DOCSLIB.ORG

Charlotte Harbor Preserve State Park Unit Management Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

CHARLOTTE HARBOR PRESERVE STATE PARK UNIT MANAGEMENT PLAN APPROVED PLAN STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Division of Recreation and Parks June 15, 2007 Charlie Crist Florida Department of Governor Environmental Protection Jeff Kottkamp Marjory Stoneman Douglas Building Lt. Governor 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000 Michael W. Sole Secretary June 18, 2007 Ms. BryAnne White Office of Park Planning Division of Recreation and Parks 3900 Commonwealth Blvd.; M.S. 525 Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Re: Charlotte Harbor Preserve State Park Lease # 4085 and # 4143 Dear Ms. White: On June 15, 2007, the Acquisition and Restoration Council recommended approval of the Charlotte Harbor Preserve State Park management plan. Therefore, the Office of Environmental Services, acting as agent for the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund, approved the management plan for the Charlotte Harbor Preserve State Park. Pursuant to Sections 253.034 and 259.032, Florida Statutes, and Chapter 18-2, Florida Administrative Code this plan’s ten-year update will be due on June 15, 2017. Approval of this land management plan does not waive the authority or jurisdiction of any governmental entity that may have an interest in this project. Implementation of any upland activities proposed by this management plan may require a permit or other authorization from federal and state agencies having regulatory jurisdiction over those particular activities. Pursuant to the conditions of your lease, please forward copies of all permits to this office upon issuance. Sincerely, Paula L. Allen Office of Environmental Services Division of State Lands Department of Environmental Protection “More Protection, Less Process” www.dep.state.fl.us TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF PLAN .......................................................................................9 MANAGEMENT PROGRAM OVERVIEW......................................................................10 Management Authority and Responsibility ......................................................................10 Park Goals and Objectives....................................................................................................11 Management Coordination..................................................................................................18 Public Participation ...............................................................................................................19 Other Designations................................................................................................................20 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT COMPONENT INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................21 RESOURCE DESCRIPTION AND ASSESSMENT.........................................................21 Natural Resources.................................................................................................................21 Cultural Resources................................................................................................................44 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ......................................................................46 Special Management Considerations .................................................................................46 Management Needs and Problems.....................................................................................48 Management Objectives.......................................................................................................49 Management Measures For Natural Resources ................................................................50 Management Measures For Cultural Resources ...............................................................54 Research Needs......................................................................................................................57 Resource Management Schedule.........................................................................................59 Land Management Review ..................................................................................................59 i LAND USE COMPONENT INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................61 EXTERNAL CONDITIONS..................................................................................................61 Regional Population..............................................................................................................61 Existing Use of Adjacent Lands...........................................................................................62 Planned Use of Adjacent Lands...........................................................................................62 PROPERTY ANALYSIS.........................................................................................................63 Recreation Resource Elements.............................................................................................63 Assessment of Use.................................................................................................................65 CONCEPTUAL LAND USE PLAN .....................................................................................71 Site Planning and Design Process .......................................................................................71 Potential Uses and Proposed Facilities...............................................................................72 Facilities Development..........................................................................................................81 Existing Use and Optimum Carrying Capacity ................................................................82 Optimum Boundary..............................................................................................................82 TABLE TABLE 1 - Existing Use and Optimum Carrying Capacity...............................................83 LIST OF ADDENDA ADDENDUM 1 Acquisition History and Advisory Group Documentation ................................. A 1 - 1 ADDENDUM 2 References Cited ......................................................................................................... A 2 - 1 ii ADDENDUM 3 Soil Descriptions ......................................................................................................... A 3 - 1 ADDENDUM 4 Plant and Animal List ................................................................................................ A 4 - 1 ADDENDUM 5 Designated Species List ............................................................................................. A 5 - 1 ADDENDUM 6 Florida Master Site File Cultural Site List ............................................................... A 6 - 1 ADDENDUM 7 Timber Assessment .................................................................................................... A 7 - 1 ADDENDUM 8 Priority Schedule and Cost Estimates...................................................................... A 8 - 1 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FNAI Descriptions of Natural Communities ......................................................................1 DHR Cultural Management Procedures..............................................................................9 MAPS Vicinity Map ...............................................................................................................................2 Reference Maps ....................................................................................................................3—8 Soils Maps .........................................................................................................................26—28 Natural Communities Maps...........................................................................................31—33 Base Maps..........................................................................................................................66—67 Conceptual Land Use Plans............................................................................................73—77 Optimum Boundary Maps..............................................................................................84—85 iii iv INTRODUCTION Charlotte Harbor Preserve State Park is located in Lee and Charlotte Counties. The preserve includes many discontinuous parcels that stretch around Charlotte Harbor, portions of which are included within the incorporated boundaries of Punta Gorda and Cape Coral (see Vicinity Map and Reference Maps). There is no central point of entry for the public, with access provided at a collection of trailheads and gates throughout the boundary of the preserve. Administrative offices are co-located with the Charlotte Harbor Aquatic Preserves, at 12301 Burnt Store Road (State Road 765) in Punta Gorda. The preserve consists of 42,598.06 acres, including over 70 miles of shoreline and numerous natural islands. The vast majority of the property is comprised of wetland communities and open water. At Charlotte Harbor Preserve State Park, public outdoor recreation and conservation is the designated single use of the property. There are no legislative or executive directives that constrain the use of this property. The preserve is made up of lands obtained through four acquisition projects in addition to donations,
Recommended publications
  • A Herpetofaunal Survey of the Santee National Wildlife Refuge Submitted

