 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Diets edit
The section on diets was somewhat misleading. In particular the statement that gizzard shad rely heavily on detritus only when their abundance is high and they cause zooplankton populations to crash. In reality, in most midwestern and southern reservoirs, the majority of their diet (aside from larvae) is detritus. I am an author on the paper that was cited about this aspect of their diets (Schaus et al 2002) and statement here about diets doesn't accurately reflect what we found. Therefore, I edited this section and added 2 references.MikeVanni (talk) 15:26, 24 September 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MikeVanni (talk • contribs) 14:38, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
Forage Fishing controversy edit
This section appears to directly contradict the conclusions of a source and provides a POV conclusion of it's own.
Unfortunately, I don't have time to clean it up. Anyone else want to make it more balanced?--216.227.57.97 (talk) 15:43, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't have time to add the apportie citations or anything, So I deleted any statement that did not have a link to a study to back it up. I also deleted the obviously bias statements and personal opinions. The article is shorter now, but at least a reader/non fish biologist wont take the incorrect and wrong message away. The original author did not know what he was talking about. Other trained professionals (such as myself) should delete and add to these articles if their time allows. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.204.149.106 (talk) 16:23, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Also remember if you choose to revise this article reference your material correctly. Do not reference in-fisherman or a blog website. If you don't know how to find scientific articles on Google scholar or in your library then you should not be writing these articles to begin with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.204.149.106 (talk) 16:30, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Regarding Gizzard shad as a pollution "canary in the coal mine" edit
This quote is unattributed to the source cited, and makes no such mention of Gizzard shad being more or less vulnerable to pollution. It only talks about Gizzard shad being potentially at risk of dying in a given concentration.
Meanwhile, this source here, Interstate Pollution Of Ohio River Wheeling, W Va - Steubenville, Ohio Area https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/2000W8E9.PDF?Dockey=2000W8E9.PDF
suggests that Gizzard shad are actually very tolerant to pollution, as they comprised a large percentage of fish in the more polluted section of the Ohio river (page 44 of the report).