DOCSLIB.ORG

Notropis Mekistocholas, a New Herbivorous Cyprinid Fish ~Ndernic to the Cape Fear River Basin, North Carolina

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Notropis Mekistocholas, a New Herbivorous Cyprinid Fish ~Ndernic to the Cape Fear River Basin, North Carolina Notropis mekistocholas, a New Herbivorous Cyprinid Fish ~ndernic to the Cape Fear River Basin, North Carolina FRA1"lKLIN F. SNELSON, JR. Notropis mekistocholas is described as a new species. It is unusual within the genus in exhibiting herbivorous adaptations-an elongate, convoluted intestine and black peritoneum. It is compared with N. alborus and N. procne, two sympatric relatives that differ in lacking herbivorous modifications, in hav.ing seven rather than eight anal rays, and in numerous other features. N. mekistocholas is the first known endemic species from the Cape Fear drainage in North Carolina. It has a very restricted distribution in the east-central Piedmont province, being known from only four streams in Chatham and Harnett counties. Intestinal modifications suggestive of an herbivorous diet are reported for N. anogenus and some species of the subgenus Luxilus. There is no evidence to suggest that N. mekistocholas should be aligned with the south. western genus Dionda, which contains herbivorous species superifically similar to Notropis species. Closest relatives of N. mekistocholas appear to be N. procne and N. stramineus. INTRODUCTION The number of predorsal scale rows in- HE genus NotroPis usually has been char. cludes all oblique scale rows crossing an imaginary line between the anterior inser- T acterized as having a short, S-shaped ali- mentary tract, distinguishing it from closely tion of the dorsal fin and the cleithrum. The related groups containing herbivorous forms first row counted was the one including the with elongate intestines. Discovery of a first predorsal scale; the last row counted was unique new species of Notropis, closely re- the one including the first (anterior-most) lated to N. procne (Cope), with an elongate lateral line scale. Single scales interposed be- gut tends to obscure further the already- tween two otherwise regular rows were not vague limits of certain North American counted. However, two or more scales in a cyprinid genera. regular oblique series were considered a row even if that series terminated before. cross- This new minnow was first discovered in ing the dorsal midline or the lateral line. 1962 in a poorly collected region of the Cape Fear River drainage in east-central North The breast was defined as that triangular- Carolina. Subsequent collecting has revealed shaped area forward of an imaginary line that it is endemic to avery restricted area joining the most posterior point of the bases within that system. Although its situation of the pectoral fins. Extent of breast scala- tion was estimated to the nearest 5%. Height at present is not precarious, its limited dis- and width of the exposed portion of the third tribution and the constant threat of habitat lateral line scale behind the head were de- alteration suggest that this new form should termined under a dissecting microscope be added to the growing list of endangered equipped with an ocular micrometer; the species. results were expressed in a height.to.width ratio. Gill rakers on the lower limb of the METHODS first branchial arch were enumerated on the Counting and measuring procedures fol- right side for ease of handling. Any raker lowed Hubbs and Lagler (1958:19-26) ex- that straddled the angle of the arch was in. cept as noted. Expression of meristic data cluded in the count. Vertebral numbers in the form (8)9-11 (13) indicates that ex- were determined from radiographs. The treme values for this character were 8 and Weberian apparatus was included as four 13, and that 85-95% of the observed counts and the hypural as one. were between 9 and 11. The opercular membrane was excluded 449 450 COPEIA, 1971, NO.3 Fig. 1. A and B. Lateral and dorsal views of Notropis mekistocholas, gravid adult female 45.4 mm SL, NCSM 3105. C and D. Lateral and dorsal views of NotroPis procne, tuberculate adult male 47.2 mm SL, NCSM 