DOCSLIB.ORG

Habitat Use and Distribution of Lithophilic Spawning and 1 Riffle Fishes in the East Fork Black River 2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Habitat Use and Distribution of Lithophilic Spawning and 1 Riffle Fishes in the East Fork Black River 2 1 HABITAT USE AND DISTRIBUTION OF LITHOPHILIC SPAWNING AND 2 RIFFLE FISHES IN THE EAST FORK BLACK RIVER 3 ____________________________________ 4 A Thesis 5 presented to 6 the Faculty of the Graduate School 7 at the University of Missouri-Columbia 8 _______________________________________________________ 9 In Fulfillment 10 of the Requirements for the Degree 11 Master of Science 12 _____________________________________________________ 13 by 14 JOHN BRANT 15 Dr. Craig Paukert, Thesis Supervisor 16 AUGUST 2020 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 The undersigned, appointed by the dean of the Graduate School, have examined the 31 thesis entitled 32 33 34 HABITAT USE AND DISTRIBUTION OF LITHOPHILIC SPAWNING AND 35 RIFFLE FISHES IN THE EAST FORK BLACK RIVER 36 37 38 39 Presented by John Brant, 40 a candidate for the degree of master of science, 41 and hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance. 42 43 44 _______________________________________ 45 Dr. Craig Paukert (Advisor) 46 47 _______________________________________ 48 Dr. Thomas Bonnot 49 50 _______________________________________ 51 Dr. Alba Argerich 52 53 _______________________________________ 54 Dr. Robert Jacobson 55 56 57 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 58 There are many people that I would like to thank for their help in the completion 59 of this project. First and foremost, I would like to thank Dr. Craig Paukert for providing 60 guidance from the beginning of project design through the final revisions to my thesis. In 61 addition, I would like to thank Dr. Thomas Bonnot, Dr. Robert Jacobson, and Dr. 62 Argerich for serving on my committee, sharing their knowledge, and providing 63 constructive criticism for the design of the project and interpretation of the results. 64 I would also like to thank the Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC) as a 65 whole for funding this project, and creating a foundation for scientific questions to be 66 pursed. Several individuals within MDC that have provided incredible collaboration 67 include Del Lobb, Brett Landwer, Paul Blanchard, Dr. Doug Novinger, and Nicole 68 Farless. Others that provided resources, housing, access to the river through their land, 69 and transportation include Ameren Missouri, The Missouri Department of Natural 70 Resources, Franklin Floats, and Kenneth Lee. Without them, we would not have been 71 able to collect data, sleep in comfort, or gather the history of the river, which have all led 72 to the completion of this project. 73 In addition, this project could not have been completed without my team members 74 that put in many hours of hard work, provided a positive attitude, and friendship. These 75 team members included Jim Baker, Eric Cox, Blake Branch, Leann Drury, Pablo Oleiro, 76 Leann Drury, Sarah Barnes, and Karol Moore. Thank you to my fellow graduate students, 77 post-docs, and the faculty within the School of Natural Resources for always being 78 around to share ideas, work through courses together, and provide direction when I 79 strayed too far. ii 80 TABLE OF CONTENTS 81 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS......................................................................................... ii 82 LIST OF TABLES...................................................................................................... iv 83 LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................... ix 84 ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... xviii 85 GENERAL INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1 86 References ....................................................................................................................... 7 87 CHAPTER ONE ................................................................................................................. 1 88 Abstract ........................................................................................................................... 1 89 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 2 90 Methods ........................................................................................................................... 6 91 Results ........................................................................................................................... 14 92 Discussion ..................................................................................................................... 18 93 Conclusions and Management Recommendations ........................................................ 22 94 References ..................................................................................................................... 24 95 Tables & Figures ........................................................................................................... 27 96 CHAPTER TWO .............................................................................................................. 44 97 Abstract ......................................................................................................................... 44 98 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 45 99 Methods ......................................................................................................................... 48 100 Results ........................................................................................................................... 56 101 Discussion ..................................................................................................................... 59 102 Conclusions and Management Recommendations ........................................................ 63 103 References ..................................................................................................................... 