DOCSLIB.ORG

Documento De Evaluación De Caudal Ecológico (Dece)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Documento De Evaluación De Caudal Ecológico (Dece) PROGRAMA NACIONAL DE RESERVAS DE AGUA DOCUMENTO DE EVALUACIÓN DE CAUDAL ECOLÓGICO (DECE). RIO USUMACINTA 1 Responsable del proyecto: Everardo Barba Macias Coordinador por grupo de trabajo: Geohidrologia: Dra Iris Neri Flores Vegetación: Dra Dulce Infante Mata Tecnicos: M.C. Carolina Madero Vega Biol. Alonso Rincón Perez Peces: Everardo Barba Macías Tecnicos Ing. Cinthia Trinidad Ocaña M.C. Jose Francisco Miranda Vidal M.C. Juan Juarez Flores 2 Contenido 1. RESUMEN EJECUTIVO ...................................................................................................................... 8 2. INTRODUCCIÓN ............................................................................................................................. 12 2.1 Reservas de agua ..................................................................................................................... 12 2.2 Antecedentes .......................................................................................................................... 13 2.2.1Decretos de Áreas Naturales Protegidas (ANP) / Reservas de la biósfera (RB) / Sitios Ramsar y sus planes de manejo. ............................................................................................... 13 2.2.2 Zonas de reserva e importancia ecológica ....................................................................... 20 3. OBJETIVOS ..................................................................................................................................... 27 3.1 Objetivo General ..................................................................................................................... 27 3.2 Objetivos Particulares ............................................................................................................. 27 4. METODOLOGÍA .............................................................................................................................. 27 4.1 Delimitación geográfica ........................................................................................................... 27 4.1.1 Diagrama conceptual del funcionamiento hidrológico de la zona de estudio ................. 28 4.1.2 Estaciones hidrométricas ................................................................................................. 29 4.1.3 Principios ecohidrológicos de trabajo. ............................................................................. 30 4.2 Determinación de unidades de estudio de caudal ecológico (UECE) y sitios de referencia ... 31 4.2.1 Selección de sitios de referencia ...................................................................................... 32 4.3 Metodologías hidrológicas y holística para la determinación del caudal ecológico. .............. 35 4.4 Metodología para la medición de las variables o disciplinas holísticas .................................. 39 4.4.1 Geohidrología ................................................................................................................... 40 4.4.1.1 Monitoreo hidrogeológico ........................................................................................ 41 4.4.2 Vegetación ........................................................................................................................ 42 4.4.3. Peces ............................................................................................................................... 47 4.4.4 Talleres y reuniones de discusión de caudal ecológico .................................................... 52 4.4.4.1 Taller de arranque ..................................................................................................... 52 4.4.4.2. Taller CONAGUA Avances......................................................................................... 54 4.4.4.3. Taller con expertos ................................................................................................... 54 5. RESULTADOS ................................................................................................................................. 56 5.1. Cuenca Usumacinta: integración holística regional ............................................................... 56 5.2. Vegetación y Uso de suelo ..................................................................................................... 57 3 5.3. Uso del Agua ........................................................................................................................... 58 5.4 Características socioeconómicas de la región. ........................................................................ 59 5.4.1 Población .......................................................................................................................... 59 5.4.2 Población total y distribución por género ........................................................................ 60 5.4.3 Poblaciones urbanas y rurales.......................................................................................... 60 5.4.4 Aspectos socioeconómicos .............................................................................................. 61 5.4.4.1 Servicios ..................................................................................................................... 61 5.4.4.2 Marginación .............................................................................................................. 61 5.4.4.3 Crecimiento poblacional ........................................................................................... 62 5.4.4.4 Actividades económicas ............................................................................................ 