DOCSLIB.ORG

Partnerships in Conservation for Central and Eastern North Carolina

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Partnerships in Conservation for Central and Eastern North Carolina U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Partnerships in Conservation 2018 for Central and Eastern North Carolina Raleigh Field Office ur 2018 conservation work is in full swing We are working with our partners in federal and with follow-through from previous years state agencies, local governments, the business Oand new conservation ventures. Raleigh community, and private citizens in 59 counties of Ecological Services Field Office staff are dedicat- central and eastern North Carolina. Together, ed to using the best available science to further we are protecting important habitat, increasing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (Service) species’ populations, and reducing the threats to mission. We seek to conserve imperiled species their survival. Our partners are pivotal and share and their habitats, ensuring that sustainable in all of the following conservation updates and populations of fish, wildlife, and plants continue accomplishments. to thrive for future generations. Contents Identifying species on the verge of extinction - Helping build the road to recovery to bring them back - Providing technical assistance to improve fish and wildlife outcomes - Employing scientific excellence to support partners’ needs - Partnering with others to restore fish and wildlife habitats -- Developing a workforce of conservation leaders River waterdog and the Atlantic pigtoe in 2018. American eel age and growth assessment in Advancing conservation science for the car- Simultaneously, we continue to pursue voluntary the Roanoke River nivorous Venus flytrap conservation measures and partnerships for at- Identifying species on the risk species. For example, we are working with he Service reviewed the status of American the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, the eels in 2007 and in 2015, finding both times NCWRC, Conservation Fisheries, Inc. and North verge of extinction that Endangered Species Act protection Carolina State University on captive propagation T for the American eel was not needed. American of the Carolina madtom and Magnificent rams- Eel populations remain stable but much remains horn snail. We’re building capacity for learning The last line of defense...ESA Protection to be learned about their complex life history. At about and managing these species while their a local level, American eels still face mortality roviding a plant or animal federal protec- status evaluations progress. from harvest and passage obstruction. In 2017, tection under the Endangered Species we partnered with the US Geological Survey, Act (ESA) is proven to be successful in P Magnificent rams- North Carolina Cooperative Fish and Wildlife preventing extinction but it is America’s last line horn by Andy Research Unit to study eels in important coast- of defense. There are tremendous opportunities Wood al North Carolina habitat, the Roanoke River. for voluntary conservation that can preclude the need to protect species and simultaneously Researchers analyse eels to determine age, sex, improve habitats for other species alike. The and health upstream and downstream of Roanoke Service is keeping a watchful eye on roughly 98 Rapids Dam. This research will clarify the needs at-risk species that include North Carolina within of populations in NC and help establish standard- their distribution. Raleigh Field Office biologists ized methods to determine age and growth mea- Venus Flytrap by Dale Suiter, FWS. are key contacts in assessing whether 16 of the surements to improve effective man agement and North Carolina at-risk species need ESA protec- understanding of this ecologically and commer- tion. cially important species. For more information he Venus flytrap is a carnivorous plant Atlantic contact [email protected] native to boggy areas. It is in 17 counties pigtoe, by Before a plant or animal species can Chris Eads, Tin southeastern North Carolina and north- receive the protection provided by NCSU eastern South Carolina. Even though a lot of it's the ESA, it must first be added to populations are within protected areas, there is the Federal lists of threatened and reason to believe the species might need federal endangered wildlife and plants. Listing decisions protection. In 2017, the Service conducted a pre- are informed by our work with other biologists on liminary evaluation of the Venus flytrap status Species Status Assessments (SSA). We assemble (a.k.a. a 90 day finding). We found enough infor- teams of species experts from state and federal mation to conduct more in-depth analysis of the agencies, academic institutions, and the