Conservation Status of Ochlodes Yuma Anasazi Cary and Stanford

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Conservation Status of Ochlodes Yuma Anasazi Cary and Stanford Conservation Assessment of Ochlodes yuma anasazi (S. Cary and Stanford) Final Report to New Mexico Department of Game and Fish pursuant to contract no. 11 516 0000 00025 Steven J. Cary, Linda S. DeLay and John J. Pfeil Natural Resource Institute Santa Fe, New Mexico December 29, 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS page Introduction . 3 Previous Work . 4 Study Area . 5 Methods . 8 Results . 10 Life History and Ecosystem Services . 10 Distribution of Host Reed. 12 Breeding Distribution of OYA . 12 Population Structure of OYA . 15 Dispersal of OYA . 15 Vulnerability . 21 Threats . 21 Future Work . 25 Literature Cited . 27 Appendix A: Location of Reed Patches . 31 Appendix B: Adult OYA Observations . 36 Appendix C: Detailed Reed Patch Maps . 39 Acknowledgements The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of volunteers who made our jobs much easier. Randy Merker, Chuck Noble and Paige Prescott assisted with our float through the La Junta reach of the Rio Grande. Paige's sharp eye quickly spotted larval shelters in reed patches. Jane Pfeil provided excellent note-taking and admirable culinary support. Doug Bland and Eric Rounds provided welcome driving, navigation and photography support. Bureau of Land Management biologist Valerie Williams gave helpful comments on a working draft of this report. Cover: Male Ochlodes yuma anasazi perching for females on Phragmites australis leaf at Little Arsenic Springs, August 26, 2011, by S. Cary. 2 Introduction Yuma skipper, Ochlodes yuma (W. H. Edwards 1873), is a 2.5cm-long butterfly (Figure 1) whose occurrence spans much of the American West and Southwest (Figure 2). Across this broad geographic range its habitats are defined by the presence of one plant species: common reed [= Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. ex Steud.]. In the semi-arid southwestern U. S. this obligate wetland plant is restricted to marshes, watercourses, pond edges, seeps, sloughs, springs and irrigation canals. Despite occurring in many western states, most populations are present only in narrow ribbons or pockets of habitat often separated from other populations by many miles of reed-less terrain (Scott et al. 1977). Colonies of O. yuma often seemed hosted by reed patches that seem quite small, sometimes only about 300 m2, and in one case only 5 m2 (Scott et al. 1977). Only rarely were adults found more than a few meters from stands of the host plant (Scott et al. 1977). Conservation organizations weighed O. yuma occurrence in most U. S. states west of the Rocky Mountains, concluded it is globally secure, and assigned it a Heritage Global Rank of G5 (www.natureserve.org/explorer). Figure 1. Ventral view of Ochlodes yuma anasazi. Photo Aug. 14, 2009, by S. Cary. At the perimeter of the overall range of O. yuma are several small satellite populations that appear to be geographically and reproductively disjunct from the general population center of the species in the Intermountain West. Outlier populations exist in Oregon, Washington, Wyoming and New Mexico (Figure 2). Those in Oregon and Washington were tentatively placed with Nevada subspecies O. y. lutea. Washington populations were assigned a state conservation rank of S1 (critically imperiled) (www.xerces.org/yuma-skipper/). Another outlier, O. y. anasazi (OYA), is restricted to northern New Mexico and the Rio Grande watershed. It was described as a distinct subspecies (Cary and Stanford 1995) and Pelham (2008) tacitly affirmed its phenotypic differentiation and genetic isolation from other O. yuma colonies. Due to lack of detailed published information about this subspecies, its conservation status has yet to be established (e.g., www.xerces.org/yuma-skipper/). The Share with Wildlife program of the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish funded this study to analyze its biology, habitat, distribution and threats and develop a conservation assessment. 3 Figure 2. County distribution of Ochlodes yuma (www.butterfliesandmoths.org/). Previous Work Wheeler Expedition naturalist Ferdinand Bischoff made the first collection of Ochlodes yuma in 1871 in southern California (Brown 1957, Brown and Miller 1980). W. H. Edwards (1873) used those specimens to formally describe the species two years later. Skinner (1899) described Pamphila scudderi from western Colorado, but this taxon was later synonymized with O. yuma (Miller and Brown 1981). Information about O. yuma accumulated slowly (e.g., Tilden 1957). Its affinity to marshy habitats was recognized early (e.g., Brown et al. 1957), but its larval host plant remained unknown until 1974 when a female was observed placing an egg on a basal leaf of Phragmites australis (Scott et al. 1977, Scott 1992). The distribution of O. yuma was long thought to include only Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada and Utah (e.g., Garth 1950, Ferris and Brown 1980). Some 20th Century Colorado workers (Scott et al. 1977) found “no