In my
last blog post, I explored the paradox of the popular, though
venomous, little madtom (genus Noturus).
But there is more to the madtom story than that painful sting. Madtoms are cryptic species in more ways than
one. Many species are at risk of extinction, but there is reason to be hopeful
for recovery. Reintroduction and stream and watershed restoration may someday return Mad Tom to their historical homes. And yea!
They are also the cutest little catfish.
Cute Margined Madtom Noturus insignis Photo by D.J.Orth
Mountain Madtom Noturus eleutherus have a highly fragmented distribution. photo by Tim Lane |
Madtoms
are nocturnal benthic hiders that are colored to blend into the environment during the daytime. While many madtoms are uniformly colored to match
their surroundings, others achieve crypsis through disruptive coloration. Light spaces between the dark saddles mimic
rocks and dark saddles mimic shadows between rocks (Armbruster
and Page 1996). One good example is the
Piebald Madtom Noturus gladiator.
Madtoms
are cryptic in another sense. Pigmentation is a common distinguishing
character, but pigment pattern can vary depending on the environment. There are very subtle differences among
cryptic species. Different species are so similar in morphology and color
pattern as to be nearly indistinguishable. For example, the Piebald Madtom was
formerly considered to be a Northern Madtom Noturus
stigmosus (Thomas and Burr 2004). The
Chucky Madtom N. crypticus and Saddled
Madtom N. fasciatus were formerly
considered to be part of the Elegant Madtom Noturus
elegans complex (Burr et al. 2005; Near and Hardman 2006). Finally, the Black River Madtom N. maydeni was formerly the Ozark Madtom N. albater (Egge and Simon 2006). More new madtoms are likely to be described.
Cryptic species of Noturus. Black River Madtom (top) was recently described from a portion of the range of the Ozark Madtom (bottom). Photos by Uland Thomas |
Both
conventional sampling and underwater observations have low detection rates for
madtoms (Davis et al. 2011). While sampling fishes in southeast Oklahoma, I
employed a three-pass removal method for estimating fish population size. The
Freckled Madtom Noturus nocturnus seldom
met the requirements of the method.
First pass I might get 3 madtoms, followed by 6 in pass two, and 10 or
more in pass three. The math didn’t work out because I assumed the probability of catching a Freckled Madtom was equal in
each pass. However, direct current electrofishing
distressed madtoms each time and they moved up through the hyporheic zone,
making them more detectable on each subsequent pass.
Madtoms,
like many catfishes, are nocturnally active and use different habitats between
night and day. Their habitat varies
greatly among different species but many occur in small streams and require loose
cobbles or woody debris for cover.
Madtoms are small and feed on immature aquatic insects. We cannot assume that all madtoms have
similar habitat use patterns. Low detection rates means we may often
overlook important habitats for these little catfishes.
Life is precarious for the
madtoms because many species have very small distributions. Seldom are populations abundant. Fourteen of the 29 species are threatened,
endangered, or under review by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The
Smoky Madtom N. baileyi, Chucky
Madtom N. crypticus, and Pygmy Madtom
N. stanauli are endangered. Yellowfin Madtom N. flavipinnis and Neosho Madtom N. placidus are threatened. Carolina Madtom N. furiosus, Orangefin Madtom N.
gilberti, Piebald Madtom N. gladiator,
Ouachita Madtom N. lachneri,
Freckledbelly Madtom N. minitus, and
Caddo Madtom N. taylori are under
review. One species, the Scioto Madtom N.trautmani, is endangered but, in fact, may be extinct (Platt 2013).
Pygmy Madtoms only reach 50 mm whereas the
widespread Stonecat N. flavus may exceed 300 mm. Smoky Madtoms Noturus baileyi have a 2-year life span
and only attain 73 mm. These tiny madtoms are associated with silt-free riffle
habitats and frequently associate with cobble-size slab rocks for concealment
during daylight. They feed at night on immature
aquatic insects. In winter, madtoms inhabit pools. Yellowfin Madtoms are often found concealed
beneath cobbles or undercut banks, or hidden in leaf litter (Gibbs et al. 2014).
They have a longer life span (3 to 4 years) and attain a larger size (134 mm).