2974. (The slightly deeper body of the N. mekistocholas specimen is due to enlarged ovaries.) from head length and postorbital head length plane. Body width was the maximum di- measurements. Fleshy orbit length was the mension, measured between the pectoral greatest transverse distance between the and pelvic fin bases. Distance between the fleshy margins of the orbit, excluding any dorsal fin origin and the occiput was mea- marginal skin that grew inward to cover the sured along the dorsal midline. Postdorsal cornea. Distance from the dorsal fin origin length was taken from the origin of the dor- to the lateral line was measured in a vertical sal fin to the caudal base. Prepelvic and SNELSON-NEW NOTROPIS 451 count of either canal. Unlike some recent authors (e.g. Reno, 1969), I follow Illick (1956) and include in the infraorbital canal those pores in the postocular commissure in addition to those in the infraorbital sensu stricto. N otroPis mekistocholas n. sp. Cape Fear Shiner B Figs. lA, B; 2A, B Apparently there are no references to this - - species in the literature. All of the material that Jordan (1889) recorded as N. procne from the Cape Fear has been reexamined by c Hubbs and Raney (1947) and myself and :.~,~,,:,:,"~-~~ found to represent either N. albarus or N. '. pracne. ) Holotype.-U.S. National Museum (USNM) 205299 (formerly NCSM 4928); a tUberculate ~~'. "-'~''''~;: adult male 55.7 mID SL; Cape Fear (Deep) dr., N. C., Chatham Co., Rocky R., N. C. D Hwy. 902 bridge, 7.0 air miles SW center - Pittsboro; 2 June 1968; Franklin F. Snelson, Jr. and William M. Palmer (FFS-68-31). - Paratypes.- Thirty-six specimens collected Fig. 2. A. Ventral view of the alimentary with the holotype are distributed as follows: tract of Notropis mekistocholas with ventral body Cornell University (CU) 64397 (7 speci- wall, viscera, and mesentaries removed. B. Ali- mens); Tulane University (TU) 63272 (7); mentary tract of N. mekistocholas, diagrammatic. University of Florida (UF) 17303 (7); Uni- C. Ventral view of the alimentary tract of NotroPis procne with ventral body wall, viscera, versity of Michigan Museum of Zoology and mesentaries removed. D. Alimentary tract (UMMZ) 197680 (7); USNM 205300 (8). of N. procne, diagrammatic. Anterior to the left. Other material.-None of the following are designated as type material: All were col- peranal measurements were taken from the lected in the Cape Fear drainage in North insertion of the first ray of those fins to the Carolina and are deposited in the North tip of the upper lip. The distance between Carolina State Natural History Museum. the anal fin origin and caudal fin base is NCSM 2078 (6 specimens); Harnett Co., self-explanatory. Neal's Cr., Co. Hwy. 1441 bridge, 2.5 miles In determining the length of the alimen- W Angier. NCSM 2770 (4), 2976 (30), tary tract, the gut was severed immediately 3105 (13), 4842 (13); Chatham Co., Robeson behind the transverse septum and at the Cr., Co. Hwy. 1939 bridge, 4.5 air miles ESE anus; and all the viscera were removed. Con- center Pittsboro. NCSM 3278 (16); Harnett nective tissue and organs were dissected Co., Parker's Cr., Co. Hwy. 1450 bridge, 7.5 away; and the alimentary tract was straight- air miles WSW Fuquay-Varina. NCSM 3463 ened, without stretching, along a steel milli- (17), 3707 (5); Chatham Co., Rocky R., Co. meter rule. Hwy. 1010 bridge, 5.5 miles SW center Pitts- Terminology, abbreviations, and counting boro. NCSM 3883 (15); Chatham Co., procedures for the cephalic lateral line fol- Rocky R., U. S. Hwy. 15-501 bridge, 6.75 low Illick (1956) with these exceptions: miles S Pittsboro. NCSM 4126 (29), 5281 1) The broad separation of the supratem- (32); Chatham Co., Rocky R., N. C. Hwy. poral canal at the dorsal midline is indicated 902 bridge, 5.5 air miles SW center Pittsboro. by a comma; otherwise, interruptions along A total of 276 specimens of the new species the length of a canal are indicated by a plus has been examined. (+) sign. 2) A common pore at the junction Diagnosis.