Attached Files
-
CABJ_208_B_2008_10_Cyprinella_spiloptera.jpg 126.03KB
14 downloads
-
CABJ_208_B_2008_5_Cyprinella_spiloptera.jpg 114.43KB
6 downloads
Opinions on this Cyprinella
Started by
Guest_ashtonmj_*
, Apr 14 2009 08:37 AM
13 replies to this topic
#1
Guest_ashtonmj_*
Guest_ashtonmj_*
-
- Guests
Posted 14 April 2009 - 08:37 AM
Caught from 2nd order reach of Cabin John Creek, Montgomery Co. Maryland in 2008. Sorry, no anal fin. In the first picture the lowest specimen is of particular interest. Discuss...
#2
Guest_fundulus_*
Guest_fundulus_*
-
- Guests
Posted 14 April 2009 - 09:20 AM
From growing up near there, and hearing stories from my father, I'm amazed that any fish are still in Cabin John Creek. But, most of the fish pictured look like spotfins. Your fish of interest is unusual with that much rusty pigmentation on the fins. It looks more like a Tallapoosa shiner than anything else, which would be hard to believe.
#3
Guest_ashtonmj_*
Guest_ashtonmj_*
-
- Guests
Posted 14 April 2009 - 09:48 AM
While anything is possible in this age of fish movement, I'd say 'no' on the Tallapoosa. The first three fish in the multi specimen picture really aren't the targets, their probably gravid females, it's the big boy at the bottom and the single fish I'm questioning.
Sea Lamprey have found their way back into the creek after many many years of being absent. Cyprinella in general isn't a bad sign either.
Sea Lamprey have found their way back into the creek after many many years of being absent. Cyprinella in general isn't a bad sign either.
#4
Guest_fundulus_*
Guest_fundulus_*
-
- Guests
Posted 14 April 2009 - 10:23 AM
Tallapoosa isn't a serious suggestion. I'd guess that any Cyprinella in this creek would have to be spotfin or satinfin.
#5
Guest_sandtiger_*
Guest_sandtiger_*
-
- Guests
Posted 14 April 2009 - 12:44 PM
They appear to be spotfins to me with the three fish in the first picture being females and the last being a male.
#6
Guest_eLeMeNt_*
Guest_eLeMeNt_*
-
- Guests
Posted 14 April 2009 - 09:33 PM
Borrow a microscope from Ellen and check out those anal fin rays.
The mainstem of Cabin John is actually pretty diverse. Long ears have also made their way up into Cabin John. I've got a nice colored up male in the lab that we got out of Cabin John last year. We also found a single rosyface shiner (you'll see it in the data Rachel sent) when we were out sampling with MDE a few miles downstream of the watermain break. We vouchered that guy if you ever want to see it.
The mainstem of Cabin John is actually pretty diverse. Long ears have also made their way up into Cabin John. I've got a nice colored up male in the lab that we got out of Cabin John last year. We also found a single rosyface shiner (you'll see it in the data Rachel sent) when we were out sampling with MDE a few miles downstream of the watermain break. We vouchered that guy if you ever want to see it.
#7
Guest_ashtonmj_*
Guest_ashtonmj_*
-
- Guests
Posted 15 April 2009 - 06:20 AM
That would be easy if they weren't pictures taken in the field six months ago. This is the only thing that exists as evidence along with the identification on the data sheet. Thank you for vouchering that, bring it out to New Germany. That is the point though... the photo vouchering doesn't work if 1) the procedure isn't followed and you take multiple pictures of one fish and 2) you don't take a picture of the diagnostic feature (i.e. anal fin). You didn't give your opinion either.
#8
Guest_eLeMeNt_*
Guest_eLeMeNt_*
-
- Guests
Posted 16 April 2009 - 07:57 PM
I don't think you can be 100% sure without seein the anal fin rays. What did Rich think?
As for my educated guess goes....the large picture of the single specimen on the right appears like a satinfin due to the shape of the body and snout. I think the bottom fish in the left picture that has the color in it may be a spotfin. I'm basing this off of my own experience. I've vouchered large breeding satinfins that I've verified in the lab with anal fin ray counts and none of them had that much yellow coloration in their fins. The other specimens I think are totally up in the air. We really need to voucher a bunch of satinfins and spotfins and compare them side by side.
This is what I'm used to seeing in a typical breeding male satinfin (this guys from Northwest Branch):
satinfinshiner.jpg 226.27KB
3 downloads
As for my educated guess goes....the large picture of the single specimen on the right appears like a satinfin due to the shape of the body and snout. I think the bottom fish in the left picture that has the color in it may be a spotfin. I'm basing this off of my own experience. I've vouchered large breeding satinfins that I've verified in the lab with anal fin ray counts and none of them had that much yellow coloration in their fins. The other specimens I think are totally up in the air. We really need to voucher a bunch of satinfins and spotfins and compare them side by side.
