DOCSLIB.ORG

Historic Document – Content May Not Reflect Current Scientific Research, Policies Or Practices

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Historic Document – Content May Not Reflect Current Scientific Research, Policies Or Practices U.S. Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Wildlife Services Historic document – Content may not reflect current scientific research, policies or practices. COOPERATIVE FISHERY UNIT REPORT FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1968 THROUGH JUNE 1969 TRAIN ING UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE BUREAU OF SPORT FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE DIVISION OF FISHERY SERVICES RESOURCE PUBLICATION 80 E RESl=AP-CH CENTEI"' {lBRARV WILDUF - · ' ~ ~ilill)lll~l~~ll I: S/'~~ P~ .'"'.' ~::'~ ~c·~~i E 90018774 OUNER, COL01\KUO t02 As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Depart- ment of the Interior has basic responsibilitie s for water, fish, wildlife, mineral, land, park, and recreational re- sources. Indian and Territorial affairs are ocher major concerns of America's "Department of Natural Resources." The Department works co assure the wisest choice in managing all our resources so each will ma lee its full contribution to a better United States -- now and in the future. Cover drawing by Craig P. Phillips, National Fisheries Center and Aquarium, Washington, D.C. For sole by tho Superlnumdont ol Docwncnta, U.S. Oovernmont Prlnll11& omce Wo.shln&ton, D.C. 20402 • Price 76 oont.s UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR , WALTER J . HICKEL , SECRETARY Leslie L. Glasgow, Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wi ldlif e, Parks, and Marine Resources Fish and Wildlife Service, Charles H. Meacham , Corrunissioner Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, John S. Gottschalk, Direct or COOPERATIVE FISHERY UNIT REPORT for the Period January 1968 through June 1969 A Nation-wide Cooperative Program of Training, Investigation and Application by the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, State Game and Fi s h Departments, and Colleges and Universities . DIVIS ION OF FISHERY SERVICES Willis King, Chief Prepared by Edward C. Kinney, Chief, Branch of Cooperative Fishery Units RESOURCE PUBLICATION 80 Washington, D . C. November 1969 111•11 90018774 Li.mno l oi•y s tuclc nls at lhc Ma i. nc Coopc r: ali.ve Fis her y Uni.l condu c ting wal e r: a nal y s i s . Mini..itur:e muskc llunce h.1tchc ry .1t the New Yo r:k Coopc r:ntivc Fis her:y unit. i_l CONTBNTS Page Map showing locations of the Cooperative Fishery Units • iv Introduction and summary l Cooperative Fishery Units Alabama • 2 Arizona • 3 California 5 Colorado • 7 Georgia • 10 Hawaii 13 Idaho 15 Iowa 19 Louisiana 26 Maine 28 Massachusetts • 31 Missouri 36 Montana 38 New York 41 North Carolina 45 Ohio 51 Oklahoma 52 Oregon 54 Pennsylvania 55 South Dakota 59 Utah 63 Virginia 66 Washington 70 Appendix A· Unit addresses and list of coordinating committee members • • 71 Appendix B. Publications of Unit staff and students. • • • • • • • • •• 75 . iii COOPERATIVE FISHERY UNITS Msu"""'· ll IWl ilozem•n I ~ 1111111. Brookingse. S. IWl 11'1'0. t-.:DSU ~ • ~vu•n ----,..__ WIS. t'• < 2 "- osu OIUA• Stillwater Ai'- • lltGIOIW. 0"1Cl ;. Honolulu .. .a o~H C> HAWAII Figure 1. -- Location of regional offices and cooperative fishery units. Cooperative Fishery Unit Report for the Period January 1968 through June 1969 Previous reports on the Cooperative Fishery Unit program were annual reports for each calendar year from 1963 through 1967. In order that the reports conform to the school year it was decided to have annual fiscal year reports. Consequently, this report covers the 18-month transition period from January 1968 through June 1969. The Cooperative Fishery Unit program began in 1960 with the enactment of Public Law 86-686 (74-Stat. 733). The stated purpose of the Act is "To facilitate cooperation between the Federal Government, colleges and universities, the States, and private organizations for cooperative unit programs of research and education relating to fish and wildlife and for other purposes." Each fishery unit is a cooperative undertaking involving the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, a college or university, and (with one exception) a State fish and game department. A coordinating committee, representing the participating