DOCSLIB.ORG

The Fish Fauna of Otsego Lake

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Fish Fauna of Otsego Lake 202 The Fish Fauna of Otsego Lake John R. Foster+ Over the past 25 years, fish surveys have been conducted by a variety of workers at the Biological Field Station (BFS) (New, 1971; 1973; Harman et al., 1980; MacWatters, 1980; 1983) and by the NYSDEC. Unfortunately, some of the earlier BFS reports are qualitative and do not lend themselves to quantitative comparisons wi th more recent work. This report relies primarily on data collected by J. R. Foster and his students since 1988. Otsego Lake can be conveniently divided into 4 major habitats: (1) warm, shallow, weedy areas which occur primarily at the north and south ends of the lake and in embayments; (2) rocky shoals, where steep drop-offs occur over most of the eastern and western shores; (3) epilimnetic waters which occur offshore; and (4) profundal offshore waters which occur in the deepest part of the lake basin. Because different sampling techniques and gear must be used to examine the fish fauna of these maj or habitats, survey data on relative abundance, diversity, and faunal changes are open to interpretation. Further, catch per unit effort (cpue) and percent species composition will vary with time of year and among sample locations. Most of the data presented here were collected primarily from the end of May through September in the portion of Otsego Lake south of Point Florence. THE INSHORE FISH FAUNA OF OTSEGO LAKE Littoral waters were sampled utilizing a 4-foot Pennsylvania trap net with a 50' lead, a 25 x 5' (3/8" stretch mesh) shore seine and a 150 • x 8' (5/8" stretch mesh) haul seine. The haul seine sampled out to a depth of 5 feet. The haul seine and shore seine were more effective in sampling small fishes, particularly young­ of-the-year, while the trap net captured more adult fish and those active at night. During the summer months, the in-shore fish fauna of Otsego Lake contained 24 species in 8 families (Tables 1,2,3). Overall, the sunfish/bass family (Centrarchidae) dominated inshore waters. However, the alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus), which generally come +BFS Visiting Researcher. Present address: Fisheries and Aquaculture, SUNY College of Agriculture and Technology, Cobelskill, N.Y. 12043. Susque- Black Rat Brook- Leather Trout Hayden Publ ic Shadow flyde Point Mean family Species hanna Bird Cove wood stocking Brook Creek Landing Brook Bay Judith Catch Outlet Bay Point Mouth Mouth Mouth Mouth Herring Alewife .9 1.0 1.7 3.4 .6 Suckers White Sucker .5 .2 .8 .2 3.0 .7 .2 Minnows Carp .2 .5 .2 .1 Golden Shiner .5 .1 .3 .5 1.0 1.0 .3 Emerald Shiner .3 1.8 .2 Spottail Shiner .1 .9 .1 .1 Bluntnose Minnow 2.5 .6 .4 .3 2.2 1.5 .3 _7 Fathead Minnow .5 .1 .1 European Rudd .3 _0 Pickerel Chain Pickeral .8 .1 .3 .1 Topminnows Banded Ki 11 i fish 22.5 .9 .4 1.3 2.3 Catfish Brown Bullhead 1.0 .1 .5 .5 .2 Channel Catfish .1 .0 Sunfish/Bass Rock Bass .5 .3 .2 .3 .5 .2 Redbreast Sunfish 1 . 5 1.5 2.0 1.9 3.8 .5 .4 2.0 1.2 Pumpkinseed 1.0 1.5 18.8 1.7 1.8 .3 1.2 2.4 .7 3.5 3.0 Bluegill 17.6 .9 1.0 1.0 .5 1.9 Smallmouth Bass 1.0 .4 .4 .7 1.5 1.3 .9 .3 2.0 .8 Largemouth Bass .5 1.3 .7 .5 1.5 1.7 3.6 .7 1.0 Perch Tesselated Darter 3.0 2.0 3.0 .6 1.2 .5 .3 .3 .1 1.0 Yellow Perch 1.0 2.9 1.0 .7 .3 .6 2.0 .8 Site Mean 7.3 32.0 50.6 8.6 10.2 3.5 5.8 12.7 18.6 4.7 11.5 Table 1 . Inshore summer fish abundance measured in catch per unit effort utilizing paired shore seine haul seine catches. Sample locations follow a clockwise pattern around the lake, starting at the Susquehanna River, N o w Family Species 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Mean (27 ) (33) (31) (35 ) (38 ) Herring Alewife .6 14.4 31. 