DOCSLIB.ORG

Survey of Endangered and Special Concern Mussel Species in the Sac, Pomme De Terre, St

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Survey of Endangered and Special Concern Mussel Species in the Sac, Pomme De Terre, St Endangered Species Grant Final Report Grant No. E-1-36 (A Survey of endangered and Special Concern Mussel Species in the St. Francis and Black Rivers in Southeast Missouri) Grant Period: 7/1/01 – 6/30/04 Survey of endangered and special concern mussel species in the Sac, Pomme de Terre, St. Francis, and Black River systems of Missouri, 2001-2003 Prepared by: Christian Hutson, M.S. Research Specialist and Chris Barnhart, Ph.D. Professor of Biology Date Prepared: October 14, 2004 Project Leader: _____________________________ Stephen E. McMurray Missouri Department of Conservation II Acknowledgements We would like to express our thanks to the generous and talented people who assisted us in this study. Bryan Simmons and Jason Gunter were essential members of the field crew. Their endurance, mechanical skills, and attention to detail were outstanding. Melissa Shiver and Nathan Eckert also made valuable contributions to the fieldwork. We thank Bob Holmes and Bill Goodman (SMSU) for modifying and repairing our boat and trailer. Sue Bruenderman, Al Buchanan and Scott Faiman of MDC and Andy Roberts of USFWS provided guidance and insight from their vast knowledge of mussels and Missouri rivers. Rick Horton, Ron Dent, Tim Banek, and Ron Bullard from MDC and Charlie Meeks from the Cedar County Republican provided important background information pertaining to the Sac River Basin and Stockton Dam. Conservation Agent Joni Bledsoe gave us valuable landowner contacts without which Sac River access would have been even more problematic than it was. Mark Boone and Paul Cieslewicz of MDC provided important information pertaining to the St. Francis and Black River basins. Andy Roberts, Paul McKenzie, and Charlie Scott of the Columbia Field Office of USFWS made this study possible by facilitating financial support. We thank DeeCee Darrow and Stephen McMurray (MDC) for their valuable editorial comments on the reports. Funding for the project was provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service through the Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund and by the Fisheries Division and Resource Science Division of the Missouri Department of Conservation. III Table of Contents Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................II Introduction and purpose of study...............................................................................1 Methods Site selection and access ............................................................................................2 Sampling methods......................................................................................................3 Sac and Pomme de Terre River systems Summary.........................................................................................................................4 Background information...............................................................................................5 Results and discussion ...................................................................................................7 Diversity and abundance in the Sac system...............................................................8 Subfossil shells in the Sac River................................................................................9 Diversity and abundance in the Pomme de Terre River ............................................9 Comparison with previous surveys............................................................................10 Longitudinal distribution in the Sac River ................................................................10 Recruitment in the Sac system...................................................................................11 Longitudinal distribution in the Pomme de Terre River............................................12 Recruitment in the Pomme de Terre system..............................................................12 Species of concern in the Sac and Pomme de Terre systems ....................................13 Threats in the Sac and Pomme de Terre systems.......................................................18 Management recommendations - Sac and Pomme de Terre systems........................20 Tables Table 1. Mussel species reported from the Sac and Pomme de Terre systems .........23 Table 2. Summary of sampling data for the Sac River..............................................25 Table 3. Sub-fossil species collected from the Sac River..........................................28 Table 4. Summary of sampling data for the Pomme de Terre River. ........................29 Figures Figure 1. Map of survey sites in the Sac and Pomme de Terre river systems ..........24 Figure 2. Species relative abundance in the Sac River. ............................................26 Figure 3. Number of species recovered vs. sample size, Sac River..........................27 Figure 4. Species relative abundance in the Pomme de Terre River. .......................30 Figure 5. Number of species recovered vs. sample size, Pomme de Terre River.....31 