DOCSLIB.ORG

Fens Biodiversity Audit DRAFT

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fens Biodiversity Audit DRAFT Fens Biodiversity Audit Methodology and Initial Results DRAFT H.L. Mossman, C.J. Panter, P.M. Dolman School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich 1 Acknowledgements This work was carried out in conjunction with CPERC and BCNP Wildlife Trust. The work was funded by Natural England, Environment Agency, National Trust, RSPB, Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust and the Norfolk Biodiveristy Partnership. We are very grateful to the members of the Fens for the Future Steering Group for their advice and support. We are indebted to Charlie Barnes, Rosie Blackman, Jon Cole, Brian Eversham, Annette Faulkner, Ian Dawson, Martin Horlock (NBIS), Peter Kirby, Nick Millar, Nick Owens, Val Perrin, Ivan Perry, John Showers, David Sheppard, Alan Stubbs and Jon Webb. We are also very grateful to the many other individuals who provided invaluable help, including biological records, autecological information, and information on management outcomes, without these generous contributions this work would not have been possible. We also acknowledge the invaluable contributions of many hundreds of additional recorders and members of the public who over many years have submitted information to the Local Records Centres, county and national taxonomic recording schemes, or NBN. 2 Contents Methodology ................................................................................................................................. 5 Study area ................................................................................................................................. 5 Data collation ............................................................................................................................ 7 Database refinement ................................................................................................................ 7 Cut-off date ............................................................................................................................... 8 Data mapping and analysis ....................................................................................................... 8 Definition of conservation priority species ............................................................................... 8 Definition of Fens Specialist species ......................................................................................... 9 Expert stakeholder validation of collated priority taxa .......................................................... 10 Extinct and extirpated taxa ..................................................................................................... 11 Collating and synthesising species habitat associations and ecological requirements .......... 12 Habitat associations ............................................................................................................ 12 Ecological structures and processes ................................................................................... 13 Sources of ecological information ...................................................................................... 13 Results ......................................................................................................................................... 14 Biodiversity in the Fens ........................................................................................................... 14 Recording coverage ............................................................................................................ 14 Distribution of biodiversity in the Fens .............................................................................. 15 Fen Regional Specialists .......................................................................................................... 23 Extinctions in the Fens ............................................................................................................ 27 Habitat Associations ............................................................................................................... 31 Key habitats for Priority Biodiversity .................................................................................. 31 Key habitats for Fens Specialists ......................................................................................... 31 Guild Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 34 Successional and hydrological conditions .......................................................................... 34 Classification of management guilds .................................................................................. 35 Management guilds ................................................................................................................ 40 Guild Descriptions ................................................................................................................... 43 1. Broad guild: Open – Fast-flowing Water ........................................................................ 43 2. Broad guild: Open – Aquatic ........................................................................................... 43 6. Broad guild: Open – Submerged margins ....................................................................... 46 11. Broad guild: Open woodland – Aquatic ........................................................................ 47 12. Broad guild: Open – Littoral .......................................................................................... 47 18. Broad guild: Scattered scrub – Littoral – Sward mosaics.............................................. 48 19. Broad guild: Open – Terrestrial littoral ......................................................................... 49 24. Broad guild: Closed-canopywood/scrub – Littoral ....................................................... 