Laserfiche WebLink
Genetic Studies: <br />Attempts to use various genetic markers to verify morphologically based identifications <br />have met with varying success. One of the earliest analyses of the genetics of pallid sturgeon <br />found that they were indistinguishable from shovelnose sturgeon (Phelps and Allendorf 1983). <br />Subsequent studies also found difficulty in discriminating between these species (Bischof and <br />Szalanski 2000; Genetic Analyses Inc. 1994). However, the addition of other genetic <br />information, especially from microsatellite loci has facilitated discrimination of pallid sturgeon <br />and shovelnose sturgeon (McQuown et al. 2000; Ray et al. 2007; Schrey et al. 2007; Simons et <br />al. 2001). In addition, applications of these techniques have been able to confirm hybrids <br />(Campton et al. 2000; Schrey 2007; Schrey et al. 2007; Tranah et al. 2004). Most recently, use of <br />genetic tags have made it possible to distinguish captive bred pallid sturgeon from wild <br />individuals (DeHaan et al. 2008). <br />The ability of researchers, managers and fishers (commercial and sport) to distinguish <br />pallid sturgeon from shovelnose sturgeon is important to recovery of pallid sturgeon in several <br />ways. First, researchers studying aspects of the biology and ecology of sturgeons need to be able <br />to ascribe their results to the correct species. Second, managers will use changes in pallid <br />sturgeon populations to indicate the success or failure of management strategies so an accurate <br />count of each species is critical. Finally, fishers need to be able to identify sturgeon species to <br />avoid "take" (harvesting) of pallid sturgeon since it is an endangered species. Tables 2 and 3 <br />summarize the references to studies that have been conducted to facilitate identification of pallid <br />sturgeon in different sections of its range.