Delaware's Wildlife Species of Greatest Conservation Need

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Delaware's Wildlife Species of Greatest Conservation Need CHAPTER 1 DELAWARE’S WILDLIFE SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED CHAPTER 1: Delaware’s Wildlife Species of Greatest Conservation Need Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 7 Regional Context ........................................................................................................................................... 7 Delaware’s Animal Biodiversity .................................................................................................................... 10 State of Knowledge of Delaware’s Species ................................................................................................... 10 Delaware’s Wildlife and SGCN - presented by Taxonomic Group .................................................................. 11 Delaware’s 2015 SGCN Status Rank Tier Definitions................................................................................. 12 TIER 1 .................................................................................................................................................... 13 TIER 2 .................................................................................................................................................... 13 TIER 3 .................................................................................................................................................... 13 Mammals ..................................................................................................................................................... 14 Mammal Diversity of Delaware ................................................................................................................ 14 Delaware SGCN Mammals ....................................................................................................................... 14 Carnivores ............................................................................................................................................ 14 Small Mammals .................................................................................................................................... 15 Bats ...................................................................................................................................................... 16 Marine Mammals .................................................................................................................................. 18 Birds ............................................................................................................................................................ 19 Avian Diversity of Delaware...................................................................................................................... 19 Regional, National, and International Perspectives .................................................................................. 21 Regional Species of Greatest Conservation Need (RSGCN)................................................................... 21 Audubon Important Bird Areas ............................................................................................................. 21 Bird Conservation Regions .................................................................................................................... 21 Delaware SGCN Birds ............................................................................................................................... 24 Waterbirds ............................................................................................................................................ 24 Landbirds.............................................................................................................................................. 39 Reptiles and Amphibians ............................................................................................................................. 51 Reptile and Amphibian Diversity of Delaware ........................................................................................... 51 1 - 2 Delaware Wildlife Action Plan Amphibians .......................................................................................................................................... 52 Snakes and Lizards ............................................................................................................................... 55 Turtles .................................................................................................................................................. 56 Fish .............................................................................................................................................................. 60 Fish Diversity of Delaware ........................................................................................................................ 60 Freshwater Fish .................................................................................................................................... 62 Diadromous Fish ................................................................................................................................... 65 Estuarine and Marine Fish ..................................................................................................................... 66 Sharks, Rays and Skates ....................................................................................................................... 69 Invertebrates ............................................................................................................................................... 72 Invertebrate Diversity of Delaware ........................................................................................................... 72 Insects .................................................................................................................................................. 