52 25. Broad guild: Open to closed-canopy – Littoral ............................................................. 52 26. Broad guild: Open – Wet............................................................................................... 52 Broad guild: Scattered scrub – Wet .................................................................................... 56 36. Broad guild: Carr – Wet................................................................................................. 56 39. Broad guild: Open to closed-canopy – Wet .................................................................. 59 41. Broad guild: Open – Seasonally wet ............................................................................. 59 47. Broad guild: Open – Wet to damp – detritus ............................................................... 62 48. Broad guild: Open woodland – Seasonally wet ............................................................ 62 49. Broad guild: Closed-canopy woodland – Damp ............................................................ 62 50. Broad guild: Open – Shaded ......................................................................................... 62 3 51. Broad guild: Open – Mesic ............................................................................................ 63 64. Broad guild: Scattered scrub – Mesic ........................................................................... 66 65. Broad guild: Open and Scrub – Mesic ........................................................................... 67 66. Broad guild: Trees in open conditions – Mesic ............................................................. 67 74. Broad guild: Closed-canopy woodland – Mesic ............................................................ 68 79. Broad guild: Tree/Shrub cover – Mesic ........................................................................ 69 84. Broad guild: Open to closed-canopy – Mesic ............................................................... 70 Broad guild: Open – Xeric ................................................................................................... 71 88. Broad guild: Open – Wet to dry .................................................................................... 73 90. Broad guild: Tree/Shrub cover – Wet or dry ................................................................ 74 Broad guild: Closed-canopy woodland – Wet to dry .......................................................... 74 92. Broad guild: Open to closed-canopy – Carrion ............................................................. 74 93. Broad guild: Open to closed-canopy – Detritus/fungi .................................................. 74 94. Broad guild: Subterranean ............................................................................................ 75 96. Broad guild: Saltmarsh .................................................................................................. 75 99. Broad guild: Open and Wood ....................................................................................... 76 100. Broad guild: Open – Wet and dry ............................................................................... 76 References .............................................................................................................................. 77 Appendices .............................................................................................................................. 78 4 Methodology Study area The Fens Biodiversity Audit study area largely comprised the Fens National Character Area (NCA); this boundary is clearly delineated by the peat soils. However, an important
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Green-Tree Retention and Controlled Burning in Restoration and Conservation of Beetle Diversity in Boreal Forests
    Dissertationes Forestales 21 Green-tree retention and controlled burning in restoration and conservation of beetle diversity in boreal forests Esko Hyvärinen Faculty of Forestry University of Joensuu Academic dissertation To be presented, with the permission of the Faculty of Forestry of the University of Joensuu, for public criticism in auditorium C2 of the University of Joensuu, Yliopistonkatu 4, Joensuu, on 9th June 2006, at 12 o’clock noon. 2 Title: Green-tree retention and controlled burning in restoration and conservation of beetle diversity in boreal forests Author: Esko Hyvärinen Dissertationes Forestales 21 Supervisors: Prof. Jari Kouki, Faculty of Forestry, University of Joensuu, Finland Docent Petri Martikainen, Faculty of Forestry, University of Joensuu, Finland Pre-examiners: Docent Jyrki Muona, Finnish Museum of Natural History, Zoological Museum, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Docent Tomas Roslin, Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Division of Population Biology, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Opponent: Prof. Bengt Gunnar Jonsson, Department of Natural Sciences, Mid Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden ISSN 1795-7389 ISBN-13: 978-951-651-130-9 (PDF) ISBN-10: 951-651-130-9 (PDF) Paper copy printed: Joensuun yliopistopaino, 2006 Publishers: The Finnish Society of Forest Science Finnish Forest Research Institute Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry of the University of Helsinki Faculty of Forestry of the University of Joensuu Editorial Office: The Finnish Society of Forest Science Unioninkatu 40A, 00170 Helsinki, Finland http://www.metla.fi/dissertationes 3 Hyvärinen, Esko 2006. Green-tree retention and controlled burning in restoration and conservation of beetle diversity in boreal forests. University of Joensuu, Faculty of Forestry. ABSTRACT The main aim of this thesis was to demonstrate the effects of green-tree retention and controlled burning on beetles (Coleoptera) in order to provide information applicable to the restoration and conservation of beetle species diversity in boreal forests.
