Alosa alabamae - Jordan and Evermann, 1896
Alabama Shad
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Alosa alabamae Jordan and Evermann in Evermann, 1896 (TSN 161705)
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.104407
Element Code: AFCFA01020
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Fishes - Bony Fishes - Other Bony Fishes
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Actinopterygii Clupeiformes Clupeidae Alosa
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: Robins, C.R., R.M. Bailey, C.E. Bond, J.R. Brooker, E.A. Lachner, R.N. Lea, and W.B. Scott. 1991. Common and scientific names of fishes from the United States and Canada. American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 20. 183 pp.
Concept Reference Code: B91ROB01NAUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Alosa alabamae
Taxonomic Comments: Forms a geographically disjunct species pair with A. sapidissima (Berry 1964).
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G2G3
Global Status Last Reviewed: 08May2011
Global Status Last Changed: 08May2011
Rounded Global Status: G2 - Imperiled
Reasons: Limited distribution in Gulf of Mexico tributaries; populations are greatly reduced due to blockage of the spawning migration by locks and dams; habitat has been degraded by siltation and pollutants.
Nation: United States
National Status: N2N3 (08May2011)

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
United States Alabama (S2), Arkansas (S1), Florida (S2), Georgia (S1), Indiana (SX), Iowa (SH), Kentucky (S1), Louisiana (S1), Mississippi (S1), Missouri (S2), Oklahoma (S2), Tennessee (SH)

Other Statuses

IUCN Red List Category: DD - Data deficient
American Fisheries Society Status: Threatened (01Aug2008)

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent: 200,000-2,500,000 square km (about 80,000-1,000,000 square miles)
Range Extent Comments: Historical range included the Gulf Coast from the Suwannee River, Florida, to the Mississippi River, westward in the Ouachita River system to eastern Oklahoma. The largest remaining population is in the Apalachicola River system below Jim Woodruff Lock and Dam; populations also persist in the Pascagoula River drainage of Mississippi (Ross 2001), the Conecuh and Choctawhatchee rivers in southcentral and southeastern Alabama (Robison and Buchanan 1988, Mettee et al. 1996), and the Mobile River drainage of Alabama (Boschung and Mayden 2004; Mettee, in Mirarchi et al. 2004). Recent Mobile Basin records are limited to single adults found in the Black Warrior River in 1998 (the first record from that river in more than 100 years) and in the Alabama River in 1993 and 1995 (Mettee et al. 1996). In the Mississippi River basin, this species is known from old records from as far north as Keokuk, Iowa (Coker 1930), the Ohio River at Louisville (Evermann 1902), and eastern Oklahoma (Moore 1957, Miller and Robison 2004); it has been found more recently in the Cumberland, Tennessee, Missouri, Arkansas, Ouachita, and Red rivers (see following for further details).

The species is sporadic and now depleted in the Mississippi River basin (Lee et al. 1980, Page and Burr 1991). Missouri has some of the last spawning populations in the Mississippi River system (Pflieger 1997). "Since 1988, 88 juveniles and eight adults of this uncommon species have been recorded in 14 Missouri collections from the lower Mississippi, Missouri, Meramec, Gasconade, and Osage rivers" (Pflieger 1997). In Arkansas, surveys in the Arkansas River (Buchanan 1976, Sanders et al. 1985) and Mississippi River (Carter 1984; Pennington et al. 1980, 1983; Beckett and Pennington 1986) did not yield any specimens. Mel Warren (pers. comm., 1999) reported that only two known spawning runs exist in the Mississippi River system (Meramec River, Missouri, and Ouachita River, Arkansas). This shad is known in Oklahoma from "only a handful of specimens and records from the Poteau and Illinois river drainages and from the Little River in McCurtain County" (Miller and Robison 2004); Miller and Robison were uncertain as to whether the species still occurs in Oklahoma. Historically it occurred in the Clinch and Stones rivers in Tennessee, and apparently it was widespread in Tennessee in pre-impoundment days, but Etnier and Starnes (1993) reported no recent records in Tennessee. Etnier and Starnes (1993) mentioned a large adult from the Tennessee River just below Kentucky Dam in Marshall County, Kentucky, collected in July 1986.

Number of Occurrences: 6 - 20
Number of Occurrences Comments: Only two known spawning runs exist in the Mississippi River system; additional spawning runs occur in the Florida panhandle (Mel Warren, pers. comm., 1999) and in southern Alabama (Mettee et al. 1996).