Figure 6. Longitudinal distribution of CPUE in the Sac River.................................32 IV Figure 7. Longitudinal distribution of species counts in the Sac River.....................33 Figure 8. Longitudinal distribution of CPUE in the Pomme de Terre River.............34 Figure 9. Longitudinal distribution of species counts in the Pomme de Terre River...........................................................35 Figure 10. Shell length frequencies - Sac River ........................................................36 Figure.11. Shell length frequencies - Pomme de Terre River....................................38 Distribution maps - species of concern Figure 13. Black sandshell.........................................................................................40 Figure 14. Elktoe........................................................................................................41 Figure 15. Flat floater. ...............................................................................................42 Figure 12. Pink mucket..............................................................................................43 Figure 16. Rock-pocketbook......................................................................................44 Figure 17. Salamander mussel ...................................................................................45 Figure 18. Spectaclecase............................................................................................46 Distribution maps - other species Figure 19. Butterfly....................................................................................................47 Figure 20. Creeper. ....................................................................................................48 Figure 21. Deertoe. ....................................................................................................49 Figure 22. Ellipse.......................................................................................................50 Figure 23. Fatmucket .................................................................................................51 Figure 24. Fluted shell. ..............................................................................................52 Figure 25. Fragile papershell .....................................................................................53 Figure 26. Giant floater..............................................................................................54 Figure 27. Lilliput. .....................................................................................................55 Figure 28. Mapleleaf..................................................................................................56 Figure 29. Monkeyface. .............................................................................................57 Figure 30. Mucket......................................................................................................58 Figure 31. Ozark shell................................................................................................59 Figure 32. Paper pondshell ........................................................................................60 Figure 33. Pimpleback. ..............................................................................................61 Figure 34. Pink heelsplitter........................................................................................62 Figure 35. Pink papershell .........................................................................................63 Figure 36. Pistolgrip...................................................................................................64 Figure 37. Plain pocketbook. .....................................................................................65 Figure 38. Pond mussel..............................................................................................66 Figure 39. Purple wartyback......................................................................................67 Figure 40. Round pigtoe. ...........................................................................................68 Figure 41. Spike.........................................................................................................69 Figure 42. Threehorn wartyback................................................................................70 Figure 43. Threeridge.................................................................................................71
Load more

Recommended publications
  • REPORT FOR: Preliminary Analysis for Identification, Distribution, And
