Ammocrypta clara - Jordan and Meek, 1885
Western Sand Darter
Synonym(s): Ammocrypta clarum ;Etheostoma clarum (Jordan and Meek, 1885)
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Ammocrypta clara Jordan and Meek, 1885 (TSN 168515)
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.105965
Element Code: AFCQC01040
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Fishes - Bony Fishes - Perches and Darters
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Actinopterygii Perciformes Percidae Ammocrypta
Genus Size: C - Small genus (6-20 species)
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: Ammocrypta clara
Taxonomic Comments: In a phylogenetic analysis based on morphology, Simons (1991) concluded that Ammocrypta asprella should be included in the genus Crystallaria (generally has been regarded as a subgenus of Ammocrypta ) and that the genus Ammocrypta should be regarded as a subgenus of Etheostoma. Page and Burr (1991), Simons (1992), and Wiley (1992) adopted this change, but Etnier and Starnes (1993) and Jenkins and Burkhead (1994) retained Ammocrypta as a distinct genus and treated Crystallaria as a subgenus. Patterns of molecular variation are consistent with the recognition of Ammocrypta species as taxonomically distinct from Etheostoma (Wood and Mayden 1997, Faber and Stepien 1998, Near et al. 2000). Nelson et al. (2004) recognized Ammocrypta as the appropriate genus for this species.
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G3
Global Status Last Reviewed: 19Oct2011
Global Status Last Changed: 28Aug2001
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by inspection
Rounded Global Status: G3 - Vulnerable
Reasons: Spotty distribution in streams from Wisconsin and Kentucky to Texas and Mississippi; has declined in several regions due to habitat degradation (e.g., siltation, impoundments); however, this cryptic species may be more common than it currently appears to be, and it is more common in the northern part of the range than in areas farther south.
Nation: United States
National Status: N3 (05Sep1996)

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 Arkansas (S3), Illinois (S2), Indiana (S2), Iowa (S2), Kentucky (S1), Louisiana (S2), Minnesota (S4), Mississippi (S1), Missouri (S2S3), Oklahoma (S2?), Tennessee (S1), Texas (S3), Virginia (S1), West Virginia (S1), Wisconsin (S3S4)

Other Statuses

American Fisheries Society Status: Vulnerable (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: This species has a wide but spotty distribution. It is known from the Neches and Sabine river drainages, eastern Texas (Hubbs et al. 1991, Warren et al. 2000); Mississippi River basin from Minnesota and Wisconsin south to Texas, Mississippi (Big Black River system; Ross 2001), and Louisiana (Douglas and Jordan 2002); east to the Green and Cumberland river drainages, Kentucky (pre-1930 records, and recently rediscovered), and the Clinch-Powell river system in the upper Tennessee River drainage, Tennessee and Virginia (Etnier and Starnes 1993, Jenkins and Burkhead 1994); Lake Michigan drainage, including the Wolf River system in Wisconsin (Becker 1965, 1983), and the Menominee River drainage along the Wisconsin-upper Michigan border (Bailey et al. 2004). Ammocrypta clara likely gained access to the Wolf River system via the Wisconsin-Fox Canal (Becker 1983).

Area of Occupancy: Unknown 4-km2 grid cells
Area of Occupancy Comments: Area of occupancy is unknown but might be less than 2,000 square kilometers (based on 1 x 1 km grid cells).

Number of Occurrences: 21 - 80
Number of Occurrences Comments: This species is represented by a large number of distinct, extant occurrences (subpopulations) (at least several dozen).

Population Size: 10,000 to >1,000,000 individuals
Population Size Comments: Total adult population size is unknown but likely exceeds 10,000. This species occurs in small isolated populations and is generally uncommon; it is extremely rare in the eastern part of the range (Page and Burr 2011) but common in a few rivers in the northern and western parts of the range (Page and Burr 1991). The species appears to be more abundant in the northern part of the range than farther south (Williams 1975). It is locally common in Wisconsin (Becker 1983) but not abundant anywhere in Missouri (Pflieger 1997). Small populations are sporadically distributed in Arkansas, where the species is not commonly collected (Robison and Buchanan 1988). It is "exceedingly rare" in the well-collected range in Tennessee (Etnier and Starnes 1993), rare in Virginia (Jenkins and Burkhead 1994) and Illinois (Smith 1979).

Number of Occurrences with Good Viability/Integrity: Few to some (4-40)
Viability/Integrity Comments: The number of occurrrences with good viability is unknown, but likely there are at least several.