geographic variation” across this broad western reach of O. yuma. Ferris and Brown (1980), however, were skeptical of this putative uniformity because modern populations seemed to have been “isolated from one another for thousands of years.” Understanding of the distribution of O. yuma has improved since 1980. Peripheral colonies were discovered in the states of Wyoming and Idaho (e.g., Stephens 2002), Oregon and Washington (Pyle 2002), and New Mexico (Cary and Stanford 1995). These discoveries demonstrated that O. yuma occurred beyond the boundaries of the Colorado River basin and the Intermountain West. Discernment of morphological differences within its far-flung range finally allowed Pelham (2008) to recognize the following distinct races of O. yuma: the nominate race of O. y. yuma in southern California; O. y. scudderi in western Colorado; O. y. lutea in north-central Nevada and the Pacific Northwest (Austin 1998); O. y. sacramentorum in California’s Central Valley (Austin 1998); and O. y. anasazi in northern New Mexico (Cary and Stanford 1995). Nothing has been published about OYA since its original description. More than 30 years of detailed butterfly observations around New Mexico by the senior author produced no other O. yuma sightings. One anecdotal, unconfirmed report of O. yuma from near Shiprock in San Juan County, NM, is most likely western Colorado subspecies O. y. scudderi. 4 Study Area All known occurrences of OYA are associated with the Rio Grande Gorge, a major physiographic feature extending the length of Taos County in northern New Mexico (Figure 3). Figure 3. Map of the Rio Grande Gorge study area in Taos County, NM. 5 Along that distance of more than 100km the Rio Grande has excavated a steep-walled canyon through thickly layered basalts and related sediments (Figure 4). The Gorge begins as a small notch near the Colorado state line, deepens to a defile more than 250m deep, then broadens into a flat-bottomed canyon north of Española. Over this distance the Rio Grande falls from 2267m above sea level at the Colorado border to 1790m above sea level at the Rio Arriba County line. Figure 4. Rio Grande Gorge looking north from trail toward Big Arsenic Springs. S. Cary photo Aug. 26, 2011. The Rio Grande Gorge is deeply incised into the Taos Plateau which, at 2287m elevation, occupies the valley between the Sangre de Cristo Mountains on the east and the Tusas Mountains on the west. Geologically this "low" spot is the southern portion of the San Luis Basin, which is the northernmost structural basin of the continent-scale Rio Grande Rift, which continues south into Texas and Mexico. The Taos Plateau represents the top of a 200 km3 layer-cake of basalts termed the Servilleta Formation. These basalts began as lava erupted from shield volcanoes that are still evident only a few kilometers to the west. As described by Bauer et al. (2007), these lavas flowed “as thin, molten sheets for tens of miles before solidifying.” Episodic eruptions between 4.8 and 2.8 million years ago built up more than 200m of basalt in this part of the San Luis Basin. Servilleta basalts are highly permeable as a result of extensive fractures and columnar joints that are open and vertically continuous, combined with deposits of sand and 6 gravel deposited between individual basalt flows (Bauer et al. 2007). Several Rift-related fault systems intersect the Gorge and are significant conduits for water movement (Bauer et al. 2007). By New Mexico standards, Taos County is rich in surface waters because it hosts the state’s highest upland, the Sangre de Cristo Mountains, a linear range which parallels the Gorge several miles to the east. These uplands generate orographic precipitation exceeding 50 cm/yr (e.g., www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?nm7323), which in turn supports numerous perennial streams and rivers. Three of these are important tributaries to the Rio Grande in the study area: Red River, Rio Hondo and Rio Pueblo de Taos. As these and lesser watercourses exit the uplands and head west and southwest toward the Gorge, water infiltrates downward through the coarse sands and gravels of alluvial fans and foot slopes and into the highly fractured basalts below. Infiltrating waters recharge local groundwater, some of which discharges to the Rio Grande through more than 150 springs in the channel bottom, along channel banks, and from canyon walls as much as 120m above the river (Bauer 2011). Many of these springs are clustered where the Gorge cuts across major geologic faults (Bauer et al. 2007). Plant communities in the study area exhibit characteristics of an inverted ecosystem: mesic pine woodlands occur at lower elevations than semi-arid shrub-steppe, when the normal relationship is reversed. Vegetation on the Taos Plateau is semi-arid grassland and shrubland dominated by big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) mixed with soapweed yucca (Yucca glauca) and grasses including blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis). Among woody plants, piñon pine (Pinus edulis) and one-seeded juniper (Juniperus monosperma) are locally favored.