private plant’s status. More research is needed to help sector to contribute data and analysis. The as- us understand some aspects of the species biol- sessments include a comprehensive review of ogy.To fill the gap, a team of experts from North scientific information, evaluation of current popu- Carolina State University, North Carolina Botan- lation status, and projection of future conditions. ical Garden and our office published research on Beyond our state bor- Venus flytrap pollinators and the prey captured In 2017, expert teams finalized assessments for ders, other Field Offices are spearheading similar in their modified leaves (traps). Results indicate the yellow lance mussel, Atlantic pigtoe mussel, assessments of at-risk spe- a green sweat bee, a checkered beetle and the the Carolina madtom catfish, and the Neuse cies that migrate or have notch-tipped flower longhorn beetle are the most River waterdog salamander. Based on the re- populations in North Car- important pollinators while spiders, beetles and sults of the assessment, the Service proposed to olina. Raleigh staff assisted ants were most commonly found in the traps. You our sister offices by sharing list the yellow lance as a threatened species in can see the paper in the American Naturalist April 2017. Threatened species are animals and data and contacts to facilitate the status assessments of the and read what others have to say about it at the plants that are likely to become endangered in black-capped petrel and MacGilli- Washington Post and National Geographic. The the foreseeable future. A final decision about vray's seaside sparrow. We also look results help us shape recommendations on poli- granting federal protection to the yellow lance forward to being part of the assess- cies and actions to avoid extinction of this Caroli- is expected in April 2018. Further consideration ment team that will soon start assessing Neuse River Waterdog na native and iconic plant. will be given to the Carolina madtom, the Neuse the status of the southern hognose snake. by Jeff Hall, NCWRC On-the-ground Seabeach amaranth We are well into a five-year research project with conservation the North Carolina Department of Transporta- Helping build the road to tion (NCDOT), other agencies, and wildlife n 2017, we planted thousands of Seabeach consultants. The winter 2017-18 surveys amaranth seeds through a Cooperative recovery to bring them concluded with 32 northern long-eared Recovery Initiative Grant. It was the largest bat captured this winter, 26 of which I planting effort ever attempted for this threat- back had transmitters attached to fol- ened species -- a vascular plant that grows on low their movements. Tracking Atlantic Ocean dunes, close to the ocean waves yielded extensive winter behav- nce a specie is included in the List of where grassess would be found more easily. Most ior information. Although the Threatened and Endangered Wildlife, populations of seabeach amaranth are located three NCDOT-funded wildlife the Service has a robust set of tools to in North Carolina but the species is also found O contractors focused bat cap- conserve those species. In coordination with our from coastal South Carolina to New York. Sea- ture efforts mainly in coun- partners in federal and state agencies, local gov- beach ama ranth was listed as threatened under ties with previous capture ernments, the business community, and private the Endangered Species Act on April 7,1993 and records, Jones and Carteret citizens, we protect endangered and threatened we’re leading efforts to help recover this rare counties were added to the plants and animals and pursue their recovery. plant. For more information contact Dale_Suit- known range through this sea- [email protected] son’s results. The known range Northern long-eared bat ecology of the species now includes 17 coastal plain counties in eastern ur biologists co-lead northern long-eared NC. The species has yet to be bat research in eastern North Carolina. captured in the piedmont region of ODue to declines caused by white-nose NC. Summer surveys will resume in syndrome, the northern long-eared bat was listed mid-April. For more information con- Northern long- as threatened under the Endangered Species Act tact [email protected]. eared bat, FWS. on April 2, 2015. So far, northern long-eared bats in the North Carolina coastal plain show no signs of exposure to the fungus that causes white-nose syndrome. It’s important to understand better the eastern North Carolina popula- tion because the coastal pop- ulation may contribute to the long-term survival Seabeach amaranth plants by Dale Suiter, FWS. and recovery of the species. Gary Jordan, Fish and Wildlife Biologist holding a bat. Photo A big brown bat hanging on a tree. by FWS. Male and female red-cockaded woodpeckers, FWS Conducting 5-Year reviews to chart progress and focus additional effort e evaluate species protected by the ESA every five years. We conduct these reviews to en- sure that our classification of each species on the lists of Endangered and Threatened Wild- Wlife and Plants is accurate. We account for the projects that help the species, the persistence and severity of threats and determine whether we should change the listin. On March 12, 2018, we announced the start of reviews for smooth coneflower and Cooley’s meadow-rue flowers photo by James Henderson Cooley’s meadowrue. We request any new information concerning the status of these plants.