Faxonius immunis

(Hagen, 1870)

Calico Crayfish

G5Secure Found in 3 roadless areas NatureServe Explorer →
G5SecureGlobal Rank
Least concernIUCN
LowThreat Impact
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.120402
Element CodeICMAL11450
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryInvertebrate Animal
IUCNLeast concern
Endemicoccurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumArthropoda
ClassMalacostraca
OrderDecapoda
FamilyCambaridae
GenusFaxonius
Synonyms
Orconectes immunis(Hagen, 1870)
Other Common Names
Écrevisse-calicot (FR) Papershell Crayfish (EN)
Concept Reference
Hobbs, H. H., Jr. 1989. An Illustrated Checklist of the American Crayfishes (Decapoda: Astacidae, Cambaridae, and Parastacidae). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 480:1-236.
Taxonomic Comments
Based on Crandall and De Grave (2017), the representatives of Orconectes form at least two distinct groups. The nominal group (the "cave Orconectes") form a monophyletic group that is more closely related to members of Cambarus, while the remaining "Orconectes" are more closely related to Barbicambarus, Creaserinus, and other species of Cambarus (Crandall and Fitzpatrick 1996, Fetzner 1996). As the type species of Orconectes, Orconectes inermis Cope, 1872, belongs to the cave-dwelling group, the genus is herein restricted to just those taxa. The surface-dwelling taxa now excluded from Orconectes sensu stricto are herein placed in the resurrected genus Faxonius Ortmann, 1905a, the oldest available name previously considered to be a synonym of Orconectes Cope, 1872.
Conservation Status
Rank MethodExpertise without calculation
Review Date2015-05-26
Change Date1996-02-19
Edition Date2009-07-01
Edition AuthorsCordeiro, J.
Threat ImpactLow
Range Extent>2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences> 300
Rank Reasons
This is a wide-ranging species that occurs from southern Quebec and New England westward across the upper Midwest to Wyoming and eastern Colorado and south to extreme northwestern Tennessee (Hobbs, 1989). It is widespread and faces no threats.
Range Extent Comments
This is a wide-ranging species that occurs from southern Quebec and New England westward across the upper Midwest to Wyoming and eastern Colorado and the Dakotas and south to extreme northwestern Tennessee (Hobbs, 1989; Pflieger, 1996).
Occurrences Comments
Although Hobbs (1989) listed Alabama, no recent specimens have been found there. In Kentucky, it occurs commonly across the western half in the lower Ohio, Green, Cumberland, and Tennessee River drainages and in several Mississippi River tributaries but is most common in the lower Green River drainage (Taylor and Schuster, 2004). In Missouri, it occurs exclusively in teh Prairie Faunal Region and on the flood plains of the Missouri and upper Mississippi Rivers (Pflieger, 1996). In Kansas, it occurs in northeastern Kansas in the eastern Kansas and Marais des Cygnes River basins (Ghedotti, 1998). Populations have recently been found in Colorado in the Colorado River (Rogers, 2005). In New England, where scattered (occasionally large) populations are known from every major drainage system except the eastern coastal drainage systems, occurrences are likely the result of early introductions (Smith, 2000). Occurrences in the Lower Monongahela drainage in Pennsylvania were reported to USGS as introductions. In Ohio, it occurs widely, but spottily in the Lake Erie basin in the northern and northwetern part of the state (Thoma and Jezerinac, 2000). It occurs statewide in Indiana with the greatest abundance in southwest Indiana (Simon et al., 2005). It also occurs in the northern portion Lake of the Woods, Ontario, Canada (Jansen et al., 2009) where it is considered invasive.
Threat Impact Comments
Is is unlikely that Orconectes immunis is being impacted by any major threats.
Ecology & Habitat

Description

Rostrum acuminate, acarinate and with cong=vergin margins lacking marginal spines or shoulders; cervical spines present; areola narrow with 2-3 punctations in narrowest part; male with hooks on ischia of 3rd pereiopods; male first pleopod terminating in 2 subparallel elements <25% length of pleopod, curved throughout length but distal 1/3 more pronounced so that apices of both elements directed at about 90 degrees to main axis of pleopod (Page, 1985). [LENGTH: to 50 TCL; to 95 TL] [WIDTH: to 25]

Diagnostic Characteristics

Male with hooks on 3rd pereiopods only; male first pleopod as described above; areola narrow.

