U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Open-File Report 2007–1262

Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, 

Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Pallid Sturgeon 

and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River
 USGS habitat vessel

 Biologists retrieve sturgeon eggs

Habitat map showing the 

depth in a river bend

Biological 

technician with an 

immature pallid

sturgeon 

Researchers 

studying physiology 

of the sturgeon

Taking sturgeon 

measurements

Cover
Factors Affecting the Reproduction, 

Recruitment, Habitat, and Population 

Dynamics of Pallid Sturgeon and 

Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Edited by Carl E. Korschgen

Contributions by Aaron J. DeLonay, Diana M. Papoulias, Robert B. Jacobson, 

Mark L. Wildhaber, Darin G. Simpkins, Carl E. Korschgen, Gerald E. Mestl1, 

Dustin W. Everitt1, Kimberly A. Chojnacki, Mandy L. Annis, Donald E. Tillitt, 

Steven R. LaBay2, Dale W. Blevins, Roy Bartholomay, Kathleen Neitzert, David 

Rus, Richard Wilson, Michael Andersen, Rich Kopish, and Roger Haschemeyer

1

 Nebraska Game and Parks Commission.

2

 South Dakota Game, Fish, and Parks, Yankton Field Office.

Volume comprises Chapters A, B, C, D, E, and F

Open-File Report 2007–1262

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Mark D. Myers, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2007

For product and ordering information:

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

For more information on the USGS--the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, 

natural hazards, and the environment:

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to 

reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.

Suggested citation:

Korschgen, C.E., ed., 2007, Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of 

Pallid Sturgeon and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2007–1262, 

280 p.
iii

U.S. Geological Survey

Columbia Environmental Research Center

Nebraska Water Science Center

South Dakota Water Science Center

Missouri Water Science Center

Iowa Water Science Center
iv
v

Volume Contents

A. Project Overview ..........................................................................................................................3

 by Aaron J. DeLonay, Diana M. Papoulias, Robert B. Jacobson, 

Mark L. Wildhaber, Darin G. Simpkins, and Carl E. Korschgen

B. Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose Sturgeon 

and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River..................................................................23

 by Aaron J. DeLonay Diana M. Papoulias, Mark L. Wildhaber, Gerald E. Mestl,

Dustin W. Everitt, and Kimberly A. Chojnacki

C. Reproductive Physiology of Missouri River Gravid Pallid Sturgeon and Shovelnose 

Sturgeon During the 2005 and 2006 Spawning Seasons....................................................107

 by Diana M. Papoulias, Mandy L. Annis, Aaron J. DeLonay, and Donald E. Tillitt

D. The Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid Sturgeon and 

Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River, Progress 2005–06 ..........................143

 by Robert B. Jacobson, Harold E. Johnson, Joanna M. Reuter, and 

Caroline M. Elliott

E. Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and Habitat Use.................................217

 by Darin G. Simpkins and Steven R. LaBay

F. Water Quality and Hydrology..................................................................................................255

 by Dale W. Blevins, Roy Bartholomay, Kathleen Neitzert, David Rus, 

Richard Wilson, Michael Andersen, Rich Kopish, and Roger Haschemeyer
vi

Conversion Factors

Inch/Pound to SI

Multiply By To obtain

Length

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

inch (in.) 25.4 millimeter (mm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

mile, nautical (nmi) 1.852 kilometer (km)

Flow rate

cubic foot per second (ft3/s) 0.02832 cubic meter per second (m3/s)

Mass

pound, avoirdupois (lb) 0.4536 kilogram (kg) 

Multiply By To obtain

Length

centimeter (cm) 0.3937 inch (in.)

millimeter (mm) 0.03937 inch (in.)

kilometer (km) 0.6214 mile (mi)

meter (m) 1.094 yard (yd) 

Area

square meter (m2) 0.0002471 acre 

hectare (ha) 2.471 acre

square kilometer (km2) 0.3861 square mile (mi2)

square centimeter (cm2) 0.1550 square inch (ft2) 

Volume

cubic meter (m3) 6.290 barrel (petroleum, 1 barrel = 42 gal)

cubic kilometer (km3) 0.2399 cubic mile (mi3) 

Flow rate

cubic meter per second (m3/s) 35.31 cubic foot per second (ft3/s)

meter per second (m/s) 3.281 foot per second (ft/s) 

Mass

gram (g) 0.03527 ounce, avoirdupois (oz)

kilogram (kg) 2.205 pound avoirdupois (lb)

Temperature in degrees Celsius (°C) may be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (°F) as follows:

°F=(1.8×°C)+32

Vertical coordinate information is referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 

(NAVD 88).

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).

Specific conductance is given in microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius (μS/cm at 

25°C).

Concentrations of chemical constituents in water are given either in milligrams per liter (mg/L) 

or micrograms per liter (μg/L).

SI to Inch/Pound
Project Overview

By Aaron J. DeLonay, Diana M. Papoulias, Robert B. Jacobson, 

Mark L. Wildhaber, Darin G. Simpkins, and Carl E. Korschgen

Chapter A of 

Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, 

and Population Dynamics of Pallid Sturgeon and Shovelnose 

Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Edited by Carl E. Korschgen

Open-File Report 2007–1262

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
Contents

Abstract...........................................................................................................................................................1

Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................1

Background............................................................................................................................................1

Status of Missouri River Sturgeon.....................................................................................................1

Reproductive Ecology of Missouri River Sturgeon .........................................................................2

Research Goal................................................................................................................................................3

Product Development and Delivery............................................................................................................3

References Cited............................................................................................................................................4

Table A1 ...........................................................................................................................................................7

Table

A1. List of publications, reports, presentations, meeting attendance, training, 

technical assistance, and outreach contacts provided by U.S. Geological 

Survey (USGS) staff......................................................................................................................8
Abstract

For more than a hundred years, human activities have 

modified the natural forces that control the Missouri River and 

its native fish fauna. While the ecological effects of regulation and channel engineering are understood in general, the 

current understanding is not sufficient to guide river restoration and management. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is 

in the third year of a multiagency research effort to determine 

the ecological requirements for reproduction and survival 

of the endangered pallid sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus) 

and shovelnose sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus platorhynchus) in 

the Missouri River. The multidisciplinary research strategy 

includes components of behavior, physiology, habitat use, 

habitat availability, and population modeling of all life stages. 

Shovelnose sturgeon are used to design the strategy because 

they are closely related to the pallid sturgeon and are often 

used as a surrogate species to develop new research tools or to 

examine the effects of management actions or environmental 

variables on sturgeon biology and habitat use.

During fiscal years 2005 and 2006, the U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers (USACE) provided funds to USGS for tasks 

associated with the Comprehensive Sturgeon Research Program (CSRP) and for tasks associated with evaluation of the 

Sturgeon Response to Flow Modifications (SRFM). Because 

work activities of CSRP and SRFM are so integrated, we are 

providing information on activities that have been consolidated at the task level. These task activities represent chapters 

in this report.

Introduction

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has been 

charged with altering operations of the Missouri River Main 

Stem Reservoir System, operation and maintenance of the 

Missouri River Bank Stabilization and Navigation Project, and 

operation of the Kansas River Reservoir System to remove a 

jeopardy opinion for the endangered pallid sturgeon (U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, 2003). The emphasis on restoring flow 

regime and channel morphology in the 2003 biological opinion reflects the understanding that these two factors have been 

highly altered by river management and that physical habitat 

is likely a bottleneck in reproduction and survival of Missouri 

River sturgeon. 

Background

Intensive management of the Missouri River for purposes 

of navigation, flood control, and power generation has resulted 

in dramatic physical changes to the river corridor (Ferrell, 

1993,1996; Galat and Lipkin, 2000). As in other rivers with 

large flood plains, agricultural pesticides, nutrient runoff, and 

increasing discharge of domestic and industrial effluents may 

also have affected the aquatic biota and the ecological health 

of the Missouri River basin (Tockner and Stanford, 2002). 

Recent proliferation of introduced and non-indigenous species 

has further threatened to diminish the ecological integrity of 

the river ecosystem (Pflieger, 1997; Galat and others, 2005). In 

combination, these changes in flow regime, physical habitat, 

water quality, and biota have been implicated in the decline of 

important components of the Missouri River native fish assemblage (Funk and Robinson, 1974; Hesse and others, 1989; 

Hesse and Sheets, 1993). 

The most notable and conspicuous evidence of these 

declines has been the loss of sturgeon species native to the 

Missouri River basin. Conservation and restoration of native 

species, such as sturgeon, require knowledge both of the biology of the specie, and of the factors limiting recovery. The 

goal of this research is to improve understanding of the factors 

affecting reproduction and survival of sturgeon in the Missouri 

River. Most immediately, our intent is to determine where, 

when and under what conditions sturgeon spawn; to evaluate 

how successfully sturgeon are spawning; to identify factors 

affecting the recruitment of age-0 sturgeon; and to develop 

sturgeon forecasting models. 

Status of Missouri River Sturgeon

The pallid sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus) is endemic 

to the turbid waters of the Missouri River and the Middle 

and Lower Mississippi River (from the mouth of the Missouri River downstream to New Orleans, La.) (Mayden and 

Kuhajda, 1997). It was listed as a federally endangered species 

Project Overview

By Aaron J. DeLonay, Diana M. Papoulias, Robert B. Jacobson, Mark L. Wildhaber, Darin G. Simpkins, and 

Carl E. Korschgen
4 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

in 1990 (Dryer and Sandvol, 1993). The pallid sturgeon is rare 

in the Lower Missouri River, and no reliable population estimate exists. Based upon recent capture rates and the incidence 

of occurrence, managers estimate that as few as several thousand individuals remain in the Lower Missouri River (Duffy 

and others, 1996; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2000). 

Natural recruitment of juvenile pallid sturgeon to the adult 

population is insufficient to sustain the species and has not 

been documented in recent years (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2000). Hybridization of pallid sturgeon with the sympatric and closely related shovelnose sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus 

platorynchus) has been documented and has been identified 

as a potentially serious threat to the persistence of the pallid sturgeon (Carlson and others, 1985; Keenlyne and others, 

1994; Wills and others, 2002). Since 1989, Missouri River 

basin management agencies have been involved in revising the 

operating plan for the Missouri River mainstem reservoirs and 

consulting on the implementation of the USACE navigation 

and bank stabilization projects (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2000, 2003). As a result, several significant management 

activities have been initiated to benefit the pallid sturgeon in 

the Lower Missouri River, including propagation efforts to 

supplement wild populations, physical habitat rehabilitation 

projects to improve riverine habitat conditions, and planned 

experimental reservoir releases to promote reproduction and 

increased survival of juvenile pallid sturgeon.

The shovelnose sturgeon is more common and widespread than the pallid sturgeon (Becker, 1983). The historical 

distribution of the species included the Mississippi, Missouri, 

Ohio, and Rio Grande Rivers and their tributaries. Similar to 

the pallid sturgeon, the shovelnose sturgeon is declining and 

has been extirpated or is at risk of extirpation from considerable portions of its native range (June, 1977; Moos, 1978; 

Keenlyne, 1997; Quist and others, 2002). Of the 24 States 

that compose the historical range of the shovelnose sturgeon, 

5 list the species as extirpated, and 8 list the species as either 

imperiled or vulnerable (Hesse and Carreirov, 1997; NatureServe, 2005). The World Conservation Union recently listed 

the species as “vulnerable” (Surprenaut, 2004). The “vulnerable” assessment reflects a past reduction in species range of 

30 perceny, and anticipates a further 30 percent reduction in 

population within the next 10 years, or three generations of 

fish. The closely related but allopatric shovelnose species from 

the Mobile River basin, the Alabama sturgeon (S. suttkusi), is 

extremely rare and close to extinction (Mayden and Kuhajda, 

1996). The causes of decline and extirpation of shovelnose 

sturgeon are similar to those that resulted in the listing of the 

pallid sturgeon. Dam construction, impoundment, sedimentation, impacts related to navigation, pollution, and past and 

current exploitation have all been implicated as causative factors (Williams and others, 1989; Keenlyne and Jenkins, 1993; 

Hesse and Carreirov, 1997; Mayden and Kuhajda, 1997; U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, 2000).

Despite evidence of substantial decline, the shovelnose 

sturgeon remains relatively common in the Lower Missouri 

River and the Mississippi Rivers (Becker, 1983). The persistence and resiliency of the shovelnose sturgeon in comparison 

to the pallid sturgeon may be due in part to its earlier maturity, 

lower trophic status, and adaptability to a broader range of 

environmental conditions. The shovelnose sturgeon matures 

earlier and attains a smaller maximum size than the pallid 

sturgeon (Keenlyne and Jenkins, 1993). The smaller shovelnose sturgeon subsists primarily on invertebrates, while the 

larger pallid sturgeon becomes piscivorous relatively early 

in life (Modde and Schmulbach, 1977; Carlson and others, 

1985; Keenlyne, 1997). Both pallid and shovelnose sturgeon 

are highly adapted to large, turbid, riverine environments, but 

pallid sturgeon apparently do not use tributaries or clear-water 

riverine habitats that are frequented by shovelnose sturgeon 

(Mayden and Kuhajda, 1997). Despite these differences, the 

morphological, physiological, and genetic similarity between 

the taxa clearly indicates that these two sympatric species 

are very closely related (Bailey and Cross, 1954; Campton 

and others, 2000; Simons and others, 2001; Snyder, 2002). 

Consequently, the shovelnose sturgeon is a suitable model for 

the development of physiological indicators and reproductive 

assessment tools that are applicable to pallid sturgeon. The 

commonalities and dissimilarities in lifehistory specifics and 

patterns of decline between the two sturgeon species provide 

opportunities to investigate factors limiting species recovery 

and to evaluate the response to experimental system alterations 

and management actions.

Reproductive Ecology of Missouri River 

Sturgeon

The decline of sturgeon populations is a global phenomenon (Birstein, 1993). Habitat alteration, river regulation, 

pollution, and overharvest have been implicated in the now 

predictable patterns of decline and localized extirpation of 

sturgeon across species and geographic areas. Symptomatic of 

this generalized pattern of decline are poor reproductive success and low or no recruitment of juveniles to the adult population. Evidence from various monitoring efforts suggests that 

recruitment of pallid sturgeon to the adult population is limited 

or nonexistent throughout most of the Missouri River (U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, 2000). Some reproduction of the 

endangered pallid sturgeon has been documented in the Lower 

Missouri River (L. Mauldin, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

oral commun., 2000) and in the Middle Mississippi River (R. 

Hrabik, Missouri Department of Conservation, oral commun., 

2002). Evidence also suggests that pallid sturgeon may be 

spawning in the Yellowstone River or Upper Missouri River 

below Fort Peck Dam, though juvenile survival apparently has 

not occurred there for decades (Pat Braaten, U.S. Geological 

Survey, oral commun., 2006). In contrast, shovelnose sturgeon 

are reproducing, and recruitment is occurring in the Missouri 

River (Moos, 1978; Keenlyne 1997). 

Unfortunately, the location of spawning and the relative 

suitability of spawning conditions for these sturgeon species in 

the Lower Missouri River are poorly understood. In addition, 
Project Overview 5

the specifics of the reproductive physiology and spawning 

behavior of both species are not well documented. Increased 

knowledge of the reproductive physiology of both species is 

necessary to develop methods that can accurately assess reproductive readiness and success in these species. These methods 

can be employed in comparative studies to evaluate reproductive success among species over a range of environmental 

conditions. Successfully conducted, these comparative studies 

will help to characterize the natural progression from gamete 

maturation through spawning in Scaphirhynchus sturgeons. In 

addition, comparative studies will aid in the determination of 

important environmental variables that may serve as reproductive cues or will identify factors that may impair or preclude 

successful reproduction.

Most North American sturgeon spawn between the spring 

equinox and summer solstice, with a peak in spawning runs 

often coinciding with the annual peak flow (Cech and Doroshov, 2004). The effect of hydrology on spawning has not been 

documented specifically for shovelnose sturgeon or pallid 

sturgeon, but fishery biologists speculate that those spawning runs are similarly dependent on river flow (Becker, 1983; 

Keenlyne and Jenkins, 1993; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

2000). Migrations of shovelnose sturgeon into smaller streams, 

presumably for spawning, have been reported when sufficient 

water is available (Becker, 1983), but similar use of small 

tributaries by pallid sturgeon has not been documented. The 

sequence of spawning behavior from migration and aggregation at the spawning site through egg deposition has not been 

documented for the shovelnose or pallid sturgeon. The timing, 

periodicity, and location of spawning events in relation to the 

substrate and overlying water conditions (that is, temperature, 

turbidity, flow, and velocity) also are not known. This information is critical to designing adequate habitat alterations and 

flow manipulations intended to promote reproduction and 

survival of young sturgeon.

Spawning areas of other North American sturgeon species are most often characterized by coarse or hard substrates. White sturgeon, Acipenser transmontanus (Scott and 

Crossman, 1973; Parsley and others, 2002); green sturgeon, 

A. medirostris (Houston, 1988); shortnose sturgeon, A. brevirostrum (Taubert, 1980; Buckley and Kynard, 1985); Atlantic 

sturgeon, A. oxyrinchus oxyrinchus (Scott and Crossman, 

1973); gulf sturgeon, A. oxyrinchus desotoi (Fox and others, 

2002); and lake sturgeon, A. fulvescens (Scott and Crossman, 

1973; LaHaye and others, 1992; Bruch and Binkowski, 2002) 

all spawn primarily over gravel, cobble, boulder, bedrock, 

or other hard surfaces. Little is known about the substrate 

preferences of spawning pallid and shovelnose sturgeon. Pallid sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon are assumed to spawn 

in current over coarse substrate in, or adjacent to, the main 

river channel (Becker, 1983; Mayden and Kuhajda, 1997). 

Eggs of most sturgeon species are broadcast over spawning 

areas, become adhesive soon after release, and attach to the 

substrate until hatch (Breder and Rosen, 1966). Knowing the 

location and type of substrate preferred by spawning pallid 

and shovelnose sturgeon would allow biologists to locate 

adult fish during the spawning season, estimate the population of reproductive adults, monitor spawning activity and 

relative success, and assess habitat suitability during the 

spawning period. 

Research Goal

The goal of this research is to determine the ecological 

requirements for successful pallid and shovelnose sturgeon 

reproduction and recruitment in the Missouri River. Past 

research on these species has focused on geographic distribution, morphological and genetic characteristics, and ecology 

of adults that are not reproductively active (Duffy and others, 

1996; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2000). Consequently, 

substantial gaps exist with respect to biotic and abiotic factors 

affecting the development, growth, and reproduction of pallid 

sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon. Lack of knowledge about 

habitat conditions necessary for successful reproduction of 

these species limits the ability of biologists to evaluate or 

define conservation or engineering criteria needed for habitat 

rehabilitation efforts. Factors that affect the survival of earlylife stages of sturgeon are poorly understood, even though this 

is the period of life history when most mortality occurs and 

year-class strength is established for each generation (Gross 

and others, 2002; Kynard and others, 2002, 2004; Parsley and 

others, 2002; Kynard and others, unpub. data). The ability to 

predict or assess relative reproductive success, coupled with 

knowledge about factors affecting recruitment of sturgeon, and 

an ability to accurately forecast future populations will enable 

managers to tailor prescribed management actions to promote 

species recovery.

Product Development and Delivery

The USGS sturgeon research team has developed and 

delivered a large number and diversity of products (table A1) 

in relation to Missouri River recovery issues that have been 

funded by the USACE. Some of the activities and products 

have been funded in part by other sources, including USGS 

appropriated funds, but they support the CSRP and the SRFM 

efforts to understand reproduction and survival of Missouri 

River sturgeon. Printed or electronic copies of these USGS 

products can be provided as long as they comply with USGS 

Fundamental Science Practices peer review and Bureau 

approval policies.

Other activities such as database management, outreach, 

and report generation activities related to CSRP Task 10: 

Information Infrastructure and Decision Support System and 

SRFM Task 5 have been incorporated into table A1 and other 

chapters of this report.
6 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

References Cited

Bailey, R.M., and Cross, F.B., 1954, River sturgeon of the 

American genus Scaphirhynchus—characters, distribution 

and synonymy: Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts and Letters, v. 39, p. 169–208.

Becker, G.C., 1983, Fishes of Wisconsin: Madison, Wis., University of Wisconsin Press, 1,053 p.

Birstein, V.J., 1993, Sturgeons and paddlefishes—threatened 

fish in need of conservation: Conservation Biology, v. 7, 

p. 773–787.

Breder, C.M., and Rosen, D.E., 1966, Modes of reproduction 

in fishes: Neptune City, N.J., T.F.H. Publications, 941 p.

Bruch, R.M., and Binkowski, F.P., 2002, Spawning behavior 

of lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens): Journal of Applied 

Ichthyology, v. 18, p. 570–579.

Buckley, J., and Kynard, B., 1985, Habitat and behaviour of 

pre-spawning and spawning shortnose sturgeon, Acipenser 

brevirostrum, in the Connecticut River, in Binkowski, F.P., 

and Doroshov, S.I., eds., North American sturgeons—biology and aquaculture potential: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 

Junk Publishers, p. 111–117.

Campton, D.E., Bass, A.L., Chapman, F.A., and Bowen, B.W., 

2000, Genetic distinction of pallid, shovelnose, and Alabama sturgeon—emerging species and the U.S. Endangered 

Species Act: Conservation Genetics, v. 1, p. 17–32.

Carlson, D.M., Pflieger, W.L., Trial, L., and Haverland, P.S., 

1985, Distribution, biology, and hybridization of Scaphirhynchus albus and Scaphirhynchus platorynchus in the 

Missouri and Mississippi River: Environmental Biology of 

Fishes, v. 14, p. 51–59.

Cech, J.J., and Doroshov, S.I., 2004, Environmental requirements, preferences, and tolerance limits of North American 

sturgeons, in LeBreton, G.T.O., Beamish, F.W.H., and 

McKinley, R.S., eds., Sturgeons and paddlefish of North 

America: The Netherlands, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 

p. 73–86.

Dryer, M.P., and Sandvol, A.J., 1993, Recovery plan for the 

pallid sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus): Bismarck, N. Dak., 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 55 p.

Duffy, W.G., Berry, C.R., and Keenlyne, K.D., 1996, Biology of the pallid sturgeon with an annotated bibliography 

through 1994: Brookings, S. Dak., Cooperative Fish and 

Wildlife Research Unit, Technical Bulletin 5, South Dakota 

State University, 32 p.

Ferrell, J., 1993, Big Dam Era—A legislative history of the 

Pick-Sloan Missouri River basin program: Omaha, Nebr., 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 228 p.

Ferrell, J., 1996, Soundings—100 years of the Missouri River 

navigation project: Omaha, Nebr., U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers, U.S. Government Printing Office 1996–555–

110, 171 p.

Fox, D.A., Hightower, J.E., and Parauka, F.M., 2002, Estuarine 

and nearshore marine habitat use by gulf sturgeon from the 

Choctawhatchee River system, Florida, in Van Winkle, W., 

Anders, P.J., Secor, D.H., and Dixon, D.A., eds., Biology, 

management, and protection of North American sturgeon: 

Bethesda, Md., American Fisheries Society, Symposium 28, 

p. 111–125.

Funk, J.L., and Robinson, J.W., 1974, Changes in the channel 

of the Lower Missouri River and effects on fish and wildlife: Jefferson City, Mo., Missouri Department of Conservation, 52 p.

Galat, D.L., and Lipkin, R., 2000, Restoring ecological integrity of great rivers—historical hydrographs aid in defining 

reference conditions for the Missouri River: Hydrobiologia, 

v. 422, p. 29–48.

Galat, D.L., Berry, C.R., Gardner, W.M., Hendrickson, J.C., 

Mestl, G.E., Power, G.J., Stone, C., and Winston, M.R., 

2005, Spatiotemporal patterns and changes in Missouri 

River fishes, in Rinne, J.N., Hughes, R.M., and Calamusso, 

B., Historical changes in large river fish assemblages of 

the Americas: Bethesda, Md., American Fisheries Society 

Symposium 45, p. 249–291.

Gross, M.R., Repka, J., Robertson, C.T., Secor, D.H., and 

Winkle, W.V., 2002, Sturgeon conservation—insights from 

elasticity analysis: American Fisheries Society Symposium 

28, p. 13–30.

Hesse, L.W., and Carreirov, J.R., 1997, The status of paddlefish, pallid sturgeon, lake sturgeon, and shovelnose sturgeon—a summary of information regarding status, distribution, and current management strategies within their present 

range: Bettendorf, Iowa, Mississippi Interstate Cooperative 

Resource Association, 52 p.

Hesse, L.W., and Sheets, W., 1993, The Missouri River hydrosystem: Fisheries, v. 18, p. 5–14.

Hesse, L.W., Schmulbach, J.C., Carr, J.M., Keenlyne, K.D., 

Unkenholz, D.G., Robinson, J.W., and Mestl, G.E., 1989, 

Missouri River fishery resources in relation to past, present, 

and future stresses, in Dodge, D.P., ed., Proceedings of the 

International Large River Symposium: Canadian Special 

Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, v. 106, 

p. 352–371.
Project Overview 7

Houston, J.J., 1988, Status of the green sturgeon, Acipenser 

medirostris, in Canada: The Canadian Field Naturalist, 

v. 102, p. 286–290.

June, F.C., 1977, Reproductive patterns in seventeen species 

of warmwater fishes in a Missouri River reservoir: Environmental Biology of Fishes, v. 2, p. 285–296.

Keenlyne, K.D., 1997, Life history and status of the shovelnose sturgeon, Scaphirhynchus platorynchus: Environmental Biology of Fishes, v. 48, p. 291–298.

Keenlyne, K.D., and Jenkins L.G., 1993, Age at sexual maturity of the pallid sturgeon: Transactions of the American 

Fisheries Society, v. 122, p. 393–396.

Keenlyne, K.D., Graham, L.K., and Reed, B.C., 1994, 

Hybridization between the pallid and shovelnose sturgeons: 

Proceedings of the South Dakota Academy of Science, 

v. 73, p. 59–66.

Kynard, B., Henyey, E., and. Horgan, M., 2002, Ontogenetic 

behavior, migration, and social behavior of pallid sturgeon, 

Scaphirhynchus albus, and shovelnose sturgeon, S. platorynchus, with notes on the adaptive significance of body 

color: Environmental Biology of Fishes, v. 63, p. 389–403.

Kynard, B., Parker, E., Pugh, D., and Parker, T., 2004, Swimming height and the effect of velocity on dispersal of 

free embryo and larval pallid sturgeon—an experimental 

study—Report to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha 

District: Turners Falls, Mass, U. S. Geological Survey S. O. 

Conte Anadromous Fish Research Center.

LaHaye, M., Branchard, A., Gendron, M., Verndon, R., and 

Fortin, R., 1992, Reproduction, early life history, and 

characteristics of the spawning grounds of the lake sturgeon 

(Acipenser fulvescens) in Des Prairies and L’Assomption 

Rivers near Montreal, Quebec: Canadian Journal of Zoology, v. 70, p. 1,681–1,689.

Mayden R.L., and Kuhajda B.R., 1996, Systematics, taxonomy, and conservation status of the endangered Alabama 

sturgeon, Scaphirhynchus suttkusi (Williams and Clemmer; 

Actinopterygii, Acipenseridae): Copeia, v. 2, p. 241–273.

Mayden R.L, Kuhajda B.R., 1997, Threatened fishes of the 

world: Scaphirhynchus albus (Forbes & Richardson, 1905; 

Acipenseridae): Environmental Biology of Fishes, v. 48, 

p. 420–421.

Modde, T., and Schmulbach, J.C., 1977, Food and feeding behavior of the shovelnose sturgeon, Scaphirhynchus 

platorynchus, in the unchannelized Missouri River, South 

Dakota: Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 

v. 106, p. 602–608.

Moos, R.E., 1978, Movement and reproduction of shovelnose 

sturgeon Scaphirhynchus platorynchus (Rafinesque) in the 

Missouri River, South Dakota: Vermillion, S. Dak., University of South Dakota, Ph.D. dissertation, 213 p.

NatureServe, 2005, NatureServe Explorer—An online encyclopedia of life, version 4.5: Arlington, Va.

Parsley, M.J., P.J. Anders, A.I. Miller, L. G. Beckman, and 

G.T. McCabe, Jr. 2002, Recovery of white sturgeon populations through natural production: Understanding the 

influence of abiotic and biotic factors on spawning and 

subsequent recruitment, in Van Winkle, W., Anders, P.J., 

Secor, D.H., and Dixon, D.A., eds., Biology, management, 

and protection of North American sturgeon: Bethesda, Md., 

American Fisheries Society, Symposium 28, p. 55–66. 

Pflieger, W.L., 1997, The fishes of Missouri: Jefferson City, 

Mo., Missouri Department of Conservation, 372 p.

Quist, M.C., Guy, C.S., Pegg, M.A., Braaten, P.J., Pierce, 

C.L., Travnichek, V.H., 2002, Potential influence of harvest 

on shovelnose sturgeon populations in the Missouri River 

system: North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 

v. 22, p. 537–549.

Scott, W.B., and Crossman, E.J., 1973, Freshwater fishes of 

Canada: Fisheries Research Board of Canada Bulletin, v. 

184, 966 p.

Simons, A.M., Wood, R.M., Heath, L.S., Kuhajda, B.R., and 

Mayden, R.L., 2001, Phylogenetics of Scaphirhynchus

based on mitochondrial DNA sequences: Transactions of 

the American Fisheries Society, v. 130, p. 359–366.

Snyder, D.E., 2002, Pallid and shovelnose sturgeon larvae—

morphological description and identification: Journal of 

Applied Ichthyology, v. 18, p. 240–265.

Surprenaut, C., 2004, Scaphirhynchus platorynchus, in IUCN 

2004, 2004 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, accessed 

Oct. 17, 2005, at http://www.iucnredlist.org.

Taubert, B.D., 1980, Reproduction of shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) in Holyoke Pool, Connecticut River, 

Massachusetts: Copeia, v. 1980, p. 114–117.

Tockner, K., and Stanford, J.A., 2002, Riverine flood plains—

present state and future trends: Environmental Conservation, v. 29, p. 308–330.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2000, Biological opinion on 

the operation of the Missouri River main stem reservoir 

system, operation and maintenance of the Missouri River 

Bank Stabilization and Navigation Project, and operation 

of the Kansas River Reservoir System: Bismarck, N. Dak., 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
8 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2003, Amendment to the 2000 

biological opinion on the operation of the Missouri River 

main stem reservoir system, operation and maintenance of 

the Missouri River Bank Stabilization and Navigation Project, and operation of the Kansas River Reservoir System: 

Minneapolis, Minn., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Williams, J.E., Johnson, J.E., Hendrickson, D.A., ContrerasBalderas, S., Williams, J.D., Navarro-Mendoza, M., 

McAllister, D.E., and Deacon, J.E., 1989, Fishes of North 

America endangered, threatened, or of special concern, 

1989: Fisheries, v. 14, no. 6, p. 2–20.

Wills, P.S., Sheehan, R.J., Heidinger, R., Sloss, B.L., and 

Clevenstine, R., 2002, Differentiation of pallid sturgeon 

and shovelnose sturgeon using an index based on meristics 

and morphometrics, in Van Winkle, W., Anders, P.J., Secor, 

D.H., and Dixon, D.A., eds., Biology, management, and 

protection of North American sturgeon: Bethesda, Md., 

American Fisheries Society, Symposium 28. 
Project Overview 

9

Table A1
10 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Table A–1. List of publications, reports, presentations, meeting attendance, training, technical assistance, and outreach contacts 

provided by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) staff.—Continued

Author/Person Title Venue

Publications

Gaeuman, D., Jacobson, R.B., and 

Johnson H.E II

Quantification of Fluid and Bed Dynamics for Characterizing Benthic Physical Habitat in Large RiversSubmitted: Journal of Applied Ichthyology

Bajer, P.B. and Wildhaber, M.L. Population viability analysis of Lower 

Missouri River shovelnose sturgeon 

with initial application to the pallid 

sturgeon

Submitted: Journal of Applied Ichthyology

Wildhaber, M.L. The Role of Reproductive Behavior in 

the Conservation of Fishes: Examples 

from the Great Plains Riverine Fishes

The Conservation Behaviorist, 2006, v. 4, 

no. 1, p. 1.

Wildhaber, M.L., Papoulias, D.M., 

DeLonay, A.J., Tillitt, D.E., 

Bryan, J.L., and Annis, M.L.

Reference guide for physical and 

hormonal examination of Missouri 

River shovelnose sturgeon reproductive stage using non- and minimally 

invasive methods

Submitted: Journal of Applied Ichthyology

Bryan, J.L., Wildhaber, M.L., 

Papoulias, D.M, Delonay, A.J., 

Tillitt, D.E., and Annis, M.L

 Effectiveness of non- and minimally 

invasive methods for estimating 

reproductive stage and fecundity of 

shovelnose and pallid sturgeons

Submitted: Journal of Applied Ichthyology

DeLonay, A.J., Papoulias, D.M., 

Wildhaber, M.W., Griffith, S.A., and 

Allert, J.A

Application of telemetry and biologically-delivered remote-sensor technology 

to evaluate reproductive behavior of 

shovelnose sturgeon

Submitted: Journal of Applied Ichthyology

Wildhaber, M.L., Papoulias, D.M., 

Delonay, A.J., Tillitt, D.E., 

Bryan, J.L., Annis, M.L., and 

Allert, J.A. 

Gender identification of shovelnose sturgeon using ultrasonic and endoscopic 

imagery and the application of the 

method to the pallid sturgeon.

Journal of Fish Biology, 2005, v. 67, 

p. 114–132.

Gaeuman, D., and Jacobson, R.B. Acoustic bed velocity and bed load 

dynamics in a large sand bed river

Journal Geophysical Research, v. 111, 

F02005, doi:10.1029/2005JF000411, 14 p.

Johnson, H.E., Jacobson, R.B., and 

Delonay, A.J.

Hydroecological modeling of the Lower 

Missouri River

Proceedings of the Third Federal Interagency 

Hydrologic Modeling Conference, Reno, 

Nev, April 2–6, 2006: Subcommittee on 

Hydrology of the Interagency Advisory 

Committee on Water Information, ISBN 

0–9779007–0–3.

Jacobson, R.B., and Galat, D. L. Flow and form in rehabilitation of large 

river ecosystems—an example from 

the Lower Missouri River 

Geomorphology, 2006, v. 77, p.249–269, 

doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2006.01.014, 21 p.

Reports

Korschgen, C. Missouri River Sturgeon Fisheries and Aquatics Bulletin, 2006, v. 5, 

no. 2, p. 4–5.

Chojnacki, K., Tracy-Smith, E., 

Clark, S., DeLonay, A., and Henke, C.

Integrating Data Collection and Management for Fisheries ResearchFisheries and Aquatics Bulletin, 2006, v. 5, 

no. 3, p. 5.

DeLonay, A., Jacobson, R., 

Papoulias, D., Wildhaber, M., 

Simpkins, D., and Korschgen, C.

Sturgeon Research activities The GROOVE, June, 28, 2006. Email to Craig 

Fleming

Wildhaber, M.L., Papoulias, D.M., 

DeLonay, A.J., Tillitt, D.E., 

Bryan, J.L., and Annis, M.L.

Development of Methods to Determine 

the Reproductive Status of Pallid 

Sturgeon in the Missouri River

USGS, Columbia Environmental Research 

Center. Final Science Support Program 

Report, 81 p. (2006)

DeLonay, A., Jacobson, R., 

Papoulias, D., Wildhaber, M., 

Simpkins, D., and Korschgen, C. 

MIPR Quarterly Reports March, June, and September, 2006. Emails to 

Craig Fleming
Project Overview 11

Table A–1. List of publications, reports, presentations, meeting attendance, training, technical assistance, and outreach contacts 

provided by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) staff.—Continued

Author/Person Title Venue

Presentations

Platform DeLonay, A.J., Papoulias, D.M., 

Wildhaber M.L., and Griffith, S.A. 

Application of Telemetry and Biologically-Delivered Remote-Sensor 

Technology to Evaluate Reproductive 

Behavior of Shovelnose Sturgeon

Evolution, Ecology, and Management of 

Scaphirhynchus, St. Louis, Mo, Jan. 11–13, 

2005

Gaeuman, D., Jacobson, R.B., and 

Johnson, H.E. II 

Quantification of Fluid and Bed Dynamics for Characterizing Benthic Physical Habitat in Large Rivers, Evolution, Ecology, and Management of 

Scaphirhynchus, St. Louis, Mo, Jan. 11–13, 

2005

Papoulias, D.M., DeLonay, A.J., 

Annis, M.L., and Tillitt, D.E. 

Evaluating Scaphirhynchus Spawning 

Success: The Use of Physiological 

Indicators

Evolution, Ecology, and Management of 

Scaphirhynchus, St. Louis, Mo, Jan. 11–13, 

2005

Wildhaber, M.L., Papoulias, D.M., 

DeLonay, A.J., Tillitt, D.E., 

Bryan, J.L., and Annis, M.L. 

Physical and Hormonal Examination of 

Missouri River Shovelnose Sturgeon 

Reproductive State

Evolution, Ecology, and Management of 

Scaphirhynchus, St. Louis, Mo, Jan. 11–13, 

2005

Bryan, J.L., Wildhaber, M.L., 

Papoulias, D.M., DeLonay, A.J., 

Tillitt, D.E., and Annis, M.L.

Effectiveness of non- and minimally 

invasive methods for estimating 

reproductive stage and fecundity of 

shovelnose and pallid sturgeons

Evolution, Ecology, and Management of 

Scaphirhynchus, St. Louis, Mo, Jan. 11–13, 

2005

Johnson, H.E. III, Jacobson, R.B, and 

DeLonay, A.J. 

Hydroecological Modeling of the Lower 

Missouri River

Third Federal Interagency Hydrologic Modeling Conference, Reno, Nevada, April 2–6, 

2006

Simpkins, D., Papoulias, D., Lebay, S., 

Stukel, S., and Kral, J. 

Assessment of Sturgeon Aggregation 

and Spawning Occurrence in the Missouri River below Gavins Point Dam

Missouri Natural Resources Committee, 

Annual Meeting, Oct 3–5, 2006, Pierre, S. 

Dak,

Papoulias, D. M. Physiological Measures of Reproductive Readiness to Spawn: Use of the 

Polarization Index

Missouri Natural Resources Committee, 

Annual Meeting, Oct 3–5, 2006, Pierre, S. 

Dak,

DeLonay, A. J. Sturgeon Behavior and Reproductive 

Ecology—Update October 2006

Missouri Natural Resources Committee, 

Annual Meeting, Oct 3–5, 2006, Pierre, S. 

Dak,

Simpkins, D., Papoulias, D., Lebay, S., 

Stukel, S. and Kral, J.

Assessment of Sturgeon Aggregation 

and Spawning Occurrence in the Missouri River below Gavins Point Dam

SRFM meeting, 13 July, 2006, Omaha, Nebr.

Lebay, S., Stukel, S., Kral, J., 

Simpkins, D., Papoulias, D., and 

Laustrup, M.

Assessment of Sturgeon Aggregation 

and Spawning Occurrence in the Missouri River below Gavins Point Dam

Fisheries Division Meeting, July 16–17, 2006, 

Pierre, S. Dak.

Mac, M. Missouri River: Science and Management—Briefing for Deputy Secretary 

of the Interior Lynn Scarlett

Department of the Interior, 25 January 2006. 

Washington, D.C.

Mac, M. Missouri River: Science and Management—Briefing for Assistant Secretary for Water and Science, Department of Interior Department of the Interior, 5 January, 2006, 

Washington, D.C.

Bartholomay, R. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Quality 

Monitoring Activities on the Missouri 

River

Sixth Annual Missouri River Institute 

Research Symposium, March 28, 2006, 

Vermillion, S. Dak.

Wilson, R. and Bartholomay, R. U.S. Geological Survey Real-Time 

Water-Quality Monitoring Activities 

on the Missouri River

Missouri Natural Resources Committee, Annual Meeting, Oct. 3–5, 2006, Pierre, S. 

Dak.

Neitzert, L. and Bartholomay, R. Real-time continuous water-quality 

monitoring in Eastern South Dakota

2006 Eastern South Dakota Water Conference, 

Nov. 1–2, 2006, Brookings, S. Dak. 

Bartholomay, R. U.S. Geological Survey Nebraska and 

South Dakota Research activities on 

the Missouri River

Missouri River Futures meeting, Nov. 8, 2006, 

Ponca, Nebr.
12 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Table A–1. List of publications, reports, presentations, meeting attendance, training, technical assistance, and outreach contacts 

provided by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) staff.—Continued

Author/Person Title Venue

Jacobson, R.B., and Galat, D.G. Hydrograph Design, Lower Missouri 

River: Endangered Species and Floods

American Association for the Advancement 

of Science, Annual Meeting, February 20, 

2006, St. Louis, Mo. 

Jacobson, R.B. and Reuter, J.M. Topographically based habitat assessment tools for riverine ecosystem 

management

American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, 

December 14, 2006, San Francisco, Calif. 

Poster

DeLonay, A., Jacobson, R., 

Papoulias, D. Wildhaber, M., 

Simpkins, D. Laustrup, M., and 

Korschgen, C. 

Factors Affecting the Reproductive 

Status, Movements, and Habitat Use 

of Pallid Sturgeon and Shovelnose 

Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Missouri Natural Resources Conference, May 

9–12, South Sioux City, Nebr.

Fleming, C., DeLonay, A., Jacobson, R., 

Papoulias, D., Wildhaber, M., 

Simpkins, D., Laustrup, M., 

Korschgen, C. Wilson, R., Blevins, 

D., Gorman, J., Bartholomay, R., 

Mestl, G., Steffensen, K., Hesse, L., 

Hill, T., Doyle, W., Stukel, S., 

LaBay, S., and Nelson-Stastney, W. 

Sturgeon Response to Gavins Point Dam 

Flow Modification

 Missouri River Natural Resources Conference, May 9–12, South Sioux City, Nebr.

DeLonay, A., Jacobson, R., 

Papoulias, D., Wildhaber, M., 

Simpkins, D., and Korschgen, C. 

The Missouri River, USA: Science for 

Management and Restoration of Sturgeon in a Large, Multi-Purpose River 

Corridor

Second International Symposium on Ecology 

and Fishery Biodiversity in Large Rivers of 

Northeast Asia and Western North America, 

Sept. 25–29, 2006. Harbin, People’s Republic of China

Chojnacki, K., Tracy-Smith, E., 

Clark-Kolaks, S., and DeLonay, A.

Integrating Data Collection and Management Tools To Support Multidisciplinary Research of Sturgeon on the 

Lower Missouri River

The 67th Midwest Fish and Wildlife Conference, December 3–6, 2006, Omaha, Nebr.

DeLonay, A., Neely, B., Gonsior, J., 

Haas, J., Hamel, M., Everitt, D., 

Mestl, G.. Chojnacki, K., 

Clark-Kolaks, S., and Tracy-Smith, E. 

Characterizing Spawning Migration 

Movements of Pallid Sturgeon and 

Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Lower 

Missouri River

The 67th Midwest Fish and Wildlife Conference, December 3–6, 2006, Omaha, Nebr.

Gaeuman, D. G. and Jacobson, R.B. Cross-validation of dune-tracking and 

acoustic bed velocity measurements 

for assessing bedload transport in a 

large river

American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, 

December 14, 2006, San Francisco, Calif.

Papoulias, D.M., Wildhaber, M.L. 

Delonay, A.J., Annis, M.L., 

Krentz, S., and Tillitt, D.E. 

Abnormal hermaphroditism in shovelnose sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus platorynchus) from the Missouri RiverInternational Workshop, Modern Problems 

of Aquatic Toxicology, September 20–24, 

2005, Borok, Yaroslavl, Russia, 

Candrl.,J.S., Papoulias, D.M., 

Buckler, J.A., Tillitt, D.E.

Temperature and Diet as Factors in the 

Early Life stage development of shovelnose sturgeon

Missouri Natural Resources Committee, 

Annual Meeting, Oct 3–5, 2006, Pierre, S. 

Dak.

Informal DeLonay, A., Jacobson, R., 

Papoulias, D., Wildhaber, M., 

Simpkins, D., Korschgen, C., 

Mac, M., and Galat, D. 

Development of a Pallid Sturgeon 

Life History Model as a Conceptual 

Framework for Species Recovery 

Science in the Lower Missouri River

Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Team, September 

13, 2006, Columbia, Mo.

Meeting Attendance

Korschgen, C. and Blevins, D. Agency Coordination Team (ACT), 

Missouri River Recovery Program

September 14 , 2006, St. Joseph, Mo.

Korschgen, C. Agency Coordination Team (ACT), 

Missouri River Recovery Program

June 20, 2006, St. Joseph, Mo.

Blevins, D. and Wilson, R. Agency Coordination Team (ACT), 

Missouri River Recovery Program

December 15, 2005 

Korschgen, C. and Blevins, D. Agency Coordination Team (ACT), 

Missouri River Recovery Program

June 20, 2006, St. Joseph, Mo.
Project Overview 13

Table A–1. List of publications, reports, presentations, meeting attendance, training, technical assistance, and outreach contacts 

provided by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) staff.—Continued

Author/Person Title Venue

Blevins, D. Agency Coordination Team (ACT), 

Missouri River Recovery Program

March 29, 2006 

Blevins, D., Wilson, R., and Gorman, J. Agency Coordination Team (ACT), 

Missouri River Recovery Program

August? 2006, Kansas City, Mo.

Blevins, D., Wilson, R., and Gorman, J. Agency Coordination Team (ACT), 

Missouri River Recovery Program

December. 6, 2006. Omaha, Nebr.

Simpkins, D. Habitat Assessment and Mitigation 

Program

March 21, 2006, Omaha, Nebr. 

Simpkins, D. Habitat Assessment and Mitigation 

Program

January 16–19, 2006, Kansas City, Mo. 

Long-term pallid sturgeon and associated fish community assessment for 

the Missouri River

December 6–7 , 2006, Omaha/Lincoln, Nebr.

DeLonay, A., Jacobson, R., 

Papoulias, D., Wildhaber, M., 

Simpkins, D., and Korschgen, C. 

Spring Rise #1, Research Planning January 20, 2006, Columbia, Mo.

DeLonay, A., Jacobson, R., 

Papoulias, D., Simpkins, D., and 

Korschgen, C. 

Spring Rise #2, Research Planning October 5, 2006, Pierre, S. Dak.

Jacobson, R., and DeLonay, A. Spring Rise Plenary Group Multiple dates and locations

DeLonay, A. J., Korschgen, C., 

Simpkins, D., Wildhaber, M., and 

Mac, M. 

Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Team Meeting September 12–13, 2006, Columbia, Mo.

DeLonay, A., Jacobson, R., 

Papoulias, D., Wildhaber, M., 

Simpkins, D., and Korschgen, C. 

Annual Meeting of the Missouri River 

Natural Resources Committee

October 3–5, 2006, Pierre, S. Dak.

Training

DeLonay, A. J., Tracy-Smith, E., and 

Clark, S.

Telemetry Workshop sponsored by 

CERC and Lotek Wireless, Inc.

August 15–18, 2006, Columbia, Mo.

Jacobson, R. Hydrograph Survey Techniques for Nebraska Game and Parks Commission March 2006, Columbia, Mo.

DeLonay, A. J. Telemetry Techniques for tracking sturgeon for Nebraska Game and Parks 

Commission

August 14, 2006, Columbia, Mo, 

Nebraska and South Dakota Water 

Science Centers

Water Quality Monitoring Training March 16–17, 2006

Iowa. Missouri, Nebraska, and South 

Dakota Water Science Centers

Water Quality Monitoring Training April 11–13, 2006

Technical Assistance

Wildhaber M., and Bryan, J. Evaluation of pallid sturgeon broodstock at Gavins Point National Fish 

Hatchery

Yankton, S. Dak.

DeLonay A., and Simpkins, D. Pallid sturgeon broodstock capture River miles 

DeLonay, A. and Braaten, P. Yellowstone River Intake consultation Billings, Mont.

DeLonay, A. Catfish Telemetry —— graduate student 

at Univ. of Missouri

Columbia, Mo.

Outreach Contacts

Jacobson, R. Water level shy for rise in March Columbia Missourian, February 28, 2006

Papoulias, D. Sturgeon — Coddling Needed Science News, March 4, 2006

Mac, M. Interview about Missouri River research “The Amy Miller Show” on The Eagle talk 

radio station, KSSZ/93.9 FM, June 29 

2006, Columbia, Mo.
14 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Table A–1. List of publications, reports, presentations, meeting attendance, training, technical assistance, and outreach contacts 

provided by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) staff.—Continued

Author/Person Title Venue

DeLonay, A. Missouri River research on the endangered pallid sturgeon Front page article—Columbia Missourian, 

April 20, 2006, Columbia, Mo.

DeLonay, A. Newspaper article—The species is so 

very rare that you do have to have 

propagation as the number one priority 

Argus Leader, May 7, 2006, Sioux Falls, 

S. Dak., 

Jacobson, R. Experts “Collaborate at the Current” KTIV, May 8, 2006, Sioux City, Iowa,

DeLonay, A. USGS research program on endangered 

pallid sturgeon in relation to the Missouri River spring rise

Morning Edition, National Public Radio, May 

19, 2006

DeLonay, A. Extra H2O Might Save Sturgeons Kansas City Star, June 24, 2006, Kansas City, 

Mo.

USGS Water Science Centers Missouri River Water Information Portal 

Web site for Realtime Information

Made available to the public in early October, 

2006 at http://ne.water.usgs.gov/

Prepared by: 

USGS Enterprise Publishing Network 

Rolla Publishing Service Center 

1400 Independence Road 

Rolla, MO 65401

For more information concerning this publication, contact:

Director

U.S. Geological Survey

Columbia Environmental Research Center

4200 New Haven Road

Columbia, MO 65201

(573) 875–5399

Or visit the Columbia Environmental Research Center website at:

http://www.cerc.usgs.gov
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive 

Behavior of Shovelnose Sturgeon and 

Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River

By Aaron J. DeLonay1 Diana M. Papoulias1, Mark L. Wildhaber1, Gerald E. Mestl2, 

Dustin W. Everitt2, and Kimberly A. Chojnacki1

Chapter B of 

Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, 

and Population Dynamics of Pallid Sturgeon and Shovelnose 

Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Edited by Carl E. Korschgen

1

 U.S. Geological Survey, Columbia Environmental Research Center.

2

 Nebraska Game and Parks Commission.

Open-File Report 2007–1262

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
Contents

Abstract.........................................................................................................................................................23

Introduction...................................................................................................................................................23

Background..........................................................................................................................................24

Objectives: 2005–06 Activities...........................................................................................................24

Telemetry System Development..............................................................................................24

Extensive Sturgeon Reproduction Study ...............................................................................24

Development of Stationary Receiver Network .....................................................................25

Aggregation and Spawning Site Location.............................................................................25

Intensive Pallid Sturgeon Reproduction Study.....................................................................25

Methods and Approach..............................................................................................................................25

Telemetry System Development.......................................................................................................25

Extensive Sturgeon Reproduction Study ........................................................................................27

Development of Stationary Receiver Network ..............................................................................29

Aggregation and Spawning Site Location......................................................................................29

Intensive Pallid Sturgeon Reproduction Study..............................................................................30

Results and Discussion...............................................................................................................................30

Telemetry System Development.......................................................................................................30

Extensive Sturgeon Reproduction Study ........................................................................................31

Development of Stationary Receiver Network ..............................................................................33

Aggregation and Spawning Site Location......................................................................................33

Intensive Pallid Sturgeon Reproduction Study..............................................................................33

Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................................33

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................33

Figures and Tables.......................................................................................................................................35

Figures

B1–B2. Photographs showing—

B1. (A) a Lotek SRX 600 radio receiver (Lotek Wireless Inc., Newmarket, Ontario, 

Canada) equipped with (B) an acoustic upconverter to detect both 

radio and ultrasonic signals and (C) a dual port Lotek MAP 600 RT digital 

ultrasonic receiver ............................................................................................................36

B2. Lotek (Lotek Wireless Inc., Newmarket, Ontario, Canada) combined acoustic/

radio transmitting (CART) tag implanted in shovelnose sturgeon in 2006 (A) and 

data storage tag (DST) implanted in all sturgeon in 2005 and 2006 (B) ....................36

B3–B5. Computer screen images showing—

B3. Lotek MapHost software (Lotek Wireless Inc., Newmarket, Ontario, Canada) 

showing the simultaneous detection and identification of three transmitters in 

real-time ..............................................................................................................................37

B4. Lotek MapHost software (Lotek Wireless Inc., Newmarket, Ontario, Canada) 

during the simultaneous detection three transmitters................................................38

B5. The custom ArcPadTM (ESRI, Inc., Redlands, Calif.) application interface 

displays ancillary data to aid the users during data collection.................................39
iii

B6. Custom data entry forms in the ArcPadTM (ESRI, Inc., Redlands, Calif.) 

application streamline and validate data collection.............................................................40

B7. Example of detailed reports available for individual fish produced in a 

near real time ..............................................................................................................................41

B8. Example of summary reports that quickly characterize the status of individual 

fish ................................................................................................................................................42

B9–B10. Photographs showing—

B9. Typical telemetry research vessels designed for use in the lower study 

segment...............................................................................................................................43

B10. Typical research telemetry vessel designed for use in the upper study 

segment...............................................................................................................................43

B11–B12.Maps showing—

B11. Pallid sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon tagging locations for 2005......................44

B12. Pallid sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon tagging locations for 2006......................45

B13. Planned release hydrograph for Gavins Point Dam..............................................................46

B14–B23.Graphs showing—

B14. Mean daily temperature recorded by HOBO® Water Temp Pro v2 data loggers 

located in the Missouri River near Hermann, Mo., during 2005, and mean daily 

discharge at U.S. Geological Survey gaging station near Hermann, Mo., during 

2005 ......................................................................................................................................47

B15. Mean daily temperature recorded by HOBO® Water Temp Pro v2 data loggers 

located in the Missouri River near Hermann, Mo., during 2006, and mean daily 

discharge at U.S. Geological Survey gaging station near Hermann, Mo., during 

2006 ......................................................................................................................................47

B16. Mean daily temperature recorded by HOBO® Water Temp Pro v2 data loggers 

located in the Missouri River near Boonville, Mo., during 2005, and mean daily 

discharge at U.S. Geological Survey gaging station near Boonville, Mo., during 

2005 ......................................................................................................................................48

B17. Mean daily temperature recorded by HOBO® Water Temp Pro v2 data loggers 

located in the Missouri River near Boonville, Mo., during 2006, and mean daily 

discharge at U.S. Geological Survey gaging station near Boonville, Mo., during 

2006 ......................................................................................................................................48

B18. Mean daily temperature recorded by HOBO® Water Temp Pro v2 data loggers 

located in the Missouri River near Rulo, Nebr., during 2005, and mean daily 

discharge at U.S. Geological Survey gaging station near Rulo, Nebr., during 

2005 ......................................................................................................................................49

B19. Mean daily temperature recorded by HOBO® Water Temp Pro v2 data loggers 

located in the Missouri River near Rulo, Nebr., during 2006, and mean daily 

discharge at U.S. Geological Survey gaging station near Rulo, Nebr., during 

2006 ......................................................................................................................................49

B20. Mean daily temperature recorded by HOBO® Water Temp Pro v2 data loggers 

located in the Missouri River near Decatur, Nebr., during 2005, and mean daily 

discharge at U.S. Geological Survey gaging station near Decatur, Nebr., during 

2005 ......................................................................................................................................50

B21. Mean daily temperature recorded by HOBO® Water Temp Pro v2 data loggers 

located in the Missouri River near Decatur, Nebr., during 2006, and mean daily 

discharge at U.S. Geological Survey gaging station near Decatur, Nebr., during 

2006 ......................................................................................................................................50

B22. Mean daily temperature recorded by Hobo® Water Temp Pro v2 data loggers 

located in the Osage River, Mo., during 2005 and 2006 ...............................................51
iv

B23. Graph showing mean daily temperature recorded by Hobo® Water Temp Pro v2 

data loggers located in the Vermillion River, S. Dak., during 2005 and 2006.....................51

B24. Photograph showing sturgeon sampling conducted from open boats in March and 

April during 2005 and 2006 by using overnight and short-term gill net sets .....................52

B25–B26.Scatter plots showing—

B25. Length-weight relationship for all shovelnose sturgeon collected during April 

2006 in the lower study segment of the Lower Missouri River ..................................53

B26. Length-weight relationship for all shovelnose sturgeon collected during April 

2006 in the upper study segment of the Lower Missouri River..................................53

B27–B28.Photographs showing—

B27. Male pallid sturgeon (2.66 kg, 883 mm fork length) in reproductive condition 

captured at river mile 600.0 in upper study segment of the Missouri River in 

April 2006 (dorsal view).....................................................................................................54

B28. Male pallid sturgeon (2.66 kg, 883 mm fork length) in reproductive condition 

captured at river mile 600.0 in upper study segment of the Missouri River in 

April 2006 (ventral view) ...................................................................................................54

B29. Scatter plot showing length-weight relationship for pallid sturgeon collected during 

April 2006 in the lower and upper study segments of the Missouri River.........................55

B30–B32.Photographs showing—

B30. Sturgeon were weighed, measured, and photographed prior to implantation 

(lateral view).......................................................................................................................55

B31. Blood samples were taken for reproductive assessment during implantation 

and again at recapture .....................................................................................................56

B32. Transmitters and data storage tags were surgically implanted through a single 

ventral incision...................................................................................................................56

B33–B36.Charts showing—

B33. Research vessels’ search effort for 2005 for the Lower Missouri River..................57

B34. Research vessels’ search effort for 2006 for the Lower Missouri River..................58

B35. Displacement of 2005 shovelnose sturgeon making an upward migration 

calculated by subtracting the capture and implantation location from the 

maximum upstream location............................................................................................59

B36. Displacement of 2006 shovelnose sturgeon making an upward migration 

calculated by subtracting the capture and implantation location from the 

maximum upstream location............................................................................................60

B37–B42.Movement map showing—

B37. Interpolated upstream and downstream movement for shovelnose sturgeon 

SNS05–011 ..........................................................................................................................61

B38. Interpolated upstream and downstream movement for shovelnose sturgeon 

SNS05–028 ..........................................................................................................................62

B39. Interpolated upstream and downstream movement for shovelnose sturgeon 

SNS05–041 ..........................................................................................................................63

B40. Interpolated upstream and downstream movement shovelnose sturgeon 

SNS05–061 ..........................................................................................................................64

B41. Interpolated upstream and downstream movement shovelnose sturgeon 

SNS05–065 ..........................................................................................................................65

B42. Interpolated upstream and downstream movement for shovelnose sturgeon 

SNS05–066 ..........................................................................................................................66
v

B43–B48.Movement maps showing—

B43. Interpolated upstream and downstream movement for shovelnose sturgeon 

SNS06–015 ..........................................................................................................................67

B44. Interpolated upstream and downstream movement for shovelnose sturgeon 

SNS06–027 ..........................................................................................................................68

B45. Interpolated upstream and downstream movement for shovelnose sturgeon 

SNS06–038 ..........................................................................................................................69

B46. Interpolated upstream and downstream movement for shovelnose sturgeon 

SNS06–080 ..........................................................................................................................70

B47. Interpolated upstream and downstream movement for shovelnose sturgeon 

SNS06–081 ..........................................................................................................................71

B48. Interpolated upstream and downstream movement for shovelnose sturgeon 

SNS06–083 ..........................................................................................................................72

B49–B60.Scatter plots showing—

B49. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black 

dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose 

sturgeon SNS05–011 .........................................................................................................73

B50. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black 

dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose 

sturgeon SNS05–028 .........................................................................................................73

B51. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black 

dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose 

sturgeon SNS05–041 .........................................................................................................74

B52. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black 

dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose 

sturgeon SNS05–061 .........................................................................................................74

B53. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black 

dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose 

sturgeon SNS05–065 .........................................................................................................75

B54. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black 

dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose 

sturgeon SNS05–066 .........................................................................................................75

B55. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black 

dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose 

sturgeon SNS06–015 .........................................................................................................76

B56. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black 

dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose 

sturgeon SNS06–027 .........................................................................................................76

B57. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black 

dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose 

sturgeon SNS06–038 .........................................................................................................77

B58. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black 

dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose 

sturgeon SNS06–080 .........................................................................................................77

B59. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black 

dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose 

sturgeon SNS06–081 .........................................................................................................78

B60. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black 

dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose 

sturgeon SNS06–083 .........................................................................................................78
vi

B61–B73.Graphs showing—

B61. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, and daily 

mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for implanted 

shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–011....................................................................................79

B62. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, and daily 

mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for implanted 

shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–028....................................................................................79

B63. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, and daily 

mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for implanted 

shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–041....................................................................................80

B64. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, and daily 

mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for implanted 

shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–061....................................................................................80

B65. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, and daily 

mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for implanted 

shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–065....................................................................................81

B66. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST) and telemetry relocations for 

implanted shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–066.................................................................81

B67. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, and daily 

mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for implanted 

shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–015....................................................................................82

B68. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, and daily 

mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for implanted 

shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–027....................................................................................82

B69. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, and daily 

mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for implanted 

shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–038....................................................................................83

B70. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, and daily 

mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for implanted 

shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–080....................................................................................83

B71. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, and daily 

mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for implanted 

shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–081....................................................................................84

B72. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, and daily 

mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for implanted 

shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–083....................................................................................84

B73–B77.Photographs showing—

B73. Necropsy of recaptured shovelnose sturgeon.............................................................85

B74. Dissected ovaries removed during necropsy of recaptured shovelnose 

sturgeon ..............................................................................................................................85

B75. Necropsy of recaptured shovelnose sturgeon.............................................................86

B76. Dissected ovaries removed during necropsy of recaptured shovelnose 

sturgeon ..............................................................................................................................86

B77. Necropsy of recaptured shovelnose sturgeon.............................................................87

B78. Graph showing telemetry relocations and daily mean temperature and discharge 

from nearest upstream gage for implanted pallid sturgeon PLS06–001............................87

B79. Map showing relocation sites of male pallid sturgeon PLS06–001 during the 

spawning period during early May 2006.................................................................................88
vii

B80–B83.Maps showing—

B80. Relocation sites of pallid sturgeon PLS06–009 between river miles 673 and 

672 from May 18, 2006, through September 13, 2006 ...................................................89

B81. Relocation sites of pallid sturgeon PLS06–006 between river miles 585 and 

583 from May 24, 2006, through October 26, 2006.........................................................90

B82. Relocation sites of pallid sturgeon PLS06–003 between river miles 332 and 

331 from May 17, 2006, through October 11, 2006.........................................................91

B83. Relocation sites of pallid sturgeon PLS06–004 between river miles 327 and 

326 from May 10, 2006, through August 8, 2006 ............................................................92

Tables

B1. Shovelnose sturgeon implanted in March–April 2005..........................................................93

B2. Pallid sturgeon implanted in 2005 ............................................................................................96

B3. Shovelnose sturgeon implanted in April 2006........................................................................96

B4. Pallid sturgeon implanted in 2006 ..........................................................................................100

B5. Gravid female shovelnose sturgeon implanted in 2005 and subsequently 

recaptured .................................................................................................................................101

B6. Gravid female shovelnose sturgeon implanted in 2006 and subsequently 

recaptured .................................................................................................................................102
viii
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of 

Shovelnose Sturgeon and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower 

Missouri River

By Aaron J. DeLonay1 Diana M. Papoulias1, Mark L. Wildhaber1, Gerald E. Mestl2, Dustin W. Everitt2, and 

Kimberly A. Chojnacki1

1

 U.S. Geological Survey, Columbia Environmental Research Center.

