DOCSLIB.ORG

FEB Craig Guyer - 4 1999 Department of Zoology and Wildlife Science Auburn University Auburn, AL 36849 (334)-844-9232 [email protected]

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
FEB Craig Guyer - 4 1999 Department of Zoology and Wildlife Science Auburn University Auburn, AL 36849 (334)-844-9232 Cguyer@Acesag.Auburn.Edu HISTORICAL AFFINITIES AND POPULATION BIOLOGY OF THE BLACK WARRIOR WATERDOG (NECTURUS ALABAMENSIS) FINAL REPORT FY 1998 FEB - 4 1999 Craig Guyer Department of Zoology and Wildlife Science Auburn University Auburn, AL 36849 (334)-844-9232 [email protected] SUMMARY 1) The Black Warrior waterdog is morphologically and genetically distinctive from other waterdogs in the state of Alabama and should be recognized as Necturus alabamensis. 2) The Black Warrior waterdog is most closely related to the mudpuppy, Necturus maculosus. 3) Four waterdogs are present in the state of Alabama, the two listed above, plus two forms from the Coastal Plains; the latter include Necturus beyeri (all rivers draining into Mobile Bay) and Necturus iodingi (Appalachicola to Perdido drainages, inclusive). 4) Populations of Black Warrior waterdogs in Sipsey Fork and Brushy Creek appear to be patchily distributed, creating challenges for determining key features of demography. 5) State and Federal protection of the Black Warrior waterdog as a threatened species is warranted. INTRODUCTION Waterdogs (Necturus: Proteidae) are paedomorphic, stream-dwelling salamanders of the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains. The systematics of these creatures has challenged herpetologists for the past 60 years. The Black Warrior Waterdog, a species restricted to the upper Black Warrior drainages of Alabama, has been particularly problematic. Viosca (1937) originally described this taxon as being similar toN maculosus, but subsequent taxonomic treattnents considered specimens from this drainage to be conspecific with waterdogs from the lower portions of the Mobile drainages (N maculosus: Bishop 1943, Schmidt 1953; N beyeri alabamensis: Hecht 1958, Conant 1958; N puncta/us: Brode 1969; N beyeri: Mount 1975; N alabamensis: Conant 1975, Conant and Collins 1998). Attempts to reconstruct the phylogenetic history of Necturus have failed to provide resolution to this controversy; data from albumin immunology do not resolve relationships offorms from the Gulf Coast (Maxson et al. 1988) and protein electorphoresis suggests that the Black Warrior waterdog are genetically distinctive and more similar to waterdogs from the Chattahoochee (GA) and Econfina (FL) rivers than to other members of Necturus (Gnttman et al. 1990). Further confounding this picture is an assnmption, perpetuated by treattnents of waterdogs in field guides (e.g. Conant !975), that the specimen described by Viosca (1937) was from the lower Coastal Plains and that the specific epithet alabamensis is associated with animals distributed in such streams 1 from the Mobile to the Appalachicola Rivers. For this reason, Ashton and Peavy (1986) considered the Black Warrior waterdog to be an undescribed taxon. However, Bart et al. (1997), building on arguments first presented by Neill (1963), demonstrated that the Viosca specimen (1937) was a Black Warrior waterdog and that the specific epithet alabamensis must be restricted to this taxon. This taxonomic decision left the remaining waterdogs from the lower Coastal Plains without a valid scientific name and Bart eta!. (1997) recommended these specimens be referred to as N sp. cf. beyeri until sufficient data were available to determine the number of distinct taxonomic units represented by these animals. The Black Warrior waterdog is extremely rare, being known from 10 localities, only six of which were known to contain specimens during intensive survey work in 1992, 1994, and 1996-97 (Guyer 1997). Sipsey Fork appears to be the only site that has a population of sufficient size to serve as a reliable source of much-needed demographic data, but this site has a declining population of another taxon restricted to the upper Black Warrior River (Sternotherus depressus; Bailey and Guyer 1998), perhaps indicating that habitat quality is deteriorating at the best remaining locality for the Black Warrior waterdog. Clearly, this taxon deserves consideration for state or federal listing for conservation protection. However, the systematic quagmire characterizing the genus Necturus creates serious problems for such listing efforts. Because