Recommended publications
  • Pollinator–Friendly Parks
    POLLINATOR–FRIENDLY PARKS How to Enhance Parks, Gardens, and Other Greenspaces for Native Pollinator Insects Matthew Shepherd, Mace Vaughan, and Scott Hoffman Black The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, Portland, OR The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation is an international, nonprofit, member–supported organiza- tion dedicated to preserving wildlife and its habitat through the conservation of invertebrates. The Society promotes protection of invertebrates and their habitat through science–based advocacy, conservation, and education projects. Its work focuses on three principal areas—endangered species, watershed health, and pollinator conservation. Copyright © 2008 (2nd Edition) The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation. 4828 SE Hawthorne Boulevard, Portland, OR 97215 Tel (503) 232-6639 Fax (503) 233-6794 www.xerces.org Acknowledgements Thank you to Bruce Barbarasch (Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District, OR) and Lisa Hamerlynck (City of Lake Oswego, OR) for reviewing early drafts. Their guidance and suggestions greatly improved these guide- lines. Thank you to Eric Mader and Jessa Guisse for help with the plant lists, and to Caitlyn Howell and Logan Lauvray for editing assistance. Funding for our pollinator conservation program has been provided by the Bradshaw-Knight Foundation, the Bullitt Foundation, the Columbia Foundation, the CS Fund, the Disney Wildlife Conservation Fund, the Dudley Foundation, the Gaia Fund, NRCS Agricultural Wildlife Conservation Center, NRCS California, NRCS West National Technical Support Center, the Panta Rhea Foundation, the Richard and Rhoda Goldman Founda- tion, the Turner Foundation, the Wildwood Foundation, and Xerces Society members Photographs We are grateful to Jeff Adams, Scott Bauer/USDA–ARS, John Davis/GORGEous Nature, Chris Evans/ www.forestryimages.com, Bruce Newhouse, Jeff Owens/Metalmark Images, and Edward S.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Animal Species with Ranks October 2017
    Washington Natural Heritage Program List of Animal Species with Ranks October 2017 The following list of animals known from Washington is complete for resident and transient vertebrates and several groups of invertebrates, including odonates, branchipods, tiger beetles, butterflies, gastropods, freshwater bivalves and bumble bees. Some species from other groups are included, especially where there are conservation concerns. Among these are the Palouse giant earthworm, a few moths and some of our mayflies and grasshoppers. Currently 857 vertebrate and 1,100 invertebrate taxa are included. Conservation status, in the form of range-wide, national and state ranks are assigned to each taxon. Information on species range and distribution, number of individuals, population trends and threats is collected into a ranking form, analyzed, and used to assign ranks. Ranks are updated periodically, as new information is collected. We welcome new information for any species on our list. Common Name Scientific Name Class Global Rank State Rank State Status Federal Status Northwestern Salamander Ambystoma gracile Amphibia G5 S5 Long-toed Salamander Ambystoma macrodactylum Amphibia G5 S5 Tiger Salamander Ambystoma tigrinum Amphibia G5 S3 Ensatina Ensatina eschscholtzii Amphibia G5 S5 Dunn's Salamander Plethodon dunni Amphibia G4 S3 C Larch Mountain Salamander Plethodon larselli Amphibia G3 S3 S Van Dyke's Salamander Plethodon vandykei Amphibia G3 S3 C Western Red-backed Salamander Plethodon vehiculum Amphibia G5 S5 Rough-skinned Newt Taricha granulosa
    [Show full text]
  • Written Findings of the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board (2003)
    DRAFT WRITTEN FINDINGS OF THE WASHINGTON STATE NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL BOARD (2003) Scientific Name: Phragmites australis (Non-native Genotype) Plant Synonyms: Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. ex Steud. var. berlandieri (Fourn.) C.F. Reed Phragmites communis Trin. Phragmites communis Trin. ssp. berlandieri (Fourn.) A.& D. Löve Phragmites communis Trin. var. berlandieri (Fourn.) Fern. Phragmites phragmites (L.) Karst. Common Name: Common Reed, Phragmites Family: Poaceae Legal Status: The Non-native Genotype of Phragmites australis was changed to a Class B Noxious Weed in 2008, after being added as a Class C in 2004. Description and Variation: Non-native genotype of Phragmites is a large perennial, grass or reed with creeping rhizomes, and often also with stolons. The woody hollow culms (stems) can grow to 12 feet tall. Leaves are lanceolate, ranging from 8-16 inches long and .5- 1.5 inches wide. The sheath of the leaf blade is glabrous (smooth, no hairs or glands), and it is loose, allowing it to twist in the wind, so the blades turn to one side. Dense silky flowers develop in mid July through October. The densely flowered panicle (floral spikelets) is feathery, tawny or purplish, 6–16 inches long, with the branches ascending. When in flower, the glumes (the lower bracts at the base of the flowering spikelet) are glabrous. The glumes are smaller than the lemmas (the bracts at the base of the individual flowers in a grass spikelet). Distinguishing Native Genotype Non-Native Genotype Characteristics Observed stand Less dense More Dense Density Stem thickness Thin, Approximately the size of a Thicker, Approximately the size of a pencil.