This is what I'm used to seeing in a typical breeding male satinfin (this guys from Northwest Branch):
satinfinshiner.jpg 226.27KB
3 downloads
#9
Guest_daveneely_*
Guest_daveneely_*
-
- Guests
Posted 20 April 2009 - 10:50 AM
...photo vouchering doesn't work if 1) the procedure isn't followed and you take multiple pictures of one fish and 2) you don't take a picture of the diagnostic feature (i.e. anal fin)...
Ummm, so you're only taking a single pic of each fish? What if there's more than one character that you need to verify an ID, particularly ones that may not show up in a lateral shot...?
#10
Guest_ashtonmj_*
Guest_ashtonmj_*
-
- Guests
Posted 21 April 2009 - 04:47 PM
Don't shoot the messenger but the necessary pictures, so yes it can be more than one, of five individual specimens per sampling crew is the gist. Multiple pictures with no unique identifier, though it was necessary, of multiple fish was the problem. So a lateral shot of a yellow bullhead should include a shot of the barbels IMO at the least. It hasn't been really thought out of enough because how it was practiced was left up to investigator error. I think it was a memo from PA or WV we were following on photo vouchering. I side on the caution of the jar.
...one cause for error I believe is because we've changed our method a little too much each year rather than sticking to something for a few years. I'm already getting a well deserved, professional earful from Starnes because of so much of the un or poorly vouchered specimens, e.g. these specimens
...one cause for error I believe is because we've changed our method a little too much each year rather than sticking to something for a few years. I'm already getting a well deserved, professional earful from Starnes because of so much of the un or poorly vouchered specimens, e.g. these specimens
#11
Guest_gerald_*
Guest_gerald_*
-
- Guests
Posted 22 April 2009 - 08:55 AM
Another possibility is a satinfin x spotfin hybrid, although hybrids are less likely with naturally sympatric cyprinellas than with introduced ones. Jenkins & Burkhead 1994 notes a hybrid report in VA, but dismisses it as possibly a non-hybrid with aberrant fin ray count. C.lutrensis on the other hand hybridizes with most any cyprinella.
[quote name='eLeMeNt' date='Apr 16 2009, 08:57 PM' post='57135']
I don't think you can be 100% sure without seein the anal fin rays. What did Rich think?
As for my educated guess goes....the large picture of the single specimen on the right appears like a satinfin due to the shape of the body and snout. I think the bottom fish in the left picture that has the color in it may be a spotfin. I'm basing this off of my own experience. I've vouchered large breeding satinfins that I've verified in the lab with anal fin ray counts and none of them had that much yellow coloration in their fins. The other specimens I think are totally up in the air. We really need to voucher a bunch of satinfins and spotfins and compare them side by side.
[quote name='eLeMeNt' date='Apr 16 2009, 08:57 PM' post='57135']
I don't think you can be 100% sure without seein the anal fin rays. What did Rich think?
As for my educated guess goes....the large picture of the single specimen on the right appears like a satinfin due to the shape of the body and snout. I think the bottom fish in the left picture that has the color in it may be a spotfin. I'm basing this off of my own experience. I've vouchered large breeding satinfins that I've verified in the lab with anal fin ray counts and none of them had that much yellow coloration in their fins. The other specimens I think are totally up in the air. We really need to voucher a bunch of satinfins and spotfins and compare them side by side.
#12
Guest_Dustin_*
Guest_Dustin_*
-
- Guests
Posted 22 April 2009 - 09:09 AM
Satinfins can have yellow fins though like the one I caught in the Pee Dee drainage in Chesterfield County, SC shown here:
http://forum.nanfa.o...?showtopic=5378
http://forum.nanfa.o...?showtopic=5378
#13
Guest_gerald_*
Guest_gerald_*
-
- Guests
Posted 22 April 2009 - 10:19 AM
I woulda guessed C.nivea on your PeeDee fish Dustin (5th pic) . Long snout, horizontal mouth, big yellow dorsal, 8 anal rays, minimal dark scale edging. NICE job on capturing fin rays in that photo! Here in the Neuse and Cape Fear i see traces of yellow in analostana (especially on bigger, older fish), but never as much yellow as nivea gets. Gerald
Satinfins can have yellow fins though like the one I caught in the Pee Dee drainage in Chesterfield County, SC shown here:
http://forum.nanfa.o...?showtopic=5378
#14
Guest_eLeMeNt_*
Guest_eLeMeNt_*
-
- Guests
Posted 23 April 2009 - 04:52 PM
Satinfins can have yellow fins though like the one I caught in the Pee Dee drainage in Chesterfield County, SC shown here:
http://forum.nanfa.o...?showtopic=5378
Sweet pictures.
Yea... I've yet to see one with that much yellow up here. I wouldn't be surprised if we found them though. I think it just goes to show how important counting those anal fin rays is when ID'ing these fish.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
NANFA Youtube Channel 
