|
Kentucky's Species of Greatest Conservation Need and their statuses. |
|
Common name |
Scientific name |
Federal |
Heritage |
GRank |
SRank |
|
Actinopterygii (9 species). |
|
Ictiobus niger |
N |
S |
G5 |
S3 |
|
Cyprinella venusta |
N |
S |
G5 |
S3 |
|
Lota lota |
N |
S |
G5 |
N |
|
Polyodon spathula |
N |
N |
G4 |
S4 |
|
Hybopsis amnis |
N |
X |
G4 |
N |
|
Clinostomus elongatus |
N |
N |
G4 |
S3 |
|
Macrhybopsis meeki |
N |
H |
G3 |
N |
|
Forbesichthys agassizii |
N |
N |
G4 |
S4 |
|
Macrhybopsis gelida |
N |
H |
G3 |
N |
Literature cited
Download all 9 new 2010 Fish Statewide Maps (10
MB)
CLASS Actinopterygii
Black Buffalo Ictiobus niger
Federal Heritage
GRank SRank GRank SRank
Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)
N S G5 S3 G5 S3
G-Trend Unknown
G-Trend Throughout
its range, the black buffalo appears to be less common than the other
Comment species
of buffalo (Etnier and Starnes 1993).
Some authorities regard this
species to be inadequately diagnosed and its taxonomic
status uncertain (Burr and
Warren 1986, Robison
and Buchanan 1988). This has led to
uncertainty
regarding its distributional status in several states and
speculation about
misidentifications.
The species is generally treated as vulnerable to imperiled in
most of the upper Mississippi River basin and Ohio River
drainage. It is
considered secure in only a few states in the middle and
lower Mississippi River
basin, although records in the Gulf Slope drainages in
Texas and New Mexico are
thought to
potentially be based on misidentifications or introductions (Etnier and
Starnes 1993, Natureserve 2008, Shute 1980).
S-Trend Unknown
S-Trend Burr and Warren
(1986) regarded this species as sporadic and rare in rivers and
Comment reservoirs
in western Kentucky, and sporadic in the main channels of the
Mississippi and Ohio rivers. In the Ohio River, Pearson and Krumholz
(1984)
reported the distribution of the black buffalo to be nearly
identical to that of the
smallmouth buffalo, but much less common. Since 1986, many additional
records have been reported for the middle and lower Ohio
River, and relatively
few from the Mississippi River and minor tributaries in
western Kentucky;
however, many of these records are not tied to vouchered
specimens and need to
be confirmed. The black buffalo is listed as a species of
Special Concern by the
Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission (2005).
Habitat / In
Kentucky, the black buffalo occurs in pools and backwaters of streams and
Life larger
rivers, but can also be found in reservoirs, oxbows, and other lentic
History environments
(Burr and Warren 1986). The species has
also been reported to
prefer stronger currents of rivers and reservoirs (Pfleiger
1997, Robison and
Buchanan 1988). The
black buffalo is a bottom feeder consuming benthic
macroinvertebrates, with mollusks such as the introduced
Asian Clam (Corbicula)
being a large
dietary component (Becker 1983, Minckley et al. 1970). Spawning
has been reported to
occur during April and May, during which fish congregate
in large numbers in shallow water broadcasting eggs over a
variety of hard
substrates from bedrock to gravel (Piller et al.
2003). Piller et al. (2003)
observed spawning fish that had migrated into a small
stream from a reservoir,
but suggested the possibility that black buffalo may be
adaptable to other habitats
for spawning, such as shallow areas of reservoirs.
Key Most occurrence records available for this species are from
the Middle and
Habitat Lower
Ohio River, including the following HUC8 units: 05090103 Little Scioto-
Tygarts (1 record, 2006), 05090201 Ohio Brush-Whiteoak (11
records, 1988-
2007), 05090203 Middle Ohio-Laughery (3 records, 1988-2005)
05140101
Silver-Little Kentucky (1973-2007, 5 records), 05140104
Blue-Sinking (1976-
2005, 2 records), 05140201 Lower Ohio-Little Pigeon
(1976-2008, 10 records),
05140202 Highland-Pigeon (2008, 1 record), 05140203 Lower
Ohio-Bay (1997-
2008, 17 records), 05140206 Lower Ohio (1996-2008, 13
records). Although
the Ohio River has been assessed and found to fully support
aquatic life
(ORSANCO 2008), the entire river has been impounded by a
series of navigation
locks and dams, which has also diminished natural variation
flow conditions in
the lower reaches of tributaries. Various sources of
industrial and domestic
pollution severely degraded water quality during the first
half of the 20th century,
with some
improvements made following the establishment of regulatory
measures such as the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act Amendments of 1972
(Pearson and Krumholz 1984).
The species has not been reported from the Green River
basin since 1983, and
only a few records exist in the following HUC8 units:
05110006 Pond (1982, 1
record), 05110003 Middle Green (1983, 1 record), 05110004
Rough (1959-1961,
2 records). Habitat conditions were found to be fully
supporting of aquatic life
use in 28% of wadeable streams based on probabilistic
(random) surveys in the
Green-Tradewater Basin Management Unit. This level of support was higher in
comparison to the upper Cumberland River and Four Rivers
basins (Kentucky
Division of Water 2008).
The Lower Tennessee (HUC8 06040006) and Lower Cumberland
(HUC8
05130205) each have relatively recent records (1997-2006)
below Kentucky and
Barkley dams; no recent records are available for Kentucky
or Barkley reservoirs.