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Gordon Myers, Executive Director
    North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Gordon Myers, Executive Director March 1, 2016 Honorable Jimmy Dixon Honorable Chuck McGrady N.C. House of Representatives N.C. House of Representatives 300 N. Salisbury Street, Room 416B 300 N. Salisbury Street, Room 304 Raleigh, NC 27603-5925 Raleigh, NC 27603-5925 Senator Trudy Wade N.C. Senate 300 N. Salisbury Street, Room 521 Raleigh, NC 27603-5925 Dear Honorables: I am submitting this report to the Environmental Review Committee in fulfillment of the requirements of Section 4.33 of Session Law 2015-286 (H765). As directed, this report includes a review of methods and criteria used by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission on the State protected animal list as defined in G.S. 113-331 and compares them to federal and state agencies in the region. This report also reviews North Carolina policies specific to introduced species along with determining recommendations for improvements to these policies among state and federally listed species as well as nonlisted animals. If you have questions or need additional information, please contact me by phone at (919) 707-0151 or via email at [email protected]. Sincerely, Gordon Myers Executive Director North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Report on Study Conducted Pursuant to S.L. 2015-286 To the Environmental Review Commission March 1, 2016 Section 4.33 of Session Law 2015-286 (H765) directed the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) to “review the methods and criteria by which it adds, removes, or changes the status of animals on the state protected animal list as defined in G.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Information on the NCWRC's Scientific Council of Fishes Rare
    A Summary of the 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes in North Carolina Submitted by Bryn H. Tracy North Carolina Division of Water Resources North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Raleigh, NC On behalf of the NCWRC’s Scientific Council of Fishes November 01, 2014 Bigeye Jumprock, Scartomyzon (Moxostoma) ariommum, State Threatened Photograph by Noel Burkhead and Robert Jenkins, courtesy of the Virginia Division of Game and Inland Fisheries and the Southeastern Fishes Council (http://www.sefishescouncil.org/). Table of Contents Page Introduction......................................................................................................................................... 3 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes In North Carolina ........... 4 Summaries from the 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes in North Carolina .......................................................................................................................... 12 Recent Activities of NCWRC’s Scientific Council of Fishes .................................................. 13 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part I, Ohio Lamprey .............................................. 14 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part II, “Atlantic” Highfin Carpsucker ...................... 17 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part III, Tennessee Darter ...................................... 20 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species
    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • A Case Study of Carolina Bays and Ditched Streams at Risk Under the Proposed WOTUS Definition
