DOCSLIB.ORG

Research.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Research.Pdf ASSEMBLAGE STRUCTURE AND SHALLOW-WATER HABITAT USE BY SMALL-BODIED FISHES AT LOWER MISSOURI RIVER SANDBARS A thesis presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School University of Missouri-Columbia In partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science by CLAYTON RIDENOUR Dr. David Galat, Thesis Supervisor AUGUST 2007 The undersigned, appointed by the dean of the Graduate School, have examined the thesis entitled ASSEMBLAGE STRUCTURE AND SHALLOW-WATER HABITAT USE BY SMALL-BODIED FISHES AT LOWER MISSOURI RIVER SANDBARS presented by Clayton Ridenour, a candidate for the degree of Master of Science, and hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance. Dr. David L. Galat Dr. Charles Rabeni Dr. Mark Ellersieck Dr. Vince Travnichek ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Missouri Department of Conservation provided funding and much of the equipment to support this project, including a large boat, motor and trailer. In addition, the University of Missouri Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, the U.S.G.S. Columbia Environmental Research Center, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Fisheries Resource Office Region 3 offered equipment and expertise as needed. The J. Louis Crum Cooperation in Columbia, Missouri, and Russ DeVenney, Jr., deserves special acknowledgement for donating several hundred dollars of copper pipe; Russ’s networking skills were invaluable for locating additional pipe at a discount price. I would like to thank my major advisor, Dr. David L. Galat, for his encouragement, support, and criticism during this research and my education. David’s expertise and eye for detail have fine tuned my scientific and creative thinking skills and improved my technical writing skills. My academic committee Drs. Charlie Rabeni, Mark Ellersieck, and Vince Travnichek provided much need professional expertise to improve this research and final product. Several field and lab technicians devoted much hard work to assure successful completion of field and lab work for this project. Andrew Avis and Benedict Nagy, Brent (Parker) Fadler, and Tim and Scott Altnether proved to be skilled electrofishers and field biologists. A special thanks to Kerry Reeves, Kevin O’Donnell, Matt Mullins and Aaron Atkins for helping to collect data when they could. Heather Calkins and Dustin Martin were invaluably proficient processing fish in the lab. Finally, I am grateful to numerous friends, family, and fellow students for their support and encouragement throughout my graduate education and work on this project. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS................................................................................................ ii LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................................. v LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... ix ABSTRACT.....................................................................................................................xiii CHAPTER I ...................................................................................................................... 1 Native Fish Ecology and the Effects of Large-river Ecosystem Degradation ............. 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 Small-bodied fishes .................................................................................................... 2 Fluvial fishes ............................................................................................................. 3 Missouri River ............................................................................................................ 7 Thesis objectives ....................................................................................................... 13 Literature Cited .......................................................................................................... 15 CHAPTER II ................................................................................................................... 26 Patterns of Distribution and Abundance by Small-bodied Fishes at Lower Missouri River Sandbars: The Importance of Body Length ...................................................... 26 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 26 Study Area ................................................................................................................... 31 Methods ........................................................................................................................ 32 Sample Design .......................................................................................................... 32 Fish collection and handling ................................................................................... 39 Habitat data collection ............................................................................................. 43 Data processing ........................................................................................................ 46 Analyses .................................................................................................................... 48 Results .......................................................................................................................... 54 Distribution, abundance, and environment ............................................................ 54 Small-bodied fish assemblage structure .................................................................. 