DOCSLIB.ORG

Tansy Ragwort

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tansy Ragwort FHTET-2011-02 September 2011 Control Biological ONTROL C AGWORT R IOLOGICAL B ANSY T AND OF IOLOGY Rachel Winston, Carol Bell Randall, Jeff Littlefield, Bell Randall, Jeff Littlefield, Carol Winston, Rachel B Mark Schwarzländer, Jennie Birdsall, and Eric Coombs Jennie Birdsall, Mark Schwarzländer, TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Forest Health Technology Technology Health Forest Team Enterprise BIOLOGY AND BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF TANSY RAGWORT WINSTON, BELL RANDALL, LITTLEFIELD, SCHWARTZLÄNDER, BIRDSALL, COOMBS FHTET-2011-02 The Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team (FHTET) was created in 1995 by the Deputy Chief for State and Private Forestry, USDA Forest Service, to develop and deliver technologies to protect and improve the health of American forests. This book was published by FHTET as part of the technology transfer series. http://www.fs.fed.us/foresthealth/technology/ This publication/database reports research involving pesticides. It CAUTION: PESTICIDES does not contain recommendations for their use, nor does it imply that the uses discussed here have been registered. All uses of pesticides must be registered by appropriate State and/or Federal agencies before they can be recommended. CAUTION: Pesticides can be injurious to humans, domestic animals, desirable plants, and fish or other wildlife—if they are not handled or applied properly. Use all pesticides selectively and carefully. Follow recommended practices for the disposal of surplus pesticides and pesticide containers. Cover photo: Mark Schwarzländer, University of Idaho The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call 202-720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. The use of trade, firm, or corporation names in this publication is for the information and convenience of the reader. Such use does not constitute an official endorsement or approval by the U.S. Department of Agriculture or the Forest Service of any product or service to the exclusion of others that may be suitable. Federal Recycling Program Printed on recycled paper The Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team (FHTET) was created in 1995 by the Deputy Chief for State and Private Forestry, USDA Forest Service, to develop and deliver technologies to protect and improve the health of American forests. This book was published by FHTET as part of the technology transfer series. http://www.fs.fed.us/foresthealth/technology/ This publication/database reports research involving pesticides. It CAUTION: PESTICIDES does not contain recommendations for their use, nor does it imply that the uses discussed here have been registered. All uses of pesticides must be registered by appropriate State and/or Federal agencies before they can be recommended. CAUTION: Pesticides can be injurious to humans, domestic animals, desirable plants, and fish or other wildlife—if they are not handled or applied properly. Use all pesticides selectively and carefully. Follow recommended practices for the disposal of surplus pesticides and pesticide containers. Cover photo: Mark Schwarzländer, University of Idaho The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call 202-720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. The use of trade, firm, or corporation names in this publication is for the information and convenience of the reader. Such use does not constitute an official endorsement or approval by the U.S. Department of Agriculture or the Forest Service of any product or service to the exclusion of others that may be suitable. Federal Recycling Program Printed on recycled paper BIOLOGY AND BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF TANSY RAGWORT Rachel Winston Mark Schwarzländer Environmental Consultant Associate Professor MIA Consulting, LLC Department of Plant, Soil, Shelley, ID and Entomological Sciences University of Idaho Carol Bell Randall Moscow, ID Entomologist USDA Forest Service Jennie Birdsall Forest Health Protection Botanist Coeur d’Alene, ID USDA Forest Service, RMRS Grassland, Shrubland, Jeff Littlefield and Desert Ecosystems Research Scientist Bozeman, MT Department of LRES Montana State University Eric Coombs Biological Control Entomologist Oregon Department of Agriculture Plant Division Salem, OR For additional copies of this publication, contact: Richard Reardon Carol Bell Randall Mark Schwarzländer USDA Forest Service USDA Forest Service University of Idaho 180 Canfield Street 3815 Schreiber Way Moscow, ID 83844 Morgantown, WV 26505 Coeur d’Alene, ID 83815 (208) 885-9319 (304) 285-1566 (208) 765-7343 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like to thank all of the county weed superintendents and land managers that we have worked with through the years for encouraging us to develop our series of biology and biological control manuals. Some of the material in this manual was adapted from past manuals in the “Biology and Biological Control of” series. We wish to acknowledge the authors of the original material. Special thanks to Rosemarie De Clerck-Floate with Agriculture and Agri- food Canada for help with information pertaining to tansy ragwort biological control agents established in Canada. An extensive amount of information, including literature, images, suggestions, and on-the-ground experience was provided by George Markin, USDA Forest Service, retired. We thank him for his significant contributions. We would also like to thank all of the excellent photographers who contributed many of the photographs in this manual. Finally, many thanks to Wendy W. Harding for layout, and Richard Reardon, USDA Forest Service FHTET, for producing this book. BIOLOGY AND BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF TANSY RAGWORT TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: INTRODUctION .................................................. 