    CAPE FEAR RIVER WATERSHED: A Case Study of Carolina Bays and Ditched Streams at Risk under the Proposed WOTUS Definition The Cape Fear River. Photo by Kemp Burdette The Cape Fear River Basin is North Carolina’s largest watershed, with an area of over 9,000 square miles. Major tributaries include the Deep River, the Haw River, the Northeast Cape Fear River, the Black River, and the South River. These rivers converge to form a thirty-mile-long estuary before flowing into the Atlantic Ocean at Cape Fear.1 The Cape Fear supplies water to some of the fastest ​ growing counties in the United States;2 roughly one in five North Carolinians gets their drinking ​ water from the Cape Fear, including residents of Greensboro, Fayetteville, and Wilmington.3 ​ The Cape Fear Basin is a popular watershed for a variety of recreation activities. State parks along the river include Haw River State Park, Raven Rock State Park, and Carolina Beach State Park. The faster-flowing water of the upper basin is popular with paddlers, as are the slow meandering blackwater rivers and streams of the lower Cape Fear and estuary. Fishing is very popular; the Cape Fear supports a number of freshwater species, saltwater species, and even anadromous (migratory) species like the endangered sturgeon, striped bass, and shad. Cape Fear River Watershed: Case Study Page 2 of 8 The Cape Fear is North Carolina’s most ecologically diverse watershed; the Lower Cape Fear is notable because it is part of a biodiversity “hotspot,” recording the largest degree of biodiversity on the eastern seaboard of the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Resilience Assessment of the Cape Fear Watershed
    PILOT: Coastal Resilience Assessment of the Cape Fear Watershed i IMPORTANT INFORMATION/DISCLAIMER: This report represents a Regional Coastal Resilience Assessment that can be used to identify places on the landscape for resilience-building efforts and conservation actions through understanding coastal flood threats, the exposure of populations and infrastructure have to those threats, and the presence of suitable fish and wildlife habitat. As with all remotely sensed or publicly available data, all features should be verified with a site visit, as the locations of suitable landscapes or areas containing flood hazards and community assets are approximate. The data, maps, and analysis provided should be used only as a screening-level resource to support management decisions. This report should be used strictly as a planning reference tool and not for permitting or other legal purposes. The scientific results and conclusions, as well as any views or opinions expressed herein, are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the U.S. Government, or the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation’s partners. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute their endorsement by the U.S. Government or the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation or its funding sources. NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION DISCLAIMER: The scientific results and conclusions, as well as any views or opinions expressed herein, are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of NOAA or the Department of Commerce. U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS DISCLAIMER: NFWF’s assessment methodology focuses on identifying and ranking Resilience Hubs, or undeveloped areas of open space.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquatic Species Mapping in North Carolina Using Maxent
    Aquatic Species Mapping in North Carolina Using Maxent Mark Endries U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services Field Office, Asheville North Carolina INTRODUCTION The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is to work with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. The Service is the lead governmental agency involved in the recovery of federally endangered and threatened species in freshwater and terrestrial habitats. To meet its recovery and protection goals, the Service: (1) works with other federal agencies to minimize or eliminate impacts to fish, wildlife, and plants from projects they authorize, fund, or carry out; (2) supports the improvement of fish and wildlife habitat on private land through technical and financial assistance; and (3) provides scientific knowledge and analyses to help guide the conservation, development, and management of the Nation’s fish and wildlife resources. Freshwater ecosystems present unique management challenges due to their linear spatial orientation and their association with upland habitat variables. On broad scales, the movement of aquatic species within the stream environment is limited to upstream and downstream migration. The inability of aquatic species to circumnavigate man-made obstacles causes them to be particularly vulnerable to habitat fragmentation. Habitat fragmentation has a major influence on species distribution and complicates distribution mapping. To better understand the spatial distributions of freshwater aquatic species in North Carolina, the Service created predictive habitat maps for 226 different aquatic species using geographic information systems (GIS) and maximum entropy (Maxent) modeling. These maps were derived by comparing known species occurrences with a suite of stream- or land-cover-derived environmental variables.
