Percina copelandi - (Jordan, 1877)
Channel Darter
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Percina copelandi (Jordan, 1877) (TSN 168480)
French Common Names: fouille-roche gris
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.106252
Element Code: AFCQC04060
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Fishes - Bony Fishes - Perches and Darters
Image 190

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

 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Actinopterygii Perciformes Percidae Percina
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: Percina copelandi
Taxonomic Comments: Percina aurora and Percina brevicauda of the eastern Gulf Slope formerly were included in Percina copelandi (see Suttkus et al. 1994).
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G4
Global Status Last Reviewed: 19Jun2011
Global Status Last Changed: 24Sep1996
Rounded Global Status: G4 - Apparently Secure
Reasons: Discontinuous distribution in streams from southeastern Canada to the south-central U.S.; has declined greatly during historical times; uncommon in eastern pat of range, where much habitat has been highly altered or destroyed; common in west.
Nation: United States
National Status: N4 (05Sep1996)
Nation: Canada
National Status: N2 (21Aug2017)

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 (S4), Indiana (S2), Kansas (S3), Kentucky (S4), Louisiana (S2), Michigan (S1), Missouri (S3), New York (S3), Ohio (S2), Oklahoma (S4), Pennsylvania (S5), Tennessee (S3), Vermont (S1), Virginia (S2), West Virginia (S2S3)
Canada Ontario (S2), Quebec (S2S3)

Other Statuses

Canadian Species at Risk Act (SARA) Schedule 1/Annexe 1 Status: T (06Apr2006)
Implied Status under the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC):E,SC
IUCN Red List Category: LC - Least concern

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: Range includes the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River drainage from Michigan to southern Quebec, New York, and Vermont; Ohio River system from the Wabash River system of western Indiana to West Virginia and, in the upper part of the Cumberland and Tennessee river systems, to northern Tennessee and southwestern Virginia; a disjunct population occurs west of the Mississippi River from southeastern Kansas and southwestern Missouri south through eastern Oklahoma and Arkansas to northern Louisiana (Suttkus et al. 1994). This darter is most common west of the Mississippi River in the Red, Ouachita, and Arkansas river drainages (Page and Burr 1991).

In Canada, it is known from Lake Erie, the Detroit River, and tributaries of the St. Lawrence River; it has been collected in the Ottawa River and in tributaries to eastern Lake Ontario; populations are small (see Goodchild, 1993 COSEWIC report, and Goodchild 1994, for further details). Phelps and Francis (2002) found that the distribution of the channel darter in Canada is more widespread than previously thought, particularly throughout Quebec. "Since the original (1994) status report, 127+ specimens of Percina copelandi were captured from four new waterbodies in Ontario and 102 specimens were captured from six new waterbodies in Quebec. At the majority of these new sites fewer than ten specimens were captured." "It is likely that the new records of capture are the result of increased sampling efforts and not increasing population sizes."

Number of Occurrences: 81 to >300
Number of Occurrences Comments: This species is represented by a large number of occurrence (subpopulations (See map in Page 1983). Estimates from 12 Heritage programs (Arkansas, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, Mississippi, Ohio, Pennsylvania, TVA, Virginia, Vermont, West Virginia) responding to questionnaire (1993) totaled about 150 EOs, though it is not known how many are currently extant in all cases. Total actual extant number of EOs likely is 150-200, including states/provinces not responding (Indiana, Louisiana, New York, Oklahoma, Ontario, Quebec).

In recent surveys in Canada, specimens were captured at 55 separate locations in 23 water bodies (Phelps and Francis 2002).

Population Size: 10,000 to >1,000,000 individuals
Population Size Comments: Total adult population size is unknown but surely exceeds 10,000 and presumably exceeds 100,000. This fish is uncommon in many areas in the eastern part of the range but common in the west (page and Burr 2011).

Overall Threat Impact: High
Overall Threat Impact Comments: This darter has been detrimentally affected by siltation, pollution, and impoundment (Burkhead and Jenkins 1991). These factors have fragmented populations and reduced the likelihood of recovery (Suttkus et al. 1994). While dam-building has largely ceased in most areas, many of the remaining populations are vulnerable to sudden extinction because of their isolation (by dams and other factors) from other populations. Areas occupied by isolated populations are unlikely to be recolonized should local extirpation occur.