-Distinguished from all mem- of the supratemporal canal and postocular bers of the genus in having an elongate ali- commissure was not included in the pore mentary tract with two accessory convo- 452 COPEIA, 1971, NO.3 OJ a> "'! ,~ '" ..,.. :c ;:: c-.i u OJ :: ~"" Q 0 Q .... z a> <C " ~ '";:: ..'" c ~ .c 0 -; = a: ,.!j <0 I~ <C '" :..; os ... i .... <.> "" '" '" Q Z '" -: ~ I/) Q ... z <C .... ..., .; ~ co ..,.. .... .... C'l '" '" 0'> '" '" is '"~ co ~ ;;i 0'> c ..,. C1J .. ..,.. z ... co -9.Q '" " "" I . 101 '" "" <:> :<!; ~ <:> ~ ~ ~ ..,.. I "," ~ ~ 0'1 <C 1 '" ..:; Q ..,.. 0> ... c z c>I <:> 0> 0'1 co <C "S:=- .... .... 00 c>I ..!. .... ~ ~ ... «> co :;;; -: <:> <:> C'l co ..,.. ~.... "" «> e ..:;'" .. ..!. " ~ :: en '" " ... ~'"t Q ~ OC') C'l <:> c c <C .... .. .~ a: '" ~ '".:; ..; 0; ... ~ '" «> «> «> <0 o~ "" 0;'" :<!; ~ co CC') " ... C'l C'l <:> "e l <.> <0 '" ~ ~ C'l C'l ~ ..!. ~ '".. ~ :..; os I/) 101 C1J .... ~ ~ ~ <:>I/) ..,.. <C .... ~ ~ 0'" z: co ... I 101 C'l 0 ... C'l ,.. ..,. Z '" ~ :0 .... co S ~ ... .... :::: <:>..,. 0 C'l oJ I -<"" ... C'l I/) ~~ «> .... C1J '" ::> If ~ ... <:> 0; CC') C'l ~ <.> '7 ~~ ... C'l c>I !;; ~ '" <0 ..,. ..,.. CI <C 0'1 -: 0 " ... .... <:> ;:3 '" "" ~ '" "" '" ..!."" <C C'l I:Q ~ tt) ... "E 0'I C'l <C .... ..,.. :! ~ ... <:> 1 '" CC') .... ~ -< os '" C'l -: ...:i '" ..,.. ",;> ...'i' .,. .... ..,.. '" ""Z 101" :') <C .... <C ::> «> ~ g'-' 0'> 8 <:> C'l 101 ;:i C'l 0'1 :;;~ '" '" C'l C'l J5 ~ 101 c>I o~ ..,.. ~ " '" z'" 0'" ... ~ '" ::> '"Oi ~!;; ;. u Z .; 101 ..::: ... ::> .. .. 0- '" '" ..:; ~ 'S 101 C C Q .. -<:: . u ~ -<:: -<:: " c ... (5 ~ I:: " ;:: '" ... ;:'I> ~" 'I> ~~'" ...; ..'" ~ 'I> ;:: .2~~ .~ :;;; ....>- ;: .. '" C 2 "- ,Q fIj ~;; ~ ..c ~ IJ '" Q., c '" c ..c'" '" E" ... ~ ~ 0 c oJ ~;;!: -9. \.. 0 ~ .." :2 S -9. .. e ~ ~u -9. .. '"-: " :..;:..; :..; 1-< :..; :..; :..; :..; :..; :..; SNELSON-NEW NOTROPIS 453 TABLE 2. FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS FOR SOME MERISTIC CHARACTERS OF Notropis mekistocholas, N.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Carmine Shiner (Notropis Percobromus) in Canada
    COSEWIC Assessment and Update Status Report on the Carmine Shiner Notropis percobromus in Canada THREATENED 2006 COSEWIC COSEPAC COMMITTEE ON THE STATUS OF COMITÉ SUR LA SITUATION ENDANGERED WILDLIFE DES ESPÈCES EN PÉRIL IN CANADA AU CANADA COSEWIC status reports are working documents used in assigning the status of wildlife species suspected of being at risk. This report may be cited as follows: COSEWIC 2006. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the carmine shiner Notropis percobromus in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vi + 29 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm). Previous reports COSEWIC 2001. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the carmine shiner Notropis percobromus and rosyface shiner Notropis rubellus in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. v + 17 pp. Houston, J. 1994. COSEWIC status report on the rosyface shiner Notropis rubellus in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. 1-17 pp. Production note: COSEWIC would like to acknowledge D.B. Stewart for writing the update status report on the carmine shiner Notropis percobromus in Canada, prepared under contract with Environment Canada, overseen and edited by Robert Campbell, Co-chair, COSEWIC Freshwater Fishes Species Specialist Subcommittee. In 1994 and again in 2001, COSEWIC assessed minnows belonging to the rosyface shiner species complex, including those in Manitoba, as rosyface shiner (Notropis rubellus). For additional copies contact: COSEWIC Secretariat c/o Canadian Wildlife Service Environment Canada Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: (819) 997-4991 / (819) 953-3215 Fax: (819) 994-3684 E-mail: COSEWIC/[email protected] http://www.cosewic.gc.ca Également disponible en français sous le titre Évaluation et Rapport de situation du COSEPAC sur la tête carminée (Notropis percobromus) au Canada – Mise à jour.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Gordon Myers, Executive Director
