DOCSLIB.ORG

Suckers of Utah Lake A. Gaylon Cook

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Suckers of Utah Lake A. Gaylon Cook SUCKERS OF UTAH LAKE A. GAYLON COOK BIOCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL 3306 N CANYON RD PROVO UT 84604-4548 Running Head: SUCKERS OF UTAH LAKE SUCKERS OF UTAH LAKE A. Gaylon Cook' ABSTRACT.— There has been much confusion about which suckers exist in Utah Lake, and even about the number of species present. Considerable misunderstanding has resulted from an incomplete exploration of the literature on catostomid morphology and taxonomy. Numerous descriptions of Utah Lake suckers have been recorded, but none has included all or close to all of the taxonomic characterizations that are now available. Herein, those descriptions are organized, collated, and discriminatingly analyzed so that different catostomids are defined and delimited as completely as possible. This paper establishes a basis for needed chemical taxonomic analyses such as DNA-DNA hybridization tests. Also, its detailed descriptions constitute a resource that can be used for such purposes as distinguishing taxa in periodic ichthyological surveys of Utah Lake or identifying suckers during recovery-plan activities on an endangered species. Key Words: catostomids, suckers, Utah Lake, taxonomy, systematics, endangered species, ichthyofauna Utah Lake, closely bordered by the city of Provo, is a 38,800-ha body of fresh water (Carter 1969: 2) in central Utah measuring 23.5 by 38.0 km (Radant and Sakaguchi 198 lb: derived from Fig. 1). This lake has a mean depth of 2.9 m and a maximal depth of 4.2 m (Radant and Sakaguchi 1981b: 2). It drains >6700 km2 of land (Carter 1969: 3-4) and formerly collected a flow of 740 million m3/yr (Arnold 1960: 11-17). Ignorance of the ichthyological literature and misperceptions about what it has established, have resulted in inaccurate nomenclatures and misinterpreted taxonomic relationships. Nescience about the phylogenetic relationships of Utah Lake catostomids is underscored by a dispute about the number of species present. Significantly, it is not known whether certain taxa constitute endemic species or subspecies that may be worthy of endangered status. The principal aim of this review is to establish a sound basis for defining and delimiting as precisely as possible the catostomids of Utah Lake. Species descriptions are compared in detail. It is hoped that this paper will lay the groundwork for further systematic investigations. Taxonomic studies employing DNA-DNA hybridization analyses, as well as those that might utilize biochemistry, 'Bioconservation International, Provo, Utah 84604-4548. GREAT BASIN NATURALIST 2 immunology, serology, protein sequencing, or comparative anatomy, need to be performed on Utah Lake suckers. Besides being quick, DNA hybridization offers the most precise quantitative comparisons (Sibley and Alquist 1990: 3). It is also anticipated that the characterizations that are presented here will assist ichthyologists in identifying Utah Lake catostomids. For example, descriptive data can be used by fishery biologists with the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Wildlife Resources in their effort to identify endangered adult June Suckers (Chasmistes liorus), and distinguish them from 3 other catostomids during spawning-season sampling and reproductive facilitation in lower Provo River. Suckers are frequently misidentified by these biologists during reproductive surveys that are performed as a part of the June Sucker recovery plan (Charles W. Thompson, personal communication). The comparative temporal incidence of the catostomids of Utah Lake will be treated in a future paper. DESCRIPTIONS OF TAXA r Exceptional Sucker Catostomus generosus (exceptional low-mouth: Greek kato, low; stoma, mouth; Latin generosus, superior or exceptional) / Mountain Sucker Catostomus platyrhynchus (broad-snouted low-mouth: Latin platy, broad; Greek rhunkhos, snout or bill). Synonyms of these species are Acomus generosus (Girard 1857a, 1858: 221-222), Catostomus (Acomus) generosus (Girard 1857b: 