Interdisciplinary Approaches Improve Understanding of Cryptogenic Species: A Historical Case Study of Crayfish in Montana, <scp>USA</scp>

ABSTRACT Cryptogenic species are those that are not yet “demonstrably native or introduced” in a given area, such as crayfish in western Montana, USA. Delving into evidence from diverse fields can help clarify the status of cryptogenic species. Primary historical sources and indigenous knowledge have informed various ecological questions but are seldom used to clarify the status of cryptogenic species, especially aquatic taxa. We summarize types of evidence used to illuminate species status and offer a case study applying historical sources to cryptogenic crayfish in Montana. We searched for crayfish mentions in dictionaries of indigenous languages and primary historical documents (e.g., travel journals, newspaper accounts, early biological surveys). Early explorer accounts we examined did not mention crayfish in Montana, though they noted them in the nearby Snake River drainage of Idaho and Wyoming. The first mention of crayfish in Montana that we found was from an 1868 newspaper account, probably referencing the upper Missouri River. The species was not noted, but an 1887 article suggested signal crayfish Pacifastacus leniusculus introductions near Bozeman, where non‐native signal crayfish still persist. The earliest crayfish mention we found west of the Great Divide in Montana was from 1934 in Ninepipes and probably referred to non‐native virile crayfish ( Faxonius virilis ). Signal crayfish were not mentioned west of the Divide until a 1944 newspaper account noted their 1937 introduction to the Bitterroot River drainage. The case study demonstrates the value of historical sources in identifying the absence of species and documenting their presence or introduction during periods predating scientific data.