DOCSLIB.ORG

Biological Constraints Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Biological Constraints Analysis Coburn Crossing APN 19-420-43 Truckee, Nevada County, CA Prepared for: Triumph Development 12 Vail Road, Suite 700 Vail, CO 81657 Contact: Travis Coggin 307-690-3716 Prepared by: Micki Kelly Kelly Biological Consulting PO Box 1625 Truckee, CA 96160 530-582-9713 June 2016 Contents 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 SITE OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ................................................................................................................................................ 1 Special-Status Species .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Wetlands and Waters of the U.S. ................................................................................................................................. 1 Waters of the State ...................................................................................................................................................... 1 2. METHODS ................................................................................................................................................................ 2 2.1 BACKGROUND REVIEW ...................................................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 FIELD ASSESSMENTS ......................................................................................................................................................... 3 3. RESULTS ................................................................................................................................................................... 3 3.1 BOTANICAL RESOURCES..................................................................................................................................................... 3 Plant Community Characterization .............................................................................................................................. 4 Sensitive Plant Species and Communities .................................................................................................................... 4 3.2 WATERS OF THE US (INCLUDING WETLANDS) ....................................................................................................................... 4 Wetlands in the Study Area .......................................................................................................................................... 7 3.3 FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES .......................................................................................................................................... 7 Common Wildlife .......................................................................................................................................................... 7 Special-Status Wildlife.................................................................................................................................................. 7 4. RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................................................................. 8 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................................. 10 APPENDIX .................................................................................................................................................................. 11 TABLE 1. SPECIAL STATUS PLANT SPECIES POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN OR NEAR THE STUDY AREA ..................................................... 11 TABLE 2. SPECIAL STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN OR NEAR THE STUDY AREA ................................................. 15 TABLE 3. PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED DURING THE JUNE 15, 2016 FIELDWORK ................................................................................ 19 WILDLIFE SURVEY SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................. 22 WETLAND DATASHEETS ........................................................................................................................................................ 23 REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOS (TAKEN JUNE 15, 2016) ................................................................................................................... 27 Biological Constraints Analysis, Coburn Crossing, June 2016 1. Introduction 1.1 Site Overview The Coburn Crossing Study Area consists of the area shown on Figure 1. The site is in Nevada County, on Donner Pass Road in the Town of Truckee, CA (APN 19-420-43, Lat. 39334950 / Long. -120.176316). The adjacent land uses include a cemetery, Highway I-80, and a US Forest Service facility. Highway I-80 bounds the property on the north, Donner Pass Road on the south and east. A cemetery lies to the west. The site is relatively flat. Most of it has been disturbed by clearing, grading, and utility line work over the last 10 or more years. 1.2 Regulatory Framework Here is a summary of the regulatory framework as it relates to biological issues. Special-Status Species Special-status plants and animals are species that are legally protected under the State and Federal Endangered Species Acts, and other regulations, and species that are considered rare by the scientific community. They are defined as: • Plants and animals that are listed or proposed for listing as Threatened or Endangered under the California Endangered Species Act (Fish and Game Code 1995 §2050 et seq., 14 CCR §670.1 et seq.) and/or the Federal Endangered Species Act (50 CFR 17.12 for plants, 50 CFR 17.11 for animals; and various notices in the Federal Register for proposed species). • Plants and animals that are Candidates for possible future listing as Threatened or Endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act (50 CFR 17.12 for plants, 59 FR 58982 November 15, 1994 for animals). • Plants and animals that are considered Federal Species of Concern (formerly C2 candidate species). • Plants and animals that meet the definition of rare or endangered under CEQA (14 CCR §15380), which includes species not found on State or Federal Endangered Species lists. • Animals that are designated as "Species of Special Concern" by CDFW (1999). • Animal species that are "fully protected" in California (Fish and Game Code, §3511, §4700, §5050 and §5515). Special-status plant species also include species on CNPS Inventory List 1A (presumed extinct in California), List 1B (plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere), or List 2 (plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere). These species fall within state regulatory authority under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. CNPS Inventory List 3 (plants about which more information is needed, a review list) and List 4 (plants of limited distribution, a watch list) are considered to be of lower sensitivity, and generally do not fall under specific state or federal regulatory authority. Specific mitigation considerations are generally required for species with federal or state protection or that are in List 1 and 2 categories. 1 Biological Constraints Analysis, Coburn Crossing, June 2016 Figure 1. The Study Area includes the parcel (APN 19-420-43) and the area marked in red. 2 Biological Constraints Analysis, Coburn Crossing, June 2016 Sensitive plant communities include habitats that fulfill special functions or have special values. Natural communities considered sensitive are those identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). CDFW ranks sensitive communities as ‘threatened’ or ‘very threatened’ and keeps records of their occurrences in its Natural Diversity Database. Also, CNDDB vegetation alliances are ranked 1 through 5. Alliances ranked globally (G) or statewide (S) as 1 through 3 are considered sensitive (Sawyer, et.al. 2009). Impacts to sensitive natural communities identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by CDFW or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFW) must be considered and evaluated under CEQA. Sensitive habitats may include areas that fulfill special functions or have special values, such as wetlands, streams, and riparian habitat. These habitats may be regulated under federal regulations (i.e. the Clean Water Act), state regulations (such as the Porter-Cologne Act, California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Streambed Alteration Program), and local ordinances or policies. Wetlands and Waters of the U.S. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) regulates “Waters of the United States” pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). “Waters of the US” are defined broadly as waters potentially used in commerce, including interstate waters and wetlands, all other waters (intrastate waterbodies, including wetlands), and their tributaries (33 CFR 328.3). Potential wetland areas are determined by the three criteria stated in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation
Recommended publications
  • Subalpine Meadows of Mount Rainier • an Elevational Zone Just Below Timberline but Above the Reach of More Or Less Continuous Tree Or Shrub Cover

