Biology, Management, and Conservation of Lampreys in North America

2009 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
Management And Conservation

Biology, Management, and Conservation of Lampreys in North America

2009 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
Exotic Species ◽  
Brown Trout ◽  
Human Activities ◽  
Salmo Trutta ◽  
Freshwater Habitats ◽  
Management And Conservation

<em>Abstract</em>.—Reported predators of lamprey include a variety of fishes, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals, and predation on lamprey is known in both marine and freshwater habitats. Although lampreys are not typically prominent in the reported diets of predators, it does not follow that predation is not an important source of lamprey mortality. Concentrations of migrating and spawning lampreys may be especially vulnerable. Assemblages of predators on lampreys have changed through human activities such as stocking and harvest of fishes. In southeastern Minnesota, for example, most of the 1,145 km in 139 streams that currently are managed for trout now support brown trout <em>Salmo trutta</em>, an exotic species that has been reported to prey on several species of lamprey. Prior to its establishment, relatively few fish in these streams would have been capable of feeding on large ammocoetes or adult lampreys.

Biology, Management, and Conservation of Lampreys in North America

2009 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
Sister Species ◽  
Mitochondrial Cytochrome ◽  
New Genera ◽  
Species Relationship ◽  
European Species ◽  
Parasitic Species ◽  
The Family ◽  
First Time ◽  
Management And Conservation

<em>Abstract</em>.—The systematics of lampreys was investigated using complete mitochondrial cytochrome <em>b</em> sequences from all genera and nearly all recognized species. The families Geotriidae and Petromyzontidae are monophyletic, but the family Mordaciidae was resolved as two divergent lineages at the base of the tree. Within Petromyzontidae, the nonparasitic <em>Lethenteron</em> sp. S and <em>Okkelbergia aepyptera</em> were recognized as distinct lineages, <em>Lethenteron morii</em> and <em>Lampetra zanandreai</em> were moved to new genera, a sister species relationship was recovered between <em>Caspiomyzon wagneri </em>and <em>Eudontomyzon hellenicus</em>, and a clade was recovered inclusive of <em>Entosphenus hubbsi</em> and western North American <em>Lampetra </em>(<em>L. ayresii </em>and <em>L. richardsoni</em>). The placement of <em>E. hellenicus</em> as the sister species to <em>C. wagneri </em>reduces the number of genera comprised entirely of parasitic species to two, <em>Geotria</em> and <em>Petromyzon</em>. The recognition of distinct lineages for <em>O. aepyptera</em> and <em>Lethenteron</em> sp. S recognizes, for the first time, lineages comprised entirely of nonparasitic species. Apart from the results mentioned above, monophyly was supported for the multispecific genera <em>Entosphenus</em>, <em>Eudontomyzon</em>, <em>Ichthyomyzon</em>, <em>Lampetra</em> (restricted to European species), and <em>Lethenteron</em>. Intergeneric relationships within Petromyzontidae were poorly resolved, but separate clades inclusive of <em>Entosphenus</em> and <em>Tetrapleurodon</em> (subfamily Entospheninae) and one comprised of <em>Eudontomyzon</em>, <em>Lampetra</em>, and <em>Okkelbergia</em> were recovered.

Biology, Management, and Conservation of Lampreys in North America

2009 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
Columbia River ◽  
The Other ◽  
Fish Length ◽  
Willamette River ◽  
Radio Transmitter ◽  
Management And Conservation ◽  
Null Expectation ◽  
Lampetra Tridentata

<em>Abstract</em>.—In-season homing of Pacific lampreys <em>Lampetra tridentata </em>was investigated using radiotelemetry in the lower Columbia River from 1998 through 1999. A total of 50 Pacific lampreys were captured: 25 at Willamette Falls (river kilometer [rkm] 45 on the Willamette River, a tributary to the Columbia River, with its confluence at rkm 163) and 25 at Bonneville Dam (rkm 238 on the Columbia River). Each fish was fitted with a radio transmitter, transported, and released in the Columbia River approximately 26 km downstream from the confluence of the Willamette River. Movement of the radio-tagged Pacific lampreys was monitored for several months using mobile and fixed receiver stations to observe rates of homing towards the site of original capture. Results indicated that the lampreys exhibited nonsignificant in-season homing fidelity (<em>p</em> = 0.622) based on the null expectation that one-half of the total recoveries would home and the other half would stray. Final location classifications were 17 homed, 20 strayed, and 13 undetermined. The undetermined classification included individuals that were not detected upstream of the confluence of the Willamette River or in other Columbia River tributaries. Final location classifications were not influenced by fish length (<em>p</em> = 0.594). Although considered weak swimmers, Pacific lampreys were capable of traveling at velocities near 2.5 km/h and sustaining that activity for at least 24 h.

scholarly journals A Brief History of English Bird Names and the American Ornithologists’ Union (now American Ornithological Society)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Winker
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Avian Diversity ◽  
Check List ◽  
Vernacular Names ◽  
History Of ◽  
Underlying Processes ◽  
Management And Conservation

English bird names exist to increase the effectiveness of communication and to make ornithology more accessible to English speakers and readers. This was recognized from the first edition of the Check-list, when it was considered important to include a vernacular and technical name for each species (AOU 1886:15). Every edition of the Check-list and its Supplements have included English names for this purpose. Improving communication is an important job, and to be effective a name choice usually has to be made, especially among widespread birds with many vernacular names. The Check-list has been the standard for North America for over a century, and underpins the legal basis for the management and conservation of avian diversity across most of the continent. Choices for the English names given in the Check-list have been made under clear criteria and guidelines (Appendices I-III) that are responsive both to increased scientific knowledge and to changing societal mores (AOS NACC 2020). For more than a century, and for many different reasons, many people have been unhappy with choices made about particular English bird names and about the underlying processes. From the published history alone, it is clear that no process will achieve universal consensus, yet there remain many emergent merits to a standardized and widely adopted approach to English bird names.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document