(DRAFT) - Taxonomy
Species WOUNDFIN
Species Id ESIS252001
Date 14 MAR 96
TAXONOMY
NAME - WOUNDFIN
OTHER COMMON NAMES - WOUNDFIN; FIN and WOUND
ELEMENT CODE -
CATEGORY - Fish
PHYLUM AND SUBPHYLUM - CHORDATA,
CLASS AND SUBCLASS - OSTEICHTHYES,
ORDER AND SUBORDER - CYPRINIFORMES,
FAMILY AND SUBFAMILY - CYPRINIDAE,
GENUS AND SUBGENUS - PLAGOPTERUS,
SPECIES AND SSP - ARGENTISSIMUS,
SCIENTIFIC NAME - PLAGOPTERUS ARGENTISSIMUS
AUTHORITY -
TAXONOMY REFERENCES -
COMMENTS ON TAXONOMY -
Woundfin
Plagopterus argentissimus Cope, 1874
KINGDOM: Animal GROUP: Fish
PHYLUM: Chordata CLASS: Osteichthyes
ORDER: Cypriniformes FAMILY: Cyprinidae
The woundfin is the most silvery of all American minnows,
reflecting blue in bright sunlight (01). The general shape is
fusiform with the exception of the flattened head and belly. The fins
are large and faleate, the eyes are somewhat reduced, the mouth is
nearly horzontal, the lips bear papillae and two barbels, and dermal
sense organs are present. The body is tannish dorsally, the sides and
belly are silvery. The two ossified, anterior dorsal rays extend into
the tip of the fin; hence the common name: woundfin (12) or wound fin
(27). This fish rarely exceeds 85 mm, although occasional specimens,
usually females, exceed 95 mm (02).
"The woundfin is considered the most highly specialized species in
the Cyprinid tribe Plagopterini, subfamily Leuciscinae (01). This
unique tribe is composed of three genera, two of which, Meda and
Plagopterus, are monotypic, and the third, Lepidomeda, is composed
of four species. The present taxonomic ranking of the group was
Taxonomy - 1 (DRAFT) - Taxonomy
Species WOUNDFIN
Species Id ESIS252001
Date 14 MAR 96
initiated by Hubbs (03), and is generally accepted. The uniqueness of
this compact group of fishes has always impressed ichthyologists.
Cope (04) erected a full subfamily, the Plagopterinae, for the genera,
and this was widely followed (05,06). Jordan, et al. (07) even
erected a separate family, the Medidae, for the group, an action
followed only by Tanner (08). The entire taxa is endemic to the lower
basin of the Colorado River and its ancestral tributary, the White
River" (02). La Rivers, 1962 (27), addressed the fact that Jordon,
1885 and 1889, referred to the species as Meda argentissima.
Miller and Hubbs (01) explain how the stated type locality "San
Luis Valley, western Colorado (Cope 1874)," was an obvious error.
This was one of many such mistakes made by collectors associated with
the Wheeler survey of 1871-74. A reported locality of "Colorado
Chiquito River, Arizona" (09) was also rejected since there are no
other indications that woundfin were ever there, and it was felt that
the type series Plagopterus argentissimus was taken from the
mainstream of the Virgin River (01).
Taxonomy - 2 (DRAFT) - Status
Species WOUNDFIN
Species Id ESIS252001
Date 14 MAR 96
STATUS
Coded Status
E: Federal Endangered
COMMENTS ON STATUS -
U.S. STATUSES AND LAWS:
The woundfin (Plagopterus argentissimus) has been designated an
Endangered species pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973
(50 CFR 17.11; P.L. 93-205, 87 Stat. 884; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1540),
as amended. The species has this status wherever found including the
States of Arizona, Nevada, and New Mexico except for the Gila River
drainage where special rules apply to an experimental population.
