Faxonius deanae

(Reimer and Jester, 1975)

Conchas Crayfish

G4Apparently Secure Found in 1 roadless area NatureServe Explorer →
G4Apparently SecureGlobal Rank
Least concernIUCN
UnknownThreat Impact
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.117716
Element CodeICMAL11110
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryInvertebrate Animal
IUCNLeast concern
Endemicendemic to a single nation
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumArthropoda
ClassMalacostraca
OrderDecapoda
FamilyCambaridae
GenusFaxonius
Synonyms
Orconectes deanaeReimer and Jester, 1975
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
Review Date2009-07-01
Change Date2008-09-08
Edition Date2009-07-01
Edition AuthorsCordeiro, J. (2009); Fitzpatrick, J.F., Jr.; Morrison, M. (1999)
Threat ImpactUnknown
Range Extent1000-20,000 square km (about 400-8000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences21 - 300
Rank Reasons
Known from portions of three states with several new occurrences in multiple counties in Oklahoma (expanded known range significantly) but has competition from introduced crayfish. There is a lack of information concerning the presence of the species between the East and Western proportion of its range. It is likely to be contiguous across this area, but this requires further investigation. There is a plausible threat of competition from O. rusticus which was introduced to Conchas Lake in the early 1980s. Currently, it is not known whether this species has extended its distribution beyond the lake, but data from other parts of the O. rusticus range suggests that this is likely. Further research on the impact and spread of O. rusticus and O. denae distribution is recommended in order to make a robust classification.
Range Extent Comments
Initially it was known only from vicinity of type-locality (Conchas Lake and River) in San Miguel and Quay County, New Mexico (Bouchard, 1977). Recently it was discovered in Woodward, Canadian, Major, Muskogee, Okfuskee Counties (Taylor et al., 2004), Oklahoma, expanding range beyond the Canadian River drainage in New Mexico 840 km east into the North Canadian River drainage (almost across the whole length of Oklahoma) plus one Arkansas River drainage record. A record also exists for a single lake in the eastern Texas panhandle (Johnson and Johnson, 2008).
Occurrences Comments
It was previously known only from vicinity of type-locality (Conchas Lake and also Conchas Canal and Conchas River) and San Miguel and Quay Counties in New Mexico (Bouchard, 1977) but recent discoveries have been made in Oklahoma including Canadian (North Canadian River), Major (North Canadian River), Muskogee (Arkansas River), Okfuskee (Alabama Creek), and Woodward (North Canadian River, Fort Supply Lake) Counties in Oklahoma (Taylor et al., 2004). In Texas, it is found only in Lake Marvin located in the Texas panhandle; and previously from localities farther up the Canadian basin in New Mexico and farther down that basin in Oklahoma (Johnson and Johnson, 2008). It is now know to occur widely in the North Canadian River main stem and associated reservoirs. Several records of O. deanae in the North Canadian River and one record in the Arkansas River in LeFlore County were found among Jimmie Pigg material (Bergey et al., 2005).
Threat Impact Comments
Orconectes rusticus was introduced to the Conchas Lake reservoir around 25 years ago (Taylor et al., 2004), which drains into the Canadian river where this species is found. However, at this time, nobody has surveyed to see whether O. rusticus has extended beyond the reservoir (C. Taylor, pers. comm., 2009).
Ecology & Habitat

Habitat

Generally found under rocks in lentic habitats (Hogger, 1988), as type locality is Conchas Lake, an approximately 4050 ha reservoir built in 1939 in New Mexico but it also occurs in lotic habitats. It occurs under rocks on substrates of gravel, sand, and bedrock in shallow shoreline areas of the lake. In Oklahoma, it occurs in woody debris piles in sandy bottomed runs of creeks and rivers and, in small reservoirs (Taylor et al., 2004). (Burrows into substrate during dry periods.) In Texas, it occurs in a small lake under solid cover that provides a small confinement from predators (Johnson and Johnson, 2008).
Other Nations (1)
United StatesN4
ProvinceRankNative
New MexicoS1Yes
TexasSNRYes
OklahomaS3Yes
Roadless Areas (1)
New Mexico (1)
AreaForestAcres
Candian RiverCibola National Forest7,149
References (9)
  1. Bergey, E.A., S.N. Jones, and D.B. Fenolio. 2005. Surveys and studies of Oklahoma crayfish and the grotto salamander. Final Report to the Oklahoma Biological Survey, University of Oklahoma, Tulsa, Oklahoma, August 2005. 26 pp.
  2. Bouchard, R.W. 1977b. Distribution, systematic status and ecological notes on five poorly known species of crayfishes in western North America (Decapoda: Astacidae and Cambaridae). Freshwater Crayfish 3: 409-424.
  3. 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.
  4. Hobbs, H. H., Jr. 1989. An Illustrated Checklist of the American Crayfishes (Decapoda: Astacidae, Cambaridae, and Parastacidae). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 480:1-236.
  5. Johnson, S.K. and N.K. Johnson. 2008. Texas Crawdads. Crawdad Club Designs: College Station, Texas. 160 pp.
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. Taylor, C.A., S.N. Jones, and E.A. Bergey. 2004. Crayfishes of Oklahoma revisited: new state records and checklist of species. Southwestern Naturalist, 49(2): 250-255.
  9. Taylor, Chris. Center for Biodiversity, Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign, IL