Lycaenldae: THECLINAE)'
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
How to Use This Checklist
How To Use This Checklist Swallowtails: Family Papilionidae Special Note: Spring and Summer Azures have recently The information presented in this checklist reflects our __ Pipevine Swallowtail Battus philenor R; May - Sep. been recognized as separate species. Azure taxonomy has not current understanding of the butterflies found within __ Zebra Swallowtail Eurytides marcellus R; May - Aug. been completely sorted out by the experts. Cleveland Metroparks. (This list includes all species that have __ Black Swallowtail Papilio polyxenes C; May - Sep. __ Appalachian Azure Celastrina neglecta-major h; mid - late been recorded in Cuyahoga County, and a few additional __ Giant Swallowtail Papilio cresphontes h; rare in Cleveland May; not recorded in Cuy. Co. species that may occur here.) Record you observations and area; July - Aug. Brush-footed Butterflies: Family Nymphalidae contact a naturalist if you find something that may be of __ Eastern Tiger Swallowtail Papilio glaucus C; May - Oct.; __ American Snout Libytheana carinenta R; June - Oct. interest. females occur as yellow or dark morphs __ Variegated Fritillary Euptoieta claudia R; June - Oct. __ Spicebush Swallowtail Papilio troilus C; May - Oct. __ Great Spangled Fritillary Speyeria cybele C; May - Oct. Species are listed taxonomically, with a common name, a Whites and Sulphurs: Family Pieridae __ Aphrodite Fritillary Speyeria aphrodite O; June - Sep. scientific name, a note about its relative abundance and flight __ Checkered White Pontia protodice h; rare in Cleveland area; __ Regal Fritillary Speyeria idalia X; no recent Ohio records; period. Check off species that you identify within Cleveland May - Oct. formerly in Cleveland Metroparks Metroparks. __ West Virginia White Pieris virginiensis O; late Apr. -
Specimen Records for North American Lepidoptera (Insecta) in the Oregon State Arthropod Collection. Lycaenidae Leach, 1815 and Riodinidae Grote, 1895
Catalog: Oregon State Arthropod Collection 2019 Vol 3(2) Specimen records for North American Lepidoptera (Insecta) in the Oregon State Arthropod Collection. Lycaenidae Leach, 1815 and Riodinidae Grote, 1895 Jon H. Shepard Paul C. Hammond Christopher J. Marshall Oregon State Arthropod Collection, Department of Integrative Biology, Oregon State University, Corvallis OR 97331 Cite this work, including the attached dataset, as: Shepard, J. S, P. C. Hammond, C. J. Marshall. 2019. Specimen records for North American Lepidoptera (Insecta) in the Oregon State Arthropod Collection. Lycaenidae Leach, 1815 and Riodinidae Grote, 1895. Catalog: Oregon State Arthropod Collection 3(2). (beta version). http://dx.doi.org/10.5399/osu/cat_osac.3.2.4594 Introduction These records were generated using funds from the LepNet project (Seltmann) - a national effort to create digital records for North American Lepidoptera. The dataset published herein contains the label data for all North American specimens of Lycaenidae and Riodinidae residing at the Oregon State Arthropod Collection as of March 2019. A beta version of these data records will be made available on the OSAC server (http://osac.oregonstate.edu/IPT) at the time of this publication. The beta version will be replaced in the near future with an official release (version 1.0), which will be archived as a supplemental file to this paper. Methods Basic digitization protocols and metadata standards can be found in (Shepard et al. 2018). Identifications were confirmed by Jon Shepard and Paul Hammond prior to digitization. Nomenclature follows that of (Pelham 2008). Results The holdings in these two families are extensive. Combined, they make up 25,743 specimens (24,598 Lycanidae and 1145 Riodinidae). -
2015-2025 Pennsylvania Wildlife Action Plan
