Biological Services Program

FWS/OBS-82/10.9

FEBRUARY 1982

HABITAT SUITABILITY INDEX MODELS:

SLOUGH DARTER

- -

L...--.....a.....-,h and Wildlife Service

•Department of the Interior

12-
The Biological Services Program was established wi t hi n the U. S. Fis h

and Wil dlife Service to supply scientific information and me thodologies on

key environmental issues that impact fis h and wi l dli fe reso urces and their

supporting ecosystems. The mission of the program is as follows:

• To strengthen the Fish and Wi l dl i fe Serv i ce i n its role as

a primary source of information on national fish and wildlife resources, particularly i n respe ct to env ironmental

impact assessment . .

• To gather, analyze, and present info rmation that wi ll ai d

decisionmakers in the identi fication and resorution of

problems associated with major changes in land and water

use.

• To provide bet ter ecological i nformation and eval uat ion

for Department of the Interior development programs , such

as those rel at i ng to energy developme nt.

Informati on develo ped by the Biological Ser vices Program is i nt ended

for use i n the planni ng and decis ionma ki ng process to prevent or mi nimi ze

the impact of devel opment on fi sh and ~I i l li f e Rese arch activ ities and

technical assistance services ar e based on an anal ysis of t he is sues , a

determina tion of t he decisionma kers involved and the i r i nformati on needs,

and an evaluation of t he st ate of t he art to identi fy i nformation ~aps

and t o determine priorities. This is a st ra tegy t hat wi l l ensure t hat

the products produced and di sseminated are t ime ly and useful .

Proj ects "have been initi ated i n t he following areas: coal extract ion

and convers ion; power pl ants; geot hermal , mi neral and oil shal e developmen t; water res ource analysis , j ncludi ng stream alterations and west ern

water allocation ; coastal ecosystems and Oute r Con tinent al Shelf devel opment ; and systems i nventory , incl uding Na ti onal Wetl and Inventory ,

habitat classi f i cation and analysis, and informat ion transfe r .

The Bi ological Services Program consists of the Office of Bi ol ogi cal

Ser vi ces in Washington, D.C. , wh i ch is r espo nsibl e for overal l planning and

ma nagement; Nat ional Teams, whi ch provide the Program's cent ra l scie nti fi c

and technical expertise and arrange ~o contract i ng bi ol 09ica l services I

studies with states, universities, consulting firms , and othe rs; Regiona l

Sta f fs , who provide a link to problems at t he operati ng leve l; and staffs at

certain Fish and Wil dli fe Ser vice resear ch facili t i es , wh o conduct in-h ouse

research stud ies .
HABITAT SUITABILITY INDEX MODELS: SLOUGH DARTER

by

Elizabeth A. Edwards

Habitat Evaluation Procedures Group

Western Energy and Land Use Team

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Drake Creekside Building One

2625 Redwing Road

Fort Collins, Colorado 80526

Mary Bacteller

and

O. Eugene Maughan

Oklahoma Cooperative Fishery Research Unit

Oklahoma State University

Stillwater, Oklahoma 74074

Western Energy and Land Use Team

Office of Biological Services

Fish and Wildlife Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

Washington, D.C. 20240

FWS/OBS-82/10.9

February 1982
This report should be cited as:

Edwards, E. A., M. Bacteller, and O. E. Maughan. 1982. Habitat suitability

index models: Slough darter. U.S.D.l. Fish and Wildlife Service.

FWS/OBS-82/10.9. 13 pp.

i i
PREFACE·

The habitat use information and Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) models

presented in this document are an aid for impact assessment and habitat management activities. Literature concerning a species ' habitat requirements and

preferences is reviewed and then synthesized into HSI models, which are scaled

to produce an index between 0 (unsuitable habitat) and 1 (optimal habitat).

Assumptions used to transform habitat use information into these mathematical

models are noted, and guidelines for model application are described. Any

models found in the literature which may also be used to calculate an HSI are

cited, and simplified HSI models, based on what the authors believe to be the

most important habitat characteristics for this species, are presented.