Low oxygen levels in Lake Erie during the late 1950s and early 1960s, coupled with silt and pollutant loads in streams, caused a decline in Ohio.

A large population was present in the Ohio River before impoundments were built, but now only a small population, probably declining, remains (Trautman 1981).

In Michigan (Lake Huron and Saginaw Bay), the minimally disturbed areas with remaining populations (AuSable and Pine rivers) presently have few of the required clean gravel beaches. Other areas in Michigan that have been severely altered (Huron and Cass rivers) no longer contain channel darter populations (Evers 1990).

Potential causes of decline along northern Lake Erie include eutrophication-induced ecosystem changes, the effect of extensive shoreline modification on beaches, and the invasive round goby (Neogobius melanostomus) (Reid and Mandrak 2008).

Short-term Trend: Decline of <30% to relatively stable
Short-term Trend Comments: Trend over the past 10 years or three generations is not documented but probably the species is relatively stable or slowly declining in abundance.

Long-term Trend: Decline of 30-50%
Long-term Trend Comments: This species has undergone considerable reduction throughout the range (Goodchild, 1993 COSEWIC report; Goodchild 1994).

There are seven sites in Ontario and Quebec where this species is no longer being captured and is possibly extirpated (Phelps and Francis 2002).

In recent surveys along the north shore of Lake Erie, channel darter was collected in only one of six historical collection sites (Reid and Mandrak 2008).

Range and abundance have declined in some areas east of the Mississippi River (Suttkus et al. 1994).

Between 1925 and 1950 there were large and small populations present in Ohio (Trautman 1981); today populations are small to moderately sized (Rice 1993).

Populations in Missouri are believed to be stable (Johnson 1993).

Michigan (Carman and Goforth 2000): "The range of the channel darter in Michigan has been drastically reduced in the past century. Prior to 1957, the darter was reported in 11 counties along Lake Huron, Lake St. Clair and the St. Clair River, and Lake Erie. In surveys conducted in 1986 and 1994, channel darters were only found in the Pine and the Au Sable Rivers. Additional surveys confirmed the presence of channel darters in the St. Clair River in 1994 and 1995."

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Inventory Needs: Rangewide surveys of historical locations with remaining suitable habitat are needed. Population size estimates are needed.

Protection Needs: This species needs protection from further habitat destruction and pollution throughout range. Representative variation in habitat throughout range should be protected. Protection planning needs to consider isolation and connection of populations. Rangewide element conservation plan is needed.

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (200,000-2,500,000 square km (about 80,000-1,000,000 square miles)) Range includes the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River drainage from Michigan to southern Quebec, New York, and Vermont; Ohio River system from the Wabash River system of western Indiana to West Virginia and, in the upper part of the Cumberland and Tennessee river systems, to northern Tennessee and southwestern Virginia; a disjunct population occurs west of the Mississippi River from southeastern Kansas and southwestern Missouri south through eastern Oklahoma and Arkansas to northern Louisiana (Suttkus et al. 1994). This darter is most common west of the Mississippi River in the Red, Ouachita, and Arkansas river drainages (Page and Burr 1991).

In Canada, it is known from Lake Erie, the Detroit River, and tributaries of the St. Lawrence River; it has been collected in the Ottawa River and in tributaries to eastern Lake Ontario; populations are small (see Goodchild, 1993 COSEWIC report, and Goodchild 1994, for further details). Phelps and Francis (2002) found that the distribution of the channel darter in Canada is more widespread than previously thought, particularly throughout Quebec. "Since the original (1994) status report, 127+ specimens of Percina copelandi were captured from four new waterbodies in Ontario and 102 specimens were captured from six new waterbodies in Quebec. At the majority of these new sites fewer than ten specimens were captured." "It is likely that the new records of capture are the result of increased sampling efforts and not increasing population sizes."

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: occurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States AR, IN, KS, KY, LA, MI, MO, NY, OH, OK, PA, TN, VA, VT, WV
Canada ON, QC

Range Map
No map available.


