Gila robusta

Baird and Girard, 1853

Roundtail Chub

G3Vulnerable Found in 12 roadless areas NatureServe Explorer →
G3VulnerableGlobal Rank
VulnerableIUCN
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.638464
Element CodeAFCJB13152
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVertebrate Animal
IUCNVulnerable
Endemicendemic to a single nation
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumCraniata
ClassActinopterygii
OrderCypriniformes
FamilyLeuciscidae
GenusGila
Synonyms
Gila robusta robustaBaird and Girard, 1853
Concept Reference
Lee, D. S., C. R. Gilbert, C. H. Hocutt, R. E. Jenkins, D. E. McAllister, and J. R. Stauffer, Jr. 1980. Atlas of North American freshwater fishes. North Carolina State Museum of Natural History, Raleigh, North Carolina. i-x + 854 pp.
Taxonomic Comments
In this database, we follow Page et al. (2013) in recognizing Gila robusta, G. nigra, G robusta, and G. jordani as distinct species. Page et al. (2013) followed Gerber et al. (2001) and Minckley and Marsh (2009) in recognizing Gila robusta jordani as a full species. This elevation is supported by more recent genetic analyses (e.g., Chafin et al. 2021).

Three species in the Gila robusta complex, robusta, nigra, and intermedia, have a controversial taxonomic history. Some studies found that these are morphologically similar and genetically indistinguishable at the species level (Carter et al. 2018, Copus et al. 2018, Page et al. 2016, 2017). Other studies found them to be distinct (Minckley and Marsh 2009, Dowling et al. 2015, Marsh et al. 2017, Chafin et al. 2021). Analyses by Suchocki et al. (2023) support recognition of Gila robusta as a single, polytypic species with isolated geographic populations. They found that within a watershed the three species are more similar to one another than they are to the same species in other watersheds.
Conservation Status
Rank MethodExpertise without calculation
Review Date2012-02-10
Change Date2012-02-10
Edition Date2012-02-10
Edition AuthorsVives, S. P., G. Hammerson, and M. K. Clausen (2012)
Range Extent20,000-2,500,000 square km (about 8000-1,000,000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences6 - 20
Rank Reasons
Wide range in the Colorado River system from Wyoming to Arizona; eliminated from a large portion of the historical range; has declined significantly in abundance in many areas, due to human-caused habitat alteration (especially impoundments) and exotic species.
Range Extent Comments
Historical range included the Colorado River and its tributaries from southwestern Wyoming, Utah, and Colorado southward to the Little Colorado River confluence in Arizona, south of which the species occurred only in primary tributaries of the Colorado River (Carman 2006). Southward range extent included much of the Bill Williams and Gila drainages, Arizona; occasionally this species may have occupied the Colorado River delta in northern Sonora and Baja California (Minckley and Marsh 2009).

Certain populations in the northern and eastern Gila River basin of Arizona and New Mexico (formerly included in G. robusta) are now recognized as a distinct species (Gila nigra) (Minckley and DeMarais 2000). See Minckley and DeMarais (2000) for a map showing the detailed distributions of G. robusta, G. intermedia, and G. nigra in the Gila River basin in Arizona, New Mexico, and Sonora. Miller (2005) assigned forms inhabiting northwestern Mexico (Rio Yaqui basin) to coastal streams in Sinaloa to Gila minacae. A population in Nevada is now recognized as a distinct species (Gila jordani) (Chafin et al. 2021).
Occurrences Comments
This species is represented by a fairly large number of occurrences (subpopulations). Stratification of recent collection locations using existing migration barriers and suitable habitat yielded 15 preliminary populations of roundtail chubs in the Colorado River basin (Bezzerides and Bestgen 2002). Some of these occupy very large areas.
Threat Impact Comments
Threats include interactions of watershed changes, such as reductions in suitable habitat due to impoundment, flow regulation, channel downcutting, substrate sedimentation (e.g., from excessive livestock grazing, timber harvest, road construction, removal of riparian vegetation), water diversion, and groundwater pumping, with the invasion of non-native predatory and competitive fish species (Hubbs 1954, Miller 1961, Minckley and Deacon 1968, Meffe 1985). The Oriental snail also has been named as a detrimental introduced species. Watershed changes and the introduction of non-native fishes often have occurred concurrently, making it difficult to determine the primary cause of the decline. Historical fish eradication programs conducted in association with dam construction likely played a role in the decline in some areas. Water quality degradation (contaminants, nutrients, pathogens) possibly may also contribute to declines or poor habitat conditions (New Mexico Department of Game and Fish 1996, Carman 2006).