    [Show full text]
  • Effect of Different Mowing Regimes on Butterflies and Diurnal Moths on Road Verges A
    Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 29.2 (2006) 133 Effect of different mowing regimes on butterflies and diurnal moths on road verges A. Valtonen, K. Saarinen & J. Jantunen Valtonen, A., Saarinen, K. & Jantunen, J., 2006. Effect of different mowing regimes on butterflies and diurnal moths on road verges. Animal Biodiversity and Conservation, 29.2: 133–148. Abstract Effect of different mowing regimes on butterflies and diurnal moths on road verges.— In northern and central Europe road verges offer alternative habitats for declining plant and invertebrate species of semi– natural grasslands. The quality of road verges as habitats depends on several factors, of which the mowing regime is one of the easiest to modify. In this study we compared the Lepidoptera communities on road verges that underwent three different mowing regimes regarding the timing and intensity of mowing; mowing in mid–summer, mowing in late summer, and partial mowing (a narrow strip next to the road). A total of 12,174 individuals and 107 species of Lepidoptera were recorded. The mid–summer mown verges had lower species richness and abundance of butterflies and lower species richness and diversity of diurnal moths compared to the late summer and partially mown verges. By delaying the annual mowing until late summer or promoting mosaic–like mowing regimes, such as partial mowing, the quality of road verges as habitats for butterflies and diurnal moths can be improved. Key words: Mowing management, Road verge, Butterfly, Diurnal moth, Alternative habitat, Mowing intensity. Resumen Efecto de los distintos regímenes de siega de los márgenes de las carreteras sobre las polillas diurnas y las mariposas.— En Europa central y septentrional los márgenes de las carreteras constituyen hábitats alternativos para especies de invertebrados y plantas de los prados semi–naturales cuyas poblaciones se están reduciendo.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Grassland Butterfly Indicator: 1990–2011
    EEA Technical report No 11/2013 The European Grassland Butterfly Indicator: 1990–2011 ISSN 1725-2237 EEA Technical report No 11/2013 The European Grassland Butterfly Indicator: 1990–2011 Cover design: EEA Cover photo © Chris van Swaay, Orangetip (Anthocharis cardamines) Layout: EEA/Pia Schmidt Copyright notice © European Environment Agency, 2013 Reproduction is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged, save where otherwise stated. Information about the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the Europa server (www.europa.eu). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2013 ISBN 978-92-9213-402-0 ISSN 1725-2237 doi:10.2800/89760 REG.NO. DK-000244 European Environment Agency Kongens Nytorv 6 1050 Copenhagen K Denmark Tel.: +45 33 36 71 00 Fax: +45 33 36 71 99 Web: eea.europa.eu Enquiries: eea.europa.eu/enquiries Contents Contents Acknowledgements .................................................................................................... 6 Summary .................................................................................................................... 7 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 9 2 Building the European Grassland Butterfly Indicator ........................................... 12 Fieldwork .............................................................................................................. 12 Grassland butterflies .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CA Checklist of Butterflies of Tulare County