Population Size: Unknown
Population Size Comments: Total adult population size is unknown. Populations are small; this species is now very rare in the entire Mississippi River basin (Lee et al. 1980, Robison and Buchanan 1988, Etnier and Starnes 1993, Pflieger 1997).

Number of Occurrences with Good Viability/Integrity: Very few to few (1-12)

Overall Threat Impact: High
Overall Threat Impact Comments: Locks and dams built for navigation, hydroelectric generation, and flood control have effectively blocked migration routes to many historical upstream spawning areas (Robison and Buchanan 1988, Mirarchi et al. 2004). High-lift navigation dams on the Alabama and Tombigbee rivers have blocked spawning migrations in the Mobile basin. Streams have been degraded by siltation and pollution, and commercial and navigational dredging of sand bars has degraded or eliminated some spawning habitat. Major threats to the remaining populations in Alabama include increased sedimentation, pesticide runoff from agricultural operations, prolonged drought, and possible reservoir construction for water supply on major tributaries (Mettee, in Mirarchi et al. 2004). Formerly, commercial fishing in the Ohio River, amounting to several thousand pounds harvested per year, was a threat.

Short-term Trend: Decline of <30% to relatively stable
Short-term Trend Comments: Currently, area of occupancy, number of subpopulations, and population size probably are declining, but the rate of decline is unknown.

Long-term Trend: Decline of <70% to Relatively Stable
Long-term Trend Comments: Distribution and abundance of the Alabama shad have greatly diminished over past 20-50 years. The species has been eliminated from much of its former inland distribution, especially in the Mobile Basin and the Mississippi River Valley (Mel Warren, pers. comm., 1999; Boschung and Mayden 2004). It is now rare or extirpated in much of the former range in Alabama (Boschung and Mayden 2004); it may be extirpated from the upper Tombigbee, Cahaba, Coosa, and upper Alabama rivers in Alabama (Mettee, in Mirarchi et al. 2004). As of around 1990, this shad evidently was still declining in the Pearl River system of Louisiana and Mississippi (Gunning and Suttkus 1990). Ross (2001) reported that this species may be extirpated in the Pearl River.

Intrinsic Vulnerability: Moderately vulnerable

Environmental Specificity: Moderate. Generalist or community with some key requirements scarce.

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Protection Needs: Set catch limits.

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (200,000-2,500,000 square km (about 80,000-1,000,000 square miles)) Historical range included the Gulf Coast from the Suwannee River, Florida, to the Mississippi River, westward in the Ouachita River system to eastern Oklahoma. The largest remaining population is in the Apalachicola River system below Jim Woodruff Lock and Dam; populations also persist in the Pascagoula River drainage of Mississippi (Ross 2001), the Conecuh and Choctawhatchee rivers in southcentral and southeastern Alabama (Robison and Buchanan 1988, Mettee et al. 1996), and the Mobile River drainage of Alabama (Boschung and Mayden 2004; Mettee, in Mirarchi et al. 2004). Recent Mobile Basin records are limited to single adults found in the Black Warrior River in 1998 (the first record from that river in more than 100 years) and in the Alabama River in 1993 and 1995 (Mettee et al. 1996). In the Mississippi River basin, this species is known from old records from as far north as Keokuk, Iowa (Coker 1930), the Ohio River at Louisville (Evermann 1902), and eastern Oklahoma (Moore 1957, Miller and Robison 2004); it has been found more recently in the Cumberland, Tennessee, Missouri, Arkansas, Ouachita, and Red rivers (see following for further details).

The species is sporadic and now depleted in the Mississippi River basin (Lee et al. 1980, Page and Burr 1991). Missouri has some of the last spawning populations in the Mississippi River system (Pflieger 1997). "Since 1988, 88 juveniles and eight adults of this uncommon species have been recorded in 14 Missouri collections from the lower Mississippi, Missouri, Meramec, Gasconade, and Osage rivers" (Pflieger 1997). In Arkansas, surveys in the Arkansas River (Buchanan 1976, Sanders et al. 1985) and Mississippi River (Carter 1984; Pennington et al. 1980, 1983; Beckett and Pennington 1986) did not yield any specimens. Mel Warren (pers. comm., 1999) reported that only two known spawning runs exist in the Mississippi River system (Meramec River, Missouri, and Ouachita River, Arkansas). This shad is known in Oklahoma from "only a handful of specimens and records from the Poteau and Illinois river drainages and from the Little River in McCurtain County" (Miller and Robison 2004); Miller and Robison were uncertain as to whether the species still occurs in Oklahoma. Historically it occurred in the Clinch and Stones rivers in Tennessee, and apparently it was widespread in Tennessee in pre-impoundment days, but Etnier and Starnes (1993) reported no recent records in Tennessee. Etnier and Starnes (1993) mentioned a large adult from the Tennessee River just below Kentucky Dam in Marshall County, Kentucky, collected in July 1986.