Use of the models presented in this publication for impact assessment

requires the setting of clear study objectives and may require modification of

the models to meet those objectives. Methods for reducing model complexity

and recommended measurement techniques for model variables are presented in

Appendix A.

The HSI models presented herein are complex hypotheses of species-habitat

relationships, not statements of proven cause and effect r e l at i onshi ps .

Results of mode~erformance tests, when available, are referenced; however,

models that have demonstrated reliability in specific situations may prove

unreliable in others. For this reason, the FWS encourages model users to

convey comments and suggestions that may help us increase the utility and

effectiveness of this habitat-based approach to fish and wildlife planning.

Please send comments to:

Habitat Evaluation Procedures Group

Western Energy and Land Use Team

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

2625 Redwing Road

Ft. Collins, CO 80526

iii

CONTENTS

Page

PREFACE iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS vi

HABITAT USE INFORMATION 1

General 1

Age, Growth, and Food 1

Reproduct i on 1

Specific Habitat Requirements................................... 1

HABITAT SUITABILITY INDEX (HSI) MODELS................................ 3

Model Applicability. 3

Model Description - Riverine.................................... 3

Model Description - Lacustrine.................................. 4

Suitability Index (SI) Graphs for

Model Variables............................................... 5

Riverine Model.................................................. 8

Lacustrine Model 8

Interpret i ng Mode 1 Outputs 9

ADDITIONAL HABITAT MODELS 12

REFERENCES CITED 12

v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We are indebted to Katie Twomey for development of an earlier literature

review and initial work on suitability index graphs. Lawrence Page reviewed

an earlier copy of the manuscript and Carol Thompson provided information on

slough darter capture sites. Their contributions are gratefully acknowledged,

but the authors accept full responsibility for the contents of the document.

Word processing was provided by Dora Ibarra and Carolyn Gulzow. The cover of

this document was illustrated by Jennifer Shoemaker.

vi
SLOUGH DARTER (Etheostoma gracile)

HABITAT USE INFORMATION

General

The native range of the slough darter (Etheostoma gracile) extends from

western Alabama (Smith-Vaniz 1968) to central Texas and northward in the

lowland areas of the former Mississippi Embayment and the Interior Low Plateau

to central Illinois (Collette 1962) and southwestern Indiana (Gerking 1945).

Its distribution also includes southeast Kansas (Metcalf 1959; Cross 1967) and

northeast Oklahoma (Blair 1959). Natural hybridization with the blackside

darter (Percina maculata) has been recorded (Page 1976).

Age, Growth, and Food

Slough darters mature at age I and reach a maximum standard length of

48 mm at age IV (Braasch and Smith 1967). Slough darters are primarily bottom

feeders and feed throughout the year on insect larvae, microcrustaceans, and

some snails (Braasch and Smith 1967). Fry eat diatoms and other plankton at

first and, subsequently, insects and microcrustaceans (Braasch and Smith

1967) .

Reproduction

The spawning season for slough darters extends from March to early June

(Hubbs and Cannon 1935; Collette 1962; Braasch and Smith 1967; Cross 1967).

The female slough darter lays eggs singly on objects, such as twigs or leaf

petioles. In the laboratory, females spawned only once, and no postspawning

care of the eggs was observed. Incubation was 5 days in the laboratory at

22.8° C, the temperature of the stream where the darters were co11 ected

(Braasch and Smith 1967). Spawning has not been observed in the field because

of turbid conditions.