the currently recognized scientific name for the Black Warrior waterdog is N. a/abamensis and because most field guides and state lists consider this scientific name to be associated with a much more widespread form in tl1e lower Coastal Plains, clarification of the systematics of Necturus is needed. Two specific decisions are required: I) a valid name (or names) for forms from the lower Gulf Coastal Plains of Alabama, Florida, and Georgia and 2) documentation of systematic affinities oftl1e Black Warrior waterdog within Necturus. The former will allow formation of a stable taxonomy for all currently recognized species, thereby simplifying the listing process; the latter will inclicate the species of Neclurus from which the most appropriate comparative data can be generated for conservation efforts associated with N alabamensis, the Black Warrior waterdog. In addition to these systematic problems, the popnlation biology of the Black Warrior waterdog requires examination to determine key environmental variables associated with critical waterdog habitat and long-term population trends. OBJECTIVES 1) To determine the systematic relationships of all putative species of the genus Necturus within Alabama. 2) To mark and recapture adult waterdogs in Sipsey Fork and Brushy Creek. METHODS Eighteen live specimens of Necturus, collected from 11 localities and representing all known and suspected species within Alabama, served as the ingroup and one live Siren served as the outgroup (Table I). These animals were dipnetted from leaf packs in streams and either were preserved in buffer or returned to the lab where they were killed by emersion in chloretone (all protocol approved by Auburn University IACUC; PRN 9812-R-0835). Fresh or buffer-preserved tissues (a rear leg oflarge specimens; the tail of small specimens) were excised, frozen, and used for extraction of DNA. Isolation of total genomic DNA was performed with QIAamp tissue kits (QIAGEN Inc., 28159 Stanford Ave., Santa Clarita CA 91355-1106). Then a double-stranded, 840 base pair section of the cytochrome b gene was amplified via the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) as suggested by Saiki et al. (1988) followed by amplification of single-stranded DNA via the protocol of Allard et a!. (1990). Sequencing of this gene was performed with the dideo>.-y-chain-termination method of Sanger eta!. (1977) and was done in two segments corresponding to MVZ 15 and MVZ 16 primers (Moritz eta!. 1992). Sequencing occurred in both directions assisted by Taq polymerase in a thermal cycler. Denaturation was performed at 94 °C, primer annealing at 55 °C, and primer extension at 72 °C, each for one minute and replicated for 34 cycles. PCR product was purified using QIAquick kits (QIAGEN, Inc.) and analyzed on a Perkin Elmer 373A automated sequencer operated by the Nucleic Acid Facility of the Scott-Ritchey Research Center at 2 the Auburn University School of Veterinary Medicine. Primers MVZ 15, MVZ 16, and cyt-b2 (Moritz et al. 1992) were used for sequencing. The DNA sequence data were used to make a character matrix for phylogenetic analysis. The matrix consisted of the sequence of the cytochrome b gene of individual specimens. These were aligned by eye prior to analysis (Appendix 1). The Hennig-86 computer program was used to estimate the most parsimonious set of historical relationships for the 18 sequenced individuals. The character states (one of four possible bases in DNA) were considered to be unpolarized and the primitive state at each locus on the DNA chain was determined by the outgroup method. An exhaustive tree-generating algorithm was nsed, thus guaranteeing that the shortest possible tree was found. To assess population biology of the Black Warror waterdog, two lOOm transects were established, one in Sipsey Fork (site 116 of Guyer 1997) and one in Brushy Creek (site 38 of Guyer 1997). Trap stations were positioned at 10m intervals (0-lOOm, inclusive) along each trap line. Four minnow traps, each baited with canned cat food, were placed at each trap station. Traps were placed in deep pools along the stream edge and tied together with a string leader that was placed so that the traps could be relocated but remain hidden from view. These traps were examined every two weeks from Jan. 10 to Apr. 19, 1998. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION A total of346 sites (out of 840) were informative (differed from the outgroup in two or more individuals of the ingroup). A single most-parsimonious tree was generated from these data (Fig. 1). This tree had a consistence index of. 76, indicating that sufficient phylogenetic signal was present in the data set to justify interpreting the evolutionary relationships implied by the tree. In this tree the Black Warrior waterdog (Necturus alabamensis) was more closely related to the mudpuppy (Necturus maculosus) than it was to waterdogs from anywhere else in the Gulf Coastal Plains. In fact, the sequence data for N. alabamensis were indistinguishable from those of the single specimen of N. macu/osus analyzed in this study. N. alabamensis differs electrophoretically from N. macu/osus (Guttman et al. 1990). Additionally, both electrophoretic (Guttman et al. 1990) and DNA sequence data (this study) document derived characters shared by these taxa and not found in any other waterdog . Therefore, waterdogs referred to as N. alabamensis and N. maculosus represent two distinct, diagnosable species that appear
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pre-Incursion Plan PIP006 Salamanders and Newts
    Pre-incursion Plan PIP006 Salamanders and Newts Pre-incursion Plan PIP006 Salamanders and Newts Order: Ambystomatidae, Cryptobranchidea and Proteidae Scope This plan is in place to guide prevention and eradication activities and the management of non-indigenous populations of Salamanders and Newts (Order Caudata; Families Salamandridae, Ambystomatidae, Cryptobranchidea and Proteidae) amphibians in the wild in Victoria. Version Document Status Date Author Reviewed By Approved for Release 1.0 First Draft 26/07/11 Dana Price M. Corry, S. Wisniewski and A. Woolnough 1.1 Second Draft 21/10/11 Dana Price S. Wisniewski 2.0 Final Draft 18/01/2012 Dana Price 3.0 Revision Draft 12/11/15 Dana Price J. Goldsworthy 3.1 New Final 10/03/2016 Nigel Roberts D.Price New DEDJTR templates and document review Published by the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources, Agriculture Victoria, May 2016 © The State of Victoria 2016. This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968. Authorised by the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources, 1 Spring Street, Melbourne 3000. Front cover: Smooth Newt (Lissotriton vulgaris) Photo: Image courtesy of High Risk Invasive Animals group, DEDJTR Photo: Image from Wikimedia Commons and reproduced with permission under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 Generic License. ISBN 078-1-925532-40-1 (pdf/online) Disclaimer This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence which may arise from you relying on any information in this publication.
    [Show full text]
  • Amphibian Conservation INTRODUCTION
    2014 | HIGHLIGHTS AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS amphibian conservation INTRODUCTION Zoos and aquariums accredited by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) have made long-term commitments, both individually and as a community organized under the Amphibian Taxon Advisory Group (ATAG), to the conservation of amphibians throughout the Americas and around the world. With the support and hard work of directors, curators, keepers and partners, 85 AZA-accredited zoos and aquariums reported spending more than $4.2 million to maintain, adapt and expand amphibian conservation programs in 2014. The stories in this report are drawn primarily from annual submissions to AZA’s field conservation database (available when logged into AZA’s website under “Conservation”), as well as from articles submitted directly to AZA. They share the successes and advances in the areas of reintroduction and research, conservation breeding and husbandry and citizen science and community engagement. These efforts are the result of extensive collaborations and multi-year (even multi-decadal!) commitments. AZA congratulates each of the members included in this report for their dedication, and encourages other facilities to become involved. The ATAG has many resources to help people get started or to expand their engagement in amphibian conservation, and people are also welcome to contact the facilities included in this report or the ATAG Chair, Diane Barber ([email protected]). Cover: Spring peeper (Pseudacris crucifer). Widespread throughout the eastern United States and with a familiar call to many, the spring peeper was the most frequently reported frog by FrogWatch USA volunteers in 2014. Although reports of spring peepers began in February, they peaked in April.
