Skip to main content

Full text of "Publications in zoology = Publications en zoologie"

See other formats


do Zoologie, n° 12 


Exchange publications sent by 


Publication(s) offerte(s) aux fins d'échange par 


Library/Bibliothèque 
National Museums of Canada 
Musées Nationaux du Canada 

Ottawa, Ontario, 
Canada 


K1A OM8 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2011 with funding from 
California Academy of Sciences Library 


http://www.archive.org/details/publicationsinzo 12nati 


A New Nonparasitic Species of Lamprey, 
Genus Lethenteron (Petromyzonidae), 
from Eastern Tributaries of the Gulf of Mexico, U.S.A. 


National Museum of Natural Sciences 
Publications in Zoology, No. 12 


Published by the 
National Museums of Canada 


Staff editor 
Frances Smith 


Crown copyrights reserved 


National Museum of Natural Sciences 
National Museums of Canada 

Ottawa, Canada 

Fourth quarter 1975 


Information Canada 
Catalogue No. NM95-10/12 


P0987654321 
Y798765 


Printed in Canada 
ISSN 0068-8037 


Musée national des Sciences naturelles 
Publications de Zoologie, n° 12 


Publié par les 
Musées nationaux du Canada 


Droits réservés au nom de la Couronne 


Musée national des Sciences naturelles 
Musées nationaux du Canada 

Ottawa, Canada 

Quatrième trimestre 1975 


Information Canada 
N° de catalogue NM95-10/12 


T0987654321 
A798765 


Imprimé au Canada 


A New Nonparasitic Species of Lamprey, 
Genus Lethenteron (Petromyzonidae), 
from Eastern Tributaries of the Gulf of Mexico, U.S.A. 


V. D. Viadykov, 
Edward Kott, 
and S. Pharand-Coad 


Acknowledgements 


The present study was made possible through the generous help 
of many persons and institutions. 

The study specimens were kindly loaned by the following 
persons: Dr. Branley A. Branson and Mr. Bruce H. Bauer, Depart- 
ment of Biological Sciences, Eastern Kentucky University; Drs. 
Warren V. Brigham and Larry M. Page, Section of Faunistic Surveys 
and Insect Identification, Illinois Natural History Survey; Drs. 
Hubert Boschung and Thomas S. Jandebeur, Department of 
Biology, University of Alabama; Dr. Frank J. Bulow, Department 
of Biology, Tennessee Technological University; Dr. George L. 
Harp, Arkansas State University; Dr. John S. Ramsey, Department 
of Fisheries and Allied Aquacultures, Auburn University; and Dr. 
Martin L. Wiley, Natural Resources Institute, University of Maryland. 

Many measurements of specimens were made by Mrs. Jacqueline 
Lanteigne-Courchéne, a student, and photographs were prepared 
by Mr. G. Ben-Tchavtchavadze, both of the Department of Biology, 
University of Ottawa. 

Dr. Carl L. Hubbs, Scripps’ Institution of Oceanography, Dr. Don 
E. McAllister and Mr. C.G. Gruchy, National Museum of Natural 
Sciences, Ottawa, carefully read the manuscript and offered many 
valuable suggestions. This study was supported by Grant No. 
A-1736 from the National Research Council of Canada. 

To all these persons and institutions the authors extend their 
most sincere thanks. 


Summary 


À new nonparasitic lamprey, Lethenteron meridionale, from streams 
of the Tennessee, the Alabama, and the Tombigbee river systems, 
is described and illustrated. The holotype (NMC 74-249) is depos- 
ited in the National Museum of Natural Sciences, Ottawa, Canada. 
The species is distinguishable from Lethenteron lamottenii, its 
nearest relative, by fewer myomeres (50-58), dentition, and pig- 
mentation. By its row of posterial teeth L. meridionale is easily 
separable from Lampetra aepyptera, which occurs in the same 
watersheds. The description is based on an examination of 79 
transformed individuals and two ammocoetes. 


Résumé 


Cet article décrit le Lethenteron meridionale, une espèce nouvelle 
de lamproie non parasite des ruisseaux tributaires des rivières 
Tennessee, Alabama et Tombigbee. L’holotype (NMC 74-249) se 
trouve au Musée national des Sciences naturelles, a Ottawa, 
Canada. Cette nouvelle espèce diffère du Lethenteron lamottenii, 
par sa dentition, sa pigmentation et son nombre inférieur de 
myomères (de 50 à 58). Sa rangée de dents postérieures la dis- 
tingue aussi de la Lampetra aepyptera qu’on rencontre dans les 
mêmes réseaux hydrographiques. La description se fonde sur une 
étude de 79 individus métamorphosés et de deux ammocètes. 


Biographical Notes 


V. D. Viadykov 


Vadim D. Vladykov was born in Russia and studied at Charles 
University in Prague, where he specialized in zoology and anthro- 
pology, receiving his Ph.D. in 1925. In 1930 Dr. Viadykov came to 
Canada, and from 1930 to 1936 was employed by the Biological 
Board of Canada (now the Fisheries Research Board of Canada) 
as a fisheries biologist. In 1936 he became a Canadian citizen. 
For the next two years he worked as a fisheries biologist for the 
State of Maryland and as professor of ichthyology at the University 
of Maryland. In 1938 he returned to Canada and joined the Biology 
Department of the University of Montreal as professor of ichthyol- 
ogy, a post he held until 1942. From 1943 to 1958 he was director 
of the Biological Laboratory of the Quebec Department of Fisheries. 
In 1958 he joined the staff of the University of Ottawa as professor 
of biology, a position he held until his retirement in 1973, at which 
time he was appointed professor emeritus. In the same year he 
accepted the honorary position of research associate at the 
National Museum of Natural Sciences. Dr. Vladykov was elected 
a fellow of the Royal Society of Canada in 1963. 

Dr. Vladykov is credited with more than 185 publications, and 
his specialties are the biology of the American eel and the taxon- 
omy of salmonids, sturgeons, and, especially, Holarctic lampreys. 
He has described several new species of lampreys from Europe 
and North America. Among Dr. Viadykov’s contributions to science, 
the studies of particular significance are those dealing with the 
description of characters by which larval lampreys (ammocoetes) 
of nonparasitic species and those of the parasitic sea lamprey 
(Petromyzon marinus) can be distinguished. This work now enables 
biologists to separate larvae of nonparasitic lampreys from those 
of parasitic lampreys, a task formerly impossible. For Canada and 
the United States this is a great financial and ecological saving, 
because treatment of streams and brooks is now restricted to 
those which contain larvae of the destructive sea lampreys. In 
recognition of his study of lampreys, a new species from central 
Europe was described under the name Eudontomyzon vladykovi 
Oliva & Zanandrea, 1959. 


Edward Kott 


Edward Kott obtained his academic training from the University of 
Toronto. He received his B.A. in 1960 and his Ph.D. in 1964. From 
1963 to 1965 he was a lecturer in biology at Lakehead University, 
Thunder Bay, Ontario. In 1965 Dr. Kott joined the Fisheries Re- 
search Board of Canada, and from 1965 to 1967 worked at the 
Marine Ecology Laboratory of the Bedford Institute of Oceanogra- 
phy, Dartmouth, Nova Scotia. He is now associate professor of 
biology at Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Ontario. His research 
has been in the ecology of small mammals, community studies, 
and the ecology and systematics of lampreys. At present Dr. Kott 
is working in cooperation with Dr. V.D. Vladykov on the system- 
atics of North American lampreys. 


Biographical Notes 


S. Pharand-Coad 

Sylvie Pharand-Coad was born in Hull, Quebec, in 1950. She gra- 
duated from the University of Ottawa with an Honours B.Sc. in 
Zoology in 1972 and a B.Ed. in 1973. For four years (1971-74), 
Mrs. Pharand-Coad worked as a research assistant to Dr. V. D. 
Vladykov on the systematics of Holarctic lampreys. Her research 
interests are centred on the systematics and ecology of lampreys, 
amphibians, and reptiles. At present she is a high-school science 
teacher with the Ottawa Board of Education. 


Introduction 


The senior author (Vladykov 1973) recently 
described a nonparasitic lamprey, Lampetra 
pacifica, from the western United States. To 
compare critically this western species with 
the nonparasitic Lampetra aepyptera, from 
eastern and southeastern United States, he 
wrote to W.V. Brigham, who had just (1973) 
described spawning of Lampetra aepyptera 
in Tennessee. Thanks to Dr. Brigham’s co- 
operation, we were able to obtain specimens 
of L. aepyptera from several institutions in 
the following states: Alabama, Arkansas, 
Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland, Ohio, and 
Tennessee. 