63 5.4.4 Usos del agua ................................................................................................................... 63 5.4.4.1 Aprovechamiento de las aguas nacionales superficiales .......................................... 63 5.4.4.2 Aprovechamiento de las aguas nacionales subterráneas ......................................... 64 5.4.4.3 Problemática socio- ambiental de la Cuenca ............................................................ 64 5.5 Resultados por zonas .............................................................................................................. 65 5.5.1 Zona I Lacantún ................................................................................................................ 65 5.5.1.1 Geohidrologia ............................................................................................................ 65 5.5.1.2 Geomorfología .......................................................................................................... 66 5.5.1.3 Hidrogeología ............................................................................................................ 66 5.5.1.4 Vegetación ................................................................................................................. 66 5.5.1.5 Peces ......................................................................................................................... 70 5.5.2 Zona II Jonuta- Catazajá ................................................................................................... 79 5.5.2.1 Geohidrologia ............................................................................................................ 79 5.5.2.2 Geomorfología .......................................................................................................... 80 5.5.2.3 Hidrogeología ............................................................................................................ 81 5.5.2.4 Vegetación ................................................................................................................. 82 5.5.2.5 Peces ......................................................................................................................... 85 5.5.3 Zona III Tres Brazos........................................................................................................... 92 5.5.3.1 Geohidrologia ............................................................................................................ 92 5.5.3.2 Geomorfología .......................................................................................................... 93 5.5.3.3 Hidrogeología ............................................................................................................ 94 4 5.5.3.4 Vegetación ................................................................................................................. 94 5.5.3.5 Peces ......................................................................................................................... 97 5.6. Discusión de talleres de expertos ........................................................................................ 105 5.7. Importancia ecológica, presión de uso y objetivos ambientales ......................................... 107 5.8. Propuesta de régimen de caudal ecológico y reserva de agua ............................................ 110 6. CONCLUSIONES ........................................................................................................................... 115 7. RECOMENDACIONES ................................................................................................................... 120 8. REFERENCIAS ............................................................................................................................... 123 9. ANEXOS ......................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Draft Genome and Target Capture Probes for Limacina Bulimoides, Tested for Cross-Species Relevance Le Qin Choo1,2*† , Thijs M
    Choo et al. BMC Genomics (2020) 21:11 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-019-6372-z RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Novel genomic resources for shelled pteropods: a draft genome and target capture probes for Limacina bulimoides, tested for cross-species relevance Le Qin Choo1,2*† , Thijs M. P. Bal3†, Marvin Choquet3, Irina Smolina3, Paula Ramos-Silva1, Ferdinand Marlétaz4, Martina Kopp3, Galice Hoarau3 and Katja T. C. A. Peijnenburg1,2* Abstract Background: Pteropods are planktonic gastropods that are considered as bio-indicators to monitor impacts of ocean acidification on marine ecosystems. In order to gain insight into their adaptive potential to future environmental changes, it is critical to use adequate molecular tools to delimit species and population boundaries and to assess their genetic connectivity. We developed a set of target capture probes to investigate genetic variation across their large-sized genome using a population genomics approach. Target capture is less limited by DNA amount and quality than other genome-reduced representation protocols, and has the potential for application on closely related species based on probes designed from one species. Results: We generated the first draft genome of a pteropod, Limacina bulimoides, resulting in a fragmented assembly of 2.9 Gbp. Using this assembly and a transcriptome as a reference, we designed a set of 2899 genome- wide target capture probes for L. bulimoides. The set of probes includes 2812 single copy nuclear targets, the 28S rDNA sequence, ten mitochondrial genes, 35 candidate biomineralisation genes, and 41 non-coding regions. The capture reaction performed with these probes was highly efficient with 97% of the targets recovered on the focal species.