agencies, provides general guidance to each unit. Members of the coordinating committees for each of the 23 units are given in appendix A. During. the 18-month reporting period there were 23 units in operation. The locations of the units are shown in figure 1. The mailing addresses of the units are given in appendix A. During the period from January 1968 through June 1969, unit staff members taught 77 formal courses having a total enrollment of 968 students, and 33 courses of research and thesis, involving 144 graduate students . Unit personnel served as advisors for 131 undergraduate and 232 graduate students. Graduate degrees were awarded to 80 unit students including 12 Ph.O.'s and 68 Master's degrees. The following are brief reports on the activities of the units. Abstracts or sul!lllaries of completed student work are included for most unit students who graduated during the reporting period. Unit students are defined as those advised by Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife staff members and those students receiving financial support from the Bureau. We regret that space was not available to include abstracts for most of the unit cooperators' students. Idaho unit students tracking catfish in the Kafue River, Zambia, Africa. Alabama Cooperative Fishery Unit The Alabama Cooperative Fishery Unit, located at Auburn University, has been in operation for about 2 years. The Unit Leader, Dr. John s. Ramsey, entered on duty in Hay 1967. Mr. James M. Barkuloo transferred from the Washington office of Fishery Services to the position of Assistant Leader during April 1969. During the report period the Unit supervised 1 postgraduate, 13 graduate and 5 undergraduate students. One Ph.D. and 2 B. Sc. degrees were awarded to Unit students. During the spring quarter, 1969, Dr. Ramsey taught ZY. 498, Special Problems in Fishery Management and ZY. 698, Special Problems in Fisheries. During the spring quarter, 1968, he taught ZY. 616, Systematic Ichthyology. Unit Leader studies include: a. Systematics of Notropis volucellus andJ'!. spectrunculus in eastern North America. b. Status of Fundulus albolineatus, a possibly extinct species. c . A new darter from Blk River, Tennessee. d. Biology of fishes of large rivers in Alabama and neighboring States. e. Ontogeny of five species of Micropterus, including largemouth, smallmouth, spotted, Suwannee and redeye bass. f. Suitability of rainbow trout as a winter pondfish. The Assistant Leader is interested in research on the life history of anadromous and estuarine sport fishes and the artificial culture of certain fishes. Student studies are listed in table 1 . TABLE 1.--unit students, degrees sought, and study subjects Student Degree Subject Chien, Shih Ming Ph.D. Host specificity of monogenetic trematodes in Nocomis Devaraj, K.V. Ph.D. Stomach contents of fed channel catfish in ponds Gilbert, Ronnie J. M.S . Distribution of fishes in the central Chatahoochie River drainage Hurst , Harold N. M.S . Life history of two species of Hicropterus in eastern Alabama Johnson, S.K. Ph . D. Distribution of copepods, Brgasilus , in Gulf of Mexico drainage Kilgen, Ronald H. Ph.D. Fishes as biofilters of pond water Naftel, John (Postgraduate) Fish chromosome number and morphology, and taxonomy Pagen, Francisco A. Ph.D. Pond culture of Tilapia ~ in baskets and free living Rawson, Mac V. M.S. Monogenetic trematodes on centrarchids in Lake Eufaula, Ala. Schmittou, H.R. Ph.D. catfish basket culture Sumawidjaja, K. *Ph.D. Production in populations of Tilapia ~ and :!· mossambica Wade, c. William M.S. Chromosome studies on Alabama freshwater fishes Wahlquist, Harold Ph.D. Age and growth of channel catfish, Tombigbee-Alabama R. system Williams, Ernest H. M.S. Parasites of marine fishes, vicinity of Mobile Bay, Alabama *Graduated Summary of abstract of dissertation. Kusman Sumawidjaja, Ph.D., 1969 Production in Mixed Populations of Tilapia fil!!:fil! and ..I· mossambica Nile tilapia <! · ~) and Congo tilapia <!· mossambica) were stocked together and separately in earthen ponds. Three different ratios were used when stocking the two species together. Net production at the same feeding rate was higher in mixed populations. The highest growth rate was observed in stocked male Nile tilapia, but maximum production was lower than obtained previously in monospecific cultures on the station. No hybrid­ ization occurred. Stomach contents were identical in both species at all sizes. Inter­ specific competition for available food was not critical. 