64 104 Tables & Figures ........................................................................................................... 67 105 CHAPTER THREE .......................................................................................................... 79 106 General Conclusions and Management Recommendations .............................................. 79 107 References ..................................................................................................................... 85 108 Tables ............................................................................................................................ 86 109 APPENDICES .................................................................................................................. 87 110 111 iii 112 LIST OF TABLES 113 Chapter One: Hornyhead Chub Spawning Habitat in the 114 East Fork Black River, Missouri 115 Page 116 Table 1-1. .………………………………………………………………………………26 117 Habitat characteristics measured (acronym and units) at the mesohabitat and 118 microhabitat scales to determine Hornyhead Chub spawning site selection. A 119 dash indicates the specific parameter was not measured at that scale. 120 Table 1-2. .………………………………………………………………………………27 121 Habitat characteristics were measured in riffle-run mesohabitats on the Lower 122 East Fork Black River (LEFBR), East Fork Black River (EFBR) upstream of 123 Taum Sauk Reservoir, Big Creek (BGCK), and the West Fork Black River 124 (WFBR) in 2017 and 2018. The number of random points was based on the size 125 of the habitats with a minimum of 20 points and a maximum of 120 points. 126 Mesohabitats 10.5 and 11.5 were labeled differently because they were side 127 channels that run adjacent to the main channel of the East Fork Black River. 128 Table 1-3. .………………………………………………………………………………28 129 Searches revealed 29 Hornyhead Chub Spawning mounds in the Lower East Fork 130 Black River in 2017. In 2018, the Upper East Fork Black River, West Fork Black 131 River, and Big Creek, Missouri were added to the study, and an additional 42 132 Hornyhead Chub spawning mounds were located. Microhabitat measurements 133 were recorded at 15 randomly selected spawning mounds in 2017 and seven 134 spawning mounds in 2018. iv 135 Chapter Two: Fish Communities of Riffle-Run Habitat in the 136 East Fork Black River, Missouri 137 138 Table 2-1. .………………………………………………………………………………66 139 Habitat characteristics summary for reaches sampled downstream from Taum 140 Sauk Dam in the East Fork Black River, Missouri during 2017 and 2018. 141 Reaches were defined by riffle-run habitat separated by large pools greater than 142 one meter deep, therefore areas ranged in size. Number of habitat points and 143 electrofishing grids sampled were dependent on reach area. NA represents that 144 prepositioned electrofishing grids were not used as a sampling method because 145 appropriate habitat was not available for effective sampling. Median substrate 146 size, mean (± 1 SD) depth, wetted width, and canopy cover are reported. 147 Table 2-2. .………………………………………………………………………………67 148 Habitat characteristics, abbreviations, and descriptions for variables included in 149 generalized linear models describing habitat preferences for fish diversity in riffle 150 run habitat reaches of the East Fork Black River, Missouri. 151 Table 2-3. .………………………………………………………………………………68 152 Generalized Linear Models used to predict how species richness focused on rare 0 1 153 species ( D or Drare weighted) or weighted equally among species
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Notropis Girardi) and Peppered Chub (Macrhybopsis Tetranema)
    Arkansas River Shiner and Peppered Chub SSA, October 2018 Species Status Assessment Report for the Arkansas River Shiner (Notropis girardi) and Peppered Chub (Macrhybopsis tetranema) Arkansas River shiner (bottom left) and peppered chub (top right - two fish) (Photo credit U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) Arkansas River Shiner and Peppered Chub SSA, October 2018 Version 1.0a October 2018 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 2 Albuquerque, NM This document was prepared by Angela Anders, Jennifer Smith-Castro, Peter Burck (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) – Southwest Regional Office) Robert Allen, Debra Bills, Omar Bocanegra, Sean Edwards, Valerie Morgan (USFWS –Arlington, Texas Field Office), Ken Collins, Patricia Echo-Hawk, Daniel Fenner, Jonathan Fisher, Laurence Levesque, Jonna Polk (USFWS – Oklahoma Field Office), Stephen Davenport (USFWS – New Mexico Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office), Mark Horner, Susan Millsap (USFWS – New Mexico Field Office), Jonathan JaKa (USFWS – Headquarters), Jason Luginbill, and Vernon Tabor (Kansas Field Office). Suggested reference: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2018. Species status assessment report for the Arkansas River shiner (Notropis girardi) and peppered chub (Macrhybopsis tetranema), version 1.0, with appendices. October 2018. Albuquerque, NM. 172 pp. Arkansas River Shiner and Peppered Chub SSA, October 2018 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES.1 INTRODUCTION (CHAPTER 1) The Arkansas River shiner (Notropis girardi) and peppered chub (Macrhybopsis tetranema) are restricted primarily to the contiguous river segments of the South Canadian River basin spanning eastern New Mexico downstream to eastern Oklahoma (although the peppered chub is less widespread). Both species have experienced substantial declines in distribution and abundance due to habitat destruction and modification from stream dewatering or depletion from diversion of surface water and groundwater pumping, construction of impoundments, and water quality degradation.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary Report of Freshwater Nonindigenous Aquatic Species in U.S
