DOCSLIB.ORG

Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis TEMESCAL VALLEY TOSCANA VILLAGE CORONA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis Prepared For: Ruth Villalobos & Associates, Inc. 3602 Inland Empire Blvd., Suite C310 Ontario, California 91764 Contact: Ms. Ruth Villalobos Prepared By: Contact: Thomas J. McGill, Ph.D. 951.285.6014 Report and Survey Prepared By: Travis J. McGill, Biologist October 2013 Updated January 2017 TEMESCAL VALLEY TOSCANA VILLAGE CORONA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis The undersigned certify that the statements furnished in this report and exhibits present data and information required for this biological evaluation, and the facts, statements, and information presented is a complete and accurate account of the findings and conclusions to the best of our knowledge and beliefs. Travis J. McGill Biologist Natural Resources Thomas J. McGill, Ph.D. Vice President Natural Resources October 2013 Updated January 2017 Executive Summary The approximate 27.11-Acre Temescal Valley Toscana Village project is located in the City of Corona, Riverside County, California. The project site is located within the jurisdiction of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). Specifically, the project site is located in Subunit 1: Estelle Mountain/Indian Canyon of the Elsinore Area Plan. The proposed project is primarily located in Criteria Cell 3448 with portions of the project site extending into Criteria Cells 3349 and 3350. These cells contribute to the assembly of the Proposed Extension of Existing Core 2 which consists of habitat associated with Temescal Canyon Wash and adjacent upland areas. The primary goal of this Cell group will focus on riparian scrub, woodland, forest, and Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub habitat associated with Temescal Wash and provides habitat for species listed in Section 4.3.3 and 4.3.4 above, and also provides for movement of species. Nine (9) plant communities were observed within the boundaries of the project site during the habitat assessment: annual grassland; Riversidean sage scrub (RSS); southern cottonwood willow riparian forest; coast live oak riparian forest; mulefat scrub; wetland; eucalyptus woodland; disturbed; and developed. Based on the 2013 Jurisdictional Delineation Report, the project applicant will be required to obtain the following regulatory approvals: Untied States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 Nationwide Permit No. 39: Commercial and Institutional Developments; a Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification; and a California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA). Separate from the regulatory permits, a Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) analysis will need to be prepared to address the loss of the riparian/riverine habitat under the MSHCP. It should be noted that the project site is no longer located within federally designated Critical Habitat. Based on habitat requirements for specific species, availability and quality of habitats needed by sensitive plant species, it was determined that the project site does not provide suitable habitat for MSHCP Narrow Endemic or Criteria Area plant species. A focused survey was conducted in 2012 for sensitive plant species on the proposed project site and was negative. Since current site conditions have not changed since the 2012 focused survey, based on the 2013 habitat assessment, it can be presumed that MSHCP Narrow Endemic and Criteria Area plant species are absent from the project site. A focused survey conducted in 2012 for burrowing owl was negative. Current site conditions have not changed since the 2012 focused survey and based on the lack of sign or observation of burrowing owl on the project site during the 2013 habitat assessment, it can be presumed that burrowing owl do not occur onsite. Temescal Valley Toscana Village Habitat Assessment and MSCHP Consistency Analysis ES-1 Executive Summary Least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus; LBVI) is known to nest within Temescal Creek, which is located approximately 800-feet from the riparian habitat on the project site. LBVI is an edge species and could migrate onto the project site. In accordance with the USFWS least Bell’s vireo survey guidelines, all riparian areas and any other potential vireo habitats within the project boundaries were surveyed at eight (8) times between April 10 and July 31, at least ten (10) days apart. Biologist Travis J. McGill conducted eight focused LBVI surveys on May 9, May 19, May, 29, June 8, June 19, June 29, July 12, and July 26, 2014. All surveys were conducted between the hours of 0600 and 1000. No LBVI were observed during these surveys and LBVI can be presumed to be absent from the project site. Temescal Valley Toscana Village Habitat Assessment and MSCHP Consistency Analysis ES-2 Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... ES-1 Section 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Location...................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Project Description ................................................................................................................. 1 Section 2 Methodology ...................................................................................................................... 6 2.1 Western Riverside County MSHCP Consistency Analysis .................................................... 6 2.2 Literature Review ................................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Habitat Assessment and Field Investigation ........................................................................... 7 2.4 Soil Series Assessment ........................................................................................................... 8 2.5 Plant Communities ................................................................................................................. 8 2.6 Plants ...................................................................................................................................... 8 2.7 Wildlife ................................................................................................................................... 8 2.8 Riparian / Riverine Habitat and Jurisdictional Areas ............................................................. 8 2.9 Stephen’s Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan .............................................................. 