95 Discussion ................................................................................................................... 103 Use of sandbar ATTZ by small-bodied fishes ....................................................... 105 Diel patterns of fishes at sandbar ATTZ ............................................................... 108 Depth-velocity profile of small-bodied fishes at sandbar ATTZ .......................... 111 Summary and conclusion ...................................................................................... 112 iii Literature Cited ........................................................................................................ 115 CHAPTER III ............................................................................................................... 127 Effect of Spatiotemporal and Environmental Factors on Small-bodied Fish Assemblage Composition at Sandbar ATTZ on Lower Missouri River .................. 127 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 127 Study Area ................................................................................................................. 131 Methods ...................................................................................................................... 132 Dataset Selection .................................................................................................... 133 Data Processing ...................................................................................................... 134 Analyses .................................................................................................................. 135 Interpreting multivariate analysis bi-plots ............................................................ 137 Results ........................................................................................................................ 138 Species .................................................................................................................... 139 Body length ............................................................................................................. 140 Discussion ................................................................................................................... 148 Body size and habitat use ....................................................................................... 152 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 155 Literature Cited ........................................................................................................ 157 Summary, Conclusions and Implications ................................................................... 166 Appendix A .................................................................................................................... 169 Small and submerged sandbar sample design .......................................................... 169 Appendix B .................................................................................................................... 170 SAS codes used for data analyses .............................................................................. 170 Metadata for SAS code input classes : ....................................................................... 171 Appendix C .................................................................................................................... 172 September substrates .................................................................................................. 172 Literature Cited ........................................................................................................ 172 Appendix D ...................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Seasonal and Diel Movements and Habitat Use of Robust Redhorses in the Lower Savannah River. Georgia, and South Carolina
    Transactions of the American FisheriesSociety 135:1145-1155, 2006 [Article] © Copyright by the American Fisheries Society 2006 DO: 10.1577/705-230.1 Seasonal and Diel Movements and Habitat Use of Robust Redhorses in the Lower Savannah River, Georgia and South Carolina TIMOTHY B. GRABOWSKI*I Department of Biological Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina,29634-0326, USA J. JEFFERY ISELY U.S. Geological Survey, South Carolina Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina, 29634-0372, USA Abstract.-The robust redhorse Moxostonta robustum is a large riverine catostomid whose distribution is restricted to three Atlantic Slope drainages. Once presumed extinct, this species was rediscovered in 1991. Despite being the focus of conservation and recovery efforts, the robust redhorse's movements and habitat use are virtually unknown. We surgically implanted pulse-coded radio transmitters into 17 wild adults (460-690 mm total length) below the downstream-most dam on the Savannah River and into 2 fish above this dam. Individuals were located every 2 weeks from June 2002 to September 2003 and monthly thereafter to May 2005. Additionally, we located 5-10 individuals every 2 h over a 48-h period during each season. Study fish moved at least 24.7 ± 8.4 river kilometers (rkm; mean ± SE) per season. This movement was generally downstream except during spring. Some individuals moved downstream by as much as 195 rkm from their release sites. Seasonal migrations were correlated to seasonal changes in water temperature. Robust redhorses initiated spring upstream migrations when water temperature reached approximately 12'C. Our diel tracking suggests that robust redhorses occupy small reaches of river (- 1.0 rkm) and are mainly active diumally.
