Identification

[Al Agnew]

I don't have any particular sources, but I know I've read many times of smallmouth being stocked to and from various streams in the early days of the present conservation departments, as well as in the more distant past. Stocking used to be looked upon as supplementing the existing populations...in other words, "There ain't enough bass in that creek, so we'll put some more in from someplace else." I suspect a lot of that stocking was never documented.

[Chief Grey Bear]

Current research suggests that the populations of smallmouth bass in the ozark highlands of Missouri and Arkansas are represented by three clades that arose due to geographic and genetic isolation. Clades are simply population groups that share a common ancestor. These groups have morphological variations and slight genetic differentiations but not enough to warrant species or subspecies status. Here is an abstract from Stark and Echelle 1998 describing these populations. If you would like a full text article, please PM me your email.

It is also interesting to note that the original publication describing neosho smallmouth as a subspecies (Hubbs and Bailey 1940) also incorrectly identified another subspecies (Micropterus punctulatus witchitae), which was later identified as a cross between a spotted bass and a smallmouth.

Genetic Structure and Systematics of Smallmouth Bass, with

Emphasis on Interior Highlands Populations

WILLIAM J. STARK*1

Oklahoma Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit and Department of Zoology

Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma 74078, USA

ANTHONY A. ECHELLE

Department of Zoology, Oklahoma State University,

Stillwater, Oklahoma 74078, USA

Abstract.—We conducted an allozyme survey of genetic variation at 33 gene loci in smallmouth

bass Micropterus dolomieu from 57 localities encompassing most of the range of the species, but

with an emphasis (51 samples) on the Interior Highlands (Ozark and Ouachita uplands). Samples

exhibited a moderate amount of total genic diversity (HT 5 0.068), but high genetic heterogenity

(FST 5 0.383). Phylogenetic analyses supported recognition of three clades from the Interior

Highlands: (1) the previously recognized Neosho smallmouth bass in Ozark tributaries of the

middle Arkansas River; (2) the Ouachita smallmouth bass in the Little and Ouachita river drainages

of the Ouachita Highlands; and (3) a clade that included populations from the White, Black,

Missouri, and other streams in the northern and eastern Ozarks. This third clade was very similar

to populations from the Ohio and upper Mississippi river basins, and, on the basis of allele

frequency parsimony, more closely related to them than to the Neosho and Ouachita smallmouth

basses. To preserve genetic diversity and the options that divergent native stocks represent for

future management, stock transfers of smallmouth bass should take into account potential effects

on native forms of the species.

Interesting to say the least.

It appears he states there is enough diversity to warrent not stocking non native species into said home wates of the Neosho and Ouachita. And he states that the yet to be named third clade is more closely related to the Northern than the Neosho and Ouachita. Which would make perfect sense. But it is exciting to think there is a possible different species in the northern and eastern Ozarks. I also don't quite see where he is leaning towards stripping the Neosho of its status. It in fact seems to be just opposite.

The debunking of the Wichita is old news. And the publication I believe you are speaking of is just a guide and not a scientfic paper. But at any rate, where did you read that the Wichita Spot was a cross between a Spot and a Smallmouth? I have never read that and I have never heard anyone say that. Especially since Cache creek is not in the native range of the Smallmouth.

[Old plug]

WOW smallmouth is bad enough I hope you guys do not try to figure out the results of breeding habits of Horney Crappie.

[Guest]

deleted

[ness]

I don't have any particular sources, but I know I've read many times of smallmouth being stocked to and from various streams in the early days of the present conservation departments, as well as in the more distant past. Stocking used to be looked upon as supplementing the existing populations...in other words, "There ain't enough bass in that creek, so we'll put some more in from someplace else." I suspect a lot of that stocking was never documented.

I don't know squat about the topic at hand, but common sense tells me that undocumented stocking is certainly a possibility. And, it doesn't take a whole bunch of fish dumped in a stream for them to get a foothold, if the conditions are right.

Interesting conversation though. I'm a little confused about the Neosho at this point though. Did we solve that anywhere that I may have missed?

[Chief Grey Bear]

None of these clades are speculated to be elevated to species or subspecies status. The focus of the research is determining lineages and ancenstry WITHIN the species. The sub species status was invalidated when genetic testing was done on the original specimens collected by Hubbs and Bailey 1940, which was in fact a scientific article and not just a "guide". I will send it to you when I send the other articles tomorrow.

In regards to the "Wichita bass".

From Near and Coppelman 2009.

At least one centrarchid subspecies has turned out to be based on hybrid specimens. Micropterus punctulatus wichitae Hubbs and Bailey was described as a subspecies from the Wichita Mountains of southwestern Oklahoma based on differences in scale row counts (Hubbs and Bailey 1940). However, this population was initially described as hybrids of M. punctulatus and M. dolomieu (Hubbs and Ortenburger 1929). Morphological data from M. p. punctulatus, M. p. wichitae, and M. dolomieu and historical records of nonnative M. dolomieu introductions near the type locality of M. p. wichitae support the hypothesis that this subspecies is based on hybrid M. punctulatus M. dolomieu specimens (Cofer 1995). Genetic analysis of both nuclear and mtDNA in M. punctulatus populations from the Red and Arkansas River Basins did not reveal genetic divergence of the Wichita Mountain populations of M. punctulatus (Coughlin et al. 2003).

I think you got confused. In regards to the Wichita Spot, I thought you were refering to the book by AJ. Which is really just a guide made to sound somewhat scientific. I was not calling your posting of Starks work as non scientific. I still question the smallmouth being in that creek. It would have to have been introduced sometime prior to 1929. Maybe it was. I can't find any info supporting that though. It certainly isn't there now. I lived in that area for a time and never caught one or heard of one being caught. Pretty much the opposite of what one would consider Smallmouth habitat.

Back to the Neosho, it appears as if the scientific community still refers to it as the Neosho. And depending on what source you are reading, they all seem to confirm that there are 1 to 2 sub species...Neosho and Ouachita. I can continue to site sources for your review if you like.

[Chief Grey Bear]

http://129.15.97.19/bbcc/BBCC_Brewer/BBCC_Brewer.html

Well worth a listen

[Chief Grey Bear]

Al Agnew, on 16 Dec 2013 - 6:08 PM, said:

I don't have any particular sources, but I know I've read many times of smallmouth being stocked to and from various streams in the early days of the present conservation departments, as well as in the more distant past. Stocking used to be looked upon as supplementing the existing populations...in other words, "There ain't enough bass in that creek, so we'll put some more in from someplace else." I suspect a lot of that stocking was never documented.

That would certainly explain and support findings of the 3rd clade.

It doesn't seem to be supported by the genetic findings of the fish in question.

It would also seem that if they were indiscriminately stocking bass, the spot would be more wide spead in the Ozarks.

[Guest]

deleted

[Mitch f]

The only thing I've never understood is that we, the Ozarks, are stuck in the middle between the huge smallmouth of the Tennessee river chain, and the huge Northern strain. Granted we don't have the longer growing season as the southern fish, but come on, we should have a longer growing season than the Northern ones. But I know the answer is these fish are "perfect" for this habitat. But I sure as heck would love to sneak some other strains in our rivers!