FISH-FAUNA OF THE UPPER NEOSHO RIVER

Collections at the upper Neosho station were more intensive than at any other station, especially in 1959. Rotenone was used in the summers of 1957, 1958 and 1959, to obtain large samples of the population in one section of the stream. In September, 1959, the shocker was used in other sections in order to estimate populations in particular pools and riffles, to measure variability in the fauna between areas having slightly different habitat, and to record movement of marked individuals in a short section of the stream.

Description of Study-areas

Two sections of the stream, each about one-half mile long (See p. 366), were studied. Additional description of particular areas is presented below. Area 1 and the pools in which rotenone was used are on the Bosch Farm approximately two miles upstream from the White Farm where Areas 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 are situated.

Area 1 has a length of 210 feet, an average width of four feet, and a maximum depth of two feet. The upper half is a swift, rubble riffle four inches in average depth; the lower half is one and one-half feet in average depth and has a slow current (Pl. 29, Fig. 1).

Area 3 has a length of 186 feet, an average width of 34 feet, and a maximum depth of two and one-half feet. This area includes a shallow riffle at both upstream and downstream ends of a pool 73 feet long and approximately one foot in average depth (Pl. 29, Fig. 2).

Area 5 has a length of 250 feet, an average width of 50 feet, and a maximum depth of two and one-half feet. This is a shallow, quiet pool over rubble and bedrock bottom except for a small area of mud bottom (backwater) above the point where a short riffle drains into this pool from Area 6 (Pl. 30, Fig. 1).

Area 6 has a length of 200 feet, an average width of 50 feet, and a maximum depth of one and one-half feet. This is a shallow, quiet pool over bedrock bottom, except for a small area of mud bottom at one side of the upper end of the pool. A short, steep, rubble-riffle is included in this area at the upstream end (Pl. 30, Fig. 2).

Areas 2, 4, and 7 resemble at least one of the areas described above but were sampled less intensively. Data from areas 2, 4, and 7 are included in discussion of the total fauna of the upper Neosho river but are excluded from the discussion of representative parts of that fauna.

Methods

Rotenone

Rotenone was applied to an intermittent pool in 1957. In 1958 and 1959 rotenone was applied to the upper end of a pool and mixed by agitating the water. The concentration in the pool was maintained by slowly introducing part of the rotenone into the riffle at the head of the pool. This was the most effective means of obtaining a large sample of fish from the deeper, slowly flowing water of the upper Neosho. Pools in which rotenone was used had areas of as much as one-half acre and depths in excess of six feet.

Shocker

In 1959 the shocker was used extensively in several areas of the upper Neosho. Because of the small size of the stream, "tennis-racket" electrodes were used effectively by two men—one carrying the electrodes and one picking up fish and placing them in a live-box. In fast water, many fish floated into a seine placed across the lower end of the area. A large segment of the population was collected in this manner. Areas in which fish were collected by means of the shocker included riffles, and pools having flowing water no more than three feet in maximum depth. The bottom-type was usually gravel, rubble or bedrock, but a small amount of mud bottom was present in many pools.

Because of the necessity of wading, we could not use the shocker effectively in water more than three feet deep. In addition, turbidity of the water prevented effective collection of stunned fish in the deeper pools. Therefore, rotenone was more effective in deep water than was the shocker. In shallow, swift riffles and pools, the shocker yielded more reliable samples than did rotenone, because of difficulty in maintaining adequate concentrations of rotenone where flow was swift.

The relative abundance of each species in the upper Neosho was calculated from cumulative results obtained by use of the shocker in seven areas in 1959. Population estimates were made by collecting fish with the shocker, marking them by clipping fins or staining them in Bismark Brown Y at a concentration of 1:20,000 (Deacon, 1961), returning them to the stream, and making a second collection three hours (Areas 1 and 3) or 24 hours (Area 6) later. The same area was shocked again within two to eight days. Collections throughout the one-half-mile section yielded information on movement.

Changes in the Fauna at the Upper Neosho Station, 1957 Through 1959.

The following discussion is based principally on collections made with rotenone in 1957, 1958 and 1959 (Table 12). Other supplementary data aid in understanding the changes that occurred after the resumption of normal flow at the upper Neosho station.