2 Arizona Cooperative Fisl\ery Unit The Arizona Cooperative Fishery Unit, located at the University of Arizona in Tucson, began operations in November 1964 with the appointment of Dr. William J. McConnell as Unit Leader. The Assistant Leader, Mr. Charles D. Ziebell , joined the Unit in February 1966. During the report period the Unit supervised 5 graduate students . Four of the students received M.s. degrees. Three fishery courses were taught by Unit staff members . Unit Staff studies: Studies by the Unit Leader are chiefly concerned with the ways in which watersheds influence fisheries in small impoundments. Areas of study emphasis included import of litter and litter extracts ; the relation of run-off salts to primary and secondary produc­ tion; identification of extracts of oak and pine litter; and bioassays of the effect of litter tannin and other phenolics on aquatic animals. Over 30 natural tannin mixtures and related compounds have been tested. Bioassay results to date indicate no acute toxicity and little chronic toxicity to snails, tadpoles and 2 fishes at naturally occurring concentrations. The Assistant Leader continued investigations on the movements of channel catfish. Field testing was carried out on two internal ultrasonic tracking tags and an internal tempera­ ture reporting tag. One tag has been functioning for nine months with excellent results. A single catfish was easily located in a 180-acre lake. 'nle Assistant Leader also continued with the exotic fish weed control project.
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]
  • 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]
  • The Native Fish Fauna of Major Drainages East of The
    THE NATIVE FISH FAUNA OF MAJOR DRAINAGES EAST OF THE CONTINENTAL DIVIDE IN NEW MEXICO A Thesis Presented to the Graduate Faculty of Biology Eastern New Mexico University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements fdr -the7Degree: Master of Science in Biology by Michael D. Hatch December 1984 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction Study Area Procedures Results and Discussion Summary Acknowledgements Literature Cited Appendices Abstract INTRODUCTION r (t. The earliest impression of New Mexico's native fish fauna =Ems during the 1850's from naturalists attached to various government survey parties. Without the collections from these and other early surveys, the record of the native fish fauna would be severely deficient because, since that time, some 1 4 native species - or subspecies of fish have become extirpated and the ranges of an additionial 22 native species or subspecies have become severly re- stricted. Since the late Miocene, physiographical changes of drainages have linked New Mexico, to varying degrees, with contemporary ichthyofaunal elements or their progenitors from the Rocky Mountains, the Great Plains, the Chihuahuan Desert, the Mexican Plateau, the Sonoran Desert and the Great Basin. Immigra- tion from these areas contributed to the diversity of the state's native ichthyofauna. Over the millinea, the fate of these fishes waxed and waned in ell 4, response to the changing physical and _chenaca-l-conditions of the surrounding environment. Ultimately, one of the most diverse fish faunas of any of the interior southwestern states developed. Fourteen families comprising 67 species of fish are believed to have occupied New Mexico's waters historically, with strikingly different faunas evolving east and west of the Continental Divide.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquatic Fish Report
    Aquatic Fish Report Acipenser fulvescens Lake St urgeon Class: Actinopterygii Order: Acipenseriformes Family: Acipenseridae Priority Score: 27 out of 100 Population Trend: Unknown Gobal Rank: G3G4 — Vulnerable (uncertain rank) State Rank: S2 — Imperiled in Arkansas Distribution Occurrence Records Ecoregions where the species occurs: Ozark Highlands Boston Mountains Ouachita Mountains Arkansas Valley South Central Plains Mississippi Alluvial Plain Mississippi Valley Loess Plains Acipenser fulvescens Lake Sturgeon 362 Aquatic Fish Report Ecobasins Mississippi River Alluvial Plain - Arkansas River Mississippi River Alluvial Plain - St. Francis River Mississippi River Alluvial Plain - White River Mississippi River Alluvial Plain (Lake