2 14.4 10.5 14.2 Suckers White Sucker 1.3 .5 .2 .7 .1 .6 Creek Chubsucker .2 .5 .2 .7 .2 .4 Minnowc-; Carp .1 .2 .1 Golden Shiner 1.1 .9 .4 1.5 .9 1.0 Emerald Shiner .1 .0 .0 .0 European ](udd .1 .1 .1 .1 Pickerel Chain Pickpral .2 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Catfi~;h Brown Bu]lhpad 1.5 2.1 .1 .5 .3 .9 Tadpole Madtom .9 .2 .2 Sunfish/Bass Rock Bass 2.0 1.0 .8 2.6 8.1 2.9 !,pdbreast Sunfi~3h .2 .2 .3 .6 .2 .3 Pumpkinseed 7.1 2.7 3.1 9.1 4.2 5.2 Bluegill 6.8 3.8 2.9 4.9 .2 3.7 Largemouth Bass .5 .2 2.1 .2 .2 .6 Perch Yellow Perch 4.1 3.0 .5 1.7 .2 1.9 Yearly Mean Catch 25.8 29.7 42.0 38.1 25.5 32.2 Table 2 . Inshore summer fish abundance measured in catch per unit effort utilizing a 4' Pennsylvania trap net. Number of 24 hour sets are given in parenthesis, N o ,J:>. Family Species 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Mean (ll) (33 ) (26) (8 ) (6 ) Herring Alewife 4.8 1.0 Suckers White Sucker 4.7 1.0 Minnows Carp .2 .1 .2 .7 .2 Golden Shiner .6 .5 .2 Bluntnose Minnow .1 .0 .0 Fallfish .1 .1 Pickerel Chain Pickeral .4 .0 .5 .2 Catfish Brown Bullhead .8 .0 1.2 .4 Topminnows Banded Killifish .3 .4 .1 Sunfish/Bass Rock Bass 1.6 2.4 1.8 1.2 5.8 2.6 Redbreast Sunfish 2.0 2.6 2.8 2.4 3.3 2.6 Pumpkinseed 9.5 4.2 2.6 25.6 1.2 8.6 Bluegill 14.6 7.5 7.5 15.4 .2 9.0 Smallmouth Bass .7 .6 4.0 .6 .6 1.3 Largemouth Bass 2.7 .3 .9 1.0 .3 1.0 Perch Tesselated Darter 1.5 .3 Yellow Perch 3.7 .6 2.7 2.3 2.3 2.3 Mean Catch 42.0 18.3 27.3 51. 4 15.6 30.9 Table 3 . Inshore summer fish abundance measured in catch per unit effort utilizing a 150' haul seine. Sample size is given in parenthesis. \t-o tv o 0'1 206 into inshore waters at night (Emery, 1973), currently appears to be the most abundant species and seems to have the most influence on the other fish populations. High trap net catches relative to seine catches for alewives and chubsuckers indicate inshore movement at night, or, in the case of tadpole madtoms, increased nocturnal activity (MacWatters, 1983) . Changes in Inshore Fish Populations Alewives were first detected in Otsego Lake in 1988 (Foster, 1990). That year, the only specimen collected was found in a lake trout stomach. Trap net data (Table 2) indicate that in two years it became the dominant species in the lake (Foster and Gallup, 1991). The percent of alewife in trap net catches rose from 0% in 1988, to 2% in 1989, 48% in 1990, and peaked at 74% in 1991. Populations have since leveled off at 38% and 41% of catch in 1992 and 1993, respectively (Table 2) . The combined catch of non-alewife species was negatively correlated to the alewife catch. In 1991, when alewife catch peaked at 31.2 fish per 24-hr set, the combined catch of all other species was lowest at 10.8 fish per set. The inshore populations of many species (e. g. golden shiner (Notemigonus erysoleueas) , white sucker (Ca tostomus eommersoni) , brown bullhead (Ietalurus nebulosus) , pumpkinseed (Lepomis gibbosus) , bluegill (L. maeroehirus) , and yellow perch (Perea flaveseens)) dropped as alewife increased. Following an alewife die-off in 1992 (documented by the presence