Population and Conservation Biology of The

POPULATION AND CONSERVATION BIOLOGY OF THE THREATENED LEOPARD DARTER By CONRAD STEFAN TOEPFER Bachelor of Science Centre College Danville, Kentucky 1990 Master of Science Louisiana State University Baton Rouge, Louisiana 1992 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY July, 1997 p::t q '1 D 1 t,1,r >P POPULATION AND CONSERVATION BIOLOGY OF THE THREATENED LEOPARD DARTER Thesis Approved: dJ~?t~ Thesis Adviser ~· Dean of the Graduate College ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to thank my adviser, Dr. William L. Fisher, for his encouragement and assistance on this project. He allowed me to flourish, and I will always value his contribution to my future. I would also like to thank the members of my committee, Dr. Tony Echelle, Dr. Stan Fox, Dr. Don Turton, and Dr. Emily Stanley, for their advice during the course of my research. I would like to thank the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation, U.S. Fish and Widlife Service, and the Oklahoma Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit for their financial support of the study. I would like to extend special thanks to Ken Collins at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ecological Services Office for his assistance in obtaining additional funding and special permits and for his general advice and insights concerning leopard darters. I appreciate a number of students and family members that helped with field work. I extend my thanks to Rex iii Anderson, Mike Sams, Mike Miller, Jason Ballew, and Tracy Brotherton. Jason Haubelt survived the Glover Curse and feral cattle for nearly two years, and I would have had difficulty doing the same without him. Lance Williams also assisted in the field, but more importantly, I would like to thank Lance for his lack of subtlety in asking questions and demanding results. Without his goading, I doubt that we would have been nearly as successful in gaining knowledge of leopard darter biology. Finally, I would like to extend extra thanks to my parents for their moral (and occasionally financial) encouragement during my years as a graduate student. My mother, Tracy Brotherton, was indispensible as a back-up technician when I was unable to find student help. Her ability to interpret falling in cold water as a good time certainly made my project much easier to accomplish. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION.................................. 1 II. USING GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS TO DETERMINE ABUNDANCE OF STREAM-DWELLING FISH... 4 Abstract...................................... 4 Introduction ................. ·. 5 The Method. 8 Case Study: Leopard Darter Abundance in Big Eagle Creek, Oklahoma.. .............. ....... 16 Conclusions. .. 25 Acknowledgments. 28 References. 30 III. FACTORS INFLUENCING ABUNDANCE OF THE THREATENED LEOPARD DARTER..................... 41 Abstract. 41 Introduction. 42 Methods....................................... 44 Results....................................... 51 Discussion. 55 Acknowledgments .................. , . 62 Literature Cited. 63 Appendices.................................... 73 IV. SWIMMING PERFORMANCE OF THE THREATENED LEOPARD DARTER IN RELATION TO ROAD CULVERTS........... 78 Abstract. 7 8 Introduction. 80 Methods ...................................... ·. 83 Results....................................... 87 V Discussion. 89 Acknowledgments... 94 References. 95 Appendices. 102 V. IMPACTS OF LAND USE ON STREAM HABITAT FOR THE LEOPARD DARTER. 121 . Abstract. 121 Introduction ...... : . 122 Methods. 125 Results....................................... 134 ·Discussion ..........'........................... 136 Acknowledgments. 143 Literature Cited. 145 Appendices. 158 VI. CONCLUSIONS. 160 vi LIST OF TABLES Table Page Chapter II 1. Mesohabitat category descriptions used to classify mesohabitat in Big Eagle Creek, Oklahoma (modified from McCain et al. 1990) 35 2. Classification of suitability of mesohabitat types based on percentage of transect points classified as preferred or non-preferred in Big Eagle Creek, Oklahoma................... 36 Chapter III 1. Mesohabitat diversity and dominance and leopard darter abundances for each stream (bold values) and for four equally-sized segments within each stream. 65 Chapter IV 1. Mean values (± lSD) for swimming performance variables. Results from ANOVA for each variable are indicated at the bottom of the the table. Only values for the treatment effect are reported for the variables which were analyzed with a nested ANOVA (burst duration, distance, and speed). Values with different letters were significantly different in the Tukey's multiple comparisons test.... 98 Chapter V 1. AGNPS model parameters, input data layer, and source (User-supplied or derived by AGNPS/ vii GRASS interface). Asterisks indicate optional parameters. 