DOCSLIB.ORG

Mosquito Management Plan and Environmental Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mosquito Management Plan and Environmental Assessment DRAFT Mosquito Management Plan and Environmental Assessment for the Great Meadows Unit at the Stewart B. McKinney National Wildlife Refuge Prepared by: ____________________________ Date:_________________________ Refuge Manager Concurrence:___________________________ Date:_________________________ Regional IPM Coordinator Concured:______________________________ Date:_________________________ Project Leader Approved:_____________________________ Date:_________________________ Assistant Regional Director Refuges, Northeast Region Table of Contents Chapter 1 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROPOSED ACTION ...................................................................................... 5 1.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Refuge Location and Site Description ............................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Proposed Action ................................................................................................................................................ 7 1.3.1 Purpose and Need for Proposed Action ............................................................................................................ 7 1.3.2 Historical Perspective of Need .......................................................................................................................... 9 1.3.3 Historical Mosquito Production Areas of the Refuge ..................................................................................... 10 1.3.4 How the Proposed Action Would Be Accomplished ........................................................................................ 10 1.3.5 Objectives of the Proposed Action .................................................................................................................. 11 1.4 Issues and Concern .......................................................................................................................................... 11 1.4.1 Public Participation ........................................................................................................................................ 11 1.4.2 Issues Related to the Proposed Action ............................................................................................................ 11 1.5 Summary of Laws, Regulations, and Policies Governing the Proposed Action .............................................. 11 1.5.1 National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 ......................................................................... 11 1.5.2 National Wildlife Refuge System Regulations ................................................................................................. 12 1.5.3 Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.1531-1544) ................................................. 12 1.5.4 Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health policy (BIDEH, 601 FW 3) ................................ 12 1.5.5 Integrated Pest Management (IPM) policy (569 FW 1) .................................................................................. 12 1.5.6 Appropriate Refuge Uses policy (603 FW 1) .................................................................................................. 13 1.5.7 Compatibility policy (603 FW 2) ..................................................................................................................... 13 1.5.8 Special Use Permits ........................................................................................................................................ 13 1.5.9 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347) ............................ 14 1.6 Decision to be Made ........................................................................................................................................ 14 Chapter 2 ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION ...................................................................... 15 2.1 The Process Used to Develop the Alternatives ............................................................................................... 15 2.2 Description of Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action and No Action .................................................. 15 2.2.1 Factors Common to All Alternatives ............................................................................................................... 15 2.3 Alternative A – Proposed Action – Phased Approach to Mosquito Control ................................................... 15 2.3.1 Phase 1 ............................................................................................................................................................ 18 2.3.2 Phase 2 ............................................................................................................................................................ 18 2.3.3 Phase 3 ............................................................................................................................................................ 19 2.3.4 Phase 4 ............................................................................................................................................................ 19 2.3.5 Phase 5 ............................................................................................................................................................ 19 2.3.6 Access .............................................................................................................................................................. 20 2.3.7 Mosquito Monitoring and Surveillance ........................................................................................................... 20 2.3.8 Wildlife Monitoring and Surveillance ............................................................................................................. 21 2.3.9 Pesticide Approval Process ............................................................................................................................. 21 2.3.10 Mosquito Control Pesticides ........................................................................................................................... 22 2.3.11 Annual Meeting/Training ................................................................................................................................ 25 2.4 Alternative B – Monitoring and Larvicide Only ............................................................................................. 26 2.5 Alternative C – No Action .............................................................................................................................. 26 2.6 Alternatives Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 27 Chapter 3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ...................................................................................................................... 27 3.1 Physical Environment ...................................................................................................................................... 