Big Eye Shiner?

I suspect these are Bigeye Shiners Notropis boops . Am I correct? S Indiana capture.


 BIGEYE_1.jpg   17.25KB   0 downloads


 BIGEYE_2.jpg   31.83KB   0 downloads


 BIGEYE_3.jpg   19.13KB   0 downloads

That's a tough one, unless it's splatted against the glass a la' Teleost.

What you should check is if the fish have black choromatophores in the jaw, in addition to the nose and through the eye.

Else, take a look at the popeye shiner, N. ariommus or the striped shiner, L. chrysocephalus. The first and second photos could be striped shiner, although there don't seem to be enough scales above the lateral stripe.

It gets even worse when you get into the Cumberland and Tennessee. Man, I hate ID'ing shiners in those systems.

FWIW, and everyone does this (I think this is what you meant by fun name)... The name is pronounced bo-Ops.

While I agree it is way more fun to say like "poop", and occassionally I'm want to do, if you find yourself in a circle of folks who take themselves too seriously, you may want to reserve the right to either pronounciation

Todd

At very first glance I saw the same thing as Todd, that it might be N. ariommus or N. telescopus. But I don't see any "stitching" pattern of chromatophores along the lateral line. The basicaudal spot is consistent with Luxilus chrysocephalus, and the general body color and pattern are similar although the fish isn't quite robust enough. So I dunno. Definitely not a starhead topminnow, anyway...

That's a tough one, unless it's splatted against the glass a la' Teleost.

What you should check is if the fish have black choromatophores in the jaw, in addition to the nose and through the eye.

Else, take a look at the popeye shiner, N. ariommus or the striped shiner, L. chrysocephalus. The first and second photos could be striped shiner, although there don't seem to be enough scales above the lateral stripe.

It gets even worse when you get into the Cumberland and Tennessee. Man, I hate ID'ing shiners in those systems.

FWIW, and everyone does this (I think this is what you meant by fun name)... The name is pronounced bo-Ops.

While I agree it is way more fun to say like "poop", and occasionally I'm want to do, if you find yourself in a circle of folks who take themselves too seriously, you may want to reserve the right to either pronounciation

Todd

Todd,
Yeah I took about 100 photos of these things and this is the best I could come up with, after lots of cropping photofixing etc...Little shinny fish are impossible to photograph! I need to make a little ID tank. Maybe I need to just get one out and photo it. Is that how I need to ID these? Get them out and use a magnifying glass and have them say "AHHH"? I looked at the possibility of them being Popeye. They don't seem to have THAT big of an eye. The mouth doesn't extend past the eye origin, but just up to the eye origin. Also, take a close look at the gill structure.
This might also help ID: the dorsal is not poined, but rounded off at the top, and it has a slightly sickle shaped anal fin.
-Thom
P.S. No need to worry, I'm rarely around people who take themselves that seriously! But thanks for the heads up.

At very first glance I saw the same thing as Todd, that it might be N. ariommus or N. telescopus. But I don't see any "stitching" pattern of chromatophores along the lateral line. The basicaudal spot is consistent with Luxilus chrysocephalus, and the general body color and pattern are similar although the fish isn't quite robust enough. So I dunno. Definitely not a starhead topminnow, anyway...

I definitly don't think they are Luxilus chrysocephalus. I've caught these before and they have a much deeper body. This may be out of the telescopes range. Collected between Columbus and Bloomington, IN. (Unless they were introduced.)

Todd,
Yeah I took about 100 photos of these things and this is the best I could come up with, after lots of cropping photofixing etc...Little shinny fish are impossible to photograph! I need to make a little ID tank. Maybe I need to just get one out and photo it. Is that how I need to ID these?

With shiners, and if you REALLY want to know... Many times it's easier to fix one of them and then take a nice macro shot with them dead. The small photo tank with the "smasher" paddle in it is the way to do it live. By doing this, you'll actually have a shot at counting scales and rays or seeing proportions. They are dang hard to photograph on the fly.

Here's my two best shots I've gotten of boops. As you can see, I've done nothing with the finnage. Teleost's phototank and paddle method really are superior for that.

 bigeye_shiner_01.jpg   56.91KB   0 downloads

 bigeye_shiner_02.jpg   52.02KB   0 downloads

Todd

Many times it's easier to fix one of them

Here's my two best shots I've gotten of boops. As you can see, I've done nothing with the finnage. Teleost's phototank and paddle method really are superior for that.

Todd

How do you "fix" a specimen? Also, if those are pics of boops, I've got it wrong . I think the fish I have don't have the elongated snout shown in your pics.