Special rules specifically address the "nonessential experimental
populations" which are being reintroduced into the Gila River drainage
(i.e., the Verde River, Gila and Yavapai counties, AZ; Tonto Creek,
Gila County, AZ; the Gila River, Graham and Greenlee counties, AZ;
the Hassayampa River, Yavapai County, AZ; and the San Francisco River,
Greenlee County, AZ) begining 1986 for a period of ten years (50 CFR,
Sec. 17.84b). The experimental populations of woundfin are treated as
if they were Threatened. Non-essential experimental populations not
occurring on National Park or National Wildlife Refuge lands are
treated as "proposed" species for purposes of Section 7, interagency
cooperation (50 CFR 17.84(b)).
This species is protected by the Lacey Act (P.L. 97-79, as
amended; 16 U.S.C. 3371 et seq.) which makes it unlawful to import,
export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase any wild animal
(alive or dead including parts, products, eggs, or offspring):
(1) in interstate or foreign commerce if taken, possessed,
transported or sold in violation of any State law or
regulation; or
(2) if taken or possessed in violation of any U.S. law,
treaty, or regulation or in violation of Indian tribal law.
It is also unlawful to possess any wild animal (alive or dead
including parts, products, eggs, and offspring) within the U.S.
territorial or special maritime jurisdiction (as defined in
18 U.S.C. 7) that is taken, possessed, transported, or sold in
violation of any State law or regulation, foreign law, or Indian
tribal law.
Status - 1 (DRAFT) - Status
Species WOUNDFIN
Species Id ESIS252001
Date 14 MAR 96
RESPONSIBLE FEDERAL AGENCIES:
USFWS -Responsible for the management/recovery, listing, and
law enforcement/protection of this species.
BIA -Responsible for the law enforcement/protection of this
species with applicable State and Federal laws on
public lands under their control. Also responsible
for management/recovery on Bureau of Indian Affairs
lands.
BLM -Responsible for the law enforcement/protection of this
species with applicable State and Federal laws on
public land under their control (43 CFR 4140). Also
responsible for management/recovery on Bureau of Land
Management lands.
NPS -Responsible for the law enforcement/protection of this
species with applicable State and Federal laws on
public lands under their control. Also responsible
for conservation (Nat. Park System Organic Act - 16
U.S.C. 1, 2-3)/management/recovery on National Park
Service lands. Taking, possessing, or disturbing of
Federally listed species is prohibited on NPS lands
(36 CFR 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3).
USFS -Responsible for the law enforcement/protection of this
species with applicable State and Federal laws on
public lands under their control. Also responsible
for management/recovery on Forest Service lands. The
Forest Service is responsible for integrating
management, protection, and conservation of Federally
listed species into the Forest Planning process
(36 CFR 219.19 and 219.20).
Management practices that would cause detrimental
changes in water temperature or composition, water
course blockage, or sediment deposits within 100 feet
of the edges of perennial streams, lakes or other
bodies of water are prohibited (36 CFR 219.27(e)).
All Federal agencies have responsibility to ensure that any
action authorized, funded, or carried out by that agency is not likely
to jeopardize the continued existence of the species or result in the
destruction or adverse modification of Critical Habitat (50 CFR 402),
and to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the
conservation of the species.
STATE STATUSES AND LAWS:
STATE: Arizona, California
DESIGNATED STATUS: Recognized Endangered
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY: Arizona Game and Fish Department
California Department of Fish and Game
STATUTE: Arizona Revised Statutes 17-201, 211, 214 and 231,
Arizona Game and Fish Commission, Sec 17-23(B)7
California Fish and Game Code, Sec 2000, 2002 and 2013
Status - 2 (DRAFT) - Status
Species WOUNDFIN
Species Id ESIS252001
Date 14 MAR 96
STATE: Nevada
DESIGNATED STATUS: Rare
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY: Nevada Department of Fish and Game
STATUTE: Nevada Administrative Code 503.584, 503.589
Nevada Revised Statutes 501.105, 501.181, 501.187
STATE: Utah
DESIGNATED STATUS: Recognized Endangered
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY: Utah Department of Natural Resources
STATUTE: Utah Code Annotated 23-13-2, 23-20-1, 23-13-5, 23-13-13
and 23-13-14
INTERNATIONAL STATUSES, TREATIES, AND AGREEMENTS:
The woundfin is listed in CITES-II, the IUCN Red Data Book for
Pices (1977), and by the Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife
Preservation in the Western Hemisphere, 1970.