2

 Nebraska Game and Parks Commission.

Abstract

This chapter is a summary of activities conducted by 

the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in collaboration with 

Nebraska Game and Parks Commission (NGPC). The intent 

of these activities was to extensively and intensively study the 

movement, habitat use, and reproductive behavior of pallid 

sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus) and shovelnose sturgeon (S. 

platorynchus) in the Lower Missouri River. This work consisted 

of five components: telemetry system development, an extensive sturgeon reproduction study, development of a stationary 

receiver network, an aggregation and spawning site location 

study, and an intensive pallid sturgeon reproduction study.

A telemetry system was sourced in 2004 and deployment was initiated in 2005. A combination of analog radio and 

ultrasonic technology, with the addition of digital ultrasonic 

technology, was used to provide effective transmitter detection 

and tracking capabilities for sturgeon and other riverine species 

in the mainstem Missouri River and tributaries. Research vessels were outfitted as mobile-data collection platforms complete 

with an array of telemetry receivers, water and habitat sampling 

equipment, and computers for data collection. A computer-based 

data collection framework was developed to support simultaneous data collection from multiple field crews working on large 

stretches of the river. A customized ArcPadTM (ESRI, Inc., 

Redlands, Califorina) application was developed for mobile 

geographical information system field mapping of telemetry 

relocation events and habitat data collection on each research 

vessel. Data from field computers are uploaded to a secure 

server and linked to a larger spatial database. A graphical user 

interface was developed to allow users to easily update, enter, or 

view data and summary reports in near real-time.

In 2005 and 2006, 100 female shovelnose sturgeon were 

implanted with a telemetry transmitter and a Data Storage Tag 

(DST). Fifty shovelnose sturgeon were captured, implanted, 

and released in each of two study segments; the lower study 

segment (Kansas City, Missouri to St. Louis, Missouri) and 

the upper study segment (Gavins Point Dam, South Dakota to 

Plattsmouth, Nebraska). All implanted shovelnose sturgeon 

were in reproductive condition. Pallid sturgeon of any sex 

and condition were implanted and incorporated into the study 

when available (5 in 2005 and 16 in 2006). Only two pallid 

sturgeon implanted in 2006 were in reproductive condition 

(one male and one female). Systematic search efforts were 

conducted to document direction and distances moved, and 

to locate potential spawning habitat. Most tagged shovelnose 

sturgeon moved upstream after implantation for a variable 

distance, stopped, and then initiated a downstream movement. 

Shovelnose sturgeon were recollected following the spawning 

season to determine if spawning had occurred. Results indicate 

that shovelnose sturgeon that moved upstream after implantation spawned successfully, and most recollected shovelnose 

sturgeon spawned successfully. In contrast to the implanted 

shovelnose sturgeon, most pallid sturgeon were not in reproductive condition and did not exhibit predictable patterns of 

movement similar to that of the shovelnose sturgeon.

Three planned components of the study, the aggregation 

study, the intensive pallid sturgeon tracking study, and the 

remote telemetry receivers were not fully implemented. The 

transmitters for the aggregation component did not arrive in 

time for implantation in 2006, and these activities were not 

completed; this work may begin during 2007. The equipment 

for the intensive pallid sturgeon component did not arrive in 

time for implantation in 2006, and all pallid sturgeon in reproductive condition were transferred into the hatchery system for 

the propagation efforts. This component is scheduled to begin 

in 2007 if pallid sturgeon can be captured. Remote telemetry 

receivers have been developed and await deployment for the 

entire lower Missouri River in the fall of 2007.

Introduction

In 2004 the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 

completed an extensive process to revise the master manual 

for the operation of the Missouri River main stem reservoir 
24 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

system, operation and maintenance of the Missouri River 

Bank Stabilization and Navigation Project, and operation of 

the Kansas River reservoir system. Coincident with the Master 

Manual revision, the USACE was in consultation with the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) about the impacts of these 

projects on several endangered species. A jeopardy opinion 

for the pallid sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus) was issued by 

the USFWS in 2000. The biological opinion was outlined in a 

comprehensive document replete with reasonable and prudent alternatives provided to the USACE to remove jeopardy 

(U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2000). The biological opinion 

was reviewed in 2003, and an amended biological opinion 

was issued. The amended biological opinion (U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 2003) reaffirmed the jeopardy opinion for 

the pallid sturgeon and restated many of the reasonable and 

prudent alternatives listed in the original 2000 biological opinion. The USACE in collaboration with numerous partners and 

stakeholders convened a multi agency workshop in 2004. The 

workshop drew upon sturgeon experts from within the Missouri River basin, including sturgeon researchers with national 

and international expertise. The workshop developed a list of 

research needs for pallid sturgeon recovery (Quist and others, 

2004). These research needs were subsequently prioritized by 

the Pallid Sturgeon Subbasin Working Groups, including the 

Middle Basin Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Work Group (2005). 

The top-ranked research needs from the Middle Basin Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Work Group were related to spawning 

and early-life-stage habitats. Priority needs included locating, 

quantifying, and characterizing pallid sturgeon spawning sites 

and quantifying spawning frequency and behavior.

This chapter is a summary of progress that describes 

activities conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 

in collaboration with Nebraska Game and Parks Commission 

(NGPC). The intent of these activities is to extensively and 

intensively study the movement, habitat use, and reproductive 

behavior of pallid sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon (S. platorynchus) in the Lower Missouri River. This work was funded 

under two research and monitoring programs with complementary objectives and approaches. Portions of this work were 

conducted under the Comprehensive Sturgeon Research Program (CSRP). The CSRP is a multi year research framework 

developed by USGS and its partners to support pallid sturgeon 

recovery through increased understanding of the life history 

requirements of the species. Other parts of this work were 

conducted under the Sturgeon Response to Flow Modification 

project (SRFM), an initiative designed to evaluate the response 

of sturgeon to flow management actions undertaken at Gavins 

Point Dam.

Background

Conservation and restoration of native species, such as 

sturgeon, require knowledge of both the biology of the species and the factors limiting recovery. Thus, the goal of this 

research is to improve understanding of the factors affecting 

reproduction and survival of sturgeon in the Missouri River. 

Most immediately, there was a need to determine where, 

when, and under what conditions sturgeon spawn in the Lower 

Missouri River. Numerous studies have examined habitat 

use and movement of Scaphirhynchus sturgeon (Hurley and 

others, 1987; Latka and others, 1995; Quist and others, 1999; 

DeLonay and others, 2000; Bramblett and White, 2001; Snook 

and Peters, 2002; Hurley and others, 2004), but few of these 

studies have addressed the reproductive status of the sturgeon 

or followed individual fish to assess whether those that are 

gravid actually spawn successfully. None of the previous 

studies have specifically focused on reproductively mature 

fish prior to and during the spawning season. As a result, little 

information is available to indicate precisely where, when, and 

under what conditions shovelnose sturgeon and pallid sturgeon 

spawn. Under the CSRP program, the USGS has developed 

and tested methodology and technology to track sturgeon during the spring spawning migration and to document changes 

in reproductive status and reproductive success. A pilot study 

examining telemetry and remote-sensing technology, in combination with sturgeon reproductive assessment methodology, 

was conducted in 2004 (DeLonay and others, 2007). In March 

2004, thirty gravid adult female shovelnose sturgeon were collected from the lower Missouri River and implanted with ultrasonic transmitters and archival data storage tags (DST). The 

implanted sturgeon were then tracked through the spawning 

period. Results indicate that upstream migration of shovelnose 

sturgeon may be rapid ( >8 km/day) and cover long distances 

(>300 km). Fish implanted with transmitters and DSTs and 

recaptured following the spawning period showed that they 

spawned successfully. Analysis of depth data recorded by the 

DSTs also indicates a characteristic pattern of behavior that 

may indicate spawning. This work was expanded in 2005 and 

2006 in anticipation of potential flow management actions and 

consisted of five components: (1) telemetry system development, (2) an extensive sturgeon reproduction study, (3) the 

development of a stationary receiver network, (4) an aggregation and spawning site location study, and (5) an intensive 

pallid sturgeon reproduction study. This chapter summarizes 

the approach and activities conducted in 2005 and 2006.

Objectives: 2005–06 Activities 

Telemetry System Development

The objective of this component was to develop a telemetry tracking and data management system for sturgeon on the 

Lower Missouri River and its tributaries.

Extensive Sturgeon Reproduction Study

The objectives of this component are to (1) determine the 

direction and magnitude of spawning movements, (2) characterize patterns of habitat use during spawning migrations, (3) 
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 25

determine where and under what conditions sturgeon spawn, 

and (4) assess the relative success of spawning in relation to 

physiological status and environmental condition. The work 

was conducted within two geographically and hydrologically distinct reaches of the Lower Missouri River to evaluate 

results in relation to the longitudinal variability in the system. 

Development of Stationary Receiver Network

The objective of this component is to increase the spatial 

and temporal resolution of sturgeon-tracking activities by augmenting manual tracking efforts with the addition of stationary 

receivers along the length of the Missouri River.

Aggregation and Spawning Site Location

The objectives of this work were to (1) provide a larger 

number of sturgeon of known sex and reproductive status (that 

is, individuals likely to spawn) that would provide information 

on the rate and extent of fish movement in relation to flow, (2) 

increase the likelihood of observing aggregations and identifying spawning locations, (3) provide location and movement 

data that could be used to modify or direct fisheries sampling 

activities or remote-sensing technologies to increase the probability of verifying spawning behavior, and (4) allow repeated 

sampling of individual fish to document progression of reproductive maturation and validate observed spawning behaviors. 

The work was to be conducted only within the uppermost 

experimental reach in conjunction with other CSRP activities.

Intensive Pallid Sturgeon Reproduction Study

The objective of this component is to (1) implant and 

track a small number of gravid adult pallid sturgeon through 

the spawning season, (2) use direct sampling and underwater 

remote-sensing technology, (3) include real-time imaging with 

the DIDSONTM (Dual Frequency Identification Sonar, Sound 

Metrics Corp., Chesapeake, Va.) acoustic camera to locate pallid sturgeon reproductive aggregations, and (4) describe pallid 

sturgeon spawning behavior and habitat. 

Methods and Approach

Telemetry System Development

The Missouri River is a varied and difficult system 

in which to use telemetry. The large size, diverse habitat, 

dynamic flows, and extreme conductivity, turbidity, sediment load, and background noise of the system pose unique 

challenges to biologists tracking the movement of fish and 

other aquatic organisms in the Lower Missouri River. In 2004 

the USGS developed specification and criteria for ultrasonic 

telemetry systems for use with sturgeon and other large river 

species on the Lower Missouri River and solicited all major 

telemetry system manufacturers for competitive bids. The 

specified system was intended to be used by a single operator 

in a small vessel. The selected system was required to meet the 

following criteria for consideration:

1. System may be either single or multiple frequency 

(40–85 kHz).

2. Each system must support two or more hydrophones 

for increased coverage and directionality.

3. System must support large numbers (>10,000) of 

individually coded transmitters on a single frequency.

4. System must have the capacity to simultaneously 

track and identify multiple coded transmitters (>10) 

within limited areas (400 m2) with low lag times.

5. System must support transmitters equipped with 

environmental sensors including depth and temperature.

6. System must support real-time manual tracking of 

individual transmitters from a mobile platform or 

vessel.

7. System must effectively detect and decode transmitters in high noise environments. Ambient noise 

levels in the Lower Missouri River may be expected 

to exceed 78 dbuPa/Hertz (Hz).

8. Operator display in manual tracking mode must 

include transmitter code, relative direction to transmitter, and signal strength.

9. System must supply audio feedback to operator in 

manual tracking mode. 

10. System must provide for fixed site data logging, in 

either attended or unattended mode, with internal 

data storage capability.

11. System must be portable for operation in small vessels. External power requirements limited to 9–30 

volts direct current (DC).

12. System must operate under ambient temperature 

conditions expected during all seasons (-40°C to 

+85°C).

13. A variety of transmitters of different sizes and 

battery life expectancies must be available for this 

system for application to a broad range of species 

and research questions.

14. In consideration of future expansion and system 

flexibility, manufacturer must also indicate the availability of remotely deployable automated receivers 
26 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

that are compatible with this system and the coding scheme used by transmitters. Specifications of 

remotely deployed receivers (size, configuration 

options, detection range, power requirements, and 

price) may influence selection of the telemetry tracking system.

In addition to meeting the selection criteria, the system 

was also required to demonstrate performance to desired 

specifications in field trials conducted in the Lower Missouri 

River prior to purchase. Acceptable demonstration of performance included the following:

1. Demonstration of receiver and hydrophone combination on the Lower Missouri River near Columbia, 

Mo.

2. Determination of detection and discrimination range 

for receiver, hydrophone, and transmitter combination likely to be used with target species in the 

Lower Missouri River. Transmitters likely to be used 

in initial studies would measure approximately 16 

mm in diameter and from 50 to 90 mm in length.

3. A detection and discrimination range exceeding 300 

m with high efficiency was desired. A detection and 

discrimination range exceeding 500 m with high 

efficiency would be preferable.

4. Successful demonstration of manual tracking 

capability of system in the Lower Missouri River. 

Operator must be able to detect, locate, and track 

the transmitter in a noisy environment with a high 

degree of accuracy (<8 m).

Lotek Wireless Inc. of Newmarket, Ontario, Canada, was 

the only company to respond to the request for bids issued by 

USGS for an acoustic telemetry system for use in the Lower 

Missouri River. The specifications of the equipment as listed 

by Lotek Wireless Inc. satisfied the specifications stated in the 

original solicitation. A field trial was conducted to demonstrate 

that the selected equipment could perform effectively to meet 

anticipated study objectives in the Lower Missouri River. The 

USGS has shown through previous experience and engineering 

feasibility studies that the Lower Missouri River contains environmental conditions in which it is extremely difficult to work. 

Telemetry equipment should not be expected to perform near 

manufacturer-stated optimum levels in this environment.

Field trials were conducted in the Lower Missouri River 

near Huntsdale, Mo. (approximately river mile (RM) 182) with 

the assistance of USGS, Columbia Environmental Research 

Center (CERC), Rivers Studies Branch’s research vessels and 

staff. The evaluated system included the following components 

configured for potential field use in the Missouri River (fig. B1): 

1. One Lotek MAP 600 RT acoustic telemetry receiver 

with two hydrophone ports operating at 76.8 kHz. 

The system was powered on 12 volts DC by using 

standard marine deep cycle batteries. The receiver 

was interfaced with a Lenovo Thinkpad® notebook 

computer (Lenovo, Morrisville, N.C.) running 

Microsoft Windows® 2000 (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Wash.). The receiver’s operation and 

detection of deployed transmitters was monitored by 

using Lotek’s MapHost software (Version 3.09).

2. One Lotek SRX 600 radio receiver and UUC 164 

acoustic upconverter.

3. Two Lotek LHP_1 omnidirectional amplified hydrophones centered at 76 kHz were fitted with 90-degree directional baffles. A 10-m cable connected 

each hydrophone to the receiver. The hydrophones 

were attached to 3 m polyvinyl chloride (PVC) struts 

temporarily mounted on either side of the bow of 

a 7-m shallow-draft research vessel. Hydrophones 

were mounted approximately 2.4-m apart. 

4. Eight Lotek MAP16_1 MAP series coded acoustic 

series transmitters (16 x 54 mm standard power). 

Transmitters were attached to a weighted cable and 

drifted or held stationary in the main channel of the 

Missouri River. Transmitters were deployed in several experiments, either singly or in multiples.

Under the test conditions the Lotek MAP_600 RT 

receiver reliably detected and decoded MAP standard power 

transmitters (16 x 54 mm) at measured ranges of 200–225 m. 

The Lotek MAP_600 RT receiver was a significant improvement over systems currently in use at CERC. Current systems 

often require the operator to close within 10 m before transmitters can be reliably decoded. 

The Lotek MAP16_1 transmitter has the lowest signal 

output power of the MAP series tags. Earlier engineering 

and feasibility studies on the Missouri River indicate that the 

higher power transmitters (>6 db increase) in this series should 

have detection ranges of nearly double the tested transmitters 

(400–450 m). The range limitations for detection and decoding 

of transmitters for this system are therefore within an acceptable 

range of 200–400 m. These transmitters are similar in size and 

output power to acoustic components currently used by USGS 

for shovelnose sturgeon on the Lower Missouri River (fig. B2).

The Lotek MapHost software allows the operator to 

monitor the detection of partial codes by the receiver (fig. B3). 

Partial codes are incomplete subsets of the entire digital code of 

a transmitter. While partial codes do not allow the discrimination of the individual identity of a transmitter, they do allow 

the operator to detect transmitter signals at extended distances 

and move the vessel in the direction of the signal (fig. B4). The 

detection range of the system may therefore be significantly 

greater than the 200 m measured in the field trial. Tags tested in 

this field trial may be detectable at distances exceeding 300 m.

In multiple tag deployments, all codes were received 

and decoded, with no evidence of missed detections caused 

by code collision (figs. B3 and B4). The ability to discriminate between multiple tags within a very small area was 

demonstrated with 100 percent efficiency. No problems were 

experienced with echoes or signal multipath. A number of 
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 27

configurations of the system are available and include options 

for combined acoustic/radio tags (CART), stationary receivers 

(both underwater and bank solutions), and three-dimensional 

acoustic positioning. Based upon the satisfaction of solicitation criteria and successful completion of required performance trials, Lotek Wireless of Canada was awarded the bid 

for the telemetry system.

In addition to the telemetry tracking system, it is necessary to develop a data collection framework to support simultaneous data collection from several field crews working over 

800 river miles. The construction of a robust and scalable relational database as well as standardized data collection parameters was required. Accurate and rapid reporting of results in a 

geographic information system (GIS) environment is required 

since it is necessary to integrate information from this study 

with results from other ongoing studies to direct sampling 

efforts and other activities (for example, mapping crews).

The development of the data collection and handling 

framework was completed within USGS with a range of products. A customized ArcPadTM (ESRI, Inc., Redlands, Calif.) 

application was developed for mobile GIS field mapping and 

validation of relocation events for implanted sturgeon, eliminating the need for paper field sheets. Custom data entry forms 

prompt a user to collect data for each relocation event, including water quality, hydrologic conditions, habitat, and substrate 

(figs. B5 and B6). In addition, the program automatically 

records date, time, and spatial coordinates from the Global 

Positioning System (GPS) unit. The customized ArcPad 

application is also used to document the search efforts of all 

relocation crews. Data collected for each search effort include 

the date, time, spatial coordinates, boat used, crew members, 

search type (drift, intensive monitor, or search for a specific 

fish), types of transmitter receivers used, and the radio and 

acoustic frequencies scanned during the search effort. A paper 

data form logging all critical data is also used by field crews 

for quality control and as a backup in case of system failure.

All data for sturgeon relocations and search efforts are 

then uploaded to a secure server located at CERC on a daily 

basis. As many as 10 crews can be collecting data on any 

given day, including 2 to 3 crews from the Nebraska Game and 

Parks Commission. Crews that have access to the CERC network servers upload their daily data across the local network, 

and remote field crews upload their daily data to a secure File 

Transfer Protocol (FTP) site. The data from each crew are then 

archived. The new relocation events and all associated data are 

incorporated into the larger spatial database.

Sturgeon relocation data are linked (via linked server 

technology Microsoft in SQL ServerTM) to the other essential data in the database framework. Relationships have been 

established between spatial data and data tables in the database 

by using mutually exclusive individual identifiers, allowing 

summary reports to be generated by using information from 

several sources. This linkage allows the spatial data to be 

maintained in its native shapefile (ESRI, Inc.) format while 

still being accessed by the database, making it possible to 

maintain data in a near real-time environment. 

A Microsoft AccessTM user interface was developed 

to allow users to easily update or enter data (that is, initial 

capture data) and to view data and summary reports. The data 

and reports accessed through the Microsoft AccessTM user 

interface are near real-time. The linkage between the database 

and spatial data facilitates the creation of several useful textual 

reports. The detailed movements report also is organized by 

river segment and individual sturgeon and details the release 

and each relocation event. This report includes the date, time, 

and location (river mile), as well as the number of days since 

the last relocation and the distance traveled during that time. 

The movements summary report is organized by river segment and individual sturgeon. This report is a summary of the 

release and relocation events, including release date, release 

location (RM), number of relocations, apex location (farthest 

upstream relocation), last location (RM), and date of the last 

location. The data in these reports are maintained in the database in near real-time because of the linkages with the spatial 

data collected daily by the field crews (figs. B7 and B8).

The database and spatial data relationships are also used 

to create spatial products. Maps are created for movements of 

each individual fish, showing the release location, all relocation events, the last known relocation and lines connecting the 

relocations to show the upstream and downstream movements. 

These maps provide information on the movements of each 

individual fish through space and time. Aggregation maps 

are created showing the number of relocations per river mile. 

Because of the linkages between the database and the spatial 

data collected by the field crews, the data driving these maps 

are created and maintained in the database in near real-time.

Deployment of the telemetry system and tracking on the 

Missouri River require specialized and customized tracking 

vessels (figs. B9 and B10). Tracking vessels are designed to 

serve as instrumented platforms, capable of searching long 

distances or monitoring individual fish or locations for long 

periods of time. Boats are purchased and built in pairs to allow 

crews to track long distances and exchange trailers if necessary. Boats are either equipped with cabins to allow operation 

during inclement weather or are open to allow for either tracking or fish capture as required. Boats range in length from 6.5 

to 8.0 m. Boats operating in the unchannelized reach are shallow draft and equipped with outboard jets. Each tracking boat 

is outfitted with ultrasonic and radio telemetry equipment, a 

ruggedized field computer running ESRI ArcPadTM software 

(ESRI, Inc.), a submeter GPS, water-quality equipment, and 

a depth sounder. Boats are required to operate under adverse 

weather conditions (within agency safety guidelines) and must 

make accommodations for the operation of sensitive electronic 

equipment under all conditions.

Extensive Sturgeon Reproduction Study

This work primarily focuses on shovelnose sturgeon, but 

pallid sturgeon were incorporated when available, albeit in 

limited numbers. This work attempted to intensively evaluate 
28 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

the reproductive status of gravid female shovelnose sturgeon, 

instrument each with transmitters and DSTs, track their movements through spawning, and attempt to recover as many as 

possible to evaluate their reproductive success after the spawning season.

Gravid shovelnose sturgeon were implanted with telemetry devices prior to spawning in early spring. Fish were 

captured in two hydrologically distinct segments of the Missouri River in 2005 (fig. B11) and 2006 (fig. B12). The lower 

segment was located on the Lower Missouri River between the 

Osage River and Grand River (RM 130–250). The upper segment was located between the Platte River in Nebraska and the 

Big Sioux River in Iowa (RM 595–734). Each river segment 

was expected to exhibit distinctive differences in availability 

of habitat and environmental variables prior to and throughout 

the sturgeon spawning season. The upper segment was considered most likely to be influenced by planned flow releases 

out of Gavins Point Dam in 2006 (fig. B13). Discharge and 

temperature relationships among several segments of the 

Lower Missouri River indicate that a wide range of conditions 

may exist along the length of the river and within its tributaries 

at any given time (figs. B14 to B23).

Shovelnose sturgeon were captured by using overnight monofilament gill net sets (6.35-cm mesh, 208 twine, 

36.58x1.83 m, 1.27-cm foam core float line and a 22.68-kg 

lead line) (fig. B24). Past experience with this mesh size 

resulted in about 50 percent of captured sturgeon larger than 

the target size of 1 kg (figs. B25 and B26). This mesh size is 

also effective at sampling adult pallid sturgeon in the Lower 

Missouri River (figs. B27 to B29). Fish greater than or equal 

to 1 kg and determined to be female at reproductive stage 

IV or V based on examination made by using ultrasonic 

and endoscopic methods (Wildhaber and others, 2005) were 

selected as candidates for implantation with ultrasonic telemetry transmitters and archival DSTs (Lotek Wireless, Inc., 

Newmarket, Ontario, Canada). Transmitter and DST weight 

did not exceed 3 percent of fish body weight to minimize 

instrumentation-related mortality postrelease (Winter, 1996; 

Zale and others, 2005). Transmitters in 2005 were ultrasonic 

only (16 x 65 mm). They had a battery life expectancy of 9–14 

months, individual ID recognition, minimum pulse intervals 

of 3,500 millisecond (ms), and frequency of 77 kHz. In 2006, 

CARTs (16 x 65 mm) were used. These transmitters had a battery life expectancy of 9–14 months, individual identification 

number (ID) recognition, minimum pulse intervals of 5,000 

ms for any signal (10,000 ms for a given frequency), and frequency of 77 kHz. Archival DSTs (11 x 32 mm) continuously 

recorded time, temperature, and pressure every 15 minutes. 

Shovelnose sturgeon were marked with a uniquely numbered 

external Floytag in the pectoral fin.

Sturgeon were transported to a suitable site along the 

river for processing and surgery. During the device implantation procedure, all shovelnose sturgeon were photographed 

and weighed (g), and standard length was recorded (mm) 

(fig. B30). Gonads were visually inspected through a 3–4 cm 

abdominal incision to verify reproductive stage. Blood and 

ovarian tissue was collected to determine readiness to spawn 

(fig. B31). The transmitter and DST were inserted, and the 

abdominal incision was closed with a series of simple, interrupted sutures (fig. B32). Tagged shovelnose sturgeon were 

allowed to recover from the procedure for 30–90 minutes 

and were released as near as practicable to the initial site of 

capture.

Individual fish were tracked to estimate the general direction and scale of movement or migratory behavior associated 

with shovelnose sturgeon spawning. Boat crews following fish 

recorded daily movements from time of implantation until the 

end of the summer (figs. B33 and B34). Relocations of fish 

were precisely documented by using submeter GPS. At each 

location, we measured depth, temperature, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, pH, turbidity, percent gravel, percent sand, and 

percent silt. Depth was measured to the nearest 0.1 m by using 

a Lowrance LCX–15TM electronic depth sounder (Lowrance 

Electronics, Inc., Tulsa, O.K.). Temperature, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, and pH were measured with an YSI 556 MPS 

multiparameter water quality instrument (YSI Hydrodata, 

Ltd., Hertfordshire, UK). Turbidity was measured with a Hach 

2100P Portable Turbidimeter (Hach Company, Loveland, 

Colo.). Substrate was visually estimated from bottom samples 

collected by using a custom built Hesse Substrate sampler. All 

data were recorded directly to a GIS by using the customized 

ESRI ArcPadTM application developed by USGS.

After the summer tracking period, attempts were made to 

recapture the fish and recover the DSTs. Upon recapture, the 

reproductive condition of the fish was reassessed to evaluate 

spawning success, and the DST data were collected.

During the course of this study, physiological measurements were initially made to assess the readiness of the 

tracked shovelnose sturgeon to spawn and later their degree 

of spawning success. At time of implantation, oocytes were 

sampled to calculate polarization index (PI, distance between 

germinal vesicle and animal pole relative to distance between 

animal and vegetal poles) and to determine whether germinal 

vesicle breakdown (GVBD) could be hormonally induced in 

vitro. Ten oocytes were preserved in 10 percent neutral buffered formalin (NBF) for the PI measurement and another 25 

oocytes were placed in ringers solution in a petri dish to which 

was added progesterone (Sigma-Aldrich Co., St. Louis, Mo.). 

After 24 hours of incubation at 19°C, oocytes were preserved 

in 10 percent NBF followed by PI measurement to determine 

if GVBD had taken place. 

Hormone measurements could indicate readiness to 

spawn and may be useful in interpreting why spawning did not 

occur. Consequently, a blood sample was collected from the 

caudal vein by using a heparinized syringe at both implantation and again when the fish were recaptured. Estradiol (E2), 

11-ketotestosterone (11-KT), ketotestosterone (KT), and cortisol were measured in plasma by using radioimmunoassay.

Upon recapture, shovelnose sturgeon were humanely 

euthanized and necropsied. The incision for the transmitter was evaluated externally and internally for healing. The 

condition of the gonad was grossly observed for indications 
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 29

of spawning, and a gonad sample was preserved in 10 percent 

NBF for histology.

Pallid sturgeon were included in this study as available. 

Ten pallid sturgeon were implanted with transmitters and 

tracked in 2005. None were in reproductive condition. Sixteen 

additional pallid sturgeon were implanted with transmitters 

and tracked in 2006. Only two implanted pallid sturgeon, 

one male and one female of hatchery origin from the lower 

study segment, were in reproductive condition in 2006 when 

captured.

Development of Stationary Receiver Network

Stationary monitoring receivers have been shown in 

other studies to be invaluable for monitoring the rapid, longrange movement of large riverine species and increasing the 

efficiency of manual tracking activities in large systems. A 

network of stationary receivers deployed at intervals of 25–50 

RM along the length of the Lower Missouri River from Gavins 

Point Dam to the mouth was determined to be a priority not 

only for the study of sturgeon but also for the study of all large 

river species.

Previous studies demonstrated that shovelnose and pallid sturgeon are capable of extensive movements within the 

Missouri River and associated tributaries. Reproductive and 

postreproductive movements of shovelnose sturgeon in the 

Missouri River have exceeded 1,100 km (DeLonay and others, 

2007). Effective tracking of long-range seasonal movements in 

a dynamic river system requires technology that can monitor stretches of river continually to detect fish passage and to 

increase the efficacy of manual fish-tracking crews. Combining data-logging receivers with cellular modems that provide 

near real-time data communication capability allows researchers to more efficiently allocate valuable tracking resources 

among river segments. Rapid data reporting also facilitates 

collaboration with field crews tasked with mapping habitat 

or sampling for reproductive products (for example, eggs or 

larvae). The infrastructure of CSRP provides for a total of 16 

stationary data-logging telemetry receiver sites at increments 

of roughly 50 river miles along the length of the Missouri 

River from the mouth at St. Louis to Gavins Point Dam. 

Under SFRM we propose to increase the density of remote 

datalogging receivers to one every 25 river miles from Gavin’s 

Point Dam to the mouth of the Platte River. Spacing may be 

modified to monitor the confluence of major tributaries to the 

Missouri River. Five more stations will be required in addition to those stations proposed under CSRP. Configuration of 

each stationary receiver will vary depending on the unique 

conditions within the segment of river monitored. Lotek MAP 

600 RT acoustic receivers and Lotek SRX 600 radio receivers 

have been selected to instrument these sites. Equipment from 

other telemetry manufacturers may also be added later. Each 

remotely sited receiver will have communication capabilities to relay data files to a central location daily. The need to 

process telemetry data and relay results in near real time is 

critical for the scheduling of coordinated habitat and fisheries 

sampling activities. The potential exists for investigators to 

modify their location and monitoring strategies on the basis 

of relocations of sturgeon or of identified aggregations within 

their study reach. This equipment was purchased in 2006 and 

will be installed in 2007. 

The first stationary receivers should be sited, installed, 

calibrated, and tested by March 1, 2007. Deployment of 

receivers may be adjusted or delayed on the basis of water and 

winter ice conditions.

Aggregation and Spawning Site Location

This component allows for the implantation of a large 

number of female and male shovelnose sturgeon with telemetry transmitters and takes advantage of the increased monitoring capability provided by stationary receivers. Previous data 

indicate that female sturgeon appear to have a characteristic 

migration pattern (DeLonay and others, 2007). It is unknown 

how the male pattern compares, and it is unknown for Scaphirhynchus species whether spawning occurs in large aggregations at a few discrete locations or in many smaller groups 

along the length of the river.

In 2006, we were scheduled to implant and track 100–200 

additional male and female shovelnose sturgeon in reproductive condition with short-duration telemetry transmitters. All 

fish were to be captured from the Missouri River above the 

Platte River in Nebraska (RM 595). Crews were to intensively 

relocate these as time allowed, but they would rely heavily on the stationary receiver network to document relative 

location and movement. Fish were to be tracked from March 

through July. During the spawning period, tracking crews 

would record locations of fish in an effort to locate aggregations of sturgeon and to identify spawning locations. Increased 

numbers of sturgeon implanted with transmitters would have 

provided a means to validate the selection criteria and locations preselected for monitoring activities conducted as part of 

the site-specific evaluations detailed later in this report (chap. 

E). The potential exists for investigators working under either 

this project or SRFM to modify their sampling strategies on 

the basis of relocations of sturgeon or identified aggregations 

within their study reach. Selected fish were to be targeted for 

recapture prior to, during, and immediately after suspected 

spawning events to validate the association between observed 

movement patterns and spawning. The current assumption is 

that sturgeon are spawning at the farthest upstream apex of 

their spawning migration. This observed pattern needs to be 

minimally verified by the recapture of tagged adults. 

Capture and implantation of the shovelnose sturgeon for 

this component should begin by February 15 and conclude 

prior to March 15 to take advantage of the start of navigation 

season. Shovelnose sturgeon may be implanted as late as May 

1 of the study year depending on the river reach and funds 

availability. Unfortunately the transmitters for this component did not arrive in time for implantation in 2006, and these 
30 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

activities were not completed. We anticipate initiating this 

work in 2007.

Intensive Pallid Sturgeon Reproduction Study

In 2006, the USGS and NGPC proposed to capture and 

implant up to 10 additional pallid sturgeon with telemetry 

transmitters and DSTs for intensive tracking efforts. Equipment did not arrive in time for implantation in 2006, and all 

pallid sturgeon in reproductive condition were transferred into 

the hatchery system for the propagation efforts. This component is scheduled to begin in 2007 if pallid sturgeon can be 

captured. If no pallid sturgeon are captured in 2007, intensive 

tracking and DIDSONTM imaging may be completed by using 

shovelnose sturgeon.

Intensive tracking efforts were to be limited to the reach 

from Gavins Point Dam to the Platte River reach. Capture 

crews attempted to locate and implant pallid sturgeon within 

the study reach, but basin priorities dictated that all adult 

pallid sturgeon be transported to Gavins Point National Fish 

Hatchery for inclusion in propagation activities. 

A tiered section criterion for pallid sturgeon was developed for this study on the basis of size, gender and reproductive status. All pallid sturgeon selected for implantation should 

be more than 1.2 kg in weight. The first five pallid sturgeon 

heavier than 1.2 kg were to be implanted with transmitters. 

Any fish subsequently selected for implantation must be 

reproductively mature and heavier than 2.2 kg. Preference 

was to be given for individuals in reproductive stage IV or 

greater (Wildhaber and others, 2007) . No more than two of 

the individuals selected were to be females in reproductive 

condition. All pallid sturgeon considered for implantation 

were to undergo a reproductive assessment made by using 

minimally non-invasive methods developed at USGS to determine gender and reproductive stage (Wildhaber and others, 

2005). Implanted sturgeon were to be released at the point of 

capture and tracked. Initially each tagged sturgeon was to be 

contacted two to three times per week to determine movement, 

aggregation, and spawning behavior. The targeted frequency 

of contacts was scheduled to increase with water temperature; 

between 15°C and 23°C, pallid sturgeon are targeted for daily 

contact. Resources are prioritized and allocated on the basis of 

species and reproductive stage. Reproductively mature pallid 

sturgeon are a priority, with the greatest emphasis given to 

females in reproductive condition. Reproductive individuals 

are to be targeted for continuous tracking on the basis of temperature (for example, 18–22°C) and behavior (changes in rate 

or pattern). Two boats were equipped by NGPC for intensive 

mobile tracking of pallid sturgeon within this reach. Field 

crews track tagged fish on an individual and area-weighted 

basis. Tagged fish are targeted for contact one to three times 

per week, with intensity increasing on the basis of reproductive status, movement, and proximity to the spawning season. 

Timeframe for intensive pallid sturgeon capture and tracking 

efforts is from “ice free” river conditions (February to March) 

to August 31. Measurements of water conditions (for example, 

temperature, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, and turbidity) 

and habitat characteristics (for example, depth and substrate) 

are recorded at each location to qualitatively and quantitatively 

describe habitat used by sturgeon during prespawn and spawning periods. At the end of the tracking period efforts, are made 

to recapture implanted pallid sturgeon to evaluate reproductive 

condition and spawning success by using methods developed 

at USGS with shovelnose sturgeon.

In addition to telemetry tracking efforts, attempts were 

to be made to verify and validate spawning behavior by using 

an acoustic camera. Through coordination and collaboration 

with NGPC this component is to explore the ability of the 

DIDSONTM acoustic camera to capture and validate spawning acts of sturgeon under Missouri River conditions. Locations for DIDSONTM acoustic camera deployment are identified through daily coordination with collaborating telemetry 

groups. Taking care not to influence fish behavior, crews document the behavior of pallid and/or shovelnose sturgeon that 

have been implanted with telemetry transmitters by using a 

DIDSONTM acoustic camera. A NGPC boat has been designed 

to deploy the DIDSONTM and operate under adverse weather 

conditions (safety permitting). This boat is equipped with 

tracking equipment to maintain contact with fish implanted 

with transmitters, carries a two-person crew, and is equipped 

to make observations for extended periods of time. Protocols 

for DIDSONTM are currently under development as part of the 

project. NPGC plans to deploy a two-person DIDSONTM crew 

from March 1, 2007, to July 31, 2007, to develop methods 

and protocols by making observations at various times (day, 

crepuscule, night), under various conditions, and of different 

fish. A more intensive observation mode is triggered during the most likely spawning period as defined by biologists, 

fish behavior, and water temperature. During this intensive 

phase the crew attempts to remain in continuous contact with 

a selected fish. Identified spawning locations are prioritized 

for characterization, mapping, and possible additional sampling for gravid adults, eggs, or larvae. Crews may selectively 

recapture individuals or sample identified locations to verify 

and validate suspected behavioral patterns.

Results and Discussion

Telemetry System Development

The telemetry system sourced and selected for this project is currently in operation on 10 research vessels (7 USGS 

vessels, 3 NGPC vessels) on the Lower Missouri River. In 

2007 these vessels will be assisting with data collection in up 

to four additional telemetry projects. Other species studied 

include flathead catfish (Pylodictis olivaris), blue catfish (Ictalurus furcatus), blue sucker (Cycleptus elongatus), and paddle-
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 31

fish (Polyodon spatula). Agencies collaborating with USGS 

and NGPC include the University of Missouri, the Missouri 

Department of Conservation, and the University of Nebraska.

The data collection and data reporting database system 

currently provides periodic updates and reports to all partners 

and collaborators. The database provides for a direct near realtime link for the USACE to assess sturgeon location data.

Extensive Sturgeon Reproduction Study

During 2005, telemetry implantation of shovelnose 

sturgeon in the lower study area began on March 24 and was 

completed by April 5 (table B1). Capture and implantation of 

shovelnose sturgeon in the upper segment began on April 19 

and was completed on April 30 (table B1). No pallid sturgeon 

were captured in 2005 during shovelnose sturgeon implantation. Pallid sturgeon were added to the study opportunistically 

through the auspices of the population assessment program 

and the propagation program (table B2). None of these additional pallid sturgeon were in reproductive condition when 

implanted. 

During 2006, implantation of shovelnose sturgeon and 

pallid sturgeon in the lower study segment began on April 12 

and was completed by April 14 (table B3). Two adult pallid 

sturgeon of hatchery origin (one male and one female) were 

captured, implanted, and released in the lower study segment. 

Later in the spring, three additional wild pallid sturgeon were 

transported from the hatchery, implanted, and released at 

their original point of capture after spending several months 

at Gavins Point National Fish Hatchery as candidates for the 

propagation program. Capture and implantation of shovelnose 

sturgeon in the upper segment began on April 19 and was 

completed by April 24 (table B3). All wild pallid sturgeon 

were transferred to the propagation program for use as potential broodstock. Five pallid sturgeon in reproductive condition 

were captured by USGS between the Gavins Point Dam and 

the Platte River, Nebr., during shovelnose collection efforts 

(two females and three males). These fish were transported to 

Gavins Point National Fish Hatchery. At the hatchery, pallid 

sturgeon collected and transferred to the facility by all basin 

programs were examined for reproductive readiness. If the 

fish were not ready, or if the fish later failed to spawn they 

were released for possible use in the telemetry study. Five 

wild pallid sturgeon were transported from the hatchery in 

May, implanted with CART and DSTs, and released in the 

upper segment in May. Six additional pallid sturgeon were 

implanted and released in the upper segment in October after 

having been released by the propagation program. In 2006, 

only the two pallid sturgeon of hatchery origin implanted in 

the lower segment were in reproductive condition. These fish 

were implanted with transmitters and were tracked in the river 

during the spawning period (table B4).

The number of pallid sturgeon encountered in 2006 was 

an unexpected result of sampling efforts (fig. B29). During the 

last four nights of sampling, nine large pallid sturgeon (>800 

mm, >2 kg) were captured. Four pallid sturgeon were captured in one night (16 nets). A small subadult pallid sturgeon 

of hatchery origin was captured, but the remaining fish were 

believed to be wild fish. Five of these sturgeon were transported to the Gavins Point National Fish Hatchery. All pallid 

sturgeon transported to the hatchery were in reproductive condition. Most pallid sturgeon were captured at or near channel 

crossovers. Most were captured in the downstream third of the 

net. One pallid sturgeon was captured off a chevron structure. 

Pallid sturgeon captures occurred above the mouth of the 

Platte River to just upstream of Blair, Nebr. All captured pallid 

sturgeon appeared to be in good condition.

The net mesh size was selected to maximize the catch 

rate of shovelnose sturgeon greater than or equal to 1 kg in 

weight while minimizing the catch of smaller sturgeon or any 

other riverine species. Data from past shovelnose sturgeon 

sampling efforts indicated that a mesh size between 5.1 and 

6.4 cm (bar) was appropriate. It was thought that fewer total 

numbers of fish per set would reduce the likelihood that nets 

would overfish (crowding and packing large numbers of fish 

in a small volume). Fewer but more desirable fish per set 

would therefore reduce stress on captured fish. Monofilament 

gill nets were selected because it was hypothesized that (1) 

monofilament nets would retain less debris and would fish 

cleaner and longer, resulting in a higher actualized effort per 

net set, with less stress to entangled fish; (2) monofilament 

material is slightly less effective at attaching to the surface of 

sharp-skinned sturgeon, would therefore be slightly more size 

selective, and would result in captures with a reduced degree 

of entanglement (that is, less gill impingement, strangulation, 

or fin clamping that results in net-induced stress or mortality); 

and (3) properly selected monofilament strand diameter would 

be less likely to abrade the skin of fish than a corded or twisted 

multifilament net and would thus result in less net trauma.

Capture and implantation crews deployed 16–18 gill net 

sets each night of study in 2006. Nets were set as late as possible in the evening and retrieved as early as possible the next 

morning. Set locations were based upon previous sampling 

experience and past telemetry data. One possible explanation for the success capturing pallid sturgeon may have been 

telemetry tracking experience of the capture crews. Crews 

targeted structures at channel crossovers (above and below) 

and selected inside-bend structures (such as wing dikes and 

chevrons). High-elevation structures with terminal points 

above the water were preferred. Capture crews selected steep 

velocity gradients downstream of flow-control structures with 

a minimum of 3.5 m depth and minimal turbulence. Nets were 

anchored to the structures with extension lines ranging from 

15 to 30 m in length. Water temperatures ranged from 10.0°C

to 15.5°C.

No sturgeon mortalities were observed, with the incidence of gill impingement, strangulation, or excessive 

entanglement being minimal or nonexistent. Sturgeon captured 

in the nets appeared to be in excellent condition. By-catch was 

low in our nets, and survival of by-catch was good, though 

sturgeon are more net tolerant than most riverine species. The 
32 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

primary species in the by-catch was the blue sucker. Monofilament nets entrained less debris, and much less time was spent 

cleaning nets than during previous efforts. Based upon this 

selected application of extended gill net sets, it appears that 

broodstock collection efforts at temperatures up to 15.5°C

could be accommodated with minimal increased trauma and 

risk. Also, capture of adult pallid sturgeon above the Platte 

River, Nebr. during the prespawn period indicates that the 

species is present and capable of responding to management 

actions occurring at or below Gavins Point Dam.

Tracking of fish began immediately after implantation 

in 2005 and continued through mid-August (fig. B33). Crews 

tracked fish to document movement and habitat use prior to, 

during, and after spawning. In 2005 in the lower segment, 47 

of 50 individuals were relocated at least once (1–10 locations, mean = 4.9) following implantation. Tracking effort in 

the lower segment utilized two boats each with a two person 

crew, tracking on a near daily basis with the goal of locating each fish at least once per week. In the upper segment, 

42 of 50 individuals were relocated (1–17 locations, mean 

= 8.1) following implantation. Relocated shovelnose sturgeon in the lower segment moved an average of 103 RM 

(166 river kilometer; Rkm) upstream and 35 RM (57 Rkm) 

downstream. Shovelnose sturgeon from the upper segment 

moved an average of 35 RM (57 Rkm) upstream and 58 RM 

(94 Rkm) downstream (fig. B35). One fish was captured by a 

recreational angler as it moved upstream prior to spawning. 

Beginning in August 2005, crews began to recover tagged 

fish. Tagged fish were recovered by drifting trammel nets 

over the fish’s location (recapture success was highly dependent upon flow conditions and fish location). Tracking and 

recovery efforts continued through December 2005. Of the 

100 fish implanted, 20 were recovered. Of those, 15 (75 percent) had spawned successfully (table B5). A manufacturer’s 

defect in the transmitters resulted in the premature battery 

failure of all tags implanted in 2005. This failure significantly impaired our ability to track and recover sturgeon after 

the spawning period. All pallid sturgeon transmitters were 

affected as well.

Tracking crews in 2006 tracked over 13,000 RM (fig. B34), 

relocating 39 of 50 female shovelnose sturgeon and all pallid sturgeon in the lower segment. In the upper segment, 48 of 50 female 

shovelnose sturgeon and all pallid sturgeon were relocated. For 

the 87 shovelnose sturgeon that were relocated, the number of 

relocations ranged from 1 to 27 with a mean number of relocations of 8.5. The number of relocations for the 10 pallid sturgeon 

ranged from 1 to 28 with a mean number of 13.3 relocations. 

Relocated shovelnose sturgeon moved approximately 36.6 RM 

(58.9 Rkm) upstream and 78.6 RM (126.5 Rkm) downstream. 

Relocated pallid sturgeon moved an average of 8.9 river miles 

(13.3 km) upstream and 52.3 RM (84.2 Rkm) downstream (fig. 

B36). To date, 22 shovelnose sturgeon have been recaptured, 5 

from the lower segment and 17 from the upper segment. Three of 

five (60 percent) shovelnose sturgeon recaptured in the lower segment spawned, while 15 of 17 (88 percent) shovelnose sturgeon 

from the upper segment spawned (table B6).

Observations from both years indicate that shovelnose 

sturgeon females that spawn typically move upstream after 

implantation, stop, and then return downstream after some 

variable period (for example, figs. B37 to B48). We hypothesize that spawning occurs near the apex, or uppermost point, 

of the spawning migration. The ability to determine where the 

apex occurs through manual tracking alone is difficult. A box 

plot can be used to estimate the confidence boundaries around 

a particular apex location for each sturgeon tracked (for 

example, figs. B49 to B60). To determine apex locations with 

a satisfactory degree of confidence may require daily relocations. The addition of DST data from individual recaptured 

fish allows additional insight into what the fish’s behavior may 

have been between manual tracking observations (for example, 

figs. B61 to B72). Large and rapid changes in depth recorded 

by the DST often occur during periods of rapid movement. 

Sudden changes in the pattern of depths used over time appear 

to occur somewhere near the apex of the upstream migration. 

Female sturgeon that spawn often show a sudden and dramatic change in patterns of depth use, which may be related 

to spawning (for example, figs. B73 and B74). Sturgeon 

determined to be non-spawners generally do not exhibit this 

characteristic movement pattern (for example, B75 to B76). 

Spawning movements of female shovelnose sturgeon tend to 

follow a predictable pattern and that females that spawn move 

upstream, spawning near the apex of their migratory pattern; 

however, the timing and extent of downstream movement after 

spawning by shovelnose sturgeon is variable.

Plotting the probable locations of each migration apex 

along the length of the river results in a scattered pattern with 

few aggregations. Even though the number of tagged fish 

was small, on the basis of the pattern of observed movement 

it seems likely that shovelnose sturgeon spawn at multiple 

locations within each river segment. Spawning locations of 

shovelnose sturgeon in the heavily modified Lower Missouri 

River may be broadly distributed in space. On the basis of 

movement and recapture data, it seems likely that shovelnose 

sturgeon spawning occurs over a protracted period and a broad 

temperature range within our study segments as well.

Evaluations of recaptured fish that had been implanted 

revealed that female sturgeon, almost without exception, 

develop moderate to extensive adhesions in response to the 

surgical incision (fig. B77). Adhesions typically only involve 

the one ovary but may in some instances involve both ovaries, 

the gut, and other internal organs, which may be a concern for 

fish that undergo surgical biopsies in the propagation program 

and among wild populations of sturgeon where commercial 

fishers frequently perform invasive egg checks. 

The one female pallid sturgeon in reproductive condition 

lost its transmitter, while the one ripe male pallid sturgeon moved 

downstream initially after implantation before holding within a 

three kilometer reach of river for most of the spawning season 

(figs. B78 and B79). In contrast to the implanted shovelnose 

sturgeon, most pallid sturgeon were not in reproductive condition 

and did not exhibit predictable patterns of movement similar to 

shovelnose sturgeon (for example, figs. B80 to B83). 
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 33

Additional work is needed to validate observed spawning patterns, to better define actual spawning locations, and to 

determine whether pallid sturgeon exhibit similar patterns of 

behavior and habitat use. To accomplish this goal, additional 

numbers of sturgeon must be implanted, the spatial and temporal resolution of manual observations must be increased, and 

pallid sturgeon in reproductive condition should be included in 

the study if basin priorities permit.

Data from 2005 and 2006 are being tabulated and proofed 

for analysis. The DST data will be analyzed by using a hierarchical Bayesian Markov switching model to predict spawning 

behavior and success of sturgeon. The model will analyze patterns of depth-use data to evaluate changes in state reflective 

of behavioral changes associated with spawning events. We 

will evaluate resource selection of gravid shovelnose sturgeon 

and nonreproductive pallid sturgeon during the breeding season by using discrete choice modeling within an informationtheoretic framework. Discrete choice models calculate the 

probability of an individual selecting a location as a function 

of the resource characteristics of that location and all other 

available locations (Cooper and Millspaugh, 1999). An advantage of using the discrete choice model is that the researcher 

can define availability separately for each recorded location, 

which makes it well suited for studies in which characteristics of resources may change over time (for example, depth 

and velocity). The information theoretic approach evaluates 

support for an a priori set of user-specified candidate models 

that contain effects (parameters) related to various hypotheses 

about the selection of resources (Anderson and Burnham, 

2002). An advantage is that simultaneous inferences can 

be made from multiple sets of competing hypotheses about 

sturgeon resource selection (for example, depth vs. velocity vs. 

depth and velocity). For example, we do not understand how 

and to what degree, if any, resources such as depth, velocity, 

and substrate drive the selection process of sturgeon during 

spawning migration, nor do we understand the distances at 

which sturgeon gather information about those resources when 

making resource choices. Therefore, we would develop and 

evaluate candidate models that contain various effects related 

to those resources at various distances.

Development of Stationary Receiver Network

The receivers and associated housing and power systems were purchased in 2006. Additional work remains to be 

completed on final installation configurations and the setup and 

testing of remote communication protocols. Initial attempts at 

remote communication with all units were successful; however, 

difficulties with the selected cellular services provided have 

resulted in delays and reconfigurations of the modem systems. 

A manufacturer’s representative is scheduled to complete a site 

visit in late January 2007 to assist in the completion of remote 

setup procedures. Final deployment will be dependent upon 

water conditions, ice, and agency funding priorities.

Aggregation and Spawning Site Location

The transmitters for this component did not arrive in 

time for implantation in 2006, and these activities were not 

completed. We anticipate initiating this work in 2007. The 

increased number of tagged fish in combination with closer 

coordination with intensive tracking crews, DIDSONTM crews, 

and egg and larval crews would result in increased benefits for 

all related studies.

Intensive Pallid Sturgeon Reproduction Study

Equipment did not arrive in time for implantation in 

2006, and all pallid sturgeon in reproductive condition were 

transferred into the hatchery system for the propagation 

efforts. This component is scheduled to begin in 2007 if 

pallid sturgeon can be captured. Crews scheduled by NPGC 

for this component trained with USGS crews on the use of 

telemetry systems and assisted in the location of tagged 

pallid sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon implanted as part 

of the extensive sturgeon reproductive study. The NGPC 

continues to work toward refining procedures and deployment techniques for the application of DIDSON technology 

to Missouri River applications. The NGPC will provide a 

report on these activities under separate cover if progress 

warrants.

Acknowledgments

Funding for this project was provided by the U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers (Omaha District, Craig Fleming, 

Project Manager) and the U.S. Geological Survey. Sandy 

Clark-Kolaks, Emily Tracy-Smith, and Janice Bryan of the 

U.S. Geological Survey, Columbia Environmental Research 

Center provided assistance with data management, analysis, 

and graphics. Sabrina Griffith, David Combs, Brian Carollo, Jessica Counihan, Jermyn Porter, Caleb Troutt, and Joe 

Deters of Artic Slope Regional Corporation captured and 

located sturgeon. Herb Bollig of the Gavins Point National 

Fish Hatchery, Yankton, S. Dak., assisted with pallid sturgeon 

holding, transport, and handling. Tracy Hill, Wyatt Doyle, and 

Andy Starostka of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Columbia Fishery Resources Office, Columbia, Mo., provided pallid 

sturgeon and field sampling expertise.

References Cited

Anderson, D.R., and Burnham, K.R., 2002, Avoiding pitfalls 

when using information-theoretic methods: Journal of Wildlife Management, v. 66, p. 912–918. 
34 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Bramblett, R.G., and White, R.G., 2001, Habitat use and 

movements of pallid and shovelnose sturgeon in the Yellowstone and Missouri Rivers in Montana and North Dakota: 

Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, v. 130, p. 

1,006–1,025.

Cooper A.B., and Millspaugh, J.J., 1999, The application of 

discrete choice models to wildlife resource selection studies: Ecology, v. 80, p. 566–575.

DeLonay, A.J., Little, E.E., and Rabeni, C.F., 2000, 

Approaches for monitoring pallid sturgeon movement and 

assessing habitat use in the Lower Missouri River, in Eiler, 

J.H., Alcorn, D.J., and Neuman, M.R., eds., Biotelemetry 

15, Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium on 

Biotelemetry, Juneau, Alaska: Wageningen, The Netherlands, International Society on Biotelemetry, p. 186–192.

DeLonay, A.J., Papoulias, D.M., Wildhaber, M.L., Annis, 

M.L., Bryan, J.L., Griffith, S.A., Holan, S.H., Tillit, D.E., 

2007, Use of behavioral and physiological indicators to 

evaluate Scaphirhynchus sturgeon spawning success: Journal of Applied Ichthyology, v. 23, p. 428–435.

Hurley, K.L., Sheehan, R.J., Heidinger, R.C., Wills, P.S., and 

Clevenstine, B., 2004, Habitat use by middle Mississippi 

River pallid sturgeon: Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, v. 133, p. 1,033–1,041.