Upon examining the specimens received, 
we found two species of nonparasitic lam- 
preys, one of which is Lampetra aepyptera 
(Abbott 1860), the other, which we here treat 
as a new species, referred to the genus 
Lethenteron Creaser and Hubbs 1922, of the 
family Petromyzonidae.* 

The aim of the present article is to des- 
cribe this new species and compare it with 
two other nonparasitic species, Lampetra 
aepyptera and Lethenteron lamottenii** (Le 
Sueur 1827). 


*Alternate spellings of the family are found in the 
literature (Viadykov 1974). 

**The name /amottenii is now, commonly without 
valid reason, spelled as /amottei (American Fish- 
eries Society, Committee on Names 1970). 


Methods and Materials 


All measurements and counts were typically 
made on the left side of the specimen, as 
established by Vladykov and Follett (1965). 


Measurements 
All measurements are expressed as percent- 
ages of the total length of the specimen; 
the disc length (d) is also expressed as a 
percentage of the branchial length (B,—B,). 
The following abbreviations are used, as in 
Vladykov and Follett (1965). 
a-C Tail length, the distance from the 
posterior edge of the cloacal slit to 
the end of the caudal fin. 
Trunk length, the distance from the 
posterior edge of the last (seventh) 
branchial opening to the anterior 
edge of the cloacal slit. 
Branchial length, the distance from 
the anterior edge of the first bran- 
chial opening to the posterior edge 
of the last (seventh) branchial open- 
ing. 
d Disc length, longitudinal diameter, 
with the oral fimbriae included, mea- 
sured with the disc closed. 
Prebranchial length, the distance 
from the anterior edge of the disc 
(in transformed individuals) or of the 
upper lip (in ammocoetes) to the 
anterior edge of the first branchial 
opening. 
Second dorsal fin maximum height, 
measured along the highest fin ray. 
0 Eye length, the horizontal diameter 
of the eye. 
TL Total length, the distance from the 
anteriormost oral fimbria to the end 
of the caudal fin. 


B.-a 


Bi-B; 


hD, 


In addition, the number of oral papillae, 
the number of anterior oral fimbriae con- 
tained within a section equal to the width of 
the base of the supraoral lamina, and the 
number of velar tentacles were counted. 

In identifying ammocoetes, the number of 
trunk myomeres and body proportions were 
used. Pattern and intensity of pigmentation 
on head and tail were also noted (Vladykov 
1950). 


Methods and Materials 


Material Examined 

The material of the new species of Lethen- 
teron consists of 79 transformed individuals 
from southern United States: 65 from Ten- 
nessee, 11 from Alabama, and 3 from Geor- 
gia; and 2 ammocoetes: one each from 
Tennessee and Alabama. 

The comparative material of Lampetra 
aepyptera consists of 53 transformed indi- 
viduals (28 from Alabama, 3 from Arkansas, 
5 from Kentucky, 6 from Maryland, 3 from 
Ohio, and 8 from Tennessee) and 13 ammo- 
coetes (10 from Alabama and 3 from Ken- 
tucky). Data for each collection are given in 
the Appendix. 


10 


Description of New Species 


Lethenteron meridionale sp. nov. 
Gulf Brook Lamprey 
Figures 1-6 


Etymology 

The species name meridionale is derived 
from the Latin meridies for midday, or south, 
and refers to the southern distribution. It is 
used in the neuter form to agree with 
Lethenteron. 


Holotype 
An adult male 104 mm in total length from 
Blue Springs Creek, a tributary of the Ten- 
nessee River, near Hillsboro, Coffee County; 
3 February 1968; J.S. Jandebeur and J.D. 
Williams; UAIC 2830, now re-catalogued as 
NMC 74-249. It bears the plastic tag W667. 
This new nonparasitic species belongs to 
the genus Lethenteron Creaser and Hubbs 
1922. This genus is well characterized by 
the arrangement of its teeth (Vladykov and 
Follett 1967). 


Diagnosis 
The new species clearly differs from its 
nearest relative, Lethenteron lamottenii (Le 
Sueur), also nonparasitic, by its low number 
of trunk myomeres in transformed speci- 
mens, varying between 50 and 58 (average 
54), whereas in L. lamottenii the myomeres 
range from 64 to 74 (average 68). Other 
differences are summarized in Table 12. 
From another nonparasitic species, Lam- 
petra aepyptera (Abbott) living in the same 
watersheds, Lethenteron meridionale is 
readily distinguishable by possession of 
posterials,* varying in number from 10 to 21 
(average 15.4). Posterials are completely 
lacking in aepyptera, as in all other species 
of Lampetra. Other differences between 
meridionale and aepyptera are given in 
Tables 7 and 11. 


Characters of Holotype 
The holotype, a male 104 mm in total length 
when received. 

Measurements of the holotype — referable 
to maturity stage 3 (Vladykov and Follett 
1965) — each expressed as a percentage of 


* It is regrettable that Scott and Crossman (1973) 
omitted posterials on their schematic drawings of 
the disc of L. lamottenii, in spite of the fact that 
these teeth are always present in all species of 
Lethenteron. 


total length, are: prebranchial length, 10.6; 
trunk length, 46.6; tail length, 30.8; maximum 
height of the second dorsal fin, 5.3; disc 
length, 6.3; eye length, 1.9. Disc length as a 
percentage of branchial length is 59.1. Trunk 
myomeres (Figures 1 and 2), 52. 

The already cornified teeth are small. On 
each side of the disc there are three inner 
lateral teeth, all unicuspid. On the anterior 
field there are about 34 teeth, all practically 
the same size; on the posterior field there 
is a single row of 18 small posterials. The 
supraoral lamina is provided with one cusp 
at each end; the infraoral lamina has about 
12 weakly developed cusps; the marginals 
are in two rows. The three lingual laminae 
are so poorly developed that the cusps are 
uncountable (Figure 3). 

Colour of the specimen preserved in 4-5% 
formalin is dark greyish brown on the flanks 
and back, and whitish along the ventral 
surface. 

Although the holotype is in the early stage 
of maturity, the dorsal fins are already high 
and close together, and the genital papilla 
is well-developed. There is an extensive, 
dark pigmentation of vertically elongated 
spots on the dorsal fins. A dark blotch sur- 
rounds the posterior section of the noto- 
chord; towards the edges of the caudal fin, 
the pigment becomes less pronounced 
(Figure 1). 


Characters of Paratypes 
Collection data for paratypes are given in 
the Appendix. 


Transformed Specimens 


Total length (Tables 1 and 2) 

The 55 males examined range in total length 
from 96 to 136 mm (average 115.8 mm); the 
24 females range from 96 to 141 mm 
(average 116.7 mm). 


Body proportions (Tables 1 and 2) 

For the 55 males the average measurements 
as percentages of total length are: prebran- 
chial length, 11.7 (range 10.2-12.9); branchial 
length, 10.2 (range 9.1-11.4); trunk length, 
48.0 (range 43.6-52.7); tail length 30.2 (27.3— 
33.9); maximum height of second dorsal fin, 
4.5 (3.0-5.7); eye length, 1.8 (range 1.5-2.1); 
disc length, 5.2 (4.2-6.5). Disc length as a 
percentage of branchial length is 51.5 (range 
41.7-66.7). 


11 


Description of New Species 


For the 24 females the average measure- 
ments are: prebranchial length, 10.7 (range 
7.8-13.0); branchial length, 10.0 (range 9.3- 
11.4); trunk length, 51.4 (49.2-53.9); tail 
length 28.0 (26.0-30.3); maximum height of 
second dorsal fin, 3.8 (range 2.5-5.1); eye 
length, 1.7 (range 1.4-2.1); disc length, 4.8 
(range 2.8-5.7). Disc length as a percentage 
of branchial length is 47.5 (range 27.6-57.1). 


Trunk myomeres (Table 5) 

The number of trunk myomeres in the trans- 
formed specimens of meridionale varies 
from 50 to 58 (average 53.8). 


Dentition (Tables 7-9) 

The teeth are small and often not fully corn- 
ified; hence some counts of them are un- 
certain. The teeth on the anterior field are 
uniformly small, averaging 16.1 (range 5-34) 
in number. The single row of posterials is 
typical for all species of the genus Lethen- 
teron. 