Chicot) - Mississippi River Habitats Weight Natural Littoral: - Large Suitable Natural Pool: - Medium - Large Optimal Natural Shoal: - Medium - Large Obligate Problems Faced Threat: Biological alteration Source: Commercial harvest Threat: Biological alteration Source: Exotic species Threat: Biological alteration Source: Incidental take Threat: Habitat destruction Source: Channel alteration Threat: Hydrological alteration Source: Dam Data Gaps/Research Needs Continue to track incidental catches. Conservation Actions Importance Category Restore fish passage in dammed rivers. High Habitat Restoration/Improvement Restrict commercial harvest (Mississippi River High Population Management closed to harvest). Monitoring Strategies Monitor population distribution and abundance in large river faunal surveys in cooperation
    [Show full text]
  • Common Name and the Probability of Occurrence
    DEVELOPING PREDICTED DISTRIBUTION MODELS FOR FISH SPECIES IN NEBRASKA Final Report: July 2006 Submitted to: The USGS National Gap Analysis Program Moscow, Idaho Project Number: 00005007 DEVELOPING PREDICTED DISTRIBUTION MODELS FOR FISH SPECIES IN NEBRASKA FINAL REPORT 11 July 2006 Scott P. Sowa Principal Investigator Gust M. Annis NHD Classification, Watershed Characterization, and Distribution Modeling Michael E. Morey Range Mapping and Distribution Modeling Aaron J. Garringer Habitat Affinity Reports Missouri Resource Assessment Partnership School of Natural Resources University of Missouri Columbia, MO 65201 Contract Administration Through: Office of Sponsored Programs University of Missouri-Columbia Submitted by: Scott P. Sowa, PhD Research Performed Under: Cooperative Agreement No. 01-HQ-AG-0202 Cooperative Agreement No. 04-HQ-AG-0134 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract.................................................................................................................ii Acknowledgements.............................................................................................iii Introduction..........................................................................................................1 Methods................................................................................................................1 Community Fish Sampling Data..................................................................1 Mapping Geographic Ranges......................................................................2 GIS Base Layer for
    [Show full text]
  • Chrosomus Erythrogaster Andc. Eos (Osteichthyes: Cyprinidae) Taxonomy, Distribution) Ecology a Thesis Submitted to the Faculty O
    CHROSOMUS ERYTHROGASTER AND C. EOS (OSTEICHTHYES: CYPRINIDAE) TAXONOMY, DISTRIBUTION) ECOLOGY A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA By Gary Lee Phillips IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Pegree Granted June, 1968 FRONTISPIECE. Male Chrosomus erythrogaster in breeding color, headwaters of the Zumbro River, Dodge County, Minnesota, 4 June 1966. Photograph by Professor David J. Merrell of the University of Minnesota. 47?-a•4 V gir irck 4r4.4- 1,1! IL .1, 74ko2,4,944,40tgrAt skr#9 4.e4 riff4eotilired‘ ik tit "ital.:A-To 4-v.w.r*:ez••01.%. '.or 44# 14 46#41bie. "v1441t..4frw.P1)4iiriiitalAttt.44- Aiihr4titeec --N. 1 4r40•4-v,400..orioggit kf)f 4y 4:11 to_ r •ArPV .1 1 "11(4% tk eat'n'ik\Nthl haf ilif -7b111,6 10t 11*4 * A Aver44, wr. • 4‘4041:Nr 0141 -at 1,10,71mr--,• 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ACKNOWLEDGMENTS SYNONYMY AND NOMENCLATURE METHODS AND MATERIALS DISTRIBUTION 23 Geographical Distribution ................... 23 Ecological Distribution ......,....•.....,.. 24 Distribution in Minnesota ............. 27 VARIATION 38 Reliability of Measurements •.*****••••••** 4 • * 38 Sexual Variation •.. 53 Ontogenetic Variation •••• • • • • • •••• 61 Geographical Variation .................. ft ft. 72 Interpopulation Mean Character Differences • • * 77 Anomalies 83 REPRODUCTION 86 Schooling BehaviOr, ....................- 86 , 000,. W.4,41 , 87 .Spawning ,Behavior. , ,10041.4100 .......„......... 00 90 Breeding Color .. Breeding Tubercle ......................,. 93 Sex Ratios ... ............... ..,. 97 Sexual cycles ' , .-•,................ ... 99 ft 99 Fecundity ... ft ft ft ft 0 ft S OlkOodt*40o,OWOOsoo•O*00-Ito , 41,* 111: Hybridization 40. 0.41400**************0.0 DIET 1.28 The Digestive Tract .....................