Hurley S.T., Hubert, W.A., and Nickum, J.G., 1987, Habitats, 

movements of shovelnose sturgeons in the upper Mississippi River: Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 

v. 116, p. 655–663.

Latka, D.C., Ramsey, J.S., and Morris, J.E., 1995, Selection 

of tributary confluence habitat by shovelnose sturgeon in 

the channelized Missouri River, in Gershanovich, A.D., and 

Smith T.I.J., eds., Proceedings, Second International Symposium on Sturgeons, 1993: Moscow, VNIRO Publications, 

p. 250–258.

Middle Basin Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Work Group, 2005, 

Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Needs for RPA 4 and RPA 5: 

Columbia, Mo., Middle Basin Pallid Sturgeon Recovery 

Work Group, 9 p.

Quist, M.C., Boelter, A.M., Lovato, J.M., Korfanta, N.M., 

Bergman, H.L., Latka, D.C., Korschgen, C., Galat, D.L., 

Krentz, S., Oetker, M., Olson, M., Scott, C.M., and Berkley, 

J., 2004, Research and assessment needs for pallid sturgeon recovery in the Missouri River—Final report to the 

U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency: Laramie, Wy., William D. Ruckelshaus 

Institute of Environment and Natural Resources, University 

of Wyoming, 82 p.

Quist, M.C., Tillma, J.S., Burlingame, M.N., and Guy, C.S., 

1999, Overwinter habitat use of shovelnose sturgeon in the 

Kansas River: Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, v. 128, p. 522–527.

Snook, V.A., and Peters, E.J., 2002, Movements and habitat 

use by hatchery-reared pallid sturgeon in the Lower Platte 

River, Nebraska, in Van Winkle, W., Anders, P.J., Secor, 

D.H., and Dixon, D.A., eds., Biology, Management, and 

Protection of North American Sturgeon: American Fisheries 

Society, Symposium 28, Bethesda, Maryland, p. 161–174.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2006, Missouri River Mainstem System—2005–2006 Annual Operating Plan: Omaha, 

Nebraska, Northwestern Division, Missouri River Basin, 

Water Management Division, 89 p.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2000, Biological opinion on 

the operation of the Missouri River main stem reservoir 

system, operation and maintenance of the Missouri River 

bank stabilization and navigation project, and operation of 

the Kansas River reservoir system: Bismarck, N. Dak., U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2003, Amendment to the 2000 

biological opinion on the operation of the Missouri River 

main stem reservoir system, operation and maintenance of 

the Missouri River bank stabilization and navigation project, 

and operation of the Kansas River reservoir system: Minneapolis, Minn., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Wildhaber, M.L., Papoulias, D.M., DeLonay, A.J., Tillit, D.E., 

Bryan, J.L., Annis, M.L., and Allert, J.A., 2005, Gender 

identification of shovelnose sturgeon using ultrasonic and 

endoscopic imagery and the application of the method to the 

pallid sturgeon: Journal of Fish Biology, v. 67, p. 114–132.

Wildhaber, M.L., Papoulias, D.M., DeLonay, A.J., Tillitt, 

D.E., Bryan, J.L., and Annis, M.L., 2007, Physical and hormonal examination of Missouri River shovelnose sturgeon 

reproductive stage using non-invasive methods: a reference 

guide. Journal of Applied Ichthyology, v. 23, p. 382–401.

Winter, J., 1996, Advances in underwater biotelemetry, in

Murphy, B.R., and Willis, D.W., eds., Fisheries techniques 

(2d ed.): Bethesda, Md., American Fisheries Society, p. 

555–590.

Zale, A.V., Brooke, C., and Fraser, W.C., 2005, Effects of 

surgically implanted transmitter weights on growth and 

swimming stamina of small adult westslope cutthroat trout: 

Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, v. 134, p. 

653–660.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 35

Figures and Tables
36 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B1. Each tracking vessel typically carries (A) a Lotek SRX 600 radio receiver (Lotek 

Wireless Inc., Newmarket, Ontario, Canada) equipped with (B) an acoustic upconverter to 

detect both radio and ultrasonic signals and (C) a dual port Lotek MAP 600 RT digital ultrasonic 

receiver. The Lotek MAP 600 RT receiver interface runs on a ruggedized field computer.

Figure B2. Lotek (Lotek Wireless Inc., Newmarket, Ontario, Canada) combined acoustic/

radio transmitting (CART) tag implanted in shovelnose sturgeon in 2006 (A) and data storage 

tag (DST) implanted in all sturgeon in 2005 and 2006 (B). Transmitters implanted in 2005 were 

acoustic-only tags of similar size but lacking the external antenna.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 37

Figure B3. Computer screen image of Lotek MapHost software (Lotek Wireless Inc., Newmarket, Ontario, Canada) showing the 

simultaneous detection and identification of three transmitters in real-time. Transmitter identity, detection time, signal strength, and 

relative direction are reported to the operator continually. MapHost software acts both as the control interface for the MAP 600 RT 

receiver and as the data display.
38 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B4. Computer screen image of Lotek MapHost software (Lotek Wireless Inc., Newmarket, Ontario, Canada) during the 

simultaneous detection three transmitters. The inset window allows the operator to isolate an individual transmitter for tracking 

regardless of the number of transmitters detected.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 39

Figure B5. The custom ArcPadTM (ESRI, Inc., Redlands, Calif.) application interface displays ancillary data to aid the users during 

data collection. Red star indicates sturgeon relocation sites.
40 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B6. Custom data entry forms in the ArcPadTM (ESRI, Inc., Redlands, Calif.) application streamline and validate data 

collection. Red star indicates sturgeon relocation sites.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 41

Figure B7. Example of detailed reports available for individual fish produced in a near real time.
42 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B8. Example of summary reports that quickly characterize the status of individual fish.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 43

Figure B9. Typical telemetry research vessels designed for use in the lower study segment, including the 

channelized Lower Missouri River and the Middle and Lower Mississippi River.

Figure B10. Typical research telemetry vessel designed for use in the upper study segment, including the Missouri 

National Recreational River reach.
44 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri RiverFigure B11. Pallid sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon tagging locations for 2005 within two geologically and hydrologically distinct segments of the Lower 

Missouri River.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 45 Figure B12. Pallid sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon tagging locations for 2006 within two geologically and hydrologically distinct segments of the Lower Missouri River.
46 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B13. Planned release hydrograph for Gavins Point Dam, assuming median hydrologic conditions in 

the Missouri River basin, during fiscal year 2006 and 2007 if storage levels are adequate (U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers, 2006). Text indicates the hypothesized functions of spring flow pulses as they may relate to 

reproduction of the pallid sturgeon.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 47

Figure B14. Mean daily temperature recorded by HOBO® Water Temp Pro v2 data 

loggers (Onset Computer Corporation, Bourne, Mass.) located in the Missouri River near 

Hermann, Mo., during 2005, and mean daily discharge at U.S. Geological Survey gaging 

station near Hermann, Mo., during 2005.

Figure B15. Mean daily temperature recorded by HOBO® Water Temp Pro v2 data loggers 

(Onset Computer Corporation, Bourne, Mass.) located in the Missouri River near Hermann, 

Mo., during 2006, and mean daily discharge at U.S. Geological Survey gaging station near 

Hermann, Mo., during 2006.
48 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B16. Mean daily temperature recorded by HOBO® Water Temp Pro v2 data 

loggers (Onset Computer Corporation, Bourne, Mass.) located in the Missouri River near 

Boonville, Mo., during 2005, and mean daily discharge at U.S. Geological Survey gaging 

station near Boonville, Mo., during 2005.

Figure B17. Mean daily temperature recorded by HOBO® Water Temp Pro v2 data 

loggers (Onset Computer Corporation, Bourne, Mass.) located in the Missouri River near 

Boonville, Mo., during 2006, and mean daily discharge at U.S. Geological Survey gaging 

station near Boonville, Mo., during 2006.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 49

Figure B18. Mean daily temperature recorded by HOBO® Water Temp Pro v2 data 

loggers (Onset Computer Corporation, Bourne, Mass.) located in the Missouri River near 

Rulo, Nebr., during 2005, and mean daily discharge at U.S. Geological Survey gaging 

station near Rulo, Nebr., during 2005.

Figure B19. Mean daily temperature recorded by HOBO® Water Temp Pro v2 data 

loggers (Onset Computer Corporation, Bourne, Mass.) located in the Missouri River near 

Rulo, Nebr., during 2006, and mean daily discharge at U.S. Geological Survey gaging 

station near Rulo, Nebr., during 2006.
50 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B20. Mean daily temperature recorded by HOBO® Water Temp Pro v2 data 

loggers (Onset Computer Corporation, Bourne, Mass.) located in the Missouri River near 

Decatur, Nebr., during 2005, and mean daily discharge at U.S. Geological Survey gaging 

station near Decatur, Nebr., during 2005.

Figure B21. Mean daily temperature recorded by HOBO® Water Temp Pro v2 data 

loggers (Onset Computer Corporation, Bourne, Mass.) located in the Missouri River near 

Decatur, Nebr., during 2006, and mean daily discharge at U.S. Geological Survey gaging 

station near Decatur, Nebr., during 2006.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 51

Figure B22. Mean daily temperature recorded by Hobo® Water Temp Pro v2 data 

loggers (Onset Computer Corporation, Bourne, Mass.) located in the Osage River, 

Mo., during 2005 and 2006.

Figure B23. Mean daily temperature recorded by Hobo® Water Temp Pro v2 data 

loggers (Onset Computer Corporation, Bourne, Mass.) located in the Vermillion River, 

S. Dak., during 2005 and 2006.
52 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B24. Sturgeon sampling was conducted from open boats in March and April during 2005 and 2006 by using overnight 

and short-term gill net sets.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 53

Figure B25. Length-weight relationship for all shovelnose sturgeon 

collected during April 2006 in the lower study segment of the Lower Missouri 

River. Only shovelnose sturgeon greater than 1,000 grams were considered as 

candidates for implantation, indicated by a red line.

Figure B26. Length-weight relationship for all shovelnose sturgeon 

collected during April 2006 in the upper study segment of the Lower 

Missouri River. Only shovelnose sturgeon greater than 1,000 grams were 

considered as candidates for implantation, indicated by a red line.
54 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B27. Male pallid sturgeon (2.66 kg, 883 mm fork length) in reproductive condition captured 

at river mile 600.0 in upper study segment of the Missouri River in April 2006 (dorsal view). Fish was 

unmarked and presumed to be of nonhatchery origin.

Figure B28. Male pallid sturgeon (2.66 kg, 883 mm fork length) in reproductive condition captured 

at river mile 600.0 in upper study segment of the Missouri River in April 2006 (ventral view). Fish was 

unmarked and presumed to be of nonhatchery origin.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 55

Figure B29. Length-weight relationship for pallid sturgeon collected during April 2006 in the 

lower and upper study segments of the Missouri River. Three of the twelve pallid sturgeon 

collected were of hatchery origin.

Figure B30. Sturgeon were weighed, measured, and photographed prior to implantation. This 

photograph shows a shovelnose sturgeon (lateral view).
56 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B31. Blood samples were taken for reproductive assessment during implantation and again at 

recapture.

Figure B32. Transmitters and data storage tags were surgically implanted through a single ventral incision. 

External antennas, when used, exited through a separate abdominal puncture 12–15 cm posterior to the ventral 

incision.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 57

3/29

4/18

5/8

5/28

6/17

7/7

7/27

8/16

9/5

9/25

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850

RIVER MILE

2005

H

E

J

C

B

O

G

L

S

J

M

V

P

L

W

V

SL: St. Louis, MO HE: Hermann, MO JC: Jefferson City, MO BO: Boonville, MO GL: Glasgow, MO WV: Waverly, MO 

LE: Leavenworth, MO SJ: St. Joseph, MO PL: Plattsmouth, NE OM: Omaha, NE MV: Missouri Valley, IA SC: Sioux City, IA PO: Ponca, NE YK: Yankton, SD

S

L

L

E

O

M

S

C

P

O

Y

K

Figure B33. Research vessels’ search effort for 2005 for the Lower Missouri River. Each line segment between the black points 

(starting and stopping location) represents a day’s search effort for one vessel.
58 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

4/21

5/11

5/31

6/20

7/10

7/30

8/19

9/8

9/28

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850

RIVER MILE

2006

Y

K

P

O

S

C

M

V

O

M

P

L

S

J

L

E

W

V

G

L

B

O

J

C

H

E

S

L

SL: St. Louis, MO HE: Hermann, MO JC: Jefferson City, MO BO: Boonville, MO GL: Glasgow, MO WV: Waverly, MO 

LE: Leavenworth, MO SJ: St. Joseph, MO PL: Plattsmouth, NE OM: Omaha, NE MV: Missouri Valley, IA SC: Sioux City, IA PO: Ponca, NE YK: Yankton, 

SD

Figure B34. Research vessels’ search effort for 2006 for the Lower Missouri River. Each line segment between the black 

points (starting and stopping location) represents a day’s search effort for one vessel.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 59

Figure B35. Displacement of 2005 shovelnose sturgeon making an upward migration calculated by 

subtracting the capture and implantation location from the maximum upstream location.
60 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B36. Displacement of 2006 shovelnose sturgeon making an upward migration calculated by subtracting the capture and 

implantation location from the maximum upstream location.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 61

Figure B37. Movement map for shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–011 showing interpolated upstream and downstream 

movement. Fish was recaptured and did spawn.
62 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B38. Movement map for shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–028 showing interpolated upstream and downstream 

movement. Fish was recaptured and did not spawn.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 63

Figure B39. Movement map for shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–041 showing interpolated upstream and downstream 

movement. Fish was recaptured and did spawn.
64 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B40. Movement map for shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–061 showing interpolated upstream and downstream 

movement. Fish was recaptured and did spawn.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 65

Figure B41. Movement map for shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–065 showing interpolated upstream and downstream 

movement. Fish was recaptured and did not spawn.
66 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B42. Movement map for shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–066 showing interpolated upstream and downstream 

movement. Fish was recaptured and did spawn.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 67

Figure B43. Movement map for shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–015 showing interpolated upstream and downstream 

movement. Fish was recaptured and did spawn.
68 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B44. Movement map for shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–027 showing interpolated upstream and downstream 

movement. Fish was recaptured and did spawn.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 69

Figure B45. Movement map for shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–038 showing interpolated upstream and downstream 

movement. Fish was recaptured and did not spawn.
70 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B46. Movement map for shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–080 showing interpolated upstream and downstream 

movement. Fish was recaptured and did spawn.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 71

Figure B47. Movement map for shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–081 showing interpolated upstream and downstream 

movement. Fish was recaptured and did not spawn.
72 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B48. Movement map for shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–083 showing interpolated upstream and downstream 

movement. Fish was recaptured and did spawn.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 73

Figure B49. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black 

dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–011. 

Fish was recaptured and did spawn. Red lines indicated approximate time period of spawning. 

Orange lines indicate approximate location of spawning. The yellow box indicates the range of 

the approximate time period of spawning and approximate location of spawning.

Figure B50. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black dots) 

prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–028. Fish 

was recaptured and did not spawn. Red lines indicated approximate time period of spawning. 

Orange lines indicate approximate location of spawning. The yellow box indicates the range of 

the approximate time period of spawning and approximate location of spawning.
74 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B51. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black 

dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–041. 

Fish was recaptured and did spawn. Red lines indicated approximate time period of spawning. 

Orange lines indicate approximate location of spawning. The yellow box indicates the range of 

the approximate time period of spawning and approximate location of spawning.

Figure B52. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black 

dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–061. 

Fish was recaptured and did spawn. Red lines indicated approximate time period of spawning. 

Orange lines indicate approximate location of spawning. The yellow box indicates the range of 

the approximate time period of spawning and approximate location of spawning.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 75

Figure B53. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black dots) 

prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–065. Fish 

was recaptured and did not spawn. Red lines indicated approximate time period of spawning. 

Orange lines indicate approximate location of spawning. The yellow box indicates the range of 

the approximate time period of spawning and approximate location of spawning.

Figure B54. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black 

dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–066. 

Fish was recaptured and did spawn. Red lines indicated approximate time period of spawning. 

Orange lines indicate approximate location of spawning. The yellow box indicates the range of 

the approximate time period of spawning and approximate location of spawning.
76 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B55. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black 

dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–

015. Fish was recaptured and did spawn. Red lines indicated approximate time period of 

spawning. Orange lines indicate approximate location of spawning. The yellow box indicates 

the range of the approximate time period of spawning and approximate location of spawning.

Figure B56. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black 

dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–

027. Fish was recaptured and did spawn. Red lines indicated approximate time period of 

spawning. Orange lines indicate approximate location of spawning. The yellow box indicates 

the range of the approximate time period of spawning and approximate location of spawning.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 77

Figure B57. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black dots) 

prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–038. Fish 

was recaptured and did not spawn. Red lines indicated approximate time period of spawning. 

Orange lines indicate approximate location of spawning. The yellow box indicates the range of 

the approximate time period of spawning and approximate location of spawning.

Figure B58. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by black 

dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–080. 

Fish was recaptured and did spawn. Red lines indicated approximate time period of spawning. 

Orange lines indicate approximate location of spawning. The yellow box indicates the range of 

the approximate time period of spawning and approximate location of spawning.
78 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B59. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by 

black dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose sturgeon 

SNS06–081. Fish was recaptured and did not spawn. Red lines indicated approximate 

time period of spawning. Orange lines indicate approximate location of spawning. 

The yellow box indicates the range of the approximate time period of spawning and 

approximate location of spawning.

Figure B60. Timing of the maximum upstream location, and locations (indicated by 

black dots) prior to and following this maximum upstream event for shovelnose sturgeon 

SNS06–083. Fish was recaptured and did spawn. Red lines indicated approximate time 

period of spawning. Orange lines indicate approximate location of spawning. The yellow 

box indicates the range of the approximate time period of spawning and approximate 

location of spawning.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 79

Figure B61. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, 

and daily mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for 

implanted shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–011. Fish was recaptured and did spawn.

Figure B62. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, 

and daily mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for 

implanted shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–028. Fish was recaptured and did not 

spawn.
80 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B63. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry 

relocations, and daily mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream 

gage for implanted shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–041. Fish was recaptured and did 

spawn.

Figure B64. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry 

relocations, and daily mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream 

gage for implanted shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–061. Fish was recaptured and did 

spawn.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 81

Figure B65. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, 

and daily mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for implanted 

shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–065. Fish was recaptured and did not spawn.

Figure B66. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST) and telemetry 

relocations for implanted shovelnose sturgeon SNS05–066. Fish was 

recaptured and did spawn.
82 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B67. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, 

and daily mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for implanted 

shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–015. Fish was recaptured and did spawn.

Figure B68. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, 

and daily mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for implanted 

shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–027. Fish was recaptured and did spawn.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 83

Figure B69. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, and daily 

mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for implanted shovelnose 

sturgeon SNS06–038. Fish was recaptured and did not spawn.

Figure B70. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, and daily 

mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for implanted shovelnose 

sturgeon SNS06–080. Fish was recaptured and did spawn.
84 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B71. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, 

and daily mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for implanted 

shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–081. Fish was recaptured and did not spawn.

Figure B72. Depths, collected from data storage tag (DST), telemetry relocations, 

and daily mean temperature and discharge from nearest upstream gage for implanted 

shovelnose sturgeon SNS06–083. Fish was recaptured and did spawn.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 85

Figure B73. Necropsy of recaptured shovelnose sturgeon. This female had spawned between 

implantation and recapture. Suture material is still visible in healed incision.

Figure B74. Dissected ovaries removed during necropsy of recaptured shovelnose sturgeon. This 

female had spawned between implantation and recapture. Note the retained and resorbing oocytes 

near the location of the transmitter and incision on the ovary nearest the bottom of the photograph. 

Some adhesion to the abdominal wall was evident.
86 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B75. Necropsy of recaptured shovelnose sturgeon. This female did not spawn. Note the 

adhesion of the gonad to the abdominal wall present in most implanted females.

Figure B76. Dissected ovaries removed during necropsy of recaptured shovelnose sturgeon. This 

female did not spawn. The ovaries have become atretic.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 87

Figure B77. Necropsy of recaptured shovelnose sturgeon. This female had spawned between 

implantation and recapture. Note the significant adhesion of ovarian tissue to the abdominal wall at 

the incision site and the marked absence of gonadal fat.

Figure B78. Telemetry relocations and daily mean temperature and discharge from 

nearest upstream gage for implanted pallid sturgeon PLS06–001. The gray lines denote the 

only observed upstream movement by this male, coincident with proximity to known coarse 

substrate deposits during the purported spawning season.
88 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B79. Relocation sites of male pallid sturgeon PLS06–001 during the spawning period during early May 2006. The 

relocations mapped occur during the shaded period in figure B78. The sturgeon was in reproductive condition when 

implanted on April 14, 2006, at river mile 199.6.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 89

Figure B80. Relocation sites of pallid sturgeon PLS06–009 between river miles 673 and 672 from May 18, 2006, through 

September 13, 2006. This sturgeon was not in reproductive condition.
90 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B81. Relocation sites of pallid sturgeon PLS06–006 between river miles 585 and 583 from May 24, 2006, through 

October 26, 2006. This sturgeon was not in reproductive condition.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 91

Figure B82. Relocation sites of pallid sturgeon PLS06–003 between river miles 332 and 331 from May 17, 2006, through 

October 11, 2006. This sturgeon was not in reproductive condition.
92 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure B83. Relocation sites of pallid sturgeon PLS06–004 between river miles 327 and 326 from May 10, 2006, through 

August 8, 2006. This sturgeon was not in reproductive condition.
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 93

Table B1. Shovelnose sturgeon implanted in March–April 2005.—Continued

[ID, identification number; mm, millimeter; g, gram; F, female; M, male]

Fish ID

Implantation

date Segment origin

Capture river 

mile Sex

Fork length

(mm)

Weight 

(g) Acoustic code

SNS05–001 3/24/05 Lower 190.1 F 665 1,350 100

SNS05–002 3/24/05 Lower 190.1 F 615 1,050 97

SNS05–003 3/25/05 Lower 188.9 F 732 1,500 30700

SNS05–004 3/24/05 Lower 188.1 F 605 1,050 98

SNS05–005 3/24/05 Lower 191.4 F 693 1,500 99

SNS05–006 3/24/05 Lower 192.2 F 617 1,050 96

SNS05–007 3/24/05 Lower 192.0 F 638 1,050 95

SNS05–008 3/25/05 Lower 110.5 F 628 1,100 101

SNS05–009 3/25/05 Lower 110.3 F 659 1,300 31200

SNS05–010 3/25/05 Lower 110.3 F 658 1,150 103

SNS05–011 3/25/05 Lower 110.3 F 638 1,000 102

SNS05–012 3/25/05 Lower 111.7 F 674 1,250 30400

SNS05–013 3/25/05 Lower 111.7 F 695 1,250 104

SNS05–014 3/25/05 Lower 111.7 F 655 1,250 94

SNS05–015 3/29/05 Lower 142.4 F 714 1,760 105

SNS05–016 3/29/05 Lower 142.4 F 673 1,300 107

SNS05–017 3/29/05 Lower 142.2 F 705 1,680 30000

SNS05–018 3/29/05 Lower 142.2 F 623 1,130 106

SNS05–019 3/29/05 Lower 146.4 F 648 1,410 29500

SNS05–020 3/29/05 Lower 142.4 F 668 1,260 111

SNS05–021 3/29/05 Lower 146.4 F 688 1,170 110

SNS05–022 3/29/05 Lower 146.4 F 674 1,530 29700

SNS05–023 3/29/05 Lower 147.6 F 684 1,700 31100

SNS05–024 3/29/05 Lower 147.6 F 704 1,490 113

SNS05–025 3/29/05 Lower 147.4 F 718 1,590 112

SNS05–026 3/29/05 Lower 147.4 F 663 1,140 114

SNS05–027 3/29/05 Lower 147.6 F 653 1,260 118

SNS05–028 3/29/05 Lower 148.2 F 683 1,630 116

SNS05–029 3/29/05 Lower 148.0 F 703 1,610 117

SNS05–030 3/29/05 Lower 147.4 F 624 1,200 115

SNS05–031 3/29/05 Lower 148.2 F 678 1,270 109

SNS05–032 3/30/05 Lower 186.7 F 634 1,800 30200

SNS05–033 3/30/05 Lower 185.7 F 671 1,250 72

SNS05–034 3/30/05 Lower 182.8 F 672 1,100 71
94 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Table B1. Shovelnose sturgeon implanted in March–April 2005.—Continued

[ID, identification number; mm, millimeter; g, gram; F, female; M, male]

Fish ID

Implantation

date Segment origin

Capture river 

mile Sex

Fork length

(mm)

Weight 

(g) Acoustic code

SNS05–035 3/30/05 Lower 185.7 F 611 1,070 69

SNS05–036 3/30/05 Lower 186.7 F 621 1,010 76

SNS05–037 3/30/05 Lower 185.1 F 629 1,100 30100

SNS05–039 3/31/05 Lower 186.4 F 709 1,730 73

SNS05–040 3/31/05 Lower 187.4 F 688 1,330 75

SNS05–041 3/31/05 Lower 186.4 F 685 1,340 74

SNS05–042 3/31/05 Lower 187.4 F 716 1,740 70

SNS05–043 4/01/05 Lower 130.2 F 589 1,040 92

SNS05–044 4/01/05 Lower 129.0 F 654 1,210 90

SNS05–045 4/01/05 Lower 126.6 F 717 1,600 30500

SNS05–046 4/01/05 Lower 126.6 F 709 1,810 108

SNS05–047 4/01/05 Lower 127.4 F 663 1,061 87

SNS05–048 4/01/05 Lower 126.7 F 718 2,100 77

SNS05–049 4/05/05 Lower 126.7 F 685 1,470 89

SNS05–050 4/05/05 Lower 126.3 F 718 1,950 84

SNS05–051 4/05/05 Lower 124.9 F 674 1,470 80

SNS05–052 4/19/05 Upper 635.9 F 628 1,010 140

SNS05–053 4/19/05 Upper 638.4 F 693 1,460 141

SNS05–054 4/19/05 Upper 638.4 F 659 1,170 142

SNS05–055 4/19/05 Upper 638.3 F 756 1,670 136

SNS05–056 4/19/05 Upper 638.3 F 604 1,100 30300

SNS05–057 4/19/05 Upper 637.1 F 630 1,060 143

SNS05–058 4/20/05 Upper 641.3 F 620 1,030 139

SNS05–059 4/20/05 Upper 638.7 F 674 1,250 138

SNS05–060 4/20/05 Upper 639.0 F 679 1,170 137

SNS05–061 4/20/05 Upper 639.0 F 613 1,020 135

SNS05–062 4/20/05 Upper 638.7 F 622 1,100 134

SNS05–063 4/21/05 Upper 668.5 F 659 1,110 31400

SNS05–064 4/21/05 Upper 668.5 F 745 1,550 133

SNS05–065 4/21/05 Upper 668.5 F 650 1,010 130

SNS05–066 4/21/05 Upper 668.5 F 687 1,370 131

SNS05–067 4/28/05 Upper 609.3 F 695 1,500 119

SNS05–068 4/28/05 Upper 610.1 F 683 1,190 120

SNS05–069 4/28/05 Upper 609.4 F 794 1,870 29800
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 95

Table B1. Shovelnose sturgeon implanted in March–April 2005.—Continued

[ID, identification number; mm, millimeter; g, gram; F, female; M, male]

Fish ID

Implantation

date Segment origin

Capture river 

mile Sex

Fork length

(mm)

Weight 

(g) Acoustic code

SNS05–070 4/28/05 Upper 609.3 F 666 1,230 121

SNS05–071 4/28/05 Upper 609.3 F 720 1,570 29900

SNS05–072 4/28/05 Upper 609.4 F 685 1,470 122

SNS05–073 4/28/05 Upper 609.8 F 625 1,010 123

SNS05–074 4/28/05 Upper 610.1 F 638 1,130 124

SNS05–075 4/28/05 Upper 610.1 F 658 1,010 125

SNS05–076 4/28/05 Upper 609.3 F 643 1,190 30900

SNS05–077 4/28/05 Upper 609.4 F 653 1,150 126

SNS05–078 4/28/05 Upper 609.8 F 643 1,190 127

SNS05–079 4/28/05 Upper 610.1 F 565 1,000 128

SNS05–080 4/28/05 Upper 609.4 F 597 1,000 129

SNS05–081 4/28/05 Upper 609.3 F 605 980 132

SNS05–082 4/28/05 Upper 609.8 F 647 1,270 30600

SNS05–083 4/28/05 Upper 610.1 F 643 1,190 144

SNS05–084 4/28/05 Upper 609.8 F 663 1,000 145

SNS05–085 4/28/05 Upper 610.1 F 620 1,100 146

SNS05–086 4/28/05 Upper 609.4 F 625 970 147

SNS05–087 4/28/05 Upper 609.8 F 640 1,120 148

SNS05–088 4/28/05 Upper 607.4 F 693 1,450 31000

SNS05–089 4/28/05 Upper 607.4 F 688 1,430 31300

SNS05–090 4/28/05 Upper 607.4 F 640 1,200 78

SNS05–091 4/28/05 Upper 607.4 F 616 1,060 79

SNS05–092 4/28/05 Upper 607.2 F 635 1,070 88

SNS05–093 4/28/05 Upper 607.2 F 658 1,330 91

SNS05–094 4/28/05 Upper 607.2 F 641 1,070 93

SNS05–095 4/29/05 Upper 607.7 F 662 1,150 29600

SNS05–096 4/29/05 Upper 607.7 F 639 1,100 81

SNS05–097 4/29/05 Upper 607.7 F 683 1,260 82

SNS05–098 4/30/05 Upper 614.2 F 660 1,210 30800

SNS05–099 4/30/05 Upper 614.2 F 632 1,130 85

SNS05–100 4/30/05 Upper 614.2 F 655 1,110 83

SNS05–101 4/30/05 Upper 614.2 F 620 1,080 86
96 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Table B2. Pallid sturgeon implanted in 2005.

[mm. millimeter; g, gram; U, unknown; F, female; M, male]

Implantation

date Segment origin Capture river mile Sex

Fork length

(mm)

Weight 

(g) Acoustic code

4/07/2005 Lower 131.2 U 774 2,000 164

4/08/2005 Lower 181.0 U 715 1,230 170

5/04/2005 Lower Weldon Springs, Mo. F 765 1,410 178

5/04/2005 Lower Weldon Springs, Mo. M 645 950 179

7/01/2005 Upper Unknown U 675 1,530 165

7/01/2005 Upper Unknown U 935 3,120 166

7/01/2005 Upper Unknown F 930 2,910 167

7/01/2005 Upper Unknown F 729 1,350 171

7/01/2005 Upper Unknown U 800 2,000 172

9/22/2005 Lower Hartsburg, Mo. M 960 3,710 177

Table B3. Shovelnose sturgeon implanted in April 2006.—Continued

[ID, identification number; mm. millimeter; g, gram; F, female; M, male]

Fish ID

Implantation

date

Segment 

origin

Capture 

river mile Sex

Fork 

length

(mm)

Weight 

(g)

Acoustic 

code

Radio 

code

SNS06–001 4/12/06 Lower 142.7 F 650 1,250 401 11

SNS06–002 4/12/06 Lower 142.4 F 710 1,470 402 12

SNS06–003 4/12/06 Lower 142.7 F 735 1,440 403 13

SNS06–004 4/12/06 Lower 143.2 F 697 1,520 405 15

SNS06–005 4/12/06 Lower 142.7 F 721 1,650 404 14

SNS06–006 4/12/06 Lower 144.5 F 720 1,200 406 16

SNS06–007 4/12/06 Lower 146.0 F 700 1,290 407 17

SNS06–008 4/12/06 Lower 145.8 F 700 1,670 408 18

SNS06–009 4/12/06 Lower 146.0 F 730 1,640 409 19

SNS06–010 4/12/06 Lower 144.5 F 770 1,780 410 20

SNS06–011 4/12/06 Lower 140.6 F 724 1,724 411 21

SNS06–012 4/12/06 Lower 143.0 F 697 1,378 412 22

SNS06–013 4/12/06 Lower 140.6 F 621 1,130 413 23

SNS06–014 4/12/06 Lower 141.6 F 685 1,300 414 24

SNS06–015 4/12/06 Lower 141.6 F 668 1,240 415 25

SNS06–016 4/12/06 Lower 141.6 F 672 1,360 416 26
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 97

Table B3. Shovelnose sturgeon implanted in April 2006.—Continued

[ID, identification number; mm. millimeter; g, gram; F, female; M, male]

Fish ID

Implantation

date

Segment 

origin

Capture 

river mile Sex

Fork 

length

(mm)

Weight 

(g)

Acoustic 

code

Radio 

code

SNS06–017 4/12/06 Lower 142.7 F 675 1,360 417 27

SNS06–018 4/13/06 Lower 122.4 F 650 1,390 430 40

SNS06–019 4/13/06 Lower 126.8 F 671 1,370 429 39

SNS06–020 4/13/06 Lower 123.1 F 653 1,149 428 38

SNS06–021 4/13/06 Lower 124.4 F 776 1,886 427 37

SNS06–022 4/13/06 Lower 124.3 F 703 1,433 426 36

SNS06–023 4/13/06 Lower 124.3 F 637 1,309 425 35

SNS06–024 4/13/06 Lower 128.3 F 633 1,120 424 34

SNS06–025 4/13/06 Lower 128.3 F 709 1,390 423 33

SNS06–026 4/13/06 Lower 128.4 F 668 1,300 422 32

SNS06–027 4/13/06 Lower 121.3 F 724 1,602 421 31

SNS06–028 4/13/06 Lower 121.9 F 722 1,495 420 30

SNS06–029 4/13/06 Lower 121.9 F 661 1,261 419 29

SNS06–030 4/13/06 Lower 125.0 F 734 1,800 418 28

SNS06–031 4/14/06 Lower 201.1 F 690 1,650 450 60

SNS06–032 4/14/06 Lower 201.1 F 683 1,430 449 59

SNS06–033 4/14/06 Lower 197.1 F 720 1,510 448 58

SNS06–034 4/14/06 Lower 199.8 F 725 1,520 447 57

SNS06–035 4/14/06 Lower 199.6 F 662 1,410 446 56

SNS06–036 4/14/06 Lower 196.3 F 700 1,330 445 55

SNS06–037 4/14/06 Lower 199.3 F 675 1,480 444 54

SNS06–038 4/14/06 Lower 199.8 F 660 1,190 443 53

SNS06–039 4/14/06 Lower 191.7 F 659 1,298 442 52

SNS06–040 4/14/06 Lower 190.8 F 634 1,027 441 51

SNS06–041 4/14/06 Lower 193.6 F 648 1,190 440 50

SNS06–042 4/14/06 Lower 191.3 F 706 1,414 439 49

SNS06–043 4/14/06 Lower 191.8 F 643 1,183 438 48

SNS06–044 4/14/06 Lower 193.6 F 636 1,070 437 47

SNS06–045 4/14/06 Lower 191.3 F 761 1,703 436 46

SNS06–046 4/14/06 Lower 190.8 F 664 1,088 435 45

SNS06–047 4/14/06 Lower 190.8 F 665 1,308 434 44

SNS06–048 4/14/06 Lower 191.3 F 725 1,703 433 43

SNS06–049 4/14/06 Lower 191.3 F 741 2,078 432 42
98 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Table B3. Shovelnose sturgeon implanted in April 2006.—Continued

[ID, identification number; mm. millimeter; g, gram; F, female; M, male]

Fish ID

Implantation

date

Segment 

origin

Capture 

river mile Sex

Fork 

length

(mm)

Weight 

(g)

Acoustic 

code

Radio 

code

SNS06–050 4/14/06 Lower 191.8 F 683 1,491 431 41

SNS06–051 4/19/06 Upper 736.5 F 745 1,923 451 61

SNS06–052 4/19/06 Upper 737.5 F 661 1,137 451 62

SNS06–053 4/19/06 Upper 741.0 F 621 1,120 453 63

SNS06–054 4/19/06 Upper 736.5 F 649 1,011 454 64

SNS06–055 4/19/06 Upper 740.6 F 638 1,250 455 65

SNS06–056 4/19/06 Upper 739.1 F 612 1,010 456 66

SNS06–057 4/19/06 Upper 740.1 F 651 1,050 457 67

SNS06–058 4/19/06 Upper 738.6 F 631 970 458 68

SNS06–059 4/19/06 Upper 723.0 F 723 1,660 459 69

SNS06–060 4/19/06 Upper 738.8 F 715 1,630 460 70

SNS06–061 4/20/06 Upper 738.6 F 609 1,200 461 71

SNS06–062 4/20/06 Upper 742.9 F 715 1,600 462 72

SNS06–063 4/20/06 Upper 743.1 F 644 1,100 463 73

SNS06–064 4/20/06 Upper 746.7 F 619 1,080 464 74

SNS06–065 4/21/06 Upper 606.7 F 697 1,560 465 75

SNS06–066 4/21/06 Upper 600.0 F 709 1,660 466 76

SNS06–067 4/21/06 Upper 610.2 F 650 1,025 467 77

SNS06–068 4/21/06 Upper 600.2 F 640 1,250 468 78

SNS06–069 4/21/06 Upper 600.0 F 677 1,240 469 79

SNS06–070 4/22/06 Upper 599.0 F 666 1,090 470 80

SNS06–071 4/22/06 Upper 595.4 F 614 1,190 471 81

SNS06–072 4/22/06 Upper 598.8 F 667 1,250 472 82

SNS06–073 4/22/06 Upper 598.3 F 651 1,160 473 83

SNS06–074 4/22/06 Upper 595.4 F 645 1,100 474 84

SNS06–075 4/22/06 Upper 598.3 F 655 1,140 475 85

SNS06–076 4/22/06 Upper 599.6 F 653 1,030 476 86

SNS06–077 4/22/06 Upper 599.6 F 619 1,010 477 87

SNS06–078 4/23/06 Upper 637.1 F 646 1,075 478 88

SNS06–079 4/23/06 Upper 644.0 F 659 1,230 479 89

SNS06–080 4/23/06 Upper 636.6 F 675 1,165 480 90

SNS06–081 4/23/06 Upper 637.1 F 650 1,065 481 91

SNS06–082 4/23/06 Upper 634.2 F 709 1,275 482 92
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 99

Table B3. Shovelnose sturgeon implanted in April 2006.—Continued

[ID, identification number; mm. millimeter; g, gram; F, female; M, male]

Fish ID

Implantation

date

Segment 

origin

Capture 

river mile Sex

Fork 

length

(mm)

Weight 

(g)

Acoustic 

code

Radio 

code

SNS06–083 4/23/06 Upper 644.0 F 684 1,180 484 94

SNS06–084 4/23/06 Upper 638.7 F 675 1,210 485 95

SNS06–085 4/23/06 Upper 644.2 F 630 1,060 486 96

SNS06–086 4/23/06 Upper 643.8 F 667 1,130 487 97

SNS06–087 4/23/06 Upper 6.38.7 F 678 1,180 488 98

SNS06–088 4/23/06 Upper 649.0 F 633 1,150 489 99

SNS06–089 4/24/06 Upper 651.0 F 694 1,450 490 100

SNS06–090 4/24/06 Upper 650.9 F 655 1,220 491 101

SNS06–091 4/24/06 Upper 651.1 F 640 1,110 492 102

SNS06–092 4/24/06 Upper 651.0 F 696 1,490 493 103

SNS06–093 4/24/06 Upper 651.1 F 646 1,190 494 104

SNS06–094 4/24/06 Upper 658.4 F 676 1,205 495 105

SNS06–095 4/24/06 Upper 658.5 F 655 1,250 496 106

SNS06–096 4/24/06 Upper 657.5 F 708 1,245 497 107

SNS06–097 4/24/06 Upper 658.5 F 698 1,525 498 108

SNS06–098 4/24/06 Upper 656.4 F 656 1,100 499 109

SNS06–099 4/24/06 Upper 657.2 F 676 1,350 501 111

SNS06–100 4/24/06 Upper 658.5 F 679 1,140 500 110
100 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Table B4. Pallid sturgeon implanted in 2006.

[ID, identification number; mm. millimeter; g, gram; F, female; M, male]

Fish ID

Implantation

date

Segment 

origin

Capture river 

mile Sex

Fork length

(mm) Weight (g)

Acoustic 

code Radio code

PLS06–002 4/12/06 Lower 141.1 F 790 2,253 521 131

PLS06–001 4/14/06 Lower 199.6 M 810 2,000 522 132

PLS06–007 5/2/06 Upper 806.5 M 740 1,452 502 112

PLS06–010 5/2/06 Upper 671.5 F 860 2,903 523 133

PLS06–009 5/2/06 Upper 675.0 F 788 2,359 524 134

PLS06–008 5/2/06 Upper 757.5 M 975 3,357 525 135

PLS06–006 5/3/06 Upper 583.5 M 936 3,338 526 136

PLS06–003 5/3/06 Lower 330.0 M 1060 4,445 527 137

PLS06–005 5/3/06 Lower 342.2 M NA 3,311 528 138

PLS06–004 5/3/06 Lower 321.2 M 940 2,948 529 139

PLS06–011 10/2/06 Upper 657.4 F 885 2,280 530 140

PLS06–012 10/2/06 Upper 654.5 M 878 2,160 531 141

PLS06–013 10/2/06 Upper 649.5 M 890 2,505 533 143

PLS06–014 10/2/06 Upper 724.5 M 860 2,310 534 144

PLS06–015 10/2/06 Upper 600.0 M 875 3,010 535 145

PLS06–016 10/2/06 Upper 610.2 F 930 3,130 536 146
Movement, Habitat Use, and Reproductive Behavior of Shovelnose and Pallid Sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River 101

Table B5. Gravid female shovelnose sturgeon implanted in 2005 and subsequently recaptured.

[ID, identification number; mm. millimeter; g, gram]

Fish ID

Implantation

date

Implantation 

river mile Recapture date

Recapture river 

mile

Recapture fork 

length (mm)

Recapture 

weight (g) Spawn

SNS05–011 3/25/05 110.3 9/08/05 144.1 635 850 Spawn

SNS05–028 3/29/05 148.2 10/27/05 221.0 682 1,370 Nonspawn

SNS05–041 3/31/05 186.4 9/01/05 326.2 675 980 Spawn

SNS05–052 4/19/05 635.9 8/12/05 587.8 616 780 Spawn

SNS05–060 4/20/05 639.0 9/15/05 622.2 667 990 Spawn

SNS05–061 4/20/05 639.0 8/10/05 640.3 604 870 Spawn

SNS05–062 4/20/05 638.7 8/11/05 658.2 625 920 Spawn

SNS05–063 4/21/05 668.5 9/13/05 668.6 652 960 Spawn

SNS05–064 4/21/05 668.5 9/14/05 694.0 738 1,330 Spawn

SNS05–065 4/21/05 668.5 8/11/05 603.1 641 870 Nonspawn

SNS05–066 4/21/05 668.5 9/01/05 315.7 682 1,130 Spawn

SNS05–071 4/28/05 609.3 10/04/05 686.5 720 1,200 Incomplete

SNS05–074 4/28/05 610.1 8/12/05 564.6 627 880 Spawn

SNS05–075 4/28/05 610.1 7/27/05 604.6 659 990 Nonspawn

SNS05–076 4/28/05 609.3 9/01/05 618.6 715 1,540 Incomplete

SNS05–085 4/28/05 610.1 8/31/05 439.6 610 790 Spawn

SNS05–094 4/28/05 607.2 10/05/05 646.0 630 770 Spawn

SNS05–099 4/30/05 614.2 10/05/05 643.3 622 850 Spawn

SNS05–101 4/30/05 614.2 8/31/05 616.4 609 780 Spawn

SNS05–096 4/29/05 607.7 8/16/06 Kansas River 629 780 Spawn
102 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Table B6. Gravid female shovelnose sturgeon implanted in 2006 and subsequently recaptured.

[ID, identification number; mm. millimeter; g, gram]

Fish ID

Implantation

date

Implantation 

river mile Recapture date

Recapture river 

mile

Recapture fork 

length (mm)

Recapture 

weight (g) Spawn

SNS06–010 4/12/06 144.5 9/06/06 177.5 758 1,536 Nonspawn

SNS06–015 4/12/06 141.6 6/08/06 204.5 659 960 Spawn

SNS06–018 4/13/06 122.4 6/09/06 232.0 650 1,154 Spawn

SNS06–027 4/13/06 121.3 10/05/06 000.0 715 1,352 Spawn

SNS06–038 4/14/06 199.8 8/23/06 289.9 650 1,058 Nonspawn

SNS06–052 4/19/06 737.5 10/11/06 733.8 656 1,026 Spawn

SNS06–053 4/19/06 741.0 9/28/06 362.0 616 808 Spawn

SNS06–055 4/19/06 740.6 10/31/06 734.5 643 1,215 Spawn

SNS06–058 4/19/06 738.6 8/03/06 707.4 632 870 Spawn

SNS06–059 4/19/06 723.0 10/02/06 686.6 718 1,430 Spawn

SNS06–061 4/20/06 738.6 5/31/06 773.4 612 950 Spawn

SNS06–063 4/20/06 743.1 8/03/06 680.9 642 852 Incomplete

SNS06–071 4/22/06 595.4 10/12/06 335.7 602 735 Spawn

SNS06–080 4/23/06 636.6 9/12/06 535.4 659 918 Spawn

SNS06–081 4/23/06 637.1 8/28/06 638.8 647 1,022 Nonspawn

SNS06–083 4/23/06 644.0 9/13/06 701.2 674 854 Spawn

SNS06–085 4/23/06 644.2 10/11/06 737.4 626 818 Spawn

SNS06–090 4/24/06 650.9 11/07/06 563.7 652 975 Spawn

SNS06–093 4/24/06 651.1 11/01/06 541.9 647 1,170 Spawn

SNS06–096 4/24/06 657.5 11/01/06 518.0 697 955 Spawn

SNS06–098 4/24/06 656.4 9/26/06 491.3 652 790 Spawn

SNS06–099 4/24/06 657.2 6/01/06 671.7 670 1,060 Spawn

Prepared by: 

USGS Enterprise Publishing Network 

Rolla Publishing Service Center 

1400 Independence Road 

Rolla, MO 65401

For more information concerning this publication, contact:

Director

U.S. Geological Survey

Columbia Environmental Research Center

4200 New Haven Road

Columbia, MO 65201

(573) 875–5399

Or visit the Columbia Environmental Research Center website at:

http://www.cerc.usgs.gov
Reproductive Physiology of Missouri River 

Gravid Pallid Sturgeon and Shovelnose 

Sturgeon During the 2005 and 2006 

Spawning Seasons

By Diana M. Papoulias, Mandy L. Annis, Aaron J. DeLonay, and Donald E. Tillitt

Chapter C of 

Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, 

and Population Dynamics of Pallid Sturgeon and Shovelnose 

Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Edited by Carl E. Korschgen

Open-File Report 2007–1262

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
Contents

Abstract.......................................................................................................................................................107

Introduction.................................................................................................................................................107

Approach............................................................................................................................................107

Study Areas........................................................................................................................................108

Yellowstone River.....................................................................................................................108

Missouri River (RM 0–200) .....................................................................................................108

Missouri River (RM 365–870) .................................................................................................108

Methods and Procedures.........................................................................................................................109

Tissue Collection...............................................................................................................................109

Hormone Extraction and Analysis for 17 β-Estradiol, 11-Ketotestosterone, and

Testosterone.........................................................................................................................109

Cortisol Analysis................................................................................................................................109

Quality Assurance Procedures and Assay Performance Characteristics..............................110

Polarization Index and Progesterone Activation Assay.............................................................110

Histology.............................................................................................................................................110

Development of an LH (GTH II) Antibody and LH Assay.............................................................110

Identification of the Maturation Inducing Hormone (MIH) and Development of an 

MIH Assay ............................................................................................................................111

Development of Cortisol Reference Values for Shovelnose Sturgeon....................................111

Results .........................................................................................................................................................111

Yellowstone River..............................................................................................................................111

Missouri River (RM 0–200)...............................................................................................................111

Polarization Index ....................................................................................................................111

Progesterone Assay................................................................................................................111

Hormones..................................................................................................................................111

Histology....................................................................................................................................111

Missouri River (RM 365–870)...........................................................................................................112

Polarization Index ....................................................................................................................112

Progesterone Assay................................................................................................................112

Hormones..................................................................................................................................112

Histology....................................................................................................................................112

Development of Hormone Indicators ............................................................................................112

LH (Gonadotropin II) ................................................................................................................112

MIH.............................................................................................................................................112

Cortisol.......................................................................................................................................112

Summary......................................................................................................................................................112

Acknowledgments.....................................................................................................................................113

References Cited........................................................................................................................................113

Figures and Tables.....................................................................................................................................115

Appendixes C1 and C2...............................................................................................................................129
iii

Figures

C1. Conceptual model of environmental cues, the physiological indicators they 

may affect, and the corresponding reproductive stage of sturgeon...............................116

C2. Graph showing (A–D) The results obtained when a single fish is repeatedly 

sampled in 2005 as it moves upstream (up the Yellowstone River) during the 

summer months.........................................................................................................................117

C3–C4. Bar graphs showing—

C3. Frequency distribution of Polarization Index (PI) values for fish collected 

from Missouri River river miles 0 to 200 and implanted with transmitters 

in 2005 ................................................................................................................................118

C4. Frequency distribution of Polarization Index (PI) values for fish collected 

from Missouri River river miles 0 to 200 and implanted with transmitters 

in 2006 ................................................................................................................................118

C5. Scatter plot of polarization Index (PI) values of fish collected from the Missouri 

River from April to June 2005 near Hartsburg, Mo..............................................................119

C6. Box plot of polarization index (PI) values for fish caught randomly during 2006 

between Missouri River river miles 0 and 195 .....................................................................119

C7–C10. Bar graphs showing—

C7. The number of fish and the percentage of each fish’s eggs that showed 

germinal vesicle breakdown (GVBD) in the progesterone assay for fish 

collected from Missouri River river miles 0 to 200 and implanted with 

transmitters in 2005 .........................................................................................................120

C8. The number of fish and the percentage of each fish’s eggs that showed 

germinal vesicle breakdown (GVBD) in the progesterone assay for fish 

collected from Missouri River river miles 0 to 200 and implanted with 

transmitters in 2006 .........................................................................................................120

C9. Frequency distribution of polarization Index (PI) values for fish collected 

from Missouri River river miles 365 to 870 and implanted with transmitters 

in 2005 ................................................................................................................................121

C10. Frequency distribution of polarization index (PI) values for fish collected 

from Missouri River river miles 365 to 870 and implanted with transmitters 

in 2006 ................................................................................................................................121

C11. Box plots of polarization index (PI) values for fish caught randomly during 2006 

between Missouri River river miles 870 and 830 (A), river miles 755 and 810 (B), 

and river miles 365 and 750 (C)...............................................................................................122

C12–C15. Bar graphs showing—

C12. The number of fish and the percentage of each fish’s eggs that showed 

germinal vesicle breakdown (GVBD) in the progesterone assay for fish 

collected from Missouri River river miles 365 to 870 and implanted with 

transmitters in 2005 .........................................................................................................123

C13. The number of fish and the percentage of each fish’s eggs that showed 

germinal vesicle breakdown (GVBD) in the progesterone assay for fish 

collected from Missouri River river miles 365 to 870 and implanted with 

transmitters in 2006 .........................................................................................................123

C14. The number of fish and the percentage of each fish’s eggs that showed 

germinal vesicle breakdown (GVBD) in the progesterone assay for fish 

collected from the Missouri River between river miles 870 and 830 ......................124

C15. 17 β-estradiol produced by vitellogenic shovelnose sturgeon oocytes 

exposed to various samples thought to contain luteinizing hormone (LH)............125
iv

C16. A sodium dodecyl (lauryl) sulfate-polyacrylamide (SDS) electrophoresis gel 

showing the G3 sample (see fig. C15) and three bands near the front line possibly 

representing the luteinizing hormone (LH) complex...........................................................125

C17. A 1.0 percent agarose gel of an EcoRI digest (restriction enzyme) of miniprep 

DNA for shovelnose sturgeon luteinizing hormone (LH)....................................................126

C18. Chromatogram of incubation media collected after incubation of oocyte follicles 

during the final phases of oocyte maturation......................................................................127

Tables

C1. Blood and biopsy samples collected during 2006 from sturgeon captured in the 

Missouri River ...........................................................................................................................127

C2. Means ± standard deviation and ranges (in parantheses) of 17 β-estradiol, 

11-ketotestosterone, testosterone, and cortisol from gravid female sturgeon 

collected from river miles 0 to 200 of the Missouri River in 2005 and 2006.....................128

C3. Means ± standard deviation and ranges (in parantheses) of 17 β-estradiol, 

11-ketotetosterone, testosterone, and cortisol from gravid female sturgeon 

collected from river miles 365 to870 of the Missouri River in 2005 and 2006..................128

Appendix

C1. Hormone values for fish randomly caught in 2005 in the Missouri River near 

Hartsburg, Mo ...........................................................................................................................129

C2. Hormone values for fish randomly caught in 2006 in the Missouri River in one 

reach above Gavins Point Dam and three reaches below Gavins Point Dam ...............130
Abstract 

In a natural, unaltered river, the location and timing of 

sturgeon spawning will be dictated by the prevailing environmental conditions to which the sturgeon have adapted. A goal 

of the Comprehensive Sturgeon Research Program (CSRP; 

see chap. A) at the U.S. Geological Survey Columbia Environmental Research Center is to identify where, when, and 

under what conditions shovelnose sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus 

platorynchus) and pallid sturgeon (S. albus) spawn in the 

altered Missouri River so that those conditions necessary for 

spawning success can be defined. One approach to achieving 

this goal is to exploit what is known about fish reproductive physiology to develop and apply a suite of diagnostic 

indicators of readiness to spawn. In 2005 and 2006, gravid 

shovelnose sturgeon and a limited number of pallid sturgeon 

were fitted with transmitters and tracked on their spawning 

migration. A suite of physiological indicators of reproductive 

state such as reproductive hormones and oocyte development 

were measured. These same measurements were made on 

tissues collected from additional fish, presumably migrating 

to spawn, that were not tagged or tracked. The data presented 

here indicating the sturgeons’ readiness to spawn are to be 

evaluated together with their behavior and the environmental conditions. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) 

Sturgeon Response to Flow Modification (SRFM; see chap. 

A) study, initiated in 2006, provides additional opportunities 

to experimentally evaluate the sturgeon reproductive response 

indicators relative to changes in flow. In this chapter, we report 

progress made on identifying and developing the physiological indicators and summarize 2 years’ worth of indicator data 

collected thus far. 

Introduction

The timing of spawning for seasonally spawning fish 

is generally believed to have evolved in synchrony with the 

seasonal hydrologic and environmental conditions that provide 

the best possible chance of survival for offspring (Balon, 

1975; Munro and others, 1990). Historically, North American sturgeon (Acipenser spp. and Scaphirhynchus spp.) have 

been reported to spawn from spring to midsummer depending 

on latitude and water temperature (lake sturgeon [Acipenser 

fulvescens]: Eddy and Surber, 1947; pallid sturgeon [Scaphirhynchus albus]: Forbes and Richardson, 1920; shovelnose 

sturgeon [S.platorhynchus]: Christenson, 1975; green sturgeon 

[A. medirostris]: Van Eenennam and others, 2005; shortnose 

sturgeon (A. brevirostrum]: Taubert, 1980; Atlantic sturgeon 

[A. oxyrhynchus]: Van Enennaam and others, 1996; and Gulf 

sturgeon [A. oxyrhynchus desotoi]: Fox and others, 2000. 

During the spawning season, specific environmental cues can 

trigger or be associated with the physiological changes in 

the fish that result in spawning activity: migration, aggregation, courtship, ovulation, oviposition, and fertilization (fig. 

C1). Although the biochemical, physiological, and behavioral 

events are generally synchronized, they can become decoupled 

with the result that spawning is unsuccessful (Dettlaff and others, 1993).

The objective of this study was to evaluate the reproductive readiness of shovelnose and pallid sturgeon and 

their spawning success relative to prevailing environmental 

conditions by using physiological indicators. This research 

is intended to support ongoing work (see other chapters of 

this report) to identify when and where shovelnose and pallid 

sturgeon spawn and to better define the environmental factors 

necessary for completion of the reproductive cycle through 

completion of spawning in the Lower Missouri River.

Approach

Photoperiod, temperature, and flow are the primary factors that cue the reproductive physiology of most fishes. Physiological and morphological measurements allow scientists to 

evaluate the response of sturgeon to environmental conditions. 

Responses may be general, such as stress, or may be specific, 

such as indicating how close a sturgeon is to ovulation. Reproductive assessment prior to a telemetry study and again at 

recapture provides information on the reproductive readiness 

of the fish and subsequently whether spawning was successReproductive Physiology of Missouri River Gravid Pallid 

Sturgeon and Shovelnose Sturgeon During the 2005 and 

2006 Spawning Seasons

By Diana M. Papoulias, Mandy L. Annis, Aaron J. DeLonay, and Donald E. Tillitt
108 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

ful or resulted in oocyte follicles being resorbed. Moreover, 

assessment of the physiological status of captured wild sturgeon allows for an understanding of the environmental factors 

necessary for successful completion of the reproductive cycle. 

Our approach was to assess the reproductive condition of sturgeon prior to their spawning migration, during their migration, 

and then again upon recapture (as soon after spawning as possible) and relate the readiness to spawn and success in spawning to discharge, temperature, and day length (Comprehensive 

Sturgeon Research Program [CSRP] task 2.2). Fish were 

primarily collected in two geographical areas with distinct 

hydrographs to allow for comparisons of the effect of hydrograph on spawning (Spring Rise Flow Modification [SRFM] 

1.c.i). Limited additional fish samples were collected in a third 

area in 2005 (the Yellowstone River) as a proof of concept of 

the relationships among upstream migration, temperature, and 

physiological indicators.

Readiness to spawn was assessed by using the polarization index (PI), the progesterone assay, and blood reproductive 

hormones (Dettlaff and others, 1993; Wildhaber and others, 

2006). Spawning success was evaluated on the basis of visual 

and microscopic inspection of gonads and blood reproductive 

hormones (Wildhaber and others, 2006). As a gravid female 

progresses towards spawning, the germinal vesicle (GV) of 

the oocyte gets closer to the animal pole. Sometime during the 

migration of the GV to the animal pole (generally estimated 

as a PI of <0.07), the hormonal system is cued that ovulation 

may proceed. The fish has reached maturational competence 

at this time. When conditions are suitable, the final stages of 

maturation commence such that specific hormones (luteinizing hormone and maturation-inducing hormone) are released, 

causing germinal vesicle breakdown (GVBD) followed by 

ovulation. The concentrations of sex hormones also change 

during the course of migration, final maturation, ovulation, 

and spawning. Estrogen and testosterone are typically high 

when migration begins and decrease at different rates through 

spawning. Additionally, some hormones, such as cortisol, 

reflect the degree of stress the fish is experiencing, and their 

increase has been correlated with changes in sex hormone 

levels and failure to spawn. 

In addition to estrogen and testosterone, several other 

blood hormone measurements can indicate readiness to spawn 

or may be useful in interpreting why spawning did not occur. 

