Weet Pitcher Plant Erv Plan RECOVERY PLAN
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Sarracenias Aquascapes Seed Grown Hybrids Dutch Treats Collector's
AQUASCAPES UNLIMITED, INC PO Box 364, Pipersville PA 18947 Phone: 215-766-8151, Fax: 215-766-8986 www.aquascapesunlimited.com EMAIL: [email protected] Spring 2014 Our Sarracenias are sold in small, medium and large sizes. The availability is indicated in the chart below with an X=Avail . The pricing reflects age and size: Small - $1.95 (1-2 Years) Multiples of 6, Medium - $3.95 (2-3 Years) Multiples of 5, Large - $8.95 (3-4Years) Multiples of 4. Sarracenias Botanical Name Common Name Small Med. Large Sarracenia alata Pale Pitcher X X X Sarracenia flava Yellow Trumpet X X Sarracenia leucophylla White Trumpet X X Sarracenia leucophylla 'Tarnock' ‘Tarnock’ X X Sarracenia psittacina Parrot Pitcher X Sarracenia purpurea Purple Pitcher X X X Sarracenia rubra Sweet Pitcher X X S. rubra ssp. jonesii (all green) Sweet Pitcher (all green) X Sarracenia x UNC Hybrid ‘Dixie Lace’ X X Sarracenia x UNC Hybrid ‘Doodle Bug’ X Sarracenia x UNC Hybrid ‘Mardi Gras’ X X Sarracenia x UNC Hybrid ‘Red Bug’ X Aquascapes Seed Grown Hybrids Sarracenia Hybrid Botanical Name Small Med. Large S. x areolata S. leucophylla x alata X X X S. x catesbaei S. purp x flava X X X S. readii x moorei S. (leuco x rubra j) (lxf) X X S. x readii All Green S. leuco x rubra jonsii X S. x moorei S. flava x leucophylla X S. x formosa (Limited) S. psitt x minor X Dutch Treats Botanical Name Common Name Size Price S. x 'Farnhamii ' Sarracenia x 'Farnhamii ' PL/72 3.95 S. -
Educational Posters on Threatened Plant Communities of North Carolina
Submitted by Nicolette L. Cagle on June 26, 2012 Native Plant Studies Certificate Project: Educational Posters on Threatened Plant Communities of North Carolina Nonriverine Wet Hardwood Forest from the Coastal Plain, NC. [Photo by David Blevins, Ph.D.] Submitted by Nicolette L. Cagle on June 26, 2012 Table of Contents Background ................................................................................................................................................... 3 Project Description........................................................................................................................................ 3 Timeline......................................................................................................................................................... 4 Most Threatened Plant Communities in North Carolina .............................................................................. 4 Poster Display at the North Carolina Botanical Garden................................................................................ 5 Posters .......................................................................................................................................................... 6 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 6 Threatened Plant Communities ................................................................................................................ 7 Poster Project References -
2012 Montana Nonpoint Source Management Plan – Table of Contents
Montana Nonpoint Source Management Plan 2012 Brian Schweitzer, Governor Richard Opper, Director DEQ WQPBWPSTR-005 Prepared by: Water Quality Planning Bureau Watershed Protection Section Acknowledgements: The Watershed Protection Section would like to thank all of our partners and collaborators for their input and advice for this update to the Montana Nonpoint Source Management Plan. Montana Department of Environmental Quality Water Quality Planning Bureau 1520 E. Sixth Avenue P.O. Box 200901 Helena, MT 59620-0901 Suggested citation: Watershed Protection Section. 2012. Montana Nonpoint Source Management Plan. Helena, MT: Montana Dept. of Environmental Quality. 2012 Montana Nonpoint Source Management Plan – Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................................... v Nonpoint Source Management Plan Overview ............................................................................................ 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3 1.0 Montana’s NPS Pollution Management Program Framework ............................................................ 1-1 1.1 Water Quality Standards and Classification ..................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Impaired Waterbodies and 303(d) List and Water Quality Assessment ......................................... -
