Giant Kangaroo
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Classification of Mammals 61
© Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FORCHAPTER SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION Classification © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC 4 NOT FORof SALE MammalsOR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION © Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC. NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION. 2ND PAGES 9781284032093_CH04_0060.indd 60 8/28/13 12:08 PM CHAPTER 4: Classification of Mammals 61 © Jones Despite& Bartlett their Learning,remarkable success, LLC mammals are much less© Jones stress & onBartlett the taxonomic Learning, aspect LLCof mammalogy, but rather as diverse than are most invertebrate groups. This is probably an attempt to provide students with sufficient information NOT FOR SALE OR DISTRIBUTION NOT FORattributable SALE OR to theirDISTRIBUTION far greater individual size, to the high on the various kinds of mammals to make the subsequent energy requirements of endothermy, and thus to the inabil- discussions of mammalian biology meaningful. -
Mammals of the California Desert
MAMMALS OF THE CALIFORNIA DESERT William F. Laudenslayer, Jr. Karen Boyer Buckingham Theodore A. Rado INTRODUCTION I ,+! The desert lands of southern California (Figure 1) support a rich variety of wildlife, of which mammals comprise an important element. Of the 19 living orders of mammals known in the world i- *- loday, nine are represented in the California desert15. Ninety-seven mammal species are known to t ':i he in this area. The southwestern United States has a larger number of mammal subspecies than my other continental area of comparable size (Hall 1981). This high degree of subspeciation, which f I;, ; leads to the development of new species, seems to be due to the great variation in topography, , , elevation, temperature, soils, and isolation caused by natural barriers. The order Rodentia may be k., 2:' , considered the most successful of the mammalian taxa in the desert; it is represented by 48 species Lc - occupying a wide variety of habitats. Bats comprise the second largest contingent of species. Of the 97 mammal species, 48 are found throughout the desert; the remaining 49 occur peripherally, with many restricted to the bordering mountain ranges or the Colorado River Valley. Four of the 97 I ?$ are non-native, having been introduced into the California desert. These are the Virginia opossum, ' >% Rocky Mountain mule deer, horse, and burro. Table 1 lists the desert mammals and their range 1 ;>?-axurrence as well as their current status of endangerment as determined by the U.S. fish and $' Wildlife Service (USWS 1989, 1990) and the California Department of Fish and Game (Calif. -
Jeremy Langley Chief Operations Officer Wilhite Langley, Inc. 21800 Barton Road, Ste 102 Grand Terrace, Ca 92313
47 1st Street, Suite 1 Redlands, CA 92373-4601 (909) 915-5900 May 22, 2019 Jeremy Langley Chief Operations Officer Wilhite Langley, Inc. 21800 Barton Road, Ste 102 Grand Terrace, Ca 92313 RE: Biological Resources Assessment, Jurisdictional Waters Delineation Glen Helen/Devore parcel - APN: 0261-161-17, Devore, CA Dear Mr. Langley: Jericho Systems, Inc. (Jericho) is pleased to provide this letter report that details the results of a general Biological Resources Assessment (BRA) that includes habitat suitability assessments for nesting birds, Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) [BUOW] and a Jurisdictional Waters Delineation (JD) for the proposed Glen Helen/Devore parcel (Project) located within Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) #0261-161-17 in the community of Devore, CA (Attachment B: Figures 1 and 2). This report is designed to address potential effects of the proposed Project to designated Critical Habitats and/or any species currently listed or formally proposed for listing as endangered or threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), or species designated as sensitive by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), or the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). Attention was focused on sensitive species known to occur locally. This report also addresses resources protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, federal Clean Water Act (CWA) regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) respectively; and Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code (FCG) administered by the CDFW. SITE LOCATION The approximately 1-acre parcel (APN: 0261-161-17) is located north of Kendall Drive just north of the intersection with N. -
