The Experts below are selected from a list of 4854 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Jake Vander M. Zanden - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
go big or don t a field based diet evaluation of freshwater piscivore and prey fish size relationships
PLOS ONE, 2018Co-Authors: Jereme W. Gaeta, Tyler D. Ahrenstorff, James S. Diana, William W. Fetzer, Thomas S. Jones, Zach J. Lawson, Michael C. Mcinerny, Victor J. Santucci, Jake Vander M. ZandenAbstract:Body size governs predator-prey interactions, which in turn structure populations, communities, and food webs. Understanding predator-prey size relationships is valuable from a theoretical perspective, in basic research, and for management applications. However, predator-prey size data are limited and costly to acquire. We quantified predator-prey total length and mass relationships for several freshwater piscivorous taxa: crappie (Pomoxis spp.), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), muskellunge (Esox masquinongy), northern pike (Esox lucius), rock bass (Ambloplites rupestris), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), and walleye (Sander vitreus). The range of prey total lengths increased with predator total length. The median and maximum ingested prey total length varied with predator taxon and length, but generally ranged from 10–20% and 32–46% of predator total length, respectively. Predators tended to consume larger fusiform prey than laterally compressed prey. With the exception of large muskellunge, predators most commonly consumed prey between 16 and 73 mm. A sensitivity analysis indicated estimates can be very accurate at sample sizes greater than 1,000 diet items and fairly accurate at sample sizes greater than 100. However, sample sizes less than 50 should be evaluated with caution. Furthermore, median log10 predator-prey body mass ratios ranged from 1.9–2.5, nearly 50% lower than values previously reported for freshwater fishes. Managers, researchers, and modelers could use our findings as a tool for numerous predator-prey evaluations from stocking size optimization to individual-based bioenergetics analyses identifying prey size structure. To this end, we have developed a web-based user interface to maximize the utility of our models that can be found at www.LakeEcologyLab.org/pred_prey.
-
Central tendency of relative ingested prey total length (percent of predator total length) consumed across predator total length.
2018Co-Authors: Jereme W. Gaeta, Tyler D. Ahrenstorff, James S. Diana, William W. Fetzer, Thomas S. Jones, Zach J. Lawson, Michael C. Mcinerny, Victor J. Santucci, Jake Vander M. ZandenAbstract:Piscivores evaluated include muskellunge (Esox masquinongy), northern pike (Esox lucius), walleye (Sander vitreus), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), and a grouped ‘crappie’ category (P. nigromaculatus and P. annularis). The relative IP50 (50th percentile regression) is shown from the 5th to 95th percentile of observed predator total lengths, which are noted on the top axes of Fig 1. When applicable, we estimated relative IP50 for different prey body shapes: fusiform (dashed lines) and laterally compressed (dotted lines).
-
Kernel density distributions of model estimated consumed prey total lengths (mm).
2018Co-Authors: Jereme W. Gaeta, Tyler D. Ahrenstorff, James S. Diana, William W. Fetzer, Thomas S. Jones, Zach J. Lawson, Michael C. Mcinerny, Victor J. Santucci, Jake Vander M. ZandenAbstract:Distributions estimated for the 5th (dotted line), 50th (dashed line), and 95th (solid line) percentile of predator total lengths (TL; mm). Piscivores evaluated include muskellunge (Esox masquinongy), northern pike (Esox lucius), walleye (Sander vitreus), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), and a grouped ‘crappie’ category (P. nigromaculatus and P. annularis). The predator total lengths correspond to the top axes of Fig 1. Kernel densities at a given predator total length were derived by estimating prey total length with percentile regressions of every percentile from the 1st to the 99th (Table A in S2 Appendix). The modes of the 5th, 50th, and 95th percentile kernel density distributions are shown along the bottom axis as gray circles, triangles, and diamonds, respectively.
-
Predator and prey fish total lengths (mm) and quantile regression models.