    North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Gordon Myers, Executive Director March 1, 2016 Honorable Jimmy Dixon Honorable Chuck McGrady N.C. House of Representatives N.C. House of Representatives 300 N. Salisbury Street, Room 416B 300 N. Salisbury Street, Room 304 Raleigh, NC 27603-5925 Raleigh, NC 27603-5925 Senator Trudy Wade N.C. Senate 300 N. Salisbury Street, Room 521 Raleigh, NC 27603-5925 Dear Honorables: I am submitting this report to the Environmental Review Committee in fulfillment of the requirements of Section 4.33 of Session Law 2015-286 (H765). As directed, this report includes a review of methods and criteria used by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission on the State protected animal list as defined in G.S. 113-331 and compares them to federal and state agencies in the region. This report also reviews North Carolina policies specific to introduced species along with determining recommendations for improvements to these policies among state and federally listed species as well as nonlisted animals. If you have questions or need additional information, please contact me by phone at (919) 707-0151 or via email at [email protected]. Sincerely, Gordon Myers Executive Director North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Report on Study Conducted Pursuant to S.L. 2015-286 To the Environmental Review Commission March 1, 2016 Section 4.33 of Session Law 2015-286 (H765) directed the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) to “review the methods and criteria by which it adds, removes, or changes the status of animals on the state protected animal list as defined in G.S.
    [Show full text]
  • RFP No. 212F for Endangered Species Research Projects for the Prairie Chub
    1 RFP No. 212f for Endangered Species Research Projects for the Prairie Chub Final Report Contributing authors: David S. Ruppel, V. Alex Sotola, Ozlem Ablak Gurbuz, Noland H. Martin, and Timothy H. Bonner Addresses: Department of Biology, Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas 78666 (DSR, VAS, NHM, THB) Kirkkonaklar Anatolian High School, Turkish Ministry of Education, Ankara, Turkey (OAG) Principal investigators: Timothy H. Bonner and Noland H. Martin Email: [email protected], [email protected] Date: July 31, 2017 Style: American Fisheries Society Funding sources: Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, Turkish Ministry of Education- Visiting Scholar Program (OAG) Summary Four hundred mesohabitats were sampled from 36 sites and 20 reaches within the upper Red River drainage from September 2015 through September 2016. Fishes (N = 36,211) taken from the mesohabitats represented 14 families and 49 species with the most abundant species consisting of Red Shiner Cyprinella lutrensis, Red River Shiner Notropis bairdi, Plains Minnow Hybognathus placitus, and Western Mosquitofish Gambusia affinis. Red River Pupfish Cyprinodon rubrofluviatilis (a species of greatest conservation need, SGCN) and Plains Killifish Fundulus zebrinus were more abundant within prairie streams (e.g., swift and shallow runs with sand and silt substrates) with high specific conductance. Red River Shiner (SGCN), Prairie Chub Macrhybopsis australis (SGCN), and Plains Minnow were more abundant within prairie 2 streams with lower specific conductance. The remaining 44 species of fishes were more abundant in non-prairie stream habitats with shallow to deep waters, which were more common in eastern tributaries of the upper Red River drainage and Red River mainstem. Prairie Chubs comprised 1.3% of the overall fish community and were most abundant in Pease River and Wichita River.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish of Greatest Conservation Need
    APPENDIX G. FISH OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED Taxa Common Name Scientific Name Tier Opportunity Ranking Fish Alewife Alosa pseudoharengus IV a Fish Allegheny pearl dace Margariscus margarita IV b Fish American brook lamprey Lampetra appendix IV c Fish American eel Anguilla rostrata III a Fish American shad Alosa sapidissima IV a Fish Appalachia darter Percina gymnocephala IV c Fish Ashy darter Etheostoma cinereum I b Fish Atlantic sturgeon Acipenser oxyrinchus I b Fish Banded sunfish Enneacanthus obesus IV c Fish Bigeye jumprock Moxostoma ariommum III c Fish Black sculpin Cottus baileyi IV