Vanicek and Kramer (1969) reported that reductions in river temperature attributable to Flaming Gorge Dam had negatively impacted the spawning success of Gila species. On the other hand, habitat changes that raise water temperatures could result in mortality. Deacon and Minckley (1974) reported heat deaths at 30.5 C in pools of the Salt River, Arizona.

Minckley (1973) correlated a proliferation of smallmouth bass with a suppression of reproductive success by chubs in tributaries of the Salt and Black Rivers, Arizona. Bestgen and Propst (1989) blamed an introduced predatory fauna, including channel catfish, flathead catfish, smallmouth bass, and possibly rainbow and brown trouts, for reductions in populations in the Gila River, New Mexico. In Turkey Creek, New Mexico, the species remains common above a barrier that prevents upstream migration of introduced predatory fishes but have steadily declined below the barrier where smallmouth bass are common (Bestgen and Propst 1989). Bestgen and Propst (1989) also blamed drought and introduced predators for extirpations from the San Francisco River, New Mexico.

The importance in retaining a natural flow regime in southwestern streams has been emphasized repeatedly (e.g., see Meffe and Minckley 1987 and Minckley and Meffe 1987). Native fishes usually survive flooding, whereas non-native fishes generally do not. In the San Juan and Gila drainages of New Mexico, roundtail chubs persist where non-native predators are absent or where natural flow regimes and periodic flooding might act to suppress populations of introduced predators and maintain habitat variability (Bestgen and Propst 1989). Also, recruitment of roundtail chub to age 1 appears to be dependent on late winter/early spring floods (Brouder 2001).
Ecology & Habitat

Description

The following description, taken from Minckley (1973), Rinne (1976), and Sublette et al. (1990), is of Gila robusta robusta, with ranges of characters for the other subspecies given parenthetically.

Gila robusta is a relatively large (250 to 350 mm standard length [SL]) minnow. The number of dorsal, anal, and pelvic fin rays is usually nine (8-10). The body is completely scaled, and scales are small, thin, and only slightly embedded (scattered populations may not be completely scaled, ranging to the condition in G. seminuda, which sometimes has a naked back, breast, and belly). Basal radii on scales are absent to weakly developed. There are usually 81 (75- 99) or more scales in the lateral line and 43 to 49 total vertebrae. Barbels are absent and pharyngeal teeth are in two rows (2,4-5,2 with some variation). The length of the head divided by the depth of the caudal peduncle is typically 3.3 to 4.3 (3.25-5.0), but rarely greater than 4.0. Both sexes possess breeding tubercles although the distribution of tubercles is less extensive on females. The dorsum is dark, becoming lighter silvery white below (Sublette et al. 1990). Both sexes have an orange-red color on ventrolateral surfaces and on all fins except the dorsal fin (Muth et al. 1985). This coloration becomes more intense in males during the breeding season (Minckley 1973). During the breeding season the genital orifice protrudes to a greater degree in females. Larvae have been described by Snyder (1981).

Diagnostic Characteristics

Gila intermedia, the Gila chub, is a more robust, more darkly colored minnow; it usually has eight dorsal and anal fin rays; the scales are larger, thicker, and broadly imbricate, and basal radii are usually present; scales in the lateral line are usually less than 80, and total vertebrae number 38 to 45.