    Subalpine Meadows of Mount Rainier • an Elevational Zone Just Below Timberline but Above the Reach of More Or Less Continuous Tree Or Shrub Cover

    Sub-Alpine/Alpine Zones and Flowers of Mt Rainier Lecturer: Cindy Luksus What We Are Going To Cover • Climate, Forest and Plant Communities of Mt Rainier • Common Flowers, Shrubs and Trees in Sub- Alpine and Alpine Zones by Family 1) Figwort Family 2) Saxifrage Family 3) Rose Family 4) Heath Family 5) Special mentions • Suggested Readings and Concluding Statements Climate of Mt Rainier • The location of the Park is on the west side of the Cascade Divide, but because it is so massive it produces its own rain shadow. • Most moisture is dropped on the south and west sides, while the northeast side can be comparatively dry. • Special microclimates result from unique interactions of landforms and weather patterns. • Knowing the amount of snow/rainfall and how the unique microclimates affect the vegetation will give you an idea of what will thrive in the area you visit. Forest and Plant Communities of Mt Rainier • The zones show regular patterns that result in “associations” of certain shrubs and herbs relating to the dominant, climax tree species. • The nature of the understory vegetation is largely determined by the amount of moisture available and the microclimates that exist. Forest Zones of Mt Rainier • Western Hemlock Zone – below 3,000 ft • Silver Fir Zone – between 2,500 and 4,700 ft • Mountain Hemlock Zone – above 4,000 ft Since most of the field trips will start above 4,000 ft we will only discuss plants found in the Mountain Hemlock Zone and above. This zone includes the Sub-Alpine and Alpine Plant communities. Forest and Plant Communities of Mt Rainier Subalpine Meadows of Mount Rainier • An elevational zone just below timberline but above the reach of more or less continuous tree or shrub cover.
  • State of Colorado 2016 Wetland Plant List