    [Show full text]
  • Managing for Species: Integrating the Needs of England’S Priority Species Into Habitat Management
    Natural England Research Report NERR024 Managing for species: Integrating the needs of England’s priority species into habitat management. Part 2 Annexes www.naturalengland.org.uk Natural England Research Report NERR024 Managing for species: Integrating the needs of England’s priority species into habitat management. Part 2 Annexes Webb, J.R., Drewitt, A.L. and Measures, G.H. Natural England Published on 15 January 2010 The views in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of Natural England. You may reproduce as many individual copies of this report as you like, provided such copies stipulate that copyright remains with Natural England, 1 East Parade, Sheffield, S1 2ET ISSN 1754-1956 © Copyright Natural England 2010 Project details This report results from work undertaken by the Evidence Team, Natural England. A summary of the findings covered by this report, as well as Natural England's views on this research, can be found within Natural England Research Information Note RIN024 – Managing for species: Integrating the needs of England’s priority species into habitat management. This report should be cited as: WEBB, J.R., DREWITT, A.L., & MEASURES, G.H., 2009. Managing for species: Integrating the needs of England’s priority species into habitat management. Part 2 Annexes. Natural England Research Reports, Number 024. Project manager Jon Webb Natural England Northminster House Peterborough PE1 1UA Tel: 0300 0605264 Fax: 0300 0603888 [email protected] Contractor Natural England 1 East Parade Sheffield S1 2ET Managing for species: Integrating the needs of England’s priority species into habitat i management.
    [Show full text]
  • List of UK BAP Priority Terrestrial Invertebrate Species (2007)
    UK Biodiversity Action Plan List of UK BAP Priority Terrestrial Invertebrate Species (2007) For more information about the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP) visit https://jncc.gov.uk/our-work/uk-bap/ List of UK BAP Priority Terrestrial Invertebrate Species (2007) A list of the UK BAP priority terrestrial invertebrate species, divided by taxonomic group into: Insects, Arachnids, Molluscs and Other invertebrates (Crustaceans, Worms, Cnidaria, Bryozoans, Millipedes, Centipedes), is provided in the tables below. The list was created between 1995 and 1999, and subsequently updated in response to the Species and Habitats Review Report published in 2007. The table also provides details of the species' occurrences in the four UK countries, and describes whether the species was an 'original' species (on the original list created between 1995 and 1999), or was added following the 2007 review. All original species were provided with Species Action Plans (SAPs), species statements, or are included within grouped plans or statements, whereas there are no published plans for the species added in 2007. Scientific names and commonly used synonyms derive from the Nameserver facility of the UK Species Dictionary, which is managed by the Natural History Museum. Insects Scientific name Common Taxon England Scotland Wales Northern Original UK name Ireland BAP species? Acosmetia caliginosa Reddish Buff moth Y N Yes – SAP Acronicta psi Grey Dagger moth Y Y Y Y Acronicta rumicis Knot Grass moth Y Y N Y Adscita statices The Forester moth Y Y Y Y Aeshna isosceles
    [Show full text]
  • Data on Cerambycidae and Chrysomelidae (Coleoptera: Chrysomeloidea) from Bucureªti and Surroundings