Measurement of the gonadotropin luteinizing hormone (LH) 

and the maturation-inducing hormone (MIH) can provide 

more precise estimates of when spawning will occur. Reagents 

to readily measure these hormones in sturgeon are not available, thus an additional objective of this work is to make the 

necessary reagents (CSRP task 2.1). The reagents will then 

be used to measure these additional hormones in the archived 

blood collected from sturgeon in these studies. Cortisol is 

an indicator of acute stress and has been measured in most 

blood samples collected in these studies; however, interpretation of the values has been difficult because reference values 

have been lacking. Therefore, an additional set of laboratory 

experiments were designed in 2006 to provide basal (low) and 

stressed (high) reference values of cortisol for comparison to 

values obtained in studies. 

Study Areas

Yellowstone River

Movements of shovelnose sturgeon have been monitored 

in the Yellowstone River and in the Missouri River upstream 

and downstream of the Yellowstone River confluence (Recovery Priority Management Area 2 (RPMA)) for the last 3 years 

as part of the Fort Peck Flow Modification Biological Data 

Collection Plan (Dr. Pat Braaten, U.S. Geological Survey, 

Fort Peck Project Office, written commun. 2004; Dave Fuller, 

Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Fort Peck, written commun., 2004). Results from this ongoing study indicate that 

shovelnose sturgeon primarily overwinter in the Missouri 

River, but during spring, some individuals of this population 

migrate into the Yellowstone River to spawn, while others 

spawn in the Missouri River downstream from Fort Peck 

Dam. As part of the ongoing Fort Peck project, 60 shovelnose 

sturgeon fitted with transmitters are tracked and relocated 

at weekly intervals from April through July. In 2005, tissue 

samples were collected from fish that were randomly captured 

weekly as field crews tracked tagged sturgeon migrating up 

the Yellowstone River.

Missouri River (RM 0–200)

In 2005 and 2006, data were collected from fish used 

in the tracking study at the time of tag implantation and 

then again from any tagged fish that were later recaptured. 

Fish for the 2005 tracking study were collected from river 

mile (RM) 110 to 192, between Morrison, Mo. and Boonville, Mo. In 2005, additional data were also collected from 

fish caught by a commercial fisherman in the Missouri 

River near Hartsburg, Mo. Fish for the 2006 tracking study 

were collected from RM 121 to 200, between Chamois, 

Mo. and slightly above Boonville, Mo. In 2006, additional 

data were also collected between RM 10 (just above the 

confluence with the Mississippi River) and RM 192 from 

fish captured as part of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

(USACE) population assessment program.

Missouri River (RM 365–870)

In 2005 and 2006, data were collected from fish used 

in the tracking study at the time of tag implantation and then 

again from any tagged fish that were later recaptured. Fish for 

the 2005 tracking study were collected from RM 607 to RM 

668, between Bellevue, Nebr., and the River Sioux, Iowa. Fish 

for the 2006 tracking study were collected from RM 596 to 

RM 747, between Plattsmouth, Nebr. and just below Ponca, 

Nebr. In 2006, additional data were also collected from fish 
Reproductive Physiology of Missouri River Gravid Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon during 2005 and 2006 Spawning 109

captured as part of the USACE population assessment program in one reach above Gavins Point Dam (RM 831 to RM 

870) and two reaches below the dam (from RM 754 to RM 

811 and from RM 367 to RM 750). 

Methods and Procedures

Tissue Collection

Blood and ovarian biopsies were collected from fish 

used in the telemetry study (see chap. 2) from the lower (n 

= 50) and the upper (n = 50) study areas in 2005 and 2006 

upon implantation and again upon recapture (lower: n = 3, 

2005, and n = 5, 2006; upper: n = 16, 2005, and n = 17, 2006). 

During 2006, blood and sometimes ovarian tissue were also 

collected from a reach above Gavins Point Dam, two reaches 

in the upper study area, and one reach in the lower study area 

(table C1). 

In 2005, additional blood and ovary samples (n = 25), 

were obtained from fish provided by a local fishermen in 

the lower study area from mid-April through June. Also in 

2005, a proof of concept test was conducted in Montana to 

demonstrate the validity and performance of the physiological measurements as indicators of readiness to spawn using 

shovelnose sturgeon captured during ongoing studies in the 

Yellowstone River (Dr. Pat Braaten, oral. commun.). Weekly, 

the group of fish associated with fish being tracked was subsampled, and ovarian tissue and blood were collected from a 

total of 26 gravid females. 

Blood was collected from the caudal vein by using a 

heparinized syringe. Blood samples were kept on wet ice until 

centrifugation at 3,500 revolutions per minute (rpm) for 10 

minutes. Plasma was transferred to 1.8-mL cryogenic vials, 

and quick frozen in dry ice, and then stored in a -80oC freezer 

until steroid extraction and analysis. Ovarian biopsy tissue was 

collected by making a small incision in the abdomen. Eggs 

and tissue were removed by using a disposable pipette. The 

incision was closed with one suture using absorbable suture 

material. Other fish were euthanized prior to biopsy. Biopsy 

samples were either preserved in 10 percent neutral buffered 

formalin (NBF) for determination of PI and for histology or 

were placed in Ringer’s solution at river temperature for the 

progesterone assay.

Hormone Extraction and Analysis for 17 

β-Estradiol, 11-Ketotestosterone, and 

Testosterone

The plasma samples for reproductive hormone analysis were extracted by using diethyl ether to separate the 

steroids from the binding proteins. The steroid-containing 

ether phase was quick frozen, and the resulting supernatant was placed in a 30o

C water bath and evaporated under 

nitrogen. The steroid residues were then reconstituted in 

phosphate buffered saline pH 7.0 with 1 percent gelatin 

(PBSG). Extracted, reconstituted samples were stored at 

-20oC until assayed.

Extraction efficiency was determined by spiking 

the plasma with a known concentration of tritiated steroid. The spiked sample then underwent the extraction 

procedure as described above, with a subsample of the 

diethyl ether supernatant taken for radioactive analysis. 

An additional scintillation vial containing a spike was also 

analyzed. The resulting radioactive count was calculated 

for recovery rate by comparing the recovered radioactive 

values to that of the known spike. A laboratory average 

was determined by averaging the recovery rates of several 

extractions to obtain an average of 95 percent, 98 percent, 

and 97 percent for estradiol, 11-ketotestosterone, and testosterone, respectively. These values were applied to the 

derived steroid data to correct sample steroid values for 

efficiency of extraction.

Estradiol (E2), 11-ketotestosterone (11-KT), and testosterone (T) were assayed by using the radioimmunoassay 

(RIA) method (McMaster and others, 1992). Each steroid 

was assayed independently. Steroid concentration was determined through competition of the steroid in the standard or 

sample and a constant volume of radiolabeled steroid for a 

fixed titer of antibody. The E2 antibody was purchased from 

Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, Mo.), Dr. Tim Gross (U.S. Geological Survey Florida Integrated Science Center) donated 

the 11-KT antibody, and the T antibody was purchased from 

MP Biomedical (Solon, Ohio). PerkinElmer (Wellesley, 

Mass.) supplied radiolabeled steroids for both E2 and T, with 

11-KT being purchased from Amersham Biosciences (Piscataway, N.J.). Test tubes containing the antibody, radiolabeled 

steriod, and extracted sample or standard were incubated 

overnight at 4 oC. A chilled solution of dextran-coated 

activated charcoal in PBSG (0.4 percent dextran, 0.625 

percent charcoal) was added and allowed to incubate before 

centrifugation at 0 oC for 20 minutes at 2,800 rpm. A portion 

of the resulting supernatant was added to a scintillation vial 

containing 5 mL of scintillation cocktail (EcoLume®). A 

scintillation count was performed with the resulting values 

indicating the amount of antibody bound to labeled steroid, 

which is inversely proportional to the amount of free steroid 

in the sample. A standard curve of a serial dilution of E2, 

11-KT, and T standards (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, Mo.) was 

used to allow calculation of steroid concentrations in the 

unknown samples. 

Cortisol Analysis

Plasma samples for cortisol analysis were shipped 

overnight on dry ice to Dr. Grant Feist (Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oreg.). Cortisol analysis followed procedures 

outlined in Redding and others (1984). 
110 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Quality Assurance Procedures and Assay 

Performance Characteristics

Samples in all assays were run in duplicate and included 

measurement of blanks which were subtracted from all absorbance values. Estradiol sensitivity was 887 pg/mL at 80 percent 

binding and 13 pg/mL at 20 percent binding. 11-ketotestosterone 

sensitivity was 83 pg/mL and 1 pg/mL at 20 percent and 80 

percent binding, respectively. Testosterone sensitivity at 80 

percent binding was 8 pg/mL and 336 pg/mL at 20 percent 

binding. Cross-reactivities of the antibodies used in these 

assays with other similar steroids are reportedly less than10 

percent according to the vendors (for E2 and T) and Sepulveda 

(2002) for 11-KT. Estradiol intra-assay variation was 11 

percent, and interassay variation was 3 percent. 11-ketotestosterone intra-assay variation was 8 percent and interassay 

variation was 13 percent. Testosterone intra-assay variation 

was 1 percent, and interassay variation was 13percent. The 

assay was validated for measurement of E2, T, and 11-KT 

by verifying that serial dilutions of sample were parallel to a 

standard curve. E2 had a slope of 0.81, with a slope of 0.80 for 

11-KT and a slope of 0.87 for T. These values were obtained 

from the regression of hormone measured and concentration of 

hormone added to a plasma sample. 

Polarization Index and Progesterone Activation 

Assay

At time of implantation, oocytes were sampled to 

calculate PI and to determine whether GVBD could be 

hormonally induced in vitro (Dettlaff and others, 1993). 

Ten oocytes were preserved in 10 percent NBF for the PI 

measurement, and another 25 oocytes were placed in Ringers solution in a Petri dish to which progesterone was added 

(Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, Mo.). After 24 hours of incubation at 19 o

C, oocytes were preserved in 10 percent NBF 

followed by PI measurement to determine if GVBD had 

taken place.

Histology

Histological analysis was conducted on the ovarian tissue of the sturgeon to accurately determine stage 

of maturity, presence of GVBD, and spawning success in 

recaptured fish. Samples were preserved and processed 

according to methods outlined by Blazer and Dethloff 

(2000). Briefly, after an initial fixation of 48 hours in 10 

percent NBF, samples were transferred through a series 

of rinses to 70 percent ethanol (EtOH). The samples were 

stored in the 70 percent EtOH until analysis was performed. 

Routine processing of tissue involved trimming into small 

pieces, dehydration through a series of alcohols followed by 

immersion in an organic solvent, and then infiltration with 

paraffin. Paraffin blocks containing the tissues were cut into 

5-μm slices. Sections were taken at three different depths 

to ensure that the microscopic evaluations were representative of the entire tissue. These sections were placed on glass 

slides, allowed to dry, and then deparaffinized. The slides 

were stained with hematoxylin and eosin (Luna, 1968) and 

viewed with a light microscope. 

Development of an LH (GTH II) Antibody and LH 

Assay

Luteinizing hormone is one of two gonadotropic hormones among the suite of reproductive hormones controlling oocyte follicle development. During germinal vesicle 

migration at approximately a PI of 0.07 or less, and when the 

fish has reached maturational competency, LH will increase. 

Currently, there are no available assays to measure shovelnose 

sturgeon LH because a specific antibody to shovelnose LH is 

required and has not been developed. 

Luteinizing hormone is produced in the pituitary. Thus, 

as a first step in development of an assay to measure LH, 400 

shovelnose whole brains were collected from gravid female 

shovelnose sturgeon for isolation and recovery in 2004. Shovelnose sturgeon were sacrificed by first calming the fish in icy 

water and then quickly severing the head. Brains with pituitaries were removed and immediately placed on dry ice. Samples 

were stored at -80 oC until they were shipped to ProteinX 

Lab, Inc. (Sorrento, Calif.) for purification of LH. ProteinX 

generally followed the methods of Swanson and others (1991), 

Mañanós and others (1997), and Lin and others (2004) with 

some modifications with the goal of obtaining a sample of 

LH with 95 percent purity and characterized by reverse phase 

high-performance liquid chromatography (rpHPLC) showing 

the alpha and beta subunits. 

From the outset it was recognized that this would be a 

difficult project because of the very small amounts of protein 

of interest in the tissues. The criteria for identifying the protein 

were based on known facts from other fish species: a pituitary 

from a mature sturgeon might contain approximately 30 μg 

of protein, the size of the protein is about 40–50 kilo Daltons 

(kD), there are two subunits of 12–24 kD that are noncovalently bound, and under acidic conditions LH could be dissociated and separated on a C18 rpHPLC column. 

The effort began with a small-scale purification by using 

only 6–8 of the 400 brains and using three different columns 

(ion exchange column (Mono Q), sizing column (sucrose 12), 

and hydrophobic interaction column [(HIC) (resource Phenyl)] 

followed by monitoring and characterization for LH by using 

SDS gel electrophoresis rpHPLC (Vydac column #218TP54, 

Grace, Deerfield, Ill.). Detection sensitivity was expected to be 

around 0.5–1 μg/mL on SDS and rpHPLC. Subsequent separations used a TSK gel ODS-120T C18 column (SigmaAldrich, 

St. Louis, Mo.) with slightly better resolution than the Vydac 

column used initially. 

Freeze-dried samples from purifications were resuspended with 0.5 mL mQ H2

0 and spun briefly. Resuspended 
Reproductive Physiology of Missouri River Gravid Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon during 2005 and 2006 Spawning 111

samples were stored at 4oC until bioassay. Bioassay involved 

exposing shovelnose sturgeon vitellogenic oocytes in vitro to 

approximately 1 μg protein of each sample (although results 

were expected to be relative since actual protein concentrations were known to vary widely) and measuring the estradiol 

produced. Samples that resulted in oocytes producing the most 

estradiol were further fractioned through gradient elution. 

Bands corresponding to likely LH based on mass were cut 

from gels and submitted for protein sequencing by using mass 

spectrometry finger printing at the Proteomics Center at the 

University of Missouri, Columbia, Mo. 

A second approach to developing an LH assay was to 

clone and sequence the shovelnose sturgeon LH beta subunit gene. The C-terminal sequence was used to develop a 

synthetic peptide conjugated to a carrier protein for antibody 

development (Querat and others, 2000; Hervitz and others, 

2005). 

Identification of the Maturation Inducing 

Hormone (MIH) and Development of an MIH 

Assay

Maturation-inducing hormone stimulates the oocyte to 

resume meiosis (identified by GVBD) during the final phases 

of oocyte maturation just prior to ovulation. The production of 

MIH is triggered by an increase in LH. Procedures generally 

followed Webb (1999). Briefly, wild gravid female shovelnose 

sturgeon were induced to ovulate, and pieces of the ovary were 

collected for in vitro production of MIH. Incubation media 

containing MIH was analyzed by using HPLC and eluted fractions containing identified peaks and then were tested in an in 

vitro bioassay to determine the most active fraction to induce 

GVBD. 

Development of Cortisol Reference Values for 

Shovelnose Sturgeon

Wild-caught mature female and male shovelnose sturgeon 

were captured from the Missouri River in 2006 and subjected 

to various stressors to establish reference values for cortisol. 

Basal cortisol levels were measured in fish every 3 hours 

for 24 hours for a baseline unstressed condition. Stressors 

included holding fish out of the water for a short period of 

time, driving the fish while in a tank in the back of a truck for 

1 hour, and stimulation with adrenocorticotropic hormone. 

Blood for all stress tests was collected by using a catheter 

inserted into the caudal vein to minimize stress from repeated 

blood collections. Procedures for measuring cortisol were as 

described above.

Results

Yellowstone River

Figure C2 shows the results obtained from fish (n = 25) 

that were randomly captured weekly as field crews tracked 

tagged sturgeon migrating up the Yellowstone River during 

the summer reproductive period. Polarization index, E2, T, and 

11-KT all decrease over the course of the movement, although 

each parameter shows a slightly different pattern.

Missouri River (RM 0–200)

Polarization Index

The majority of fish implanted in 2005 had PIs of 

0.15–0.20 (fig. C3), while the majority of fish implanted in 

2006 had PIs of 0.10–0.15 (fig. C4). The PIs of fish collected 

randomly throughout the spawning season near Hartsburg, 

Mo. in 2005 did not show a clear trend (fig. C5). The PIs of 

fish collected randomly during 2006 were initially low in May 

but then increased through June (fig. C6). 

Progesterone Assay

Slightly more fish tagged in 2006 compared with those 

tagged in 2005 had reached maturational competency as indicated by 100 percent GVBD (figs. C7 and C8). 

Hormones

In general, and as expected, all hormones decreased from 

initial levels at implantation of tags (table C2). Twenty-five 

samples remain to be analyzed from the 2006 tracking study. 

Hormone results for the additional samples from fish caught 

near Hartsburg, Mo. in 2005 and between RM 0 and RM 195 

can be found in appendix C1 (note that 11 samples remain to 

be analyzed).

Histology

Histological analysis of the ovarian tissue of the three 

recapatured fish from 2005 indicated that one fish resorbed 

many of its follicles. Analyses for ovarian tissue at time of 

implantation, randomly sampled, or recaptured for 2005 and 

2006 fish are pending.
112 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Missouri River (RM 365–870)

Polarization Index

The majority of fish implanted in 2005 had PIs of 0.15–

0.20 (fig. C9), while the majority of fish implanted in 2006 

had PIs of 0.15 (fig. C10). The PIs of fish collected randomly 

throughout the spawning season from the reach above Gavins 

Point Dam and the two other reaches downstream of the dam 

tended to decrease over time (fig. C11). 

Progesterone Assay

Slightly more fish tagged in 2006 compared with those 

tagged in 2005 (fig. C12) had reached maturational competency as indicated by 100 percent GVBD (fig. C13). By midMay most of the fish caught in the river reach immediately 

below Gavins Point Dam had reached maturational competency as indicated by the number of fish with 100 percent 

GVBD (fig. C14)

Hormones

In general, and as expected, all hormones decreased from 

initial levels at implantation of tags (table C3). Twenty-one 

samples remain to be analyzed from the 2006 tracking study. 

Hormone results for the additional samples from fish caught 

between RM 365 and RM 875 can be found in appendix C1 

(note that 231 samples remain to be analyzed).

Histology

Three of sixteen tissue samples from 2005 recaptured fish 

indicated that many eggs were not ovulated and were resorbed. 

Histological analyses for ovarian tissue at time of implantation, randomly sampled, or recaptured for 2005 and 2006 fish 

are pending.

Development of Hormone Indicators

LH (Gonadotropin II)

The low level of LH in the tissue has made it very difficult to isolate the protein. After hundreds of purifications, several samples likely to contain LH were obtained and tested in 

an in vitro bioassay for activity. Sample G3 was identified as 

having the greatest activity (fig. C15). Sample G3 was a relatively pure fraction from a step elution off of the ion exchange 

column containing—a couple of micrograms of protein.

Subsequently, the sample was further fractionated by gradient 

elution, and fractions 2 and 4 were picked up. Fraction 4 was 

a good representative of sample G3 however, a concern with 

sample G3 was that the molecular weight was smaller than 

expected, 1315 kD, and separated on SDS without reductants 

(fig. C16). Before proceeding further, bands from fraction 

4 were submitted for quick sequencing involving a solution 

digest, followed by matrix assisted laser desorption/ionization 

mass spectrometry (MALDI MS). We got no matches that 

indicated that the protein was LH. 

Subsequently, we have attempted to separate pituitaries from remaining brain tissue. The pituitaries have been 

resubmitted to Protein X (September 2006), and they are again 

attempting to isolate LH. We have also begun to try another 

approach by cloning and sequencing the shovelnose sturgeon 

LH beta subunit gene by using the C-terminal sequence to 

develop a synthetic peptide conjugated to a carrier protein for 

antibody development (fig. C17). Currently, an antibody is 

being made to the conjugated synthetic LH peptide by Abraxis 

LLC (Westminister, Pa.). 

MIH

Eluted fractions corresponding to resolved peaks and likely 

to contain MIH based on incorporation of tritiated progesterone 

have been prepared and are ready to be exposed in vitro to late 

stage vitellogenic oocyte follicles to assess GVBD (fig. C18). 

Cortisol

Results of blood cortisol analysis of laboratory stress 

experiments were received in mid-December 2006 and are 

being evaluated.

Summary

Initial work in the Yellowstone River demonstrated 

that telemetered and tracked fish physiologically cycle in a 

predictable pattern on their spawning migration up river based 

on hormone and egg measurements. Data for the 2005 and 

2006 Missouri River tracking study provided information at 

the beginning and, if fish were recaptured, at the end of the 

spawning period. These data will be useful in assessing why a 

given fish may not have spawned and the readiness to spawn 

relative to environmental conditions. The additional 2006 

dataset from untracked sturgeon will allow us to more closely 

evaluate spawning readiness together with behavior and environmental conditions during the reproductive period. These 

data are especially useful when we evaluate responses to different flow patterns whether they are during the same year but 

in different geographic areas or in different years. Reference 

values for evaluating cortisol levels and stress in shovelnose 

sturgeon will soon be available. Encouraging progress is being 

made to provide reagents and assays to measure additional 

and more proximal indicators of readiness to spawn, allowing 

us to further narrow the window for when and where sturgeon 

spawning is occurring.
Reproductive Physiology of Missouri River Gravid Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon during 2005 and 2006 Spawning 113

Acknowledgments

Funding for this project was provided by the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers (Omaha District, Craig Fleming, Project 

Manager). We are grateful to a number of individuals who 

contributed their time and talent to this work and especially to 

Craig Fleming and Mark Drobish for being supportive of our 

efforts to collect tissues from a large number of fish burdening their monitoring crews with additional work. We want to 

recognize the U.S. Geological Survey field crews under the 

leadership of Sabrina Griffith, Dane Shuman and his U. S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) field crew from South 

Dakota, Steve LaBay and Sam Stukel and their field crews 

from South Dakota Department of Game, Fish, and Parks, 

Gerald Mestl and Kirk Steffenson and their field crews from 

the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission, and USFWS Missouri field crews under the guidance of Dr. Tracy Hill, Wyatt 

Doyle, Corey Lee, and Nick Utrup. Darin Simpkins (USGS 

Columbia Environmental Research Center [CERC]) provided 

assistance in getting samples from South Dakota. James Candrl (USGS CERC), Monique Koll (formerly USGS CERC), 

Dr. Scott Lankford (Central Missouri State University) and Dr. 

Grant Feist (Oregon State University) assisted with the cortisol 

study. Dr. Cathy Richter and Dr. Kathy Echols at USGS CERC 

did much of the LH and MIH work, respectively. Dr. Pat 

Braaten, Dave Fuller, and their crew in Montana were kind 

enough to take extra time to collect tissue samples as they 

tracked their sturgeon up the Yellowstone River. Chris Henke, 

Kim Chojnacki, Emily Tracy, and Sandy Clark (USGS CERC) 

provided database support and interfaced with the CERC 

field crews. Eugene Greer and Julia Towns provided fish 

culture and informational resources support, respectively. Lori 

Buitinik and Tom Scott did much of the paperwork behind the 

scenes, enabling us to get our jobs done. The Biochemistry 

and Physiology Branch staff, as always, did great work in 

making this project a success: Rachel Claunch, Diane Nicks, 

James Candrl (fish culture), Justin Buckler, Vanessa Velez, 

Justin Gilmore, Jim Zajicek, Jo Ellen Hinck, Robin Lipkin, 

and all of the undergrads who have come and gone. Thanks 

also to Mark Wildhaber for coordination with other groups 

working on the Missouri River and to Janice Bryan for ultrasound and endoscopy.

References Cited

Balon, E.K., 1975, Reproductive guilds of fishes—A proposal 

and a definition: Journal Fisheries Research Board Canada, 

v. 32 , p. 821–864.

Blazer, V.S., and Dethloff, G.M., 2000, Immune system 

indicators, in Schmitt, C.J., and Dethloff, G.M, eds., 

Biomonitoring of environmental status and trends (BEST) 

program—Selected methods for monitoring chemical contaminants in aquatic ecosystems: U.S. Geological Survey 

Biological Resources Division, Information and Technology 

Report 2000–0005, p. 25–30.

Christenson, L.M., 1975, The shovelnose sturgeon, 

Scaphirynchus Platorynchus (Rafinesque) in the Red 

Cedar-Chippewa River System, Wisconsin: Madison, Wis., 

Department of Natural Resources, Interim report 82, 23 p.

Dettlaff, T.A., Ginsburg, A.S, and Schmalhausen, O.I., 1993, 

Sturgeon fishes—Developmental biology and aquaculture: 

Berlin, Springer-Verlag, 300 p.

Eddy, S., and Surber, T., 1947, Northern fishes: Minneapolis, 

Minn., University of Minnesota Press, 276 p.

Forbes, S.A., and Richardson, R.E., 1920, The fishes of Illinois: Illinois Natural History Survey, v.3, p. 1 –357.

Fox, D.A., Hightower, J.E., and Parauka, F.M., 2000, Gulf 

sturgeon spawning migration and habitat in the Choctawhatchee River system, Alabama-Florida: Transactions of the 

American Fisheries Society, v. 129, p. 811–826.

Hurvitz, A., Degani, G., Goldberg, D., Din, S.Y., Jackson, K., 

and Levavi-Sivan, B., 2005, Cloning of FSHbeta, LHbeta, 

and glycoprotein alpha subunits from the Russian sturgeon 

(Acipenser gueldenstaedtii), beta subunit mRNA expression, gonad developement, and steriod levels in immature 

fish: General and Comparative Endocrinology, v. 140, 

p. 61–73.

Lin, Y.P., Petrino, T.R., and Wallace, R.A., 2004, Fundulus 

heterclitus gonadotropins—Small scale chromatographic 

fractionation of pituitary extracts into components with different steroidogenic activities usage homologous bioassays: 

Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, v. 2, p. 14. 

Luna, L.G., 1968, Manual of histological staining methods of 

the armed forces institute of pathology: New York, McGraw 

Hill Book Company, 258 p.

Mañanós, E.L., Swanson, P., Stubblefield, J., and Zohar, Y., 

1997, Purification of gonadotropin II from a teleost fish, the 

hybrid striped bass, and development of a specific enzymelinked immunosorbent assay: General and Comparative 

Endocrinology, v. 108, p. 209–222.

McMaster, M.E., Munkittrick, K.R., and Van Der Kraak, G.J., 

1992, Protocol for measuring circulating levels of gonadal 

sex steroids in fish: Canada Technical Report, Fish Aquatic 

Science, p. 1836–1929.Munro, A.D., Li-Lianb, C., and 

Nqankee, K., 1990, Preliminary observation on environmental control of ovulation and spawning in a small tropical 

Cyprinid (Barbus tetrazona): Tokyo, Japan, Proceedings of 

the Second Asian Fisheries Forum, p. 17–22.

Quérat, B., Sellouk, A., and Salmon, C., 2000, Phylogenetic 

analysis of the vertebrate glycoprotein hormone family 
114 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

including new sequences of sturgeon (Acipenser baeri)—

Subunits of the two gonadotropins and the thyroid-stimulating hormone: Biology of Reproduction, v. 63, p. 222–228.

Redding, J.M., Schreck, C.B., Birks, E.K., and Ewing, R.D., 

1984, Cortisol and its effects on plasma thyroid hormone 

and electrolyte concentrations in fresh water and during seawater acclimation in yearling coho salmon Oncorhynchus 

kisutch: General and Comparative Endocrinology, v. 56, 

p. 146–155.

Sepulveda, M.S., Johnson, W.E., Hyman, J.C., Denslow, N.D., 

Schoeb, T.R., Gross, T.S., 2002, An evaluation of biomarkers of reproductive function and potential contaminant 

effects in Florida largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides 

floridanus) sampled from the St. Johns River: Science of the 

Total Environment, v. 289, p. 133–144.

Swanson,P., Suzuki, K., Kawachui, H., and Dickhoff, W.W., 

1991, Isolation and characterization of two Coho Salmon 

gonadotropins, GTH I and GTH II: Biology of Reproduction, v. 44, p. 29–38. 

Taubert, B.D., 1980, Reproduction of shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) in Holyoke Pool, Connecticut River, 

Massachusetts: Copeia, v. 1, p. 114–117.

Van Eenennaam, J.P., Doroshov, S.T., Moberg, G.P., Watson, 

J.G., Moore, D.S., and Linares, J., 1996, Reproductive 

conditions of the Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus) 

in the Hudson River: Estuaries, v. 19, p. 769–777.

Van Eenennaam, J.P., Linares-Casenave, J, Deng, X., and 

Doroshov, S.I., 2005, Effect of incubation temperature on 

green sturgeon embryos, Acipenser medirostris: Environmental Biology of Fishes, v.72, p.145–154.

Webb, M.A.H., 1999, Ovarian steroidogenesis and environmental temperature effects during final ovarian maturation 

and ovulation of white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus

Richardson): Davis, Calif., University of California–Davis, 

Ph.D. dissertation, 140 p.

Wildhaber, M.L., Papoulias, D.M., DeLonay, A.J., Tillitt, 

D.E., Bryan, J.L., and Annis, M.L., 2006, Development of 

methods to determine the reproductive status of pallid sturgeon in the Missouri River: U.S. Geological Survey, Final 

Science Report to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 81 p. 
Reproductive Physiology of Missouri River Gravid Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon during 2005 and 2006 Spawning 115

Figures and Tables
116 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure C1. Conceptual model of environmental cues, the physiological indicators they may affect 

(gonadotropin=GTH, H1=hormone, H2=hormone, T=testosterone, 11KT=11-ketotestosterone, E2=17 

β-Estradiol, PI=polarization index, GVBD=germinal vesicle breakdown), and the corresponding 

reproductive stage of sturgeon.

Fish migration Final oocyte maturation Ovulation

PI: >.07 .07 .03 GVBD

CUES: Temp?

Photoperiod? Temp?

Flow?

Substrate?

Males?

Time: Months/Weeks Days Hours

Conceptual Model

E2

T/11KT

GTH H1 GTH H2

Flow?

Spawning
Reproductive Physiology of Missouri River Gravid Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon during 2005 and 2006 Spawning 117

 

Date captured

Apr May Jun Jul Aug 

Tempeature or ng/mL

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

river mile code 3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Temperature

E2

Date captured

Apr May Jun Jul Aug 

Temperature or ng/mL

0

10

20

30

40

50

river mile code 3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Temperature

T

T

Date captured

Apr May Jun Jul Aug 

Temperature or ng/mL

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

river mile code 3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Temperature

11KT

Date captured

Apr May Jun Jul Aug 

Temperature

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

PI units

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.20

river mile code 3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

PI

Temperature

Chapter C, Page 1 

Figure C2. (A–D) The results obtained when a single fish is repeatedly sampled in 2005 as it moves upstream (up 

the Yellowstone R.) during the summer months. Polarization index (PI), 17 β-Estradiol (E2), Testosterone (T), and 

11-ketotestosterone (11KT) all decrease over the course of the movement, although each parameter shows a slightly 

different pattern. The yellow box shows the temperature at which spawning is thought to occur. 
118 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

 

PI

0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40

Number of fish

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Chapter C, Page 1 

PI

0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40

Number of fish

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Figure C3. Frequency distribution of Polarization Index (PI) values for fish collected from 

Missouri River river miles 0 to 200 and implanted with transmitters in 2005.

Figure C4. Frequency distribution of Polarization Index (PI) values for fish collected from 

Missouri River river miles 0 to 200 and implanted with transmitters in 2006.
Reproductive Physiology of Missouri River Gravid Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon during 2005 and 2006 Spawning 119

Date

Mon 04 Mon 18 Mon 02 Mon 16 Mon 30 Mon 13 Mon 27 

PI

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

April May June

Chapter C, Page 1 

Date

1/1/06 3/1/06 5/1/06 7/1/06 9/1/06 

Discharge, in cubic feet per second

2.0e+4

4.0e+4

6.0e+4

8.0e+4

1.0e+5

1.2e+5

Degrees Celsius

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

PI

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

discharge 

temperature 

PI

Figure C5. Polarization Index (PI) values of fish collected from the Missouri River from April to 

June 2005 near Hartsburg, Mo.

Figure C6. Polarization Index (PI) values for fish caught randomly during 2006 between Missouri 

River river miles 0 and 195. Green dots indicate mean values. Dotted purple line shows the PI value 

(0.07) at which maturational competence is estimated to occur. 
120 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

% eggs with GVBD

-20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Number of fish

0

10

20

30

40

Chapter C, Page 1 

% eggs with GVBD

-20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Number of fish

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Figure C7. The number of fish and the percentage of each fish’s eggs that showed germinal 

vesicle breakdown (GVBD) in the progesterone assay for fish collected from Missouri River river 

miles 0 to 200 and implanted with transmitters in 2005.

Figure C8. The number of fish and the percentage of each fish’s eggs that showed germinal 

vesicle breakdown (GVBD) in the progesterone assay for fish collected from Missouri River river 

miles 0 to 200 and implanted with transmitters in 2006.
Reproductive Physiology of Missouri River Gravid Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon during 2005 and 2006 Spawning 121

PI

0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40

Number of fish

0

5

10

15

20

25

Chapter C, Page 1 

PI

0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40

Number of fish

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Figure C9. Frequency distribution of polarization Index (PI) values for fish collected from 

Missouri River river miles 365 to 870 and implanted with transmitters in 2005.

Figure C10. Frequency distribution of polarization index (PI) values for fish collected from 

Missouri River river miles 365 to 870 and implanted with transmitters in 2006.
122 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Date

1/1/06 3/1/06 5/1/06 7/1/06 9/1/06 

Discharge, in cubic feet per second

2.0e+4

4.0e+4

6.0e+4

8.0e+4

1.0e+5

1.2e+5

Degrees Celcius

0

10

20

30

PI

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

discharge 

temperature 

PI 

 N = 10

A

Date

1/1/06 3/1/06 5/1/06 7/1/06 9/1/06 

Discharge, in cubic feet per second

2.0e+4

4.0e+4

6.0e+4

8.0e+4

1.0e+5

1.2e+5

Degress Celcius

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

PI

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

discharge

temperature

PI

N = 97

B

 

Date

1/1/06 3/1/06 5/1/06 7/1/06 9/1/06 

Discharge, in cubic feet per second 2.0e+4

4.0e+4

6.0e+4

8.0e+4

1.0e+5

1.2e+5

Degrees Celcius

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

PI

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

discharge 

temperature 

PI

N = 64

C

 

 

Chapter C, Page 1 

Figure C11. Polarization Index (PI) values for fish caught randomly 

during 2006 between Missouri River river miles 870 and 830 (A), river 

miles 755 and 810 (B), and river miles 365 and 750 (C). Green dots 

indicate mean values. Dotted purple line shows the PI value (0.07) 

at which maturational competence is estimated to occur. The total 

number of fish sampled (N) is indicated in the upper right corner of the 

graph.
Reproductive Physiology of Missouri River Gravid Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon during 2005 and 2006 Spawning 123

% eggs with GVBD

-20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Number of fish

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

 

Chapter C, Page 1 

% eggs with GVBD

-20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Number of fish

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Figure C12. The number of fish and the percentage of each fish’s eggs that showed germinal 

vesicle breakdown (GVBD) in the progesterone assay for fish collected from Missouri River river 

miles 365 to 870 and implanted with transmitters in 2005.

Figure C13. The number of fish and the percentage of each fish’s eggs that showed germinal 

vesicle breakdown (GVBD) in the progesterone assay for fish collected from Missouri River river 

miles 365 to 870 and implanted with transmitters in 2006.
124 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River Number of Fish with 0% GVBD

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Number of gish with 20% GVBD

0

2

4

16

18

Col 60 

Number of gish with 80% GVBD

0

2

4

16

18

Date

Mar Apr May Jun Jul

Number of fish with 100% GVBD

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Chapter C, Page 1 

Figure C14. The number of fish and the 

percentage of each fish’s eggs that showed 

germinal vesicle breakdown (GVBD) in the 

progesterone assay for fish collected from the 

Missouri River between river miles 870 and 830 

in 2006.
Reproductive Physiology of Missouri River Gravid Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon during 2005 and 2006 Spawning 125

Sample ID

Control G1 G2 G3 G4 G5 G6 G7 G8 G9

Estradiol (pg/mL)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

Chapter C, Page 1 

Marke Other G3

27K

~13K ??

Figure C16. An sodium dodecyl (lauryl) sulfate-polyacrylamide (SDS) electrophoresis gel showing the G3 

sample (see fig. C15) and three bands near the front line possibly representing the luteinizing hormone (LH) 

complex.

Figure C15. 17 β-estradiol produced by vitellogenic shovelnose sturgeon oocytes 

exposed to various samples thought to contain luteinizing hormone (LH). 
126 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

0.5 kb 

0.75 kb

3.0 kb 

4.0 kb 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Vector, 3.5 kb 

Incorrect

LH insert, 0.538 kb 

Figure C17. A 1.0 percent agarose gel of an EcoRI digest (restriction enzyme) of miniprep DNA for 

shovelnose sturgeon luteinizing hormone (LH). Clones 1 and 6 have the correct LH insert; clone 7 has an 

incorrect insert. Clones 3 and 4 were chosen for sequencing.
Reproductive Physiology of Missouri River Gravid Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon during 2005 and 2006 Spawning 127

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 min

mAU 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

 VWD1 A, Wavelength=254 nm (MIH 7-17-2006\7-20-2006 MIH A.D) 3 . 6 8 9 4 . 9 5 7 6 . 1 7 3 2 . 3 1 1 5 . 6 5 1 4 . 0 6 5

Chapter C, Page 1 

Figure C18. Chromatogram of incubation media collected after incubation of oocyte follicles during the final phases of oocyte 

maturation. Peaks indicate potential maturation-inducing compounds. 

Table C1. Blood and biopsy samples collected during 2006 from sturgeon 

captured in the Missouri River.

Number of samples

River reach (river miles) Plasma Biopsy

870–830 80 10

810–755 119 103

750–365 180 62

195–0 132 60

Total 511 235
128 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Table C2. Means ± standard deviation and ranges (in parantheses) of 17 β-estradiol, 11-ketotestosterone, testosterone, and cortisol 

from gravid female sturgeon collected from river miles 0–200 of the Missouri River in 2005 and 2006.

[Sampling occurred during implantation and then again if the fish were recaptured. pg/mL, picograms per milliliter; AP, analysis pending]

Year Time point

17 β-Estradiol 

(pg/mL)

11-Ketotestorone 

(pg/mL)

Testosterone

(pg/mL)

Cortisol 

(ng/mL)

2005 Implantation 7722 ± 5999

(969–22896)

1599 ± 1983

(412–13563)

13462 ± 5306

(3199–23153)

19 ± 8

(6–48)

Recapture 167 ± 49

(23–134)

148 ± 41

(119–176)

1728 ± 855

(92–2467)

7 ± 4

(3–12)

2006 Implantation 7017 ± 10106

(164–40991)

2655 ± 1921

(236–6915)

13175 ± 7766

(2198–34009)

24 ± 13

(6–69)

Recapture AP AP AP AP

Table C3. Means ± standard deviation and ranges (in parantheses) of 17 β-estradiol, 11-ketotetosterone, testosterone, and cortisol 

from gravid female sturgeon collected from river miles 365–870 of the Missouri River in 2005 and 2006.

[Sampling occurred during implantation and then again if the fish were recaptured. pg/mL, picograms per milliliter; AP, analysis pending]

Year Time Point

17 β-Estradiol 

(pg/mL)

11-Ketotestosterone 

(pg/mL)

Testosterone

(pg/mL) Cortisol (ng/mL)

2005 Implantation 3678 ± 3289

(531–17221)

3341 ± 3262

(201–13592)

10865 ± 7961

(892–33567)

40 ± 27

(9–148)

Recapture 248 ± 124

(150–640)

244 ± 383

(65–1327)

1342 ± 533

(588–2665)

12 ± 9

(1–41)

2006 Implantation 11515 ± 15584

(236–58648)

3159 ± 2877

(295–11288)

17569 ± 7999

(2443–31038)

AP

Recapture 103 ± 15

(92–113)

20 ± 0

(20–20)

132 ± 47

(165–98)

AP
Reproductive Physiology of Missouri River Gravid Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon during 2005 and 2006 Spawning 129

Appendixes C1 and C2

Appendix C1. Hormone values for fish randomly caught in 2005 in the Missouri River near Hartsburg, Mo. 

[pg/mL, picograms per liter; NA, data not available].

Sample

Estradiol 

(pg/mL)

11-Ketotestosterone 

(pg/mL)

Testosterone 

(pg/mL)

1 24 6,919 22,195

2 165 7,578 16,881

3 103 2,319 NA

4 63 1,351 NA

5 15 5,462 NA

6 7 873 78

7 10 10,483 989

8 8 2,523 262

9 29 11,972 520

10 15 9,106 889

11 NA 4,481 8,994

12 NA 7,613 16,650

13 NA 3,711 13,353

14 509 1,299 219

15 24 2,074 5,196

16 40 10,457 20,393

17 47 3,781 7,622

18 101 5,201 14,258

19 912 663 6,787

20 210 871 4,971

21 124 2,092 8,863

22 12 8,626 16,650

23 58 1,823 5,724

24 NA 1,219 6,335

25 NA 1,408 4,958
130 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Appendix C2. Hormone values for fish randomly caught in 2006 in the Missouri River in one 

reach above Gavins Point Dam and three reaches below Gavins Point Dam.—Continued

[pg/mL, picograms per liter; RM, river mile]

Sample

17 β-Estradiol 

(pg/mL)

11-Ketotestosterone 

(pg/mL)

Testosterone

(pg/mL)

RM 750-811

23 149 214 1,570

46 8,087 764 17,177

79 1,131 311 8,514

80 10,131 4,987 24,982

82 36,891 2,481 18,179

90 8,710 1,318 15,672

151 39,519 517 10,460

185 46,583 589 14,493

256 3,683 808 14,685

264 6,651 4,875 21,766

265 37,761 3,845 23,876

279 9,108 2,212 14,152

293 19,821 4,186 23,308

296 1,412 8,105 19,345

317 7,528 4,238 23,603

331 7,173 4,876 22,121

346 743 5,956 25,371

352 7,363 5,322 26,624

364 1,104 7,047 28,827

370 3,875 4,146 15,980

389 3,587 5,784 24,356

389 2,543 6,034 24,841

412 22,855 5,037 26,840

433 7,881 1,614 13,641

435 17,222 2,624 15,789

444 176 6,284 20,185

459 13,169 5,246 20,797

468 26,827 2,982 25,779

708 3,928 4,787 26,917

744 174 10,699 34,192

757 130 5,798 18,980

763 1,909 5,898 25,119

771 1,620 4,957 19,534

912 18,422 3,121 21,689

926 19,384 2,978 17,734

973 58,887 4,400 22,765

974 12,759 6,595 25,867

975 4,931 1,881 13,097

978 3,289 6,671 16,949

2825 1,658 6,925 27,623
Reproductive Physiology of Missouri River Gravid Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon during 2005 and 2006 Spawning 131

Appendix C2. Hormone values for fish randomly caught in 2006 in the Missouri River in one 

reach above Gavins Point Dam and three reaches below Gavins Point Dam.—Continued

[pg/mL, picograms per liter; RM, river mile]

Sample

17 β-Estradiol 

(pg/mL)

11-Ketotestosterone 

(pg/mL)

Testosterone

(pg/mL)

23004 951 5,340 22,559

23021 142 10,017 26,628

23039 1,684 6,745 24,382

23043 7,028 8,052 25,991

23045 16,381 4,526 16,700

23046 2,073 8,813 30,656

23196 27,235 7,323 15,818

23503 3,248 6,229 25,633

23507 975 4,772 17,160

23509 1031 5,498 24,483

23516 328 5,581 5,541

23519 24,087 1,741 11,638

23550 369 10,826 31,969

23575 131 6,581 4,383

23604 2,820 6,423 26,112

23605 16,522 2,847 23,540

23606 1,928 4,810 25,485

23610 1,249 9,681 25,541

23618 12,408 5,755 19,297

23626 1,280 9,370 26,729

23635 5,189 7,777 26,221

23680 118 10,285 30,017

24023 453 7,294 20,786

24040 172 8,935 22,173

24053 175 35 23,993

24247 13,783 6,488 28,943

24249 130 275 218

RM 367.5-750

1815 2,401 1,924 13,753

1822 8,190 1,648 14,214

1823 14,515 1,190 11,354

1824 109 318 5,676

1878 10,829 1,425 11,994

1881 366 743 6,760

1882 7,793 554 4,902

1884 11,176 1,183 9,213

1886 3,649 2,746 17,934

1888 125 1,701 184

1890 18,767 2,801 20,519

1897 155 50 715

1898 17,274 1,140 14,184
132 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Appendix C2. Hormone values for fish randomly caught in 2006 in the Missouri River in one 

reach above Gavins Point Dam and three reaches below Gavins Point Dam.—Continued

[pg/mL, picograms per liter; RM, river mile]

Sample

17 β-Estradiol 

(pg/mL)

11-Ketotestosterone 

(pg/mL)

Testosterone

(pg/mL)

1922 893 1,714 12,171

1923 3691 7,236 24,660

1942 27,764 1,396 10,857

1944 42,269 4,236 23,581

1946 27,409 2,630 19,013

1947 1,310 1,991 11,824

1948 214 10,782 34,819

1949 170 340 3,637

2080 116 2,251 14,806

2222 27,305 7,783 12,346

2238 7,684 19 16,877

2362 2,035 1,099 10,406

2372 2,794 4,207 23,184

2397 5,017 311 6,296

2482 291 156 726

2502 115 4,821 26,775

2517 10,203 1,188 13,819

2614 14,214 3,173 20,366

2623 133 46 1,012

2685 127 277 2200

2698 1,688 1,026 12,423

2871 455 7,128 26,137

2872 117 157 1,869

2873 11,767 809 10,022

2934 332 7,869 25,467

2981 135 7,532 35,210

2984 169 3,422 686

2986 500 133 11,687

4182 1,167 3,266 18,261

10070 23,477 1,284 13,689

10076 280 4,015 22,318

10076 200 449 9,413

10077 112 140 1,245

10092 225 589 9,439

10096 199 58 406

10097 125 1,019 7,401

10098 25,843 3,547 21,359

10229 175 9,247 34,847

10509 169 8,498 30,719

10540 6,457 6,433 25,124

10603 115 78 802
Reproductive Physiology of Missouri River Gravid Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon during 2005 and 2006 Spawning 133

Appendix C2. Hormone values for fish randomly caught in 2006 in the Missouri River in one 

reach above Gavins Point Dam and three reaches below Gavins Point Dam.—Continued

[pg/mL, picograms per liter; RM, river mile]

Sample

17 β-Estradiol 

(pg/mL)

11-Ketotestosterone 

(pg/mL)

Testosterone

(pg/mL)

10604 11,574 2,258 16,826

10605 604 1,873 10,417

10619 1,485 5,600 23,876

10638 9,519 5,238 23,423

10640 468 7,141 25,371

10641 377 6,051 21,175

10651 116 293 199

10652 159 5,178 22,888

10655 234 8,410 23,108

10656 228 9,262 4,536

10672 9,896 4,546 21,926

10753 159 6,868 27,842

11317 207 364 6,707

11323 137 11,201 23,955

12003 103 190 2,905

12007 4,561 3,778 18251

12571 119 51 1,785

12579 10,323 1,805 12,848

8047 172 11,564 28,776

8048 127 10,196 24305

8049 127 10,382 20,362

8101 5,644 9,043 30,647

8104 172 445 3,978

8106 130 11,761 32,840

8109 159 4,697 22,570

8111 114 9,611 30,005

8112 136 9,051 38,092

8113 137 1,768 14,731

8114 227 26 448

8115 142 9,598 29,931

8116 138 69 1,482

8117 137 7,451 26,945

8118 103 37 536

8119 15,265 8,306 34,704

8120 120 9,676 32,960

8121 122 11,061 34,027

8122 160 10,451 33,755

8123 15,548 781 12,119

8124 38,983 2,442 21,878

8125 34,641 3,704 22,604

8126 157 111 2,652
134 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Appendix C2. Hormone values for fish randomly caught in 2006 in the Missouri River in one 

reach above Gavins Point Dam and three reaches below Gavins Point Dam.—Continued

[pg/mL, picograms per liter; RM, river mile]

Sample

17 β-Estradiol 

(pg/mL)

11-Ketotestosterone 

(pg/mL)

Testosterone

(pg/mL)

8127 152 218 5,254

8128 132 1,063 16,369

8129 152 9,124 26,553

8145 250 165 3,527

8146 140 10,050 32,318

8149 20,635 4,254 24,415

8150 126 8,473 29,328

8161 181 225 8,316

8162 3,630 1,709 22,915

8163 1,584 185 6,781

8164 199 9,885 28,670

8165 136 31 555

8167 18,522 672 555

8168 25,676 598 25,748

8169 120 8,467 12,143

8170 177 122 5,501

8171 27,836 1,451 30,943

8172 100 9,186 15,326

8175 5,809 295 10,676

8185 160 93 3,523

8186 124 42 748

8187 134 881 748

8188 125 55 15,183

8189 100 3,318 1,288

8190 90 2,951 28,565

8192 132 1,333 16,523

8193 148 80 13,450

8194 88 2,334 15,871

8196 108 71 1,045

8526 130 10,965 27,350

8527 112 10,500 28,387

8528 16,486 5,955 23,420

8530 15,000 7,071 21,159

8531 25,884 9,197 33,299

8534 114 16 174

8535 152 168 1,496

8536 149 9,677 20,383

8537 5,877 9,472 32,659

8692 154 455 212

8693 13,587 3,058 19,656

8695 147 11,694 30,382
Reproductive Physiology of Missouri River Gravid Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon during 2005 and 2006 Spawning 135

Appendix C2. Hormone values for fish randomly caught in 2006 in the Missouri River in one 

reach above Gavins Point Dam and three reaches below Gavins Point Dam.—Continued

[pg/mL, picograms per liter; RM, river mile]

Sample

17 β-Estradiol 

(pg/mL)

11-Ketotestosterone 

(pg/mL)

Testosterone

(pg/mL)

8697 2,924 422 8,141

8698 134 32 388

RM 0-250

5128 13,591 1,216 13,096

5218 18,382 1,498 13,907

5221 131 9,814 29,761

5272 25,965 3,581 18,498

5333 649 7,618 22,933

5334 16,743 5,098 26,424

5335 2,889 5,013 20,071

5408 483 5,974 21,149

5439 6,929 1,000 8,621

5441 44,750 4,049 18,674

5444 25,705 5,349 19,162

5449 15,083 3,609 19,795

5450 73,315 7,020 24,937

5648 412 3,065 8,422

5650 152 6,317 22,018

5778 14,188 3,948 15,149

5778 27,139 4,108 15,982

5783 33,682 6,479 22,217

5853 41,124 7,037 20,419

5867 16,880 5,654 26,162

5874 18,272 2,156 13,840

15038 132 419 10,359

15045 17,395 1,680 13,543

15406 4,006 8,106 27,488

15417 989 4,696 18,253

15425 115 27 134

15432 37,147 2,064 27,989

15434 3,101 3,592 18,565

15436 391 9,833 36,029

15438 49,519 2,388 19,419

15440 51,756 4,511 21,292

15445 39,434 5,960 28,215

15458 9,907 1,660 7,752

15458 11,248 1,987 7,848

15494 169 258 4,646

15495 15,978 1,004 10,867

15499 66,942 1,075 8,357

15500 17,095 451 8,858
136 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Appendix C2. Hormone values for fish randomly caught in 2006 in the Missouri River in one 

reach above Gavins Point Dam and three reaches below Gavins Point Dam.—Continued

[pg/mL, picograms per liter; RM, river mile]

Sample

17 β-Estradiol 

(pg/mL)

11-Ketotestosterone 

(pg/mL)

Testosterone

(pg/mL)

15711 20,106 4,244 22,114

16416 1,088 5,259 2,244

16460 1,449 6,978 28,896

16466 437 6,960 26,566

16474 3,221 797 5,669

16763 1,927 2,609 17,670

16800 3503 1,979 15,899

16875 5,821 9,522 29,734

17312 10,681 9,535 941

17313 107 53 171

CR002 122 4,973 7,549

CR003 150 2,468 24,505

CR004 201 4,768 7,010

CR006 15,142 3,486 10,908

CR007 146 4,848 16,549

CR008 140 8,247 29,422

CR011 124 6,757 10,874

CR012 98 3,986 26,922

CR013 19,420 2,387 5,285

CR014 205 2,408 11,573

CR015 1,315 4,944 6,390

CR016 475 2,382 7,826

CR020 1,057 2,918 8,296

CR021 45,369 442 2,833

CR022 17,313 612 4,258

CR023 22,054 2,165 16,216

CR026 207 1,053 3,660

CR035 233 2,802 4,561

Prepared by: 

USGS Enterprise Publishing Network 

Rolla Publishing Service Center 

1400 Independence Road 

Rolla, MO 65401

For more information concerning this publication, contact:

Director

U.S. Geological Survey

Columbia Environmental Research Center

4200 New Haven Road

Columbia, MO 65201

(573) 875–5399

Or visit the Columbia Environmental Research Center website at:

http://www.cerc.usgs.gov
The Roles of Physical Habitat in 

Reproduction and Survival of Pallid 

Sturgeon and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the 

Lower Missouri River, Progress 2005–06 

By Robert B. Jacobson, Harold E. Johnson, Joanna M. Reuter, and 

Caroline M. Elliott

Chapter D of 

Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, 

and Population Dynamics of Pallid Sturgeon and Shovelnose 

Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Edited by Carl E. Korschgen

Open-File Report 2007–1262

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
Contents

Abstract.......................................................................................................................................................143

Background.................................................................................................................................................143

Reproductive Ecology of Missouri River Sturgeon .....................................................................144

Physical Habitat Concepts ..............................................................................................................145

Historical Alteration, Lower Missouri River.................................................................................145

Objectives and Scope ...............................................................................................................................146

General Approach......................................................................................................................................146

Research Components..............................................................................................................................146

Component 1—Habitat Use ............................................................................................................146

Principal Investigators............................................................................................................146

Specific Objectives..................................................................................................................146

Approach/Methods .................................................................................................................147

Progress During 2005–06........................................................................................................147

Data Processing and Map Production........................................................................147

Depth and Derived Grids ......................................................................................147

Velocity and Derived Grids...................................................................................148

Substrate.................................................................................................................148

Data Summary and Analysis.........................................................................................148

Habitat Selection Modeling .................................................................................148

Plans for 2007............................................................................................................................149

Component 2—Habitat Availability................................................................................................149

Principal Investigators............................................................................................................149

Specific Objectives..................................................................................................................149

Approach/Methods .................................................................................................................149

Reach Selection..............................................................................................................149

Reach-Scale Data Collection........................................................................................150

Calibration/Validation Collection..................................................................................150

Progress During 2006 ..............................................................................................................150

Plans for 2007............................................................................................................................150

Component 3—Habitat and Geomorphic Dynamics...................................................................151

Principal Investigators............................................................................................................151

Specific Objectives..................................................................................................................151

Approach/Methods .................................................................................................................151

Progress During 2006 ..............................................................................................................152

Plans for 2007............................................................................................................................152

Summary......................................................................................................................................................152

Acknowledgments.....................................................................................................................................153

References Cited........................................................................................................................................153

Figures and Tables.....................................................................................................................................157
iii

Figures

D1. Map showing the Missouri River basin and Lower Missouri River showing 

locations of stream gages, habitat-availability modeling reaches, and Missouri 

River segments..........................................................................................................................158

D2. Diagram showing relations of Comprehensive Sturgeon Research Project (CSRP)

tasks to life-stage components of pallid sturgeon, and relations of Sturgeon

Response to Flow Modification (SRFM) tasks to CSRP......................................................159

D3. Conceptual model of sturgeon life stages and migration, Lower Missouri River.