    Checklist of Buerflies of Tulare County hp://www.natureali.org/Tularebuerflychecklist.htm Tulare County Buerfly Checklist Compiled by Ken Davenport & designed by Alison Sheehey Swallowtails (Family Papilionidae) Parnassians (Subfamily Parnassiinae) A series of simple checklists Clodius Parnassian Parnassius clodius for use in the field Sierra Nevada Parnassian Parnassius behrii Kern Amphibian Checklist Kern Bird Checklist Swallowtails (Subfamily Papilioninae) Kern Butterfly Checklist Pipevine Swallowtail Battus philenor Tulare Butterfly Checklist Black Swallowtail Papilio polyxenes Kern Dragonfly Checklist Checklist of Exotic Animals Anise Swallowtail Papilio zelicaon (incl. nitra) introduced to Kern County Indra Swallowtail Papilio indra Kern Fish Checklist Giant Swallowtail Papilio cresphontes Kern Mammal Checklist Kern Reptile Checklist Western Tiger Swallowtail Papilio rutulus Checklist of Sensitive Species Two-tailed Swallowtail Papilio multicaudata found in Kern County Pale Swallowtail Papilio eurymedon Whites and Sulphurs (Family Pieridae) Wildflowers Whites (Subfamily Pierinae) Hodgepodge of Insect Pine White Neophasia menapia Photos Nature Ali Wild Wanderings Becker's White Pontia beckerii Spring White Pontia sisymbrii Checkered White Pontia protodice Western White Pontia occidentalis The Butterfly Digest by Cabbage White Pieris rapae Bruce Webb - A digest of butterfly discussion around Large Marble Euchloe ausonides the nation. Frontispiece: 1 of 6 12/26/10 9:26 PM Checklist of Buerflies of Tulare County hp://www.natureali.org/Tularebuerflychecklist.htm
    [Show full text]
  • Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections
    SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOLUME 116, NUMBER 7 (End of Volume) THE BUTTERFLIES OF VIRGINIA (With 31 Plates) BY AUSTIN H. CLARK AND LEILA F. CLARK Smithsonian Institution DEC 89 «f (PUBUCATION 4050) CITY OF WASHINGTON PUBLISHED BY THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION DECEMBER 20, 1951 0EC2 01951 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 116, NO. 7, FRONTISPIECE Butterflies of Virginia (From photograph by Frederick M. Bayer. For explanation, see page 195.) SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOLUME 116, NUMBER 7 (End of Volume) THE BUTTERFLIES OF VIRGINIA (With 31 Plates) BY AUSTIN H. CLARK AND LEILA F. CLARK Smithsonian Institution z Mi -.££& /ORG (Publication 4050) CITY OF WASHINGTON PUBLISHED BY THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION DECEMBER 20, 1951 Zfyt. Borb QBattimovt (preee BALTIMORE, 1ID., D. 6. A. PREFACE Since 1933 we have devoted practically all our leisure time to an intensive study of the butterflies of Virginia. We have regularly spent our annual leave in the State, stopping at various places from which each day we drove out into the surrounding country. In addition to prolonged visits of 2 weeks or more to various towns and cities, we spent many week ends in particularly interesting localities. We have visited all the 100 counties in the State at least twice, most of them many times, and our personal records are from more than 800 locali- ties. We have paid special attention to the Coastal Plain, particularly the great swamps in Nansemond, Norfolk, and Princess Anne Counties, and to the western mountains. Virginia is so large and so diversified that it would have been im- possible for us, without assistance, to have made more than a super- ficial and unsatisfactory study of the local butterflies.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Wildlife Notebook
    ARIZONA WILDLIFE CONSERVATION ARIZONA WILDLIFE NOTEBOOK GARRY ROGERS Praise for Arizona Wildlife Notebook “Arizona Wildlife Notebook” by Garry Rogers is a comprehensive checklist of wildlife species existing in the State of Arizona. This notebook provides a brief description for each of eleven (11) groups of wildlife, conservation status of all extant species within that group in Arizona, alphabetical listing of species by common name, scientific names, and room for notes. “The Notebook is a statewide checklist, intended for use by wildlife watchers all over the state. As various individuals keep track of their personal observations of wildlife in their specific locality, the result will be a more selective checklist specific to that locale. Such information would be vitally useful to the State Wildlife Conservation Department, as well as to other local agencies and private wildlife watching groups. “This is a very well-documented snapshot of the status of wildlife species – from bugs to bats – in the State of Arizona. Much of it should be relevant to neighboring states, as well, with a bit of fine-tuning to accommodate additions and deletions to the list. “As a retired Wildlife Biologist, I have to say Rogers’ book is perhaps the simplest to understand, yet most comprehensive in terms of factual information, that I have ever had occasion to peruse. This book should become the default checklist for Arizona’s various state, federal and local conservation agencies, and the basis for developing accurate local inventories by private enthusiasts as well as public agencies. "Arizona Wildlife Notebook" provides a superb starting point for neighboring states who may wish to emulate Garry Rogers’ excellent handiwork.