1 Overview ..........................................................................1 Classical Biological Control of Weeds ................................................2 Code of Best Practices for Classical Biological Control of Weeds ......................4 Biological Control of Tansy Ragwort.................................................4 Integrated Weed Management .....................................................5 Is Biological Control of Tansy Ragwort Right For You? ................................6 About This Manual . .7 CHAPTER 2: GEttING TO KNOW TANSY RAGWORT ................................ 9 Taxonomy..........................................................................9 Related Species in North America ...................................................9 Tansy Ragwort ................................................................... 10 Classification . 10 Description................................................................... 10 Biology and Ecology .......................................................... 14 Distribution . 15 Commonly Confused Species ................................................. 16 CHAPTER 3: BIOLOGY OF TANSY RAGWORT BIOLOGICAL CONTROL AGENTS ........... 19 History........................................................................... 19 Basic Insect Biology . 19 Butterflies and Moths (Order Lepidoptera)..................................... 21 Beetles (Order Coleoptera) .................................................... 21 Flies (Order Diptera) .......................................................... 21 Tansy Ragwort Biological Control Agents.......................................... 21 Tyria jacobaeae . 23 Cinnabar moth Botanophila seneciella......................................................... 25 Ragwort seed head fly Longitarsus jacobaeae......................................................... 27 Tansy ragwort flea beetle Unapproved (U.S.) Tansy Ragwort Insects ...................................... 33 Cochylis atricapitana....................................................... 33 Additional Longitarsus species ............................................. 34 CHAPTER 4: ELEMENTS OF A TANSY RAGWORT BIOLOGICAL CONTROL PROGRAM ...... 35 Before You Begin . 35 Determining the Scope of the Problem ........................................ 35 Defining Goals and Objectives ................................................ 35 Understanding Tansy Ragwort Management Options .......................... 36 TABLE OF CONTENTS I BIOLOGY AND BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Oviposition Preference of Botanophila Flies (Diptera: Anthomyiidae) Towards Stroma Size of Epichloe¨ (Hypocreales: Clavicipitaceae) Hosts
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by RERO DOC Digital Library BEHAVIOR Oviposition Preference of Botanophila Flies (Diptera: Anthomyiidae) Towards Stroma Size of Epichloe¨ (Hypocreales: Clavicipitaceae) Hosts 1,2 3 4 1 K. GO´ RZYN´ SKA, Z. OLSZANOWSKI, A. LEUCHTMANN, AND M. LEMBICZ Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 107(2): 532Ð538 (2014); DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1603/AN13094 ABSTRACT Stromata of grass-infecting fungi from the genus Epichloe¨ (Clavicipitaceae: Ascomy- cota) serve as a food source and egg-laying surface for ßies of genus Botanophila (Diptera: Antho- myiidae). Larger stromata should make it possible for ßies to lay more eggs and provide more food to offspring. This hypothesis was tested in four different grassÐfungus associations that occur in central Poland. In two of these associations, Epichloe¨ bromicola on Elymus repens and Epichloe¨ typhina on Puccinellia distans, ßies showed a preference for longer stromata, and egg density on these stromata was signiÞcantly higher than in the other two associations. A negative correlation between egg density and offspring success was observed in only one association, E. bromicola–El. repens. However, offspring success in this association did not differ signiÞcantly from offspring success in associations with lower egg density on the stromata, in which ßies showed no preference for the stroma length. Long-term observations (2000Ð2010) of ßyÐfungus interaction in the E. typhinaÐP. distans association showed that ßy preference toward stroma length may vary over time but with no clear tendency. No signiÞcant correlations were found between the larval density on a stroma and either larval weight or mortality.
