DOCSLIB.ORG

Saltwater Fishes of Texas= "

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Saltwater Fishes of Texas= Saltwater Fishes of Texas= " 5ICIIU1Nggyy A DlcHotoFAGUs Ksf IN INllfpg!p$ggg Edward 0. Murdy SAL,TWATERFISHES OF TEXAS A Dichotomous Key by Edward 0. Nurdy Departmentof Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences Texas AQl University College Station, Texas 77843 Illustrations by Janice D. Fechhelm Bland Crowder, Editor August 1983 TAMU-SG-83-607 Partially Supportedthrough Institutional GrantNA81AA-D00092 to Texas A&M Uni versi ty by the National Sea Grant College Program National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration U.S. Department of Commerce o 1983 Texas APl University Sea Grant Colleqe Proqram Price: $7 Order from Marine Information Ser vice Sea Grant College Program A/1-1 Texas A8M University TAMU-SG-83-607 College Station, Texas 77843 1,0GO August 1983 PREFACE In the 10 years since the second edition of Ke to the Estuarine and Marine Fishes of Texas was published, many studies have improved our knowledge of Texas marine fishes. Notable amongthese works have been Bright and Cashman 1974!, Hoese and Moore 1976! and the FAOSpecies Identification Sheets for the Western Central Atlantic 978!. These publications and other sources have provided the impetus and much new information for this work. While the basic format and style of the second edition have been retained, the large number of additions has forced the emendation of roughly 50$ of the original keys at the ordinal, familial and species levels. The second edition, while largely outdated, is a seminal work and my gratitude is extended to its preparers, Benny J. Gallaway, Jack C. Parker and Donald Moore. Janice D. Fechhelm has expertly drawn approximately 500 figures for this edition which includes 130 species not found in the second edition. Consequently, the number of estuarine and marine species in Texas waters now approaches 550. I wish to acknowledge the support of Feenan D. Jennings and Lauriston R. King of the Texas A&MUniversity Sea Grant College Program. Laura Colunga and Bland Crowder provided editorial expertise. Sandra Garcia typed and retyped! the manuscript. My sincere thanks go to the following who reviewed and commentedon portions of the manuscript: Steven D. Branstetter sharks!, John D. McEachran skates and rays!, David G. Smith Anguilliformes!, and Richard E. Matheson Gerr eidae!. Michael J. McCoid and Frank Pezeld also added pertinent comments. Edward 0. Murdy Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences Texas A&M University College Station, Texas 77843 111 TABLE OF CONTENTS I NTRODUCTI ON ~ ~ ~ ~~ 4 ~ 4~ 4 4 ~ 4~ ~~ ~4 ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ 4~ Plan of Guide...... ~ ..~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ -~ ~- ~~ ~~ ~~ ..... ~ ~~ 2 Identification........... ~ ~... 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 2 How to Use the Key.................. ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 4~ ~~ ~~ 4~ 44 ~4 ~~ 4~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~3 Morphology............................................................. 4 Basic Count s and Meas ur ements........................ 7 GLOSSARYOF SELECTEDTECHNICAL TERMS.......,....,.................,.... 9 KEY TOORDERS.... ~ -... ~ -~ -~ ~~ -~ ~ ~ ~-- ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~... 14 HEXANCHIFORMES....................... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 2 ORECTOLOBIFORMES.~ ................... ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 32 LAMNIFORMES.......................... ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ 0 4 ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 33 CARCHARHINIFORMES..................., ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 4 ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~0 ~ ~0 ~~ ~~ ~~ 34 SgUALIF ORMES4 ~~ ~~ ~~ ~4 4 ~~ ~~ 4~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~4 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ .........42 S UATINIFORMES.....................,. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 43 PR1ST IF ORMES ~ ~~ ~~ ~4 ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 43 TORPEDINIFORMES................... ~ ~4 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ 4 ~ 43 RAJIFORMES..................... ~ ...., ~ 44 ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~44 ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~0 ~~ 0~ ~45 MYLIOBATIFORMES...................... 4 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 45 LE P! SOSTEIFORMES ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~4 4~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ 44 ~ ~~ a~ ~49 AMIIFORMES.... ~ ................4 ~ .... ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 51 ELOPIFORMES ~ ~~ ~~ 4~ ~a ~~ 4~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~4 ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ r 440 ~ ~04 ~ 4 ~ 40 ~ 4 ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 51 ANGUILl IFORMES....................... ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 52 CLUPE IFORMES ~ ~~ ~~ ~4 ~ 0 ~~ 0 ~~ 4 ~~ 4 44 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~4 ~~ ~4 61 SA LMONI F ORMES ~ ~~ ~~ 4~ 0~ ~~ ~~ 4~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~0 ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~44 ~ 4 ~44 e466 MYCTOPHIFORMES....................... 40 ~ 40 ~ ~04 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 444 ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 4~ 68 AULOPIFORMES.. ~ ...................... ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~~ s~ ~s ~~ 4~ 68 CYPR! NIFORMES 4 4~ 4~ ~4 ~ ~~ 4~ ~ 4 ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ 4~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 0~ ~~ ~~ 0~ 72 BATRACHO ID IF ORMES.................... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ I ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~~ ~4 ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 72 GOBIESO CIFORME...................... ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ .72 LOPH I IF ORMES~ ~~ e~ ~~ ~4 4~ ~~ ~~ 4 ~~ 0 4~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 74 GADIF ORMES 4 ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 4~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 78 OPH! DI IFORMES ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ 4 ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 82 CYPRINODONTIFORMES.......... ~ ........ ~ ~0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 84 BELONIFORMES~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ as ~ ~04 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~4 ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~4 ~ ~~ 4~ ~0 87 ATHERINIFORMES....................... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ 4 ~ ~ 4 ~ .94 LAMPRIFORMES.... ~ ~........, ~ ...,..... ~ ~4 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 94 BERYCIFORNES..... ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~....,9S ZEIFORMES........ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .....96 GASTEROSTEIF ORNES F0 ' ~98 SCORPAE N IFORMES ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ....100 PERCIFORNES...... ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~....108 P LEURONEC T IF ORMES 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~0 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .193 TETRAODONT IFORME S ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~202 INDEX TO FAMILIES........................,,.....,....,, 212 B I 8 L I OGRAPHY ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 0~ 0~ ~0 ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~0 ~~ ~~ 0~ 0~ ~4 0218 I NTRODUC T I ON Personsattempting to identify estuarineand marine fishes found along the Texascoast face a serioushandicap because the pertinentliterature i s vast andscattered through a varietyof booksand technical journals. This keyis a compilationof that literature into a singlevolume and includes onlythose adult fishes known or expectedto occuralong the Texascoast. Thekey was first publishedas anunillustrated 1aboratary manual far ma- rine ichthyology Parker, Gallaway and moore, 1970! and has been consider- ably expandedin a subsequenteditions. Thearea of coverageextends from SabinePass to the mouthof the Rio GrandeRiver, and includes all estuarinewaters and that part of the Gulf of Nexicoabove the continentalshelf to a depthof 200meters 56 feet!. Thecompilation of specieswas obtained from the checklistsof Hoese 1958!,Briggs et al. 1964!and Parker 1965! and supplemented bymore re- cent recordsfrom the literature. A fewmarine species that havebeen re- portedonly from waters beyond the continental shelf are included because the locationat whichthey werecollected was close enough to the 200meter boundaryto indicatethat theymay venture into the areaof coverage. Thesespecies are denoted by an asterisk as they appear in the text. Some familiesof freshwaterfishes were also includedto facilitate identifica- tion in the low salinity regionsof the estuaries. Fora keyto the fresh- waterspecies, the reader is referredto Eddyand Underhill 1978!. Plan of Guide Theformat consists first of a key to the orders, then families within orders, andfinally specieswithin families. Dependingon their distribu- tion, the familiesand species are distinguishedas beingfreshwater F!, estuarine E!, marine M!, or any combination thereof. Thesystematic arrangement proposed by Nelson 1976!has been adopted, exceptin a fewcases where different namesare useddue to recent revi- sions. Commonnames of families and species follow that of the American Fisheries Society Robins et al., 1980!. Identification In order to ensure proper identification, the following