174), Catostomus generosus (taken at Utah Lake) (Cope 1872), Minomus platyrhynchus, M. jarrovii, and C. ? generosus (all 3 collected about Provo, Utah) (Cope 1876), and Pantosteus platyrhynchus and P. jarrovii (Cope and Yarrow 1876: 673-675). Neither C. generosus nor the 1.1-kg C. ? generosus was described. To be able to confirm that they resemble A. generosus more than M. platyrhynchus or M. jarrovii, sound examples of the 2 generosus forms must persist, allowing their comparison with descriptions of the other forms, and any remaining intact exemplars of A. generosus and M. platyrhynchus (apparently no examples of M. jarrovii persist; see below). After comparing multiple specimens of each form, Jordan (1878a, b: 183-184) deemed Pantosteus (= Acomus = Catostomus) generosus equal to P. jarrovii, but the remarkably slender (allegedly due to flabbiness) P. platyrhynchus a separate species. Jordan (1878b) reported that P. generosus occurred in the "Rio Grande, Colorado Basin," and the "Great Basin of Utah". There was SUCKERS OF UTAH LAKE 3 actually no record of this species in Colorado. However, Cope and Yarrow (1876) had recorded collections of "P. jarrovii", a synonym of P. generosus, at 5 New Mexico localities. Perhaps, Jordan (1878b) considered the "Costilla, N. Mex" site, which existed on the New Mexico side of its border with Colorado, to be in the Colorado Basin. It is situated in San Luis Valley which lies principally in Colorado, and to an appreciable extent, in its Costilla County. Jordan (1878b) stated (see also Jordan and Gilbert [1882: 123]) that P. generosus and P. platyrhynchus were "very similar" but added, "...at present I consider (them) distinct." Later, Jordan (1886) proclaimed, "The type of Catostotnus generosus seems to me unquestionably identical with the type of" P. platyrhynchus and "with P. jarrovii". "The peculiarities of P. platyrhynchus seem to be due to its shriveled condition." Actually, 3 specimens (apparently syntypes) of A. generosus (Girard 1858) and several syntypes of M. platyrhynchus (Cope 1876) had been collected. Jordan (1887b: 805) lumped all 3 forms within P. generosus. Jordan (1891) and Jordan and Evermann (1896a: 170-171) regarded Cope's (1876) M. jarrovii and M. platyrhynchus as synonyms of A. generosus (Girard 1857a,b, 1858) but Cope and Yarrow's (1876: 674-675) P. jarrovii from New Mexico as a synonym of Catostomus plebeius which had been taken at Mimbres River near the border of USA and Mexico (Baird and Girard 1856). Jordan (1887a) and Jordan and Evermann (1896b: 238, 1902: 45-46) also did not consider platyrhynchus or jarrovii to be full species. Jordan and Evermann (1896a: 170) gave an inaccurate and incomplete synopsis of "P. generosus". Snyder (1916) placed generosus in the genus Notolepidomyzon with plebeius and 2 other forms, and surmised that jarrovii, whose "cotypes" were missing, was a synonym of generosus because it was squatter than platyrhynchus, to which he synonymized Pantosteus jordani from the upper Missouri River Basin (Evermann 1894). Believing that Pantosteus (= Acomus) generosus might equal Catostomus plebeius, Snyder (1922) speculated that the unit of Captain J. W. Gunnison and Lieutenant E. G. Beckwith, who were searching for a potential railroad route to the Pacific Ocean, took the former from the Rio Grande Basin of southern Colorado. Jordan et al. (1930: 104) assigned generosus and plebeius to the genus Notolepidomyzon, and platyrhynchus to Pantosteus, placing a question mark in front of the name of its synonym M. jarrovii from Provo, Utah, because "the type" (actually there were 2 syntypes) of GREAT BASIN NATURALIST 4 M. jarrovii (Cope 1876) had been lost. The synonymization of jarrovii with platyrhynchus was in error on the basis of previous examinations of specimens which indicated that jarrovii equaled generosus (see above). Based on the geographic ranges in Moore's (1968: 101) species accounts, his Catostonws platyrhynchus included generosus and jarrovii (see also Robins et al. [1991]). In an article rife with inaccuracies (e.g., the claim that specimens of Gila elegans and Algansea obesa were