marulius Blackfinned Snakehead Channidae Channa melanoptera NA Channidae Channa melanostigma Black Snakehead, Manu Channidae Channa melasoma Giant Snakehead, Red Snakehead Channidae Channa micropeltes NA Channidae Channa ninhbinhensis Night Snakehead Channidae Channa nox Ceylon Snakehead, Walking Snakehead, Smooth-breasted Snakefish Channidae Channa orientalis NA Channidae Channa ornatipinnis Panaw Snakehead Channidae Channa panaw Ocellated Snakehead Channidae
    [Show full text]
  • Current River Watershed and Inventory Assessment
    Current River Watershed and Inventory Assessment, January 2003 Prepared by Thomas F. Wilkerson Jr., Fisheries Biologist Missouri Department of Conservation, West Plains, Missouri Table of Contents Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... 5 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 6 Location .......................................................................................................................................... 9 Geology ......................................................................................................................................... 11 Physiographic Region ............................................................................................................... 11 Soils .......................................................................................................................................... 11 Geology and Karst .................................................................................................................... 12 Stream Order, Mileage and Permanency .................................................................................. 13 Drainage Area ........................................................................................................................... 14 Stream Channel Gradient .........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ecology of the Rare Yellowfin Madtom, Noturus Flavipinnis Taylor in Citico Creek, Tennessee
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 6-1984 Ecology of the rare yellowfin Madtom, Noturus flavipinnis Taylor in Citico Creek, Tennessee Peggy W. Shute University of Tennessee, Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Recommended Citation Shute, Peggy W., "Ecology of the rare yellowfin Madtom, Noturus flavipinnis Taylor in Citico Creek, Tennessee. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 1984. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/6031 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Peggy W. Shute entitled "Ecology of the rare yellowfin Madtom, Noturus flavipinnis Taylor in Citico Creek, Tennessee." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Zoology. David A. Etnier, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Mary Ann Handel, Richard Strange Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Peggy W. Shute entitled "Ecology of the Rare Yellowfin Madtom, Noturus flavipinnis Taylor, in Citico Creek, Tennessee." I have examined the final copy of this thesis for fonn and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Zoology.
    [Show full text]