The population in 1957 was strongly dominated by black bullhead and young-of-the-year channel catfish. Other common species were long-eared sunfish, red shiner, yellow bullhead, orange-spotted sunfish and green sunfish. This fauna, with the exception of young-of-the-year individuals, was a fauna produced during the years of drought. Deacon and Metcalf (1961:318-321) found a similar fauna in streams of the Wakarusa River Basin that had been seriously affected by drought.

The black bullheads taken in 1957 were predominately yearlings. It is likely that by 1956 the total fish population in the upper Neosho had been decimated by drought. The ponded conditions prevalent in that year were conducive to production and survival of young black bullheads. Fig. 3 shows that this dominant 1956 year-class reached an average length of approximately 6.5 inches by August, 1959.

Reproduction by black bullheads was limited in 1957, 1958, and 1959, and slight reduction in relative abundance occurred from 1957 to 1958. The relative abundance in 1959 remained nearly stable. If stream-flow remains essentially continuous for the next few years, the number of black bullheads probably will decline as individuals of the 1956 year-class reach the end of their life-span.

Reference has been made to the large hatch of channel catfish in 1957, in a discussion of that species. Conditions for survival of young channel catfish at the upper Neosho station in 1957 were good because there was continuous flow over many gravel-rubble riffles, which were largely unoccupied by other fish, in the spring and summer of 1957.

Table 12. Percentage-composition of the Fish-fauna at the Upper Neosho Station in 1957, 1958 and 1959, as Computed from Collections Obtained by Using Rotenone.

Species 1957 1958 1959

Big-mouthed Buffalo....................... T[D] T

Small-mouthed Buffalo............................ T

River Carpsucker.................. T 0.8 1.8

Golden Redhorse................... T 3.0 5.7

Creek Chub................................ T 0.8

Red-finned Shiner................. 1.3 3.0 0.8

Red Shiner........................ 6.5 13.1 12.1

Ghost Shiner...................... T T........

Blunt-nosed Minnow................ T T T

Fat-headed Minnow................. T T 1.4

Stoneroller....................... 0.8 1.5 3.5

Black Bullhead.................... 40.8 30.5 32.0

Yellow Bullhead................... 5.3 8.8 2.5

Channel Catfish................... 28.4 15.5 18.5

Flathead.......................... T T T

Stonecat.......................... T T 1.4

Spotted Bass...................... T T 0.8

Largemouth........................ T T T

Green Sunfish..................... 3.1 6.8 6.4

Long-eared Sunfish................ 8.8 3.7 1.9

Orange-spotted Sunfish............ 3.1 8.9 2.5

Bluegill.......................... T T T

White Crappie..................... T....... T

Logperch......................... T 2.1 0.8

Slender-headed Darter............. 0.6 0.6 3.1

Orange-throated Darter.................... T 2.5

Total number of fish.............. 786 965 513

Size of sample-area in acre-feet.. .002 .33 .33

Channel catfish also showed a slight decline in relative abundance after 1957, resulting from mortality in the 1957 year-class. With continuous flow, channel catfish will probably remain abundant, although annual reproductive success probably will be less than in 1957.

The big-mouthed buffalo, small-mouthed buffalo, creek chub and orange-throated darter were not taken in 1957, but appeared in collections in 1958. The river carpsucker, golden redhorse, red shiner, fat-headed minnow, stoneroller, stonecat, and slender-headed darter also increased in abundance between 1957 and 1959. The increased abundance of all these species in 1958 and 1959 resulted in a more diversified fauna, with lesser predominance by any single species, than in 1957 (Table 12); this change is related to the increased, permanent flow in 1958 and 1959.

Local Variability of the Fauna in Different Areas at the Upper Neosho Station, 1959

The shallow areas in which the shocker was used in 1959 are the prevalent habitat in the upper Neosho River. The relative abundance of fishes found in these areas is presented in Table 13. The red shiner was most abundant and was followed (in decreasing order) by long-eared sunfish, minnows of the genus Pimephales, green sunfish, red-finned shiner, channel catfish, and stoneroller. Other species combined comprise less than ten per cent of the population.

Table 13 also shows the variability in relative abundance of different species among areas that have the same general kind of habitat. The species composition is similar in all areas. The sample obtained with rotenone in 1959 is included in Table 13 to show differences in the fauna of deep, slowly flowing areas and shallower areas with stronger current. The differences in relative abundance indicate the kind of habitat that each species is able to utilize most fully.