of unknown origin when in actuality, G. elegans had been collected at 5 different known sites including Grand River, Utah, and A. obesa had been taken in Humboldt River [Baird and Girard 1854a, Girard 1857a, b: 183, 205, 1858: 239, 286-287]), Snyder (1922; "do" in his table means "ditto") indicated that 4 or 5 of the 6 piscine species that had been taken in 1853 or 1854 at Cottonwood Creek, "an affluent of the great Salt Lake of Utah" (Girard 1857a, b: 174, 185-186, 197, 199, 1858: 21-22, 221-222, 243-244, 267, 271-272), were actually from the Mississippi River Basin. One of those 6 taxa was A. generosus. Apparently, Snyder's (1922) skepticism about the origin of fishes that had been taken in "Cottonwood Creek, Utah" was triggered by Jordan and Evermann's (1896a: 273) comment that the recorded collection site of Cyprinella gunnisoni (Girard 1857a, b: 197, 1858: 267-268; equals Leuciscus (= Notropis) bubalinus [Baird and Girard 1854b] based on Jordan's [1886] statement that "The types of C. gunnisoni seem to be the young of N. bubalinus"; see also Jordan and Evermann [1896a: 273], Jordan et al. [1930: 130]) must be in error because Notropis spp. do not occur in Utah. Snyder (1922) reasoned that if any specimens (e.g., those of Notropis spp.) which were reported to have been taken from Cottonwood Creek, Utah were not actually collected there, none of them were. In accordance with the publication and comments of Snyder (1922), a colleague and former student of Jordan's at Stanford University, Jordan et al. (1930: 130-131), without a sound evidential basis, proclaimed acquisitions of C. gunnisoni from "Cottonwood Creek of the Rio Grande, Colo.", C. ludibunda (Girard 1857a, b: 199, 1858: 271-272; = Notropis ludibundus of Jordan and Evermann [1896a: 273] and contrary to priority, N. stramineus of Robins et al. [1991: 77]; see also Jordan et al. [1930: 130]) from a "locality now known to be Cottonwood Creek, Colo.", and C. lugubris (Girard 1857a,b, 1858; likely = N. macrostomus; see Jordan and Gilbert [1882: 177], Jordan and Evermann [1896a: 274], Jordan et al.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ecological Importance of Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Utah Lake
    Ecological Importance of Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Utah Lake File name: Ecological Role of Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Utah Lake Focus on the Keystone Taxon Chironomidae and HABs Version 1.2 Ecological Importance of Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Utah Lake With a Focus on the Role of the Keystone Taxon Chironomidae on HABs Progress Report January 28, 2017 By: David C. Richards, Ph. D. OreoHelix Consulting Phone: 406.580.7816 Email: [email protected] and Theron Miller, Ph.D. Jordan River Farmington Bay Water Quality Council OreoHelix Consulting 1 Ecological Importance of Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Utah Lake Introduction Benthic macroinvertebrates are a critical component of the ecology and ecosystem functioning of Utah Lake. They are a major link between sediment chemistry, water column chemistry, nutrient cycling, benthic algae, phytoplankton, and Utah Lake’s food web including carp, game fish, June suckers, waterfowl, shorebirds, etc. Benthic invertebrates provide underappreciated but invaluable ecosystem services and are keystone taxa instrumental for the functioning of Utah Lake’ ecosystem. It has become clear that several dominant benthic taxa, primarily chironomids, play a key role in the timing and intensity of harmful algal blooms (HABs) in the lake. Very few studies have been conducted on the benthic invertebrate assemblages in Utah Lake (Barnes and Toole 1981, Spencer and Denton 2003, Shiozawa and Barnes 1977) and none were conducted at the level and intensity that is presently being accomplished by this group. No study has ever examined the role of benthic invertebrates on HABs in Utah Lake, this is the first. Our research is also an important element of sediment chemistry, nutrients, and food web models that are presently being conducted by us and others on Utah Lake.