Specific Habitat Requirements

Adult. Slough darters are typically found in pools and oxbows of lowland

streams (Gerking 1945; Cross 1955; Cook 1959; Braasch and Smith 1967; Cross

1967), in backwaters (Linder 1955; Collette 1962), bayous (Blatchley 1938;

Hancock and Sublette 1958), sloughs (Cook 1959; Braasch and Smith 1967), s~amps (Blatchley 1938; Gerking 1945; Collette 1962), and ponds or lakes (Cook

1959; .collette 1962). Optimal habitat for slough darters can be characterized

as warm, turbid waters (Linder 1955; Wallen 1958; Braasch and Smith 1967;

Pflieger 1975) with little or no flow (Gerking 1945; Cook 1959; Collette 1962;

Cross 1967; Pflieger 1975), mud or silt bottoms (Hancock and Sublette 1958;

Wallen 1958; Collette 1962; Braasch and Smith 1967), and some vegetation or

debris (Braasch and Smith 1967). Vegetation may be used for cover and as a

spawning substrate (Wallen 1958; Blair 1959; Braasch and Smith 1967; Cross

1967). However, Collette (1962) reported that only about half of the areas

where slough darters were collected had aquatic vegetation, and the amount was

usually slight to moderate. The most consistent habitat characteristic where
slough darters were collected was a mud or silt bottom (Collette 1962; Braasch

and Smith 1967). Occasionally they were found over bedrock or clay (Wallen

1958; Collette 1962) and, somewhat more frequently, over sand, detritus, or

gravel (Collette 1962). In rivers and streams, adults may overwinter in deep

sand or mud bottomed pools (Braasch and Smith 1967).

Most slough darters were collected in waters with gradients of less than

0.5 m/km; they avoided areas with gradients averaging 3.5 m/km or more

(Collette 1962). Within these lowland areas, pools are occupied almost exclusively (Hancock and Sublette 1958; Braasch and Smith 1967; Cross 1967). Thus,

it is assumed that a high pool to riffle ratio is optimum. Sluggish (Gerking

1945; Hancock and Sublette 1958; Blair 1959) or quiet (s 10 cm/sec) (Wallen

1958; Braasch and Smith 1967) water is preferred. Slough darters are not

found in upstream areas with current-swept channels (Collette 1962; Cross

1967) .

In addition to current velocity, turbidity seems to be an important

limiting factor (Collette 1962). Slough darters typically inhabit moderate

(Gerking 1945; Linder 1955; Wallen 1958; Blair 1959; Collette 1962; Pflieger

1975) to highly turbid waters (Braasch and Smith 1967), although they may be

found in clear or slightly turbid waters (Wallen 1958). Although upper

turbidity limits are not known, it is assumed that very high turbidities

adverse l y affect the popul at i on by 1imi t i ng food production. Turbi di ty a1so

provides cover for all life stages.

The pH tolerances of the slough darter have not been recorded. However,

the species has been captured in a Louisiana bayou at a pH level of 6.7-7.2

(Hancock and Sublette 1958). A pH range of 6.5-8.5 is considered to be essential for good production of freshwater fish (Stroud 1967; U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency 1972); a range of 5.5-9.5 provides only minimum protection

for survival of freshwater fish (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1972).

There is little available data on either temperature or dissolved oxygen

requirements of slough darters. The maximum temperature in a bayou where

slough darters were collected one summer in Louisiana was 26.5° C (Hancock and

Sublette 1958). Slough darters are subject to oxygen deficit kills when

dissolved oxygen (D.O.) levels become too low (Braasch and Smith 1967). In a

bayou having slough darters, the minimum D.O. concentration was 1.7 mg/l

(Hancock and Sublette 1958). A D.O. value of 5.0 mg/l is an adequate lower

limit to sustain optimum growth and survival of freshwater fish (Stroud 1967).

Embryo. Eggs hatch after 5 days at 22.8° C (Braasch and Smith 1967), and

optimum temperature for embryos is considered similar.

Fry-Juvenile. No specific habitat requirement data for fry and juvenile

slough darters are reported in the literature. However, since fry were caught

in the same area as adults (Braasch and Smith 1967), we assume that the habitat

requirements of fry and juveniles are the same or similar as for the adults.