    [Show full text]
  • Protection of Pandora Moth (Coloradia Pandora Blake) Eggs from Consumption by Golden-Mantled Ground Squirrels (Spermophilus Lateralis Say)
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Elizabeth Ann Gerson for the degree of Master of Science in Forest Science presented on 10 January, 1995. Title: Protection of Pandora Moth (Coloradia pandora Blake) Eggs From Consumption by Golden-mantled Ground Squirrels (Spermophilus lateralis Say) Abstract approved: Redacted for Privacy William C. McComb Endemic populations of pandora moths (Coloradia pandora Blake), a defoliator of western pine forests, proliferated to epidemic levels in central Oregon in 1986 and increased dramatically through 1994. Golden-mantled ground squirrels (Spermophilus lateralis Say) consume adult pandora moths, but reject nutritionally valuable eggs from gravid females. Feeding trials with captive S. lateralis were conducted to identify the mode of egg protection. Chemical constituents of fertilized eggs were separated through a polarity gradient of solvent extractions. Consumption of the resulting hexane, dichloromethane, and water egg fractions, and the extracted egg tissue residue, was evaluated by randomized 2-choice feeding tests. Consumption of four physically distinct egg fractions (whole eggs, "whole" egg shells, ground egg shells, and egg contents) also was evaluated. These bioassays indicated that C. pandora eggs are not protected chemically, however, the egg shell does inhibit S. lateralis consumption. Egg protection is one mechanism that enables C. pandora to persist within the forest food web. Spermophilus lateralis, a common and often abundant rodent of central Oregon pine forests, is a natural enemy of C. pandora
    [Show full text]
  • Insects for Weed Control (Page 1 of 2)
    Insects for Weed Control (Page 1 of 2) Insects for Weed Control Project Title: Project 3.24 Code: Rearing, Release and Distribution of Insects for Biological Control of Pasture Weeds Completed: August 2006 Researchers: Stephen Crozier Weed: A valueless plant growing wild, especially one that grows on cultivated ground to the exclusion or injury of the desired crop. – Random House Dictionary of the English Language Other than plants that are poisonous to livestock, individual plants growing on a pasture are rarely a problem. However when large populations of a single species spread over a wide area, choking out and replacing the pasture grasses that provide nutrition to livestock, weeds become an economic issue. Many of the plants that are considered weeds in Canada were accidentally or misguidedly introduced into North America from other parts of the world. For example, purple loosestrife, which invades wetlands and ditches and out-competes and replaces native plants, was introduced into eastern Canada and the United States in the 1800s for ornamental and medicinal purposes. Bindweed, native to Eurasia, was also sold as an ornamental plant in the 1800s. Other plants, such as bull thistle, were likely introduced by seeds stuck to European settler’s belongings. In their native lands, insect pests evolved with these plants, thus helping keep them in check. When the plants are introduced in parts of the world where their insect pests don’t exist, they often spread more rapidly than in their native habitat. As early as the 1920s, scientists began studying insect pests as a means to control the spread of non-native weeds.