Body Size, Not Phylogenetic Relationship Or Residency, Drives Interspecific Dominance in a Little Pocket Mouse Community
Animal Behaviour 137 (2018) 197e204 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Animal Behaviour journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/anbehav Body size, not phylogenetic relationship or residency, drives interspecific dominance in a little pocket mouse community * Rachel Y. Chock a, , Debra M. Shier a, b, Gregory F. Grether a a Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, U.S.A. b Recovery Ecology, San Diego Zoo Institute for Conservation Research, Escondido, CA, U.S.A. article info The role of interspecific aggression in structuring ecological communities can be important to consider Article history: when reintroducing endangered species to areas of their historic range that are occupied by competitors. Received 6 September 2017 We sought to determine which species is the most serious interference competitor of the endangered Initial acceptance 6 November 2017 Pacific pocket mouse, Perognathus longimembris pacificus, and more generally, whether interspecific Final acceptance 1 December 2017 aggression in rodents is predicted by body size, residency status or phylogenetic relatedness. We carried out simulated territory intrusion experiments between P. longimembris and four sympatric species of MS. number: A17-00719 rodents (Chaetodipus fallax, Dipodomys simulans, Peromyscus maniculatus, Reithrodontomys megalotis)ina field enclosure in southern California sage scrub habitat. We found that body size asymmetries strongly Keywords: predicted dominance, regardless of phylogenetic relatedness or the residency status of the individuals. aggression The largest species, D. simulans, was the most dominant while the smallest species, R. megalotis, was the dominance least dominant to P. longimembris. Furthermore, P. longimembris actively avoided encounters with all interference competition Perognathus longimembris species, except R. -
Mammal Species Native to the USA and Canada for Which the MIL Has an Image (296) 31 July 2021
Mammal species native to the USA and Canada for which the MIL has an image (296) 31 July 2021 ARTIODACTYLA (includes CETACEA) (38) ANTILOCAPRIDAE - pronghorns Antilocapra americana - Pronghorn BALAENIDAE - bowheads and right whales 1. Balaena mysticetus – Bowhead Whale BALAENOPTERIDAE -rorqual whales 1. Balaenoptera acutorostrata – Common Minke Whale 2. Balaenoptera borealis - Sei Whale 3. Balaenoptera brydei - Bryde’s Whale 4. Balaenoptera musculus - Blue Whale 5. Balaenoptera physalus - Fin Whale 6. Eschrichtius robustus - Gray Whale 7. Megaptera novaeangliae - Humpback Whale BOVIDAE - cattle, sheep, goats, and antelopes 1. Bos bison - American Bison 2. Oreamnos americanus - Mountain Goat 3. Ovibos moschatus - Muskox 4. Ovis canadensis - Bighorn Sheep 5. Ovis dalli - Thinhorn Sheep CERVIDAE - deer 1. Alces alces - Moose 2. Cervus canadensis - Wapiti (Elk) 3. Odocoileus hemionus - Mule Deer 4. Odocoileus virginianus - White-tailed Deer 5. Rangifer tarandus -Caribou DELPHINIDAE - ocean dolphins 1. Delphinus delphis - Common Dolphin 2. Globicephala macrorhynchus - Short-finned Pilot Whale 3. Grampus griseus - Risso's Dolphin 4. Lagenorhynchus albirostris - White-beaked Dolphin 5. Lissodelphis borealis - Northern Right-whale Dolphin 6. Orcinus orca - Killer Whale 7. Peponocephala electra - Melon-headed Whale 8. Pseudorca crassidens - False Killer Whale 9. Sagmatias obliquidens - Pacific White-sided Dolphin 10. Stenella coeruleoalba - Striped Dolphin 11. Stenella frontalis – Atlantic Spotted Dolphin 12. Steno bredanensis - Rough-toothed Dolphin 13. Tursiops truncatus - Common Bottlenose Dolphin MONODONTIDAE - narwhals, belugas 1. Delphinapterus leucas - Beluga 2. Monodon monoceros - Narwhal PHOCOENIDAE - porpoises 1. Phocoena phocoena - Harbor Porpoise 2. Phocoenoides dalli - Dall’s Porpoise PHYSETERIDAE - sperm whales Physeter macrocephalus – Sperm Whale TAYASSUIDAE - peccaries Dicotyles tajacu - Collared Peccary CARNIVORA (48) CANIDAE - dogs 1. Canis latrans - Coyote 2. -
