Etheostoma tippecanoe - Jordan and Evermann, 1890
Tippecanoe Darter
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Etheostoma tippecanoe Jordan and Evermann, 1890 (TSN 168443)
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.104788
Element Code: AFCQC02800
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Fishes - Bony Fishes - Perches and Darters
Image 168

© Noel Burkhead & Virginia Dept of Game and Inland Fisheries (Fishes of Virginia)

 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Actinopterygii Perciformes Percidae Etheostoma
Genus Size: D - Medium to large genus (21+ species)
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: 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.
Concept Reference Code: B04NEL01NAUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Etheostoma tippecanoe
Taxonomic Comments: Subgenus Nothonotus. Etheostoma denoncourti of the Tennessee River drainage, Tennessee and Virginia, formerly was included in this species (see Stauffer and van Snik 1997).
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G3G4
Global Status Last Reviewed: 24Jan2012
Global Status Last Changed: 19Feb2002
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by inspection
Rounded Global Status: G3 - Vulnerable
Reasons: Discontinuously distributed from the Ohio River basin to the Cumberland River drainage; listed or regarded as endangered, threatened, or special concern in all states except Kentucky; habitat has declined due to impoundments, siltation, and possibly agricultural contaminants.
Nation: United States
National Status: N3N4 (19Feb2002)

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 Indiana (S3), Kentucky (S4S5), Ohio (S2), Pennsylvania (S3S4), Tennessee (S1S2), West Virginia (S2)

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 darter is widely but sporadically distributed in the Ohio River basin, from the Allegheny River and French Creek drainages in western Pennsylvania, Muskingum and Scioto river drainages in Ohio, Tippecanoe River and East Fork White River drainages in Indiana, and the Little Kanawha and Elk rivers in West Virginia south to the Cumberland River drainage in Tennessee and Kentucky (Lee et al. 1980, Trautman 1981, Cooper 1983, Burr and Warren 1986, Etnier and Starnes 1993, Felbaum 1995, Stauffer et al. 1995, Skelton and Etnier 2000). In Tennessee, this species is restricted to short reaches in the Big South Fork Cumberland, Red, and Harpeth rivers (Skelton and Etnier 2000).

Populations reported from the upper Tennessee River drainage, Tennessee and Virginia, and the Duck and Buffalo rivers in the lower Tennessee River drainage, represent another species, E. denoncourti (Stauffer and van Snik 1997, Skelton and Etnier 2000, Kinziger et al. 2001).

Area of Occupancy: 501-2,000 1-km2 grid cells
Area of Occupancy Comments: Linear distance of occupancy is not precisely known but appears to be at least several hundred stream kilometers.

Number of Occurrences: 21 - 80
Number of Occurrences Comments: On a coarse scale, Skelton and Etnier (2000) mapped approximately 40 collection sites representing perhaps 20+ distinct occurrences. Number of locations (as defined by IUCN) exceeds 10.

Population Size: Unknown
Population Size Comments: Total adult population size is unknown; extremely localized and locally common (Page and Burr 2011). In Kentucky, Burr and Warren (1986) reported that this darter is sporadic and generally uncommon in the Green River, the South and Middle Forks Kentucky river, and Big South Fork Cumberland River; occasional and seasonally common in the middle to lower Licking River. Subsequent surveys have found this species to be more common than previously known.

Overall Threat Impact: Medium
Overall Threat Impact Comments: This species is considered imperiled over much of its range and is listed or regarded as endangered, threatened, or special concern in all states except Kentucky (Skelton and Etnier 2000). Some populations have been eliminated by impoundments and siltation (Etnier and Starnes 1993); siltation, and possibly contaminants in agricultural runoff, are chronic limiting factors in some areas.

Short-term Trend: Decline of <30% to relatively stable
Short-term Trend Comments: Trend over the past 10 years or three generations is unknown, but area of occupancy, number of subpopulations, population size, and habitat quality probably are relatively stable or slowly declining.

Warren et al. (2000) categorized this species as "vulnerable" (may become endangered or threatened by relatively minor disturbances to its habitat, or deserves careful monitoring of its distribution and abundance) in the southeastern and southcentral United States. The status review by Warren et al. did not include the northern extent of the range of E. tippecanoe in Indiana, Ohio, or Pennsylvania, but it did include Kentucky, the state in which the Tippecanoe darter is represented by most of the best remaining populations.

Long-term Trend: Decline of 30-50%
Long-term Trend Comments: This species has been eliminated from many areas (Etnier and Starnes 1993).

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Inventory Needs: Better information is needed on current distribution, abundance, and trend in many parts of the range.

Protection Needs: Unpolluted, unsilted habitats should be maintained.

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (200,000-2,500,000 square km (about 80,000-1,000,000 square miles)) This darter is widely but sporadically distributed in the Ohio River basin, from the Allegheny River and French Creek drainages in western Pennsylvania, Muskingum and Scioto river drainages in Ohio, Tippecanoe River and East Fork White River drainages in Indiana, and the Little Kanawha and Elk rivers in West Virginia south to the Cumberland River drainage in Tennessee and Kentucky (Lee et al. 1980, Trautman 1981, Cooper 1983, Burr and Warren 1986, Etnier and Starnes 1993, Felbaum 1995, Stauffer et al. 1995, Skelton and Etnier 2000). In Tennessee, this species is restricted to short reaches in the Big South Fork Cumberland, Red, and Harpeth rivers (Skelton and Etnier 2000).

Populations reported from the upper Tennessee River drainage, Tennessee and Virginia, and the Duck and Buffalo rivers in the lower Tennessee River drainage, represent another species, E. denoncourti (Stauffer and van Snik 1997, Skelton and Etnier 2000, Kinziger et al. 2001).