9 Section 3 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................ 10 3.1 Local Climate ....................................................................................................................... 10 3.2 Topography and Soils ........................................................................................................... 10 3.3 Surrounding Land Uses ........................................................................................................ 12 Section 4 Discussion ........................................................................................................................ 13 4.1 Site Conditions ..................................................................................................................... 13 4.2 Vegetation ............................................................................................................................ 13 4.2.1 Annual Grasslands ............................................................................................................ 15 4.2.2 Riversidean Sage Scrub .................................................................................................... 15 4.2.3 Riparian ............................................................................................................................ 15 4.2.3.1 Southern Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest ............................................................ 16 4.2.3.2 Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest ................................................................................... 16 4.2.3.3 Mulefat Scrub ............................................................................................................... 16 4.2.4 Wetland ............................................................................................................................ 16 4.2.5 Eucalyptus Woodland ....................................................................................................... 16 Temescal Valley Toscana Village Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis i Table of Contents 4.2.6 Disturbed .......................................................................................................................... 17 4.2.7 Developed ......................................................................................................................... 17 4.3 Wildlife ................................................................................................................................. 17 4.3.1 Amphibians......................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rubber Boas in Radium Hot Springs: Habitat, Inventory, and Management Strategies
    Rubber Boas in Radium Hot Springs: Habitat, Inventory, and Management Strategies ROBERT C. ST. CLAIR1 AND ALAN DIBB2 19809 92 Avenue, Edmonton, AB, T6E 2V4, Canada, email [email protected] 2Parks Canada, Box 220, Radium Hot Springs, BC, V0A 1M0, Canada Abstract: Radium Hot Springs in Kootenay National Park, British Columbia is home to a population of rubber boas (Charina bottae). This population is of ecological and physiological interest because the hot springs seem to be a thermal resource for the boas, which are near the northern limit of their range. This population also presents a dilemma to park management because the site is a major tourist destination and provides habitat for the rubber boa, which is listed as a species of Special Concern by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). An additional dilemma is that restoration projects, such as prescribed logging and burning, may increase available habitat for the species but kill individual snakes. Successful management of the population depends on monitoring the population, assessing the impacts of restoration strategies, and mapping both summer and winter habitat. Hibernation sites may be discovered only by using radiotelemetry to follow individuals. Key Words: rubber boa, Charina bottae, Radium Hot Springs, hot springs, snakes, habitat, restoration, Kootenay National Park, British Columbia Introduction The presence of rubber boas (Charina bottae) at Radium Hot Springs in Kootenay National Park, British Columbia (B.C.) presents some unusual challenges for wildlife managers because the site is a popular tourist resort and provides habitat for the species, which is listed as a species of Special Concern by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC 2004).
    [Show full text]
  • California's Freshwater Fishes: Status and Management
    California’s freshwater fishes: status and management Rebecca M. Quiñones* and Peter B. Moyle Center for Watershed Sciences, University of California at Davis, One Shields Ave, Davis, 95616, USA * correspondence to [email protected] SUMMARY Fishes in Mediterranean climates are adapted to thrive in streams with dy- namic environmental conditions such as strong seasonality in flows. Howev- er, anthropogenic threats to species viability, in combination with climate change, can alter habitats beyond native species’ environmental tolerances and may result in extirpation. Although the effects of a Mediterranean cli- mate on aquatic habitats in California have resulted in a diverse fish fauna, freshwater fishes are significantly threatened by alien species invasions, the presence of dams, and water withdrawals associated with agricultural and urban use. A long history of habitat degradation and dependence of salmonid taxa on hatchery supplementation are also contributing to the decline of fish- es in the state. These threats are exacerbated by climate change, which is also reducing suitable habitats through increases in temperatures and chang- es to flow regimes. Approximately 80% of freshwater fishes are now facing extinction in the next 100 years, unless current trends are reversed by active conservation. Here, we review threats to California freshwater fishes and update a five-tiered approach to preserve aquatic biodiversity in California, with emphasis on fish species diversity. Central to the approach are man- agement actions that address conservation at different scales, from single taxon and species assemblages to Aquatic Diversity Management Areas, wa- tersheds, and bioregions. Keywords: alien fishes, climate change, conservation strategy, dams Citation: Quiñones RM, Moyle PB (2015) California’s freshwater fishes: status and man- agement.
