DOCSLIB.ORG

Conserving Texas Biodiversity: Status, Trends, and Conservation Planning for Fishes of Greatest Conservation Need

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Conserving Texas Biodiversity: Status, Trends, and Conservation Planning for Fishes of Greatest Conservation Need Final Report for: Conserving Texas Biodiversity: Status, Trends, and Conservation Planning for Fishes of Greatest Conservation Need Authors: Adam E. Cohen1, Gary P. Garrett1, Melissa J. Casarez1, Dean A. Hendrickson1, Benjamin J. Labay1, Tomislav Urban2, John Gentle2, Dennis Wylie3, and David Walling2 Affiliations: 1) University of Texas at Austin, Department of Integrative Biology, Biodiversity Center, Texas Natural History Collections (TNHC), Ichthyology; 2) University of Texas at Austin, Texas Advanced Computing Center (TACC); 3) University of Texas at Austin, Department of Integrative Biology, Center for Computational Biology & Bioinformatics (CCBB) Final Report for: Conserving Texas Biodiversity: Status, Trends, and Conservation Planning for Fishes of Greatest Conservation Need Authors Adam E. Cohen, Gary P. Garrett, Melissa J. Casarez, Dean A. Hendrickson, Benjamin J. Labay, Tomislav Urban, John Gentle, Dennis Wylie, and David Walling Principal Investigator: Dean A. Hendrickson, Curator of Ichthyology, University of Texas Austin, Department of Integrative Biology, Biodiversity Collections (Texas Natural History Collections - TNHC), 10100 Burnet Rd., PRC176EAST/R4000, Austin, Texas 78758-4445; phone: 512-471-9774; email: [email protected] Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Project Leader: Sarah Robertson, River Studies, P.O. Box 1685 or 951 Aquarena Springs Dr., The Rivers Center, San Marcos, TX 78666. Phone 512-754-6844 Funded by: Texas Parks and Wildlife Department through U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service State Wildlife Grant Program, grant TX T-106-1 (CFDA# 15.634) Contract/Project Number: Contract No. 459125 UTA14-001402 Reporting Period: September 1, 2014 through December 31, 2017 Submitted: 3-23-2018 Suggested citation: Cohen, Adam E., Gary P. Garrett, Melissa J. Casarez, Dean A. Hendrickson, Benjamin J. Labay, Tomislav Urban, John Gentle, Dennis Wiley, and David Walling. 2018. “Final Report: ‘Conserving Texas Biodiversity: Status, Trends, and Conservation Planning for Fishes of Greatest Conservation Need’ (Contract No. 459125 UTA14-001402),” Texas Parks and Wildlife Department through U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service State Wildlife Grant Program, grant TX T-106-1 (CFDA# 15.634), January, 362 pages. https://doi.org/10.15781/T26M33M7Z Final Report - Conserving Texas Biodiversity: Status, Trends, and Conservation Planning for Fishes of Greatest Conservation Need Executive Summary The primary aim of this grant was to work with Texas Parks and Wildlife (TPWD), Texas Advanced Computing Center (University of Texas at Austin), and other collaborators to (1) utilize Fishes of Texas Project (FoTX) data to aid in conservation of Texas fishes, (2) conduct field surveys in under-sampled areas of conservation interest, and (3) further develop the FoTX database and website as a research and management tool. While much of our work focused on Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN), almost everything we did was applied to all species, or affected data for all species. This report documents how FoTX’s specimen-based data were used to produce species distribution models that, in turn, fed into prioritization analyses that led to official creation of Native Fish Conservation Areas (NFCAs) that are now becoming the foundation of aquatic resource conservation prioritization and management in Texas. Our data were also used by TPWD staff to update the Texas Natural Diversity Database, previously depauperate for fish data, and to develop state and global conservation rankings for fishes using NatureServe’s standard methodology. Using FoTX data, we also developed recommendations for updating TPWD’s SGCN list, which will inform conservation in Texas for many years. We also expanded the scope of FoTX beyond Texas, throughout entire drainages, thus reducing biases and analytical complications related to our previous political boundary that lacked a biogeographical basis. We also added many new records from new types of data sources, especially agency databases that complement the museum specimen data to provide a more thorough, updated and unbiased dataset for analyzing temporal and spatial trends in fish faunas. The FoTX website’s checklists were improved in many ways to increase their utility to resource managers, and the site also now accesses occurrence data held in formerly inaccessible, but now digitized and easily accessed documents. We used diverse resources and our occurrence data to determine native ranges for all Texas fishes, and now visualize them in our website's maps, so when viewed alongside occurrence data, users can more easily recognize and explore spatial and temporal trends. We focused another effort at understanding range changes through time, and produced dynamic graphs, that when fully implemented will update automatically as underlying data evolve, depicting and statistically describing locational and general range size changes through time. In addition to database and website work, we were also in the field alongside, and in close coordination with, TPWD staff, focusing on collecting areas previously lacking data, or where there were other conservation-related reasons for sampling. The resultant thousands of new specimens and tissue samples deposited and permanently housed in the University of Texas Biodiversity