DOCSLIB.ORG

Parasites of the Woundfin Minnow, Plagopterus Argentissimus, and Other Endemic Fishes from the Virgin River, Utah

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Parasites of the Woundfin Minnow, Plagopterus Argentissimus, and Other Endemic Fishes from the Virgin River, Utah Great Basin Naturalist Volume 46 Number 4 Article 10 10-31-1986 Parasites of the woundfin minnow, Plagopterus argentissimus, and other endemic fishes from the Virgin River, Utah Richard A. Heckmann Brigham Young University James E. Deacon University of Nevada, Las Vegas Paul D. Greger University of Nevada, Las Vegas Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn Recommended Citation Heckmann, Richard A.; Deacon, James E.; and Greger, Paul D. (1986) "Parasites of the woundfin minnow, Plagopterus argentissimus, and other endemic fishes from the Virgin River, Utah," Great Basin Naturalist: Vol. 46 : No. 4 , Article 10. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn/vol46/iss4/10 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Basin Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. PARASITES OF THE WOUNDFIN MINNOW, PLAGOPTERUS ARGENTISSIMUS, AND OTHER ENDEMIC FISHES FROM THE VIRGIN RIVER, UTAH Richard A. Heckmann', James E. Deacon", and Paul D. Greger^ — Abstract. ^Two hundred woundfin minnows, Plagopterus argentlssimus . from four sites along the Virgin River, Utah, were examined on two dates during summer 1985. The foreguts of 211 woundfin and variable numbers of other fishes from the Virgin River near Beaver Dam Wash, Arizona, and Mesquite, Nevada, were examined for cestodes on four dates throughout 1979. Seven parasites were found in P. argentissimus: Posthodiplostomtim minimum (metacer- cariae), Diplostomum spathaceum (metacercariae), Bothriocephalus acheilognathi. Gijrodactijlus sp., Lernaea cypri- nacea, Trichodina sp., and Ichthyophythirius multifiliis. Fungal infections were noted on two fish during the study. Seventeen Virgin River roundtail chub, Gila robusta seminuda, were examined from two of the four sites in 1985 and 64 specimens from Beaver Dam Wash were examined in 1979. Gila robusta seminuda was infected with Posthodiplosto- mum minimum (metacercariae) and Bothriocephalus acheilognathi, the Asian fish tapeworm. This cestode probably gained entrance into the ichthyofauna of the Virgin River from red shiners, Notropis lutrensis, and has the potential of being very detrimental to the endemic and endangered fishes of the Virgin River. Parasite loads were correlated with water quality and habitat disturbance, with highest number and frequency occurring in "disturbed" sites. Low river flows and increased total dissolved solids appear to be associated with a higher parasite frequency and mean number in fishes of the Virgin River. These data represent the first known published records for parasites of the woundfin minnow and Virgin River roundtail chub. There is a paucity of information on the etc. (David 1947, Dogiel 1958, Hoffman parasitofauna of the woundfin minnow, 1967). Plagopterus argentissimus , and other species The primary objectives of this study were as of fish from the Virgin River, Utah-Arizona- follows: Nevada. Many of the fishes in the Virgin River 1. Identify the species of parasites inhabiting the are endemic and have been hsted as endan- woundfin minnow at selected sites in the Virgin River gered species, the woundfin included. Hoff- in Utah. 2. Determine the frequency of occurrence, abundance, man (1967) lists no parasites for the woundfin. and temporal variation of parasites for P. argentissimus Other common fishes in the Virgin River in the summer during the normal period of low flow. drainage include the Virgin roundtail chub, 3. Determine the relationship bet^^'een parasitism and Gila robusta seminuda; speckled dace, the immediate habitat of the host. Rhinichthys osculus; Virgin spinedace, Lepi- 4. Determine the pathogenicity of the parasite to the host. domeda mollispinis; desert sucker, Cato- stomus clarki; flannelmouth sucker, Cato- In a previous study conducted during 1979 stomus latipinnis; and the introduced red (Greger 1983), woundfin minnows examined shiner, Notropis lutrensis. Parasites of these during February and June near Beaver Dam later species are also poorly known (Hoffman Wash, Arizona, were not parasitized by ces- 1967). Parasites can have adverse effects on todes. Cestodes were present, however, in fish populations. Changes in incidence, inten- the foreguts of P. argentissimus and increased sity, or parasite species infecting or infesting a in both