Overall Threat Impact: Very high - high
Overall Threat Impact Comments: Habitat degradation is considered to be the primary cause of decline (Douglas, pers. comm. 1993; Shute, pers. comm. 1993; Jelks et al. 2008). Habitat has been degraded and remains threatened by siltation (Smith 1979, Pflieger 1997), such as results from poor agricultural practices, and chemical spills, such as that which occurred in the Clinch River in 1967. Alteration of the Mississippi River for commercial navigation purposes, including multiple lock and dam structures, has eliminated habitat for this species (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 2005). Impoundments undoubtedly have destroyed much habitat in the Tennessee River drainage (Burkhead and Jenkins 1991). Extirpations associated with impoundments in Illinois and Wisconsin were reported by Smith (1979) and Becker (1983); a Wisconsin extirpation below a dam also was associated with the use of fish toxicants during a carp control program (Becker 1983). In Tennessee, "both the Powell and Clinch river habitats are jeopardized by coal-related pollution originating in Virginia, and local gravel-removal operations pose an additional threat to the Powell River population" (Etnier and Starnes 1993). Stream channelization is a potential threat. Small scattered populations are highly vulnerable to local extirpation.

Short-term Trend: Unknown
Short-term Trend Comments: Trend over the past 10 years is unknown; overall, habitat quality and population size are suspected to be declining. Populations tend to fluctuate. A population may appear abundant for a time and then be essentially absent (Shute, pers. comm., 1994).

Long-term Trend: Decline of 10-50%
Long-term Trend Comments: Over the long term, this darter has declined in distribution and abundance (Kuehne and Barbour 1983; Hubbs, pers. comm. 1993; Burr, pers. comm. 1993), but the magnitude of the decline is uncertain. Much of the decline probably occurred decades ago. Recently the species as rated as "vulnerable" in the southern U.S. by Warren et al. (2000). In Iowa, it has been extirpated or nearly extirpated in the Cedar, Des Moines, Raccoon, and Shellrock rivers, and it persists as a widespread species only in the Mississippi River (Harlan et al. 1987). In Missouri, the species has progressively declined in collections from the upper Mississippi River since the early 1940s; it seems to be declining also in the lowlands of southeastern Missouri (Pflieger 1997). Trend in range extent in Arkansas is uncertain (Robison and Buchanan 1988). This species formerly was described as the most common darter in the Powell River, Tennessee, but now it is exceedingly rare in the well-collected Powell and upper Clinch rivers (Etnier and Starnes 1993); it is also rare, but apparently has been recovering, in the Clinch-Powell system in Virginia (Jenkins and Burkhead 1994). In Kentucky, the species has been found in 5 general locations, but in 3 of these the most recent records are earlier than 1984 (Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Information System, data through May 2005). A survey of the Big Black River system in Mississippi (the only known location for the species in that state), did not detect this species (Pezold et al. 1993).

Intrinsic Vulnerability: Moderately vulnerable

Environmental Specificity: Narrow. Specialist or community with key requirements common.

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (200,000-2,500,000 square km (about 80,000-1,000,000 square miles)) This species has a wide but spotty distribution. It is known from the Neches and Sabine river drainages, eastern Texas (Hubbs et al. 1991, Warren et al. 2000); Mississippi River basin from Minnesota and Wisconsin south to Texas, Mississippi (Big Black River system; Ross 2001), and Louisiana (Douglas and Jordan 2002); east to the Green and Cumberland river drainages, Kentucky (pre-1930 records, and recently rediscovered), and the Clinch-Powell river system in the upper Tennessee River drainage, Tennessee and Virginia (Etnier and Starnes 1993, Jenkins and Burkhead 1994); Lake Michigan drainage, including the Wolf River system in Wisconsin (Becker 1965, 1983), and the Menominee River drainage along the Wisconsin-upper Michigan border (Bailey et al. 2004). Ammocrypta clara likely gained access to the Wolf River system via the Wisconsin-Fox Canal (Becker 1983).

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 AR, IA, IL, IN, KY, LA, MN, MO, MS, OK, TN, TX, VA, WI, WV

Range Map
No map available.