    State of Colorado 2016 Wetland Plant List

    5/12/16 State of Colorado 2016 Wetland Plant List Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin. 2016. The National Wetland Plant List: 2016 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published 28 April 2016. ISSN 2153 733X http://wetland-plants.usace.army.mil/ Aquilegia caerulea James (Colorado Blue Columbine) Photo: William Gray List Counts: Wetland AW GP WMVC Total UPL 83 120 101 304 FACU 440 393 430 1263 FAC 333 292 355 980 FACW 342 329 333 1004 OBL 279 285 285 849 Rating 1477 1419 1504 1511 User Notes: 1) Plant species not listed are considered UPL for wetland delineation purposes. 2) A few UPL species are listed because they are rated FACU or wetter in at least one Corps Region. 3) Some state boundaries lie within two or more Corps Regions. If a species occurs in one region but not the other, its rating will be shown in one column and the other column will be BLANK. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 1/22 5/12/16 Scientific Name Authorship AW GP WMVC Common Name Abies bifolia A. Murr. FACU FACU Rocky Mountain Alpine Fir Abutilon theophrasti Medik. UPL UPL FACU Velvetleaf Acalypha rhomboidea Raf. FACU FACU Common Three-Seed-Mercury Acer glabrum Torr. FAC FAC FACU Rocky Mountain Maple Acer grandidentatum Nutt. FACU FAC FACU Canyon Maple Acer negundo L. FACW FAC FAC Ash-Leaf Maple Acer platanoides L. UPL UPL FACU Norw ay Maple Acer saccharinum L. FAC FAC FAC Silver Maple Achillea millefolium L. FACU FACU FACU Common Yarrow Achillea ptarmica L.
  • Well-Known Plants in Each Angiosperm Order

    Well-Known Plants in Each Angiosperm Order

    Well-known plants in each angiosperm order This list is generally from least evolved (most ancient) to most evolved (most modern). (I’m not sure if this applies for Eudicots; I’m listing them in the same order as APG II.) The first few plants are mostly primitive pond and aquarium plants. Next is Illicium (anise tree) from Austrobaileyales, then the magnoliids (Canellales thru Piperales), then monocots (Acorales through Zingiberales), and finally eudicots (Buxales through Dipsacales). The plants before the eudicots in this list are considered basal angiosperms. This list focuses only on angiosperms and does not look at earlier plants such as mosses, ferns, and conifers. Basal angiosperms – mostly aquatic plants Unplaced in order, placed in Amborellaceae family • Amborella trichopoda – one of the most ancient flowering plants Unplaced in order, placed in Nymphaeaceae family • Water lily • Cabomba (fanwort) • Brasenia (watershield) Ceratophyllales • Hornwort Austrobaileyales • Illicium (anise tree, star anise) Basal angiosperms - magnoliids Canellales • Drimys (winter's bark) • Tasmanian pepper Laurales • Bay laurel • Cinnamon • Avocado • Sassafras • Camphor tree • Calycanthus (sweetshrub, spicebush) • Lindera (spicebush, Benjamin bush) Magnoliales • Custard-apple • Pawpaw • guanábana (soursop) • Sugar-apple or sweetsop • Cherimoya • Magnolia • Tuliptree • Michelia • Nutmeg • Clove Piperales • Black pepper • Kava • Lizard’s tail • Aristolochia (birthwort, pipevine, Dutchman's pipe) • Asarum (wild ginger) Basal angiosperms - monocots Acorales
  • Botany Biological Evaluation

    Botany Biological Evaluation

    APPENDIX I Botany Biological Evaluation Biological Evaluation for Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Plants and Fungi Page 1 of 35 for the Upper Truckee River Sunset Stables Restoration Project November 2009 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE – FOREST SERVICE LAKE TAHOE BASIN MANAGEMENT UNIT Upper Truckee River Sunset Stables Restoration Project El Dorado County, CA Biological Evaluation for Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Plants and Fungi PREPARED BY: ENTRIX, Inc. DATE: November 2009 APPROVED BY: DATE: _____________ Name, Forest Botanist, Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit SUMMARY OF EFFECTS DETERMINATION AND MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS AND/OR REQUIREMENTS One population of a special-status bryophyte, three-ranked hump-moss (Meesia triquetra), was observed in the survey area during surveys on June 30, 2008 and August 28, 2008. The proposed action will not affect the moss because the population is located outside the project area where no action is planned. The following species of invasive or noxious weeds were identified during surveys of the Project area: cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum); bullthistle (Cirsium vulgare); Klamathweed (Hypericum perforatum); oxe-eye daisy (Leucanthemum vulgare); and common mullein (Verbascum Thapsus). The threat posed by these weed populations would not increase if the proposed action is implemented. An inventory and assessment of invasive and noxious weeds in the survey area is presented in the Noxious Weed Risk Assessment for the Upper Truckee River Sunset Stables Restoration Project (ENTRIX 2009). Based on the description of the proposed action and the evaluation contained herein, we have determined the following: There would be no significant effect to plant species listed as threatened, endangered, proposed for listing, or candidates under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA), administered by the U.S.
  • Evolution of Portulacineae Marked by Gene Tree Conflict and Gene Family Expansion Associated with Adaptation to Harsh Environments