ECONOMIC STATUSES:
The woundfin has no commercial value. It has cultural value in
that its Endangered status may have an impact on human population
growth in the Virgin Valley; growth that if not planned would
effectively dry the Virgin River and extirpate the woundfin.
70/10/13:35 FR 16047/16048 - Listed as Endangered
77/02/22:42 FR 10462/10488 - CITES II listing
77/11/02:42 FR 57329/57330 - Proposed designation of Critical Habitat
79/03/06:44 FR 12382/12384 - Removal of proposed Critical Habitat
79/05/21:44 FR 29566/29567 - Five year review
84/04/10:49 FR 14149/14152 - Determ of status of introduced population
85/07/22:50 FR 29901/29909 - Five year review
85/07/24:50 FR 30188/30195 - Reintroduced experimental pop. status
85/09/30:50 FR 39691/ - Correction, final rule
Status - 3 HABITAT ASSOCIATIONS
HABITAT - AQUATIC
INLAND AQUATIC
LAND USE -
Cropland and Pasture
Orchards, Groves, Vineyards, Nurseries,
Shrub and Brush Rangeland
Streams and Canals
Reservoirs
NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY CODES
NWI NWICLS NWIMOD NWISPEC
Riverine, upper perennial UB2
COMMENTS ON HABITAT ASSOCIATIONS -
Woundfin have most often been collected from runs over sand
bottoms, near some cover. Water depths average .34 cm (+ or - 19) and
currents average 0.48 m/sec (+ or - 0.23) (12). They have shown a
preference for physically unmodified habitats, but are also found in
areas that have been greatly modified. Woundfin reach peak numbers in
areas with mobile sand bottoms where the substrate shifts slowly
downstream under the influence of near-laminar currents. Depths
preferred by woundfin appear to range from 5 to 35 cm but disturbed
fish swim quickly into deeper water. Woundfin have been collected
from waters with temperatures from 10 to 35.5 degrees C (25).
Preferred temperature is not known, but as water temperatures approach
30 degrees C, woundfin leave the shallow water areas and congregate in
deeper portions of the stream (13). Larval and post-larval woundfin
appear to live inshore after hatching, staying in back waters and
along the shoreline in a few millimeters of water, then moving into
deeper water as they grow larger (02). Adult fish have been found in
flows from 0.095 m/sec to 1.132 m/sec (25).
Recently, woundfin have been found in habitats different from
those described above, principally in less sandy and faster moving
portions of the Virgin River. This is primarily because these areas
are less accessible for collecting and had not been sampled during
previous work (10). The species has been found to be common or
abundant in areas which exhibit pool habitat.
Streamflows in the Virgin River below 100 cf/s during the spring
are associated with poor reproduction and/or recruitment into the
population (14). Mean monthly flows between 30 and 200 cf/s are
optimal for spawning, fry development, and recruitment of woundfin.
Irrigation diversions have a significant adverse effect on
recruitment, probably by reducing flows during spawning and fry
development (12).
The alteration of agricultural areas, reservoirs, and desert
shrub/pinyon-juniper rangeland may adversely effect associated
woundfin habitat.