procedure is recommended: ! Familiarizeyoursel f with the sectionson Morphology,Basic Counts and Measurements,Diagnostic Charactersand Glossaryof SelectedTechnical Termssince the information contained there is critic,al to understand- ing the technical languageused in the keys. Wordsnot explainedin the glossary will be found in a standard dictionary. ! Keythe fish from the largest group Key to Orders! through succes- sively smaller groups Keys to Families and Species! until a scienti- fic and common name is found. ! Comparethe fish in questionwith the outline drawingof the deter- minedspecies. If they correspondthe identification is probably cor- rect. If, after repeatedattempts, the fish cannot be satisfactorily identified it should be preserved in a 10$ formalin solution with data on the time, place and date of capture and sent to a museum.Both the Departmentof Wildlife andFisheries Sciences, Texas A8M University
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Phylogeny Classification Additional Readings Clupeomorpha and Ostariophysi
    Teleostei - AccessScience from McGraw-Hill Education http://www.accessscience.com/content/teleostei/680400 (http://www.accessscience.com/) Article by: Boschung, Herbert Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. Gardiner, Brian Linnean Society of London, Burlington House, Piccadilly, London, United Kingdom. Publication year: 2014 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1036/1097-8542.680400 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1036/1097-8542.680400) Content Morphology Euteleostei Bibliography Phylogeny Classification Additional Readings Clupeomorpha and Ostariophysi The most recent group of actinopterygians (rayfin fishes), first appearing in the Upper Triassic (Fig. 1). About 26,840 species are contained within the Teleostei, accounting for more than half of all living vertebrates and over 96% of all living fishes. Teleosts comprise 517 families, of which 69 are extinct, leaving 448 extant families; of these, about 43% have no fossil record. See also: Actinopterygii (/content/actinopterygii/009100); Osteichthyes (/content/osteichthyes/478500) Fig. 1 Cladogram showing the relationships of the extant teleosts with the other extant actinopterygians. (J. S. Nelson, Fishes of the World, 4th ed., Wiley, New York, 2006) 1 of 9 10/7/2015 1:07 PM Teleostei - AccessScience from McGraw-Hill Education http://www.accessscience.com/content/teleostei/680400 Morphology Much of the evidence for teleost monophyly (evolving from a common ancestral form) and relationships comes from the caudal skeleton and concomitant acquisition of a homocercal tail (upper and lower lobes of the caudal fin are symmetrical). This type of tail primitively results from an ontogenetic fusion of centra (bodies of vertebrae) and the possession of paired bracing bones located bilaterally along the dorsal region of the caudal skeleton, derived ontogenetically from the neural arches (uroneurals) of the ural (tail) centra.
    [Show full text]
  • Updated Checklist of Marine Fishes (Chordata: Craniata) from Portugal and the Proposed Extension of the Portuguese Continental Shelf
    European Journal of Taxonomy 73: 1-73 ISSN 2118-9773 http://dx.doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2014.73 www.europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu 2014 · Carneiro M. et al. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Monograph urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:9A5F217D-8E7B-448A-9CAB-2CCC9CC6F857 Updated checklist of marine fishes (Chordata: Craniata) from Portugal and the proposed extension of the Portuguese continental shelf Miguel CARNEIRO1,5, Rogélia MARTINS2,6, Monica LANDI*,3,7 & Filipe O. COSTA4,8 1,2 DIV-RP (Modelling and Management Fishery Resources Division), Instituto Português do Mar e da Atmosfera, Av. Brasilia 1449-006 Lisboa, Portugal. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] 3,4 CBMA (Centre of Molecular and Environmental Biology), Department of Biology, University of Minho, Campus de Gualtar, 4710-057 Braga, Portugal. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] * corresponding author: [email protected] 5 urn:lsid:zoobank.org:author:90A98A50-327E-4648-9DCE-75709C7A2472 6 urn:lsid:zoobank.org:author:1EB6DE00-9E91-407C-B7C4-34F31F29FD88 7 urn:lsid:zoobank.org:author:6D3AC760-77F2-4CFA-B5C7-665CB07F4CEB 8 urn:lsid:zoobank.org:author:48E53CF3-71C8-403C-BECD-10B20B3C15B4 Abstract. The study of the Portuguese marine ichthyofauna has a long historical tradition, rooted back in the 18th Century. Here we present an annotated checklist of the marine fishes from Portuguese waters, including the area encompassed by the proposed extension of the Portuguese continental shelf and the Economic Exclusive Zone (EEZ). The list is based on historical literature records and taxon occurrence data obtained from natural history collections, together with new revisions and occurrences.