of thousands of dead individuals following ice breakup) the populations of these species have rebounded. The overall five year trend for pumpkinseed and bluegill indicated a decrease in their populations in inshore waters. Current conditions seem to favor pumpkinseed, as bluegill populations have dropped more drastically. Other species, such as emerald shiner (Notropis atherinoides) and bluntnose minnow (Pimephales nota tus) also showed a drop in inshore populations between 1989-1993. In most cases, year-to-year fluctuations in seine catches followed a similar pattern as trap net catches, although seining captured a much higher percent of young-of-the-year and juveniles, whil.e the trap net captured a much higher percentage of adults (Tables 2,3). Most bass and sunfish showed large peaks in year class strength. For example, the 1992 haul seine catch of bluegill and pumpkinseed indicates a very good year class. Population changes in predators of small fishes, such as rock bass (Ambloplites rupestris) , largemouth bass (Mieropterus salmoides) , 207 smallmouth bass (M. dolomieui) , yellow perch, and pickerel (Esox niger) did not follow the same pattern. This would indicate that other factors besides food supply are affecting tr"eir numbers. Rock bass was one of the few fish that had a larger inshore population in 1993 compared to 1989. Changes in the occurrence and abundance of inshore fishes are cTvTiderlt ~rl cOlnparlsons of ~v1ac~'Jatters sur'v'ey's (t·1ac~·Jatters, 1983; MacWatters et al., 1981) and BFS surveys conducted between 1988 and 1995.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Thermal Toxicity Literature Evaluation
    Thermal Toxicity Literature Evaluation 2011 TECHNICAL REPORT Electric Power Research Institute 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338 • PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813 USA 800.313.3774 • 650.855.2121 • [email protected] • www.epri.com Thermal Toxicity Literature Evaluation 1023095 Final Report, December 2011 EPRI Project Manager R. Goldstein ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3420 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304-1338 ▪ PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303-0813 ▪ USA 800.313.3774 ▪ 650.855.2121 ▪ [email protected] ▪ www.epri.com DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY THE ORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW AS AN ACCOUNT OF WORK SPONSORED OR COSPONSORED BY THE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC. (EPRI). NEITHER EPRI, ANY MEMBER OF EPRI, ANY COSPONSOR, THE ORGANIZATION(S) BELOW, NOR ANY PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM: (A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, (I) WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT, INCLUDING MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR (II) THAT SUCH USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OR INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS, INCLUDING ANY PARTY'S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, OR (III) THAT THIS DOCUMENT IS SUITABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR USER'S CIRCUMSTANCE; OR (B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRI OR ANY EPRI REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM YOUR SELECTION OR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT OR ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT.