The Yaqui chub, Gila purpurea, and the Sonora chub, Gila ditaenia, have radii strongly developed on all fields of scales, the mouth is horizontal to oblique, and a basicaudal spot is present, albeit possibly indiscrete or diffuse. Gila elegans, the bonytail chub, and Gila cypha, the humpback chub, are distinctive as adults, each having a prominent predorsal hump; also, a line projected along the venter parallel with the base of the anal fin either intersects near the middle of the upper lobe of the caudal fin as in roundtail chub, falls on or near the dorsal margin of that fin as in the humpback chub, or passes across the caudal peduncle anterior to the caudal fin as in the bonytail chub. Other distinguishing characteristics are given in Douglas et al. (1989). See McElroy et al. (1997) for information on discriminating G. robusta and G. cypha (identification of a significant number of individuals in any sample likely will be problematic). Douglas et al. (2001) provided a geometric morphometric method for differentiating between Gila cypha and G. robusta in the Upper Colorado River basin.

Habitat

Habitat includes rocky runs, rapids, and pools of creeks and small to large rivers; also large reservoirs in the upper Colorado River system; generally this species prefers cobble-rubble, sand-cobble, or sand-gravel substrate. Adults are associated with the largest, most permanent water in streams (Minckley 1981), where a few deep (greater than 1 meter) pools with cover (boulders, woody debris) are intermixed with riffles, runs, and eddies (Bestgen and Propst 1989, Propst 1999, White 2005). Large populations often occur in pools behind irrigation diversions (Barber and Minckley 1966). Roundtail chubs are less prone to using cover than are Gila or headwater chubs, and they typically frequent open areas in the deepest pools and eddies of middle sized to larger streams (Minckley and DeMarais 2000).

Eggs are scattered over clean gravel or cobble substrates (sometimes sand and silt) of pools or moderate velocity runs generally at least 25 cm deep (Neve 1976, Minckley 1981, Sublette et al. 1990).

Ecology

The roundtail chub is associated with a native fish fauna that varies over its extensive range but would typically include speckled dace (Rhinichthyes osculus), one or more Catostomus sp., and one or more Pantosteus sp. Historically it was also associated with woundfin (Plagopterus argentissimus), bonytail chub (Gila elegans), humpback chub (Gila cypha), squawfish (Ptychocheilus lucius), and razorback sucker (Xyrauchen texanus), now extirpated over most of their former range (Minckley 1973).

Reproduction

In the lower Colorado River basin, breeding colors and tubercles in Gila species have been noted from December to June (primarily February to June), mature gonads from December to June (primarily April to June), and spawning activity from March to May (primarily April to May) (Neve 1976, Minckley 1981). In the upper Colorado River basin, Gila species spawn from mid- to late June or early July, when water temperatures reach 18 C (Vanicek and Kramer 1969).