    [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]
  • GOVERNANCE & OVERSIGHT NARRATIVE Local Authority
    GOVERNANCE & OVERSIGHT NARRATIVE Local Authority: Wasatch County Instructions: In the cells below, please provide an answer/description for each question. PLEASE CHANGE THE COLOR OF SUBSTANTIVE NEW LANGUAGE INCLUDED IN YOUR PLAN THIS YEAR! 1) Access & Eligibility for Mental Health and/or Substance Abuse Clients Who is eligible to receive mental health services within your catchment area? What services (are there different services available depending on funding)? Wasatch County Family Clinic-Wasatch Behavioral Health Special Service District (WCFC-WMH) is a comprehensive community mental health center providing mental health and substance use disorder services to the residents of Wasatch County. WCFC-WBH provides a mental health and Substance Use screening to any Wasatch County resident requesting services. Based on available resources, (funding or otherwise), prospective clients will be referred to or linked with available resources. Medicaid eligible clients will be provided access to the full array of services available. Individuals who carry commercial insurance will be seen as their benefits allow. Clients with no funding may be seen on a sliding fee scale. Who is eligible to receive substance abuse services within your catchment area? What services (are there different services available depending on funding)? Identify how you manage wait lists. How do you ensure priority populations get served? WCFC-WBH provides substance abuse services to residents of Wasatch County. Medicaid and commercial insurances are also accepted and services are provided as benefits allow. WCFC-WBH provides substance abuse services as funding allows those without insurance or ability to pay. A sliding fee scale is available for these clients. Clients accepted into the drug court also have all services available and fees are also set based on the sliding scale.
    [Show full text]
  • 1-1-19 Transcript Bulletin
    The Meads’ love of Model A cars keeps them rolling See B1 TOOELETRANSCRIPT BULLETIN TUESDAY January 1, 2019 www.TooeleOnline.com Vol. 125 No. 61 $1.00 OF PERSONS THE YEAR DANIEL PACHECO • ROBIN DOUGLAS • ROB CLAUSING • MARIA SWEETEN RICHARD MITCHELL • ERIK GUMBRECHT • BRENDA FADDIS 2018 FRANCIE AUFDEMORTE/TTB PHOTO Daniel Pacheco, Robin Douglas, Rob Clausing, Maria Sweeten, Richard Mitchell, Erik Gumbrecht and Brenda Faddis served on the Tooele County Government Study Committee. The group’s members have been awarded the Tooele Transcript Bulletin’s Person of the Year. Government study committee Study committee of different backgrounds, experiences wins Person of the Year Award comes together for change Committee’s 2,500 hours of volunteer labor gave voters the chance to STEVE HOWE shape the future of Tooele County’s form of government STAFF WRITER A year of weekly meetings working toward a com- mon goal has a way of bringing people together. TIM GILLIE Commission will become history and the county will be When seven members of the Tooele County STAFF WRITER led by a five-member part-time legislative council and an Government Study Committee gathered this past week The Tooele County Form of Government Study appointed county manager. for a photo, you could hardly tell some of them had Committee logged over 2,500 hours of volunteer labor The study committee started weekly meetings in only met in 2017. There were plenty of smiles, laughs with the estimated value of $312,500 while reviewing the February 2017 with 11 members appointed by a special — and goofing off for the camera — during the shoot.