Golden redhorse and black bullhead were most abundant in large, deep, quiet pools (5.7 per cent and 32 per cent of the total population) and were more abundant in Area 5 (3.2 per cent and 7.3 per cent respectively) than in any of the other shallow areas. Area 5 has greater average depth, more mud bottom, and less riffle area than areas 1, 3 and 6.

The golden redhorse and black bullhead have specific habitat preferences that are not evident in the above discussion. My collections indicate that the golden redhorse prefers deep water having some current, whereas the black bullhead prefers little or no current.

Species that prevailed in or near riffles were: creek chub, sucker-mouthed minnow, stoneroller, channel catfish (young-of-the-year only), flathead (young-of-the-year only), stonecat, slender-headed darter, and orange-throated darter. Of these species, the sucker-mouthed minnow, slender-headed darter and orange-throated darter reached their greatest abundance at Area 3, where the riffle is shallow, slow, and has a bottom composed of flat limestone rubble.

The riffle at Area 1 is, for the most part, deeper and faster than at Area 3 and has a bottom composed of gravel and small rocks. The creek chub, stoneroller, channel catfish (young-of-the-year), flathead (young-of-the-year), and stonecat reached their greatest abundance in Area 1. All species that showed a preference for riffles were rare or absent in Area 5 where no riffle-habitat was sampled. The riffle-dwelling species that were present in collections made with rotenone in the deeper pools were taken from the riffle into which rotenone was introduced.

Table 13. Relative Abundance of Fish (Per Cent of Total Population Made Up by Each Species), in the First Collection Made in Each of Four Different Shallow Areas by Means of the Shocker, is Shown in Vertical Columns 1-4. Results of the Use of Rotenone in a Fifth, Deeper Area are Shown in Column 5. Column 6 Combines Data from All Collections Made by Using the Shocker in Seven Shallow Areas (Including Columns 1-4).

Area 1Area 3Area 5Area 6RotenoneAll areas

Big-mouthed Buffalo .... .... T[E] .... T T

Small-mouthed Buffalo .... .... .6 .... T T

River Carpsucker .... T 10.6 T 1.8 .8

River Carpsucker (yy)[F] .... .8 T 3.7 .... 1.0

Short-headed Redhorse .... .... .6 .... .... T

Golden Redhorse .8 1.0 3.2 .... 5.7 T

Carp .... .... .... .... .... T

Golden Shiner .... .... .... .... .... T

Creek Chub 1.6 T T T .8 T

Sucker-mouthed Minnow .... 11.2 T 3.4 .... 1.4

Red-finned Shiner .... .... .... 4.0 .8 8.1

Red Shiner 18.2 24.0 7.8 20.1 12.1 35.9

Sand Shiner .... 5.2 .... 1.1 .... T

Pimephales (yy) .... .... .... .... .... 6.7

Mountain Minnow .... .... .... T .... T

Blunt-nosed Minnow .... .8 4.1 11.7 T 3.4

Parrot Minnow .... .... .... .... .... T

Fat-headed Minnow T T 3.4 12.1 1.4 2.6

Stoneroller 27.7 17.4 .6 5.8 3.5 5.1

Black Bullhead 2.1 T 7.3 T 32.0 .6

Yellow Bullhead T T .... T 2.5 T

Channel Catfish (j)[G] 5.8 7.6 41.3 T 14.6 4.2

Channel Catfish (yy) 9.5 7.0 T 4.3 3.9 2.5

Flathead (j) .... .8 2.1 T T T

Flathead (yy) 1.6 T .... .... .... T

Stonecat 10.3 1.4 .... .... 1.4 .7

Spotted Bass .... T .6 T .8 T

Largemouth .... .... T .... T T

Green Sunfish 11.2 3.5 5.9 12.2 6.4 10.1

Long-eared Sunfish 5.4 6.0 5.1 14.6 1.9 12.8

Orange-spotted Sunfish T T 1.4 1.8 2.5 .5

Bluegill .... .... 1.0 .... T T

White Crappie .... .... .... .... T T

Logperch T T T T .8 T

Slender-headed Darter T 11.4 1.1 1.6 3.1 1.3

Orange-throated Darter .8 1.8 T .5 2.5 T

Freshwater Drum .... .... T .... .... T

Total number of fish 242 484 727 924 513 17,796

Area in square feet 840 6324 12500 10000 .... ....

