Cromartie, William J., Ph.D
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
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 .................................................................................................................................................... -
Notes on Virginia Butterflies, with Two New State Records!
144 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS' SOCIETY NOTES ON VIRGINIA BUTTERFLIES, WITH TWO NEW STATE RECORDS! CHARLES V. COVELL, JR. Deparbnent of Biology, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky 40208 AND GERALD B. STRALEY Botany Department, POlter Hall, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio 45701 In 1951 Austin and Leila Clark published The Butterflies of Virginia. This work crowned 20 years of avid collecting and observation in the Old Dominion by the Clarks and their colleagues, and brought together all the records and knowledge about the Virginia butterfly fauna up to that time. According to the nomenclature used by the Clarks, a total of 154 species and subspecies (144 species) was recorded as having been collected in Virginia. Keys, diagnostic features, range, variation, occurrence, season, and interesting discussions were given for the butter flies and a complete bibliography of literature on Virginia butterflies rounded out the work. Since the appearance of Clark & Clark (1951) very little has been published to add to our knowledge of the Virginia butterfly fauna. Covell ( 1962) added Satyrium kingi (Klots & Clench) to the State list and Straley (1969) recorded Thymelicus lineola (Ochsenheimer) for the first time from the State. Nomenclature and arrangement of species were brought into line with dos Passos (1964), the present standard for North American Rhopalocera classification, by Covell (1967). The latter list also included the first record of Megathymus yuccae (Boisduval & Le Conte) for Virginia. In this paper we include two more first records for the State-Problema bulenta (Boisduval & Le Conte) and Satyrium caryaevorus (McDun nough). In accordance with the dos Passos arrangement, plus recent changes in the nomenclature of Lethe, 158 species and subspecies (149 species) of butterflies are now known to have been taken in Virginia. -
Coastal Butterflies & Host Plants
GIANT SKIPPERS Family: Hesperiidae, Subfamily: Megathymi- nae Yucca Giant-Skipper: Megathymus yuccae Host: Yuccas (Yucca aloifolia, Y. gloriosa, Y. fila- mentosa, Y. flaccida) Carolina Satyr S. Pearly-eye Gemmed Satry Viola’s Wood-Satyr Horace’s Duskywing by Gosse Silver-spotted Skipper nectaring on pickerlweed Butterflies need native host plants to complete SATYRS their life cycle. The larvae of many species can Family: Nymphalidae, Subfamily: Satyrinae only survive on specific plants; think of mon- Southern Pearly-eye: Enodia portlandia * archs and milkweeds, longwings and passion- Host: Switchcane (Arundinaria tecta) flowers. The host plants listed here are native to the coastal region of Georgia & South Caro- Creole Pearly Eye: Enodia creola Delaware Skipper Long-tailed Skipper Host: Switchcane (Arundinaria tecta) lina. They provide a critical link for butterfly survival. Protect native plants in your landscape Appalachian Brown: Satyrodes appalachia and grow them in your gardens to support Host: Carex spp., Rhynchospora spp. these important pollinators. Gemmed Satyr: Cyllopsis gemma * Host: Woodoats (Chasmanthium laxum, C. ses- siliflorum) Sachem Skipper Whirlabout Skipper Carolina Satyr: Hermeuptychia sosybius * Host: St. Augustine (Stenotaphrum secundatum) Georgia Satyr: Neonympha areolata Host: Sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense), Sedges (Cyperaceae) Fiery Skipper Checkered Skipper Provided by Coastal WildScapes Little Wood Satyr: Megisto cymela * Twin-spotted Skipper Lace-winged Roadside (www.coastalwildscapes.org) Host: St. Augustine -
Chapter 4. Virginia's Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain
Chapter 4. Virginia’s Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain Figure 4.1. The Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain ecoregion. 4.1. Introduction 4.1.1. Description The Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain (Coastal Plain, Figure 4.1) corresponds to what other classification systems call the Coastal Plain (Table 4.1). The terrain is mostly flat. This province is bounded by the Southern Appalachian Piedmont to the west and the Chesapeake Bay and Atlantic Ocean to the east. The soils of the Coastal Plain are predominantly deep, moist Aquults and Aqualfs (McNab and Avers 1994). Rainfall in the region averages 110cm per year, and the average temperature ranges from 13 to 14°C (McNab and Avers 1994). The growing season generally lasts between 185 and 259 days (shortest in the northern portion, longest in the City of Virginia Beach, Woodward and Hoffman 1991). Forest cover is mostly loblolly pine- hardwood (McNab and Avers 1994), except the southernmost portion, which is mainly southeastern evergreen (longleaf and loblolly pine, Woodward and Hoffman 1991). Most streams are small