    [Show full text]
  • BIOLOGICAL FIELD STATION Cooperstown, New York
    BIOLOGICAL FIELD STATION Cooperstown, New York 49th ANNUAL REPORT 2016 STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK COLLEGE AT ONEONTA OCCASIONAL PAPERS PUBLISHED BY THE BIOLOGICAL FIELD STATION No. 1. The diet and feeding habits of the terrestrial stage of the common newt, Notophthalmus viridescens (Raf.). M.C. MacNamara, April 1976 No. 2. The relationship of age, growth and food habits to the relative success of the whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis) and the cisco (C. artedi) in Otsego Lake, New York. A.J. Newell, April 1976. No. 3. A basic limnology of Otsego Lake (Summary of research 1968-75). W. N. Harman and L. P. Sohacki, June 1976. No. 4. An ecology of the Unionidae of Otsego Lake with special references to the immature stages. G. P. Weir, November 1977. No. 5. A history and description of the Biological Field Station (1966-1977). W. N. Harman, November 1977. No. 6. The distribution and ecology of the aquatic molluscan fauna of the Black River drainage basin in northern New York. D. E Buckley, April 1977. No. 7. The fishes of Otsego Lake. R. C. MacWatters, May 1980. No. 8. The ecology of the aquatic macrophytes of Rat Cove, Otsego Lake, N.Y. F. A Vertucci, W. N. Harman and J. H. Peverly, December 1981. No. 9. Pictorial keys to the aquatic mollusks of the upper Susquehanna. W. N. Harman, April 1982. No. 10. The dragonflies and damselflies (Odonata: Anisoptera and Zygoptera) of Otsego County, New York with illustrated keys to the genera and species. L.S. House III, September 1982. No. 11. Some aspects of predator recognition and anti-predator behavior in the Black-capped chickadee (Parus atricapillus).
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Sensitivity Index Guidelines Version 2.0
    NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS ORCA 115 Environmental Sensitivity Index Guidelines Version 2.0 October 1997 Seattle, Washington noaa NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION National Ocean Service Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment National Ocean Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration U.S. Department of Commerce The Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment (ORCA) provides decisionmakers comprehensive, scientific information on characteristics of the oceans, coastal areas, and estuaries of the United States of America. The information ranges from strategic, national assessments of coastal and estuarine environmental quality to real-time information for navigation or hazardous materials spill response. Through its National Status and Trends (NS&T) Program, ORCA uses uniform techniques to monitor toxic chemical contamination of bottom-feeding fish, mussels and oysters, and sediments at about 300 locations throughout the United States. A related NS&T Program of directed research examines the relationships between contaminant exposure and indicators of biological responses in fish and shellfish. Through the Hazardous Materials Response and Assessment Division (HAZMAT) Scientific Support Coordination program, ORCA provides critical scientific support for planning and responding to spills of oil or hazardous materials into coastal environments. Technical guidance includes spill trajectory predictions, chemical hazard analyses, and assessments of the sensitivity of marine and estuarine environments to spills. To fulfill the responsibilities of the Secretary of Commerce as a trustee for living marine resources, HAZMAT’s Coastal Resource Coordination program provides technical support to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency during all phases of the remedial process to protect the environment and restore natural resources at hundreds of waste sites each year.
    [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]
  • A Fish Habitat Partnership
