Jump to content


A few shiners


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_drewish_*

Guest_drewish_*
  • Guests

Posted 08 January 2008 - 10:05 PM

I finally got around to getting some pics from our last trip to the Rivanna River.

Rosefin Shiner, Lythrurus ardens
Attached File  rosefin.jpg   15.59KB   5 downloads

Rosyface Shiner, Notropis rubellus
Attached File  rosyface.jpg   13.84KB   1 downloads

Comely Shiner, Notropis amoenus
Attached File  comely.jpg   13.58KB   1 downloads

#2 Guest_NateTessler13_*

Guest_NateTessler13_*
  • Guests

Posted 08 January 2008 - 11:36 PM

Nice pictures. Do you an editing program? They are good, but look like they could use a touch up of contrast/brightness. But you got great shots of them.

#3 Guest_drewish_*

Guest_drewish_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 January 2008 - 12:03 AM

You mean like this ?

Attached File  rosefin2.jpg   30.2KB   2 downloads

#4 Guest_ashtonmj_*

Guest_ashtonmj_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 January 2008 - 07:05 AM

They look so much nicer, and easier to ID :biggrin: than they did when we pulled them out of the water.
Does anyone one want to weigh in, chastise me, and maybe change my mind, on the ID I gave for comely shiner? Melanophores underneath on the chin, dorsal fin (8 rays) compressed trick worked, somewhat lack of caudal spot, dusky snout.

#5 Guest_drewish_*

Guest_drewish_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 January 2008 - 10:57 AM

Man, my monitor at home sucks! They do look so much darker on a real monitor here at work.

I was having issues taking the pics so I probably blocked all my light.

I did more digging last night in FoVA and I'm pretty sure it is comely. I just took a couple when Bernie and I went after our trip to confirm. They were a lot easier to ID than when we went.

OH! I don't remember if I told you but we had about 7-8 shiner species in one seine pull.

#6 Guest_ashtonmj_*

Guest_ashtonmj_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 January 2008 - 11:02 AM

I'm pretty sure they are too. I'd only seen about two dozen before that day though and small silvery minnows aren't my strong suite. I do remeber having that in a couple of the seine hauls. Such an unoccupied benthos!!!!

#7 Guest_daveneely_*

Guest_daveneely_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 January 2008 - 12:30 PM

Did you preserve any? I've never seen amoenus with dorsolateral scales like that - I'd be much more tempted to call it telescopus. Yeah, I know, Jenkins & Burkhead shows telescopus as only known from the way upper James... but it's been 15 years since Jenk's book came out and introduced species can move a lot in that time...

Minimally, it's worth having a vouchered specimen somewhere.

#8 Guest_drewish_*

Guest_drewish_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 January 2008 - 12:50 PM

I have a few live ones. We were catching bunches of Roanoke darters from the same place so I know what you mean about introduced species in that watershed.

I don't have the resources to preserve. Is there an easy way to do so and who wants it?

#9 Guest_fundulus_*

Guest_fundulus_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 January 2008 - 12:54 PM

I took the liberty of downloading and photoshopping the "comely shiner" photo. I've never seen a comely shiner so I can't judge if it is one, but in a brighter image the fish certainly looks a lot more like a telescope shiner.

Attached File  VirginiaTelescopeMaybe.jpg   14.86KB   1 downloads

#10 Guest_ashtonmj_*

Guest_ashtonmj_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 January 2008 - 01:07 PM

The dorsal lateral scales are exactly what was bothering me (They're HUGE!). I don't have our species list on hand but I thought I recalled calling out N. telescopus and when I saw the pictures today that is what it struck me as, especially after seeing Bruce's photo. If you can get grain alcohol you can preserve :mrgreen: I can bring formalin with me and labels next time we go out. The snout just isn't blunt enough, the body not long enough, and that lateral line takes such a dive it says telescopus more and more to me.

I left my personal vouchers in TN. I had to pick between a half a closet of shells or a couple jars of dead fish, the fist lost.