    [Show full text]
  • The Freshwater Snails (Mollusca: Gastropoda) of Mexico: Updated Checklist, Endemicity Hotspots, Threats and Conservation Status
    Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad 91 (2020): e912909 Taxonomy and systematics The freshwater snails (Mollusca: Gastropoda) of Mexico: updated checklist, endemicity hotspots, threats and conservation status Los caracoles dulceacuícolas (Mollusca: Gastropoda) de México: listado actualizado, hotspots de endemicidad, amenazas y estado de conservación Alexander Czaja a, *, Iris Gabriela Meza-Sánchez a, José Luis Estrada-Rodríguez a, Ulises Romero-Méndez a, Jorge Sáenz-Mata a, Verónica Ávila-Rodríguez a, Jorge Luis Becerra-López a, Josué Raymundo Estrada-Arellano a, Gabriel Fernando Cardoza-Martínez a, David Ramiro Aguillón-Gutiérrez a, Diana Gabriela Cordero-Torres a, Alan P. Covich b a Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas, Universidad Juárez del Estado de Durango, Av.Universidad s/n, Fraccionamiento Filadelfia, 35010 Gómez Palacio, Durango, Mexico b Institute of Ecology, Odum School of Ecology, University of Georgia, 140 East Green Street, Athens, GA 30602-2202, USA *Corresponding author: [email protected] (A. Czaja) Received: 14 April 2019; accepted: 6 November 2019 Abstract We present an updated checklist of native Mexican freshwater gastropods with data on their general distribution, hotspots of endemicity, threats, and for the first time, their estimated conservation status. The list contains 193 species, representing 13 families and 61 genera. Of these, 103 species (53.4%) and 12 genera are endemic to Mexico, and 75 species are considered local endemics because of their restricted distribution to very small areas. Using NatureServe Ranking, 9 species (4.7%) are considered possibly or presumably extinct, 40 (20.7%) are critically imperiled, 30 (15.5%) are imperiled, 15 (7.8%) are vulnerable and only 64 (33.2%) are currently stable.
    [Show full text]
  • Phenotypic Features of Helicina Variabilis (Gastropoda: Neritimorpha) from Minas Gerais, Brazil
    Phenotypic features of Helicina variabilis (Gastropoda: Neritimorpha) from Minas Gerais, Brazil Luiz Ricardo L. Simone¹ ¹ Universidade de São Paulo (USP), Museu de Zoologia (MZUSP). São Paulo, SP, Brasil. ORCID: 0000-0002-1397-9823. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract. Helicina variabilis Wagner, 1827 (Neritimorpha, Helicinidae) is redescribed based on a sample collected in Nanuque, northern Minas Gerais, Brazil. The species description, previously based only on the shell, is expanded to the phenotypic fea- tures. The study revealed absorption of the internal shell whorls; a diaphragm muscle connected to the floor of the pallial cav- ity; a monoaulic pallial oviduct, with the female genital aperture inside the anal aperture, and the lack of a seminal receptacle and provaginal sac; and the pleural ganglia of the nerve ring connected with each other. The significance of these findings is discussed in the light of current taxonomic and phylogenetic knowledge. Key-Words. Atlantic Rainforest; Helicinidae; Anatomy; Morphology; Phenotype. INTRODUCTION on comparative anatomical information will be compared to those inferred using molecular ap- With the main goal of filling a gap in knowl- proaches (e.g., Uribe et al., 2016). edge of neritimorph phenotypic features, a more The Helicinidae constitute a terrestrial branch complete anatomical description of Helicina vari‑ of the Neritimorpha (Richling & Glaubrecht, 2008), abilis Wagner, 1827 is provided herein. Specimens a taxon with ~2,000 species in four superfami- of this species were collected during an expedition lies, Neritopsoidea, Hydrocenoidea, Helicinoidea by the naturalist and conchologist José Coltro Jr. (which includes the family Helicinidae), and and his team to the region of Nanuque in north- Neritoidea (Uribe et al., 2016), most of the species ern Minas Gerais state, which recovered many in the last two taxa.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Snail Diversity in Brazil
    2019 25 1-2 jan.-dez. July 20 2019 September 13 2019 Strombus 25(1-2), 10-20, 2019 www.conchasbrasil.org.br/strombus Copyright © 2019 Conquiliologistas do Brasil Land snail diversity in Brazil Rodrigo B. Salvador Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, Wellington, New Zealand. E-mail: [email protected] Salvador R.B. (2019) Land snail diversity in Brazil. Strombus 25(1–2): 10–20. Abstract: Brazil is a megadiverse country for many (if not most) animal taxa, harboring a signifi- cant portion of Earth’s biodiversity. Still, the Brazilian land snail fauna is not that diverse at first sight, comprising around 700 native species. Most of these species were described by European and North American naturalists based on material obtained during 19th-century expeditions. Ear- ly 20th century malacologists, like Philadelphia-based Henry A. Pilsbry (1862–1957), also made remarkable contributions to the study of land snails in the country. From that point onwards, however, there was relatively little interest in Brazilian land snails until very recently. The last de- cade sparked a renewed enthusiasm in this branch of malacology, and over 50 new Brazilian spe- cies were revealed. An astounding portion of the known species (circa 45%) presently belongs to the superfamily Orthalicoidea, a group of mostly tree snails with typically large and colorful shells. It has thus been argued that the missing majority would be comprised of inconspicuous microgastropods that live in the undergrowth. In fact, several of the species discovered in the last decade belong to these “low-profile” groups and many come from scarcely studied regions or environments, such as caverns and islands.