72 Mollusks ............................................................................................................................................... 95 Estuarine and Marine Invertebrates ...................................................................................................... 99 Plants .......................................................................................................................................................... 101 Update and Revision of Delaware’s SGCN List ............................................................................................ 103 Summary of SGCN List Changes since 2006 ............................................................................................ 103 SGCN Selection Process .......................................................................................................................... 107 SGCN Prioritization Methods ...................................................................................................................... 112 Tier Definitions and Criteria ..................................................................................................................... 112 Species Conservation Approaches .............................................................................................................. 115 Surrogate Species ................................................................................................................................ 115 Literature Cited ........................................................................................................................................... 117 Figures Figure 1. 1 Delmarva Fox Squirrel (Sciurus niger cinereus). Photo: USFWS .................................................... 16 Photo: Shannon Alexander 1- 3 CHAPTER 1: Delaware’s Wildlife Species of Greatest Conservation Need Figure 1. 2 Map of North American Bird Habitat Joint Ventures, showing the Atlantic Coast Joint Venture (ACJV) area in light blue ................................................................... ……………………………………………………23 Figure 1. 3 Red knots (Calidris canutus) need to encounter favorable habitat, weather conditions, and food (such as the horseshoe crabs they feed upon in Delaware) within narrow seasonal windows during their migration stopovers. Photo: Harold A. Davis ................................................................................................ 26 Figure 1. 4 The piping plover (Charadrius melodus) population has been on the rise since the early 1990s, but this is due to sustained management initiatives, upon which populations remain dependent. Photo: Harold A. Davis ........................................................................................................................................................ 29 Figure 1. 5 Yellow-crowned night heron (Nyctanassa violacea). Photo: Harold A. Davis ............................... 32 Figure 1. 6 Saltmarsh sparrow (Ammodramus caudacutus). Photo: Harold A. Davis ...................................... 38 Figure 1. 7 Rusty blackbird (Euphagus carolinus). Photo: Harold A. Davis ...................................................... 51 Figure 1. 8 Barking treefrog (Hyla gratiosa) is a southeastern species that reaches the northern edge of its range in Delaware and is entirely dependent on Coastal Plain seasonal ponds for breeding habitat. Photo: Jim White ....................................................................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Lepidoptera of North America 5
    Lepidoptera of North America 5. Contributions to the Knowledge of Southern West Virginia Lepidoptera Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Lepidoptera of North America 5. Contributions to the Knowledge of Southern West Virginia Lepidoptera by Valerio Albu, 1411 E. Sweetbriar Drive Fresno, CA 93720 and Eric Metzler, 1241 Kildale Square North Columbus, OH 43229 April 30, 2004 Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Cover illustration: Blueberry Sphinx (Paonias astylus (Drury)], an eastern endemic. Photo by Valeriu Albu. ISBN 1084-8819 This publication and others in the series may be ordered from the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity, Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523 Abstract A list of 1531 species ofLepidoptera is presented, collected over 15 years (1988 to 2002), in eleven southern West Virginia counties. A variety of collecting methods was used, including netting, light attracting, light trapping and pheromone trapping. The specimens were identified by the currently available pictorial sources and determination keys. Many were also sent to specialists for confirmation or identification. The majority of the data was from Kanawha County, reflecting the area of more intensive sampling effort by the senior author. This imbalance of data between Kanawha County and other counties should even out with further sampling of the area. Key Words: Appalachian Mountains,
    [Show full text]
  • Insects of Western North America 4. Survey of Selected Insect Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma 2
    Insects of Western North America 4. Survey of Selected Insect Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma 2. Dragonflies (Odonata), Stoneflies (Plecoptera) and selected Moths (Lepidoptera) Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Survey of Selected Insect Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma 2. Dragonflies (Odonata), Stoneflies (Plecoptera) and selected Moths (Lepidoptera) by Boris C. Kondratieff, Paul A. Opler, Matthew C. Garhart, and Jason P. Schmidt C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 March 15, 2004 Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Cover illustration (top to bottom): Widow Skimmer (Libellula luctuosa) [photo ©Robert Behrstock], Stonefly (Perlesta species) [photo © David H. Funk, White- lined Sphinx (Hyles lineata) [photo © Matthew C. Garhart] ISBN 1084-8819 This publication and others in the series may be ordered from the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity, Department of Bioagricultural Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 Copyrighted 2004 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY……………………………………………………………………………….…1 INTRODUCTION…………………………………………..…………………………………………….…3 OBJECTIVE………………………………………………………………………………………….………5 Site Descriptions………………………………………….. METHODS AND MATERIALS…………………………………………………………………………….5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION………………………………………………………………………..…...11 Dragonflies………………………………………………………………………………….……..11