    [Show full text]
  • Tennessee Fish Species
    The Angler’s Guide To TennesseeIncluding Aquatic Nuisance SpeciesFish Published by the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency Cover photograph Paul Shaw Graphics Designer Raleigh Holtam Thanks to the TWRA Fisheries Staff for their review and contributions to this publication. Special thanks to those that provided pictures for use in this publication. Partial funding of this publication was provided by a grant from the United States Fish & Wildlife Service through the Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force. Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency Authorization No. 328898, 58,500 copies, January, 2012. This public document was promulgated at a cost of $.42 per copy. Equal opportunity to participate in and benefit from programs of the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency is available to all persons without regard to their race, color, national origin, sex, age, dis- ability, or military service. TWRA is also an equal opportunity/equal access employer. Questions should be directed to TWRA, Human Resources Office, P.O. Box 40747, Nashville, TN 37204, (615) 781-6594 (TDD 781-6691), or to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office for Human Resources, 4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Arlington, VA 22203. Contents Introduction ...............................................................................1 About Fish ..................................................................................2 Black Bass ...................................................................................3 Crappie ........................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Rockfish (Sebastes) That Are Evolutionarily Isolated Are Also
    Biological Conservation 142 (2009) 1787–1796 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Biological Conservation journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon Rockfish (Sebastes) that are evolutionarily isolated are also large, morphologically distinctive and vulnerable to overfishing Karen Magnuson-Ford a,b, Travis Ingram c, David W. Redding a,b, Arne Ø. Mooers a,b,* a Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby BC, Canada V5A 1S6 b IRMACS, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby BC, Canada V5A 1S6 c Department of Zoology and Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, #2370-6270 University Blvd., Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Z4 article info abstract Article history: In an age of triage, we must prioritize species for conservation effort. Species more isolated on the tree of Received 23 September 2008 life are candidates for increased attention. The rockfish genus Sebastes is speciose (>100 spp.), morpho- Received in revised form 10 March 2009 logically and ecologically diverse and many species are heavily fished. We used a complete Sebastes phy- Accepted 18 March 2009 logeny to calculate a measure of evolutionary isolation for each species and compared this to their Available online 22 April 2009 morphology and imperilment. We found that evolutionarily isolated species in the northeast Pacific are both larger-bodied and, independent of body size, morphologically more distinctive. We examined Keywords: extinction risk within rockfish using a compound measure of each species’ intrinsic vulnerability to Phylogenetic diversity overfishing and categorizing species as commercially fished or not. Evolutionarily isolated species in Extinction risk Conservation priorities the northeast Pacific are more likely to be fished, and, due to their larger sizes and to life history traits Body size such as long lifespan and slow maturation rate, they are also intrinsically more vulnerable to overfishing.
    [Show full text]
  • DRAFT Status of Quillback Rockfish Sebastes( Maliger) in U.S
    Agenda Item G.5 Supplemental REVISED Attachment 12 June 2021 DRAFT Status of quillback rockfish Sebastes( maliger) in U.S. waters off the coast of Washington in 2021 using catch and length data by Brian J. Langseth1 Chantel R. Wetzel1 Jason M. Cope1 Tien-Shui Tsou2 Lisa K. Hillier2 1Northwest Fisheries Science Center, U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, 2725 Montlake Boulevard East, Seattle, Washington 98112 2Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, 600 Capital Way North, Olympia, Washington 98501 June 2021 © Pacific Fisheries Management Council, 2021 Correct citation for this publication: Langseth, B.J., C.R. Wetzel, J.M. Cope, T.S. Tsou, L.K. Hillier. 2021. DRAFT Status of quillback rockfish (Sebastes maliger) in U.S. waters off the coast of Washington in 2021 using catch and length data. Pacific Fisheries Management Council, Portland, Oregon. 111 p. Contents Disclaimer i 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Basic Information . 1 1.2 Life History . 1 1.3 Historical and Current Fishery Information . 2 1.4 Summary of Management History and Performance . 2 2 Data 3 2.1 Fishery-Dependent Data . 3 2.1.1 Commercial Fishery . 3 2.1.2 Recreational / Sport Fishery . 5 2.2 Fishery-Independent Data . 6 2.3 Biological Data . 6 2.3.1 Natural Mortality . 6 2.3.2 Maturation and Fecundity . 7 2.3.3 Length-Weight Relationship . 7 2.3.4 Growth (Length-at-Age) . 8 3 Assessment Model 8 3.1 Summary of Previous Assessments . 8 3.1.1 Bridging Analysis . 8 3.2 Model Structure and Assumptions .