2
HABITAT SUITABILITY INDEX (HSI) MODELS

Model Applicability

Geographic area. The model is applicable throughout the native range of

the slough darter in North America. The standard of comparison for each

individual variable suitability index is the optimum value of the variable

that occurs anywhere within the range of the species.

Season. The model provides a rating for a water body based on its ability

to support a reproducing population of slough darters through all seasons of

the year.

Cover types. The model is applicable in riverine, palustrine, and lacustrine habitats as described by Cowardin et al. (1979).

Minimum habitat area. Minimum habitat area is defined as the minimum

area of contiguous suitable habitat that is required for a species to live and

reproduce. No attempt has been made to establish a minimum habitat size for

slough darters.

Verification level. The acceptance goal of the slough darter model is to

produce an index between 0 and 1 which has a positive relationship to habitat

carrying capacity for slough darters. In order to verify that the model

output was acceptable, HSI's were calculated from sample data sets. These

sample data sets and their relationship to model verification are discussed in

greater detail later.

Model Description - Riverine

Slough darter habitat quality analysis is based on basic components

consisting of food, cover, water quality, and other various habitat requirements. Variables that have been shown to impact growth, survival, abundance,

or other measures of well-being of slough darters are placed in the appropriate

component (Figure 1).

Food-cover component. Information is lacking on the specific habitat

requirements for food and cover in the slough darter. It is assumed that

turbidity (V6 ) is important because very high turbidities can limit the food

supply. Turbidity can also provide cover for all life stages of the fish.

Percent pools (V2 ) is included because slough darters require pool habitat in

a riverine habitat, and the food and cover requirements will be met in pool

areas.

Water quality component. Dissolved oxygen (VI) and average water

temperature (Vs ) are included because these parameters can affect survival,

development, and growth of the species. Turbidity (V6 ) is included because it

is an important habitat characteristic limiting slough darters. pH (Va) is an

important water quality parameter that can affect survival of freshwater fish.

3
Other component. The variables in this component are those which aid in

describing habitat suitability for the slough darter, yet are not specifically

related to life requisite components already presented. Stream gradient (V 3 )

is included because slough darters are restricted to low gradient streams.

Habitat Variables Life Requisites

Turbidity (V6 ) ------------=====--==-- Food-cover (CF-C)

% pools (V2)-~----------

Dissolved oxygen (VI)

Avera ge wa t er t Ee:m:p:e~r~a~t~u~r~e~~~~;;;~~;;;;;;;;~ Wa t er qua 1ity (CWQ) ------7 HS I

Turb td t t.y -

pH (V8 )

Stream gradient (V,)~

Substrate type (V4 ) Other (COT)

Average velocity (V 7 )

Figure 1. Tree diagram illustrating relationship of habitat variables

and life requisites in the riverine model for the slough darter. The

lacustrine model for this species includes the water quality component

only.

Substrate type (V4 ) is important because it is the most consistent habitat

cha racteri st i c where slough darters are found. Average ve1oc ity (V7) is

included because slough darter distribution is limited by current velocity.

Model Description - Lacustrine

Because most information is limited to slough darter riverine habitats,

the slough darter lacustrine model describes water quality only.

Water quality component. Refer to the riverine water quality component.

4
Suitability Index (SI) Graphs for Model Variables

This section contains suitability index graphs for the eight variables

described above and equations for combining selected variable indices into a

species HSI using the component approach. Variables may pertain to either a

riverine (R) habitat, a Iacust r i ne (L) habitat, or both.

Habitat

R,L

Variable

Minimum dissolved oxygen

level during the summer.

Suitability Graph

1. a +-_..0....-----1'-----'-_--'-_....,...._....

0.8 "'0

c

>, 0.6

+-'

0.4

0.2

0.0

a

Percent pools during

average summer flow. 1.0

x

Q.J

"'0 0.8 c

>,

+-' 0.6

r-

.'--

..0

ro 0.4

+-'

::::l

c..n. 0.2

0.0

0

5

25

2

mg/l

50

%

4

75

6

100
R (V 3 ) Average stream gradieht 1.0

within the representa- >< tive reach. OJ

-0

c 0.8 .........