    [Show full text]
  • 5 Black Warrior Waterdog Status
    STATE : Alabama PROJECT NUMBER: E-1 SEGMENT: 2 STUDY NUMBER: 5 BLACK WARRIOR WATERDOG STATUS SURVEY FINAL REPORT 1991-92 BY MARK A. BAILEY Dece:nber, 1992 Approved by: FINAL REPORT State: Alabama Study Title: Black Warrior Waterdog Status Survey Study No. 5 Project Title: Alabama Endangered Wildlife Projects Project No. E-1 Period Covered: 1 December 1990 to 30 September 1992 Prepared by: Alabama Natural Heritage Program Mark A. Bailey, Principal Investigator Notice of nomenclatural conventions used in this report: In the absence of a Latin name, and for the sake of clarity and convenience, the undescribed Nectwus of the upper Black Warrior River system will be referred to by its generally accepted common name, the Black Warrior waterdog. Despite uncertainty over the proper taxonomic placement of other species (N. beyeri and/or N. a/abamensis) with which the Black Warrior waterdog is sympatric in the lower portion of its range, it/they will be referred to as N. a/abamensis. Abstract: The Black Warrior waterdog, an undescribed form of Necturus endemic to the upper Black Warrior River system of Alabama, was surveyed for at 66 sites in nine counties from November, 1990 to February, 1992. Although gilled larvae of other salamander genera including Desmognathus, Eurycea, and Pseudotriton were encountered at 28 (45%) of the 62 sites sampled by netting, Necturus specimens referable to the Black Warrior waterdog were found at only four (6%) of the 66 sites netted and/or trapped: the Sipsey Fork of the Black Warrior River, Wmston County (six adults, one larva); Lost Creek, Walker County (one adult); North River and Yellow Creek, Tuscaloosa County (one larva and one subadult, respectively).
    [Show full text]
  • Amphibian Taxon Advisory Group Regional Collection Plan
    1 Table of Contents ATAG Definition and Scope ......................................................................................................... 4 Mission Statement ........................................................................................................................... 4 Addressing the Amphibian Crisis at a Global Level ....................................................................... 5 Metamorphosis of the ATAG Regional Collection Plan ................................................................. 6 Taxa Within ATAG Purview ........................................................................................................ 6 Priority Species and Regions ........................................................................................................... 7 Priority Conservations Activities..................................................................................................... 8 Institutional Capacity of AZA Communities .............................................................................. 8 Space Needed for Amphibians ........................................................................................................ 9 Species Selection Criteria ............................................................................................................ 13 The Global Prioritization Process .................................................................................................. 13 Selection Tool: Amphibian Ark’s Prioritization Tool for Ex situ Conservation ..........................
