(Percidae: Etheostoma), with Descriptions of Five New Species

Layman & Mayden Morphological Diversity and Phylogenetics of the Darter subgenus Doration (Percidae: Etheostoma) 17tion and plate; Virginia distribution); Etnier and Starnes,1994:534–537 (biology; distribution and status; systematics;key); Jenkins and Burkhead, 1994: 838–840, fish 290–291, plate 28 (systematics; description; breeding malecoloration; biology; habitat; distribution; halftone photos;breeding male color plate).Etheostoma meadiae (Jordan and Evermann) was resurrectedby Howell (1980b), who found the name availablefor a distinctive form of Doration from the upper Clinchand Powell rivers in the upper Tennessee drainage.Howell (1968) had earlier treated these populations asintergrades between what he considered nominal E. stigmaeumfrom the Cumberland drainage (described as anew species below) and nominal E. jessiae. He based thisassessment on the observation that 53% of specimenspossessed a frenum, which he considered the most distinctivecharacter separating the taxa, and present-daydrainage patterns suggestive of stream capture betweenthe Cumberland and Powell rivers.Examination of additional specimens later convincedHowell (1980b) that these apparent intergrades actuallyrepresent a distinct taxon (Etnier and Starnes, 1994). Hisrecognition of E. meadiae and all other taxa of Doration asdistinct species (Howell, 1980a, 1980b, 1980c) was bolsteredby the apparent reproductive isolation of sympatricforms of E. stigmaeum and E. jessiae in the Stones Riverof the Cumberland drainage (Etnier and Starnes, 1994,in pers. comm. with Howell). Howell’s (1980a, 1980b,1980c) conclusions were not accompanied by supportingdata. Consequently, E. meadiae has failed to gain recognitionas a species. Furthermore, the single record of E. jessiaefrom the Stones River has been shown to be invalid,having resulted from an error in cataloging specimensfrom Little Pigeon River in the Tennessee River drainage(Layman, 1994).Etheostoma meadiae is currently treated as a subspeciesor race of a polytypic E. stigmaeum by Etnier andStarnes (1994). Jenkins and Burkhead (1994) also treatit as a subspecies but hold out the possibility of it beingan intergrade. Starnes and Etnier (1986) pointed to thelack of evidence for a major stream capture between theCumberland and Powell rivers, weakening support forHowell’s intergradation hypothesis (Etnier and Starnes,1994). Patterns of nuptial male coloration are also inconsistentwith intergradation. Males of both supposed parentaltaxa develop orange pigment in the base of thespinous dorsal fin and bright orange spots on the softdorsal, caudal, and pectoral fins. These features are lackingin E. meadiae.Morphological and breeding color data gathered inthis study indicate that E. meadiae warrants recognitionas a distinct species. Moreover, the phylogenetic hypothesisgenerated using these data suggests that E. meadiaeand E. jessiae are not even sister taxa. Etheostoma meadiae istreated herein as a distinct species restricted to the upperClinch and Powell rivers upstream of Norris Reservoir inTennessee and Virginia.Holotype.—USNM 48903, male, 46 mm SL, IndianCreek, tributary of Powell River, Cumberland Gap, Tennessee,17 October 1893, R. R. Gurley. The holotype isfigured in Jordan and Evermann (1900:fig. 447).Paratypes.—USNM 125623, male, 46 mm SL, samedata as holotype, original number BF 711 (U. S. Bureauof Fisheries). According to Collette and Knapp (1966),the third type was apparently sent to Stanford University,but it was not listed among the types there by Bohlke(1953); they were unable to locate it.Figure 8. Etheostoma meadiae (Jordan and Evermann, 1898). Blackwater Creek at TN Hwy 70, 0.5 km S Virginia line,Hancock County, Tennessee, 1 April 1993. UAIC 10706.01; male, 51 mm SL. Drawing by Joseph R. Tomelleri (americanfishes.com).Copyrighted by Joseph R. Tomelleri. Used with permission.