    [Show full text]
  • History of Fishes - Structural Patterns and Trends in Diversification
    History of fishes - Structural Patterns and Trends in Diversification AGNATHANS = Jawless • Class – Pteraspidomorphi • Class – Myxini?? (living) • Class – Cephalaspidomorphi – Osteostraci – Anaspidiformes – Petromyzontiformes (living) Major Groups of Agnathans • 1. Osteostracida 2. Anaspida 3. Pteraspidomorphida • Hagfish and Lamprey = traditionally together in cyclostomata Jaws = GNATHOSTOMES • Gnathostomes: the jawed fishes -good evidence for gnathostome monophyly. • 4 major groups of jawed vertebrates: Extinct Acanthodii and Placodermi (know) Living Chondrichthyes and Osteichthyes • Living Chondrichthyans - usually divided into Selachii or Elasmobranchi (sharks and rays) and Holocephali (chimeroids). • • Living Osteichthyans commonly regarded as forming two major groups ‑ – Actinopterygii – Ray finned fish – Sarcopterygii (coelacanths, lungfish, Tetrapods). • SARCOPTERYGII = Coelacanths + (Dipnoi = Lung-fish) + Rhipidistian (Osteolepimorphi) = Tetrapod Ancestors (Eusthenopteron) Close to tetrapods Lungfish - Dipnoi • Three genera, Africa+Australian+South American ACTINOPTERYGII Bichirs – Cladistia = POLYPTERIFORMES Notable exception = Cladistia – Polypterus (bichirs) - Represented by 10 FW species - tropical Africa and one species - Erpetoichthys calabaricus – reedfish. Highly aberrant Cladistia - numerous uniquely derived features – long, independent evolution: – Strange dorsal finlets, Series spiracular ossicles, Peculiar urohyal bone and parasphenoid • But retain # primitive Actinopterygian features = heavy ganoid scales (external
    [Show full text]
  • Download Full Article in PDF Format
    A new actinopterygian fauna from the latest Cretaceous of Quintanilla la Ojada (Burgos, Spain) Ana BERRETEAGA Universidad del País Vasco/EHU, Facultad de Ciencia y Tecnología, Departamento de Estratigrafía y Paleontología, Apartado 644, SP-48080 Bilbao (Spain) and Universidad de Alcalá de Henares, Facultad de Ciencias, Departamento de Geología, Plaza San Diego s/n, SP-28801 Alcalá de Henares (Spain) [email protected] Francisco José POYATO-ARIZA Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Departamento de Biología, Unidad de Paleontología, Cantoblanco, SP-28049 Madrid (Spain ) [email protected] Xabier PEREDA-SUBERBIOLA Universidad del País Vasco/EHU, Facultad de Ciencia y Tecnología, Departamento de Estratigrafía y Paleontología, Apartado 644, SP-48080 Bilbao (Spain) [email protected] Berreteaga A., Poyato-Ariza F. J. & Pereda-Suberbiola X. 2011. — A new actinopterygian fauna from the latest Cretaceous of Quintanilla la Ojada (Burgos, Spain). Geodiversitas 33 (2): 285-301. DOI: 10.5252/g2011n2a6. ABSTRACT We describe a new actinopterygian fauna from the uppermost Cretaceous of Quintanilla la Ojada (Burgos, Spain), in the Villarcayo Sinclynorium of the Basque-Cantabrian Region. It consists mostly of isolated teeth of pycnodon- tiforms (cf. Anomoeodus sp., Pycnodontoidea indet.), amiiforms (cf. Amiidae indet.) and teleosteans (elopiforms: Phyllodontinae indet., Paralbulinae indet.; KEY WORDS aulopiforms: Enchodontidae indet., plus fragmentary fi n spines of Acantho- Osteichthyes, Pycnodontiformes, morpha indet.). Paralbulinae teeth are the most abundant elements in the fossil Amiiformes, assemblage. All the remains are disarticulated and show intense post-mortem Elopiformes, Aulopiformes, abrasion. Th e fossil association has been found in dolomite sandstones that are Acanthomorpha, laterally correlated with the Valdenoceda Formation (Lower to basal Upper Maastrichtian, Maastrichtian) of the Castilian Ramp.