2 0 1 5 – 2 0 2 5 Species Assessments Appendix 1.1A – Birds A Comprehensive Status Assessment of Pennsylvania’s Avifauna for Application to the State Wildlife Action Plan Update 2015 (Jason Hill, PhD) Assessment of eBird data for the importance of Pennsylvania as a bird migratory corridor (Andy Wilson, PhD) Appendix 1.1B – Mammals A Comprehensive Status Assessment of Pennsylvania’s Mammals, Utilizing NatureServe Ranking Methodology and Rank Calculator Version 3.1 for Application to the State Wildlife Action Plan Update 2015 (Charlie Eichelberger and Joe Wisgo) Appendix 1.1C – Reptiles and Amphibians A Revision of the State Conservation Ranks of Pennsylvania’s Herpetofauna Appendix 1.1D – Fishes A Revision of the State Conservation Ranks of Pennsylvania’s Fishes Appendix 1.1E – Invertebrates Invertebrate Assessment for the 2015 Pennsylvania Wildlife Action Plan Revision 2015-2025 Pennsylvania Wildlife Action Plan Appendix 1.1A - Birds A Comprehensive Status Assessment of Pennsylvania’s Avifauna for Application to the State Wildlife Action Plan Update 2015 Jason M. Hill, PhD. Table of Contents Assessment ............................................................................................................................................. 3 Data Sources ....................................................................................................................................... 3 Species Selection ................................................................................................................................ -
A SKELETON CHECKLIST of the BUTTERFLIES of the UNITED STATES and CANADA Preparatory to Publication of the Catalogue Jonathan P
A SKELETON CHECKLIST OF THE BUTTERFLIES OF THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA Preparatory to publication of the Catalogue © Jonathan P. Pelham August 2006 Superfamily HESPERIOIDEA Latreille, 1809 Family Hesperiidae Latreille, 1809 Subfamily Eudaminae Mabille, 1877 PHOCIDES Hübner, [1819] = Erycides Hübner, [1819] = Dysenius Scudder, 1872 *1. Phocides pigmalion (Cramer, 1779) = tenuistriga Mabille & Boullet, 1912 a. Phocides pigmalion okeechobee (Worthington, 1881) 2. Phocides belus (Godman and Salvin, 1890) *3. Phocides polybius (Fabricius, 1793) =‡palemon (Cramer, 1777) Homonym = cruentus Hübner, [1819] = palaemonides Röber, 1925 = ab. ‡"gunderi" R. C. Williams & Bell, 1931 a. Phocides polybius lilea (Reakirt, [1867]) = albicilla (Herrich-Schäffer, 1869) = socius (Butler & Druce, 1872) =‡cruentus (Scudder, 1872) Homonym = sanguinea (Scudder, 1872) = imbreus (Plötz, 1879) = spurius (Mabille, 1880) = decolor (Mabille, 1880) = albiciliata Röber, 1925 PROTEIDES Hübner, [1819] = Dicranaspis Mabille, [1879] 4. Proteides mercurius (Fabricius, 1787) a. Proteides mercurius mercurius (Fabricius, 1787) =‡idas (Cramer, 1779) Homonym b. Proteides mercurius sanantonio (Lucas, 1857) EPARGYREUS Hübner, [1819] = Eridamus Burmeister, 1875 5. Epargyreus zestos (Geyer, 1832) a. Epargyreus zestos zestos (Geyer, 1832) = oberon (Worthington, 1881) = arsaces Mabille, 1903 6. Epargyreus clarus (Cramer, 1775) a. Epargyreus clarus clarus (Cramer, 1775) =‡tityrus (Fabricius, 1775) Homonym = argentosus Hayward, 1933 = argenteola (Matsumura, 1940) = ab. ‡"obliteratus" -
Butterflies (Lepidoptera) on Hill Prairies of Allamakee County, Iowa: a Comparison of the Late 1980S with 2013 Nicole M
114 THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST Vol. 47, Nos. 3 - 4 Butterflies (Lepidoptera) on Hill Prairies of Allamakee County, Iowa: A Comparison of the Late 1980s With 2013 Nicole M. Powers1 and Kirk J. Larsen1* Abstract In the late 1980s, several hundred butterflies were collected by John Nehnevaj from hill prairies and a fen in Allamakee County, Iowa. Nehnevaj’s collection included 69 species, 14 of which are currently listed in Iowa as species of greatest conservation need (SGCN). The goal of this study was to revisit sites surveyed in the 1980s and survey three additional sites to compare the species present in 2013 to the species found by Nehnevaj. A primary objective was to document the presence of rare prairie specialist butterflies (Lepidoptera), specifi- cally the ottoe skipper (Hesperia ottoe W.H. Edwards; Hesperiidae), which was thought to be extirpated from Iowa. Twelve sites were surveyed 4 to 7 times between June and September 2013 using a meandering Pollard walk technique. A total of 2,860 butterflies representing 58 species were found; eight of these species were SGCN’s, including the hickory hairstreak (Satyrium caryaevorum McDunnough; Lycaenidae), and Leonard's skipper (Hesperia leonardus Harris; Hesperiidae), species not collected in the 1980s, and the ottoe skipper and Balti- more checkerspot (Euphydryas phaeton Drury; Nymphalidae), both species also found by Nehnevaj. Species richness for the sites ranged from 14 to 33 species, with SGCNs found at 11 of the 12 sites. Significant landscape changes have occurred to hill prairies in Allamakee County over the past 25 years. Invasion by red cedar (Juniperus virginiana) has reduced hill prairie an average of 55.4% at these sites since the 1980s, but up to 100% on some of the sites surveyed by Nehnevaj. -