    [Show full text]
  • Florida Keys Species List
    FKNMS Species List A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T 1 Marine and Terrestrial Species of the Florida Keys 2 Phylum Subphylum Class Subclass Order Suborder Infraorder Superfamily Family Scientific Name Common Name Notes 3 1 Porifera (Sponges) Demospongia Dictyoceratida Spongiidae Euryspongia rosea species from G.P. Schmahl, BNP survey 4 2 Fasciospongia cerebriformis species from G.P. Schmahl, BNP survey 5 3 Hippospongia gossypina Velvet sponge 6 4 Hippospongia lachne Sheepswool sponge 7 5 Oligoceras violacea Tortugas survey, Wheaton list 8 6 Spongia barbara Yellow sponge 9 7 Spongia graminea Glove sponge 10 8 Spongia obscura Grass sponge 11 9 Spongia sterea Wire sponge 12 10 Irciniidae Ircinia campana Vase sponge 13 11 Ircinia felix Stinker sponge 14 12 Ircinia cf. Ramosa species from G.P. Schmahl, BNP survey 15 13 Ircinia strobilina Black-ball sponge 16 14 Smenospongia aurea species from G.P. Schmahl, BNP survey, Tortugas survey, Wheaton list 17 15 Thorecta horridus recorded from Keys by Wiedenmayer 18 16 Dendroceratida Dysideidae Dysidea etheria species from G.P. Schmahl, BNP survey; Tortugas survey, Wheaton list 19 17 Dysidea fragilis species from G.P. Schmahl, BNP survey; Tortugas survey, Wheaton list 20 18 Dysidea janiae species from G.P. Schmahl, BNP survey; Tortugas survey, Wheaton list 21 19 Dysidea variabilis species from G.P. Schmahl, BNP survey 22 20 Verongida Druinellidae Pseudoceratina crassa Branching tube sponge 23 21 Aplysinidae Aplysina archeri species from G.P. Schmahl, BNP survey 24 22 Aplysina cauliformis Row pore rope sponge 25 23 Aplysina fistularis Yellow tube sponge 26 24 Aplysina lacunosa 27 25 Verongula rigida Pitted sponge 28 26 Darwinellidae Aplysilla sulfurea species from G.P.