Habitat Associations - 1 (DRAFT) - Food Habits
Species WOUNDFIN
Species Id ESIS252001
Date 14 MAR 96
FOOD HABITS
TROPHIC LEVEL -
OMNIVORE
LIFESTAGE FOOD FOOD PART
General Detritus
General Algae
General Arthropods
Food Habits - 1 (DRAFT) - Environment Associations
Species WOUNDFIN
Species Id ESIS252001
Date 14 MAR 96
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATIONS
G = General A = Adult
LIM = Limiting RA = Resting Adult
J = Juvenile FA = Feeding Adult
RJ = Resting Juvenile BA = Breeding Adult
FJ = Feeding Juvenile P = Pupae
L = Larvae E = Egg
RL = Resting Larvae
FL = Feeding Larvae
LIFESTAGE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATIONS
G Aquatic Features: Pool areas
Environment Associations - 1 (DRAFT) - Life History
Species WOUNDFIN
Species Id ESIS252001
Date 14 MAR 96
LIFE HISTORY
FOOD HABITS:
Woundfin have a poorly delineated stomach, occupying about 20% of
the total gut length. Fourteen specimens collected in Aug. 1974 had
the following food items: "amorphous material (presumably organic) and
sand grains were most abundant; insects were commonly found (aquatic
insect larvae, especially diptera, were predominant; ants and other
terrestrial insects were rare); filamentous algae and organic detritus
occurred in about 1/2 of the individuals; amphipod larvae were found
in 2 specimens" (02). Lockhart (16) studied 188 woundfin from all
seasons of the year and found them quite unselective in their food
habits; filamentous algae (Zygnemataceae) were the most common item
found. Insects, mostly diptera and stonefly larvae, were most common
in 16 specimens collected in 2 different seasons by Winget and Baumann
(17). The intestine length/standard length ratio for woundfin is
slightly less than unity, placing it near the division between Odum's
(19) carnivorous (<1) and omnivorous (1-3) species. It would seem
that algae and organic detritus would not be of much value because of
the relative length of the gut. Possibly bacteria, protozoans and
micro-algae attached to large algae and detrital particles supply the
nutrients or aid in the breakdown of plant material (02). More recent
studies have also shown that, although omnivorous, woundfin are at
times selective (or choice is limited) and that foods taken vary with
location on the river. For example, in Feb at Mesquite, Nevada,
woundfin were preying heavily on ceratopogonid larvae. Foods taken at
Beaver Dam Wash, Arizona, are more varied than at Mesquite (20).
When studied in laboratory aquaria (39 & 208 liters), woundfin at
first showed evidence of visual selection of food. Soon after the
addition of dried foods woundfin began milling excitedly about the
bottom. For the first few weeks they fed on or just above the bottom;
but, within a month, most were rising to the surface to feed (12).
HOME RANGE/TERRITORY:
Movements of woundfin are poorly understood. They are not
territorial. Collections over a number of years indicate that they
may be very mobile (21). Systematic collections on the Virgin River
during recent years show an unexplained disappearance of larger
individuals in late summer, indicating either movement or mortality.
MIGRATION PATTERNS:
This species is non-migratory.
COVER/SHELTER REQUIREMENTS:
Woundfin prefer shallow moving water (5-35 cm), but move into
deeper waters to escape danger (12). As water temperatures approach
30 degrees C, woundfin leave the shallow water areas and congregate in
deeper portions of the stream (13). Larval and post-larval woundfin
appear to live inshore after hatching, staying in back waters and
along the shoreline in a few millimeters of water. Later they begin
moving into deeper water as they grow larger (02).
REPRODUCTIVE SITE REQUIREMENTS:
Life History - 1 (DRAFT) - Life History
Species WOUNDFIN
Species Id ESIS252001
Date 14 MAR 96
Little is known about spawning site requirements. Deacon (22)
observed apparent spawning activity on 17 April 1977 in the Virgin
River south of Mesquite, Nevada. Water temperature was 14.5 degrees
C. Spawning apparently occurred in deeper pockets in the stream bed
in flowing current. More recently, Gregor and Deacon (23) found that
woundfin select a substrate of rocks 5-10 cm in diameter in current at
a temperature of 25 degrees C.
Streamflows in the Virgin River below 100 cf/s during the spring
are associated with poor reproduction and/or recruitment into the
population (14). Deacon (26) reports that mean flows of 90 to 94 cf/s
in the Virgin River in April, May and June coincided with poor
reproduction while mean flows of 450 cf/s over the same monthes
coincided with good reproductive success. Mean monthly flows between
30 and 200 cf/s are optimal for spawning, fry development, and
recruitment of woundfin. Irrigation diversions have a significant
adverse effect on recruitment, probably simply by reducing flows
during spawning and fry development (12).