The posterials range in number from 10 to 
21 (average 15.4), but are often weakly 
developed and difficult to count. The supra- 
oral lamina has two blunt cusps, one at each 
end; as an exception, one specimen, Tag 
W533, from Alabama, has a strongly devel- 
oped median cusp on the supraoral lamina. 

The rounded and weakly developed cusps 
on the infraoral lamina average 9.9, ranging 
from 6 to 13 in number. 

The typical number of inner laterals in the 
genus Lethenteron is six, three on each side 
of the disc. Infrequently, fewer than six 
(rarely aS many as eight) cornified inner 
laterals develop in meridionale. In three spec- 
imens (Table 8) all inner laterals are lacking. 
The average number of inner laterals is 5.5 
(range 0-8). Although in the genus Lethen- 
teron all inner laterals are typically bicuspid, 
in L. meridionale they are usually unicuspid. 

The marginals tend to form two rows 
around the disc. 

The transverse and longitudinal lingual 
laminae are weakly developed and the cusps 
are uncountable. 

Anenlarged median cusp on the transverse 
lamina is typical of other species of Leth- 
enteron (Figure 4), but does not develop in 
L. meridionale. 


Other characters 


Velar tentacles were counted in two speci- 
mens of meridionale where only three ten- 


1124 


tacles were found: one median with a single 
lateral on either side. 

The average number of oral papillae 
around the disc in 55 specimens of L. meri- 
dionale is 14.2 (range 8-25). The number of 
anterior fimbriae within the width of the 
base of the supraoral lamina is somewhat 
variable. In 10 specimens from Tennessee 
the average is 17.2 (range 13-22) and in 5 
from Alabama the average is 11.0 (range 
9-15). The difference between the Tennessee 
and Alabama specimens appears to be 
related to the width of the supraoral lamina, 
which averages 2.6 mm in Tennessee speci- 
mens and 1.9 mm in those from Alabama. 

There are dark chromatophores in the 
buccal cavity but none extend onto the 
tongue. 


Colouration (Table 10) 

The sides and back of specimens fixed in 
4-5% formalin are greyish brown and the 
lower surface is whitish. 

Dark pigmentation on the second dorsal 
fin, if developed, consists of a series of 
vertically elongated narrow dark spots. There 
is a distinct black blotch (Figures 1 and 2) on 
the caudal fin. The intensity of dark pigmen- 
tation varies with the geographical region; in 
specimens from the Tennessee-Mississippi 
drainage pigmentation is very pronounced, 
in contrast with those from the Tombigbee 
and Alabama rivers, where it is weakly deve- 
loped. 


Sexual dimorphism 

The external appearance of males and fe- 
males of Lethenteron meridionale is similar 
to that of L. lamottenii as described by 
Vladykov (1949). 

There are sexual differences in body pro- 
portions (Tables 1, 2, and 4). Disc length (d), 
prebranchial length (d-B,) and tail length 
(a-C) are greater in males; females have a 
relatively longer trunk (B,-a). 

All specimens were in prespawning condi- 
tion. One female (Tag W556, from Alabama), 
maturity stage 3, 122 mm in length, collected 
on 5 December 1963, had 2,154 eggs aver- 
aging 0.63 mm in diameter. 


Ammocoetes 
Only two ammocoetes were available, one 


from Tennessee (Tag W677), 100 mm long, 
and the other from Alabama (Tag W552), 


142 mm. Body proportions expressed as 
percentages of total length were as follows: 
d-B,, 7.0-8.5; B,-B,, 11.2-12.5; B,-a, 50.5- 
53.5; a-C, 28.5. The myomeres number 54 
and 55. 

As in the transformed specimens, the 
ammocoete from Tennessee is more heavily 
pigmented than the one from Alabama. The 
limited number of specimens does not permit 
a critical description of the ammocoetes of 
Lethenteron meridionale. 


Comparison of Lethenteron meridionale with 
L. lamottenii 


In the Tennessee River tributaries from which 
the holotype and topotypes of L. meridionale 
were obtained, one male and one female of 
L. lamottenii (Tags W679 and W680) were 
collected, in Putnam County, Tennessee. 

These Tennessee specimens of the two 
nonparasitic species are compared in Table 
12. The principal differences are found in 
the number and degree of development of 
different types of teeth (Figures 2 and 4). The 
number of myomeres in meridionale is 50- 
58, whereas each of the two specimens of 
lamottenii from Tennessee has 68. Smith- 
Vaniz (1968) indicated 63-70 for /amottenii 
from the Tennessee River system in Alabama, 
and Trautman (1957) reported 63-73 from 
Ohio. Several authors, Valdykov (1949), 
Manion and Purvis (1970), and Kott (1974), 
observed a similar number in material from 
the St. Lawrence River and Great Lakes 
areas. 

Another striking difference between me- 
ridionale and lamottenii is in dark pigmen- 
tation of the second dorsal fin. In meridionale 
there are often several vertical narrow spots, 
whereas in lamottenii individual spots are 
absent, but a dark-brown tint made up of 
minute chromatophores is noticeable over 
the fin membrane (Figures 1 and 5). 

Lethenteron meridionale is asmall species, 
attaining less than 150 mm in total length, 
whereas some individuals of L. /amottenii 
have been reported to reach a “gigantic” 
size, up to 300 mm (Manion and Purvis 1970), 
but ordinarily reach 217 mm (Kott 1974). 


13 


Comparison of Lethenteron meridionale with 
Lampetra aepyptera 


In exterior appearance Lethenteron meri- 
dionale and Lampetra aepyptera are similar 
(Figure 2). For this reason all specimens 
that we now identify as meridionale were 
originally determined as Lampetra aepyptera 
in collections of the University of Alabama. 

Similarity between meridionale and aepyp- 
tera was observed in number of trunk myo- 
meres (Tables 5 and 6), in dark pigmentation 
of fins, and in size. However, a close exam- 
ination of body proportions (Tables 1-4) and 
dentition (Tables 7-9) revealed differences. 
See Table 10 for degree of pigmentation. 

Lethenteron meridionale and Lampetra 
aepyptera are compared in detail in Table 
11. The principal differences between them 
are in numbers and degree of development 
of teeth on the anterior and posterior fields. 
The number of anterials average 16 (range 
7-34) in meridionale and 8 (range 2-21) in 
aepyptera. The posterials are always present 
in all species of Lethenteron. In meridionale 
the number of posterials averages 15.9 (range 
10-21). In all species of Lampetra, including 
aepyptera, the posterials are absent (Figures 
3 and 6). Even in histological sections, 
Seversmith (1953) found no evidence of 
posterials in aepyptera. 

The number of inner laterals averages 5.5 
(range 0-8) in meridionale and 4.6 (range 
1-6) in aepyptera. In our material three 
specimens of meridionale are devoid of inner 
laterals. A similar loss in aepyptera was 
reported by Raney (1952). 

Two counts suggest that the fecundity of 
meridionale may be significantly higher than 
that of aepyptera: a 122-mm female of 
meridionale (Tag W556, from Alabama) con- 
tained 2,154 eggs, whereas a 118-mm speci- 
men of aepyptera (Tag W537, also from 
Alabama) collected on 2 February 1963, 
contained 1,547. 

Lethenteron meridionale and Lampetra 
aepyptera are placed in separate genera on 
the basis of the presence or absence of 
posterial teeth. In spite of their allocation to 
different genera, the two species are similar 
in myomere number, size, pigmentation, and 
reduction in number of teeth. One can 
speculate that these similarities may be due 
to parallelism, in which case assignment to 
different genera is warranted. Or, aepyptera 
may have lost its posterials and may share 
a recent common ancestor with meridionale. 
Lamprey collections from other Gulf states 
would hopefully cast light on this problem. 


14 


Geographical Distribution of Lethenteron 


meridionale 


This species has been collected so far only 
in freshwater streams in the eastern drainage 
of the Gulf of Mexico, that is, in Tennessee, 
Alabama, and Georgia. In Tennessee it has 
been collected in several tributaries of the 
Tennessee River system. It is significant to 
note that in streams of Putnam County, Ten- 
nessee, lamottenii and aepyptera are present 
in addition to meridionale. Several samples 
of meridionale were obtained from the Mobile 
Basin to which the Alabama and Tombigbee 
rivers belong. From the Alabama River sys- 
tem meridionale has been collected in Geor- 
gia and Alabama. Specimens have also 
been obtained from the Tombigbee River in 
Alabama. 

