Journal of Fisheries Research

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.
Reach Us +44 151 808 1136

Perspective - Journal of Fisheries Research (2023) Volume 7, Issue 3

Zoogeography, scientific categorization, and preservation of West Virginia's Ohio Waterway floodplain crawfishes

Nomellini Smit*

Department of Microbiology and Immunology, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada

*Corresponding Author:
Nomellini Smit
Department of Microbiology and Immunology
The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada

Received: 14-May-2023, Manuscript No. aajfr-23-104747; Editor assigned: 17-May-2023, PreQC No. aajfr-23-104747(PQ); Reviewed: 05-June-2023, QC No.aajfr-23-104747; Revised: 09-June-2023, Manuscript No. aajfr-23-104747(R); Published: 19-June-2023, DOI:10.35841/aajfr-7.3.154

Citation: Nomellini Smit. Zoogeography, scientific categorization, and preservation of West Virginia's Ohio waterway floodplain crawfishes. J Fish Res. 2023;7(3):154

Visit for more related articles at Journal of Fisheries Research


The crawfish fauna of West Virginia comprises of 23 species and a few undescribed taxa. Most overview endeavors archiving this fauna have been directed in lotic streams all through the Appalachian level, Allegheny Mountains, and Edge and Valley physiographic territories. Bottomland backwoods bogs, and swamps related with enormous waterway floodplain, for example, the Ohio Stream floodplain generally have been under-studied in the state. These environments harbour the most extravagant essential tunnelling crawfish fauna in West Virginia, and genuinely deserve study endeavors. With an end goal to make up for this shortcoming, the crawfish fauna of West Virginia's Ohio Stream floodplain was studied from 2004 through 2009. From this overview, nine species from four genera were recorded occupying the floodplain. Zoogeography, science, and preservation status is accommodated each of the nine crawfishes. The prevailing class along the floodplain is Cambarus, which incorporates Cambarus (Cambarus) carinirostris, Cambarus (Cambarus) bartonii cavatus, Cambarus (Procambarus) robustus and Cambarus (Tubericambarus) thomai. Cambarus (Tubericambarus) thomai is the most predominant tunneling species happening along the floodplain. The sort Orconectes comprises of two local species, Orconectes (Cambarus) obscurus and Orconectes (Cambarus) sanbornii; and two intrusive taxa, Orconectes (Gremicambarus) virilis and Orconectes (Procambarus) rusticus. Orconectes (Cambarus) obscurus has encountered a reach expansion toward the south and involves streams previously involved by Orconectes (Cambarus) sanbornii. Both intrusive taxa were aligned with anthropogenic environments and unsettling influence angles. The genera Fallicambarus and Procambarus are addressed by solitary animal categories. Both Fallicambarus (Cambarus) fodiens and Procambarus (Orconectes) acutus are restricted to the noteworthy preglacial Marietta Waterway Valley [1].

Dynamic hydroperiod seasons normally last from January through early June. During this period a huge number of spineless creatures and vertebrates, including crawfish, use these wetlands for different parts of their life history. A time of drawdown starts during the late-spring months and by late June-July a large part of the floodplains fleeting wetlands experience total vanishing. Intermittent summer storms at times reflood these wetlands; however most of pools stay torpid until the accompanying fall or winter (ZJ Loughman individual perception) [2].

The essential assortment strategy utilized for stream species were seines. Seines were arrangement at the terminal finishes of riffles, runs, and floats in first through 6th request streams. By upsetting the stream's substrate, crawfish were ousted from their cover and streamed downstream into the situated seine. At each stream site at least five seine pull endeavors (a solitary seine pull = one seining exertion) and limit of 10 seine pulls were performed. Exertion was expanded with expanding stream size and environment intricacy [3].

Leaf packs were overviewed in stream pools utilizing longtook care of, solid lure well plunge nets. These were utilized to "scoop" leaf packs onto a minnow seine that was fanned out on the stream bank. Crawfish were then picked from the gathered leaf pack on shore. After they were eliminated from the leaf pack it was returned upstream of its unique area so the items could again be utilized by the stream's benthos. All crawfish life stages used leaf packs, making this strategy critical for deciding regenerative achievement and enrollment [4].

The focal shaft and focal office of other floodplain tunneling species Fallicambarus fodiens, were the width of the crawfish's carapace at the most extensive point. Cambarus bartonii cavatus tunnels didn't follow this equivalent example and, typically, were wide and oval. Episodically, Cambarus bartonii cavatus tunnels were promptly recognized by the presence of these primary parts; however this technique for ID was not used to conclusively check Cambarus bartonii cavatus presence at a site [5].

Examples from Jackson Province, Center Ohio South bowl, address area records. It is missing from the Upper Ohio South bowl and happens again in the Upper Ohio North bowl. Inside the Upper Ohio North, Cambarus thomai was gathered, yet not a masse. Cambarus thomai populaces enter the Upper Ohio North bowl from the Tuscarawas Stream in Eastern Ohio. Different soil types are found in the Upper Ohio North and South bowls, which could make sense of the species' dissemination. Another chance controlling Cambarus thomai appropriation is the expanded rural land use rehearses and declining riparian environment that has strongly expanded in the Upper Ohio South and North bowls [6].


  1. Clerc A, Manceau C, Nesme X. Comparison of randomly amplified polymorphic DNA with amplified fragment length polymorphism to assess genetic diversity and genetic relatedness within genospecies III of Pseudomonas syringae. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1998;64:1180-1187.
  2. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  3. Cuppels DA. Generation and characterization of Tn5 insertion mutations in Pseudomona syringae pv. tomato. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1986;51:323-327.
  4. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  5. Cuppels DA, Ainsworth T. Molecular and physiological characterization of Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato and Pseudomonas syringae pv. maculicola strains that produce the phytotoxin coronatine. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1995;61:3530-3536.
  6. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  7. Kearney B, Staskawicz BJ. Characterization of IS476 and its role in bacterial spot disease of tomato and pepper. J Bacteriol. 1990;172:143-148.
  8. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  9. Kimura M, Ohta T. Stepwise mutation model and distribution of allelic frequencies in a finite population. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1978;75(6):2868-2872.
  10. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  11. Yan S. Role of recombination in the evolution of the model plant pathogen Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato DC3000, a very atypical tomato strain. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2008;74:3171–3181.
  12. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Get the App