2018Co-Authors: Jereme W. Gaeta, Tyler D. Ahrenstorff, James S. Diana, William W. Fetzer, Thomas S. Jones, Zach J. Lawson, Michael C. Mcinerny, Victor J. Santucci, Jake Vander M. ZandenAbstract:Piscivores evaluated include muskellunge (Esox masquinongy; n = 473), northern pike (Esox lucius; n = 2,233), walleye (Sander vitreus; n = 18,102), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides; n = 1,486), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu; n = 380), and a grouped ‘crappie’ category (P. nigromaculatus and P. annularis; n = 317). The 1st, 5th, 50th, 95th, and 99th percentile regressions are shown as gray lines. When the appropriate taxonomic resolution and sample size was available, prey fishes were categorized as having fusiform (black points) or laterally compressed (gray points) body shape, otherwise prey fish body shape was unclassified (open points). The 5th, 50th, and 95th percentiles of predator total lengths are shown at the top of each plot and correspond to the range of lengths modeled in Figs 2 and 3 as well as the density distributions in Fig 4.
-
Go big or … don't? A field-based diet evaluation of freshwater piscivore and prey fish size relationships
2018Co-Authors: Jereme W. Gaeta, Tyler D. Ahrenstorff, James S. Diana, William W. Fetzer, Thomas S. Jones, Zach J. Lawson, Michael C. Mcinerny, Victor J. Santucci, Jake Vander M. ZandenAbstract:Body size governs predator-prey interactions, which in turn structure populations, communities, and food webs. Understanding predator-prey size relationships is valuable from a theoretical perspective, in basic research, and for management applications. However, predator-prey size data are limited and costly to acquire. We quantified predator-prey total length and mass relationships for several freshwater piscivorous taxa: crappie (Pomoxis spp.), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), muskellunge (Esox masquinongy), northern pike (Esox lucius), rock bass (Ambloplites rupestris), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), and walleye (Sander vitreus). The range of prey total lengths increased with predator total length. The median and maximum ingested prey total length varied with predator taxon and length, but generally ranged from 10–20% and 32–46% of predator total length, respectively. Predators tended to consume larger fusiform prey than laterally compressed prey. With the exception of large muskellunge, predators most commonly consumed prey between 16 and 73 mm. A sensitivity analysis indicated estimates can be very accurate at sample sizes greater than 1,000 diet items and fairly accurate at sample sizes greater than 100. However, sample sizes less than 50 should be evaluated with caution. Furthermore, median log10 predator-prey body mass ratios ranged from 1.9–2.5, nearly 50% lower than values previously reported for freshwater fishes. Managers, researchers, and modelers could use our findings as a tool for numerous predator-prey evaluations from stocking size optimization to individual-based bioenergetics analyses identifying prey size structure. To this end, we have developed a web-based user interface to maximize the utility of our models that can be found at www.LakeEcologyLab.org/pred_prey.
William W. Fetzer - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
go big or don t a field based diet evaluation of freshwater piscivore and prey fish size relationships
PLOS ONE, 2018Co-Authors: Jereme W. Gaeta, Tyler D. Ahrenstorff, James S. Diana, William W. Fetzer, Thomas S. Jones, Zach J. Lawson, Michael C. Mcinerny, Victor J. Santucci, Jake Vander M. ZandenAbstract:Body size governs predator-prey interactions, which in turn structure populations, communities, and food webs. Understanding predator-prey size relationships is valuable from a theoretical perspective, in basic research, and for management applications. However, predator-prey size data are limited and costly to acquire. We quantified predator-prey total length and mass relationships for several freshwater piscivorous taxa: crappie (Pomoxis spp.), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), muskellunge (Esox masquinongy), northern pike (Esox lucius), rock bass (Ambloplites rupestris), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), and walleye (Sander vitreus). The range of prey total lengths increased with predator total length. The median and maximum ingested prey total length varied with predator taxon and length, but generally ranged from 10–20% and 32–46% of predator total length, respectively. Predators tended to consume larger fusiform prey than laterally compressed prey. With the exception of large muskellunge, predators most commonly consumed prey between 16 and 73 mm. A sensitivity analysis indicated estimates can be very accurate at sample sizes greater than 1,000 diet items and fairly accurate at sample sizes greater than 100. However, sample sizes less than 50 should be evaluated with caution. Furthermore, median log10 predator-prey body mass ratios ranged from 1.9–2.5, nearly 50% lower than values previously reported for freshwater fishes. Managers, researchers, and modelers could use our findings as a tool for numerous predator-prey evaluations from stocking size optimization to individual-based bioenergetics analyses identifying prey size structure. To this end, we have developed a web-based user interface to maximize the utility of our models that can be found at www.LakeEcologyLab.org/pred_prey.
