Ogzogzanis Pattersoni Eigenmann, Standard Length L~ 87.2 Mm A= Dorsal View, B =Lateral View, and C = Ventral View L
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
STATUS ·OF TROGLOGLANIS :pAnERSONI EIGDIMAHN, THE . 'TOOTllLESS ·;auNDCAT STATUS .OF SATAN EURYSTOMUS.· HUBBS.· .AND BAl11Y, THI 'WID;EMOUTH BLINDCAT ,-............- ,..,... ~ r•&~_., .. rvn ·S"n& °'PISll ·AND WILDUFE .SERVICE .ALBUQUERQUE. tlEW .atCO :GLENN LONGLEY HENRY. 'KARNEI, JR. - 1919 .. -r·- 1 \. .r STATUS OF TROGLOGLANIS PATTERSONI EIGENMANN, THE TOOTHLESS BLINDCAT (' l by ~r Glenn Longley and Henry Karnei, Jr. [ Aquatic Station Southwest Texas State University r San Marcos, Texas 78666 k .. f k Contract il4-l6-0002-77-035 i .' . ' tL June 30, .1978 ' " [ Project Leader rr L James E. Johnson Endangered Species Biologist u. s. Fish and Wildlife Service P. o. Box 1306 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103 1· /: L r I. .r- L_,i ! -r~~} , r L , ABSTRACT Twenty-six specimens of P:rog1..ogZ.anis patte:rsoni Eigenmann were collected during this study. New ·evidence about ecological .relationships is presented including current status, distribution, ....[ £eeding habits, parasitism, and population levels. "l'he study . ' area was the Central Pool of the Edwards Aquifer in Bexar County, ''. ' . '. [;;;,.. .Texas9 This report is submitted .in ful£illment of Contract No,. 14- "-~. 16-0002-77-035 by Glenn Longley and Henry Karnei, Jr .. under the '.m sponsorship of the u .. s. Fish and Wil.d.life .service. The report ·covers the period from March l., J.977 to Ma,y 31, 1978 .. ~ .:rn ·.~ l~ .. '[ !~~ ;I f '!ii .I )'l 1)., : ~;:~ k~- . .' D ; ·-- ""'!) . '·Ll· ., .,,·::i ' ii [J' ~ CONTENTS ii ••[ Abstract • • ,a. ·• .. .. 0 . .. ·• . .. iv Figures .• 0 0 • • . ·• . ~ . ~ . "f Table v Appendices v . .. .. O O O 9 • e 9 • • • • e e ~ 0 ·• ·O • Acknowledgements ~ ~ ~ .. .. e a e 0 • • G e a e e 4 • a 4 0 vi f :Introduction .. .. ·• .. .. 1 Background • 1 • 4 • ·• Q o a • ~ • • • • ·• . 1 Distinguishing Characteristics . ... .. ·• ·• . 10 ·nistribution • ,.ff.. • . • • • • • .• 0 • ·• ·• ... ·& ·• • :• • 14 ~ Habitat • • O .e ·e • G ~ • 0 • -·· 0 ·• 0 0 • ·O ~ • ~ • 0 • •• 0 21 ·~: Essential Habitat • • • • • • • ·• • 4 • • • • • • • ·• • 0 • 31 Nutritional Needs and Feeding Habits • . 32 ·f Reproduction and Development_ .... • • • • • • • • e • e • 36 Population Level • • all • .. 0 .. .. .. .. .. .. 36 -~ Parasitism and Predation . .. ·• . .. ·O 9 o 40 ·~ Reasons for Current Status 0 • • ·• • • 0 • • • • • 40 Conservation and Recovery • .• ... o • • • • • • • • .. • • .. .. 41 i Literature Cited . ·• . 42 ~ [ [ [ iii [, -r L~-- .<:·. l ·. .C _,; FIGURES ·F Number Page ! t~· l . !frog'Z.og'Z.anis pattersoni Eigenmann • • • o • • • • 3 2 A comparison between the stonecat, Noturus flavus and the toothless .bl.indcat, !f'rogZ.og'Z.a.nis patte7'soni . 9 0 0 • • • ·• 0 • ·• • . .. 0 •• • • • e 5 .... ' ~< 3 A comparison between the black bullhead, IctaZurus meias and the toothless blindcat, ,I:;-,, :frog 7,ogianis pattersoni .. • • .. • • • .. .• • • • 6 j ;~ 1, , 4 Phylogeny of the Ictaluridae 0 • -0 •Cl • .. • • • • 8 . .~ 5 Mouth structure of Trog7,ogZ.anis pattersoni .. • • 9 6 Col.lection locations of ProgZ.og"lanie pattersoni .. 