number and frequency from Septem- host can provide important clues to the health ber to December. Frequency of infection of and status offish host populations. To under- woundfin with cestodes was much less near stand management options, it is essential to Beaver Dam Wash, Arizona, than was true also know the life cycle of the parasite and its further downstream in Nevada. This sug- effiects at various levels of infection. For exam- gested that woundfin may be more vulnerable ple, parasitism can be responsible for reduced to parasitism in an agriculturalK' disturbed growth rates, reduced egg production, poor habitat than in a more natural environment. swimming performance, aberrant behavior. Because the Virgin River near St. George, 'Department of Zoology, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah 84602. ^Department of Biology, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada 89154. 662 October 1986 Heckmann ftal.:Woundfin Minnow Parasites 663 Utah, exhibits similar agricultural distur- salmon and trout infected with helminths bances, our hypothesis was that the parasite (Smith and Margolis 1970, Heckman 1983). load in the fish population near St. George These data also demonstrate some nutritional would be higher than in the less disturbed or growth impairments for infected fish. sections of Virgin River in Utah. Other researchers (Wardle 1933, Dogiel The life cycles of cestodes and other para- 1958, Dombroski 1955) have reported that sites of fishes from the Virgin River have not adult pseudophyllidean cestodes can affect been determined in detail. In general, fishes host nutrition and survival. Severe occlusion can be both definitive and intermediate hosts (impaction) of the gut has been reported for for cestodes. Reproductively mature adult infected salmon (Dogiel 1964) and appeared cestodes present in fish will release eggs from to affect the nutritional status in severe cases. gravid proglottids while in the intestine of the Impaction by parasites would also affect re- host. The eggs passs through the host's anus productive potential. Williams and Halvorsen and may settle in the stream sediments. For (1971) negated the belief that contents of the many cestodes, increasing temperature fish host intestine represent an unlimited causes the operculate eggs to hatch, releasing source of food for cestodes. Impaction and a ciliated coracidium (motile oncosphere). Cy- reduced growth and vigor would also reduce clopoid copepods (first intermediate host) in- reproductive potential. gest these larvae and become infected. The Other indirect effects of cestode adults on oncosphere sheds its ciliated coat in the gut of their hosts have been demonstrated in the the copepod and burrows through the intesti- laboratory. Boyce and Clarke (1983) deter- nal wall to the hemocoel, where it develops mined that Sockeye salmon yearlings infected into a procercoid larvae (Cheng 1973). This with tapeworms had a reduced ability to adapt mesacestode-type larva cannot become infec- to seawater as evidenced by increased mortal- tive to a definitive host for about two to three ity and elevated plasma sodium levels. Boyce weeks, until cercomer formation (Cheng and Behrens-Yamada (1977) also reported 1973). If a fish ingests an infected copepod, Sockeye salmon juveniles infected with the the adult cestode may commence develop- same cestode, Eiibothrium salvelini, to be ment in the intestine of the host. Although more sensitive to zinc toxicity. These effects larval (pleroceroid) development in a second could make the infected fish less vigorous and intermediate host (such as a smaller fish) is more susceptible to predation during its sea- possible, it is unlikely to occur in the Virgin ward migration. River ichthyofauna, since no primarily pisciv- The Asian fish tapeworm, Bothriocephalus orous fishes are present. It seems more proba- acheilognathi, introduced into this country by ble that development of the adult cestode in imports of grass carp, has been described as a Virgin River fishes occurs following ingestion dangerous parasite in Europe (Bauer et al. of an infected copepod. Direct development 1981). This cestode has apparently become of the adult pseudophyllidean cestode Eu- established in the ichthyofauna of southern bothrium salvelini following ingestion of in- Utah. fected Cyclops sp. by Sockeye salmon, The most common fish parasite found in Oncorhynchus nerka, has been reported by this survey was the metacercarial state of the Smith (1973) from a lake in British Columbia. digenetic trematode, Posthodiplostomum min- The effects of adult cestodes upon fish hosts imum. "Black spot, " for example, is caused by have not been studied in detail. Rees (1967), metacercarie found in melanin-pigmented after an extensive review of the literature, cysts in the skin. This larval stage of flukes reached no definitie conclusions regarding may be found in all tissues of fish (Spall and the lethal effects of adult cestodes. Other in- Summerfelt 1969b). vestigators have suggested that adverse ef- fects are considerable. Smith
