Jump to content


Redhorse ID


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_IsaacSzabo_*

Guest_IsaacSzabo_*
  • Guests

Posted 07 October 2012 - 03:03 PM

From the Buffalo River in AR. Black, Golden, River, and Shorthead are known to occur here. The morphometrics don't quite match my ID books, but I think it's most likely a Black (M. duquesnei). What do some of you guys more experienced with redhorse ID think?

Posted Image

#2 Michael Wolfe

Michael Wolfe
  • Board of Directors
  • North Georgia, Oconee River Drainage

Posted 07 October 2012 - 03:15 PM

I'm not one of the experts, but looking at Peterson's your fish looks just like the picture of black redhorse to me... head does not look like shorthead... tail does not look red or big enough to be river... and between golden and black, yours definitely has the longer slender caudal peduncle (and likewise the same angle around the anal fin).

What did not morphometric out for you?
Either write something worth reading or do something worth writing. - Benjamin Franklin

#3 Guest_IsaacSzabo_*

Guest_IsaacSzabo_*
  • Guests

Posted 07 October 2012 - 03:43 PM

I agree that in general it looks most like the drawing of the black redhorse in Peterson's, and, for many reasons, my overall conclusion was that it was most likely a black. However, my measurements for standard length/head length (~4.8), standard length/body depth (~5.4), and caudal peduncle length/caudal peduncle depth (~1.8) are all outside the range given for black redhorse in my ID book. Some of those measurements are closer to some of the other species known to occur here. I just thought it would be a good idea to get confirmation from some of the members here who have much more knowledge and experience with redhorse ID than I.

Edited by IsaacSzabo, 07 October 2012 - 03:47 PM.


#4 Guest_Casper_*

Guest_Casper_*
  • Guests

Posted 07 October 2012 - 06:21 PM

Issac...
It looks like a sleek Black to my limited skill. A mature River Red would be very robust with big red fins. A Golden also appears to be more robust with a big blocky head. I cannot speak of the Shorthead.
You need to get a "lip print".
:)
A friend and his wife are canoeing the Buffalo today, but they have no idea what a Red Horse really is to us fishfolk.

#5 Guest_FirstChAoS_*

Guest_FirstChAoS_*
  • Guests

Posted 07 October 2012 - 07:20 PM

A friend and his wife are canoeing the Buffalo today, but they have no idea what a Red Horse really is to us fishfolk.


Yes, they're not like other horses. They never get quite big enough to put a saddle on.

#6 Guest_daveneely_*

Guest_daveneely_*
  • Guests

Posted 07 October 2012 - 07:37 PM

Unusually slender M. duquesnei. Nothing else in Arkansas would have the combination of a) a distinct LL with a mid-40s scale count, b) a uniformly slate-colored caudal fin, and c) concave distal dorsal fin margin, regardless of all the other characters that point to duquesnei.

Funky light refraction on the dorsum, but otherwise a nice photo!

#7 Guest_IsaacSzabo_*

Guest_IsaacSzabo_*
  • Guests

Posted 07 October 2012 - 09:40 PM

Thanks for the ID confirmation guys and especially for the detailed response Dave. My ID skills for many suckers beyond the genus level have been lacking for a while, and I recently decided it was time to start to change that.

Casper, the water level in the Buffalo is still extremely low and considered unfloatable. I suspect your friends may do more walking than floating, but the scenery should still be nice!

#8 Guest_bbrown_*

Guest_bbrown_*
  • Guests

Posted 07 October 2012 - 10:14 PM

As others have noted, the narrow caudal peduncle, long slender body and high lateral line scale count ( often 47 - 48 in OK) suggest black redhorse. If you can count pelvic rays, blacks have 10, everything else 9.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users