Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.103103
Element CodeAFCJB22010
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVertebrate Animal
IUCNEndangered
Endemicendemic to a single nation
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumCraniata
ClassActinopterygii
OrderCypriniformes
FamilyLeuciscidae
GenusMeda
Concept ReferenceRobins, 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.
Conservation Status
Rank MethodExpertise without calculation
Review Date2012-04-13
Change Date1999-12-23
Edition Date2012-04-13
Edition AuthorsHammerson, G., J. Griffin, and S. S. Vives
Range Extent20,000-200,000 square km (about 8000-80,000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences1 - 20
Rank ReasonsSmall range in streams in Arizona and New Mexico; occupies only 10 percent of historical range; declining; threatened by effects nonnative aquatic species and alteration or diminishment of stream flows.
Range Extent CommentsRange includes the upper Gila River basin, Arizona and New Mexico (Page and Burr 2011). Historically, this species was common throughout much of the Verde, Agua Fria, Salt, San Pedro, San Francisco, and Gila (upstream from Phoenix) river systems (USFWS 2012); to elevations of 1800-1900 meters. Range and abundance are now much reduced. Spikedace are now restricted to portions of the upper Gila River (Grant, Catron, and Hidalgo counties, New Mexico); Aravaipa Creek (Graham and Pinal counties, Arizona); Eagle Creek (Graham and Greenlee
counties, Arizona); and the Verde River (Yavapai County, Arizona) (see USFWS 2012).
The species is now common only in Aravaipa Creek in Arizona and one section of the Gila River south of Cliff, New Mexico. The Verde River is presumed occupied; however, the last captured fish from this river was from a 1999 survey. Spikedace from the Eagle Creek population have not been seen for over a decade, although they are still thought to exist in numbers too low for the sampling efforts to detect. The Middle Fork Gila River population is thought to be very small and has not been seen since 1991, but sampling is localized and inadequate to detect a sparse population. Source: USFWS (2012, which see for original source citations).
In 2007, spikedace were translocated into Hot Springs and Redfield canyons, in Cochise County, Arizona, and these streams were subsequently augmented. Both Hot Springs and Redfield canyons are tributaries to the San Pedro River. Spikedace were also translocated into Fossil Creek, a tributary to the Verde River in Gila County, Arizona, in 2007, and were subsequently augmented in 2008 and 2011. In 2008, spikedace were translocated into Bonita Creek, a tributary to the Gila River in Graham County, Arizona, and were repatriated to the upper San Francisco River in Catron County, New Mexico. Augmentations with additional fish will occur for the next several years at all sites, if adequate numbers of fish are available. Monitoring at each of these sites is ongoing to determine if populations ultimately become self-sustaining. Source: USFWS (2012, which see for original source citations).
Extent of occurrence appears to be roughly 50,000 square kilometers, based on USFWS (2012:10922).
Occurrences CommentsUSFWS (2012) designated critical habitat in 8 units, some of which comprised separate stream segments. These could be interpreted as representing not more than 10 locations (with respect to threats, as defined by IUCN). However, the number of occurrences or locations currently with at least good viability probably does not exceed 5.
Threat Impact CommentsThe two primary threats are competition with and predation by nonnative aquatic species and alteration or diminishment of stream flows. These threats are persistent, and research indicates that the combination of the two is leading to spikedace declines . The ongoing drought and climate conditions aggravate the loss of water in some areas, and future water development projects have been identified. The opportunities for range expansion is limited by dams, reservoirs, dewatering, and nonnative species distribution. Source: USFWS (2012).
Range and abundance have been severely reduced by habitat destruction and alteration (dam construction, stream channelization, water diversion, groundwater pumping, excessive sedimentation, destruction and alteration of riparian vegetation), and probably competition with exotic fishes (red shiner, Cyprinella lutrensis) (Douglas et al. 1994; USFWS, Federal Register, 8 March 1994; USFWS 1999). Introduced predatory fishes (e.g., channel catfish, flathead catfish, green sunfish, smallmouth bass, largemouth bass) also pose a threat (Miller 1961, Minckley and Deacon 1968, FWS 1985).
Watershed changes and the introduction and establishment of non-native fishes occurred concurrently in the Gila River drainage, making it difficult to determine the relative importance of factors involved in the decline. However, the inverse relationship between numbers of red shiner and spikedace, first identified as a potential problem in 1953 (Hubbs 1954), suggests that the red shiner may be a causal factor in the temporal and spatial declines of the spikedace (Minckley 1973, 1985; Propst et al. 1986). In one case, in the San Francisco River, spikedace were rare before red shiner became common and water diversion and low flows have been implicated in spikedace declines (Anderson 1978, Bestgen and Propst 1987). Anderson (1978) noted an inverse relationship between numbers of spikedace and predatory ictalurid species, which he hypothesized were important in the reduction of spikedace. Marsh et al. (1989) provided direct evidence that red shiners displace spikedace both in natural situations and laboratory experiments. Spikedace were displaced to areas of slower current velocities in an artificial stream with red shiners versus when red shiners were absent. In field collections, spikedace were displaced to higher current velocities in the presence of red shiners versus when red shiners were absent. Marsh et al. (1989) attributed this seeming contradiction to differences in available velocities in the laboratory versus field situation.
The importance in retaining a natural flow regime in southwestern streams has been emphasized by Propst et al. (1986), Meffe and Minckley (1987), and Minckley and Meffe (1987). Native fishes usually survive flooding, whereas non-native fishes generally do not. Propst et al. (1986) suggested that natural flooding was also important in maintaining suitable substrate for spikedace, but there is no direct evidence to support this hypothesis. Propst et al. (1986) suggested that erosion and siltation, which result in filling of interstitial spaces of gravel riffles occupied by spikedace, may interfere with successful egg deposition and incubation and thus recruitment.