7774

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 7774
• Author: Desert Fishes Council, H., Dean A., ed.)‎.
• Title: Proceedings of the Desert Fishes Council Volume XXIV, 1992 Annual Symposium, 18 to 21 November, Mesa, Arizona.
• USFW Year: 1992.
• USFW - Doc Type: November 18-21.
• Copyright Material: NO

ABSTRACTS OF PRESENTATIONS IN ORDER PRESENTED
Se presentaran porciones del proyecto de investigaci6n y una discusi6n resumida: Las formas en que los peces en
peligro fueron usados (alimento, cebo, abono, etc.); tallas hist6ricas de peces en peligro; causas posibles de declinaci6n
ofrecidas por los ciudadanos; nombres comunes y no comunes de los peces; y la actitud de la gente hacia los peces.
MEYER, C. W.*; MILLER, D. D. (CWM and DDM - Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Laramie, WY)
Spinal injury in trout electrofished with a Coffelt VVP-15 or CPS` system / Daiio en la
espina de truchas capturadas con el sistema de electropesca Coffelt VVP-15 o CPS
KEYWORDS: electrofishing; spinal injury; Wyoming; Oncorhynchus mykiss; Salmo trutta
ABSTRACT
We investigated the occurrence of spinal injuries in rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss and brown trout Salmo
trutta collected by single-pass, pulsed DC electrofishing using a Coffelt VVP-15, or a Coffelt CPSTm shocker, and the
occurrence of spinal injuries in trout collected on the fourth pass of a multiple mark-recapture population estimate using
a Coffelt VVP-15 shocker. Spinal injuries were determined from x-rays of the collected fish. The mean percentage
occurrence of spinal injuries in trout collected from a single electrofishing pass using the VVP-15 was 8% (n=45). A
single electrofishing pass using the CPS' resulted in a mean percentage occurrence of spinal injuries of 13 % (n=110).
The trout collected and x-rayed on the fourth pass of the multiple mark-recapture population estimate, using the VVP-15,
were not recaptures (i.e., were unmarked fish). An average of 30% (n=65) of these trout suffered spinal injuries. We
concluded that under the conditions present during this work, the CP9` and VVP-15 worked comparably (i.e., good
electrotaxis and relatively low spinal injury). Also it appeared that fish not netted and handled suffered spinal injuries.
We could not categorize these fish as having been shocked similarly to netted and handled fish, but missed by the netter,
or as fish that escaped on the fringes of the electric field.
RESUMEN
Investigamos la ocurrencia de daft en la espina de truchas arcoiris Oncorhynchus mykiss y truchas cafe Salmo trutta
colectadas con electropesca DC de pulsaci6n de paso simple usando un chocador Coffelt VVP-15 o un Coffelt CPSTM,
y la ocurrencia de danos en espina en truchas colectadas en el cuarto paso de m6todo de la estimaci6n de poblaci6n por
marcado y recaptura multiple usando un chocador Coffelt VVP-15. Los danos espinales en truchas colectadas pot
electropesca simple usando el VVP-15 fue de 8% (n=45). Un electropesca de paso simple usando CPSTM resulto en
un porcentaje medio de ocurrencia 13 % de danos en espina (N=110). Las truchas colectadas y pasadas por rayos X en
el estimador de poblaci6n multiple de marca-recaptura de cuarto paso, usando el chocador VVP-15, no fueron
recapturadas (ejem. fueron peces no marcados). Un promedio del 30% (n=65) de estas truchas sufrieron danos en la
espina. Concluimos que bajo las condiciones presentes durante este trabajo, el CPSTM y el VVP-15 trabajaron de manera
comparable (ejem. buena electrotaxis y relativamente bajo daft en la espina). Al parecer tambi6n los peces capturados
con la red y manejados sufrieron danos en la espina. No podemos categorizar de manera similar a aquellos peces que
hayan sido chocados con los que fueros capturados en redes y manejados, sino como perdidos por el manejador de la
red, o como peces que escaparon de los limites del campo el6ctrico.
WILLIAMS, R. N.*; PROEBSTEL, D. S.; SMOZAWA, D. K.; EvANS, R. P. (Department of Biology, Boise State
University; Department of Fish and Wildlife, Colorado State University; DKS and RPE - Department of Zoology, Brigham Young University)
Genetics and morphological evidence supporting subspecific designation of the Humboldt
cutthroat trout / Evidencia genetica y morfol6gica sosteniendo la designacion subespecifica
de la trucha garganta cortada de Humboldt
KEYWORDS: Humboldt cutthroat trout; Nevada; Lahontan cutthroat trout; mitochondrial DNA; morphological
characters; Oregon; California
ABSTRACT
Humboldt cutthroat trout, an unclassified subspecies of the cutthroat trout endemic to northeastern Nevada; differed
consistently from adjacent Lahontan cutthroat trout with respect to mitochondrial DNA haplotype and morphological
characters including counts of gill rakers and scales. Restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis of
mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) variation revealed consistent differences between Humboldt and Lahontan cutthroat trout
at a Pst I restriction site. Sixty-two of 64 Humboldt cutthroat trout (96.9%) from seven populations examined shared a
composite mtDNA haplotype that differed from the common Lahontan haplotype by 0.13 % sequence divergence. The
common Lahontan haplotype was observed in 64 of 66 (97.0 %) Lahontan cutthroat trout examined from nine populations
in northwestern Nevada, southeastern Oregon, and eastern California. Similarly, discriminant function analysis of
morphological characters (total number of gill rakers in the first arch, number of scales above the lateral line, and number
of scales in the lateral line series) also differentiated from Lahontan cutthroat trout (95.8% and 93.2% correct
classification, respectively). These results show that Humboldt cutthroat trout share evolutionarily derived genetic and
morphological traits that separate them systematically from the adjacent Lahontan cutthroat trout. On this basis, the
Humboldt cutthroat trout warrants formal recognition and classification as a unique subspecies of cutthroat trout.
38