>,

.~

+-> 0.6 r--

-r-r

..0

ro 0.4 +->

:::::l

Vl 0.2

0.0

0 2

m/km

3 4

R (V 4 ) Dominant substrate type 1.0

of a stream bottom. ><

OJ

-0 0.8 A) > 75% substrate mud c

.........

or silt; some sand >,

and/or detritus. +-> 0.6

B) > 50% sand and/or

detritus; some mud, ..0

ro 0.4 silt , or gravel. +->

C) > 75~'; gravel, sand, :::::l

Vl 0.2

or detritus.

D) Mostly clay and/or

bedrock. 0.0

-

-

-

-

A B C D

Class

R,L (V s ) Average water temperature,spring to fall. 1.0

><

-0

OJ 0.8 c

.........

>, 0.6

+->

.~ 0.4 ..0

ro

+->

.~

:::::l 0.2 Vl

0.0

10 20 30

DC

6
R,L Maximum monthly

average turbidity.

1.0 ><

Q)

-0 0.8 c:

0.6 ......

..0

ro 0.4 +J

......

:::::l

(/)

0.2

0.0

0 50 100

LlTU

150 200

R ( V7 ) Average velocity at 1.0

0.6 m depth during >< 0.8

average summer flow. Q)

-0

c:

0.6

>,

+J

0.4 ..0

ro

+J

:::::l 0.2 (/)

0.0

0 10 20

em/sec

30

1.0 R,L ( V8 ) pH 1eve 1s during the

year. >< 0.8 Q)

-0

c:

........ 0.6

>,

+J

0.4 ..0

ro

+J

...... 0.2 :::::l

(/)

0.0

4

7

6 8

pH

10
Riverine Model

These equations utilize the life requisite approach and consist of three

components: food-cover, water quality, and other.

Food-Cover (CF-C)

Water Quality (CWQ)

CWQ = (V 1

2 x Vs 2 X V6 2 x Vs ) 1/ 7, or

if VI' Vs , or V6 is 0.4, CWQ equals the lowest of the following: VI'

Vs , V6 , or the above equation. If any variable equals 0, CWQ equals O.

Other (COT)

C (V V 2 V 2)1/5 OT = 3 x 4 X 7 ,or

if any of these variables is 0.4, COT equals the lowest of the following:

V3 , V4 , V7 , or the above equation. If any variable equals 0, COT equals O.

HSI determination

HSI (C C C 2)1/4 = F-C x WQ x OT ' or

if COT or CWQ is 0.4, then the HSI equals the lowest of COT' CWQ' or

the above equation.

Lacustrine Model

This equation utilizes the life requisite approach and consists of one

component: water quality.

8
if V1 , Vs, or V6 is 0.4, C

WQ equals the lowest of the following: V1 ,

Vs, V6 , or the above equation.

HSI determination

HSI = C

WQ

If any variable equals 0, then C

WQ = 0 = HSI.

Sources of data and assumptions made in developing the suitability indices

are presented in Table 1.

Sample data sets from which HSI's have been generated using the riverine

HSI equations are given in Table 2. Similar data sets using the lacustrine

HSI equation are given in Table 3. The data sets are not actual field measurements, but represent combinations that could occur in a riverine or lacustrine

habitat. The HSI's calculated from the data reflect what we think carrying

capacity trends would be in riverine and lacustrine habitats with the listed

characteristics. Thus, the models meet the acceptance goal of producing an

index between 0 and 1 which is believed to have a positive relationship to the

habitat carrying capacity of slough darters.