-
Central tendency of relative ingested prey total length (percent of predator total length) consumed across predator total length.
2018Co-Authors: Jereme W. Gaeta, Tyler D. Ahrenstorff, James S. Diana, William W. Fetzer, Thomas S. Jones, Zach J. Lawson, Michael C. Mcinerny, Victor J. Santucci, Jake Vander M. ZandenAbstract:Piscivores evaluated include muskellunge (Esox masquinongy), northern pike (Esox lucius), walleye (Sander vitreus), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), and a grouped ‘crappie’ category (P. nigromaculatus and P. annularis). The relative IP50 (50th percentile regression) is shown from the 5th to 95th percentile of observed predator total lengths, which are noted on the top axes of Fig 1. When applicable, we estimated relative IP50 for different prey body shapes: fusiform (dashed lines) and laterally compressed (dotted lines).
-
Kernel density distributions of model estimated consumed prey total lengths (mm).
2018Co-Authors: Jereme W. Gaeta, Tyler D. Ahrenstorff, James S. Diana, William W. Fetzer, Thomas S. Jones, Zach J. Lawson, Michael C. Mcinerny, Victor J. Santucci, Jake Vander M. ZandenAbstract:Distributions estimated for the 5th (dotted line), 50th (dashed line), and 95th (solid line) percentile of predator total lengths (TL; mm). Piscivores evaluated include muskellunge (Esox masquinongy), northern pike (Esox lucius), walleye (Sander vitreus), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), and a grouped ‘crappie’ category (P. nigromaculatus and P. annularis). The predator total lengths correspond to the top axes of Fig 1. Kernel densities at a given predator total length were derived by estimating prey total length with percentile regressions of every percentile from the 1st to the 99th (Table A in S2 Appendix). The modes of the 5th, 50th, and 95th percentile kernel density distributions are shown along the bottom axis as gray circles, triangles, and diamonds, respectively.
-
Predator and prey fish total lengths (mm) and quantile regression models.
2018Co-Authors: Jereme W. Gaeta, Tyler D. Ahrenstorff, James S. Diana, William W. Fetzer, Thomas S. Jones, Zach J. Lawson, Michael C. Mcinerny, Victor J. Santucci, Jake Vander M. ZandenAbstract:Piscivores evaluated include muskellunge (Esox masquinongy; n = 473), northern pike (Esox lucius; n = 2,233), walleye (Sander vitreus; n = 18,102), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides; n = 1,486), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu; n = 380), and a grouped ‘crappie’ category (P. nigromaculatus and P. annularis; n = 317). The 1st, 5th, 50th, 95th, and 99th percentile regressions are shown as gray lines. When the appropriate taxonomic resolution and sample size was available, prey fishes were categorized as having fusiform (black points) or laterally compressed (gray points) body shape, otherwise prey fish body shape was unclassified (open points). The 5th, 50th, and 95th percentiles of predator total lengths are shown at the top of each plot and correspond to the range of lengths modeled in Figs 2 and 3 as well as the density distributions in Fig 4.
-
Go big or … don't? A field-based diet evaluation of freshwater piscivore and prey fish size relationships
2018Co-Authors: Jereme W. Gaeta, Tyler D. Ahrenstorff, James S. Diana, William W. Fetzer, Thomas S. Jones, Zach J. Lawson, Michael C. Mcinerny, Victor J. Santucci, Jake Vander M. ZandenAbstract:Body size governs predator-prey interactions, which in turn structure populations, communities, and food webs. Understanding predator-prey size relationships is valuable from a theoretical perspective, in basic research, and for management applications. However, predator-prey size data are limited and costly to acquire. We quantified predator-prey total length and mass relationships for several freshwater piscivorous taxa: crappie (Pomoxis spp.), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), muskellunge (Esox masquinongy), northern pike (Esox lucius), rock bass (Ambloplites rupestris), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), and walleye (Sander vitreus). The range of prey total lengths increased with predator total length. The median and maximum ingested prey total length varied with predator taxon and length, but generally ranged from 10–20% and 32–46% of predator total length, respectively. Predators tended to consume larger fusiform prey than laterally compressed prey. With the exception of large muskellunge, predators most commonly consumed prey between 16 and 73 mm. A sensitivity analysis indicated estimates can be very accurate at sample sizes greater than 1,000 diet items and fairly accurate at sample sizes greater than 100. However, sample sizes less than 50 should be evaluated with caution. Furthermore, median log10 predator-prey body mass ratios ranged from 1.9–2.5, nearly 50% lower than values previously reported for freshwater fishes. Managers, researchers, and modelers could use our findings as a tool for numerous predator-prey evaluations from stocking size optimization to individual-based bioenergetics analyses identifying prey size structure. To this end, we have developed a web-based user interface to maximize the utility of our models that can be found at www.LakeEcologyLab.org/pred_prey.