    [Show full text]
  • Striped Bass Morone Saxatilis
    COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Striped Bass Morone saxatilis in Canada Southern Gulf of St. Lawrence Population St. Lawrence Estuary Population Bay of Fundy Population SOUTHERN GULF OF ST. LAWRENCE POPULATION - THREATENED ST. LAWRENCE ESTUARY POPULATION - EXTIRPATED BAY OF FUNDY POPULATION - THREATENED 2004 COSEWIC COSEPAC COMMITTEE ON THE STATUS OF COMITÉ SUR LA SITUATION ENDANGERED WILDLIFE DES ESPÈCES EN PÉRIL IN CANADA AU CANADA 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 2004. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Striped Bass Morone saxatilis in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vii + 43 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm) Production note: COSEWIC would like to acknowledge Jean Robitaille for writing the status report on the Striped Bass Morone saxatilis prepared under contract with Environment Canada, overseen and edited by Claude Renaud the COSEWIC Freshwater Fish Species Specialist Subcommittee Co-chair. For additional copies contact: COSEWIC Secretariat c/o Canadian Wildlife Service Environment Canada Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: (819) 997-4991 / (819) 953-3215 Fax: (819) 994-3684 E-mail: COSEWIC/[email protected] http://www.cosewic.gc.ca Ếgalement disponible en français sous le titre Ếvaluation et Rapport de situation du COSEPAC sur la situation de bar rayé (Morone saxatilis) au Canada. Cover illustration: Striped Bass — Drawing from Scott and Crossman, 1973. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada 2004 Catalogue No. CW69-14/421-2005E-PDF ISBN 0-662-39840-8 HTML: CW69-14/421-2005E-HTML 0-662-39841-6 Recycled paper COSEWIC Assessment Summary Assessment Summary – November 2004 Common name Striped Bass (Southern Gulf of St.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Biological Assessment for Roseate Tern, New
    FINAL BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT for the ROSEATE TERN NEW BEDFORD HARBOR – SOUTH TERMINAL PROJECT NEW BEDFORD, MASSACHUSETTS U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Ecosystem Protection (OEP05-2)) U.S. EPA New England Region 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100 Boston, MA 02109-3912 July 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS Subject Page I. Introduction 3 II. Description of Project and Action Area 4 A. Project Description 4 B. Action Area 6 III. Environmental Setting 6 A. Flora - Salt Marsh, Intertidal and Subtidal Resources 6 B. Fauna – Finfish and Shellfish 7 C. Physical Conditions – Sediments, Patterns of Circulation, Noise 11 IV. Roseate Tern Biology 12 A. Seasonal Distribution 12 B. Nesting 12 C. Staging 14 D. Foraging 14 V. Effects Analysis 17 A. Direct Loss of Salt Marsh, Intertidal and Subtidal habitat 17 B. Foraging by Nesting/Migrating Terns 18 C. Effects on Prey Species In Shallow Water Habitat 18 D. Dredging Impacts to Prey Fish in Sub-tidal Environment 19 E. Noise and Traffic 20 F. Oil Spills and Shipping Traffic 21 G. Ecological Benefits of the Project 22 VI. Determination of Effects on the Roseate Tern 22 VII Conclusion 23 VIII. References. 24 IX. List of Contacts Made and Preparers 28 2 New Bedford Harbor - South Terminal Project Endangered Species Act Biological Assessment for the Roseate Tern I. Introduction This Biological Assessment (BA) was prepared to comply with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). It assesses the potential effects of the construction and long-term operation of the proposed New Bedford Harbor (NBH) - South Terminal project in New Bedford, MA, on the roseate tern (Sterna dougallii), a federally listed as endangered which may occur in the area of the proposed project.1 While New Bedford Harbor is not federally designated critical habitat for any federally endangered species, the project area provides potential habitat for nesting and foraging for the roseate tern.
    [Show full text]
  • Hawk Moths of North America Is Richly Illustrated with Larval Images and Contains an Abundance of Life History Information
    08 caterpillars EUSA/pp244-273 3/9/05 6:37 PM Page 244 244 TULIP-TREE MOTH CECROPIA MOTH 245 Callosamia angulifera Hyalophora cecropia RECOGNITION Frosted green with shiny yellow, orange, and blue knobs over top and sides of body. RECOGNITION Much like preceding but paler or Dorsal knobs on T2, T3, and A1 somewhat globular and waxier in color with pale stripe running below set with black spinules. Paired knobs on A2–A7 more spiracles on A1–A10 and black dots on abdomen cylindrical, yellow; knob over A8 unpaired and rounded. lacking contrasting pale rings. Yellow abdominal Larva to 10cm. Caterpillars of larch-feeding Columbia tubercle over A8 short, less than twice as high as broad. Silkmoth (Hyalophora columbia) have yellow-white to Larva to 6cm. Sweetbay Silkmoth (Callosamia securifera) yellow-pink instead of bright yellow knobs over dorsum similar in appearance but a specialist on sweet bay. Its of abdomen and knobs along sides tend to be more white than blue (as in Cecropia) and are yellow abdominal tubercle over A8 is nearly three times as set in black bases (see page 246). long as wide and the red knobs over thorax are cylindrical (see page 246). OCCURRENCE Urban and suburban yards and lots, orchards, fencerows, woodlands, OCCURRENCE Woodlands and forests from Michigan, southern Ontario, and and forests from Canada south to Florida and central Texas. One generation with mature Massachusetts to northern Florida and Mississippi. One principal generation northward; caterpillars from late June through August over most of range. two broods in South with mature caterpillars from early June onward.