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
IN Carroll (18015), Fountain (18045)*, Warren (18171)*
LA East Feliciana (22037), Livingston (22063), Morehouse (22067), Ouachita (22073), St. Tammany (22103)*, Tangipahoa (22105), Union (22111), Washington (22117), West Feliciana (22125)
MI Alcona (26001)*, Alpena (26007)*, Arenac (26011)*, Cheboygan (26031)*, Huron (26063)*, Iosco (26069)*, Macomb (26099), Monroe (26115)*, Ogemaw (26129)*, Saginaw (26145)*, St. Clair (26147), Tuscola (26157)*, Wayne (26163)*
MO Barton (29011), Carter (29035), Jasper (29097), McDonald (29119)*, Newton (29145)
OH Adams (39001), Ashtabula (39007), Athens (39009), Belmont (39013), Brown (39015), Clermont (39025), Columbiana (39029), Cuyahoga (39035), Erie (39043), Gallia (39053), Hamilton (39061), Jefferson (39081), Lawrence (39087), Lorain (39093), Lucas (39095), Meigs (39105), Monroe (39111), Ottawa (39123), Pike (39131), Ross (39141), Scioto (39145), Washington (39167)
OK Johnston (40069)
PA Allegheny (42003)*, Armstrong (42005), Beaver (42007), Erie (42049), Forest (42053), McKean (42083), Potter (42105), Venango (42121), Warren (42123)
VA Lee (51105), Scott (51169), Wise (51195)*
VT Addison (50001), Chittenden (50007), Rutland (50021)
WV Braxton (54007), Brooke (54009), Cabell (54011), Calhoun (54013), Gilmer (54021), Hancock (54029), Kanawha (54039)*, Logan (54045)*, Marshall (54051), Mason (54053), Mingo (54059)*, Ohio (54069), Pleasants (54073), Ritchie (54085), Roane (54087), Wetzel (54103), Wirt (54105)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
02 Lake George (02010001), Winooski (02010003), Ausable (02010004), Great Chazy-Saranac (02010006)*
03 Lower Pearl. Mississippi (03180004)+, Bogue Chitto (03180005)
04 Lone Lake-Ocqueoc (04070003)+, Cheboygan (04070004)+*, Black (04070005)+, Thunder Bay (04070006)+, Au Sable (04070007)+, Au Gres-Rifle (04080101)+, Pigeon-Wiscoggin (04080103)+, Shiawassee (04080203)+*, Cass (04080205)+*, Saginaw (04080206)+, Lake Huron (04080300)+*, Lake St. Clair (04090002)+, Detroit (04090004)+, Huron (04090005)+*, Ottawa-Stony (04100001), Lower Maumee (04100009), Cedar-Portage (04100010)+, Sandusky (04100011), Huron-Vermilion (04100012)+, Black-Rocky (04110001)+, Ashtabula-Chagrin (04110003)*, Chautauqua-Conneaut (04120101)+, Buffalo-Eighteenmile (04120103), Lake Erie (04120200), Upper St. Lawrence (04150301)*, Raquette (04150305), St. Regis (04150306)*, English-Salmon (04150307)*, Mettawee River (04150401)+, Otter Creek (04150402)+, Winooski River (04150403)+, Lake Champlain (04150408)+
05 Upper Allegheny (05010001)+, Conewango (05010002), Middle Allegheny-Tionesta (05010003)+, Middle Allegheny-Redbank (05010006)+, Upper Ohio (05030101)+, Upper Ohio-Wheeling (05030106)+, Little Muskingum-Middle Island (05030201)+, Upper Ohio-Shade (05030202)+, Little Kanawha (05030203)+, Hocking (05030204)+, Muskingum (05040004)+, Upper Kanawha (05050006)+, Elk (05050007), Lower Scioto (05060002)+, Upper Guyandotte (05070101)+, Tug (05070201), Upper Levisa (05070202), Lower Levisa (05070203), Big Sandy (05070204), Lower Great Miami (05080002)+, Whitewater (05080003), Raccoon-Symmes (05090101)+, Little Scioto-Tygarts (05090103)+, Ohio Brush-Whiteoak (05090201)+, Middle Ohio-Laughery (05090203)+, Licking (05100101), North Fork Kentucky (05100201), Middle Fork Kentucky (05100202), South Fork Kentucky (05100203), Upper Kentucky (05100204), Upper Green (05110001), Rough (05110004)*, Middle Wabash-Deer (05120105), Tippecanoe (05120106)+, Middle Wabash-Little Vermilion (05120108)+, Middle Wabash-Busseron (05120111), Lower Wabash (05120113), Upper White (05120201), Lower White (05120202), Upper Cumberland-Lake Cumberland (05130103), South Fork Cumberland (05130104)
06 Nolichucky (06010108)*, Watts Bar Lake (06010201)*, Upper Clinch (06010205)+, Powell (06010206)+, Lower Clinch (06010207)*, Kentucky Lake (06040005)*