Jereme W. Gaeta - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
go big or don t a field based diet evaluation of freshwater piscivore and prey fish size relationships
PLOS ONE, 2018Co-Authors: Jereme W. Gaeta, Tyler D. Ahrenstorff, James S. Diana, William W. Fetzer, Thomas S. Jones, Zach J. Lawson, Michael C. Mcinerny, Victor J. Santucci, Jake Vander M. ZandenAbstract:Body size governs predator-prey interactions, which in turn structure populations, communities, and food webs. Understanding predator-prey size relationships is valuable from a theoretical perspective, in basic research, and for management applications. However, predator-prey size data are limited and costly to acquire. We quantified predator-prey total length and mass relationships for several freshwater piscivorous taxa: crappie (Pomoxis spp.), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), muskellunge (Esox masquinongy), northern pike (Esox lucius), rock bass (Ambloplites rupestris), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), and walleye (Sander vitreus). The range of prey total lengths increased with predator total length. The median and maximum ingested prey total length varied with predator taxon and length, but generally ranged from 10–20% and 32–46% of predator total length, respectively. Predators tended to consume larger fusiform prey than laterally compressed prey. With the exception of large muskellunge, predators most commonly consumed prey between 16 and 73 mm. A sensitivity analysis indicated estimates can be very accurate at sample sizes greater than 1,000 diet items and fairly accurate at sample sizes greater than 100. However, sample sizes less than 50 should be evaluated with caution. Furthermore, median log10 predator-prey body mass ratios ranged from 1.9–2.5, nearly 50% lower than values previously reported for freshwater fishes. Managers, researchers, and modelers could use our findings as a tool for numerous predator-prey evaluations from stocking size optimization to individual-based bioenergetics analyses identifying prey size structure. To this end, we have developed a web-based user interface to maximize the utility of our models that can be found at www.LakeEcologyLab.org/pred_prey.
-
Central tendency of relative ingested prey total length (percent of predator total length) consumed across predator total length.
2018Co-Authors: Jereme W. Gaeta, Tyler D. Ahrenstorff, James S. Diana, William W. Fetzer, Thomas S. Jones, Zach J. Lawson, Michael C. Mcinerny, Victor J. Santucci, Jake Vander M. ZandenAbstract:Piscivores evaluated include muskellunge (Esox masquinongy), northern pike (Esox lucius), walleye (Sander vitreus), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), and a grouped ‘crappie’ category (P. nigromaculatus and P. annularis). The relative IP50 (50th percentile regression) is shown from the 5th to 95th percentile of observed predator total lengths, which are noted on the top axes of Fig 1. When applicable, we estimated relative IP50 for different prey body shapes: fusiform (dashed lines) and laterally compressed (dotted lines).
-
Kernel density distributions of model estimated consumed prey total lengths (mm).
2018Co-Authors: Jereme W. Gaeta, Tyler D. Ahrenstorff, James S. Diana, William W. Fetzer, Thomas S. Jones, Zach J. Lawson, Michael C. Mcinerny, Victor J. Santucci, Jake Vander M. ZandenAbstract:Distributions estimated for the 5th (dotted line), 50th (dashed line), and 95th (solid line) percentile of predator total lengths (TL; mm). Piscivores evaluated include muskellunge (Esox masquinongy), northern pike (Esox lucius), walleye (Sander vitreus), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), and a grouped ‘crappie’ category (P. nigromaculatus and P. annularis). The predator total lengths correspond to the top axes of Fig 1. Kernel densities at a given predator total length were derived by estimating prey total length with percentile regressions of every percentile from the 1st to the 99th (Table A in S2 Appendix). The modes of the 5th, 50th, and 95th percentile kernel density distributions are shown along the bottom axis as gray circles, triangles, and diamonds, respectively.