(Sarracenia) Provide a 21St-Century Perspective on Infraspecific Ranks and Interspecific Hybrids: a Modest Proposal* for Appropriate Recognition and Usage
Systematic Botany (2014), 39(3) © Copyright 2014 by the American Society of Plant Taxonomists DOI 10.1600/036364414X681473 Date of publication 05/27/2014 Pitcher Plants (Sarracenia) Provide a 21st-Century Perspective on Infraspecific Ranks and Interspecific Hybrids: A Modest Proposal* for Appropriate Recognition and Usage Aaron M. Ellison,1,5 Charles C. Davis,2 Patrick J. Calie,3 and Robert F. C. Naczi4 1Harvard University, Harvard Forest, 324 North Main Street, Petersham, Massachusetts 01366, U. S. A. 2Harvard University Herbaria, Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, 22 Divinity Avenue, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, U. S. A. 3Eastern Kentucky University, Department of Biological Sciences, 521 Lancaster Avenue, Richmond, Kentucky 40475, U. S. A. 4The New York Botanical Garden, 2900 Southern Boulevard, Bronx, New York 10458, U. S. A. 5Author for correspondence ([email protected]) Communicating Editor: Chuck Bell Abstract—The taxonomic use of infraspecific ranks (subspecies, variety, subvariety, form, and subform), and the formal recognition of interspecific hybrid taxa, is permitted by the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants. However, considerable confusion regarding the biological and systematic merits is caused by current practice in the use of infraspecific ranks, which obscures the meaningful variability on which natural selection operates, and by the formal recognition of those interspecific hybrids that lack the potential for inter-lineage gene flow. These issues also may have pragmatic and legal consequences, especially regarding the legal delimitation and management of threatened and endangered species. A detailed comparison of three contemporary floras highlights the degree to which infraspecific and interspecific variation are treated inconsistently. -
Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- BIBLIOGRAPHY
Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Ackerfield, J., and J. Wen. 2002. A morphometric analysis of Hedera L. (the ivy genus, Araliaceae) and its taxonomic implications. Adansonia 24: 197-212. Adams, P. 1961. Observations on the Sagittaria subulata complex. Rhodora 63: 247-265. Adams, R.M. II, and W.J. Dress. 1982. Nodding Lilium species of eastern North America (Liliaceae). Baileya 21: 165-188. Adams, R.P. 1986. Geographic variation in Juniperus silicicola and J. virginiana of the Southeastern United States: multivariant analyses of morphology and terpenoids. Taxon 35: 31-75. ------. 1995. Revisionary study of Caribbean species of Juniperus (Cupressaceae). Phytologia 78: 134-150. ------, and T. Demeke. 1993. Systematic relationships in Juniperus based on random amplified polymorphic DNAs (RAPDs). Taxon 42: 553-571. Adams, W.P. 1957. A revision of the genus Ascyrum (Hypericaceae). Rhodora 59: 73-95. ------. 1962. Studies in the Guttiferae. I. A synopsis of Hypericum section Myriandra. Contr. Gray Herbarium Harv. 182: 1-51. ------, and N.K.B. Robson. 1961. A re-evaluation of the generic status of Ascyrum and Crookea (Guttiferae). Rhodora 63: 10-16. Adams, W.P. 1973. Clusiaceae of the southeastern United States. J. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc. 89: 62-71. Adler, L. 1999. Polygonum perfoliatum (mile-a-minute weed). Chinquapin 7: 4. Aedo, C., J.J. Aldasoro, and C. Navarro. 1998. Taxonomic revision of Geranium sections Batrachioidea and Divaricata (Geraniaceae). Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 85: 594-630. Affolter, J.M. 1985. A monograph of the genus Lilaeopsis (Umbelliferae). Systematic Bot. Monographs 6. Ahles, H.E., and A.E. -