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Endangered Species
    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES
    ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES Tables STEPHEN T. ROSS University of California Press Berkeley Los Angeles London © 2013 by The Regents of the University of California ISBN 978-0-520-24945-5 uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 1 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 2 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 1.1 Families Composing 95% of North American Freshwater Fish Species Ranked by the Number of Native Species Number Cumulative Family of species percent Cyprinidae 297 28 Percidae 186 45 Catostomidae 71 51 Poeciliidae 69 58 Ictaluridae 46 62 Goodeidae 45 66 Atherinopsidae 39 70 Salmonidae 38 74 Cyprinodontidae 35 77 Fundulidae 34 80 Centrarchidae 31 83 Cottidae 30 86 Petromyzontidae 21 88 Cichlidae 16 89 Clupeidae 10 90 Eleotridae 10 91 Acipenseridae 8 92 Osmeridae 6 92 Elassomatidae 6 93 Gobiidae 6 93 Amblyopsidae 6 94 Pimelodidae 6 94 Gasterosteidae 5 95 source: Compiled primarily from Mayden (1992), Nelson et al. (2004), and Miller and Norris (2005). uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 3 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 3.1 Biogeographic Relationships of Species from a Sample of Fishes from the Ouachita River, Arkansas, at the Confl uence with the Little Missouri River (Ross, pers. observ.) Origin/ Pre- Pleistocene Taxa distribution Source Highland Stoneroller, Campostoma spadiceum 2 Mayden 1987a; Blum et al. 2008; Cashner et al. 2010 Blacktail Shiner, Cyprinella venusta 3 Mayden 1987a Steelcolor Shiner, Cyprinella whipplei 1 Mayden 1987a Redfi n Shiner, Lythrurus umbratilis 4 Mayden 1987a Bigeye Shiner, Notropis boops 1 Wiley and Mayden 1985; Mayden 1987a Bullhead Minnow, Pimephales vigilax 4 Mayden 1987a Mountain Madtom, Noturus eleutherus 2a Mayden 1985, 1987a Creole Darter, Etheostoma collettei 2a Mayden 1985 Orangebelly Darter, Etheostoma radiosum 2a Page 1983; Mayden 1985, 1987a Speckled Darter, Etheostoma stigmaeum 3 Page 1983; Simon 1997 Redspot Darter, Etheostoma artesiae 3 Mayden 1985; Piller et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Plan
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Revised RECOVERY PLAN for the Pallid Sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus) Original Plan Approved: November 1993 Prepared by: Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Coordinator U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Montana Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office Billings, Montana For Mountain-Prairie Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Denver, CO January 2014 DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that are believed necessary to recover and/or protect listed species. Plans are prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, sometimes with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State agencies, and others. Plans are reviewed by the public and subject to additional peer review before they are adopted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Objectives will only be attained and funds expended contingent upon appropriations, priorities, and other budgetary constraints. Recovery plans do not obligate other parties to undertake specific tasks. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views nor the official positions or approval of any individuals or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. They represent the official position of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service only after they have been signed by the Regional Director or Director as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species’ status, and the completion of recovery tasks. Copies of all documents reviewed in development of the plan are available in the administrative record, located at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Montana Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office, Billings, Montana.