Habitat

The species is always in, at best, sluggish flow; burrows during drying periods (i.e., tertiary burrower). In Missouri, it occurs in shallow ditches and sloughs on the broad, flat flood plains of large to medium-sized rivers and in the isolated pools of intermittent headwater streams draining level upland prairies. Wide seasonal fluctuations in water area and depth (with many areas becoming entirely dry during late summer), deep mud bottoms and absence of strong flow or current are common characteristics of these habitats. However, large populations also occurred in habitats where high turbidity provided the only cover (Pflieger, 1996). It can sometimes be found in caves such as Blue Spring and Pless Caves in Indiana (Hobbs, 1976).

Reproduction

Data suggest amplexus anytime, brooding year-round but with late winter/early sping being principal brooding.
Palustrine Habitats
TEMPORARY POOL
Other Nations (2)
United StatesN5
ProvinceRankNative
MinnesotaSNRYes
MontanaSNRYes
ConnecticutSNANo
KentuckySUYes
WisconsinS4Yes
WyomingSNRYes
Rhode IslandSNANo
MassachusettsSNANo
OhioS4Yes
MichiganS4Yes
New HampshireSNANo
NebraskaSNRYes
TennesseeS5Yes
IowaSNRYes
MaineSNANo
MissouriSNRYes
VermontSNANo
IllinoisS5Yes
PennsylvaniaS1Yes
South DakotaSNRYes
ColoradoSNAYes
IndianaS5Yes
New YorkSNRYes
North DakotaS3Yes
KansasS4Yes
CanadaN4
ProvinceRankNative
OntarioS4Yes
QuebecS4Yes
ManitobaS3Yes
Roadless Areas (3)
Minnesota (2)
AreaForestAcres
Baker - Homer - Brule LakesSuperior National Forest6,712
Tait LakeSuperior National Forest6,327
Vermont (1)
AreaForestAcres
Wilder Mountain 09082Green Mountain and Finger Lakes National Forests8,759
References (23)
  1. Benson, A.J., C.C. Jacono, P.L. Fuller, E.R. McKercher, and M.M. Richerson. 2004. Summary Report of Nonindigenous Aquatic Species in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 5. Report prepared for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arlington, Virginia, 29 February 2004. 142 pp.
  2. Burskey, J.L. and T.P. Simon. 2010. Reach- and watershed-scale associations of crayfish within an area of varying agricultural impact on west-central Indiana. Southeastern Naturalist 9 (special issue 3):199-216.
  3. Chucholl, C. 2009. The 'newcomer' <i>Orconectes immunis</i> keeps spreading in the Upper Rhine Plain. Crayfish News 31(3):4-5.
  4. Crandall, K. A., and S. De Grave. 2017. An updated classification of the freshwater crayfishes (Decapoda: Astacidea) of the world, with a complete species list. Journal of Crustacean Biology 37(5):615-653.
  5. Crocker, D.W. and D.W. Barr. 1968. Handbook of the Crayfishes of Ontario. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, Canada. 158 pp.
  6. Dube, J. et J.-F. Desroches. 2007. Les ecrevisses du Quebec. Ministere des Ressources naturelles et de la Faune, Direction de l'amenagement de la faune de l'Estrie, de Montreal et de la Monteregie, Longueuil. v + 51 pp.
  7. Dussling, U. and C. Huffmann. 1998. First discovery of a populationi of <i>Orconectes immunis</i> in Germany. Crayfish News, 20(4): 5.
  8. Ghedotti, M.J. 1998. An annotated list of the crayfishes of Kansas with first records of <i>Orconectes macrus</i> and <i>Procambarus acutus</i> in Kansas. Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science 101(1-2):54-57.