    [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]
  • Rare Animals Tracking List
    Louisiana's Animal Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) ‐ Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Animals ‐ 2020 MOLLUSKS Common Name Scientific Name G‐Rank S‐Rank Federal Status State Status Mucket Actinonaias ligamentina G5 S1 Rayed Creekshell Anodontoides radiatus G3 S2 Western Fanshell Cyprogenia aberti G2G3Q SH Butterfly Ellipsaria lineolata G4G5 S1 Elephant‐ear Elliptio crassidens G5 S3 Spike Elliptio dilatata G5 S2S3 Texas Pigtoe Fusconaia askewi G2G3 S3 Ebonyshell Fusconaia ebena G4G5 S3 Round Pearlshell Glebula rotundata G4G5 S4 Pink Mucket Lampsilis abrupta G2 S1 Endangered Endangered Plain Pocketbook Lampsilis cardium G5 S1 Southern Pocketbook Lampsilis ornata G5 S3 Sandbank Pocketbook Lampsilis satura G2 S2 Fatmucket Lampsilis siliquoidea G5 S2 White Heelsplitter Lasmigona complanata G5 S1 Black Sandshell Ligumia recta G4G5 S1 Louisiana Pearlshell Margaritifera hembeli G1 S1 Threatened Threatened Southern Hickorynut Obovaria jacksoniana G2 S1S2 Hickorynut Obovaria olivaria G4 S1 Alabama Hickorynut Obovaria unicolor G3 S1 Mississippi Pigtoe Pleurobema beadleianum G3 S2 Louisiana Pigtoe Pleurobema riddellii G1G2 S1S2 Pyramid Pigtoe Pleurobema rubrum G2G3 S2 Texas Heelsplitter Potamilus amphichaenus G1G2 SH Fat Pocketbook Potamilus capax G2 S1 Endangered Endangered Inflated Heelsplitter Potamilus inflatus G1G2Q S1 Threatened Threatened Ouachita Kidneyshell Ptychobranchus occidentalis G3G4 S1 Rabbitsfoot Quadrula cylindrica G3G4 S1 Threatened Threatened Monkeyface Quadrula metanevra G4 S1 Southern Creekmussel Strophitus subvexus
    [Show full text]
  • Drainage Basin Checklists and Dichotomous Keys for Inland Fishes of Texas
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 874: 31–45Drainage (2019) basin checklists and dichotomous keys for inland fishes of Texas 31 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.874.35618 CHECKLIST http://zookeys.pensoft.net Launched to accelerate biodiversity research Drainage basin checklists and dichotomous keys for inland fishes of Texas Cody Andrew Craig1, Timothy Hallman Bonner1 1 Department of Biology/Aquatic Station, Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas 78666, USA Corresponding author: Cody A. Craig ([email protected]) Academic editor: Kyle Piller | Received 22 April 2019 | Accepted 23 July 2019 | Published 2 September 2019 http://zoobank.org/B4110086-4AF6-4E76-BDAC-EA710AF766E6 Citation: Craig CA, Bonner TH (2019) Drainage basin checklists and dichotomous keys for inland fishes of Texas. ZooKeys 874: 31–45. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.874.35618 Abstract Species checklists and dichotomous keys are valuable tools that provide many services for ecological stud- ies and management through tracking native and non-native species through time. We developed nine drainage basin checklists and dichotomous keys for 196 inland fishes of Texas, consisting of 171 native fishes and 25 non-native fishes. Our checklists were updated from previous checklists and revised using reports of new established native and non-native fishes in Texas, reports of new fish occurrences among drainages, and changes in species taxonomic nomenclature. We provided the first dichotomous keys for major drainage basins in Texas. Among the 171 native inland fishes, 6 species are considered extinct or extirpated, 13 species are listed as threatened or endangered by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and 59 spe- cies are listed as Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) by the state of Texas.