Butterflies of Finger Lakes National Forest, New York Prepared by Charles R
Butterflies of Finger Lakes National Forest, New York Prepared by Charles R. Smith, Ph.D. Senior Research Associate (Retired) Cornell University August 2014 Sixty-three species and two distinctive subspecies are listed here, from an assemblage of 161 species reported from New York State by Lotts and Naberhaus (2014), including 141 species reported by Shapiro (1974). English and scientific names and taxonomic sequence follow those recommended by the North American Butterfly Association (2001). Finger Lakes National Forest is approximately 16,000 acres in size and located in the Finger Lakes Region of central New York. This list is based upon observations by Donald J. Bright-Smith, Charles R. Smith, and others, since 1990. A question mark (?) after a species name indicates that the species has been reported only once from Finger Lakes National Forest, without verification by an independent observer, specimens, or photographic evidence. Additional information would be useful in order to verify the status of those species with question marks, if they occur on the national forest. For some species, dates of first observation are noted in parenthesis. Family Papilionidae: Swallowtails Vanessa virginiensis, American Lady Papilio polyxenes, Black Swallowtail Vanessa cardui, Painted Lady Papilio cresphontes, Giant Swallowtail (5 June 2011) Junonia coenia, Common Buckeye (5 August 2011) Papilio glaucus, Eastern Tiger Swallowtail Vanessa atalanta, Red Admiral Papilio troilus, Spicebush Swallowtail Limenitis arthemis, Red-spotted Admiral Limenitis -
Butterflies and Moths of Michigan, United States
Heliothis ononis Flax Bollworm Moth Coptotriche aenea Blackberry Leafminer Argyresthia canadensis Apyrrothrix araxes Dull Firetip Phocides pigmalion Mangrove Skipper Phocides belus Belus Skipper Phocides palemon Guava Skipper Phocides urania Urania skipper Proteides mercurius Mercurial Skipper Epargyreus zestos Zestos Skipper Epargyreus clarus Silver-spotted Skipper Epargyreus spanna Hispaniolan Silverdrop Epargyreus exadeus Broken Silverdrop Polygonus leo Hammock Skipper Polygonus savigny Manuel's Skipper Chioides albofasciatus White-striped Longtail Chioides zilpa Zilpa Longtail Chioides ixion Hispaniolan Longtail Aguna asander Gold-spotted Aguna Aguna claxon Emerald Aguna Aguna metophis Tailed Aguna Typhedanus undulatus Mottled Longtail Typhedanus ampyx Gold-tufted Skipper Polythrix octomaculata Eight-spotted Longtail Polythrix mexicanus Mexican Longtail Polythrix asine Asine Longtail Polythrix caunus (Herrich-Schäffer, 1869) Zestusa dorus Short-tailed Skipper Codatractus carlos Carlos' Mottled-Skipper Codatractus alcaeus White-crescent Longtail Codatractus yucatanus Yucatan Mottled-Skipper Codatractus arizonensis Arizona Skipper Codatractus valeriana Valeriana Skipper Urbanus proteus Long-tailed Skipper Urbanus viterboana Bluish Longtail Urbanus belli Double-striped Longtail Urbanus pronus Pronus Longtail Urbanus esmeraldus Esmeralda Longtail Urbanus evona Turquoise Longtail Urbanus dorantes Dorantes Longtail Urbanus teleus Teleus Longtail Urbanus tanna Tanna Longtail Urbanus simplicius Plain Longtail Urbanus procne Brown Longtail -
Sentinels on the Wing: the Status and Conservation of Butterflies in Canada