The distribution of meridionale corres- 
ponds to that of 16 other freshwater species 
of Alabama, which Smith-Vaniz (1968) con- 
cluded probably originated in the Tennessee 
River system, whence they invaded the 
headwaters of the Alabama River system 
and Tombigbee River. 


Figure 1 

Enlarged photographs of the head and tail regions 
of Lethenteron meridionale, holotype, Tag W667, 
&, total length 104 mm, from Tennessee. 


15 


Figure 2 

Enlarged photographs of two nonparasitic lam- 
preys. Upper: Lethenteron meridionale, Tag W667, 
holotype, &, total length 104 mm, from Tennessee. 
Lower: Lampetra aepyptera, Tag W548, & , total 
length 99 mm, from Alabama. 


16 


Figure 3 

Enlarged photograph of the disc of Lethenteron 
meridionale, holotype, Tag W667, o”, total length 
104 mm, from Tennessee. 


17 


Figure 4 

Enlarged photograph of the disc of Lethenteron 
lamottenii, Tag W681, o, total length 162 mm, 
from Gatineau River, Quebec, collected on 17 
May 1958, by M. Corbeil and A. Lutz. 


18 


‘ZN7 “VW puke 1184109 ‘W Aq ‘8S6L Aew ZL 
uO p9}99/[09 ‘2eqenD “JaAly neesunedy wos ‘Www 
291 uiBue] 1eJ0} ‘ © ‘LgoM Gey ‘ueyowe, uole} 
-U9y197 JO UolBei jez ay} jo yde1Boyoud pebiejuy 

G oinbi4 


19 


Figure 6 

Enlarged photograph of the disc of Lampetra 
aepyptera, Tag W572, o’, total length 93 mm, 
from Alabama. 

Note: The pinning of the disc for photography 
caused a certain distortion on the left side of the 
photograph. Hence, three small supplementary 
marginal teeth, which could be mistaken for 
posterial teeth, are brought closer to the infraoral 
lamina. 


20 


Table 1 
Body proportions (as percentages of total length) of 55 males of Lethenteron meridionale 
from Tennessee, Alabama, and Georgia 


TL d-B: B;-B; B--a a-C hD, 0 d d 

Tag No. (mm) TL TL TL TL TL HE TL B;-B; 
Tennessee 

W673 96 12.5 9.9 45.8 31.8 5.2 2.1 5.2 52.6 
W634 97 12.4 10.3 45.9 31.4 5.2 2.1 6.2 60.0 
W618 98 12.8 9.7 48.5 29.1 4.6 2.0 5.1 52.6 
W670 98 12.8 9.7 45.4 32.1 5.1 2.0 5.6 57.9 
W633 101 11.4 9.9 48.5 29.7 5.0 2.0 5.4 55.0 
W667* 104 12.1 10.6 46.6 30.8 5.3 1.9 6.3 59.1 
W615 105 12.9 11.4 44.3 31.0 4.8 1.9 6.2 54.2 
W631 105 12.4 10.5 46.7 30.5 4.8 1.9 6.3 59.1 
W645 105 11.9 10.0 48.6 29.5 5.2 1.9 5.7 57.1 
W635 105 12.4 11.0 46.2 30.5 4.8 1.9 5.7 57.1 
W632 108 12.5 9.7 46.3 31.5 5.6 1.9 6.5 66.7 
W643 109 12.4 10.6 47.7 29.4 5.0 1.8 5.5 52.2 
W668 109 11.0 10.6 49.1 29.4 4.6 1.8 5.5 52.2 
W629 110 12.3 10.5 46.4 30.9 5.5 1.8 5.0 47.8 
W639 110 12.7 10.0 47.3 30.0 5.5 1.8 5.5 54.5 
W637 111 10.8 10.8 47.7 30.6 5.4 1.8 5.4 50.5 
W644 111 12.2 10.8 45.0 32.0 5.4 1.8 5.4 50.5 
W613 112 12.1 10.7 45.5 31.7 5.4 1.8 5.4 50.0 
W660 112 12.9 10.7 45.5 30.8 4.9 1.8 5.8 54.2 
W671 112 121 9.8 47.3 30.8 4.9 1.8 5.8 59.1 
W648 113 12.4 9.7 46.9 31.0 5.3 1.8 5.3 54.5 
W661 113 11.9 11.1 46.0 31.0 4.4 1.8 6.2 56.0 
W666 113 11.5 9.7 49.6 30.1 49 1.8 5.8 59.1 
W657 114 11.8 10.5 47.4 30.3 4.8 1.8 5.7 54.2 
W674 114 11.8 9.6 47.8 30.7 4.8 1.8 5.7 59.1 
W646 115 11.7 9.1 47.8 31.3 5.2 1:7 5.7 61.9 
W659 115 12.2 9.6 48.3 30.0 4.8 17 6.1 63.6 
W658 115 11.3 10.0 48.3 30.4 5.2 17 5.2 52.2 
W612 116 11.2 9.9 47.0 31.5 3.4 07 4.7 47.8 
W619 116 12.1 9.9 45.7 32.3 5.6 17 5.2 52.2 
W630 116 12.5 10.3 48.7 28.4 5.2 17 5.6 54.2 
W638 117 12.0 10.3 43.6 34.2 5.1 1.7 5.6 54.2 
W649 117 12.0 10.3 45.3 32.5 4.7 17 4.7 45.8 
W665 117 12.0 9.8 48.3 29.9 4.7 47 5.6 56.5 
W642 119 11.8 10.1 46.2 31.9 5.0 17 5.5 54.2 
W647 119 11.3 10.1 46.2 31.9 5.0 17 5.5 54.2 
W672 120 12.1 10.0 46.7 31.3 5.0 1.7 5.4 54.2 
W636 122 12.3 tia 45.9 30.3 4.9 1.6 5.3 48.1 
W616 124 121 10.5 47.6 29.8 5.2 2.0 6.5 61.5 
W640 124 11.7 10.9 45.6 31.9 4.4 1.6 5.2 48.1 


Table 1 


age d-B: B,-B; Ba a-C hD: 0 d d 
Tag No. (mm) Wt ae TL ae TL WL TL B:-B; 
W656 124 Aer 9.3 45.2 33.9 5.6 1.6 5.6 60.7 
W641 126 11.9 10.3 47.6 30.1 4.4 1.6 5.6 53.8 
W655 126 11.5 9.5 47.2 31.7 5.2 1.6 5.2 54.2 
W676 132 10.2 9.8 52,7 27.3 3.0 1.5 4.5 46.2 
W677 136 11.0 9.9 50.4 28.7 3.7 1.5 4.8 48.1 
Mean 112.8 12.0 10.2 47.0 31.0 5.0 1.8 5.5 54.7 
Alabama 
W533 116 11.2 9.5 50.7 30.2 3.9 124 4.3 45.5 
W581 116 12.1 10.3 50.0 27.6 - 1.8 5.2 50.0 
W583 116 1122 9.5 50.0 29.3 - 17 6.0 63.6 
W582 117 11.5 9.8 49.6 29.1 - 2.1 5.6 56.5 
W555 118 11.4 10.2 50.0 28.4 3.0 ln 4.2 41.7 
W554 122 11.1 10.2 50.8 27.9 3.7 1.6 4.9 48.0 
W558 131 10.3 9.2 51.9 28.6 3.1 1.5 4.2 45.8 
Mean 119.4 11.3 9.8 50.4 28.7 3.4 etl 4.9 50.2 
Georgia 

W596 103 12.1 lee, 45.1 31.2 4.9 1.9 5.0 47.8 
W598 110 11.8 10.5 49.5 28.6 4.5 1.8 52 50.5 
W597 123 11.8 10.2 45.5 32.5 SA 1.6 DA 56.0 
Mean 112.0 11.9 10.6 46.7 30.8 5.0 1.8 5.2 50.5 
Combined 