    [Show full text]
  • Master List of Fishes
    FISHES OF THE FRESHWATER POTOMAC Compiled by Jim Cummins, The Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin Always DRAFT - Version 02/21/2013 The following list of one-hundred and eighteen fish species known to be present in the freshwater portions of the Potomac River basin. Included, but not numbered, are fish that once were in the Potomac but are no longer are present; eight extirpated fish species (only one of which, the log perch, was perhaps a native to the Potomac) and three with uncertain presences. The list was originally (1995) compiled through a combination of personal field experience, a search of the literature, and input from regional fisheries biologists Ed Enamait (MD), Gerald Lewis (WV), Ed Stienkoenig (VA), and Jon Siemiens (DC). However, I attempt to keep the list updated when new information becomes available, thus the list is always draft. The distribution of these fishes within the Potomac is highly variable. Many are year-round residents and are fairly wide-spread, while some, such as the torrent shiner, are only found in very limited habitats/areas. Eleven are migratory species which typically come into the river system to spawn, and nine represent occasional visitors in freshwater-tidal areas. The native or introduced status of most of these species are generally accepted, but for some species this status is an object of continued researched and therefore caution should be used in interpreting this designation, especially when noted with a “?” mark. Of the 118 species currently found in the river, approximately 80 (68%) are considered native, 23 (19%) are considered introduced, and the rest (15, or 13%) are uncertain in origin.
    [Show full text]
  • Zootaxa, a New Species of Ladyfish, of the Genus Elops
    Zootaxa 2346: 29–41 (2010) ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Article ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2010 · Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) A new species of ladyfish, of the genus Elops (Elopiformes: Elopidae), from the western Atlantic Ocean RICHARD S. MCBRIDE1, CLAUDIA R. ROCHA2, RAMON RUIZ-CARUS1 & BRIAN W. BOWEN3 1Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 100 8th Avenue SE, St. Petersburg, FL 33701 USA. E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] 2University of Texas at Austin - Marine Science Institute, 750 Channel View Drive, Port Aransas, TX 78374 USA. E-mail: [email protected] 3Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology, P.O. Box 1346, Kaneohe, HI 96744 USA. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract This paper describes Elops smithi, n. sp., and designates a lectotype for E. saurus. These two species can be separated from the five other species of Elops by a combination of vertebrae and gillraker counts. Morphologically, they can be distinguished from each other only by myomere (larvae) or vertebrae (adults) counts. Elops smithi has 73–80 centra (total number of vertebrae), usually with 75–78 centra; E. saurus has 79–87 centra, usually with 81–85 centra. No other morphological character is known to separate E. smithi and E. saurus, but the sequence divergence in mtDNA cytochrome b (d = 0.023–0.029) between E. smithi and E. saurus is similar to or greater than that measured between recognized species of Elops in different ocean basins. Both species occur in the western Atlantic Ocean, principally allopatrically but with areas of sympatry, probably via larval dispersal of E.