    [Show full text]
  • BD5208 Wide Scale Enhancement of Biodiversity (WEB) Final Report on Phase 2, and Overview of Whole Project Executive Summary
    BD5208 Wide Scale Enhancement of Biodiversity (WEB) Final report on phase 2, and overview of whole project Executive summary Core objective The WEB project aimed to inform the development of new or existing Entry Level (ELS) and Higher Level Stewardship scheme (HLS) options that create grassland of modest biodiversity value, and deliver environmental ecosystem services, on large areas of land with little or no potential for creation or restoration of BAP Priority Habitat grassland. Specific objectives Quantify the success of establishing a limited number of plant species into seedbeds (ELS/HLS creation option) and existing grassland (currently HLS restoration option) to provide pollen, nectar, seed, and/or spatial and structural heterogeneity. Quantify the effects of grassland creation and sward restoration on faunal diversity/abundance, forage production and quality, soil properties and nutrient losses. Develop grazing and cutting management practices to enhance biodiversity, minimise pollution and benefit agronomic performance. Liaise with Natural England to produce specifications for new or modified ES options, and detailed guidance for their successful management. Overview of experiment: The vast majority of lowland grasslands in the UK have been agriculturally improved, receiving inputs of inorganic fertiliser, reseeding, improved drainage and are managed with intensive cutting and grazing regimes. While this has increased livestock productivity it has led to grasslands that are species-poor in both native plants and invertebrates. To rectify this simple Entry Level Stewardship scheme options have been developed that reduce fertiliser inputs; this includes the EK2 and EK3 options. While permanent grasslands receiving low fertiliser inputs account for the largest area of lowland managed under the agri-environment schemes they currently provide only minimal benefits for biodiversity or ecosystem services.
    [Show full text]
  • Aethes Fortsat, Cochylidia, Cochylis Mv. (4326-4365) Aethes Cnicana (Wstw.)
    Cochylini del 3 Aethes fortsat, Cochylidia, Cochylis mv. (4326-4365) Aethes cnicana (Wstw.) 13-18 mm. Imago flyver om aftenen omkring foderplanten og kommer fint til lys i juni juli. Længere mod syd i to generationer. Der er en del variation. Båndet kan være næsten jævnt bredt i hele længden eller – oftere - noget knudret, men dog sammenhængende. Aethes cnicana (Wstw.) Larven lever i frø, rødder og stængler af forskellige tidsler, i Norden først og fremmest Tidsel og Bladhovedtidsel (Cirsium, Carduus). Den overvintrer og forpupper sig i stængel/rod om foråret. Udbredt og almindelig i hele det nordlige og centrale Europa. Aethes cnicana & rubigana Aethes cnicana (tv.) er lysere, mere roligt tegnet og midtbåndet er næsten udelt. Aethes rubigana (th.) har delt midtbånd og den nederste del ender med et rundt hoved, der tydeligt bøjer udad mod apex. Midt- båndet er også tydeligt bre- dere og der er et tydeligt, bredt bånd af lidt mørkere skæl længere ude på vingen. Aethes rubigana (Tr.) 15-19 mm. Imago flyver i aftentimerne omkring foderplanterne i juli-august og kommer gerne til lys. Længere mod syd er der også en generation i maj-juni. Også hos denne art er der en del variation, men båndet er altid afbrudt. Aethes rubigana (Tr.) Larven lever i september-oktober i blomsterhovederne af Burre (Actium) og overvintrer i stængel/rodstok. Sommergenerationen kan leve også i bladene. Aethes rubigana (Tr.) Arten kan også være meget spraglet og mørkere i yderfeltet som det viste eksemplar. Det er oftest hunner. Aethes rubigana (Tr.) Arten er udbredt øst for israndslinjen i Danmark og lokalt almindelig.
    [Show full text]
  • Eldorado National Forest Placerville Ranger District Biological Assessment / Evaluation for Botanical Species
    ELDORADO NATIONAL FOREST PLACERVILLE RANGER DISTRICT BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT / EVALUATION FOR BOTANICAL SPECIES: PILLIKEN FOREST HEALTH PROJECT 2016 Prepared By: /s/ Matt Brown Date: 4/13/2016 . Matt Brown Botanist Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 3 II. CONSULTATION TO DATE ....................................................................................... 6 III. CURRENT MANAGEMENT DIRECTION ............................................................... 6 IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................... 7 V. EXISTING SPECIES AND HABITAT CONDITION ................................................. 7 VI. EFFECTS .................................................................................................................... 16 VII. OTHER MANAGEMENT ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS: ..................... 16 VIII. MITIGATIONS AND MONITORING ................................................................... 19 IX. DETERMINATION ................................................................................................... 19 X. REFERENCES............................................................................................................. 20 APPENDIX A: BOTANY REPORT FOR SPECIAL INTEREST PLANTS .................. 21 APPENDIX B: NOXIOUS WEED RISK ASSESSMENT .............................................. 27 APPENDIX C: NOXIOUS/INVASIVE WEEDS OF CONCERN .................................
