DOCSLIB.ORG

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROPOSED DESIGNATION of CRITICAL HABITAT for CORAL PINK SAND DUNES TIGER BEETLE (Cicindela Albissima) in UTAH

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROPOSED DESIGNATION of CRITICAL HABITAT for CORAL PINK SAND DUNES TIGER BEETLE (Cicindela Albissima) in UTAH DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROPOSED DESIGNATION OF CRITICAL HABITAT FOR CORAL PINK SAND DUNES TIGER BEETLE (Cicindela albissima) IN UTAH Prepared by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Utah Ecological Services Field Office West Valley City, Utah April 30, 2013 Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 4 1.0 Purpose for the Proposed Action .......................................................................................... 4 2.0 Need for the Action .............................................................................................................. 4 2.1 Background .......................................................................................................................... 5 2.1.1 Taxonomy and Species Description ................................................................................. 5 2.1.2 Habitat .............................................................................................................................. 6 2.1.3 Population Distribution .................................................................................................... 7 2.1.4 Life History ...................................................................................................................... 9 2.1.5 Adult Behavior and Ecology ............................................................................................ 9 2.1.6 Adult Dispersal ............................................................................................................... 10 2.1.7 Larval Behavior and Ecology ......................................................................................... 11 2.1.8 Population Size and Dynamics ....................................................................................... 11 2.1.9 Threats ............................................................................................................................ 12 2.2 Endangered Species Act .................................................................................................... 14 2.2.1 Critical Habitat ............................................................................................................... 14 2.2.2 Section 7 Consultation ................................................................................................... 15 2.2.3 Technical Assistance ...................................................................................................... 16 2.2.4 Section 9 Prohibitions .................................................................................................... 17 2.2.5 Section 10 Permits .......................................................................................................... 17 3.0 Description of Alternatives ................................................................................................ 18 3.1 Alternatives Considered But Not Fully Evaluated............................................................. 18 3.2 Alternative A. No Action Alternative ............................................................................... 19 3.3 Alternative B. Designation of Critical Habitat (Proposed Action) ................................... 19 3.4 Summary of Actions by Alternative .................................................................................. 20 4.0 Description of the Affected Environment .......................................................................... 20 4.1 Physical Environment ........................................................................................................ 20 4.2 Fish, Wildlife, and Plants ................................................................................................... 20 4.3 Human Environment .......................................................................................................... 23 4.4 Tribal Lands ....................................................................................................................... 23 5.0 Environmental Consequences ............................................................................................ 23 5.1 Physical Environment ........................................................................................................ 25 5.2 Fish, Wildlife, and Plants ................................................................................................... 25 5.3 Human Environment .......................................................................................................... 27 5.3.1 Energy Development ...................................................................................................... 29 5.3.2 Transportation Projects .................................................................................................. 29 5.3.3 Agriculture and Grazing ................................................................................................. 29 5.3.4 Recreation....................................................................................................................... 30 5.3.5 Residential and Commercial Development .................................................................... 32 5.5 Archeological and Cultural Resources ............................................................................... 32 5.6 Environmental Justice ........................................................................................................ 33 5.7 Cumulative Impacts ........................................................................................................... 