    Evolution of Portulacineae Marked by Gene Tree Conflict and Gene Family Expansion Associated with Adaptation to Harsh Environments

    Supplementary Figures Evolution of Portulacineae marked by gene tree conflict and gene family expansion associated with adaptation to harsh environments Ning Wang, Email: [email protected] Stephen A. Smith, E-mail: [email protected] Dendroscope view Limeaceae_Limeum aethiopicum Montiaceae_Phemeranthus parviflorus Basellaceae_Anredera cordifolia Anacampserotaceae_Anacampseros kurtzii Portulacaceae_Portulaca amilis Cactaceae_Leuenbergeria lychnidiflora Cactaceae_Stenocereus yunckeri Cactaceae_Maihuenia poeppigii Cactaceae_Opuntia bravoana Cactaceae_Pereskia grandifolia Talinaceae_Talinum paniculatum A Didiereaceae_Portulacaria afra PhyloPlot view Limeaceae_Limeum aethiopicum Montiaceae_Phemeranthus parviflorus Basellaceae_Anredera cordifolia Anacampserotaceae_Anacampseros kurtzii 0.008 Portulacaceae_Portulaca amilis 0.992 0.118 Cactaceae_Leuenbergeria lychnidiflora Cactaceae_Stenocereus yunckeri 0.24 0.146 0.76 Cactaceae_Maihuenia poeppigii 0.854 0.882 0.364 Cactaceae_Opuntia bravoana 0.636 Cactaceae_Pereskia grandifolia B Talinaceae_Talinum paniculatum Didiereaceae_Portulacaria afra FIG. S1. The phylogenetic network inferred using MPL method in PhyloNet. Taxa were selected from each plant family based on their gene occupancy statistics. A: network visualized in Dendroscope, and B: the same network with inheritance probabilities between hybridization lineages visualized by PhyloPlot that implemented in PhyloNetworks (Solís-Lemus et al. 2017). Anacampserotaceae Basellaceae Anacampseros A. kurtzii Talinopsis frutescens Anredera cordifolia Basella alba filamentosa Bese 400 4000 4000 3000 3000 200 2000 2000 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 Portulacaceae Portulaca amilis P. cryptopetala P. grandiflora P. molokiniensis P. oleracea P. pilosa 300 500 800 800 200 200 300 150 400 400 100 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 0.01 1.0 2.0 3.0 Talinaceae P.
  • Alplains 2013 Seed Catalog P.O