Sentinels on the Wing The Status and Conservation of Butterflies in Canada Peter W. Hall Foreword In Canada, our ties to the land are strong and deep. Whether we have viewed the coasts of British Columbia or Cape Breton, experienced the beauty of the Arctic tundra, paddled on rivers through our sweeping boreal forests, heard the wind in the prairies, watched caribou swim the rivers of northern Labrador, or searched for song birds in the hardwood forests of south eastern Canada, we all call Canada our home and native land. Perhaps because Canada’s landscapes are extensive and cover a broad range of diverse natural systems, it is easy for us to assume the health of our important natural spaces and the species they contain. Our country seems so vast compared to the number of Canadians that it is difficult for us to imagine humans could have any lasting effect on nature. Yet emerging science demonstrates that our natural systems and the species they contain are increas- ingly at risk. While the story is by no means complete, key indicator species demonstrate that Canada’s natural legacy is under pressure from a number of sources, such as the conversion of lands for human uses, the release of toxic chemicals, the introduction of new, invasive species or the further spread of natural pests, and a rapidly changing climate. These changes are hitting home and, with the globalization and expansion of human activities, it is clear the pace of change is accelerating. While their flights of fancy may seem insignificant, butterflies are sentinels or early indicators of this change, and can act as important messengers to raise awareness. -
Common Butterflies of the Chicago Region
version 2 Common Butterflies of the Chicago Region 1 The Field Museum, Illinois Butterfly Monitoring Network and Chicago Wilderness Note: The black scale bar represents 2 cm in all photos. Dorsal View Ventral View Resting View GIANT SWALLOWTAILS: Giant swallowtail is a large butterfly with dark wings above with two yellow crossing stripes, below pale yellow. Host Plants: prickly ash (Xanthoxylum) and hoptree (Ptelea). FMNHINS 124003 Papilionidae: Papilioninae: Papilionini Papilio cresphontes Cramer, 1777 EASTERN TIGER SWALLOWTAIL: As compared to the Black Swallowtail, no inner line of yellow dots. Lots of blue on hindwing, up into center of hind wing. No inner row of orange dots. Host Plants: Black Cherry (Prunus serotina) and Tulip Tree (Liriodendron tulipifera). FMNHINS 124000 Papilionidae: Papilioninae: Papilionini Papilio glaucus Linnaeus, 1758 EASTERN TIGER SWALLOWTAIL female dark form: Tiger stripes often still visible on female dark form. FMNHINS 124001 Papilionidae: Papilioninae: Papilionini Papilio glaucus Linnaeus, 1758 BLACK SWALLOWTAIL: In addition to outer line of yellow dots, male has a strong inner line, and blue may be almost absent. Female with much weaker inner line of yellow with separate spot near tip of wing. Some blue on hind-wing, but does not extend up into hindwing above row of faint spots. Host Plants: Parsley Family (Apiaceae). FMNHINS 124005 Papilionidae: Papilioninae: Papilionini Papilio polyxenes Fabricius, 1775 SPICEBRUSH SWALLOWTAIL: With half-moon shaped blue marks on the hindwings and cream-blue edge spots. Host Plants: Spicebush (Lindera) and Sassafras. FMNHINS 124006 Papilionidae: Papilioninae: Papilionini Papilio troilus Linnaeus, 1758 IL 60605 USA. Museum, Chicago, Boone Field ©The Jim and Cassie Kelsey by Produced Taron. -
Changes in Conservation Value from Grasslands to Savannas to Forests: How a Temperate Canopy Cover Gradient Affects Butterfly Community Composition
PLOS ONE RESEARCH ARTICLE Changes in conservation value from grasslands to savannas to forests: How a temperate canopy cover gradient affects butterfly community composition 1 2 1 Ralph GrundelID *, Gary S. Dulin , Noel B. Pavlovic 1 U.S. Geological Survey, Great Lakes Science Center, Chesterton, Indiana, United States of America, a1111111111 2 Valparaiso University, Department of Biology, Valparaiso, Indiana, United States of America a1111111111 * [email protected] a1111111111 a1111111111 a1111111111 Abstract Temperate savannas and grasslands are globally threatened. In the Midwest United States of America (USA), for example, oak savannas persist today at a small percentage of recent OPEN ACCESS historic coverage. Therefore, restoration of habitats of low and intermediate canopy cover is Citation: Grundel R, Dulin GS, Pavlovic NB (2020) a landscape conservation priority that often emphasizes returning tree density to a savanna- Changes in conservation value from grasslands to like target value. Understanding how animal species react to such changes