08 Ouachita Headwaters (08040101), Upper Ouachita (08040102), Little Missouri (08040103), Lower Ouachita-Bayou De Loutre (08040202)+, Upper Saline (08040203), Lower Saline (08040204), Bayou Bartholomew (08040205)+, Lower Ouachita (08040207)+, Bayou Sara-Thompson (08070201)+, Tickfaw (08070203)+, Liberty Bayou-Tchefuncta (08090201)+
11 Beaver Reservoir (11010001)*, Current (11010008)+, Upper Walnut River (11030017), Lower Walnut River (11030018), Kaw Lake (11060001), Black Bear-Red Rock (11060006), Upper Verdigris (11070101), Fall (11070102), Middle Verdigris (11070103), Elk (11070104), Lower Verdigris (11070105), Caney (11070106), Bird (11070107), Neosho headwaters (11070201), Upper Cottonwood (11070202), Lower Cottonwood (11070203), Upper Neosho (11070204), Middle Neosho (11070205), Lake O' the Cherokees (11070206), Spring (11070207)+, Elk (11070208)+, Lower Neosho (11070209), Lower Canadian (11090204), Dirty-Greenleaf (11110102), Illinois (11110103), Robert S. Kerr Reservoir (11110104), Poteau (11110105), Frog-Mulberry (11110201), Dardanelle Reservoir (11110202), Petit Jean (11110204), Cadron (11110205), Fourche La Fave (11110206), Cache (11130202), West Cache (11130203), Middle Washita (11130303), Blue (11140102)+, Clear Boggy (11140104), Kiamichi (11140105), Upper Little (11140107), Mountain Fork (11140108), Lower Little (11140109)
+ 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, elongate fish.
General Description: See Suttkus et al. (1994).
Diagnostic Characteristics: See Suttkus et al. (1994).
Reproduction Comments: Spawning occurs in April-May in Kansas and probably Missouri and Virginia, June-July in Michigan, and April-June in Oklahoma, at water temperatures of 20-21 C (Page 1983, Hubbs 1985, Burkhead and Jenkins 1991, Suttkus et al. 1984). Females mature at age one. Spawning is communal, with many territories of breeding males in a small area.
Habitat Type: Freshwater
Non-Migrant: N
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: N
Mobility and Migration Comments: Individuals may move short distances between nonbreeding habitat and suitable spawning areas.
Riverine Habitat(s): CREEK, Low gradient, MEDIUM RIVER, Moderate gradient, Pool, Riffle
Lacustrine Habitat(s): Shallow water
Special Habitat Factors: Benthic
Habitat Comments: Habitat includes warm, low and moderate gradient rivers and large creeks in areas of moderate current, this darter usually is found over sand and gravel substrates; it prefers clear water and silt-free bottoms. In Virginia and eastern Tennessee, it is associated with moderate and swift riffles and runs with mixed small gravel to medium rubble substrates (Burkhead and Jenkins 1991). Channel darters may overwinter in quiet pools or backwaters. Spawning generally occurs over gravel, rubble, or rock-strewn bedrock in moderate or swift current. In the northeastern part of the range, this species also occurs and spawns along lake shores. See Suttkus et al. (1994).
Adult Food Habits: Invertivore
Immature Food Habits: Invertivore
Food Comments: The diet includes aquatic insect (e.g., midge and mayfly) larvae and small crustaceans (Page 1983) obtained primarily from the bottom.
Colonial Breeder: Y
Length: 5 centimeters
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary
Help
Biological Research Needs: Research needs include determination of minimum requirements for viable population and development of effective monitoring techniques.
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: 10Jun2011
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Van Dam, B., J. D. Soule, and G. Hammerson
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 09Jun2011
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
  • Aquin, P. 1999. Évaluation de la situation des groupes taxonomiques des poissons du Québec. Ministère de l'Environnement et de la Faune. 9 pages.

