Disclaimer:

The Nonindigenous Occurrences section of the NAS species profiles has a new structure. The section is now dynamically updated from the NAS database to ensure that it contains the most current and accurate information. Occurrences are summarized in Table 1, alphabetically by state, with years of earliest and most recent observations, and the tally and names of drainages where the species was observed. The table contains hyperlinks to collections tables of specimens based on the states, years, and drainages selected. References to specimens that were not obtained through sighting reports and personal communications are found through the hyperlink in the Table 1 caption or through the individual specimens linked in the collections tables.

---

Common name: Scarlet Shiner

Taxonomy: available through www.itis.gov

Identification: Page and Burr (1991); Etnier and Starnes (1993); Jenkins and Burkhead (1994); another commonly used name is Notropis ardens. Snelson (1990) recognized two subspecies, L. a. ardens and L. a. fasciolaris. Dimmick et al. (1996) recognized L. ardens as a species complex; as part of a re-evaluation, they elevated L. a. fasciolaris to species status. Mayden et al. (1992) and Gilbert (1998) treated as a valid species.

Size: 8.5 cm.

Native Range: Ohio River basin from Scioto River drainage, Ohio, southwest to extreme southeastern Illinois (now extirpated) and south to Tennessee River drainage, Alabama; New River drainage, Virginia and West Virginia (Snelson 1990; Page and Burr 1991).

Alaska	Hawaii	Puerto Rico & Virgin Islands	Guam Saipan

Native range data for this species provided in part by NatureServe

Hydrologic Unit Codes (HUCs) Explained
Interactive maps: Point Distribution Maps

Means of Introduction: Unknown; probable bait bucket release.

Status: Established in Alabama. Reported in Ohio.

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.

Remarks: In their taxonomic revision, Dimmick et al. (1996) recognized three distinct species in the L. ardens complex and they restricted the range of each of the species. Based on the distribution map given by Dimmick et al. (1996) for the three species, we can assume that records from the Muskingum River drainage, Ohio, represent Lythrurus fasciolaris. However, among the L. ardens complex, Dimmick et al. (1996) apparently only recognized populations found in the York River drainage (L. ardens) of Virginia as introduced. Snelson (1990) provided details on the distribution of native and introduced populations. However, Snelson was uncertain of the origin of the subspecies fasciolaris (now L. fasciolaris) population occurring in the Black Warrior River system of the Tombigbee River drainage, Alabama; he indicated that it may be native or simply the result of recent introduction. Similarly, Swift et al. (1986) listed this species as possibly introduced into the Black Warrior system in Alabama; however, Mettee et al. (1996) listed it as native to that river system.

Other Resources:

Author: Nico, L.

Peer Review Date: 3/20/2001

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.