27 3.1.1 Climate ............................................................................................................................................................ 27 3.1.2 Topography, Geology, and Soils ..................................................................................................................... 28 3.1.3 Air Quality ....................................................................................................................................................... 28 3.1.4 Water and Water Quality ................................................................................................................................ 29 3.2 Biological Considerations ............................................................................................................................... 29 3.2.1 Vegetation and Habitat Types ......................................................................................................................... 29 3.2.2 Special Biological Communities/Critical Wildlife Habitat ............................................................................. 30 3.2.3 Noxious Weeds/Exotic Plants .......................................................................................................................... 30 3.2.4 Wildlife ............................................................................................................................................................ 34 3.3 Socioeconomic Considerations ....................................................................................................................... 40 3.3.1 Cultural Resources .......................................................................................................................................... 40 3.3.2 Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice.................................................................................................... 40 3.3.3 Land Use ......................................................................................................................................................... 41 3.3.4 Aesthetics ........................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2006 Butterfly Inventory
    I I I Boulder County Parks and Open Space I Boulder, Colorado I I Small Grants Program 2006 I I I BUTTERFLY INVENTORY AND RESEARCH I ON OPEN SPACE PROPERTIES I I I I By Janet Chu I I December 12, 2006 I I I I I I Table of Contents I Acknowledgments 3 I. Abstract 4 II. Introduction and Literature Review 5 I III. Research Methods 6 IV. Results and Data Analyses 7 A. Survey Dates and Locations for 2006 7 I B. Numbers of Butterny Species Observed in BerOS Habitats 7 Table I. Survey Dates and Locations 8 C. Populations in Each Habitat 9 I D. Species Numbers and Days of Field Work 9 E. Largest Populations for Each Habitat 9 F. Forty Frequently Observed Butternics 10 I Photof,'Taphs of BuuerOies with Large Populations G. Butterny Surveys for 2006 (Tables 3-8) 10 H. Burned and Unburned Transects - Big Meadow, Heil Valley II I V. Discussion ofthe Results 12 A. Findings orthe Inventory 12 B. Application to Natural Resource and/or Visitor Management 15 I VI. Conclusion 17 VII. Recommendations 18 I VIII. References 19 Table 2. Commonly Sighted ButterOies (Monlhs,Localions)20 Table 3. Plains - Carolyn Holmberg at Rock Creek, 21 I Pella Crossing Table 4. Foothills - Anne U. White, Steamboat Mountain 22 Rabbit Mountain I Observations and Notes ~ Plains, Foothills Table 5. Foothill/Montane Transition- Heil Valley Ranch 23 Geer Canyon I Table 6. FoothilllMontane Transition - Heil Valley Ranch 24 Plumely Canyon Observations and Notes - Heil Valley I Table 7. Montane - Meyers Gulch, Reynolds Ranch 25 Observations and Notes - Montane Table 8.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquatic Invertebrates As Indicators of Stream Pollution
    Aquatic Invertebrates as Indicators Of Stream Pollution By ARDEN R. GAUFIN, Ph. D., and CLARENCE M. TARZWELL, Ph. D. Year-round field studies of the biology of various sections of the stream and diurnal stream sanitation were initiated by the biology changes in environmental conditions are dis- section of the Public Health Service's Environ- cussed here. mental Health Center on Lytle Creek in Octo- Lytle Creek, which was especially selected ber 1949. The aims of these investigations for the study, is about 45 miles northeast of were: Cincinnati, Ohio, and is a tributary of Todds 1. To develop or devise and field test pro- Fork, a part of the Little Miami River system. cedures and equipment for biological surveys It is a small stream approximately 11 miles and investigations of polluted streams. long, 3 to 35 feet wide during non-floodstage, 2. To investigate seasonal and diurnal en- and a few inches up to 6 feet deep. The prin- vironmental changes in a stream polluted with cipal natural source of water in the stream is oxygen-depleting wastes. surface drainage from the surrounding area. 3. To determine how the physical-chemical Some 7 miles above its mouth, the creek receives environment in the various pollutional zones the effluent from the primary sewage treatment affects the qualitative and quantitative com- plant of Wilmington, Ohio, a city of about position of aquatic populations and how these 10,000 people. Lytle Creek is particularly fa- populations in turn affect or change physical- vorable for studies of the pollutional effects of chemical conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • “Sockets” Or Are Articulated, As Are the Primary D Or SD GIELIS, C
    VOLUME 60, NUMBER 2 97 “sockets” or are articulated, as are the primary D or SD GIELIS, C. 2000. Division of the Pterophoridae into tribes (Lepi- setae. doptera). Quadrifina 3: 57-60. GIELIS, C. 2003. Pterophoridae & Alucitoidea - In: World Catalogue While tribal placement of Cosmoclostis in of Insects 4: 1-198. Pterophorini can be supported, additional species need HEINRICH, C. 1916. On the taxonomic value of some larval characters to be examined, to ascertain larval and pupal characters in the Lepidoptera. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 18: 154-164. HAO, S.-L., LI, H.-H. , & WU, C.-S. 2004. First record of the genus entirely unique to the genus Cosmoclostis. Continuing Cosmoclostis Meyrick from China, with descriptions of two new studies of larval and pupal structure will provide species (Lepidoptera, Pterophoridae). Acta Zoo. Sinica 29(1): additional insight into the relationships between and 142-146. MATTHEWS, D.L. & LOTT, T.A. 2005. Larval Hostplants of the within tribes and subfamilies of this group. Pterophoridae (Lepidoptera: Pterophoroidea). Mem. Amer. En- tomol. Inst. 76: 1-324. We thank Marianne Horak, Australian National Insect Collection, MEYRICK, E. 1886. On the classification of the Pterophoridae. Trans. for arranging the loan of the described specimens. George Mathew, Entom. Soc. Lond. 1886: 1-21. Kerala Forest Institute, India, provided comparative larval material of MOSHER, E. 1916. A classification of the Lepidoptera based on char- Cosmoclostis leucomochla. We also thank Terry A. Lott, J. Howard acters of the pupa. Bull. Ill. State Lab. Nat. Hist. 12(2): 18-153, Frank, and Donald W. Hall for reviewing the manuscript.
