Inland fishes of Massachusetts /

Freshwater Fish Mercury Concentrations in a Regionally High Mercury Deposition Area

“…These two species were used because LMB are known to bioaccumulate mercury to relatively high levels in the freshwater food chain (Cizdziel et al 2002;Cizdziel et al 2003;Saiki et al 2005;and Paller and Littrell 2007), they are representative of an upper level trophic group (Scott and Crossman 1973), and are very common throughout Massachusetts (Hartel et al 2002). YP are ubiquitous introduced omnivores (Scott and Crossman 1973;Hartel et al 2002) and have been used in other studies as sentinel species (Ion et al 1997;Rencz et al 2003;Kamman et al 2005). Both species are also popular recreational fisheries species in MA (R. Hartley, Massachusetts Department of Fish and Game, Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, personal communication).…”

Application of the target fish community model to an urban river system

“…This yielded 34 species. We supplemented these results with a review of "Inland Fishes of Massachusetts" by Hartel et al (2002), which raised the total to 53 species. Species found commonly in reference rivers were added to this list to bring the total to 61 species.…”

“…From this list, 24 species were deleted for a variety of reasons based on consultations with regional fisheries experts: ten marine and estuarine species only enter coastal freshwater habitats (e.g., Atlantic silverside, Menidia menidia, and winter flounder, Pseudopleuronectes americanus), two species have a restricted distribution to estuarine and coastal areas in the New England region but are more prevalent in other United States regions (e.g., ninespine stickleback, Pungitius pungitius, and hogchocker, Trinectes maculatus; Hartel et al, 2002), nine species were judged out of range (e.g. eastern blacknose dace, Rhinichthys atratulus, and Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar; Hartel et al, 2002), and three were historically introduced species that failed to become established (e.g., rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss, tiger muskellunge, Esox masquinongy x Esox lucius, and bowfin, Amia calva; Hartel et al, 2002). Anadromous fish were included in the list of potential species based on the fact that the Charles River dam, located at the mouth of the Charles River between the Charlestown and North End sections of Boston, has a fish ladder and a locking procedure allowing passage of migrating fish.…”

“…For pollution tolerance, we used the classifications of Barbour et al (1999) and Halliwell et al (1999) for Northeast US fishes: intolerant (I), moderately tolerant (M), or tolerant (T). Finally, species were designated as native or exotic (introduced) from Hartel et al (2002).…”

Foraging by Two Estuarine Fishes, Fundulus heteroclitus and Fundulus majalis, on Juvenile Asian Shore Crabs (Hemigrapsus sanguineus) in Western Long Island Sound

“…Before diet analysis, fish were thawed, measured [total length (TL) to the nearest 0.1 cm], and identified to species using taxonomic keys (Whitworth et al 1968;Hartel et al 2002). The entire alimentary tract, which was considered as the gut, was removed from each fish, and its contents were examined.…”