33 ii 6.0 Council on Environmental Quality Analysis of Significance ............................................ 35 6.1 Context ............................................................................................................................... 35 6.2 Intensity.............................................................................................................................. 35 7.0 Contacts and Coordination with Others ............................................................................. 36 7.1 List of Agencies, Organizations, and Persons to Whom Copies of This Environmental Assessment Were Sent or Contacted ............................................................................................ 36 8.0 List of Contributors ............................................................................................................ 37 9.0 Literature Cited .................................................................................................................. 37 10.0 Maps ............................................................................................................................... 37 10.1 Map of Alternative B: Proposed Action ......................................................................... 38 10.2 Map of Alternative A: No Action .................................................................................. 39 List of Tables Table 1. Proposed Critical Habitat for CPSD tiger beetle. .......................................................... 20 Table 2. Candidate, threatened, and endangered species in Kane County Utah. .......................... 21 Table 3. Summary of Conservation Activity Related Co-Extensive Impacts to Economic Activities over the Next 20 Years (including a 7% Discount Rate). ........................................... 28 Table 4. Projected Co-extensive Costs of Consultations by Economic Activity from 2013-2033 ....................................................................................................................................................... 28 Table 5. Summary of Environmental Consequences by Alternative ........................................... 34 List of Figures Figure 1. CPSD tiger beetle populations and Conservation Areas. ................................................ 8 Figure 2. Adult CPSD tiger beetle population size estimate at CPSD from 1992 to 2011. .......... 12 Figure 3. Proposed critical habitat for CPSD tiger beetle (Cincindel albissima) .........................38 Figure 4. CPSD tiger beetle (Cincindela albissima) areas without critical habitat designation....39 iii Introduction The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is proposing to designate critical habitat for Coral Pink Sand Dunes (CPSD) tiger beetle (Cicindela albissima) in Utah, as required by section 4 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA). We proposed to list the CPSD tiger beetle as threatened and to designate critical habitat for the species on October 2, 2012 (77 FR 60208). In total, we proposed approximately 921 hectares (ha) (2,276 acres (ac)) in Kane County, Utah, for designation as critical habitat in our proposed rule. We announced a Notice of Availability in the Federal Register on May 6, 2013 that requests public review of 2012 CPSD tiger beetle survey information and how it should be considered for the final designation of critical habitat. Critical habitat designation is required by the ESA for listed species. This Draft Environmental Assessment presents the purpose of and need for the critical habitat designation, the proposed action and alternatives, and an evaluation of the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the alternatives pursuant to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) as implemented by the Council on Environmental regulations (40 CFR 1500, et seq.) and according to the U.S. Department of Interior
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Species Concepts and the Evolutionary Paradigm in Modern Nematology
    JOURNAL OF NEMATOLOGY VOLUME 30 MARCH 1998 NUMBER 1 Journal of Nematology 30 (1) :1-21. 1998. © The Society of Nematologists 1998. Species Concepts and the Evolutionary Paradigm in Modern Nematology BYRON J. ADAMS 1 Abstract: Given the task of recovering and representing evolutionary history, nematode taxonomists can choose from among several species concepts. All species concepts have theoretical and (or) opera- tional inconsistencies that can result in failure to accurately recover and represent species. This failure not only obfuscates nematode taxonomy but hinders other research programs in hematology that are dependent upon a phylogenetically correct taxonomy, such as biodiversity, biogeography, cospeciation, coevolution, and adaptation. Three types of systematic errors inherent in different species concepts and their potential effects on these research programs are presented. These errors include overestimating and underestimating the number of species (type I and II error, respectively) and misrepresenting their phylogenetic relationships (type III error). For research programs in hematology that utilize recovered evolutionary history, type II and III errors are the most serious. Linnean, biological, evolutionary, and phylogenefic species concepts are evaluated based on their sensitivity to systematic error. Linnean and biologica[ species concepts are more prone to serious systematic error than evolutionary or phylogenetic concepts. As an alternative to the current paradigm, an amalgamation of evolutionary and phylogenetic species concepts is advocated, along with a set of discovery operations designed to minimize the risk of making systematic errors. Examples of these operations are applied to species and isolates of Heterorhab- ditis. Key words: adaptation, biodiversity, biogeography, coevolufion, comparative method, cospeciation, evolution, nematode, philosophy, species concepts, systematics, taxonomy.