Most records
available for the Jackson Purchase area, including the Lower
Mississippi-Memphis (HUC8 08010100) and Bayou du
Chien-Mayfield (HUC8
08010201) were collected prior to 1986; only two records
were reported since
2000. Habitat
conditions fully supporting aquatic life in the Four Rivers basins
based on a probability biosurvey and analysis were 17% of
wadeable streams
were fully supporting of aquatic life use (Kentucky
Division of Water 2008). The
mainstem Mississippi
River, like the Ohio, has been altered by channel
modifications to accommodate barge traffic, which has
deteriorated conditions to
fully support
aquatic life.
Guilds Large rivers in slackwater.
Statewide Black_Buffalo.pdf
Map
Conservation Issues
Aquatic habitat degradation
2C Construction/Operation
of impoundments (migration barrier)
2E Stream
channelization/ditching
2J Alteration
of surface runoff patterns (flow/temp regimes)
Biological/ consumptive uses
5J Incidental
mortality due to commercial fishing/musseling (mortality and
overharvest)
5K Lack of
suitable habitat for spawning, nesting, or breeding
CLASS Actinopterygii
Blacktail Shiner Cyprinella venusta
Federal Heritage
GRank SRank GRank SRank
Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)
N S G5 S3 G5 S3
G-Trend Stable
G-Trend This species
occurs in the Gulf Coastal Plain from the Suwannee River system in
Comment Florida
to the Rio Grande in Texas, where it is generally abundant (Etnier and
Starnes, 1993), and in the Mississippi basin north to
central Missouri and extreme
southern Illinois
(Boschung and Mayden 2004). Most
populations are
considered to be stable, having experienced declines and
fluctuations over a small
portion
(approximately 10%) of the species’ range (Natureserve 2008).
Kristmundsdottir and Gold (1996) identified four groups
(clades) based on
geographic variation in mtDNA (Choctawatchee, Apalachicola,
Mobile, and
Western) that could potentially be recognized as distinct
species, although
additional study is needed.
S-Trend Unknown
S-Trend Although
it is considered to be stable throughout most of its range, the blacktail
Comment shiner is
considered vulnerable to critically imperiled at the northern periphery of
its range in western Kentucky and southern Illinois, where
it faces threats of
habitat loss and hybridization with the invasive red shiner
(Smith 1979, Burr and
Warren 1986). This
species needs regular periodic surveys to monitor long-term
trends in distributional status and abundance. It is listed
as Special Concern by
the Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission (2005).
Habitat / In
Kentucky, the blacktail shiner mostly occurs in small Coastal Plain streams
Life over
firm sand/gravel substrates in riffles, raceways, or along undercut banks
History and
around submerged logs and stumps. Less
frequently, or more sporadically, it
is found along
shorelines of the Mississippi and lower Ohio rivers over firm sand
or gravel in current
(Burr and Warren 1986). The blackfin
shiner is a schooling
species feeding primarily aquatic insect larvae,
terrestrial insects, and small seeds
(Robison and Buchanan 1988, Ross 2001). In Tennessee, the spawning period
has been estimated to occur from mid-May through August,
based on
observations of males in breeding condition (Etnier and
Starnes 1993). Eggs are
deposited by females in crevices of submerged objects
occupied and defended by
breeding males
(Heins 1990, Pfleiger 1997, Boschung and Mayden 2004).
Key This species is restricted to extreme western Kentucky, where
it occurs in
Habitat Terrapin
Creek (Obion River HUC8 08010202), Lower Ohio (HUC8 05140206),
Lower Mississippi-Memphis (HUC8 08010100), and Bayou De
Chien-Mayfield
(08010100) watersheds.
These watersheds are located primarily within the
Mississippi Loess Plains in the Jackson Purchase area and
small sections of the
Interior River Valleys and Hills (along the lower Ohio
River) and Mississippi
Alluvial Plain (along the Mississippi River). Forested wetlands that were once
extensive have been replaced by cropland and
pastureland. Streams typically
have low gradients with gravel and sand substrates. Nearly all of the major
stream systems containing blacktail shiner populations have
been channelized to
some degree (Burr and Warren 1986, Woods et al. 2002).
Guilds Large
rivers in current, Lowland Streams in riffles, Lowland Streams in
slackwater.
Statewide Blacktail_Shiner.pdf
Map
Conservation Issues
Aquatic habitat degradation
2E Stream
channelization/ditching
2F Riparian
zone removal (Agriculture/development)
2H Wetland
loss/drainage/alteration
Biological/ consumptive uses
5D Competition
from introduced/invasive or native species
5E Hybridization
with closely related species
Siltation and increased turbidity
1B Agriculture
CLASS Actinopterygii
Burbot Lota lota
Federal Heritage
GRank SRank GRank SRank
Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)
N S G5 SU G5 N
G-Trend Stable
G-Trend Globally,
the burbot is widely distributed in both hemispheres south to about 40
Comment degrees N
(Lee and Gilbert 1980). In the eastern
hemisphere, it occurs
throughout Canada, Alaska, and northern United States south
to Pennsylvania,
Kentucky, Missouri, Wyoming, and Oregon (Page and Burr
1991). The species
is secure (often cited as common) throughout Cananda and
Alaska, and the Great
Lakes drainages;
however, it is uncommon in the Mississippi River basin (Becker
1983), which represents
the southern periphery of its North American range.
S-Trend Unknown
S-Trend The
status of the burbot in Kentucky has been in question since the earliest
Comment reported
records from the Ohio River in the late 1800s (Clay 1975, Burr and
Warren 1986). This
species is infrequently caught, usually accidentally, by
anglers and commercial fishermen. There is no evidence that reproduction
occurs anywhere in Kentucky (Clay 1975), and it is
uncertain whether
occasionally captured individuals represent escapees from
stocked fishing lakes in
Indiana, Kentucky,
or Ohio, or are evidence of a sparse, but naturally
reproducing population.