    [Show full text]
  • Level 4 Potential Conservation Area (PCA) Report Name Unaweep Seep Site Code S.USWRO1*760
    Level 4 Potential Conservation Area (PCA) Report Name Unaweep Seep Site Code S.USWRO1*760 IDENTIFIERS Site ID 1090 Site Class PCA Site Alias None Network of Conservation Areas (NCA) NCA Site ID NCA Site Code NCA Site Name - No Data County Mesa (CO) SITE DESCRIPTION Site Description This site contains a large seep wetland complex. The hillside wetland at Vega Reservoir is larger, but lacks the diversity of wetland types found at Unaweep Seep. No other wetland observed during this survey matches the diversity of species and wetland habitat at Unaweep Seep. A 1983-84 study of the Bureau of Land Management Grand Junction Resource Area found that Unaweep Seep had the richest plant, bird, and small mammal life in the Resource Area (BLM 1999). The Audubon Society has declared this area an Important Bird Area in Colorado (National Audubon Society 2000). The site includes the Unaweep Seep state designated Natural Area an unusual hillside wetland ecosystem of marshes, wet meadows, and seeps. Dense stands of coyote willow (Salix exigua) occupy the seep's uppermost source area. Most of the seep is dominated by beaked spikerush (Eleocharis rostellata) with sporadic stands of river birch (Betula occidentalis) occurring on the lateral fringe of the seep. A large population of the giant helleborine orchid ( Epipactis gigantea) occurs on the lower part of the slope amid spikerushes and underneath the canopy of the river birches. Near the toeslope, wet meadows and marshes support dense stands of hardstem bulrush ( Schoenoplectus acutus), common reed (Phragmites australis), and creeping spikerush (Eleocharis palustris). Other species found in the wetland complex include red-osier dogwood (Cornus sericea), river hawthorn (Crataegus rivularis), poison ivy (Toxicodendron rydbergii), horsemint (Monarda fistulosa), Joe Pye weed (Eupatorium maculatum), cattail (Typha latifolia), fowl mannagrass (Glyceria striata), beggar's tick (Bidens frondosa), Nebraska sedge (Carex nebrascensis), woolly sedge (C.
    [Show full text]
  • Ts Denver Museum of Nature & Science Reports
    DENVER MUSEUM OF NATURE & SCIENCE REPORTS DENVER MUSEUM OF NATURE & SCIENCE REPORTS DENVER MUSEUM OF NATURE & SCIENCE & SCIENCE OF NATURE DENVER MUSEUM NUMBER 16, OCTOBER 11, 2019 SCIENCE.DMNS.ORG/MUSEUM-PUBLICATIONS Denver Museum of Nature & Science Reports 2001 Colorado Boulevard (Print) ISSN 2374-7730 Denver, CO 80205, U.S.A. Denver Museum of Nature & Science Reports (Online) ISSN 2374-7749 REPORTS • NUMBER 16 • OCTOBER 11, 2019 • NUMBER 16 OCTOBER Cover photo: Oreas Anglewing (Polygonia oreas nigrozephyrus Scott, 1984), Gregory Canyon, Boulder County, Colorado, USA, 2 October 1973, leg. Michael G. Pogue. Photo: Bob Livingston. The Denver Museum of Nature & Science Reports (ISSN Frank Krell, PhD, Editor and Production 2374-7730 [print], ISSN 2374-7749 [online]) is an open- access, non peer-reviewed scientifi c journal publishing papers about DMNS research, collections, or other Program and Abstracts Museum related topics, generally authored or co-authored 30th Annual Meeting by Museum staff or associates. Peer review will only be arranged on request of the authors. of the High Country Lepidopterists October 11–12, 2019 The journal is available online at science.dmns.org/ Museum-Publications free of charge. Paper copies Denver Museum of Nature & Science are available for purchase from our print-on-demand publisher Lulu (www.lulu.com). DMNS owns the copyright of the works published in the Reports, which are Frank-Thorsten Krell (Ed.) published under the Creative Commons Attribution Non- Commercial license. For commercial use of published