Roundtail chubs mature between 2-5 years of age. A few may live to an age of up to 20 years (Scoppetone 1988), but the largest and oldest individuals are more commonly around 7-10 years of age and about 400 mm TL (Bezzerides and Bestgen 2002).
Other Nations (1)
United StatesNNR
ProvinceRankNative
UtahS2Yes
Navajo NationS1Yes
WyomingS3Yes
ColoradoS2Yes
ArizonaS2Yes
CaliforniaSXYes
New MexicoS2Yes
Roadless Areas (12)
Arizona (12)
AreaForestAcres
Black River CanyonApache-Sitgreaves National Forests11,817
Boulder CanyonCoconino National Forest4,554
Cimarron HillsCoconino National Forest5,303
GaliuroCoronado National Forest28,333
HackberryCoconino National Forest17,885
Hot AirApache-Sitgreaves National Forests31,712
Lower San FranciscoApache-Sitgreaves National Forests59,310
MazatzalTonto National Forest16,942
MuldoonPrescott National Forest5,821
Pine Mountain Wilderness ContiguousPrescott National Forest3,129
Pine Mountain Wilderness ContiguousTonto National Forest6,518
Santa TeresaCoronado National Forest8,929
References (68)
  1. Barber, W. E., and W. L. Minckley. 1966. Fishes of Aravaipa Creek, Graham and Pinal Counties, Arizona. Southwestern Naturalist 11:313-24.
  2. Bestgen, K. R., and D. L. Propst. 1989. Distribution, status, and notes on the ecology of <i>Gila robusta</i> (Cyprinidae) in the Gila River drainage, New Mexico. Southwestern Naturalist 34:402-412.
  3. Bezzerides, N., and K. R. Bestgen. 2002. Status review of roundtail chub <i>Gila robusta</i>, flannelmouth sucker <i>Catostomus latipinnis</i>, and bluehead sucker <i>Catostomus discobolus</i> in the Colorado River Basin. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado.
  4. Brouder, M. J. 2001. Effects of flooding on recruitment of roundtail chub, <i>Gila robusta</i>, in a southwestern river. Southwestern Naturalist 46:302-310.
  5. Carman, S. M. 2006. Colorado River basin chubs roundtail chub <i>Gila robusta</i> Gila chub <i>Gila intermedia</i> headwater chub <i>Gila nigra</i> recovery plan. New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, Santa Fe, New Mexico.
  6. Carter, J. Meka, M. J. Clement, A. S. Makinster, C. D. Crowder, and B. T. Hickerson. 2018. Classification success of species within the <i>Gila robusta</i> complex using morphometric and meristic characters—a reexamination. Copeia 106(2):279-291.
  7. Chafin, T.K., M.R. Douglas, M.R. Bangs, B.T. Martin, S.M. Mussmann, and M.E. Douglas. 2021. Taxonomic uncertainty and the anomaly zone: phylogenomics disentangle a rapid radiation to resolve contentious species (<i>Gila robusta</i> complex) in the Colorado River. Genome Biology and Evolution 13 (9): 1-19.
  8. Copus, J. M., W. L. Montgomery, Z. H. Forsman, B. W. Bowen and R. J. Toonen. 2018. Geopolitical species revisited: genomic and morphological data indicate that the roundtail chub <i>Gila robusta</i> species complex (Teleostei, Cyprinidae) is a single species. PeerJ 6:e5605:1-32.
  9. Courtenay, W. R., Jr., J. R. Deacon, D. W. Sada. R. C. Allan and G. L. Vinyard. 1985. Comparative status of fishes along the course of the pluvial White River, Nevada. Southwestern Naturalist 30(4):503-524.
  10. Deacon, J. E. and W. L. Minckley. 1974. Desert Fishes. Pp. 385-488 in G. W. Brown (ed.). Desert Biology, Vol. II. Academic Press, Inc., New York, NY.
  11. DeMarais, B. D. 1986. Morphological variation in <i>Gila</i> (Pisces: Cyprinidae) and geologic history: lower Colorado River Basin. Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ. M.S. Thesis.
  12. Douglas, M. E., M. R. Douglas, J. M. Lynch, and D. M. McElroy. 2001. Use of morphometrics to differentiate <i>Gila</i> (Cyprinidae) within the upper Colorado River basin. Copeia 2001:389-400.
  13. Douglas, M. E., W. L. Minckley, and H. M. Tyus. 1989. Qualitative characters, identification of Colorado River chubs (Cyprinidae: genus <i>Gila</i>) and the "art of seeing well." Copeia 1989:653-662.