    [Show full text]
  • Data-Driven Identification of Potential Zika Virus Vectors Michelle V Evans1,2*, Tad a Dallas1,3, Barbara a Han4, Courtney C Murdock1,2,5,6,7,8, John M Drake1,2,8
    RESEARCH ARTICLE Data-driven identification of potential Zika virus vectors Michelle V Evans1,2*, Tad A Dallas1,3, Barbara A Han4, Courtney C Murdock1,2,5,6,7,8, John M Drake1,2,8 1Odum School of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, United States; 2Center for the Ecology of Infectious Diseases, University of Georgia, Athens, United States; 3Department of Environmental Science and Policy, University of California-Davis, Davis, United States; 4Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, Millbrook, United States; 5Department of Infectious Disease, University of Georgia, Athens, United States; 6Center for Tropical Emerging Global Diseases, University of Georgia, Athens, United States; 7Center for Vaccines and Immunology, University of Georgia, Athens, United States; 8River Basin Center, University of Georgia, Athens, United States Abstract Zika is an emerging virus whose rapid spread is of great public health concern. Knowledge about transmission remains incomplete, especially concerning potential transmission in geographic areas in which it has not yet been introduced. To identify unknown vectors of Zika, we developed a data-driven model linking vector species and the Zika virus via vector-virus trait combinations that confer a propensity toward associations in an ecological network connecting flaviviruses and their mosquito vectors. Our model predicts that thirty-five species may be able to transmit the virus, seven of which are found in the continental United States, including Culex quinquefasciatus and Cx. pipiens. We suggest that empirical studies prioritize these species to confirm predictions of vector competence, enabling the correct identification of populations at risk for transmission within the United States. *For correspondence: mvevans@ DOI: 10.7554/eLife.22053.001 uga.edu Competing interests: The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    [Show full text]
  • Chironomus Frontpage No 28
    CHIRONOMUS Journal of Chironomidae Research No. 30 ISSN 2387-5372 December 2017 CONTENTS Editorial Anderson, A.M. Keep the fuel burning 2 Current Research Epler, J. An annotated preliminary list of the Chironomidae of Zurqui 4 Martin, J. Chironomus strenzkei is a junior synonym of C. stratipennis 19 Andersen, T. et al. Two new Neo- tropical Chironominae genera 26 Kuper, J. Life cycle of natural populations of Metriocnemus (Inermipupa) carmencitabertarum in The Netherlands: indications for a southern origin 55 Lin, X., Wang, X. A redescription of Zavrelia bragremia 67 Short Communications Baranov, V., Nekhaev, I. Impact of the bird-manure caused eutrophication on the abundance and diversity of chironomid larvae in lakes of the Bolshoy Aynov Island 72 Namayandeh, A., Beresford, D.V. New range extensions for the Canadian Chironomidae fauna from two urban streams 76 News Liu, W. et al. The 2nd Chinese Symposium on Chironomidae 81 In memoriam Michailova, P., et al. Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Friedrich Wülker 82 Unidentified male, perhaps of the Chironomus decorus group? Photo taken in the Madrona Marsh Preserve, California, USA. Photo: Emile Fiesler. CHIRONOMUS Journal of Chironomidae Research Editors Alyssa M. ANDERSON, Department of Biology, Chemistry, Physics, and Mathematics, Northern State University, Aberdeen, South Dakota, USA. Torbjørn EKREM, NTNU University Museum, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway. Peter H. LANGTON, 16, Irish Society Court, Coleraine, Co. Londonderry, Northern Ireland BT52 1GX. The CHIRONOMUS Journal of Chironomidae Research is devoted to all aspects of chironomid research and serves as an up-to-date research journal and news bulletin for the Chironomidae research community.