The latter possibility is the reason it has been listed as a
species of Special Concern by the Kentucky State Nature
Preserves Commission
(2005). Additional
research is needed to clarify the status of this species in the
Ohio River.
Habitat / Habitat
preferences for this species in Kentucky are poorly known; most
Life individuals
have been captured by commercial or sport fishermen from large
History rivers. In northern areas, the species prefers
bottoms of cold lakes and streams
in depths greater than 1.5 m with substrates of rock, sand,
and mud (Burr and
Warren 1986). The
burbot is nocturnal in both its reproductive and feeding
habits (Lee and Gilbert 1980, Becker 1983). In the Great Lakes and areas to the
north, spawning occurs in mid-winter, from January to
March, usually in shallow
bays over and or on
gravel shoals (Becker 1983, Holm et al. 2009).
In rivers,
spawning has been reported in areas of low current velocity
in main channels or
side channels behind deposition bars (U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service 2003). The
burbot has a voracious appetite, foraging on the bottom at
night for wide variety
of fishes, crustaceans, and other benthic
macroinvertebrates (Scott and
Crossman 1973, Holm et al. 2009).
Key The
only records available for this species are from the Ohio, Kentucky, and
Habitat Licking
rivers. In the Ohio River, the burbot
has been reported from the
following HUC8 units: 05090201 Ohio Brush-Whiteoak,
05090203 Middle Ohio-
Laughery, 05140101 Silver-Little Kentucky, 05140104
Blue-Sinking, 05140203
Lower Ohio-Bay, and 05140206 Lower Ohio. Pre-1967 records are available for
the Lower Kentucky River (05100205) and Licking River
(05100101). The most
recent records are
from the Ohio River: 05140203 Lower Ohio-Bay (2002, photo
record), 05140104
Blue-Sinking (1993, specimen record), and 05090201 Ohio
Brush-Whiteoak (1993, photo record) (Compton et al.
2004). Although the Ohio
River has been assessed and found to fully support aquatic
life (ORSANCO
2008), the entire river has been impounded by a series of
navigation locks and
dams, which has also diminished natural variation flow
conditions in the lower
reaches of tributaries. Various sources of industrial and
domestic pollution
severely degraded water quality during the first half of
the 20th century, with
some improvements made following the establishment of
regulatory measures
such as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (Pearson
and
Krumholz 1984).
Guilds Large rivers in
slackwater.
Statewide Burbot.pdf
Map
Conservation Issues
Aquatic habitat degradation
2C Construction/Operation
of impoundments (migration barrier)
2E Stream
channelization/ditching
2J Alteration
of surface runoff patterns (flow/temp regimes)
Biological/ consumptive uses
5F Low population
densities
5J Incidental
mortality due to commercial fishing/musseling (mortality and
overharvest)
5K Lack of
suitable habitat for spawning, nesting, or breeding
CLASS Actinopterygii
Paddlefish Polyodon spathula
Federal Heritage
GRank SRank GRank SRank
Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)
N N G4 S4 G4 S4
G-Trend Stable
G-Trend The
Paddlefish is a wide-ranging species in central and eastern North America,
Comment once
common throughout much of the Mississippi River Basin, Gulf Coastal
drainages, and formerly in Lake Erie (Etnier and Starnes
1993). Because the
Paddlefish is common in the international caviar trade, in
1992 the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and
Flora (CITES)
adopted a U.S. proposal to regulate trade in this species
under CITES Appendix II
(Rasmussen and
Graham 1998). Although it is considered
apparently secure by
NatureServe (2008), the Paddlefish is listed as vulnerable
on the American
Fisheries Society list of imperiled freshwater and
diadromous fishes of North
America due to 1) present or threatened destruction,
modification, or reduction of
the species’ habitat
or range, and 2) over-exploitation for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational purposes including
intentional eradication or
indirect impacts of
fishing (Jelks et al. 2008).
S-Trend Unknown
S-Trend Burr and
Warren (1986) considered this species to be occasional in the
Comment Mississippi,
Ohio, Tennessee, Cumberland, Green, Salt, Kentucky, and Licking
rivers and lower Bayou du Chien. It was initially assigned to a conservation
status category of special concern in a list of state
endangered, threatened, or
rare fishes (Branson et al. 1981), but was later removed
because it was thought
to be more common that previously believed (Burr and Warren
1986). Although
assigned a status of S4 (Apparently Secure) by NatureServe
(2008), Kentucky
currently lacks solid information on the status of populations
within the state.
There is ample evidence in most states that illegal harvest
of Paddlefish for eggs
continues to be a problem that may lead to depleted
stocks. Because Paddlefish
move freely through large rivers in the Mississippi River
Basin, the Mississippi
Interstate Cooperative Resource Association (MICRA) was
established in 1991,
to provide an interjurisdictional fishery management
framework and conduct
cooperative basinwide stock assessments (Rasmussen and
Graham 1998).
Habitat / In
Kentucky, the Paddlefish inhabits quiet or slow-moving waters of large and
Life medium-sized
rivers, oxbows, backwaters, and impoundments rich in
History zooplankton
on which it feeds. Adults must have
access to gravel bars subject to
sustained flooding
during spring months for spawning (Burr and Warren 1986).
The species prefers depths greater than 1.5 m, seeking
deeper water in late fall
and winter (Burkhead and Jenkins 1991). Individuals may
congregate near
artificial structures (e.g., below dams) that create eddies
and reduce current
velocity (Southall and Hubert 1984). Paddlefish have been
reported to spawn in
fast
shallow water over gravel bars, including significant tail water sections
below
upstream impoundments (e.g., Stancill et al. 2002).
