|
?-? . 26,
<br />388 The Southwestern Naturalist vol rtq,
<br />'t
<br />ment with reproduction, but do not disprove other functions of trailing
<br />behavior. The trailing activity of T. proximus' also is likely to be related to
<br />reproduction, but further information on timing of courtship is needed.
<br />I thank Dr. Charles Carpenter and Joan Oswalt Ford for their assistance in this project. Dag
<br />reported were a part of the author's M.S. thesis at the University of Oklahoma.
<br />LITERATURE CITED
<br />BAUMANN, F. 1929. "Experiments fiber den Geruchsinn and den Beuteerwerb der Viper 11•tp.t
<br />aspis L.)." Z. Vergl. Physiol., 10:36-119.
<br />BistioP, S. C. 1927. The amphibians and reptiles of Allegany State Park. Bull. New fork St.
<br />Mus., 3:1-141.
<br />CARPENTER. C. C. 1952. Comparative ecology of the common garter snake (Thamnophis s. s?
<br />tali,), the ribbon snake (Thamnophis s. sauritus), and Butler's garter snake (Thanmapt*
<br />butleri) in mixed populations. Ecol. Monogr.. 22:235-258.
<br />CLARK, D. R. 1974. The western ribbon snake (Thamnophis proximus): ecology of a mar
<br />population. Herpetologica, 30:372-379.
<br />DAVIS, D. D. 1936. Courtship and mating behavior in snakes. Field `vtus. Nat. Hist., Zool. fist.
<br />20:257-290.
<br />DEVINE , M. C. 1977. Chemistry and source of sex-attrac[ant pheromones and their role to tnar
<br />discrimination by garter snakes. Ph.D. dissert., Univ. Michigan, kiln Arbor. 67 pp.
<br />DUNDEE, H. A., AND M. C. MILLER, III. 1968. Aggregative behavior and habitat conditioning tat
<br />the prairie ringneck snake. Diadophis punctatus arnyi. Tulane Stud. Zool. Bot.. 15.41,
<br />58.
<br />FINNERAN, L. C. 1949. A sexual aggregation of the garter snake, Thamnophis butler (Guwi
<br />Copeia, 1949:141-144.
<br />FITCH, H. S. 1965. An ecological study of the garter snake, Thamnophis sirtalis. Univ. Kaawa
<br />Publ., Mus. Nat. Hist., 15:493-564.
<br />1970. Reproductive cycles in lizards and snakes. Univ. Kansas Publ., Mus. Nat. Illta,
<br />52:1-247.
<br />FITZSIMONS, F. W. 1932. Snakes. Hutchison, London, 286 pp.
<br />FORD, N. B. 1978. Evidence for species specificity of pheromone trails in two sympatric Rarer
<br />snakes, Thamnophis. Herp. Rev., 9:10.
<br />GARDNER, J. B. 1955. A ball of garter snakes. Copeia. 1955:310.
<br />GEHLBACH, F. R., J. F. WATKINS, AND J. C. KROLL. 1971. Pheromone trail -following studies v
<br />typhlopid,leptotyphlopid,and colubrid snakes. Behaviour, 40:282-294.
<br />GREGORY, P. T. 1975. Aggregations of gravid snakes in Manitoba. Canada. Copeia. 1975105-
<br />186.
<br />NOBLE, G. K. 1937. The sense organs involved in the courtship of Storeria. Thamnophis. Od
<br />other snakes. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 73:673-725.
<br />NOBLE, G. K., AND H. J. CLAUSEN. 1936. The aggregation behavior Of Storeria dekavi and adw
<br />snakes with especial reference to the sense organs involved. Ecol. Monogr., 6:269.316
<br />SOKAL, R. R., AND F. J. ROHLF. 1969. Biometry. W. H. Freeman and Co., San Francism
<br />PP.
<br />TINKLE, D. W. 1957. Ecology, maturation, and reproduction of Thamnophis sauritus P"d'i
<br />mus. Ecology, 38:69-77.
<br />TRUITT, R. V. 1927. Notes on the mating of snakes. Copeia, 1927:21-24.
<br />WRIGHT, A. H., AND A. A. WRIGHT. 1957. Handbook of snakes of the United States and COO""
<br />Comstock Publ. Assoc., Ithaca, 1533 pp.
<br />Address of author: Dept. of Biology, Univ. of Texas at Tyler, Tyler. TX 75701.