    [Show full text]
  • Table 7: Species Changing IUCN Red List Status (2012-2013)
    IUCN Red List version 2013.2: Table 7 Last Updated: 25 November 2013 Table 7: Species changing IUCN Red List Status (2012-2013) Published listings of a species' status may change for a variety of reasons (genuine improvement or deterioration in status; new information being available that was not known at the time of the previous assessment; taxonomic changes; corrections to mistakes made in previous assessments, etc. To help Red List users interpret the changes between the Red List updates, a summary of species that have changed category between 2012 (IUCN Red List version 2012.2) and 2013 (IUCN Red List version 2013.2) and the reasons for these changes is provided in the table below. IUCN Red List Categories: EX - Extinct, EW - Extinct in the Wild, CR - Critically Endangered, EN - Endangered, VU - Vulnerable, LR/cd - Lower Risk/conservation dependent, NT - Near Threatened (includes LR/nt - Lower Risk/near threatened), DD - Data Deficient, LC - Least Concern (includes LR/lc - Lower Risk, least concern). Reasons for change: G - Genuine status change (genuine improvement or deterioration in the species' status); N - Non-genuine status change (i.e., status changes due to new information, improved knowledge of the criteria, incorrect data used previously, taxonomic revision, etc.) IUCN Red List IUCN Red Reason for Red List Scientific name Common name (2012) List (2013) change version Category Category MAMMALS Nycticebus javanicus Javan Slow Loris EN CR N 2013.2 Okapia johnstoni Okapi NT EN N 2013.2 Pteropus niger Greater Mascarene Flying
    [Show full text]
  • Notropis Mekistocholas, a New Herbivorous Cyprinid Fish ~Ndernic to the Cape Fear River Basin, North Carolina
    Notropis mekistocholas, a New Herbivorous Cyprinid Fish ~ndernic to the Cape Fear River Basin, North Carolina FRA1"lKLIN F. SNELSON, JR. Notropis mekistocholas is described as a new species. It is unusual within the genus in exhibiting herbivorous adaptations-an elongate, convoluted intestine and black peritoneum. It is compared with N. alborus and N. procne, two sympatric relatives that differ in lacking herbivorous modifications, in hav.ing seven rather than eight anal rays, and in numerous other features. N. mekistocholas is the first known endemic species from the Cape Fear drainage in North Carolina. It has a very restricted distribution in the east-central Piedmont province, being known from only four streams in Chatham and Harnett counties. Intestinal modifications suggestive of an herbivorous diet are reported for N. anogenus and some species of the subgenus Luxilus. There is no evidence to suggest that N. mekistocholas should be aligned with the south. western genus Dionda, which contains herbivorous species superifically similar to Notropis species. Closest relatives of N. mekistocholas appear to be N. procne and N. stramineus. INTRODUCTION The number of predorsal scale rows in- HE genus NotroPis usually has been char. cludes all oblique scale rows crossing an imaginary line between the anterior inser- T acterized as having a short, S-shaped ali- mentary tract, distinguishing it from closely tion of the dorsal fin and the cleithrum. The related groups containing herbivorous forms first row counted was the one including the with elongate intestines. Discovery of a first predorsal scale; the last row counted was unique new species of Notropis, closely re- the one including the first (anterior-most) lated to N.
    [Show full text]
  • Positive Interactions in Freshwater Systems
    Clemson University TigerPrints All Theses Theses 12-2018 Positive Interactions in Freshwater Systems Samuel Clarence Silknetter Clemson University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses Recommended Citation Silknetter, Samuel Clarence, "Positive Interactions in Freshwater Systems" (2018). All Theses. 3257. https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses/3257 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses at TigerPrints. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Theses by an authorized administrator of TigerPrints. For more information, please contact [email protected]. POSITIVE INTERACTIONS IN FRESHWATER SYSTEMS A Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of Clemson University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science Wildlife and Fisheries Biology by Samuel Clarence Silknetter December 2018 Accepted by: Dr. Brandon Peoples, Committee Chair Dr. Kyle Barrett Dr. Troy Farmer ABSTRACT The goals of this thesis are twofold, 1) to review the existing literature on positive interactions, and 2) to experimentally test the role of biotic context in a freshwater reproductive interaction. First, my co-authors and I have conducted a review of positive interactions in freshwaters to establish a direction for future research. By outlining case studies and causal mechanisms, we illustrate the diversity of positive interactions, and set the stage for a comprehensive look at the role of context in shaping interaction outcomes. Our research directive focuses on the value of both basic life history and experimental research, then using those findings to investigate these interactions under different contexts, in different levels of ecosystem structure, and at multiple geographic scales.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Southampton Research Repository
    University of Southampton Research Repository Copyright © and Moral Rights for this thesis and, where applicable, any accompanying data are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis and the accompanying data cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder/s. The content of the thesis and accompanying research data (where applicable) must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holder/s. When referring to this thesis and any accompanying data, full bibliographic details must be given, e.g. Thesis: Author (Year of Submission) "Full thesis title", University of Southampton, name of the University Faculty or School or Department, PhD Thesis, pagination. Data: Author (Year) Title. URI [dataset] UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND THE ENVIRONMENT Centre for Environmental Sciences Civil, Maritime, and Environmental Engineering and Science Quantification of the collective response of fish to hydrodynamics for improving downstream fish passage facilities by Jasper de Bie Thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy April 2017 UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON ABSTRACT FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND THE ENVIRONMENT Civil, Maritime and Environmental Engineering and Science Thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Quantification of the collective response of fish to hydrodynamics for improving downstream fish passage facilities Jasper de Bie Migrating freshwater fish species are limited in their longitudinal movements due to barriers representing anthropogenic water resource management.