    [Show full text]
  • ARTHROPOD MONITORING: Mosquito Studies
    64 ARTHROPOD MONITORING: Mosquito Studies - Greenwoods, Summer 1995 Wi~~iam L. Butts Expanded sampling of the area inunediately adj acent to the large bog ("Cranberry Bog") for anthrophilic mosquitoes was the main focus of studies at Greenwoods. Initial plans to conduct biting/alighting sampling from a boat at selected sites around the margin of the impoundment were abandoned due to logistical difficulties. Emergent and submerged obstructions made it impossible to move about by boat at a rate that would allow for sampling at a sufficient number of sites within the hours of feeding activity. It was also evident that repeated sampling by boat would cause an unacceptable level of disruption to aquatic vegetation. A series of eight sampling sites marked with bicolored streamers was established along the west side of the bog from the point of access to the main dam northward. A similar series was laid out along the east side with three sampling stations south of the one at the dock site and four stations north of it. Biting/alighting collections were made by the author sitting for 20 minutes at each site with one forearm exposed. Mosquitoes alighting upon that arm or at other points on the body within reach of the other arm were collected by inverting a small killing vial over the mosquitoes. Sampling series were begun at approximately first light and in late evening beginning at a time estimated to terminate the series when unaided visual observation became difficult. In most instances one side of the bog was sampled in the evening and the other side the following morning.
    [Show full text]
  • Common Kansas Spiders
    A Pocket Guide to Common Kansas Spiders By Hank Guarisco Photos by Hank Guarisco Funded by Westar Energy Green Team, American Arachnological Society and the Chickadee Checkoff Published by the Friends of the Great Plains Nature Center i Table of Contents Introduction • 2 Arachnophobia • 3 Spider Anatomy • 4 House Spiders • 5 Hunting Spiders • 5 Venomous Spiders • 6-7 Spider Webs • 8-9 Other Arachnids • 9-12 Species accounts • 13 Texas Brown Tarantula • 14 Brown Recluse • 15 Northern Black Widow • 16 Southern & Western Black Widows • 17-18 Woodlouse Spider • 19 Truncated Cellar Spider • 20 Elongated Cellar Spider • 21 Common Cellar Spider • 22 Checkered Cobweb Weaver • 23 Quasi-social Cobweb Spider • 24 Carolina Wolf Spider • 25 Striped Wolf Spider • 26 Dotted Wolf Spider • 27 Western Lance Spider • 28 Common Nurseryweb Spider • 29 Tufted Nurseryweb Spider • 30 Giant Fishing Spider • 31 Six-spotted Fishing Spider • 32 Garden Ghost Spider Cover Photo: Cherokee Star-bellied Orbweaver ii Eastern Funnelweb Spider • 33 Eastern and Western Parson Spiders • 34 Garden Ghost Spider • 35 Bark Crab Spider • 36 Prairie Crab Spider • 37 Texas Crab Spider • 38 Black-banded Crab Spider • 39 Ridge-faced Flower Spider • 40 Striped Lynx Spider • 41 Black-banded Common and Convict Zebra Spiders • 42 Crab Spider Dimorphic Jumping Spider • 43 Bold Jumping Spider • 44 Apache Jumping Spider • 45 Prairie Jumping Spider • 46 Emerald Jumping Spider • 47 Bark Jumping Spider • 48 Puritan Pirate Spider • 49 Eastern and Four-lined Pirate Spiders • 50 Orchard Spider • 51 Castleback Orbweaver • 52 Triangulate Orbweaver • 53 Common & Cherokee Star-bellied Orbweavers • 54 Black & Yellow Garden Spider • 55 Banded Garden Spider • 56 Marbled Orbweaver • 57 Eastern Arboreal Orbweaver • 58 Western Arboreal Orbweaver • 59 Furrow Orbweaver • 60 Eastern Labyrinth Orbweaver • 61 Giant Long-jawed Orbweaver • 62 Silver Long-jawed Orbweaver • 63 Bowl and Doily Spider • 64 Filmy Dome Spider • 66 References • 67 Pocket Guides • 68-69 1 Introduction This is a guide to the most common spiders found in Kansas.
