My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8101
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
8101
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:33 PM
Creation date
5/20/2009 10:54:03 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
8101
Author
Lentsch, L. D., Y. Converse, P. D. Thompson, D. T. A. Crowl and D. C. A. Toline.
Title
Bonytail Reintroduction Plan for the Upper Colorado River Basin - Final Report.
USFW Year
1996.
USFW - Doc Type
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
47
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />species, may be the cause of the recent genetic pattern of introgression. <br />Alternatively, the Gila genus may represent a natural hybrid swarm (Echelle <br />1984; Wilde and Echelle 1992; Dowling et al. 1995) with levels of <br />introgression continuously changing as a consequence of natural population <br />fluctuations. <br />Although hybridization may be a natural part of the evolutionary history <br />of the Gila complex, a successful reintroduction (as defined by the Recovery <br />Implementation Program) can only occur if, at least, some bonytail can remain <br />isolated until the population is stable. A more natural flow regime, such as <br />spring peaks and late summer low flows, may provide the necessary hydrologic <br />conditions for the successful execution of spatial, temporal or ethological <br />isolating mechanisms. However, this mechanism(s) should be understood to <br />ensure successful reintroduction. <br />Nonnative fish interactions <br />Nonnative fish interactions also impact native fish populations (Kaeding <br />et al. 1986). Successful bonytail reintroduction requires minimizing impacts <br />from nonnative fishes. Unfortunately, these impacts have only been minimally <br />assessed to date. An in-depth understanding of community dynamics would allow <br />a more effective reintroduction effort (Chart and Cranney 1993). <br />One possible way to reduce impacts of nonnative fishes is to reduce <br />their numbers. Minckley and Meffe (1987) found that nonnative fish gradually <br />dominated native fish during low discharges. However, during high flows, <br />native fish were dominant in number. Valdez (1985) noted that numbers of <br />age-0 nonnative fish were highest during low flow years. Floods may prevent <br />successful spawning and recruitment of nonnative fishes, which are usually not <br />adapted to high flows or flooding conditions. <br /> <br />16 <br />FAI
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.