    [Show full text]
  • Western Tiger Salamander,Ambystoma Mavortium
    COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Western Tiger Salamander Ambystoma mavortium Southern Mountain population Prairie / Boreal population in Canada Southern Mountain population – ENDANGERED Prairie / Boreal population – SPECIAL CONCERN 2012 COSEWIC status reports are working documents used in assigning the status of wildlife species suspected of being at risk. This report may be cited as follows: COSEWIC. 2012. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Western Tiger Salamander Ambystoma mavortium in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. xv + 63 pp. (www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/default_e.cfm). Previous report(s): COSEWIC. 2001. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the tiger salamander Ambystoma tigrinum in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vi + 33 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm). Schock, D.M. 2001. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the tiger salamander Ambystoma tigrinum in Canada, in COSEWIC assessment and status report on the tiger salamander Ambystoma tigrinum in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. 1-33 pp. Production note: COSEWIC would like to acknowledge Arthur Whiting for writing the status report on the Western Tiger Salamander, Ambystoma mavortium, in Canada, prepared under contract with Environment Canada. This report was overseen and edited by Kristiina Ovaska, Co-chair of the COSEWIC Amphibians and Reptiles Specialist Subcommittee. For additional copies contact: COSEWIC Secretariat c/o Canadian Wildlife Service Environment Canada Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: 819-953-3215 Fax: 819-994-3684 E-mail: COSEWIC/[email protected] http://www.cosewic.gc.ca Également disponible en français sous le titre Ếvaluation et Rapport de situation du COSEPAC sur la Salamandre tigrée de l’Ouest (Ambystoma mavortium) au Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • Recovery Plan for Northeastern Beach Tiger Beetle
    Northeastern Beach Tiger Beetle, (Cincindela dorsalisdorsal/s Say) t1rtmow RECOVERY PLAN 4.- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service SFAVI ? Hadley, Massachusetts September 1994 C'AZ7 r4S \01\ Cover illustration by Katherine Brown-Wing copyright 1993 NORTHEASTERN BEACH TIGER BEETLE (Cicindela dorsalis dorsalis Say) RECOVERY PLAN Prepared by: James M. Hill and C. Barry Knisley Department of Biology Randolph-Macon College Ashland, Virginia in cooperation with the Chesapeake Bay Field Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and members of the Tiger Beetle Recovery Planning-Group Approved: . ILL Regi Director, Region Five U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date: 9 29- ~' TIGER BEETLE RECOVERY PLANNING GROUP James Hill Philip Nothnagle Route 1 Box 2746A RFD 1, Box 459 Reedville, VA Windsor, VT 05089 Judy Jacobs Steve Roble U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service VA Natural Heritage Program Annapolis Field Office Main Street Station 177 Admiral Cochrane Drive 1500 East Main Street Annapolis, MD 21401 Richmond, VA 23219 C. Barry Knisley Tim Simmons Biology Department The Nature Conservancy Massachusetts Randolph-Macon College Field Office Ashland, VA 23005 79 Milk Street Suite 300 Boston, MA 02109 Laurie MacIvor The Nature Conservancy Washington Monument State Park 6620 Monument Road Middletown, MD 21769 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NORTHEASTERN BEACH TIGER BEETLE RECOVERY PLAN Current Status: This tiger beetle occurred historically "in great swarms" on beaches along the Atlantic Coast, from Cape Cod to central New Jersey, and along Chesapeake Bay beaches in Maryland and Virginia. Currently, only two small populations remain on the Atlantic Coast. The subspecies occurs at over 50 sites within the Chesapeake Bay region.
    [Show full text]
  • Loggerhead Shrike, Migrans Subspecies (Lanius Ludovicianus Migrans), in Canada
    PROPOSED Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series Recovery Strategy for the Loggerhead Shrike, migrans subspecies (Lanius ludovicianus migrans), in Canada Loggerhead Shrike, migrans subspecies © Manitoba Conservation 2010 About the Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series What is the Species at Risk Act (SARA)? SARA is the Act developed by the federal government as a key contribution to the common national effort to protect and conserve species at risk in Canada. SARA came into force in 2003, and one of its purposes is “to provide for the recovery of wildlife species that are extirpated, endangered or threatened as a result of human activity.” What is recovery? In the context of species at risk conservation, recovery is the process by which the decline of an endangered, threatened or extirpated species is arrested or reversed, and threats are removed or reduced to improve the likelihood of the species’ persistence in the wild. A species will be considered recovered when its long-term persistence in the wild has been secured. What is a recovery strategy? A recovery strategy is a planning document that identifies what needs to be done to arrest or reverse the decline of a species. It sets objectives and broad strategies to attain them and identifies the main areas of activities to be undertaken. Detailed planning is done at the action plan stage. Recovery strategy development is a commitment of all provinces and territories and of three federal agencies — Environment Canada, Parks Canada Agency and Fisheries and Oceans Canada — under the Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix B References
    Final Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement and Preliminary Section 4(f) Evaluation Appendix B, References July 2021 Federal Aid No. 999-M(161)S ADOT Project No. 999 SW 0 M5180 01P I-11 Corridor Final Tier 1 EIS Appendix B, References 1 This page intentionally left blank. July 2021 Project No. M5180 01P / Federal Aid No. 999-M(161)S I-11 Corridor Final Tier 1 EIS Appendix B, References 1 ADEQ. 2002. Groundwater Protection in Arizona: An Assessment of Groundwater Quality and 2 the Effectiveness of Groundwater Programs A.R.S. §49-249. Arizona Department of 3 Environmental Quality. 4 ADEQ. 2008. Ambient Groundwater Quality of the Pinal Active Management Area: A 2005-2006 5 Baseline Study. Open File Report 08-01. Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Water 6 Quality Division, Phoenix, Arizona. June 2008. 7 https://legacy.azdeq.gov/environ/water/assessment/download/pinal_ofr.pdf. 8 ADEQ. 2011. Arizona State Implementation Plan: Regional Haze Under Section 308 of the 9 Federal Regional Haze Rule. Air Quality Division, Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, 10 Phoenix, Arizona. January 2011. https://www.resolutionmineeis.us/documents/adeq-sip- 11 regional-haze-2011. 12 ADEQ. 2013a. Ambient Groundwater Quality of the Upper Hassayampa Basin: A 2003-2009 13 Baseline Study. Open File Report 13-03, Phoenix: Water Quality Division. 14 https://legacy.azdeq.gov/environ/water/assessment/download/upper_hassayampa.pdf. 15 ADEQ. 2013b. Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Fact Sheet: Construction 16 General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity. Arizona 17 Department of Environmental Quality. June 3, 2013. 18 https://static.azdeq.gov/permits/azpdes/cgp_fact_sheet_2013.pdf.