    [Show full text]
  • Quillback Carpiodes Cyprinus
    Supplemental Volume: Species of Conservation Concern SC SWAP 2015 Quillback Carpiodes cyprinus Contributors (2005): Scott D. Lamprecht and Jason Bettinger [SCDNR] Editors (2013): Scott D. Lamprecht and Mark C. Scott (SCDNR) DESCRIPTION Taxonomy and Basic Description The Quillback is a member of the family Catostomidae, which is represented by 8 genera and 25 species in the mid-Atlantic region (Rohde et al. 1994). This family is characterized by soft-rayed fins, a mouth located on the underside of the head, thick fleshy distensible lips, and paired fins attached low on the body (Rohde et al. 1994). Current taxonomic and genetic work indicates that Atlantic Slope Quillback-type fish that are found in South Carolina may represent an undescribed species. Quillback are high bodied, laterally compressed fish that range in length up to 500 mm (19.5 in.) (W. Starnes, pers. comm.). They have a long, falcate dorsal fin with 23 to 30 rays, a small conical head, a silver to golden body, large conspicuous scales about twice as high as wide, and a lateral line that runs the length of the body. Quillback lack mouth barbels as well as dorsal and anal fin spines. The Quillback’s first long dorsal ray does not usually reach the full length of the dorsal fin base, while the first dorsal ray of the similar Highfin Carpsucker typically is as long as the fin (Rohde et al. 1994; Jenkins and Burkhead 1994). Quillback feed on insect larvae and other benthic organisms. They are spring spawners that can attain an age of at least 11 years (Jenkins and Burkhead 1994).
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Relationships Between Six Rare Minnesota Mussels and Their Host Fishes
    Conservation Biology Research Grants Program Final Report - Hove and Kapuscinski Division of Ecological Services Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Ecological relationships between six rare Minnesota mussels and their host fishes Abstract Of 297 freshwater mussel species living in North America, 213 are either endangered, threatened, or of special concern. The identification of fish hosts is listed as an urgent research objective in the National Strategy for Freshwater Mussel Conservation. Suitable hosts were determined by artificially infesting various fishes and amphibians with glochidia from one of six mussel species. A fish was considered a suitable host when larval metamorphosis to the juvenile stage was observed. Although twenty-five fish species and mudpuppy were exposed to spectaclecase glochidia, none of the species tested facilitated glochidial metamorphosis. Three-fold shell growth was observed on pistolgrip juveniles collected from yellow and brown bullheads. Transformation of ellipse glochidia was observed in mottled sculpin, four darters, and brook stickleback. Metamorphosis of butterfly glochidia was not observed. Blackside darter and logperch were found to be suitable hosts for snuffbox. Purple wartyback glochidia transformed on four catfishes. We used microscopy and initiated molecular techniques to identify a subsample of approximately 5000 juvenile mussels collected from freshwater drum naturally infested with glochidia. Light microscopes and a scanning electron microscope were used to study the juvenile mussels and glochidia from mussels whose length is less than 100 µm. Species identification was limited to subfamily using light microscopes. Analysis of shell surface sculpture, shell outline, and shell height from scanning electron micrographs suggest the subsample of juveniles are either Truncilla truncata or T.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish and Invertebrate Community Response to Flow Magnitude in the Kansas River
    FISH AND INVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY RESPONSE TO FLOW MAGNITUDE IN THE KANSAS RIVER by JOSEPH EDWARD GERKEN B.S., Miami University, 2005 M.S., University of Central Arkansas, 2007 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 2015 Abstract River discharge influences fish and invertebrate communities and understanding how hydrologic variables contribute to fish and invertebrate composition can provide information for restoration and management. This study examines the relationship between several flow regime metrics that may influence fish and invertebrate community structure in large river systems such as the Kansas River. First, I examined how hydrology influences macroinvertebrate (drifting and benthic) density and fish communities before, during, and after flooding in both main and secondary channels. I found that drifting invertebrate density increased during flooding potentially providing increased prey opportunities for fishes. I also found that fluvial dependent and generalist fish species use inundated habitats more than fluvial specialists. My results suggest that the flux of water into inundated habitats supports a unique subset of invertebrate and fish communities of the main channel. Next, I examined the importance of lateral connectivity on fish and invertebrate composition by examining differences in seasonally and permanently inundated secondary channels in relation to main channel reaches. I found that drifting and benthic invertebrate assemblages and fish assemblages differed between seasonally inundated and permanently connected secondary channels. These results suggest that maintenance of diverse secondary channel connections is useful in preserving native biota in the Kansas River.