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces

Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
Color legend for Distribution Map
Endemism: endemic to a single nation

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States AL, AR, FL, GA, IA, INextirpated, KY, LA, MO, MS, OK, TN

Range Map
No map available.


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
AL Bibb (01007)*, Choctaw (01023)*, Covington (01039)*, Dale (01045)*, Dallas (01047)*, Escambia (01053)*, Geneva (01061), Houston (01069)*, Marengo (01091)*, Monroe (01099)*, Perry (01105)*, Shelby (01117)*, Sumter (01119)*, Wilcox (01131)
AR Clark (05019), Hot Spring (05059), Nevada (05099), Ouachita (05103)
FL Calhoun (12013), Franklin (12037), Gadsden (12039), Gulf (12045), Jackson (12063), Liberty (12077)
GA Baker (13007), Brooks (13027), Colquitt (13071)*, Cook (13075)*, Decatur (13087), Dougherty (13095), Lowndes (13185)
KY Fulton (21075), Jefferson (21111)*, Livingston (21139), Marshall (21157)
LA East Baton Rouge (22033), East Feliciana (22037), Jefferson (22051)*, Livingston (22063), St. Helena (22091), St. Tammany (22103), Tangipahoa (22105)*, Washington (22117)
MO Boone (29019), Callaway (29027), Clark (29045)*, Cole (29051)*, Crawford (29055), Franklin (29071), Gasconade (29073), Jefferson (29099), Maries (29125), Moniteau (29135), Osage (29151), Perry (29157), Phelps (29161), Pulaski (29169), St. Louis (29189), Warren (29219)
MS Clay (28025)*, Hinds (28049), Lowndes (28087)*, Madison (28089), Rankin (28121)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
03 Upper Suwannee (03110201), withlacoochee (03110203)+, Little (03110204)+*, Lower Suwannee (03110205), Santa Fe (03110206), Lower Ochlockonee (03120003), Lower Chattahoochee (03130004), Lower Flint (03130008)+, Ichawaynochaway (03130009)+, Apalachicola (03130011)+, Chipola (03130012)+, St. Andrew-St. Joseph Bays (03140101), Choctawhatchee Bay (03140102), Yellow (03140103)+, Upper Choctawhatchee (03140201)+, Pea (03140202), Lower Choctawhatchee (03140203)+, Lower Conecuh (03140304)+, Escambia (03140305), Lower Coosa (03150107)*, Upper Alabama (03150201)+*, Cahaba (03150202)+, Middle Alabama (03150203)+, Lower Alabama (03150204)+, Upper Tombigbee (03160101)+*, Middle Tombigbee-Lubbub (03160106)+*, Lower Black Warrior (03160113), Middle Tombigbee-Chickasaw (03160201)+, Lower Tambigbee (03160203)*, Mobile Bay (03160205), Upper Chickasawhay (03170002)*, Upper Leaf (03170004), Lower Leaf (03170005), Pascagoula (03170006), Mississippi Coastal (03170009), Upper Pearl (03180001), Middle Pearl-Strong (03180002)+, Middle Pearl-Silver (03180003), Lower Pearl. Mississippi (03180004)+, Bogue Chitto (03180005)+
05 Lower Cumberland-Sycamore (05130202)*, Silver-Little Kentucky (05140101)+*
06 Lower Clinch (06010207)*, Kentucky Lake (06040005)+, Lower Tennessee (06040006)
07 Copperas-Duck (07080101)*, Flint-Henderson (07080104)*, Bear-Wyaconda (07110001)+*, Cahokia-Joachim (07140101), Meramec (07140102)+, Bourbeuse (07140103)+, Big (07140104)+, Upper Mississippi-Cape Girardeau (07140105)+
08 Lower Mississippi-Memphis (08010100)+, Lower Mississippi-Helena (08020100), Lower Mississippi-Greenville (08030100), Upper Ouachita (08040102)+, Little Missouri (08040103)+, Lower Ouachita-Smackover (08040201), Lower Ouachita-Bayou De Loutre (08040202), Amite (08070202)+, Tickfaw (08070203), Tangipahoa (08070205)+, East Central Louisiana Coastal (08090301)+*
10 Lower Osage (10290111)+, Upper Gasconade (10290201)+, Lower Gasconade (10290203)+, Lower Missouri-Moreau (10300102)+, Lower Missouri (10300200)+
11 Dirty-Greenleaf (11110102), Illinois (11110103), Frog-Mulberry (11110201)*, Upper Little (11140107)*
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed (based on multiple information sources) Help
Ecology & Life History
Help
Basic Description: Alabama shad, Clupeidae.
General Description: An elongate, silvery fish, 55-60 scales in the lateral series; 15-17 rays in dorsal fin, 18-19 rays in anal fin; dorsum greenish blue; fins generally clear, with slightly darker margin on dorsal and caudal fins; adults are 30-46 cm (Mettee et al. 1996).
Reproduction Comments: Adults appear in spawning rivers January-April in southern coastal sites and are present in the upper Mississippi from April to July (Coker 1930, Pflieger 1997). In Alabama, adults spawn in April, when water temperatures reach 18-20 C, and migrate downstream thereafter (Mettee et al. 1996). Young-of-the-year are found in the Mississippi River in Missouri only between mid-July and early October (Pflieger 1975, 1997). Juveniles stay in fresh water for 6-8 months, leave rivers by winter, return to spawn usually when 3-4 years old. Using otoliths, Mettee et al. (1996) found that males were 1-4 years old and females were 2-6 years old; this is 2-3 years older than previous determinations that used scale readings.
Habitat Type: Freshwater
Non-Migrant: N
Locally Migrant: Y
Long Distance Migrant: Y
Mobility and Migration Comments: This fish migrates between its river spawning habitat and marine nonspawning habitat. It enters river mouths from January through March and arrives in the Alabama reach of the Choctawhatcheee and Conecuh rivers in March (Mettee et al. 1996). Adults have been found in the Mississippi River near Keokuk, Iowa, from early May to late July (Coker 1930).
Marine Habitat(s): Near shore
Estuarine Habitat(s): Bay/sound, Lagoon, River mouth/tidal river
Riverine Habitat(s): BIG RIVER, Low gradient, MEDIUM RIVER, Moderate gradient
Habitat Comments: This is an anadromous fish; adults live in saltwater and migrate into medium to large coastal rivers to spawn. Mettee et al. (1996) stated that actual spawning has not been observed but probably occurs in open, flowing water over sand bars in late afternoon or at night. In northwestern Florida, spawning occurs at 19-22 C in moderate current over coarse sand and gravel (Laurence and Yerger 1966, Mills 1972). In Missouri, young were captured in swift water about rock wing dikes in the Osage River and over rocky shoals having noticeable current in the Gasconade River.