    Alplains 2013 Seed Catalog P.O

    ALPLAINS 2013 SEED CATALOG P.O. BOX 489, KIOWA, CO 80117-0489, U.S.A. Three ways to contact us: FAX: (303) 621-2864 (24 HRS.) email: [email protected] website: www.alplains.com Dear Growing Friends: Welcome to our 23rd annual seed catalog! The summer of 2012 was long, hot and brutal, with drought afflicting most of the U.S. Most of my botanical explorations were restricted to Idaho, Wash- ington, Oregon and northern California but even there moisture was below average. In a year like this, seeps, swales, springs, vestigial snowbanks and localized rainstorms became much more important in my search for seeding plants. On the Snake River Plains of southern Idaho and the scab- lands of eastern Washington, early bloomers such as Viola beckwithii, V. trinervata, Ranunculus glaberrimus, Ranunculus andersonii, Fritillaria pudica and Primula cusickiana put on quite a show in mid-April but many populations could not set seed. In northern Idaho, Erythronium idahoense flowered extensively, whole meadows were covered with thousands of the creamy, pendant blossoms. One of my most satisfying finds in the Hells Canyon area had to be Sedum valens. The tiny glaucous rosettes, surround- ed by a ring of red leaves, are a succulent connoisseur’s dream. Higher up, the brilliant blue spikes of Synthyris missurica punctuated the canyon walls. In southern Oregon, the brilliant red spikes of Pedicularis densiflora lit up the Siskiyou forest floor. Further north in Oregon, large populations of Erythronium elegans, Erythronium oregonum ssp. leucandrum, Erythro- nium revolutum, trilliums and sedums provided wonderful picture-taking opportunities. Eriogonum species did well despite the drought, many of them true xerics.
  • Two New Genera in the Omphalodes Group (Cynoglosseae, Boraginaceae)

    Two New Genera in the Omphalodes Group (Cynoglosseae, Boraginaceae)

    Nova Acta Científica Compostelana (Bioloxía),23 : 1-14 (2016) - ISSN 1130-9717 ARTÍCULO DE INVESTIGACIÓN Two new genera in the Omphalodes group (Cynoglosseae, Boraginaceae) Dous novos xéneros no grupo Omphalodes (Cynoglosseae, Boraginaceae) M. SERRANO1, R. CARBAJAL1, A. PEREIRA COUTINHO2, S. ORTIZ1 1 Department of Botany, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Santiago de Compostela, 15782 Santiago de Compostela , Spain 2 CFE, Centre for Functional Ecology, Department of Life Sciences, University of Coimbra, 3000-456 Coimbra, Portugal *[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] *: Corresponding author (Recibido: 08/06/2015; Aceptado: 01/02/2016; Publicado on-line: 04/02/2016) Abstract Omphalodes (Boraginaceae, Cynoglosseae) molecular phylogenetic relationships are surveyed in the context of the tribe Cynoglosseae, being confirmed that genusOmphalodes is paraphyletic. Our work is focused both in the internal relationships among representatives of Omphalodes main subgroups (and including Omphalodes verna, the type species), and their relationships with other Cynoglosseae genera that have been related to the Omphalodes group. Our phylogenetic analysis of ITS and trnL-trnF molecular markers establish close relationships of the American Omphalodes with the genus Mimophytum, and also with Cynoglossum paniculatum and Myosotidium hortensia. The southwestern European annual Omphalodes species form a discrete group deserving taxonomic recognition. We describe two new genera to reduce the paraphyly in the genus Omphalodes, accommodating the European annual species in Iberodes and Cynoglossum paniculatum in Mapuchea. The pollen of the former taxon is described in detail for the first time. Keywords: Madrean-Tethyan, phylogeny, pollen, systematics, taxonomy Resumo Neste estudo analisamos as relacións filoxenéticas deOmphalodes (Boraginaceae, Cynoglosseae) no contexto da tribo Cynoglosseae, confirmándose como parafilético o xéneroOmphalodes .
  • Evaluating the Monophyly and Biogeography of Cryptantha (Boraginaceae)

    Evaluating the Monophyly and Biogeography of Cryptantha (Boraginaceae)