    REPORT FOR: Preliminary Analysis for Identification, Distribution, and Conservation Status of Species of Fusconaia and Pleurobema in Arkansas Principle Investigators: Alan D. Christian Department of Biological Sciences, Arkansas State University, P.O. Box 599, State University, Arkansas 72467; [email protected]; Phone: (870)972-3082; Fax: (870)972-2638 John L. Harris Department of Biological Sciences, Arkansas State University, P.O. Box 599, State University, Arkansas 72467 Jeanne Serb Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Organismal Biology, Iowa State University, 251 Bessey Hall, Ames, Iowa 50011 Graduate Research Assistant: David M. Hayes, Department of Environmental Science, P.O. Box 847, State University, Arkansas 72467: [email protected] Kentaro Inoue, Department of Environmental Science, P.O. Box 847, State University, Arkansas 72467: [email protected] Submitted to: William R. Posey Malacologist and Commercial Fisheries Biologist, AGFC P.O. Box 6740 Perrytown, Arkansas 71801 April 2008 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY There are currently 13 species of Fusconaia and 32 species of Pleurobema recognized in the United States and Canada. Twelve species of Pleurobema and two species of Fusconaia are listed as Threatened or Endangered. There are 75 recognized species of Unionidae in Arkansas; however this number may be much higher due to the presence of cryptic species, many which may reside within the Fusconaia /Pleurobema complex. Currently, three species of Fusconaia and three species of Pleurobema are recognized from Arkansas. The true conservation status of species within these genera cannot be determined until the taxonomic identity of populations is confirmed. The purpose of this study was to begin preliminary analysis of the species composition of Fusconaia and Pleurobema in Arkansas and to determine the phylogeographic relationships within these genera through mitochondrial DNA sequencing and conchological analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mussels (Unionacea: Bivalvia) of Oklahoma - Part I - Ambleminae
    38 THE MUSSELS (UNIONACEA: BIVALVIA) OF OKLAHOMA - PART I - AMBLEMINAE Branley A. Branson Department of Biological Sciences, Eastern Kentucky University, Richmond, Kentucky 40475 Keys and distributional data for the subfamilies, tribes, and genera and species of the subfamily Ambleminae known from Oklahoma are presented. Megalonaias gigantea, Tritogonia verrucosa, Plectomerus dombeyanus, Amblema plicata, Fusconaia ozarkensis, F. flava, F. undata, F. ebena, Quadrula cylindrica, Q. quadrula, Q. metanevra, Q. nodulata, and Q. pustulosa are discussed. Photographs of the species are included. INTRODUCTION The naiad, or mussel, fauna of Oklahoma has never been treated in a single work on a statewide basis for the benefit of nonexperts, field biologists, and other workers involved with planning and water usage. Isley's (1) work on the fauna of eastern Oklahoma is, although considerable portions of the taxonomy are out of date, still a useful publication but often difficult to obtain. Other publications with direct bearing on the Oklahoma unionid fauna are relatively few in number. Chronologically arranged, those papers include the following. Call (2) reported 13 unionid species from Oklahoma (mostly eastern), Ferris (3) reported 8 species from Oklahoma City without additional comments, and Baker (4) recorded 16 species from several creeks and the Chikaskia River near Tonkawa and Williston, Oklahoma. Frierson (5) made collections of Lampsilis rafinesqueana at Moodys, Oklahoma and Strecker (6) reported on the distribution of 8 species of clams in the Red River, following which there were no additional (except Isley's work) papers published on Oklahoma unionids until the mid-1950's. In 1956, Riggs and Webb (7) conducted a population study on Lake Texoma mussels, and Sublette (8) investigated the macrobenthos, including 5 unionids, in the same lake.
    [Show full text]
  • The Freshwater Mussels (Mollusca: Bivalvia: Unionoida) of Nebraska
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences and Affiliated Societies Nebraska Academy of Sciences 11-2011 The Freshwater Mussels (Mollusca: Bivalvia: Unionoida) of Nebraska Ellet Hoke Midwest Malacology, Inc., [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/tnas Part of the Life Sciences Commons Hoke, Ellet, "The Freshwater Mussels (Mollusca: Bivalvia: Unionoida) of Nebraska" (2011). Transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences and Affiliated Societies. 2. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/tnas/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Nebraska Academy of Sciences at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences and Affiliated Societiesy b an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. The Freshwater Mussels (Mollusca: Bivalvia: Unionoida) Of Nebraska Ellet Hoke Midwest Malacology, Inc. Correspondence: Ellet Hoke, 1878 Ridgeview Circle Drive, Manchester, MO 63021 [email protected] 636-391-9459 This paper reports the results of the first statewide survey of the freshwater mussels of Nebraska. Survey goals were: (1) to document current distributions through collection of recent shells; (2) to document former distributions through collection of relict shells and examination of museum collections; (3) to identify changes in distribution; (4) to identify the primary natural and anthropomorphic factors impacting unionids; and (5) to develop a model to explain the documented distributions. The survey confirmed 30 unionid species and the exotic Corbicula fluminea for the state, and museum vouchers documented one additional unionid species. Analysis of museum records and an extensive literature search coupled with research in adjacent states identified 13 additional unionid species with known distributions near the Nebraska border.