Spatial and Temporal Continuity of Kangaroo Rat Populations Shown by Sequencing Mitochondrial DNA from Museum Specimens
Spatial and Temporal Continuity of Kangaroo Rat Populations Shown by Sequencing Mitochondrial DNA from Museum Specimens W. Kelley Thomas, Svante Paabo, Francis X. Villablanca, and Allan C. Wilson Surnmary. The advent ofdirect sequencing via the region - tRNA genes - Population dynamics POlymerase chain reaction (PCR) has opened up the Population tree- Molecular trees Possibility of molecular studies on museum speci ~~ns. Here we analyze genetic variation in popu attons over time by applying PCR to DNA extract Introduction ed from museum specimens sampled from iPulations of one species over the last 78 years. Over the past 10 years, mitochondrial DNA ncluded in this study were 43 museum specimens (mtDNA) has been a productive source of infor o_fthe Panamint kangaroo rat Dipodomys panamin mation about genetic variation at and below the lLnu.s from localities representing each ofthree geo species level (for reviews, see Wilson et al. 1985; graphically distinct subspecies. These specimens Hamson 1988). However, because these studies have :were originally collected and prepared as dried skins been restricted to the analysis of present-day pop 10 19 11 , 1917, or 1937. For each specimen, a 225 ulations, they represent a static view ofthe historic bp segment of the mitochondrial genome was se processes that shape the genetic variation detected quenced. These mitochondrial DNA sequences were in contemporary populations. Due to recent tech compared to those of 63 specimens collected at the nical advances brought about by the polymerase same localities in 1988. The three subspecies were chain reaction (PCR) (Kocher et al. 1989; Paabo et n~a rl y completely distinct. -
Dipodomys Ingens)
Species Status Assessment Report for the Giant Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys ingens) Photo by Elizabeth Bainbridge Version 1.0 August 2020 Prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service August 2020 GKR SSA Report – August 2020 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed the giant kangaroo rat (Dipodomys ingens) as endangered under the Endangered Species Act in 1987 due to the threats of habitat loss and widespread rodenticide use (Service 1987, entire). The giant kangaroo rat is the largest species in the genus that contains all kangaroo rats. The giant kangaroo rat is found only in south-central California, on the western slopes of the San Joaquin Valley, the Carrizo and Elkhorn Plains, and the Cuyama Valley. The preferred habitat of the giant kangaroo rat is native, sloping annual grasslands with sparse vegetation (Grinnell, 1932; Williams, 1980). This report summarizes the results of a species status assessment (SSA) that the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) completed for the giant kangaroo rat. To assess the species’ viability, we used the three conservation biology principles of resiliency, redundancy, and representation (together, the 3Rs). These principles rely on assessing the species at an individual, population, and species level to determine whether the species can persist into the future and avoid extinction by having multiple resilient populations distributed widely across its range. Giant kangaroo rats remain in fragmented habitat patches throughout their historical range. However, some areas where giant kangaroo rats once existed have not had documented occurrences for 30 years or more. The giant kangaroo rat is found in six geographic areas (units), representing the northern, middle, and southern portions of the range. -
San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat Trapping Study
NATURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, INC. San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys merriami parvus) Presence/Absence Trapping Studies Cajon Boulevard Warehouse Project San Bernardino, California Prepared for: L&L Environmental 721 Nevada, Suite 307 Redlands, CA 92373 951 681 4929 Prepared by: ENVIRA P. O. Box 2612 Ramona, CA 92065 Phone 619-885-0236 E-mail [email protected] May 9, 2018 Project Number: LLE18-101 T (951) 686-4483 3415 Valencia Hill Drive F (951) 686-8418 Riverside, California 92507 [email protected] Cajon Boulevard Warehouse Development! NATURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, INC. San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat Trapping Survey CERTIFICATION This Phase One Survey and report were conducted and prepared in accordance with professional requirements for small mammal trapping studies by Philippe Vergne (USFWS Permit TE068072-3). Philippe Jean Vergne, Field Biologist and Author. !!!!!!! !! May 9, 2018 Cajon Warehouse Trapping LLE18-101!i Cajon Boulevard Warehouse Development! NATURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, INC. San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat Trapping Survey Table of Contents Page 1.0 Introduction!.........................................................................................................................................................................1 2.0 Site Location and Project Description!..............................................................................................................................1 3.0 Methods................................................................................................................................................................................! -
2021 Rangewide SKR Management & Monitoring Plan
Stephens’ Kangaroo Rat Rangewide Management and Monitoring Plan Photo by Moose Peterson March 2021 Prepared by Conservation Biology Institute for Bureau of Land Management and Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency CBI is a 501(c)3 tax-exempt organization that works collaboratively to conserve biological diversity in its natural state through applied research, education, planning, and community service. Preferred Citation: Spencer, W.D., D. DiPietro, H. Romsos, D. Shier, and R. Chock. 2021. Stephens’ Kangaroo Rat Rangewide Management and Monitoring Plan. Unpublished report prepared by the Conservation Biology Institute for Bureau of Land Management and Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency. March 2021. SKR Rangewide Management & Monitoring Plan Conservation Biology Institute, 2021 Table of Contents Foreword 5 Acknowledgments 7 Glossary 8 1. Introduction 12 1.1. Background and Context 14 1.2. Approach 16 1.2.1. Use of Habitat Models and Delineating Population Units 17 1.2.2. Biogeographic Mapping and Genetic Considerations 17 1.2.3. Threats Assessment 18 1.2.4. Management Strategy 18 1.2.5. Monitoring Strategy 18 1.2.6. Data Management Strategy 19 1.2.7. Coordination Structure 19 2. SKR Ecology 20 2.1. Distribution and Population Genetics 20 2.2. Habitat 21 2.3. Sociality and Burrow Use 22 2.4. Diet and Foraging 23 2.5. Space-use Patterns 23 2.6. Reproduction 23 2.7. Communication 24 2.8. Activity Patterns 24 2.9. Interspecific Relationships 25 3. SKR Habitat Model 27 3.1. Methods 28 3.2. Results and Discussion 29 4. Delineating SKR Habitat & Population Units 34 4.1. -
Convergent Evolution of Olfactory and Thermoregulatory Capacities in Small Amphibious Mammals
Convergent evolution of olfactory and thermoregulatory capacities in small amphibious mammals Quentin Martineza,1, Julien Clavelb,c, Jacob A. Esselstynd,e, Anang S. Achmadif, Camille Grohég,h, Nelly Piroti,j, and Pierre-Henri Fabrea,k aInstitut des Sciences de l’Évolution de Montpellier (ISEM), CNRS, Institut de recherche pour le développement (IRD), Université de Montpellier (UM), UMR 5554, 34095 Montpellier, France; bDepartment of Life Sciences, The Natural History Museum, SW7 5DB London, United Kingdom; cUniv. Lyon Laboratoire d’Ecologie des Hydrosystèmes Naturels et Anthropisés, UMR CNRS 5023, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, École Nationale des Travaux Publics de l’État (ENTPE), F‐69622 Villeurbanne, Cedex, France; dMuseum of Natural Science, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803; eDepartment of Biological Sciences, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803; fMuseum Zoologicum Bogoriense, Research Center for Biology, Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI), 16911 Cibinong, Indonesia; gDivision of Paleontology, American Museum of Natural History, New York, NY 10024; hLaboratoire Paléontologie Évolution Paléoécosystèmes Paléoprimatologie (PALEVOPRIM, UMR 7262, CNRS-Institut écologie et environnement [INEE]), Université