    Systematic Botany (2018), 43(1): pp. 53–76 © Copyright 2018 by the American Society of Plant Taxonomists DOI 10.1600/036364418X696978 Date of publication April 18, 2018 Evaluating the Monophyly and Biogeography of Cryptantha (Boraginaceae) Makenzie E. Mabry1,2 and Michael G. Simpson1 1Department of Biology, San Diego State University, San Diego, California 92182, U. S. A. 2Current address: Division of Biological Sciences and Bond Life Sciences Center, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri 65211, U. S. A. Authors for correspondence ([email protected]; [email protected]) Abstract—Cryptantha, an herbaceous plant genus of the Boraginaceae, subtribe Amsinckiinae, has an American amphitropical disjunct distri- bution, found in western North America and western South America, but not in the intervening tropics. In a previous study, Cryptantha was found to be polyphyletic and was split into five genera, including a weakly supported, potentially non-monophyletic Cryptantha s. s. In this and subsequent studies of the Amsinckiinae, interrelationships within Cryptantha were generally not strongly supported and sample size was generally low. Here we analyze a greatly increased sampling of Cryptantha taxa using high-throughput, genome skimming data, in which we obtained the complete ribosomal cistron, the nearly complete chloroplast genome, and twenty-three mitochondrial genes. Our analyses have allowed for inference of clades within this complex with strong support. The occurrence of a non-monophyletic Cryptantha is confirmed, with three major clades obtained, termed here the Johnstonella/Albidae clade, the Maritimae clade, and a large Cryptantha core clade, each strongly supported as monophyletic. From these phylogenomic analyses, we assess the classification, character evolution, and phylogeographic history that elucidates the current amphitropical distribution of the group.
  • Literature Cited

    Literature Cited

    Literature Cited Robert W. Kiger, Editor This is a consolidated list of all works cited in volumes 19, 20, and 21, whether as selected references, in text, or in nomenclatural contexts. In citations of articles, both here and in the taxonomic treatments, and also in nomenclatural citations, the titles of serials are rendered in the forms recommended in G. D. R. Bridson and E. R. Smith (1991). When those forms are abbre- viated, as most are, cross references to the corresponding full serial titles are interpolated here alphabetically by abbreviated form. In nomenclatural citations (only), book titles are rendered in the abbreviated forms recommended in F. A. Stafleu and R. S. Cowan (1976–1988) and F. A. Stafleu and E. A. Mennega (1992+). Here, those abbreviated forms are indicated parenthetically following the full citations of the corresponding works, and cross references to the full citations are interpolated in the list alphabetically by abbreviated form. Two or more works published in the same year by the same author or group of coauthors will be distinguished uniquely and consistently throughout all volumes of Flora of North America by lower-case letters (b, c, d, ...) suffixed to the date for the second and subsequent works in the set. The suffixes are assigned in order of editorial encounter and do not reflect chronological sequence of publication. The first work by any particular author or group from any given year carries the implicit date suffix “a”; thus, the sequence of explicit suffixes begins with “b”. Works missing from any suffixed sequence here are ones cited elsewhere in the Flora that are not pertinent in these volumes.
  • Washington Plant List Douglas County by Scientific Name

    Washington Plant List Douglas County by Scientific Name

    The NatureMapping Program Washington Plant List Revised: 9/15/2011 Douglas County by Scientific Name (1) Non- native, (2) ID Scientific Name Common Name Plant Family Invasive √ 763 Acer glabrum Douglas maple Aceraceae 800 Alisma graminium Narrowleaf waterplantain Alismataceae 19 Alisma plantago-aquatica American waterplantain Alismataceae 1087 Rhus glabra Sumac Anacardiaceae 650 Rhus radicans Poison ivy Anacardiaceae 29 Angelica arguta Sharp-tooth angelica Apiaceae 809 Angelica canbyi Canby's angelica Apiaceae 915 Cymopteris terebinthinus Turpentine spring-parsley Apiaceae 167 Heracleum lanatum Cow parsnip Apiaceae 991 Ligusticum grayi Gray's lovage Apiaceae 709 Lomatium ambiguum Swale desert-parsley Apiaceae 997 Lomatium canbyi Canby's desert-parsley Apiaceae 573 Lomatium dissectum Fern-leaf biscuit-root Apiaceae 582 Lomatium geyeri Geyer's desert-parsley Apiaceae 586 Lomatium gormanii Gorman's desert-parsley Apiaceae 998 Lomatium grayi Gray's desert-parsley Apiaceae 999 Lomatium hambleniae Hamblen's desert-parsley Apiaceae 609 Lomatium macrocarpum Large-fruited lomatium Apiaceae 1000 Lomatium nudicaule Pestle parsnip Apiaceae 634 Lomatium triternatum Nine-leaf lomatium Apiaceae 474 Osmorhiza chilensis Sweet-cicely Apiaceae 264 Osmorhiza occidentalis Western sweet-cicely Apiaceae 1044 Osmorhiza purpurea Purple sweet-cicely Apiaceae 492 Sanicula graveolens Northern Sierra) sanicle Apiaceae 699 Apocynum androsaemifolium Spreading dogbane Apocynaceae 813 Apocynum cannabinum Hemp dogbane Apocynaceae 681 Asclepias speciosa Showy milkweed Asclepiadaceae
  • Full of Beans: a Study on the Alignment of Two Flowering Plants Classification Systems