    [Show full text]
  • DEPARTMENT of the INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife
    This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 01/13/2016 and available online at http://federalregister.gov/a/2016-00452, and on FDsys.gov DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 16 RIN 1018–BA77 [Docket No. FWS–HQ–FAC–2015–0005] [FXFR13360900000–156–FF09F14000] Injurious Wildlife Species; Listing Salamanders Due to Risk of Salamander Chytrid Fungus AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Interim rule; request for comments; notice of availability of economic analysis. 1 SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is amending its regulations under the Lacey Act to add all species of salamanders from 20 genera, of which there are 201 species, to the list of injurious amphibians. With this interim rule, both importation into the United States and interstate transportation between States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any territory or possession of the United States of any live or dead specimen, including parts, of these 20 genera of salamanders are prohibited, except by permit for zoological, educational, medical, or scientific purposes (in accordance with permit conditions) or by Federal agencies without a permit solely for their own use. This action is necessary to protect the interests of wildlife and wildlife resources from the introduction, establishment, and spread of the chytrid fungus Batrachochytrium salamandrivorans into ecosystems of the United States. The fungus affects salamanders, with lethal effects on many species, and is not yet known to be found in the United States. Because of the devastating effect that we expect the fungus will have on native U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Abundance of Gulf Coast Waterdogs (Necturus Beyeri) Along Bayou Lacombe, Saint Tammany Parish, Louisiana
    Abundance of Gulf Coast Waterdogs (Necturus beyeri) along Bayou Lacombe, Saint Tammany Parish, Louisiana Authors: Glorioso, Brad M., Waddle, J. Hardin, Muse, Lindy J., and Godfrey, Sidney T. Source: Journal of Herpetology, 55(2) : 160-166 Published By: Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles URL: https://doi.org/10.1670/20-062 BioOne Complete (complete.BioOne.org) is a full-text database of 200 subscribed and open-access titles in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Complete website, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/terms-of-use. Usage of BioOne Complete content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non - commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Journal-of-Herpetology on 18 Jun 2021 Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-use Access provided by University of Florida Journal of Herpetology, Vol. 55, No. 2, 160–166, 2021 Copyright 2021 Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles Abundance of Gulf Coast Waterdogs (Necturus beyeri) along Bayou Lacombe, Saint Tammany Parish, Louisiana 1,4 1,2 1 1,3 BRAD M. GLORIOSO, J. HARDIN WADDLE, LINDY J. MUSE, AND SIDNEY T.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix H - Gap Status of Vertebrate Species
    Appendix H - Gap status of vertebrate species Table H1 Gap status of amphibian species Common Name Elcode Status 1 Status 2 Status 3 Status 4 Pct in Total HA % of % HA % HA % HA % HA Status 1 & 2 Georgia Alabama waterdog AAAAE01010 0.7558 427 2.1839 1,235 0.9861 558 96.0742 54,332 2.9397 56,552 0.3671 American toad AAABB01020 1.7340 67,681 2.2753 88,807 7.7921 304,137 88.1986 3,442,523 4.0093 3,903,148 25.3355 Apalachicola dusky salamander AAAAD03120 0.3084 46 1.1699 173 14.8126 2,191 83.7091 12,384 1.4783 14,794 0.0960 Barking treefrog AAABC02100 2.6912 166,907 2.4131 149,660 3.5712 221,487 91.3245 5,663,897 5.1043 6,201,950 40.2572 Bird-voiced treefrog AAABC02030 1.0377 7,715 3.1698 23,567 5.3613 39,861 90.4313 672,350 4.2075 743,494 4.8261 Blackbelly salamander AAAAD03080 10.3723 4,070 2.0214 793 32.7075 12,834 54.8989 21,542 12.3937 39,239 0.2547 Blue Ridge two-lined salamander AAAAD05150 10.9049 10,629 1.9154 1,867 34.6328 33,755 52.5469 51,215 12.8203 97,466 0.6327 Brimley's chorus frog AAABC05020 2.6109 5,678 2.2751 4,948 7.9622 17,317 87.1518 189,545 4.8859 217,489 1.4117 Brownback salamander NONE 0.3874 95 0.7694 188 8.8894 2,172 89.9538 21,982 1.1568 24,437 0.1586 Bullfrog AAABH01070 6.7804 72,246 3.7188 39,623 3.0085 32,055 86.4923 921,581 10.4992 1,065,505 6.9162 Carpenter frog AAABH01230 0.8462 54,629 1.9195 123,924 3.7049 239,194 93.5294 6,038,365 2.7656 6,456,111 41.9069 Cave salamander AAAAD05050 3.7366 3,073 1.0908 897 6.7121 5,519 88.4605 72,742 4.8274 82,231 0.5338 Cope's gray treefrog AAABC02050 1.1582 99,944 1.9392
    [Show full text]
  • Black Warrior Waterdog (Necturus Alabamensis)