REPRODUCTIVE CHARACTERISTICS:
Information available is limited. The beginning of the
reproductive cycle may be related to rising water temperatures,
lengthening daylight, and declining spring run-off. It would seem to
be to the advantage of the species to spawn after the peak run-off as
eggs spawned before run-off would be buried by silt or carried away by
the current. Some spawning in sheltered areas during high spring
flows may occur (02).
Gonads mature in March, April, and May (24). Fry appear in June
(12); therefore, we assume that spawning begins in late May. Since
fry have been found as late as Aug, limited spawning may occur
throughout the summer, but peak activity is probably late May to early
June. Deacon (22) found indications that spawning begins about a
month earlier in the lower Virgin River than at Laverkin Creek. He
observed a female, accompanied by 3-4 smaller males, moving out of a
pool into flowing current. More males joined the group as they swam
around deeper pockets in the stream bed. After much accelerated
activity within the group, the female swam back upstream into the
pool. This procedure was repeated several times.
In 1980, young were successfully produced in the Dexter Hatchery
for the first time, but in small numbers. In 1983 they were produced
in sufficient numbers to seriously consider transplants of fry in the
near future (10). In 1986, reintroduction efforts commenced in AZ.
PARENTAL CARE:
Development of young: Fry are first found in shallow areas
lateral to the main current and only in the main channel when water
levels are low. They are never found in pools containing potential
predators such as Gambusia affinis, Lepomis machochirus, Micropterus
salmoides, and Gila robusta seminuda. Young-of-the-year woundfin of
20-30 cm have been seen in Aug, and growth appears to be good through
Oct. (15). Late fall and winter are the time of highest mortality,
coinciding with the period of lowest flows and temperatures, and this
mortality appears to be the result of these 2 factors (02). Flows
between 30 and 200 cf/s are recommended for the best fry development
Life History - 2 (DRAFT) - Life History
Species WOUNDFIN
Species Id ESIS252001
Date 14 MAR 96
and population recruitment (12).
POPULATION BIOLOGY:
Lockhart (25) reports that adult mortality appears to be greatest
in the period of October through December. The youngest age group
begins to appear in June and recruitment of these fish into the main
river population begins in June and ends in August. Newly recruited
fish show their period of greatest growth from August to October (25).
Current limiting factors for the woundfin are the modification and
loss of its habitat. Construction of dams and associated reservoirs,
diversion structures, canals, laterals, and aquaducts have all
irrevocably changed the habitat of the woundfin. The resultant stream
dewatering and the return of physically, chemically, and biologically
(i.e., exotic species) polluted water to the main channel have
destroyed or markedly changed southwestern rivers formerly inhabited
by the woundfin. Increasing human populations and increased demands
for water will increase pressures on the woundfin unless measures are
implemented to protect its habitat (02).
Examination of field notes and collections at the Univ. of Nevada,
Las Vegas, Brigham Young Univ., Univ. of Michigan Museum of Zoology,
and U.S. National Museum indicate the abundance of woundfin in the
Virgin River above Mesquite, Nevada. Today the woundfin is rarely
found below Mesquite. The red shiner (Notropis lutrensis) has
replaced the woundfin in the modified habitats in the lowermost
reaches of the river (02) and has recently become established in the
upper reaches of the Virgin River. In 1984, red shiners were captured
for the first time in the Virgin River above the gorge. By 1985 they
comprised 25 percent of the fish taken in the St. George area.
Still, populations in the upper Virgin River are large and self-
sustaining. Much of the detail of the biology of the species is
remains unknown. At times, 100 or more individuals are caught in one
seining, while at other times none are caught (10). The present
extent of the species population is all that is left of a formerly
large range that probably included most of the rivers of Arizona. The
danger lies in that the entire population of the species is in one
small river system and could be lost in one major catastrophe or slow
negative change in the habitat. It is, therefore, essential that at
least 2 additional populations of woundfin be established and
maintained in suitable areas within their probable historic range
(02).