    Travaux du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle © Novembre Vol. LI pp. 387–416 «Grigore Antipa» 2008 DATA ON CERAMBYCIDAE AND CHRYSOMELIDAE (COLEOPTERA: CHRYSOMELOIDEA) FROM BUCUREªTI AND SURROUNDINGS RODICA SERAFIM, SANDA MAICAN Abstract. The paper presents a synthesis of the data refering to the presence of cerambycids and chrysomelids species of Bucharest and its surroundings, basing on bibliographical sources and the study of the collection material. A number of 365 species of superfamily Chrysomeloidea (140 cerambycids and 225 chrysomelids species), belonging to 125 genera of 16 subfamilies are listed. The species Chlorophorus herbstii, Clytus lama, Cortodera femorata, Phytoecia caerulea, Lema cyanella, Chrysolina varians, Phaedon cochleariae, Phyllotreta undulata, Cassida prasina and Cassida vittata are reported for the first time in this area. Résumé. Ce travail présente une synthèse des données concernant la présence des espèces de cerambycides et de chrysomelides de Bucarest et de ses environs, la base en étant les sources bibliographiques ainsi que l’étude du matériel existant dans les collections du musée. La liste comprend 365 espèces appartenant à la supra-famille des Chrysomeloidea (140 espèces de cerambycides et 225 espèces de chrysomelides), encadrées en 125 genres et 16 sous-familles. Les espèces Chlorophorus herbstii, Clytus lama, Cortodera femorata, Phytoecia caerulea, Lema cyanella, Chrysolina varians, Phaedon cochleariae, Phyllotreta undulata, Cassida prasina et Cassida vittata sont mentionnées pour la première fois dans cette zone Key words: Coleoptera, Chrysomeloidea, Cerambycidae, Chrysomelidae, Bucureºti (Bucharest) and surrounding areas. INTRODUCTION Data on the distribution of the cerambycids and chrysomelids species in Bucureºti (Bucharest) and the surrounding areas were published beginning with the end of the 19th century by: Jaquet (1898 a, b, 1899 a, b, 1900 a, b, 1901, 1902), Montandon (1880, 1906, 1908), Hurmuzachi (1901, 1902, 1904), Fleck (1905 a, b), Manolache (1930), Panin (1941, 1944), Eliescu et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Planthopper and Leafhopper Fauna (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha Et Cicadomorpha) at Selected Post-Mining Dumping Grounds in Southern Poland
    Title: Planthopper and leafhopper fauna (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha et Cicadomorpha) at selected post-mining dumping grounds in Southern Poland Author: Marcin Walczak, Mariola Chruściel, Joanna Trela, Klaudia Sojka, Aleksander Herczek Citation style: Walczak Marcin, Chruściel Mariola, Trela Joanna, Sojka Klaudia, Herczek Aleksander. (2019). Planthopper and leafhopper fauna (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha et Cicadomorpha) at selected post-mining dumping grounds in Southern Poland. “Annals of the Upper Silesian Museum in Bytom, Entomology” Vol. 28 (2019), s. 1-28, doi 10.5281/zenodo.3564181 ANNALS OF THE UPPER SILESIAN MUSEUM IN BYTOM ENTOMOLOGY Vol. 28 (online 006): 1–28 ISSN 0867-1966, eISSN 2544-039X (online) Bytom, 05.12.2019 MARCIN WALCZAK1 , Mariola ChruśCiel2 , Joanna Trela3 , KLAUDIA SOJKA4 , aleksander herCzek5 Planthopper and leafhopper fauna (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha et Cicadomorpha) at selected post- mining dumping grounds in Southern Poland http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3564181 Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Silesia, Bankowa Str. 9, 40-007 Katowice, Poland 1 e-mail: [email protected]; 2 [email protected]; 3 [email protected] (corresponding author); 4 [email protected]; 5 [email protected] Abstract: The paper presents the results of the study on species diversity and characteristics of planthopper and leafhopper fauna (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha et Cicadomorpha) inhabiting selected post-mining dumping grounds in Mysłowice in Southern Poland. The research was conducted in 2014 on several sites located on waste heaps with various levels of insolation and humidity. During the study 79 species were collected. The paper presents the results of ecological analyses complemented by a qualitative analysis performed based on the indices of species diversity.