Mean 114.7 ul 10.2 48.0 30.2 4.5 1.8 5.2 515 
*Holotype 


22 


Table 2 


Body proportions (as percentages of total length) of 24 females of Lethenteron meridionale 


from Tennessee and Alabama 


TL 
Tag No. (mm) 
W650 96 
W620 99 
W621 100 
W662 105 
W626 107 
W627 108 
W622 109 
W623 109 
W669 109 
W625 dti 
W652 111 
W628 113 
W651 114 
W624 115 
W653 116 
W663 116 
W664 116 
W654 118 
W617 119 
W675 141 
Mean 111.6 
W553 119 
W543 121 
W556 122 
W557 125 
Mean 121.8 
Combined 
Mean 116.7 


d-B, Bi-B Ba a-C hD; 0 

TL TL ie TE TL TE. 
Tennessee 

13.0 10.4 50.5 26.0 4.7 2.1 
12.1 10.6 50.5 26.8 5.1 2.0 
12.0 10.0 51.0 27.0 5.0 2.0 
11.4 11.4 50.0 27.1 4.3 1.9 
10.7 10.3 52.3 26.6 4.2 1.9 
10.6 10.2 52.8 26.4 4.6 1.9 
11.0 9.6 50.9 28.4 4.6 1.8 
ies) 10.6 50.0 28.0 4.6 176 
11.5 10.6 51.8 26.1 4.7 1.8 
10.8 9.5 52.3 27.5 4.5 1.8 
wales) 9.9 BATA 27.6 4.7 127 
11.1 9.3 51.8 27.9 4.4 1.8 
10.5 10.1 51.8 28.1 4.4 1.8 
10.9 9.6 51.3 28.3 4.3 17 
10.8 9.9 51.7 27.6 4.7 let 
11.2 112. 49.6 28.0 4.7 5 IEA 
10.3 9.5 51.7 28.4 3.9 127 
11.4 11.4 50.0 27.1 4.3 1.9 
10.1 10.1 49.6 30.3 3.4 ei, 
7.8 10.3 53.9 28.0 2.5 1.4 
11.0 10.2 Sis 27.6 4.4 1.8 

Alabama 

10.5 9.7 51:3 28.6 2.9 1.7 
9.1 9.9 537 PATES) 2.9 atl 
10.7 10.2 49.2 29.9 3.3 1.6 
10.8 9.6 52.0 27.6 3.2 1.6 
10.3 9.8 51.5 28.3 Oat 1% 
10.7 10.0 51.4 28.0 3.8 174 


B;-B; 


Table 3 


Body proportions (as percentages of total length) of 23 males and 12 females of Lampetra 
aepyptera from Tennessee and Alabama 


Tag No. 


5072 (VDV) 
5073 (VDV) 
5075 (VDV) 
5071 (VDV) 
5074 (VDV) 
5076 (VDV) 


Mean 


W517 
W548 
W549 
W524 
W539 


W540 
W530 
W550 
W528 
W526 


W531 
W551 
W578 
W579 
W546 


W522 
W580 


Mean 


Combined 
Mean 


5070 (VDV) 
5069 (VDV) 


Mean 


we 


(mm) 


121 
134 
135 
142 
142 
145 


136.5 


91 
99 
99 
101 
107 


109 
110 
111 
112 
112 


115 
118 
119 
122 
123 


124 
128 


110.1 


117.0 


140 
151 


145.5 


95 
97 
99 
102 
103 


d-B; 
TL 


11.6 
11-9 
11.9 
11.6 
12.0 
10.3 


11.4 
10.9 


11.2 


Uist, 
11.3 
12.6 
10.8 

9.2 


B,-B, 


TL 


10.1 


10.2 


B--a 
wit 


Males 
Tennessee 


50.4 
50.4 
48.5 
48.9 
50.0 
49.7 


49.7 
Alabama 


48.4 
47.5 
48.5 
46.5 
48.1 


48.6 
49.1 
50.5 
47.8 
49.6 


50.0 
48.7 
48.3 
48.4 
49.2 


47.2 
47.7 


48.6 


49.2 


Females 
Tennessee 


53.2 
54.3 


a-C 


ho: 
ME 


6.0 
5.5 


ND = a a oS 
ON 


œ o 


_ 
[Ce] 


B,-B; 


Table 3 


TL d-B, B.-B; B-a a-G hD; We d 

Tag No. (mm) ie TL Tite TL TL TL TE 
W523 106 11.3 9.9 51.4 27.4 4.7 1.9 4.7 
W541 107 10.7 10.3 50.9 28.0 33 1.4 5.1 
W542 111 10.4 10.4 50.9 28.4 3.6 1.8 4.5 
W547 112 10.3 10.3 50.4 29.0 3.6 1.8 4.9 
W537 118 9.3 9.3 50.8 30.5 3.0 1.7 3.8 
Mean 105.4 10.7 10.0 50.8 28.6 4.0 1.8 4.9 
Combined 

Mean 112.1 11.0 10.2 52.3 28.4 4.9 1.8 5.1 


25 


0°SS-6 0ÿ 
£'0S 
L'29—9'2c 
GLY 
9°€9-GS'SP 
£'9g 
L99-L LY 
GES 


19—'q 
p 


S0e-e22  E+S-0'0S 
vec Es 
£‘0E-092 6 '€S-z'6r 
0°8z ÿ'LS 
yle-e'8z  g'OS-5'9 
9°62 z'6+ 
GEE-C/Z L'eS—9'EP 
z'0€ 0'8r 
71 LL 
9-28 eg 


vVOlL-6'8 
AU 

VLL-€'6 
0'0t 

oc LL-€'6 
€ Ob 

VLL-L'6 
co OL 


aL 


‘q—'g 


9°¢l-2'6 
OLE 

O'EL-8"2 
l'OL 

VEL-EOL 
Lek 

6 ¢cl-c OL 
Zt 


LSI-G6 
L'LL ch 
Lv L—96 
L'Art ve 
SvlL—-L6 
OCLL £c 
9€ 1-96 
ZLYVLL gs 
(ww) suawioeds 
ail 40 ‘ON 


e1a]dAdee ‘7 
9/EU0IpIIOU ‘7 
elajdAdae ‘7 


2/EU0IpIISU ‘7 


saiseds 


eee 
£-L Se|gqeL uo peseq 


‘esajdAdee eyedwe7 pue ejeuoipriowu uoiejueyje7 jo (u1Bue] [2101 jo sebejuaoied se) suoruodoid Apoq 26 


e1aAe JO UOSIUedWOD 


ÿ SIGeL 


ee eeSSSS———SsesSsS 


26 


0‘ÿG L L QL LE SL 9L 9 I L ZL cvl—-96 210} pauiquiog 
0'”S oS te = L L L Pad T € €cl—-OLL l10L 
oes = SS = = L NÉE SLT L eck 9961 “ABW 7 uoyeq ‘Bulidg peweuun 
0'¢S Ss. = = = = L ae L LoL 9961 JEW ÿ leueA ‘yo-un1 Buds 
O'S = ait = L = = Pa L OLL 9961 JEN ÿ Buuds enig 


(eBeuleip JaAly eweqe]y) e161089 


AT ONE REC € v - - - - LL LEL-OLL JE}OL 
0'SS = = À L L - - - = € ZLL-OLL €96L “JEW SL esoojeosn| 1POU ‘19 
0'‘rS - - - - L = — = = L OLL 9961 ‘Bny 1€ Bulids 18JemMp109 
O'rS - - - - L - - - - L LZL 996L ‘uef pa ‘19 enig 
LSS bE =e zZ L - = - = 9 LEL-8LL £96L ‘29 SG ‘19 uoluuIg 


(sebeuresp JeAu eweqge|y pue seqhiquio,) eweqely 


ges = L eb 8 £L GE G 2 L £9 cvl—-96 JB}O] 

Buds 
Ges = = = = L L = = = (4 vcl-GOL 896L JPW 8c 19}SeUOuIM “JO poweuuy 
£'GG = = A = L = = = = € CVIL-LEL é ‘19 Buds 
0¢S = = = = = = L = = L SLL 896L ABW 8c 19 SUE9HinH 
oes = = = = L L L = = € 6LL-86 896L q91 € ‘19 AsjueH 
L'EG = = L L € A = & L OL 921-96 896L “Ged € ‘qu} ‘19 Aejpeig 
6€ = L G 9 G 8 cA € = 0€ 91-26 896L “G84 € ‘19 Aejpeig 
Lys = = & L L & L = = Z ZLL-vOL 8961 “G84 € ‘19 sBulids enig 
evs = = € = L L = L = 9 02lL-96 896L “484 7 19 S,uesg 


(eBeureip 18A1H eosseuue]) sesseuual 


ues eg 24S 9S SS +S EG 2G IS OS Suewlseds (ww) 
sosowoAw jo Jaquinn Jo JaquINN ALL ejeq A12207 


