DOCSLIB.ORG

Molecular Detection of Northern Leatherside Chub (Lepidomeda Copei) DNA in Environmental Samples

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Molecular Detection of Northern Leatherside Chub (Lepidomeda Copei) DNA in Environmental Samples Western North American Naturalist Volume 78 Number 1 Article 8 4-4-2018 Molecular detection of northern leatherside chub (Lepidomeda copei) DNA in environmental samples Joseph C. Dysthe U.S. Forest Service, National Genomics Center for Wildlife and Fish Conservation, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Missoula, MT, [email protected] Kellie J. Carim U.S. Forest Service, National Genomics Center for Wildlife and Fish Conservation, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Missoula, MT, [email protected] Thomas W. Franklin U.S. Forest Service, National Genomics Center for Wildlife and Fish Conservation, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Missoula, MT, [email protected] Dave Kikkert Stantec, Inc., Salt Lake City, UT, [email protected] Michael K. Young U.S. Forest Service, National Genomics Center for Wildlife and Fish Conservation, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Missoula, MT, [email protected] SeeFollow next this page and for additional additional works authors at: https:/ /scholarsarchive.byu.edu/wnan Recommended Citation Dysthe, Joseph C.; Carim, Kellie J.; Franklin, Thomas W.; Kikkert, Dave; Young, Michael K.; McKelvey, Kevin S.; and Schwartz, Michael K. (2018) "Molecular detection of northern leatherside chub (Lepidomeda copei) DNA in environmental samples," Western North American Naturalist: Vol. 78 : No. 1 , Article 8. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/wnan/vol78/iss1/8 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Western North American Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Molecular detection of northern leatherside chub (Lepidomeda copei) DNA in environmental samples Authors Joseph C. Dysthe, Kellie J. Carim, Thomas W. Franklin, Dave Kikkert, Michael K. Young, Kevin S. McKelvey, and Michael K. Schwartz This note is available in Western North American Naturalist: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/wnan/vol78/iss1/8 Western North American Naturalist 78(1), © 2018, pp. 92–99 Molecular detection of northern leatherside chub (Lepidomeda copei ) DNA in environmental samples JOSEPH C. D YSTHE 1,* , K ELLIE J. C ARIM 1, T HOMAS W. F RANKLIN 1, D AVE KIKKERT 2, MICHAEL K. Y OUNG 1, K EVIN S. M CKELVEY 1, AND MICHAEL K. S CHWARTZ 1 1U.S. Forest Service, National Genomics Center for Wildlife and Fish Conservation, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Missoula, MT 59801 2Stantec, Inc., Salt Lake City, UT 84107 ABSTRACT .— The northern leatherside chub ( Lepidomeda copei ) is a cyprinid fish native to the Snake River, Green River, and Bonneville basins of the western United States. Population declines prompted the development of a multi - state conservation agreement and strategy, which emphasized the need to reliably delineate its current distribution and monitor its status. To facilitate species monitoring, we developed a quantitative PCR assay to detect northern leatherside chub DNA in environmental samples. The assay consistently detected northern leatherside chub DNA in concentra - tions as low as 2 copies per reaction and did not amplify DNA of potentially sympatric fish species. The assay amplified a synthetic DNA template representing 3 congeneric species: White River spinedace ( L. albivallis ), Virgin spinedace, (L. mollispinis mollispinis ), and Big Spring spinedace, ( L. m. pratensis ); however, none of these are sympatric with northern leatherside chub. Field tests of the assay accurately reproduced expected patterns of species occupancy. RESUMEN .