c Fish Blackbanded sunfish Enneacanthus chaetodon I a Fish Blackside darter Percina maculata IV c Fish Blotched chub Erimystax insignis IV c Fish Blotchside logperch Percina burtoni II a Fish Blueback Herring Alosa aestivalis IV a Fish Bluebreast darter Etheostoma camurum IV c Fish Blueside darter Etheostoma jessiae IV c Fish Bluestone sculpin Cottus sp. 1 III c Fish Brassy Jumprock Moxostoma sp. IV c Fish Bridle shiner Notropis bifrenatus I a Fish Brook silverside Labidesthes sicculus IV c Fish Brook Trout Salvelinus fontinalis IV a Fish Bullhead minnow Pimephales vigilax IV c Fish Candy darter Etheostoma osburni I b Fish Carolina darter Etheostoma collis II c Virginia Wildlife Action Plan 2015 APPENDIX G. FISH OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED Fish Carolina fantail darter Etheostoma brevispinum IV c Fish Channel darter Percina copelandi III c Fish Clinch dace Chrosomus sp. cf. saylori I a Fish Clinch sculpin Cottus sp. 4 III c Fish Dusky darter Percina sciera IV c Fish Duskytail darter Etheostoma percnurum I a Fish Emerald shiner Notropis atherinoides IV c Fish Fatlips minnow Phenacobius crassilabrum II c Fish Freshwater drum Aplodinotus grunniens III c Fish Golden Darter Etheostoma denoncourti II b Fish Greenfin darter Etheostoma chlorobranchium I b Fish Highback chub Hybopsis hypsinotus IV c Fish Highfin Shiner Notropis altipinnis IV c Fish Holston sculpin Cottus sp.
    [Show full text]
  • Information on the NCWRC's Scientific Council of Fishes Rare
    A Summary of the 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes in North Carolina Submitted by Bryn H. Tracy North Carolina Division of Water Resources North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Raleigh, NC On behalf of the NCWRC’s Scientific Council of Fishes November 01, 2014 Bigeye Jumprock, Scartomyzon (Moxostoma) ariommum, State Threatened Photograph by Noel Burkhead and Robert Jenkins, courtesy of the Virginia Division of Game and Inland Fisheries and the Southeastern Fishes Council (http://www.sefishescouncil.org/). Table of Contents Page Introduction......................................................................................................................................... 3 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes In North Carolina ........... 4 Summaries from the 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes in North Carolina .......................................................................................................................... 12 Recent Activities of NCWRC’s Scientific Council of Fishes .................................................. 13 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part I, Ohio Lamprey .............................................. 14 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part II, “Atlantic” Highfin Carpsucker ...................... 17 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part III, Tennessee Darter ...................................... 20 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part
    [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]
  • A Case Study of Carolina Bays and Ditched Streams at Risk Under the Proposed WOTUS Definition
    CAPE FEAR RIVER WATERSHED: A Case Study of Carolina Bays and Ditched Streams at Risk under the Proposed WOTUS Definition The Cape Fear River. Photo by Kemp Burdette The Cape Fear River Basin is North Carolina’s largest watershed, with an area of over 9,000 square miles. Major tributaries include the Deep River, the Haw River, the Northeast Cape Fear River, the Black River, and the South River. These rivers converge to form a thirty-mile-long estuary before flowing into the Atlantic Ocean at Cape Fear.1 The Cape Fear supplies water to some of the fastest ​ growing counties in the United States;2 roughly one in five North Carolinians gets their drinking ​ water from the Cape Fear, including residents of Greensboro, Fayetteville, and Wilmington.3 ​ The Cape Fear Basin is a popular watershed for a variety of recreation activities. State parks along the river include Haw River State Park, Raven Rock State Park, and Carolina Beach State