‘peuiquoo sexes ‘e161099 pue ‘eweqeiy ‘28SSauU2] WOsJ 2/EU0IpIIeW UO018]uU2y]27 PEaWIOJSUEI} JO Se18WOAW UNI} JO JOQUNN 
G eIqeL 


27 


g'vs L L & S S SL € CA = L Se LSL-L6 [201 peuiquoyg 


9°rS LE SON TN G RE TC | Le 8cL-L6 feJoL 
‘09 ejepiepne 
02S = St ea ae a gS 4 90L-LOL 196L ‘IN 62 ‘Buluds peweuun 
ÿ96L ‘UEP ZL 
G'pS SEC le a £cL-60L 2961 “Ady L ‘19 Apues unos 
Ors 69S ee MST L OLL 996L “G84 Sz ‘4 Aesdis 
oes ee  — L G6 996L JEW 62 ‘19 Z}Inys 
09S = | L SLL £96L “Ge4 2 ‘19 eBbpugejod 
8961 JEW 0€ 
0'9S = =) = 6. = = = SiS e- md bal-cLL G96L ‘dy € ‘H MON 
CLS Soe Se = E = nn 4 £cL-cOL 6961 ‘uef GZ ‘19 SseidA9 a/ppin 
0'ES = = = = SF Seb = = = L 66 1961 ‘IPN € ‘19 SsaidA9 an 
19S ee EU ne € £OL-L6 9G6L “JEW 22 ‘19 euedluny 
eS = Soe TS Ee = = a) £ SZL-6LL OZ6L ABW L ‘19 Aeino 
O'S SSeS SF SS Se L ZOL 196L ‘IEN G Buds eaeg 
09S | oe | ee =, e LLL-ZOL €96L YEW SL 19 SOU 
0'GG = A See eee SR S 8LL-66 +96L “JEW 8 Buids Apues Big 
0‘9G = = = = = = = = = L ZLL Q96L “JEW ZL ‘19 181829g 


(seBbeuleip Jeu eweqe]y pue ‘eeqBiquo] ‘eesseuus]) eweqely 


trs ee — L L 9 age PARENTS LE 8 LGI-ICE é "y Jaye Bulle 


(eBeureip 1eAIH oesseuue]) sesseuuer 


UEON 6S 8S 2G 9G GG S$ EG cG IS OS suawloeds (ww) 9}eq Ayje207 
saiawohky Jo sequiny Jo Joquny AL 


——— eee 
‘PeuIquo9 sexes ‘eweqeiy pue sessouue| WO eJajdAdae esjadwe7 jo SuawIdads pewsojsued} JO Se18WOÂW HUNI} JO JeQUNN 


9 eIqeL 
—_—_——  —  — …]]] 


28 


‘U199} [PISJUE LZ Sey UdWIDeds auO,, 
‘adAjojoy ul yjee} jPHejUE pe , 


SI-G 06 8c = 0 LE Le—c 62 LE ueayy pauiquo) 
cl-G 78 Le = 0 £c **xPL—C Ls £c ewegely 
SI-6 Lol L = 0 8 GIE GL 8 aesseuus] 


elajdAdae esjadwe7 


€1-9 66 19 bc-OL vst 9€ ve-S LOL [072 ues) peulquoT 
OL-8 0'6 & 9E=EE Gel 4 ve-St ele € 2161085 
Liz s'8 8 GIE € € vI-G 6 OL 6 BWeQe|V 
€l-9 LOL ZS Le—OL 6'GL LE +vE-L Z9OL 8S sessouusl 


a/eUuOIPIaW UO18}U2y}27 


eBbuey ueayy suawioeds ebuey UEON] suawioeds ebuey UPS suawioeds a}e]S 
JO ‘ON JO ‘ON JO ‘ON 
sdsno jes0esjul JO ‘ON 4}99} Jela}SOd jo ‘ON U}99} [EHO}UE JO ‘ON 


‘peuiquo9 sexes ‘2161089 pue ‘eweqeiy ‘aessouue| O1} 
esaydÂdee eijadwe7] pue ajeuoiplieu uolaj]uayj2e7 JO SOSIP eu} UO ‘sdsno jeloeljuI pue ‘Yy}99} [eH1esod pue [elajJue JO 18QUNN 
231921 


29 


Table 8 
Number of inner lateral teeth, combined for both sides of disc, in Lethenteron meridionale 
and Lampetra aepyptera from Tennessee, Alabama, and Georgia;* sexes combined. 


No. of Number of inner lateral teeth 
Species specimens 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Mean 
L. meridionale 77 3 2 2 = 3 2 61 2 2 5.5 
9.92% 2:6 2:6 ~ 3.9 2.6 79.2 2.6 2:6 1000 
L. aepyptera 31 - 2 2 4 3 8 12 - - 4.6 
- Gist = 76:5) NC PCR - 100.0 


* From Georgia we have three specimens of L. meridionale and none of L. aepyptera. 
**Figures in this line are percentages. 


Table 9 
Frequency of occurrence of cusps on inner lateral teeth in Lethenteron meridionale and 
Lampetra aepyptera from Tennessee, Alabama, and Georgia;* sexes combined. 


L. meridionale L. aepyptera 
Inner lateral No. of Mean Mean 
teeth cusps % no. of cusps % no. of cusps 
Anterior 1 91.7 1.1 63.9 1.4 
2 8.3 36.1 
Middle 1 73.5 1.3 33.3 12 
2 26.5 61.1 
3 - 5.6 
Posterior 1 84.8 dee 85.1 sl 
2 1912 14.9 
Supplementary 1 100.0 1.0 - - 


posterior 


*From Georgia we have three specimens of L. meridionale and none of L. aepyptera. 


= eg KT 
= L zZ 
o'0s o'0s . 
ÿ v = 
- = 0‘0€ 
= : € 
sZt ep 6e 
8 62 €z 


Buoys 9}219POUI YE9M 
ul} jepneg 


002 
L 

£'9 
v 


juasqe 


£'8 0'Sc 
L € 

G28 Paci 
2 L 

ose Sls 
9} LE 


Buoys ajeispou 


v'8s 


0°06 
6 

xo Lb 

LE 


yeam 


juasqe 


ul} [eSIOp puo2es 


OL 


v9 


suawioeds 
40 ‘ON 


“soPejus91od aie aul) Siu} ul Sain6l4, 


ewegely 
eassouudl ela}dAdae ‘7 

eweqely 
sessouud] O/EUOIPIIaW “7 
9}e1S saloads 


‘eWeqe|Y 


pue sessouue| Woi] elajdAdae e1edwe7 pue ajeuospliaw Uo18]u24/}97 JO SUIJ [Ppne2 pue [ES10p puo9es au} JO uonyejuewuBid y12q 


OL 8IqeL 


31 


nn 000 


Table 11 


Detailed comparison of Lethenteron meridionale with Lampetra aepyptera, based on Tables 
1-9. Numbers in italics refer to means, and ranges (in parentheses), for each character. 


Character 


L. meridionale 


L. aepyptera 


Similarities 
Supraoral lamina 


Marginals 
All lingual laminae 
Number of myomeres 


Number of velar tentacles 
Buccal cavity 
Tongue 


Dark pigmentation of second 
dorsal and caudal fins 


Body proportions, except length 


of disc and height of second 
dorsal fin 


Total length (mm), 
sexes combined 


Differences 
Posterial teeth 
Anterial teeth (type) 


Anterial teeth (number) 


Total number of inner 
lateral teeth 


Middle lateral tooth 


Infraoral lamina and number 
of cusps 


Number of oral papillae 


Length of disc as percentage 
of TL 


Height of second dorsal fin 
as percentage of TL 


Number of eggs 
and their diameter 


Length of female 


with two cusps, 
one at each end 


in a double row 
typically with obsolete cusps 


54.0 
(50-58) 


3 

pigmented 
nonpigmented 
quite similar 


similar 


96-141 


present 


small, uniform, 
but numerous 


16.1 
(7-34) 


5.5 
(0-8) 


typically with one cusp 
cusps degenerate 
9.9 


(6-13) 
14.2 
(8-25) 
male: 5.2 
(4.2-6.5) 
female: 4.8 
(2.8-5.7) 
male: 4.5 
(3.0-5.7) 
female: 3.8 
(2.5-5.1) 


2,154 (0.6 mm) 


122 mm 


with two cusps, 
one at each end 


in a double row 
typically with obsolete cusps 


54.5 
(50-59) 


typically 3 
pigmented 
nonpigmented 
quite similar 


similar 


91-151 


absent 
small, uniform, but few 


8.1 

(2-21) 

4.6 

(1-6) 

typically with 2 cusps 
cusps degenerate 


15.8 
(10-24) 
male: 5.8 
(4.3-6.7) 
female: 5.1 
(3.8-5.6) 
male: 5.0 
(3.3-7.0) 
female: 4.9 
(3.0-6.0) 


1,543 (0.8 mm) 


118 mm 


Table 12 


Comparison of two nonparasitic species of Lethenteron from Tennessee. Numbersinitalics 


refer to means, and ranges (in parentheses), for each character. 