— La especie Lepidomeda copei es un pez ciprínido nativo de las cuencas del Río Snake, Río Green y del Lago Bonneville del oeste de los Estados Unidos. La disminución de su población impulsó el desarrollo de un acuerdo de conservación multi-estado, que enfatiza la necesidad de delinear con precisión su distribución actual y de monitorear su estado. Para facilitar el monitoreo de las especies, aplicamos la técnica cuantitativa de Reacción en Cadena de la Polimerasa (PCR, por sus siglas en inglés) que permitió detectar ADN de L. copei en muestras ambientales. La técnica detectó de manera consistente ADN de L. copei en concentraciones menores a 2 copias por reacción, sin amplificar ADN de otras especies de peces potencialmente simpátricas. La técnica amplificó un templado de ADN sintético que representa tres especies congenéres: L. albivallis, L. mollispinis mollispinis, y L. m. pratensis. Sin embargo, ninguna de estas especies es simpátrica con L. copei . Los muestreos de campo reprodujeron con precisión los patrones previstos en cuanto a la ocupación de las especies. Fishes of the genus Lepidomeda (family Bonneville and Snake River basins. They also Cyprinidae) are patchily distributed through - concluded that northern leatherside chub is out warm- and cold-desert streams of the not the sister taxon to southern leatherside Bonneville, Colorado River, and Snake River chub, but is more closely related to Virgin basins (UDWR 2009, Blakney et al. 2014). spinedace ( L. mollispinis ) and White River This group has been the subject of some taxo - spinedace ( L. albivallis ) (Johnson et al. 2004). nomic revision. Until 2004, the leatherside Due to this taxonomic revision and the chub ( Snyderichthys copei or Gila copei; understanding of the northern leatherside’s Johnson et al. 2004) was considered a broadly taxonomic uniqueness, there has been greater distributed taxon of the intermountain western interest in the evaluation of its current distri - United States. Considering genetic, morpho - bution. While some populations that were logical, and ecological evidence, however, John - regarded as introduced (UDWR 2009) were son et al. (2004) split this taxon into 2 species actually likely to be indigenous (Blakney et al. and placed them in the genus Lepidomeda: 2014), suggesting a wider range than previ - the southern leatherside chub ( L. aliciae ) in ously thought, there is a broad consensus that the southern Bonneville basin and the north - the northern leatherside chub has declined ern leatherside chub ( L. copei ) in the northern across its range and has been extirpated from *Corresponding author: [email protected] JCD orcid.org/ 0000-0002-6790-7841 KJC orcid.org/ 0000-0002-9622-9146 MKY orcid.org/ 0000-0002-0191-6112 92 DYSTHE ET AL . ♦ NORTHERN LEATHERSIDE CHUB EDNA A SSAY 93 several basins (Belk and Johnson 2006, UDWR tool, we further examined the specificity of 2009). To mitigate further range contractions, each component of the assay in silico to deter - this taxon was petitioned for listing under the mine potential sources of non target detection. U.S. Endangered Species Act (USFWS 2011) We then compared the candidate assay and was designated as a species of conserva - with all northern leatherside chub cytb tion concern throughout its range (UDWR sequences ( n = 47) available on GenBank 2009). Conservation efforts have emphasized (AF270885–AF270893, Johnson and Jordan the need to assess the distribution of northern 2000; AF452086–AF452087, Dowling et al. leatherside chub (Blakney et al. 2014, Schultz 2002; AY825431–AY825445, Johnson et al. et al. 2016), but its patchy occurrence and low 2004; JX443059, Schonhuth et al. 2012; and relative abundance (UDWR 2009, Dauwalter KJ175008–KJ175027, Blakney et al. 2014). et al. 2014) have sometimes made this task These sequences were obtained from fish challenging. Thus, developing a rapid and collected in 24 streams throughout the Bear reliable method for assessing presence and River, Green River, and Snake River water - distribution would be useful for evaluating sheds in Idaho, Nevada, Utah, and Wyoming. species status and prioritizing conservation We found that one of the 47 sequences (acces - efforts for this species. sion: KJ175010; Blakney et al. 2014), which Environmental DNA (eDNA) sampling has was not evaluated in the initial in silico step, proven to be an efficient and reliable method contained a single nucleotide polymorphism for delineating distributions of rare species (SNP) in which guanine replaced adenine 10 (McKelvey et al. 2016) and detecting sensitive bases from the 3 ፱ end of the probe. This fish species (Thomsen et al. 2012, Sigsgaard et al. originated in Muddy Creek within the Bear 2015, Spear et al. 2015) or species difficult to River basin in Wyoming, and was the only sample using traditional approaches (Taberlet fish with this SNP in 225 sequences exam - et al. 