In the lower
Cumberland and
Tennessee rivers, larvae have been reported to drift from
Reservoir
to reservoir (Wallus 1986).
Key Numerous occurrence records available for this species are from the Ohio
River,
Habitat including
the following HUC8 units: Little Scioto-Tygarts (05090103), Ohio
Brush-Whiteoak (05090201), Middle Ohio-Laughery (05090203),
Silver-Little
Kentucky (05140101), Blue-Sinking (05140104), Lower
Ohio-Little Pigeon
(05140201), Highland-Pigeon (05140202), Lower Ohio-Bay
(05140203), and
Lower Ohio (05140206).
Although the Ohio River has been assessed and found
to fully support aquatic life (ORSANCO 2008), the entire
river has been
impounded by a series of navigation locks and dams, which
has also diminished
natural variation flow conditions in the lower reaches of
tributaries. Various
sources of industrial and domestic pollution severely
degraded water quality
during the first half of the 20th century, with some
improvements made
following the establishment of regulatory measures such as
the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1972 (Pearson and Krumholz 1984).
Records for this species are also available for the Lower
Mississippi-Memphis
(08010100), and Bayou du Chien-Mayfield (08010201)
watershed units. Sections
of
the Mississippi River where this species has been found are impacted by
channel modifications made to enhance barge traffic. No reach of the Mississippi
River or its tributaries in western Kentucky are rated as
fully supporting aquatic
life. Most (64%)
offer only partial support, while 36% are considered non-
supportive (Kentucky Division of Water 2002).
Several records are available for the Lower Cumberland
River (05130205),
Kentucky Lake (06040005), and Lower Tennessee River
(06040006). Habitat
conditions fully supporting aquatic life in the Four Rivers
basins based on a
probability biosurvey and analysis were 17% of wadeable
streams were fully
supporting of aquatic life use (Kentucky Division of Water
2008).
Two records exist for the Rough River (05110004) and Middle
Green River
(05110003). Habitat conditions were found to be fully
supporting of aquatic life
use in 28% of wadeable streams based on probabilistic
(random) surveys in the
Green-Tradewater Basin Management Unit. This level of support was higher in
comparison to the upper Cumberland River and Four Rivers
basins (Kentucky
Division of Water 2008).
Several records are available for the Lower Kentucky River
(05100205). The
mainstem Kentucky River is impounded by a series of locks
and dams extending
from the mouth upstream to the confluence of the South
Fork. The resultant
pooling of the mainstem has resulted in the loss of
Paddlefish spawning habitat
and prevents long-range movements that may be required to
maintain populations
(Dillard et al. 1986).
Three records are available for the Licking River
(05100101). The Licking River
is free-flowing below Cave Run Lake and has a significant
portion of outstanding
resource waters (Kentucky Division of Water 2002); however,
much of the
middle and lower sections of the watershed has been
subjected to excessive
siltation from poor agricultural practices as well as sewage pollution
(Burr and
Warren
1986).
Gilds Large rivers in current, Large rivers
in slackwater.
Statewide Paddlefish.pdf
Map
Conservation Issues
Aquatic habitat degradation
2A Navigational
dredging/Commercial dredging
2C Construction/Operation
of impoundments (migration barrier)
2G Water
level fluctuations
Biological/ consumptive uses
5P Market
hunting for human consumption
Terrestrial habitat degradation
3H Habitat
loss outside of Kentucky
CLASS Actinopterygii
Pallid Shiner Hybopsis amnis
Federal Heritage
GRank SRank GRank SRank
Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)
N X G4 S1 G4 N
G-Trend Decreasing
G-Trend The pallid
shiner occurs in the Mississippi River from Wisconsin and Minnesota,
Comment south to
Louisiana and west to the Guadaloupe River in Texas (Clemmer 1980).
Population declines have been documented over the past
three decades,
particularly in the northern portions of its range (Clemmer
1980, Becker 1983,
Skelly and Sule 1983, Warren and Burr 1988, Kwak 1991,
Pflieger 1997).
Currently, the species is uncommon throughout the northern
extent of its range
and stable in portions of the south, where it has been
reported to be fairly
common (Natureserve 2008).
Recently, the pallid shiner was added to the
American Fisheries Society list of imperiled freshwater and
diadromous fishes of
North America based on present or threatened destruction,
modification, or
reduction of the species’ habitat or range (Jelks et al.
2008).
S-Trend Unknown
S-Trend The
pallid shiner is known from only six localities in the lower Tennessee, Green,
Comment and upper
Cumberland basins in Kentucky (Burr and Warren 1986). Until
rediscovered in the South Fork Cumberland River in 2005
(Thomas 2006), the
pallid shiner was on the list of plants and animals
presumed extinct or extirpated
from Kentucky (Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission
2005); the last
previous record was from Wolf Lick Creek (Middle Green
River drainage) in
1970. The species
was collected again in the South Fork Cumberland River in
2006. The pallid
shiner is a species that potentially could have been overlooked in
recent collections
because of its close similarity to other minnows (e.g., bigeye
chub and mimic shiner). Additional sampling at other known
historic localities is
needed to determine the status of this species within the
state.
Habitat / Habitat
preferences for this species in Kentucky are poorly known (Burr and
Life Warren
1986). In the South Fork Cumberland
River, 17 individuals were
History collected
along the margin of the stream lined with water willow (Justicia sp.);
substrate was a mixture of medium- to large-sized cobble,
mixed with gravel and
sand (Thomas 2006).
In more southern parts of its range, the pallid shiner has
been reported to occur in medium to large streams and
rivers in quite water at the
lower ends of sand
bars over soft sand/silt substrates (Clemmer 1980, Burr and
Warren 1986).