    [Show full text]
  • Malosma Laurina (Nutt.) Nutt. Ex Abrams
    I. SPECIES Malosma laurina (Nutt.) Nutt. ex Abrams NRCS CODE: Family: Anacardiaceae MALA6 Subfamily: Anacardiodeae Order: Sapindales Subclass: Rosidae Class: Magnoliopsida Immature fruits are green to red in mid-summer. Plants tend to flower in May to June. A. Subspecific taxa none B. Synonyms Rhus laurina Nutt. (USDA PLANTS 2017) C. Common name laurel sumac (McMinn 1939, Calflora 2016) There is only one species of Malosma. Phylogenetic analyses based on molecular data and a combination of D. Taxonomic relationships molecular and structural data place Malosma as distinct but related to both Toxicodendron and Rhus (Miller et al. 2001, Yi et al. 2004, Andrés-Hernández et al. 2014). E. Related taxa in region Rhus ovata and Rhus integrifolia may be the closest relatives and laurel sumac co-occurs with both species. Very early, Malosma was separated out of the genus Rhus in part because it has smaller fruits and lacks the following traits possessed by all species of Rhus : red-glandular hairs on the fruits and axis of the inflorescence, hairs on sepal margins, and glands on the leaf blades (Barkley 1937, Andrés-Hernández et al. 2014). F. Taxonomic issues none G. Other The name Malosma refers to the strong odor of the plant (Miller & Wilken 2017). The odor of the crushed leaves has been described as apple-like, but some think the smell is more like bitter almonds (Allen & Roberts 2013). The leaves are similar to those of the laurel tree and many others in family Lauraceae, hence the specific epithet "laurina." Montgomery & Cheo (1971) found time to ignition for dried leaf blades of laurel sumac to be intermediate and similar to scrub oak, Prunus ilicifolia, and Rhamnus crocea; faster than Heteromeles arbutifolia, Arctostaphylos densiflora, and Rhus ovata; and slower than Salvia mellifera.
    [Show full text]
  • CATALINA CALIFORNIA QUAIL (Callipepla Californica Catalinensis) Paul W
    II SPECIES ACCOUNTS Andy Birch PDF of Catalina California Quail account from: Shuford, W. D., and Gardali, T., editors. 2008. California Bird Species of Special Concern: A ranked assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of immediate conservation concern in California. Studies of Western Birds 1. Western Field Ornithologists, Camarillo, California, and California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento. California Bird Species of Special Concern CATALINA CALIFORNIA QUAIL (Callipepla californica catalinensis) Paul W. Collins Criteria Scores Population Trend 0 Santa Range Trend 0 Barbara County Population Size 7.5 Range Size 10 Ventura Endemism 10 County Population Concentration 10 Threats 0 Los San Miguel Is. Santa Cruz Is. Angeles County Anacapa Is. Santa Rosa Is. Santa Barbara Is. Santa Catalina Is. San Nicolas Is. San Clemente Is. Current Year-round Range Historic Year-round Range County Boundaries Kilometers 20 10 0 20 Current and historic (ca. 1944) year-round range of the Catalina California Quail. Birds from Santa Catalina Island (perhaps brought by Native Americans) later introduced successfully to Santa Rosa (1935–1940) and Santa Cruz (late 1940s) islands, but unsuccessfully to San Nicolas Island (1962); quail from mainland populations of C. c. californica introduced unsuccessfully to Santa Cruz (prior to 1875) and San Clemente (late 19th century, 1913) islands. Catalina California Quail Studies of Western Birds 1:107–111, 2008 107 Studies of Western Birds No. 1 SPECIAL CONCERN PRIORITY HISTORIC RANGE AND ABUNDANCE Currently considered a Bird Species of Special IN CALIFORNIA Concern (year round), priority 3. This subspecies Grinnell and Miller (1944) described the Catalina was not included on prior special concern lists California Quail as a “common to abundant” (Remsen 1978, CDFG 1992).