  • Beaulieu, H. 1992. Liste des espèces de la faune vertébrée susceptibles d'être désignées menacées ou vulnérables. Ministère du Loisir, de la Chasse et de la Pêche. 107 p.

  • 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.

  • COSEPAC 2002. Évaluation et Rapport de situation du COSEPAC du fouille-roche gris (Percina copelandi) au Canada - Mise à jour. Comité sur la situation des espèces en péril au Canada. Ottawa. vii + 21 p.

  • COSEWIC. 2002. Canadian Species at Risk, May 2002. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 34 pp. Available online: http://www.cosewic.gc.ca/

  • CROSS, F.B., AND J.T. COLLINS. 1975. FISHES IN KANSAS. UNIV. KANS. MUS.NAT.HIST., PUB.ED.SERIES NO.3.

  • CROSS, F.B.1967.HANDBOOK OF FISHES IN KANSAS. E. RAYMOND HALL.UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY, LAWRENCE, KANSAS.

  • Carman, S.M. and R.R. Goforth. 2000. Special animal abstract for Percina copelandi (channel darter). Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Lansing, Michigan. 2 pp.

  • Dauten, J. et al. 1998. Draft element occurrence data standard. The Nature Conservancy in cooperation with the Network of Natural Heritage program and conservation data centers. 188 p.

  • Desrochers, D., Y. Chagnon, S. Gonthier et L, Mathieu. 1996. Inventaire du fouille-roche gris (Percina copelandi) 1996. Milieu Inc. et Ministère de l'Environnement et de la faune du Québec. Direction de la faune et des habitats, Service de la faune aquati

  • Dextrase, A.J. 1997. COSSARO Candidate V,T,E Species Evaluation Form for Channel Darter (Percina copelandi). Unpublished report prepared for Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO), Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 3 pp.

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

  • Eaton, S.W., R.J. Nemecek and M.M. Kozubowski. 1982. Fishes of the Allegheny River above Kinzua Dam. New York Fish and Game J. 29(2):189-198.

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

  • Genoways, H.H. & BRENNER, F.J., EDITORS. 1985. SPECIES OF SPECIAL CONCERN IN PENNSYLVANIA. CARNEGIE MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY, PITTSBURGH. SPECIAL PUBLICATION NO. 11. 430 PP. B85GEN01PAUS.

  • Goodchild, C. D. 1993. Status of the channel darter, Percina copelandi, in Canada. The Canadian Field-Naturalist, Vol.107; 431-439 p.

  • Goodchild, C. D. 1994. Status of the channel darter, Percina copelandi, in Canada. Canadian Field-Naturalist 108:431-439.

  • Goodchild, C.D. 1994. Status of the Channel Darter, Percina copelandi, in Canada. Canadian Field-Naturalist 107 (4) : 431-439.

  • Hubbs, C. 1985. Darter reproductive seasons. Copeia 1985:56-68.

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

  • Lapointe, M. 1997. Rapport sur la situation du Fouille-roche gris (Percina copelandi) au Québec. Ministère de l'Environnement et de la Faune, Direction de la faune et des habitats. 55 p.

  • 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.

  • Lee, David, Carter R. Gilbert, Charles H. Hocult, Robert E. Jenkins, Don E. McAllister, and Jay R. Stauffer, Jr. 1980. Atlas of North American freshwater fishes. N. Carolina Biol. Survey Publ. 1980-12. 867 pp.

  • Legendre, V. et J.F. Bergeron. 1977. Liste des poissons d' eau douce du Québec. MLCP, Service Aménage. Expl. Faune. Rap. dact. 6

  • McAllister, D. E. 1974. Poissons de la région de la capitale du Canada. Ministère de l'Environnement, Service des pêches et des sciences de la mer, Ottawa. 200 p.