    [Show full text]
  • Mollusca of the Illinois River, Arkansas M
    Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science Volume 33 Article 14 1979 Mollusca of the Illinois River, Arkansas M. E. Gordon University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Arthur V. Brown University of Arkansas, Fayetteville L. Russert Kraemer University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas Part of the Population Biology Commons Recommended Citation Gordon, M. E.; Brown, Arthur V.; and Kraemer, L. Russert (1979) "Mollusca of the Illinois River, Arkansas," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 33 , Article 14. Available at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol33/iss1/14 This article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able to read, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 33 [1979], Art. 14 Mollusca of the IllinoisRiver, Arkansas M.E. GORDON, A.V. BROWN and L. RUSSERT KRAEMER Department of Zoology University of Arkansas Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 ABSTRACT The Illinois River is in the Ozark region of northwestern Arkansas and eastern Oklahoma. A survey of the Illinois River in Arkansas produced nine species and one morphological sub- species of gastropods, three species of sphaeriid clams, and 23 species of unionid mussels.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 8. Appendices
    Section 8. Appendices Appendix 1.1 — Acronyms Terminology AWAP – Arkansas Wildlife Action Plan BMP – Best Management Practice CWCS — Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy EO — Element Occurrence GIS — Geographic Information Systems SGCN — Species of Greatest Conservation Need LIP — Landowner Incentive Program MOA — Memorandum of Agreement ACWCS — Arkansas Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy SWG — State Wildlife Grant LTA — Land Type Association WNS — White-nose Syndrome Organizations ADEQ — Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality AGFC — Arkansas Game and Fish Commission AHTD — Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department ANHC — Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission ASU — Arkansas State University ATU — Arkansas Technical University FWS — Fish and Wildlife Service HSU — Henderson State University NRCS — Natural Resources Conservation Service SAU — Southern Arkansas University TNC — The Nature Conservancy UA — University of Arkansas (Fayetteville) UA/Ft. Smith — University of Arkansas at Fort Smith UALR — University of Arkansas at Little Rock UAM — University of Arkansas at Monticello UCA — University of Central Arkansas USFS — United States Forest Service 1581 Appendix 2.1. List of Species of Greatest Conservation Need by Priority Score. List of species of greatest conservation need ranked by Species Priority Score. A higher score implies a greater need for conservation concern and actions. Priority Common Name Scientific Name Taxa Association Score 100 Curtis Pearlymussel Epioblasma florentina curtisii Mussel 100
    [Show full text]
  • Species Richness, Distribution, and Relative Abundance of Freshwater Mussels (Bivalvia: Unionidae) of the Buffalo National River, Arkansas M
    Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science Volume 63 Article 15 2009 Species Richness, Distribution, and Relative Abundance of Freshwater Mussels (Bivalvia: Unionidae) of the Buffalo National River, Arkansas M. Matthews Arkansas State University F. Usrey US National Park Service S. W. Hodges US National Park Service John L. Harris Arkansas State University, [email protected] Alan D. Christian University of Massachusetts Boston, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas Part of the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons, and the Zoology Commons Recommended Citation Matthews, M.; Usrey, F.; Hodges, S. W.; Harris, John L.; and Christian, Alan D. (2009) "Species Richness, Distribution, and Relative Abundance of Freshwater Mussels (Bivalvia: Unionidae) of the Buffalo aN tional River, Arkansas," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 63 , Article 15. Available at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol63/iss1/15 This article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able to read, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 63 [2009], Art.
    [Show full text]
  • A Revised List of the Freshwater Mussels (Mollusca: Bivalvia: Unionida) of the United States and Canada
    Freshwater Mollusk Biology and Conservation 20:33–58, 2017 Ó Freshwater Mollusk Conservation Society 2017 REGULAR ARTICLE A REVISED LIST OF THE FRESHWATER MUSSELS (MOLLUSCA: BIVALVIA: UNIONIDA) OF THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA James D. Williams1*, Arthur E. Bogan2, Robert S. Butler3,4,KevinS.Cummings5, Jeffrey T. Garner6,JohnL.Harris7,NathanA.Johnson8, and G. Thomas Watters9 1 Florida Museum of Natural History, Museum Road and Newell Drive, Gainesville, FL 32611 USA 2 North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences, MSC 1626, Raleigh, NC 27699 USA 3 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 212 Mills Gap Road, Asheville, NC 28803 USA 4 Retired. 5 Illinois Natural History Survey, 607 East Peabody Drive, Champaign, IL 61820 USA 6 Alabama Division of Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries, 350 County Road 275, Florence, AL 35633 USA 7 Department of Biological Sciences, Arkansas State University, State University, AR 71753 USA 8 U.S. Geological Survey, Wetland and Aquatic Research Center, 7920 NW 71st Street, Gainesville, FL 32653 USA 9 Museum of Biological Diversity, The Ohio State University, 1315 Kinnear Road, Columbus, OH 43212 USA ABSTRACT We present a revised list of freshwater mussels (order Unionida, families Margaritiferidae and Unionidae) of the United States and Canada, incorporating changes in nomenclature and systematic taxonomy since publication of the most recent checklist in 1998. We recognize a total of 298 species in 55 genera in the families Margaritiferidae (one genus, five species) and Unionidae (54 genera, 293 species). We propose one change in the Margaritiferidae: the placement of the formerly monotypic genus Cumberlandia in the synonymy of Margaritifera. In the Unionidae, we recognize three new genera, elevate four genera from synonymy, and place three previously recognized genera in synonymy.