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Species Selected at SRG 45 Following Working Group Recommendations on Reptiles and One Scorpion from Benin, Ghana and Togo
    Review of species selected at SRG 45 following working group recommendations on reptiles and one scorpion from Benin, Ghana and Togo (Version edited for public release) A report to the European Commission Directorate General E - Environment ENV.E.2. – Environmental Agreements and Trade by the United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre November, 2008 UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre 219 Huntingdon Road Cambridge CB3 0DL CITATION United Kingdom UNEP-WCMC (2008). Review of species selected at SRG 45 following working group recommendations on reptiles Tel: +44 (0) 1223 277314 and one scorpion from Benin, Ghana and Togo. A Report Fax: +44 (0) 1223 277136 to the European Commission. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge. Email: [email protected] Website: www.unep-wcmc.org PREPARED FOR ABOUT UNEP-WORLD CONSERVATION The European Commission, Brussels, Belgium MONITORING CENTRE The UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre DISCLAIMER (UNEP-WCMC), based in Cambridge, UK, is the The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect specialist biodiversity information and assessment the views or policies of UNEP or contributory centre of the United Nations Environment organisations. The designations employed and the Programme (UNEP), run cooperatively with WCMC presentations do not imply the expressions of any 2000, a UK charity. The Centre's mission is to opinion whatsoever on the part of UNEP, the evaluate and highlight the many values of European Commission or contributory organisations biodiversity and put authoritative biodiversity concerning the legal status of any country, territory, knowledge at the centre of decision-making. city or area or its authority, or concerning the Through the analysis and synthesis of global delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 5 References
    Section 5 References 5.0 REFERENCES Akçakaya, H. R. and J. L. Atwood. 1997. A habitat-based metapopulation model of the California Gnatcatcher. Conservation Biology 11:422-434. Akçakaya, H.R. 1998. RAMAS GIS: Linking landscape data with population viability analysis (version 3.0). Applied Biomathematics, Setaauket, New York. Anderson, D.W. and J.W. Hickey. 1970. Eggshell changes in certain North American birds. Ed. K. H. Voous. Proc. (XVth) Inter. Ornith. Congress, pp 514-540. E.J. Brill, Leiden, Netherlands. Anderson, D.W., J.R. Jehl, Jr., R.W. Risebrough, L.A. Woods, Jr., L.R. Deweese, and W.G. Edgecomb. 1975. Brown pelicans: improved reproduction of the southern California coast. Science 190:806-808. Atwood, J.L. 1980. The United States distribution of the California black-tailed gnatcatcher. Western Birds 11: 65-78. Atwood, J.L. 1990. Status review of the California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica). Unpublished Technical Report, Manomet Bird Observatory, Manomet, Massachusetts. Atwood, J.L. 1992. A maximum estimate of the California gnatcatcher’s population size in the United States. Western Birds. 23:1-9. Atwood, J.L. and J.S. Bolsinger. 1992. Elevational distribution of California gnatcatchers in the United States. Journal of Field Ornithology 63:159-168. Atwood, J.L., S.H. Tsai, C.H. Reynolds, M.R. Fugagli. 1998. Factors affecting estimates of California gnatcatcher territory size. Western Birds 29: 269-279. Baharav, D. 1975. Movement of the horned lizard Phrynosoma solare. Copeia 1975: 649-657. Barry, W.J. 1988. Management of sensitive plants in California state parks. Fremontia 16(2):16-20. Beauchamp, R.M.
    [Show full text]
  • Birds on San Clemente Island, As Part of Our Work Toward the Recovery of the Island’S Endangered Species
    WESTERN BIRDS Volume 36, Number 3, 2005 THE BIRDS OF SAN CLEMENTE ISLAND BRIAN L. SULLIVAN, PRBO Conservation Science, 4990 Shoreline Hwy., Stinson Beach, California 94970-9701 (current address: Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, 159 Sapsucker Woods Rd., Ithaca, New York 14850) ERIC L. KERSHNER, Institute for Wildlife Studies, 2515 Camino del Rio South, Suite 334, San Diego, California 92108 With contributing authors JONATHAN J. DUNN, ROBB S. A. KALER, SUELLEN LYNN, NICOLE M. MUNKWITZ, and JONATHAN H. PLISSNER ABSTRACT: From 1992 to 2004, we observed birds on San Clemente Island, as part of our work toward the recovery of the island’s endangered species. We increased the island’s bird list to 317 species, by recording many additional vagrants and seabirds. The list includes 20 regular extant breeding species, 6 species extirpated as breeders, 5 nonnative introduced species, and 9 sporadic or newly colonizing breeding species. For decades San Clemente Island had been ravaged by overgrazing, especially by goats, which were removed completely in 1993. Since then, the island’s vegetation has begun recovering, and the island’s avifauna will likely change again as a result. We document here the status of that avifauna during this transitional period of re- growth, between the island’s being largely denuded of vegetation and a more natural state. It is still too early to evaluate the effects of the vegetation’s still partial recovery on birds, but the beginnings of recovery may have enabled the recent colonization of small numbers of Grasshopper Sparrows and Lazuli Buntings. Sponsored by the U. S. Navy, efforts to restore the island’s endangered species continue—among birds these are the Loggerhead Shrike and Sage Sparrow.