    [Show full text]
  • (Gila Elegans) (BONY) Basic Conceptual Ecological Model for the Lower Colorado River
    Bonytail (Gila elegans) (BONY) Basic Conceptual Ecological Model for the Lower Colorado River 2018 Updates 1. Eggs & Early Larvae G1-2 R5-1 S1-2 5. Spawning 2. Fry & Adults Juveniles S5-4 G2-4 G4-4 P4-5 S2-4 S4-4 4. Established Adults G3-4 3. Newly- S3-4 Stocked SHR Adults Photo courtesy of the Bureau of Reclamation March 2019 Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program Steering Committee Members Federal Participant Group California Participant Group Bureau of Reclamation California Department of Fish and Wildlife U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service City of Needles National Park Service Coachella Valley Water District Bureau of Land Management Colorado River Board of California Bureau of Indian Affairs Bard Water District Western Area Power Administration Imperial Irrigation District Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Palo Verde Irrigation District Arizona Participant Group San Diego County Water Authority Southern California Edison Company Arizona Department of Water Resources Southern California Public Power Authority Arizona Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern Arizona Game and Fish Department California Arizona Power Authority Central Arizona Water Conservation District Cibola Valley Irrigation and Drainage District Nevada Participant Group City of Bullhead City City of Lake Havasu City Colorado River Commission of Nevada City of Mesa Nevada Department of Wildlife City of Somerton Southern Nevada Water Authority City of Yuma Colorado River Commission Power Users Electrical District
    [Show full text]
  • US Fish & Wildlife Service Revised
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Revised RECOVERY PLAN for the Pallid Sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus) Original Plan Approved: November 1993 Prepared by: Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Coordinator U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Montana Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office Billings, Montana For Mountain-Prairie Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Denver, CO January 2014 DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that are believed necessary to recover and/or protect listed species. Plans are prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, sometimes with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State agencies, and others. Plans are reviewed by the public and subject to additional peer review before they are adopted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Objectives will only be attained and funds expended contingent upon appropriations, priorities, and other budgetary constraints. Recovery plans do not obligate other parties to undertake specific tasks. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views nor the official positions or approval of any individuals or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. They represent the official position of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service only after they have been signed by the Regional Director or Director as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species’ status, and the completion of recovery tasks. Copies of all documents reviewed in development of the plan are available in the administrative record, located at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Montana Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office, Billings, Montana.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution, Demise, and Restoration of the Native Fishes of the Lower Colorado River by Brent R
    The evolution, demise, and restoration of the native fishes of the lower Colorado River By Brent R. Campos ABSTRACT Throughout the last century, the Colorado River’s natural flow regime was drastically altered by the infrastructure of water regulation. The once dramatic seasonal and annual variations in water flows, which shaped the life histories and unique morphologies of its native fishes, have been subdued by the many impoundments throughout the river. Bluehead sucker, flannelmouth sucker, speckled dace, bonytail, Colorado pikeminnnow, humpback chub and razorback sucker are fish native to the Colorado River Basin, the latter four being critically endangered endemics. The native fish face two major threats: (1) habitat degradation, caused by cold, sediment-starved, and relatively flat-lined water releases, and (2) nonnative fishes, introduced since the late 1800s. Both of these threats work together in precluding the recruitment of the natives. The cold, clear, hypolimnetic releases degrade the natives’ backwater rearing habitat and cause near-zero growth rates in their young-of-year offspring, while the introduced fishes predate upon the young-of-year and juveniles. The current and proposed management strategies for restoring and/or perpetuating the fish native to the mainstem of the lower Colorado River include experimental flows, mimicking the natural flow regime, tailwater warming, nonnative fish control, and artificially-maintained populations. A holistic, ecosystem-based approach, using a combination of these management options, will likely be needed if the sustainable recovery of the lower Colorado River’s native fishes is ever to be achieved. INTRODUCTION The many dams impeding the natural flow of water on the Colorado River and its tributaries make the Colorado River Basin one of the most altered watersheds in the world (Fradkin 1981).