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
AR Ashley (05003), Bradley (05011), Clay (05021), Hempstead (05057), Independence (05063), Jackson (05067), Lafayette (05073), Lawrence (05075), Lee (05077), Miller (05091), Randolph (05121), Sevier (05133)
IA Benton (19011), Black Hawk (19013), Boone (19015)*, Bremer (19017), Buchanan (19019)*, Butler (19023), Clayton (19043)*, Clinton (19045), Dallas (19049)*, Des Moines (19057), Greene (19073)*, Jackson (19097), Linn (19113), Muscatine (19139), Polk (19153)*, Wapello (19179)*, Warren (19181)*, Webster (19187)*
IL Calhoun (17013)*, Carroll (17015), Fayette (17051), Jackson (17077), Jo Daviess (17085), Logan (17107), Madison (17119)*, Mercer (17131)*, Pike (17149)*, Randolph (17157)*, Rock Island (17161), Shelby (17173), Union (17181)*, Will (17197), Winnebago (17201)*
IN Daviess (18027), Dubois (18037), Knox (18083), Martin (18101), Pike (18125)
KY Breathitt (21025), Butler (21031), Edmonson (21061), Green (21087)*, Hart (21099), Martin (21159)*, Warren (21227), Wayne (21231)*
LA Avoyelles (22009), Beauregard (22011), Bossier (22015), Caddo (22017), De Soto (22031)*, Morehouse (22067), Natchitoches (22069), Ouachita (22073), Rapides (22079), Red River (22081)*, Sabine (22085)*, Union (22111), Vernon (22115)
MO Butler (29023), Cape Girardeau (29031), Dunklin (29069), Franklin (29071), Jefferson (29099), Lewis (29111), Lincoln (29113), Marion (29127), Monroe (29137)*, New Madrid (29143), Pemiscot (29155), Perry (29157), Pike (29163), Ralls (29173), St. Charles (29183), St. Louis (29189), Ste. Genevieve (29186), Stoddard (29207), Wayne (29223)*
MS Copiah (28029)*, Madison (28089)*, Yazoo (28163)*
OK Choctaw (40023)
TN Claiborne (47025)
TX Hardin (48199), Harrison (48203)*, Jasper (48241)*, Newton (48351)*, Panola (48365)*, Rusk (48401)*, Tyler (48457)*
VA Lee (51105), Scott (51169)
WI Adams (55001), Buffalo (55011), Columbia (55021), Crawford (55023), Dane (55025), Dunn (55033), Grant (55043), Iowa (55049), Jackson (55053), Jefferson (55055)*, Juneau (55057)*, La Crosse (55063), Monroe (55081), Outagamie (55087), Pepin (55091), Pierce (55093), Polk (55095), Richland (55103), Sauk (55111), Shawano (55115), St. Croix (55109), Trempealeau (55121), Vernon (55123), Waupaca (55135)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
04 Wolf (04030202)+
05 Tug (05070201)+*, North Fork Kentucky (05100201)+, Upper Green (05110001)+, Tippecanoe (05120106), Lower White (05120202)+, Lower East Fork White (05120208)+, Upper Cumberland-Lake Cumberland (05130103)+*
06 Upper Clinch (06010205)+, Powell (06010206)+
07 Twin Cities (07010206)*, Lower Minnesota (07020012)*, Lower St. Croix (07030005)+, Rush-Vermillion (07040001)+, Buffalo-Whitewater (07040003)+, Zumbro (07040004), Trempealeau (07040005)+, La Crosse-Pine (07040006)+, Black (07040007)+, Root (07040008), Lower Chippewa (07050005)+, Red Cedar (07050007)+, Coon-Yellow (07060001)+, Grant-Little Maquoketa (07060003)+, Apple-Plum (07060005)+, Castle Rock (07070003)+, Baraboo (07070004)+, Lower Wisconsin (07070005)+, Copperas-Duck (07080101)+, Upper Wapsipinicon (07080102)+*, Lower Wapsipinicon (07080103)+*, Flint-Henderson (07080104)+, South Skunk (07080105)+*, Skunk (07080107)+*, Upper Cedar (07080201)+, Shell Rock (07080202)+, West Fork Cedar (07080204)+, Middle Cedar (07080205)+, Lower Cedar (07080206)+, Middle Iowa (07080208)+, Upper Rock (07090001)+*, Sugar (07090004)+, Lower Rock (07090005)*, Middle Des Moines (07100004)+*, North Raccoon (07100006)+*, Lake Red Rock (07100008)+*, Lower Des Moines (07100009)+*, Bear-Wyaconda (07110001)+, North Fabius (07110002)+, South Fabius (07110003)+, The Sny (07110004)+, South Fork Salt (07110006)+*, Salt (07110007)+, Peruque-Piasa (07110009)+, Kankakee (07120001)+, Spoon (07130005)*, Salt (07130009)+, La Moine (07130010)*, Cahokia-Joachim (07140101)+, Meramec (07140102)+, Big (07140104)+, Upper Mississippi-Cape Girardeau (07140105)+, Upper Kaskaskia (07140201)+, Middle Kaskaskia (07140202)+
08 Upper St. Francis (08020202)+*, Lower St. Francis (08020203)+, Little River Ditches (08020204)+, Cache (08020302), Lower White (08020303), Lower Ouachita-Bayou De Loutre (08040202)+, Lower Saline (08040204)+, Bayou Bartholomew (08040205)+, Lower Red (08040301)+, Lower Big Black (08060202)+*, Bayou Pierre (08060203)+*, Bayou Teche (08080102)+