    A Herpetofaunal Survey of the Santee National Wildlife Refuge Submitted

    A Herpetofaunal Survey of the Santee National Wildlife Refuge Submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service October 5, 2012 Prepared by: Stephen H. Bennett Wade Kalinowsky South Carolina Department of Natural Resources Introduction The lack of baseline inventory data of herpetofauna on the Santee National Wildlife Refuge, in general and the Dingle Pond Unit specifically has proven problematic in trying to assess priority species of concern and direct overall management needs in this system. Dingle Pond is a Carolina Bay which potentially provides unique habitat for many priority reptiles and amphibians including the federally threatened flatwoods salamander, the state endangered gopher frog, state threatened dwarf siren and spotted turtle and several species of conservation concern including the tiger salamander, upland chorus frog (coastal plain populations only), northern cricket frog (coastal plain populations only), many-lined salamander, glossy crayfish snake and black swamp snake. The presence or abundance of these and other priority species in this large Carolina Bay is not known. This project will provide for funds for South Carolina DNR to conduct baseline surveys to census and assess the status of the herpetofauna in and adjacent to the Dingle Pond Carolina Bay. Surveys will involve a variety of sampling techniques including funnel traps, hoop traps, cover boards, netting and call count surveys to identify herpetofauna diversity and abundance. Herpetofauna are particularly vulnerable to habitat changes including climate change and human development activities. Many unique species are endemic to Carolina Bays, a priority habitat that has been greatly diminished across the coastal plain of South Carolina. These species can serve as indicator species of habitat quality and climate changes and baseline data is critical at both the local and regional level.
  • Summary of Amphibian Community Monitoring at Canaveral National Seashore, 2009

    Summary of Amphibian Community Monitoring at Canaveral National Seashore, 2009

    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Program Center Summary of Amphibian Community Monitoring at Canaveral National Seashore, 2009 Natural Resource Data Series NPS/SECN/NRDS—2010/098 ON THE COVER Clockwise from top left, Hyla chrysoscelis (Cope’s grey treefrog), Hyla gratiosa (barking treefrog), Scaphiopus holbrookii (Eastern spadefoot), and Hyla cinerea (Green treefrog). Photographs by J.D. Willson. Summary of Amphibian Community Monitoring at Canaveral National Seashore, 2009 Natural Resource Data Series NPS/SECN/NRDS—2010/098 Michael W. Byrne, Laura M. Elston, Briana D. Smrekar, Brent A. Blankley, and Piper A. Bazemore USDI National Park Service Southeast Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network Cumberland Island National Seashore 101 Wheeler Street Saint Marys, Georgia, 31558 October 2010 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Program Center Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Program Center publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Data Series is intended for timely release of basic data sets and data summaries. Care has been taken to assure accuracy of raw data values, but a thorough analysis and interpretation of the data has not been completed. Consequently, the initial analyses of data in this report are provisional and subject to change. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner.
  • Contributions of Intensively Managed Forests to the Sustainability of Wildlife Communities in the South

    Contributions of Intensively Managed Forests to the Sustainability of Wildlife Communities in the South