Priorities are those listed by the Middle Basin Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Work 

Group (2005) based on the assessment of research priorities in Quist (2004) ...............160

D4. Maps showing modern (2000) and historical (1894) channel maps, Lower Missouri 

River at Hermann, Mo ..............................................................................................................161

D5. Duration hydrographs illustrating effects of flow regulation, Lower Missouri 

River............................................................................................................................................162

D6. Maps of depth, velocity, terrain classification, and substrate for Mulberry Bend,

Gavins segment, mapped on May 30 and 31, 2006, at a discharge of approximately

21,000 ft3/s...................................................................................................................................163

D7. Side-scan sonar imagery for Mulberry Bend, Gavins segment .......................................164

D8. Maps of depth, velocity, terrain classification, and substrate for a reach at the

mouth of the Little Sioux in the Big Sioux segment, mapped on June 1, 2006, at a

discharge of approximately 26,400 ft3/s ................................................................................165

D9. Histograms of depth and velocity, and percent distribution of terrain (depth)

classification and substrate, for the reach at the mouth of the Little Sioux River 

(fig. D8)........................................................................................................................................166

D10. Maps of depth, velocity, terrain classification, and substrate for several reaches at

Cranberry Bend, Kansas segment; reaches were mapped at different discharges,

ranging from 36,600 ft3/s to 65,100 ft3/s ..................................................................................167

D11. Side-scan sonar imagery for Cranberry Bend, Kansas segment.....................................168

D12. Hydrographs for six locations on the main stem of the Lower Missouri River,

2005–06 .......................................................................................................................................169

D13. Schematic of the terrain-classification approach..............................................................170

D14–D16.Histograms showing—

D14. Comparison of conditions near sturgeon points with reach averages for 2006 ...171

D15. Depth for the segments of the Lower Missouri River, compiled from reaches 

mapped for habitat use...................................................................................................172

D16. Velocity for the segments of the Lower Missouri River, compiled from reaches 

mapped for habitat use...................................................................................................173

D17. Example of a modeling/monitoring reach, Missouri River near Yankton, S. Dak...........174

D18–D21.Maps showing—

D18. Bed-elevation grid at Yankton modeling/monitoring reach was produced 

from a bathymetric survey, made by using hydroacoustic depth sounders..........175

D19. Bed-elevation grid at Kensler’s Bend modeling/monitoring reach was 

produced from a bathymetric survey made by using hydroacoustic depth 

sounders............................................................................................................................176

D20. Bed-elevation grid at Little Sioux modeling/monitoring reach was produced 

from a bathymetric survey using hydroacoustic depth sounders...........................177

D21. Bed-elevation grid at Miami modeling/monitoring reach was produced 

from a bathymetric survey, made by using hydroacoustic depth sounders..........178
iv

D22–D30.Maps showing—

D22. Multi-Dimensional Surface Water Modeling System model input at 

Yankton reach...................................................................................................................179

D23. Multi-Dimensional Surface Water Modeling System model input at 

Kensler’s Bend reach......................................................................................................180

D24. Multi-Dimensional Surface Water Modeling System model input at 

Little Sioux reach .............................................................................................................181

D25. Multi-Dimensional Surface Water Modeling System model input at Miami 

reach..................................................................................................................................182

D26. Multi-Dimensional Surface Water Modeling System mesh at Kensler’s Bend ....183

D27. Depth-averaged velocity grid of the Yankton reach, which is used for 

comparison and calibration of the hydraulic model ..................................................184

D28. Depth-averaged velocity grid of the Kensler’s Bend reach, which is used 

for comparison and calibration of the hydraulic model ............................................185

D29. Depth-averaged velocity grid of the Little Sioux reach, which is used for 

comparison and calibration of the hydraulic model ..................................................186

D30. Depth-averaged velocity grid of the Miami reach, which is used for 

comparison and calibration of the hydraulic model ..................................................187

D31. Hydrographs from stream gages at (A) Gavins Point Dam (U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers); (B) Sioux City, Iowa (U.S. Geological Survey [USGS] 06486000); (C)

Decatur, Nebr. (USGS 06601200); and (D) Waverly, Mo. (USGS 06895500)......................188

D32. Graph showing example of discharge-habitat relations for two physical habitat 

classes simulated with a multidimensional hydrodynamic model on the Lower 

Missouri River near Boonville, Mo ........................................................................................189

D33–D36.Maps showing—

D33. Randomly selected transects at Yankton reach.........................................................189

D34. Randomly selected transects at Kensler’s Bend reach............................................190

D35. Randomly selected transects at Little Sioux reach ...................................................191

D36. Randomly selected transects at Miami reach............................................................192

D37. Planned release hydrograph for Gavins Point Dam, assuming median hydrologic

conditions in the Missouri River basin, during fiscal years 2006 and 2007 if storage

levels are adequate..................................................................................................................193

D38–D45.Graphs showing—

D38. Examples of cross sections along four transects and four surveys at 

Yankton reach...................................................................................................................194

D39. Examples of cross sections along four transects and four surveys, 

Kensler’s Bend reach......................................................................................................195

D40. Examples of cross sections along four transects and four surveys, Little 

Sioux reach.......................................................................................................................196

D41. Examples of cross sections along four transects and four surveys, Miami 

reach..................................................................................................................................197

D42. Conceptual interpretation of E1 and E2 values of substrate parameters along 

a cross section.................................................................................................................198

D43. Depth, E1 (roughness), and E2 (hardness) at cross section 23 P 40 at the 

Miami reach......................................................................................................................199

D44. Depth, E1 (roughness) and E2 (hardness) at cross section 53 P 00 at the 

Miami reach......................................................................................................................200

D45. Bed velocity and depth at transect 62 P 60 from five separate surveys in 

the Miami reach...............................................................................................................201
v

D46. Graphs showing bed velocity and depth at transect 65 P 80 from five separate 

surveys in the Miami reach.....................................................................................................202

D47. Photographs of substrate located within the zone exposed during non-navigation

flows in the Miami and Little Sioux reaches ........................................................................203

D48–D50.Graphs showing—

D48. Sample of (A) one long and (B) one short profile showing bed elevations 

(A, B, and C) along the thalweg of the Little Sioux reach .........................................204

D49. Sample of (A )one long and (B) one short profile showing bed elevations 

(A,B, and C) along the thalweg of the Miami reach...................................................205

D50. Long profiles surveyed in March, April, May, July, and November 2006 at the 

Miami reach......................................................................................................................206

Tables

D1. List of reaches greater than 1 km in length that were mapped for sturgeon 

habitat-use assessment in 2005 and 2006 ............................................................................207

D2. Summary of 2005 and 2006 reaches surveyed for sturgeon habitat-use 

assessment................................................................................................................................208

D3. Habitat classification hierarchy used in this study.............................................................211

D4. Habitat-availability sites with survey date and discharge indicated...............................212
vi
Abstract

This report documents progress on three related 

components of habitat assessments in the Lower Missouri 

River during 2005–06. The habitat-use component links this 

research directly to sturgeon ecology research described in 

other chapters. The habitat availability and habitat dynamics assessments provide physical context for the ecological research. Results from 2005 to 2006 indicate that the 

methods developed to assess habitat use, quality, quantity, 

and dynamics are appropriate and sufficiently accurate to 

address critical questions about sturgeon habitat on the 

Lower Missouri River. Preliminary analysis of habitats 

occupied by adult female shovelnose sturgeon indicates 

that migrating sturgeon do not select for depth but seem to 

select for lower than reach-averaged velocities and higher 

than reach-averaged velocity gradients. Data collected to 

compile, calibrate, and validate multidimensional hydraulic 

models in probable spawning reaches appear to be sufficient to support the modeling objectives. Monitoring of 

selected channel cross sections and long profiles multiple 

times during the year showed little change at the upstreammost reach over the range of flows measured during 2006, 

likely because of channel stability associated with an 

armored bed. Geomorphic changes documented at monitoring cross sections increased with distance downstream. 

Hydroacoustic substrate-class parameters documented 

systematic changes with discharge and with hydraulic 

environment across the channel. Similarly, bed velocity 

varied predictably with discharge and hydraulic environment, indicating its potential as an indicator of bedload 

sediment transport. Longitudinal profiles showed substantial downstream movement of dunes over the monitored 

discharges, as well as substantial within-year variability in 

dune size. Observations of geomorphic change during the 

moderate flow range of 2006 support the hypothesis that 

the magnitude of flow modifications under consideration 

on the Lower Missouri River will be sufficient to transport 

sediment and potentially modify spawning habitats. 

Background

Intensive management of the Missouri River (fig. D1) 

for navigation, flood control, and power generation has 

resulted in substantial physical changes to the river corridor 

(Ferrell, 1993; 1996; Galat and Lipkin, 2000; Jacobson and 

others, 2004b; Jacobson and Galat, 2006). Other factors, 

such as agricultural pesticides, nutrient runoff, and increasing discharge of domestic and industrial effluents, also may 

have affected the aquatic biota and the ecological health of 

the Missouri River basin (Tockner and Stanford, 2002). In 

addition, recent proliferation of introduced and non-indigenous species has further threatened to diminish the ecological integrity of the river ecosystem (Pflieger, 1997; Galat and 

others, 2005). Cumulatively, these changes in flow, physical 

habitat, water quality, and biota have been implicated in the 

decline of important components of the Missouri River’s 

native fish assemblage (Funk and Robinson, 1974; Hesse and 

others, 1989; Hesse and Sheets, 1993). The most notable and 

conspicuous of these is the decline of sturgeon species native 

to the Missouri River basin.

Physical habitat has been central to recovery strategies 

on the Missouri River. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

is charged with altering operations of the Missouri River 

Main Stem Reservoir System, operation and maintenance 

of the Missouri River Bank Stabilization and Navigation 

Project, and operation of the Kansas River Reservoir System to remove a jeopardy opinion for the endangered pallid 

sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus) (U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, 2003), largely through manipulations of physical 

habitat. Interdisciplinary compilations of research needs 

for pallid sturgeon recovery have also emphasized physical habitat. A research-needs workshop in 2004 (Quist and 

others, 2004) developed priorities that were subsequently 

prioritized by the Middle Basin Pallid Sturgeon Recovery 

Work Group (Middle Basin Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Work 

Group, 2005). Three top-ranked research needs from the 

working group were related to spawning and early-life-stage 

physical habitats:

The Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and 

Survival of Pallid Sturgeon and Shovelnose Sturgeon 

in the Lower Missouri River, Progress 2005–06 

By Robert B. Jacobson, Harold E. Johnson, Joanna M. Reuter, and Caroline M. Elliott
144 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

•	 Locate, quantify, and characterize pallid sturgeon 

spawning sites, and quantify spawning frequency and 

behavior.

•	 Locate, define, characterize, and quantify pallid sturgeon juvenile and rearing habitats.

•	 Determine habitat use by larval pallid sturgeon.

Research needs specific to flow modification responses 

also were deliberated by experts, stakeholders, and managers 

in a series of basin-wide meetings (plenary group process) 

during summer 2005. The plenary group articulated hypotheses relating spring pulses to habitat availability and quality:

•	 Spring flow pulses may act to “condition” spawning 

substrate by transporting sediment and cleaning it of 

silt and sand.

•	 Spring flow pulses may act to make spawning habitat 

available to reproductive fish by inundating habitat 

patches or changing patch hydraulics.

•	 Spring flow pulses may affect rate and distance of 

larval drift.

Based on the statements of research priorities, this study 

addresses the roles of physical habitat in reproduction and survival of sturgeon in the Missouri River. Physical habitat in this 

context is defined as the joint spatial and temporal distribution 

of depth, velocity, substrate, turbidity, temperature, and other 

related variables; at the reach scale, physical habitat is typically described as measures of depth, velocity, and substrate 

(Gordon and others, 1992; Reuter and others, 2003).

The research described here is a task within a series of 

coordinated studies being conducted by the U.S. Geological 

Survey’s (USGS) Columbia Environmental Research Center 

(CERC) and collaborating agencies on factors affecting the 

reproduction and survival of pallid sturgeon and shovelnose 

sturgeon (S. platorynchus) in the Missouri River. The overarching project is the Comprehensive Sturgeon Research 

Project (CSRP) and is organized as a matrix of life-stage components and tasks that address ecosystem and population processes (fig. D2). Flow-manipulation experiments are included 

conceptually within CSRP as an approach to developing field 

data under relatively controlled experimental conditions; these 

efforts are addressed in part under a coordinated project called 

the Sturgeon Response to Flow Modification (SRFM) project. 

Progress in habitat studies under both CSRP and SRFM are 

described in this chapter.

The CSRP approach recognizes that any life stage of sturgeon could be a bottleneck in their reproduction and survival; 

however, technical experts in the Missouri River basin have 

consistently identified spawning and early-life stages as priorities because of the vulnerability of populations to disturbances 

during early-life stages (Quist and others, 2004; Middle Basin 

Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Work Group, 2005). Accordingly, 

the priorities of this study and coordinated CSRP studies are 

to understand the factors affecting spawning first, followed by 

factors affecting larval and juvenile fish habitats (fig. D3). 

Reproductive Ecology of Missouri River 

Sturgeon

Evidence from various monitoring efforts suggests that 

recruitment of pallid sturgeon to the adult population is limited 

or nonexistent throughout most of the Missouri River (U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, 2000). In contrast, the closely 

related shovelnose sturgeon is reproducing, and some recruitment is occurring in the Missouri River (Moos, 1978; Keenlyne, 1997). Locations of spawning and the relative suitability 

of spawning conditions for both of these sturgeon species in 

the Lower Missouri River are not known. In addition, the specifics of the reproductive physiology and spawning behavior 

of both species are not well documented. 

The effect of hydrology on spawning has not been 

described for either shovelnose sturgeon or pallid sturgeon, but 

fishery biologists speculate that spawning runs are somewhat 

dependent on river flow (Becker, 1983; Keenlyne and Jenkins, 

1993; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2000). Migrations of 

shovelnose sturgeon into smaller streams, presumably for 

spawning, have been reported (Becker, 1983) but, similar use 

of small tributaries by pallid sturgeon has not been documented. The sequence of spawning behavior from migration 

and aggregation at the spawning site through egg deposition 

has not been documented for either the shovelnose sturgeon 

or pallid sturgeon. The timing, periodicity, and location of 

spawning events in relation to the physical habitat variables 

have not been documented. This information is critical for 

designing habitat alterations and flow modifications to promote reproduction and survival of young sturgeon.

Spawning areas of other North American sturgeon species are usually characterized by coarse or hard substrates, 

with variable depths and velocities. White sturgeon, Acipenser transmontanus (Scott and Crossman, 1973; Parsley 

and others, 2002); green sturgeon, A. medirostris (Houston, 

1988); shortnose sturgeon, A. brevirostrum (Taubert, 1980; 

Buckley and Kynard, 1985); Atlantic sturgeon, A. oxyrinchus 

oxyrinchus (Scott and Crossman, 1973); Gulf sturgeon, A. 

oxyrinchus desotoi (Fox and others, 2002); and lake sturgeon, 

A. fulvescens (Scott and Crossman, 1973; LaHaye and others, 

1992; Bruch and Binkowski, 2002) spawn primarily over 

gravel, cobble, boulder, bedrock, or other hard surfaces. Little 

is known, however, about the specific substrate preferences of 

spawning pallid and shovelnose sturgeon. Pallid sturgeon and 

shovelnose sturgeon have been assumed to spawn in relatively 

rapid current over coarse substrate in, or adjacent to, the main 

river channel (Becker, 1983; Mayden and Kuhajha, 1996). 

Knowledge of the location and type of substrate preferred by 

spawning pallid and shovelnose sturgeon would allow biologists to locate adult fish during the spawning season, estimate 

the population of reproductive adults, monitor spawning activ-
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 145

ity and relative success, and assess habitat preferences and 

suitability during the spawning period. 

Potential postspawn controls on sturgeon survival are also 

poorly understood. To survive, sturgeon eggs must be deposited on suitable substrate, without either being covered with 

sediment or being dislodged as a result of bedload transport. 

Recently, hypotheses have been developed that white sturgeon 

eggs drift with the current after spawning and may need to be 

deposited in riparian vegetation patches downstream from the 

site of spawning (Coutant, 2004). If applicable to Missouri 

River sturgeon, this theory would require relatively high flows 

during spawning and specific spatial organization of spawning 

and egg-incubation habitat patches. Water quality may also be 

critical at this stage. 

After hatching, larval sturgeon drift and migrate downstream for 8–13 days. While they lack swimming ability, their 

transport and fate are determined mainly by river hydraulics. 

Distance of drift and the types of habitats encountered by 

the larvae are key variables that may influence their survivability. In particular, the fate of larvae may be very different 

if they remain in the central thread of high-velocity current or 

are advected or diffused into marginal, slow-water areas with 

different mixes of food sources, water quality, and potential 

predators (Braaten and Fuller, in press). 

Physical Habitat Concepts

The goal of this research is to determine the physical habitat requirements for pallid and shovelnose sturgeon 

reproduction and survival in the Missouri River. Habitat is 

conventionally defined as the place or a set of places where 

a fish, a fish population, or a fish assemblage finds suitable 

environmental features to survive and reproduce (Orth and 

White, 1999). Because Missouri River sturgeon migrate long 

distances during their lives, habitat assessments need to consider a broad suite of places within the river system (fig. D3). 

The more restricted definition of physical habitat is the threedimensional structure in which riverine organisms live; time 

(frequency, duration, sequence, rate of change) adds a critical 

fourth dimension (Gordon and others, 1992). Water depth, 

flow velocity, and substrate are the three main characteristics 

of physical habitat that are usually evaluated. Water temperature and turbidity typically are also strongly associated with 

depth and flow velocity. 

Physical aquatic habitat results from interaction of water 

with the morphology of the stream channel and adjacent flood 

plain (Jacobson and Galat, 2006). Flow regime describes the 

quantity and temporal variation of water flows. Flow regimes 

can be assessed independent of channel form by considering 

biologically important measures of flow variability (Poff and 

others, 1997; Richter and others, 1997; Richter and others, 

2003). River channel form determines how the water is distributed across the channel, thereby creating the spatial distribution of depth, velocity, and substrate. Form can also be independently assessed by using measures of channel morphology. 

Putting form and flow together to achieve an integrated spatial 

and temporal assessment of habitat availability generally 

requires a hydrodynamic modeling approach (Bowen and others, 2003). Hydrodynamic modeling is especially critical for 

understanding the spatial and temporal organization of habitat 

patches that may determine reproductive success at the reach 

scale (Coutant, 2004; Jacobson and Galat, 2006; Johnson and 

others, 2006).

Historical Alteration, Lower Missouri River

The channel form and flow regime of the Lower Missouri 

River have been substantially altered to promote economic 

development but at the expense of fish and wildlife habitat 

(National Research Council, 2002). The Lower Missouri 

River (generally defined as the Missouri River downstream 

of Gavins Point Dam at Yankton, S. Dak., fig. D1) drains 

1,300,000 km2 at its mouth (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

1998). Engineering of the Lower Missouri River began in 

the 1830s with clearing, snagging, and bank stabilization to 

improve conditions for steamboat navigation. Most of the 

river’s engineering structures date from the Missouri River 

Bank Stabilization and Navigation Project, first authorized in 

the River and Harbor Act of 1912 (37 Stat. 201) and followed 

by an additional six acts of Congress in 1917 (40 Stat. 250), 

1925, 1927, 1930 (46 Stat. 918), 1935 (PL 74–109), and 1945 

(59 Stat. 10) (Ferrell, 1996). Wing dikes and revetments have 

stabilized the riverbank, and narrowed and focused the thalweg 

to maintain a self-dredging navigation channel from Sioux 

City, Iowa, 1,200 km downstream to St. Louis, Mo. (fig. D4). 

These engineering structures have created a narrow, swift, and 

deep channel from what was historically a shallow, shifting, 

braided river, resulting in the loss of as much as 400 km2 of 

river-corridor habitats (Funk and Robinson, 1974; Hesse and 

Sheets, 1993; National Research Council, 2002; Galat and 

others, 2005). 

Recognition of the scope of habitat loss has increased 

interest in rehabilitating parts of the Missouri River to help 

recover native biota (Latka and others, 1993). The U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers began implementing the Missouri River 

Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Project (Mitigation Project) in 

1986. Initial authorization for mitigation along the Lower Missouri River was for 194.7 km2

; an additional 480.2 km2 were 

authorized in 1999 (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2004a). 

Following the very large flood of 1993, numerous landowners sold their flood-damaged lands to the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and other Government agencies for conservation purposes. 

The river has been regulated since 1954 by the Missouri 

River Reservoir System, the Nation’s largest reservoir system, 

with nearly 93 km3 of storage (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

2004b). The system is managed for multiple purposes including maintenance of navigation flows, flood control, hydropower, public water supply, recreation, and fish and wildlife 

resources. A historical perspective on hydrologic changes 
146 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

(Galat and Lipkin, 2000) documents substantial alteration 

to the annual hydrograph below the reservoirs, with generally decreased spring pulses and increased summer low flows 

(fig. D5). The intensity of hydrologic alteration diminishes 

downstream from the dams as minimally regulated tributaries 

enter the Missouri River. The lower 590 km downstream of 

the Kansas River confluence has a notably altered hydrograph, 

particularly with respect to low flows, but has regained substantial variability, as shown at Hermann, Mo. (fig. D5).

Objectives and Scope

The general objectives of this study are to develop a 

predictive understanding of the roles of physical habitat in 

reproduction and survival of sturgeon in the Missouri River. 

Addressing this objective requires coordination with biological 

studies to define the linkages between physical habitat processes and biological responses. In the short term—a 3–5-year 

time frame—the emphasis is on understanding the physical 

processes that determine spawning and early-life-stage habitats. Our specific objectives are as follows: 

1. Quantify physical habitat parameters associated with 

sturgeon spawning, successful egg maturation, and 

larval drift at the reach scale.

2. Quantify the sensitivity of spawning and early-lifestage habitats to variations in discharge, especially 

related to managed ecological flows. 

A. Refine understanding of spawning habitat by 

quantifying spatial and temporal organization 

of habitat patches and quantifying gradients 

between patches at the reach scale.

B. Assess hydrodynamic modeling errors associated with varying bed roughness and bed deformation in the context of ecological information 

needs.

C. Evaluate methods to address larval drift by scaling models upward to the segment scale.

3. Evaluate the role of sediment transport in altering 

quantity and quality of habitat for spawning and 

early-life stages. Emphasis in this objective is on the 

“conditioning” of spawning patches and processes 

that affect survival of adhered eggs. 

This chapter is intended to document progress in data 

collection efforts during 2005 and 2006 to address the three 

objectives listed above. We provide illustrations of representative data and some very limited interpretations. More comprehensive interpretations will be included in final project 

reports.

General Approach

This research is generally field based, combining measurements and modeling of physical habitat with biological 

understanding of habitat use. Hydroacoustic, Global Positioning System (GPS), and lidar survey methods are used to 

measure habitats, monitor geomorphic change, and compile, 

calibrate, and validate digital hydrodynamic models. Linkages to biotic responses are established through collaborations 

with coordinated studies on sturgeon physiology, ecology, and 

distributions (chaps. A, B, C, E). Additional understanding 

about the contribution of water quality to sturgeon habitat is 

provided by coordinated water-quality monitoring (chap. F).

Emphasis during 2005–06 has been on spawning habitat. 

If spawning habitat does not prove to be a unique bottleneck 

to sturgeon reproduction and survival, emphasis in later years 

will shift toward larval drift and rearing habitats.

To communicate more effectively with stakeholders, 

managers, and other scientists working on the Lower Missouri 

River, we use a mix of U.S. customary units and International 

System of Units (SI) units of measure in this chapter. For locations along the river and for discharges, we use the customary 

units of river mile (RM) and cubic feet per second. Reachscale hydraulic variables—current velocity and depth—are in 

SI units of meters per second and meters.

Research Components

Component 1—Habitat Use 

Principal Investigators

•	 Robert B. Jacobson

•	 Joanna M. Reuter

•	 Caroline M. Elliott

Specific Objectives

The objective of the habitat-use component is to quantify 

characteristics of prespawning, spawning, and early-life-stage 

habitats used by pallid and shovelnose sturgeon. The following discussion focuses on habitat as determined primarily from 

movements of 200 acoustically tagged, reproductively ready 

female shovelnose sturgeon; a few pallid sturgeon were also 

included in the study in 2006 (chap. B). Research activities 

during 2005–06 focused on adult sturgeon use of prespawning, 

spawning, and postspawning habitats.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 147

Approach/Methods 

Habitat-use studies depend substantially on telemetry 

data developed in the coordinated CSRP (task 1) project (chap. 

B, fig. D2). Ongoing radioacoustic telemetry studies involve 

the tagging of shovelnose and pallid sturgeon that are known 

to be in reproductive condition. Sturgeon were tagged in the 

downstream river segment between the Grand River, Mo. 

and the Osage River, Mo. and in the upstream river segment 

between the Big Sioux River, S. Dak. and the Platte River, 

Nebr. Telemetry was used to relocate the sturgeon periodically. 

Sturgeon locations were provided as Universal Transverse 

Mercator (UTM) coordinates accurate to within 2 m.

Two methods, based on fish locations, were used to 

select river reaches for physical habitat assessment. In the first 

method, a location was randomly selected from the previous 

day’s sturgeon locations. Randomly selected locations are best 

suited for unbiased assessments of habitat use and availability (Millspaugh and Marzlugg, 2001). The second selection 

method utilized telemetry or behavioral observations that 

indicated that one or more of the tagged female sturgeon might 

be spawning. These potential spawning locations were preferentially selected without randomization because of their likely 

importance in defining spawning habitats. Also, pallid sturgeon relocations were selected without randomization at times, 

in order to validate similarity between shovelnose and pallid 

sturgeon habitat-use patterns. In addition, nonrandomized sites 

were mapped when randomization was not possible because 

of fluctuations in discharge, threat of severe weather, or other 

logistical constraints. Habitat mapping was not attempted if 

the discharge changed more than 10 percent between the time 

that a sturgeon was located and the time that the hydroacoustic 

survey could begin. Mapping was completed between April 

and August in 2005 and between May and July in 2006. 

A mapping reach was defined as a complete river bendcrossover-bend or crossover-bend-crossover sequence roughly 

centered on the sturgeon location. The intent was to assess 

all macrohabitats available to the sturgeon. Reaches generally ranged from1,500 m to 3,000 m in length with 3,000 m 

being the maximum reach length that could be mapped during 

a single day. Sampling transects extended from bank to bank 

of the river perpendicular to general flow direction at 20- and 

40-m intervals downstream of Rulo, Nebr. and 15- and 30-m 

intervals upstream of Rulo, Nebr. Five transects upstream 

and five transects downstream of the sturgeon location were 

mapped at the smaller transect spacing (15 or 20 m). Also, a 

longitudinal profile to define bedform dimensions was collected from upstream to downstream, following the thalweg 

along the entire reach. Commensurate with the accuracy of 

sturgeon locations, the hydroacoustic mapping was georeferenced with real-time Differential Global Positioning System 

(DGPS) data to submeter accuracy of northing and easting. 

Hydroacoustic mapping included high-resolution single-beam 

echosounding and acoustic bed-material classification. Threedimensional flow velocities were measured with an acoustic 

Doppler current profiler. Selected sites were also mapped with 

high-resolution side-scan sonar to provide a complementary 

qualitative picture of spawning habitats. Except as discussed 

below, established USGS CERC protocols and standard methods were used (Elliott and others, 2004; Jacobson and others, 

2004a; Jacobson and others, 2004b; Oberg and others, 2005) 

to produce depth, velocity, and substrate maps with 5-m cells 

that can be queried to determine averages and measures of 

variability of depth, velocity, and substrate or combinations of 

these characteristics.

Progress During 2005–06

During 2006, hydroacoustic data were collected, and 

maps were constructed for 28 reaches representing 73.6 km, 

bringing the 2005–06 total to 116 reaches and 305.5 km (figs. 

D6 to D11; tables D1, D2). Discounting overlapping reaches, 

251.7 km, or nearly one-fifth of the Lower Missouri River 

(from Gavins Point Dam to the mouth), was mapped at least 

once as a part of the sturgeon habitat-use assessment in 2005 

and 2006. Reaches have been mapped in each of the major 

river segments. In 2006 we increased the number of reaches 

in the Gavins segment (fig. D1), where mapping is logistically 

more difficult because of the prevalence of shallow water. 

Mapping in the Gavins, Ponca, and Big Sioux segments (fig. 

D1) was also complicated by rapidly varying flows from May 

to June (fig. D12). The rapidly varying flows made it difficult 

to map reaches on the day after sturgeon were relocated while 

also meeting the criterion that discharges should be within the 

range of plus or minus10 percent.

Four of the 2006 reaches were selected for more intensive 

study beyond the usual depth, velocity, and substrate maps. At 

these sites, we collected side-scan sonar data for qualitative 

interpretation (for example, figs. D7, and D11). These reaches 

are considered potential spawning reaches based on sturgeon 

movements in 2005 and presence of coarse, hard substrate 

(Laustrup and others, 2007).

Data Processing and Map Production

Grids of depth, velocity, and substrate have been generated for habitat-use data collected in 2005 and 2006 (for 

example, figs. D6, D8, D10). Some of the map-making 

protocols were refined for 2006 data processing. Derived grids 

(including slope, velocity gradient, and terrain classification) 

have also been prepared from the basic depth and velocity 

maps; these derived grids yield additional information and in 

some cases show less sensitivity to discharge. Development of 

terrain-classification methods is ongoing, and additional work 

remains to refine the protocols to scale terrain units to channel 

size.

Depth and Derived Grids 

Depth maps for 2005 and 2006 were generated by using 

standard protocols (Elliott and others, 2004; Jacobson and 

others, 2004a; Jacobson and others, 2004b; Oberg and others, 2005). The depth maps were used to create derived grids 
148 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

including slope (approximating topographic slope) and a form 

of relative depth classification (fig. D13). The relative depth 

classification categorizes the reach based on the elevation of a 

cell compared to that in the surrounding area; this classification is based on the idea of the topographic position index and 

the Benthic Terrain Modeler (Lundblad and others, 2006). 

Combining slope and relative depth classifications yields 

four terrain classes: crests (bars), depressions (thalweg and 

deep holes), slopes (>5o), and flat areas. These terrain classes 

are relatively insensitive to changes in discharge, potentially 

providing a way to infer some basic habitat information for 

sturgeon relocations that fall within a mapped reach but at a 

different discharge. We are currently evaluating the discharge 

sensitivity of this classification approach and its effectiveness 

as a mesohabitat indicator; further refinement of this technique 

is possible as spatial metrics are scaled to river size.

Velocity and Derived Grids

Velocity grid maps in 2006 were generated by using a 

streamlined approach of standard methods using a Python 

script that calls ArcGIS kriging routines (ESRI, Redlands, 

Calif.). A slightly different method that yielded nearly equivalent results was used in 2005. In addition to the velocity 

maps, we created derived maps of velocity gradients. These 

gradient maps can be used to test hypotheses about sturgeon 

preference for high-velocity-gradient zones (Johnson and 

others, 2006). 

Substrate

In 2006, two different models of RoxAnn instruments 

(Sonavision Ltd., Aberdeen, Scotland) were used to collect 

substrate data; one instrument also was used during 2005. In 

order to produce comparable maps from the two instruments, 

we developed new protocols for substrate classification. The 

new approach classifies substrate point-by-point and utilizes 

the values of E1(roughness) and E2 (hardness) at the point as 

well as the local variability of these parameters to classify substrate into three generalized categories. A calibration reach was 

mapped with both instruments. Side-scan sonar and substrate 

sampling were used for ground truthing. This new method was 

applied to generate a set of substrate maps for all 2005 and 

2006 habitat-use datasets with available RoxAnn data.

Data Summary and Analysis

For targeted sturgeon locations, we have extracted values 

from habitat maps at each sturgeon relocation point and in its 

vicinity. Point values have been acquired from grids for depth, 

velocity, substrate, depth classification, velocity gradient, and 

slope of depth (an example is shown in fig. D9). Summary 

statistics are being compiled within a circular region surrounding the sturgeon points for various radii (fig. D14). The spatial 

summary statistics for continuous-value data (including depth, 

velocity, slope, and velocity gradient) are minimum, maximum, mean, and standard deviation. For discrete-value data 

(including substrate and terrain classification), summary statistics include the amount of each class in the zone of interest. 

Although additional analysis is necessary, these data indicate 

a tendency for sturgeon to select lower than reach-averaged 

velocities and higher than reach-averaged velocity gradients. 

There is no apparent selection for depths.

In general, reaches were mapped in response to the 

relocation of a sturgeon, but many mapped reaches contained additional sturgeon relocation points (nontargeted 

sturgeon locations) from different time periods or discharges. 

For nontargeted sturgeon locations in mapped reaches, the 

hydroacoustic maps may still provide useful information about 

habitat if the nontargeted sturgeon were relocated at a time 

when discharge was similar to the map date. 

To address the question of what habitat parameters can 

be inferred for nontargeted sturgeon and over what range of 

discharge, we are using an existing two-dimensional hydrodynamic model of the Missouri River near the junction with the 

Lamine River (Johnson and others, 2006) to assess sensitivity of habitat parameters to changes in discharge, assuming 

constant topography. Initial assessment indicates that terrain 

classification, depth gradient, and velocity gradient are less 

sensitive to changes in discharge than to depth and velocity 

themselves. The results from components 2 and 3, (this chapter) will yield further information about sensitivity of habitat 

to hydrologic and geomorphic changes. 

Sensitivity analyses will be used to determine over what 

range of discharge and over what period of time the maps 

are reasonably valid for extraction of habitat parameters for 

nontargeted sturgeon. It appears that some parameters will 

be valuable over a wider range of discharge than others. This 

method yields a hierarchical scheme for determining habitat 

parameters for sturgeon relocations, shown conceptually in 

table D3. 

We have also combined reach-scale depth and velocity 

data to generalize habitat characteristics at the segment scale. 

Based on these data summaries, distinctive signatures emerge 

for each main segment of the river (figs. D15, D16). For example, the depth histograms tend to be bimodal for reaches in the 

lower segments of the river. Simpler, single-peaked histograms 

describe the upper segments, with increasingly shallow peak 

values progressing upstream from the Big Sioux segment to 

the Gavins segment. 

Habitat Selection Modeling

In addition to the geomorphically based analyses of 

these data, we are working with collaborators at CERC and 

the University of Missouri to analyze the spatial associations 

between fish locations and habitat availability (fig. D2). This 

analysis compares habitat measures at the sturgeon relocation 

points (habitat use) with habitat at randomly selected points 

in the mapped reaches (habitat availability). The data that we 

provide will be used to support testing of hypotheses in an 

information-theoretic framework (Millspaugh and Marzlugg, 

2001; Burnham and Anderson, 2002).
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 149

Plans for 2007

Efforts in 2007 will be divided between collecting new 

data and analyzing the substantial existing dataset. The primary emphasis for new data collection will be to map identified spawning sites as determined by coordinated telemetry 

studies. For spawning sites, we will collect side-scan sonar 

data in conjunction with the standard depth, velocity, and 

substrate data.

We will continue to summarize and analyze existing 

reach-scale data from the hydroacoustic maps to explore 

information content at multiple scales. This analysis will 

include development of depth-based habitat diversity indices and refinement of the terrain-classification approach. 

Analysis will include subdividing and aggregating data over 

multiple scales of classification. This analysis will address 

the extent to which habitat availability can be generalized 

from microhabitat measures (depth, velocity, and substrate) 

to mesohabitat (such as terrain classes, inside/outside bend 

classes, and classes based on spatial relations to engineering structures) and macrohabitat (bend-crossover, reach, 

and segment) scales. If relations exist, microhabitat features 

may be inferred from readily available geographic information system-scale data. Based on the timing and position 

of sturgeon relocations relative to the hydroacoustic maps, 

a hierarchy of habitat parameters may be inferred (table 

D3); the most detail is available for those sturgeon found 

on habitat maps at similar discharges and in close temporal 

proximity to the hydroacoustic map date, but some basic 

information may be inferred for all sturgeon relocation 

points. Results from the habitat availability portion of the 

study (components 2 and 3, this chapter) will help to assess 

the extent to which it is valid to infer mapped parameters 

for point data at times and discharges different from the 

conditions of the hydroacoustic map date. During 2007, we 

will continue to collaborate with University of Missouri 

colleagues to provide information needed for statistical 

models of habitat selection. In 2007, we will draft a peerreviewed USGS series report documenting habitat-use data 

and interpreting implications of these data with regard to 

river management activities.

Component 2 — Habitat Availability

Principal Investigators

•	 Robert B. Jacobson

•	 Harold E. Johnson

•	 Richard Wilson

•	 Benjamin J. Dietsch 

Specific Objectives

The objective of the habitat-availability component is 

to assess sensitivity of spawning and early-life-stage habitat 

availability to discharge variation, with emphasis on assessing 

the range of flows that may be considered under environmental flow management (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2000; 

2003; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2004b). 

Approach/Methods

Habitat simulation is the most widely used tool worldwide for assessment of ecological responses to river management (Tharme, 2003). The use of two or three dimensional 

hydrodynamic models allows quantification of spatial attributes of habitat, including diversity (Reuter and others, 2003; 

Pasternack and others, 2004), gradients between habitat units 

(Crowder and Diplas, 2006; Johnson and others, 2006), patch 

dynamics (Bowen and others, 2003), and patch persistence 

(Bovee and others, 2004). 

Habitat simulation studies generally have been limited 

in how well they capture physical habitat availability because 

they have assumed a fixed bed, as most models lack the ability 

to model sediment transport and channel evolution. This is a 

minor problem for low-flow studies or studies on rivers with 

immobile beds, but substantial limitations exist for studies 

that consider the ecological effects of flows that are capable of 

transporting bed material because the models do not account 

for changing channel boundary conditions (geometry and 

flow resistance) during individual flow events or over seasons. 

New understanding of sediment transport at scales relevant to 

habitat (Schmeeckle and Nelson, 2003) and hydrodynamicmodeling code that can simulate bed evolution (Barton and 

others, 2005; McDonald and others, 2005) are contributing 

to progress toward overcoming the assumption of a fixed 

bed. The sand bed of the Lower Missouri River is subject to 

transport and change over the range of flows considered in this 

study. Therefore, hydrodynamic models which incorporate bed 

evolution may be necessary to simulate habitat availability. 

Hence, this project seeks to assess the errors and uncertainties 

inherent in modeling with and without bed evolution.

Models of natural systems are generally classified as those 

that are used to predict and those that are used to increase understanding (Kirkby, 1996). The focus of this project component is 

to use hydrodynamic models to increase understanding of what 

is suitable spawning and early-life-stage habitat for the Missouri 

River sturgeon and the sensitivity of habitat to flow variation. 

The modeling effort is exploratory and intended to elucidate 

relations between sturgeon and their environment.

Reach Selection

During 2006 we began to evaluate habitat availability 

in four reaches (Yankton, Kensler’s Bend, Little Sioux, and 
150 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Miami study sites) that are representative of probable spawning locations for sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River (fig. 

D1). These reaches were selected on the basis of two criteria: 

each reach (1) has patches of coarse, hard substrate thought to 

be preferred spawning substrate (Laustrup and others, 2007) 

and/or (2) was the upstream apex of movement of a female 

shovelnose that completely spawned in 2005. For three of the 

four reaches, evidence is strong that spawning occurred somewhere within the reach. The fourth reach at Yankton, S. Dak., 

lacked data confirming spawning activity in 2005 (although 

spawning activity was confirmed during 2006, chap. E), but 

it has the most extensive deposit of gravel-cobble substrate 

identified on the Lower Missouri River (Laustrup and other, in 

press). Additional reaches may be added in subsequent years 

as additional fish location data are collected. The 2006 work 

was the first year of a 2-year effort needed to complete the 

first phase of validated modeling for the four reaches. Habitatavailability reaches were selected and delineated to include 

replicates of macrohabitats (at least one complete bend-crossover-bend sequence) and to insure that probable spawning 

areas were included (fig. D17). 

Reach-Scale Data Collection

Each habitat-availability reach was mapped completely 

for depth, velocity, and substrate at a relatively high discharge 

(although substantially less than bankfull). This dataset was 

used to compile base bathymetric data and to provide highflow velocity calibration data. Compilation mapping was 

based on 20-m transect intervals. Data were collected with a 

precision depth sounder, a 1,200 kHz acoustic Doppler current profiler, a substrate classifier, and Real-Rime Kinematic 

Global Positioning System (RTK-GPS) by using established 

USGS habitat-mapping protocols (Elliott and others, 2004; 

Jacobson and others, 2004a; Gaeuman and Jacobson, 2005; 

2006). Terrestrial RTK-GPS surveys were completed along 

cross sections to reach the top of bank and to define engineering structures. Terrestrial lidar data is available for the Yankton 

and Kensler’s Bend reaches and will be assessed for its utility 

in supplementing hydroacoustic surveys. Photogrammetrically derived digital elevation data from 2000, gridded at 5-m 

intervals, are available from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

(Northwestern Division, Omaha, Nebr.) in all four reaches to 

supplement overbank elevation data. Hydroacoustic elevation 

data have been merged with terrestrial surveys and either lidar 

data or the photogrammetric digital elevation data to create 

mass-point datasets for continuous surface mapping of the 

channel and flood plain elevations, extending over the bank to 

include the nominal 5-year recurrence flood plain. 

Calibration/Validation Collection

Discharge, velocity, depth, substrate class, and channelbottom elevation data were collected on a subset of approximately 30 randomly selected transects (also used in component 3, this chapter) at a range of discharges. Each calibration/

validation survey included a replicate longitudinal profile. 

Longitudinal profiles provided bedform dimensions for 

estimating boundary roughness parameters as well as watersurface profiles. These data will be used for calibration and 

validation of the hydrodynamic model and for defining relations between stage and discharge in each reach. Additional 

discharge and longitudinal profile data will be collected in the 

reach as needed to compile stage-discharge curves for modeling.

Progress During 2006

During 2006, a full-reach, bathymetric survey was 

conducted for the Yankton, Kensler’s Bend, Little Sioux, 

and Miami reaches (figs. D18 to D21). Hydroacoustic depth, 

velocity, and substrate data were gathered along transects 

spanning the width of the river from bank to bank at 20-meter 

intervals. A terrestrial survey with RTK-GPS includes top 

of bank, control structure, and other topographic points. We 

created mass points for a computational mesh for a multidimensional hydraulic model, the Multi-Dimensional Surface 

Water Modeling System, MD-SWMS (McDonald and others, 

2005) by combining the bathymetry and terrestrial surveys 

with available Digital Elevation Model or lidar data (figs. D22 

to D25). An example of an initial computational mesh for the 

Kensler’s Bend reach is shown in figure D26. Depth-averaged 

velocity maps of each reach will be used for comparison with 

model output at specific discharges (figs. D27 to D30). Four 

to five other bathymetric surveys during the year (table D4) 

were completed on the randomly selected transects to provide 

model calibration and validation through recording of watersurface elevations, bedform dimensions, bathymetry, and 

velocity measurements (fig. D31).

Plans for 2007

Calibration/validation data will be edited and analyzed 

to document sensitivity of depth, velocity, and substrate class 

availability to changing discharge. A subset of the calibration/

validation data will be used to calibrate a multidimensional 

hydrodynamic model that uses the MD-SWMS program. The 

remainder of the calibration/validation data will be used to 

validate model performance in terms of depth, velocity distributions, and water-surface elevations. Model performance 

will be validated with water-surface elevations and velocity 

distributions.

Results from the hydrodynamic models will be explored 

to evaluate habitat sensitivity to discharge variations and 

sensitivity of suspected habitat classes to modeling procedure 

emphasizing patch dynamics and areas of high hydraulic 

gradients (Bowen and others, 2003; Bovee and others, 2004; 

Crowder and Diplas, 2006; Johnson and others, 2006) (fig. 

D32). 

We anticipate that the modeling process will be iterative. As more precise measures of spawning habitat selection become apparent (component 1, this chapter), we will 

update how model results are analyzed and perhaps increase 
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 151

resolution in critical parts of the models. Model results also 

will be used to interpolate flow fields spatially and over 

varying discharges to provide reach- and mesohabitat-scale 

visualization of flow structure. Model results will help to 

improve understanding of factors that create effective habitat 

for the fish, including characteristic scales, patch shapes, and 

patch adjacency. Because of the reach-scale definition of the 

hydrodynamic models, results will show a variety of habitat patches that may relate to other ecosystem components 

important to sturgeon reproduction and survival, including 

patches used by prey or predator fishes and patches involved 

in drift of larvae. 

A generic problem with hydrodynamic models in sandbed rivers is systematic and nonsystematic deformation of 

the bed morphology and flow resistance over time and with 

changing discharge. Monitoring data (described in component 

3, this chapter) will be used to assess the variation of bed 

morphology with discharge, to help quantify the effects of a 

deforming bed on model errors, and to assess how bed changes 

vary among reaches. In addition, monitoring data will be used 

to explore how well bed-evolution capabilities of the model 

code can simulate transient bed evolution. 

During 2007 we will also begin to explore the use of 

model results to evaluate drift dynamics, with emphasis on 

calculating reach averaged transit times and probabilities of 

neutrally buoyant particles passing from the main current into 

marginal, slow-velocity areas. Comparisons among reaches 

will illustrate the relative roles of natural and engineered channel morphologies in retaining or passing larval fish.

Data from the model runs will be analyzed statistically to 

explore changes in habitat availability with discharge. Model 

results will be imported into a geographic information system 

database to allow spatial analyses. Spatial relations among 

habitat patches will be analyzed statistically by using FRAGSTATS (McGarigal and Marks, 1995) to assess factors such as 

edge length, adjacency, and patch shape. 

Model results will be analyzed during 2007 and published 

in a peer-reviewed USGS series report in 2008.

Component 3—Habitat and Geomorphic 

Dynamics

Principal Investigators

•	 Robert B. Jacobson

•	 Harold E. Johnson

•	 Richard Wilson

Specific Objectives

The relations between geomorphic dynamics and habitat 

quality and quantity will be assessed through monitoring and 

measurement of channel morphology, substrate, and measures 

of sediment transport in the four reaches identified in component 2 (this chapter). The specific objective is to evaluate 

effects of sediment transport over a range of discharges to 

assess the role of flow modifications and natural flow events in 

modifying habitats.

Approach/Methods 

A randomly selected subset of 30 transects (the same set 

used for calibration/validation measurements, component 2, 

this chapter) was resurveyed by using RTK-GPS hydroacoustic mapping protocols to evaluate change in the cross section 

shape and area, change in substrate conditions, and change 

in velocity structure (figs. D33 to D36). Random selection of 

transects is essential for unbiased estimates of how much area 

of the reach is affected by geomorphic changes. Also, selection of a subset of the transects was necessary to allow completion of surveys during transient flow events; surveys were 

completed during 1 day. Four or five surveys were performed 

in 2006 to assess geomorphic changes and sediment transport 

associated with a range of discharges. Surveys were coordinated with planned flow modifications (U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers, 2006) (fig. D37). In the two downstream reaches, 

the planned flow modifications were much diminished relative 

to natural variation. The cross sections were randomly selected 

once, and the original set of randomly selected cross sections 

was resurveyed to assess change. 

The randomly selected cross sections were surveyed 

with RTK-GPS-controlled hydroacoustic methods and by 

using USGS CERC protocols. Terrestrial RTK-GPS surveys 

extended the hydroacoustic surveys from the water’s edge to at 

least 5 m beyond the top of the bank. The precision of RTKGPS allows for comparisons of elevation changes between 

surveys. Simultaneous collection of RTK-GPS-controlled 

acoustic Doppler current profiler (ADCP) data provided current-velocity data and bed-velocity measurements (Gaeuman 

and Jacobson, 2005; 2006). RoxAnn acoustic bed-classification methods were used for substrate typing, which allowed 

assessment of bed material changes as a function of discharge. 

Cross sections made with an ADCP were also processed to 

yield discharges.

In addition to the transect surveys, a longitudinal profile 

was collected during each survey. The longitudinal profile was 

used to document bedform changes as a result of flow changes 

and to quantify bedform dimensions. As an experiment in sediment transport assessment, a short—approximately 500–800 

m—section of the longitudinal profile was resurveyed after 

approximately 2.5–3 hours and used for one-dimensional bedload 

transport estimates by bedform differencing in the two lower 

(Little Sioux and Miami) reaches (Simons and others, 1965). 

Velocities, bedform dimensions, and water-surface 

profiles collected during these surveys will also be used for 

calibration and validation of hydrodynamic models in component 2 (this chapter).
152 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Progress During 2006

Thirty to thirty-three transects per reach were processed 

to obtain bed elevation, substrate parameters (E1, roughness, and E2, hardness), and bed-velocity data. Bed elevation 

from each survey was compared to determine cross-sectional 

area change (examples in figs. D38 to D41). Transects in the 

Yankton reach were notable for their lack of change over the 

range of flows that occurred during 2006. In contrast, most 

transects in the other reaches downstream showed substantial 

geomorphic changes, indicating that the range of flows occurring during 2006 were capable of altering bed morphology in 

those reaches. 

Substrate parameters (E1 and E2) were measured on each 

transect to address evolution of the channel bed types before, 

during, and after flow changes. Calibration and validation of 

RoxAnn data are continuing through 2007. Substrate classification from RoxAnn parameters is based on typical E1 

and E2 distributions for the major bed-material types of the 

Lower Missouri River (fig. D42) This classification differs 

substantially from previously used supervised and unsupervised statistical classification procedures (Elliott and others, 

2004). Our simplest derived classification is based on uniform 

low values for both E1 and E2 (silt and mud), low E1 combined with spatially variable E2 (sand and sand dunes), and 

highly variable E1 and E2 (rough substrate including cobble, 

gravel, and revetment). Typical RoxAnn data for two transects 

it the Miami reach demonstrate that substrate parameters vary 

measurably with discharge and across the channel (figs. D43 

and D44). Preliminary analysis indicates that the highest flows 

measured (about 47,000 ft3/s) resulted in a softer bed in the 

center of the channel, suggesting either a flush of fine sediment or a moving bed (which typically has low E1 and E2 

values). 

Data obtained with an ADCP were processed with both 

bottom track and GPS positioning to allow for calculation 

of bed velocities (examples shown in figs. D45, D46). These 

examples indicate that calculated bed velocities increase as 

expected during higher flows and indicate the proportion of 

the cross section affected by transport. 

Photography was used to document substrate changes 

at points along a subset of the terrestrial RTK-GPS surveys. 

The photographs were taken within a scaled frame at the first 

survey before navigation season, and after the last postnavigation survey. This photography was done to document visual 

evidence of substrate change within the area of the river bank 

that would be inundated during ecological flows but exposed 

at lower flows. The photographs taken at the Miami surveys 

show that deposition occurred in this specific part of the reach, 

although in the Little Sioux reach, erosion was typical (fig. 

D47). Together, these results indicate that the range of flows 

evaluated during 2006 has the potential to alter substrate quality by transporting sediment.

Longitudinal profiles were collected for comparison at all 

four reaches (sample profiles in figs. D48 and D49). Longitudinal profiles collected during the four to five surveys also 

provide information on bed mobility and bedform dimensions (fig. D50). Typical dune bedform wavelengths are 4–7 

m and heights are 0.2–0.6 m. In addition, at the Little Sioux 

and Miami reaches an experimental short profile was surveyed 3.5–4 hours after the first survey (figs. D48, and D49). 

The long and short profiles from each survey were analyzed 

to calculate sediment transport rate by bedform differencing 

(Simons and others, 1965). Computer code to analyze these 

data has been written and tested. The one-dimensional transport rate for dune migration shown in figure D49, for example, 

is equivalent to a flux of approximately 0.1 kg/s/m (unit width) 

at a discharge of 24,500 ft3/s. One-dimensional transport rates 

calculated by using this procedure will be used to assess relative transport rates among reaches and as functions of discharge, thereby providing a measure of relative sensitivity of 

sediment transport to flow modifications.

Plans for 2007

For 2007, each reach will be resurveyed at least four 

times during the year with the intent of documenting effects of 

a wider range of flows and of isolating planned flow modifications, if they occur. Results of surveys will be used to assess 

geomorphic sensitivity to discharge and to evaluate hydrodynamic model errors that would arise if bed evolution and 

bedform roughness are not taken into account. Results will 

also be compared with runs of hydrodynamic models simulating bed evolution to evaluate the extent to which bed-evolution 

simulations capture actual geomorphic changes (component 2, 

this chapter).

A peer-reviewed USGS series, peer report documenting 

habitat and geomorphic change for each of the four sites will 

be prepared in 2007.

Summary

This report documents progress on three related components of habitat assessments in the Lower Missouri River during 2005–06. The habitat components consist of habitat use, 

habitat availability, and habitat and geomorphic dynamics. The 

habitat-use component links this research directly to sturgeon 

ecology research described in chapters B, C, and E. In turn, 

the habitat availability and dynamics assessments are intended 

to provide physical context for the ecological research and to 

provide a physical component to eventual population modeling 

(Bajer and Wildhaber, in press). Complementary water-quality 

components of habitat are described in chapter F. 

Results from 2005 to 2006 indicate that the methods 

developed to assess habitat use, quality, quantity, and change 

are appropriate and sufficiently accurate to address critical 

questions about sturgeon habitat on the Lower Missouri River. 

Preliminary analysis of habitats occupied by adult female 

shovelnose sturgeon indicates that migrating and post-spawn 

sturgeon do not select for depth but seem to select for lower 
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 153

than reach-averaged velocities and higher than reach-averaged 

velocity gradients. Data collected to compile, calibrate, and 

validate multidimensional hydraulic models in probable 

spawning reaches appear to be sufficient to support the modeling objective. Monitoring of selected channel cross sections 

and long profiles showed little change at the Yankton reach 

over the range of flows measured during 2006. This lack of 

change is likely due to channel stability associated with the 

armored bed in this degraded segment of the river. Documented geomorphic change increased with distance downstream. RoxAnn substrate parameters documented systematic 

changes with discharge and with hydraulic environment across 

the channel. Similarly, bed velocity varied predictably with 

discharge and hydraulic environment, indicating its potential 

as an indicator of bedload sediment transport. Longitudinal 

profiles showed substantial downstream movement of dunes 

over the monitored discharges, as well as substantial withinyear variability in dune size. Observations of geomorphic 

change during the moderate flow range of 2006 support the 

hypothesis that the magnitude of flow modifications under 

consideration on the Lower Missouri River will be sufficient to 

transport sediment and potentially modify spawning habitats. 

Acknowledgments

Funding for this project was provided by the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers (Omaha District, Craig Fleming, Project 

Manager) and the USGS. Chad Vishy and Matt Smith provided assistance in field data collection and data processing. 

We are indebted to Aaron DeLonay and the sturgeon telemetry 

crew for fish location data.

References Cited

Bajer, P.G., and Wildhaber, M.L., in press, Population viability 

analysis of Lower Missouri River shovelnose sturgeon with 

initial application to the pallid sturgeon: Journal of Applied 

Ichthyology.

Barton, G.J., McDonald, R.R., Nelson, J.M., and Dinehart, 

R.L., 2005, Simulation of flow and sediment mobility using 

a multidimensional flow model for the white sturgeon 

critical-habitat reach, Kootenai River near Bonners Ferry, 

Idaho: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations 

Report 2005–5230, 54 p.

Becker, G.C., 1983, Fishes of Wisconsin: Madison, Wis., University of Wisconsin Press, 1,053 p.

Bovee, K.D., Waddle, T.J., and Jacobson, R.B., 2004, Quantification of habitat patch persistence in rivers affected by 

hydropeaking, in AWRA Spring Specialty Conference: 

GIS and Water Resources III, May 2004, Nashville, Tenn., 

American Water Resources Association, p. 1–10.

Bowen, Z.H., Bovee, K.D., and Waddle, T.J., 2003, Effects 

of flow regulation on shallow-water habitat dynamics and 

floodplain connectivity: Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, v. 132, p. 809–823.

Braaten, P.J., and Fuller, D.B., in press, Drift dynamics of larval pallid sturgeon in a side channel of the Missouri River, 

Montana: Journal of Applied Ichthyology.

Bruch, R.M., and Binkowski, F.P., 2002, Spawning behavior 

of lake sturgeon (Acipenser fluvescens): Journal of Applied 

Ichthyology, v. 18, p. 570–590.

Buckley, J., and Kynard, B., 1985, Habitat and behavior of 

pre-spawning and spawning shortnose sturgeon, Acipenser 

brevirostrum, in the Connecticut River, in Binkowski, F.P., 

and Doroshov, S.I., eds., North American Sturgeons—Biology and Aquaculture Potential: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 

Junk Publishers, p. 111–117.

Burnham, K.P., and Anderson, D.R., 2002, Model selection 

and multimodel inference: A practical information-theoretic 

approach: (2d ed.): New York, Springer, 488 p.

Coutant, C.C., 2004, A riparian habitat hypothesis for successful reproduction of white sturgeon: Review in Fisheries 

Science, v. 12, p. 23–73.

Crowder, D.W., and Diplas, P., 2006, Applying spatial hydraulic principles to quantify stream habitat: River Research and 

Applications, v. 22, p. 79–89.

Elliott, C.M., Jacobson, R.B., and Delonay, A.J., 2004, Physical aquatic habitat assessment, Fort Randall segment of the 

Missouri river, Nebraska and South Dakota: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2004–1060, 80 p.

Ferrell, J., 1993, Big dam era — A legislative history of the 

Pick-Sloan Missouri River Basin Program: Omaha, U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers.

Ferrell, J., 1996, Soundings—100 years of the Missouri River 

Navigation Project: Omaha, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Fox, D.A., Hightower, J.E., and Parauka, F.M., 2002, Estuarine and nearshore marine habitat use by gulf sturgeon from 

Choctawatchee River system, Florida, in Van Winkle, W., 

Anders, P.J., Secor, D.H., and Dixon, D.A., eds., Biology, 

management, and protection of North American Sturgeon: 

Bethesda, Md., American Fisheries Society, Symposium 28, 

p. 111–125.

Funk, J.L., and Robinson, J.W., 1974, Changes in the channel 

of the lower Missouri River and effects on fish and wildlife: 

Jefferson City, Mo., Missouri Department of Conservation.
154 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Gaeuman, D., and Jacobson, R.B., 2005, Aquatic habitat 

mapping with an acoustic Doppler current profiler—considerations for data quality, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 2005–1163, 20 p.

Gaeuman, D., and Jacobson, R.B., 2006, Acoustic bed velocity 

and bed load dynamics in a large sand bed river: Journal of 

Geophysical Research, v. 111, p. 1–14.

Galat, D.L., Berry, C.R., Jr., Peters, E.J., and White, R.G., 

2005, Missouri River Basin, in Benke, A.C., and Cushing, 

C.E., eds., Rivers of North America: Oxford, Elsevier, 

p. 427–480.

Galat, D.L., and Lipkin, R., 2000, Restoring ecological integrity of great rivers: historical hydrographs aid in defining 

reference conditions for the Missouri River: Hydrobiologia, 

v. 422, p. 29–48.

Gordon, N.D., McMahon, T.A., and Finlayson, B.L., 1992, 

Stream hydrology— An introduction for ecologists: Chichester, England, John Wiley and Sons, 526 p.

Hesse, L.W., Schmulbach, J.C., Carr, J.M., Keenlyne, K.D., 

Unkenholz, D.G., Robinson, J.W., and Mestl, G.E., 1989, 

Missouri River fishery resources in relation to past, present, 

and future stresses, in Dodge, D.P., ed., Proceedings of the 

International Large River Symposium, Canadian Special 

Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, p. 353–371.

Hesse, L.W., and Sheets, W., 1993, The Missouri River hydrosystem: Fisheries, v. 18, no. 5, p. 5–14.

Houston, J.J., 1988, Status of the green sturgeon, Acipenser 

medirostris, in Canada: The Canadian Field Naturalist, 

v. 102, p. 286–290.

Jacobson, R.B., Elliott, C.M., and Johnson, H.E., 2004a, 

Assessment of shallow-water habitat availability in modified dike structures, Lower Missouri River, 2004: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 2004–1409, 20 p.

Jacobson, R.B., and Galat, D.L., 2006, Flow and form in 

rehabilitation of large-river ecosystems: An example from 

the Lower Missouri River: Geomorphology, v. 77, no. 3–4, 

p. 249–269.

Jacobson, R.B., Laustrup, M.S., D’Urso, G.J., and Reuter, 

J.M., 2004b, Physical habitat dynamics in four side-channel 

chutes, Lower Missouri River:, U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 2004–1071, 60 p.

Johnson, H.E., Jacobson, R.B., and Delonay, A.J., 2006, 

Hydroecological modeling of the Lower Missouri River, in 

Proceedings of the Third Federal Interagency Hydrologic 

Modeling Conference, Reno, Nevada, April 2–6, 2006: 

Subcommittee on Hydrology of the Interagency Advisory 

Committee on Water Information.

Keenlyne, K.D., 1997, Life history and status of the shovelnose sturgeon, Scaphirhynchus platorynchus: Environmental Biology of Fishes, v. 48, p. 291–298.

Keenlyne, K.D., and Jenkins, L.G., 1993, Age at sexual maturity of the pallid sturgeon: Transactions of the American 

Fisheries Society, v. 122, p. 393–396.

Kirkby, M.J., 1996, A role for theoretical models in geomorphology?, in Rhoads, B.L., and Thorne, C.E., eds., Thescientific nature of geomorphology—Proceedings of the 27th 

Annual Binghamton Symposium in Geomorphology: New 

York, John Wiley and Sons, 

p. 257–272.

LaHaye, M., Branchard, A., Gendron, M., Verndon, R., and 

Fortin, R., 1992, Reproduction, early life history, and 

characteristics of the spawning grounds of the lake sturgeon 

(Acipenser fulvescens) in Des Prairies and L’Assomption 

Rivers near Montreal, Quebec: Canadian Journal of Zoology, v. 70, p. 1,681–1,689.

Latka, D.C., Nestler, J., and Hesse, L.W., 1993, Restoring 

physical habitat in the Missouri River: A historical perspective, in Restoration planning for the rivers of the Mississippi 

River ecosystem, U.S. Department of Interior, National 

Biological Survey: Biological Report 19, p. 350–359.

Laustrup, M.S., Jacobson, R.B., and Simpkins, D.G., 2007, 

Distribution of potential spawning habitat for sturgeon in 

the Lower Missouri River: U.S. Geological Survey OpenFile Report 2007–1192, 26 p.

Lundblad, E.R., Wright, D.J., Miller, J., Larkin, E.M., Rinehart, R., Naar, D.F., Donahue, B.T., Anderson, S.M., and 

Battista, T., 2006, A benthic terrain classification scheme 

for American Samoa: Marine Geodesy, v. 29, no. 2, 

p. 89–111.

Mayden, R.L., and Kuhajha, B.R., 1996, Systematics, taxonomy, and conservation status of the endangered Alabama 

sturgeon, Scaphirhynchus suttkusi Williams and Clemmer 

(Actinopterygii, Acipenseridae): Copeia, v. 2, p. 241–273.

McDonald, R.R., Nelson, J.M., and Bennett, J.P., 2005, Multidimensional surface-water modeling system user’s guide: 

U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods 6–B2, 

136 p.