    [Show full text]
  • Population Genetics of Bowfins (Amiidae, Amia Spp.) Across the Laurentian Great Lakes and the Carolinas
    SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry Digital Commons @ ESF Honors Theses 12-2015 Population Genetics of Bowfins (Amiidae, Amia spp.) Across the Laurentian Great Lakes and the Carolinas Madeline J. Clark Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.esf.edu/honors Part of the Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons Recommended Citation Clark, Madeline J., "Population Genetics of Bowfins (Amiidae, Amia spp.) Across the Laurentian Great Lakes and the Carolinas" (2015). Honors Theses. 90. https://digitalcommons.esf.edu/honors/90 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ ESF. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ ESF. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Population Genetics of Bowfins (Amiidae, Amia spp.) Across the Laurentian Great Lakes and the Carolinas By Madeline J. Clark Candidate for Bachelor of Science Environmental and Forest Biology With Honors December 2015 APPROVED: Thesis Project Advisor: ______________________________ (Donald J. Stewart, Professor) Second Reader: ______________________________ (Steven M. Bogdanowicz, M.S.) Honors Director: _____________________________ William M. Shields, Professor Date: _____1 December 2015__________ 1 Abstract The Bowfin, Amia calva Linneaus (1766), is a common Eastern North American fish and the last extant member of the order Amiiformes. By 1870, twelve additional species of Bowfin had been described from widely dispersed localities from lakes Huron and Champlain in the north to Charleston, SC, and New Orleans, LA, in the south. This diversity of nominal forms was synonymized into a single species, A. calva, by Jordan and Evermann in 1896. Since then, this monotypy hypothesis has been generally accepted, but never scientifically validated.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of Kansas Fishes
    CHECKLIST OF KANSAS FISHES From "A Checklist of the Vertebrate Animals of Kansas", second edition, 1999, by George Potts, Joseph Collins and Kate Shaw (Species marked with an asterisk * are extirpated from the wild in Kansas.) 142 Species REFERENCE: Fishes in Kansas, 2nd edition, 1995 By Frank Cross and Joseph Collins, KU Press Order of Lampreys (Petromyzontiformes) Family Petromyzontidae Chestnut Lamprey - Ichthyomyzon castaneus Order of Sturgeons and Paddlefish (Acipenseriformes) Family Acipenseridae Lake Sturgeon - Acipenser fulvescens Pallid Sturgeon - Scaphirhynchus albus Shovelnose Sturgeon - Scaphirhynchus platorynchus Family Polyodontidae Paddlefish - Polyodon spathula Order of Gars (Semionotiformes) Family Lepisosteidae Spotted Gar - Lepisosteus oculatus Longnose Gar - Lepisosteus osseus Shortnose Gar - Lepisosteus platostomus Order of Bowfins (Amiiformes) Family Amiidae Bowfin - Amia calva Order of Bony-tongued fishes (Osteoglossiformes) Family Hiodontidae Goldeye - Hiodon alosoides * Mooneye - Hiodon tergisus Order of Eels (Anguilliformes) Family Anguillidae American Eel - Anguilla rostrata Order of Herrings (Clupeiformes) Family Clupeidae Skipjack Herring - Alosa chrysochloris Gizzard Shad - Dorosoma cepedianum Threadfin Shad - Dorosoma petenense Page 1 of 5 Order of Carp-like fishes (Cypriniformes) Family Cyprinidae Central Stoneroller - Campostoma anomalum Goldfish - Carassius auratus Grass Carp - Ctenopharyngodon idella Bluntface Shiner - Cyprinella camura Red Shiner - Cyprinella lutrensis Spotfin Shiner - Cyprinella spiloptera
    [Show full text]
  • Using Empirical and Simulated Data to Study the Influence Of