2012). Furthermore, analysis of eDNA via ined by Blakney et al. (2014), which included quantitative PCR (qPCR) is more sensitive and other northern leatherside chubs collected effective in detecting low DNA concentrations from Muddy Creek (Ernest Keeley, Idaho than traditional PCR methods (Wilcox et al. State University, personal communication). To 2013, 2016). Accordingly, we developed a ensure detection of this rare haplotype, we qPCR assay for northern leatherside chub for developed an additional probe incorporating eDNA-based detection throughout its range. this SNP; the assay is a mixture of both To develop an eDNA assay for northern probes (Table 2). leatherside chub, we examined 54 GenBank We tested the specificity of the assay in sequences of the cytochrome b (cytb) mito - vitro using a StepOne Plus Real-time PCR chondrial region of northern leatherside Instrument (Life Technologies) in 15- mL reac - chub and 14 sympatric or closely related non - tions containing 7.5 mL of Environmental target species
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Edna Assay Development
    Environmental DNA assays available for species detection via qPCR analysis at the U.S.D.A Forest Service National Genomics Center for Wildlife and Fish Conservation (NGC). Asterisks indicate the assay was designed at the NGC. This list was last updated in June 2021 and is subject to change. Please contact [email protected] with questions. Family Species Common name Ready for use? Mustelidae Martes americana, Martes caurina American and Pacific marten* Y Castoridae Castor canadensis American beaver Y Ranidae Lithobates catesbeianus American bullfrog Y Cinclidae Cinclus mexicanus American dipper* N Anguillidae Anguilla rostrata American eel Y Soricidae Sorex palustris American water shrew* N Salmonidae Oncorhynchus clarkii ssp Any cutthroat trout* N Petromyzontidae Lampetra spp. Any Lampetra* Y Salmonidae Salmonidae Any salmonid* Y Cottidae Cottidae Any sculpin* Y Salmonidae Thymallus arcticus Arctic grayling* Y Cyrenidae Corbicula fluminea Asian clam* N Salmonidae Salmo salar Atlantic Salmon Y Lymnaeidae Radix auricularia Big-eared radix* N Cyprinidae Mylopharyngodon piceus Black carp N Ictaluridae Ameiurus melas Black Bullhead* N Catostomidae Cycleptus elongatus Blue Sucker* N Cichlidae Oreochromis aureus Blue tilapia* N Catostomidae Catostomus discobolus Bluehead sucker* N Catostomidae Catostomus virescens Bluehead sucker* Y Felidae Lynx rufus Bobcat* Y Hylidae Pseudocris maculata Boreal chorus frog N Hydrocharitaceae Egeria densa Brazilian elodea N Salmonidae Salvelinus fontinalis Brook trout* Y Colubridae Boiga irregularis Brown tree snake*
    [Show full text]
  • LITTLE COLORADO RIVER SPINEDACE, Lepidomeda Vitata RECOVERY PLAN
    DRAFT LITTLE COLORADO RIVER SPINEDACE, Lepidomeda vitata RECOVERY PLAN prepared by: C.O. Minckley U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 2 Parker Fishery Resource Office, Parker, Arizona 85344 August 1994 for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Albuquerque, New Mexico ' DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions which are believed to be required to recover and/or protect listed species. Plans are published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, sometimes prepared with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State agencies, and others. Objectives will be attained and any necessary funds made available, subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views nor the official positions or approvals of any individuals or agencies (involved in the plan formulation), other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. They represent the official position of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service only after they have been signed by the Regional Director or Director as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks. ...) i ' ,4 , ' P DRAF1- ig l Li &a-liATION8 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 199. Little Colorado River spinedace, Lepidomeda vittata Recovery Plan. Phoenix, AZ pp. Additional copies may be purchased from: Fish and Wildlife Reference Service: 5430 Grosvenor Lane, Suite 110 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 301/492-6403 or 1-800-582-3421 The fee for the Plan varies depending on the number of pages of the Plan.