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix B Natural History and Control of Nonnative Invasive Species
    Appendix B: Natural History and Control of Nonnative Invasive Plants Found in Ten Northern Rocky Mountains National Parks Introduction The Invasive Plant Management Plan was written for the following ten parks (in this document, parks are referred to by the four letter acronyms in bold): the Bear Paw Battlefield-BEPA (MT, also known as Nez Perce National Historical Park); Big Hole National Battlefield-BIHO (MT); City of Rocks National Reserve-CIRO (ID); Craters of the Moon National Monument and Preserve-CRMO (ID); Fossil Butte National Monument-FOBU (WY); Golden Spike National Historic Site-GOSP (UT); Grant-Kohrs Ranch National Historic Site-GRKO (MT); Hagerman Fossil Beds National Monument-HAFO (ID); Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument-LIBI (MT); and Minidoka National Historic Site-MIIN (ID). The following information is contained for each weed species covered in this document (1) Park presence: based on formal surveys or park representatives’ observations (2) Status: whether the plant is listed as noxious in ID, MT, UT, or WY (3) Identifying characteristics: key characteristics to aid identification, and where possible, unique features to help distinguish the weed from look-a-like species (4) Life cycle: annual, winter-annual, biennial, or perennial and season of flowering and fruit set (5) Spread: the most common method of spread and potential for long distance dispersal (6) Seeds per plant and seed longevity (when available) (7) Habitat (8) Control Options: recommendations on the effectiveness of a. Mechanical Control b. Cultural
    [Show full text]
  • Barcoding Chrysomelidae: a Resource for Taxonomy and Biodiversity Conservation in the Mediterranean Region
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 597:Barcoding 27–38 (2016) Chrysomelidae: a resource for taxonomy and biodiversity conservation... 27 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.597.7241 RESEARCH ARTICLE http://zookeys.pensoft.net Launched to accelerate biodiversity research Barcoding Chrysomelidae: a resource for taxonomy and biodiversity conservation in the Mediterranean Region Giulia Magoga1,*, Davide Sassi2, Mauro Daccordi3, Carlo Leonardi4, Mostafa Mirzaei5, Renato Regalin6, Giuseppe Lozzia7, Matteo Montagna7,* 1 Via Ronche di Sopra 21, 31046 Oderzo, Italy 2 Centro di Entomologia Alpina–Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy 3 Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Verona, lungadige Porta Vittoria 9, 37129 Verona, Italy 4 Museo di Storia Naturale di Milano, Corso Venezia 55, 20121 Milano, Italy 5 Department of Plant Protection, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources–University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran 6 Dipartimento di Scienze per gli Alimenti, la Nutrizione e l’Ambiente–Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy 7 Dipartimento di Scienze Agrarie e Ambientali–Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy Corresponding authors: Matteo Montagna ([email protected]) Academic editor: J. Santiago-Blay | Received 20 November 2015 | Accepted 30 January 2016 | Published 9 June 2016 http://zoobank.org/4D7CCA18-26C4-47B0-9239-42C5F75E5F42 Citation: Magoga G, Sassi D, Daccordi M, Leonardi C, Mirzaei M, Regalin R, Lozzia G, Montagna M (2016) Barcoding Chrysomelidae: a resource for taxonomy and biodiversity conservation in the Mediterranean Region. In: Jolivet P, Santiago-Blay J, Schmitt M (Eds) Research on Chrysomelidae 6. ZooKeys 597: 27–38. doi: 10.3897/ zookeys.597.7241 Abstract The Mediterranean Region is one of the world’s biodiversity hot-spots, which is also characterized by high level of endemism.
