Common name: Northern Redbelly Dace
Synonyms and Other Names: Phoxinus eos (Cope, 1861)
available through www.itis.gov
Identification: Becker (1983); Smith (1985); Holton (1990); Page and Burr (1991). Another name is Chrosomus eos.
Size: 8 cm.
Native Range: Atlantic, Great Lakes, Hudson Bay, upper Mississippi, Missouri, and Peace-Mackenzie River drainages, from Nova Scotia west to Northwest Territories and British Columbia, south to northern Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Colorado (Page and Burr 1991).
Puerto Rico &
Hydrologic Unit Codes (HUCs) Explained
Native range data for this species provided in part by NatureServe
Interactive maps: Point Distribution Maps
Table 1. States with nonindigenous occurrences, the earliest and latest observations in each state, and the tally and names of HUCs with observations†. Names and dates are hyperlinked to their relevant specimen records. The list of references for all nonindigenous occurrences of Chrosomus eos are found here.
Table last updated 10/4/2018
† Populations may not be currently present.
* HUCs are not listed for states where the observation(s) cannot be approximated to a HUC (e.g. state centroids or Canadian provinces).
Means of Introduction: In a summary table on fishes liberated in Ohio waters, Trautman (1981) noted that 7,000 Northern Redbelly Dace from Michigan were unsuccessfully introduced into Ohio waters in October 1935, presumably as a forage fish. The report in Oklahoma is apparently based on observations of this species in bait tanks near Ft. Gibson Reservoir in Wagoner County (Heard 1959). The owner of the bait establishment said the minnows were imported from Minnesota. The retailer had noticed the dace mixed in the primarily fathead minnow bait shipments that he had been purchasing and re-selling for over a year. Although, there are no verified records from open waters, at least some individuals were likely introduced through discarded or escaped bait.
Status: Extirpated in Ohio. Reported from Oklahoma.
Impact of Introduction: The impacts of this species are currently unknown, as no studies have been done to determine how it has affected ecosystems in the invaded range. The absence of data does not equate to lack of effects. It does, however, mean that research is required to evaluate effects before conclusions can be made.
Leo Nico, and Pam Fuller
Revision Date: 12/5/2003
Peer Review Date: 4/1/2016
Leo Nico, and Pam Fuller, 2019, Chrosomus eos Cope, 1861: U.S. Geological Survey, Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Database, Gainesville, FL, https://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/FactSheet.aspx?SpeciesID=618, Revision Date: 12/5/2003, Peer Review Date: 4/1/2016, Access Date: 8/25/2019
This information is preliminary or provisional and is subject to revision. It is being provided to meet the need for timely best science. The information has not received final approval by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and is provided on the condition that neither the USGS nor the U.S. Government shall be held liable for any damages resulting from the authorized or unauthorized use of the information.