    [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]
  • ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES
    ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES Tables STEPHEN T. ROSS University of California Press Berkeley Los Angeles London © 2013 by The Regents of the University of California ISBN 978-0-520-24945-5 uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 1 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 2 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 1.1 Families Composing 95% of North American Freshwater Fish Species Ranked by the Number of Native Species Number Cumulative Family of species percent Cyprinidae 297 28 Percidae 186 45 Catostomidae 71 51 Poeciliidae 69 58 Ictaluridae 46 62 Goodeidae 45 66 Atherinopsidae 39 70 Salmonidae 38 74 Cyprinodontidae 35 77 Fundulidae 34 80 Centrarchidae 31 83 Cottidae 30 86 Petromyzontidae 21 88 Cichlidae 16 89 Clupeidae 10 90 Eleotridae 10 91 Acipenseridae 8 92 Osmeridae 6 92 Elassomatidae 6 93 Gobiidae 6 93 Amblyopsidae 6 94 Pimelodidae 6 94 Gasterosteidae 5 95 source: Compiled primarily from Mayden (1992), Nelson et al. (2004), and Miller and Norris (2005). uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 3 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 3.1 Biogeographic Relationships of Species from a Sample of Fishes from the Ouachita River, Arkansas, at the Confl uence with the Little Missouri River (Ross, pers. observ.) Origin/ Pre- Pleistocene Taxa distribution Source Highland Stoneroller, Campostoma spadiceum 2 Mayden 1987a; Blum et al. 2008; Cashner et al. 2010 Blacktail Shiner, Cyprinella venusta 3 Mayden 1987a Steelcolor Shiner, Cyprinella whipplei 1 Mayden 1987a Redfi n Shiner, Lythrurus umbratilis 4 Mayden 1987a Bigeye Shiner, Notropis boops 1 Wiley and Mayden 1985; Mayden 1987a Bullhead Minnow, Pimephales vigilax 4 Mayden 1987a Mountain Madtom, Noturus eleutherus 2a Mayden 1985, 1987a Creole Darter, Etheostoma collettei 2a Mayden 1985 Orangebelly Darter, Etheostoma radiosum 2a Page 1983; Mayden 1985, 1987a Speckled Darter, Etheostoma stigmaeum 3 Page 1983; Simon 1997 Redspot Darter, Etheostoma artesiae 3 Mayden 1985; Piller et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Parker Little Colorado River Spinedace Recovery Plan
    Parker Fisheries Resource Office Little Colorado River Spinedace Recovery Plan Little Colorado River Spinedace Lepidomeda vittata Recovery Plan prepared by: C. 0. Minckley U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Parker Fishery Resource Office, Parker, Arizona 85344 October 1997 for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Albuquerque, New Mexico Approved: ~~~ector Regi Date: r~IAN 09 1998 Little Colorado River Spinedace Recovery Plan DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions believed necessary to recover and/or protect listed species. Plans are published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, sometimes prepared with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State agencies, and others. Objectives will be attained and any necessary funds made available, subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the stakeholders involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views nor the official positions or approvals ofany individuals or agencies (involved in the plan formulation), other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. They represent the official position ofthe U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service only after they have been signed by the Regional Director or Director as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion ofrecovery tasks. Little Colorado River Spinedace Recovery Plan LITERATURE CITATION U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998. Little Colorado River spinedace, Lepido-meda vittata Recovery Plan. Albuquerque NM. 51 pp. Additional copies may be purchased from: Fish and Wildlife Reference Service: 5430 Grosvenor Lane, Suite 110 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 301/492-6403 or 800/582-3421 Fees charged for Recovery Plans vary depending on the number of Plans requested.