    [Show full text]
  • Biogeography. Lecture 20
    Biogeography. Lecture 20 Alexey Shipunov Minot State University March 26, 2014 Shipunov (MSU) Biogeography. Lecture 20 March 26, 2014 1 / 15 Insects: Arthropoda/Insecta Hexapoda/Insecta Insects: Arthropoda/Insecta Hexapoda/Insecta Shipunov (MSU) Biogeography. Lecture 20 March 26, 2014 2 / 15 Insects: Arthropoda/Insecta Hexapoda/Insecta Hexapods: very short overview 1) Entognatha (springtails etc.) 2) Insecta: I Apterygota I Pterygota I Palaeoptera I Neoptera I Polyneoptera I Paraneoptera I Holometabola: Hymenoptera, Neuropteroidea, Mecopterida Shipunov (MSU) Biogeography. Lecture 20 March 26, 2014 3 / 15 Insects: Arthropoda/Insecta Hexapoda/Insecta Insecta tree (Ishiwata et al., 2010) Shipunov (MSU) Biogeography. Lecture 20 March 26, 2014 4 / 15 Insects: Arthropoda/Insecta Hexapoda/Insecta A: Basal groups Shipunov (MSU) Biogeography. Lecture 20 March 26, 2014 5 / 15 Insects: Arthropoda/Insecta Hexapoda/Insecta B: Polyneoptera Shipunov (MSU) Biogeography. Lecture 20 March 26, 2014 6 / 15 Insects: Arthropoda/Insecta Hexapoda/Insecta C: Paraneoptera Shipunov (MSU) Biogeography. Lecture 20 March 26, 2014 7 / 15 Insects: Arthropoda/Insecta Hexapoda/Insecta D: Hymenoptera and Neuropteroidea Shipunov (MSU) Biogeography. Lecture 20 March 26, 2014 8 / 15 Insects: Arthropoda/Insecta Hexapoda/Insecta E: Mecopterida Shipunov (MSU) Biogeography. Lecture 20 March 26, 2014 9 / 15 Mollusca Terrestrial mollusks Mollusca Terrestrial mollusks Shipunov (MSU) Biogeography. Lecture 20 March 26, 2014 10 / 15 Mollusca Terrestrial mollusks Short overview Mollusks belong to the phylum Mollusca in Lophotrochozoa. There are many classes of mollusks but only one, gastropods (Gastropoda) was successful enough to conquer land. I Gastropoda I Cycloneritimorpha (e.g., Helicina) I Littorinimorpha (e.g., Pomatias) I Pulmonata (most of land gastropods belong here) Shipunov (MSU) Biogeography.
    [Show full text]
  • The Growth and Reproduction of the Freshwater Limpet
    The Growth and Reproduction of the Freshwater Limpet Burnupia stenochorias (Pulmonata, Ancylidae), and An Evaluation of its Use As An Ecotoxicology Indicator in Whole Effluent Testing A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY of RHODES UNIVERSITY by HEATHER DENISE DAVIES-COLEMAN September 2001 ABSTRACT For the protection of the ecological Reserve in South Africa, the proposed introduction of compulsory toxicity testing in the licensing of effluent discharges necessitates the development of whole effluent toxicity testing. The elucidation of the effects of effluent on the local indigenous populations of organisms is essential before hazard and risk assessment can be undertaken. The limpet Burnupia stenochorias, prevalent in the Eastern Cape of South Africa, was chosen to represent the freshwater molluscs as a potential toxicity indicator. Using potassium dichromate (as a reference toxicant) and a textile whole effluent, the suitability of B. stenochorias was assessed under both acute and chronic toxicity conditions in the laboratory. In support of the toxicity studies, aspects of the biology of B. stenochorias were investigated under both natural and laboratory conditions. Using Principal Component and Discriminant Function Analyses, the relative shell morphometrics of three feral populations of B. stenochorias were found to vary. Length was shown to adequately represent growth of the shell, although the inclusion of width measurements is more statistically preferable. Two of the feral populations, one in impacted water, were studied weekly for 52 weeks to assess natural population dynamics. Based on the Von Bertalanffy Growth Equation, estimates of growth and longevity were made for this species, with growth highly seasonal.