    [Show full text]
  • Insect Pests
    Crop Profile for Sweetpotatoes in Mississippi Prepared: May, 1999 General Production Information ● In 1997, sweetpotatoes were harvested from 8,400 acres in Mississippi. Production totaled 100 million lbs with a value of $18 million in 1997. Mississippi ranks fourth among states in sweetpotato production [8]. ● Commercial production is currently concentrated in Calhoun and Chickasaw Counties in north central Mississippi although sweetpotatoes are grown commercially in more than half of Mississippi’s counties. They can be grown throughout the state since all areas provide a frost-free period of more than 150 days [2]. Insect Pests Many insect pests have the potential to reduce the quality and yield of sweetpotatoes. Insects that damage the roots directly are the most trouble some and are referred to as soil insect pests. They can cause economic loss in relatively low numbers, and it is difficult to control then with insecticides because they live below the soil surface. Insects that injure the foliage reduce the yield of the plants indirectly and are referred to as foliage feeding insects. These insects can cause economic loss, but usually only at very high numbers, and it is relatively easy to control them with insecticides because they are exposed on the plant [1]. Sweetpotato Soil Insects: The sweetpotato root can be injured by several soil insects, including the sweetpotato weevil, rootworms, wireworms, white grubs, whitefringed beetles and flea beetles. The sweetpotato weevil larva is the only insect that tunnels throughout the root. Other soil insects feed on the surface on the developing sweetpotato root. The injury caused by rootworms and wireworms is similar and cannot be separated very easily.
    [Show full text]
  • HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN Green Bay and Gravel Island
    HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN Green Bay and Gravel Island National Wildlife Refuges October 2017 Habitat Management Plans provide long-term guidance for management decisions; set forth goals, objectives, and strategies needed to accomplish refuge purposes; and, identify the Fish and Wildlife Service’s best estimate of future needs. These plans detail program planning levels that are sometimes substantially above current budget allocations and as such, are primarily for Service strategic planning and program prioritization purposes. The plans do not constitute a commitment for staffing increases, operational and maintenance increases, or funding for future land acquisition. The National Wildlife Refuge System, managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is the world's premier system of public lands and waters set aside to conserve America's fish, wildlife, and plants. Since the designation of the first wildlife refuge in 1903, the System has grown to encompass more than 150 million acres, 556 national wildlife refuges and other units of the Refuge System, plus 38 wetland management districts. This page intentionally left blank. Habitat Management Plan for Green Bay and Gravel Island National Wildlife Refuges EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Habitat Management Plan (HMP) provides vision and specific guidance on enhancing and managing habitat for the resources of concern (ROC) at the refuge. The contributions of the refuge to ecosystem- and landscape-scale wildlife and biodiversity conservation, specifically migratory waterfowl, are incorporated into this HMP. The HMP is intended to provide habitat management direction for the next 15 years. The HMP is also needed to ensure that the refuge continues to conserve habitat for migratory birds in the context of climate change, which affects all units of the National Wildlife Refuge System.