    [Show full text]
  • Defining Conservation Priorities for Freshwater Fishes According To
    Ecological Applications, 21(8), 2011, pp. 3002–3013 Ó 2011 by the Ecological Society of America Defining conservation priorities for freshwater fishes according to taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity 1,4 1 2 3 ANGELA L. STRECKER, JULIAN D. OLDEN, JOANNA B. WHITTIER, AND CRAIG P. PAUKERT 1School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98105 USA 2Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri 65211 USA 3U.S. Geological Survey, Missouri Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri 65211 USA Abstract. To date, the predominant use of systematic conservation planning has been to evaluate and conserve areas of high terrestrial biodiversity. Although studies in freshwater ecosystems have received recent attention, research has rarely considered the potential trade- offs between protecting different dimensions of biodiversity and the ecological processes that maintain diversity. We provide the first systematic prioritization for freshwaters (focusing on the highly threatened and globally distinct fish fauna of the Lower Colorado River Basin, USA) simultaneously considering scenarios of: taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity; contemporary threats to biodiversity (including interactions with nonnative species); and future climate change and human population growth. There was 75% congruence between areas of highest conservation priority for different aspects of biodiversity, suggesting that conservation efforts can concurrently achieve strong complementarity among all types of diversity. However, sizable fractions of the landscape were incongruent across conservation priorities for different diversity scenarios, underscoring the importance of considering multiple dimensions of biodiversity and highlighting catchments that contribute disproportionately to taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Teleostei: Cyprinidae) from Cytochrome B Sequences
    Copeia, 2002(3), pp. 665±678 Evolutionary Relationships of the Plagopterins (Teleostei: Cyprinidae) from Cytochrome b Sequences THOMAS E. DOWLING,C.ALANA TIBBETS,W.L.MINCKLEY, AND GERALD R. SMITH Sequences of cytochrome b (cytb) were used to examine composition and phylo- genetic relationships of cyprinid ®shes of the tribe Plagopterini, endemic to the Great Basin and Lower Colorado River in southwestern North America. The pla- gopterin genera, Lepidomeda, Meda, Plagopterus, and Snyderichthys, were most closely af®liated with the chubs Couesius and Margariscus of northern and eastern North America. As indicated by previous morphologic, allozymic, and mtDNA studies, Sny- derichthys is intimately related to Lepidomeda. The relationship is paraphyletic, how- ever, according to our molecular data. Snyderichthys from the Snake and Bear River drainages are part of a clade that includes Lepidomeda mollispinis and Lepidomeda albivallis according to the cytb sequence, with Snyderichthys from the central and southern Bonneville basin more divergent. This paraphyly and the complex geo- graphic relationships of mtDNA sequences indicate a complex history of the group and cast doubt on the validity of morphologically diagnosed Snyderichthys. Estimates of divergence time, based on a combination of fossil and molecular data, indicate that the plagopterins are an ancient clade, at least 17 million years old. HE Cyprinidae or minnows are the most di- They hypothesized existence of three major T verse freshwater ®sh family in North Amer- groups: ``shiner,'' ``chub,'' and ``western'' ica, represented by more than 300 species in clades. Plagopterins fell within a Gila clade of approximately 50 genera (Burr and Mayden, western minnows, most closely related to a clade 1992).
    [Show full text]
  • Fishes As a Template for Reticulate Evolution
    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 12-2016 Fishes as a Template for Reticulate Evolution: A Case Study Involving Catostomus in the Colorado River Basin of Western North America Max Russell Bangs University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the Evolution Commons, Molecular Biology Commons, and the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Recommended Citation Bangs, Max Russell, "Fishes as a Template for Reticulate Evolution: A Case Study Involving Catostomus in the Colorado River Basin of Western North America" (2016). Theses and Dissertations. 1847. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/1847 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Fishes as a Template for Reticulate Evolution: A Case Study Involving Catostomus in the Colorado River Basin of Western North America A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Biology by Max Russell Bangs University of South Carolina Bachelor of Science in Biological Sciences, 2009 University of South Carolina Master of Science in Integrative Biology, 2011 December 2016 University of Arkansas This dissertation is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council. _____________________________________ Dr. Michael E. Douglas Dissertation Director _____________________________________ ____________________________________ Dr. Marlis R. Douglas Dr. Andrew J. Alverson Dissertation Co-Director Committee Member _____________________________________ Dr. Thomas F. Turner Ex-Officio Member Abstract Hybridization is neither simplistic nor phylogenetically constrained, and post hoc introgression can have profound evolutionary effects.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishtraits: a Database on Ecological and Life-History Traits of Freshwater