    [Show full text]
  • Grassflies of the Subfamily Chloropinae, Except the Tribe
    © Entomologica Fennica. 10 June 1999 Grassflies of the subfamily Chloropinae, except the tribe Chloropini and the genus Meromyza, of Finland, Karelia and the Kola Peninsula (Diptera, Cyclorrhapha, Chloropidae) E. P. Nartshuk Nartshuk, E. P. 1999: Grassflies of the subfamily Chloropinae (except the tribe Chloropini and the genus Meromyza) of Finland, Karelia and the Kola Peninsula (Diptera, Cyclorrhapha, Chloropidae).- Entomol. Fennica 10: 7-28. 27 species of Chloropinae are recorded from Finland, 7 of them for the first time. 14 species are recorded from Karelia and 3 from the Kola Peninsula, all for the first time. The distributions of all species in the territory investigated are mapped. The type specimens of Lasiosina parvipennis Duda are examined and a lectotype designated. A key to the genera and species of Chloropinae, except for species of the genera Chlorops and Meromyza, is given. The distribution in Finland of all species of Chloropinae, including the genera Chlorops and Meromyza, is dis­ cussed. The fauna of Chloropinae of Finland is compared with the faunas of St. Petersburg Province, Estonia and Yakutia. Emilia P. Nartshuk, Zoological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, 199034 St. Petersburg, Russia. E-mail: [email protected] Received 11 June 1997, accepted 24 February 1999 1. Introduction Some ecological data on the Finnish Chloro­ pinae were published by Krogerus (1932, 1960), This paper is the third in a series of papers on the Kontkanen (1935), Kallio (1950) and Lindberg Chloropidae of Finland and adjacent territories & Saris (1952). of Russia. It deals with the species of the sub­ family Chloropinae, except the generaMeromyza Meigen, Chlorops Meigen, Melanum Becker and 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Blattkäfer (Coleoptera: Megalopodidae, Orsodacnidae Et Chryso- Melidae Excl
    Blattkäfer (Coleoptera: Megalopodidae, Orsodacnidae et Chryso- melidae excl. Bruchinae) Bestandssituation. Stand: März 2013 Wolfgang Bäse Einführung Exkremente zum Schutz vor Feinden auf dem Rücken. Nur wenige Blattkäfer-Arten sind durch ihre wirt- Zu den Blattkäfern gehören nach Löbl & Smetana schaftliche Bedeutung allgemein bekannt. Hierzu gehö- (2010) drei Familien. So werden die ehemaligen Un- ren der Kartoffelkäfer, der Rübenschildkäfer (Cassida terfamilien Zeugophorinae als Megalopodidae und die nebulosa), Vertreter der Kohlerdflöhe (Phyllotreta spp.) Orsodacninae als Orsodacnidae interpretiert. Die ur- und die Spargel-, Getreide- und Lilienhähnchen (Crio- sprüngliche Familie der Samenkäfer (Bruchidae) zählt ceris spp., Oulema spp. und Lilioceris spp.). Viele Arten jetzt als Unterfamilie (Bruchinae) zu den Chrysomelidae. sind jedoch durch die Zerstörung naturnaher Standorte In dieser Arbeit fehlen die Samenkäfer, da die Datenlage gefährdet. So waren die Schilfkäfer ursprünglich an die momentan als nicht ausreichend angesehen wird. dynamischen Auenbereiche der Bäche und Flüsse gebun- Zu den größten Käferfamilien der Welt gehörend, sind den. Durch Grundwasserabsenkungen, Uferzerstörung die Blattkäfer ohne Berücksichtigung der Samenkäfer in und intensive Freizeitnutzung wurden viele ursprüng- Deutschland mit 510 Arten (Geiser 1998) vertreten. liche Lebensräume zerstört. Weniger spezialisierte Arten Der Habitus der Blattkäfer ist nicht einheitlich. Ne- sind vielfach noch ungefährdet, da sie auf sekundäre ben dem typischen gewölbten bis eiförmigen Habitus, Lebensräume wie Teiche oder Gräben ausweichen kön- wie er vom Kartoffelkäfer (Leptinotarsa decemlineata) nen. Die seltener nachgewiesenen Arten sind oft hoch- bekannt ist, gibt es bockkäferähnliche Formen bei den spezialisiert. So ist Donacia obscura nur in Mooren zu Schilfkäfern (Donaciinae), flachgedrückte Vertreter bei finden, während Macroplea mutica im Binnenland an den Schildkäfern (Cassida spp.), die eher zylindrisch ge- Salzseen gebunden ist.