SPECIES INTERRELATIONSHIPS:
The red shiner (Notropis lutrensis) largely replaces woundfin
where they occur together in modified reaches of the Virgin River.
Red shiners occur sympatrically with woundfin near Littlefield,
Arizona, where shiners are rare and woundfin are usually common. The
habitat here is relatively undisturbed. These data suggests that
woundfin maintain a competitive edge over the introduced red shiner in
unmodified habitat, or may indicate habitat preferences.
Predators of woundfin include piscivorous birds such as
kingfishers and herons, soft-shelled turtles and other vertebrate
species. Woundfin are especially vulnerable during periods of low
flow and clear water. Fish that feed on woundfin doubtlessly include
Life History - 3 (DRAFT) - Life History
Species WOUNDFIN
Species Id ESIS252001
Date 14 MAR 96
Gila robusta seminuda (feeding on all life stages), and Lepidomeda m.
mollispinis (feeding on larvae and fry). The exotic largemouth bass
(Micropterus salmoides) and green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus)
population in the Virgin River is small. Channel catfish (Ictalurus
punctatus), while rare in the Virgin River system, may prey on all
life stages of the woundfin (02).
OTHER LIFE HISTORY DESCRIPTORS:
None.
Life History - 4 (DRAFT) - Management Practices
Species WOUNDFIN
Species Id ESIS252001
Date 14 MAR 96
MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
RESULT MANAGEMENT PRACTICE
Beneficial Maintaining/Controlling Water Flow
Beneficial Maintaining undisturbed/undeveloped areas
Beneficial Land Acquisition
Beneficial Water Right Acquisition
Beneficial Controlling pollution [thermal, chemical, physical]
Beneficial Controlling/Restricting Agricultural Practice
Beneficial Stocking captive-reared wild-strain animals
Beneficial Transplanting wild animals
Beneficial Controlling/Removing Exotic Vertebrates
Adverse Siltation
Existing Siltation
Adverse Salinity alteration
Existing Salinity alteration
Adverse Irrigating
Existing Irrigating
Adverse Reservoirs
Existing Reservoirs
Adverse Migration barriers
Existing Migration barriers
Adverse Environmental Contamination/Pollution
Existing Environmental Contamination/Pollution
Adverse Exotic/Feral/Introducted Species
Existing Exotic/Feral/Introducted Species
COMMENTS ON MANAGEMENT PRACTICES -
The major reason for the Endangered status of the woundfin is
the man-made dams on the rivers where it formerly lived. There are
now 8 major dams on the Salt, Verde, and Gila Rivers. These have
effectively cut off natural flow in the lower portions of these
streams. Suitable habitat may yet exist above San Carlos Reservoir
(Gila) and Horseshoe Reservoir (Verde). Lake Mead inundated the lower
parts of the Virgin and Moapa Rivers. In addition, habitat
alterations resulting from irrigation diversions have reduced the
suitability of portions of the Virgin River. Areas of concern include
the river from Mesquite, NV to Lake Mead, and the 1-2 kilometers below
the Washington-St George Canal Company diversion near St. George (02).
A unquantified problem is competition with introduced species.
Woundfin are intimately associated with only 4 native and 1 introduced
fishes, though 8 other introduced and 2 other native fishes are known
from the Virgin River system. The high salinity and turbidity of the
Virgin may now be giving a competitive advantage to the woundfin, but
if water quality is improved, the introductions may gain the
competitive edge. Introductions may have out-competed woundfin in
other rivers in its former range (10). Another unquantified factor
may be pollution by chemicals such as pesticides, herbicides, and
fertilizers added to the river from returning irrigation waters (10).
Plans exist for as many as 9 more water projects on the Virgin River
(11).
Management Practices - 1 (DRAFT) - Management Practices
Species WOUNDFIN
Species Id ESIS252001
Date 14 MAR 96
APPROVED PLAN:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1985. Revised Recovery Plan for the
Woundfin Plagopterus argentissimus Cope. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Albuquerque, NM. 74 pp.
