Sample Details: 



SloKey Gulch (2272): All twenty-three successfully amplitled individuals in this sample displayed PINE fragments 

 diagnostic of vvestslope cutthroat trout. No evidence of introgression with rainbow trout was detected. With a sample 

 size of twenty -three, we have a 94% chance of detecting as little as 1% hybridization between westslope cutthroat trout 

 and rainbow trout. 



This sample was also tested for introgression with Yellowstone cutthroat trout. No evidence of introgression was 

 detected. With a sample size of twenty -three, we have an 84" o chance of detecting as little as 1% hybridization 

 between Yellowstone and westslope cutthroat trout. 



Spring Creek to Sturgeon Creek (2274): All eighteen successfully amplified individuals in this sample displayed only 

 PENE fragments diagnostic of westslope cutthroat trout. With a sample size of eighteen, we have an 89'/o chance of 

 detecting as little as 1% hybridization between westslope cutthroat trout and rainbow trout. 



Tins sample was also tested for introgression with Yellowstone cutthroat trout. No evidence of introgression was 

 detected. With a sample size of eighteen, we have a 76% chance of detecting as little as 1% hybridization beUveen 

 Yellowstone and westslope cutthroat trout. A larger sample size is necessary for a more accurate analysis. 



Wilson Creek (2275): All twenty-two successfully amplified individuals in this sample displayed only PINE 

 fragments diagnostic of westslope cutthroat trout. Three individuals failed to amplify at one pnmer pair. With a 

 sample size of twenty-^vo, we have a 93% chance of detecting as little as 1% hybridization between westslope 

 cutthi^oat trout and rainbow trout. 



This sample was also tested for introgression with Yellowstone cutthroat trout. No evidence of introgression was 

 detected. With a sample size of twenty-two, we have an 83% chance of detecting as little as 1% hybndization between 

 Yellowstone and westslope cutthroat trout. 



Second Creek (227S): This sample failed to amplify at two of the three primer pairs. The samples were ream as 

 motherlodes and still failed to amplify. This may be due to storage in bad ethanol (collected 6/2000). 



Pattee Creek (22S1): All thirteen successfully amplified individuals in this sample displayed PINE fragments 

 diagnostic of westslope cutthroat trout. No evidence of inti-ogression with rainbow trout was detected. With a sample 

 size of thirteen, we have a 79% chance of detecting as little as 1% hybridization between westslope cutthroat trout and 

 rainbow trout. 



This sample was also tested for introgression with Yellowstone cutthroat trout. No evidence of introgression was 

 detected. With a sample size of thirteen, we have a 65% chance of detecting as little as 1% hybridization between 

 Yellowstone and westslope cutthroat trout. A larger sample size is necessary for a more accurate analysis. 



Deep Creek near Superior (22S4): All twenty-five successfully amplified individuals in this sample displayed only 

 PINE fragments diagnostic of westslope cutthroat trout. With a sample size of twenty-five, we have a 95% chance of 

 detecting as little as T/o hybridization between westslope cutthroat trout and rainbow trout. 



This sample was also tested for introgression with Yellowstone cutthroat trout. No evidence of introgression was 

 detected. With a sample size of twenty-five, we have an 87% chance of detecting as little as 1% hybridization between 

 Yellowstone and westslope cutthroat trout. 