Biology and life history of populations in Kentucky are unknown.
In the south, the
species has been reported to spawn during late winter and early
spring; adults in
reproductive condition have been observed during March in
Arkansas (Clemmer 1980), and during May in western Tennesee
(Etnier and
Starnes 1993).
Key Because
this species has not been collected recently anywhere outside of the
Habitat South
Fork Cumberland River, this watershed may currently provide the best
suitable habitat for this species in Kentucky. In the South Fork Cumberland
River, habitat conditions fully supporting aquatic life
include 90% of the 75.5
miles of stream assessed within the watershed, and 52.3
stream miles are
considered outstanding resource water (Kentucky Division of
Water 2002). Other
watersheds
containing historic records are more impaired.
Habitat conditions in
these watersheds fully supporting aquatic life range from
49% in the Middle
Green River (HUC8 05110003) to 75% in the Lower
Tennessee-Kentucky Lake
(HUC8 06040006) (Kentucky Division of Water 2004).
Guilds Medium
to large streams, Upland streams in pools.
Statewide Pallid_Shiner.pdf
Map
Conservation Issues
Aquatic habitat degradation
2B Gravel/sand
removal or quarrying (e.g., mineral excavation)
2C Construction/Operation
of impoundments (migration barrier)
2E Stream
channelization/ditching
2G Water
level fluctuations
2J Alteration
of surface runoff patterns (flow/temp regimes)
Siltation and increased turbidity
1A Coal
mining
1B Agriculture
1D Urbanization/Development General Construction
1E Silviculture
CLASS Actinopterygii
Redside Dace Clinostomus elongatus
Federal Heritage
GRank SRank GRank SRank
Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)
N N G4 S3S4 G4 S3
G-Trend Decreasing
G-Trend The
redside dace currently occupies a discontinuous distribution from the upper
Comment Susquehanna
River drainage of New York and Pennsylvania, west through the
lower Great Lakes, Ohio, and upper Mississippi River basins
to Iowa (now
extirpated) and Minnesota.
Disjunct populations have disappeared or are
declining in the eastern portion of its range and it is
localized and very rare in the
west (Gilbert 1980, Page and Burr 1991, Natureserve
2008). In Canada, it
occurs in only a few streams draining into Lake Ontario,
Lake Erie and Lake
Huron in southern Ontario (Parker et al. 1988, Natureserve
2008). Recently, the
redside dace was added to the American Fisheries Society
list of imperiled
freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America based on
present or
threatened destruction, modification, or reduction of the
species’ habitat or range
(Jelks et al. 2008).
S-Trend Stable
S-Trend The
redside dace reaches the southern extent of its range on the Western
Comment Allegheny
Plateau of northeastern Kentucky, where it is occasional to locally
common in several tributaries of the North Fork of Licking
River, Beaver Creek,
and Red River (Burr and Warren 1986, Meade et al.
1986). Although these small,
isolated populations
currently appear to be stable, lack of adequate protection
makes them vulnerable to habitat loss and degradation. In
Wisconsin, Lyons et al.
(2000) associated
extirpation of redside dace populations with introductions and
population expansions of the piscivorous brown trout into
headwater habitats
used by the dace. In
Kentucky, several streams supporting redside dace are
stocked with rainbow and/or brown trout.
Habitat / Habitat
requirements for this species are narrow and specific. Streams
Life supporting
populations share certain physiochemical characteristics, including
History cool
and clear water of near neutral pH in forested watersheds with good canopy
cover. Forest cover
usually includes eastern hemlock and white laurel.
Individuals are typically found in pools less than 2 m
deep, in moderate current,
with gravel and sandy substrates, and minimal siltation
(Burr and Warren 1986,
Meade et al. 1986).
The redside dace often spawns over gravel/pebble nests
constructed by other minnows, such as the creek chub. Spawning occurs
during spring when water temperatures exceed 18 degrees
Celsius (Koster,
1939). Based on
field and aquarium observations, the species has a habitat of
jumping several centimeters out of the water to catch
insects; therefore, a large
portion of its diet consists of terrestrial insects (Schwartz and
Norvell 1958).
Key This
species currently persists in limited sections of the Licking River (HUC8
Habitat 05100101)
and Upper Kentucky (HUC8 05100204) watersheds.
In the Licking
River drainage, historic and recent records are available
for ten streams
distributed along the Northern Forested Plateau Escarpment
ecoregion near the
northwestern margin of the Allegheny Plateau. Streams in this area are cool,
clear, and typically have moderate to high gradients with
rocky substrates.
Logging and recreation are important land uses in this
region (Woods et al. 2002).
This portion of the
Licking River drainage has not been as severely impacted as
the lower basin below Cave Run Lake, which has been
subjected to excessive
siltation from poor agricultural practices as well as
sewage pollution (Burr and
Warren 1986).
In the Red River drainage (Upper Kentucky), the species has
been documented in
seven streams, all
of which are generally are of high quality and were rated as
fully supporting of aquatic life by the Kentucky Division
of Water (2000). Land
within these watersheds is mostly rural and wooded;
two-thirds of the Red River
drainage is managed by the U.S. Forest Service as part of
the Daniel Boone
National Forest (Kentucky Water Research Institute
2001).
Because of the cool, high gradient character of streams
containing redside dace,
they are also regarded as suitable waters for trout
introduction. Trout that have
been (and continue to be) stocked in several of these
streams could potentially
diminish or extirpate redside dace populations through predation.
Guilds Upland
headwater streams in pools.