Volume .... .... .... .... ⅓ acre-foot

The river carpsucker, blunt-nosed minnow, fat-headed minnow, channel catfish (yearlings and two-year-olds), flathead (yearlings and two-year-olds), green sunfish and long-eared sunfish showed a preference for shallow, quiet water. All of these species were more common in collections from Areas 5 and 6 than in collections from other areas.

Temporal Variability of Fauna in the Same Areas

The variability of the population in successive collections from the same area is presented in Table 14. Supplementary data obtained in Areas 2, 4 and 7 support conclusions discussed below for Areas 1, 3 and 6. The abundance of some species maintained a constant level, whereas that of others varied.

Table 14. Numbers of Individuals Collected by Means of the Shocker at Varying Intervals in September, 1959. The Number at the Top of Each Column is the Date When the Collection was Made.

SpeciesArea 1Area 3Area 6

34891015161820

Golden Redhorse 2 2 ... 5 5 2 ... ... 3

Creek Chub 4 3 7 1 ... ... 1 2 ...

Sucker-mouthed Minnow ... ... ... 54 42 25 31 7 6

Red-finned Shiner ... ... 1 ... ... 4 31 13 4

Red Shiner 44 7 211 117 170 438 186 209 62

Blunt-nosed Minnow ... ... ... 4 10 19 108 91 13

Fat-headed Minnow 1 ... ... 1 2 3 112 156 48

Stoneroller 67 39 49 84 107 55 54 67 22

Black Bullhead 5 ... 1 2 1 ... ... 3 7

Yellow Bullhead 1 1 ... 2 1 ... 1 ... 3

Channel Catfish 14 7 ... 36 16 ... 3 1 23

Channel Catfish(yy)[H] 23 16 17 34 34 22 40 23 28

Flathead ... ... ... 4 8 1 2 ... 1

Flathead(yy) 4 1 1 2 1 1 ... ... ...

Stonecat 25 8 12 7 7 5 ... ... ...

Green Sunfish 27 17 12 13 16 17 62 62 74

Long-eared Sunfish 13 12 1 6 3 3 10 22 31

Logperch 1 ... ... 2 ... ... ... ... ...

Slender-headed Darter ... 1 2 55 45 23 15 1 1

Orange-throated Darter 2 1 2 9 11 8 5 ... 1

Total 233 115 316 438 480 626 661 657 347

Stoneroller, channel catfish (young-of-the-year), green sunfish, and long-eared sunfish formed the most stable element of the population, in that the numbers of these species varied less in successive collections than did numbers of other species.

The number of orange-throated darters remained constant at Areas 1 and 3, and the number of stonecats changed little in successive collections from Area 3. I suspect that an apparent decline in stonecats at Area 1 on September 4 was due to a slow rate of dispersal from the point of release (see pages 413, 414).

Some species (sucker-mouthed minnow, red-finned shiner, slender-headed darter, and fat-headed minnow) decreased significantly in successive samples from the same area because of mortality in handling or movement out of the area of initial capture.

The decrease in abundance of the sucker-mouthed minnow may have been due to some mobility of the species. Evidence for mortality caused by handling was obtained for the red-finned shiner and probably accounts for the reduction of this species in Area 6. The red-finned shiner is also probably a mobile species. The reduction in abundance of the slender-headed darter seems unexplainable because no evidence was obtained for either movement or mortality.

Fat-headed minnows also declined markedly in successive collections from Area 6, the only area in which the species was common. No marked fat-headed minnows were taken outside the area of release, indicating low mobility of the species. I cannot certainly account for their decline; possibly there was latent mortality due to shocking.

The numbers of red shiners, blunt-nosed minnows, and juvenile channel catfish varied erratically in successive collections, probably as a result of movement. This problem is discussed for all species in a later section.

Population-Estimation

The direct-proportion method was used to estimate fish populations in Areas 1, 3 and 6. Reliable results could not be obtained for all species because of scarcity, mortality in handling, mobility, or other factors.

A high rate of mortality due to handling was observed in Area 1 for the red shiner and in Area 6 for river carpsucker (young-of-the-year), sucker-mouthed minnows, red-finned shiner, red shiner, blunt-nosed minnow, and stoneroller. In Area 3, in contrast, there was little mortality in the same species during the twelve-hour interval that fish were held in traps prior to release as marked individuals.