    [Show full text]
  • Notropis Mekistocholas)
    HABITAT USE OF LARVAL AND JUVENILE CAPE FEAR SHINERS (NOTROPIS MEKISTOCHOLAS) Except where reference is made to the work of others, the work described in this thesis is my own or was done in collaboration with my advisory committee. This thesis does not include proprietary or classified information. _________________________________ Andrew Reid Henderson Certificate of Approval: ____________________________ _____________________________ Carol E. Johnston, Chair Mary C. Freeman Associate Professor Affiliate Professor Fisheries and Allied Aquacultures Fisheries and Allied Aquacultures ____________________________ _____________________________ Craig Guyer George T. Flowers Professor Dean Biological Sciences Graduate School HABITAT USE OF LARVAL AND JUVENILE CAPE FEAR SHINERS (NOTROPIS MEKISTOCHOLAS) Andrew Reid Henderson A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in Partial Fulfillment of the Degree of Master of Science Auburn, AL December 19, 2008 HABITAT USE OF LARVAL AND JUVENILE CAPE FEAR SHINERS (NOTROPIS MEKISTOCHOLAS) Permission is granted to Auburn University to make copies of this thesis at its discretion, upon request of individuals or institutions and at their expense. The author reserves all publication rights. ______________________________ Signature of Author ______________________________ Date of Graduation iii VITA Andrew Reid Henderson was born in Birmingham, AL, on July 25, 1980, and raised in Springville, Alabama. He attended Auburn University and graduated with a bachelor's degree in Fisheries and Allied Aquacultures in 2004. After graduation, he worked as an intern for the Stream Survey Team of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources. In July 2005 he began graduate school in the Department of Fisheries and Allied Aquacultures. iv THESIS ABSTRACT HABITAT USE OF LARVAL AND JUVENILE CAPE FEAR SHINERS (NOTROPIS MEKISTOCHOLAS) Andrew R.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Genetics of Five Species of Dionda in West Texas
    CONSERVATION GENETICS OF FIVE SPECIES OF DIONDA IN WEST TEXAS A Thesis by ASHLEY HELEN HANNA Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE December 2011 Major Subject: Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences Conservation Genetics of Five Species of Dionda in West Texas Copyright 2011 Ashley Helen Hanna CONSERVATION GENETICS OF FIVE SPECIES OF DIONDA IN WEST TEXAS A Thesis by ASHLEY HELEN HANNA Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Approved by: Chair of Committee, John R. Gold Committee Members, J. Spencer Johnston R. Neal Wilkins Head of Department, John B. Carey December 2011 Major Subject: Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences iii ABSTRACT Conservation Genetics of Five Species of Dionda in West Texas. (December 2011) Ashley Helen Hanna Chair of Advisory Committee: Dr. John R. Gold Minnows of the genus Dionda (Cyprinidae, Teleostei) inhabit spring-fed streams in the southwestern United States and Mexico. Five nominal species of Dionda (D. argentosa, D. diaboli, D. episcopa, D. nigrotaeniata and D. serena) are found in streams and rivers in central and west Texas. Because Dionda require clean, flowing water, they serve as aquatic indicator species of biological impacts of drought and human water use. Consequently, the ecological and conservation status of species of Dionda are important relative to monitoring habitat deterioration. This study used genetic data from geographic samples of the five nominal species of Dionda in Texas waters to document the conservation-genetics status of populations in each species.
    [Show full text]