  14. Dowling, T.E., C.D. Anderson, P.C. Marsh, and M.S. Rosenberg. 2015. Population structure in the Roundtail Chub (<i>Gila robusta</i> complex) of the Gila River basin as determined by microsatellites: evolutionary and conservation implications. PloS one, 10(10), p.e0139832.
  15. Fertig, W. Heritage Botanist. Wyoming Natural Diversity Database. Laramie, WY
  16. Gerber, A. S., C. A. Tibbets, and T. E. Dowling. 2001. The role of introgressive hybridization in the evolution of the <i>Gila robusta</i> complex (Teleostei: Cyprinidae). Evolution 55:2028-2039.
  17. Holden, P. B. and C. B. Stahlnaker. 1970. Systematic studies of the cyprinid genus <i>Gila</i> in the upper Colorado River Basin. Copeia. 1970:409-20.
  18. Hubbs, C. L. 1954. Establishment of a forage fish, the red shiner (<i>Notropis lutrensis</i>), in the lower Colorado River system. California Fish and Game 40:287-94.
  19. Lee, D. S., C. R. Gilbert, C. H. Hocutt, R. E. Jenkins, D. E. McAllister, and J. R. Stauffer, Jr. 1980. Atlas of North American freshwater fishes. North Carolina State Museum of Natural History, Raleigh, North Carolina. i-x + 854 pp.
  20. Marsh, P. C. Associate Research Professor. Center for Environmental Studies, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ.
  21. Marsh, P. C., R. W. Clarkson, and T. E. Dowling. 2017. Molecular genetics informs spatial segregation of two desert stream <i>Gila </i>species. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 146:1:47-59.
  22. McElroy, D. M., and M. E. Douglas. 1995. Patterns of morphological variation among endangered populations of <i>Gila robusta</i> and <i>Gila cypha</i> (Teleostei:Cyprinidae) in the upper Colorado River basin. Copeia 1995:636-649.
  23. McElroy, D. M., J. A. Shoemaker, and M. E. Douglas. 1997. Discriminating <i>Gila robusta</i> and <i>Gila cypha</i>: risk assessment and the Endangered Species Act. Ecological Applications 7:958-967.
  24. Meffe, G. K. 1985. Predation and species replacement in American southwestern fishes: a case study. Southwestern Naturalist 30:173-187.
  25. Meffe, G. K., and W. L. Minckley. 1987. Persistence and stability of fish and invertebrate assemblages in a repeatedly disturbed Sonoran desert stream. American Midland Naturalist 117:177-191.
  26. Mikesic, D. Zoologist, Navaho Natural Heritage Program, Navajo Fish and Wildlife Deparment, Window Rock, AZ
  27. Miller, R. R. 1961. Man and the changing fish fauna of the American Southwest. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts and Letters 46:365-404.
  28. Miller, R. R. and C. H. Lowe. 1964. Part 2: An annotated check-list of the fishes of Arizona. Pp. 133-51 in C. H. Lowe (ed.). The vertebrates of Arizona. University of Arizona Press, Tuscon, AZ.
  29. Miller, R. R. (with the collaboration of W. L. Minckley and S. M. Norris). 2005 [actually published in 2006]. Freshwater fishes of Mexico. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois. 490 pp.
  30. Miller, W. H., H. M. Tyus, and C. A. Carlson. 1982. Fishes of the upper Colorado system: present and future. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland. 131 pp.
  31. Minckley, W. L. 1973. Fishes of Arizona. Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, Arizona. 293 pp.
  32. Minckley, W. L. 1981. Ecological studies of Aravaipa Creek, central Arizona, relative to past, present, and future uses. Final Report. U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Safford, Arizona. Contract Number YA-512-CT6-98. 362 pp.
  33. Minckley, W. L. 1985. Native fishes and natural aquatic habitats in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region II west of the Continental Divide. Report to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 158 pp.
  34. Minckley, W. L., and B. D. DeMarais. 2000. Taxonomy of chubs (Teleostei, Cyprinidae, genus <i>Gila</i>) in the American Southwest with comments on conservation. Copeia 2000:251-256.