    CONTRIBUTIONS OF INTENSIVELY MANAGED FORESTS TO THE SUSTAINABILITY OF WILDLIFE COMMUNITIES IN THE SOUTH T. Bently Wigley1, William M. Baughman, Michael E. Dorcas, John A. Gerwin, J. Whitfield Gibbons, David C. Guynn, Jr., Richard A. Lancia, Yale A. Leiden, Michael S. Mitchell, Kevin R. Russell ABSTRACT Wildlife communities in the South are increasingly influenced by land use changes associated with human population growth and changes in forest management strategies on both public and private lands. Management of industry-owned landscapes typically results in a diverse mixture of habitat types and spatial arrangements that simultaneously offers opportunities to maintain forest cover, address concerns about fragmentation, and provide habitats for a variety of wildlife species. We report here on several recent studies of breeding bird and herpetofaunal communities in industry-managed landscapes in South Carolina. Study landscapes included the 8,100-ha GilesBay/Woodbury Tract, owned and managed by International Paper Company, and 62,363-ha of the Ashley and Edisto Districts, owned and managed by Westvaco Corporation. Breeding birds were sampled in both landscapes from 1995-1999 using point counts, mist netting, nest searching, and territory mapping. A broad survey of herpetofauna was conducted during 1996-1998 across the Giles Bay/Woodbury Tract using a variety of methods, including: searches of natural cover objects, time-constrained searches, drift fences with pitfall traps, coverboards, automated recording systems, minnow traps, and turtle traps. Herpetofaunal communities were sampled more intensively in both landscapes during 1997-1999 in isolated wetland and selected structural classes. The study landscapes supported approximately 70 bird and 72 herpetofaunal species, some of which are of conservation concern.
  • Outline of Angiosperm Phylogeny

    Outline of Angiosperm Phylogeny

    Outline of angiosperm phylogeny: orders, families, and representative genera with emphasis on Oregon native plants Priscilla Spears December 2013 The following listing gives an introduction to the phylogenetic classification of the flowering plants that has emerged in recent decades, and which is based on nucleic acid sequences as well as morphological and developmental data. This listing emphasizes temperate families of the Northern Hemisphere and is meant as an overview with examples of Oregon native plants. It includes many exotic genera that are grown in Oregon as ornamentals plus other plants of interest worldwide. The genera that are Oregon natives are printed in a blue font. Genera that are exotics are shown in black, however genera in blue may also contain non-native species. Names separated by a slash are alternatives or else the nomenclature is in flux. When several genera have the same common name, the names are separated by commas. The order of the family names is from the linear listing of families in the APG III report. For further information, see the references on the last page. Basal Angiosperms (ANITA grade) Amborellales Amborellaceae, sole family, the earliest branch of flowering plants, a shrub native to New Caledonia – Amborella Nymphaeales Hydatellaceae – aquatics from Australasia, previously classified as a grass Cabombaceae (water shield – Brasenia, fanwort – Cabomba) Nymphaeaceae (water lilies – Nymphaea; pond lilies – Nuphar) Austrobaileyales Schisandraceae (wild sarsaparilla, star vine – Schisandra; Japanese
  • Checklist of Reptiles and Amphibians Revoct2017

    Checklist of Reptiles and Amphibians Revoct2017

    CHECKLIST of AMPHIBIANS and REPTILES of ARCHBOLD BIOLOGICAL STATION, the RESERVE, and BUCK ISLAND RANCH, Highlands County, Florida. Voucher specimens of species recorded from the Station are deposited in the Station reference collections and the herpetology collection of the American Museum of Natural History. Occurrence3 Scientific name1 Common name Status2 Exotic Station Reserve Ranch AMPHIBIANS Order Anura Family Bufonidae Anaxyrus quercicus Oak Toad X X X Anaxyrus terrestris Southern Toad X X X Rhinella marina Cane Toad ■ X Family Hylidae Acris gryllus dorsalis Florida Cricket Frog X X X Hyla cinerea Green Treefrog X X X Hyla femoralis Pine Woods Treefrog X X X Hyla gratiosa Barking Treefrog X X X Hyla squirella Squirrel Treefrog X X X Osteopilus septentrionalis Cuban Treefrog ■ X X Pseudacris nigrita Southern Chorus Frog X X Pseudacris ocularis Little Grass Frog X X X Family Leptodactylidae Eleutherodactylus planirostris Greenhouse Frog ■ X X X Family Microhylidae Gastrophryne carolinensis Eastern Narrow-mouthed Toad X X X Family Ranidae Lithobates capito Gopher Frog X X X Lithobates catesbeianus American Bullfrog ? 4 X X Lithobates grylio Pig Frog X X X Lithobates sphenocephalus sphenocephalus Florida Leopard Frog X X X Order Caudata Family Amphiumidae Amphiuma means Two-toed Amphiuma X X X Family Plethodontidae Eurycea quadridigitata Dwarf Salamander X Family Salamandridae Notophthalmus viridescens piaropicola Peninsula Newt X X Family Sirenidae Pseudobranchus axanthus axanthus Narrow-striped Dwarf Siren X Pseudobranchus striatus
  • RUGEL's PAWPAW Deeringothamnus Rugelii