    A Fish Habitat Partnership Strategic Plan for Fish Habitat Conservation in Midwest Glacial Lakes Engbretson Underwater Photography September 30, 2009 This page intentionally left blank. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 I. BACKGROUND 7 II. VALUES OF GLACIAL LAKES 8 III. OVERVIEW OF IMPACTS TO GLACIAL LAKES 9 IV. AN ECOREGIONAL APPROACH 14 V. MULTIPLE INTERESTS WITH COMMON GOALS 23 VI. INVASIVES SPECIES, CLIMATE CHANGE 23 VII. CHALLENGES 25 VIII. INTERIM OBJECTIVES AND TARGETS 26 IX. INTERIM PRIORITY WATERSHEDS 29 LITERATURE CITED 30 APPENDICES I Steering Committee, Contributing Partners and Working Groups 33 II Fish Habitat Conservation Strategies Grouped By Themes 34 III Species of Greatest Conservation Need By Level III Ecoregions 36 Contact Information: Pat Rivers, Midwest Glacial Lakes Project Manager 1601 Minnesota Drive Brainerd, MN 56401 Telephone 218-327-4306 [email protected] www.midwestglaciallakes.org 3 Executive Summary OUR MISSION The mission of the Midwest Glacial Lakes Partnership is to work together to protect, rehabilitate, and enhance sustainable fish habitats in glacial lakes of the Midwest for the use and enjoyment of current and future generations. Glacial lakes (lakes formed by glacial activity) are a common feature on the midwestern landscape. From small, productive potholes to the large windswept walleye “factories”, glacial lakes are an integral part of the communities within which they are found and taken collectively are a resource of national importance. Despite this value, lakes are commonly treated more as a commodity rather than a natural resource susceptible to degradation. Often viewed apart from the landscape within which they occupy, human activities on land—and in water—have compromised many of these systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Kansas Stream Fishes
    A POCKET GUIDE TO Kansas Stream Fishes ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ By Jessica Mounts Illustrations © Joseph Tomelleri Sponsored by Chickadee Checkoff, Westar Energy Green Team, Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism, Kansas Alliance for Wetlands & Streams, and Kansas Chapter of the American Fisheries Society Published by the Friends of the Great Plains Nature Center Table of Contents • Introduction • 2 • Fish Anatomy • 3 • Species Accounts: Sturgeons (Family Acipenseridae) • 4 ■ Shovelnose Sturgeon • 5 ■ Pallid Sturgeon • 6 Minnows (Family Cyprinidae) • 7 ■ Southern Redbelly Dace • 8 ■ Western Blacknose Dace • 9 ©Ryan Waters ■ Bluntface Shiner • 10 ■ Red Shiner • 10 ■ Spotfin Shiner • 11 ■ Central Stoneroller • 12 ■ Creek Chub • 12 ■ Peppered Chub / Shoal Chub • 13 Plains Minnow ■ Silver Chub • 14 ■ Hornyhead Chub / Redspot Chub • 15 ■ Gravel Chub • 16 ■ Brassy Minnow • 17 ■ Plains Minnow / Western Silvery Minnow • 18 ■ Cardinal Shiner • 19 ■ Common Shiner • 20 ■ Bigmouth Shiner • 21 ■ • 21 Redfin Shiner Cover Photo: Photo by Ryan ■ Carmine Shiner • 22 Waters. KDWPT Stream ■ Golden Shiner • 22 Survey and Assessment ■ Program collected these Topeka Shiner • 23 male Orangespotted Sunfish ■ Bluntnose Minnow • 24 from Buckner Creek in Hodgeman County, Kansas. ■ Bigeye Shiner • 25 The fish were catalogued ■ Emerald Shiner • 26 and returned to the stream ■ Sand Shiner • 26 after the photograph. ■ Bullhead Minnow • 27 ■ Fathead Minnow • 27 ■ Slim Minnow • 28 ■ Suckermouth Minnow • 28 Suckers (Family Catostomidae) • 29 ■ River Carpsucker •
    [Show full text]
  • Pennington Creek Fish
    FAMILY: CENTRARCHIDAE (sunfishes) FAMILY: CYPRINIDAE (minnows) Bluegill Orangespotted Sunfish Smallmouth Bass Bigeye Shiner Lepomis macrochirus Lepomis humilis Micropterus dolomieu Notropis boops Characteristics: deep-bodied, small mouth, Characteristics: small with orange spots Characteristics: large mouth, vertical dark Characteristics: large eye relative to black spot posterior dorsal rays on side, long white-edged opercular flap bars are sometimes present on olive- body size, large mouth with a small bronze colored sides of the fish, juveniles head, dark lateral stripe extends from have an orange and black band on the cau- the lips through the eye to the end of dal fin the caudal peduncle Green Sunfish Redear Sunfish Largemouth Bass Blacktail Shiner Lepomis cyanellus Lepomis microlophus Micropterus salmoides Cyprinella venusta Characteristics: elongated body, large Characteristics: large, short opercular flap Characteristics: large mouth, upper jaw Characteristics: prominent black spot at mouth, black spot posterior dorsal & anal with a bright red crescent marking extends past the eye, dark midlateral the base of the caudal fin, large stripe from snout to base of the caudal fin diamond shaped scales outlined in black, breeding males develop yellow fins Longear Sunfish White & Black Crappie Spotted Bass Bluntnose Minnow Lepomis megalotis Pomoxis annularis, Pomoxis nigromacula- Micropterus punctulatus Pimephales notatus Characteristics: small, deep-bodied, long tus Characteristics: resembles the largemouth Characteristics: blunt, rounded
    [Show full text]
  • Annotated Key to the Fishes of Indiana
    IF ANNOTATED KEY TO THE FISHES OF INDIANA Joseph S. Nelson and Shelby D. Gerking Department of Zoology, Indiana University, Bloomington Indiana Aquatic Research Unit Project Number 342-303-815 March, 1968 INN MN UM OM MI NMI 11111111 MI IIIIII NMI OM MS ill MI NM NM NM OM it Draft Copy ANNOTATED KEY TO THE FISHES OF INDIANA Joseph S. Nelson and Shelby D. Gerking Introduction This annotated key provides a means of identifying fishes presently occurring or known to have occurred in Indiana and gives a rough indication of their range and distribution within the state. Recent changes in nomenclature, additional diagnostic characters, and distributional changes are combined with information from the detailed analyses of Indiana fishes by Gerking (1945, 1955). Geography The state of Indiana covers 36,291 square miles. It extends 265 miles 1 in a north-south direction between the extremes of 41046t and 37°46 N latitude and 160 miles in an east-west direction between the extremes of 84°47' and 88°061 W longitude. Its northern border includes the southern tip of Lake Michigan and extends along part of the southern border of Michigan state. Ohio lies along most of the eastern border, the Ohio River, with Kentucky to the south,comprises the southern border, while Illinois lies along the western border. Approximately the northern sixth of Indiana lies in the Lake Michigan- Lake Erie watershed; the remainder is in the Mississippi drainage, composed primarily of the Wabash and Ohio rivers and their tributaries (Fig. 1). The elevation of the state is highest in the east central portion with the highest ° 1 point at 1257 feet in the northeastern corner of Wayne County, 40 00 N; 84°51' W.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquatic Biota
    Low Gradient, Cold, Headwaters and Creeks Macrogroup: Headwaters and Creeks Smith Pond Brook, © Josh Royte Ecologist or State Fish Game Agency for more information about this habitat. This map is based on a model and has had little field-checking. Contact your State Natural Heritage Description: Cold, slow-moving, headwaters and creeks of flat, marshy settings. These small streams of northern regions or high elevations occur on flats or very gentle slopes in watersheds less than 39 sq.mi in size. The cold slow-moving waters may have high turbidity and be somewhat poorly oxygenated, although some examples may have significant groundwater inflow that maintains the cold temperature. Instream habitats are dominated by glide- pool and ripple-dune systems with runs interspersed by pool and a few short or no distinct riffles. Bed materials are predominantly sands, silt, and only isolated amounts of gravel. These low- Source: 1:100k NHD+ (USGS 2006), >= 1 sq.mi. drainage area gradient streams may have high sinuosity but are usually only State Distribution:ME, NH, NY, VT slightly entrenched with adjacent floodplain and riparian wetland ecosystems. Permanent cold water temperatures in these streams means coldwater fish species, such as brook trout, likely Total Habitat (mi): 4,114 represent over half of the fish community. Additional variation in the stream biological community is associated with acidic, % Conserved: 29.0 Unit = Acres of 100m Riparian Buffer calcareous, and neutral geologic settings where the pH of the water will limit the distribution of certain macroinvertebrates, State State Miles of Acres Acres Total Acres plants, and other aquatic biota.