Interpreting Model Outputs

The slough darter HSI determined by use of these models will not necessarily represent the population of slough darters in the study area. This may

be due to the fact that these models rely on habitat-based factors, and other

factors may more significantly affect the population level of slough darters

in an area. If the model is a good representation of slough darter riverine

or lacustrine habitat, then, in areas where slough darter population levels

are due primarily to habitat related factors, the model should be positively

correlated with long-term average population levels. However, this has not

been tested. The proper interpretation of the HSI is one of comparison. If

two habitats have different HSI1s, the one with the higher HSI should have the

potential to support more slough darters than the one with the lower HSI,

given that the model assumptions have not been violated.

9
Table 1. Data sources and assumptions for slough darter suitability indices.

Variable and source

Hancock and Sublette 1958

Braasch and Smith 1967

Stroud 1967

Hancock and Sublette 1958

Braasch and Smith 1967

Cross 1967

Collette 1962

Wallen 1958

Collette 1962

Hancock and Sublette 1958

Gerking 1945

Linder 1955

Wallen 1958

Blair 1959

Collette 1962

Braasch and Smith 1967

Pflieger 1975

Gerking 1945

Hanock and Sublette 1958

Wallen 1958

Blair 1959

Collette 1962

Braasch and Smith 1967

Cross 1967

Pflieger 1975

Hancock and Sublette 1958

Stroud 1967

U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency 1972

Assumption

D.O. levels which promote maximum growth

and survival are optimum. Levels that

are tolerated, but are not adequate for

good growth are suboptimum. D.O. levels

that may be lethal are unsuitable.

Since slough darters are found almost

exclusively in pools, it is assumed

that a high pool to riffle ratio would

characterize optimum habitat.

Stream gradients where slough darters

are most often found are optimum.

Gradients where the species is not

found are unsuitable.

The substrate type where slough darters

are most often found is optimum. Substrate types where they are collected

less often are suboptimum.

Temperatures where slough darters are

collected are assumed to be optimum.

Turbidity levels of waters where slough

darters are typically found are optimum.

Levels where the species is found less

often or where food production may be

limited is suboptimum.

Average velocities where slough darters

are most often collected are optimum.

Velocities that the species does not

tolerate are unsuitable.

pH levels where slough darters are

collected are optimum. Levels considered adequate for growth of freshwater

fish have high suitability. Levels that

provide only minimum protection or cause

death for fish in general are unsuitable.

10
Table 2. Sample data sets using riverine HS1 model.

Data set 1 Data set 2 Data set 3

Variable Data SI Data SI Data SI

Dissolved oxygen

(mg/l) VI 5.0 1.0 3.0 0.4 6.0 1.0

% pool V2 45 0.9 30 0.6 75 1.0

Stream gradient

(m/km) V3 1.5 0.2 1.2 0.5 0.2 1.0

Substrate type V4 C 0.5 B 0.6 A 1.0

Temperature (OC) Vs 24 0.9 26 1.0 20.5 0.5

Turbidity (JTU) V6 25 0.7 100 1.0 40 0.9

Surfa eeve 10 city

(em/sec) V7 10 0.9 15 0.6 2 1.0

pH Va 7 1.0 8.5 0.7 6.5 0.7

Component SI

CF-C = 0.80 0.80 0.95

C

WQ = 0.88 0.40 0.76

COT = 0.02 0.58 1. 00

HS1 = 0.02 0.57 0.92

11
Table 3. Sample data sets using lacustrine HSI model.

Data set 1 Data set 2 Data set 3

Variable Data SI Data SI Data SI

Dissolved oxygen

(mg/l) VI 5.5 1.0 5.0 1.0 4.5 0.9

Temperature (OC) Vs 22 0.7 20.5 0.5 24 0.9

Turbidity (JTU) V6 50 1.0 20 0.6 100 1.0

pH Vs 8 0.8 6.5 0.7 9 0.4

Component SI

C

WQ = 0.87 0.67 0.83

HSI = 0.87 0.67 0.83

ADDITIONAL HABITAT MODELS

Optimal riverine slough darter habitat is characterized by the following

conditions, assuming water quality is adequate: moderate to highly turbid

waters (50-150 JTU); sluggish or quiet waters (s 10 em/sec); low average

stream gradient « 0.5 m/km); high pool to riffle ratio (> 50%); and a mud or

si It substrate.

number of above criteria present HS I = -----------;=--------'---- 5

REFERENCES CITED

Blair, A. P. 1959. Distribution of the darters (Percidae, Etheostomatinae)

of northeastern Oklahoma. Southwestern Nat. 4:1-13.

