Shorthead Redhorse
#1 Guest_teleost_*
Posted 26 May 2007 - 08:58 AM
Moxostoma_macrolepidotum.jpg 44.5KB 4 downloads
Moxostoma_macrolepidotum_mouth.jpg 23.41KB 2 downloads
#2 Guest_smbass_*
Posted 29 May 2007 - 05:55 PM
#3 Guest_teleost_*
Posted 29 May 2007 - 06:39 PM
#4 Guest_teleost_*
Posted 29 May 2007 - 10:08 PM
Unless someone can tell me why this isn't a shorthead, that's what I'm calling it
#5 Guest_farmertodd_*
Posted 30 May 2007 - 06:24 AM
The first thing to look at in the Moxostoma ID Matrix is the tail color, if you're lucky to have life colors to deal with. Wether it's slate grey (such as this) or red will limit your possiblities quickly.
Based on Brian's scale count and the depth of the front lip, I'd agree it's a golden.
Great pics, as always. With the pictures Brian and Nate took this year, we should assemble a pinned Moxostoma ID gallery.
Todd
#6 Guest_teleost_*
Posted 30 May 2007 - 10:03 AM
#7 Guest_TomNear_*
Posted 30 May 2007 - 11:51 AM
I clearly need better reference material. I don't have as much as you fellas do for reference. Might anyone have suggested ID material for redhorse?
#8 Guest_farmertodd_*
Posted 30 May 2007 - 11:56 AM
The Missouri (line drawings) and Arkansas (photos) books are also very good and cost effective. I picked the Arkansas book for $10 on bookfinder.com. There's a copy right now for $17.
Those are two of the books I couldn't live without here in the Midwest.
The others would be Fishes of TN, the combo of Fishes of AL (Mayden) and The Mobile Basin (Metee), and I'm eagerly awaiting Rob Criswell's Fishes of PA. A KY book would be devine.
The Fishes of WI is online, if you haven't seen it yet... http://www.seagrant....ish/becker.html Just have to download the viewer.
Save your pennies for Fishes of VA!
Todd
#9 Guest_ashtonmj_*
Posted 30 May 2007 - 01:04 PM
#10 Guest_farmertodd_*
Posted 30 May 2007 - 01:28 PM
If I have to sit through one more talk on smallmouth bass, I'm going to roll over, puke and die.
Maybe that was their plan... Hmmmmm.
My one true favorite is some analysis my friend had to sit through. Some people (who will remain unnamed) decided that the effect of their treatment was not demonstrated at the 0.05 alpha, and decided to set the bar a little bit lower, as they felt they had definately shown an effect. The new alpha?
0.5
Flip a coin, anyone?
And even then, some of their treatments were still insignificant!
If I wanted to listen to that BS, I could just turn on the News and hear it for free
Okay, I'll take this train wreck some place else...
Todd
#11 Guest_teleost_*
Posted 30 May 2007 - 02:15 PM
I've found in some cases rather large discrepancies from a state to state or even a national description of a particular fish. Am I silly in always trying to rely on a state book or adjacent state book? Should I just use the best reference material no matter how far away the fish was found from that state?
#12 Guest_farmertodd_*
Posted 30 May 2007 - 02:42 PM
However, yeah, there's a fair amount of regional variance within a species, because, well, they're probably not the same species. Sunfish and Darters being the most notorious. This is why having both the Mayden and Mettee books are great, because you get a photo of a dead body AND a stylized drawing. With the older families though, you're not going to see that much variance.
I wouldn't say it's silly to rely on more local guides, but you should rethink hindering yourself in such a manner. You're building a case with each identification, and the more info you have to build the case, the better the case is built.
Talk your wife into a Christmas spending account where you have a set limit per year and then you're watching for the books on bookfinder for cheap, get them and have the decency to let her hide it until the big morning, if she so demands. Between my parents, wife, inlaws etc I amassed my collection in 3 years, and they still got to buy me clothes I didn't want
Todd
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users