    Using empirical and simulated data to study the influence of environmental heterogeneity on fish species richness in two biogeographic provinces Supporting Information Philippe Massicotte1, Rapha¨elProulx1, Gilbert Cabana1, and Marco A. Rodr´ıguez1 1Centre de Recherche sur les Interactions Bassins Versants- Ecosyst`emesaquatiques´ (RIVE). Universit´edu Qu´ebec `aTrois-Rivi`eres,Trois-Rivi`eres,Canada October 20, 2014 1 Appendix S1 Summary of fish species sampled in the two biogeographic provinces. Table 1: Summary of fish species sampled in the two biogeographic provinces. Mean Mean fork Order Family Genus Species abundance length (catch per (cm) unit effort) Acipenseriformes Acipenseridae Acipenser brevirostrum 3.67 59.90 oxyrinchus 2.50 27.81 Polyodontidae Polyodon spathula 1.50 14.25 Anguilliformes Anguillidae Anguilla rostrata 1.38 43.64 Congridae Conger oceanicus 1.00 20.10 Atheriniformes Atherinopsidae Membras martinica 12.33 6.69 Menidia menidia 2.50 6.72 Aulopiformes Synodontidae Synodus foetens 1.90 15.92 Batrachoidiformes Batrachoididae Opsanus beta 2.58 15.30 pardus 1.50 16.52 tau 4.05 19.29 Porichthys plectrodon 1.20 28.51 Beloniformes Belonidae Strongylura marina 6.00 20.15 Carcharhiniformes Carcharhinidae Carcharhinus isodon 1.00 38.00 limbatus 1.00 39.20 porosus 1.00 50.50 Sphyrnidae Sphyrna tiburo 1.00 37.47 Triakidae Mustelus canis 4.67 53.95 Clupeiformes Clupeidae Alosa aestivalis 3.62 7.95 pseudoharengus 6.38 7.35 sapidissima 7.33 10.43 Brevoortia gunteri 35.17 7.99 patronus 20.81 8.79 smithi 1.00 12.20 tyrannus 5.69 13.19
    [Show full text]
  • Acipenseriformes, Elopiformes, Albuliformes, Notacanthiformes
    Early Stages of Fishes in the Western North Atlantic Ocean Species Accounts Acipenseriformes, Elopiformes, Albuliformes, Notacanthiformes Selected meristic characters in species belonging to the above orders whose adults or larvae have been collected in the study area. Classification sequence follows Eschmeyer, 1990. Vertebrae and anal fin rays are generally not reported in the No- tacanthiformes. Most notacanthiform larvae are undescribed. Sources: McDowell, 1973; Sulak, 1977; Castle, 1984; Snyder, 1988; Smith, 1989b. Order–Family Total vertebrae Species (or myomeres) Dorsal fin rays Anal fin rays Caudal fin rays Acipenseriformes-Acipenseridae Acipenser brevirostrum 60–61 myo 32–42 18–24 60 Acipenser oxyrhynchus 60–61 myo 30–46 23–30 90 Elopiformes-Elopidae Elops saurus 74–86 18–25 8–15 9–11+10+9+7–8 Elopiformes-Megalopidae Megalops atlanticus 53–59 10–13 17–23 7+10+9+6–7 Albuliformes-Albulidae Albula vulpes 65–72 17–19 8–10 8+10+9+6 Order–Family Total vertebrae Species (or myomeres) Dorsal fin rays Anal fin rays Pelvic fin rays Notacanthiformes-Halosauridae Aldrovandia affinis No data 11–13 No data I, 7–9 Aldrovandia oleosa No data 10–12 No data I, 8 Aldrovandia gracilis No data 10–12 No data I, 7–9 Aldrovandia phalacra No data 10–12 No data I, 7–8 Halosauropsis macrochir No data 11–13 No data I, 9 Halosaurus guentheri No data 10–11 158–209 I, 8–10 Notacanthiformes-Notacanthidae Notacanthus chemnitzii 225–239 9–12 spines XIII–IV,116–130 I, 8–11 Polyacanthonotus challengeri 242–255 36–40 spines XXXIX–LIX, 126–142 I–II, 8–9 Polyacanthonotus merretti No data 28–36 spines No data I–II, 6–8 Polyacanthonotus rissoanus No data 26–36 spines No data I, 7–11 Notacanthiformes-Lipogenyidae Lipogenys gillii 228–234 9–12 116–136 II, 6–8 Meristic data from California Current area (Moser and Charter, 1996a); data from western Atlantic may differ Early Stages of Fishes in the Western North Atlantic Ocean 3 Acipenseriformes, Elopiformes, Albuliformes, Notacanthiformes Acipenseriformes Sturgeons are anadromous and freshwater fishes restricted to the northern hemisphere.