    [Show full text]
  • Survey of Lepidoptera of the Wainwright Dunes Ecological Reserve
    SURVEY OF LEPIDOPTERA OF THE WAINWRIGHT DUNES ECOLOGICAL RESERVE Alberta Species at Risk Report No. 159 SURVEY OF LEPIDOPTERA OF THE WAINWRIGHT DUNES ECOLOGICAL RESERVE Doug Macaulay Alberta Species at Risk Report No.159 Project Partners: i ISBN 978-1-4601-3449-8 ISSN 1496-7146 Photo: Doug Macaulay of Pale Yellow Dune Moth ( Copablepharon grandis ) For copies of this report, visit our website at: http://www.aep.gov.ab.ca/fw/speciesatrisk/index.html This publication may be cited as: Macaulay, A. D. 2016. Survey of Lepidoptera of the Wainwright Dunes Ecological Reserve. Alberta Species at Risk Report No.159. Alberta Environment and Parks, Edmonton, AB. 31 pp. ii DISCLAIMER The views and opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the policies of the Department or the Alberta Government. iii Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................... vi 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 STUDY AREA ............................................................................................................. 2 3.0 METHODS ................................................................................................................... 6 4.0 RESULTS ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bats and Moths Contribute to the Reproductive Success of the Columnar Cactus Pilosocereus Leucocephalus
    Journal of Arid Environments xxx (xxxx) xxxx Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Arid Environments journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jaridenv Bats and moths contribute to the reproductive success of the columnar cactus Pilosocereus leucocephalus ∗ Antonio Miranda-Jácomea, Ricardo Rodríguez-Garcíaa, Miguel A. Munguía-Rosasb, a Instituto de Investigaciones Biológicas, Universidad Veracruzana, Xalapa, 91190, Mexico b Laboratorio de Ecología Terrestre, Centro de Investigación y Estudios Avanzados del Instituto Politécnico Nacional (Cinvestav), Carretera Antigua a Progreso km 6, Mérida, 97310, Mexico ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: The pollination systems of columnar cacti in the dry tropics are often thought to be highly specialized to bats. Bat pollination This specialization is generally inferred when flowers that are only exposed to the activity of nocturnal visitors Columnar cactus set fruit and seed. Although moths are also common visitors to the flowers of columnar cacti at night, it is Moth pollination generally thought that their contribution to the reproductive success of this cactus is negligible. Using selective Pollination exclusions, we assessed the contribution of bats and moths to the reproductive success in a population of Pollination system Pilosocereus leucocephalus in central Mexico. Fruit set was 100% for bat-pollinated flowers and 34% in moth- pollinated flowers. Seed number per fruit was 1473 in bat-pollinated and 836 in moth pollinated flowers. Our results clearly show that in addition to bats, moths are effective pollinators of Pilosocereus leucocephalus in the study area. Therefore, bats are the main pollinators of P. leucocephalus, and moths are the secondary pollinators. Columnar cacti are the dominant elements in the plant communities fruit (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Moths of North Carolina - Early Draft 1
    Sphingidae Amorpha juglandis Walnut Sphinx 20 n=36 ••• • • • • • • • High Mt. • • • • N 10 • • •• u • • • • • • • m • • • • • b • • e 0 • • • • • • r 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 • 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 NC counties: 45 • • Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec • o 20 • f n=42 • = Sighting or Collection Low Mt. High counts of: • in NC since 2001 F • = Not seen since 2001 l 10 3 - Gates - 2007-08-19 • i 2 - Dare - 1994-04-23 g Status Rank h 2 - Haywood - 2004-06-28 0 NC US NC Global t 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 D Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec a 20 20 t n=25 n=24 e Pd CP s 10 10 0 0 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 15 5 25 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Three periods to each month: 1-10 / 11-20 / 21-31 FAMILY: Sphingidae SUBFAMILY: Smerinthinae TRIBE: Smerinthini TAXONOMIC_COMMENTS: A monotypic genus, this species has been associated with the genus Laothoe since Hodges misplaced it there in 1971 (see Tuttle (2007) for a discussion of this misplacement.