    FINAL REPORT Habitat Assessment of Known Occurrences Black Warrior Waterdog (Necturus alabamensis) Sipsey Fork below AL Hwy 33 bridge (Winston County) and at Lewis Smith Dam (Walker/Cullman counties) Photos by M. Bailey Order No. 1448-43910-99-M515 March 2000 Prepared for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by Mark A. Bailey, Conservation Services Southeast 2040 Old Federal Road Shorter, AL 36075 (334) 727-2040 fax (334) 727-1005 Contents Introduction.................................................................................................................................1 Background ......................................................................................................................1 Historic Sites.....................................................................................................................3 Objectives ....................................................................................................................................5 Methods........................................................................................................................................5 Investigators.....................................................................................................................5 Determination of Site Condition and Status................................................................6 Site Assessments.........................................................................................................................7 Summary and Conclusion ......................................................................................................19
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 81, No. 8/Wednesday, January 13, 2016
    1534 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 8 / Wednesday, January 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations If . Then include . ******* (j) the estimated value of the acquisition exceeds $10 million ................ 52.222–24 Pre-award On-site Equal Opportunity Compliance Evalua- tion. (k) the contracting officer requires cost or pricing data for work or serv- 52.215–10 Price Reduction for Defective Certified Cost or Pricing Data. ices exceeding the threshold identified in FAR 15.403–4. 52.215–12 Subcontractor Certified Cost or Pricing Data. ******* [FR Doc. 2016–00475 Filed 1–12–16; 8:45 am] DATES: This interim rule is effective as the offspring or eggs of any of the BILLING CODE 6820–161–P of January 28, 2016. Interested persons foregoing that are injurious to human are invited to submit written comments beings, to the interests of agriculture, on this interim rule on or before March horticulture, or forestry, or to the DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 14, 2016 wildlife or wildlife resources of the ADDRESSES: You may submit comments United States. Fish and Wildlife Service by any of the following methods: We have determined that salamanders • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// that can carry the fungus 50 CFR Part 16 www.regulations.gov. Search for Docket Batrachochytrium salamandrivorans (Bsal) are injurious to wildlife and RIN 1018–BA77 No. FWS–HQ–FAC–2015–0005 and follow the instructions for submitting wildlife resources of the United States. [Docket No. FWS–HQ–FAC–2015–0005; comments. This determination was based on a FXFR13360900000–156–FF09F14000] • Mail, Hand Delivery, or Courier: review of the literature and an Public Comments Processing, Attn: evaluation under the criteria for Injurious Wildlife Species; Listing FWS–HQ–FAC–2015–0005; Division of injuriousness by the Service.
    [Show full text]
  • AMPHIBIANS and REPTILES of ALABAMA Conservation Status of Species and Selected Subspecies Alabama Natural Heritage Program June
    AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES OF A LABAMA Conservation status of species and selected subspecies Alabama Natural Heritage Program June 24, 1994 Global State USFWS AL CLASS AMPHIBIA ANURA: Frogs & toads BUFONIDAE Bufo americanus . American toad . GS SS Bufo quercicus . oak toad . GS S5 Bufo terrestris . southern toad . GS SS Bufo woodhousii . Fowler's toad 0 • 0 ••• 0 0 • 0 •• 0 0 GS SS HYLIDAE Acris crepitans . 0 0 0 • 0 0 ••• 0 •••• 0 ••• northern cricket frog 0 • 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 GS S5 Acris gryllus . 0 • • • • • • • • •• 0 • ••• 0 ••• southern cricket frog .... 0 •••• G5 Ss p Hyla andersonii 0 • 0 0 ••••••••• 0 •• 0 • Pine Barrens treefrog .. 0 • 0 • 0 0 • G4 S2 Hyla avivoca 0 • 0 ••• 0 0 0 • • • • 0 •• 0 0 • • 0 bird-voiced treefrog 0 0 • 0 0 • 0 0 •• GS SS Hyla chrysoscelis . 0 • 0 ••••••• 0 • 0 •• 0 Cope's gray treefrog 0 •••• 0 •• 0 GS S5 Hyla cinerea ............ 0 •••••• • • green treefrog . .... 0 GS SS Hyla femora/is 0 • 0 0 0 •••• 0 ••• 0 ••• 0 0 pine woods treefrog 0 • 0 •••• 0 0 • G5 S5 Hyla gratiosa 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 •• 0 • 0 •• 0 • 0 •• barking treefrog 0 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 •• 0 •• GS SS Hyla squirella . 0 ••••••• 0 ••••••• o •• squirrel treefrog . 0 GS S5 Pseudacris brachyphona .. 0 0 • • • • • •• mountain chorus frog 0 0 •• 0 0 0 • 0 GS SS Pseudacris crucifer 0 0 0 •• 0 •••• 0 • 0 0 0 spring peeper 0 0 • 0 • 0 0 • 0 • 0 0 •• GS SS Pseudacris nigrita . 0 • • • • • • • southern chorus frog ... 0 • 0 0 •• G5 S5 Pseudacris ocularis .