Genetics of Sarracenia Leaf and Flower Color PHIL SHERIDAN
Genetics of Sarracenia leaf and flower color PHIL SHERIDAN Virginia Commonwealth Meadowview Biological Research University Station 8390 Fredericksburg Turnpike Department of Biology Woodford, VA 22580 816 Park Avenue Keywords: genetics: pigmentation-genetics: Sarracenia. Abstract Sarracenia is a genus of insectivorous plants confined to wetlands of eastern U.S. and Canada. Eight species are generally recognized with flower and leaf color ranging from yellow to red. Fertile hybrids occur in the wild under disturbed conditions and can be artificially produced in the greenhouse. Thus genetic barriers between species are weak. Normally when crosses occur or are induced between species or between different color types the progeny exhibit a blending of parental phenotypes called incomplete or partial dominance. In most species all-green mutants have been found which lack any red pigment in leaves, flowers or growth point. Controlled crosses were performed on all-green mutants from S. purpurea and two subspecies of the S. rubra complex. Self pollinated all-green plants Figure 1: A pink flowered hybrid in cultivation. This result in all-green offspring specimen was collected by Fred Case and is the cross S. and self pollinated wild-type rubra subsp. wherry) x S. alata. red plants result in red offspring. Crosses between red and all-green plants produce wild-type colored red progeny. These results suggest that the red alleles are "dominant" to the "recessive" all green mutant alleles in the three independent all-green variants tested. Since partial dominance is the usual genetic pattern in the genus, dominant/recessive characteristics are an unusual phenomenon. 1 Introduction The Sarraceniaceae (American pitcher plants) is a family of insectivorous pitcher plants restricted to wet, sunny, generally acid, nutrient poor habitats of the southeastern United States, Canada, northern California, southern Oregon, Venezuela, British Guiana (Lloyd, 1942), and Brazil (Maguire, 1978). -
Mountain Sweet Pitcher Plant Sarracenia Rubra Ssp
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Mountain sweet pitcher plant Sarracenia rubra ssp. jonesii Threats: The most serious threat to increasingly making use of wild plants, mountain sweet pitcher plant is the seeking out the remaining wild strain destruction or degradation of its small of many common crops, such as wheat wetland habitat. Collecting from wild and corn, to produce new hybrids that populations continues to be a problem are more resistant to disease, pests, for carnivorous plants, even though and marginal climatic conditions. Our cultivated sources are available for food crops depend on insects and other almost all species. animals for pollination. Why should we be concerned about Healthy forests clean the air and the loss of species? Extinction is a provide oxygen for us to breathe. Mountain sweet pitcher plant, natural process that has been occurring Wetlands clean water and help Gary Peeples since long before the appearance of minimize the impacts of floods. These humans. Normally, new species develop services are the foundation of life and Status: Endangered through a process known as speciation, depend on a diversity of plants and at about the same rate other species animals working in concert. Each time Description: Mountain sweet pitcher become extinct. However, because a species disappears, we lose not only plant is a carnivorous perennial herb of air and water pollution, forest those benefits we know it provided with tall, hollow pitcher-shaped leaves clearing, loss of wetlands, and other but other benefits that we have yet to and red sweet-smelling flowers. The man-induced environmental changes, realize. -
Carex Austrodeflexa (Cyperaceae), a New Species of Carex Sect