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Rubber Boa (Charina Bottae) Predicted Suitable Habitat Modeling
    Northern Rubber Boa (Charina bottae) Predicted Suitable Habitat Modeling Distribution Status: Resident Year Round State Rank: S4 Global Rank: G5 Modeling Overview Created by: Bryce Maxell & Braden Burkholder Creation Date: October 1, 2017 Evaluator: Bryce Maxell Evaluation Date: October 1, 2017 Inductive Model Goal: To predict the distribution and relative suitability of general year-round habitat at large spatial scales across the species’ known range in Montana. Inductive Model Performance: The model does a good job of reflecting the distribution of Northern Rubber Boa general year-round habitat suitability at larger spatial scales across the species’ known range in Montana. Evaluation metrics indicate a good model fit and the delineation of habitat suitability classes is well-supported by the data. Deductive Model Goal: To represent the ecological systems commonly and occasionally associated with this species year-round, across the species’ known range in Montana. Deductive Model Performance: Ecological systems that this species is commonly and occasionally associated with over represent the amount of suitable habitat for Northern Rubber Boa across the species’ known range in Montana and this output should be used in conjunction with inductive model output for survey and management decisions. Suggested Citation: Montana Natural Heritage Program. 2017. Northern Rubber Boa (Charina bottae) predicted suitable habitat models created on October 01, 2017. Montana Natural Heritage Program, Helena, MT. 15 pp. Montana Field Guide Species Account: http://fieldguide.mt.gov/speciesDetail.aspx?elcode=ARADA01010 page 1 of 15 Northern Rubber Boa (Charina bottae) Predicted Suitable Habitat Modeling October 01, 2017 Inductive Modeling Model Limitations and Suggested Uses This model is based on statewide biotic and abiotic layers originally mapped at a variety of spatial scales and standardized to 90×90 meter raster pixels.
    [Show full text]
  • Paper Version of Palos Verdes
    Selected Plants Native to Palos Verdes Peninsula (C.M. Rodrigue, 07/26/11) http://www.csulb.edu/geography/PV/ Succulents (plants with fleshy, often liquid-saturated leaves and/or stems. These features can be found in a variety of life forms, including annual herbaceous plants, vines, shrubs, and trees, as well as cacti) Herbaceous plants (non-woody, though there may be a woody caudex or basal stem and root -- annual growth dies back each year, resprouting in perennial or biennial plants, or the plant dies and is replaced by a new generation each year in the case of annual plants) Extremely tiny plant. Stems only about 2-6 cm tall, occasionally as much as 10 cm, leaves only 1-3 mm long (can get up to 6 mm long), fleshy, found at the plant's base or on the stems, shape generally ovate (egg-shaped), may have a blunt rounded end or a fine acute tip. The leaves are arranged oppositely, not alternately. The plant is green when new but ages to red or pink. Tiny flower (0.5- 2 mm) borne in leaf axils, usually just one per leaf pair on a pedicel (floral stem) less than 6 mm long. Two or 3 petals and 3 or 4 sepals. Flowers February to May. Annual herb. Found in open areas, in rocky nooks and crannies, and sometimes in vernal ponds (temporary pools that form after a rain and then slowly evaporate). Crassula connata (Crassulaceae): pygmy stonecrop or pygmy-weed or sand pygmyweed Leaves converted into scales along stems, which are arranged alternately and overlap.