Collections now provide new, modern data points for ongoing conservation actions. In summary, this project allowed FoTX to continue to grow and diversify, moving away from focusing solely on archiving and improving the data, to applying those data in diverse ways that maximize their value for conservation. The project also greatly increased collaborations between FoTX and TPWD staff, and inspired a Herps of Texas Project templated on the FoTX database schema and website, thus providing an efficient pathway for getting that project to a similar state, with the added advantage of a high level of inter-compatibility of most improvements across both sites. Our hope is that other projects, focusing on other taxa, continue to follow in our footsteps, allowing mutual benefit, and eventually query interfaces that provide users access to high quality data for entire ecological communities. Page | 1 Final Report - Conserving Texas Biodiversity: Status, Trends, and Conservation Planning for Fishes of Greatest Conservation Need Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 7 Activity 1. Coordinate and Facilitate Science and Conservation Actions for Conserving Texas Biodiversity 7 UT, TPWD and Other Collaborations ........................................................................................................ 8 New Products .......................................................................................................................................... 11 Conservation and Monitoring Documents .......................................................................................... 11 List of Imperiled Species ..................................................................................................................... 11 Native Ranges ..................................................................................................................................... 11 Contribution to Natural Diversity Database ....................................................................................... 13 Distributional Analyses, Trends and Other Statistics using NHD Plus Dataset ................................... 13 Website Features .................................................................................................................................... 27 Improved Mapping.............................................................................................................................. 27 Species Accounts (Taxa Pages) ............................................................................................................ 29 Checklists ............................................................................................................................................ 29 Dark Documents (Beta) ....................................................................................................................... 30 Statistics Tab ....................................................................................................................................... 32 General Website Performance and User Experience ......................................................................... 32 Data Growth and Improvement .............................................................................................................. 32 TNHC Specimen Contribution ............................................................................................................. 35 Other Internally Derived or Solicited Data Sources ............................................................................ 35 Specimen Examinations and Data Improvement ................................................................................ 36 Database and Website Technical Details ................................................................................................ 38 Database ............................................................................................................................................
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]
  • 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]
  • Full Issue PDF Volume 40, Issue 11
    Fisheries ISSN: 0363-2415 (Print) 1548-8446 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ufsh20 Full Issue PDF Volume 40, Issue 11 To cite this article: (2015) Full Issue PDF Volume 40, Issue 11, Fisheries, 40:11, 525-572, DOI: 10.1080/03632415.2015.1115707 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03632415.2015.1115707 Published online: 05 Nov 2015. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 147 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ufsh20 Download by: [Department Of Fisheries] Date: 13 March 2016, At: 23:47 FisheriesVol. 40 • No. 11 • November 2015 Downloaded by [Department Of Fisheries] at 23:47 13 March 2016 How to Thrive in Grad School Are Hermaphroditic Fish More Vulnerable to Fishing? Introduced Populations Help Preclude ESA Listing “I was amazed at how eective these gloves were and how easy they made handling of large-sized fishes.” – Alan Temple* “We were some of the first people to field-test [the gloves]. We used them last spring in our hatcheries to spawn muskies and walleye, and in the field to implant transmitters in muskies, walleyes and trout for telemetry studies. They worked great. We were really impressed.” – Je Hansbarger** · Portable, waterproof, and lightweight · Measuring and tagging made simple · Chemical free handling · Fish can be lawfully released immediately Downloaded by [Department Of Fisheries] at 23:47 13 March 2016 · Rubber gloves Safely immobilize live fish with Smith-Root’s new insulate user FISH HANDLING GLOVE SYSTEM.