Statewide Redside_Dace.pdf
Map
Conservation Issues
Aquatic habitat degradation
2E Stream
channelization/ditching
2F Riparian
zone removal (Agriculture/development)
2J Alteration
of surface runoff patterns (flow/temp regimes)
2K Transportation
routes (fords and crossings)
Biological/ consumptive uses
5A Predation
from introduced species. This has been
linked to extirpation in
other states (see comments and citation above).
5H Isolated
populations (low gene flow)
5O Bait
collection. A potential threat due to
the colorful appearance of this
minnow.
Siltation and increased turbidity
1C Road
construction
1E Silviculture
1F Recreational
activities (atv, horseback riding)
CLASS Actinopterygii
Sicklefin Chub Macrhybopsis meeki
Federal Heritage
GRank SRank GRank SRank
Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)
N H G3 S1 G3 N
G-Trend Decreasing
G-Trend The range
of the sicklefin chub is confined to the Missouri River and Mississippi
Comment River
below the Missouri River confluence (Pflieger 1997). The species has been
reported to be
relatively abundant in portions of the Missouri River, but much
less common in the Mississippi River (Pflieger 1997, Etnier
and Starnes 1993).
In the Mississippi River, it occurs primarily from western
Kentucky (below
mouth of Ohio River) north to the mouth of the Missouri
River. Records are rare
in the lower Mississippi River and are thought to be
accidental occurrences (Ross
2001). With the exception of Missouri, the sicklefin
chub is listed as imperiled
to critically imperiled in states throughout its range
(Natureserve 2008). It was
listed as a federal candidate species in 1995 (U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service
1995), and is listed as Endangered by the Kentucky State
Nature Preserves
Commission (2005).
The American Fisheries Society lists the species as
vulnerable based on present or threatened destruction, modification,
or reduction
of the species’ habitat or range (Jelks et al. 2008).
S-Trend Decreasing
S-Trend Very few
records are available for this species in the Mississippi River in western
Comment
Kentucky. This has been due mostly to
difficulties with capturing small benthic
fishes in large river habitats. Etnier and Starnes (1993) suggested that the
species
is probably more
common in the Mississippi River than records indicate. Results
of recent surveys
using benthic trawls in the Mississippi River support this
premise to some extent, but additional data are needed to
assess long-term
population trends; short-term data suggest that this
species is uncommon and
may be declining (Herzog 2004).
Habitat / This is
a small, benthic minnow limited to the turbid waters of the main channel
Life of
the Mississippi River in western Kentucky.
Recent benthic trawl surveys
History (2000-2001)
produced individuals at a single location at Wolf Island (Herzog
2004). According to
Herzog (2004), sicklefin and sturgeon chubs generally
utilize similar habitats during particular times of the
year (e.g., Febrary-March),
but partition themselves by age class, size, and species at
other times. The
sicklefin chub apparently occupies deeper and swifter water
than the sturgeon
chub. Like the
sturgeon chub, it has characteristics typical of fishes adapted to
low light conditions of large turbid rivers, including
reduced eyes partially
covered by skin and well-developed external taste
buds. The food habits of the
sicklefin chub are poorly known, but it is probably a
bottom feeder relying on
taste to locate its food (Pflieger 1997). Other aspects of its biology are
unknown, but it is thought to spawn in the spring based on
young-of-year
individuals in collections taken during July from the
Missouri River (Etnier and
Starnes 1993, Pflieger 1997).
Key Records
for this species are available for the Lower Mississippi-Memphis (HUC8
Habitat 08010100)
and Lower Ohio (05140206) watershed units; in the latter unit, two
historic records are available, including one from the
lower Ohio and one from
the Mississippi River at Cairo, Illinois (Burr and Warren
1986). Sections of the
Mississippi River where this species has been found are
impacted by channel
modifications made to enhance barge traffic. No reach of the Mississippi River
or its tributaries in western Kentucky are rated as fully
supporting aquatic life.
Most (64%) offer only partial support, while 36% are
considered non-supportive
(Kentucky Division of Water 2002).
Guilds Large
rivers in current.
Statewide Sicklefin_Chub.pdf
Map
Conservation Issues
Aquatic habitat degradation
2A Navigational
dredging/Commercial dredging
2B Gravel/sand
removal or quarrying (e.g., mineral excavation)
2C Construction/Operation
of impoundments (migration barrier)
2G Water
level fluctuations
2J Alteration
of surface runoff patterns (flow/temp regimes)
CLASS Actinopterygii
Spring Cavefish Forbesichthys agassizii
Federal Heritage
GRank SRank GRank SRank
Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)
N N G4G5 S4S5 G4 S4
G-Trend Decreasing
G-Trend The spring
cavefish has a localized distribution, occurring in springs and caves
Comment from the
Highland Rim of the Tennessee River drainage in Tennessee, middle and
lower Cumberland
drainage, upper Barren Green drainages of Kentucky, Ohio
and Mississippi River tributaries near their junction in
western Kentucky and
southern Illinois, and a single population west of the
Mississippi River in Missouri
(Etnier and Starnes
1993, Pfleiger 1997). Some populations
are now considered
threatened or vulnerable, prompting the American Fisheries
Society to add this
species to its list of imperiled freshwater and diadromous
fishes of North
America (Jelks et al. 2008). It is critically imperiled in
Missouri and Illinois along
the northern and western periphery of its range
(Natureserve 2008).
S-Trend Unknown
S-Trend The
spring cavefish has been reported to be occasional and at times abundant in
Comment caves,
springs, and spring-fed streams near the Ohio River, Livingston County,
through Land Between the Lakes, Red River (Cumberland River
drainage), and
the Barren River drainage to Mammoth Cave; it is uncommon
in the Pond and
Middle Green River drainages (Burr and Warren 1986). Most known
occurrences are on private land. A comprehensive survey of this species in
Kentucky needs to be conducted to identify and protect
critical habitat.