Adult Food Habits: Invertivore, Piscivore
Immature Food Habits: Invertivore, Piscivore
Food Comments: Spawning adults do not feed while in freshwater. Adults not in spawning condition eat aquatic insects, crustaceans, small fishes, and vegetation. Juveniles eat small fishes and aquatic insects in rivers before emigrating to sea (Laurence and Yerger 1966).
Length: 45 centimeters
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary
Help
Management Requirements: A primary management need is the creation of fishways so that shad can migrate through or around locks and dams.
Biological Research Needs: Obtain life-history information.
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Fishes with Anadromous Populations

Use Class: Freshwater
Subtype(s): Rearing & Migration Area, Spawning & Rearing Area
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Occurrences are based on evidence of historical presence, or current and likely recurring presence, at a given location. Such evidence minimally includes collection or reliable observation and documentation of one or more individuals (including eggs and larvae) in appropriate habitat. For anadromous populations, occurrences are based on collection or reliable observation and documentation of one or more spawning adults, redds, other evidence of spawning, or larvae or juveniles in appropriate spawning/rearing habitat.
Mapping Guidance: Conceptually, the occurrence includes the entire freshwater area used by the population, including spawning, rearing, and migration areas. For anadromous populations, an occurrence should extend from the most upstream spawning areas downstream to the ocean. However, it is desirable (and practical) to subdivide this sometimes very large occurrence, sometimes overlapping with many other spaghetti-like occurrences extending down from the upstream spawning areas to the ocean, into separate source features or sub-occurrences, labeled with a feature label that reflects the life history stage in that area. Moreover, it may make practical sense to treat the areas downstream of spawning and/or rearing areas as a mixed element animal assemblage: Freshwater Salmon Migration Corridor. This negates the need to separately map each occurrence down to the ocean from its upstream spawning location. Information about areas with different life-history uses can be generated by using best professional judgment by district or regional fish biologists and may or may not incorporate specific locational information from spawning surveys or other surveys.
Separation Barriers: Dam lacking a suitable fishway; high waterfall; upland habitat that is very unlikely to be submerged even during periods of exceptionally high water (e.g., 100-year flood or 1% flood).
Alternate Separation Procedure: For anadromous populations and migratory populations that have distinct and separate spawning and nonspawning areas, the area used by each population whose spawning area is separated by a gap of at least 10 stream-km from other spawning areas within a stream system is potentially mappable as a distinct occurrence that extends down to the ocean (but see mapping guidance), regardless of whether the spawning areas are in the same or different tributaries.