  35. Minckley, W. L., and G. K. Meffe. 1987. Differential selection by flooding in stream-fish communities of the arid American southwest. Pp. 93-104 in W.J. Matthews and D.C. Heins (eds.). Community and evolutionary ecology of North American stream fishes. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, Oklahoma. 310 pp.
  36. Minckley, W. L., and J. E. Deacon. 1968. Southwestern fishes and the enigma of "endangered species." Science 159:1424-32.
  37. Minckley, W. L., and J. E. Deacon. 1991. Battle Against Extinction: Native Fish Management in the American West. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. xviii + 517 pp.
  38. Minckley, W. L., and P. C. Marsh. 2009. Inland fishes of the greater Southwest: chronicle of a vanishing biota. University of Arizona Press, Tucson, Arizona, 426 pp.
  39. Muth, R. T., C. M. Haynes and C. A. Carlson, 1985. Culture of roundtail chubs, <i>Gila robusta robusta</i> (Cyprindidae), through the larval period. Southwestern Naturalist 30:152-154.
  40. Neve, L. L. 1976. The life history of the roundtail chub, <i>Gila robusta grahami</i>, at Fossil Creek, Arizona. Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ. M.S. Thesis. 46. pp.
  41. New Mexico Department of Game and Fish. 1996. October 1-last update. Fish and Wildlife Information Exchange-VA Tech. Online. Available: http//www.fw.vt.edu/fishex/nm.html. Accessed 1997, April 8.
  42. Page, L. M., and B. M. Burr. 1991. A field guide to freshwater fishes: North America north of Mexico. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, Massachusetts. 432 pp.
  43. Page, L. M., and B. M. Burr. 2011. Peterson field guide to freshwater fishes of North America north of Mexico. Second edition. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston. xix + 663 pp.
  44. Page, L. M., C. C. Baldwin, H. Espinosa-Pérez, L. T. Findley, C. R. Gilbert, K. E. Hartel, R. N. Lea, N. E. Mandrak, J. J. Schmitter-Soto and H. J. Walker Jr. 2017. Taxonomy of <i>Gila </i>in the lower Colorado River basin of Arizona and New Mexico. Fisheries (American Fisheries Society) 42(9):456-460.
  45. Page, L. M. (Chair), C. C. Baldwin, H. Espinosa-Pérez, C. R. Gilbert, K. E. Hartel, R. N. Lea, N. E. Mandrak, J. J. Schmitter-Soto, and H. J. Walker. 2016. Final report of the AFS/ASIH Joint Committee on the Names of Fishes on the taxonomy of <i>Gila</i> in the Lower Colorado River basin of Arizona and New Mexico to the Arizona Game and Fish Department, Wildlife Management Division, Phoenix, Arizona 85086
  46. Page, L. M., H. Espinosa-Pérez, L. T. Findley, C. R. Gilbert, R. N. Lea, N. E. Mandrak, R. L. Mayden, and J. S. Nelson. 2013. Common and scientific names of fishes from the United States, Canada, and Mexico. Seventh edition. American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 34, Bethesda, Maryland.
  47. Page, L. M., K. E. Bemis, T. E. Dowling, H.S. Espinosa-Pérez, L.T. Findley, C. R. Gilbert, K. E. Hartel, R. N. Lea, N. E. Mandrak, M. A. Neigbors, J. J. Schmitter-Soto, and H. J. Walker, Jr. 2023. Common and scientific names of fishes from the United States, Canada, and Mexico. Eighth edition. American Fisheries Society (AFS), Special Publication 37, Bethesda, Maryland, 439 pp.
  48. Propst, D. L. 1999. Threatened and endangered fishes of New Mexico. Technical Report No. 1. New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, Santa Fe, New Mexico.
  49. Rinne, J. N. 1976. Cyprinid fishes of the genus <i>Gila</i> from the lower Colorado River Basin. Wassman Journal of Biology 34:65-107.
  50. Robins, C.R., R.M. Bailey, C.E. Bond, J.R. Brooker, E.A. Lachner, R.N. Lea, and W.B. Scott. 1991. Common and scientific names of fishes from the United States and Canada. American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 20. 183 pp.