    [Show full text]
  • Dionda Diaboli), 6 with Implications for Its Conservation…………………………………
    ECOLOGICAL PROFILES FOR SELECTED STREAM-DWELLING TEXAS FRESHWATER FISHES IV A Final Report To The Texas Water Development Board Prepared by: Robert J. Edwards Department of Biology University of Texas-Pan American Edinburg, TX 78541 TWDB Contract Number: 95-483-107 30 August 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ………………………………………….…………………….. 2 Introduction 3 Scientific Publications Resulting From This TWDB Contract………...………. 3 Discovery of a New Population of Devils River Minnow (Dionda diaboli), 6 With Implications for its Conservation…………………………………. Acknowledgements………………………………………………………..………. 14 Literature Cited……………….………………………………………….……….. 14 2 Introduction A major goal of the Water Development Board's mission are its research, monitoring, and assessment programs designed to minimize the effects of water development projects on the affected native aquatic fauna and to maintain the quality and availability of instream habitats for the use of dependent aquatic resources. The instream flows necessary for the successful survival, growth and reproduction of affected aquatic life are a major concern. Unfortunately, instream flow data with respect to the ecological requirements of Texas riverine fishes are largely unknown. While some information can be found in the published literature, a substantial but unknown quantity of information is also present in various agencies and research museums around the state. In order to minimize the disruptions to the native fauna, quantitative and qualitative information concerning life histories, survival,
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species
    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES
    ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES Tables STEPHEN T. ROSS University of California Press Berkeley Los Angeles London © 2013 by The Regents of the University of California ISBN 978-0-520-24945-5 uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 1 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 2 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 1.1 Families Composing 95% of North American Freshwater Fish Species Ranked by the Number of Native Species Number Cumulative Family of species percent Cyprinidae 297 28 Percidae 186 45 Catostomidae 71 51 Poeciliidae 69 58 Ictaluridae 46 62 Goodeidae 45 66 Atherinopsidae 39 70 Salmonidae 38 74 Cyprinodontidae 35 77 Fundulidae 34 80 Centrarchidae 31 83 Cottidae 30 86 Petromyzontidae 21 88 Cichlidae 16 89 Clupeidae 10 90 Eleotridae 10 91 Acipenseridae 8 92 Osmeridae 6 92 Elassomatidae 6 93 Gobiidae 6 93 Amblyopsidae 6 94 Pimelodidae 6 94 Gasterosteidae 5 95 source: Compiled primarily from Mayden (1992), Nelson et al. (2004), and Miller and Norris (2005). uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 3 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 3.1 Biogeographic Relationships of Species from a Sample of Fishes from the Ouachita River, Arkansas, at the Confl uence with the Little Missouri River (Ross, pers. observ.) Origin/ Pre- Pleistocene Taxa distribution Source Highland Stoneroller, Campostoma spadiceum 2 Mayden 1987a; Blum et al. 2008; Cashner et al. 2010 Blacktail Shiner, Cyprinella venusta 3 Mayden 1987a Steelcolor Shiner, Cyprinella whipplei 1 Mayden 1987a Redfi n Shiner, Lythrurus umbratilis 4 Mayden 1987a Bigeye Shiner, Notropis boops 1 Wiley and Mayden 1985; Mayden 1987a Bullhead Minnow, Pimephales vigilax 4 Mayden 1987a Mountain Madtom, Noturus eleutherus 2a Mayden 1985, 1987a Creole Darter, Etheostoma collettei 2a Mayden 1985 Orangebelly Darter, Etheostoma radiosum 2a Page 1983; Mayden 1985, 1987a Speckled Darter, Etheostoma stigmaeum 3 Page 1983; Simon 1997 Redspot Darter, Etheostoma artesiae 3 Mayden 1985; Piller et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquatic Fish Report
    Aquatic Fish Report Acipenser fulvescens Lake St urgeon Class: Actinopterygii Order: Acipenseriformes Family: Acipenseridae Priority Score: 27 out of 100 Population Trend: Unknown Gobal Rank: G3G4 — Vulnerable (uncertain rank) State Rank: S2 — Imperiled in Arkansas Distribution Occurrence Records Ecoregions where the species occurs: Ozark Highlands Boston Mountains Ouachita Mountains Arkansas Valley South Central Plains Mississippi Alluvial Plain Mississippi Valley Loess Plains Acipenser fulvescens Lake Sturgeon 362 Aquatic Fish Report Ecobasins Mississippi River Alluvial Plain - Arkansas River Mississippi River Alluvial Plain - St. Francis River Mississippi River Alluvial Plain - White River Mississippi River Alluvial Plain (Lake Chicot) - Mississippi River Habitats Weight Natural Littoral: - Large Suitable