    [Show full text]
  • Figure S1. Maximum Likelihood Phylogenetic Tree of The
    100 Cochlicopa 55 Vallonia 92 Pupilloidei Buliminus [= Orthurethra] Chondrina Arion 100 Arionoidei 66 Meghimatium Vitrina 100 Oxychilus Limacoidei 82 100 Euconulus Cryptozona Albinaria Clausilioidei Corilla [Corillidae] Plectopyloidea 70 Rhytida [Rhytididae] Helicina 53 Dorcasia [Dorcasiidae] [‘non-achatinoid clade’] Caryodes [Caryodidae] Rhytidoidei Megalobulimus Testacella Testacelloidea Drymaeus 94 Orthalicoidei Gaeotis 82 93 Satsuma Stylommatophora 100 Bradybaena Helicoidei Monadenia 87 93 84 Trochulus Haplotrema Haplotrematoidea 93 Euglandina Oleacinoidea Coeliaxis 92 Thyrophorella Achatina 92 Achatinina 100 Glessula Achatinoidea [‘achatinoid clade’] 100 Subulina Ferussacia 76 Gonaxis Streptaxoidea 100 Guestieria Systrophia Scolodontoidea Scolodontina Laevicaaulis Laemodonta ‘non-stylommatophoran Carychium pulmonates’ Siphonaria 1% 0.01 Figure S1. Maximum likelihood phylogenetic tree of the Stylommatophora based on concatenated sequences of 5782 unambiguously aligned nucleotides from the combined dataset of the LSU (and 5.8S) gene, the SSU gene, the H3 gene and the 1st and 2nd codon positions of the CO1 gene. The optimal model GTR+G was used. The phylogeny is rooted on the siphonariid Siphonaria pectinata. Values on the nodes represent bootstrap support (1000 replicates). Bootstrap support values less than 50% are not shown. The scale bar represents 1 substitutional change per 100 nucleotide positions. 1 91 Satsuma 100 Bradybaena Trochulus 97 Helicoidei 68 Monadenia 87 Haplotrema Haplotrematoidea Euglandina Oleacinoidea 100 Vallonia
    [Show full text]
  • Winners and Losers in a Changing Ocean: Impact on the Physiology and Life History of Pteropods in the Scotia Sea; Southern Ocean
    Winners and losers in a changing ocean: Impact on the physiology and life history of pteropods in the Scotia Sea; Southern Ocean A thesis submitted to the School of Environmental Sciences of the University of East Anglia in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Jessie Gardner June 2019 © This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognise that its copyright rests with the author and that use of any information derived therefrom must be in accordance with current UK Copyright Law. In addition, any quotation or extract must include full attribution. Winners and losers in a changing ocean: Impact on the physiology and life history of pteropods in the Scotia Sea; Southern Ocean. © Copyright 2019 Jessie Gardner 2 Winners and losers in a changing ocean: Impact on the physiology and life history of pteropods in the Scotia Sea; Southern Ocean. Abstract The Scotia Sea (Southern Ocean) is a hotspot of biodiversity, however, it is one of the fastest warming regions in the world alongside one of the first to experience ocean acidification (OA). Thecosome (shelled) pteropods are planktonic gastropods which can dominate the Scotia Sea zooplankton community, form a key component of the polar pelagic food web and are important contributors to carbon and carbonate fluxes. Pteropods have been identified as sentinel species for OA, since their aragonitic shells are vulnerable to dissolution in waters undersaturated with respect to aragonite. In this thesis I investigate the impact of a changing ocean on the physiology and life history of pteropods in the Scotia Sea.
    [Show full text]
  • Estudo Zooarqueológico Da Malacofauna Das Ruínas Da Igreja Medieval De Santa Maria Do Castelo (Torres Novas, Portugal)
    Estudo zooarqueológico da malacofauna das ruínas da igreja medieval de Santa Maria do Castelo (Torres Novas, Portugal) Pedro M. Callapez1, Ricardo J. Pimentel2, Solange Silva3, Paulo Legoinha4 & Miguel de Carvalho5 1 Universidade de Coimbra, CITEUC - Centro de Investigação da Terra e do Espaço da Universidade de Coimbra, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Departamento de Ciências da Terra, Polo II, Rua Sílvio Lima, P-3030 790 Coimbra, Portugal. E-mail: [email protected] 2 Agrupamento de Escolas de Guia, Rua dos Fundadores do Colégio, P-3105 075 Guia, Pombal, Portugal. E-mail: [email protected] 3 Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Departamento de Ciências da Terra, Mestrado de Paleontologia, Quinta da Torre, P-2829 516 Caparica, Portugal. E-mail: [email protected] 4 Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, GEOBIOTEC - GeoBiociências, Geotecnologias e Geoengenharias, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Departamento de Ciências da Terra, Campus da Caparica, P-2829 516 Caparica, Portugal. E-mail: [email protected] 5 Livraria Miguel de Carvalho, Rua de O Figueirense, 10-14, P-3080 059 Figueira da Foz, Portugal Resumo: A intervenção arqueológica realizada no terreiro da antiga igreja medieval de Santa Maria do Castelo, em Torres Novas, permitiu a recolha de um acervo malacológico composto por oito espécies de moluscos marinhos, terrestres e dulçaquícolas, representativas de um mínimo de 27 indivíduos. A amostra compreende os bivalves Ostrea edulis Linnaeus, 1758, Crassostrea angulata (Lamarck, 1819), Cerastoderma edule (Linnaeus, 1758) e Ruditapes decussatus (Linnaeus, 1758) e os gastrópodes Theodoxus fluviatilis (Linnaeus, 1758), Tritia nitida (Jeffreys, 1867), Testacella maugei (Férussac, 1831) e Ferussacia folliculum (Schröter, 1784).