Fixing is typically done with a formaldehyde solution, somewhere in the concentration of 5% - 10%. This essentially tans soft tissues by crosslinking proteins at the molecular level, and keep the tissue firm but pliable.

After seeing Todd's pictures I'm also convinced your fish aren't boops.

They do appear to be juvenile Luxilus to me. I am not certain as to which is present in your area, but I do not think these are a Notropis sp.

Dustin, you gave me the "courage" for a me-too ID on juvenile Luxilus. Up to a size of 10 cm individuals don't get that robust look of the adults, and the basicaudal spot looks better and better for Luxilus. Now I can rest easy... (I hope).

I like to use ~ 3% for ID. It doesn't burn the tissues as much. For long term storage then, I'd add another splash of formalin, and then switch them over to ethanol when I get back around to currating in the winter.

Yeah, and again, I can't rule out striped shiner from these photos. But I've resovled to never give a "positive" ID from a photo of a shiner again

Todd

Before I even read the above posts I felt strongly that it looked just like our juvenile N. Illinois Striped Shiner Luxilus chrysocephalus. Locally we have no other fish with a large eye and a distinct lemon stripe above the lateral line.

With shiners, and if you REALLY want to know... Many times it's easier to fix one of them and then take a nice macro shot with them dead. The small photo tank with the "smasher" paddle in it is the way to do it live. By doing this, you'll actually have a shot at counting scales and rays or seeing proportions. They are dang hard to photograph on the fly.

Here's my two best shots I've gotten of boops. As you can see, I've done nothing with the finnage. Teleost's phototank and paddle method really are superior for that.

Thanks for the kind words about the tanks and paddles Todd. Not to be picky but I want to let folks know that you really don't need to "smash" the fish with the paddle. Naturally you will unnecessarily harm the fish but your photo will look quite unnatural if you compress the fish. The real trick is simply keeping the fish still without smashing them. I insist that even the most fragile fish are completely unharmed if handled properly. Extremely hot days can harm delicate fish, if you don't want to harm them, simply wait until the air/water temp cools down a bit.

Notropis boops from Southern Illinois


Is it bew-Ops or bow-Ops?

Sorry, I meant "smash" in a tongue-n-cheeky kind of way. Uland's way has it down. This is the least invasive way I've seen to get a quality photo for identification purposes.

Is it bew-Ops or bow-Ops?

bow-Ops.

Yeah, I think a lot of you are realizing that the words are Latin, not English I don't know the absolute rules, but I've made some observations.

Typically, the second syllable recieves the emphasis. I think one good way to illustrate this is from (of all the things) Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure concerning the man known as Socrates. Aside from Bill and Ted's "so-crates", you would know in English we pronounce it "Sock-ra-tees". But you'll notice that Socrates introduces himself to our wiley friends as "so-Kra-tees".

So "etheostoma" is "ee-Thee-Ost-oma" not "E-thee-Oh-stoh-ma"
So "campostoma" is "camp-Ost-oma" not "Camp-o-stoh-ma"
So "cyprinid" is "sigh-Pri-nid" not "Sip-ra-nid"
So "catostomus" is "ca-Tost-o-mus" not "Cato-sto-mus"

and etc...

And yeah, it's hard to tell how species names are said. If they were classically named (that is, not after someone's advisor) then it seems these rules apply. However, it's all bets off. Best thing to do is get around someone who's listened to some someone who listened to someone who was classically trained. We're about 2 generations away from that kind of training, it seems.

Party on Dudes,
Todd

Golly Todd, no harm done. I just don't want some new members to squeeze fish until the explode

As I remember all C's are hard.
So for example percina Is pronounced "Perkina"

Truf I would go along with Dustin and Bruce on these and think they are juvenile Luxilus and in your area thats chrysocephalus.

As I remember all C's are hard.
So for example percina Is pronounced "Perkina"

Possibly, but as far as I know everyone in the fishy world says Per sigh na.

Here are some more pics, with a rigged-up the "fish smasher" method. The plastic on the critter pen was a little scratched up, so they are still in need of work, but.... Is the consensus still juvenile Striped Shiner?

 BIGEYE_a11108.jpg   15.91KB   0 downloads


 BIGEYE_b11108.jpg   30.34KB   0 downloads


 BIGEYE_c11108.jpg   23.29KB   0 downloads


EDIT: Looking at these they aren't much better thatn the originals!!

Yeah, now that you can see the proportion of the head to the rest of the body, I'd say that's a definite on the striped shiner.

Todd

I agree