    [Show full text]
  • Montana DEQ-Table of Known Or Expected Spawning Times for Most
    The following table lists the known or expected spawning times for most fishes in Montana. This table was prepared for the purpose of identifying periods when “early life stages” of fish may be present. EPA has defined the early life stage for salmonids to be 30 days after emergence/swim-up; for all other species it is 34 days after spawning. This information is necessary when applying Dissolved Oxygen and Ammonia water quality standards to individual waterbodies. SPAWNING TIMES OF MONTANA FISHES, Prepared by Don Skaar, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, 3/6/01. This table is a combination of known spawning times for fish in Montana and estimates based on spawning times reported in other areas in North America of similar latitude. Sources used for this table include G.C. Becker, Fishes of Wisconsin; C.J.D. Brown, Fishes of Montana; K.D. Carlander, Handbook of freshwater fishery biology, volumes 1 and 2; R.S. Wydoski, and R.R. Whitney. Inland fishes of Washington; Scott and Crossman. Freshwater fishes of Canada; Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks fisheries biologists. The code for the table is as follows: J1,J2, F1, F2 refer to the half month increments of January 1-15, January 16-31, February 1-14, February 15-29, and so on. In the table S=spawning period, I = incubation period for eggs of salmonids, E=time period in which salmonid sac-fry are in the gravels Species J1 J2 F1 F2 M1 M2 A1 A2 M1 M2 J1 J2 J1 J2 A1 A2 S1 S2 O1 O2 N1 N2 D1 D2 White sturgeon S S S S Pallid sturgeon S S S S S Shovel.
    [Show full text]
  • Pennsylvania Fishes IDENTIFICATION GUIDE
    Pennsylvania Fishes IDENTIFICATION GUIDE Editor’s Note: During 2018, Pennsylvania Angler & the status of fishes in or introduced into Pennsylvania’s Boater magazine will feature select common fishes of major watersheds. Pennsylvania in each issue, providing scientific names and The table below denotes any known occurrence. WATERSHEDS SPECIES STATUS E O G P S D Freshwater Eels (Family Anguillidae) American Eel (Anguilla rostrata) N N N N Species Status Herrings (Family Clupeidae) EN = Endangered Blueback Herring (Alosa aestivalis) N TH = Threatened Skipjack Herring (Alosa chrysochloris) DL N Hickory Shad (Alosa mediocris) EN N C = Candidate Alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus) I N N American Shad (Alosa sapidissima) N N EX = Believed extirpated Atlantic Menhaden (Brevoortia tyrannus) N DL = Delisted (removed from the Gizzard Shad (Dorosoma cepedianum) N N N N endangered, threatened or candidate species list due to significant Suckers (Family Catostomidae) expansion of range and abundance) River Carpsucker (Carpiodes carpio) N Quillback (Carpiodes cyprinus) N N N N Highfin Carpsucker (Carpiodes velifer) EX N Watersheds Longnose Sucker (Catostomus catostomus) EN N N White Sucker (Catostomus commersonii) N N N N N N E = Lake Erie Blue Sucker (Cycleptus elongatus) EX N O = Ohio River Eastern Creek Chubsucker (Erimyzon oblongus) N N N Lake Chubsucker (Erimyzon sucetta) EX N G = Genesee River Northern Hogsucker (Hypentelium nigricans) N N N N N X Smallmouth Buffalo (Ictiobus bubalus) DL N N P = Potomac River Bigmouth Buffalo (Ictiobus cyprinellus)
    [Show full text]
  • ES Teacher Packet.Indd
    PROCESS OF EXTINCTION When we envision the natural environment of the Currently, the world is facing another mass extinction. past, one thing that may come to mind are vast herds However, as opposed to the previous five events, and flocks of a great diversity of animals. In our this extinction is not caused by natural, catastrophic modern world, many of these herds and flocks have changes in environmental conditions. This current been greatly diminished. Hundreds of species of both loss of biodiversity across the globe is due to one plants and animals have become extinct. Why? species — humans. Wildlife, including plants, must now compete with the expanding human population Extinction is a natural process. A species that cannot for basic needs (air, water, food, shelter and space). adapt to changing environmental conditions and/or Human activity has had far-reaching effects on the competition will not survive to reproduce. Eventually world’s ecosystems and the species that depend on the entire species dies out. These extinctions may them, including our own species. happen to only a few species or on a very large scale. Large scale extinctions, in which at least 65 percent of existing species become extinct over a geologically • The population of the planet is now growing by short period of time, are called “mass extinctions” 2.3 people per second (U.S. Census Bureau). (Leakey, 1995). Mass extinctions have occurred five • In mid-2006, world population was estimated to times over the history of life on earth; the first one be 6,555,000,000, with a rate of natural increase occurred approximately 440 million years ago and the of 1.2%.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishes-Of-The-Salish-Sea-Pp18.Pdf