-
Predator and prey fish total lengths (mm) and quantile regression models.
2018Co-Authors: Jereme W. Gaeta, Tyler D. Ahrenstorff, James S. Diana, William W. Fetzer, Thomas S. Jones, Zach J. Lawson, Michael C. Mcinerny, Victor J. Santucci, Jake Vander M. ZandenAbstract:Piscivores evaluated include muskellunge (Esox masquinongy; n = 473), northern pike (Esox lucius; n = 2,233), walleye (Sander vitreus; n = 18,102), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides; n = 1,486), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu; n = 380), and a grouped ‘crappie’ category (P. nigromaculatus and P. annularis; n = 317). The 1st, 5th, 50th, 95th, and 99th percentile regressions are shown as gray lines. When the appropriate taxonomic resolution and sample size was available, prey fishes were categorized as having fusiform (black points) or laterally compressed (gray points) body shape, otherwise prey fish body shape was unclassified (open points). The 5th, 50th, and 95th percentiles of predator total lengths are shown at the top of each plot and correspond to the range of lengths modeled in Figs 2 and 3 as well as the density distributions in Fig 4.
-
Go big or … don't? A field-based diet evaluation of freshwater piscivore and prey fish size relationships
2018Co-Authors: Jereme W. Gaeta, Tyler D. Ahrenstorff, James S. Diana, William W. Fetzer, Thomas S. Jones, Zach J. Lawson, Michael C. Mcinerny, Victor J. Santucci, Jake Vander M. ZandenAbstract:Body size governs predator-prey interactions, which in turn structure populations, communities, and food webs. Understanding predator-prey size relationships is valuable from a theoretical perspective, in basic research, and for management applications. However, predator-prey size data are limited and costly to acquire. We quantified predator-prey total length and mass relationships for several freshwater piscivorous taxa: crappie (Pomoxis spp.), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), muskellunge (Esox masquinongy), northern pike (Esox lucius), rock bass (Ambloplites rupestris), smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), and walleye (Sander vitreus). The range of prey total lengths increased with predator total length. The median and maximum ingested prey total length varied with predator taxon and length, but generally ranged from 10–20% and 32–46% of predator total length, respectively. Predators tended to consume larger fusiform prey than laterally compressed prey. With the exception of large muskellunge, predators most commonly consumed prey between 16 and 73 mm. A sensitivity analysis indicated estimates can be very accurate at sample sizes greater than 1,000 diet items and fairly accurate at sample sizes greater than 100. However, sample sizes less than 50 should be evaluated with caution. Furthermore, median log10 predator-prey body mass ratios ranged from 1.9–2.5, nearly 50% lower than values previously reported for freshwater fishes. Managers, researchers, and modelers could use our findings as a tool for numerous predator-prey evaluations from stocking size optimization to individual-based bioenergetics analyses identifying prey size structure. To this end, we have developed a web-based user interface to maximize the utility of our models that can be found at www.LakeEcologyLab.org/pred_prey.
Thomas J Near - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
phylogeny and time scale of diversification in the fossil rich sunfishes and black basses teleostei percomorpha centrarchidae
Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 2021Co-Authors: Thomas J Near, Daemin KimAbstract:Abstract Species of the North American freshwater fish lineage Centrarchidae are apex predators in their habitats and are among the world’s most popular sport fishes. Centrarchids boast a rich fossil record that extends from the latest Eocene to the Pleistocene. To investigate the phylogeny and timing of diversification of Centrarchidae, we deploy a dataset of DNA sequences of 16 nuclear genes sampled from nearly all of the recognized and undescribed species. We also utilize previously published morphological datasets to assess the phylogenetic placement of one of the oldest known centrarchid fossils, †Plioplarchus whitei. A Bayesian multispecies coalescent species tree analysis provides insight on relationships that evaded resolution in earlier studies, such as the relationships of Acantharchus pomotis, the resolution of a clade consisting of species previously synonymized under the Spotted Bass, Micropterus punctulatus, and a clade of recently described species previously considered populations of the Redeye Bass, Micropterus coosae. This new molecular phylogeny and the inclusion of †P. whitei and other centrarchid fossils in the tip-dated fossilized birth–death analysis results in a new hypothesis of the timing of diversification in Centrarchidae that contextualizes the ages of centrarchid fossils to the timing of speciation among the extant species. In addition to providing new temporal perspectives on the diversification of freshwater fishes in North America, this study may close of the chapter of centrarchid phylogeny inferred using Sanger-sequenced genes, as the use of genomic-scale datasets becomes mainstream in the phylogenetics of fishes.