149 2. Areas (hectares of soil in Big Eagle Creek and West Fork Glover River watersheds by hydrologic group and soil erodibility factor. Percent of total area in each watershed is indicated in parentheses. 15 O 3. Land use in Big Eagle Creek and West Fork Glover River watersheds............................. 151 4. C-factors for each type of land use. Most values were taken directly from tables provided by Dissmeyer and Foster (1984) .................. 152 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page Chapter II 1. Flow chart depicting the method of using GIS to determine abundance of stream fishes..... 38 2a. Sample maps of mesohabitat types for a stretch of approximately 475 m of Big Eagle Creek. The abbreviations H.G. and L.G. are "High Gradient" and "Low Gradient" and M.C. is "Midchannel.. 39 b. Sample map of mesohabitat types after re-classification into suitability classes for leopard darters............................. 39 3. Predicted densities of leopard darters as a function of mesohabitat quality and longitudinal stream position. Open circles are densities at optimal mesohabiat sampling locations and open squares are densities at suitable mesohabitat sampling locations. The dashed lines indicate a hypothetical maximal abundance.............. 40 Chapter III 1. Little River drainage in southeastern Oklahoma and southwestern Arkansas................... 67 2. Inter-annual abundance in density of leopard darters. WF indicates sites in West Fork Glover and RF indicates sites in Robinson Fork River. 6 8 3. Length-frequency histograms for annual survival of leopard darters in Big Eagle Creek and West lX Fork Glover River........................... 69 4. Length-frequency histograms for post-recruitment to pre-spawning survival.................... 70 5. Habitat complementation measured as percent of usable habitat within 75 m distance classes from the nearest riffle..................... 71 6. Mean daily discharge for a three-year period in the Mountain Fork River near Smithville, OK. 72 Chapter IV 1. Schematic of the flow-through swimming performance apparatus, top view ............. 100 2. Box and whisker plots of current velocity in all culverts at each road crossing in the Glover River drainage. The boxes cover the central 50 percent of the observations, and the whiskers extend to the 5th and 95th percentiles. The dashed line across each section of the figure indicates 25 cm/s, the highest velocity tested in the laboratory swimming performance experiment. EF indicates crossings in the East Fork Glover River, WF indicates those in the West Fork Glover River, and MG indicates those in mainstem Glover River .................... 101 Chapter V 1. Big Eagle Creek and West Fork Glover watersheds and stream channels ......................... 154 2. Sediment yield in Big Eagle Creek watershed, Oklahoma. The two areas in the southwest portion of the watershed were clearcuts ............. 155 3. Sediment yield in West Fork Glover River watershed................................... 156 X 4. Sediment yield as a function of longitudinal position in each stream. The lines indicate sediment yield in the lower 21 km of continuous stream channel in each mainstem ............. 157 xi CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The leopard darter Percina pantherina is a threatened percid endemic to five streams in the Little River drainage in southeastern Oklahoma and southwestern Arkansas. Before 1977, only 165 specimens had been collected from four streams in the drainage (Robison 1978). Between 1977 and 1988, a total of 1210 leopard darters were collected during studies conducted in the entire drainage (Jones and Maughan 1984, James et al. 1991, Zale et al. 1994). It was apparent that abundances were higher than previously believed, but much of the increase may have reflected improvements in sampling and a better understanding of leopard darter habitat use. However, the overall abundance, survival, and distribution of leopard darters in the drainages was still poorly understood prior to this study (see chapters II and III). After obtaining data on overall abundances and distribution of leopard darters, we can begin to examine 1 how life history and other (e.g., abiotic and biotic) factors interact to influence patterns in abundance. Previous work with the species described habitat use (Jones 1981, James 1989), spawning behavior and habitat (James et al. 1989), growth (Jones et al. 1983, James et al. 1991), and diet (James et al. 1991). This study adds to previous population biology information and extends it by examining how human and environmental impacts affect the abundance, survival, and habitats of the species. The first challenge in determining overall abundance of leopard

Load more