    [Show full text]
  • MOSQUITO EVOLUTION: a STORY with a BITE Strickman D
    Ðîçä³ë 1. Á³îáåçïåêà òà á³îçàõèñò ó âåòåðèíàðí³é ìåäèöèí³, åìåðäæåíòí³ òðàíñì³ñèâí³ òà òðàíñêîðäîíí³ õâîðîáè òâàðèí MOSQUITO EVOLUTION: A STORY WITH A BITE Strickman D. United States Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service, USA Abstract: Mosquitoes (Culicidae) are one of many families of insects that are not only important to humans, but have actually shaped the direction of human development. As vectors of pathogens that cause diseases like malaria, yellow fever, and dengue, mosquitoes are very damaging to human health and economy. Because of their importance, mosquitoes have been studied extensively, possibly more extensively than any other family of insects. The nomenclature of mosquitoes is a refl ection of their taxonomy, which is a refl ection of systematics studies based on evolutionary phylogeny. Much of the current debate over genus names is a result of disagreement between those who want a practical system to identify groups of mosquitoes and those who want a more precise correspondence to phylogenetic studies. The evolutionary history of mosquitoes is a single reality and our measurements of morphology, genetics, biogeography, and molecular biology are all attempts to understand that history. Studies to date have produced some consensus on the higher level evolution that has a lot of general interest, for example that the family Culicidae shared a common ancestor with Chaoboridae (fairy midges) and Corethrellidae (biting fairy midges). This trio of families, in turn, shared a common ancestor with Dixidae (dixid midges). Mosquitoes may have emerged with recognizable characteristics in the middle of the Paleozoic, though the oldest fossil is from the late Cretaceous (90 million years ago).
    [Show full text]
  • Out of the Orient: Post-Tethyan Transoceanic and Trans-Arabian Routes
    Systematic Entomology Page 2 of 55 1 1 Out of the Orient: Post-Tethyan transoceanic and trans-Arabian routes 2 fostered the spread of Baorini skippers in the Afrotropics 3 4 Running title: Historical biogeography of Baorini skippers 5 6 Authors: Emmanuel F.A. Toussaint1,2*, Roger Vila3, Masaya Yago4, Hideyuki Chiba5, Andrew 7 D. Warren2, Kwaku Aduse-Poku6,7, Caroline Storer2, Kelly M. Dexter2, Kiyoshi Maruyama8, 8 David J. Lohman6,9,10, Akito Y. Kawahara2 9 10 Affiliations: 11 1 Natural History Museum of Geneva, CP 6434, CH 1211 Geneva 6, Switzerland 12 2 Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, 32611, U.S.A. 13 3 Institut de Biologia Evolutiva (CSIC-UPF), Passeig Marítim de la Barceloneta, 37, 08003 14 Barcelona, Spain 15 4 The University Museum, The University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan 16 5 B. P. Bishop Museum, 1525 Bernice Street, Honolulu, Hawaii, 96817-0916 U.S.A. 17 6 Biology Department, City College of New York, City University of New York, 160 Convent 18 Avenue, NY 10031, U.S.A. 19 7 Biology Department, University of Richmond, Richmond, Virginia, 23173, USA 20 8 9-7-106 Minami-Ôsawa 5 chome, Hachiôji-shi, Tokyo 192-0364, Japan 21 9 Ph.D. Program in Biology, Graduate Center, City University of New York, 365 Fifth Ave., New 22 York, NY 10016, U.S.A. 23 10 Entomology Section, National Museum of the Philippines, Manila 1000, Philippines 24 25 *To whom correspondence should be addressed: E-mail: [email protected] Page 3 of 55 Systematic Entomology 2 26 27 ABSTRACT 28 The origin of taxa presenting a disjunct distribution between Africa and Asia has puzzled 29 biogeographers for centuries.