11 i 7 Bead region of !f'roglogZ.anis patte'Z'soni ,. • • 15 ;I 8 Geologic cross-section of Bexar County • • 0 20 9 Hypothetical diagram showing how water in the ril cavernous Edwards may flow • • • • • • • .. • . 22 10 Water temperature and depth of selected wells in the .study area • • • • .• • • • .. • • • • • . .. 23 ;-~ ',. ll Edwards Aquifer • • . .. 24 '. r Cl • • • 26 ;. 12 Water level contours in Bexar County 13 Concentrations of dissolved solids, sulfates, and chlorides in selected wells • • .. .. • o 0 " • • • 27 i..... 14 Projected flow of San Antonio Springs . 29 . ~. 15 Hydrologic models ·• . 30 r· 16 Comparison of the intestines of Trogiogianis .(' pattersoni and Satan eurystomus • · • • · · · 35 iv ' 0. TABLE Number Page l Rel.ative abundance of troglobitic aquatic invertebrates from artesian wells in Bexar County, Texas .. • • • • • .. • • • • • .• • ct 0 .. .. 37 J~; .. ~ '! APPENDICES J~;: .Ji l Proportional measurements of J.':rogZ.ogZ.anis pattersoni • • • • ~ • • • • ~ ~ • • • • • • 46 ·I 2 Physicochemical analyses of wells sampled '· during the study period .. • • • • • • • • 52 -·f 3 Numbers of TrogZ.og1.anis pattersoni co.llected "-· -· during this study • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 54 [ .. , l . \ •... rt;~ ..': 6 ·L L ···-·L v -r t l~ 1·r it. :·r ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 1[~ Dr. D. G. Huffman, of the Aquatic Station, Southwest Texas I State University, examined specimens for parasites. We wish to extend sincere appreciation to Mr. Richard D.. Reeves, u.s .. G.. S. in San Antonio, for his assistance and encouragement during this ' \ study. The City Water Board and Mr .. Ozzie A. Bcynie cooperated \ by allowing us to sample a city water well. We appreciate the assistance of Mr. Richard Verstraeten and his brothers in making '·l5s::·:~»·;· ~-:~; their wells and irrigation facilities available to us. ,. [:) We would like to give special thanks to Gail Lindholm for illustrating the fishes fo~ us. The cooperation of Southwest Texas State University is grate- fully acknowledged. .,- . ~. [ ".>- vi [ ·~. [ [ f f' INTRODUCTION [. P:raog"Log1.anis pat'tePsoni Eigenmann, 1919 is commonly referred to as the toothless blindcat. This species is classified a,s in- :17" {~, di cated below: Phylmn Chordata Class Osteichthyes Order Siluriformes Family Ic.taluridae This fish is presently protected under the State of Texas nongame rule 127.70.12.001-.006 under the authority of Sections 43.021 through 43.030 and Sections 67.001 through 67.005, Texas Parks and Wildlife Code. A permit is required to take this fish. .. From the study of distribution patterns, population esti ': ·. .' [ mates, and general condition of this unique ecosystem, we are con ',. ' vinced that this species.is not endangered. There is considerable ·. ~ l· evidence that the nearby occurrence of the "Bad Water Zone" is required for its existence. BACKGROUND r:· ~ {" ORIGINAL DISCOVERY AND DESCRIPTION ·t~ In 1919 c. H. Eigenmann described a new blind catfish from r L San An tonic , Texas • The specimen had been obtained from a well belonging to George w. Brackenridge. No date of collection was r l .L".