    Summary Report of Freshwater Nonindigenous Aquatic Species in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 4—An Update April 2013 Prepared by: Pam L. Fuller, Amy J. Benson, and Matthew J. Cannister U.S. Geological Survey Southeast Ecological Science Center Gainesville, Florida Prepared for: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Southeast Region Atlanta, Georgia Cover Photos: Silver Carp, Hypophthalmichthys molitrix – Auburn University Giant Applesnail, Pomacea maculata – David Knott Straightedge Crayfish, Procambarus hayi – U.S. Forest Service i Table of Contents Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................................... ii List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................ v List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................ vi INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1 Overview of Region 4 Introductions Since 2000 ....................................................................................... 1 Format of Species Accounts ...................................................................................................................... 2 Explanation of Maps ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fishes of the Eleven Point River Within Arkansas Michael B
    Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science Volume 31 Article 19 1977 Fishes of the Eleven Point River Within Arkansas Michael B. Johnson Arkansas State University John K. Beadles Arkansas State University Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas Part of the Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons, and the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Recommended Citation Johnson, Michael B. and Beadles, John K. (1977) "Fishes of the Eleven Point River Within Arkansas," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 31 , Article 19. Available at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol31/iss1/19 This article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able to read, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 31 [1977], Art. 19 Fishes of the Eleven Point River Within Arkansas B.MICHAELJOHNSON and JOHN K.BEADLES Division of Biological Sciences Arkansas State University State University, Arkansas 72467 ABSTRACT A survey of the fishes of the Eleven Point River and its tributaries was made between 31 January 1976 and 13 February 1977.
    [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]
  • Minnesota Fish Taxonomic Key 2017 Edition
    Minnesota Fish Taxonomic Key 2017 Edition Pictures from – NANFA (2017) Warren Lamb Aquatic Biology Program Bemidji State University Bemidji, MN 56601 Introduction Minnesota’s landscape is maze of lakes and river that are home to a recorded total of 163 species of fish. This document is a complete and current dichotomous taxonomic key of the Minnesota fishes. This key was based on the 1972 “Northern Fishes” key (Eddy 1972), and updated based on Dr. Jay Hatch’s article “Minnesota Fishes: Just How Many Are There?” (Hatch 2016). Any new species or family additions were also referenced to the 7th edition of the American Fisheries society “Names of North American Fishes” (Page et al. 2013) to assess whether a fish species is currently recognized by the scientific community. Identifying characteristics for new additions were compared to those found in Page and Burr (2011). In total five species and one family have been added to the taxonomic key, while three have been removed since the last publication. Species pictures within the keys have been provide from either Bemidji State University Ichthyology Students or North American Native Fish Association (NANFA). My hope is that this document will offer an accurate and simple key so anyone can identify the fish they may encounter in Minnesota. Warren Lamb – 2017 Pictures from – NANFA (2017) References Eddy, S. and J. C. Underhill. 1974. Northern Fishes. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. 414 pp. Hatch, J. 2015. Minnesota fishes: just how many are there anyway? American Currents 40:10-21. Page, L. M. and B. M. Burr. 2011. Peterson Field Guide to Freshwater Fishes of North America North of Mexico.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 2E - Revised Baseline Ecological Risk Assessment Hudson River Pcbs Reassessment
    PHASE 2 REPORT FURTHER SITE CHARACTERIZATION AND ANALYSIS VOLUME 2E - REVISED BASELINE ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT HUDSON RIVER PCBS REASSESSMENT NOVEMBER 2000 For U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 2 and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Kansas City District Book 2 of 2 Tables, Figures and Plates TAMS Consultants, Inc. Menzie-Cura & Associates, Inc. PHASE 2 REPORT FURTHER SITE CHARACTERIZATION AND ANALYSIS VOLUME 2E- REVISED BASELINE ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT HUDSON RIVER PCBs REASSESSMENT RI/FS CONTENTS Volume 2E (Book 1 of 2) Page TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................ i LIST OF TABLES ........................................................... xiii LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................... xxv LIST OF PLATES .......................................................... xxvi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................ES-1 1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................1 1.1 Purpose of Report .................................................1 1.2 Site History ......................................................2 1.2.1 Summary of PCB Sources to the Upper and Lower Hudson River ......4 1.2.2 Summary of Phase 2 Geochemical Analyses .......................5 1.2.3 Extent of Contamination in the Upper Hudson River ................5 1.2.3.1 PCBs in Sediment .....................................5 1.2.3.2 PCBs in the Water Column ..............................6 1.2.3.3 PCBs in Fish .........................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Hornyhead Chub (Nocomis Biguttatus)