The revised Recovery Plan calls for maintaining and enhancing
existing woundfin populations through: monitoring the species and
habitat; studying habitat requirements; protecting habitat through
cooperative management agreements; habitat management planning;
identifying and implementing habitat enhancement features; watershed
vegetation management; controlling exotic fishes once studies are
under taken to determine the nature and extent of interactions; and
maintaining optimum habitat including water flows. The plan also
calls for the restoration of woundfin to their former range (where
suitable habitat still exists), locating potential habitat, selecting
and enhancing transplant sites, and undertaking such transplants.
Finally, it suggests a good public education program and continuing
law enforcement activities. The danger lies in that the entire
population of the species is in one small river system and could be
lost in one major catastrophe or slow negative change in the habitat.
It is therefore essential that at least 2 additional populations of
woundfin be established and maintained in suitable areas within their
probable historic range (02).
In 1986, the USFWS reintroduced the woundfin into the Gila River
drainage of Arizona (specific locations can be found in the occurrence
narrative). These populations are determined as "nonessential
experimental" populations of an Endangered species to be treated as if
they were Threatened. In the past, this species was more widespread
in the State of Arizona where it occurred in several river drainages.
Introductions are being taken in an effort to reestablish populations
of woundfin within their historic range. As of 1986, plans call for
annual stocking for the next ten years.
Management Practices - 2 (DRAFT) - References
Species WOUNDFIN
Species Id ESIS252001
Date 14 MAR 96
References
*****REFERENCES FOR ALL NARRATIVES EXCEPT N-OCCURRENCE*****
01 Miller, R.R. and C.L. Hubbs. 1960. The Spiny-Rayed Cyprinid
Fishes (Plagopterini) of the Colorado River System. Misc. Publ.
Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich. 115:1-39.
02 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1985. Recovery Plan for the
Woundfin, Plagopterus argentissimus Cope. 74 pp.
03 Hubbs, C.L. 1955. Hybridization Between Fish Species in Nature.
Syst. Zool. 4:1-20.
04 Cope, E.D. 1874. On The Plagopterinae and the Icthyology of Utah.
Amer. Philos. Soc., Proc. 14:129-140.
05 Jordan, D.S. and C.H. Gilbert. 1883. Synopsis of the Fishes of
North America. Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus. 16:I-LVI + 1-1018.
06 Jordan, D.S. and B.W. Evermann. 1896. The Fishes of North and
Middle America. Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus., Part I, 47:I + LX, 1-1240.
07 Jordan, D.S., B.W. Evermann, and H.W. Clark. 1930. Checklist of
the Fishes and Fish-Like Vertebrates of North and Middle America
North of the Northern Boundary of Venezuela and Columbia. U.S.
Fish Comm. Rept. (1928). Doc. No. 1055. 670 pp.
08 Tanner, V.M. 1936. A Study of the Fishes of Utah. Proc. Utah
Acad. Sci., Arts, Lett.; 13:155-178.
09 Bohlke, J. 1953. A Catalogue of the Type Specimens of Recent
Fishes in the Natural History Museum of Stanford University.
Stanford Ichthy. Bull., 5:1-168.
10 Burton, J. 1983. Personal Communications. USFWS, P.O. Box 1306,
Albuquerque, NM 87103.
11 Hickman, T. 1983. Personal Communication. USFWS, P.O. Box 1575,
St. George, UT 84770.
12 Hardy, T.B. and J.E. Deacon. 1985. Impact analysis of the
proposed Quail Creek Reservoir on Plagopterus argentissimus
(woundfin) in the Virgin River. Unpubl. Bio. Assessment for the
Washington County Water Conservation District. 43 pp.
13 Lockhart, J.N. 1977. Personal Communication Cited in 02 above.
14 Deacon, J.E. 1979. Endangered and Threatened Fish of the West.
Great Basin Nat. 39:41-64.
15 Deacon, J.E. and T.B. Hardy. 1982. Streamflow Requirements of
Woundfin (Plagopterus argentissimus) in the Virgin River, Utah,
Arizona, and Nevada. Typescript, 21 pp.
