Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ .' <br /> <br />---- <br /> <br />, " <br /> <br />, . <br /> <br />. <br />, <br />,: . <br />~/.. <br /> <br />,. <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />'~~....~ I~/:, . <br /> <br />, .' <br />~ <br /> <br />~. <br /> <br />... <br /> <br />;.... . . <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />.'.. ""l <br /> <br />. <br />. . <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. '. ',.....______~~:.A..;; <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />~ ~ j <br />.' ,j <br />I <br />~ 1 <br />~ " j <br />:.< ,11 <br />'''1 <br />. , <br /> <br />i <br />I <br />1 <br />i <br />'.., <br />.'~ <br /> <br />.. '..i <br />" <br /> <br />,I <br /> <br />; <br />. <br />i <br />i <br />..,~J <br />. ""';0;';1 <br />j <br /> <br />. . <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />.-..- ~ <br />. . , <br />~ ~ l <br />, <br /> <br />''''' <br /> <br />. ' <br />..1 <br /> <br />'" <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. ~ <br /> <br />. .. <br /> <br />I' <br /> <br />. <br />. , <br /> <br />..' <br /> <br />.. . <br /> <br />,~ <br />,. <br /> <br />." <br /> <br />w:,. ...~ -:.,....... ~....,~- <br /> <br />~' <br />'L...;;" <br /> <br />.';'.. <br /> <br />, ' <br />.' ~ : "".- .'. ". ....;;,"~~.; ~ ..::.... <br /> <br />j <br />1..__ <br /> <br />Ir;. ...;J,;. .j.....m" <br /> <br />..e...ih:,,":"; <br /> <br />434 <br /> <br />JAMES E. DEACON AND W. L MINCKLEY <br /> <br />\ <br /> <br />1963), and in the main seems the most important single variable. This <br />understanding resulted in large part from early studies by Shelford <br />(1911a,b) on ecological succession, in which he emphasized the physio- <br />graphic influences in strcams as being far more important than biotic fac- <br />tors (Allee et aI., 1949). Geologic maturation of strcams was considered <br />as a successional phenomenon, followed by succession of the fish fauna <br />at a given point from those of swift headwater situations to species with <br />proclivities and morphologies more adapted to downstream or lentic situa- <br />tions, Such relationships have been demonstrated throughout the world <br />where fishes inhabit streams. <br />Figure 6 outlines the actual or generalized distributions of fishes in a <br />number of regions or stream systems and illustrates correlations between <br />fish morphology and habitat features of different stream segments. This <br />correlation cuts across taxonomic groupings, in most part, and serves to <br />illustrate the close ties between body shape in fishes and the environments <br />in which they live. That the correlative factor in such situations is current <br />(or gradient) may easily be demonstrated by examining unusual streams <br />which flow through flat lands in their headwaters, then enter a section of <br />higher gradient in their lower reaches;, the longitudinal distribution of fishes <br />is similarly reversed (Larimore et ai., 1952). IQ Aravaipa Creek, Arizona, <br />a high-gradient area is sandwiched between two low gradient sections. <br />Headwater fishes occur mostly in the middle reach of that stream (Barber <br />and Minckley, 1966). In fact, the simple presence of an arca of swift water <br />between pools-a riffle-provides living space for headwater fishes in the <br />midst of lakclike conditions. <br />Careful examination of shorelines of larger rivers, as opposed to eddies <br />along the current of the main channel, or the swift, central part, reveal <br />similar current-related habitat preferences. In well-watered zones, or in <br />large, persistently flowing desert rivers, a tremendous diversity of species <br />may exist within this complex type of environment. In other places, a <br />group may diversify into a number of niches or habitats. <br />Segregation of a group into differing regimes of current (or current- <br />related habitats) is remarkably developed in cyprinoid fishes of the Colo- <br />rado River basin of western North America. The swift-water minnows and <br />suckers of that system display some of the most bizarre morphological <br />adaptations to the constant stress of current (and likely suspended solids) <br />that are known in any river in the world (Hubbs. 1940, 1941a), <br /> <br />In more obvious adaptation ., . the fish tend to be larger and much more <br />stream-lined . . . , with more terete bodies. sharper entering wedges and. <br />particularly, with much slenderer caudal peduncles and longer and more <br />. falcate fins; and often with more rays in one or more fins or with smaller <br />scales (which provide a smoother surface) (Hubbs, 194Ia). <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />... <br />