    FishTraits database Traits References Allen, D. M., W. S. Johnson, and V. Ogburn-Matthews. 1995. Trophic relationships and seasonal utilization of saltmarsh creeks by zooplanktivorous fishes. Environmental Biology of Fishes 42(1)37-50. [multiple species] Anderson, K. A., P. M. Rosenblum, and B. G. Whiteside. 1998. Controlled spawning of Longnose darters. The Progressive Fish-Culturist 60:137-145. [678] Barber, W. E., D. C. Williams, and W. L. Minckley. 1970. Biology of the Gila Spikedace, Meda fulgida, in Arizona. Copeia 1970(1):9-18. [485] Becker, G. C. 1983. Fishes of Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI. Belk, M. C., J. B. Johnson, K. W. Wilson, M. E. Smith, and D. D. Houston. 2005. Variation in intrinsic individual growth rate among populations of leatherside chub (Snyderichthys copei Jordan & Gilbert): adaptation to temperature or length of growing season? Ecology of Freshwater Fish 14:177-184. [349] Bonner, T. H., J. M. Watson, and C. S. Williams. 2006. Threatened fishes of the world: Cyprinella proserpina Girard, 1857 (Cyprinidae). Environmental Biology of Fishes. In Press. [133] Bonnevier, K., K. Lindstrom, and C. St. Mary. 2003. Parental care and mate attraction in the Florida flagfish, Jordanella floridae. Behavorial Ecology and Sociobiology 53:358-363. [410] Bortone, S. A. 1989. Notropis melanostomus, a new speices of Cyprinid fish from the Blackwater-Yellow River drainage of northwest Florida. Copeia 1989(3):737-741. [575] Boschung, H.T., and R. L. Mayden. 2004. Fishes of Alabama. Smithsonian Books, Washington. [multiple species] 1 FishTraits database Breder, C. M., and D. E. Rosen. 1966. Modes of reproduction in fishes.
    [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]
  • Spatiotemporal Response of Aquatic Native and Nonnative Taxa to Wildfire Disturbance in a Desert Stream Network
    SPATIOTEMPORAL RESPONSE OF AQUATIC NATIVE AND NONNATIVE TAXA TO WILDFIRE DISTURBANCE IN A DESERT STREAM NETWORK by JAMES E. WHITNEY B.S., Emporia State University, 2007 M.S., Kansas State University, 2010 AN ABSTRACT OF A DISSERTATION submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Division of Biology College of Arts and Sciences KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY Manhattan, Kansas 2014 Abstract Many native freshwater animals are imperiled as a result of habitat alteration, species introductions and climate-moderated changes in disturbance regimes. Native conservation and nonnative species management could benefit from greater understanding of critical factors promoting or inhibiting native and nonnative success in the absence of human-caused ecosystem change. The objectives of this dissertation were to (1) explain spatiotemporal patterns of native and nonnative success, (2) describe native and nonnative response to uncharacteristic wildfire disturbance, and (3) test the hypothesis that wildfire disturbance has differential effects on native and nonnative species. This research was conducted across six sites in three reaches (tributary, canyon, and valley) of the unfragmented and largely-unmodified upper Gila River Basin of southwestern New Mexico. Secondary production was measured to quantify success of native and nonnative fishes prior to wildfires during 2008-2011. Native fish production was greater than nonnatives across a range of environmental conditions, although nonnative fish, tadpole, and crayfish production could approach or exceed that of native macroinvertebrates and fishes in canyon habitats, a warmwater tributary, or in valley sites, respectively. The second objective was accomplished by measuring biomass changes of a warmwater native and nonnative community during 2010-2013 before and after consecutive, uncharacteristic wildfires.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Gila Watershed (HUC8 15040001)
    Upper Gila Watershed (HUC8 15040001) Rapid Watershed Assessment Upper Gila Watershed 1 Upper Gila Watershed (HUC8 15040001) The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination writ e to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 2 Upper Gila Watershed (HUC8 15040001) Table of Contents Overview ......................................................................................................................................... 5 Physical Setting ............................................................................................................................... 7 Precipitation .................................................................................................................................. 10 Land
    [Show full text]