  • 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.

  • PFLIEGER,W.L.1975. THE FISHES OF MISSOURI. SULLIVAN, MARK. MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION.

  • 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.

  • Phelps, A., and A. Francis. 2000. Update COSEWIC Status Report on Channel Darter (Percina copelandi). 22 pp.

  • Phelps, A., and A. Francis. 2002. Update COSEWIC status report on the channel darter Percina copelandi in Canada, in COSEWIC assessment and update status on report on the channel darter Percina copelandi in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. 21 pp.

  • Phelps, Anne and Anthony Francis. 2001. Draft COSEWIC Status Report on Channel Darter (Percina copelandi). Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC); (unpublished). 27 pp.

  • Reid, S. M., and N. E. Mandrak. 2008. Historical changes in the distribution of threatened channel darter (Percina copelandi) in Lake Erie with general observations on the beach fish fish assemblage. Journal of Great Lakes Research 34:324-333.

  • 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. et T.M. Buchanan. 1984. Fishes of Arkansas. University of Arkansas Press. Fayetteville. 536 p.

  • Rohde, F.C., R.G. Arndt, D.G. Lindquist et J.F. Parnell. 1994. Freshwater fishes of the Carolines, Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware. University of North Carolina Press. London. 222 p.

  • Scott W.B. et E.J. Crossman. 1974. Poissons d'eau douce du Canada. Ministère de l'Environnement. Service des pêches et des sciences de la mer. Office des recherches sur les pêcherires du Canada. Bulletin 184. 1026 p.

  • Service canadien de la faune 2003. La faune de l'arrière-pays [en ligne]. Disponible sur le site internet. - Accès : «http://www.cws-scf.ec.gc.ca/hww-fap/index_f.cfm». Service canadien de la faune 2003 [Réf. 28 mai 2003] .

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

  • Smith, C.L. 1985. The Inland Fishes of New York State. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Albany, NY. 522pp.

  • Société de la faune et des parcs du Québec. 2003. Les espèces menacées [en ligne]. Disponible sur le site Internet. - Accès :«http://www.fapaq.gouv.qc.ca/fr/etu_rec/esp_mena_vuln/index.htm». La société, 2003 [Réf. 3 novembre 2003] .

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

  • Suttkus, R. D., B. A. Thompson, and H. L. Bart, Jr. 1994. Two new darters, Percina (Cottogaster), from the southeastern United States, with a review of the subgenus. Occasional Papers of the Tulane Museum of Natural History 4:1-46.

  • Werner, R.G. 1980. Freshwater fishes of New York State. N.Y.: Syracuse University Press. 186 pp.

  • Winn, H.E. 1953. Breeding habits of the Percid fish, Hadropterus copelandi, in Michigan. Copeia 1953 (1): 26-30.

  • http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/species-especes/species/species_channeldarter_f.asp 2004. Fouille-roche gris. Pêches et Océans Canada .

  • http://www.speciesatrisk.gc.ca/search/speciesDetails_f.cfm?SpeciesID=74 2004. Fouille-roche gris. Environnement Canada .

  • Équipe de rétablissement du fouille-roche gris 2001. Plan de rétablissement du fouille-roche gris (Percina copelandi) au Québec. Société de la faune et des parcs du Québec, Direction de la faune. 34 p.

References for Watershed Distribution Map
  • 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.

  • Cross, F. B., and J. T. Collins. 1995. Fishes in Kansas. Second Edition, revised. University of Kansas Museum of Natural History. xvii + 315 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.

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

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

  • Smith, C. L. 1983. Fishes of New York (maps and printout of a draft section on scarce fishes of New York). Unpublished draft.

  • Smith, C. L. 1985. The inland fishes of New York State. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Albany, New York, xi + 522 pp.

  • 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.

  • Trautman, M. B. 1981. The fishes of Ohio. Second edition. Ohio State University Press, Columbus, Ohio. 782 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 2019.
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 © 2019 NatureServe, 2511 Richmond (Jefferson Davis) Highway, Suite 930, Arlington, VA 22202, 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. 2019. 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.