    [Show full text]
  • Additional Details on Select Pollinator Plants Sugar Bush (Rhus Ovata
    Additional Details on Select Pollinator Plants Sugar Bush (Rhus ovata) • Native to dry canyons/slopes of California • Flower colors are white and pink • Blooms during spring, winter • When established, needs only occasional watering and is easy to take care of • Prefers low moisture, is drought tolerant • Attracts butterflies and insects, bird friendly • Often used for firescaping (surrounding area with fire-resistant plants to create barrier) and slope stabilization (minimizing erosion) • Grows best in south facing chaparral slopes and hot/dry environments Pomegranate Trees • Pomegranate trees (Punica granatum) maximum height is 30 feet tall in ideal conditions, but commonly grow 12 to 16 feet tall as a round shrub or small tree. • The fruit is typically in season from September to February. • Prefer full sun exposure. • Once established, pomegranates can take considerable drought, but for good fruit production they must be irrigated Toyon Berry • Often grow to about 8 feet tall. • Its leaves are evergreen, alternate, sharply toothed, and are 5 cm in length and 2 cm wide. • The flowers are visited by butterflies and other insects, and have a mild, hawthorn-like scent. • They like sun or part shade, though they tend to do better in part shade in the southern, drier part of their geographic range. Canyon Sunflower (Venegasia carpesioides) • A great choice for a dry shady part of the garden as it tolerates full shade or part shade/sun. • Its yellow flowers are nearly always blooming. • They are fairly drought tolerant and they require little or no care and it’s tolerant of a variety of different garden soils.
    [Show full text]
  • Calabaria and the Phytogeny of Erycine Snakes
    <nological Journal of the Linnean Socieb (1993), 107: 293-351. With 19 figures Calabaria and the phylogeny of erycine snakes ARNOLD G. KLUGE Museum of <oolog~ and Department of Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mr 48109 U.S.A. Receiued October 1991, revised manuscript accepted Mar I992 Two major subgroups of erycine snakes, designated Charina and Eyx, are delimited with a cladistic analysis of 75 morphological characters. The hypotheses of species relationships within the two clades are (reinhardtii (bottae, triuirgata) ) and (colubrinus, conicus, elegans, jayakari, muellen’, somalicus (miliaris (tataricus (iaculus, johnii)))),respectively. This pattern of grouping obtains without assuming multistate character additivity. At least 16 synapomorphies indicate that reinhardtii is an erycine and that it is the sister lineage of the (bottae, friuirgata) cladr. Calabaria and Lichanura are synonymized with Charina for reasons of taxonomic efficiency, and to emphasize the New-Old World geographic distribution of the three species in that assemblage. Further resolution of E’yx species relationships is required before Congylophis (type species conicus) can be recognized. ADDITIONAL KEY WORDS:--Biogeography - Cladistics - erycines - fossils - taxonomy CONI‘EN’I’S Introduction ................... 293 Erycine terminal taxa and nomenclature ............ 296 Fossils .................... 301 Methods and materials ................ 302 Eryrine phylogeny ................. 306 Character descriptions ............... 306 Other variation ................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Final Report Saratoga Horticultural Research Endowment 2013-2015
    Final Report Saratoga Horticultural Research Endowment 2013-2015 Ornamental plant trials for the new California landscape: Evaluating industry introductions for sustainable characteristics on reduced water Principal Investigator: Karrie Reid, UCCE Environmental Horticulture Advisor, San Joaquin County 2101 E. Earhart Ave., Ste 200 Stockton, CA 95206-3949 (209) 953-6109 office (209) 953-6128 fax [email protected] Co-Investigators: David W. Fujino, Ph.D., Director, California Center for Urban Horticulture, UC Davis Lorence (Loren) R. Oki, Ph.D., CE Specialist, Dept. of Plant Sciences, UC Davis Jared Sisneroz, Staff Research Associate, Dept. of Plant Sciences, UC Davis Executive Summary In these trials 16 perennial landscape plant species, (9 new cultivars and 7 underutilized species/cultivars), were evaluated for overall performance on a range of reduced irrigation levels in clay loam soil in the hot interior Central Valley of California. All plants were grown in- ground for 2 years; 12 of the species in full sun and 4 under 50% shade. Planting in October 2013 was followed by an establishment period of irrigation at 80%-100% of reference evapotranspiration (ET0) and 25% management allowable depletion through April 2015. Plants were then subjected to 1 of 4 different levels of reduced irrigation at 20%, 40%, 60%, or 80% of ET0 during the dry season through the first week of October 2015. During the deficit irrigation season they were evaluated across treatments for growth, health and vigor, overall appearance, flowering, pest tolerance, and disease resistance. From these assessments, irrigation recommendations are made for their use in the landscape. Introduction Plant performance trials are a critical step in the introduction and promotion of new or unfamiliar ornamental plants.
    [Show full text]