  9. Hasiotis, S.T. 1993. Evaluation of the burrowing behaviour of stream and pond dwelling species of <i>Orconectes </i>in the Front Range of Boulder, Colorado USA: their ethological and geological implications. Freshwater Crayfish, 9: 399-406.
  10. Hobbs, H.H., III. 1976b. Observations on the cave-dwelling crayfishes of Indiana. Freshwater Crayfish 2:405-414.
  11. Hobbs, H. H., Jr. 1989. An Illustrated Checklist of the American Crayfishes (Decapoda: Astacidae, Cambaridae, and Parastacidae). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 480:1-236.
  12. Jansen, W., N. Geard, T. Mosindy, G. Olson, and M. Turner. 2009. Relative abundance and habitat association of three crayfish (<i>Orconectes virilis</i>, <i>O. rusticus</i>, and <i>O. immunis</i>) near an invasion front of O. rusticus, and long-term changes in their distribution in Lake of the Woods, Canada. Aquatic Invasions 4(4):627-649.
  13. McLaughlin, P. A., D. K. Camp, M. V. Angel, E. L. Bousfield, P. Brunel, R. C. Brusca, D. Cadien, A. C. Cohen, K. Conlan, L. G. Eldredge, D. L. Felder, J. W. Goy, T. Haney, B. Hann, R. W. Heard, E. A. Hendrycks, H. H. Hobbs III, J. R. Holsinger, B. Kensley, D. R. Laubitz, S. E. LeCroy, R. Lemaitre, R. F. Maddocks, J. W. Martin, P. Mikkelsen, E. Nelson, W. A. Newman, R. M. Overstreet, W. J. Poly, W. W. Price, J. W. Reid, A. Robertson, D. C. Rogers, A. Ross, M. Schotte, F. Schram, C. Shih, L. Watling, G. D. F. Wilson, and D. D. Turgeon. 2005. Common and Scientific Names of Aquatic Invertebrates from the United States and Canada: Crustaceans. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 31. 545 pp.
  14. Page, L. M. 1985. The crayfishes and shrimps (Decapoda) of Illinois. Illinois Natural History Survey Bulletin 33(4): 335-448.
  15. Pflieger, W.L. [B. Dryden, editor]. 1996. The Crayfishes of Missouri. Missouri Department of Conservation, Jefferson City, Missouri. 152 pp.
  16. Rogers, D.C. 2005. Identification manual to the freshwater Crustacea of the western United States and adjacent areas encountered during bioassessment. EcoAnalysts, Inc., Technical Publication #1, Moscow, Idaho. 81 pp.
  17. Simon, T.P., M. Weisheit, E. Seabrook, L. Freeman, S. Johnson, L. Englum, K.W. Jorck, M. Abernathy, and T.P. Simon, IV. 2005. Notes on Indiana crayfish (Decapoda: Cambaridae) with comments on distribution, taxonomy, life history, and habitat. Proceedings of the Indiana Academy of Science 114(1):55-61.
  18. Smith, D.G. 2000a. Keys to the Freshwater Macroinvertebrates of Southern New England. Douglas G. Smith: Sunderland, Massachusetts. 243 pp.
  19. Sovell, J.R. and R. Guralnick. 2005. Montane mollusc and crustacean survey of western Colorado. Final report to the Colorado Division of Wildlife, Colorado. 65 pp.
  20. Taylor, C.A. and G.A. Schuster. 2004. The Crayfishes of Kentucky. Illinois Natural History Survey Special Publication, 28: viii + 210 pp.
  21. Taylor, C. A., G. A. Schuster, J. E. Cooper, R. J. DiStefano, A. G. Eversole, P. Hamr, H. H. Hobbs III, H. W. Robison, C. E. Skelton, and R. F. Thoma. 2007. A reassessment of the conservation status of crayfishes of the United States and Canada after 10+ years of increased awareness. Fisheries 32(8):371-389.
  22. Thoma, R.F. and R.E. Jezerinac. 2000. Ohio crayfish and shrimp atlas. Ohio Biological Survey Miscellaneous Contribution 7:1-28.
  23. Unger, P. A. 1978. The Crayfishes (Crustacea: Cambaridae) of Colorado. Natural History Inventory of Colorado 3: 1-19.