#11 Guest_teleost_*

Guest_teleost_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 January 2008 - 01:19 PM

I like to post comparative photos... Notropis telescopus Telescope Shiner photographed form SE Kentucky last summer above Drew's fish.

Attached File  Notropis_telescopus_Telescope_Shiner.jpg   16.1KB   0 downloads
Posted Image

I've never seen a Comely shiner so I have no input.

#12 Guest_drewish_*

Guest_drewish_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 January 2008 - 01:36 PM

Matt, we called them comely, probably more so because of location. I think we both said telescope til we looked at the books.

So if it is indeed telescope, we could have both telescope AND comely at that location?

#13 Guest_ashtonmj_*

Guest_ashtonmj_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 January 2008 - 01:40 PM

Quite likely, because I remember more elongated looking shiners with the chin pigment but it wasn't that guy in the picture. The field sheet is on my desk at home I'll take a look.

#14 Guest_daveneely_*

Guest_daveneely_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 January 2008 - 02:23 PM

It's certainly possible that you got both.

from http://www.flmnh.ufl...ts/R1NE1998.htm

"In 1997, Mike [Pinder, with VDGIF] and Paul Bugas, Region 4 Fisheries Manager, continued survey of upper James River streams for roughhead shiner, a state species of special concern. Of the four historical sites known for roughheads, telescope shiners have taken over, fulfilling the prediction of Bob Jenkins back in the 1970's. Mike will continue surveying sites in the 1998 field season."

I've checked online databases for fish collections at VIMS and NMNH and didn't find any records from the lower portion of the drainage, or even any near where you picked them up. It might be worth dropping either Mike Pinder or Mark Kopeny (an ichthyologist at UVA) an email and asking if they are aware of this population, or if telescope shiners are not even more widely distributed on the Piedmont by now...

#15 Guest_drewish_*

Guest_drewish_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 January 2008 - 02:32 PM

I will look in my tank and see if there is another look-a-like.

I'll also send a clearer and larger picture to Mike Pinder and see what he says. I've already promised him pics from my trips but that was pre-permit.

#16 Guest_drewish_*

Guest_drewish_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 January 2008 - 03:02 PM

Decided to call Mike and he basically said it would be interesting but not surprising that telescopes would make it down the James. I will be sending him higher resolution pics and he will forward to the appropriate folks.

Will let you guys know what I find out.

#17 Guest_ashtonmj_*

Guest_ashtonmj_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 January 2008 - 04:46 PM

Nabbed the data sheet and just saw I wrote Comely shiner (?) Telescope shiner (huh?). Probably didn't include that in the list when I PM'ed it to you because I couldn't remeber them, looked at the book, and saw my comment and thought "no way".

#18 Guest_fritz_*

Guest_fritz_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 January 2008 - 06:52 PM

Nabbed the data sheet and just saw I wrote Comely shiner (?) Telescope shiner (huh?). Probably didn't include that in the list when I PM'ed it to you because I couldn't remeber them, looked at the book, and saw my comment and thought "no way".


definitely not comelys. agree with telescope ID.

#19 Guest_drewish_*

Guest_drewish_*
  • Guests

Posted 10 January 2008 - 11:49 AM

Fritz,
What makes them "definitely" not comely? I know the scales were mentioned previously, is that what you are going by?

#20 Guest_fritz_*

Guest_fritz_*
  • Guests

Posted 13 January 2008 - 01:27 PM

Fritz,
What makes them "definitely" not comely? I know the scales were mentioned previously, is that what you are going by?


Sorry for taking so long. I am big into gestalt identification - just know what it is but sometimes hard to articulate.

comelys are more elongate and slender than the telescope. and as mentioned earlier the dorsolateral scales are different. The origin of the dorsal fin is significantly behind the pelvic fin origin in the comely. In telescope is basically directly above it. The dorsal fin in the telescope is larger and more pointed than in the comely. the comely has more pointed snout - rounder in telescope. lateral line is usually unpigmented in the comely. and on and on. hope this helps.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users