Character 


Anterial teeth 


Number of posterial teeth 


Total number of inner lateral 
teeth 


cusps on inner lateral teeth 


Infraoral lamina and 
number of cusps 


Marginal teeth 
All lingual laminae 


Transverse lingual lamina 
Number of myomeres 


Number of velar tentacles 
Buccal cavity 


Dark pigmentation of second 
dorsal fin 


Total length (mm) 


L. meridionale 


L. lamottenii 


uniform in size 


15.9 

(10-21) 

515 

(0-8) 

all typically 
with one cusp 


cusps degenerate 
10.1 

(6-13) 

in two rows 


with cusps typically 
obsolete 


middle cusp 
not enlarged 


53.8 
(50-58) 


3 
pigmented 


several vertical 
narrow spots 


96-141 


of two sizes: large near 
supraoral lamina and smaller 
towards marginals 


21.5 
(20-23) 

6.0 

(6) 

all bicuspid 


cusps prominent 
9.5 
(9-10) 


in one row 
with cusps well developed 


middle cusp enlarged 


68.0 
(68) 


7 
nonpigmented 


dark-brown tint without 
distinct spots 


153-162 


Appendix 


Complete data for the collections of Lethenteron 
meridionale and Lampetra aepyptera used in this 
study appear in the following sequence: 


ES 


Tag number. Small white plastic tags (15 mm 

long by 5 mm wide) of two series were used. 

Series a: On one side of the tag is the letter W, 

followed by a number; on the other side 

“Canada” is written. 

Series b: On one side there is only a number, 

and on the other the letters VDV, the initials 

of the senior author, appear. 

Number of specimens 

Sex (in transformed specimens) 

Total length 

Localities in each river system (presented al- 

phabetically) 

Date of collection 

Collector 

Repository institution abbreviated as follows: 

ASUMZ Arkansas State University Museum of 
Zoology, State University, Arkansas 

AU Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama 


O1 B © D 


OND 


CBL Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, 
Solomons, Maryland 

EKU Eastern Kentucky University, Museum 
of Fishes, Richmond, Kentucky 

INHS Illinois Natural History Survey, 
Urbana, Illinois 

NMC National Museum of Natural Sciences, 
National Museums of Canada, Ottawa 

TTU Tennessee Technological University, 
Cookeville, Tennessee 

UAIC University of Alabama Ichthyological 


Collection, University, Alabama 
9 Catalogue number of repository institution 


Lethenteron meridionale 
Holotype and Topotypic Paratypes 


W662-66 and 668 (392, 105-16 mm; 3%, 109- 
17 mm); collected with holotype, W667 (now 
NMC 74-249); Blue Springs Creek, a tributary of 
the Tennessee River, near Hillsboro, Coffee 
County; 3 February 1968; J.S. Jandebeur and J.D. 
Williams; UAIC 2830. 


Other Paratypes 


Tennessee: Tennessee River system 

W669-74 (one®, 109 mm; 5, 96-120 mm); 
Bean’s Creek, 2 miles southeast of Hillsboro at 
Stephenson, Coffee County; 4 February 1968; 
J.S. Jandebeur and J.D. Williams; UAIC 2837. 

W620-49 (92 , 99-115 mm; 219, 97-126 mm); 
Bradley Creek at Hillsboro, Coffee County; 3 
February 1968; J.S. Jandebeur and J.D. Williams; 
UAIC 2831. 

W650-61 (59, 96-118 mm; 7c”, 112-26 mm); 
unnamed spring, tributary of Bradley Creek at 
Hillsboro, Coffee County; 3 February 1968; J.S. 
Jandebeur and J.D. Williams; UAIC 2832. 


34 


W612 (ones, 116 mm); Elk River at Elk Head, 
Grundy County; 3 February 1968; J.S. Jandebeur 
and J.D. Williams; UAIC 2835. 

W617-19 (one®, 119 mm; 207, 98-116 mm); 
Henly Creek, 2.1 miles southeast of Pelham, 
Grundy County; 3 February 1968; J.S. Jandebeur 
and J.D. Williams; UAIC 2834. 

W613 (ones, 112 mm); Hurricane Creek, at 
Awalt, Franklin County; 28 March 1968; J.S. 
Jandebeur and J.D. Williams; UAIC 2866. 

W675-77 (one®, 141 mm; 207, 132-36 mm), 
W978 (one ammocoete, 142 mm); Spring Creek, 
Putnam County; date and collector unknown; TTU. 

W615-16 (25, 105-24 mm); unnamed creek, 
2 miles southwest of Winchester Spring, Franklin 
County; 28 March 1968; J.S. Jandebeur and J.D. 
Williams; UAIC 2864. 


Alabama: Tombigbee River system 

W553-58 (32, 119-25 mm; 307, 118-31 mm), 
W552 (one ammocoete, 100 mm); spring tributary 
of Binnion Creek, Samantha, Tuscaloosa County; 
5 December 1963; J.D. Williams and W.M. Howell; 
UAIC 1091. 

W543 (oneQ, 121 mm); Blue Creek about 1% 
miles north of Vina, Frankline County; 24 January 
1966; B. Wall and H.T. Boschung; UAIC 1837. 

W533 (ones, 116 mm); Coldwater Spring, 5.7 
miles west of Oxford, Calhoun County; 31 August 
1966; J.D. Williams, J.G. Armstrong, and B.R. 
Wall; UAIC 2349. 

W581-83 (30, 116-17 mm); first creek south 
of Tuscaloosa on Alabama highway 69, Tusca- 
loosa County; 15 March 1963; A.B. Stapp and J. 
Barnes; UAIC 991. 


Georgia: Alabama River system 

W598 (one, 110 mm); Blue Spring, 0.55 miles 
north of Varnell, Whitfield County; 4 March 1966; 
R.D. Caldwell and W.M. Howell; UAIC 1868. 

W596 (ones, 113 mm); spring west of U.S. 
highway 41, 6.8 miles south of Dalton, Whitfield 
County; 4 March 1966; R.D. Caldwell and W.M. 
Howell; UAIC 1873. 

W597 (oneo’, 123 mm); spring pond run-off, 
Y% mile north of Varnell, Whitfield County; 4 
March 1966; R.D. Caldwell and W.M. Howell; 
UAIC 1871. 


Lampetra aepyptera 


Alabama: Alabama, Tennessee, and 

Tombigbee River systems 

W526 (one, 112 mm); Beaver Creek, 4.4 miles 
northwest of Aliceville, Pickens County; 12 March 
1966; R.D. Caldwell and H.T. Boschung; UAIC 
1892. 

W902 (one ammocoete, 80 mm); Big Reedy 
Creek, tributary to Alabama River, 1.6 miles north 
of Choctaw Bluff, Clarke County; 8 April 1972; 
J.R. Ramsey and W.L. Shelton; AU 6268. 

W547-51 (one®, 112 mm; 4, 99-118 mm); 
Big Sandy Spring, Tuscaloosa County; 8 March 


Appendix 


1964; R.D. Caldwell and J.C. Hall; UAIC 1225. 

W541-42 (29, 107-11 mm); tributary to Car- 
roll’s Creek, 5 miles north of Tuscaloosa, Tus- 
caloosa County; 15 March 1963; J.D. Williams 
and W.M. Howell; UAIC 1837. 

W539 (ones, 107 mm); Cave Spring, 1% miles 
east of junction of Morgan County; 5 March 1967; 
J.G. Armstrong and J.D. Williams; UAIC 1982. 

W578-80 (37, 119-28 mm); Gurley Creek, on 
U.S. route 79 near Blout-Jefferson County line, 
Jefferson County; 1 March 1970; Lee Barclay and 
Vickie Barclay; UAIC 3342. 