    [Show full text]
  • Notropis Atherinoides) in the Upper Niagara River, New York: Growth, Diversity, and Importance As a Forage Species Jacob L
    State University of New York College at Buffalo - Buffalo State College Digital Commons at Buffalo State Great Lakes Center Masters Theses Great Lakes Center 8-2017 Ecology of the Young-of-the-Year Emerald Shiner (Notropis Atherinoides) in the Upper Niagara River, New York: Growth, Diversity, and Importance as a Forage Species Jacob L. Cochran State University of New York College at Buffalo, [email protected] Advisor Dr. Alicia Pérez-Fuentetaja First Reader Dr. Alicia Pérez-Fuentetaja Second Reader Dr. Randal J. Snyder Third Reader Mark D. Clapsadl Department Chair Dr. Alexander Y. Karatayev To learn more about the Great Lakes Center and its educational programs, research, and resources, go to http://greatlakescenter.buffalostate.edu/. Recommended Citation Cochran, Jacob L., "Ecology of the Young-of-the-Year Emerald Shiner (Notropis Atherinoides) in the Upper Niagara River, New York: Growth, Diversity, and Importance as a Forage Species" (2017). Great Lakes Center Masters Theses. 3. http://digitalcommons.buffalostate.edu/greatlakes_theses/3 Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.buffalostate.edu/greatlakes_theses Part of the Other Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, Population Biology Commons, and the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Abstract of Thesis The emerald shiner (Notropis atherinoides) is a relatively understudied Cyprinid that fills a major keystone role in the Niagara River. Little is known about the emerald shiner’s early life history, such as the ecology of their larval and juvenile stages, which is the focus of this study. In the upper Niagara River, larvae first recruited into sampling gear in early July at a mean water temperature of 23oC, with larvae appearing into August.
    [Show full text]
  • A Checklist Are Specially Adapted to Finding Food Don’T Expect to See Fish Swimming Deep Below in Low-Light Environments
    HABITATS OF THE LOWER GRAND RIVER FISHES OF THE LOWER GRAND RIVER The warm, muddy water of the Grand River is home to more than 100 species FISH WATCHING of fish. Some are large river fish that A CHECKLIST are specially adapted to finding food Don’t expect to see fish swimming deep below in low-light environments. Many others the turbid water of the Grand, but late summer is use the Grand as a connecting highway a good time to see gar gulping air at the surface. between their preferred habitats. Schools of young shad also create disturbances on the surface. When the water is calm in backwaters and at the mouth of the river, you can observe a variety of sucker species, carp, drum and bass feeding over rocks or shallow flats. Backwaters include a drowned river mouth lake (Spring Lake), numerous bayous and COllECTING FISH man-made gravel pits. Some are dominated Angling with hook and line is the best way to by rich plankton blooms and others offer catch most species. Even minnows and darters abundant rooted vegetation. will strike a tiny fly or hook baited with a piece of worm. Nets and minnow traps are also legal gear Many small creeks flow to theGrand River. for certain species in some environments (check Some suffer from excessive sediment and the Michigan Fishing Guide for regulations). nutrients, which creates poor water quality Seines are a good choice for snag-free flats and that can limit fish diversity. However, others cast nets are effective on open water species in like the upper reaches of Crockery Creek Lake Michigan waters.
    [Show full text]
  • A Check-List of the Fishes of Iowa, with Keys for Identification
    A CHECK-LIST OF THE FISHES OF IOWA, WITH KEYS FOR IDENTIFICATION By Reeve M. Bailey TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction ................................................................................................................... 187 Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................ 188 Species Removed from the Iowa Faunal List ........................................................ 188 Check-list of Iowa Fishes ............................................................................................ 189 Additional Fishes which May Occur in Iowa ........................................................ 195 Keys for the Identification of Iowa Fishes ............................................................ 196 Key to Families of Iowa Fishes .................................................................... 198 Key to Petromyzontidae (lampreys) .......................................................... 206 Key to Acipenseridae (sturgeons) .............................................................. 207 Key to Lepisosteidae (gars) .......................................................................... 207 Key to Salmonidae (trouts) .......................................................................... 208 Key to Clupeidae (herrings) .......................................................................... 209 Key to Hiodontidae (mooneyes) .................................................................... 209 Key to Esocidae (pikes) .................................................................................
    [Show full text]