11 Middle White (11010004)+, Upper Black (11010007)+, Current (11010008)+, Lower Black (11010009)+, Spring (11010010)+, Strawberry (11010012)+, Upper White-Village (11010013)+, Bois D'arc-Island (11140101)+, Pecan-Waterhole (11140106), Lower Little (11140109)+, Mckinney-Posten Bayous (11140201)+, Middle Red-Coushatta (11140202)+, Red Chute (11140204)+*, Lower Red-Lake Iatt (11140207)+, Cross Bayou (11140304)+*
12 Middle Sabine (12010002)+, Toledo Bend Reservoir (12010004)+, Lower Sabine (12010005)+, Lower Neches (12020003)+, Village (12020006)+
+ 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: A small fish (sand darter).
General Description: A very slender, almost cylindrical, pallid fish with a series of dark spots along the back; back is translucent yellow, sides and belly are silvery white (may have indistinct dusky blotches along side) (Pflieger 1997); distinct opercular spine; upper lip separated from snout by a continuous groove, not connected at the midline by a narrow bridge of skin (Pflieger 1997); up to about 2.5 inches long.
Diagnostic Characteristics: Other sand darters lack a spine on the opercle, have well-developed dark blotches along the side, or have black bands on the dorsal fins (Page and Burr 1991).
Reproduction Comments: Spawns in summer, probably from about late June to early August in Iowa and Wisconsin, and probably late May-June in the upper Tennessee River system. In Wisconsin, lives 3 years at most. See Page (1983) and Burkhead and Jenkins (1991).
Habitat Type: Freshwater
Non-Migrant: N
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: N
Riverine Habitat(s): BIG RIVER, Low gradient, MEDIUM RIVER, Moderate gradient, Pool, Riffle
Special Habitat Factors: Benthic
Habitat Comments: Habitat is usually sandy runs of clear to moderately turbid medium and large rivers; this species is most common in slight to moderate current over coarse sand or fine gravel (Douglas 1974, Becker 1983, Robison and Buchanan 1988, Etnier and Starnes 1993, Pflieger 1997, Page and Burr 2011). In the Clinch River, Virginia, western sand darters were captured in a large riffle-run area with substrate dominated by large gravel and small and medium rubble; small patches of sand were more than 10 meters away (Jenkins and Burkhead 1994). It has been recorded as occurring in quiet margins of drainage canals and shallow backwaters, usually where there is enough current to keep the bottom largely free of silt. In the north, this species often occurs in the mouths of tributaries to large rivers, over bottoms of shifting sand (Eddy and Underhill 1974, Phillips et al. 1982). Habitats in the southern part of the range include more often include deep, open channels of medium to large streams, moderate-sized rivers, and sparsely vegetated ditches (Douglas 1974, Robison and Buchanan 1988, Etnier and Starnes 1993, Pflieger 1997). In the upper Tennessee River system, western sand darters may move into shallow riffles to spawn (see Burkhead and Jenkins 1991). Individuals bury themselves in sandy bottoms with only the eyes and part of the head protruding.
Adult Food Habits: Invertivore
Immature Food Habits: Invertivore
Food Comments: Eats mainly larval aquatic insects (Page 1983).
Length: 6 centimeters
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary
Help
Stewardship Overview: The primary management consideration for this species is maintenance of good water quality and prevention of stream siltation and impoundment.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (2005) identified the following priority conservation actions: (1) protect and restore appropriate habitat in the medium and large rivers of the Mississippi and Lake Michigan drainage basins; (2) control point and non-point source pollution, including use of broad riparian buffer strips, stiff pesticide regulations, upland erosion control, and modern pollution control systems; and (3) obtain more information on distribution, populations trends, and limiting factors.

Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Darters

Use Class: Not applicable
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.
Separation Barriers: Dam lacking a suitable fishway; high waterfall; upland habitat.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Justification: Data on dispersal and other movements generally are not available. Though larvae of some species may drift with the current, Turner (2001) found no significant relationship between a larval transport index and gene flow among several different darter species.

Separation distances are arbitrary but reflect the likely low probability that two occupied locations separated by less than several kilometers of aquatic habitat would represent truly independent populations.

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.

Occupied locations that are separated by a gap of 10 km or more of any aquatic habitat that is not known to be occupied generally represent different occurrences. However, it is important to evaluate seasonal changes in habitat to ensure that an occupied habitat occurrence for a particular population does not artificially separate spawning areas and nonspawning areas as different occurrences simply because there have been no collections/observations in an intervening area that may exceed the separation distance.

Date: 21Sep2004
Author: Hammerson, G.
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: 19Oct2011
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Neal, J., J. C. Whittaker, and G. Hammerson
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 19Oct2011
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
  • Allen, C. R., S. Demarais, and R. S. Lutz. 1994. Red imported fire ant impact on wildlife: an overview. The Texas Journal of Science 46(1):51-59.

  • Anderson, Allison A., C. Hubbs, K. O. Winemiller, and R. J. Edwards. 1995. Texas freshwater fish assemblages following three decades of environmental change. The Southwest Naturalist 40(3):314-321.

  • Bailey, R. M., W. C. Latta, and G. R. Smith. 2004. An atlas of Michigan fishes with keys and illustrations for their identification. University of Michigan Museum of Zoology Miscellaneous Publications No. 192. iv + 215 pp.

  • Becker, G. C. 1965. The western sand darter, Ammocrypta clara, in the Great Lakes basin. Copeia 1965:241.

  • Becker, G. C. 1983. Fishes of Wisconsin. Univ. Wisconsin Press, Madison. 1052 pp.

  • Becker, G. C. 1983. Fishes of Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison. 1,052 pp.

  • Burkhead, N. M., and R. E. Jenkins. 1991. Fishes. Pages 321-409 in K. Terwilliger (coordinator). Virginia's Endangered Species: Proceedings of a Symposium. McDonald and Woodward Publishing Company, Blacksburg, Virginia.

  • 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.

  • Dimmick, W.W. 1988. Discovery of the western sand darter, AMMOCRYPTA CLARA, in the Mississippi River below the confluence of the Missouri River. Trans. Ill. State Acad. Sci. 81(1& 2):211-212.

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

  • Douglas, N. H., and R. J. Jordan. 2002. Louisiana's inland fishes: a quarter century of change. Southeastern Fishes Council Proceedings (43):1-10.

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

  • Eddy, S. and J. C. Underhill. 1974. Northern fishes, with special reference to the Upper Mississippi Valley, 3rd edition. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Minnesota. 414 pp

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

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

  • Faber, J. E., and C. A. Stepien. 1998. Tandemly repeated sequences in the mitochondrial DNA control region and phylogeography of the pike-perches Stizostedion. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 10:310-322.

  • Harlan, J. R., E. B. Speaker, and J. Mayhew. 1987. Iowa fish and fishing. Iowa Conservation Commission, Des Moines, Iowa. 323 pp.

  • Herkert, J. R., editor. 1992. Endangered and threatened species of Illinois: status and distribution. Vol. 2: Animals. Illinois Endangered Species Protection Board. iv + 142 pp.

  • Herkert, Jim. 1998. Proposed additions, deletions, and changes to the Illinois List of Threatened and Endangered Animals. 101st ESPB Meeting, August 21, 1998. 16pp.

  • Hubbs, C., R. J. Edwards, and G. P. Garrett. 1991. An annotated checklist of the freshwater fishes of Texas, with keys to identification of species. Texas Journal of Science, Supplement 43(4):1-56.

  • 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.

  • Jenkins, R. E., and N. M. Burkhead. 1994. Freshwater fishes of Virginia. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland. xxiii + 1079 pp.

  • Kuehne, R. A., and R. W. Barbour. 1983. The American Darters. University Press of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky. 177 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.

  • Linder, A. D. 1959. The American percid fishes Ammocrypta clara Jordan and Meek and Ammocrypta pellucida (Baird). Southwestern Naturalist 4(4):176-184.

  • MORIARTY, LOREN J. AND KIRK O. WINEMILLER. 1997. SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL VARIATION IN FISH ASSEMBLAGE STRUCTURE IN VILLAGE CREEK, HARDIN COUNTY, TEXAS. TEXAS J. SCI. 49(3)SUPPL.: 85-110.