-
investigating phylogenetic relationships of sunfishes and black basses actinopterygii centrarchidae using dna sequences from mitochondrial and nuclear genes
Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 2004Co-Authors: Thomas J Near, Daniel I. Bolnick, Peter C WainwrightAbstract:Abstract The 32 species of the Centrarchidae are ecologically important components of the diverse fish communities that characterize North American freshwater ecosystems. In spite of a rich history of systematic investigations of centrarchid fishes there is extensive conflict among previous hypotheses that may be due to restricted taxon or character sampling. We present the first phylogenetic analysis of the Centrarchidae that combines DNA sequence data from both the mitochondrial and nuclear genomes and includes all described species. Gene sequence data were collected from a complete mtDNA protein coding gene (NADH subunit 2), a nuclear DNA intron (S7 ribosomal protein intron 1), and a portion of a nuclear DNA protein-coding region (Tmo-4C4). Phylogenetic trees generated from analysis of the three-gene dataset were used to test alternative hypotheses of centrarchid relationships that were gathered from the literature. Four major centrarchid lineages are present in trees generated in maximum parsimony (MP) and Bayesian maximum likelihood analyses (BML). These lineages are Acantharchus pomotis, Micropterus, Lepomis, and a clade containing Ambloplites, Archoplites, Centrarchus, Enneacanthus, and Pomoxis. Phylogenetic trees resulting from MP and BML analyses are highly consistent but differ with regard to the placement of A. pomotis. Significant phylogenetic incongruence between mtDNA and nuclear genes appears to result from different placement of Micropterus treculi, and is not characteristic of relationships in all other parts of the centrarchid phylogeny. Slightly more than half of the 27 previously proposed hypotheses of centrarchid relationships were rejected based on the Shomodaira–Hasegawa test.
-
speciation in north american black basses Micropterus actinopterygii centrarchidae
Evolution, 2003Co-Authors: Thomas J Near, Todd W Kassler, Jeffrey B Koppelman, Casey B Dillman, David P. PhilippAbstract:Abstract The Pleistocene Epoch has been frequently cited as a period of intense speciation for a significant portion of temperate continental biotas. To critically assess the role of Pleistocene glaciations on the evolution of the freshwater fish clade Micropterus, we use a phylogenetic analysis of complete gene sequences from two mitochondrial genes (cytochrome b and ND2), and a fossil calibration of the molecular clock to estimate ages of speciation events and rates of diversification. The absence of substantial morphological and ecological divergence together with endemism of five of the eight species in North American tributaries of the Gulf of Mexico may be interpreted as the result of a recent Pleistocene origin for these species. Speciation dates in Micropterus range from 1.01 ± 0.32 to 11.17 ± 1.02 million years ago. Only one speciation event is dated to the Pleistocene, and rates of diversification are not significantly variable in Micropterus. The premise that the Pleistocene was an exceptional ...
Craig P. Paukert - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Ecologically important thermal criteria for smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), and Ozark hellbender (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis bishopi) in the Ozark National Scenic Riverways.
2014Co-Authors: Jacob T. Westhoff, Craig P. PaukertAbstract:Ecologically important thermal criteria for smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), and Ozark hellbender (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis bishopi) in the Ozark National Scenic Riverways.
-
Predicted number of optimal growth days for smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu (Panel A), largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides (Panel B), and Ozark hellbenders Cryptobranchus alleganiensis bishopi (Panel C) in the Ozark National Scenic Riverways d
2014Co-Authors: Jacob T. Westhoff, Craig P. PaukertAbstract:Predicted number of optimal growth days for smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu (Panel A), largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides (Panel B), and Ozark hellbenders Cryptobranchus alleganiensis bishopi (Panel C) in the Ozark National Scenic Riverways displayed by spatial influence factor values for two climate scenarios (EH5 and GENMOM) during 1995 and 2080.
