and Moe (49) and Moyle (34) also reported such 

 summary data for all species considered here 

 except the white crappie, spotted sucker, 

 orangespotted suniish , bigmouth buffalo, and 

 smallmouth buffalo. 



A rectilinear relationship between total 

 body length and length of the anterior scale 

 radius was used for all growth calculation. The 

 values of the correction for length at time of 

 scale formation, where used (Table 21), were 

 taken from various sources except for carp. 

 Following the method of Butler and Smith (8) 

 for examination of scale pocket formation, the 

 average total length at time of scale formation 

 (in the area of the body from which samples 

 were taken) of carp was found to be 0.9 inches. 



Table 21: — Values of correction for length at time 



of scale formation in the various species 

 used in growth calculations. 



Species 



Correction 

 f Total length in inches) 



Largemouth bass 



White bass 



Blue gill 



Bigmouth buffalo 



Smallmouth buf faT o 



Carp 



Black crappie 



White crappie 



Freshwater drum 



Yellow perch 



Sauger 



Spotted sucker 



Orangespotted sunfish 



0.8 



0.0 



0.86 



0.0 



0.0 



0.9 



0.8 



0.8 



0.8 



0.5 



0.7 



0.0 



0.0 



each of these species the difference in numerical 

 representation of the 1944 and 1945 year classes 

 (age groups III and II) was extensive. Because 

 so few specimens of the former year class were 

 present, significant figures for most species 

 are limited to age groups I and II. In general, 

 very poor growth was shown for all species in 

 1945 . Since that year class strongly affects 

 the weighted calculations due to its strong 

 representation in the samples compared to other 

 year classes, the resulting data are not con- 

 sidered to be representative of the general 

 growth picture for the area. Butler and Smith 

 (8) found similar conditions in the 1945 year 

 class of the freshwater drum. 



Table 22; — Grand average calculated total lengths in inches at time of 

 annulus fomation of various suecies, sexes conbijied, from 

 Killer Lake, August 15, 19li7. 



Back calculations of length at various 

 annuli were made by the use of manila tag- 

 board strips marked from the projected scale 

 image and a straightline nomograph (Carlander 

 and Smith, 13). Two scales from each sample 

 were read to minimize the influence of varia- 

 bility of the scales . Size of the samples and 

 incomplete sex data did not permit separate 

 calculations for each sex. 



References in this section to the number of 

 year classes or age groups present exclude 

 young-of-the-year (age group 0). 



Miller lake 



Growth -rate calculations were made for 

 eight species from Miller Lake (Table 22). For 



Areas A and B 



The growth- rate calculations for various 

 species from areas A and B have been combined 

 where an increase in the size of the sample of 

 poorly represented year classes would result. 

 It is assumed that fish from both areas represent 

 the same population because: 1) there is agree- 

 ment in the growth -rate calculations among 

 well -represented year classes of certain species; 

 2) both areas open upon the same unobstructed 

 channel during low water stages; and 3) at high 

 water levels both are virtually contiguous and 

 offer an opportunity for random distribution of 

 fish over the entire area . Robert Sharp!/ 



7/Personal communication, December Ih, 1951. 



35 