    [Show full text]
  • CURRICULUM VITAE Royal Skousen Royal Skousen
    1 CURRICULUM VITAE Royal Skousen Fundamental Scholarly Discoveries and Academic Accomplishments listed in an addendum first placed online in 2014 plus an additional statement regarding the Book of Mormon Critical Text Project from November 2014 through December 2018 13 May 2020 O in 2017-2020 in progress Royal Skousen Professor of Linguistics and English Language 4037 JFSB Brigham Young University Provo, Utah 84602 [email protected] 801-422-3482 (office, with phone mail) 801-422-0906 (fax) personal born 5 August 1945 in Cleveland, Ohio married to Sirkku Unelma Härkönen, 24 June 1968 7 children 2 education 1963 graduated from Sunset High School, Beaverton, Oregon 1969 BA (major in English, minor in mathematics), Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah 1971 MA (linguistics), University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois 1972 PhD (linguistics), University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois teaching positions 1970-1972 instructor of the introductory and advanced graduate courses in mathematical linguistics, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois 1972-1979 assistant professor of linguistics, University of Texas, Austin, Texas 1979-1981 assistant professor of English and linguistics, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah 1981-1986 associate professor of English and linguistics, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah 1986-2001 professor of English and linguistics, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah O 2001-2018 professor of linguistics and English language, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah 2007-2010 associate chair,
    [Show full text]
  • Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 1900–2010 Author(S): Noel M
    Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 1900–2010 Author(s): Noel M. Burkhead Source: BioScience, 62(9):798-808. 2012. Published By: American Institute of Biological Sciences URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1525/bio.2012.62.9.5 BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use. Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. Articles Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 1900–2010 NOEL M. BURKHEAD Widespread evidence shows that the modern rates of extinction in many plants and animals exceed background rates in the fossil record. In the present article, I investigate this issue with regard to North American freshwater fishes. From 1898 to 2006, 57 taxa became extinct, and three distinct populations were extirpated from the continent. Since 1989, the numbers of extinct North American fishes have increased by 25%. From the end of the nineteenth century to the present, modern extinctions varied by decade but significantly increased after 1950 (post-1950s mean = 7.5 extinct taxa per decade).
    [Show full text]
  • Native Unionoida Surveys, Distribution, and Metapopulation Dynamics in the Jordan River-Utah Lake Drainage, UT
    Version 1.5 Native Unionoida Surveys, Distribution, and Metapopulation Dynamics in the Jordan River-Utah Lake Drainage, UT Report To: Wasatch Front Water Quality Council Salt Lake City, UT By: David C. Richards, Ph.D. OreoHelix Consulting Vineyard, UT 84058 email: [email protected] phone: 406.580.7816 May 26, 2017 Native Unionoida Surveys and Metapopulation Dynamics Jordan River-Utah Lake Drainage 1 One of the few remaining live adult Anodonta found lying on the surface of what was mostly comprised of thousands of invasive Asian clams, Corbicula, in Currant Creek, a former tributary to Utah Lake, August 2016. Summary North America supports the richest diversity of freshwater mollusks on the planet. Although the western USA is relatively mollusk depauperate, the one exception is the historically rich molluskan fauna of the Bonneville Basin area, including waters that enter terminal Great Salt Lake and in particular those waters in the Jordan River-Utah Lake drainage. These mollusk taxa serve vital ecosystem functions and are truly a Utah natural heritage. Unfortunately, freshwater mollusks are also the most imperiled animal groups in the world, including those found in UT. The distribution, status, and ecologies of Utah’s freshwater mussels are poorly known, despite this unique and irreplaceable natural heritage and their protection under the Clean Water Act. Very few mussel specific surveys have been conducted in UT which requires specialized training, survey methods, and identification. We conducted the most extensive and intensive survey of native mussels in the Jordan River-Utah Lake drainage to date from 2014 to 2016 using a combination of reconnaissance and qualitative mussel survey methods.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishes of the Jordan River Compiled by Dan Potts, Local Naturalist/Ichthyologist, Revised 2011
    Fishes of the Jordan River compiled by Dan Potts, local naturalist/ichthyologist, revised 2011 TROUTS, SALMONS (SALMONIDAE) natives Bonneville cutthroat trout Onchorhynchus clarki rare introduced exotics Brown trout Salmo trutta rare Rainbow trout Onchorhynchus mykiss locally common, stocked annually NOTE: All of the trouts are found primarily in and near tributary streams to the Jordan, except rainbows that are found in areas where they are stocked as sport fish by the State of Utah Division of Wildlife Resources. MINNOWS (CYPRINIDAE) natives Redside shiner Richardsonius balteatus locally common Speckled dace Rhinichthys osculus locally common Utah chub Gila atraria uncommon introduced exotics Common carp Cyprinus carpio common, pervasive Goldfish Carassius auratus rare Fathead minnow Pimephales promelas rare Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucus rare NOTE: Common carp are so common that they account for the vast majority of the fish by weight throughout the Jordan River. Fathead minnow and golden shiner were introduced into Utah Lake as a prey species and have found their way downstream in very limited numbers. Goldfish were probably introduced as pets, but have persisted over the years. The three remaining natives are less common and mostly found in upstream reaches, especially below the Narrows. SUCKERS (CATOSTOMIDAE) natives Utah sucker Catostomus ardens common Mountain sucker Catostomus platyrhychus uncommon June sucker Chasmistes liorus rare NOTE: Utah sucker are the second most abundant fish species by weight in the Jordan River, and are found throughout. Mountain sucker are much less numerous and much smaller. June sucker is a “lake” species of Utah Lake, and are currently listed as an endangered species by the Federal Government.