    [Show full text]
  • Beiträge Zur Bayerischen Entomofaunistik 11:1–8, Bamberg (2011), ISSN 1430-015X
    Dieses PDF wird von der Arbeitsgemeinschaft bayerischer Entomologen e.V.für den privaten bzw. wissenschaftlichen Gebrauch zur Verfügung gestellt. Die kommerzielle Nutzung oder die Bereitstellung in einer öffentlichen Bibliothek oder auf einer website ist nicht gestattet. Beiträge zur bayerischen Entomofaunistik 11:18, Bamberg (2011), ISSN 1430-015X Neue Ergebnisse in der bayerischen Kleinschmetterlingsfaunistik 2. Beitrag (Insecta: Lepidoptera) aus der Arbeitsgemeinschaft Microlepidoptera in Bayern (mit Beiträgen von Georg Derra [GD], Gerald Fuchs [GF], Rudi Keller [RK], Peter Lichtmannecker [PL] und Werner Wolf [WW]) Abstract: 13 records of remarkable microlepidoptera from Bavaria are given, including the first german record of Gracillaria loriolella Frey, 1881 and the first bavarian record of Scrobipalpa ocellatella (Boyd, 1858). Zusammenfassung: Es werden Nachweise von 13 interessanten Kleinschmetterlingsarten aus Bayern besprochen, darunter der Erstnachweis von Gracillaria loriolella Frey, 1881 für Deutschland und der Erstnachweis der Rübenmotte Scrobipalpa ocella- tella (Boyd, 1858) für Bayern. Mit diesem neuen Beitrag möchten wir wieder einige für Bayern neue und interessante Kleinschmetter- lingsarten dokumentieren. Bezugnehmend auf die Rote Liste bayerischer Microlepidoptera (Pröse et al., [2004]) haben wir auch bemerkenswerte Neu- und Wiederfunde aus den 4 naturräumlich begründeten Re- gionen Bayerns, nach der die Rote Liste aufgegliedert wurde (Voith, [2004]), aufgenommen. Die Arbeitsgemeinschaft Microlepidoptera in Bayern versteht sich als loser, d. h. vereins- und organisa- tionsübergreifender Zusammenschluß und möchte insbesondere die faunistische Erfassung der bayerischen Kleinschmetterlinge bündeln. Sie steht allen an der Kleinfalterwelt Bayerns Interessierten offen. Adela associatella Zeller, 1839 (Abb. 1) Neu für das ostbayerische Grundgebirge! Von dieser prächtigen Langfühlermotte waren in der Roten Liste (Pröse et al., [2004]) in Bayern aktuelle Funde nur aus Alpen/Alpenvorland bekannt.
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidoptera: Tortricidae, Olethreutinae) SHILAP Revista De Lepidopterología, Vol
    SHILAP Revista de Lepidopterología ISSN: 0300-5267 [email protected] Sociedad Hispano-Luso-Americana de Lepidopterología España Zhang, A. H.; Li, H. H. A systematic study on Gibberifera Obraztsov, 1946 from China1 (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae, Olethreutinae) SHILAP Revista de Lepidopterología, vol. 32, núm. 128, diciembre, 2004, pp. 289-295 Sociedad Hispano-Luso-Americana de Lepidopterología Madrid, España Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=45512808 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative 289 Zhang 3/1/77 18:25 Página 289 SHILAP Revta. lepid., 32 (128), 2004: 289-295 SRLPEF ISSN:0300-5267 A systematic study on Gibberifera Obraztsov, 1946 from China1 (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae, Olethreutinae) A. H. Zhang & H. H. Li Abstract This paper deals with eight species of the genus Gibberifera Obraztsov from China. One new species, G. cla- vata Zhang & Li, sp. n., is described. The female of G. monticola Kuznetsov is described for the first time in scien- ce. A key to the Chinese species is given. KEY WORDS: Lepidoptera, Tortricidae, Olethreutinae, Gibberifera, new species, China Un estudio sistemático sobre Gibberifera Obraztsov, 1946 de China (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae, Olethreutinae) Resumen Este trabajo trata ocho especies del género Gibberifera Obraztsov de China. Se describe una nueva especie G. clavata Zhang & Li, sp. n. Se describe por primera vez para la ciencia la hembra de G. monticola Kuznetsov. Se da una clave de las especies chinas.