    [Show full text]
  • Where Are the Facts? Water Delivered by District in 2011
    Spring 2012 Kolob Reservoir Water for Today and Tomorrow • Conservation Every Day™ Manager’s Message — Drought conditions extremely likely this summer Where are the The National Oceanic and 673-3617 or go to the District’s website value of approximately $101 million. Facts? Atmospheric Association has issued a for conservation tips. (wcwcd.org/ The QCP was a $30 million project. statement that La Niña is still with us conservation) About 30% of the county’s taxable value Check out our new and may even strengthen. This particular All of us saving several gallons was bonded so this project could be webpage at wcwcd.org weather pattern usually means that of water will, in the long run, save built. Washington County residents went southern Utah will experience drought thousands of gallons of water. The Water to the polls and over 90% voted in favor conditions. Local reservoirs will do their District’s maxim says it this way: “Water of the QCP bond. See our blog for job to make sure we have the water we for Today and Tomorrow – Conservation Today, close to 150,000 people reside information about water need, but water levels will drop. Every Day.” in Washington County and the county’s projects and water issues Even though we had a record wet year taxable property value is approximately wcwcd.org/blog in 2011, that does not mean we can be Yesterday’s canals are $10 billion. We are able to borrow wasteful. It takes years to recover from today’s pipelines money for the important projects that we the impacts of even a short-term drought.
    [Show full text]
  • August 1979, Vol
    August 1979, Vol. IV, No. 8 ENDANGERED SPECIES W TECHNICAL BULLETIN Department of the Interior • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • Endangered Species Program, Washington, D.C. 20240 Critical Habitat for Three Fishes Reproposed; Withdrawn A reproposal of Critical Habitat for three fishes in Alabama and Ten- nessee will be withdrawn by the Ser- vice because of procedural errors in the nature of the public meeting and the inadequate availability of informa- tion concerning economic considera- tions. The reproposal was published in the July 27, 1979, Federal Register, and the subsequent meetings were held August 28-30. The proposed listing for the spring pygmy sunfish (Elassoma sp.) and the pygmy sculpin (Cottus pygmaeus) will be automatically with- drawn on November 29,1979, two years after its initial publication. The pro- posed listing for the Barrens topmin- now (Fundulus sp.) will be withdrawn on December 30, 1979, also two years U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Photo after publication. A new proposal will Current knowledge suggests that the agent that extirpated the brown pelican from be made only if new information be- Louisiana would have been equally effective regardless of the population size. comes available. Recovery Planned for LIght-Footed Clapper Rail, Woundfin, Eastern Brown Pelican The Service approved three recovery new habitat. These activities will aid in consists of a marsh environment with plans in July; one for the light-footed achieving the plan's objective of in- cordgrass or pickleweed for nesting clapper rail {Rallus longirostris creasing the rail's breeding population and escape cover, a supply of crabs, levipes), a California bird Endangered to at least 400 pairs.
    [Show full text]
  • Guam Marine Biosecurity Action Plan
    GuamMarine Biosecurity Action Plan September 2014 This Marine Biosecurity Action Plan was prepared by the University of Guam Center for Island Sustainability under award NA11NOS4820007 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coral Reef Conservation Program, as administered by the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management and the Bureau of Statistics and Plans, Guam Coastal Management Program. The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Guam Marine Biosecurity Action Plan Author: Roxanna Miller First Released in Fall 2014 About this Document The Guam Marine Biosecurity Plan was created by the University of Guam’s Center for Island Sustainability under award NA11NOS4820007 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coral Reef Conservation Program, as administered by the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management and the Bureau of Statistics and Plans, Guam Coastal Management Program. Information and recommendations within this document came through the collaboration of a variety of both local and federal agencies, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program (CRCP), the University of Guam (UOG), the Guam Department of Agriculture’s Division of Aquatic and Wildlife Resources (DAWR), the United States Coast Guard (USCG), the Port Authority of Guam, the National Park Service
    [Show full text]
  • Table 7: Species Changing IUCN Red List Status (2012-2013)