Blatchley, W. S.

Indianapolis.

1938. The fishes of Indiana.

121 pp.

12

Nature Publ. Co. ,
Braasch, M. E., and P. W. Smith. 1967. The life history of the slough darter,

Etheostoma ~cile (Pisces, Percidae). Ill. Nat. Hist. Surv. Biol.

Notes 58. 12 pp.

Collette, B. B. 1962. The swamp darters of the subgenus Hololepis (Pisces,

Percidae). Tulane Stud. Zool. 9:115-211.

Cook, F. A. 1959. Freshwater fishes in Mississippi. Miss. Game Fish Comm.,

Jackson. 239 pp.

Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. J. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. USDI Fish

Wildl. Serv., FWS/OBS-79/31. 103 pp.

Cross, F. B. 1955. Records of fishes little-known from Kansas. Trans. Acad.

Sci. 57:473-479.

1967. Handbook of fishes of Kansas. Univ. Kan. Mus. Nat.

Hist. Misc. Publ. 45. 357 pp.

Gerking, S. D. 1945. The distribution of the fishes of Indiana. Invest.

Ind. Lakes Streams 3. 137 pp.

Hancock, C. D., Jr, and J. E. Sublette. 1958. A survey of the fishes in the

upper Kisatchie Drainage of west central Louisiana. Proc. Louisiana

Acad. Sci. 20:38-52.

Hubbs, C. L., and M. D. Cannon. 1935. The darters of the genera Hololepis

and Villora. Univ. Michigan Mus. Zool. Misc. Publ. 30. 93 pp.

Linder, A. D. 1955. Observations on the care and behavior of darters,

Etheostomatinae, in the laboratory. Proc. Okla. Acad. Sci. 34:28-30.

Metcalf, A. L. 1959. Fishes of Chautauqua, Cowley and Elk Counties, Kansas.

Univ. Kan. Publ. Mus. Nat. Hist. 11(6):345-400.

Page, L. M. 1976. Natural darter hybrids: Etheostoma gracile x Percina

maculata, Percina caprodes x Percina maculata, and Percina phoxocephala x

Percina maculata. Southwestern Nat. 21:161-168.

Pflieger, W. L. 1975. The fishes of Missouri. Missouri Dept. Conserv.

342 pp.

Smith-Vaniz, W. F. 1968. Freshwater fishes of Alabama. Auburn Univ. Agric.

Exp. Stn., Auburn, Ala. 211 pp.

Stroud, R. H. 1967. Water quality criteria to protect aquatic life: A

summary. Am. Fish. Soc. Spec. Publ. 4:33-37.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1972. Water quality criteria, 1972.

Washington, D.C. pp. 140-143.

Wallen, G. H. 1958. Fishes of the Verdigris River in Oklahoma. M.S. Thesis,

Oklahoma State Univ., Stillwater. 57 pp.

13
50272 -f 01

REPORT DOCUMENTATION 1. REPORT NO.

PAGE FWSjOBS-82jlO.9

3. Recipient's Accession No.

8. Performing Organization Rept. No.

5. Report Date

February 1982

Habitat 6. Su i tab i l i ty Index Models: Slough darter

7. Author(s) Elizabeth A. Edwards, Mary Bacteller, and O. Eugene

Mauohan

4. Tltle and Subtitle

l-----------"-------~--+------

9. PerformingOrsanization Name and Addre..

Oklahoma Cooperative

Fishery Research Unit

Stillwater, OK 74074

Habitat Evaluation Procedures Group

Western Energy and Land Use Team

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Drake Creekside Building One

2625 Redwing Road

Fort Collins, Colorado 80526

10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.