    Hornyhead chub (Nocomis biguttatus) Freshwater Fish Species of Concern State Rank: S1 (critically imperiled) Global Rank: G5 (secure) Description The hornyhead chub takes its name from the pronounced white tuberacles that develop on the heads of breeding males. The males reach a maximum length of 12 inches but are typically between 6-9 inches with the females being smaller. It is a stout bodied fish with a dark lateral band from the eye to the base of the tail, ending in a prominent dark spot. Its color is olive brown on the back and silvery on the sides with a creamy belly. There is a distinctive red patch behind each eye © Native Fish Conservancy in breeding males. Its fins have an orangish coloring and it has a terminal mouth (rook.org). Prominent pearl organs are developed on the snout and posterior of head of breeding males (Cooper 1983). Behavior Males construct and guard large mound-nests in early summer in gravel riffles. Males defend these mounds from other hornyhead chubs but other minnow species use these convenient spawning sites and hybridization is prevalent. Following the spawning, where one male may spawn with several females, the nests are abandoned (Cooper 1983). Diet The principal food items consist of invertebrates, but small amounts of plant material, which may be of little nutritional value, are taken incidentally (Cooper 1983). Threats and Protection Needs The hornyhead chub is critically imperiled in Pennsylvania but globally secure (natureserve.org). It is a candidate for rare listing in Pennsylvania (naturalheritage.state.pa.us). The hornyhead is common in much of its range and little data is available on possible threats and protection needs for this species.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fishes of Crooked Creek (White River Drainage) in Northcentral Arkansas, with New Records and a List of Species
    Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science Volume 65 Article 16 2011 The iF shes of Crooked Creek (White River Drainage) in Northcentral Arkansas, with New Records and a List of Species H. W. Robison Southern Arkansas University C. T. McAllister Eastern Oklahoma State College, [email protected] K. E. Shirley Arkansas Game and Fish Commission Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas Part of the Zoology Commons Recommended Citation Robison, H. W.; McAllister, C. T.; and Shirley, K. E. (2011) "The iF shes of Crooked Creek (White River Drainage) in Northcentral Arkansas, with New Records and a List of Species," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 65 , Article 16. Available at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol65/iss1/16 This article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able to read, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 65 [2011], Art. 16 The Fishes of Crooked Creek (White River Drainage) in Northcentral Arkansas, with New Records and a List of Species H.W.
    [Show full text]
  • Risk Assessment of the Alien Smallmouth Bass (Micropterus Dolomieu)
    2017 Risk assessment of the alien smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu) M.E. Schiphouwer, R.P.W.H. Felix, G.A. van Duinen, L. de Hoop, P.C. de Hullu, J. Matthews, G. van der Velde & R.S.E.W. Leuven 1 Risk assessment of the alien smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu) M.E. Schiphouwer, R.P.W.H. Felix, G.A. van Duinen, L. de Hoop, P.C. de Hullu, J. Matthews, G. van der Velde & R.S.E.W. Leuven 24th December 2017 Netherlands Centre of Expertise for Exotic Species (NEC-E): Bargerveen Foundation, Bureau Natuurbalans - Limes Divergens, RAVON and Radboud University (Institute for Water and Wetland Research, Department of Environmental Science) Commissioned by the Invasive Alien Species Team Office for Risk Assessment and Research Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority 2 Series of Reports Environmental Science The Reports Environmental Science are edited and published by the Department of Environmental Science, Institute for Water and Wetland Research, Faculty of Science, Radboud University, Heyendaalseweg 135, 6525 AJ Nijmegen, the Netherlands (tel. secretariat: + 31 (0)24 365 32 81). Reports Environmental Science 527 Title: Risk assessment of the alien smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu) Authors: M.E. Schiphouwer, R.P.W.H. Felix, G.A. van Duinen, L. de Hoop, P.C. de Hullu, J. Matthews, G. van der Velde & R.S.E.W. Leuven Cover photo: Smallmouth bass © E. Engbretson, US Fish and Wildlife Service Project management: Dr. P.C. de Hullu, Bargerveen Foundation, Toernooiveld 1, 6525 ED Nijmegen, the Netherlands, e-mail: [email protected] Quality assurance: Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishes of the Dakotas
    South Dakota State University Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange Electronic Theses and Dissertations 2020 Fishes of the Dakotas Kathryn Schlafke South Dakota State University Follow this and additional works at: https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/etd Part of the Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons, and the Biology Commons Recommended Citation Schlafke, Kathryn, "Fishes of the Dakotas" (2020). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 3942. https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/etd/3942 This Thesis - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FISHES OF THE DAKOTAS BY KATHRYN SCHLAFKE A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Science Major in Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences Specialization in Fisheries Science South Dakota State University 2020 ii THESIS ACCEPTANCE PAGE Kathryn Schlafke This thesis is approved as a creditable and independent investigation by a candidate for the master’s degree and is acceptable for meeting the thesis requirements for this degree. Acceptance of this does not imply that the conclusions reached by the candidate are necessarily the conclusions of the major department. Brian Graeb, Ph.D. Advisor Date Michele R. Dudash Department Head Date Dean, Graduate School Date iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would first like to thank my advisors throughout this project, Dr. Katie Bertrand and Dr. Brian Graeb for giving me the opportunity to work towards a graduate degree at South Dakota State University.