The aptly named Pygmy Madtom (top) attains an adult size of only 50 mm. The Stonecat may reach 12 inches (300 mm). Top photo by Conservation Fisheries, Inc. Bottom by Kentucky Fish and Wildlife. |
Rarity,
small distributions, and low detectability make monitoring and inventorying the
madtoms very difficult. For decades, the Yellowfin Madtom and Smoky Madtom were
presumed extinct. The Yellowfin Madtom was not collected anywhere between 1893
and 1968 (Etnier 1994). The Smoky Madtoms were known only from Abrams Creek in Tennessee. However, a stream reclamation project in 1957 killed all fishes in Abrams Creek so that Brook
Trout could be restored. Fortunately, the
Smoky Madtom was rediscovered in adjacent Citico Creek in 1980. Many years of captive propagation, pioneered
by Conservation Fisheries, Inc., and stocking have restored breeding
populations of both madtoms (Shute et al. 2005).
This
first success at madtom recovery has led to other efforts to reintroduce the
Yellowfin Madtom to historic habitats in Nork Fork Holston River and
Powell and Clinch Rivers. Given the small ranges of many madtoms, the
threats vary greatly among the various at-risk species. Where channelization
has straightened and simplified streams, artificial riffle construction has been implemented (Fuselier
and Edds 1995), whereas other locations minimum flow releases from dams were
increased (Wildhaber et al. 2000). There
are reasons to hope that madtom recovery efforts may be more commonplace in the
future.
References
Arce-H., M., J.G.
Lundberg, and M.A. O’Leary. 2016. Phylogeny of the North American catfish
family Ictaluridae (Teleostei: Siluriformes) combining morphology, genes and
fossils. Cladistics 2016:1-23. DOI:
10.1111/cla.12175
Armbruster, J.W., and
L.M. Page. 1996. Convergence of a
cryptic saddle pattern in benthic freshwater fishes. Environmental Biology of Fishes 45:249-257.
Burr, B. M., D. J.
Eisenhour, and J.M. Grady. 2005. Two new species of Noturus (Siluriformes:
Ictaluridae) from the Tennessee River Drainage: description, distribution, and
conservation status. Copeia
2005:783–802.
Davis, J.G., J.E.
Miller, M.S. Billings, W.K. Gibbs, and S.B. Cook. 2011.
Capture efficiency of underwater observation protocols for three
imperiled fishes. Southeastern Naturalist
10(1):155-166. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1656/058.010.0113
Egge, J.J.D., and A.M.
Simon. 2006. The challenge of truly cryptic diversity: diagnosis and
description of a new madtom catfish (Ictaluridae: Noturus). Zoologica Scripta
35:581-595.
Etnier, D.A. 1994. Our southeastern fishes – What have we lost
and what are we likely to lose. Proceedings of the Southeastern Fishes
Council 29:5-9.
Fuselier, L., and D.
Edds. 1995. An artificial riffle as restored habitat for the threatened Neosho
Madtom. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 15:499-503
Gibbs,W.K., J. E.
Miller, J. K. Throneberry, S. B. Cook, and M.A. Kulp. 2014. Summer habitat use
and partitioning by two reintroduced rare madtom species. Journal of Freshwater Ecology 29:243-258. DOI:
10.1080/02705060.2014.881308
Near, T.J., and M.
Hardman. 2006. Phylogenetic relationships of Noturus stanauli and N.
crypticus (Siluriformes: Ictaluridae), two imperiled freshwater fish
species from the Southeastern United States.
Copeia 2006:378-383. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1643/0045-8511(2006)2006[378:PRONSA]2.0.CO;2
Platt, J.R. 2013. Tiny Ohio catfish species, last seen in 1957,
declared extinct. Scientific American
Blog. Accessed at https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/extinction-countdown/tiny-ohio-catfish-species-last-seen-in-1957-declared-extinct/
on
April 10, 2017.
Shute, J.R., P.L. Rakes,
and P.W. Shute. 2005. Reintroduction of four imperiled fishes in Abrams Creek,
Tennessee. Southeastern Naturalist
4:93–110.
Thomas, M. R. and B. M. Burr. 2004. Noturus
gladiator, a new species of madtom (Siluriformes: Ictaluridae) from Coastal
Plain streams of Tennessee and Mississippi. Ichthyological
Exploration of Freshwaters 15:351–368.
Wildhaber, M. L., and six coauthors. 2000. Ictalurid populations in relation to the
presence of mainstem reservoir in a Midwestern warmwater stream with
emphasis on the threatened Neosho Madtom. Transactions of the American
Fisheries Society 129:1264-1280.
Don, Didn't see this back when posted, but I have to point out a big omission. We (CFI) have also restored smoky and yellowfin madtoms (and Citico darters and spotfin chubs) to Tellico River. Smokys are definitely viable, but yellowfins too soon to tell. We have also seen the first reproduction of yellowfins in the NFkHolston above Saltville just last year... Yellowfins will be a delisting candidate soon. Smokys could be downlisted.
ReplyDelete