  51. Rosenfeld, M. J., and J. A. Wilkinson. 1989. Biochemical genetics of the Colorado River <i>Gila</i> complex (Pisces: Cyprinidae). Southwestern Naturalist 34(2):232-244.
  52. Schwartz, S. Data Manager, Arizona Heritage Data Management System, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, AZ
  53. Scoppetone, G.G. 1988. Growth and longevity of the cui-ui and longevity of other catostomids and cyprinids in western North America. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 117:301-307.
  54. Sigler, W. F., and J. W. Sigler. 1987. Fishes of the Great Basin: a natural history. University of Nevada Press, Reno, Nevada. xvi + 425 pp.
  55. Sigler, W. F., and R. R. Miller. 1963. Fishes of Utah. Utah State Department of Fish and Game, Salt Lake City, Utah, 203 pp.
  56. Smith, G. R., R. R. Miller, and W. D. Sable. 1979. Species relationships among fishes of the genus <i>Gila</i> in the Upper Colorado River drainage. Pages 613-623 In R.M Linn, ed. Proceedings of the First Conference on Scientific Research in the National Parks, 9-12 November 1976, New Orleans, Louisiana. USDI National Park Service Transactions and Proceedings Series No. 5.
  57. Snyder, D. E. 1981. Contributions to a guide to the cypriniform fish larvae of the upper Colorado River system in Colorado. United States Bureau of Land Management, Biological Sciences Series 3, Denver, Colorado. 81 pp.
  58. Sublette, J. E., M. D Hatch, and M. Sublette. 1990. The fishes of New Mexico. University New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 393 pp.
  59. Suchocki, C.R., C. Ka'apu-Lyons, J.M. Copus, C.A.J. Walsh, A.M. Lee, J.M. Carter, E.A. Johnson, P.D. Etter, Z.H. Forsman, B.W. Bowen, and R.J. Toonen. 2023. Geographic destiny trumps taxonomy in the Roundtail Chub, <i>Gila robusta</i> species complex (Teleostei, Leuciscidae). Scientific Reports 13(1): 15810.
  60. Taylor, F. R., L. A. Gillman, and J. W. Pedretti. 1989. Impact of cattle on two isolated fish populations in Pahranagat Valley, Nevada. Great Basin Naturalist 49:491-495.
  61. Texas Natural History Collection. 1996. Sept. 9 last update. Index to North American freshwater fishes (fish images, maps, and information). Online. Available: http://www.utexas.edu/depts/tnhc/na/naindex.html.
  62. Tyus, H. M., and W. L. Minckley. 1988. Migrating Mormon crickets, <i>Anabrus simplex</i> (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae), as food for stream fishes. Great Basin Naturalist 48(1):25-30.
  63. University of Nevada at Reno. 1997. February 25-last update. Biological Resource Research Center. Online. Available: http://loco.biodiv/fish.html. Accessed 1997, April 14.
  64. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1990. Endangered and threatened species recovery program: report to Congress. 406 pp.
  65. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1998. Recovery plan for the aquatic and riparian species of Pahranagat Valley. USFWS, Portland, Oregon. vi + 82 pp.
  66. Vanicek, C. D., and R. H. Kramer. 1969. Life history of the Colorado squawfish, <i>Ptychocheilus lucius</i>, and the Colorado chub, <i>Gila robusta</i>, in the Green River in Dinosaur National Monument, 1964-1966. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society. 98(2):193-208
  67. Voeltz, J. B. 2002. Roundtail chub (<i>Gila robusta</i>) status survey of the Lower Colorado River Basin. AGFD Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program Technical Report #186. Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, Arizona. 221 pp.
  68. White, J. N. 2005. Habitat improvement, augmentation, and monitoring of roundtail chub (<i>Gila robusta</i>) in the Navajo River, Jicarilla Apache Nation, New Mexico. Jicarilla National, Tribal Landowner Incentive Program Grant - 2003: Third Quarter Report 2005. Jicarilla Game and Fish Department, Dulce, New Mexico.