McGarigal, K., and Marks, B.J., 1995, FRAGSTATS—spatial 

pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape structure: Portland, Oregon, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, General Technical Report PNW–351, 122 p.

Middle Basin Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Work Group, 2005, 

Pallid Sturgeon recovery needs for RPA 4 and RPA 5: 

Middle Basin Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Work Group, p. 

9, accessed June 2007 at URL online at: http://www.fws.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 155

gov/midwest/ColumbiaFisheries/reports/Middle_Basin_

workgroup_survey_results.pdf.

Millspaugh, J.J., and Marzlugg, J.M., 2001, Radio tracking of 

animal populations: San Diego, Calif., Academic Press, 

474 p.

Moos, R.E., 1978, Movement and reproduction of shovelnose 

sturgeon Scaphirhynchus platorynchus (Rafinesque) in the 

Missouri River, South Dakota, Vermillion, S. Dak., University of South Dakota, Ph.D. dissertation, 213 p.

National Research Council, 2002, The Missouri River ecosystem, exploring the prospects for recovery: Washington, 

D.C., National Academy Press, 176 p.

Oberg, K.A., Morlock, S.E., and Caldwell, W.S., 2005, 

Quality-assurance plan for discahrge measurements using 

acoustic Doppler current profilers: U.S. Geological Survey 

Scientific Investigations Report 2005–5183, 45 p.

Orth, D.J., and White, R.J., 1999, Stream habitat management, 

in Kohler, C.C., and Hubert, W.A., eds., Inland Fisheries 

Management in North America: Bethesda, Md., American 

Fisheries Society, p. 249–284.

Parsley, M.J., Anders, P.J., Millier, A.I., Beckman, L.G., 

and McCabe, G.T., Jr., 2002, Recovery of white sturgeon 

populations through natural production—understanding 

the influence of abiotic and biotic factors in spawning and 

subsequent recruitment, in Van Winkle, W., Anders, P.J., 

Secor, D.H., and Dixon, D.A., eds., Biology, management, 

and protection of North American Sturgeon: Bethesda, Md., 

American Fisheries Society, Symposium 28, p. 55–66.

Pasternack, G.B., Wang, C.L., and Merz, J.E., 2004, Application of a 2d hydrodynamic model to design of reach-scale 

spawning gravel replenishment on the Mokelumne River, 

California: River Research and Applications, v. 20, p. 

205–225.

Pflieger, W.L., 1997, The fishes of Missouri: Jefferson City, 

Mo., Missouri Department of Conservation, 372 p.

Poff, N.L., Allan, J.D., Bain, M.B., Karr, J.R., Presetegaard, 

K.L., Richter, B.D., Sparks, R.E., and Stromberg, J.C., 

1997, The natural flow regime: Bioscience, 

v. 47, p. 769–784.

Quist, M.C., Boelter, A.M., Lovato, J.M., Korfanta, N.M., 

Bergman, H.L., Latka, D.C., Korschgen, C., Galat, D.L., 

Krentz, S., Oetker, M., Olson, M., Scott, C.M., and Berkley, 

J., 2004, Research and assessment needs for pallid sturgeon 

Recovery in the Missouri River—Final report to the U.S. 

Geological Survey, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Laramie, Wyo., William D. Ruckelshaus 

Institute of Environment and Natural Resources, University 

of Wyoming, 82 p.

Reuter, J.M., Jacobson, R.B., and Elliott, C.M., 2003, Physical stream habitat dynamics in Lower Bear Creek, Northern 

Arkansas: U.S. Geological Survey Biological Sciences 

Report 2003–0002, 49 p.

Richter, B.D., Baumgartner, J.V., Wiginton, R., and Braun, 

D.P., 1997, How much water does a river need?: Freshwater 

Biology, v. 37, p. 231–249.

Richter, B.D., Mathews, R., Harrison, D.L., and Wigington, 

R., 2003, Ecologically sustainable water management—

Managing river flows for ecological integrity: Ecological 

Applications, v. 13, no. 1, p. 206–224.

Schmeeckle, M.W., and Nelson, J.M., 2003, Direct numerical simulation of bedload transport using a local, dynamic 

boundary condition: Sedimentology, v. 50, p. 279–301.

Scott, W.B., and Crossman, E.J., 1973, Freshwater fishes of 

Canada: Fisheries Research Board of Canada, v. 184, 

966 p.

Simons, D.B., Richardson, E.V., and Nordin, C.F., 1965, Bedload equation for ripples and dunes:U.S. Geological Survey 

Professional Paper 462–H, 9 p.

Taubert, B.D., 1980, Reproduction of shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) in Holyoke Pool, Connecticut River, 

Massachusetts: Copeia, v. 1980, p. 114–117.

Tharme, R.E., 2003, Global perspective on environmental 

flow assessment: Emerging trends in the development and 

application of environmental flow methodologies for rivers: 

River Research and Applications, v. 19, p. 397–441.

Tockner, K., and Stanford, J.A., 2002, Riverine flood plains—

present state and future trends: Environmental Conservation, v. 29, p. 308–330.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1998, Reservoir regulation 

studies—Daily routing model studies, master water control 

manual Missouri River review and update study, v. 2A: U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, Northwest Division.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2004a, Missouri River bank 

stabilization and navigation project, fish and wildlife mitigation project, annual implementation report 2004: U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineersp. 63 p.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2004b, Summary Missouri 

River final wnvironmental impact statement—Master water 

control manual review and update: Portland, Ore., U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, Northwest Division, 28 p.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2006, Missouri River Mainstem System—2005–2006 annual operating plan: Omaha, 

Ne., Northwestern Division, Missouri River Basin, Water 

Management Division, 89 p.
156 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2000, Biological opinion on 

the operation of the Missouri River main stem Reservoir 

system, operation and maintenance of the Missouri River 

bank stabilization and navigation project, and operation of 

the Kansas River reservoir system: Bismarck, N. Dak., U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, 286 p.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2003, Amendment to the 2000 

Biological opinion on the operation of the Missouri River 

main stem Reservoir system, operation and maintenance of 

the Missouri River bank stabilization and navigation project, 

and operation of the Kansas River reservoir system: Minneapolis, Minn., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 308 p.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 157

Figures and Tables
158 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D1. Missouri River basin and Lower Missouri River showing locations of stream gages, habitat-availability 

modeling reaches, and Missouri River segments.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 159

Figure D2. Diagram showing relations of Comprehensive Sturgeon Research Project (CSRP) tasks to life-stage 

components of pallid sturgeon, and relations of Sturgeon Response to Flow Modification (SRFM) tasks to CSRP. 

Information flow (curvilinear lines) from task 3 of CSRP (this study) are illustrated with weights commensurate 

with sequence of emphasis; in the early parts of this project, emphasis has been on prespawning and 

spawning, but emphasis will shift to larval and juvenile habitats over time. A subset of intertask arrows 

(rectilinear lines) are shown here, linking task 3 to other CSRP tasks. The double-headed arrows indicate 

two-way, iterative interaction among tasks, a feature that is essential to developing the comprehensive 

understanding of factors affecting sturgeon reproduction and survival in the Lower Missouri River.
160 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D3. Conceptual model of sturgeon life stages and migration, Lower Missouri River. Priorities are those listed by 

the Middle Basin Pallid Sturgeon Recovery Work Group (2005) based on the assessment of research priorities in Quist 

(2004).
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 161

Figure D4. Modern (2000) and historical (1894) channel maps, Lower Missouri River at Hermann, Mo..
162 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D5. Duration hydrographs illustrating effects of flow regulation, Lower Missouri 

River. Daily flow duration for 100 years of daily data; note differences in discharge scales. 

(A) Missouri River at Sioux City, Iowa. (B) Missouri River at Hermann, Mo. ROR, run-of-theriver simulation model; CWCP, current water control plan simulation model, operational 

control plan 1967 to April 2004.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 163 Figure D6. Maps of depth, velocity, terrain classification, and substrate for Mulberry Bend, Gavins segment, mapped on May 30 and 31, 2006, at a discharge of approximately 21,000 ft3/s.
164 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri RiverFigure D7. Side-scan sonar imagery for Mulberry Bend, Gavins segment. Insets show examples of (

A) mud and fish (bright objects), (

B) dunes, and (

C) gravelcobble substrate.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 165

Figure D8. Maps of depth, velocity, terrain classification, and substrate for a reach at the mouth of the Little Sioux 

in the Big Sioux segment, mapped on June 1, 2006, at a discharge of approximately 26,400 ft3/s.
166 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D9. Histograms of depth and velocity, and percent distribution of terrain (depth) classification and substrate, for the 

reach at the mouth of the Little Sioux River (fig. D8). Points indicate the values at the sturgeon positions that were found within 

10 percent of the discharge on the map date.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 167

Figure D10. Maps of depth, velocity, terrain classification, and substrate for several reaches at Cranberry Bend, 

Kansas segment; reaches were mapped at different discharges, ranging from 36,600 ft3/s to 65,100 ft3/s.
168 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D11. Side-scan sonar imagery for Cranberry Bend, Kansas segment.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 169

Figure D12. Hydrographs for six locations on the main stem of the Lower Missouri River, 2005–06.
170 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D13. Schematic of the terrain-classification approach. (A) For each grid cell, 

relative depth is computed by determining the difference between the depth at the cell and 

the mean depth in an annulus surrounding the cell, generating a map of relative depth. (B) 

Relative depth and slope, both computed from the depth grid, are used for the classification. 

(C) The grid values are used to differentiate four terrain classes: depression, crest, slope, 

and flat.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 171

Figure D14. Histograms showing 

comparison of conditions near sturgeon 

points with reach averages for 2006. 

Mean grid values were computed within 

25 m of each sturgeon relocation point 

and compared with reach-averaged 

values for the respective reach. Data 

are for 132 sturgeon that were relocated 

at discharges within 10 percent of the 

discharge on the hydroacoustic map 

date. Results are shown for (A) depth, (B) 

velocity, (C) velocity gradient, computed 

as percent change in velocity within a 

9-cell patch from a 5-m grid.
172 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D15. Histograms of depth for the segments of the Lower Missouri River, compiled from reaches mapped for habitat use. 

(In addition to the reaches listed in table D1, some reaches less than 1 km in length were included in this compilation.)
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 173

Figure D16. Histograms of velocity for the segments of the Lower Missouri River, compiled from reaches mapped for habitat 

use. (In addition to the reaches listed in table D1, some reaches less than 1 km in length were included in this compilation.)
174 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River Figure D17. Example of a modeling/monitoring reach, Missouri River near Yankton, S. Dak. Black lines indicate survey transects and centerline for collecting elevation data. Red lines are randomly selected monitoring transects for evaluating geomorphic change and sediment transport (Component 3).
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 175 Figure D18. Bed-elevation grid at Yankton modeling/monitoring reach was produced from a bathymetric survey, made by using hydroacoustic depth sounders. Transects spanning from left descending bank to right descending bank were spaced 20 m apart and gridded to a 5-m mesh.
176 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D19. Bed-elevation grid at Kensler’s Bend modeling/monitoring reach was produced from a bathymetric 

survey made by using hydroacoustic depth sounders. Transects spanning from left descending bank to right 

descending bank were spaced 20 m apart and gridded to a 5-m mesh.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 177

Figure D20. Bed-elevation grid at Little Sioux modeling/monitoring reach was produced from a bathymetric 

survey using hydroacoustic depth sounders. Transects spanning from left descending bank to right descending 

bank were spaced 20 m apart and gridded to a 5-m mesh.
178 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D21. Bed-elevation grid at Miami modeling/monitoring reach was produced from a bathymetric survey, made by using 

hydroacoustic depth sounders. Transects spanning from left descending bank to right descending bank were spaced 20 m apart 

and gridded to a 5-m mesh.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 179 Figure D22. Multi-Dimensional Surface Water Modeling System model input at Yankton reach. The input data were created by using elevation data from the bathymetric and terrestrial surveys.
180 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D23. Multi-Dimensional Surface Water Modeling System model input at Kensler’s Bend reach. The input data 

were created by using elevation data from the bathymetric and terrestrial surveys.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 181

Figure D24. Multi-Dimensional Surface Water Modeling System model input at Little Sioux reach. The input 

data were created by using elevation data from the bathymetric and terrestrial surveys.
182 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D25. Multi-Dimensional Surface Water Modeling System model input at Miami reach. The input data were created 

by using elevation data from the bathymetric and terrestrial surveys.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 183

Figure D26. Multi-Dimensional Surface Water Modeling System mesh at Kensler’s Bend. Mesh was created by 

using elevation data from the bathymetric and terrestrial surveys.
184 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River Figure D27. Depth-averaged velocity grid of the Yankton reach, which is used for comparison and calibration of the hydraulic model.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 185

Figure D28. Depth-averaged velocity grid of the Kensler’s Bend reach, which is used for comparison and 

calibration of the hydraulic model.
186 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D29. Depth-averaged velocity grid of the Little Sioux reach, which is used for comparison and calibration 

of the hydraulic model.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 187

Figure D30. Depth-averaged velocity grid of the Miami reach, which is used for comparison and calibration of the 

hydraulic model.
188 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri RiverFigure D31. Hydrographs from stream gages at (

A) Gavins Point Dam (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers); (

B) Sioux City, Iowa (U.S. Geological Survey [USGS] 

06486000); (

C) Decatur, Nebr. (USGS 06601200); and (

D) Waverly, Mo. (USGS 06895500). Survey dates are shown as black points. 
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 189

Figure D32. Example of discharge-habitat relations for two physical 

habitat classes simulated with a multidimensional hydrodynamic model 

on the Lower Missouri River near Boonville, Mo. (Johnson and others, 

2006). The “wake” habitat is defined as regions of high spatial gradients 

of depth and velocity associated with flow separation.

Figure D33. Randomly selected transects at Yankton reach. The randomized sample was used to provide unbiased estimates of 

areas of the reach affected by flow and transport processes. Transects were surveyed four separate times throughout the year 

(2006) at various discharges. Transects with identification are for referencing in other figures.
190 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D34. Randomly selected transects at Kensler’s Bend reach. The randomized sample was used to provide 

unbiased estimates of areas of the reach affected by flow and transport processes. Transects were surveyed four 

separate times throughout the year (2006) at various discharges. Transects with identification are for referencing 

in other figures.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 191

Figure D35. Randomly selected transects at Little Sioux reach. The randomized sample was used to provide 

unbiased estimates of areas of the reach affected by flow and transport processes. Transects were surveyed 

five separate times throughout the year (2006) at various discharges. Transects with identification are for 

referencing in other figures.
192 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D36. Randomly selected transects at Miami reach. The randomized sample was used to provide unbiased estimates of 

areas of the reach affected by flow and transport processes. Transects were surveyed four separate times throughout the year 

(2006) at various discharges. Transects with identification are for referencing in other figures.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 193

Figure D37. Planned release hydrograph for Gavins Point Dam, assuming median hydrologic conditions in 

the Missouri River basin, during fiscal years 2006 and 2007 if storage levels are adequate (U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers, 2006). Text indicates the hypothesized functions of spring flow pulses as they may relate to 

reproduction of the pallid sturgeon.
194 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D38. Examples of cross sections along four transects and four surveys at Yankton reach. Elevation of the river bed is 

in meters above the North American Datum of 1988. Data are displayed from left descending bank to right descending bank.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 195

Figure D39. Examples of cross sections along four transects and four surveys, Kensler’s Bend reach. Elevation of the river bed 

is in meters above the North American Datum of 1988. Data are displayed from left descending bank to right descending bank.
196 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D40. Examples of cross sections along four transects and four surveys, Little Sioux reach. Elevation of the river bed is in 

meters above the North American Datum of 1988. Data are displayed from left descending bank to right descending bank.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 197

Figure D41. Examples of cross sections along four transects and four surveys, Miami reach. Elevation of the river bed is in 

meters above North American Datum of 1988. Data are displayed from left descending bank to right descending bank.
198 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D42. Conceptual interpretation of E1 and E2 values of substrate parameters along 

a cross section. Three distinct signatures of E1 and E2 values are illustrated based on 

repeat RoxAnn (Sonavision Ltd., Aberdeen Scotland) measurements, sediment sampling, 

and side-scan sonar interpretation. Mud (or silt) is characterized by low and stable E1 and 

E2 values. Sand is characterized by low and stable E1 values and byfluctuating moderate 

E2 values. The degree of fluctuation in E2 values is likely related to dune form and size. 

Rock, gravel, and coarse, hard sand tend to have very high E1 and/or E2 values.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 199

Figure D43. Depth, E1 (roughness), and E2 (hardness) at cross section 23 P 40 at the Miami reach. Cross 

sections are oriented downstream. E1 and E2 values on the left side of the cross section are both high, 

indicating a hard substrate, revetment. The right side of the cross sections have E1 and E2 values that are 

consistently low, indicating a fine (soft mud and silt) substrate. The middle of the channel illustrates E1 

and E2 signatures typical of sand and dunes, with low E1 and E2 values of varying magnitude. Discharge is 

indicated by the variable Q.
200 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D44. Depth, E1 (roughness) and E2 (hardness) at cross section 53 P 00 at the Miami reach. 

Cross sections are oriented downstream. Both E1 and E2 values on the left side of the cross section are 

relatively high, indicating a presence of gravel on the bed. The remainder of the bed illustrates E1 and E2 

values typical of sand and sand dunes. Discharge is indicated by the variable Q.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 201

Figure D45. Bed velocity and depth at transect 62 P 60 from five separate surveys in the Miami reach. Transect is located 

downstream of a wing dike and is located on the right descending bank. Discharge is indicated by the variable Q.
202 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D46. Bed velocity and depth at transect 65 P 80 from five separate surveys in the Miami reach. Transect is located 

downstream of a wing dike and is located on the right descending bank. Discharge is indicated by the variable Q.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 203

Figure D47. Substrate located within the zone exposed during non-navigation flows in the Miami and Little Sioux 

reaches. Photographs document the finding that 2006 flows were capable of altering substrate conditions in these 

reaches.

 
204 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D48. Sample of (A) one long and (B) one short profile showing bed elevations (A, B, and C) along the thalweg of the Little Sioux 

reach. In future studies, multiple profiles will be compared to provide a better understanding of bed morphology changes over time. 

Short profile was surveyed 2.5–3 hours after long profile.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 205

Figure D49. Sample of (A ) one long and (B) one short profile showing bed elevations (A, B, and C) along the thalweg of the Miami 

reach. In future studues, multiple profiles will be compared to provide a better understanding of bed morphology changes over time. 

Short profile was surveyed 2.5–3 hours after long profile.
206 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure D50. Long profiles surveyed in March, April, May, July, and November 2006 at the Miami reach.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 207

Table D1. List of reaches greater than 1 km in length that were mapped for sturgeon habitat-use assessment in 2005 and 

2006.

[km, kilometer; km2, square kilometers]

For reaches greater than 1 km in length: 2005 2006 Total

Number of reaches

All reaches 88 28 116

Randomized reaches 65 13 78

Number of reaches with

Depth 88 28 116

Velocity 87 28 115

Substrate 48 26 74

Side-scan sonar 0 7 7

Number of reaches by segment

Gavins 1 4 5

Ponca 2 2 4

Big Sioux 42 5 47

Platte 4 1 5

Kansas 8 7 15

Grand 23 7 30

Osage 8 2 10

Length of river surveyed, in km

Overlapping areas counted only once 197.8 73.6 251.71

Counting overlap each time mapped 231.1 74.4 305.5

Area of river surveyed, in km2

Overlapping areas counted only once 51 19.3 64.81

Counting overlap each time mapped 59.3 19.5 78.8

Number of sturgeon in mapped reaches 

(for all discharges)

Includes initial capture 407 215 622

Relocations only 343 208 551

1

Total values are net length or area mapped in both years. The total is less than the sum of 2005 and 2006 values because of areas that were mapped 

in both years.
208 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Table D2. Summary of 2005 and 2006 reaches surveyed for sturgeon habitat-use assessment.—Continued

[RM, river mile, km2, square kilometers; m/s, meters per second; ft3/s, cubic feet per second; x, map completed; GP, Gavins Point Dam; --, not available; SUX, 

Sioux City; BS, Big Sioux; DE, Decatur; OM, Omaha; NC, Nebraska City; KC, Kansas City; WA, Waverly; GL, Glasgow; CH, Chariton; BO, Booneville; HE, 

Hermann; GA, Gasconade; STC, St Charles]

Segment

Center 

of reach 

RM Map date

Area,

 km2

Length, 

meters

Depth, 

meters

Velocity,

m/s Substrate

Sidescan 

sonar

Provisional 

discharge 

ft3/s

Gages 

used1

Selection 

type

Acoustic ID 

of primary 

target 

sturgeon

Gavins 807.9 2006-07-11 0.66 2,966 x x x 25,500 GP random 166

805.6 2006-06-13 0.85 2,505 x x x x 25,000 GP nonrandom --

775.2 2006-05-30 0.54 2,314 x x x x 21,000 GP nonrandom 459

774.1 2006-06-08 0.80 2,167 x x 23,000 GP nonrandom 461

759.7 2005-06-15 0.58 1,384 x x x 27,500 SUX, BS random 131

Ponca 751.7 2006-06-22 0.79 2,898 x x x 26,800 SUX, BS nonrandom 460

746.4 2005-06-10 0.58 2,570 x x x 32,400 SUX, BS random 31400

746.3 2005-07-11 0.30 1,332 x x x 22,800 SUX, BS nonrandom 31400

743.7 2006-07-12 0.69 3,005 x x x 26,200 SUX, BS random 484

Big Sioux 732.4 2005-06-16 0.48 2,651 x x x 32,900 SUX random 145

725 2006-05-23 0.46 2,453 x x x 27,300 SUX random 458

716.9 2005-08-09 0.35 1,816 x x x 26,100 SUX nonrandom 145

709.2 2006-06-07 0.55 2,996 x x x 27,500 SUX nonrandom 451

701.1 2005-08-10 0.49 2,559 x x 26,400 SUX nonrandom 133

697.8 2005-06-03 0.54 2,721 x x x 27,600 SUX random 145

693.5 2005-06-09 0.49 2,585 x x x 42,900 DE random 29900

693 2005-06-17 0.54 2,849 x x x 34,200 DE random 29900

692.7 2005-07-12 0.29 1,526 x x x 26,200 DE nonrandom 126

686.6 2005-05-18 0.41 2,164 x x x 23,900 DE random 133

683.9 2005-06-24 0.46 2,327 x x x 31,900 DE random 143

673.8 2005-05-10 0.58 3,016 x x x 26,400 DE random 133

672.4 2005-06-02 0.52 2,726 x x x 29,300 DE random 139

670.4 2005-08-11 0.52 2,759 x x 28,000 DE nonrandom 31400

669.2 2006-06-01 0.59 3,013 x x x 26,400 DE nonrandom 472

668.9 2005-04-22 0.42 2,190 x x x 31,200 OM nonrandom --

665.6 2006-06-06 0.59 3,021 x x x 29,500 OM nonrandom 490

663 2005-06-08 0.55 2,780 x x x 45,200 OM random 124

657.4 2005-05-19 0.41 2,077 x x 31,600 OM random 82

654.7 2005-05-07 0.45 2,369 x x x 26,800 OM random 139

652 2005-05-25 0.45 2,357 x x x 29,900 OM nonrandom 135

651.8 2005-07-13 0.29 1,532 x x x 28,800 OM nonrandom 135

650.3 2005-06-23 0.53 2,746 x x x 34,300 OM random 93

647.6 2005-05-11 0.43 2,085 x x x 32,200 OM random 137

644.8 2005-06-14 0.58 2,799 x x x 36,900 OM random 142

641.5 2006-05-18 0.31 1,612 x x x 34,600 OM random 477

640.5 2005-05-05 0.60 3,120 x x x 27,700 OM random 141

638.9 2005-06-01 0.55 2,762 x x x 33,100 OM random 86

638.3 2005-04-20 0.57 3,065 x x x 27,900 OM nonrandom --

627.8 2005-07-14 0.29 1,525 x x x 28,600 OM nonrandom 30800

627.6 2005-05-20 0.49 2,487 x x x 35,000 OM nonrandom 83

626.1 2005-09-01 0.46 2,349 x x x 27,800 OM nonrandom 30800

622.8 2005-06-22 0.61 2,862 x x x 33,800 OM random 30900

620.2 2005-05-12 0.56 2,952 x x x 34,000 OM random 29600

618.7 2005-06-21 0.54 2,765 x x x 34,600 OM random 83

616.3 2005-08-31 0.54 2,702 x x x 27,800 OM nonrandom 86

614.5 2005-04-30 0.50 2,799 x x x 25,200 OM nonrandom --

611.6 2005-04-28 0.56 2,867 x x x 25,100 OM nonrandom --

627.8 2005-07-14 0.29 1,525 x x x 28,600 OM nonrandom 30800
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 209

Table D2. Summary of 2005 and 2006 reaches surveyed for sturgeon habitat-use assessment.—Continued

[RM, river mile, km2, square kilometers; m/s, meters per second; ft3/s, cubic feet per second; x, map completed; GP, Gavins Point Dam; --, not available; SUX, 

Sioux City; BS, Big Sioux; DE, Decatur; OM, Omaha; NC, Nebraska City; KC, Kansas City; WA, Waverly; GL, Glasgow; CH, Chariton; BO, Booneville; HE, 

Hermann; GA, Gasconade; STC, St Charles]

Segment

Center 

of reach 

RM Map date

Area,

 km2

Length, 

meters

Depth, 

meters

Velocity,

m/s Substrate

Sidescan 

sonar

Provisional 

discharge 

ft3/s

Gages 

used1

Selection 

type

Acoustic ID 

of primary 

target 

sturgeon

609.9 2005-05-06 0.50 2,537 x x x 26,800 OM random 81

609.7 2005-06-05 0.50 2,542 x x x 33,100 OM random 122

608.2 2005-04-29 0.55 3,151 x x x 25,100 OM nonrandom --

606.8 2005-05-17 0.27 1,349 x x x 36,100 OM random 30500

606.4 2005-04-27 0.54 2,844 x x x 25,300 OM nonrandom --

604.1 2005-06-04 0.48 2,521 x x x 32,900 OM random 30600

602.4 2005-05-09 0.57 3,005 x x x 28,500 OM random 123

601.2 2005-05-22 0.49 2,620 x x x 31,100 OM random 148

Platte 593.7 2005-06-11 0.37 1,896 x x x 57,300 NC random 123

588.6 2005-05-23 0.49 2,385 x x x 39,400 NC random 146

583.8 2006-07-13 0.56 2,974 x x x 30,200 NC random 526

565.4 2005-05-24 0.53 2,488 x x x 39,600 NC random 121

554.2 2005-06-25 0.51 2,319 x x x 46,300 NC random 30300

Kansas 362.8 2005-05-04 0.72 3,013 x x 39,200 KC random 75

354.4 2005-05-25 0.76 3,004 x x 52,900 KC random 29700

331.9 2006-06-20 0.74 2,709 x x x 35,600 KC nonrandom 527

330.1 2005-04-29 0.96 3,048 x x 43,300 KC random 96

326.8 2006-05-24 0.86 2,989 x x x 38,600 KC nonrandom 529

325.2 2005-05-11 0.63 2,141 x x 37,600 KC random 74

315.1 2005-04-27 0.83 3,032 x x 45,000 KC random 30100

311.6 2005-05-05 0.81 3,019 x x 39,200 WA random 95

291.8 2005-05-26 1.00 3,026 x x 53,000 WA random 30700

289.4 2006-07-06 0.86 3,026 x x x 36,200 WA random 443

281.5 2006-06-13 0.28 1,331 x x x x 36,700 WA nonrandom --

280.4 2006-05-04 0.54 2,002 x x x x 65,100 WA random 437

279.7 2006-06-08 0.52 2,171 x x x x 38,200 WA nonrandom 437

278.2 2006-06-14 0.56 2,242 x x x x 37,400 WA nonrandom --

Kansas 275.8 2005-06-10 0.40 1,514 x x 84,400 WA random 105

Grand 247.6 2006-06-02 0.76 2,567 x x x 45,700 GL, CH random 447

247.5 2005-05-12 1.01 2,921 x x 44,400 GL, CH random 107

230.6 2005-05-06 0.81 3,017 x x 42,700 GL random 29500

219.2 2005-04-15 0.93 3,049 x x 69,500 GL random 176

218.9 2006-05-19 0.78 3,021 x x 39,700 GL random 420

217.6 2005-06-27 0.94 3,025 x x 68,900 GL random 31300

208.7 2005-07-05 0.86 2,697 x x 59,300 GL random 102

206.1 2006-06-07 0.73 3,004 x x x x 38,000 GL nonrandom 411

203.3 2005-04-28 0.88 3,043 x x 53,300 GL random 30000

202.3 2006-06-06 0.80 2,886 x x x 40,100 BO nonrandom 440

201.3 2005-04-07 0.93 3,236 x x x 38,700 BO random 71

197.4 2005-05-18 1.09 3,067 x x 106,000 BO random 30400

197 2005-07-13 0.47 1,538 x x 43,000 BO nonrandom 31200

196.1 2006-07-07 0.94 3,002 x x x 38,000 BO random 411

186.8 2005-05-27 0.91 3,032 x x 59,500 BO random 114

178 2005-04-12 0.76 2,772 x x 48,500 BO random 118

177.4 2006-05-10 0.83 2,851 x x x 54,000 BO nonrandom 522

173.5 2005-06-01 0.99 2,948 x x 53,600 BO random 109

173.3 2005-04-22 0.94 2,946 x x 53,800 BO random 118

168 2005-07-01 1.13 3,036 x x 65,400 BO random 176
210 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Table D2. Summary of 2005 and 2006 reaches surveyed for sturgeon habitat-use assessment.—Continued

[RM, river mile, km2, square kilometers; m/s, meters per second; ft3/s, cubic feet per second; x, map completed; GP, Gavins Point Dam; --, not available; SUX, 

Sioux City; BS, Big Sioux; DE, Decatur; OM, Omaha; NC, Nebraska City; KC, Kansas City; WA, Waverly; GL, Glasgow; CH, Chariton; BO, Booneville; HE, 

Hermann; GA, Gasconade; STC, St Charles]

Segment

Center 

of reach 

RM Map date

Area,

 km2

Length, 

meters

Depth, 

meters

Velocity,

m/s Substrate

Sidescan 

sonar

Provisional 

discharge 

ft3/s

Gages 

used1

Selection 

type

Acoustic ID 

of primary 

target 

sturgeon

166.9 2005-05-19 0.97 2,422 x x 90,900 BO random 92

165.5 2006-06-21 0.82 2,983 x x x 37,600 BO random 410

160.6 2005-05-10 0.86 3,033 x x 40,500 BO random 92

146.5 2005-06-03 0.98 2,849 x x 59,600 BO random 109

146.5 2005-08-10 0.90 2,929 x x 35,000 BO nonrandom 109

142.7 2005-05-23 0.98 2,814 x x 71,000 BO random 113

142.1 2005-08-09 0.69 2,394 x x 35,100 BO nonrandom 113

140.9 2005-06-02 0.89 2,750 x x 54,000 BO random 178

136.3 2005-04-14 0.96 2,795 x x x 73,900 BO random 102

130.7 2005-04-19 0.86 2,495 x x 50,000 BO random 164

Osage 128.5 2005-05-31 0.96 2,780 x x 53,600 HE,GA random 164

127.6 2006-05-09 1.06 2,705 x x x 69,700 HE,GA random 412

127.2 2005-04-26 0.98 2,377 x x 86,500 HE,GA random 170

120.6 2005-04-05 0.34 1,084 x x 43,500 HE,GA nonrandom --

119.6 2006-06-30 1.00 3,006 x x x 41,700 HE,GA random 522

118.4 2005-05-03 1.07 3,041 x x 52,700 HE,GA random 23

118.2 2005-07-06 1.09 2,833 x x 66,800 HE,GA random 23

109.3 2005-08-31 1.23 2,992 x x 90,600 HE,GA nonrandom 164

75.9 2005-07-07 0.97 2,796 x x 70,600 HE random 179

27.3 2005-07-08 1.15 3,011 x x 71,800 STC random 30000

1

Gavins Point Dam discharge is from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; all other streamflow discharges are from the U.S. Geological Survey.
Roles of Physical Habitat in Reproduction and Survival of Pallid and Shovelnose Sturgeon in the Missouri River, 2005–06 211

Table D3. Habitat classification hierarchy used in this study.

[X, maps exist at appropriate level of hierarchy]

Habitat hierarchy Variable

Sturgeon found in reaches 

within narrow range 

of discharge (10%) on 

mapped date and in appropriate time period

Sturgeon found in reaches 

that were mapped within 

wider range of discharge 

and in appropriate time 

period All sturgeon relocations

Microhabitat Depth X

Velocity X

Substrate X

Velocity gradient X X

Mesohabitat Proximity to mapped 

control structures

X X X

Classified topographic 

location: depression, 

crest, flat, slope

X X

Macrohabitat Inner bend, outer bend, 

crossover

X X X

Hydrologic/physiographic River segment X X X
212 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Prepared by: 

USGS Enterprise Publishing Network 

Rolla Publishing Service Center 

1400 Independence Road 

Rolla, MO 65401

For more information concerning this publication, contact:

Director

U.S. Geological Survey

Columbia Environmental Research Center

4200 New Haven Road

Columbia, MO 65201

(573) 875–5399

Or visit the Columbia Environmental Research Center website at:

http://www.cerc.usgs.gov

Table D4. Habitat-availability sites with survey date and discharge indicated.

[ft3/s, cubic feet second; NEWSC, U.S. Geological Survey Nebraska Water Science Center; IAWSC, U.S. Geological Survey Iowa Water 

Science Center; CERC, U.S. Geological Survey Columbia Environmental Research Center; RV, research vessel]

Site Survey date Survey crew/ vessel Discharge (average ft3/s)

Yankton 3/7/2006 NEWSC 9,000

3/28/2006 NEWSC, IAWSC 18,800

5/15/2006 NEWSC, IAWSC 23,500

6/26/2006 NEWSC, IAWSC 25,000

Kensler’s Bend 3/9/2006 NEWSC 12,300

3/30/2006 IAWSC 23,800

5/16/2006 NEWSC, IAWSC 29,300

6/20/2006 NEWSC, IAWSC 28,500

Little Sioux 3/14/2006 CERC, RV Slim Funk 12,600

4/17/2006 CERC, RV Slim Funk 27,000

5/16/2006 CERC, RV Slim Funk 40,200

7/18/2006 CERC, RV Slim Funk 26,400

10/24/2006 CERC, RV Slim Funk 11,600

Miami 3/23/2006 CERC, RV Lucien Brush 24,500

4/19/2006 CERC, RV Lucien Brush 47,200

5/22/2006 CERC, RV Lucien Brush 43,000

7/25/2006 CERC, RV Lucien Brush 35,000

11/6/2006 CERC, RV Lucien Brush 21,000
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning 

Behavior and Habitat Use

By Darin G. Simpkins1 and Steven R. LaBay2

Chapter E of 

Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, 

and Population Dynamics of Pallid Sturgeon and Shovelnose 

Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Edited by Carl E. Korschgen

1

 U.S. Geological Survey, Columbia Environmental Research Center.

2

 South Dakota Game, Fish, and Parks, Yankton Field Office.

Open-File Report 2007–1262

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
Contents

Abstract.......................................................................................................................................................217

Introduction.................................................................................................................................................218

Study Area...................................................................................................................................................219

Methods.......................................................................................................................................................219

Hydrologic Conditions and Temperature ......................................................................................219

Presence and Aggregation of Sturgeon near Coarse Substrate Habitats 

(Objectives 1 & 2) ................................................................................................................219

Use of Coarse Substrate Habitats for Spawning (Objective 3) .................................................220

Spatial and Temporal Distribution of Larval Sturgeon and Other Larval Fishes 

(Objective 4)..........................................................................................................................221

Results and Discussion.............................................................................................................................221

Hydrologic Conditions and Temperature ......................................................................................221

Presence and Aggregation of Sturgeon near Coarse Substrate Habitats 

(Objectives 1 & 2) ................................................................................................................221

Use of Coarse Substrate Habitats for Spawning (Objective 3) .................................................223

Spatial and Temporal Distribution of Larval Sturgeon and Other Larval Fishes 

(Objective 4)..........................................................................................................................224

Larval Fishes.............................................................................................................................224

Larval Sturgeon........................................................................................................................225

Summary......................................................................................................................................................226

Acknowledgments.....................................................................................................................................227

References Cited........................................................................................................................................227

Figures and Tables.....................................................................................................................................229

Figures

E1. Hydrograph from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2006 annual operating plan 

for the Missouri River below Gavins Point Dam..................................................................230

E2. Map showing the Missouri National Recreational River system below Gavins Point 

Dam and approximate bend locations (numbered boxes) where hard substrates 

occurred (bends 1, 3, and 4) and sturgeon (bends 1–12), eggs (bends 1, 3, 4, 17, and 

30), and larvae (bends 2, 4, 7, 11, 17, 20, 30) were sampled during 2006..........................231

E3. Photograph showing coarse substrate deposits at river mile 806 (bend 4) in early 

March 2006 at a discharge of 9,000 ft3/s from Gavins Point Dam.....................................232

E4. Hypothetical map of the Missouri River showing boundaries of continuous 

macrohabitats ...........................................................................................................................233

E5–E7. Photographs showing—

E5. Mats used to sample eggs on coarse substrate deposits........................................234

E6. Lcthyoplankton net with 750-μm mesh attached to a 75-lb (34 kg) Columbusstyle sounding weight used to sample drifting larval fishes ....................................234

E7. A larval sturgeon (approximately 8-mm in total length) that was collected 

upstream from the Vermillion River bend 17 on May 3, 2006....................................235

E8. Graph showing actual flows and water temperatures at Gavins Point Dam in 2006 .....235
iii

E9–E10. Bar graphs showing—

E9. Mean catch-per-unit effort (CPUE) of shovelnose sturgeon and gravid 

shovelnose sturgeon at targeted bends in the Missouri National 

Recreational River reach below Gavins Point Dam that were sampled in 

2006 ....................................................................................................................................236

E10. Mean catch-per-unit effort (CPUE) of shovelnose sturgeon and gravid 

shovelnose sturgeon at randomly selected bends from upper (bends 1–6) 

and lower (bends 7–12) river segments in the Missouri National Recreational 

River reach below Gavins Point Dam that were sampled in 2006 ...........................237

E11–E12. Scatter plots showing—

E11. Effect of flow from Gavins Point Dam on catch-per-unit effort (CPUE) of 

shovelnose sturgeon collected in 2006........................................................................238

E12. Effect of 3-day changes in flow on catch-per-unit effort (CPUE) of 

shovelnose sturgeon collected in 2006........................................................................238

E13–E14. Graphs showing—

E13. Trends in mean catch-per-unit effort (CPUE) of all shovelnose sturgeon 

collected at bend 3 (river mile 808) and bend 4 (river mile 806) in relationship 

to flow from Gavins Point Dam in 2006.........................................................................239

E14. Trends in mean catch-per-unit effort (CPUE) of all gravid shovelnose 

sturgeon collected at bend 3 (river mile 808) and bend 4 (river mile 806) in 

relationship to flow from Gavins Point Dam in 2006...................................................240

E15. Photograph showing opaque eggs collected on mat.........................................................241

E16–E23. Graphs showing—

E16. Mean column velocities (m/s), bottom velocities (m/s), and depths (m) 

for mats that were observed with opaque eggs.........................................................242

E17. Mean density (number/100 m3) by date of larval fishes collected in the 

Missouri River downstream from the Gavins Point Dam (bend 2) in 2006 .............243

E18. Mean density (number/100 m3) by date of larval fishes collected in the 

Missouri River downstream from Riverside Park in Yankton, S. Dak. (bend 4) 

in 2006 ................................................................................................................................243

E19. Mean density (number/100 m3) by date of larval fishes collected in the 

Missouri River upstream from the James River (bend 7) in 2006 ............................244

E20. Mean density (number/100 m3) by date of larval fishes collected in the 

Missouri River downstream from the James River (bend 11) in 2006.....................244

E21. Mean density (number/100 m3) by date of larval fishes collected in the 

Missouri River upstream from the Vermillion River (bend 17) in 2006.....................245

E22. Mean density (number/100 m3) by date of larval fishes collected in the 

Missouri River downstream from the Vermillion River (bend 20) in 2006...............245

E23. Mean density (number/100 m3) by date of larval fishes collected in the 

Missouri River downstream from the boat ramp at Ponca State Park 

(bend 30) in 2006...............................................................................................................246
iv

Tables

E1. River bends and associated rivermiles (RM) where trammel nets were drifted 

to sample shovelnose sturgeon (Total) and gravid shovelnose sturgeon (gravid) 

in the Missouri National Recreational River reach below Gavins Point Dam................247

E2. Reproductive stage of female and male shovelnose sturgeon collected from 

May 2001 through June 2002 ..................................................................................................248

E3. Description of larval fish sampling sites for 2006 in the Missouri National 

Recreational River reach below Gavins Point Dam............................................................248

E4. Mean catch-per-unit effort (CPUE; with standard errors in parentheses) of 

shovelnose sturgeon sampled with drifting trammel nets at targeted bends 

and randomly selected bends from upper (bends 1–6) and lower (bends 7–12) 

segments of the Missourri National Recreational River reach below Gavins 

Point Dam during five flow periods in 2006 ..........................................................................249

E5. Mean catch-per-unit effort (CPUE; with standard errors in parentheses) of 

gravid shovelnose sturgeon sampled with drifting trammel nets at targeted 

bends and randomly selected bends from upper (bends 1–6) and lower (bends 

7–12) segments of the Missouri National Recreational River reach below Gavins 

Point Dam during five flow periods in 2006 ..........................................................................249

E6. Total number of sturgeon tagged and recaptured at the same bend at least once 

during five flow periods in 2006..............................................................................................249

E7. Number (N) and frequency (%) of larval fishes collected at seven sites in the 

Missouri National Recreational River reach below Gavins Point Dam in 2006..............250

E8. Total number (N), mean density (number/100 m3), median density, minimum 

density (min), maximum density (max), mean total length (mm), and total length 

range of larval sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus spp.), by date, collected in the Missouri 

River upstream from the James River (bend 7) in 2006 ......................................................251

E9. Total number (N), mean density (number/100 m3), median density, minimum 

density (min), maximum density (max), mean total length (mm), and total length 

range of larval sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus spp.), by date, collected in the Missouri 

River upstream from the Vermillion River (Bend 17) in 2006..............................................252

E10. Total number (N), mean density (number/100 m3), median density, minimum 

density (min), maximum density (max), mean total length (mm), and total length 

range of larval sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus spp.), by date, collected in the Missouri 

River downstream from the Vermillion River (Bend 20) in 2006 ........................................253

E11. Total number (N), mean density (number/100 m3), median density, minimum 

density (min), maximum density (max), mean total length (mm), and total length 

range of larval sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus spp.), by date, collected in the Missouri 

River downstream from the boat ramp at Ponca State Park (Bend 30) in 2006 .............254
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and 

Habitat Use

By Darin G. Simpkins1 and Steven R. LaBay2

1

 U.S. Geological Survey, Columbia Environmental Research Center.

2

 South Dakota Game, Fish, and Parks, Yankton Field Office.

Abstract

The Missouri River biological opinion developed by 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, 2000, 2003) formally identified that river engineering and flow management practices on the Missouri River 

have impacted reproductive success, growth, and recruitment of pallid sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus) in the Missouri River below Gavins Point Dam. In response, the U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) partnered with state and 

federal agencies to identify causes for poor reproduction and 

recruitment by funding research and monitoring projects that 

addressed questions about environmental conditions required 

by pallid sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon (S. platorynchus) 

to complete their life cycles and flow management practices 

that enhance environmental conditions for spawning and 

recruitment of sturgeon in the Missouri River. This chapter 

describes results from activities supported by USACE in 2006 

to (1) determine if and when gravid pallid sturgeon or shovelnose sturgeon were found near coarse substrate habitats, (2) 

assess if sturgeon aggregate in the vicinity of coarse substrate 

habitats during modified hydrologic events, (3) evaluate if 

coarse substrate habitats are used for spawning by sturgeon, 

and (4) assess the spatial and temporal distribution of drifting 

larval sturgeon and other larval fishes in relationship to coarse 

substrate habitats and tributaries below Gavins Point Dam. 

This research was conducted in the Missouri National Recreational River reach of the Missouri River below Gavins Point 

Dam and jointly implemented by the U.S. Geological Survey 

Columbia Environmental Research Center and South Dakota 

Game, Fish, and Parks. 

Flows released from Gavins Point Dam were not exactly 

as prescribed in the 2006 USACE annual operating plan 

(U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2006), but flow periods were 

prescribed based on patterns in flow releases and water temperature. Winter period was characterized by relatively stable 

flows of 9,000–10,000 ft3/s when water temperatures were less 

than 5.5 degrees Celsius (°C). The March pulse period began 

March 17, 2006, when flows increased to 21,000 ft3/s and continued until the interpulse period began on April 1when flows 

decreased to 15,400 ft3/s. The May pulse period began on May 

13 when flow increased to 25,000 ft3/s and was characterized 

by fluctuations in mean daily flow as high as 6,500 ft3/s. Daily 

mean water temperatures were 14–23°C during the May pulse 

period. The summer period began on June 15 after mean flows 

stabilized at 25,000 ft3/s over 3 consecutive days.

Sturgeon were captured by using drifting trammel nets 

at targeted and randomly selected sites from March through 

August to identify if and when pallid sturgeon and shovelnose 

sturgeon occur and aggregate near coarse substrate deposits. 

Gravid shovelnose sturgeon were assessed for reproductive 

condition to determine readiness to spawn. Pallid sturgeon 

and shovelnose sturgeon were collected near coarse substrate 

deposits. Capture rates of shovelnose sturgeon indicated the 

possibility of a winter aggregation near one coarse substrate 

deposit upstream from the Highway 81 bridge in Yankton, 

S. Dak., but interactions between fish behavior and high and 

variable flows affected capture efficiencies and our ability 

to identify aggregations during other periods. Nevertheless, 

capture rates of gravid shovelnose sturgeon were high during 

the May pulse and summer period upstream from the Highway 

81 bridge despite any effect of flow. Assessments of reproductive condition suggested that most of these fish were ready to 

spawn if appropriate stimuli were available for fish to release 

eggs (chap. C).

Egg mats were used to determine if coarse substrate 

deposits were used for spawning by sturgeon. Sturgeon eggs 

were not collected despite the deployment of 132 mats over 

coarse substrate deposits from May through mid-July. However, opaque eggs were collected on mats on four separate 

occasions. Eggs from one occasion were successfully hatched 

in the hatchery and tentatively identified as Catostomidae. 

Collections of adhesive eggs on mats demonstrate the usefulness of the technique to determine spawning sites and characterize spawning habitats for lithophillic fishes in the Missouri 

River. Future attempts to use egg mats should be closely 

coupled with telemetry activities (chap. B).

Larval fishes were sampled two times per week from 

early May to early August at seven sites from Gavins Point 

Dam to Ponca State Park in Nebraska. As of December 5, 

2006, 65 percent of the samples had been processed. A total 

of 10,392 larvae representing 10 families were sampled across 
218 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

sites. Freshwater drum (Sciaenidae Aplodinotus grunniens) 

was the most dominant taxon and composed 85.6 percent of 

the larvae sampled. Other relatively abundant taxa included 

gizzard shad (Dorosoma cepedianum) 6.5 percent), suckers 

(Catostomidae) 3.9 percent, temperate basses (Moronidae) 1.8 

percent, and minnows and carps (Cyprinidae) 0.8 percent). 

Larval sturgeon (Acipenseridae Scaphirhynchus spp.) and 

paddlefish (Polyodontidae Polyodon spathula) composed 0.3 

percent and 0.2 percent of the larval fishes sampled, respectively. Small larval sturgeon (7–10 mm in total length) were 

collected upstream from the James River in August but were 

collected upstream and downstream of the Vermillion River 

and downstream from the boat ramp at Ponca State Park in 

late May and June. On the basis of the sizes of larval sturgeon 

collected, water temperatures, incubation times, movement 

data and recaptures of gravid shovelnose sturgeon used in 

telemetry studies (chap. B), and reproductive assessments 

of gravid female sturgeon captured in the Missouri National 

Recreational River reach (this chapter), we estimate that many 

shovelnose sturgeon spawned between May 28 and June 22 

at water temperatures of 19–23°C. The collection of small 

sturgeon larvae in August upstream from the James River 

however, supports suggestions that shovelnose sturgeon in the 

Missouri River have a protracted spawning period: spawning 

occurred during the May pulse and summer flow periods.

Introduction

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) listed 

pallid sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus) as endangered in 

1990 and identified in a biological opinion to the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers (USACE) that river engineering and flow 

management practices on the Missouri River have impacted 

reproductive success, growth, and recruitment of pallid 

sturgeon and other large river fishes (U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service 2000, 2003). Following the guidance provided by the 

USFWS that was outlined in the opinion as reasonable and 

prudent alternatives, the USACE partnered with State and 

Federal agencies to identify causes for poor reproduction and 

recruitment by funding research and monitoring projects that 

addressed questions about environmental conditions required 

by pallid sturgeon to complete their life cycle. Funded efforts 

included (1) scopes of work from the U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS) to determine the ecological requirements for successful pallid sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon (S. platorynchus) 

reproduction and recruitment in the Missouri River, referred to 

as the Comprehensive Sturgeon Research Project (CSRP), and 

(2) a cooperative, multiagency proposal for long-term evaluation of Sturgeon Response to Flow Modifications (SRFM) 

on the Lower Missouri River (Fleming and others, 2006). In 

2006, these projects were conceived, developed, and proposed 

to be integrated. The CSRP concentrated on the biology of 

pallid sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon, overall unknowns 

about sturgeon life histories, and methods development and 

evaluation for research and monitoring programs on sturgeon 

and other fishes throughout the Missouri River. The SRFM 

project focused on how a specific management action (flow 

manipulation) affected spawning habitat, behavior, and success of sturgeon in the Lower Missouri River. Thus, SRFM 

was inherently a subcomponent of the broad purpose and goals 

outlined within CSRP. 

The SRFM study design was based on hypotheses that 

related specific life-history events of sturgeon to a hydrograph that exhibited two discrete pulses during the spring that 

coincided with historical patterns of snowmelt and precipitation across the Rocky Mountains and Great Plains (fig. E1). 

The USACE annual operating plan (AOP) in 2006 indicated 

that winter flow from Gavins Point Dam would increase from 

9,000 ft3/s to 26,000 ft3/s over a period of 5 days for the first 

pulse in mid- March (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2006). 

After two days, flow would be gradually reduced over 5 days 

and maintained at 21,000 ft3/s during the interpulse period. 

When water temperatures reached 16°C, flow would again 

increase over 2 days and be maintained at 34,000 ft3/s for an 

additional 2 days. Subsequently, flow would be cut by 30 percent over the next 2 days and then decline at a constant rate to 

navigation service over the next 8 days. Analyses of physical 

changes (redistribution of sediments and habitat creation) and 

biological responses (timing of migration, aggregation, spawning, hatching, and dispersal) in relationships to patterns in 

flow were dependent on the occurrence of discrete flow events 

outlined in the AOP and SRFM proposal.

The purpose of this chapter is to provide a report of activities from tasks funded in 2006 by USACE that were described 

as “site-specific assessments” of spawning behavior and habitat use of sturgeon under both CSRP (task 4) and SRFM (task 

1bii). The research approach outlined under these two tasks 

was complementary to ongoing telemetry activities funded by 

USACE under CSRP and SRFM to describe spawning movements and habitat use of pallid sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon in the Missouri River (chap. B), but our approach used 

a multimetric design to document spawning behavior, occurrence, and habitat use of sturgeon (and opportunistically other 

fish species) under various environmental conditions (flow and 

temperature) in the Missouri River below Gavins Point Dam. 

Our approach was patterned from research and monitoring 

activities in the Missouri River below Fort Peck Dam (referred 

to as the Fort Peck Flow Modification Biological Data Collection Plan or simply the Fort Peck Data Collection Plan) that 

was jointly implemented by Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks 

and U.S. Geological Survey and funded by USACE (Braaten 

and Fuller, 2002; 2005). Efforts described in this chapter were 

funded by the USACE and jointly implemented by the USGS 

Columbia Environmental Research Center (CERC) and South 

Dakota Game, Fish, and Parks. 

Our efforts were based on an a priori hypothesis that 

was developed from other sturgeon species in other river 

systems. Spawning habitat for pallid sturgeon and shovelnose 

sturgeon has not been described but is thought to have similar 

physical characteristics used by various sturgeon species 
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and Habitat Use 219

for spawning (Quist and others, 2004). Sturgeon generally 

spawn over coarse gravel, cobble, or boulder substrates where 

water velocities are swift (Parsley and Beckham, 1994; Auer, 

1996; Marchant and Shutters, 1996; Kynard, 1997; Fox and 

others, 2000; Bruch and Binkowski, 2002). Such spawning 

habitats have been characterized below or in close proximity 

to impoundments or other structures that modify hydrologic 

characteristics (bridges) or serve as migration barriers (Auer, 

1996; Bruch and Binkowski, 2002; Peterson and others, 2002; 

Cooke and Leach, 2004; Duncan and others, 2004). In 2005, 

USGS personnel conducted visual and side-scan sonar surveys 

in the Lower Missouri River and identified several large and 

relatively discrete patches of coarse substrates below Gavins 

Point Dam (figs. E2 and E3). Consequently, our hypothesis 

was that sturgeon in the Missouri River would aggregate and 

spawn in habitats with coarse substrates near Gavins Point 

Dam. Our objectives were to (1) determine if and when gravid 

pallid sturgeon or shovelnose sturgeon were found near coarse 

substrate habitats (CSRP), (2) assess if sturgeon aggregate in 

the vicinity of coarse substrate habitats during modified hydrologic events (SRFM), (3) evaluate if coarse substrate habitats 

are used for spawning by sturgeon (CSRP), and (4) assess the 

spatial and temporal distribution of drifting larval sturgeon and 

other larval fishes in relationship to coarse substrate habitats 

and tributaries (CSRP) below Gavins Point Dam. 

Study Area

The Missouri River study area in 2006 was in the Missouri National Recreational River reach that extends from 

Ponca State Park in Nebraska near river mile (RM) 753 to 

Gavins Point Dam at RM 811 (fig. E2). The river through this 

reach is relatively shallow and has shifting sandbars as well as 

islands and snags (Berry and Young, 2004). River width averages approximately 600 m and varies from 200 m to 1.6 km; 

depth can be as much as 6 m in pools, but much of the river is 

shallow (less than 1 m) deep. Annual discharge after the dam 

was closed averaged 29,556 ft3/s at Sioux City, Iowa. A variety 

of aquatic macrohabitats occur, including main channel and 

border, secondary channels, backwaters, pools downstream 

from sandbars, and tributary confluences. The flood plain is 

relatively level, except for a few areas having steep, tree-covered bluffs. Riverbanks vary from flat, sandy beaches to areas 

with 5-m vertical faces where active erosion occurs. Tributaries of the Missouri River within the reach include the James 

River (mean annual discharge = 759 ft3/s) and the Vermillion 

River (mean annual discharge = 374 ft3/s).

Operation of Gavins Point Dam has caused changes in 

the aquatic habitat (Schmulbach and others, 1981; Galat and 

Lipkin, 2000). Turbidity and temperature have decreased: 

the timing, duration, and extent of spring flows have diminished: channel incision has increased: channel macrohabitats 

have been dewatered: and substrate size on the river bottom 

has increased from scouring (Holly and Karin, 1986). Habitat change and fish stocking caused shifts in the kinds and 

numbers of plankton, macroinvertebrates, and fishes after the 

dam was closed (Morris and others 1968; Walburg and others, 1971; Hesse and Sheets, 1993; Committee on Missouri 

River Ecosystem Science, 2002). Nevertheless, the Missouri 

National Recreational River reach below Gavins Point Dam 

contains a species-rich fish fauna that includes pallid sturgeon 

and shovelnose sturgeon (Berry and Young, 2004).

Methods

Hydrologic Conditions and Temperature

Flow data were obtained from USACE operation 

reports for Gavins Point Dam (http://www.nwd-mr.usace.

army.mil/rcc/, accessed March–September 2006). The 

actual 2006 hydrograph was compared to the anticipated 

hydrograph described in the 2006 USACE AOP for Gavins 

Point Dam to determine if specific flow periods inferred 

from the AOP in the SRFM proposal could be characterized on the basis of patterns in flow and water temperature. 

Water temperature data was obtained from a USGS stream 

gage station (stream gage 06467500) at Yankton, S. Dak. 

(http://waterdata.usgs.gov/sd/nwis/, accessed March–September 2006, chap. F).

Presence and Aggregation of Sturgeon near 

Coarse Substrate Habitats (Objectives 1 & 2)

From early March through late August, 2006 trammel nets were used to sample sturgeon near three coarse 

substrate habitat patches previously identified as potential 

spawning locations in 2005 surveys below Gavins Point 

Dam (figs. E2 and E3). Trammel nets were 125 ft (38.1 

m) long multifilament nets with an 8-ft (2.4-m) inner wall 

of 2.5-in (6.4 cm) bar mesh and a 6-ft (1.8-m) outer wall 

of 12-in (30.5-cm) bar mesh. Nets were actively fished by 

drifting them perpendicular to the current for a target distance of 984 ft (300 m), the target distance, but frequently 

was less because of the net becoming tangled in large 

substrates and woody debris. Sample sites included a patch 

immediately downstream from the dam (bend 1), near the 

highway 81 bridge (bend 3), and 5 mil (8 km) downstream 

from Gavins Point Dam (bend 4; fig. E2; table E1). Fish 

were also sampled from two randomly selected bends from 

each of two river segments every week. The upper segment was between RM 802 and RM 811 (bends 1–6) and 

the lower river segment was between RM 790 and RM 801 

(bends 7–12; table E1). Bends were numbered on the basis 

of aerial photographs taken in 2005.

Sampling followed protocols outlined in Drobish 

(2004). Trammel nets were drifted two times per week near 
220 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

each coarse substrate patch with at least a 3-day interval 

between samples. Samples consisted of four net drifts per 

site for each visit. Attempts were made to drift at least 

one net in each of three macrohabitats within the bend, 

including inside and outside bends and channel crossovers 

as described in Drobish (2004) and Sappington and others (1998; fig. E4), with the purpose of identifying where 

sturgeon could be effectively sampled with drifting trammel nets within the bend and of maximizing capture rates. 

Consequently, the fourth net was deployed in the habitat 

where sturgeon had been previously collected to maximize 

sturgeon captures within the bend. Sturgeon were weighed, 

measured, and individually marked by using alphanumeric 

T-bar anchor tags. 

Sturgeon exhibiting any one of the following characteristics were evaluated for the presence of black eggs: relative 

weight body condition index (Wr) greater than 86 (Quist 

and others, 1998), dark belly markings, and/or protruded 

bellies. Analyses (analysis of variance and Tukeys multiple 

comparisons tests; Zar 1996) on existing USGS data of 343 

shovelnose sturgeon sampled from May 2001 to June 2002 

(data from Wildhaber and others, 2005) revealed that mean 

Wr of gravid shovelnose sturgeon (stage 5; table E2) significantly differed (P < 0.05; JMP 4.0.4, SAS Institute Inc., 

2001) from males and younger stages of females (stages less 

than 5; table E2). Although the ranges of Wr values overlapped among reproductive stages and sexes, 56 percent of 

stage 5 female shovelnose sturgeon collected in 2001–2002 

had Wr values greater than 86. Thus, Wr was used with other 

characteristics (dark belly markings and protruded bellies) of 

fish collected in 2006 to minimize the necessity for surgical 

evaluation of reproductive state and provided cost-effective, 

conservative estimates of gravid shovelnose sturgeon capture 

rates. 