W517-19 (22, 97-103 mm, onec, 91 mm); 
branch of Hurricane Creek at Alberta City, Tus- 
caloosa County; 22 March 1956; W. Herndon and 
J. Zambernard; UAIC 796. 

W572 (one? , 93 mm); Hurricane Creek, Tus- 
caloosa, Tuscaloosa County; 23 March 1956; L.B. 
Cooper; UAIC 711. 

W523-24 (oneQ, 106 mm; onec’, 101 mm); 
unnamed spring, Lauderdale County; 23 March 
1967; J. Armstrong and T. Jandebeur; UAIC 1991. 

W529 (one2, 99 mm); Little Cypress Creek, 
%> mile west of Zip City, Lauderdale County; 23 
March 1967; B.R. Wall, H. Harima, and J.F. 
Thompson; UAIC 2509. 

W531-32 (one?, 102 mm; one, 115 mm); 
tributary of Middle Cypress Creek at Bethel Berry 
Church, Lauderdale County; 29 January 1969; 
Wall, Harima, and Mettee; UAIC 3240. 

W522 (ones, 124 mm); New River below U.S. 
highway 278 at Natural Bridge, Marion County; 
30 March 1968; Caldwell, Wall and Barclay; UAIC 
2885. 

W528 (onec’, 112 mm); New River below U.S. 
highway 278 at Natural Bridge, Marion County; 
3 April 1965; J.D. Williams, D. Caldwell, and W.M. 
Howell; UAIC 1593. 

W537 (one®, 118 mm); Polebridge Creek, 11 
miles north of Tuscaloosa, Tuscaloosa County; 
2 February 1963; J.D.W. and W.M. Howell; UAIC 
1161. 

W544 (one2, 95 mm); Schultz Creek, 4 miles 
north of Centerville, Bibb County; 29 March 1966; 
W.M. Howell; UAIC 1903. 

W896-900 (5 ammocoetes, 66-125 mm); Seven 
Springs, tributary to Choccolocco Creek, 1.3 miles 
north-northeast of Choccolocco, Calhoun County; 
11 September 1971; J.E. McCaleb and L.L. Ram- 
sey; AU 4819. 

W530 (onec’, 110 mm); tributary of Sipsey 
River, 2 miles south of Fayette, Tuscaloosa 
County; 25 February 1966; R.D. Caldwell and Bill 
Shamblen; UAIC 1863. 

W540 (one, 109 mm); South Sandy Creek, 
Talladega National Forest, Bibb County; 1 April 
1962; T.H. Walker, R.B. Phillips, and B. Hepner; 
UAIC 882. 

W546 (ones, 123 mm); South Sandy Creek, 
Tuscaloosa County; 17 January 1964; R.D. Cald- 
well and W.M. Howell; UAIC 1112. 

W892-95 (4 ammocoetes, 98-132 mm); Town 
Creek, tributary to Cotaco Creek near Somerville, 


Morgan County; 12 July 1966; G.R. Hooper; UAIC 
1848 and UAIC 1873. 


Arkansas: Mississippi River system 
W742 (one, 110 mm); Piney Creek, Izard County; 
17 February 1973; W.J. and R.S. Matthews and 
G.L. Harp; ASUMZ 1878. 

W740-41 (29, 110-12 mm); Saddle Mill Pond 
branch, South Folk River, Fulton County; 27 Jan- 
uary 1973; G.L. Harp; ASUMZ. 


Kentucky: upper Mississippi River system 

W2316 (oneo’, 150 mm); Clear Creek, 2 miles 
southeast of Disputanta, Rockcastle County; 20 
March 1966; Steve Stacy; EKU 168. 

W607 (onec’, 143 mm); creek, 6 miles south of 
Fairdale, Bullitt County; 7 April 1968; R.T. Schaaf; 
INHS. 

W609-10 (2c, 121-36 mm); creek one mile 
west of Means, Montgomery County; 12 April 
1968; P.W. and D.M. Smith; INHS. 

W747-49 (3 ammocoetes, 62-67 mm); north 
fork of Rough River, Breckinridge County; 18 
April 1970; Branson and Class; EKU 421. 

W608 (one? , 140 mm); Walters Creek, 4 miles 
north of Magnolia, Larue County; 28 March 1964; 
M.E. Braasch and P.W. Smith; INHS. 


Maryland: Chesapeake Bay basin 
W1104-08 (one®, 92 mm; 4, 100-12 mm);trib- 
utary of Battle Creek, 5 miles southwest of 
Prince Frederick, Calvert County; 4 April 1964; 
Brooke Kaine; CBL 2266. 

W1101 (one®, 128 mm); below Uriebille Pond, 
Kent County; 14 November 1958; J. Longwell; 
CBL 1969. 


Ohio: Ohio River system 
W588-89 (one® , 113 mm; onec’, 135 mm); Crane 
Hollow, Ohio River, Hocking County; 20 April 
1967; Andrew White; UAIC 2846. 

W587 (oneco’, 123 mm); Laurelville; 17 April 
1969; Andrew White; UAIC 4504 . 


Tennessee: Tennessee River system 

5069-76 (VDV), (22, 140-51 mm; 69, 121-45 
mm); Falling Water River, 7%2 miles southeast of 
Cookeville, Putnam County; date and collector 
unknown; TTU. 


35 


References Cited 


Abbott, C.C. 

(1860). Descriptions of new species of American 
freshwater fishes. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 
1860: 325-28. 


American Fisheries Society, 

Committee on Names of Fishes 

(1970). A list of common and scientific names of 
fishes from the United States and Canada, 3rd ed., 
by Reeve M. Bailey, et al. Am. Fish. Soc. Spec. 
Publ. no. 6. 150 pp. 


Brigham, W.U. 
(1973). Nest construction of the lamprey, Lam- 
petra aepyptera. Copeia 1973: 135-36. 


Creaser, C.W., and C.L. Hubbs 
(1922). A revision of the Holarctic lampreys. 
Occas. Pap. Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich. 120. 14 pp. 


Kott, Edward 

(1974). A morphometric and meristic study of a 
population of the American brook lamprey, Le- 
thenteron lamottei (Le Sueur), from Ontario. Can. 
J. Zool. 52: 1047-55. 


Le Sueur, C.A. 

(1927). American ichthyology, or natural history 
of the fishes of North America. New Harmony, 
Ind. 6 pp. 


Manion, P.J., and H.A. Purvis 

(1970). Giant American brook lampreys, Lampetra 
lamottei, in the upper Great Lakes. J. Fish. Res. 
Board Can. 28: 616-20. 


Raney, E.C. 
(1952). A new lamprey, Ichthyomyzon hubbsi, 
from the upper Tennessee River system. Copeia 
1952: 93-99. 


Scott, W.B., and E.J. Crossman 
(1973). Freshwater fishes of Canada. Fish. Res. 
Board Can. Bull 184. 966 pp. 


Seversmith, H.F. 

(1953). Distribution, morphology and life history 
of Lampetra aepyptera, a brook lamprey, in Mary- 
land. Copeia 1953: 225-32. 


Smith-Vaniz, W.F. 
(1968). Freshwater fishes of Alabama. Auburn 
University, Agricultural Experiment Station, Au- 
burn, Ala. 211 pp. 


Trautman, M.B. 


(1957). The fishes of Ohio. Ohio State University 
Press, Columbus. 683 pp. 


36 


Viadykov, V.D. 

(1949). Quebec lampreys (Petromyzonidae). 1, 
List of species and their economic importance. 
Contrib. Dep. Fish., Quebec, no. 26, 67 pp. 
(1950). Larvae of eastern American lampreys 
(Petromyzonidae). 1, Species with two dorsal fins. 
Nat. can. 77: 73-95. 

(1973). Lampetra pacifica, a new nonparasitic 
species of lamprey (Petromyzontidae from Ore- 
gon and California. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 30: 
205-13. 

(1974). Request for a ruling on the stem of 
family-group names based on the type-genus 
Petromyzon Linnaeus, 1758. Z.N. (S.) 2045. Bull 
Zool. Nomencl. 30: 198-99. 


Viadykov, V.D., and W.I. Follett 

(1965). Lampetra richardsoni, a new nonparasitic 
species of lamprey (Petromyzonidae) from western 
North America. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 22: 139- 
58. 

(1967). The teeth of lampreys (Petromyzonidae): 
their terminology and use in a key to the Holarctic 
genera. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 24: 1067-75.