    [Show full text]
  • Additions, Deletions and Corrections to the Staphylinidae in the Irish Coleoptera Annotated List, with a Revised Check-List of Irish Species
    Bulletin of the Irish Biogeographical Society Number 41 (2017) ADDITIONS, DELETIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO THE STAPHYLINIDAE IN THE IRISH COLEOPTERA ANNOTATED LIST, WITH A REVISED CHECK-LIST OF IRISH SPECIES Jervis A. Good1 and Roy Anderson2 1Glinny, Riverstick, Co. Cork, Republic of Ireland. e-mail: <[email protected]> 21 Belvoirview Park, Belfast BT8 7BL, Northern Ireland. e-mail: <[email protected]> Abstract Since the 1997 Irish Coleoptera – a revised and annotated list, 59 species of Staphylinidae have been added to the Irish list, 11 species confirmed, a number have been deleted or require to be deleted, and the status of some species and names require correction. Notes are provided on the deletion, correction or status of 63 species, and a revised check-list of 710 species is provided with a generic index. Species listed, or not listed, as Irish in the Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera (2nd edition), in comparison with this list, are discussed. The Irish status of Gabrius sexualis Smetana, 1954 is questioned, although it is retained on the list awaiting further investgation. Key words: Staphylinidae, check-list, Irish Coleoptera, Gabrius sexualis. Introduction The Staphylinidae (rove-beetles) comprise the largest family of beetles in Ireland (with 621 species originally recorded by Anderson, Nash and O’Connor (1997)) and in the world (with 55,440 species cited by Grebennikov and Newton (2009)). Since the publication in 1997 of Irish Coleoptera - a revised and annotated list by Anderson, Nash and O’Connor, there have been a large number of additions (59 species), confirmation of the presence of several species based on doubtful old records, a number of deletions and corrections, and significant nomenclatural and taxonomic changes to the list of Irish Staphylinidae.
    [Show full text]
  • Rvk-Diss Digi
    University of Groningen Of dwarves and giants van Klink, Roel IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below. Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Publication date: 2014 Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database Citation for published version (APA): van Klink, R. (2014). Of dwarves and giants: How large herbivores shape arthropod communities on salt marshes. s.n. Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). The publication may also be distributed here under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license. More information can be found on the University of Groningen website: https://www.rug.nl/library/open-access/self-archiving-pure/taverne- amendment. Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum. Download date: 01-10-2021 Of Dwarves and Giants How large herbivores shape arthropod communities on salt marshes Roel van Klink This PhD-project was carried out at the Community and Conservation Ecology group, which is part of the Centre for Ecological and Environmental Studies of the University of Groningen, The Netherlands.
    [Show full text]
  • Phragmites Australis
    Journal of Ecology 2017, 105, 1123–1162 doi: 10.1111/1365-2745.12797 BIOLOGICAL FLORA OF THE BRITISH ISLES* No. 283 List Vasc. PI. Br. Isles (1992) no. 153, 64,1 Biological Flora of the British Isles: Phragmites australis Jasmin G. Packer†,1,2,3, Laura A. Meyerson4, Hana Skalov a5, Petr Pysek 5,6,7 and Christoph Kueffer3,7 1Environment Institute, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia; 2School of Biological Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia; 3Institute of Integrative Biology, Department of Environmental Systems Science, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) Zurich, CH-8092, Zurich,€ Switzerland; 4University of Rhode Island, Natural Resources Science, Kingston, RI 02881, USA; 5Institute of Botany, Department of Invasion Ecology, The Czech Academy of Sciences, CZ-25243, Pruhonice, Czech Republic; 6Department of Ecology, Faculty of Science, Charles University, CZ-12844, Prague 2, Czech Republic; and 7Centre for Invasion Biology, Department of Botany and Zoology, Stellenbosch University, Matieland 7602, South Africa Summary 1. This account presents comprehensive information on the biology of Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. ex Steud. (P. communis Trin.; common reed) that is relevant to understanding its ecological char- acteristics and behaviour. The main topics are presented within the standard framework of the Biologi- cal Flora of the British Isles: distribution, habitat, communities, responses to biotic factors and to the abiotic environment, plant structure and physiology, phenology, floral and seed characters, herbivores and diseases, as well as history including invasive spread in other regions, and conservation. 2. Phragmites australis is a cosmopolitan species native to the British flora and widespread in lowland habitats throughout, from the Shetland archipelago to southern England.
    [Show full text]