in vegetation savannas to forests: How a temperate canopy structure is important for assessing the value of these restoration plans. We examined how cover gradient affects butterfly community composition. PLoS ONE 15(6): e0234139. https:// butterfly community attributes in northwest Indiana USA, including community composition, doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0234139 richness, and abundance responded to a grassland-to-forest gradient of canopy cover. But- Editor: Christopher Nice, Texas State University, terfly community composition under intermediate canopy cover differed significantly from UNITED STATES community composition in the most open or closed-canopy habitats. Composition of the Received: December 31, 2019 plant community in flower was a significant predictor of three assessed attributes of the but- terfly communityÐcomposition, richness, and abundance. -
Butterflies of Wyoming National Park Service Units
Butterflies of Wyoming National Park Service Units Devils Tower National Monument, Crook County Fort Laramie National Historical Park, Goshen County Paul A. Opler, Professor and Matthew C. Garhart C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523 December 2004 C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523 Introduction A small contract was issued in early 2004 to increase the knowledge about the butterfly faunas of Devils Tower National Monument, Crook County, Wyoming and Fort Laramie National Historical Site, Goshen County, Wyoming. It was agreed that three trips would be taken to assess the butterflies of Fort Laramie and that two visits would be made to Devils Tower, Crook County, Wyoming. A previous survey of the butterflies of Devils Tower National Monument was conducted between 1983 and 1985 (Ferris, 1986). Many of the specimens on which the Ferris report was based were found at the National Museum of Natural History, Washington, D.C. In this report we assess the butterflies that we found in 2004 as well as those from the earlier survey. We use the current species concepts used for North American butterflies (Opler and Warren, 2004) as well as some unpublished research to assess some elements of the faunas (Opler, unpublished data). Devils Tower National Monument, Crook County We made visits to the monument on May 28, 2004 (Opler and Stanford) and on August 17, 2004 (Garhart). In the species accounts below, we give the current latin name (Opler and Warren, 2004), the accepted common name (Opler, 1999), and the localities and collection dates from our survey. -
Inventory of Natural Areas and Wildlife Habitats for Orange County, North Carolina
Inventory of Natural Areas and Wildlife Habitats for Orange County, North Carolina Dawson Sather and Stephen Hall (1988) Updated by Bruce Sorrie and Rich Shaw (2004) December 2004 Orange County Environment & Resource Conservation Department North Carolina Natural Heritage Program NC Natural Heritage Trust Fund Inventory of Natural Areas and Wildlife Habitats for Orange County, North Carolina Dawson Sather and Stephen Hall (1988) Updated by Bruce Sorrie and Rich Shaw (2004) December 2004 Orange County Environment & Resource Conservation Department North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Funded by Orange County, North Carolina NC Natural Heritage Trust Fund Prepared by Rich Shaw and Margaret Jones Orange County Environment and Resource Conservation Department Hillsborough, North Carolina For further information or to order copies of the inventory, please contact: Orange County ERCD P.O. Box 8181 Hillsborough, NC 27278 919/245-2590 or The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program 1601 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 www.ncnhp.org Table of Contents Page PREFACE....................................................................................................................................... i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS....................................................................................................... ii INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................ 1 Information Sources............................................................................................................