    [Show full text]
  • Tentacle Newsletter of the IUCN Species Survival Commission Mollusc Specialist Group ISSN 0958-5079
    Tentacle Newsletter of the IUCN Species Survival Commission Mollusc Specialist Group ISSN 0958-5079 No. 8 July 1998 EDITORIAL The Tokyo Metropolitan Government has shelved its plan to build an airport on the Ogasawaran island of Anijima (see the article by Kiyonori Tomiyama and Takahiro Asami later in this issue of Tentacle). This is a Tentacle as widely as possible, given our limited major conservation success story, and is especially resources. I would therefore encourage anyone with a important for the endemic land snail fauna of the island. concern about molluscs to send me an article, however The international pressure brought to bear on the Tokyo short. It doesn’t take long to pen a paragraph or two. Government came about only as a result of the publicis- Don’t wait until I put out a request for new material; I ing of the issue through the internet and in newsletters really don’t wish to have to beg and plead! Send me and other vehicles, like Tentacle (see issues 6 and 7). The something now, and it will be included in the next issue. committed people who instigated this publicity cam- Again, to reiterate (see editorial in Tentacle 7), I would paign should be proud of their success. But as Drs. like to see articles from all over the world, and in partic- Tomiyama and Asami note, vigilance remains necessary, ular I would like to see more on “Marine Matters”. Don’t as the final decision on the location of the new airport be shy! I make only very minor editorial changes to arti- has not been decided.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 20 Number 2 October 2017
    FRESHWATER MOLLUSK BIOLOGY AND CONSERVATION THE JOURNAL OF THE FRESHWATER MOLLUSK CONSERVATION SOCIETY VOLUME 20 NUMBER 2 OCTOBER 2017 Pages 33-58 oregonensis/kennerlyi clade, Gonidea angulata, and A Revised List of the Freshwater Mussels (Mollusca: Margaritifera falcata Bivalvia: Unionida) of the United States and Canada Emilie Blevins, Sarina Jepsen, Jayne Brim Box, James D. Williams, Arthur E. Bogan, Robert S. Butler, Donna Nez, Jeanette Howard, Alexa Maine, and Kevin S. Cummings, Jeffrey T. Garner, John L. Harris, Christine O’Brien Nathan A. Johnson, and G. Thomas Watters Pages 89-102 Pages 59-64 Survival of Translocated Clubshell and Northern Mussel Species Richness Estimation and Rarefaction in Riffleshell in Illinois Choctawhatchee River Watershed Streams Kirk W. Stodola, Alison P. Stodola, and Jeremy S. Jonathan M. Miller, J. Murray Hyde, Bijay B. Niraula, Tiemann and Paul M. Stewart Pages 103-113 Pages 65-70 What are Freshwater Mussels Worth? Verification of Two Cyprinid Host Fishes for the Texas David L. Strayer Pigtoe, Fusconaia askewi Erin P. Bertram, John S. Placyk, Jr., Marsha G. Pages 114-122 Williams, and Lance R. Williams Evaluation of Costs Associated with Externally Affixing PIT Tags to Freshwater Mussels using Three Commonly Pages 71-88 Employed Adhesives Extinction Risk of Western North American Freshwater Matthew J. Ashton, Jeremy S. Tiemann, and Dan Hua Mussels: Anodonta nuttalliana, the Anodonta Freshwater Mollusk Biology and Conservation ©2017 ISSN 2472-2944 Editorial Board CO-EDITORS Gregory Cope, North Carolina State University Wendell Haag, U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Tom Watters, The Ohio State University EDITORIAL REVIEW BOARD Conservation Jess Jones, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Fertilization Success in Freshwater Mussels. Project Period