<br />[NF.,SOUTHWESTERN NATURALIST 26(4):389-393
<br />NOVEMBER 20, 1981
<br />DISTRIBUTION OF FISHES IN
<br />THE WHITE RIVER, UTAH
<br />STEVEN H. LANIGAN AND CHARLES R. BERRY, ,JR.
<br />
<br />:r+i FACT.-A survey of the White River. Utah, was made during the summer of 1978 and 1979
<br />,,,,rune the abundance and distribution of endemic fishes during and after spring runoff.
<br />l) population was similar to that in other eastern Utah streams. Red shiners (Notropis
<br />were most abundant, followed, in order, by roundtail chubs (Gila robusla), flannel-
<br />iih uckers (Catostomus latipinnis), speckled dace lRhinichlhys osculus), fathead minnows
<br />--,.t,iiales prornelas), carp (Cyprinus carpio), and channel catfish (Lctalurus pun(tatus). Blue-
<br />.,I uckers lCatoslomus discobolus), black bullheads (L(talurus melas), green sunfish (Lepomis
<br />;--inei, brown trout (Salmo trulta), and Colorado squawfish (Pty(hocheilus lucius) individu-
<br />„nnprised less than 0.5% of the total number of fish. Native fishes dominated the fish fauna at
<br />,u,,,,n stations introduced fishes dominated at downstream stations. A total of 15 adult Colo-
<br />,,, .,lu.nvluh, an endangered fish, was captured or observed.
<br />lit. %%htte River basin in Uintah County, Utah, and Rio Blanco County,
<br />imado, contains some of the largest oil shale deposits in the West. In
<br />its the Utah Division of Water Resources proposed construction of a dam
<br />' 1,m upstream from the mouth of the White River to provide water for oil
<br />.fair development (Utah Division of Water Resources, 1977). This and other
<br />-ulv watershed developments may affect the aquatic fauna in the White
<br />The purpose of this study was to determine the abundance and distri-
<br />auun of endemic fish in the White River in Utah during and after spring
<br />:nolf.
<br />, or -AREA.-The White River, a tributary to the Green River. is in the Upper Colorado River
<br />,sill Cnd drains more than 13,000 km' of Utah and Colorado (Fig. 1). In Utah. the river flows
<br />n Irom the Colorado border to the confluence with the Green River, draining arid pinyon-
<br />f,u .:aJ. sagebrush, and barren land habitat. Most tributaries of the river in Utah are intermittent.
<br />nrr quality during the studv varied little with river mile. From April to October 1978-79.
<br />^t; <ruure ranged from 15.5 to 23.51C, dissolved oxygen from 2.2 to 7.9 mgr I, pH from 7.9 to
<br />anal hardness from 330 to 440 mg./I, and conductivity front 700 to 1.250 µmhos. This water
<br />-11(1 )'as similar to that recorded in preceding years tU.S. Geological Survey, 1977, 1978; Utah
<br />-nr Division Health, 1977).
<br />hr veer can be partitioned into three habitat types. The upper area (Stations I to 4) is a com-
<br />"tlunn ill shallow (<1 m) rapids with substrate composed of small rubble and deep rapidly flow-
<br />^ was Containing large boulders. The middle section (Stations 5 to 12) has a wide diversity of
<br />.neat ranging from large slow moving backwater areas to narrow, deep, turbulent reaches. The
<br />"I +rcuon (Stations 13 to 15) is wider and more uniform in depth and flow. Sand and silt are
<br />t)rrdominant bottom substrates in the lower section.
<br />:br fishes of the White River in Colorado have been recently inventoried (Carlson et al.. 1979).
<br />urvtrv fishery survey was conducted in the Utah portion of the White River in 1971 (Holden
<br />•1 sialnaker, 1975); more extensive work was conducted in 1974-1975 (Crosby, 1975). Endemic
<br />'I" hound were the flannelmouth sucker (Catostomus latipinnis), speckled dace (Rhinichthvs
<br />mountain whitefish (Prosopium williamsoni), bluehead sucker (Catostomus discobolus),
<br />',odt:ul Chub (Gila robusta), and mottled sculpin (Cottus bairdi). In the Colorado portion, two
<br />"'"lads) squawfish (Peychocheilus lucius), an endangered species, were captured.
<br />"Irruons.-Fish were collected from the White River in July-September 1978 and April-June
<br />?p n I:) sites (Fig. 1). A bag seine, 4.5 tit by 1.2 in with 15-nun stretched mesh, was used in slow
<br />d4
<br />
<br />!" V-N
<br />b ?
<br />r
<br />mot,
<br />.J
|