to intermediate in size and have very low flow rates (McNab and Avers 1994). Table 4.1. Names for the Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain as used in other ecoregional schemes and planning efforts. The following at least roughly correspond to the same area as Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain as used in this document. Planning Effort/Regional Scheme Name of Ecoregion Reference NABCI Bird Conservation Regions (BCR) 27, NABCI 2000 Southeastern Coastal Plain, and 30, New England/Mid-Atlantic Coast 1 PIF Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain Watts 1999 (Physigraphic Region 44) 2 4-1 VIRGINIA’S COMPREHENSIVE WILDLIFE CONSERVATION STRATEGY Chapter 4 — The Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain Planning Effort/Regional Scheme Name of Ecoregion Reference United States Shorebird Planning Region 29, Southern Coastal Brown et al. -
Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2020
Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2020 Hickory Nut Gorge Green Salamander (Aneides caryaensis) Photo by Austin Patton 2014 Compiled by Judith Ratcliffe, Zoologist North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources www.ncnhp.org C ur Alleghany rit Ashe Northampton Gates C uc Surry am k Stokes P d Rockingham Caswell Person Vance Warren a e P s n Hertford e qu Chowan r Granville q ot ui a Mountains Watauga Halifax m nk an Wilkes Yadkin s Mitchell Avery Forsyth Orange Guilford Franklin Bertie Alamance Durham Nash Yancey Alexander Madison Caldwell Davie Edgecombe Washington Tyrrell Iredell Martin Dare Burke Davidson Wake McDowell Randolph Chatham Wilson Buncombe Catawba Rowan Beaufort Haywood Pitt Swain Hyde Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Johnston Graham Henderson Jackson Cabarrus Montgomery Harnett Cleveland Wayne Polk Gaston Stanly Cherokee Macon Transylvania Lenoir Mecklenburg Moore Clay Pamlico Hoke Union d Cumberland Jones Anson on Sampson hm Duplin ic Craven Piedmont R nd tla Onslow Carteret co S Robeson Bladen Pender Sandhills Columbus New Hanover Tidewater Coastal Plain Brunswick THE COUNTIES AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NORTH CAROLINA Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2020 Compiled by Judith Ratcliffe, Zoologist North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org This list is dynamic and is revised frequently as new data become available. New species are added to the list, and others are dropped from the list as appropriate. The list is published periodically, generally every two years. -
CHESAPEAKE BAY LOWLANDS ECOREGIONAL PLAN Conservation Science Support—Northeast and Caribbean
CHESAPEAKE BAY LOWLANDS ECOREGIONAL PLAN Conservation Science Support—Northeast and Caribbean The Chesapeake Bay Lowlands Plan is a first iteration. The draft report that was distributed in hardcopy for review on 6/27/2002 is included on the CD. No updates were made to that version. CSS is now developing a standard template for ecoregional plans, which we have applied to the CBY ecoregional plan report. Some of the CBY results have been edited or updated for this version. Click on index in the navigation plane to browse the report sections. Note: The Bibliography (still slightly incomplete) contains the references cited in all report sections except for the Marine references, which have their own bibliography. What is the purpose of the report template? The purpose of creating a standard template for ecoregional plans in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic is twofold: — to compile concise descriptions of methodologies developed and used for ecoregional planning in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic. These descriptions are meant to meet the needs of planning team members who need authoritative text to include in future plan documents, of science staff who need to respond to questions of methodology, and of program and state directors looking for material for general audience publications. — to create a modular resource whose pieces can be selected, incorporated in various formats, linked to in other documents, and updated easily. How does the template work? Methods are separated from results in this format, and the bulk of our work has gone into the standard methods sections. We have tried to make each methods section stand alone. -
Use of a Marsh Dominated by the Introduced European Lake Sedge, Carex Acutiformis , by Highly Localized Native Butterflies