For other (e.g., nonanadromous) populations in streams, separation distance is 10 stream-km for both suitable and unsuitable habitat. However, if it is known that the same population occupies sites separated by more than 10 km (e.g., this may be common for migratory, nonanadromous populations), those sites should be included within the same occurrence. In lakes, occurrences include all suitable habitat that is presumed to be occupied (based on expert judgment), even if documented collection/observation points are more than 10 km apart. Separate sub-occurrences or source features may usefully document locations of critical spawning areas within a lake.

Separation Justification: The separation distance is arbitrary but was selected to ensure that occurrences are of manageable size but not too small. Because of the difficulty in defining suitable versus unsuitable habitat, especially with respect to dispersal, and to simplify the delineation of occurrences, a single separation distance is used regardless of habitat quality.

"Restricted movement is the norm in populations of stream salmonids during nonmigratory periods," but there is considerable variation in movements within and among species (Rodriguez 2002). Redband trout in Montana had October-December home ranges of 5-377 m, consistent with small movements observed for radio-tagged brook trout and cutthroat trout during fall and winter (Muhlfeld et al. 2001). For nonanadromous populations, little is known about juvenile dispersal (e.g., how far fishes may move between between their embryonic developmental habitat and eventual spawning site).

In summer and fall, radio-tagged cutthroat trout in Strawberry Reservoir in Utah had single-month home ranges that were usually about 3-4 km in maximum length (Baldwin et al. 2002). In the Blackfoot River drainage, Montana, radio-tagged westslope cutthroat trout moved 3-72 km (mean 31 km) to access spawning tributaries (Schmetterling 2001). This indicates that migratory but nonanadromous populations may use extensive areas and that one should not invoke the 10-km separation distance without considering the full extent of the population.

Date: 25Nov2009
Author: Hammerson, G., and L. Master
Notes: This Specs Group comprises fish species that include anadromous populations (may also include nonanadromous populations), such as lampreys, sturgeons, herrings, shads, salmonids, and smelts.

Criteria for marine occurrences (Location Use Class: Marine) have not yet been established. These may not be needed for marine occurrences of species that likely will be dealt with as mixed element assemblages (e.g., Salmonid Marine Concentration Area).

Feature Descriptor Definitions:

Spawning Area: area used for spawning but not for rearing or migration.

Rearing Area: area used for larval/juvenile development but not for spawning or migration.

Migration Corridor: area used for migration but not for rearing or spawning.

Population/Occurrence Viability
Help
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank) Not yet assessed
Help
Authors/Contributors
Help
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Edition Date: 08May2011
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Hammerson, G.
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 30Oct2006
Element Ecology & Life History Author(s): Hammerson, G.

Zoological data developed by NatureServe and its network of natural heritage programs (see Local Programs) and other contributors and cooperators (see Sources).

References
Help
  • Barkuloo, J. M. 1993. Systematic and population status of Alabama shad in rivers tributary to the Gulf of Mexico. Panama City, Florida, 1993.

  • Beckett, D. C., and C. H. Pennington. 1986. Water quality, macroinvertebrates, larval fishes, and fishes of the lower Mississippi River--a synthesis. Tech. Rep. E-86-12, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

  • Berry, F. H. 1964. Review of: S. F. Hildebrand, family Clupeidae, in: The fishes of the western North Atlantic. Copeia 1964:720-730.

  • Boschung, H. T., and R. L. Mayden. 2004. Fishes of Alabama. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. 736 pages.