CAREX AUSTRODEFLEXA (CYPERACEAE), A NEW SPECIES OF CAREX SECT. ACROCYSTIS FROM THE ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN OF THE SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES Bruce A. Sorrie Patrick D. McMillan Brian van Eerden NC Natural Heritage Program Museum of Natural History The Nature Conservancy and UNC Herbarium, CB 3280 Clemson University 530 East Main Street Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599, U.S.A. Clemson, South Carolina 29634, U.S.A. Richmond, Virginia 23219-2428, U.S.A. [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Richard J. LeBlond Philip E. Hyatt Loran C. Anderson PO Box 787 610 East Sixth Street R.K. Godfrey Herbarium Richlands, North Carolina 28574, U.S.A. Mountain Home, Arkansas 72653, U.S.A. Florida State University [email protected] [email protected] Tallahassee, Florida 32306-4370, U.S.A. [email protected] ABSTRACT Carex austrodeflexa (sect. Acrocystis) is described from the coastal plain of the southeastern United States. This species inhabits distinc- tive wetland communities in streamheads and small-stream swamps, usually under seepage influence. It is the only wetland member of section Acrocystis found in the southern Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain. It may be told from the morphologically similar Carex deflexa on the basis of its loosely cespitose habit with long, slender, reddish rhizomes, papillose, glabrate, elliptic perigynium, longer perigynium beak, and longer staminate scales and spikes. RESUMEN Se describe Carex austrodeflexa (sect. Acrocystis) de la llanura costera del sureste de los Estados Unidos. Esta especie vive en comunidades de humedales en cabeceras de arroyos y pantanos de pequeños arroyos, usualmente bajo influencia de filtraciones. -
Water Quality and Pollution Control Handbook
ANR-790 Water Quality And Pollution Control Handbook Compiled by James E. Hairston, Extension Water Quality Scientist Assisted by Leigh Stribling, Technical Writer Alabama Cooperative Extension System, Alabama A&M and Auburn Universities ARCHIVE Contents Preface Acknowledgments —Part One— Chapter 1 Water As A Resource Section 1.1 Getting To Know Water 1.1.1 Understanding Water As A Resource 1.1.2 How Nature Recycles And Purifies Water: The Hydrologic Cycle 1.1.3 Where Water Supplies Are Stored: Surface Water And Groundwater 1.1.4 How Water Supplies Become Contaminated: Water Purity And Pollution Section 1.2 Protecting Water Quality 1.2.1 Recycling Household Wastes 1.2.2 Composting Yard Wastes 1.2.3 Disposing Of Household Chemical Wastes 1.2.4 Using Pesticides Safely Around Your Home 1.2.5 Understanding Your Septic System And Water Quality 1.2.6 Controlling Runoff From Your Yard Section 1.3 Conserving Water 1.3.1 Why Conserve Water? 1.3.2 Installing Water-Saving Devices 1.3.3 Developing Water-Conserving Habits: A Checklist 1.3.4 Xeriscaping: Landscape Design For Water Conservation Chapter 2 Managing Drinking Water Quality Section 2.1 Drinking Water Standards 2.1.1 Safe Drinking Water—Who’s In Charge? 2.1.2 Drinking Water Standards: How Are They Set? 2.1.3 Protecting Your Health: Primary Standards 2.1.4 Regulating Nuisance Contaminants: Secondary Standards 2.1.5 What Happens At A Water Treatment Plant? Section 2.2 Water Testing 2.2.1 Should You Have Your Water Tested? 2.2.2 Where Can You Have Your Water Tested? 2.2.3 How Should You Collect -
PDF Linkchapter
Index [Italic page numbers indicate major references] Abajo Mountains, 382, 388 Amargosa River, 285, 309, 311, 322, Arkansas River, 443, 456, 461, 515, Abort Lake, 283 337, 341, 342 516, 521, 540, 541, 550, 556, Abies, 21, 25 Amarillo, Texas, 482 559, 560, 561 Abra, 587 Amarillo-Wichita uplift, 504, 507, Arkansas River valley, 512, 531, 540 Absaroka Range, 409 508 Arlington volcanic field, 358 Acer, 21, 23, 24 Amasas Back, 387 Aromas dune field, 181 Acoma-Zuni scction, 374, 379, 391 Ambrose tenace, 522, 523 Aromas Red Sand, 180 stream evolution patterns, 391 Ambrosia, 21, 24 Arroyo Colorado, 395 Aden Crater, 368 American Falls Lava Beds, 275, 276 Arroyo Seco unit, 176 Afton Canyon, 334, 341 American Falls Reservoir, 275, 276 Artemisia, 21, 24 Afton interglacial age, 29 American River, 36, 165, 173 Ascension Parish, Louisana, 567 aggradation, 167, 176, 182, 226, 237, amino acid ash, 81, 118, 134, 244, 430 323, 336, 355, 357, 390, 413, geochronology, 65, 68 basaltic, 85 443, 451, 552, 613 ratios, 65 beds, 127,129 glaciofluvial, 423 aminostratigraphy, 66 clays, 451 Piedmont, 345 Amity area, 162 clouds, 95 aggregate, 181 Anadara, 587 flows, 75, 121 discharge, 277 Anastasia Formation, 602, 642, 647 layer, 10, 117 Agua Fria Peak area, 489 Anastasia Island, 602 rhyolitic, 170 Agua Fria River, 357 Anchor Silt, 188, 198, 199 volcanic, 54, 85, 98, 117, 129, Airport bench, 421, 423 Anderson coal, 448 243, 276, 295, 396, 409, 412, Alabama coastal plain, 594 Anderson Pond, 617, 618 509, 520 Alamosa Basin, 366 andesite, 75, 80, 489 Ash Flat, 364 Alamosa -