de Poitiers, 86073 Poitiers, Cedex 9, France; iInstitut de Recherche en Cancérologie de Montpellier (IRCM), INSERM, U1194 UM, Institut du Cancer de Montpellier (ICM), F-34298 Montpellier, Cedex 5, France; jRéseau d’Histologie Expérimentale de Montpellier, UMS3426 CNRS-US009 INSERM-UM, 34298 Montpellier, France; and kMammal Section, Department of Life Sciences, The Natural History Museum, SW7 5DB London, United Kingdom Edited by David B. Wake, University of California, Berkeley, CA, and approved February 28, 2020 (received for review October 11, 2019) Olfaction and thermoregulation are key functions for mammals. The partitioning has been documented in histological, airflow dynamic, former is critical to feeding, mating, and predator avoidance behaviors, and performance test studies (9–13). -
Survey Protocol for the Great Grey Owl Within the Range of the Northwest Forest Plan
SURVEY PROTOCOL FOR THE GREAT GRAY OWL WITHIN THE RANGE OF THE NORTHWEST FOREST PLAN Version 3.0 January 12, 2004 Prepared for the USDA Forest Service and USDI Bureau of Land Management By Deborah L. Quintana-Coyer-Taxon Leader -USFS Richard P. Gerhardt- Taxon Expert-Sage Science Matthew D. Broyles-Team Member-BLM Jeffrey A. Dillon-Team Member-USFWS Cheryl A. Friesen-Team Member-USFS Steven A. Godwin -Team Member-BLM Shane D. Kamrath-Team Member-USFS And with editorial assistance from Kimberly L. Garvey-USFS Survey Protocol for the Great Grey Owl within the Range of the Northwest Forest Plan 1 Survey Protocol for the Great Grey Owl within the Range of the Northwest Forest Plan Table of Contents Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 I. TRIGGERS FOR SURVEY 7 Trigger Criteria 7 Activities that are not generally habitat-disturbing 7 Activities that are generally habitat-disturbing 7 II. SPECIES DESCRIPTION 8 III. ECOLOGY 9 Range 9 General Ecology 9 Ecological Differences 10 Diet 10 Breeding/Courtship 11 Habitat Use 11 Nest Structure 12 Nesting Habitat 12 Roosting Habitat 14 Foraging Habitat 14 Elevation Use 16 Wintering Habitat 16 Areas Where Pre-Disturbance Surveys are NOT Needed for a Reasonable 16 Assurance of Persistence IV. METHODS 17 Survey Period 17 Pre-Survey Planning 18 Calling Techniques 19 Recommended Equipment Specifications 19 Conducting Surveys 20 Follow-up Surveys 22 Requirements 23 Determining a Known Site 24 Determining Other Observations 24 StatusBaiting or “Mousing” 24 Data Management 25 Training/Qualifications 25 V. APPENDICES 27 Appendix -
The California Desert CONSERVATION AREA PLAN 1980 As Amended
the California Desert CONSERVATION AREA PLAN 1980 as amended U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Desert District Riverside, California the California Desert CONSERVATION AREA PLAN 1980 as Amended IN REPLY REFER TO United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT STATE OFFICE Federal Office Building 2800 Cottage Way Sacramento, California 95825 Dear Reader: Thank you.You and many other interested citizens like you have made this California Desert Conservation Area Plan. It was conceived of your interests and concerns, born into law through your elected representatives, molded by your direct personal involvement, matured and refined through public conflict, interaction, and compromise, and completed as a result of your review, comment and advice. It is a good plan. You have reason to be proud. Perhaps, as individuals, we may say, “This is not exactly the plan I would like,” but together we can say, “This is a plan we can agree on, it is fair, and it is possible.” This is the most important part of all, because this Plan is only a beginning. A plan is a piece of paper-what counts is what happens on the ground. The California Desert Plan encompasses a tremendous area and many different resources and uses. The decisions in the Plan are major and important, but they are only general guides to site—specific actions. The job ahead of us now involves three tasks: —Site-specific plans, such as grazing allotment management plans or vehicle route designation; —On-the-ground actions, such as granting mineral leases, developing water sources for wildlife, building fences for livestock pastures or for protecting petroglyphs; and —Keeping people informed of and involved in putting the Plan to work on the ground, and in changing the Plan to meet future needs.