Park. The faster-flowing water of the upper basin is popular with paddlers, as are the slow meandering blackwater rivers and streams of the lower Cape Fear and estuary. Fishing is very popular; the Cape Fear supports a number of freshwater species, saltwater species, and even anadromous (migratory) species like the endangered sturgeon, striped bass, and shad. Cape Fear River Watershed: Case Study Page 2 of 8 The Cape Fear is North Carolina’s most ecologically diverse watershed; the Lower Cape Fear is notable because it is part of a biodiversity “hotspot,” recording the largest degree of biodiversity on the eastern seaboard of the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Arkansas River Shiner Management Plan for the Canadian River 2 from U
    FINAL - Submitted for Approval Arkansas River Shiner (Notropis girardi) Management Plan for the Canadian River From U. S. Highway 54 at Logan, New Mexico to Lake Meredith, Texas © Konrad Schmidt Canadian River Municipal Water Authority June 2005 Arkansas River Shiner Management Plan for the Canadian River 2 from U. S. Highway 54 at Logan, New Mexico to Lake Meredith Arkansas River Shiner (Notropis girardi) Management Plan for the Canadian River from U. S. Highway 54 at Logan, New Mexico to Lake Meredith, Texas This management plan is a cooperative effort between various local, state, and federal entities. Funding for this plan was provided by the Canadian River Municipal Water Authority. Suggested citation: Canadian River Municipal Water Authority – 2005 – Arkansas River Shiner (Notropis girardi) Management Plan for the Canadian River from U. S. Highway 54 at Logan, New Mexico to Lake Meredith, Texas Preparation of this Plan was accomplished by John C. Williams, acting as Special Advisor under contract to CRMWA. Technical review was provided by Rod Goodwin, Wildlife Biologist and Head of the Water Quality Division of CRMWA. Editorial review was performed by Jolinda Brumley. Cover photograph: Arkansas River Shiner by Ken Collins, USFWS Arkansas River Shiner Management Plan for the Canadian River 3 from U. S. Highway 54 at Logan, New Mexico to Lake Meredith Table of Contents Introduction and Background …………………………………………………………7 Species Biology ...................................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • COPEIA February 1
    2000, No. 1COPEIA February 1 Copeia, 2000(1), pp. 1±10 Phylogenetic Relationships in the North American Cyprinid Genus Cyprinella (Actinopterygii: Cyprinidae) Based on Sequences of the Mitochondrial ND2 and ND4L Genes RICHARD E. BROUGHTON AND JOHN R. GOLD Shiners of the cyprinid genus Cyprinella are abundant and broadly distributed in eastern and central North America. Thirty species are currently placed in the genus: these include six species restricted to Mexico and three barbeled forms formerly placed in different cyprinid genera (primarily Hybopsis). We conducted a molecular phylogenetic analysis of all species of Cyprinella found in the United States, using complete nucleotide sequences of the mitochondrial, protein-coding genes ND2 and ND4L. Maximum-parsimony analysis recovered a single most-parsimonious tree for Cyprinella. Among historically recognized, nonbarbeled Cyprinella, the mitochondrial (mt) DNA tree indicated that basal lineages in Cyprinella are comprised largely of species with linear breeding tubercles and that are endemic to Atlantic and/or Gulf slope drainages, whereas derived lineages are comprised of species broadly distrib- uted in the Mississippi basin and the American Southwest. The Alabama Shiner, C. callistia, was basal in the mtDNA tree, although a monophyletic Cyprinella that in- cluded C. callistia was not supported in more than 50% of bootstrap replicates. There was strong bootstrap support (89%) for a clade that included all species of nonbarbeled Cyprinella (except C. callistia) and two barbeled species, C. labrosa and C. zanema. The third barbeled species, C. monacha, fell outside of Cyprinella sister to a species of Hybopsis. Within Cyprinella were a series of well-supported species groups, although in some cases bootstrap support for relationships among groups was below 50%.