Egg and blood samples were collected from gravid 

shovelnose sturgeon in the field following CERC standard 

operating procedures (SOP P.624; SOP P.626: chap. C), 

and reproductive readiness was assessed in the laboratory 

by using blood chemistry, egg polarization index measurement, and physiology (germinal vesicle breakdown during 

progesterone assays) as described under separate tasks of 

CSRP (task 2) and SRFM (task 1ci) (chap. C). Assessments 

of reproductive condition of males were not conducted.

Capture data were sent to the Missouri Department 

of Conservation for electronic entry to the USACE Missouri River monitoring database (Drobish, 2004). The total 

number of gravid shovelnose sturgeon and female shovelnose sturgeon captured was compared between targeted 

bends with coarse substrate and randomly selected bends by 

using chi-square analysis (Zar, 1996). Catch-per-unit effort 

(CPUE) was calculated as the number of sturgeon collected 

per 100 m that the net drifted. Total shovelnose sturgeon 

and gravid shovelnose sturgeon CPUE were compared to 

CPUE estimates derived from randomly selected sites over 

time in association with changes in flow and water temperature. 

Use of Coarse Substrate Habitats for Spawning 

(Objective 3)

We designed devices to collect eggs deposited over coarse 

substrates where sturgeon were suspected to spawn in the 

Missouri River below Gavins Point Dam (fig. E2, E3, and E4). 

Egg mats were designed according to Marchant and Shutters 

(1996) with general modifications described in Duncan and 

others (2004). Mats consisted of a commercial spawning mat 

material (Spawntex, Blocksom & Co., Michigan City, Ind.) 

that was placed within a folded piece of wire mesh. Straight 

reinforcement bar was attached to the structures to provide 

added stability and weight. Egg mats measured 24 square 

inches (61 cm2) and weighed 15–17 lb (7–8 kg). One or two 

5- lb (2 kg) concrete weights were attached as anchors when 

needed to secure egg mat placement. Buoys were attached to 

each mat with rope that was used for egg mat retrieval. 

Egg mats were placed in a grid pattern over coarse 

substrate patches identified in 2005 below Gavins Point Dam 

that were suspected spawning sites based on studies of other 

sturgeon species in other river systems and on behavioral 

data from telemetry activities described in CSRP (task 1) and 

SRFM (tasks 1ai and 1bi) (chap. B). Sample sites included 

patches where gravid shovelnose sturgeon were sampled 

for objectives 1 and 2 (figs. E2 and E3; table E1): (1) patch 

immediately downstream from the dam (bend 1), (2) a patch 

near the Highway 81 bridge (bend 3), and (3) a patch 5 mi (8 

km) downstream from Gavins Point Dam (bend 4). The size of 

the grid depended on the size of the substrate deposit, but egg 

mats were spaced approximately 26 ft (8 m) apart throughout 

each submerged deposit where water velocities were relatively 

swift in comparison to the surrounding area and depths were 

greater than 3 ft (1 m) at the time of deployment. 

Mats were deployed in early May 2006 and checked for 

the presence of eggs every 48–72 hours through mid-July. 

Eggs that were collected on mats were counted. The spatial 

arrangement and concentration of eggs on mats were recorded. 

Egg samples were collected and preserved in 70 percent ethanol and 10 percent buffered formalin for later identification 

made by using genetics or egg morphology. Another sample of 

eggs was delivered to the USFWS Gavins Point National Fish 

Hatchery in Yankton, S. Dak., in attempt to hatch eggs and 

identify specimens based on larval fish morphology.

Habitat characteristics were assessed at sites where eggs 

were collected. Depth was determined by using sonar (Garmin 

GPSMAP® model 178–I). Mean column and bottom water 

velocity was measured by using a Flow Mate 2000 (Hach/

Marsh-McBirney, Inc., Frederick, Maryland) that was attached 

to a 75-lb (34-kg) Columbus-style sounding weight and 

deployed by using a davit. Mean column velocity was estimated by averaging current velocity measured at 0.2 and 0.8 

times depth where depths were greater than 4 ft (1.2 m) and 

at 0.6 times depth otherwise. Turbidity was measured with a 

model 2100P turbidimeter (Hach Company, Loveland, Colo.). 

Water temperature data were obtained from a USGS gaging 

station (gage 06467500) at Yankton, S. Dak.
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and Habitat Use 221

Spatial and Temporal Distribution of Larval 

Sturgeon and Other Larval Fishes (Objective 4) 

Larval sturgeon and other larval fishes were sampled 

two times per week from early May through August 2006 at 

seven sites (fig. E2; table E3). Two of the sites were located 

downstream from coarse substrate patches where sturgeon 

were suspected to spawn in the Missouri River below Gavins 

Point Dam. One site was downstream from Gavins Point Dam 

(bend 2) and another site was downstream from Riverside Park 

in Yankton, S. Dak. (bend 4), approximately 5-miles (8 km) 

downstream from Gavins Point Dam. Other sites that were 

sampled in the Missouri River were above and below confluences with the James River and the Vermillion River. Another 

site was downstream from the boat ramp at Ponca State Park. 

Larval fish at all sites were sampled with a 0.5-m-diameter 

icthyoplankton net (750-μm mesh) attached to a 75-lb (34-kg) 

Columbus-style sounding weight and fitted with a model 

2030R velocity meter (General Oceanics Inc, Miami, Fla.) 

(fig. E6). 

Larval fish sampling followed general protocols used 

in the Missouri River below Fort Peck Dam as described by 

Braaten and Fuller (2002); however, swift current velocities 

limited our ability to deploy two nets simultaneously at one 

location. Consequently, a single net was attached to a 75-lb 

(34-kg) Columbus-style sounding weight that was deployed 

by using a davit. The boat was anchored during net deployment (“passive” sampling). Duplicate samples were collected at both midwater (M) and bottom (B) areas of the 

water column at both inside bend (ISB) and outside bend 

(OSB) locations of the river channel (macrohabitats) for 

each site (two samples x two depths x two macrohabitats = 

eight samples per visit at each site; table E3). Net position 

in the water column was monitored by using a Lowrance®

X-15 sonar unit (Lowrance® ,Tulsa, Okla. Sampling duration 

for nets was approximately 10 minutes but was dependent 

on accumulation of drifting debris. One sample collected 

from each area in the water column and location in the 

river channel was preserved in 10 percent buffered formalin containing phloxine-B dye, whereas the corresponding duplicate sample was preserved in 70 percent ethanol. 

Samples were stored in Whirl-paks® (M-Tech Diagnostics 

ltd., Chesire, England) until field sampling activities were 

completed. 

Larval fish were extracted from samples and placed in 

vials containing either 10 percent buffered formalin or 70 

percent ethanol, depending on initial preservation method. 

Larvae were identified by using Auer (1982) to at least 

family, but sometimes to genus and species, on the basis of 

morphological characteristics and were counted (fig. E7). 

Damaged individuals that could not be identified were classified as unknown. Identifications of sturgeon and paddlefish (Polyodon spathula) larvae were verified by Darrel 

Snyder at Colorado State University (Snyder, 1980, 2002).

Results and Discussion

Hydrologic Conditions and Temperature

The AOP described a hydrograph that exhibited two 

distinct flow pulses that were planned to be released in 2006 

from Gavins Point Dam when water temperature criteria were 

met (16°C for May pulse) if sufficient water was available for 

release from Lewis and Clark Lake (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2006). The SRFM proposal presented hypotheses about 

life-history events of pallid sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon 

that may be related to specific flow periods that were inferred 

from the hydrograph in the AOP (fig. E1). Actual flows 

released from Gavins Point Dam in 2006 did not occur exactly 

as described in the 2006 AOP. The March pulse was cancelled 

because of insufficient water storage in Lewis and Clark Lake, 

because flows were generally lower than described in the 

AOP, and because the May pulse was substantially smaller in 

magnitude and did not exhibit the 30 percent decrease in flow 

after peaking as described in the AOP (fig. E8). Nevertheless, 

flow periods inferred from the AOP in the SRFM proposal 

were modified for the actual 2006 hydrograph to assess relationships between flow and capture rates of sturgeon. For this 

analysis, the winter flow period was characterized by daily 

mean flows of 9,000–10,000 ft3/s that occurred when water 

temperatures were less than 5.5°C (fig. E8). The March pulse 

period began on March 17 when flow was increasing to 21,000 

ft3/s and the period continued until the interpulse period began 

on April 1 when flow decreased to 15,400 ft3/s. Flows during the interpulse period varied from 10,000 to 16,100 ft3

/s as 

daily mean water temperatures increased from 5.5°C–15°C. 

The May pulse period began on May 13when flows were 

increased to 25,000 ft3/s over a period of 2 days and was characterized by fluctuations in daily mean flow as high as 6,500 

ft3/s. Daily mean water temperatures were 14°C–23°C during 

the May pulse period. The summer period began on June 15 

after mean flows stabilized at 25,000 ft3/s over three consecutive days. Daily mean water temperatures were 19°C–27°C 

during the summer period.

Presence and Aggregation of Sturgeon near 

Coarse Substrate Habitats (Objectives 1 & 2)

A total of 997 trammel net drifts over a total of 78 mi (126 

km) collected 1 lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens), 3 pallid 

sturgeon, and 709 shovelnose sturgeon, including 73 gravid 

shovelnose sturgeon from March 6 to August 30, 2006 (table 

E1). The lake sturgeon and one pallid sturgeon were captured 

at RM 803 (bend 5) and the other two pallid sturgeon were 

captured at RM 808 (bend 3; fig. E2). Our captures of pallid 

sturgeon coincided with the location of a radio-tagged pallid 

sturgeon by USGS personnel at RM 808 in March (chap. B). 
222 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Fifty-four percent of the net drifts were targeted at hard 

substrate patches and collected 62 percent of the shovelnose 

sturgeon and 47 percent of the gravid shovelnose sturgeon. 

Significantly more shovelnose sturgeon were captured near 

hard substrate patches than at random locations (X2 = 22.68; 

P < 0.001). Most of the shovelnose sturgeon were captured at 

bends 3 and 4 (table E1). The total number of gravid shovelnose sturgeon collected did not differ between targeted and 

randomly selected sites, but random sites that were sampled 

included hard-substrate patches that were targeted for sturgeon. Twelve out of 39 gravid sturgeon were collected from 

bends 1, 3, and 4 which were randomly selected. Removal of 

these random bends and associated fish data from the analysis 

did not result in a statistical difference in the total number of 

gravid shovelnose sturgeon collected between targeted and 

randomly selected sites. Nevertheless, most of the gravid 

shovelnose sturgeon were captured at bends 3 and 4 (table E1). 

Forty-three percent of gravid shovelnose sturgeon assessed for 

reproductive readiness at bends 1, 3, and 4 and 31 percent of 

gravid shovelnose sturgeon assessed for reproductive readiness at other sites had polarization index (PI) values of less 

than 0.10 and germinal vesicle breakdown during progesterone 

assays (chap. C).

Catch rates (CPUE) of shovelnose sturgeon and gravid 

shovelnose sturgeon varied spatially and temporally (figs. 

E9 and E10; table E1). Few shovelnose sturgeon were collected immediately below Gavins Point Dam (bend 1; fig. 

E9). Trammel nets were difficult to drift at many sites within 

this bend because of swift velocities, large substrates (cobble 

and boulders), debris, and the intermittent presence of recreational anglers. Nevertheless, gravid shovelnose sturgeon 

were sampled at this bend in late April and early May. Mean 

number per net and CPUE of shovelnose sturgeon from March 

through August was highest near coarse substrate patches 

above (bend 3) and below (bend 4) the Highway 81 bridge and 

at bend 8 (table E1). Daily mean CPUE of shovelnose sturgeon were highest during early to mid March at bend 3 and 4 

(fig E9). After mid-March, shovelnose sturgeon were consistently captured at low rates at bend 3 throughout the study, but 

daily mean CPUE of shovelnose sturgeon at bend 4 was higher 

in April and early May than in the following months. Relatively high daily mean CPUE of shovelnose sturgeon collected 

with the trammel nets generally corresponded to collections 

of gravid shovelnose sturgeon. The highest mean daily CPUE 

of gravid shovelnose sturgeon among all sites was at bend 4 in 

early March (fig. E9).

Daily mean CPUE of shovelnose sturgeon at randomly 

selected bends varied among segments and over time (fig. 

E10). Bends selected from the upper segment (bends 1–6) generally had higher catches of sturgeon than did bends from the 

lower segment (bends 7–12). Relative catches of shovelnose 

sturgeon at random bends were not as high as targeted bends 

in March, but CPUE of shovelnose sturgeon in random bends 

was relatively high in April and May. Trends in daily CPUE of 

gravid shovelnose sturgeon were similar for randomly selected 

bends in upper and lower segments, but catches were relatively 

high in early June for upper segment bends and in mid-May 

for in lower segment bends. 

Randomly selected sites where high CPUE of gravid 

female sturgeon occurred was at bend 8 (RM 799) on April 23, 

bend 6 (RM 802) on April 30, and bend 3 (RM 808) on June 

6, but, the high CPUE estimate at bend 8 was based on the 

collection of only one gravid shovelnose sturgeon over a relatively short drift distance (39 ft or 12 m) in comparison to the 

mean drift distance for all samples (table E1). Nets deployed at 

bend 6 on April 30 captured three gravid shovelnose sturgeon, 

whereas nets at bend 3 on June 6 captured eight gravid shovelnose sturgeon. Only one of the fish collected at bend 6 had 

a PI value of less than 0.10 and germinal vesicle breakdown 

during progesterone assays, but all of the gravid shovelnose 

sturgeon captured at bend 3 had PI values less than 0.10 and 

germinal vesicle breakdown during progesterone assays (chap. 

C). Furthermore, 19 out of 22 (86 percent) gravid shovelnose 

sturgeon assessed for reproductive readiness between June 

1and June 22from bend 3 had PI values less than 0.10 and 16 

out of 22 (73 percent) had germinal vesicle breakdown during 

progesterone assays. Thus, assessments of reproductive condition that were based on egg morphology (polarization index 

(PI) measurement) and physiological assays (germinal vesicle 

breakdown during progesterone assays) suggested that some 

gravid shovelnose sturgeon collected in late May from bend 6 

(RM 802) and most of the fish collected in early to mid-June 

from bend 3 (RM 808) below Gavins Point Dam were ready to 

spawn if appropriate stimuli were available for fish to release 

eggs (D. Papoulias, USGS, oral commun.; chap. C). 

Mean CPUE of shovelnose sturgeon varied across flow 

periods (table E4). Highest mean CPUE occurred during the 

winter flow period at targeted bends 3 and 4. Mean CPUE 

was also relatively high at targeted bends during the interpulse 

period compared to the pulse and summer periods but did not 

differ from randomly sampled bends from upper or lower segments during the interpulse period. Catch rates of gravid shovelnose sturgeon did not differ among flow periods or between 

targeted and random bends (table E5).

Patterns in mean CPUE among flow periods and sample 

locations suggest the possibility of winter aggregations of 

shovelnose sturgeon at two of the three targeted sites where 

coarse substrates occur (bends 3 and 4). In comparison to other 

periods and random sites, mean CPUE was also relatively high 

at bend 4 during the interpulse period, suggesting the possibility 

of an aggregation at this site during this period; however, it was 

expected that recaptures of sturgeon would be frequent during specific periods if aggregations occurred. Thirty individual 

shovelnose sturgeon were tagged and then recaptured during 

sampling under SRFM in 2006. Recapture of shovelnose sturgeon at a sample site occurred infrequently, but 14 shovelnose 

sturgeon at bend 3, 10 shovelnose sturgeon at bend 4, and 1 

shovelnose sturgeon at bend 9 were recaptured in the same bend 

where they were tagged. Most of the recaptures occurred during 

the interpulse period at bend 4 and during summer period at 

bend 3 (table E6). One gravid shovelnose sturgeon was tagged 

on March 8 at bend 4 and recaptured at bend 3 on April 10.
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and Habitat Use 223

An issue in using CPUE and recapture frequencies 

to assess the possible aggregation of sturgeon among flow 

periods includes interactive effects of flow on capture efficiencies and changes in flow on sturgeon behavior. High and 

variable flows were associated with reduced capture rates of 

shovelnose sturgeon during this study. Highest CPUE occurred 

when flows from Gavins Point Dam were less than 20,000 

ft3/s (fig. E11) and did not change over a period of 3 days (fig. 

E12). The effect of flow was evident in mean daily CPUE 

of sturgeon captured at bend 3 and bend 4 (fig. E13). On the 

basis of pooled data (data from random and targeted collections), it seems that highest CPUE occurred when flows were 

relatively low and stable. Nevertheless, CPUE of shovelnose 

sturgeon and gravid shovelnose sturgeon was high in early and 

mid-June at bend 3 and remained relatively stable from April 

to June at bend 4 despite any effect of flow on capture efficiencies (fig. E14). Since reproductive assessments suggested that 

the majority of gravid shovelnose sturgeon from bend 3 was 

ready to spawn in June if appropriate stimuli were available 

for fish to release eggs, high daily mean CPUE of shovelnose 

sturgeon and gravid shovelnose sturgeon in June may suggest 

aggregation behavior of fish in similar reproductive condition. 

However, it is unknown if fish were aggregating to spawn at 

bend 3. Gravid shovelnose sturgeon were not recaptured at 

bend 3, and assessments of reproductive condition of males 

were not conducted. It is possible that shovelnose sturgeon in 

similar reproductive condition formed an aggregation during 

the migration to suitable spawning habitats and that our sampling at bend 3 identified this group of fish.

Use of Coarse Substrate Habitats for Spawning 

(Objective 3)

We constructed 152 egg mats and then transported them 

from Columbia, Mo. to the USGS Field Research Station in 

Yankton, S. Dak. Beginning on May 3, 2006, 30 egg mats 

were deployed on coarse substrates immediately below Gavins 

Point Dam (bend 1), 21 egg mats were deployed on coarse 

substrates beneath or upstream of the Highway 81 bridge 

(bend 3), and 73 egg mats were deployed downstream of the 

Highway 81 bridge (bend 4; fig. E2). On May 11, four egg 

mats were deployed over coarse substrates in an outside bend 

that abuts a bluff immediately downstream from Ponca State 

Park at RM 753. Four additional egg mats were deployed at 

RM 775 (bend 17) immediately downstream from the Highway 19 bridge near Vermillion, S. Dak. on June 4 after USGS 

tracking crews located a radio-tagged gravid shovelnose 

sturgeon several times near a coarse substrate deposit that was 

previously identified in 2005 surveys. Egg mats were checked 

two times every week from May 3 until July 13 for the presence of eggs. Black eggs that resembled those of sturgeon or 

paddlefish were not collected at any site, but opaque eggs were 

collected on egg mats in May on four separate occasions (fig. 

E15). Eggs were collected below the dam, downstream from 

Highway 81 bridge, and at Ponca State Park. Samples of eggs 

were removed from the mat and preserved in either 70 percent 

ethanol and 10 percent buffered formalin. Another sample of 

eggs and an egg mat were transported to the USFWS Gavins 

Point National Fish Hatchery in Yankton, S. Dak. Attempts 

were made to hatch sampled eggs by using jars as well as by 

hatching eggs directly on the egg mat in a raceway by using 

water supplied from a well. Attempts to hatch eggs were 

conducted in an area of the hatchery that was not used for sturgeon culture but that was used for culture of other nonendangered fish species from various rivers, lakes, and ponds in the 

area. Two groups of eggs were successfully hatched from the 

jars. One group of eggs collected on May 12 was immediately 

preserved after hatching in formalin for identification using 

morphological characteristics of larval fish. The preliminary 

identification of fish from this sample was Catostomidae. The 

latter group of eggs that hatched was collected from mats on 

May 19, hatched approximately a week later, and was moved 

into an aluminum tank that was supplied with unfiltered water 

from Lewis and Clark Lake. Increased growth rates associated 

with relatively warm water from the lake aided in efficiently 

identifying fish that were spawned on the egg mat on the basis 

of juvenile characteristics instead of larval fish morphology; 

however, the use of unfiltered water from the lake resulted in 

contamination of our samples with various other fishes. Fish 

represented in the contaminated tanks included individuals 

from the families Centrarchidae, Cyprinidae, Clupeidae, Percidae, and Sciaenidae.

Depth, mean column velocity, bottom velocity, water 

temperature, and turbidity were measured at locations of each 

mat containing eggs. The presumed Catostomidae spawned on 

May 12 immediately below the dam when daily mean water 

temperatures were 14.5°C and turbidity was 14 nephelometric 

turbidity units (NTUs). The substrate where mats were placed 

immediately below the dam consisted of large cobbles and 

boulders. Fish spawned at depths of 3.5–5.5 m, mean column 

velocities of 0.8–1.4 m/s, and bottom velocities of 0.2–0.7 m/s 

(fig. E16). The highest proportion of mats with eggs had bottom velocities of 0.5 m/s and depths of 5 m. Velocity measurements near the river bed at spawning sites below Gavins Point 

Dam were similar to those reported for catostomids in other 

rivers (Curry and Spacie, 1994).

Collections of adhesive eggs on mats demonstrate the 

usefulness of the technique to determine sites and characterize habitat of spawning locations for lithophillic fishes 

in the Missouri River. Despite the fact that the technique 

had been used to sample sturgeon eggs in other rivers 

(Marchant and Shutters, 1996; Duncan and others, 2004), 

sturgeon and paddlefish eggs were not collected on egg 

mats deployed below Gavins Point Dam in 2006. Since 

female sturgeon in reproductive condition were collected 

near coarse substrate patches that were sampled during 

this study, sturgeon eggs were expected to be collected on 

mats. Sturgeon may not have spawned on coarse substrate 

deposits below Gavins Point Dam in 2006, or egg mats 

may not have been deployed exactly on spawning sites or 

during the times when spawning occurred. A few gravid 
224 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

shovelnose sturgeon collected during this study in August 

had eggs that appeared to be resorbing (M. Annis, USGS, 

oral commun., 2007). Modification of the egg mat deployment technique based on behavior of telemetered fish, fish 

reproductive condition, proximity of sturgeon to coarse 

substrates, and water temperatures when spawning is suspected to occur may aid in collecting sturgeon eggs. Any 

future attempts to use egg mats to identify spawning locations and habitats of sturgeon in the Missouri River should 

be closely coupled with telemetry techniques.

Spatial and Temporal Distribution of Larval 

Sturgeon and Other Larval Fishes (Objective 4)

Larval fish were sampled on 20–25 individual sampling events, depending on the sampling site, between May 

8 and August 10, 2006. The larval fish sampling regime 

resulted in a total of 1,350 larval fish samples. The number 

of total samples collected varied among sites because of 

weather conditions and associated safety concerns, difficulties with equipment, and personnel schedules (table 

E3). Mean volume of water sampled per sample was 86.8 

m3 at the site downstream from Gavins Point Dam (bend 

2; total = 16,671 m3), 42.6 m3 at the site downstream from 

Riverside Park (bend 4; total = 8,649 m3), 91.2 m3 at the 

site upstream from the James River confluence with the 

Missouri River (bend 7; total = 18,323 m3), 82.7 m3 at the 

site downstream from the James River confluence with the 

Missouri River (bend 11; total = 13,560 m3), 66.5 m3 at the 

site upstream from the Vermillion River confluence with 

the Missouri River (bend 17; total = 13,290 m3), 88.8 m3

at the site downstream from the Vermillion River confluence with the Missouri River (bend 20; total = 15,541 m3

), 

and 70.1 m3 downstream from the boat ramp at Ponca State 

Park (bend 30; total = 14,932 m3).

As of December 5, 2006, 65 percent of the samples 

had been processed in the laboratory (table E3). All of 

the samples preserved in formalin were processed, but 

only 29 percent of the samples preserved in ethanol 

were processed. Consequently, results are presented only 

for samples that have been processed, and results will 

change when sorting and identification of larval fish in 

the remaining samples are completed. To date, a total 

of 10,392 larvae representing 10 families were sampled 

across sites during 2006 (table E6). Freshwater drum 

(Sciaenidae Aplodinotus grunniens) was the numerically 

dominant taxon and composed 85.6 percent of the larvae 

sampled. Other relatively abundant taxa sampled included 

gizzard shad (Clupeidae Dorosoma cepedianum, 6.5 

percent), suckers (Catostomidae, 3.9 percent), temperate 

basses (Moronidae, 1.8 percent) and minnows and carps 

(Cyprinidae, 0.8 percent). Larval sturgeon (Acipenseridae 

Scaphirhynchus spp,) and paddlefish (Polyodontidae Polyodon spathula) composed 0.3 percent and 0.02 percent of 

the larval fishes sampled, respectively. 

Larval Fishes

Composition of the larval fishes sampled in 2006 varied 

among taxa and sites (table E7). Larval fishes from nine families were collected upstream from the Vermillion River confluence with the Missouri River and at Ponca State Park. Seven 

families were collected downstream from Riverside Park, both 

upstream and downstream from the James River confluence 

with the Missouri River, and downstream from the Vermillion 

River confluence with the Missouri River. Six families of larval fishes were sampled downstream from Gavins Point Dam. 

Representatives of Catostomidae, Centrarchidae (sunfishes and 

basses), Clupeidae, Cyprinidae, Sciaenidae, and Moronidae 

were sampled at all seven sites. Larval sturgeon (Acipenseridae) and fish from the darter, perch, walleye and sauger family 

(Percidae) were collected at four sites, whereas bullhead catfish (Ictaluridae) and paddlefish (Polyodontidae) larvae were 

only collected at one site.

The larval fish community at the site downstream from 

Gavins Point Dam was dominated by freshwater drum (Sciaenidae; fig. E17). Mean densities of Sciaenidae increased 

from late May to early June to a maximum of 764.84 

larvae/100 m3 and then substantially declined in mid-June and 

were relatively low (less than 5.00 larvae/100 m3) in July and 

August. Mean densities of Clupeidae and Moronidae peaked 

in early June (5.63 and 7.49 larvae/100 m3, respectively), but 

mean density of Clupeidae exhibited two more peaks, in late 

June (8.64 larvae/100 m3) and in early July (4.24 larvae/100 

m3). Catostomidae exhibited a peak in mean density on June 

1(1.39 larvae/100 m3) but were also collected on June 8, June 

22, and June 26 in relatively low densities (mean = 0.48–0.78 

larvae/100 m3). Cyprinidae) exhibited three peaks in mean 

densities that were relatively low compared to other families. 

The first peak was on June 5 (1.51 larvae/100 m3), the second 

peak was on July 14 (1.07 larvae/100 m3), and the third peak 

was on July 24 (1.77 larvae/100 m3). Centrarchidae were 

collected on three dates (July 21, July 28, and August 2) at 

relatively low densities (mean = 0.07–0.40 larvae/100 m3). The 

highest mean density of Centrarchidae occurred in August. No 

Percidae, Ictaluridae, Acipenseridae, or Polyodontidae were 

collected.

Larval fishes collected downstream from Riverside Park 

in Yankton, S. Dak. were dominated by Sciaenidae (fig. E18). 

Mean densities of Sciaenidae increased from late May to early 

June to a maximum of 483.34 larvae/100 m3, declined to 2.19 

larvae/100 m3 in mid June, increased to 152.19 larvae/100 

m3 in late June, and declined thereafter; however, Sciaenidae 

continued to be collected in low to moderate densities in July 

(mean = 0–10.49 larvae/100 m3) and August (mean = 0.27–

1.13 larvae/100 m3). Clupeidae was the second most dominant 

family of larval fishes collected downstream from Riverside Park and exhibited three peaks in mean density. Peaks 

occurred on June 8 (14.66 larvae/100 m3), June 22 (24.89 

larvae/100 m3), and July 6 (5.81 larvae/100 m3). Mean densities of Catostomidae and Moronidae were high in early June, 

but Catostomidae were collected over a longer period (May 15 
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and Habitat Use 225

to July 14) than Moronidae (May 28 to June 28). Cyprinidae 

were collected in early June and late July, whereas Centrarchidae were collected in late July. Percidae were collected in 

relatively low densities on May 18 (0.21 larvae/100 m3) and 

May 24 (0.95 larvae/100 m3). No Ictaluridae, Acipenseridae, 

or Polyodontidae were collected.

Similar to the dam and Riverside Park sites, the larval 

fish assemblage sampled upstream from the James River was 

dominated by freshwater drum (Sciaenidae; fig. E19). Mean 

densities of drum were highest on June 5 (353.98 larvae/100 

m3) and June 22 (90.93 larvae/100 m3). Gizzard shad (Clupeidae) was the second most dominant family, with mean densities peaking on June 1 (6.09 larvae/100 m3

), June 8 (13.21 

larvae/100 m3), and June 22 (5.18 larvae/100 m3). Catostomidae larvae were collected from mid May to late June, but mean 

density peaked on June 1(4.13 larvae/100 m3) with densities 

of Cyprinidae (2.34 larvae/100 m3) and Moronidae (1.89 

larvae/100 m3). Centrarchidae were collected on 1 day in late 

July (0.52 larvae/100 m3) and on 1 day in early August (0.14 

larvae/100 m3). One sturgeon (Acipenseridae) was collected 

on August 8, but no Percidae, Ictaluridae, or Polyodontidae 

were collected (table E8).

Downstream from the James River, freshwater drum 

(Sciaenidae) again dominated the larval fish community (fig. 

E20), but at lower densities than at upstream sites. Mean densities were highest in early June (maximum = 76.34 larvae/100 

m3) and peaked again in late June (28.40 larvae/100 m3) and 

late July (5.02 larvae/100 m3). Gizzard shad (Clupeidae) 

was again the second most dominant taxon and had similar 

peaks in mean density as observed at the site upstream from 

the James River; however, gizzard shad were not collected 

downstream of the James River until June 8 (mean density 

= 12.75 larvae/100 m3). Catostomidae larvae were collected 

from late May to mid-July, but mean density peaked on June 

1 (10.78 larvae/100 m3). Cyprinidae and Moronidae were 

collected from early June through early August, and mean 

densities were highest in early June. Centrarchidae larvae 

were collected on June 8 (0.53 Centrarchidae larvae/100 m3), 

whereas Percidae were only collected on May 8 (0.27 Percidae 

larvae/100 m3). No Ictaluridae, Acipenseridae, or Polyodontidae were collected.

The larval fish assemblage upstream from the Vermillion River consisted primarily of freshwater drum, but mean 

densities were not as high as upstream sites (fig. E21). Mean 

density of Sciaenidae peaked on June 4 at 150.82 larvae/100 

m3. Catostomidae was the second most dominant family and 

demonstrated four peaks in mean density in May and June. 

Clupeidae were captured early June through late July but 

demonstrated a bimodal peak in mean density in early (5.46 

larvae/100 m3) and late (13.77 larvae/100 m3) June. Moronidae larvae were collected in late May through June and mean 

densities were highest on June 4 (3.76 larvae/100 m3) and June 

11 (3.96 larvae/100 m3). Cyprinidae were captured on 4 days 

in June and densities were highest on June 4 (1.60 larvae/100 

m3). Centrarchidae were collected 2 days in July at low densities (mean densities of less than 0.25 larvae/100 m3

), whereas 

Percidae were collected on 2 days in May (mean densities = 

0.29–0.96 larvae/100 m3). Ictaluridae were collected on July 

25 (0.21 larvae/100 m3). No Polyodontidae were collected, 

but sturgeon (Acipenseridae) were collected late May through 

June (table E9).

Downstream from the Vermillion River, the larval fish 

community was largely Sciaenidae (fig. E22). Mean densities 

of freshwater drum were highest on June 4(214.16 larvae/100 

m3). Catostomidae and Clupeidae were also common larval 

fishes collected, with maximum densities of Catostomidae 

in late May (10.23 larvae/100 m3) and of gizzard shad in late 

June (5.11 larvae/100 m3). Cyprinidae and Moronidae were 

collected from early June through early August, and mean 

densities were highest for both Cyprinidae (1.73 larvae/100 

m3) and Moronidae (8.99 larvae/100 m3) in early June. Centrarchidae were collected 1 day each in May, June, and July 

at low densities (mean densities less than 0.35 larvae/100 m3). 

No Percidae, Ictaluridae, or Polyodontidae were collected, but 

sturgeon (Acipenseridae) were collected in June (table E10).

Similar to all of the other sites, larval fishes collected 

downstream from the boat ramp at Ponca State Park were 

dominated by freshwater drum (Sciaenidae; fig. E23). Mean 

densities of Sciaenidae were highest on June 4(467.79 

larvae/100 m3). Catostomidae was the second most dominant 

family and was collected from May through July. Mean densities of Catostomidae were highest on June 4 (9.86 larvae/100 

m3). Gizzard shad (Clupeidae) were collected in June and July 

and had maximum mean densities on June 11 (5.34 larvae/100 

m3). Mean densities of Cyprinidae were highest on June 4 

(3.49 larvae/100 m3), but were collected at low densities (mean 

densities less than 0.65) on seven days from May through 

August. Moronidae were collected from late May through 

June and mean densities were highest on June 14 (2.46 

larvae/100 m3). Percidae were collected only on May 21 (mean 

density = 0.62 larvae/100 m3). No Ictaluridae were collected, 

but paddlefish (Polyodontidae) were collected on 2 days in 

mid- to late May (mean densities = 0.27–0.44 larvae/100 m3), 

and sturgeon (Acipenseridae) were collected in late May and 

June (table E11).

Larval Sturgeon

The periodicity and densities of larval sturgeon sampled 

during 2006 varied among sampling sites and dates. Larval 

sturgeon were only collected upstream from the James River 

confluence, upstream and downstream of the Vermillion River 

confluence, and at Ponca State Park. Only one larval sturgeon 

was captured upstream from the James River in August (table 

E8). Upstream from the Vermillion River confluence, a total 

of 13 larval sturgeon were collected on three dates between 

May 31 and June 21 (table E9; fig. E7). Mean density of larval 

sturgeon was highest on May 31 (4.35 larvae/100 m3) but less 

than 1.5 larvae/100 m3 on the other days. Twelve larval sturgeon were collected in the Missouri River downstream from 

the Vermillion River confluence in 5 days in June (table E10). 

Mean density of larval sturgeon was highest on June 21 (mean 
226 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

= 1.01 larvae/100 m3) but less than 0.90 larvae/100 m3 on the 

other dates. In the Missouri River downstream of the boat 

ramp at Ponca State Park, four larval sturgeon were collected 

over 3 days (table E11). Mean density of larval sturgeon was 

highest on June 18 (mean = 0.98 larvae/100 m3) but was less 

than 0.50 larvae/100 m3 on the other days.

Pallid sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon hatch at approximately 8–9 mm in total length (Snyder, 2002). Based on length 

ranges of larvae collected at each site (table E8, 6–9, 6–10, 

and 6–11), larval sturgeon collected were probably less than 1 

day post hatch. Incubation times for Scaphirhynchus spp. eggs 

depend on water temperature but approximately range from 

74 hours (~3 days) at 24°C to 100 hours (4 days) at 20°C after 

fertilization (K.M. Kappenman and M.A. Webb, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, written commun., 2007). Daily mean water 

temperatures at Gavins Point Dam in May and June, when 

most of the sturgeon larvae were collected were 19–23°C. On 

the basis of daily water temperatures and our larvae collections, 

we estimate that many shovelnose sturgeon spawned in the 

Missouri National Recreational River reach below Gavins Point 

Dam between May 28 and June 22, 2006. Data from telemetry 

efforts on movements of gravid shovelnose sturgeon and reproductive assessments of gravid shovelnose sturgeon sampled in 

2006 support these findings (chap. B). Twelve radio-tagged fish 

were located at their furthest upstream locations in the Missouri 

National Recreational River reach below Gavins Point Dam. 

Eight of the twelve fish were recaptured between May 31 and 

October 11 and were determined to have spawned. One gravid 

shovelnose sturgeon was located at RM 798 (upstream from the 

James River) on June 2. Five gravid shovelnose sturgeon were 

located within 19 mi upstream from bend 17 (the site upstream 

from the Vermillion River) from May 10 to June 19, including one fish that was located immediately upstream from the 

site where larval fishes were sampled (RM 775). Two gravid 

shovelnose sturgeon were located 3–5 mi upstream from RM 

769 (site downstream from the Vermillion River) from May 

9 to June 9 and one of these fish was recaptured at RM 774 

on May 31 and determined to have spawned. The Ponca State 

Park site where larval sturgeon were collected was within 

3–16 mi downstream from the most upstream location of four 

radio-tagged shovelnose sturgeon between May 11 and June 

2. Reproductive assessments of gravid shovelnose sturgeon 

sampled in the Missouri National Recreational River reach 

in late May and June suggested that the majority of fish were 

ready to spawn if appropriate stimuli were available for fish to 

release eggs (see above; see also chap. B).

Even though most spawning by sturgeon appeared to 

occur in late May and June, spawning also occurred later in 

the summer. Small sturgeon larvae (8 mm total length) were 

collected upstream from the James River in August when 

water temperatures were 25°C–26°C. These findings support 

earlier suggestions that shovelnose sturgeon in the Missouri 

River below Gavins Point Dam have a protracted spawning 

period (D. Papoulias, U.S. Geological Survey, oral commun., 

2006). Spawning occurred during both the May pulse and 

summer flow periods. 

Summary

Pallid sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus) and shovelnose 

sturgeon (S. platorynchus) were collected near coarse substrate 

deposits. Capture rates of shovelnose sturgeon indicated the 

possibility of a winter aggregation near one coarse substrate 

deposit upstream from the Highway 81 bridge in Yankton, 

S. Dak., but interactions between fish behavior and high and 

variable flows affected capture efficiencies and our ability 

to identify aggregations during other periods. Nevertheless, 

capture rates of gravid shovelnose sturgeon were high during 

the May pulse and summer period upstream from the Highway 

81 bridge despite any effect of flow. Assessments of reproductive condition suggested that most of these fish were ready to 

spawn if appropriate stimuli were available for fish to release 

eggs (chap. C).

Sturgeon eggs were not collected despite deployment of 132 mats over coarse substrate deposits from May 

through mid-July; but, opaque eggs were collected on mats 

on four separate occasions. Eggs from one occasion were 

successfully hatched in the hatchery and tentatively identified as Catostomidae. Collections of adhesive eggs on mats 

demonstrate the usefulness of the technique to determine 

spawning sites and characterize spawning habitats for lithophillic fishes in the Missouri River. Future attempts to use 

egg mats should be closely coupled with telemetry activities (chap. B).

As of December 5, 2006, a total of 10,392 larvae 

representing 10 families were collected. Freshwater drum 

(Sciaenidae Aplodinotus grunniens) was the most dominant 

taxon and composed 85.6 percent of the larvae sampled. 

Other relatively abundant taxa included gizzard shad (Clupeidae Dorosoma cepedianum; 6.5 percent), Catostomidae 

(suckers; 3.9 percent), Moronidae (temperate basses; 1.8 

percent), and Cyprinidae (minnows and carps; 0.8 percent). 

Larval sturgeon (Acipenseridae Scaphirhynchus spp.) and 

paddlefish (Polyodontidae Polyodon spathula) composed 0.3 

and 0.2 percent of the larval fishes sampled, respectively. 

Small larval sturgeon (7–10 mm in total length) were collected upstream from the James River in August but were 

collected upstream and downstream of the Vermillion River 

and downstream from the boat ramp at Ponca State Park in 

late May and June. On the basis of the sizes of larval sturgeon collected, water temperatures, incubation times, movement data and recaptures of gravid shovelnose sturgeon used 

in telemetry studies (chap. B), and reproductive assessments 

of gravid female sturgeon captured in the Missouri National 

Recreational River reach of the Missouri River (chap. C and 

this chapter), we estimate that many shovelnose sturgeon 

spawned between May 28 and June 22 at water temperatures 

of 19°C–23°C. The collection of small sturgeon larvae in 

August upstream from the James River, however, supports 

suggestions that shovelnose sturgeon in the Missouri River 

have a protracted spawning period and spawned during the 

May pulse and summer flow periods.
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and Habitat Use 227

Acknowledgments 

Funding for this project was provided by the USACE 

(Omaha District, Craig Fleming, Project Manager). Personnel 

from the SDGFP and the USGS involved in this project are 

commended for their quality performance in the field and laboratory: Adam Walter (USGS), Amy George (USGS), Charlie 

Thompson (USGS), Jason Kral (SDGFP), Jedediah Konsor 

(USGS), Mark Fincel (USGS), Ronald Gunderson (USGS), 

Sam Stukel (SDGFP), and Susan Muehlbeier (USGS). Carl 

Korschgen (USGS), David Fuller (Montana Fish, Wildlife, 

and Parks), Jessica Coulihan (USGS), Joe Deters (USGS), 

Larry Farley (USGS), Mark Laustrup (USGS), Patrick Braaten 

(USGS), and Wyatt Doyle (USFWS) provided assistance 

in developing sampling gears and methodology. Vince 

Travnichek and Yan Hong (Missouri Department of Conservation) and Kim Chojnacki (USGS) provided data management 

assistance. Kim Chojnacki developed the map of the study 

site. Diana Papoulias, James Candrl, Justin Buckler, Mandy 

Annis, Monique Koll, and Susan Muehlbeier with USGS 

Columbia Environmental Research Center provided data on 

reproductive condition. Craig Bockholt, Herb Bollig, and Jeff 

Powell at the USFWS Gavins Point National Fish Hatchery 

in Yankton, S. Dak. incubated eggs and raised larvae. Larval 

fish reference specimens and identification assistance were 

provided by Bernard Kuhajda (University of Alabama), Craig 

Bockholt, Darrel Snyder (Colorado State University), Diana 

Papoulias, Duane Chapman (USGS), Jan Dean (USFWS), 

James Candrl, Joe Deters, and Herb Bollig. Water temperature 

data for the Missouri River at Gavins Point Dam were provided by Dale Blevins, Joseph Gorman, Rick Wilson, and Roy 

Bartholomay with the USGS Water Science Centers.

References Cited

Auer, N.A., 1982, Identification of larval fishes of the Great 

Lakes basin with emphasis on the Lake Michigan Drainage: Ann Arbor, Mich., Great Lakes Fishery Commission, 

Special Publication 82–3. 

Auer, N.A, 1996, Responses of spawning lake sturgeon to 

change in hydroelectric facility operations: Transactions of 

the American Fisheries Society, v. 125, p. 66–77.

Berry, C.R., and Young, B., 2004, Fishes of the Missouri 

National Recreational River, South Dakota and Nebraska: 

Great Plains Research, v. 14, p. 89–114.

Braaten, P.J., and Fuller, D.B., 2002, Fort Peck flow modification biological data collection plan—summary of 2001 

activities: Fort Peck, Mont., Report prepared for the U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, Montana Department of Fish, 

Wildlife and Parks. 

Braaten, P.J., and Fuller, D.B., 2005, Fort Peck flow modification biological data collection plan—summary of 2002 

activities: Fort Peck, Mont., Report prepared for the U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, Montana Department of Fish, 

Wildlife and Parks.

Bruch, R.M., and Binkowski, F.P., 2002, Spawning behavior 

of lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens): Journal of Applied 

Ichthyology, v. 18, p. 570–579.

Committee on the Missouri River Ecosystem Science, 2002, 

The Missouri River ecosystem—exploring the prospects for 

recovery: Washington, D.C., National Academy Press.

Cooke, D.W., and Leach, S.D., 2004, Implications of a migration impediment on shortnose sturgeon spawning: North 

American Journal of Fisheries Management, v. 24, 

p. 1,460–1,468.

Curry, K.D., and Spacie, A., 1994, Differential use of stream 

habitat by spawning Catostomids: American Midland Naturalist, v. 111, p. 267–279.

Drobish, M., 2004, Long-term pallid sturgeon and associated fish community assessment for the Missouri River and 

standardized guidelines for sampling and data collection: 

Yankton, S. Dak., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Duncan, M. S., Iseley, J.J., and Cooke, D.W., 2004, Evaluation 

of shortnose sturgeon spawning the Pinopolis Dam tailrace, 

South Carolina: North American Journal of Fisheries Management, v. 24, p. 932–938.

Fleming, C., DeLonay, A., Jacobson, R., Papoulias, D., Wildhaber, M., Simpkins, D., Laustrup, M., Korschgen, C., Wilson, R., Blevins, D., Gorman, J., Bartholomay, R., Mestl, 

G., Steffensen, K., Hesse, L., Hill, T., Doyle, W., Stukel, S., 

LaBay, S., and Nelson-Stastney, W., 2006, Evaluation of the 

biological responses of sturgeon and the Missouri River fish 

fauna to flow modifications, Lower Missouri River (SRFM): 

Yankton, S. Dak., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 

Fox, D.A., Hightower, J.E., and Parauka, F.M., 2000, Gulf 

sturgeon spawning migration and habitat in the Choctawhatchee River system, Alabama-Florida: Transactions of the 

American Fisheries Society, v. 129, p. 811–826.

Galat, D.L., and Lipkin, R., 2000, Restoring ecological integrity of great rivers—Historical hydrographs aid in defining 

reference conditions for the Missouri River: Hydrobiologia, 

v. 422/423, p. 29–48.

Hesse, L.W., and Sheets, W.F., 1993, The Missouri River 

hydrosystem: Fisheries, v. 18, p. 5–13.

Holly, F.M., and Karin, M.F., 1986, Simulation of the Missouri 

River bed degradation: Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 

v. 112, p. 497–517. 
228 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Kynard, B., 1997, Life history, latitudinal patterns, and status 

of the shortnose sturgeon, Acipenser brevirostrum, with 

notes on social behavior: Environmental Biology of Fishes, 

v. 48, p. 319–334. 

Marchant, S.R., and Shutters, M.K., 1996, Artificial substrates 

collect gulf sturgeon eggs: North American Journal of Fisheries Management, v. 16, p. 445–447.

Morris, L.A., Langemeirer, R.N., Russell, T.R., and Witt, A., 

1968, Effects of main stem impoundment and channelization upon the limnology of the Missouri River: Transactions 

of the American Fisheries Society, v. 97, p. 380–388.

Parsley, M.J., and Beckham, L.G., 1994, White sturgeon 

spawning and rearing habitat in the lower Columbia River: 

North American Journal of Fisheries Management, v. 14, 

p. 812–827.

Peterson, D.L., Gunderman, B., and Vecsei, P., 2002, Lake 

Sturgeon in the Manistee River—a current assessment 

of spawning stock size, age, and growth, in Van Winkle, 

W., Anders, P., Secor, D.H., and Dixon, D., eds., Biology, 

management, and protection of North American sturgeon: 

Bethesda, Md., American Fisheries Society Symposium 28, 

p. 175–182.

Quist, M.C., Boelter, A.M., Lovato, J.M., Korfanta, N.M., 

Bergman, H.L., Korschgen, C.E., Galat, D.L., Latka, D.C., 

Krentz, S., Oetker, M., Olson, M., Scott, C.M., and Berkley, 

J., 2004, Research and assessment needs for pallid sturgeon 

recovery in the Missouri River: Laramie, Wyo., William 

D. Ruckelshaus Institute of Environment and Natural 

Resources, University of Wyoming, Final report to the U.S. 

Geological Survey, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, accessed September 2006 at URL http://

infolink.cr.usgs.gov/Science/PallidSturgeon/PSWorkshop04.

pdf.

Quist, M.C., Guy, C.S., and Braaten, P.J., 1998, Standard 

weight (Ws) equation and length categories for shovelnose 

sturgeon: North American Journal of Fisheries Management, v. 18, p. 992–997.

Sappington, L.C., Dieterman, D.J., and Galat, D.L., 1998, 

Standard operating procedures for population dynamics 

and habitat use of benthic fishes along the Missouri River: 

Omaha, Nebr., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, accessed 

September 2006 at URL http://now.usace.army.mil/html/

pd-e/planning.html.

SAS Institute Inc, 2001, JMP statistics and graphics guide, 

version 4.1: Cary, N.Car., SAS Institute Inc.

Schmulbach, J.C., Schuckman, J.J., and Nelson, E.A., 1981, 

Aquatic habitat inventory of the Missouri River from Gavins 

Point Dam to Ponca State Park, Nebraska: Omaha, Nebr., 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

 Snyder, D.E., 1980, Characteristics for distinguishing the 

protolarvae of paddlefish and sturgeon: American Fisheries 

Society, Early Life History Section Newsletter, v. 1, p. 9–10.

Snyder, D.E., 2002, Pallid and shovelnose sturgeon larvae—

morphological description and identification: Journal of 

Applied Ichthyology v. 18, p. 240–265. 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2006, Missouri River mainstem system—2005–2006 annual operating plan: Omaha, 

Nebr., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, accessed September 

2006 at URL http://www.nwd-mr.usace.army.mil/rcc/aop.

html.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2000, Biological opinion on 

the operation of the Missouri River mainstem reservoir system, operation and maintenance of the Missouri River bank 

stabilization and navigation project, and operation of the 

Kansas River reservoir system: Fort Snelling, Minn., U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2003, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service 2003 amendment to the 2000 biological opinion 

on the operation of the Missouri River mainstem reservoir 

system, operation and maintenance of the Missouri River 

bank stabilization and navigation project and operation of 

the Kansas River reservoir system: Fort Snelling, Minn., 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, accessed September, 2006, 

at URL http://www.fws.gov/feature/pdfs/FinalBO.pdf.

Walburg, C.H., Kaiser, G.L., and Hudson, P.L., 1971, Lewis 

and Clark Lake tailwater biota and some relations of the 

tailwater and reservoir fish populations, in Hall, G., ed., 

Reservoir fisheries and limnology: Bethesda, Md., American Fisheries Society Special Publication No. 8, p. 449–467.

Wildhaber, M.L., Papoulias, D.M., DeLonay, A.J., Tillitt, D.E., 

Bryan, J.L., Annis, M.L., and Allert, J.A., 2005,, Effectiveness of minimally invasive imaging techniques for gender 

identification of Missouri River shovelnose and pallid sturgeons in the field and laboratory: Journal of Fish Biology 

v. 67, p. 114–132.

Zar, J.H., 1996, Biostatistical Analyses, 3rd edition: Upper 

Saddle River, N.J., Prentice Hall.
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and Habitat Use 229

Figures and Tables
230 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure E1. Hydrograph from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2006 annual operating plan for the Missouri River below 

Gavins Point Dam. Hypotheses (highlighted in red) about the role of discrete flow periods (highlighted in black) on 

specific life-history events of pallid sturgeon and shovelnose sturgeon were described in the Sturgeon Response to Flow 

Modification (SRFM) proposal (Fleming and others, 2006).
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and Habitat Use 231 Figure E2. The Missouri National Recreational River system below Gavins Point Dam and approximate bend locations (numbered boxes) where hard substrates occurred (bends 1, 3, and 4) and sturgeon (bends 1–12), eggs (bends 1, 3, 4, 17, and 30), and larvae (bends 2, 4, 7, 11, 17, 20, 30) were sampled during 2006. River miles are denoted by black triangles.
232 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure E3. Coarse substrate deposits at river mile 806 (bend 4) in early March 2006 at a discharge of 9,000 ft3/s from Gavins Point 

Dam. Sturgeon were fished, egg mats were deployed, and larval fish were sampled on or near these deposits in 2006.
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and Habitat Use 233

Figure E4. Hypothetical map of the Missouri River showing boundaries of continuous macrohabitats. Reprinted from Sappington 

and others (1998).
234 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure E5. Mats used to sample eggs on coarse substrate deposits.

Figure E6. Lcthyoplankton net with 750-μm mesh attached 

to a 75-lb (34 kg) Columbus-style sounding weight used to 

sample drifting larval fishes. 
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and Habitat Use 235

Figure E7. A larval sturgeon (approximately 8-mm in total length) that was collected upstream 

from the Vermillion River bend 17 on May 3, 2006. The fish was identified based on morphological 

characteristics by Auer (1982) and verified by Darrel Snyder at Colorado State University (Snyder, 

2002).

Figure E8. Actual flows and water temperatures at Gavins Point Dam in 2006. Flows were not exactly 

as described in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers annual operating plan (AOP) in 2006 (see fig. E1), 

but flow periods described in the Sturgeon Response to Flow Modification (SRFM) proposal were 

modified for the actual 2006 hydrograph to assess relationships between flow and capture rates of 

sturgeon.
236 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure E9. Mean catch-per-unit effort (CPUE) of shovelnose sturgeon and gravid shovelnose sturgeon at targeted bends in the 

Missouri National Recreational River reach below Gavins Point Dam that were sampled in 2006.
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and Habitat Use 237

Figure E10. Mean catch-per-unit effort (CPUE) of shovelnose sturgeon and gravid shovelnose sturgeon at randomly selected 

bends from upper (bends 1–6) and lower (bends 7–12) river segments in the Missouri National Recreational River reach below 

Gavins Point Dam that were sampled in 2006.
238 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure E11. Effect of flow from Gavins Point Dam on catch-per-unit effort (CPUE) of shovelnose sturgeon 

collected in 2006.

Figure E12. Effect of 3-day changes in flow on catch-per-unit effort (CPUE) of shovelnose sturgeon 

collected in 2006.
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and Habitat Use 239

Figure E13. Trends in mean catch-per-unit effort (CPUE) of all shovelnose sturgeon collected at bend 3 (river mile 808) and 

bend 4 (river mile 806) in relationship to flow from Gavins Point Dam in 2006. The y-axis on the left for mean CPUE differs 

between the graphs.
240 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure E14. Trends in mean catch-per-unit effort (CPUE) of all gravid shovelnose sturgeon collected at bend 3 (river mile 

808) and bend 4 (river mile 806) in relationship to flow from Gavins Point Dam in 2006. The y-axis on the left for mean CPUE 

differs between the graphs.
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and Habitat Use 241

Figure E15. Picture of opaque eggs collected on mat. 
242 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure E16. Mean column velocities (m/s), bottom velocities (m/s), and depths (m) for mats that 

were observed with opaque eggs.
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and Habitat Use 243

Figure E17. Mean density (number/100 m3) by date of larval fishes collected in the Missouri River downstream from the 

Gavins Point Dam (bend 2) in 2006. 

Figure E18. Mean density (number/100 m3) by date of larval fishes collected in the Missouri River downstream from 

Riverside Park in Yankton, S. Dak. (bend 4) in 2006. 
244 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure E19. Mean density (number/100 m3) by date of larval fishes collected in the Missouri River upstream from the 

James River (bend 7) in 2006. 

Figure E20. Mean density (number/100 m3) by date of larval fishes collected in the Missouri River downstream from the 

James River (bend 11) in 2006. 
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and Habitat Use 245

Figure E21. Mean density (number/100 m3) by date of larval fishes collected in the Missouri River upstream from the 

Vermillion River (bend 17) in 2006. 

Figure E22. Mean density (number/100 m3) by date of larval fishes collected in the Missouri River downstream from the 

Vermillion River (bend 20) in 2006. 
246 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure E23. Mean density (number/100 m3) by date of larval fishes collected in the Missouri River downstream from the boat ramp 

at Ponca State Park (bend 30) in 2006. 
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and Habitat Use 247

Table E1. River bends and associated river miles (RM) where trammel nets were drifted to sample shovelnose sturgeon (total) and gravid shovelnose sturgeon (gravid) in the Missouri National Recreational River reach below Gavins Point Dam.[Bends 1, 3, and 4 were targeted sample locations where coarse substrates were present and egg mats were deployed. Random bends were selected every week from an upper segment (bends 1–6) and lower segment (bends 7–12). Mean drift distance, number of shovelnose sturgeon per net, and catch-per-unit effort (CPUE) with standard errors (SE) are presented]

Mean

drift distance (SE)

Number of 

shovelnose sturgeon

Mean number of shovelnose 

sturgeon captured per net (SE)

Mean

CPUE (SE) Number 

of nets Bend RM feet meters Total Gravid Total Gravid Total Gravid

1 811 218 348 (11.8) 106 (3.6) 27 2 0.12 (0.03) 0.01 (0.01) 0.11 (0.03) 0.01 (0.01)2 810 44 469 (38.7) 143 (11.8) 14 3 0.32 (0.11) 0.07 (0.05) 0.23 (0.08) 0.03 (0.02)3 808 234 472 (18.4) 144 (5.6) 290 33 1.24 (0.18) 0.14 (0.04) 0.80 (0.12) 0.09 (0.02)4 806 236 361 (11.2) 110 (3.4) 251 13 1.06 (0.16) 0.05 (0.02) 1.21 (0.22) 0.07 (0.03)5 803 41 469 (39.4) 143 (12.0) 9 2 0.22 (0.15) 0.05 (0.03) 0.26 (0.16) 0.06 (0.04)6 802 24 345 (30.2) 102 (9.2) 18 5 0.75 (0.28) 0.21 (0.10) 0.74 (0.27) 0.23 (0.13)7 801 16 367 (40.4) 112 (12.3) 2 1 0.13 (0.09) 0.06 (0.06) 0.10 (0.07) 0.04 (0.04)8 799 48 439 (36.7) 134 (11.2) 59 7 1.23 (0.60) 0.15 (0.08) 1.17 (0.52) 0.27 (0.18)9 798 40 407 (39.0) 124 (11.9) 14 3 0.35 (0.15) 0.08 (0.04) 0.38 (0.20) 0.09 (0.05)

10 797 32 541 (56.8) 165 (17.3) 5 1 0.16 (0.10) 0.03 (0.03) 0.07 (0.04) 0.01 (0.01)11 795 28 574 (46.6) 175 (14.2) 8 3 0.29 (0.15) 0.11 (0.08) 0.25 (0.14) 0.09 (0.07)12 793 36 479 (40.7) 146 (12.4) 12 0 0.33 (0.11) 0.00 (0.00) 0.23 (0.08) 0.00 (0.00)

Total 997 413 (7.5) 126 (2.3) 709 73 0.71 (0.7) 0.07 (0.01) 0.63 (0.07) 0.07 (0.01)
248 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River Table E2. Reproductive stage of female and male shovelnose sturgeon collected from May 2001 through June 2002. [number of samples (N), fork length (FL) range, mean relative weight (Wr) index values, with 95 percent (%) confidence intervals and range, and percent of fish with Wr greater than (>) 86. All data are from Wildhaber and others (2005)] Reproductive stage

N FL range (mm) Mean Wr 95% CI Wr Wr range % of fish with Wr > 86

Females

1 12 317–668 75 72.0–77.9 68.5–83.5 02 47 443–732 78.6 75.8–81.3 51.8–98.4 133 30 552–725 82.1 78.4–85.9 67.4–114.8 204 21 547–730 83.9 80.6–87.2 69.5–99.8 335 43 542–760 90.9 87.5–94.4 73.5–118.5 566 3 588–710 81.7 50.6–112.8 68.2–92.9 33

Males

1 5 480–603 75.0 58.3–91.6 60.2–91.3 202 47 404–704 76.3 73.7–78.9 56.3–103.3 133 41 536–666 83.5 80.9–86.2 71.9–113.7 324 34 486–740 82.1 79.1–85.0 67.8–107.3 265 45 534–795 84.1 81.4–86.8 65.4–107.9 296 15 577–671 80.6 74.4–86.7 62.5–106.8 20

Table E3. Description of larval fish sampling sites for 2006 in the Missouri National Recreational River reach below Gavins Point Dam.[Duplicate samples were collected in inside bend (ISB) and outside bend (OSB) macrohabitats at both bottom (B) and midwater (M) locations in the water column]

Approximate 

river mile 

(RM)

Total number 

of samples

collected

Samples

processed

Samples

remaining to

be processed Larval fish sampling site Bend Macrohabitat Replicates Net location

Downstream from Gavins Point Dam 2 810 ISB/OSB 2 B/M 192 124 68

Downstream of Riverside Park 4 806 ISB/OSB 2 B/M 204 138 66Upstream of James River 7 801 ISB/OSB 2 B/M 200 133 67Downstream of James River 11 795 ISB/OSB 2 B/M 164 104 60Upstream of Vermillion River 17 775 ISB/OSB 2 B/M 200 126 74Downstream of Vermillion River 20 769 ISB/OSB 2 B/M 176 110 66Downstream from Ponca State Park 30 753 ISB/OSB 2 B/M 213 138 75
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and Habitat Use 249

Table E4. Mean catch-per-unit effort (CPUE; with standard errors in parentheses) of shovelnose sturgeon sampled with drifting 

trammel nets at targeted bends and randomly selected bends from upper (bends 1–6) and lower (bends 7–12) segments of the 

Missourri National Recreational River reach below Gavins Point Dam during five flow periods in 2006.