    RUGEL's PAWPAW Deeringothamnus Rugelii

    RUGEL'S PAWPAW Deeringothamnus rugelii Photo of Rugel's Pawpaw. Photo courtesy of Walter K. Taylor. FAMILY: Annonaceae (Custard-apple family) STATUS: Endangered, September 26, 1986 DESCRIPTION AND REPRODUCTION: Rugel's pawpaw is a low shrub with a stout taproot. The fruits are cylindrical berries with pulpy flesh, 3 to 6 centimeters (1 to 3 inches) long, and yellow-green when ripe. Seeds are about the shape and size of brown beans. The annual or biennial stems are 10 to 20 centimeters (4 to 8 inches) tall, rarely taller. The plant resprouts readily from the roots after the top is destroyed by fire or mowing. The absence of such disturbance leads to the plant's eventual demise. This pawpaw bears flowers with straight, oblong, canary yellow petals. Flowering occurs in the spring and fruits are produced several months later. Observations made during 1981 revealed that many of the plants were vigorous and flowering, but very few produced any fruits. The pollinators (if any) are unknown. RANGE AND POPULATION LEVEL: This species is presently known primarily from an area near New Smyrna Beach in Volusia County, Florida. There are presently twenty-nine known populations of which half are on public lands. HABITAT: The general habitat type is poorly-drained slash pine-saw palmetto flatwoods. REASONS FOR CURRENT STATUS: Loss of habitat to real estate development is considered to be the primary threat to this species. Many of the populations are within 1 mile of Interstate 95 at New Smyrna Beach in a rapidly growing area. Some of the occupied and potential habitat may eventually be used for housing or other development.
  • FROG LISTENING NETWORK This Program Is Designed to Assist You in Learning the Frogs, and Their Calls, in the Hillsborough River Greenway System

    FROG LISTENING NETWORK This Program Is Designed to Assist You in Learning the Frogs, and Their Calls, in the Hillsborough River Greenway System

    HILLSBOROUGH RIVER GREENWAYS TASK FORCE FROG LISTENING NETWORK This program is designed to assist you in learning the frogs, and their calls, in the Hillsborough River Greenway System. Through this program, volunteers can help in local frog and toad research efforts. We use frogs and toads because: • They are good biological indicators of the river system’s health. • Their lifecycles span from wetland to upland areas. • They are very susceptible to environmental change. • They track the hydrologic cycle. • They are good ecological barometers for the health of the ecosystem. Frogs indicative of healthy Ecosystems: • Gopher Frog • Certain Tree Frogs Such As The: Barking Treefrog and the Pinewoods Treefrog Frogs indicative of exotic invasion and conversion to urbanization: • Cuban Tree Frog • Marine Toad These are non-native species that have been imported or introduced to our area. Volunteers are helping by: • Learning the calls. • Listening for calls. • Recording call information. Provide the recorded call information to the HRGTF on the data forms provided. This information will be used to detect changes or trends within frog populations over time. • This in turn helps to assess the health of the Ecosystem which then benefits: •Frogs • Other area wildlife •Ourselves Frog calls are easy to learn! • They are distinctive and unique. • We will use mnemonics (phrases that sound like the frog call) to remind us what frog we are listening to. • Many of the names of the frogs are associated with their calls. • For Example: the Bullfrog has a call that sounds like a bullhorn. Frog Diversity • 2700 Worldwide • 82 in the United States • 28 in Florida • 21 in the Hillsborough River Greenway (14 Frogs; 4 Toads; 3 Exotics) First lets look at the six large frogs found in the Hillsborough River Greenway.
  • Character Evolution in Anaxagorea (Annonaceae)