    [Show full text]
  • Notropis Volucellus and Notropis Wickliffi in the Mississippi River Drainage: a Literature Review
    Long Term Resource Monitoring Program Special Report 96-S001 Taxonomic and Distributional Status of Notropis volucellus and Notropis wickliffi in the Mississippi River Drainage: A Literature Review This PDF file may appear different from the printed report because of slight variations incurred by electronic transmission. The substance of the report remains unchanged. July 1996 Taxonomic and Distributional Status of Notropis volucellus and Notropis wickliffi in the Mississippi River Drainage: A Literature Review by Robert A. Hrabik Missouri Department of Conservation Open River Field Station Jackson, Missouri 63755 Prepared for National Biological Service Environmental Management Technical Center 575 Lester Avenue Onalaska, Wisconsin 54650 Project Leader: Steve Gutreuter July 1996 LTRMP Special Reports provide Long Term Resrouce Program partners with scientific and technical support. The opinions and conclusions in LTRMP Special Reports are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the Environmental Management Technical Center. All reports in this series receive anonymous peer review. National Biological Service Environmental Management Technical Center CENTER DIRECTOR Robert L. Delaney ECOLOGICAL MONITORING AND RESEARCH DIRECTOR Steve Gutreuter INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY SERVICES DIRECTOR Norman W. Hildrum INFORMATION TRANSFER AND MEDIA SERVICES MANAGER Terry D'Erchia REPORT EDITOR Deborah K. Harris Cover graphic by Mi Ae Lipe-Butterbrodt Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the National Biological Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. The National Biological Service . gathering, analyzing, and sharing the biological information necessary to support the wise stewardship of the Nation's natural resources. Printed on recycled paper Contents Page Preface ................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Reproductive Timing of the Largescale Stoneroller, Campostoma Oligolepis, in the Flint River, Alabama
    REPRODUCTIVE TIMING OF THE LARGESCALE STONEROLLER, CAMPOSTOMA OLIGOLEPIS, IN THE FLINT RIVER, ALABAMA by DANA M. TIMMS A THESIS Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in The Department of Biological Sciences to The School of Graduate Studies of The University of Alabama in Huntsville HUNTSVILLE, ALABAMA 2017 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my advisor Dr. Bruce Stallsmith for all his guidance on this project and greater dedication to raising awareness to Alabama’s river ecosystems. I am grateful to my other committee members, Dr. Gordon MacGregor and Dr. Debra Moriarity also from UAH. Thanks to everyone who braved the weather and elements on collecting trips: Tiffany Bell, Austin Riley, Chelsie Smith, and Joshua Mann. I would like to thank Megan McEown, Corinne Peacher, and Bonnie Ferguson for dedicating long hours in the lab. Special thanks to Matthew Moore who assisted in collections, lab work, and data processing. Most of all, I would like to thank my husband, Patrick, for his love and encouragement in all my endeavors. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page • List of Figures viii • List of Tables x • CHAPTER ONE: Introduction 1 o Context 1 o Campostoma oligolepis Taxonomy 3 o History of Campostoma oligolepis 4 ▪ Campostoma oligolepis in the South 6 ▪ Campostoma Hybridization 8 ▪ Campostoma Ranges and Species Differentiation 9 ▪ Life History 12 ▪ Reproduction 12 o Purpose and Hypothesis 15 • CHAPTER TWO: Methodology 17 o Laboratory Analysis 19 o Reproductive Data 21 o Ovary and Oocyte Staging 22 o Statistical Analysis 22 • CHAPTER THREE: Results 27 o Reproductive Data 29 ▪ Ovary and Oocyte Development 32 ▪ Testicular Development 39 vi • CHAPTER FOUR: Discussion 40 o Study Limitations 40 o Lateral Line Scale Count 41 o Reproductive Cues and Environmental Influences 42 o Multiple-spawners 42 o Asymmetry of Ovaries 42 o Bourgeois Males 43 o Campostoma variability 44 o Conclusion 45 • WORKS CITED 46 vii LIST OF FIGURES Page • 1.1 Campostoma oligolepis, Largescale Stoneroller, specimens from the Flint River, Alabama.
    [Show full text]