    [Show full text]
  • Utah Lake EFDC Model
    Utah Lake EFDC Model Nicholas von Stackelberg Science Panel Meeting 9/18/2020 Topics 1) Utah Lake Model Framework 2) Utah Lake Model Build and Calibration Methods 3) EFDC Results Division of Water Quality 2 Model Framework hydrodynamics water level current velocity WASP SWAN EFDC Water Nutrients Wave Hydrodynamics Algae Quality HABs Model Sub‐Model Model orbital velocity radiation stress shear stress EFDC Sediment Transport Sub‐Model Division of Water Quality 3 Model Structure Cartesian grid 1,000 m x 1,000 m cell size 3 vertical layers Variable depth (sigma stretched) 1,356 total segments Stage‐Surface Area‐Storage Bathymetry Division of Water Quality 4 Model State Variables (Water Column) EFDC WASP + • Flow Ammonia [NH3 / NH4 ] • Phytoplankton (4 classes) – Depth Nitrate [NO ‐ + NO ‐] – Diatoms (Bacillariophyta) – Velocity 2 3 – Green Algae as Phytoplankton – Shear Stress Dissolved Inorganic – Cyanobacteria (Aphanizomenon • Water Temperature Phosphate gracile) ‐ 2‐ – Cyanobacteria (Synechococcus; Not • *Inorganic Solids [H2PO4 / HPO4 / PO4 ] Nitrogen‐fixed) (3 classes) Dissolved Oxygen • Periphyton Solids (3 classes) • Particulate Organic Matter * Constituent not output to WASP (POM) – Sand, silt, clay – Particulate Organic Carbon (POC) Water Temperature – Particulate Organic Nitrogen (PON) (from EFDC) – Particulate Organic Phosphorus (POP) Alkalinity (not implemented yet)• Dissolved Organic Matter pH (not implemented yet) – CBOD Ultimate (1 class) – Dissolved Organic Nitrogen (DON) – Dissolved Organic Phosphorus (DOP) Model Calibration Calibration period . EFDC: Water Year 2006-2018 . WASP: Water Year 2006-2015 . Significant data gaps in tributary loading and lake sampling Model review and comments from James Martin (April 2020) Detailed analysis period: water year 2009-2013 . Period with roughly monthly tributary and lake sampling data .