    [Show full text]
  • Order ELOPIFORMES
    click for previous page Elopiformes: Elopidae 1619 Class ACTINOPTERYGII Order ELOPIFORMES ELOPIDAE Tenpounders (ladyfishes) by D.G. Smith A single species occurring in the area. Elops hawaiiensis Regan, 1909 Frequent synonyms / misidentifications: Elops australis Regan, 1909 / Elops saurus Linnaeus, 1766. FAO names: En - Hawaiian ladyfish. branchiostegal gular rays plate Diagnostic characters: Body elongate, fusiform, moderately compressed. Eye large. Mouth large, gape ending behind posterior margin of eye; mouth terminal, jaws approximately equal; a gular plate present between arms of lower jaw. Teeth small and granular. Branchiostegal rays numerous, approximately 20 to 25. All fins without spines; dorsal fin begins slightly behind midbody; anal fin short, with approximately 14 to 17 rays, begins well behind base of dorsal fin; caudal fin deeply forked; pectoral fins low on side of body, near ventral outline; pelvic fins abdominal, below origin of dorsal fin. Scales very small, approxi- mately 100 in lateral line. Colour: blue or greenish grey above, silvery on sides; fins sometimes with a faint yellow tinge. ventral view of head Similar families occurring in the area Clupeidae: lateral line absent; gular plate absent; most species have scutes along midline of belly. Megalopidae (Megalops cyprinoides): scales much larger, about 30 to 40 in lateral line; last ray of dorsal fin elongate and filamentous. no lateral line filament scutes Clupeidae Megalopidae (Megalops cyprinoides) 1620 Bony Fishes Albulidae (Albula spp.): mouth inferior. Chanidae (Chanos chanos): mouth smaller, gape not extending behind eye; gular plate absent; bran- chiostegal rays fewer, approximately 4 or 5. mouth inferior mouth smaller Albulidae (Albula spp.) Chanidae (Chanos chanos) Size: Maximum standard length slightly less than 1 m, commonly to 50 cm; seldom reaches a weight of 5 kg (= “ten pounds”), despite the family’s common name.
    [Show full text]
  • Peng2009chap44.Pdf
    Teleost fi shes (Teleostei) Zuogang Penga,c, Rui Diogob, and Shunping Hea,* Until recently, the classiA cation of teleosts pioneered aInstitute of Hydrobiology, The Chinese Academy of Sciences, by Greenwood et al. (5) and expanded on by Patterson Wuhan, 430072, China; bDepartment of Anthropology, The George and Rosen (6) has followed the arrangement proposed c Washington University, Washington, DC, 20052, USA; Present by Nelson (7) and today is still reP ected in A sh textbooks address: School of Biology, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, and papers. In it, species were placed in four major GA 30332, USA *To whom correspondence should be addressed ([email protected]) groups: Osteoglossomorpha, Elopomorpha, Otocephala, and Euteleostei. 7 is division was based on multiple morphological characters and molecular evidence. Abstract Based on morphological characters, Osteoglossomor- pha was considered as the most plesiomorphic living tel- Living Teleost fishes (~26,840 sp.) are grouped into 40 eosts by several works (6, 7). However, the anatomical orders, comprising the Infraclass Teleostei of the Class studies of Arratia (8–10) supported that elopomorphs, Actinopterygii. With few exceptions, morphological and not osteoglossomorphs, are the most plesiomor- and molecular phylogenetic analyses have supported phic extant teleosts. 7 is latter view was supported by four subdivisions within Teleostei: Osteoglossomorpha, the results of the most extensive morphologically based Elopomorpha, Otocephala (= Ostarioclupeomorpha), and cladistic analysis published so far on osteichthyan high- Euteleostei. Despite the progress that has been made in er-level phylogeny, which included 356 osteological and recent years for the systematics of certain teleost groups, myological characters and 80 terminal taxa, including the large-scale pattern of teleost phylogeny remains open.
    [Show full text]