·.... indicated in the original description (Eigenmann, 1919)0 Mr. Brackenridge gave the specimen to Professor J. T. Patterson of the University of Texas who sent it to Eigenmann for determination. The holotype is catalogued as No. 15240 Indiana University Museum. Eigenmann named the new £ish TrogZ.ogZ.anis pattersoni (Figure l). The generic name TrogZ.ogZ.anis is derived from (G)Trog'Lo = Cave, (G)gZ.anis = catfish, originally from Glanis, the name of a river. ·IT ,:1~~ The specific or trivial name, pattersoni, honors Professor J .. T. ' :·· Patterson. This original description was very brief and was based ': ... i[ ~ on one specimen .. J--; i['. The second known specimen was caught in June, 1934 by Josef Boecke in a ditch fed by an artesian well on his farm 4.42 km east and 2.0 km north of the Alamo in San Antonio. It was an immature FY.......,·· [,' 20. 7. G).. A much more complete description based on this specimen ,.p was included in a paper comparing the blind catfishes from Texas .L -.. , . (Hubbs and Bailey, 1947) .. The last known T. pattersoni collected prior to this study was caught by Mr. John E. Werler from a 1280 m deep well on the 0. Ro Mitchell ranch, Von Ormy, Texas ; 16. 4 3 km southwest of San Antonio. The .date of collection was unknown but the specimen was received at Tulane University in 1955 (Suttkus, 1961). This L specimen is in the Tulane University Museum collection Noo TU10808. Suttkus provides additional descriptive information particularly [ regarding osteology. [ r 2 L .\.:: I t .... f-· l L A r -~f ·l~ F 'l( .; re_ ·L .F L.. .. c "\. .. ' ; c c T·"'--" r Figure 1. T:!'ogZogZanis pattersoni Eigenmann, standard length L~ 87.2 mm A= Dorsal view, B =Lateral view, and C = Ventral view L .· [ . 3 [ TAXONOMIC PROBLEMS [. The three papers mentioned contributed to the description of ; .._:' T. pattersoni and they also included proposals regarding the tax .[' onomic relationships of this species to known surface forms. Eigen- mann (1919) concluded that T. pa:t;tersoni was most related to the r .L Madtoms genus Noturus (formerly Schi 'Lbeodes) • He reasoned that the position of the dorsal and ventral ·fins, as well as the adi- pose fin indicate this relationship. A comparison of the two genera is illustrated in Figure 2~ Hubbs and Bailey, (1947) and Suttkus (1961) agree that T. pat- tersoni is most probably derived from an ancestor of the bullhead genus Icta'Lurus (formerly Ameiurus). Hubbs and Bailey reasoned that since the venoin pore in the pectoral axil is lacking and the .[ adipose fin, al though large, is separated from the pro.current caudal rays, the derivation from Ictaiurus is more plausible. Suttkus E gave more evidence of the relationship to Icta"Lurus by comparing [ the shapes of the dermethmoid bone of the skull. In Figure 3 the genus Icta'Lurus is compared with T. pattersoni. The monotypic ·.~· ·L genus Trog'Log'Lanis is very highly differentiated from other members of the fcunily Ictaluridae. The highly specialized, toothless mouth has undergone more change than other external morphological f ea- fil tures. Since there is a lack of fossil evidence linking this form to surface forms it may be premature to try to establish relation- fL ships with epigean genera. The relationships will be understood much better after physiological and biochemical characters are studied. In hypogean populations genetic drift