Habitat / This
species is a facultative cave dweller of the Highland Rim and Shawnee Hills
Life physiographic
areas. It occurs in cave streams and
occasionally around the
History mouths
of springs and in spring-fed swamps and small streams (Burr and Warren
1986). Most known life history information is based
on populations in southern
Illinois. Adults
apparently spawn in subterranean habitats during late winter
(Smith and Welch 1978).
Fecundity averages about 100 ova per female, and
sexual maturity is reached at age 1 (Poulson 1963); maximum
life span is
estimated at 3 years (Smith and Welch 1978). Hill (1968) reported a diet of
midge larvae, tiny worms, and microcrustaceans. This study also documented
cannibalism among individuals when residing in subterranean
habitats.
Key This
species is known from caves, springs, and spring-fed streams in the
Habitat following
HUC8 watersheds: Lower Ohio-Bay (05140203), Tradewater
(05140205), Lower Cumberland (05130205), Kentucky Lake
(06040005), Pond
(05110006), Middle Green (05110003), Red (05130206), and
Barren (05110002).
Habitat conditions fully
supporting aquatic life range from 20% in the Pond
River drainage to 93% in the Barren River drainage. Apart from caves and
springs contained within the boundaries of Mammoth Cave
National Park and
Land Between the Lakes National Recreation Area, most
habitats supporting
populations of this species are on private land.
Guilds Cave
streams, Lowland Streams in slackwater.
Statewide Spring_Cavefish.pdf
Map
Conservation Issues
Aquatic habitat degradation
2H Wetland
loss/drainage/alteration
2I Periodic
cessation or removal of spring flows or seeps
2J Alteration
of surface runoff patterns (flow/temp regimes)
Biological/ consumptive uses
5H Isolated populations
(low gene flow)
Point and non-point source pollution
4B Waste
water discharge (e.g., sewage treatment)
4E Agricultural
runoff – including fertilizers/animal waste, herbicides, pesticides
4G Chemical
spills and contaminants (applied and accidental)
4H Confined
animal operations
Siltation and increased turbidity
1D Urbanization/Development General Construction
CLASS Actinopterygii
Sturgeon Chub Macrhybopsis gelida
Federal Heritage
GRank SRank GRank SRank
Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)
N H G3 S1 G3 N
G-Trend Unknown
G-Trend The
sturgeon chub occurs in the Missouri River drainage and the main channel of
Comment the
Mississippi River below the confluence of the Missouri River (Pflieger 1997).
It is more
widespread in the Missouri River drainage than the sicklefin chub
(Etnier and Starnes 1993, Jenkins 1980). Like the sicklefin
chub, it has been
reported to be relatively abundant in portions of the
Missouri River, but much less
common in the
Mississippi River (Pflieger 1997, Etnier and Starnes 1993). The
species is rare in the lower Mississippi River below the
confluence of the
Missouri River south to Louisiana (Etnier and Starnes 1993,
Burr and Warren
1986, Robison and Buchanan 1988). The sturgeon chub is listed as critically
imperiled in states east of the Mississippi River
(Illinois, Kentucky, and
Tennessee), vulnerable in Missouri, possibly extirpated in
Iowa, and imperiled to
critically imperiled in states containing the upper
Missouri River drainage
(Natureserve 2008).
It was listed as a federal candidate species in 1995 (U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service 1995), and is listed as
Endangered by the Kentucky
State Nature Preserves Commission (2005). The American Fisheries Society lists
the species as
vulnerable based on present or threatened destruction,
modification, or reduction of the species’ habitat or range
(Jelks et al. 2008).
S-Trend Unknown
S-Trend Like the
sicklefin chub, very few records are available for this species in the
Comment Mississippi
River in western Kentucky (Burr and Warren 1986, Herzog 2004).
This has been due mostly to difficulties with capturing
small benthic fishes in
large river habitats.
The species was captured recently along with the sicklefin
chub in benthic trawl samples in the Mississippi River at
Wolf Island in western
Kentucky; short-term data suggest that this species is
uncommon, but not rare,
and that its numbers are stable (Herzog 2004).
Habitat / This is
a small, benthic minnow limited to the turbid waters of the main channel
Life of
the Mississippi River in western Kentucky.
Recent benthic trawl surveys
History (2000-2001)
produced sturgeon and sicklefin chubs at a single location at Wolf
Island (Herzog 2004).
According to Herzog (2004), both species generally utilize
similar habitats
during particular times of the year (e.g., February-March), but
partition themselves by age class, size, and species at
other times. The sturgeon
chub apparently occupies shallower depths (68% captured at
less than 2 m) than
the sicklefin chub (69% captured at greater than 4 m). Like the sicklefin chub, it
has
characteristics typical of fishes adapted to low light conditions of large
turbid
rivers, including
reduced eyes partially covered by skin and numerous taste buds
covering the head,
body, and fins; in addition, the sturgeon chub has peculiar
keeled dorsolateral scales (Etnier and Starnes; Pflieger
1997). The food habits of
the sicklefin chub are poorly known, but it is probably a
bottom feeder relying on
taste to locate its
food (Pflieger 1997). Pflieger (1997)
surmised that the
spawning habits of this species are probably like those of
the speckled chub
(eggs deposited in deep water in swift current), since the
two species are known
to hybridize.
Spawning is thought to occur in late spring or early summer, based
on tubercled males taken in May and late June (Robison and
Buchanan 1988).