    [Show full text]
  • Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 1 Table 1. Current Taxonomic Keys and the Level of Taxonomy Routinely U
    Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 Table 1. Current taxonomic keys and the level of taxonomy routinely used by the Ohio EPA in streams and rivers for various macroinvertebrate taxonomic classifications. Genera that are reasonably considered to be monotypic in Ohio are also listed. Taxon Subtaxon Taxonomic Level Taxonomic Key(ies) Species Pennak 1989, Thorp & Rogers 2016 Porifera If no gemmules are present identify to family (Spongillidae). Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Cnidaria monotypic genera: Cordylophora caspia and Craspedacusta sowerbii Platyhelminthes Class (Turbellaria) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Nemertea Phylum (Nemertea) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Phylum (Nematomorpha) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Nematomorpha Paragordius varius monotypic genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Ectoprocta monotypic genera: Cristatella mucedo, Hyalinella punctata, Lophopodella carteri, Paludicella articulata, Pectinatella magnifica, Pottsiella erecta Entoprocta Urnatella gracilis monotypic genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Polychaeta Class (Polychaeta) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Annelida Oligochaeta Subclass (Oligochaeta) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Hirudinida Species Klemm 1982, Klemm et al. 2015 Anostraca Species Thorp & Rogers 2016 Species (Lynceus Laevicaudata Thorp & Rogers 2016 brachyurus) Spinicaudata Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Williams 1972, Thorp & Rogers Isopoda Genus 2016 Holsinger 1972, Thorp & Rogers Amphipoda Genus 2016 Gammaridae: Gammarus Species Holsinger 1972 Crustacea monotypic genera: Apocorophium lacustre, Echinogammarus ischnus, Synurella dentata Species (Taphromysis Mysida Thorp & Rogers 2016 louisianae) Crocker & Barr 1968; Jezerinac 1993, 1995; Jezerinac & Thoma 1984; Taylor 2000; Thoma et al. Cambaridae Species 2005; Thoma & Stocker 2009; Crandall & De Grave 2017; Glon et al. 2018 Species (Palaemon Pennak 1989, Palaemonidae kadiakensis) Thorp & Rogers 2016 1 Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 Taxon Subtaxon Taxonomic Level Taxonomic Key(ies) Informal grouping of the Arachnida Hydrachnidia Smith 2001 water mites Genus Morse et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Contributions Toward a Lepidoptera (Psychidae, Yponomeutidae, Sesiidae, Cossidae, Zygaenoidea, Thyrididae, Drepanoidea, Geometro
    Contributions Toward a Lepidoptera (Psychidae, Yponomeutidae, Sesiidae, Cossidae, Zygaenoidea, Thyrididae, Drepanoidea, Geometroidea, Mimalonoidea, Bombycoidea, Sphingoidea, & Noctuoidea) Biodiversity Inventory of the University of Florida Natural Area Teaching Lab Hugo L. Kons Jr. Last Update: June 2001 Abstract A systematic check list of 489 species of Lepidoptera collected in the University of Florida Natural Area Teaching Lab is presented, including 464 species in the superfamilies Drepanoidea, Geometroidea, Mimalonoidea, Bombycoidea, Sphingoidea, and Noctuoidea. Taxa recorded in Psychidae, Yponomeutidae, Sesiidae, Cossidae, Zygaenoidea, and Thyrididae are also included. Moth taxa were collected at ultraviolet lights, bait, introduced Bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum), and by netting specimens. A list of taxa recorded feeding on P. notatum is presented. Introduction The University of Florida Natural Area Teaching Laboratory (NATL) contains 40 acres of natural habitats maintained for scientific research, conservation, and teaching purposes. Habitat types present include hammock, upland pine, disturbed open field, cat tail marsh, and shallow pond. An active management plan has been developed for this area, including prescribed burning to restore the upland pine community and establishment of plots to study succession (http://csssrvr.entnem.ufl.edu/~walker/natl.htm). The site is a popular collecting locality for student and scientific collections. The author has done extensive collecting and field work at NATL, and two previous reports have resulted from this work, including: a biodiversity inventory of the butterflies (Lepidoptera: Hesperioidea & Papilionoidea) of NATL (Kons 1999), and an ecological study of Hermeuptychia hermes (F.) and Megisto cymela (Cram.) in NATL habitats (Kons 1998). Other workers have posted NATL check lists for Ichneumonidae, Sphecidae, Tettigoniidae, and Gryllidae (http://csssrvr.entnem.ufl.edu/~walker/insect.htm).
    [Show full text]