    [Show full text]
  • Version 2020-04-20 June Sucker (Chasmistes Liorus) Species Status
    Version 2020-04-20 June Sucker (Chasmistes liorus) Species Status Statement. Distribution June sucker is endemic to Utah Lake and its tributaries. The species spends the majority of the year in Utah Lake, but conducts an annual spawning migration up the tributaries in late spring and early summer (often peaking in June, hence its name). Primary spawning locations are the Provo River, Hobble Creek, and the Spanish Fork River (Fonken, 2017). A refuge population exists in Red Butte Reservoir, and hatchery and grow-out facilities are located at the state fish hatchery in Logan, Utah and at Rosebud Ponds in Box Elder County. Table 1. Utah counties currently occupied by this species. June Sucker BOX ELDER CACHE SALT LAKE UTAH WEBER Abundance and Trends Managers estimated that fewer than 1,000 June sucker existed at the time of their Endangered Species Act listing in 1986 (USFWS, 1999). As self-sustaining populations of this species no longer existed in the wild, managers began a captive breeding program, and stocked artificially propagated June suckers into Utah Lake on an annual basis. Additionally, they established a June sucker refuge population in Red Butte Reservoir. Recent modeling has shown an increasing population in Utah Lake, with current estimates of approximately 3,000 spawning adults (Conner, 2018). Statement of Habitat Needs and Threats to the Species. Habitat Needs In addition to the main body of Utah Lake, June sucker requires complex delta habitat in order to complete its life cycle. Historically, tributaries dispersed into a series of braided channels and wetlands at their interface with Utah Lake.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishes As a Template for Reticulate Evolution
    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 12-2016 Fishes as a Template for Reticulate Evolution: A Case Study Involving Catostomus in the Colorado River Basin of Western North America Max Russell Bangs University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the Evolution Commons, Molecular Biology Commons, and the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Recommended Citation Bangs, Max Russell, "Fishes as a Template for Reticulate Evolution: A Case Study Involving Catostomus in the Colorado River Basin of Western North America" (2016). Theses and Dissertations. 1847. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/1847 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Fishes as a Template for Reticulate Evolution: A Case Study Involving Catostomus in the Colorado River Basin of Western North America A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Biology by Max Russell Bangs University of South Carolina Bachelor of Science in Biological Sciences, 2009 University of South Carolina Master of Science in Integrative Biology, 2011 December 2016 University of Arkansas This dissertation is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council. _____________________________________ Dr. Michael E. Douglas Dissertation Director _____________________________________ ____________________________________ Dr. Marlis R. Douglas Dr. Andrew J. Alverson Dissertation Co-Director Committee Member _____________________________________ Dr. Thomas F. Turner Ex-Officio Member Abstract Hybridization is neither simplistic nor phylogenetically constrained, and post hoc introgression can have profound evolutionary effects.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishtraits: a Database on Ecological and Life-History Traits of Freshwater
    FishTraits database Traits References Allen, D. M., W. S. Johnson, and V. Ogburn-Matthews. 1995. Trophic relationships and seasonal utilization of saltmarsh creeks by zooplanktivorous fishes. Environmental Biology of Fishes 42(1)37-50. [multiple species] Anderson, K. A., P. M. Rosenblum, and B. G. Whiteside. 1998. Controlled spawning of Longnose darters. The Progressive Fish-Culturist 60:137-145. [678] Barber, W. E., D. C. Williams, and W. L. Minckley. 1970. Biology of the Gila Spikedace, Meda fulgida, in Arizona. Copeia 1970(1):9-18. [485] Becker, G. C. 1983. Fishes of Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI. Belk, M. C., J. B. Johnson, K. W. Wilson, M. E. Smith, and D. D. Houston. 2005. Variation in intrinsic individual growth rate among populations of leatherside chub (Snyderichthys copei Jordan & Gilbert): adaptation to temperature or length of growing season? Ecology of Freshwater Fish 14:177-184. [349] Bonner, T. H., J. M. Watson, and C. S. Williams. 2006. Threatened fishes of the world: Cyprinella proserpina Girard, 1857 (Cyprinidae). Environmental Biology of Fishes. In Press. [133] Bonnevier, K., K. Lindstrom, and C. St. Mary. 2003. Parental care and mate attraction in the Florida flagfish, Jordanella floridae. Behavorial Ecology and Sociobiology 53:358-363. [410] Bortone, S. A. 1989. Notropis melanostomus, a new speices of Cyprinid fish from the Blackwater-Yellow River drainage of northwest Florida. Copeia 1989(3):737-741. [575] Boschung, H.T., and R. L. Mayden. 2004. Fishes of Alabama. Smithsonian Books, Washington. [multiple species] 1 FishTraits database Breder, C. M., and D. E. Rosen. 1966. Modes of reproduction in fishes.
    [Show full text]