    [Show full text]
  • NEWSLETTER• of the MICHIGAN ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY
    NEWSLETTER• of the MICHIGAN ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY Volume 38, Numbers 4 December, 1993 Impacts ofBt on Non-Target Lepidoptera John W. Peacock, David L. Wagner, and Dale F. Schweitzer USDA Forest Service, Hamden, CT; University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT; and The Nature Conservancy, Port Norris, NT, respectively Introduction gypsy moth in Oregon. Sample et a1. ing attempts bycertain birds. In another (1 993) have likewise reported a signifi­ study, Bellocq et al. (1992) showed that Bacillus thuringiensis Berliner var. cant reduction inspecies abundance and the use of Btk increased immigration kurstaki (Btk) is one of the pesticides richness in non-target Lepidoptera in rates andcaused d ietary shifts inshrews. most commonly employed against lepi­ field studies in eastern West Virginia. We report here a summary of our dopteran forest pests. In the eastern U.S., James et al. (1993) haveshown thatBtk is studies aimed at determining the effect where millionsofhectares of deciduous toxic to late, but not early, instar larvae of Btko n non-target Lepidoptera inboth forest have been defoliated by the ''Eu­ of the beneficial cinnabar moth, Tyria laboratoryand field studies. Laboratory ropean" gypsy moth, Lymantria dispar jacobaeae (L.). bioassays were conducted on larvae in (L.), Btk has been used extenSively to In addition to its direct effects on seven families of native eastern U.S. slow the spread of this pest and to re­ native Lepidoptera, Btk can indirectly Macrolepidoptera. Field studies were duce defoliation. In 1992 alone, over affect other animals that rely on lepi­ carried out in Rockbridge County, Vir­ 300,000 ha were treated with Btk, in­ dopterous larvae as a primary source of ginia, and were the first to evaluate non­ cluding gypsy moth suppression activi­ food.
    [Show full text]
  • FOURTH UPDATE to a CHECKLIST of the LEPIDOPTERA of the BRITISH ISLES , 2013 1 David J
    Ent Rec 133(1).qxp_Layout 1 13/01/2021 16:46 Page 1 Entomologist’s Rec. J. Var. 133 (2021) 1 FOURTH UPDATE TO A CHECKLIST OF THE LEPIDOPTERA OF THE BRITISH ISLES , 2013 1 DAvID J. L. A GASSIz , 2 S. D. B EAvAN & 1 R. J. H ECkFoRD 1 Department of Life Sciences, Division of Insects, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD 2 The Hayes, Zeal Monachorum, Devon EX17 6DF Abstract This update incorporates information published since 30 November 2019 and before 1 January 2021 into A Checklist of the Lepidoptera of the British Isles, 2013. Introduction The Checklist of the Lepidoptera of the British Isles has previously been amended (Agassiz, Beavan & Heckford 2016a, 2016b, 2019 and 2020). This update details 4 species new to the main list and 3 to Appendix A. Numerous taxonomic changes are incorporated and country distributions are updated. CENSUS The number of species now recorded from the British Isles stands at 2,558 of which 58 are thought to be extinct and in addition there are 191 adventive species. ADDITIONAL SPECIES in main list Also make appropriate changes in the index 15.0715 Phyllonorycter medicaginella (Gerasimov, 1930) E S W I C 62.0382 Acrobasis fallouella (Ragonot, 1871) E S W I C 70.1698 Eupithecia breviculata (Donzel, 1837) Rusty-shouldered Pug E S W I C 72.089 Grammodes bifasciata (Petagna, 1786) Parallel Lines E S W I C The authorship and date of publication of Grammodes bifasciata were given by Brownsell & Sale (2020) as Petagan, 1787 but corrected to Petagna, 1786 by Plant (2020).