11. Contract(C) or Grant(G) No.

(C)

(G)

12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address Western Energy and Land Use Team

Office of Biological Services

Fish and Wildlife Service

U.S. Department of Interior

Washi no ton Dr. ?n?Lln

13. Type of Report & Period Covered

14.

15. Supplementary Notes

"U5. Abstract (Limit: 200 words)

A literature review encompassing habitat and species characteristics of the slough

darter (Etheostoma gracile) is followed by a discussion of the relationship of

habitat variables and life requisites of this species. These data are then incorporated into Habitat Suitability Index models for the slough darter.

This is one in a series of publications describing habitat requirements of selected fish

and wildlife species. Numerous literature sources have been consulted in an effort

to consolidate scientific data on species habitat relationships. These data have

subsequently been synthesized into Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) models. The

models are based on suitability indices formulated for variables found to affect the

life cycle and survival of the species. The models are designed to be modified to

evaluate specific habitat alterations using the HSI model building techniques presented

in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Habitat Evaluation Procedures.

17. Document Anal~is a. Descriptors

Habi tabil i ty

Fishes

b. Identlfiers/OPen·Ended Terms

Habitat

Habitat Suitability

Slough darter

Etheostoma gracile

Index

c. COSATI Field/Group

18. Availability Statement

Unlimited !

19. Security Class (This Report)

, Unclassified

; 20. Security Class (This Page)

, Unclassified

I 21. No. of Pall"

i 13 -_

i 22. Price

<S.. ANSI-zJ9.18) See InstructIons on R"vers"

U U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE; 1982-578-131/193 REGION No.8

OPTIONAL FORM 272 (4-77)

(Formerly NTI5-3S)

Department of Commerce
•

••• ..__ .... J~.

' . '· 0 ,,-

Hawaiian Islands (>

-(:( Headq uarters . Division of Biological

Services, Wasnington, DC

x Eastern Energy anO Land Use Team

Leetown , WV

* Nationa l Coastal Ecosystems Team

Slidell, LA

• Western Energy and Land Use Team

Ft. Coll ins . CO

• Locat ions of Regional Off ices

REGION 1

Regional Director

U,S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Lloyd Five Hundred Building, Suite 1692

500 N.E. Multnomah Street

Portland , Oregon 97232

REGION 4

Regional Director

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Richard B. Russell Building

75 Spring Street , S.W.

Atlanta, Georgia 30303

I

J- - - - ---6 1

r-- - L, J

I : --

I I

1- - -'

I I

l,_ I 2 ,, -~-

-_.J

REGION 2

Regional Director

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

P.O. Box 1306

Albuquerque, New Mexico 87 103

REGION 5

Regional Director

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

One Gateway Cente r

Newton Corner, Massachusetts 02158

REGION 7

Regional Director

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

lOll E. Tudor Road

Anchorage, Alaska 99503

- ..~,.

REGION 3

Regional Director

U.S. Fish and WildlifeService

Federal Building, Fort Snelling

Twin Cities, Minnesota 551 JI

REGION 6

Regional Director

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

P.O. Box 25486

Denver Federal Center

Denver, Colorado 8022 5
u.s. FISH ..WILDLIFE f>ERVICE

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR hi?]

u.s.FISH ANDWILDLIFESERVICE "'-r rw T " "

As the Nation's pri ncipal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has responsibility for most of our ,nationally owned public lands and natural resources . This includes

fostering the wisest use of our land and water resources, protecting our fish and wildlife,

preserving th & environmental and cultural values of our national parks and historical places,

and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The Department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to assure that t heir development is in

the best interests of all our people. The Department also has a major respons ibility for

American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island territories under

U.S. adm inist ration.