    [Show full text]
  • Tiger Beetle (Cicindela Spp.) Inventory in the South Okanagan, British Columbia, 2009
    TIGER BEETLE (CICINDELA SPP.) INVENTORY IN THE SOUTH OKANAGAN, BRITISH COLUMBIA, 2009 Cicindela pugetana photographed at East Skaha Lake TNT property; courtesy of Dawn Marks BCCC. By Dawn Marks and Vicky Young, BC Conservation Corps BC Ministry of Environment Internal Working Report October 10, 2009 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Okanagan valley is home to a diverse array of rare or endangered insects, including grassland associated tiger beetles. Three of these, Dark Saltflat Tiger Beetle (Cicindela parowana), Badlands Tiger Beetle (Cicindela decemnotata) and Sagebrush Tiger Beetle (Cicindela pugetana) have been found in the Okanagan area. These tiger beetles are Red- listed (S1), Red-listed (S1S3) and Blue-listed (S3) respectively by the BC Conservation Data Centre and thought to occupy similar habitats (open soils in low elevation grasslands and forest). Under the BC Conservation Framework additional inventory is listed as an action for these three species. In 2009, the BC Conservation Corps crew, with guidance and support from the BC Ministry of Environment, conducted multi-species surveys in the Okanagan grasslands. These three species of tiger beetles were included in the surveys. Surveyors conducted tiger beetle inventories in May and again in September during the adult tiger beetle activity periods. Tiger beetles were also searched for, casually, during the multi-species surveys throughout the field season. The September surveys proved most effective and over 50 tiger beetles were observed at nine sites in the south Okanagan. Surveyors covered 84.2km while targeting tiger beetles in September. No Dark Saltflat Tiger Beetles were encountered. One Badlands Tiger Beetle and twenty- one Sagebrush Tiger Beetles were recorded.
    [Show full text]
  • This Work Is Licensed Under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License
    This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA. THE TIGER BEETLES OF ALBERTA (COLEOPTERA: CARABIDAE, CICINDELINI)' Gerald J. Hilchie Department of Entomology University of Alberta Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2E3. Quaestiones Entomologicae 21:319-347 1985 ABSTRACT In Alberta there are 19 species of tiger beetles {Cicindela). These are found in a wide variety of habitats from sand dunes and riverbanks to construction sites. Each species has a unique distribution resulting from complex interactions of adult site selection, life history, competition, predation and historical factors. Post-pleistocene dispersal of tiger beetles into Alberta came predominantly from the south with a few species entering Alberta from the north and west. INTRODUCTION Wallis (1961) recognized 26 species of Cicindela in Canada, of which 19 occur in Alberta. Most species of tiger beetle in North America are polytypic but, in Alberta most are represented by a single subspecies. Two species are represented each by two subspecies and two others hybridize and might better be described as a single species with distinct subspecies. When a single subspecies is present in the province morphs normally attributed to other subspecies may also be present, in which case the most common morph (over 80% of a population) is used for subspecies designation. Tiger beetles have always been popular with collectors. Bright colours and quick flight make these beetles a sporting and delightful challenge to collect.