    [Show full text]
  • Yorkhill Green Spaces Wildlife Species List
    Yorkhill Green Spaces Wildlife Species List April 2021 update Yorkhill Green Spaces Species list Draft list of animals, plants, fungi, mosses and lichens recorded from Yorkhill, Glasgow. Main sites: Yorkhill Park, Overnewton Park and Kelvinhaugh Park (AKA Cherry Park). Other recorded sites: bank of River Kelvin at Bunhouse Rd/ Old Dumbarton Rd, Clyde Expressway path, casual records from streets and gardens in Yorkhill. Species total: 711 Vertebrates: Amhibians:1, Birds: 57, Fish: 7, Mammals (wild): 15 Invertebrates: Amphipods: 1, Ants: 3, Bees: 26, Beetles: 21, Butterflies: 11, Caddisflies: 2, Centipedes: 3, Earthworms: 2, Earwig: 1, Flatworms: 1, Flies: 61, Grasshoppers: 1, Harvestmen: 2, Lacewings: 2, Mayflies: 2, Mites: 4, Millipedes: 3, Moths: 149, True bugs: 13, Slugs & snails: 21, Spiders: 14, Springtails: 2, Wasps: 13, Woodlice: 5 Plants: Flowering plants: 174, Ferns: 5, Grasses: 13, Horsetail: 1, Liverworts: 7, Mosses:17, Trees: 19 Fungi and lichens: Fungi: 24, Lichens: 10 Conservation Status: NameSBL - Scottish Biodiversity List Priority Species Birds of Conservation Concern - Red List, Amber List Last Common name Species Taxon Record Common toad Bufo bufo amphiban 2012 Australian landhopper Arcitalitrus dorrieni amphipod 2021 Black garden ant Lasius niger ant 2020 Red ant Myrmica rubra ant 2021 Red ant Myrmica ruginodis ant 2014 Buff-tailed bumblebee Bombus terrestris bee 2021 Garden bumblebee Bombus hortorum bee 2020 Tree bumblebee Bombus hypnorum bee 2021 Heath bumblebee Bombus jonellus bee 2020 Red-tailed bumblebee Bombus
    [Show full text]
  • Diptera) of Finland 369 Doi: 10.3897/Zookeys.441.7527 CHECKLIST Launched to Accelerate Biodiversity Research
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 441: 369–382 (2014)Checklist of the family Anthomyiidae (Diptera) of Finland 369 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.441.7527 CHECKLIST www.zookeys.org Launched to accelerate biodiversity research Checklist of the family Anthomyiidae (Diptera) of Finland Verner Michelsen1 1 Natural History Museum of Denmark (Zoological Museum), Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark Corresponding author: Verner Michelsen ([email protected]) Academic editor: J. Kahanpää | Received 15 March 2014 | Accepted 8 May 2014 | Published 19 September 2014 http://zoobank.org/4946FF28-E271-4E73-BFE5-12B71572C9F3 Citation: Michelsen V (2014) Checklist of the family Anthomyiidae (Diptera) of Finland. In: Kahanpää J, Salmela J (Eds) Checklist of the Diptera of Finland. ZooKeys 441: 369–382. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.441.7527 Abstract An updated checklist of the the genera and species of Anthomyiidae (Diptera) found in Finland is provided. Keywords Checklist, Finland, Diptera, Anthomyiidae Introduction The family Anthomyiidae is a large and taxonomically difficult group of flies that has for the same reason suffered from unstable taxonomy and nomenclature. A checklist of the anthomyiid species known from pre-war Finland was compiled by their leading regional specialist of calyptrate flies Lauri Tiensuu (1906−1980) and published in Frey et al. (1941). The Anthomyiidae were then not recognized as a separate family but combined with the fanniid and true muscid flies in a comprehensive Muscidae fam- ily equivalent of the present Muscoidea less Scathophagidae. Tiensuu’s list included confirmed records of 199 anthomyiid species classified in 41 genera and subgenera. No less than 34% of the species names and 58% of the genus-group names in that list are Copyright Verner Michelsen.
    [Show full text]