Key Records
for this species are available for the Lower Mississippi-Memphis (HUC8
Habitat 08010100)
and Lower Ohio (05140206) watershed units; the latter record is
actually from the Mississippi River at Cairo, Illinois
(Burr and Warren 1986).
Sections of the Mississippi River where this species has
been found are impacted
by channel modifications made to enhance barge
traffic. No reach of the
Mississippi River or its tributaries in western Kentucky
are rated as fully
supporting aquatic life.
Most (64%) offer only partial support, while 36% are
considered non-supportive (Kentucky Division of Water
2002).
Guilds Large
rivers in current.
Statewide Sturgeon_Chub.pdf
Map
Conservation Issues
Aquatic habitat degradation
2A Navigational
dredging/Commercial dredging
2B Gravel/sand
removal or quarrying (e.g., mineral excavation)
2C Construction/Operation
of impoundments (migration barrier)
2G Water
level fluctuations
2J Alteration
of surface runoff patterns (flow/temp regimes)
Becker, G. C. 1983. Fishes of Wisconsin.
Boschung, H. T., Jr., and R. L. Mayden. 2004. Fishes of
Burr, B.
M., and M. L. Warren. 1986. A Distributional Atlas of
Clay, W. M. 1975.
The fishes of
Clemmer,
G. H. 1980. Notropis amnis Hubbs
and Greene, pallid shiner. Page 224 in D.S. Lee, et al., editor. Atlas of North American freshwater fishes.
Etnier, D. A., and W. C. Starnes.
1993. The Fishes of
Gilbert, C. R. 1980. Clinostomus elongatus
(Kirtland), redside dace. Page 148 in D.S. Lee, et al., editor. Atlas of North American freshwater fishes.
Herzog, D. P. 2004. Capture
efficiency and habitat use of sturgeon chub (Macrhybopsis gelida) and sicklefin
chub (Macrhybopsis meeki) in the
Hill, L. G. 1969. Feeding and food habits of the spring cavefish, Chologaster agassizi. American
Holm, E.,
M. Burridge, and N. Mandrak.
2009. The ROM Field Guide to the Freshwater Fishes of
Jelks, H. L., S. J. Walsh, N. M. Burkhead, S. Contreras-Balderas, E. Diaz-Pardo, D. A. Hendrickson, J. Lyons, N. E. Mandrak, F. McCormick, J. S. Nelson, S. P. Platania, B. A. Porter, C. B. Renaud, J. J. Schmitter-Soto, E. B. Taylor, and M. L. Warren, Jr. 2008. Conservation status of imperiled North American freshwater and diadromous fishes. Fisheries 33:372-407.
Jenkins, R. E. 1980. Hybopsis gelida
(Girard), sturgeon chub. Page 185 in D.S. Lee, et al., editor. Atlas of
North American freshwater fishes.
Koster, W. J. 1939. Some phases of the life history and relationships of the cyprinid, Clinostomus elongatus. Copeia 1939: 201-208.
Kristmundsdottir, A. Y., and J. R. Gold. 1996. Systematics of the blacktail shiner (Cyprinella venusta) inferred from analysis of mitochondrial DNA. Copeia 4: 773-783.
Kwak, T. J. 1991. Ecological characteristics of a northern population of the Pallid Shiner. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 120: 106-115.
Lee, D. S.
and C. R. Gilbert. 1980. Lota lota (Linnaeus), burbot. Page 487 in D.S. Lee, et
al., editor. Atlas of North American freshwater
fishes.
Lyons, J.,
P. A. Cochran and D. Fago.
Meade, L.
D. L. McNeely, L. Kornman, and A. Surmont.
1986. New records of the redside dace, Clinostomus elongatus,
with comments on its habitat requirements. Transactions of the
Minckley, W. L., J. E. Johnson, J.
N. Rinne, and S. E. Willoughby. 1970. Foods of
buffalofishes, genus Ictiobus, in central
Natureserve. 2008. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.0. NatureServe, Arlington, VA. U.S.A. Available http://www.natureserve.org/explorer. (Accessed: March, 2010)
Page, L. M.
and B. M. Burr. 1991. A field guide to freshwater fishes of North
America north of
Pearson, W.
D. and L. A. Krumholz. 1984. Distribution and
status of
Pflieger, W. R. 1997. The Fishes of Missouri, Second Edition. Missouri Department of Conservation, Jefferson City, USA.
Piller, K. R., H. L. Bart, Jr., and
J. A. Tipton. 2003. Spawning in the black buffalo Ictiobus
Poulson,
T. 1963. Cave Adaptation in Amblyopsid Fishes.
American
Robison, H.
W., and T. M. Buchanan. 1988. Fishes of
Ross, S. T. 2001.
The Inland Fishes of
Schwartz,
F. J. and J. Norvell. 1958. Food, growth, and
sexual dimorphism of the redside dace, Clinostomus elongatus
(Kirtland), in Linesville Creek, Crawford County,
Scott, W.
B., and E. J. Crossman. 1973. Freshwater fishes of
Shute, J. R. 1980. Ictiobus
Skelly, T. M. and M. J. Sule. 1983. The pallid shiner, Notropis amnis Hubbs
and Greene, a rare
Smith, P. W. 1979. The fishes of Illinois.
Smith, P.
W. and N. M. Welch. 1978. A summary of the life history and distribution
of the spring cavefish, Chologaster agassizi
Putnam, with population estimates for the species in southern
Thomas, M. R. 2006. Distribution, habitat, and
conservation status of Species of Greatest Conservation Need in Kentucky. Interim Annual Performance Report for State
and Tribal Wildlife Grant: T-9-RSI-1, Ichthyofauna Resources of
Warren, M.
L., Jr. and B. M. Burr. 1988. Reassessment of the