Low Elevation Seep (Bedrock Subtype)
LOW ELEVATION SEEP (BEDROCK SUBTYPE) Concept: Low Elevation Seeps are seepage-fed wetlands that are intermediate in apparent fertility and that lack the distinctive species composition and other characteristics of Hillside Seepage Bog, Piedmont Boggy Streamhead, High Elevation Boggy Seep, Sandhill Seep, and of Southern Appalachian Bogs and Fens on the one hand and of Rich Montane Seep on the other. They can be quite small, but their vegetation contrasts sharply with adjacent communities. The Bedrock Subtype consists of large seeps in shallow soil over unfractured bedrock, such as the edges of granitic domes or along bedrock stream beds. Distinguishing Features: Low Elevation Seeps are distinguished by saturated soil and by abundant wetland vegetation and flora that includes species that are intermediate in nutrient needs, while lacking those most characteristic of High Elevation Boggy Seep and the Mountain Bogs and Fens communities. The Bedrock Subtype is distinguished from other subtypes by occurring on shallow soil over bedrock and having a distinctive flora that includes some bog species. Small seepage patches are common in various rock outcrop communities and in Spray Cliffs, but this subtype is reserved for larger patches that are well-differentiated from the adjacent community and have a substantial wetland flora. Examples should be at least several meters wide and tens of meters long. Though treated as a subtype of Low Elevation Seep, the Bedrock Subtype can occur over a wide range of elevations, overlapping with High Elevation Granitic Dome, Northern Hardwood Forest, and other higher elevation communities. Low Elevation Acidic Glade (Biltmore Sedge Subtype) is similar to some examples of the Bedrock Subtype in occurring in bedrock seepage areas on granitic dome outcrops; it is distinguished by longer-term wet conditions and by vegetation that is not dominated by Carex biltmoreana. -
Proceedings: Colorado Water Workshop July 21-23, 1991 from the Dome to the Ditches-Translating Environmental Legislation Into Practice
Proceedings: Colorado Water Workshop July 21-23, 1991 From the Dome to the Ditches-Translating Environmental Legislation into Practice Presented by Western State College Foundation Western State College of Colorado Information Series No. 68 PROCEEDINGS: COLORADO WATER WORKSHOP JULY 21-23, 1991 Presented by Western State College of Colorado Gunnison, Colorado From the Dome to the Ditches: Translating Environmental Legislation into Practice Colorado Water Resources Research Institute Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO 80523 Robert C. Ward, Director Infonnation Series No. 68 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 Opening Remarks Michael Callihan, Lieutenant Governor of Colorado ...................... .. 2 Reauthorization of the Clean Water Act: Implications for Colorado Bennett Raley, Legal Counsel, Senator Hank Brown 4 Melinda Kassen, Attorney, Environmental Defense Fund. .................. .. 13 Questions and Answers. ....................................... .. 21 Integrating Environmental Values Into Western Water Law and Policy: Minor Adjustments or Major Reform? 27 Greg Hobbs, Attorney, Davis, Graham, and Stubbs Marc Reisner, Author, Cadillac Desert and Overtapped Oasis Moderator: Larry McDonald, Natural Resources Law Center, University of Colorado Colorado's Non-point Control Program and Hydrologic Modifications Karen Hamilton, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency " 46 Non-point Pollution and Agriculture in Colorado Dan Parker, Director, Colorado Soil Conservation Board 53 Marketing Salvaged Agricultural Water David Merritt, Engineer,