Natural Pool: - Medium - Large Optimal Natural Shoal: - Medium - Large Obligate Problems Faced Threat: Biological alteration Source: Commercial harvest Threat: Biological alteration Source: Exotic species Threat: Biological alteration Source: Incidental take Threat: Habitat destruction Source: Channel alteration Threat: Hydrological alteration Source: Dam Data Gaps/Research Needs Continue to track incidental catches. Conservation Actions Importance Category Restore fish passage in dammed rivers. High Habitat Restoration/Improvement Restrict commercial harvest (Mississippi River High Population Management closed to harvest). Monitoring Strategies Monitor population distribution and abundance in large river faunal surveys in cooperation
    [Show full text]
  • Teleostei: Cyprinidae), and Its Related Congeners in Sonora, Mexico
    Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad 87 (2016) 390–398 www.ib.unam.mx/revista/ Taxonomy and systematics Morphometric and meristic characterization of the endemic Desert chub Gila eremica (Teleostei: Cyprinidae), and its related congeners in Sonora, Mexico Caracterización morfométrica y merística de la carpa del desierto endémica Gila eremica (Teleostei: Cyprinidae) y sus congéneres relacionados en Sonora, México a b c Carlos A. Ballesteros-Córdova , Gorgonio Ruiz-Campos , Lloyd T. Findley , a a a,∗ José M. Grijalva-Chon , Luis E. Gutiérrez-Millán , Alejandro Varela-Romero a Departamento de Investigaciones Científicas y Tecnológicas, Universidad de Sonora, Luis Donaldo Colosio s/n, entre Sahuaripa y Reforma, Col. Centro, 83000 Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico b Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Autónoma de Baja California, P.O. Box 233, 22800 Ensenada, Baja California, Mexico c Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo, A.C./Unidad Guaymas, Carretera al Varadero Nacional km 6.6, Col. Las Playitas, 85480 Guaymas, Sonora, Mexico Received 29 July 2015; accepted 24 November 2015 Available online 16 May 2016 Abstract The Desert chub, Gila eremica DeMarais, 1991 is a freshwater fish endemic to Northwest Mexico, being described from the Sonora, Matape and Yaqui River basins in Sonora, Mexico. The recent discovery of 2 isolated small populations from the known distribution for this taxon makes necessary an evaluation to determine their specific taxonomical identities (herein designated as G. cf. eremica). Thirty-three morphometric and 6 meristic characters were evaluated in 219 specimens of several populations of the genus Gila in Sonora, including all the known populations of G.
    [Show full text]
  • The Global Status of Freshwater Fish Age Validation Studies and a Prioritization Framework for Further Research Jonathan J
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Nebraska Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Research Nebraska Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Research Unit -- Staff ubP lications Unit 2015 The Global Status of Freshwater Fish Age Validation Studies and a Prioritization Framework for Further Research Jonathan J. Spurgeon University of Nebraska–Lincoln, [email protected] Martin J. Hamel University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Kevin L. Pope U.S. Geological Survey—Nebraska Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit,, [email protected] Mark A. Pegg University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/ncfwrustaff Part of the Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons, Environmental Indicators and Impact Assessment Commons, Environmental Monitoring Commons, Natural Resource Economics Commons, Natural Resources and Conservation Commons, and the Water Resource Management Commons Spurgeon, Jonathan J.; Hamel, Martin J.; Pope, Kevin L.; and Pegg, Mark A., "The Global Status of Freshwater Fish Age Validation Studies and a Prioritization Framework for Further Research" (2015). Nebraska Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Research Unit -- Staff Publications. 203. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/ncfwrustaff/203 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Nebraska Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Research Unit at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Nebraska Cooperative Fish & Wildlife Research Unit -- Staff ubP lications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Reviews in Fisheries Science & Aquaculture, 23:329–345, 2015 CopyrightO c Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 2330-8249 print / 2330-8257 online DOI: 10.1080/23308249.2015.1068737 The Global Status of Freshwater Fish Age Validation Studies and a Prioritization Framework for Further Research JONATHAN J.