The following species were common in at least one area, but probably are sufficiently mobile (see page 416) to invalidate estimates of static populations in small areas: red shiner, red-finned shiner, and channel catfish (yearlings and older). Other species were rare and are indicated as "T" in Table 13.

Those species for which population-estimates seem warranted include: golden redhorse, sucker-mouthed minnow, red shiner, sand shiner, fat-headed minnow, stoneroller, stonecat, channel catfish (young-of-the-year), green sunfish, long-eared sunfish, slender-headed darter, and orange-throated darter. I consider the estimate valid if a high percentage of the marked fish is recaptured. Results are presented in Table 15, and ordinarily will not be referred to in the following discussion of the population in each of the three areas.

Area 1

The order of abundance at Area 1, in terms of the estimated population per 500 square feet, was as follows: stoneroller (47.6), stonecat (29.4), channel catfish (young-of-the-year) (20.6), green sunfish (19.4), red shiner (18.2), long-eared sunfish (9.4), channel catfish (yearlings and older) (6.5), golden redhorse (1.2). Insufficient data make inclusion of other species unreliable.

A comparison of the order of abundance between the estimated total population and the percentage composition in the first collection from each area shows significant correlations. The percentage-composition of the fish fauna at Area 1 was calculated as follows: stoneroller (27.7%), red shiner (18.2%), green sunfish (11.2%), stonecat (10.3%), channel catfish (young-of-the-year) (9.5%), channel catfish (yearlings and older) (5.8%), long-eared sunfish (5.4%), golden redhorse (0.8%). It can be seen that the stoneroller, green sunfish, long-eared sunfish and golden redhorse follow each other in the same order in both calculations. The stonecat is shown to be more common than channel catfish (young-of-the-year) in both calculations, but both species appear to be more abundant than green sunfish and red shiner in calculations of the total population and less abundant in the percentage-composition in the first collection. I think that the order of abundance as shown by percentage-composition is the more accurate figure for Area 1. The abundance of the red shiner is known to have been affected by mortality in collecting. Furthermore, as will be shown later, the species is so mobile that its abundance often changes markedly in a short time. Therefore, it is not surprising to find the red shiner in widely varying positions of relative and absolute abundance. However, the green sunfish maintains stable populations and should remain in about the same position of abundance in relation to other species (such as the stonecat and channel catfish young-of-the-year) that also maintain stable populations. The differences in order of abundance obtained by the two methods for green sunfish and channel catfish young-of-the-year are not great. However, in the estimation of total population the abundance of the stonecat seems significantly greater, in relation to other species, than in the calculation of percentage-composition. I believe that this difference can be attributed to the relatively low number of marked fish recaptured, which is probably due to a slow rate of dispersal from the point of release. Stonecats were released in relatively quiet water, and if they remained there they might be missed in subsequent collections, because they lack air-bladders and tend to remain on the bottom when shocked. Therefore, the calculated total population of the stonecat in Area 1 may be too high.

Table 15. Data Used in Estimating Total Populations, by Direct Proportions, in Areas 1, 3, and 6 at the Upper Neosho Stations.

Species Number captured first collection Number marked and released Number captured second collectionNumber of marked fish recapturedEstimated total populationPercent of marked fish recoveredNumber per 500 square feet