    IUCN Red List version 2013.2: Table 7 Last Updated: 25 November 2013 Table 7: Species changing IUCN Red List Status (2012-2013) Published listings of a species' status may change for a variety of reasons (genuine improvement or deterioration in status; new information being available that was not known at the time of the previous assessment; taxonomic changes; corrections to mistakes made in previous assessments, etc. To help Red List users interpret the changes between the Red List updates, a summary of species that have changed category between 2012 (IUCN Red List version 2012.2) and 2013 (IUCN Red List version 2013.2) and the reasons for these changes is provided in the table below. IUCN Red List Categories: EX - Extinct, EW - Extinct in the Wild, CR - Critically Endangered, EN - Endangered, VU - Vulnerable, LR/cd - Lower Risk/conservation dependent, NT - Near Threatened (includes LR/nt - Lower Risk/near threatened), DD - Data Deficient, LC - Least Concern (includes LR/lc - Lower Risk, least concern). Reasons for change: G - Genuine status change (genuine improvement or deterioration in the species' status); N - Non-genuine status change (i.e., status changes due to new information, improved knowledge of the criteria, incorrect data used previously, taxonomic revision, etc.) IUCN Red List IUCN Red Reason for Red List Scientific name Common name (2012) List (2013) change version Category Category MAMMALS Nycticebus javanicus Javan Slow Loris EN CR N 2013.2 Okapia johnstoni Okapi NT EN N 2013.2 Pteropus niger Greater Mascarene Flying
    [Show full text]
  • Population of These Species Are Known from the Virgin River in Utah, Arizona And
    \, I DRAFT EXECUTIVE ST]MMARY OF THE RECOVERY PLAN FOR TRE WOI]NDFIN ATID VIRGIN RIVER ROI'NDTAIL CHI'B Current Status: The woundfin and roundtail chub are listed as endangered. One population of these species are known from the Virgin River in Utah, Arizona and Nevada. Historically, the woundfin was collected in the Salt River near Tempe' Arizona; at the mouth of the Gila River near Yuma, Arizona; in the colorado River near Yuma, Arizona; in the Virgin River in Nevada, Arizona, and Utah and in LaVerkin Creek, a tributary to the Virgin River in Utah (Gilbert and Scofield 1898; Snyder 1915; Miller and Hubbs I960; Cross I975). The Virgin River roundtail chub has been collected from the Virgin River in Utah, Arizona and Nevada and from the Moapa River, a tributary to the Virgin River in Nevada. Habitat Requirernents and Limitins Factors: Woundfin are most often collected in run and quiet water habitats with sand substrates. Roundtail chubs are most often collected in deep run or pools associated instream cover. Alteration of flow regimes, decreasedwat.er quality and introduction of exotic species are the principal threats. Recovery Obiectives: Delisting Recovery Criteria: The woundfin and roundtail chub current listing of endangered will be recommended for threatened status when: (l) present Virgin River habitat- essential to survival of all life stages are assured; (2) when present marginal Virgin River habitat is upgraded to maintain all life stages; and (3) when an DRAFT additional population is established in a separate stream within historic range in which adequate habitat for all life stages of woundfin are assured.
    [Show full text]
  • Thermal Tolerances and Preferences of Fishes of the Virgin River System (Utah, Arizona, Nevada)
    Publications (WR) Water Resources 10-1987 Thermal tolerances and preferences of fishes of the Virgin River system (Utah, Arizona, Nevada) James E. Deacon University of Nevada, Las Vegas Paul B. Schumann University of California School of Public Health, Los Angeles Edward L. Stuenkel University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/water_pubs Part of the Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons, Desert Ecology Commons, Environmental Monitoring Commons, Fresh Water Studies Commons, Natural Resources and Conservation Commons, Sustainability Commons, and the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Repository Citation Deacon, J. E., Schumann, P. B., Stuenkel, E. L. (1987). Thermal tolerances and preferences of fishes of the Virgin River system (Utah, Arizona, Nevada). Great Basin Naturalist, 47(4), 538-546. Available at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/water_pubs/38 This Article is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by Digital Scholarship@UNLV with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Article in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/ or on the work itself. This Article has been accepted for inclusion in Publications (WR) by an authorized administrator of Digital Scholarship@UNLV. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THERMAL TOLERANCES AND PREFERENCES OF FISHES OF THE VIRGIN RIVER SYSTEM (UTAH, ARIZONA, NEVADA) James E.
    [Show full text]