    [Show full text]
  • Species and Community Profiles to Six Clutches of Eggs, Totaling About 861 Eggs During California Vernal Pool Tadpole Her Lifetime (Ahl 1991)
    3 Invertebrates their effects on this species are currently being investi- Franciscan Brine Shrimp gated (Maiss and Harding-Smith 1992). Artemia franciscana Kellogg Reproduction, Growth, and Development Invertebrates Brita C. Larsson Artemia franciscana has two types of reproduction, ovovi- General Information viparous and oviparous. In ovoviviparous reproduction, the fertilized eggs in a female can develop into free-swim- The Franciscan brine shrimp, Artemia franciscana (for- ming nauplii, which are set free by the mother. In ovipa- merly salina) (Bowen et al. 1985, Bowen and Sterling rous reproduction, however, the eggs, when reaching the 1978, Barigozzi 1974), is a small crustacean found in gastrula stage, become surrounded by a thick shell and highly saline ponds, lakes or sloughs that belong to the are deposited as cysts, which are in diapause (Sorgeloos order Anostraca (Eng et al. 1990, Pennak 1989). They 1980). In the Bay area, cysts production is generally are characterized by stalked compound eyes, an elongate highest during the fall and winter, when conditions for body, and no carapace. They have 11 pairs of swimming Artemia development are less favorable. The cysts may legs and the second antennae are uniramous, greatly en- persist for decades in a suspended state. Under natural larged and used as a clasping organ in males. The aver- conditions, the lifespan of Artemia is from 50 to 70 days. age length is 10 mm (Pennak 1989). Brine shrimp com- In the lab, females produced an average of 10 broods, monly swim with their ventral side upward. A. franciscana but the average under natural conditions may be closer lives in hypersaline water (70 to 200 ppt) (Maiss and to 3-4 broods, although this has not been confirmed.
    [Show full text]
  • Towards a Global Names Architecture: the Future of Indexing Scientific Names
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 550: 261–281Towards (2016) a Global Names Architecture: The future of indexing scientific names 261 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.550.10009 RESEARCH ARTICLE http://zookeys.pensoft.net Launched to accelerate biodiversity research Towards a Global Names Architecture: The future of indexing scientific names Richard L. Pyle1 1 Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum, 1525 Bernice Street, Honolulu, HI 96817, USA Corresponding author: Richard L. Pyle (email address) Academic editor: Ellinor Michel | Received 19 May 2015 | Accepted 20 May 2015 | Published 7 January 2016 http://zoobank.org/AD5B8CE2-BCFC-4ABC-8AB0-C92DEC7D4D85 Citation: Pyle RL (2016) Towards a Global Names Architecture: The future of indexing scientific names. In: Michel E (Ed.) Anchoring Biodiversity Information: From Sherborn to the 21st century and beyond. ZooKeys 550: 261–281. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.550.10009 Abstract For more than 250 years, the taxonomic enterprise has remained almost unchanged. Certainly, the tools of the trade have improved: months-long journeys aboard sailing ships have been reduced to hours aboard jet airplanes; advanced technology allows humans to access environments that were once utterly inacces- sible; GPS has replaced crude maps; digital hi-resolution imagery provides far more accurate renderings of organisms that even the best commissioned artists of a century ago; and primitive candle-lit micro- scopes have been replaced by an array of technologies ranging from scanning electron microscopy to DNA sequencing. But the basic paradigm remains the same. Perhaps the most revolutionary change of all – which we are still in the midst of, and which has not yet been fully realized – is the means by which taxonomists manage and communicate the information of their trade.
    [Show full text]
  • Hibbett Et Al 2011 Fung Biol
    fungal biology reviews 25 (2011) 38e47 journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fbr Plenary Paper Progress in molecular and morphological taxon discovery in Fungi and options for formal classification of environmental sequences David S. HIBBETTa,*, Anders OHMANa, Dylan GLOTZERa, Mitchell NUHNa, Paul KIRKb, R. Henrik NILSSONc,d aBiology Department, Clark University, Worcester, MA 01610, USA bCABI UK, Bakeham Lane, Egham, Surrey TW20 9TY, UK cDepartment of Plant and Environmental Sciences, University of Gothenburg, Box 461, 405 30 Goteborg,€ Sweden dDepartment of Botany, Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, 40 Lai St., 51005 Tartu, Estonia article info abstract Article history: Fungal taxonomy seeks to discover, describe, and classify all species of Fungi and provide Received 14 December 2010 tools for their identification. About 100,000 fungal species have been described so far, but it Accepted 3 January 2011 has been estimated that there may be from 1.5 to 5.1 million extant fungal species. Over the last decade, about 1200 new species of Fungi have been described in each year. At that Keywords: rate, it may take up to 4000 y to describe all species of Fungi using current specimen-based Biodiversity approaches. At the same time, the number of molecular operational taxonomic units Classification (MOTUs) discovered in ecological surveys has been increasing dramatically. We analyzed Environmental sequences ribosomal RNA internal transcribed spacer (ITS) sequences in the GenBank nucleotide data- Molecular ecology base and classified them as “environmental” or “specimen-based”. We obtained 91,225 MOTU sequences, of which 30,217 (33 %) were of environmental origin. Clustering at an average Taxonomy 93 % identity in extracted ITS1 and ITS2 sequences yielded 16,969 clusters, including 6230 (37 %) clusters with only environmental sequences, and 2223 (13 %) clusters with both envi- ronmental and specimen-based sequences.