    [Show full text]
  • Nabs 2004 Final
    CURRENT AND SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHIES ON BENTHIC BIOLOGY 2004 Published August, 2005 North American Benthological Society 2 FOREWORD “Current and Selected Bibliographies on Benthic Biology” is published annu- ally for the members of the North American Benthological Society, and summarizes titles of articles published during the previous year. Pertinent titles prior to that year are also included if they have not been cited in previous reviews. I wish to thank each of the members of the NABS Literature Review Committee for providing bibliographic information for the 2004 NABS BIBLIOGRAPHY. I would also like to thank Elizabeth Wohlgemuth, INHS Librarian, and library assis- tants Anna FitzSimmons, Jessica Beverly, and Elizabeth Day, for their assistance in putting the 2004 bibliography together. Membership in the North American Benthological Society may be obtained by contacting Ms. Lucinda B. Johnson, Natural Resources Research Institute, Uni- versity of Minnesota, 5013 Miller Trunk Highway, Duluth, MN 55811. Phone: 218/720-4251. email:[email protected]. Dr. Donald W. Webb, Editor NABS Bibliography Illinois Natural History Survey Center for Biodiversity 607 East Peabody Drive Champaign, IL 61820 217/333-6846 e-mail: [email protected] 3 CONTENTS PERIPHYTON: Christine L. Weilhoefer, Environmental Science and Resources, Portland State University, Portland, O97207.................................5 ANNELIDA (Oligochaeta, etc.): Mark J. Wetzel, Center for Biodiversity, Illinois Natural History Survey, 607 East Peabody Drive, Champaign, IL 61820.................................................................................................................6 ANNELIDA (Hirudinea): Donald J. Klemm, Ecosystems Research Branch (MS-642), Ecological Exposure Research Division, National Exposure Re- search Laboratory, Office of Research & Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 26 W. Martin Luther King Dr., Cincinnati, OH 45268- 0001 and William E.
    [Show full text]
  • Morphological and Cytological Observations on the Early Development of Culiseta Inornata (Williston) Phyllis Ann Harber Iowa State University
    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Retrospective Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 1969 Morphological and cytological observations on the early development of Culiseta inornata (Williston) Phyllis Ann Harber Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd Part of the Zoology Commons Recommended Citation Harber, Phyllis Ann, "Morphological and cytological observations on the early development of Culiseta inornata (Williston) " (1969). Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. 4657. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/4657 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Retrospective Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This dissertation has been 69-15,615 microfilmed exactly as received HARDER, Phyllis Ann, 1931- MORPHOLOGICAL AND CYTOLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE EARLY DEVELOPMENT OF CULISETA INORNATA (WILLISTON). Iowa State University, PluD., 1969 Zoology University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan MORPHOLOGICAL AND CYTOLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE EARLY DEVELOPMENT OF CULISETA INORNATA (WILLISTON) by Phyllis Ann Harber A Dissertation Subiuittecl to the Graduate Faculty in Partial Full;ilIment of The Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Major Subject: Zoology Approved: Signature was redacted for privacy. of Major Work Signature was redacted for privacy. Headwf Major Department Signature was redacted for privacy. De Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 1969 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 LITERATURE REVIEW 5 METHODS AND MATERIALS 12 OBSERVATIONS AND DISCUSSION 22 SUMMARY 96 LITERATURE CITED 98 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 106 1 INTRODUCTION In the development of an organism two processes occur: differentia­ tion, and growth.
    [Show full text]
  • BUTTERFLIES in Thewest Indies of the Caribbean
    PO Box 9021, Wilmington, DE 19809, USA E-mail: [email protected]@focusonnature.com Phone: Toll-free in USA 1-888-721-3555 oror 302/529-1876302/529-1876 BUTTERFLIES and MOTHS in the West Indies of the Caribbean in Antigua and Barbuda the Bahamas Barbados the Cayman Islands Cuba Dominica the Dominican Republic Guadeloupe Jamaica Montserrat Puerto Rico Saint Lucia Saint Vincent the Virgin Islands and the ABC islands of Aruba, Bonaire, and Curacao Butterflies in the Caribbean exclusively in Trinidad & Tobago are not in this list. Focus On Nature Tours in the Caribbean have been in: January, February, March, April, May, July, and December. Upper right photo: a HISPANIOLAN KING, Anetia jaegeri, photographed during the FONT tour in the Dominican Republic in February 2012. The genus is nearly entirely in West Indian islands, the species is nearly restricted to Hispaniola. This list of Butterflies of the West Indies compiled by Armas Hill Among the butterfly groupings in this list, links to: Swallowtails: family PAPILIONIDAE with the genera: Battus, Papilio, Parides Whites, Yellows, Sulphurs: family PIERIDAE Mimic-whites: subfamily DISMORPHIINAE with the genus: Dismorphia Subfamily PIERINAE withwith thethe genera:genera: Ascia,Ascia, Ganyra,Ganyra, Glutophrissa,Glutophrissa, MeleteMelete Subfamily COLIADINAE with the genera: Abaeis, Anteos, Aphrissa, Eurema, Kricogonia, Nathalis, Phoebis, Pyrisitia, Zerene Gossamer Wings: family LYCAENIDAE Hairstreaks: subfamily THECLINAE with the genera: Allosmaitia, Calycopis, Chlorostrymon, Cyanophrys,
    [Show full text]