16 Lockhart, J.N. 1979. Ecology of the Woundfin Minnow, Plagopterus
argentissimus, Cope. M.S. Thesis, Univ Nevada, Las Vegas. 187 pp.
17 Winget, R.N. and R.W. Baumann. 1977. Virgin River, Utah-Arizona-
Nevada, Aquatic Habitat, Fisheries and Microinvertebrate Studies;
in: Impact of Warner Valley Water Project on Endangered Fish of the
Virgin River. Vaughn Hansen Associates, Salt Lake City, Utah.
18 Cope, E.D. and H.C. Yarrow. 1875. Report upon the Collections of
Fishes Made in Portions of Nevada, Utah, California, Colorado, New
Mexico, and Arizona, During the Years 1871, 1872, 1873, and 1874.
Rept. Geol. Expl. Surv. W 100th Meridian (Wheeler Survey), 5:635-
703.
19 Odum, W.E. 1970. Utilization of the Direct Grazing and Plant
Detritus Food Chains by the Striped Mullet Mugil cephalus, P.
References - 1 (DRAFT) - References
Species WOUNDFIN
Species Id ESIS252001
Date 14 MAR 96
222-240; In: J.H. Steele (ed.), Marine Food Chains. Univ Calif.
Press, Berkeley.
20 Gregor, P.D. and J.E. Deacon. 1982. Food Partitioning of the
Fishes in the Virgin River. Typescript, 110 pp.
21 Deacon, J.E. 1979. Unpublished Data Cited in 02 above.
22 Deacon, J.E. 1977. Habitat Requirements of Woundfin in the Virgin
River in Relation to the Proposed Warner Valley Project; In: Impact
of Warner Valley Water Project on Endangered Fish of the Virgin
River. Vaughn Hansen Associates, Salt Lake City, Utah.
23 Gregor, P.D. and J.E. Deacon. 1982. Some Observations on Woundfin
in an Outdoor Experimental Stream. Great Basin Nat. 42 pp.
24 Peters, E.J. 1970. Changes with Growth in Selected Body
Proportions of the Woundfin (Plagopterus argentissimus Cope:
Cyprinidae). M.S. Thesis, Brigham Young Univ, Provo, Utah.
25 Lockhart, J. 1975. Studies of the Woundfin, Plagopterus
argentissimus. In: Proc. Desert Fishes Council (1983) III-IX:
173 pp.
26 Deacon, J.E. 1980. Effects of the Low Flow on Woundfin in the
Virgin River. In: Proc. Desert Fishes Council (1980)XII:79 pp.
27 La Rivers, IRA. 1962. Fishes and Fisheries of Nevada. Nevada
State Fish and Game Comm. State Printing Office, Carson City, NV.
782 pp.
*****REFERENCES FOR N-OCCURRENCE NARRATIVE ONLY*****
01 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1985. Recovery Plan for the
Woundfin, Plagopterus argentissimus Cope. 74 pp.
02 Burton, J. 1983. Personal Communication. USFWS, P.O. Box 1306,
Albuquerque, NM 87103.
03 Deacon, J.E. and W.G. Bradley. 1972. Ecological Distribution of
Fishes of Moapa River in Clark County, Nevada. Trans. Amer. Fish.
Soc. 101:408-419.
04 Gilbert, C.H. and N.B. Scofield. 1898. Notes on a Collection of
Fishes from the Colorado Basin in Arizona. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus.
20:487-499.
05 Jordan, D.S. and B.W. Evermann. 1896. The Fishes of North and
Middle America. Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus. 16:I-LVI + 1-1240
(appropriate heading; "Fort Yuma").
06 USDI/USFWS. 1984. Proposed Determination of Experimental
Population Status for Certain Introduced Populations of Colorado
Squawfish and Woundfin. Federal Register 49: 14149/14152; April
10, 1984.
07 Deason, W. 1973. Status of Woundfin (Plagopterus argentissimus)
Recovery Plans. In: Proc. Desert Fishes Council (1983) III-IX:105.
References - 2