    [Show full text]
  • A SKELETON CHECKLIST of the BUTTERFLIES of the UNITED STATES and CANADA Preparatory to Publication of the Catalogue Jonathan P
    A SKELETON CHECKLIST OF THE BUTTERFLIES OF THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA Preparatory to publication of the Catalogue © Jonathan P. Pelham August 2006 Superfamily HESPERIOIDEA Latreille, 1809 Family Hesperiidae Latreille, 1809 Subfamily Eudaminae Mabille, 1877 PHOCIDES Hübner, [1819] = Erycides Hübner, [1819] = Dysenius Scudder, 1872 *1. Phocides pigmalion (Cramer, 1779) = tenuistriga Mabille & Boullet, 1912 a. Phocides pigmalion okeechobee (Worthington, 1881) 2. Phocides belus (Godman and Salvin, 1890) *3. Phocides polybius (Fabricius, 1793) =‡palemon (Cramer, 1777) Homonym = cruentus Hübner, [1819] = palaemonides Röber, 1925 = ab. ‡"gunderi" R. C. Williams & Bell, 1931 a. Phocides polybius lilea (Reakirt, [1867]) = albicilla (Herrich-Schäffer, 1869) = socius (Butler & Druce, 1872) =‡cruentus (Scudder, 1872) Homonym = sanguinea (Scudder, 1872) = imbreus (Plötz, 1879) = spurius (Mabille, 1880) = decolor (Mabille, 1880) = albiciliata Röber, 1925 PROTEIDES Hübner, [1819] = Dicranaspis Mabille, [1879] 4. Proteides mercurius (Fabricius, 1787) a. Proteides mercurius mercurius (Fabricius, 1787) =‡idas (Cramer, 1779) Homonym b. Proteides mercurius sanantonio (Lucas, 1857) EPARGYREUS Hübner, [1819] = Eridamus Burmeister, 1875 5. Epargyreus zestos (Geyer, 1832) a. Epargyreus zestos zestos (Geyer, 1832) = oberon (Worthington, 1881) = arsaces Mabille, 1903 6. Epargyreus clarus (Cramer, 1775) a. Epargyreus clarus clarus (Cramer, 1775) =‡tityrus (Fabricius, 1775) Homonym = argentosus Hayward, 1933 = argenteola (Matsumura, 1940) = ab. ‡"obliteratus"
    [Show full text]
  • How Much Biodiversity Is in Natura 2000?
    Alterra Wageningen UR Alterra Wageningen UR is the research institute for our green living environment. P.O. Box 47 We off er a combination of practical and scientifi c research in a multitude of How much Biodiversity is in Natura 2000? 6700 AA Wageningen disciplines related to the green world around us and the sustainable use of our living The Netherlands environment, such as fl ora and fauna, soil, water, the environment, geo-information The “Umbrella Eff ect” of the European Natura 2000 protected area network T +31 (0) 317 48 07 00 and remote sensing, landscape and spatial planning, man and society. www.wageningenUR.nl/en/alterra The mission of Wageningen UR (University & Research centre) is ‘To explore Technical report Alterra Report 2730B the potential of nature to improve the quality of life’. Within Wageningen UR, ISSN 1566-7197 nine specialised research institutes of the DLO Foundation have joined forces with Wageningen University to help answer the most important questions in the Theo van der Sluis, Ruud Foppen, Simon Gillings, Thomas Groen, René Henkens, Stephan Hennekens, domain of healthy food and living environment. With approximately 30 locations, 6,000 members of staff and 9,000 students, Wageningen UR is one of the leading Kim Huskens, David Noble, Fabrice Ottburg, Luca Santini, Henk Sierdsema, Andre van Kleunen, organisations in its domain worldwide. The integral approach to problems and Joop Schaminee, Chris van Swaay, Bert Toxopeus, Michiel Wallis de Vries and Lawrence Jones-Walters the cooperation between the various disciplines
    [Show full text]