136136136136136136136

Golden Redhorse 2 5 0 2 5 0 2 5 0250250 100 100—1.2.40

Sucker-mouthed Minnow 0 54 31 0 51 15 0 42 1201700 126——3300 10.0—

Red Shiner 44 116 186 22 106 86 7 165 2025181431 972 1284231711 18.2 77.1 64

Sand Shiner 0 25 10 0 25 7 0 35 10—121073——48—05.8—

Blunt-nosed Minnow 0 4 108 0 3 28 0 10 910180—319—33280— 16

Fat-headed Minnow 1 1 112 1 1 101 0 2 1560019——8300019—— 41.5

Stoneroller 67 84 54 58 79 33 39 107 672835881 242276484424 47.6 19.2 13.8

Channel Catfish (j)[I] 14 37 3 9 32 3 7 16 161301139—674106.53.1—

Channel Catfish (yy)[J] 3 34 40 22 33 39 16 34 231011135 102—45333 20.68.1—

Stonecat 25 7 0 25 7 0 8 7 041—50—01614— 29.4—0

Green Sunfish 27[K]— 62 27 — 62 17 — 6214—2233—17552—35 19.4—8.8

Long-eared Sunfish 13 6 10 13 6 10 12 3 221036166377650609.4.51.9

Area 3

The order of abundance of the species at Area 3, in terms of the estimated population per 500 square feet, was as follows: red shiner (77.1), stoneroller (19.2), sucker-mouthed minnow (10.0), channel catfish (young-of-the-year) (8.1), sand shiner (5.8), channel catfish (yearlings and older) (3.1), long-eared sunfish (0.5), golden redhorse (0.4). Insufficient data make inclusion of other species unreliable.

For comparison with the estimates of total population, the percentage-composition in the first collection gives the following results: red shiner (24.0%), stoneroller (17.4%), sucker-mouthed minnow (11.2%), channel catfish (yearlings and older) (7.6%), channel catfish (young-of-the-year) (7.0%), long-eared sunfish (6.0%), sand shiner (5.2%), and golden redhorse (1.0%).

For the most part, the species have the same order of abundance in both methods of analysis. Those that are apparently out of order are channel catfish (yearlings and older) and long-eared sunfish. The first species is mobile (excepting young-of-the-year) and commonly fluctuates widely in numbers in the same area; the second species was treated differently in that only adults were considered in the population-estimation whereas both young and adults were considered in calculating percentage-composition. (I found that I could not confidently distinguish between young-of-the-year of green sunfish, long-eared sunfish and orange-spotted sunfish after staining.)

Area 6

The order of abundance of the species at Area 6, in terms of the estimated population per 500 square feet, was as follows: red shiner (64.0), fat-headed minnow (41.5), blunt-nosed minnow (16.0), stoneroller (13.8), green sunfish (8.8), long-eared sunfish (1.9). Insufficient data make inclusion of other species unreliable.

Calculations of percentage-composition give the following results: red shiner (20.1%), long-eared sunfish (14.6%), green sunfish (12.2%), fat-headed minnow (12.1%), blunt-nosed minnow (11.7%), stoneroller (5.8%). The two species of sunfish form a more significant part of the population in the latter analysis because young are included. Only adults were considered in the estimation of total population.

The fact that estimates of the total population and the percentage-composition agree in most respects lends support to the validity of both methods of analysis. It should be re-emphasized that differences in the order of abundance in the various areas reflect the ability of each species to utilize each particular kind of habitat.

Movement of Marked Fish

Table 16. Data on Movement of Marked Fish at the Upper Neosho Station, September, 1959.

SpeciesNumber markedNumber recapturedNumber moved upstreamNumber moved downstream

Golden Redhorse 24 16 0 2

Sucker-mouthed Minnow 68 27 7 0

Red-finned Shiner 74 0 0 0

Red Shiner 1326 152 48 25

Blunt-nosed Minnow 136 32 1 10

Fat-headed Minnow 151 40 0 0

Stoneroller 177 90 1 0

Black Bullhead 25 6 2 0

Channel Catfish (j)[L] 294 36 4 7

Channel Catfish (yy)[M] 145 34 2 0

Stonecat 33 6 0 0

Green Sunfish 124 68 1 0

Long-eared Sunfish 33 21 0 0

Slender-headed Darter 70 1 0 0

Orange-throated Darter 13 0 0 0

Some measure was gained of the amount of movement exhibited by several species of fish. Results are biased in favor of a conclusion that a species is sedentary because a large percentage of the recaptures were made in collections taken in the same immediate area three hours after release of marked fish, the total area checked was not large (one mile), and collecting was limited to an eleven-day period. Nevertheless, some species were shown to be definitely mobile and others exhibited pronounced sedentary tendencies. The results of experiments on movement are presented in Table 16. Marked fish (dyed and fin-clipped) were taken as long as seven days after being marked. Only those species in which more than ten individuals were marked are included.

Blunt-nosed minnow, red shiner, and channel catfish (yearlings and older) are more mobile than other species.

The mobility of channel catfish has been discussed by Muncy (1958) and Funk (1957). My records show that of 36 marked channel catfish that were recaptured, 11 were taken in areas other than the one into which they had been returned. A pronounced mobile tendency on the part of the red shiner and blunt-nosed minnow is shown by the fact that of 152 marked red shiners recaptured, 73 had moved from the area of release; and of 32 marked blunt-nosed minnows recaptured, 11 had moved from the area of release. The fact that the habitat occupied by these species is not precise (ranging from swift riffles to quiet pools) supports a conclusion that the species are mobile.