    [Show full text]
  • A Distributional Checklist of the Fishes of Kentucky
    A Distributional Checklist of the Fishes of Kentucky BROOKS M. BURR Department of Zoology, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Illinois 62901 ABSTRACT. —A compilation of records of fishes from Kentucky waters based on specimens deposited in museums, personal collecting, and accepted literature reports revealed that 229 species occur or did oc- cur in the state. A substantial amount of new distributional data is presented in the form of an annotated list including records of several species of fishes previously unreported from the state. Distributional statements in the checklist are based on individual spot maps completed for all Kentucky fishes. A list of five problematical species is included at the end of the checklist. INTRODUCTION The fish fauna of Kentucky is more diverse than that of any other in- land area of comparable size in North America except Tennessee and Alabama. Presently, 229 species are known to occur or to have occurred in Kentucky waters and only 10 or 11 are the result of introduction by man. A major factor contributing to the present completeness of our knowledge of the Kentucky fish fauna has been its rich history of ichthyological investigations going back to the time of one of North America's earliest ichthyologists, Constantine Samuel Rafinesque. Since Rafinesque's groundbreaking work on Ohio River valley fishes (1820) there have been four other reports on Kentucky fishes (Woolman 1892, Garman 1894, Evermann 1918, Clay 1975). Woolman's study is of im- mense historical value in documenting the distribution of many Ken- tucky fishes before most of the changes brought on by man took place.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Character, Plants, and Animals of the Inner Bluegrass Region of Kentucky: Past, Present, and Future
    University of Kentucky UKnowledge Biology Science, Technology, and Medicine 1991 Bluegrass Land and Life: Land Character, Plants, and Animals of the Inner Bluegrass Region of Kentucky: Past, Present, and Future Mary E. Wharton Georgetown College Roger W. Barbour University of Kentucky Click here to let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Thanks to the University of Kentucky Libraries and the University Press of Kentucky, this book is freely available to current faculty, students, and staff at the University of Kentucky. Find other University of Kentucky Books at uknowledge.uky.edu/upk. For more information, please contact UKnowledge at [email protected]. Recommended Citation Wharton, Mary E. and Barbour, Roger W., "Bluegrass Land and Life: Land Character, Plants, and Animals of the Inner Bluegrass Region of Kentucky: Past, Present, and Future" (1991). Biology. 1. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/upk_biology/1 ..., .... _... -- ... -- / \ ' \ \ /·-- ........ '.. -, 1 ' c. _ r' --JRichmond 'I MADISON CO. ) ' GARRARD CO. CJ Inner Bluegrass, ,. --, Middle Ordovician outcrop : i lancaster CJ Eden Hills and Outer Bluegrass, ~-- ' Upper Ordovician outcrop THE INNER BLUEGRASS OF KENTUCKY This page intentionally left blank This page intentionally left blank Land Character, Plants, and Animals of the Inner Bluegrass Region of Kentucl<y Past, Present, and Future MARY E. WHARTON and ROGER W. BARBOUR THE UNIVERSITY PRESS OF KENTUCKY Publication of this book was assisted by a grant from the Land and Nature Trust of the Bluegrass. Copyright © 1991 by The University Press of Kentucky Scholarly publisher for the Commonwealth, serving Bellarmine College, Berea College, Centre College of Kentucky, Eastern Kentucky University, The Filson Club, Georgetown College, Kentucky Historical Society, Kentucky State University, Morehead State University, Murray State University, Northern Kentucky University, TI:ansylvania University, University of Kentucky, University of Louisville, and Western Kentucky University.
    [Show full text]