  • Buchanan, T. M. 1976. An evaluation of the effects of dredging within the Arkansas River Navigation System. Vol. 5. The effects upon the fish fauna. Arkansas Water Resources Research Center Publ. No. 47. 277 pp.

  • Carter, F. A. 1984. Fishes collected from the Mississippi River and adjacent flood areas in Arkansas, river mile 770.0 to river mile 816.0. M.S. thesis, Arkansas State University, Jonesboro. 42 pp.

  • Coker, R. E. 1929 (1930). Studies of common fishes of the Mississippi River at Keokuk. Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Fisheries 45:141-225.

  • Douglas, Neil H. 1974. Freshwater fishes of Louisiana. Claitor's publ. div. Baton Rouge, Louisiana. 443 pp.

  • Etnier, David A. and Wayne C. Starnes. 1993. The Fishes of Tennessee. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville. 681 pp.

  • Evermann, B. W. 1902. Description of a new species of shad (Alosa ohioensis) with notes on other food-fishes of the Ohio River. Report of the U.S. Fisheries Commission (1901):273-288.

  • Gunning, G. E., and R. D. Suttkus. 1990. Decline of the Alabama shad, ALOSA ALABAMAE, in the Pearl River, Louisiana-Mississippi: 1963-1988. Southeastern Fishes Council Proceedings 21:3-4.

  • Jelks, H. L., S. J. Walsh, N. M. Burkhead, S. Contreras-Balderas, E. Díaz-Pardo, D. A. Hendrickson, J. Lyons, N. E. Mandrak, F. McCormick, J. S. Nelson, S. P. Platania, B. A. Porter, C. B. Renaud, J. Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, E. B. Taylor, and M.L. Warren, Jr. 2008. Conservation status of imperiled North American freshwater and diadromous fishes. Fisheries 33(8):372-407.

  • Laurence, G. C., and R. W. Yerger. 1966. Life history studies of the Alabama shad, alosa alabamae, in the Apalachicola River, Florida. Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association of Game and Fish Commisioners, pp. 260-273.

  • Limburg, K. E., and J. R. Waldman. 2003. Biodiversity, status, and conservation of the world's shads. American Fisheries Society Symposium 35.

  • Mettee, M. F., P. E. O'Neil, and T. E. Shepard. 1995. Status survey of gulf sturgeon Acipenser oxyrinchus desotoi and Alabama shad Alosa alabamae in the Choctawhatchee, Conecuh, and Alabama river systems, 1992-95. Geological Survey of Alabama open-file report. 30 pp.

  • Miller, R. J., and H. W. Robison. 2004. Fishes of Oklahoma. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. 450 pp.

  • Mills, J. G. 1972. Biology of the Alabama shad in northwest Florida. State of Florida Department of Natural Resources, Technical Series No. 68. 24 pp.

  • Mirarchi, R. E., J. T. Garner, M. F. Mettee, and P.E. O'Neil, editors. 2004. Alabama wildlife. Volume 2. Imperiled aquatic mollusks and fishes. The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. 255 pages

  • Mirarchi, R.E., J.T. Garner, M.F. Mettee, and P.E. O'Neil. 2004b. Alabama wildlife. Volume 2. Imperiled aquatic mollusks and fishes. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. xii + 255 pp.

  • Mirarchi, R.E., M.A. Bailey, J.T. Garner, T.M. Haggerty, T.L. Best, M.F. Mettee, and P. O'Neil, editors. 2004. Alabama Wildlife. Volume 4. Conservation and management recommendations for imperiled wildlife. The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. 221 pages.

  • Mirarchi, R.E., editor. 2004. Alabama Wildlife. Volume 1. A checklist of vertebrates and selected invertebrates: aquatic mollusks, fishes, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. 209 pages.

  • Moore, G. A. 1957. Fishes (pages 31-210 in Vertebrates of the United States, by W. F. Blair et al.). McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York.

  • Nelson, J. S., E. J. Crossman, H. Espinosa-Perez, L. T. Findley, C. R. Gilbert, R. N. Lea, and J. D. Williams. 2004. Common and scientific names of fishes from the United States, Canada, and Mexico. American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 29, Bethesda, Maryland. 386 pp.

  • Nelson, J. S., E. J. Crossman, H. Espinosa-Pérez, L. T. Findley, C. R. Gilbert, R. N. Lea, and J. D. Williams. 2004. Common and scientific names of fishes from the United States, Canada, and Mexico. Sixth edition. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 29. 386 pages.