    [Show full text]
  • Report Title
    AWWQRP Special Studies Report: Use of the EPA Recalculation Procedure with the Copper Biotic Ligand Model and Relative Role of Sodium and Alkalinity vs. Hardness in Controlling Acute Ammonia Toxicity Prepared for Pima County Wastewater Management 201 N. Stone, 8th Floor Tucson, AZ 85701-1207 Prepared by Parametrix Environmental Research Lab 33972 Texas Street SW Albany, OR 97321-9487 541-791-1667 www.parametrix.com In Collaboration with GEI Consultants, Chadwick Ecological Division 5575 S. Sycamore St., Suite 101 Littleton, CO 80123 303-794-5530 www.geiconsultants.com April 2007 │ 07-03-P-139257-0207 CITATION Pima County Wastewater Management. 2007. AWWQRP Special Studies Report: Use of the EPA Recalculation Procedure with the Copper Biotic Ligand Model, and Relative Role of Sodium and Alkalinity vs. Hardness in Controlling Acute Ammonia Toxicity. Prepared by Parametrix, Albany, Oregon. April 2007. AWWQRP Special Studies Report Pima County Wastewater Management TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD.............................................................................................................VII REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. X EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................................................................................XI EVALUATION OF SITE-SPECIFIC STANDARDS USING BIOTIC LIGAND MODEL ADJUSTED COPPER AMBIENT WATER QUALITY CRITERIA/USE OF THE USEPA RECALCULATION PROCEDURE TO DEVELOP SITE-SPECIFIC BLM-BASED COPPER CRITERIA........................XI
    [Show full text]
  • Screening Report for Federal and State Listed Threatened and Endangered Species and General Wildlife
    Screening Report for Federal and State Listed Threatened and Endangered Species and General Wildlife Thunder Valley PUD Weld County, Colorado January 26, 2018 Prepared for: J&T Consulting, Inc. 305 Denver Avenue, Suite D Fort Lupton, Colorado 80621 Contact: Todd Yee Phone: (303) 857‐6222 Email: toddyee@j‐tconsulting.com ERC Project #420‐1707 Thunder Valley PUD Threatened‐Endangered Species and General Wildlife Screening Screening Report for Federal and State Listed Threatened and Endangered Species and General Wildlife Thunder Valley PUD Weld County, Colorado January 26, 2018 Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 GENERAL SURVEY AREA DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................... 1 3.0 SCREENING METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................... 7 4.0 GENERAL WILDLIFE HABITAT (NON‐REGULATED) ................................................................................... 7 5.0 MIGRATORY BIRD TREATY ACT ................................................................................................................ 8 6.0 SPECIES PROTECTED UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT OF 1973 .................................................. 9 COLORADO BUTTERFLY PLANT (GAURA NEOMEXICANA VAR. COLORADENSIS) ................................ 10 PREBLE’S MEADOW JUMPING MOUSE (ZAPUS HUDSONIUS
    [Show full text]
  • An Ichthyological Survey of the Forks of the Platte River in Western Nebraska
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by UNL | Libraries University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences and Affiliated Societies Nebraska Academy of Sciences 1996 An Ichthyological Survey of the Forks of the Platte River in Western Nebraska John D. Lynch University of Nebraska-Lincoln Brian R. Roh University of Nebraska-Lincoln Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/tnas Part of the Life Sciences Commons Lynch, John D. and Roh, Brian R., "An Ichthyological Survey of the Forks of the Platte River in Western Nebraska" (1996). Transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences and Affiliated Societies. 86. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/tnas/86 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Nebraska Academy of Sciences at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences and Affiliated Societiesy b an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. 1996. Transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences, 23: 65-84 AN ICHTHYOLOGICAL SURVEY OF TIlE FORKS OF TIlE PLATTE RIVER IN WESTERN NEBRASKA John D. Lynch and Brian R. Roh School of Biological Sciences University of Nebraska-Lincoln Lincoln, Nebraska 68588-0118 ABSTRACT lections in the 1930s and 1940s (deposited in the Uni­ An ichthyological survey (1989-1995) of 31 sites on the versity of Michigan's Museum of Zoology, Ann Arbor), North Platte and South Platte rivers and immediately below very little in the way of vouchered collections exist.
    [Show full text]