Use of a Marsh Dominated by the Introduced European Lake Sedge, Carex acutiformis , by Highly Localized Native Butterflies PaUL M. C atLINg 1, 3 and BrENDa KoStIUK 2 1Environmental Health, Biodiversity, Saunders Building, Central Experimental Farm, agriculture and agri-Food Canada, ottawa, ontario K1a 0C6 Canada 2170 Sanford ave., ottawa, ontario K2C 0E9 Canada 3Corresponding author: [email protected] Catling, Paul M., and Brenda Kostiuk. 2014. Use of a marsh dominated by the introduced European Lake Sedge, Carex acuti - formis , by highly localized native butterflies. Canadian Field-Naturalist 128(4): 358 –362. to determine whether native butterflies had colonized a marsh in ottawa that was entirely dominated by the invasive alien European Lake Sedge ( Carex acutiformis ), we surveyed two adjacent stands of the sedge and surrounding habitats. Dion Skipper ( Euphyes dion ), Mulberry Wing ( Poanes massasoit ), Broad-winged Skipper (P. viator ), and browns ( Lethe spp.) were all abundant in the introduced sedge, but absent from surrounding habitats. this is the first report of the use of invasive- dominated wetland by native Canadian butterflies. reduced nectar resources because of dominance of the invasive species over native nectar-producing plants did not prevent significant colonization. the known restriction of the butterflies to native Lakebank Sedge ( Carex lacustris ) as a larval host plant, but its absence in the area, coupled with dominance of its close relative, European Lake Sedge, provides strong circumstantial evidence of the use of the latter as larval food. this report doubles the number of recently localized native butterflies that have been able to increase their distribution by switching to habitat dominated by invasive plants. -
Status of the Rare Skipper (Problema Bulenta) in Virginia
Banisteria 19: 20-22 © 2002 by the Virginia Natural History Society Status of the Rare Skipper (Problema bulenta) in Virginia Anne C. Chazal and Christopher S. Hobson Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Division of Natural Heritage 217 Governor Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 The life history of the rare skipper (Problema tidal marshes along the Chickahominy River near its bulenta) is poorly documented. It is associated with confluence with Diascund Creek (Nicolay, 1979; tidal marshes or upland habitats with abundant nectar Pague, 1991; Hobson, pers. obs.). R. Anderson, S. sources in the vicinity of tidal marshes. Larvae are Nicolay, C. Covell, and G. Straley collected P. bulenta suspected to feed on giant cordgrass (Spartina from the flowers of swamp milkweed (Asclepias cynosuroides), southern wild rice (Zizaniopsis incarnata) at this location in August 1970 (Covell & miliacea), and wild rice (Zizania aquatica) (Opler & Straley, 1973). Anderson and Nicolay captured it again Krizek, 1984; Cromartie & Schweitzer, 1993; in August of 1971, but efforts by Anderson in mid-July Glassberg, 1999). Recently, late instar larvae were 1971 were unsuccessful (Covell & Straley, 1973). found on Phragmites australis in New Jersey (D. F. C. S. Hobson and S. M. Roble reverified this Schweitzer, pers. comm.). Despite the widespread population on 23 August 1999, when they observed occurrence of apparently suitable habitat, the rare nine adults at two marshes upstream of the mouth of skipper tends to be highly localized and sporadic in Diascund Creek. Eight of the individuals were seen distribution. nectaring on pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata) about The rare skipper has been documented from seven 1-1.75 km upstream of the mouth of Diascund Creek in states along the Atlantic coast: New Jersey, Delaware, New Kent County. -
John Abbot's Butterfly Drawings for William Swainson
VOLUME 61, NUMBER 1 1 J OURNAL OF T HE L EPIDOPTERISTS’ S OCIETY Volume 61 2007 Number 1 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society 61(1), 2007, 1–20 JOHN ABBOT’S BUTTERFLY DRAWINGS FOR WILLIAM SWAINSON, INCLUDING GENERAL COMMENTS ABOUT ABBOT’S ARTISTIC METHODS AND WRITTEN OBSERVATIONS JOHN V. C ALHOUN1 977 Wicks Dr., Palm Harbor, FL 34684 ABSTRACT. Between 1816 and 1818, artist-naturalist John Abbot completed 103 drawings of insects for English naturalist William Swain- son. The history of these illustrations is reviewed, leading up to their rediscovery in 1977 in the Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington, New Zealand. Four of these drawings are figured. The adults in the 21 butterfly drawings are identified and the figures of larvae and pupae are as- sessed for accuracy. The illustrated plants are also identified and their status as hosts is examined. Aspects of Abbot’s life history notes are dis- cussed, including his spelling, grammar, and use of Latin names. His notes for Swainson are transcribed and analyzed. A review of Abbot’s art- work indicates that he duplicated many of his compositions for 20–25 years. He sometimes portrayed erroneous figures of larvae, pupae, and hostplants. Figures of immatures were sometimes fabricated using other species as models. He also applied duplicate figures of larvae to more than one species. Abbot may have sent another set of insect drawings to Swainson in 1830. Ninety-nine smaller drawings at the Turnbull Li- brary are attributed to both Abbot and Swainson. Six of these illustrations are figured. Abbot’s notes for Swainson suggest that at least three butterfly species are now more abundant than during the early nineteenth century, while three others are probably less widespread than for- merly. -
List of Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Animals of Maryland