    Full of Beans: a Study on the Alignment of Two Flowering Plants Classification Systems

    Full of beans: a study on the alignment of two flowering plants classification systems Yi-Yun Cheng and Bertram Ludäscher School of Information Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA {yiyunyc2,ludaesch}@illinois.edu Abstract. Advancements in technologies such as DNA analysis have given rise to new ways in organizing organisms in biodiversity classification systems. In this paper, we examine the feasibility of aligning two classification systems for flowering plants using a logic-based, Region Connection Calculus (RCC-5) ap- proach. The older “Cronquist system” (1981) classifies plants using their mor- phological features, while the more recent Angiosperm Phylogeny Group IV (APG IV) (2016) system classifies based on many new methods including ge- nome-level analysis. In our approach, we align pairwise concepts X and Y from two taxonomies using five basic set relations: congruence (X=Y), inclusion (X>Y), inverse inclusion (X<Y), overlap (X><Y), and disjointness (X!Y). With some of the RCC-5 relationships among the Fabaceae family (beans family) and the Sapindaceae family (maple family) uncertain, we anticipate that the merging of the two classification systems will lead to numerous merged solutions, so- called possible worlds. Our research demonstrates how logic-based alignment with ambiguities can lead to multiple merged solutions, which would not have been feasible when aligning taxonomies, classifications, or other knowledge or- ganization systems (KOS) manually. We believe that this work can introduce a novel approach for aligning KOS, where merged possible worlds can serve as a minimum viable product for engaging domain experts in the loop. Keywords: taxonomy alignment, KOS alignment, interoperability 1 Introduction With the advent of large-scale technologies and datasets, it has become increasingly difficult to organize information using a stable unitary classification scheme over time.
  • References and Appendices

    References and Appendices

    References Ainley, D.G., S.G. Allen, and L.B. Spear. 1995. Off- Arnold, R.A. 1983. Ecological studies on six endan- shore occurrence patterns of marbled murrelets gered butterflies (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae): in central California. In: C.J. Ralph, G.L. Hunt island biogeography, patch dynamics, and the Jr., M.G. Raphael, and J.F. Piatt, technical edi- design of habitat preserves. University of Cali- tors. Ecology and Conservation of the Marbled fornia Publications in Entomology 99: 1–161. Murrelet. USDA Forest Service, General Techni- Atwood, J.L. 1993. California gnatcatchers and coastal cal Report PSW-152; 361–369. sage scrub: the biological basis for endangered Allen, C.R., R.S. Lutz, S. Demairais. 1995. Red im- species listing. In: J.E. Keeley, editor. Interface ported fire ant impacts on Northern Bobwhite between ecology and land development in Cali- populations. Ecological Applications 5: 632-638. fornia. Southern California Academy of Sciences, Allen, E.B., P.E. Padgett, A. Bytnerowicz, and R.A. Los Angeles; 149–169. Minnich. 1999. Nitrogen deposition effects on Atwood, J.L., P. Bloom, D. Murphy, R. Fisher, T. Scott, coastal sage vegetation of southern California. In T. Smith, R. Wills, P. Zedler. 1996. Principles of A. Bytnerowicz, M.J. Arbaugh, and S. Schilling, reserve design and species conservation for the tech. coords. Proceedings of the international sym- southern Orange County NCCP (Draft of Oc- posium on air pollution and climate change effects tober 21, 1996). Unpublished manuscript. on forest ecosystems, February 5–9, 1996, River- Austin, M. 1903. The Land of Little Rain. University side, CA.