    [Show full text]
  • Geological Survey of Alabama Calibration of The
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF ALABAMA Berry H. (Nick) Tew, Jr. State Geologist WATER INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM CALIBRATION OF THE INDEX OF BIOTIC INTEGRITY FOR THE SOUTHERN PLAINS ICHTHYOREGION IN ALABAMA OPEN-FILE REPORT 0908 by Patrick E. O'Neil and Thomas E. Shepard Prepared in cooperation with the Alabama Department of Environmental Management and the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Tuscaloosa, Alabama 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ............................................................ 1 Introduction.......................................................... 1 Acknowledgments .................................................... 6 Objectives........................................................... 7 Study area .......................................................... 7 Southern Plains ichthyoregion ...................................... 7 Methods ............................................................ 8 IBI sample collection ............................................. 8 Habitat measures............................................... 10 Habitat metrics ........................................... 12 The human disturbance gradient ................................... 15 IBI metrics and scoring criteria..................................... 19 Designation of guilds....................................... 20 Results and discussion................................................ 22 Sampling sites and collection results . 22 Selection and scoring of Southern Plains IBI metrics . 41 1. Number of native species ................................
    [Show full text]
  • Louisiana's Animal Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN)
    Louisiana's Animal Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) ‐ Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Animals ‐ 2020 MOLLUSKS Common Name Scientific Name G‐Rank S‐Rank Federal Status State Status Mucket Actinonaias ligamentina G5 S1 Rayed Creekshell Anodontoides radiatus G3 S2 Western Fanshell Cyprogenia aberti G2G3Q SH Butterfly Ellipsaria lineolata G4G5 S1 Elephant‐ear Elliptio crassidens G5 S3 Spike Elliptio dilatata G5 S2S3 Texas Pigtoe Fusconaia askewi G2G3 S3 Ebonyshell Fusconaia ebena G4G5 S3 Round Pearlshell Glebula rotundata G4G5 S4 Pink Mucket Lampsilis abrupta G2 S1 Endangered Endangered Plain Pocketbook Lampsilis cardium G5 S1 Southern Pocketbook Lampsilis ornata G5 S3 Sandbank Pocketbook Lampsilis satura G2 S2 Fatmucket Lampsilis siliquoidea G5 S2 White Heelsplitter Lasmigona complanata G5 S1 Black Sandshell Ligumia recta G4G5 S1 Louisiana Pearlshell Margaritifera hembeli G1 S1 Threatened Threatened Southern Hickorynut Obovaria jacksoniana G2 S1S2 Hickorynut Obovaria olivaria G4 S1 Alabama Hickorynut Obovaria unicolor G3 S1 Mississippi Pigtoe Pleurobema beadleianum G3 S2 Louisiana Pigtoe Pleurobema riddellii G1G2 S1S2 Pyramid Pigtoe Pleurobema rubrum G2G3 S2 Texas Heelsplitter Potamilus amphichaenus G1G2 SH Fat Pocketbook Potamilus capax G2 S1 Endangered Endangered Inflated Heelsplitter Potamilus inflatus G1G2Q S1 Threatened Threatened Ouachita Kidneyshell Ptychobranchus occidentalis G3G4 S1 Rabbitsfoot Quadrula cylindrica G3G4 S1 Threatened Threatened Monkeyface Quadrula metanevra G4 S1 Southern Creekmussel Strophitus subvexus
    [Show full text]
  • South Carolina Department of Natural Resources
    FOREWORD Abundant fish and wildlife, unbroken coastal vistas, miles of scenic rivers, swamps and mountains open to exploration, and well-tended forests and fields…these resources enhance the quality of life that makes South Carolina a place people want to call home. We know our state’s natural resources are a primary reason that individuals and businesses choose to locate here. They are drawn to the high quality natural resources that South Carolinians love and appreciate. The quality of our state’s natural resources is no accident. It is the result of hard work and sound stewardship on the part of many citizens and agencies. The 20th century brought many changes to South Carolina; some of these changes had devastating results to the land. However, people rose to the challenge of restoring our resources. Over the past several decades, deer, wood duck and wild turkey populations have been restored, striped bass populations have recovered, the bald eagle has returned and more than half a million acres of wildlife habitat has been conserved. We in South Carolina are particularly proud of our accomplishments as we prepare to celebrate, in 2006, the 100th anniversary of game and fish law enforcement and management by the state of South Carolina. Since its inception, the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SCDNR) has undergone several reorganizations and name changes; however, more has changed in this state than the department’s name. According to the US Census Bureau, the South Carolina’s population has almost doubled since 1950 and the majority of our citizens now live in urban areas.
    [Show full text]