  • Page, L. M., H. Espinosa-Pérez, L. T. Findley, C. R. Gilbert, R. N. Lea, N. E. Mandrak, R. L. Mayden, and J. S. Nelson. 2013. Common and scientific names of fishes from the United States, Canada, and Mexico. Seventh edition. American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 34, Bethesda, Maryland.

  • Page, L. M., and B. M. Burr. 1991. A field guide to freshwater fishes: North America north of Mexico. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, Massachusetts. 432 pp.

  • Page, L. M., and B. M. Burr. 2011. Peterson field guide to freshwater fishes of North America north of Mexico. Second edition. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston. xix + 663 pp.

  • Page, LM, H.Espinoza-Perez, L.Findley, C.Gilbert, R. Lea, N. Mandrak, R.Mayden and J.Nelson. 2013. Common and scientific names of fishes from the United States, Canada, and Mexico, 7th edition. American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 34, Bethesda, Maryland.

  • Pennington, C. H., H. L. Schramm, Jr., M. E. Potter, and M. P. Farrell. 1980. Aquatic habitat studies on the lower Mississippi river, river mile 480 to 530. Report 5, Fish Studies-pilot report. Environmental and Water Quality Operational Studies. Misc. Paper E-80-1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg. 45 pp.

  • Pennington, C. H., J. A. Baker, and M. E. Potter. 1983. Fish populations along natural and revetted banks on the lower Mississippi river. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 3(2):204-211.

  • Pflieger, W. L. 1997a. The fishes of Missouri. Revised edition. Missouri Department of Conservation, Jefferson City. vi + 372 pp.

  • ROSS, STEPHEN T. 1996. INLAND FISHES OF MISSISSIPPI. SELECTED SPECIES ACCOUNTS. COAUTHORED WITH W.M. BRENNEMAM, W.T. SLACK, M.T. O'CONNELL, AND T.L. PETERSON. ILLUSTRATED BY D.G. ROSS. DRAFT COPY.

  • Robins, C.R., R.M. Bailey, C.E. Bond, J.R. Brooker, E.A. Lachner, R.N. Lea, and W.B. Scott. 1991. Common and scientific names of fishes from the United States and Canada. American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 20. 183 pp.

  • Rodriguez, M. A. 2002. Restricted movement in stream fish: the paradigm is complete, not lost. Ecology 83(1):1-13.

  • Ross, S. T. (with W. M. Brennaman, W. T. Slack, M. T. O'Connell, and T. L. Peterson). 2001a. The Inland Fishes of Mississippi. University Press of Mississippi: Mississippi. xx + 624 pp.

  • Rulifson, R. A., and M. T. Huish. 1982. Anadromous fish in the southeastern United States and recommendations for development of a management plan. Atlanta, Georgia.

  • Sanders, L. G., J. A. Baker, C. L. Bond, and C. H. Pennington. 1985. Biota of selected aquatic habitats of the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System. Tech. Rep. E-85-6. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg.

  • Simon, Thomas P. 2011. Fishes of Indiana. Indiana University Press. Bloomington, 345 pp.

References for Watershed Distribution Map
  • Boschung, H. T., and R. L. Mayden. 2004. Fishes of Alabama. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. 960 pp.

  • Burr, B. M., and M. L. Warren, Jr. 1986a. Distributional atlas of Kentucky fishes. Kentucky Nature Preserves Commission, Scientific and Technical Series No. 4, Frankfort, Kentucky. 398 pp.

  • Douglas, N. H. 1974. Freshwater fishes of Louisiana. Claitor's Publishing Division, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. 443 pp.

  • Etnier, D. A., and W. C. Starnes. 1993. The fishes of Tennessee. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, Tennessee. xiv + 681 pp.

  • Lee, D. S., C. R. Gilbert, C. H. Hocutt, R. E. Jenkins, D. E. McAllister, and J. R. Stauffer, Jr. 1980. Atlas of North American freshwater fishes. North Carolina State Museum of Natural History, Raleigh, North Carolina. i-x + 854 pp.

  • Mettee, M. F., P. E. O'Neil, and J. M. Pierson. 1996. Fishes of Alabama and the Mobile Basin. Oxmoor House, Birmingham, Alabama. 820 pp.

  • Pflieger, W. L. 1975. The fishes of Missouri. Missouri Department of Conservation. Columbia, Missouri. viii + 343 pp.

  • Robison, H. W. and T. M. Buchanan. 1988. Fishes of Arkansas. The University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas. 536 pp.