The fat-headed minnow, stoneroller, channel catfish (young-of-the-year), green sunfish and long-eared sunfish form a sedentary element of the population. With the exception of the fat-headed minnow, the sedentary group also maintained relatively stable numbers in Areas 1, 3 and 6 throughout the study (Table 14). It is interesting to note that, in contrast to the mobile group, the species forming the sedentary group have rather well-defined habitat preferences.

A third group of species, represented by the red-finned shiner, stonecat, slender-headed darter and orange-throated darter, was characterized by having a low rate of recapture. I suspect that mortality is a factor contributing to the failure to recapture red-finned shiners, because in one collection only four of 31 red-finned shiners captured were successfully marked and released, in another case 70 of 818. The red-finned shiner occurs most often in pools but is also taken in other areas, is pelagic, and probably is a mobile species.

The stonecat, slender-headed darter and orange-throated darter are generally restricted to riffle-habitats, and are probably sedentary. The low number of recaptures for these three species probably is due either to a slow rate of dispersal from the point of release or to latent mortality resulting from shock. Table 14 shows that these three species maintain comparatively stable populations, but there seems to be a tendency for a reduction in numbers with continued collecting, even though all fish captured were returned to the stream.

Golden redhorse showed a high rate of recapture. All individuals marked were recaptured three hours after release in Areas 1 (two fish) and 3 (five fish). Nine individuals were taken from Area 4 on 11 September; seven of these were marked and released in the next pool downstream (Area 3). On 15 September, two fish were retaken in Area 3 and two were retaken in Area 2, the next pool downstream. The species was common in Area 5 also where five of eight marked individuals were recaptured two days after release. It seems that the golden redhorse is somewhat restricted in movement, at least for short periods.

The sucker-mouthed minnow and black bullhead showed some movement—less than such mobile species as red shiners and channel catfish, but more than the sedentary group. Seven of 27 marked sucker-mouthed minnows were taken in areas adjacent to the one to which they had been returned. Two of six black bullheads that were recaptured had moved. The black bullhead moved the greater distance. The extent of short-term movement by several of the species in the Upper Neosho correlates well with redistribution subsequent to drought in the Wakarusa River, discussed by Deacon and Metcalf (1961).

Similarity of the Fauna at the Upper Neosho Station to the Faunas of Nearby Streams

The fauna that I found to be characteristic at the upper Neosho station has affinity with the upland tributary-fauna described by Metcalf (1959) for Chautauqua, Cowley and Elk Counties, Kansas. The primary difference is a nearly complete absence at my station of the Ozarkian element of the population. Some species (red-finned shiner, long-eared sunfish, and spotted bass) listed by Metcalf as characteristic of the mainstream of smaller rivers occur at the upper Neosho station in greater abundance then elsewhere in the Neosho. This difference is probably due to the fact that the upper Neosho station is somewhat larger and slightly more turbid than Metcalf's "upland tributaries."

Hall (1952) reported on the distribution of fishes in the vicinity of Fort Gibson Reservoir, an impoundment on the Grand (Neosho) River in Oklahoma. He separated the fishes into three groups according to habitat-preference: species restricted to upland tributaries on the east side of Grand (Neosho) River, species restricted to lowland tributaries on the west side of Grand (Neosho) River, and species occurring in the Grand River proper and/or tributaries on one or both sides.

Several species found in the upper Neosho River also occur in the area studied by Hall. Of these, only the creek chub was restricted to upland tributaries on the east side of Grand (Neosho) River. The sucker-mouthed minnow and red-finned shiner were restricted to the lowland tributaries on the west side of Grand (Neosho) River in the Fort Gibson Reservoir Area. Golden redhorse, stoneroller, yellow bullhead, spotted bass, green sunfish, long-eared sunfish, and orange-throated darter were present in collections from the Grand River proper and/or tributaries on both sides of the river, most commonly in tributaries.

Hall's data show that black bullhead, large-mouthed bass, white crappie, and logperch occurred most frequently in or near the quiet water of the reservoir. In my study these fish were most common in the larger, quiet pools at the upper Neosho station.