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 IN, KY, OH, PA, TN, WV

Range Map
No map available.


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
IN Carroll (18015), Cass (18017), Daviess (18027), Dubois (18037), Fulton (18049)*, Lawrence (18093), Martin (18101), Pike (18125), Pulaski (18131), Tippecanoe (18157), White (18181)
KY Owsley (21189)
OH Coshocton (39031)*, Franklin (39049), Madison (39097), Pickaway (39129), Ross (39141), Washington (39167)
PA Allegheny (42003), Crawford (42039), Erie (42049), Forest (42053), Mercer (42085), Venango (42121), Warren (42123)
TN Cheatham (47021), Robertson (47147), Rutherford (47149)*, Scott (47151)
WV Braxton (54007), Calhoun (54013), Clay (54015), Gilmer (54021), Kanawha (54039), Ritchie (54085), Wirt (54105)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
05 Upper Allegheny (05010001)+, Middle Allegheny-Tionesta (05010003)+, French (05010004)+, Lower Allegheny (05010009)+, Little Kanawha (05030203)+, Walhonding (05040003)+*, Muskingum (05040004)+, Elk (05050007)+, Upper Scioto (05060001)+, Lower Scioto (05060002)+, Paint (05060003)+, Licking (05100101), Middle Fork Kentucky (05100202), South Fork Kentucky (05100203)+, Upper Green (05110001), Barren (05110002), Upper Wabash (05120101)+, Eel (05120104)+, Middle Wabash-Deer (05120105)+, Tippecanoe (05120106)+, Wildcat (05120107)+, Middle Wabash-Little Vermilion (05120108)+, Lower East Fork White (05120208)+, South Fork Cumberland (05130104)+, Stones (05130203)+*, Harpeth (05130204)+, Red (05130206)+
06 Upper Clinch (06010205)
+ 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 (darter).
Reproduction Comments: According to Kuehne and Barbour (1983), may spawn in late spring and early summer (Kuehne and Barbour 1983), but Burkhead and Jenkins (1991) concluded that breeding probably occurs mostly in July and extends into August, at water temperatures in the mid- to upper 20s C. Males guard eggs. Evidently lives no longer than 2 years (Burkhead and Jenkins 1991). According to Bart and Page (1992) age of maturity and maximum age of breeding females is 1 year.
Ecology Comments: Exhibits major annual fluctuations in population size (see Burkhead and Jenkins 1991).
Habitat Type: Freshwater
Non-Migrant: N
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: N
Riverine Habitat(s): MEDIUM RIVER, Moderate gradient, Riffle
Special Habitat Factors: Benthic
Habitat Comments: Habitat includes shallow gravel riffles of small to medium-sized rivers (Page and Burr 2011) with moderate gradient and warm, usually clear water; adults occupy shallow and deep, moderate and swift runs and long shallow gravel/sand riffles (Trautman 1981, Burr and Warren 1986, Burkhead and Jenkins 1991). Spawning occurs at heads or tails of clean-swept gravel and pebble riffles in water 8-46 centimeters deep with gentle current (Lee et al. 1980, Page 1983, Burr and Warren 1986).
Adult Food Habits: Invertivore
Immature Food Habits: Invertivore
Food Comments: Diet is dominated by mayfly, caddisfly, and midge larvae (Clarke, in Burkhead and Jenkins 1991).
Length: 4 centimeters
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary
Help
Monitoring Requirements: A fine mesh sein is required for sampling for this species. The coarse mesh seines normally used to sample strong rapids allow this fish to escape.
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: 24Jan2012
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Hammerson, G., J. Losey, and S. Roble
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 24Jan2012
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
  • Bart, H. L., Jr., and L. M. Page. 1992. The influence of size and phylogeny on life history variation in North American percids. Pages 553-572 in R.L. Mayden, editor. Systematics, historical ecology, and North American freshwater fishes. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. xxvi + 969 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.

  • Cooper, E. L. 1983. Fishes of Pennsylvania and the northeastern United States. Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park. 243 pp.

  • Cooper, E.L. 1983. Fishes of Pennsylvania. Penn State Univ. Press, University Park, PA.

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

  • Felbaum, F., B. Mitchell, K. McKenna, J. Hassinger, A. Shiels, J. Hart and D. Brauning. 1995. Endangered and threatened species of Pennsylvania. Wildlife Conservation Resource Fund, Harrisburg, PA, 80 pp

  • 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.

  • Kinziger, A. P., R. M. Wood, and S. A. Welsh. 2001. Systematics of Etheostoma tippecanoe and Etheostoma denoncourti (Perciformes: Percidae). Copeia 2001:235-239.

  • 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.

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

  • 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.

  • 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.

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

  • Skelton, C. E., and D. A. Etnier. 2000. Taxonomic status of Etheostoma denoncourti Stauffer and van Snik. Copeia 2000:1097-1103.

  • Stauffer, J. R., Jr., and E. S. van Snik. 1997. New species of Etheostoma (Teleostei: Percidae) from the upper Tennessee River. Copeia 1997:116-122.

  • Stauffer, JAY R., JR. 1987 EVALUATION OF NON-GAME FISHES FROM THE OHIO RIVER DRAINAGE IN PENNSYLVANIA, THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY. U87STA01PAUS.

  • 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.

  • Wood, R. M. 1996. Phylogenetic systematics of the darter subgenus Nothonotus (Teleostei: Percidae). Copeia 1996:300-318.

References for Watershed Distribution Map
  • 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.

  • Stauffer, J. R., Jr., J. M. Boltz, and L. R. White. 1995. The fishes of West Virginia. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 146:1-389.

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.