  • Natural Resources Commission. 2014. Roster of Indiana Animals, Insects, and Plants That Are Extirpated, Endangered, Threatened or Rare. Information Bulletin #2 (Sixth Amendment. 20pp.

  • Near, T. J., J. C. Porterfield, and L. M. Page. 2000. Evolution of cytochrome b and the molecular systematics of Ammocrypta (Percidae: Etheostomatinae). Copeia 2000:701-711.

  • 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.

  • Page, L. M. 1983a. Handbook of Darters. T. F. H. Publications, Inc., Neptune City, New Jersey. 271 pp.

  • 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, L.M. 1983. Handbook of darters. T.F.H. Pub., Inc., Neptune City, NJ. 271pp.

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

  • Pezold, F., N. H. Douglas, and S. G. George. 1993. A status survey of the Western Sand Darter, Ammocrypta clara, in the Big Black River, Mississippi. Southeastern Fishes Council Proceedings 27:2-6.

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

  • Pflieger, W.L. 1975. The fishes of Missouri. Missouri Dept. Cons. 343pp.

  • Phillips, G. L., W. D. Schmid, and J. C. Underhill. 1982. Fishes of the Minnesota region. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Minnesota. 248 pp.

  • 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.

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

  • Roosa, D. M. 1977. Endangered and threatened fish of Iowa. Special Report No. 1, Iowa State Preserves Advisory Board, Des Moines. 25 pp. + append.

  • 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.

  • Setzler-Hamilton E, W. R. Boynton, K. V. Wood, H. H. Zion, L. Lubbers, N. K. Mountford, P. Frere, L. Tucker and J. A. Mihursky. 1980. Synopsis of biological data on Striped Bass, (Morone saxatilis) (Walbaum). NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service. FAO Synopsis No. 121. Washington, D. C. 74 pp.

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

  • Simons, A. M. 1991. Phylogenetic relationships of the crystal darter, Crystallaria asprella (Teleostei: Percidae). Copeia 1991:927-936.

  • Simons, A. M. 1992. Phylogenetic relationships of the Boleosoma species group (Percidae: Etheostoma). Pages 268-292 in R.L. Mayden, editor. Systematics, historical ecology, and North American freshwater fishes. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. xxvi + 969 pp.

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

  • Warren, M. L., Jr., B. M. Burr, S. J. Walsh, H. L. Bart, Jr., R. C. Cashner, D. A. Etnier, B. J. Freeman, B. R. Kuhajda, R. L. Mayden, H. W. Robison, S. T. Ross, and W. C. Starnes. 2000. Diversity, distribution, and conservation status of the native freshwater fishes of the southern United States. Fisheries 25(10):7-31.

  • Wiley, E. O. 1992. Phylogenetic relationships of the Percidae (Teleostei: Perciformes): a preliminary hypothesis. Pages 247-267 in R.L. Mayden, editor. Systematics, historical ecology, and North American freshwater fishes. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. xxvi + 969 pp.

  • Wiley, E. O., III, and D. D. Hall. 1975. Fundulus blairae,a new species of the Fundulus nottii complex (Teleostei, Cyprinodontidae). American Museum Novitates No. 2577. 13 pp. + 5 figs., 9 tables.

  • Williams, J.D. 1975. Systematics of the percid fishes of the subgenus Ammocrypta, genus Ammocrypta, with descriptions of two new species. Bulletin of the Alabama Museum of Natural History, No.1:1-56.

  • Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 2005. Wisconsin's Strategy for Wildlife Species of Greatest Conservation Need. Madison, WI.

  • Wood, R. M., and R. L. Mayden. 1997. Phylogenetic relationships among selected darter subgenera (Teleostei: Percidae) as inferred from analysis of allozymes. Copeia 1997:265-274.

References for Watershed Distribution Map
  • Smith, P. W. 1979. The fishes of Illinois. University of Illinois Press, Urbana. 314 pp.

  • State Natural Heritage Data Centers. 1996a. Aggregated element occurrence data from all U.S. state natural heritage programs, including the Tennessee Valley Authority, Navajo Nation and the District of Columbia. Science Division, The Nature Conservancy.

  • State Natural Heritage Data Centers. 1996b. Aggregated element occurrence data from all U.S. state natural heritage programs, including the Tennessee Valley Authority, Navajo Nation and the District of Columbia: Export of freshwater fish and mussel records west of the Mississippi River in 1997. Science Division, The Nature Conservancy.

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.