    [Show full text]
  • When Mycologists Describe New Species, Not All Relevant
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal MycoKeys 72: 109–128 (2020) Mycological species descriptions over time 109 doi: 10.3897/mycokeys.72.56691 RESEARCH ARTICLE MycoKeys http://mycokeys.pensoft.net Launched to accelerate biodiversity research When mycologists describe new species, not all relevant information is provided (clearly enough) Louisa Durkin1, Tobias Jansson1, Marisol Sanchez2, Maryia Khomich3, Martin Ryberg4, Erik Kristiansson5, R. Henrik Nilsson1 1 Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Gothenburg Global Biodiversity Centre, University of Gothenburg, Box 461, 405 30 Göteborg, Sweden 2 Department of Forest Mycology and Plant Pathology, Uppsala Biocentre, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden 3 Nofima – Norwegian Institute of Food, Fisheries and Aquaculture Research, P.O. Box 210, 1431 Ås, Norway 4 Department of Organismal Biology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden 5 Department of Mathematical Sciences, Chalmers University of Technology and University of Gothenburg, Göteborg, Sweden Corresponding author: R. Henrik Nilsson ([email protected]) Academic editor: T. Lumbsch | Received 19 July 2020 | Accepted 24 August 2020 | Published 10 September 2020 Citation: Durkin L, Jansson T, Sanchez M, Khomich M, Ryberg M, Kristiansson E, Nilsson RH (2020) When mycologists describe new species, not all relevant information is provided (clearly enough). MycoKeys 72: 109–128. https://doi.org/10.3897/mycokeys.72.56691 Abstract Taxonomic mycology struggles with what seems to be a perpetual shortage
    [Show full text]
  • Describing Species
    DESCRIBING SPECIES Practical Taxonomic Procedure for Biologists Judith E. Winston COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS NEW YORK Columbia University Press Publishers Since 1893 New York Chichester, West Sussex Copyright © 1999 Columbia University Press All rights reserved Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data © Winston, Judith E. Describing species : practical taxonomic procedure for biologists / Judith E. Winston, p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-231-06824-7 (alk. paper)—0-231-06825-5 (pbk.: alk. paper) 1. Biology—Classification. 2. Species. I. Title. QH83.W57 1999 570'.1'2—dc21 99-14019 Casebound editions of Columbia University Press books are printed on permanent and durable acid-free paper. Printed in the United States of America c 10 98765432 p 10 98765432 The Far Side by Gary Larson "I'm one of those species they describe as 'awkward on land." Gary Larson cartoon celebrates species description, an important and still unfinished aspect of taxonomy. THE FAR SIDE © 1988 FARWORKS, INC. Used by permission. All rights reserved. Universal Press Syndicate DESCRIBING SPECIES For my daughter, Eliza, who has grown up (andput up) with this book Contents List of Illustrations xiii List of Tables xvii Preface xix Part One: Introduction 1 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 3 Describing the Living World 3 Why Is Species Description Necessary? 4 How New Species Are Described 8 Scope and Organization of This Book 12 The Pleasures of Systematics 14 Sources CHAPTER 2. BIOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 19 Humans as Taxonomists 19 Biological Nomenclature 21 Folk Taxonomy 23 Binomial Nomenclature 25 Development of Codes of Nomenclature 26 The Current Codes of Nomenclature 50 Future of the Codes 36 Sources 39 Part Two: Recognizing Species 41 CHAPTER 3.
    [Show full text]