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Status of Freshwater Gastropods of Canada and the United States Paul D
    This article was downloaded by: [69.144.7.122] On: 24 July 2013, At: 12:35 Publisher: Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Fisheries Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ufsh20 Conservation Status of Freshwater Gastropods of Canada and the United States Paul D. Johnson a , Arthur E. Bogan b , Kenneth M. Brown c , Noel M. Burkhead d , James R. Cordeiro e o , Jeffrey T. Garner f , Paul D. Hartfield g , Dwayne A. W. Lepitzki h , Gerry L. Mackie i , Eva Pip j , Thomas A. Tarpley k , Jeremy S. Tiemann l , Nathan V. Whelan m & Ellen E. Strong n a Alabama Aquatic Biodiversity Center, Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (ADCNR) , 2200 Highway 175, Marion , AL , 36756-5769 E-mail: b North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences , Raleigh , NC c Louisiana State University , Baton Rouge , LA d United States Geological Survey, Southeast Ecological Science Center , Gainesville , FL e University of Massachusetts at Boston , Boston , Massachusetts f Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources , Florence , AL g U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service , Jackson , MS h Wildlife Systems Research , Banff , Alberta , Canada i University of Guelph, Water Systems Analysts , Guelph , Ontario , Canada j University of Winnipeg , Winnipeg , Manitoba , Canada k Alabama Aquatic Biodiversity Center, Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources , Marion , AL l Illinois Natural History Survey , Champaign , IL m University of Alabama , Tuscaloosa , AL n Smithsonian Institution, Department of Invertebrate Zoology , Washington , DC o Nature-Serve , Boston , MA Published online: 14 Jun 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • Board of Game and Inland Fisheries Meeting Agenda
    Revised Board of Game and Inland Fisheries 4000 West Broad Street, Board Room Richmond, Virginia 23230 August 14, 2012 9:00am Call to order and welcome, reading of the Mission Statement and Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 1. Recognition of Employees and Others 2. Public Comments – Department plan to build a new headquarters under PPEA 3. Public Comments – Non-Agenda Items 4. Approval of July 10, 2012 Board Meeting Minutes 5. Committee Meeting Reports: Wildlife, Boat and Law Enforcement Committee: Mr. Turner, Chairman of the Wildlife, Boat and Law Enforcement Committee, will report on the activities of the August 7, 2012 Committee Meeting. The Committee will recommend the following items to the full Board for final action: Staff Recommendations – Fisheries Regulation Amendments Staff Recommendations – Diversity Regulation Amendments Staff Recommendations – Boating Regulation Amendments Staff Recommendations – 2012-2013 Migratory Waterfowl Seasons and Bag Limits Staff Recommendations – ADA Regulation Agency Land Use Plan Proposed CY2013 Board Meeting Schedule Finance, Audit and Compliance Committee: Mr. Colgate, Chairman of the Finance, Audit and Compliance Committee, will report on the activities of the July 25, 2012 Committee Meeting. The Committee will present the following reports: FY2012 Year-end Financial Summary Internal Audit FY2013 Work Plan - Final Action Education, Planning and Outreach Committee: Ms. Caruso, Chairwoman of the Education, Planning, and Outreach Committee Meeting. Ms. Caruso will announce the next Committee Meeting will be held on October 17, 2012 beginning at 10:00am. 6. Closed Session 7. Director's Report: 8. Chairman's Remarks 9. Additional Business/Comments 10. Next Meeting Date: October 18, 2012 beginning at 9:00am 11.
    [Show full text]