  • Ross, S. T., and W. M. Brenneman. 1991. Distribution of freshwater fishes in Mississippi. Freshwater Fisheries Report No. 108. D-J Project Completion Report F-69. Mississippi Department of Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries and Parks. Jackson, Mississippi. 548 pp.

  • Smith, P. W. 1979. The fishes of Illinois. University of Illinois Press, Urbana. 314 pp.

Use Guidelines & Citation

Use Guidelines and Citation

The Small Print: Trademark, Copyright, Citation Guidelines, Restrictions on Use, and Information Disclaimer.

Note: All species and ecological community data presented in NatureServe Explorer at http://explorer.natureserve.org were updated to be current with NatureServe's central databases as of March 2018.
Note: This report was printed on

Trademark Notice: "NatureServe", NatureServe Explorer, The NatureServe logo, and all other names of NatureServe programs referenced herein are trademarks of NatureServe. Any other product or company names mentioned herein are the trademarks of their respective owners.

Copyright Notice: Copyright © 2018 NatureServe, 4600 N. Fairfax Dr., 7th Floor, Arlington Virginia 22203, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Each document delivered from this server or web site may contain other proprietary notices and copyright information relating to that document. The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference the web site.

Citation for data on website including State Distribution, Watershed, and Reptile Range maps:
NatureServe. 2018. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. (Accessed:

Citation for Bird Range Maps of North America:
Ridgely, R.S., T.F. Allnutt, T. Brooks, D.K. McNicol, D.W. Mehlman, B.E. Young, and J.R. Zook. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Birds of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Bird Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Robert Ridgely, James Zook, The Nature Conservancy - Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International - CABS, World Wildlife Fund - US, and Environment Canada - WILDSPACE."

Citation for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
Patterson, B.D., G. Ceballos, W. Sechrest, M.F. Tognelli, T. Brooks, L. Luna, P. Ortega, I. Salazar, and B.E. Young. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Mammals of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Bruce Patterson, Wes Sechrest, Marcelo Tognelli, Gerardo Ceballos, The Nature Conservancy-Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International-CABS, World Wildlife Fund-US, and Environment Canada-WILDSPACE."

Citation for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe. 2004. Global Amphibian Assessment. IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe, Washington, DC and Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
"Data developed as part of the Global Amphibian Assessment and provided by IUCN-World Conservation Union, Conservation International and NatureServe."

NOTE: Full metadata for the Bird Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/birdDistributionmapsmetadatav1.pdf.

Full metadata for the Mammal Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/mammalsDistributionmetadatav1.pdf.

Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute documents delivered from this server is hereby granted under the following conditions:
  1. The above copyright notice must appear in all copies;
  2. Any use of the documents available from this server must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes;
  3. Some data may be downloaded to files and altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above;
  4. No graphics available from this server can be used, copied or distributed separate from the accompanying text. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring by implication, estoppel, or otherwise any license or right under any trademark of NatureServe. No trademark owned by NatureServe may be used in advertising or promotion pertaining to the distribution of documents delivered from this server without specific advance permission from NatureServe. Except as expressly provided above, nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring any license or right under any NatureServe copyright.
Information Warranty Disclaimer: All documents and related graphics provided by this server and any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server are provided "as is" without warranty as to the currentness, completeness, or accuracy of any specific data. NatureServe hereby disclaims all warranties and conditions with regard to any documents provided by this server or any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, including but not limited to all implied warranties and conditions of merchantibility, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement. NatureServe makes no representations about the suitability of the information delivered from this server or any other documents that are referenced to or linked to this server. In no event shall NatureServe be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, consequential damages, or for damages of any kind arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information contained in any documents provided by this server or in any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, under any theory of liability used. NatureServe may update or make changes to the documents provided by this server at any time without notice; however, NatureServe makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. Since the data in the central databases are continually being updated, it is advisable to refresh data retrieved at least once a year after its receipt. The data provided is for planning, assessment, and informational purposes. Site specific projects or activities should be reviewed for potential environmental impacts with appropriate regulatory agencies. If ground-disturbing activities are proposed on a site, the appropriate state natural heritage program(s) or conservation data center can be contacted for a site-specific review of the project area (see Visit Local Programs).

Feedback Request: NatureServe encourages users to let us know of any errors or significant omissions that you find in the data through (see Contact Us). Your comments will be very valuable in improving the overall quality of our databases for the benefit of all users.