List of Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Animals of Maryland December 2016 Maryland Wildlife and Heritage Service Natural Heritage Program Larry Hogan, Governor Mark Belton, Secretary Wildlife & Heritage Service Natural Heritage Program Tawes State Office Building, E-1 580 Taylor Avenue Annapolis, MD 21401 410-260-8540 Fax 410-260-8596 dnr.maryland.gov Additional Telephone Contact Information: Toll free in Maryland: 877-620-8DNR ext. 8540 OR Individual unit/program toll-free number Out of state call: 410-260-8540 Text Telephone (TTY) users call via the Maryland Relay The facilities and services of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources are available to all without regard to race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, age, national origin or physical or mental disability. This document is available in alternative format upon request from a qualified individual with disability. Cover photo: A mating pair of the Appalachian Jewelwing (Calopteryx angustipennis), a rare damselfly in Maryland. (Photo credit, James McCann) ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Maryland Department of Natural Resources would like to express sincere appreciation to the many scientists and naturalists who willingly share information and provide their expertise to further our mission of conserving Maryland’s natural heritage. Publication of this list is made possible by taxpayer donations to Maryland’s Chesapeake Bay and Endangered Species Fund. Suggested citation: Maryland Natural Heritage Program. 2016. List of Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Animals of Maryland. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, 580 Taylor Avenue, Annapolis, MD 21401. 03-1272016-633. INTRODUCTION The following list comprises 514 native Maryland animals that are among the least understood, the rarest, and the most in need of conservation efforts. -
Glossary, Acronyms, and Species Names
Glossary, Acronyms, and Species Names USFWS Frank Miles/ Pine warbler Glossary, Acronyms and Abbreviations, and Species Scientific Names Glossary Acronyms and Abbreviations Species Scientific Names Glossary Glossary adaptive management A process in which projects are implemented within a framework of scientifically driven experiments to test predictions and assumptions outlined within the comprehensive conservation plan. The analysis of the outcome of project implementation helps managers determine whether current management should continue as is or whether it should be modified to achieve desired conditions. abiotic Nonliving; a physical feature of the environment such as climate, temperature, geology, soils. ADA-accessible A site, building, facility, or portion thereof that complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act guidelines alluvium An unconsolidated accumulation of stream-deposited sediments, often including sands, silts, clays, or gravels. alternative A set of objectives and strategies needed to achieve refuge goals and the desired future condition. anadromous fish Fish that spend a large portion of their life cycle in the ocean and return to freshwater to breed. appropriate use A proposed or existing use on a refuge that meets at least one of the following three conditions: • The use is a wildlife-dependent one; • The use contributes to fulfilling the refuge purpose(s), the System mission, or goals or objectives described in a refuge management plan approved after October 9, 1997, the date the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act was signed into law; or • The use has been determined appropriate as specified in section 1.11 of that act. approved acquisition A project boundary that the Director of the U.S. -
Management Plan for Sweet Hall Marsh Chesapeake Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA Management Plan for Sweet Hall Marsh Chesapeake Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve Prepared by: Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Division of Natural Heritage Natural Heritage Technical Report #07-09 2008 Management Plan for Sweet Hall Marsh Reserve – 2008 Management Plan for Sweet Hall Marsh Chesapeake Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve 2008 Natural Heritage Technical Report #07-09 Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Division of Natural Heritage 217 Governor Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 (804) 786-7951 This document may be cited as follows: R.K. Myers, K.E. Heffernan, P.P. Coulling, N. Van Alstine, A.C. Chazal, and S.Y. Erdle. 2008. Management Plan for Sweet Hall Marsh Chesapeake Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. Natural Heritage Technical Report #07-09. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. Richmond, Virginia. 48 pages plus appendices. i Management Plan for Sweet Hall Marsh Reserve – 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ iii LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..............................................................................................................v PLAN SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................1