    NOAA Professional Paper NMFS 18 Fishes of the Salish Sea: a compilation and distributional analysis Theodore W. Pietsch James W. Orr September 2015 U.S. Department of Commerce NOAA Professional Penny Pritzker Secretary of Commerce Papers NMFS National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Kathryn D. Sullivan Scientifi c Editor Administrator Richard Langton National Marine Fisheries Service National Marine Northeast Fisheries Science Center Fisheries Service Maine Field Station Eileen Sobeck 17 Godfrey Drive, Suite 1 Assistant Administrator Orono, Maine 04473 for Fisheries Associate Editor Kathryn Dennis National Marine Fisheries Service Offi ce of Science and Technology Fisheries Research and Monitoring Division 1845 Wasp Blvd., Bldg. 178 Honolulu, Hawaii 96818 Managing Editor Shelley Arenas National Marine Fisheries Service Scientifi c Publications Offi ce 7600 Sand Point Way NE Seattle, Washington 98115 Editorial Committee Ann C. Matarese National Marine Fisheries Service James W. Orr National Marine Fisheries Service - The NOAA Professional Paper NMFS (ISSN 1931-4590) series is published by the Scientifi c Publications Offi ce, National Marine Fisheries Service, The NOAA Professional Paper NMFS series carries peer-reviewed, lengthy original NOAA, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, research reports, taxonomic keys, species synopses, fl ora and fauna studies, and data- Seattle, WA 98115. intensive reports on investigations in fi shery science, engineering, and economics. The Secretary of Commerce has Copies of the NOAA Professional Paper NMFS series are available free in limited determined that the publication of numbers to government agencies, both federal and state. They are also available in this series is necessary in the transac- exchange for other scientifi c and technical publications in the marine sciences.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of the Inland Fishes of Louisiana
    Southeastern Fishes Council Proceedings Volume 1 Number 61 2021 Article 3 March 2021 Checklist of the Inland Fishes of Louisiana Michael H. Doosey University of New Orelans, [email protected] Henry L. Bart Jr. Tulane University, [email protected] Kyle R. Piller Southeastern Louisiana Univeristy, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/sfcproceedings Part of the Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons, and the Biodiversity Commons Recommended Citation Doosey, Michael H.; Bart, Henry L. Jr.; and Piller, Kyle R. (2021) "Checklist of the Inland Fishes of Louisiana," Southeastern Fishes Council Proceedings: No. 61. Available at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/sfcproceedings/vol1/iss61/3 This Original Research Article is brought to you for free and open access by Volunteer, Open Access, Library Journals (VOL Journals), published in partnership with The University of Tennessee (UT) University Libraries. This article has been accepted for inclusion in Southeastern Fishes Council Proceedings by an authorized editor. For more information, please visit https://trace.tennessee.edu/sfcproceedings. Checklist of the Inland Fishes of Louisiana Abstract Since the publication of Freshwater Fishes of Louisiana (Douglas, 1974) and a revised checklist (Douglas and Jordan, 2002), much has changed regarding knowledge of inland fishes in the state. An updated reference on Louisiana’s inland and coastal fishes is long overdue. Inland waters of Louisiana are home to at least 224 species (165 primarily freshwater, 28 primarily marine, and 31 euryhaline or diadromous) in 45 families. This checklist is based on a compilation of fish collections records in Louisiana from 19 data providers in the Fishnet2 network (www.fishnet2.net).
    [Show full text]