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to the Natural Communities of Florida
    GUIDE TO THE NATURAL COMMUNITIES OF FLORIDA Prepared by the Florida Natural Areas Inventory and Florida Department of Natural Resources February 1990 Table of Contents Page Introduction....................................................................……….........................………… 1 Table 1: Florida Natural Areas Inventory Natural Community Rank…………………… 3 Natural Community Descriptions TERRESTRIAL XERIC UPLANDS Sandhill...............................................................……….……….. 5 Scrub.....................................................................……...……….. 5 Xeric Hammock.....................................................…….………... 6 COASTAL UPLANDS Beach Dune……….…………………………………………….. 8 Coastal Berm.......................................................…………….…. 9 Coastal Grassland............................................……………….…. 9 Coastal Rock Barren........................................……………….…. 10 Coastal Strand................................................…………………... 11 Maritime Hammock.........................................………………….. 11 Shell Mound.................................................………………….…. 12 MESIC UPLANDS Slope Forest.....................................…………………………..… 14 Upland Glade...............................……………………………..… 15 Upland Hardwood Forest...............…………………….…….…. 16 Upland Mixed Forest...................…………………………….…. 16 Upland Pine Forest........................……………………………… 17 ROCKLANDS Pine Rockland................................……………………….…….. 19 Rockland Hammock........................…………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • Number 10 February 1985 EDITORIAL STAFF
    All ct«te •«' Carolina ^ number 10 february 1985 EDITORIAL STAFF John E. Cooper, Editor Alexa C. Williams, Managing Editor John B. Funderburg, Editor-in-Chief Board Alvin L. Braswell, Curator of David S. Lee, Chief Curator Lower Vertebrates, N.C. of Birds, N.C State Museum State Museum John C. Clamp, Associate Curator William M. Palmer, Chief Curator (Invertebrates), N.C of Lower Vertebrates, N.C State Museum State Museum James W. Hardin, Department Rowland M. Shelley, Chief of Botany, N.C State Curator of Invertebrates, N.C. University State Museum Brimleyana, the Journal of the North Carolina State Museum of Natural His- tory, will appear at irregular intervals in consecutively numbered issues. Con- tents will emphasize zoology of the southeastern United States, especially North Carolina and adjacent areas. Geographic coverage will be limited to Alabama, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia. Subject matter will focus on taxonomy and systematics, ecology, zoo- geography, evolution, and behavior. Subdiscipline areas will include general invertebrate zoology, ichthyology, herpetology, ornithology, mammalogy, and paleontology. Papers will stress the results of original empirical field studies, but synthesizing reviews and papers of significant historical interest to southeastern zoology will be included. Suitability of manuscripts will be determined by the Editor, and where neces- sary, the Editorial Board. Appropriate specialists will review each manuscript judged suitable, and final acceptability will be determined by the Editor. Address manuscripts and all correspondence (except that relating to subscrip- tions and exchange) to Editor, Brimleyana, N. C. State Museum of Natural History, P.
    [Show full text]