 |
|
|
||||
| NAS - Nonindigenous Aquatic Species |
Translate this page with 
Common Name: redlip shiner
Taxonomy: available through 
Identification: Page and Burr (1991); Jenkins and Burkhead (1994).
Size: 7.2 cm.
Native Range: Dan River (Roanoke River drainage) and Peedee River drainages, Virginia and North Carolina (Page and Burr 1991).
Nonindigenous Occurrences: This species is known from several drainages of the Atlantic Slope and Ohio River basin. These include the Catawba, Pee Dee (Lumber River system) (Menhinick 1991), Cape Fear (Deep River system) (Jenkins and Burkhead 1994), and New (including Little River system) drainages (Menhinick 1991; Page and Burr 1991; Jenkins and Burkhead 1994) in North Carolina, and upper Big Chestnut Creek in the New drainage in Virginia (Hocutt et al. 1986; Page and Burr 1991; Jenkins and Burkhead 1994).
Means of Introduction: Possible bait bucket releases. Richardson and Carnes (1964, in Jenkins and Burkhead 1994) speculated that it probably was introduced into the Little River system by bait fishermen. It was first discovered in the Little River system in 1963 (Richardson and Carnes 1964); in Big Chestnut Creek, Virginia, in 1976; and in the Deep River system, North Carolina, in 1985 (Jenkins and Burkhead 1994).
Status: Established in North Carolina and Virginia. The Big Chestnut Creek population is "flourishing" (Jenkins and Burkhead 1994).
Impact of Introduction: Unknown.
Remarks: Lee et al. (1980 et seq.) and Page and Burr (1991) stated that it was recently introduced in New River drainage, North Carolina and Virginia. Hocutt et al. (1986) regarded it as introduced (but possibly native) in the Kanahwa above falls. In his summary table on North Carolina fishes, Menhinick (1991) listed this species as probably introduced into the New, the Catawba, and the Lumber and Waccamaw drainages. In their summary table on Virginia fishes, Jenkins and Burkhead (1994) regarded this species as introduced (but possibly native) in the New drainage and native (but possibly introduced) in the Roanoke drainage. Lee et al. (1980 et seq.) and Hocutt et al. (1986) considered it native to the Dan system (Roanoke River drainage). Jenkins and Burkhead (1994) agreed with that conclusion, but they also speculated that it may have been introduced there. These latter authors noted that its disjunctive distribution in the middle Dan and throughout the Smith, and its apparent absence in the lower Dan, may have resulted from separate introductions in upper portions of the system. Nevertheless, Jenkins and Burkhead concluded that the Dan system was scantily sampled prior to the 1950s and that the range of this species in the Dan can be deemed relictive (native). Jenkins and Burkhead (1994) noted that the upper New drainage has two tributary populations that are considered to be introduced, perhaps separately.
Other Resources:
FishBase Fact Sheet
Author: Leo Nico
Revision Date: 12/5/2003 Citation for this information:
Leo Nico. 2009. Notropis chiliticus. USGS Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Database, Gainesville, FL.
<http://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/FactSheet.asp?speciesID=591> Revision Date: 12/5/2003
| AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and Notices | |
  |
|