[Flow periods are described in fig. E8. --, no data]

Flow period

Site Winter March pulse Interpulse May pulse Summer

Targeted Bends

Bend 1 0.00 (0.00) -- 0.17 (0.09) 0.09 (0.06) 0.06 (0.03)

Bend 3 2.35 (0.87) 0.42 (0.42) 0.78 (0.27) 0.95 (0.33) 0.59 (0.12)

Bend 4 3.89 (1.97) 0.00 (0.00) 2.70 (0.49) 0.55 (0.16) 0.05 (0.03)

Total 2.66 (0.90) 0.19 (0.19) 1.25 (0.22) 0.52 (0.12) 0.24 (0.05)

Random Bends

Upper segment 0.81 (0.38) 0.00 (0.00) 1.08 (0.40) 0.58 (0.15) 0.21 (0.06)

Lower segment 0.15 (0.11) 0.65 (0.55) 0.79 (0.41) 0.65 (0.42) 0.20 (0.06)

Total 0.52 (0.23) 0.39 (0.33) 0.95 (0.29) 0.61 (0.18) 0.20 (0.04)

Table E5. Mean catch-per-unit effort (CPUE; with standard errors in parentheses) of gravid shovelnose sturgeon sampled with 

drifting trammel nets at targeted bends and randomly selected bends from upper (bends 1–6) and lower (bends 7–12) segments of the 

Missouri National Recreational River reach below Gavins Point Dam during five flow periods in 2006.

[Flow periods are described in fig. E8. --, no data]

Flow period

Site Winter March pulse Interpulse May pulse Summer

Targeted Bends

Bend 1 0.00 (0.00) -- 0.04 (0.03) 0.00 (0.00) 0.00 (0.00)

Bend 3 0.04 (0.04) 0.00 (0.00) 0.12 (0.05) 0.12 (0.05) 0.05 (0.03)

Bend 4 0.28 (0.28) 0.00 (0.00) 0.13 (0.05) 0.11 (0.07) 0.00 (0.00)

Total 0.13 (0.11) 0.00 (0.00) 0.10 (0.03) 0.08 (0.03) 0.02 (0.01)

Random Bends

Upper segment 0.15 (0.10) 0.00 (0.00) 0.04 (0.04) 0.15 (0.07) 0.02 (0.01)

Lower segment 0.00 (0.00) 0.11 (0.11) 0.16 (0.07) 0.25 (0.21) 0.01 (0.01)

Total 0.08 (0.06) 0.07 (0.07) 0.09 (0.04) 0.18 (0.09) 0.02 (0.01)

Table E6. Total number of sturgeon tagged and recaptured at the same bend at least once during five flow periods in 2006. 

Site Winter March pulse Interpulse May pulse Summer

Bend 3 1 0 2 1 10

Bend 4 1 0 6 3 0

Bend 9 0 0 0 0 1

Total 2 0 8 4 11
250 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River Table E7. Number (N) and frequency (%) of larval fishes collected at seven sites in the Missouri National Recreational River reach below Gavins Point Dam in 2006. [The symbol “T” means less than 0.1%] Downstream from Gavins Point Dam (bend 2) Downstream from Riverside Park (bend 4) Upstream from James River (bend 7) Downstream from James River (bend 11) Upstream from Vermillion River (bend 17) Downstream from Vermillion River (bend 20) Downstream from Ponca State Park (bend 30) Taxon

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

%

N

%

Catostomidae 11 0.42 56 3.93 23 1.79 43 5.82 122 11.20 60 3.50 93 6.20Centrarchidae 4 0.15 1 T 3 0.23 1 0.14 3 0.28 3 0.17 4 0.27Sciaenidae 2,427 92.11 1,210 84.91 1,179 91.54 543 73.48 822 75.48 1,447 84.32 1,305 87.00Percidae 0 T 4 0.28 0 0.00 1 0.14 2 0.18 0 T 2 0.13Clupeidae 124 4.71 126 8.84 66 5.12 104 14.07 91 8.36 119 6.93 49 3.27Cyprinidae 23 0.87 7 0.49 7 0.54 13 1.76 10 0.92 13 0.76 13 0.87Moronidae 38 1.44 27 1.89 6 0.47 24 3.25 26 2.39 52 3.03 19 1.27Ictaluridae 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 T 0 T 0 TAcipenseridae 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 T 0 0.00 13 1.19 12 0.70 4 0.27Polyodontidae 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 T 2 0.13Unidentified due to damage 7 0.27 7 0.49 3 0.23 9 1.22 5 0.46 12 0.70 8 0.53Total larvae 2,635 1,425 1,288 739 1,089 1,716 1,500
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and Habitat Use 251

Table E8. Total number (N), mean density (number/100 m3), median density, minimum density (min), maximum density 

(max), mean total length (mm), and total length range of larval sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus spp.), by date, collected in the 

Missouri River upstream from the James River (bend 7) in 2006.

Density (number of larvae/100 m3) Total length (mm)

Date N Mean Median Min Max Mean Range

5/8/2006

5/15/2006

5/18/2006

5/22/2006

5/24/2006

5/28/2006

6/1/2006

6/5/2006

6/8/2006

6/12/2006

6/19/2006

6/22/2006

6/28/2006

7/6/2006

7/12/2006

7/14/2006

7/18/2006

7/21/2006

7/24/2006

7/26/2006

7/28/2006

7/31/2006

8/2/2006

8/8/2006 1 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.99 8.02 8.02

8/10/2006
252 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Table E9. Total number (N), mean density (number/100 m3), median density, minimum density (min), maximum density 

(max), mean total length (mm), and total length range of larval sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus spp.), by date, collected in the 

Missouri River upstream from the Vermillion River (Bend 17) in 2006.

Density (number of larvae/100 m3) Total length (mm)

Date N Mean Median Min Max Mean Range

5/11/2006

5/15/2006

5/17/2006

5/21/2006

5/24/2006

5/28/2006

5/31/2006 5 4.35 0.00 0.00 17.40 8.52 7.22–9.58

6/4/2006 1 0.38 0.00 0.00 1.53 7.57 7.57

6/7/2006

6/11/2006

6/14/2006

6/21/2006 7 1.35 1.04 0.00 4.36 9.25 7.97–11.30

6/25/2006

6/28/2006

7/6/2006

7/10/2006

7/12/2006

7/17/2006

7/21/2006

7/25/2006

7/28/2006

8/1/2006

8/3/2006

8/7/2006

8/9/2006
Site-Specific Assessment of Spawning Behavior and Habitat Use 253

Table E10. Total number (N), mean density (number/100 m3), median density, minimum density (min), maximum density 

(max), mean total length (mm), and total length range of larval sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus spp.), by date, collected in the 

Missouri River downstream from the Vermillion River (Bend 20) in 2006.

Density (number of larvae/100 m3) Total length (mm)

Date N Mean Median Min Max Mean Range

5/17/2006

5/21/2006

5/31/2006

6/4/2006 1 0.57 0.00 0.00 2.27 8.22 8.22

6/7/2006

6/11/2006 2 0.87 0.87 0.00 1.76 8.31 7.87–8.76

6/14/2006

6/18/2006 3 0.85 0.44 0.00 2.51 8.30 7.66–9.43

6/21/2006 5 1.01 1.00 0.00 2.82 9.12 8.09–10.01

6/25/2006 1 0.39 0.00 0.00 1.58 9.35 9.35

6/28/2006

7/6/2006

7/10/2006

7/12/2006

7/17/2006

7/21/2006

7/25/2006

7/28/2006

8/1/2006

8/3/2006

8/7/2006

8/9/2006
254 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Table E11. Total number (N), mean density (number/100 m3), median density, minimum density (min), maximum density 

(max), mean total length (mm), and total length range of larval sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus spp.), by date, collected in the 

Missouri River downstream from the boat ramp at Ponca State Park (Bend 30) in 2006. 

[NA means not available because of specimen being damaged]

Density (number of larvae/100 m3) Total length (mm)

Date N Mean Median Min Max Mean Range

5/11/2006

5/14/2006

5/15/2006

5/17/2006

5/21/2006

5/24/2006

5/28/2006

5/31/2006 1 0.48 0.00 0.00 1.92 7.87 7.87

6/4/2006

6/7/2006

6/11/2006

6/14/2006

6/18/2006 2 0.98 0.00 0.00 3.92 7.92 7.35–8.48

6/21/2006

6/25/2006 1 0.35 0.00 0.00 1.41 NA NA

6/28/2006

7/6/2006

7/10/2006

7/12/2006

7/17/2006

7/21/2006

7/25/2006

7/28/2006

8/1/2006

8/3/2006

8/7/2006

8/9/2006

Prepared by: 

USGS Enterprise Publishing Network 

Rolla Publishing Service Center 

1400 Independence Road 

Rolla, MO 65401

For more information concerning this publication, contact:

Director

U.S. Geological Survey

Columbia Environmental Research Center

4200 New Haven Road

Columbia, MO 65201

(573) 875–5399

Or visit the Columbia Environmental Research Center website at:

http://www.cerc.usgs.gov
Water Quality and Hydrology

By Dale W. Blevins, Roy Bartholomay, Kathleen Neitzert, David Rus, Richard 

Wilson, Michael Andersen, Rich Kopish, and Roger Haschemeyer

Chapter F of 

Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, 

and Population Dynamics of Pallid Sturgeon and Shovelnose 

Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Edited by Carl E. Korschgen

Open-File Report 2007–1262

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
Contents

Introduction and Background..................................................................................................................259

Objectives....................................................................................................................................................259

Study Area and Methods..........................................................................................................................259

Results and Discussion.............................................................................................................................261

Summary......................................................................................................................................................262

References Cited........................................................................................................................................263

Figures and Tables.....................................................................................................................................265

Figures

F1. Missouri River Water Information Portal (MORWIP) webpage showing main 

stem and tributary monitoring sites in the Lower Missouri River Basin

including the real-time continuous water-quality data-collection sites .........................266

F2. Photograph showing SonTek acoustic Doppler velocity meter (Sontek/YSI 

incorporated, San Diego, Calif) ..............................................................................................267

F3. Screen image of output of the SonTek acoustic Doppler velocity meter (Sontek/

YSI Incorporated, San Diego, Calif.)......................................................................................268

F4. Photograph showing the SonTek shuttle at the gaging station near Ponca, Nebr .......269

F5–F11. Graphs showing—

F5. Gage height at Ponca, Nebr. showing the spring rise releases from Gavins 

Point Dam May 12–June 14, 2006..................................................................................270

F6. River stage and water temperature of the Missouri River at Yankton, S. Dak......271

F7. River stage, dissolved oxygen, water temperature, and turbidity with time 

during the spring flow pulse (released from Gavins Point Dam May 12 to 

June 15, 2006) at St. Joseph, Mo...................................................................................271

F8. Turbidity and river stage at Decatur, Iowa, showing no increase in turbidity 

associated with a release from Gavins Point Dam....................................................272

F9. Turbidity and river stage at Decatur, Iowa, showing increases in turbidity 

associated with natural rises from tributaries downstream from Yankton, 

S. Dak.................................................................................................................................272

F10. Specific conductance of the Missouri, James, and Vermillion Rivers in 

South Dakota ....................................................................................................................273

F11. Specific conductance and river stage on the Missouri River near 

Decatur, Iowa, showing dilution from rises from tributaries below 

Ponca, Nebr......................................................................................................................273
iii

Tables

F1. Monthly maximum (max), minimum (min), and mean water temperatures in the 

2006 water year at 11 gaging stations on the Missouri, James, and Vermillion 

Rivers ..........................................................................................................................................274

F2. Monthly maximum (max), minimum (min), and mean turbidity values in the 

2006 water year at 11 gaging stations on the Missouri, James, and Vermillion 

Rivers ..........................................................................................................................................275

F3. Monthly maximum (max), minimum (min), and mean dissolved-oxygen 

concentrations in the 2006 water year at 11 gaging stations on the Missouri, 

James and Vermillion Rivers...................................................................................................276

F4. Monthly maximum (max), minimum (min), and mean specific conductance 

values in the 2006 water year at 11 gaging stations on the Missouri, James 

and Vermillion Rivers................................................................................................................277

F5. Monthly maximum (max), minimum (min), and mean pH values in the 2006 

water year at 11 gaging stations on the Missouri, James and Vermillion Rivers..........278

F6. Discharge measurements at the gaging station near Ponca, Nebr ................................279

F7. Suspended-sediment concentrations in samples collected from the Missouri 

River near Ponca, Nebr ...........................................................................................................279
iv
Introduction and Background

Increasing discharge and water temperatures have been 

identified as the most likely variables cuing the movement and 

spawning of sturgeon (Scaphrynchus) in the Missouri River. 

Other water properties—such as velocity, stage, turbidity, 

dissolved oxygen, and pH—also are components of sturgeon 

habitat and are likely to have important roles in the movement, spawning, and survival of sturgeon. Therefore, flow and 

water-quality parameters are essential variables to be monitored during the study of sturgeon and river ecosystems. In 

2006, 11 continuous real-time water-quality monitors and an 

acoustic Doppler velocity meter were installed on the Missouri River and operated for nearly 9 months. The effort in this 

first year of the study was focused on installing instruments 

at existing gaging stations with data collection platforms 

(DCPs) to collect continuous flow and water-quality data on a 

real-time basis and on transmitting the data by satellite to the 

U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) National Water Information 

System (NWIS) for distribution on the Internet. Data corrections, compilations, and quality assurance were completed 

through September 30, 2006. This initial dataset provides 

some insight into the relations between water quality, flow, 

and flow sources. Interpretation of the data or attempts to correlate water-quality data with sturgeon or other biological data 

were not part of the 2006 study effort. Interpretative activities 

to characterize water quality and to investigate the relations 

between water quality, sturgeon, and ecosystem response are 

planned for 2007 through 2010.

Objectives

The water-quality and hydrology objectives of Spring 

Rise Flow Modification (SRFM) program on the Missouri 

River in 2006 were as follows:

1. Install and operate 11 real-time water-quality monitors at 11 gaging stations from Yankton, S. Dak. to 

Hermann, Mo.

2. Upgrade the stage-only gage at Ponca, Nebr. with 

a continuous real-time water-quality monitor and 

a velocity, discharge, and suspended-sediment 

measurement station using a “side-looking” acoustic 

Doppler velocity meter (ADVM). 

3. Archive all water-quality and discharge data in 

appropriate computer databases and distribute the 

information on an unrestricted basis.

4. Provide descriptions of data collection methods and 

results. This chapter and the 2006 Water Resources 

Data Reports for Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska, and 

South Dakota (available in May 2007 at http://water.

usgs.gov) will fulfill this objective.

Study Area and Methods

Real-time water-quality monitors were installed at 11 

sites on the main stem of the Missouri River and near the 

mouths of the James and Vermillion Rivers in South Dakota 

(fig. F1). These sites were all collocated with USGS or U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) stage or discharge gaging stations. The gage at Ponca, Nebr. was upgraded from a 

stage-only station to a real-time water-quality, discharge, and 

suspended-sediment monitoring station with a side-looking 

ADVM.

All sites were equipped with YSI Model 6600 EDS (YSI 

Inc., Yellow Springs, Ohio) water-quality monitors and satellite telemetry to provide water-quality data in real time on 

the Internet. Four sites were installed on bridges that required 

the installation of dual polyvinyl chloride conduit pipes on 

bridge piers extending about 100 ft from the bridge deck to 

several feet below the water surface. The remaining sites were 

installed on riverbanks with underground conduits connecting 

the gage house to the monitors below the water surface. All 

monitors were protected by PVC pipe with holes drilled in the 

pipe to provide adequate water exchange between the river and 

the interior of the pipe. Installation was according to specifications provided by the manufacturer (YSI) and to USGS 

standards (Wagner and others, 2006).

Temperature, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, specific conductance, and pH were collected at 15-minute intervals at all 

11 sites according to methods described in Wagner and others 

Water Quality and Hydrology

By Dale W. Blevins, Roy Bartholomay, Kathleen Neitzert, David Rus, Richard Wilson, Michael Andersen, 

Rich Kopish, and Roger Haschemeyer
260 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

(2006). Uniform data-collection methods and data comparability were ensured through use of standardized USGS methods 

and training of field technicians. Calibrations and instrument 

servicing were conducted at approximately 2-week intervals 

except when real-time monitoring of the data indicated that 

more frequent visits were needed. Near the end of the water 

year, several of the dissolved-oxygen membrane probes were 

replaced with new luminescent probes. These new nonmembrane probes may extend the time between servicing by as 

much as a week at some stations, reducing the cost of operation and maintenance. Data were automatically archived in 

the USGS NWIS database and are now accessible to the pubic 

through the NWIS Website (http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis). 

Data were processed in the USGS Automatic Data Processing 

System (ADAPS) and evaluated according to quality assurance 

criteria described in Wagner and others (2006). All field waterquality procedures and data-collection activities are technically reviewed every 3 years by USGS water-quality specialists from around the United States for adherence to standard 

procedures and uniformity among field offices.

At the Ponca gaging station (fig. F1, station 06479097), a 

multicomponent data-collection platform (DCP) was constructed in the spring of 2006. Previously, this stage-only 

gage was operated by the USACE. This site is located at the 

downstream end of the 59-mi reach of the Missouri National 

Recreational River that stretches from Gavins Point Dam to 

Ponca State Park in Nebraska. This 59-mi reach is the farthest 

downstream section of the Missouri River that is not channelized and it is thought to provide habitat for threatened and 

endangered species. Data collection activities at the Ponca 

gage included the following:

1. Real-time water-quality monitoring identical to 

efforts at the other 10 gages. 

2. Flow measurements including stage, velocity, and 

discharge on a continuous and real-time basis. A 

Design Analysis H-522 DCP and high-speed Geosynchronous Orbit Environmental Satellite (GOES) 

Transmitter were installed. A SonTek 0.5MHz 

Long-Range Argonaut Side-Looking ADVM (fig. 

F2) was installed to collect stream flow characteristics. The DCP was programmed to log at 15-minute 

intervals and transmit every hour. Logged data 

include date, time, stage, signal to noise ratio (SNR), 

stream velocity in the downstream direction, velocity 

magnitude, and cell end. The DCP operated continuously and produced an accurate record of stage 

and velocity. The electronic data logged (EDL) was 

downloaded from the DCP on every site visit and 

archived for future reference.

Calibration of the Ponca gage acoustic Doppler 

current profiler (ADCP) equipment included measurement of equipment draft, internal diagnostics test, 

and compass calibration. Velocity data were collected 

with either a 10- or 25-cm bin cell size and a blanking distance of 25 cm. Multiple bins arranged in a 

vertical column or “ensemble” were measured every 

0.60–1.45 seconds (depending on the water mode 

selected). Boat speed was maintained at or near surface water velocity (roughly 2.0 knots). Data acquisition based on boat speed and differential Global 

Positioning System coverage occurred approximately 

every 1–5 ft. At a minimum, four passes or transects 

of the river channel were made collecting velocity 

data. These data were averaged together to obtain a 

final discharge.

The cross-sectional ADCP measurements of the 

river channel at Ponca were performed to develop a 

stage-area rating of the site. Final ADCP discharge 

measurement values were used to calibrate the 

ADVM stage-area rating to develop an index-velocity 

rating for the site. The index-velocity rating is used to 

identify correlations between the velocities in subsections of river to the measured discharge. If successful, 

the ADVM is able to accurately measure velocity, 

stage, and therefore discharge (fig. F3). The ADVM 

may also be used to measure acoustic backscatter 

data that can be used to estimate suspended-sediment 

concentrations. The SonTek ADVM was mounted to 

a shuttle (fig. F4) on an 8-inch by 8-inch steel I-beam 

track system anchored to the ground. The I-beam 

measured 37 ft in length and was anchored to the 

slope of the river channel such that the lower portion 

of the shuttle remained below water level and the 

upper portion entered a 48-inch culvert set in a vertical position. The ADVM was initially programmed to 

collect data in a portion of the river measuring 6.56 

ft by 6.56 ft and extending out 52.5 ft into the river 

channel from the instrument. On June 26, the cell 

end was extended to 150 ft and reprogrammed into 

the ADVM to allow the measurement of a greater 

percentage of the river flow. The ADVM was programmed to measure data once every 15 minutes and 

average the measurement over a 3-minute period. The 

ADVM has built-in memory that records a number 

of parameters for quality assurance. These data were 

downloaded on every site visit and archived for future 

reference.

Standard discharge measurements were made 

from a boat using a Rio Grande 1200-KHz ADCP. 

The ADCP was deployed off the side or through the 

hull of a 20-ft Clark boat. Gage height and velocity 

profiles were logged into a ruggedized field computer 

running WinRiver software version 10.14 (fig. F5). 

Compass calibrations and an internal diagnostics test 

were performed before each measurement. Geospatial 

horizontal positioning of the ADCP was obtained 

using a Trimble Ag132 12-channel differentially 

corrected Global Positioning System (DGPS). The 

antenna for the DGPS was mounted directly over 

the bathymetric transducer. Channel geometry was 

collected using a survey grade echosounder and trans-
Water Quality and Hydrology 261

ducer. Equipment setup, calibration and data collection procedures complied with guidelines of the U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers (2002). An Innerspace 456 

single frequency (200-KHz) echosounder coupled 

with an 8° beam transducer was mounted directly 

in front of the ADCP. An Innerspace 443A velocity 

profiler was used to measure and record speed-ofsound profiles in the water column for calibration of 

the bathymetric echosounder.

3. Suspended-sediment sampling was conducted with 

a DH-95 suspended sediment sampler according to 

the guidelines outlined by Wilde and others (1999). 

The DH-95 is a depth-integrating suspended sampler 

that continuously collects a representative sample 

from a river while transiting a vertical at a constant 

rate (Davis and others, 2005). Suspended-sediment 

samples were collected from 10 vertical transits 

using the equal-width-increment (EWI) method. 

The EWI method requires the equal spacing of each 

vertical transit along with a constant transit rate of 

each vertical to yield a sample that is proportional 

to the total river flow (Edwards and Glysson, 1999). 

The DH-95 was suspended from a reel attached to 

a crane base mounted to a boat. The sample was 

collected along the same river transect as the ADCP 

measurement near the Ponca gage. River water from 

each vertical was composited in a churn, and a subsample was submitted for analysis.

Results and Discussion

Temperature, turbidity, dissolved-oxygen, specific 

conductance, pH, stage, and discharge data were collected at 

15-minute intervals at all 11 sites from March through the end 

of September 2006. Less than 5 percent of all data was missed 

because of instrument malfunction, environmental conditions, 

or human error. All data collected in the most recent 31 days 

are available in real time on the USGS Water Resource RealTime Web pages (http://waterdata.usgs.gov/usa/nwis/rt); however, in order to make access to real-time data easier for those 

interested in the Missouri River water quality, a special Web 

page, titled Missouri River Water Information Portal (MORWIP) was created to make quicker and easier access to the 

data (fig. F1; http://ne.water.usgs.gov/missouririverwq/index.

html). This Web page shows the location of every real-time 

station on the main stem of the lower Missouri River as well 

as the locations of real-time stations near the mouths of major 

tributaries. All 11 continuous water-quality sites, dischargeonly sites, and water-sampling sites are shown on the Webpage map. Clicking on a station will automatically bring up 

real-time data for that station.

The spring rise pulse from Gavins Point Dam on May 

12–13, 2006, increased the stage at Yankton, S. Dak. and 

Ponca, Nebr. 2–3 ft (figs. F5 and F6), with smaller subsequent 

releases occurring every few days through the end of the 

month. From St. Joseph, Mo. downstream, the rise was attenuated to 1.5 ft or less. Consequently, water-quality responses 

were not expected to be large. Graphs of temperature (figs. 

F6 and F7) during the May release indicate a corresponding 

rise in water temperature of about 10 oC. An earlier rise with 

a colder temperature increase of similar magnitude occurred 

in late March and early April (fig. F6) at Yankton, S. Dak. 

Therefore, it may be difficult to distinguish whether river flow 

or temperature rise was more important to sturgeon migration. 

Monthly-mean water temperatures at main stem gages (table 

F1) generally increased with decreasing latitude. Water temperatures at the tributary gages on the James River at Scotland, 

S. Dak. and the Vermillion River at Vermillion, S. Dak. were 

higher than than those at the Yankton gage in March, April, 

and May, thus contributing to a quicker temperature increase 

downstream and providing a warmer refuge earlier in the 

spring. Maximum water temperatures were above 32°C for a 

few days during July downstream from Nebraska City, Nebr. 

Ecological effects of these high temperatures on pallid sturgeon (scaphrynchus albus) from the lower Missouri River and 

many other river species has not been documented. Diurnal 

fluctuations of about 1°C were commonly observed (fig. F7) at 

most gages. 

Turbidity was generally the lowest of any gage in releases 

from Gavins Point Dam (as measured at Yankton). The 

ongoing releases of clear water from Gavins Point Dam from 

May 12 to June 15, 2006 caused little change in maximum or 

mean turbidity compared to previous and subsequent months 

at Yankton, S. Dak. (table F2). Monthly-mean turbidities at 

Ponca were similar to those at Yankton, but natural rises from 

downstream tributaries, including the James and Vermillion 

Rivers, caused large increases in turbidity (figs. F7, F8, and 

F9). This difference in turbidities between clear Gavins Point 

Dam releases and natural rises could be important if turbidity 

plays a role in the spawning, migration, or survival of juvenile 

river sturgeon. Frequently, small natural rises on the Missouri 

River caused equivalent or larger increases in turbidity as large 

rises (figs. F8 and F9). Specific conductance, turbidity, and 

other water quality parameters at Ponca, Nebr. varied more 

before the May rise and the initiation of navigation season 

than it varied after these flow increases, probably because 

reservoir water quality discharged from Gavins Point Dam is 

more stable than water quality from tributaries between Gavins 

Point and Ponca. 

Dissolved-oxygen concentrations decreased to values 

less than the water-quality standard of 5 mg/L during several 

natural rises in the summer (fig. F7 and table F3) at several 

downstream gages, but, releases from Gavins Point Dam did 

not substantially decrease dissolved-oxygen concentrations, 

as the minimum concentration at the Yankton gaging station 

was 6.4 mg/L. Dissolved-oxygen concentrations as low as 3.8 

mg/L were measured at St. Joseph, Mo. in August. Historically, dissolved-oxygen concentrations less than 2.0 mg/L 

have been recorded. The Vermillion and James Rivers also 

exhibited dissolved-oxygen sags with concentrations near 0 
262 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

mg/L during one rise. The effects of low dissolved-oxygen 

concentrations on pallid sturgeon and other important species 

in the Missouri River are not well documented, but limitations 

may be possible given that low concentrations of dissolved 

oxygen persisted for several days. Diurnal fluctuations of 1–2 

mg/L were common at most sites during the summer (fig F7). 

Specific conductance is strongly related to the concentration of dissolved solids in the Missouri River. The specific 

conductance of the James and Vermillion Rivers is two to 

three times the conductance of the Missouri River at Yankton, S. Dak. (fig. F10 and table F4). Therefore, the large 

spring rises of these tributaries substantially increased the 

conductance and concentration of dissolved ions in the reach 

of the Missouri River between Yankton, S. Dak. and Ponca, 

Nebr, in April and May (table F4 and fig. F10), but low flows 

from these two tributaries in June through September did not 

substantially increase specific conductance in the Missouri 

River. Specific conductance at main stem sites below Ponca 

was relatively stable except when tributaries rose and caused 

short periods of dilution (fig. F11). Generally, but not always, 

monthly mean conductance values decreased slightly with distance downstream of Omaha as lower conductance tributaries 

dilute the Missouri River. Large changes in pH generally were 

not observed with changes in discharge. Monthly pH data are 

summarized in table F5.

At the Ponca gage, 26 standard ADCP discharge measurements were made by boat from March 30 through October 

12, 2006 (table F6). Measured discharges ranged from 14,800 

ft3/s on October 12, 2006, to 31,800 ft3/s on August 3, 2006. 

Special emphasis was placed on obtaining measurements 

that coincided with flow modifications or hydrologic events. 

Events of special interest include moderate to extreme changes 

in river stage particularly at the beginning and end of the 

navigation season and during pulse flows such as the spring 

rise. All discharge measurements comply with the guidelines 

described in “Quality-Assurance Plan for Discharge Measurements Using Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers” (Oberg and 

others, 2005).

At the Ponca gage, suspended-sediment samples were 

collected prior to, during, and after navigation season and 

during the spring rise flow modifications (table F7). A goal of 

the study was to determine the correlations between real-time 

water quality, acoustic backscatter (sound waves reflected off 

of sediment particles back to the instrument), and suspended 

sediment. If a water-quality parameter or acoustic backscatter can be established as a surrogate for suspended sediment, 

then suspended sediment can be estimated on a continuous 

and real-time basis and provide time-critical information to be 

used to evaluate the effectiveness of flow modifications upon 

suspended-sediment mobilization and transport.

Because 2006 was the first year of monitoring the effects 

of flow releases and restoration activities on the pallid sturgeon and its habitat—which include water quality, suspended 

sediment, and discharge—only instrumentation and data 

collection were undertaken in 2006. Continued data collection 

and substantial interpretation are planned in future years with 

substantial integration with existing information on the effects 

of water quality on sturgeon and large-river ecosystems and 

biological data collected by other participants in the SRFM 

program. These planned interpretative activities are as follows:

1. Identify and characterize the response of selected 

fish species and other biological response variables 

to continuous and surrogate water-quality parameters.

2. Evaluate the existing continuous water-quality network for efficiency.

3. Characterize the response of continuously monitored 

water-quality parameters to the flow pulses released 

from Gavins Point Dam and natural rises on the Missouri River.

4. Characterize the sources of sediment or turbidity 

during rises on the Missouri River.

5. Develop surrogate regression relations for suspended 

sediment, total organic carbon, total nitrogen, and 

other constituents with existing water-sample data 

at selected sites. Identify new analytes that could 

potentially have biological significance, and add 

them to compounds analyzed at existing sample 

sites. These contaminants would likely be highly 

toxic, bioaccumulative, or endocrine-disrupting 

compounds.

6. Characterize the amount of variation and central 

tendencies of temporal changes in continuous waterquality parameters observed in 2006.

Summary

All sites were equipped with YSI Model 6600 EDS 

water-quality monitors (YSI Inc., Yellow Springs, Ohio) 

and deployed with existing satellite transmitters to provide 

water-quality data in real time on the Internet. Temperature, 

turbidity, dissolved oxygen, specific conductance, and pH data 

were collected at 15-minute intervals at all 11 sites from early 

March through October 2006. A stage-only gage at Ponca, 

Nebr. was also upgraded to a multicomponent data collection platform that included measuring the flow parameters 

of stage, velocity, discharge, and acoustic backscatter with a 

side-scan acoustic Doppler velocity meter (ADVM). In future 

years, acoustic backscatter data from the ADVM will be correlated with turbidity and suspended-sediment concentrations 

in an effort to produce continuous estimates of suspendedsediment concentrations. Data were automatically archived 

in the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Information 

System (NWIS) database and are now accessible to the public 

through the NWIS Web site. All continuous water-quality and 

discharge data will be published on the World Wide Web in 
Water Quality and Hydrology 263

the 2006 Water Resources Data Reports for Missouri, Iowa, 

Nebraska, and South Dakota (available at http://water.usgs.

gov/).

Temperature rises of about 10°C were associated with 

the Gavins Point Dam release in May and were near the time 

of the planned release in late March and early April. Consequently, it may be difficult to separate the importance of flow 

and temperature on sturgeon behavior. Maximum temperatures 

greater than 30°C occurred for several days at the lower gages 

and may have caused problems for power stations and stress 

for some fish species. The May release from Gavins Point 

Dam did not cause increases in turbidity, but natural rises 

from downstream tributaries did. This difference in turbidities 

between clear Gavins Point Dam releases and natural rises 

could be important if turbidity plays a role in the spawning, 

migration, or survival of juvenile sturgeon. Dissolved-oxygen 

concentrations decreased to values of less than the waterquality standard of 5 mg/L during natural rises in the summer 

at several main stem sites. The Vermillion and James Rivers 

also exhibited dissolved-oxygen depletion with concentrations 

near 0 mg/L during one rise. The effects or limitations of low 

dissolved-oxygen concentrations on pallid sturgeon and other 

important species in the Missouri River are not well documented, but effects may exist given that low concentrations of 

dissolved oxygen persisted for several days.

This year was the first of monitoring the effects of flow 

releases and restoration activities on the pallid sturgeon and its 

habitat. Consequently, only instrumentation and data collection was initiated in 2006. Interpretation and integration of 

biological data are planned to begin in late 2007.

References Cited

Davis, B.E., and the Federal Interagency Sedimentation Project, 2005, A Guide to the proper selection and use of federally approved sediment and water-quality samplers: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 2005–1087, 20 p.

Edwards, T.K., and Glysson, G.D., 1999, Field methods for 

measurement of fluvial sediment: U.S. Geological Survey 

Techniques of Water Resources Investigations, book 3, 

chap. C2, 89 p. 

Oberg, K.A., Morlock, S.E., and Caldwell, W.S., 2005, 

Quality-assurance plan for discharge measurements using 

acoustic Doppler current profilers: U.S. Geological Survey 

Scientific Investigations Report 2005–5183, 35 p.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2002, Engineering and 

design—Hydrographic surveying: U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers manual, no. 1110–2–1003, 579 p.

Wilde, F.D., Radtke, D.B., Gibs, J., and Iwatsubo, R.T., eds., 

1999, National field manual for the collection of waterquality data—Collection of water samples: U.S. Geological 

Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, 

book 9.

Wagner, R.J., Boulger Jr., R.W., Oblinger, C.J., and Smith, 

B.A., 2006, Guidelines and standard procedures for continuous water quality monitors—Station operation, record 

computation, and data reporting: U.S. Geological Survey 

Techniques and Methods 1–D3, 51 p.
264 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River
Water Quality and Hydrology 265

Figures and Tables
266 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Spring flow pulse

Spring flow pulse

Figure F1. Missouri River Water Information Portal (MORWIP) webpage showing main stem and tributary monitoring sites in the Lower 

Missouri River Basin including the real-time continuous water-quality data-collection sites (http://ne.water.usgs.gov/missouririverwq/

index.html).
Water Quality and Hydrology 267

Figure F2. SonTek acoustic Doppler velocity meter (Sontek/YSI incorporated, San Diego, 

Calif).
268 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Figure F3. Output of the SonTek acoustic Doppler velocity meter (Sontek/YSI Incorporated, San Diego, Calif.).
Water Quality and Hydrology 269

Figure F4. SonTek shuttle at the gaging station near Ponca, Nebr.
270 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

O Manually Measured Gage Height . 

____ Gage Height Measured by Recorder 

Gage Height, in feet 

Figure F5. Gage height at Ponca, Nebr. showing the spring rise releases from Gavins Point Dam May 12–June 14, 2006.
Water Quality and Hydrology 271

6

8

10

12

14

3/1/20063/8/2006

3/15/20063/22/20063/29/2006

4/5/2006

4/12/20064/19/20064/26/2006

5/3/2006

5/10/20065/17/20065/24/20065/31/2006

DATE

DAILY MEAN RIVER STAGE,

IN FEET

0

6

12

18

24

MEAN DAILY WATER TEMPERATURE,

 IN DEGREES CELSIUS 

Daily mean river stage

Daily mean water temperature

Spring flow pulse

Figure F-9. Graph of turbidity and river stage at Decatur, IA showing increases in 

turbidity associated with natural rises from tributaries downstream from Yankton, 

4

8

12

16

20

24

28

5/15/065/22/065/29/066/5/06

DATE

Stage, in feet

Dissolved Oxygen, in mg/L

Temperature, in degress Celsius

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Turbidity, in formazin nephelometric 

units

River Stage

Dissolved Oxygen

Water Temperature

Turbidity

Spring flow pulse

Figure F6. River stage and water temperature of the Missouri River at Yankton, S. Dak.

Figure F7. River stage, dissolved oxygen, water temperature, and turbidity with time during 

the spring flow pulse (released from Gavins Point Dam May 12 to June 15, 2006) at St. Joseph, 

Mo.
272 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

0

20

40

60

80

100

3/15/20063/18/20063/21/20063/24/20063/27/20063/30/2006

4/2/2006

Date

Turbidity, 

in Formazin Nephelometric Turbidity Units

15

17

19

21

23

25

River stage, in feet

Turbidity

Gage height

River Stage and Turbidity at Decatur, IA

0

100

200

300

400

500

4/8/2006

4/12/20064/16/20064/20/20064/24/20064/28/2006

5/2/2006

Date

Turbidity, in Formazin 

Nephelometric Turbidity 

Units

19

19.5

20

20.5

21

21.5

22

22.5

23

23.5

24

River stage, in feet 

Turbidity

River stage

Figure F8. Turbidity and river stage at Decatur, Iowa, showing no increase in turbidity associated with a 

release from Gavins Point Dam.

Figure F9. Turbidity and river stage at Decatur, Iowa, showing increases in turbidity associated with natural 

rises from tributaries downstream from Yankton, S. Dak.
Water Quality and Hydrology 273

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3/1/2006

3/15/20063/29/20064/12/20064/26/20065/10/20065/24/2006

6/7/2006

6/21/2006

7/5/2006

7/19/2006

8/2/2006

8/16/20068/30/20069/13/20069/27/2006

Date

SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE, IN 

MICROSIEMENS PER CENTIMETER 

AT 25 DEGRESS CELSIUS

Missouri River near Yankton, S. Dak.

James River near Scotland, S. Dak.

Vermillion River near Vermillion, S. Dak.

Missouri River near Ponca, Nebr.

600

700

800

900

1000

4/7/20064/9/2006

4/11/20064/13/20064/15/20064/17/20064/19/2006

Date

Specific conductance, in 

microsiemens per centimeter at 25 

degrees Celsius)

20.0

21.0

22.0

23.0

24.0

River stage, in feet 

Specific conductance

River stage

Figure F10. Specific conductance of the Missouri, James, and Vermillion Rivers in South Dakota.

Figure F11. Specific conductance and river stage on the Missouri River near Decatur, Iowa, showing dilution 

from rises from tributaries below Ponca, Nebr.
274 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Table F1. Monthly maximum (max), minimum (min), and mean water temperatures in the 2006 water year at 11 gaging 

stations on the Missouri, James, and Vermillion Rivers.

[See fig. F1 for locations; all values in degrees Celsius; --, missing data]

Nearest

city

Station

number

March April May June

Max Min Mean Max Min Mean Max Min Mean Max Min Mean

Yankton, S. Dak. 06467500 5.7 0.9 2.6 14.5 5.0 11.0 23.5 12.1 16.0 24.1 18.5 21.8

Scotland, S. Dak. 06478500 b10.4 b1.0 b6.0 17.4 7.7 13.0 25.8 13.4 18.2 28.4 17.7 24.1

Vermillion, S. Dak. 06479010 -- 0.0 -- 18.1 6.9 12.5 26.4 12.1 16.9 a28.0 a14.8 a21.7

Ponca, Nebr. 06479097 a8.2 0.0 a3.6 17.4 4.9 12.2 24.3 11.5 16.9 25.5 18.5 23.0

Decatur, Nebr. 06601200 7.9 1.8 4.4 16.8 6.8 12.5 24.4 13.1 17.3 24.9 19.8 23.6

Council Bluffs, Iowa 06610505 8.1 3.5 5.6 17.0 8.1 13.2 25.3 13.5 17.7 25.8 21.8 24.5

Nebraska City, Nebr. 06807000 8.9 3.9 6.2 17.4 8.7 14.0 25.6 13.9 18.3 26.3 23.0 25.1

St. Joseph, Mo. 06818000 9.7 4.2 7.1 17.9 9.4 14.8 a25.6 a14.0 a19.0 a27.9 a24.1 a26

Waverly, Mo. 06895500 a11.3 a6.0 a8.5 19.1 10.8 16.0 25.9 15.8 19.5 28.3 25.3 26.6

Boonville, Mo. 06909000 11.5 5.9 8.6 20.0 10.9 16.4 26.3 16.0 19.4 27.8 23.6 26.3

Hermann, Mo. 06934500 12.3 6.6 8.9 a20.3 a11.8a a16.5 a26.8 a16.0 a18.1 28.5 24.6 26.5

Nearest

city

Station 

number

July August September

Max Min Mean Max Min Mean Max Min Mean

Yankton, S. Dak. 06467500 27.8 22.8 25.1 27.7 23.2 25.2 23.2 14.4 18.8

Scotland, S. Dak. 06478500 31.6 24.3 27.9 30.3 21.4 26.0 a23.2 a12.8 a17.5

Vermillion, S. Dak. 06479010 32.9 18.1 24.9 31.2 17.1 23.8 a24.8 9.4 a16.1

Ponca, Nebr. 06479097 28.4 22.9 26.1 a28.3 a22.5 a25.6 23.4 14.0 18.6

Decatur, Nebr. 06601200 28.4 24.2 26.5 28.0 23.6 25.9 23.8 15.0 19.0

Council Bluffs, Iowa 06610505 29.4 25.1 27.4 28.9 24.2 26.6 24.4 15.7 19.7

Nebraska City, Nebr. 06807000 29.8 25.6 27.7 29.4 24.7 27.0 24.6 15.8 20.0

St. Joseph, Mo. 06818000 31.2 25.7 28.6 30.3 24.9 27.8 25.8 16.6 21.0

Waverly, Mo. 06895500 32.5 27.0 29.3 a30.9 a25.4 a28.5 25.8 17.5 22.2

Boonville, Mo. 06909000 32.0 26.6 29.0 a31.4 a25.5 a28.7 25.9 17.6 22.4

Hermann, Mo. 06934500 32.1 26.7 29.1 31.6 25.6 28.7 25.8 17.9 22.6

a

Monthly statistic computed with 1–7 days of missing data.

b

Monthly statistic computed with 8–10 days of missing data.
Water Quality and Hydrology 275

Table F2. Monthly maximum (max), minimum (min), and mean turbidity values in the 2006 water year at 11 gaging stations on 

the Missouri, James, and Vermillion Rivers.

[See fig. F1 for locations; all values in formazin nephelometric turbidity units; --, missing data]

Nearest

city

Station

number

March April May June

Max Min Mean Max Min Mean Max Min Mean Max Min Mean

Yankton, S. Dak. 06467500 b41 b4 b10 60 4 14 36 8 15 a37 a6 a12

Scotland, S. Dak. 06478500 b58 b19 b27 200 43 117 130 71 94 120 37 70

Vermillion, S. Dak. 06479010 -- -- -- a490 a42 a147 b82 b24 b39 a240 a16 a61

Ponca, Nebr. 06479097 b38 b7 b16 a310 a8.1 a31 a51 a6.7 a15 26 5.6 13

Decatur, Nebr. 06601200 34.49 7.34 16 220 32 84 59 22 32 78 20 30

Council Bluffs, Iowa 06610505 67.72 19.01 27 240 43.49 120 91 37 57 78 28 39

Nebraska City, Nebr. 06807000 92 25 33 200 49 116 130 30 54 88 27 46

St. Joseph, Mo. 06818000 150 21 34 430 60 160 a720 a33 a95 a660 a28 a78

Waverly, Mo. 06895500 a490 a24 a47 370 49 160 480 44 120 350 42 89

Boonville, Mo. 06909000 700 15 85 340 69 160 660 33 150 930 34 110

Hermann, Mo. 06934500 a340 a15 a75 a280 a46 a130a a520 a37 a140 a370 a21 a86

Nearest

city

Station 

number

July August September

Max Min Mean Max Min Mean Max Min Mean

Yankton, S. Dak. 06467500 a49 a6 a14 a88 a5 a11 44 3 12

Scotland, S. Dak. 06478500 88 a25 a37 a280 a25 a53 130 23 a46

Vermillion, S. Dak. 06479010 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Ponca, Nebr. 06479097 b31 b6.9 b18 a33 a0.4 a8.8 32 3 9

Decatur, Nebr. 06601200 43 16.27 19 23 9.9 15 25 8.6 13

Council Bluffs, Iowa 06610505 37 21 27 51 21 27 62 14 26

Nebraska City, Nebr. 06807000 66 20 32 160 19 39 170 20 32

St. Joseph, Mo. 06818000 a130 a21 a45 340 12 63 a320 a30 a70

Waverly, Mo. 06895500 130 31 48 500 28 100 a380 a44 a94

Boonville, Mo. 06909000 620 26 49 a420 a23 a91 a320 a35 a100

Hermann, Mo. 06934500 200 18 38 280 16 65 280 25 82

a

Monthly statistic computed with 1–7 days of missing data.

b

Monthly statistic computed with 8–10 days of missing data.
276 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Table F3. Monthly maximum (max), minimum (min), and mean dissolved-oxygen concentrations in the 2006 water year at 11 

gaging stations on the Missouri, James and Vermillion Rivers.

[See fig. F1 for locations; all values in milligrams per liter; --, missing data]

Nearest

city

Station

number

March April May June

Max Min Mean Max Min Mean Max Min Mean Max Min Mean

Yankton, S. Dak. 06467500 b18.1 b12.6 b13.9 13.9 9.8 11.7 12.8 9.2 11.0 a10.5 a7.0 a8.9

Scotland, S. Dak. 06478500 b14.0 b10.3 b12.7 a11.8 a6.9 a9.0 10.7 4.4 8.4 b11.2 b6.3 b8.2

Vermillion, S. Dak. 06479010 -- -- -- 14.8 a7.2 a9.7 a17.6 a6.8 a11.2 a15.8 b6.4 b9.1

Ponca, Nebr. 06479097 -- -- -- b12.7 b9.3 b10.8 11.8 5.2 9.3 b10.8 b5.4 b8.0

Decatur, Nebr. 06601200 17.0 11.3 13.4 12.2 8.5 10.3 10.3 8.6 9.7 10.0 8.4 8.9

Council Bluffs, Iowa 06610505 14.4 11.5 13.1 11.1 7.9 9.5 10.3 8.8 9.5 9.8 7.7 8.7

Nebraska City, Nebr. 06807000 13.3 10.7 12.2 10.6 7.8 9.3 10.2 7.5 9.1 9.2 6.6 7.8

St. Joseph, Mo. 06818000 13.0 10.6 11.8 10.9 7.2 8.5 a10.3 a5.0 a8.7 a10.8 a5.1 a7.7

Waverly, Mo. 06895500 a12.9 a9.4 a11.4 11.4 7.0 8.5 9.5 6.2 8.2 8.9 4.9 6.5

Boonville, Mo. 06909000 13.6 9.2 11.7 11.5 7.7 8.6 10.1 5.8 8.4 8.7 4.4 6.6

Hermann, Mo. 06934500 a14.6 a9.9 a12.5 -- -- -- -- -- -- a9.1 a5.3 a6.8

Nearest

city

Station 

number

July August September

Max Min Mean Max Min Mean Max Min Mean

Yankton, S. Dak. 06467500 a8.4 a6.4 a7.2 a8.6 a6.6 a7.7 10.1 7.7 8.9

Scotland, S. Dak. 06478500 b17.4 b4.9 b9.0 b13.7 b0.3 b5.8 b11.8 b4.5 b8.2

Vermillion, S. Dak. 06479010 a12.0 b2.7 b7.7 11.7 b1.5 b6.6 a12.2 -- --

Ponca, Nebr. 06479097 a8.5 a5.6 a7.2 -- -- -- 9.8 7.1 8.4

Decatur, Nebr. 06601200 8.1 7.3 7.7 8.6 6.9 7.7 9.4 8.3 8.9

Council Bluffs, Iowa 06610505 9.3 7.7 8.5 10.1 7.1 8.4 10.3 7.6 9.1

Nebraska City, Nebr. 06807000 8.4 7.0 7.7 10.0 6.1 7.8 9.9 7.1 8.5

St. Joseph, Mo. 06818000 -- -- -- a8.8 a3.8 a6.8 9.8 6.2 7.9

Waverly, Mo. 06895500 a8.8 a5.2 a6.9 9.2 4.0 6.5 10.0 5.5 8.0

Boonville, Mo. 06909000 a10.2 a5.9a a7.8 a10.8 a4.4 a7.5 10.8 6.2 8.2

Hermann, Mo. 06934500 9.6 5.3 7.6 a9.5 -- -- a10.7 a5.4 a8.0

a

Monthly statistic computed with 1–7 days of missing data.

b

Monthly statistic computed with 8–10 days of missing data.
Water Quality and Hydrology 277

Table F4. Monthly maximum (max), minimum (min), and mean specific conductance values in the 2006 water year at 11 

gaging stations on the Missouri, James and Vermillion Rivers. 

[See fig. F1 for locations; all values in microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degress Celsius; --, missing data]

Nearest

city

Station

number

March April May June

Max Min Mean Max Min Mean Max Min Mean Max Min Mean

Yankton, S. Dak. 06467500 812 618 669 683 627 666 725 674 698 748 692 723

Scotland, S. Dak. 06478500 b1,820 b1,630 b1,700 b1,690 b709 b1,300 -- -- -- a1,590 a1,440 a1,520

Vermillion, S. Dak. 06479010 -- -- -- 2,120 1,170 1,840 2,190 1,730 1,880 a1,900 a1,140 a1,690

Ponca, Nebr. 06479097 a765 a587 a653 873 663 756 804 698 748 747 702 731

Decatur, Nebr. 06601200 825 690 750 876 641 775 860 752 792 759 686 726

Council Bluffs, Iowa 06610505 827 701 766 818 722 777 828 738 780 799 744 768

Nebraska City, Nebr. 06807000 756 648 709 790 651 730 780 689 743 793 716 754

St. Joseph, Mo. 06818000 797 655 741 796 621 727 a791 a630 a742 a772 a685 a741

Waverly, Mo. 06895500 a797 a657 a750 782 602 717 787 561 719 778 680 744

Boonville, Mo. 06909000 828 583 733 770 590 695 782 473 693 763 546 707

Hermann, Mo. 06934500 803 550 682 a763 a579 a665 a735 a433 a611 740 548 659

Nearest

city

Station 

number

July August September

Max Min Mean Max Min Mean Max Min Mean

Yankton, S. Dak. 06467500 772 647 742 a770 a517 a702 721 562 663

Scotland, S. Dak. 06478500 a764 a718 a742 765 710 740 737 624 717

Vermillion, S. Dak. 06479010 1,800 1,560 1,720 1,990 1,360 1,660 a1,590 a1,110 a1,370

Ponca, Nebr. 06479097 1,720 1,580 1,650 1,800 1,420 1,600 a1,670 1,190 a1,490

Decatur, Nebr. 06601200 749 727 740 a774 a727 a743 774 695 725

Council Bluffs, Iowa 06610505 753 706 734 764 719 742 757 672 721

Nebraska City, Nebr. 06807000 765 734 750 760 682 729 766 690 729

St. Joseph, Mo. 06818000 766 686 732 779 666 728 753 583 684

Waverly, Mo. 06895500 780 538 744 761 551 720 760 556 688

Boonville, Mo. 06909000 a771 a687 a747 a769 a517 a706 a747 a576 a687

Hermann, Mo. 06934500 744 620 703 741 566 687 710 539 651

a

Monthly statistic computed with 1–7 days of missing data.

b

Monthly statistic computed with 11–13 days of missing data.
278 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Table F5. Monthly maximum (max), minimum (min), and mean pH values in the 2006 water year at 11 gaging stations on the 

Missouri, James and Vermillion Rivers.

[See fig. F1 for locations; all values in pH units; --, missing data]

Nearest

city

Station

number

March April May June

Max Min Median Max Min Median Max Min Median Max Min Median

Yankton, S. Dak. 06467500 8.8 8.2 8.5 8.8 8.4 8.6 8.7 8.6 8.7 8.6 8.1 8.4

Scotland, S. Dak. 06478500 a8.9 a8.5 a8.7 8.6 8.0 8.3 8.6 8.3 8.4 8.6 8.2 8.4

Vermillion, S. Dak. 06479010 -- -- -- 8.4 7.9 8.1 8.3 7.6 8.0 a8.4 a7.8 a8.0

Ponca, Nebr. 06479097 a8.6 a7.8 a8.2 8.5 7.9 8.2 8.9 8.2 8.5 8.5 8.2 8.4

Decatur, Nebr. 06601200 8.5 8.2 8.3 8.5 8.0 8.3 8.6 8.4 8.5 8.4 8.2 8.3

Council Bluffs, Iowa 06610505 8.4 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.0 8.2 8.5 8.2 8.4 8.6 8.3 8.3

Nebraska City, Nebr. 06807000 8.4 8.2 8.3 8.4 7.9 8.1 8.4 8.2 8.3 8.5 8.2 8.3

St. Joseph, Mo. 06818000 8.5 8.4 8.4 8.5 8.0 8.2 a8.6 a8.0 a8.4 a8.8 a8.0 a8.4

Waverly, Mo. 06895500 a8.5 a8.1 a8.3 8.4 7.9 8.1 8.5 7.9 8.3 8.6 8.0 8.2

Boonville, Mo. 06909000 8.4 7.9 8.3 8.3 8.0 8.1 8.6 7.8 8.3 8.6 7.7 8.2

Hermann, Mo. 06934500 8.6 a8.1 a8.4 8.3 7.9 8.1 a8.4 a7.7 a8.1 a8.4 a7.8 a8.1

Nearest

city

Station 

number

July August September

Max Min Median Max Min Median Max Min Median

Yankton, S. Dak. 06467500 8.4 8.1 8.2 8.4 8.2 8.3 8.6 8.4 8.5

Scotland, S. Dak. 06478500 8.7 8.2 8.5 8.7 7.8 8.3 8.8 8.0 8.4

Vermillion, S. Dak. 06479010 8.2 7.6 7.9 8.3 7.7 8.0 a8.3 a7.8 a8.1

Ponca, Nebr. 06479097 8.4 8.0 8.2 a8.8 a8.2 a8.5 8.6 8.3 8.4

Decatur, Nebr. 06601200 8.5 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.3 8.4 8.6 8.4 8.5

Council Bluffs, Iowa 06610505 8.5 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.0 8.2 8.5 8.3 8.4

Nebraska City, Nebr. 06807000 8.6 8.3 8.5 8.6 8.2 8.4 8.6 8.2 8.4

St. Joseph, Mo. 06818000 8.7 8.3 8.5 8.8 8.0 8.5 8.6 8.1 8.4

Waverly, Mo. 06895500 8.6 8.2 8.4 a8.6 a7.9 a8.2 8.7 8.0 8.3

Boonville, Mo. 06909000 8.7 8.0 8.5 a8.8 a7.8 a8.2 8.7 8.0 8.4

Hermann, Mo. 06934500 8.6 8.1 8.4 8.7 7.9 8.3 8.8 7.9 8.4

a

Monthly statistic computed with 1–7 days of missing data.
Water Quality and Hydrology 279

Table F6. Discharge measurements at the gaging station near Ponca, Nebr. 

[ft2, square feet; ft3/s, cubic feet per second]

Date Central Time

Measurement 

number

Width, 

in feet

Area, 

in ft2

Velocity, in feet 

per second

Gage height, 

in feet

Discharge, 

in ft3/s

3/30/2006 11:30 1 685 6,220 3.39 11.45 21,100

3/30/2006 13:30 2 664 6,120 3.44 11.43 21,100

5/25/2006 12:30 3 679 6,050 3.37 11.10 20,400

6/8/2006 11:15 4 681 8,080 3.28 12.93 26,500

6/8/2006 11:45 5 718 7,310 3.49 12.30 25,500

6/30/2006 11:30 6 715 7,640 3.36 12.82 25,700

6/30/2006 13:00 7 702 7,290 3.57 12.82 26,000

7/21/2006 9:00 8 687 7,590 3.38 12.70 25,600

8/3/2006 9:00 9 650 8,490 3.75 14.10 31,800

8/3/2006 10:10 10 649 8,510 3.71 14.08 31,500

8/3/2006 11:35 11 650 8,470 3.68 14.08 31,100

8/3/2006 13:10 12 650 8,460 3.69 14.08 31,200

8/11/2006 8:35 13 651 8,280 3.61 13.62 29,900

8/11/2006 9:10 14 650 8,280 3.55 13.56 29,400

8/11/2006 11:00 15 655 8,250 3.55 13.54 29,300

9/1/2006 11:00 16 692 7,960 3.52 13.01 28,000

9/27/2006 8:50 17 649 7,360 3.54 12.66 26,100

9/27/2006 10:00 18 647 7,359 3.52 12.64 25,910

10/10/2006 12:00 19 668 6,940 3.00 11.24 20,800

10/10/2006 13:40 20 674 6,830 2.96 11.18 20,200

10/11/2006 10:08 21 669 6,750 2.75 10.53 18,600

10/11/2006 11:25 22 666 6,410 2.83 10.42 18,100

10/11/2006 12:00 23 668 6,490 2.81 10.36 18,200

10/12/2006 10:40 24 662 5,810 2.67 9.55 15,500

10/12/2006 12:10 25 658 5,680 2.68 9.45 15,200

10/12/2006 13:05 26 655 5,480 2.70 9.38 14,800

Table F7. Suspended-sediment concentrations in samples collected from the Missouri River near Ponca, Nebr.

Date Central Time

Suspended-sediment concentration, 

in milligrams per liter

3/17/2006 10:30 114

3/28/2006 15:15 251

4/26/2006 15:30 122

5/16/2006 10:30 231

6/8/2006 13:00 123

7/12/2006 11:30 56

9/1/2006 11:30 200

10/10/2006 13:00 67

10/11/2006 10:55 89
280 Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River

Prepared by: 

USGS Enterprise Publishing Network 

Rolla Publishing Service Center 

1400 Independence Road 

Rolla, MO 65401

For more information concerning this publication, contact:

Director

U.S. Geological Survey

Columbia Environmental Research Center

4200 New Haven Road

Columbia, MO 65201

(573) 875–5399

Or visit the Columbia Environmental Research Center website at:

http://www.cerc.usgs.gov

Korschgen, ed.—Factors Affecting the Reproduction, Recruitment, Habitat, and Population Dynamics of Sturgeon in the Missouri River—OFR 2007–1262

Printed on recycled paper