    Sept 29, 1997 REPORT: Fertilization success in freshwater mussels. Project period: July 1, 1996- June 30, 1997 Submitted to: Missouri Department of Conservation Natural History Division Submitted by: M. Christopher Barnhart, Ph.D. Department of Biology Southwest Missouri State University 901 S. National Springfield, Missouri 65804 TELEPHONE: 417-836-5166 FAX: 417-836-6934 Email: [email protected] 1 INTRODUCTION This report describes an investigation of fertilization success in unionid mussels. The reproduction of unionids is of interest because of the endangered status of many species within this family. Of an original fauna of roughly 300 species in North America, at least 21 unionids are already extinct and 56 are federally classified as endangered. Many workers believe that over half of North American unionid species are in danger of extinction over the next 50 years (Bogan 1993, Biggins et al. 1995, Neves 1997). One of the possible impediments to reproduction of rare mussel species is failure of fertilization of the eggs. Male mussels release milt into the water. Females retain their eggs within the marsupial gills and must filter sperm from the water in order for fertilization to occur. In still water, the dispersal of sperm by swimming must be limited by the small size of spermatozoa and by their limited energy reserves. In flowing water, sperm can move only downstream and their concentration in the water will quickly be diluted. In either case, if individuals of a species are rare and sparsely distributed, transfer of sperm among individuals may be unlikely, and eggs may not be fertilized. Very few studies have attempted to test the hypothesis that mussel population density limits fertilization success.
    [Show full text]
  • (Mollusca: Margaritiferidae, Unionidae) in Arkansas, Third Status Review John L
    Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science Volume 63 Article 10 2009 Unionoida (Mollusca: Margaritiferidae, Unionidae) in Arkansas, Third Status Review John L. Harris Arkansas State University, [email protected] William R. Posey II Arkansas Game and Fish Commission C. L. Davidson U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Jerry L. Farris Arkansas State University S. R. Oetker U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas Part of the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons, and the Zoology Commons Recommended Citation Harris, John L.; Posey, William R. II; Davidson, C. L.; Farris, Jerry L.; Oetker, S. R.; Stoeckel, J. N.; Crump, B. G.; Barnett, M. S.; Martin, H. C.; Seagraves, J. H.; Matthews, M. W.; Winterringer, R.; Osborne, C.; Christian, Alan D.; and Wentz, N. J. (2009) "Unionoida (Mollusca: Margaritiferidae, Unionidae) in Arkansas, Third Status Review," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 63 , Article 10. Available at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol63/iss1/10 This article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able to read, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK.
    [Show full text]
  • Significant Additions to the Molluscan Fauna of the Illinois River, Arkansas Mark E
    Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science Volume 34 Article 36 1980 Significant Additions to the Molluscan Fauna of the Illinois River, Arkansas Mark E. Gordon University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Arthur V. Brown University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas Part of the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Recommended Citation Gordon, Mark E. and Brown, Arthur V. (1980) "Significant Additions to the Molluscan Fauna of the Illinois River, Arkansas," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 34 , Article 36. Available at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol34/iss1/36 This article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able to read, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This General Note is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. ¦ Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 34 [1980], Art. 36 I Table 3. Habitat Skunk Killed Table 4. Timeof Day Skunk Killed HABITAJ__ 1977 1978 lj)79 TOTAL TIME 1977 1978 1979 TOTAL ] ] Woodland 3(8) 20(14) 51(13) 74(13) 6:00-12:00 A.M. 19(58) 44(42) 131(48) 194(47) Open Field or Pasture 3(8) 20(14) 68(17) 91(16) 12:00-6:00 P.M.
    [Show full text]