    Character Evolution in Anaxagorea (Annonaceae)

    QUT Digital Repository: http://eprints.qut.edu.au/ Scharaschkin, Tanya and Doyle, James A. (2006) Character evolution in Anaxagorea (Annonaceae). American Journal of Botany 93(1):pp. 36-54. © Copyright 2006 Botanical Society of America American Journal of Botany 93(1): 36±54. 2006. CHARACTER EVOLUTION IN ANAXAGOREA (ANNONACEAE)1 TANYA SCHARASCHKIN2,3 AND JAMES A. DOYLE2 2Section of Evolution and Ecology, University of California, Davis, California 95616 USA Anaxagorea is a critical genus for understanding morphological evolution in Annonaceae because it shares a variety of features with other Magnoliales that have been interpreted as primitive relative to other Annonaceae. We present a detailed discussion of morphological characters used in a combined morphological and molecular phylogenetic analysis of Anaxagorea, along with impli- cations of the analysis for character evolution in the genus. In spite of a high level of homoplasy in stamen and leaf venation characters, their removal results in loss of resolution in the trees obtained. The distributions of characters on trees con®rm assumptions that several distinctive similarities between Anaxagorea and other Magnoliales are primitive retentions (e.g., the presence of an adaxial plate of xylem in the midrib, nonpeltate stamen connectives, inner staminodes, and several leaf architectural characters). However, lateral extensions of the ``laminar'' stamens, though possibly ancestral in Anaxagorea, are convergent with those in other Magnoliales. A number of morphological synapomorphies have been identi®ed for a clade containing most Central American species and another comprising all Asian species (e.g., conical bud shape and reduced inner petals for the Central American clade, and adaxial cuticular striations and capitate stigma shape for the Asian clade).
  • Sniffing out Evolution

    Sniffing out Evolution

    WAGENINGEN NIFFING OUT VOLUTION UR S E Congruence of Fragrances and Phylogenetic Relationships in Annonaceae Jeike L. van de Poel BSc. – MBI 890421659010 Under supervision of Dr. Lars Chatrou and Dr. Kate Goodrich Biosystematics group, October 2012 Course code: BIS-80439 Abstract The flowering plants are a relatively young group that has reached high levels of diversity and harbors an enormous assortment of chemical components. Annonaceae encompass an astounding amount of different flower fragrances. Floral odor is important in the attraction of pollinators, especially if the pollinators in question are beetles, which is the case for most Annonaceae. A floral fragrance consists of approximately 100 Volatile Organic Compounds. From two genera within the Annonaceae (Asimina Adans. and Deeringothamnus Small) the complete chemical composition of the floral scent has been studied. These chemical data were provided in order to perform optimizations over a simplified version of an existing phylogenetic tree based on chloroplast markers (ITS, accD-psal, matK-trnK, psbA-trnH, psbM-ycf6, rpL16 intron, rpl32-trnl, rpoB-trnC, trnC-ycf6, trnL-trnL-trnF, trnS-psbC, trnS-trnfM, ycf1). Due to a lack of previous studies in which phylogenetic analysis and extensive collection of fragrance data are combined, there is no real agreement as to what is the best method to use fragrance data in phylogenetic analyses. The aim of this study is to find out which method (within Maximum Parsimony and Maximum Likelihood optimization) is best to use for optimization of components from floral fragrances, and whether it is possible to use chemical data as a means to resolve polytomies.
  • Beautiful Pawpaw Deeringothamnus Pulchellus Small

    Beautiful Pawpaw Deeringothamnus Pulchellus Small

    Beautiful Pawpaw Deeringothamnus pulchellus Small Federal Status: Endangered (Sept. 26, 1986) he beautiful pawpaw (Deeringothamnus pulchellus) is a low shrub of the Annonaceae family that occurs Critical Habitat: None Designated Tin two disjunct locations in central and southwest Florida Status: Endangered Florida. It is found in xeric, mesic, and hydric pine Recovery Plan Status: Revision: May 18, 1999 flatwoods in western Charlotte and Lee counties and Geographic Coverage: Rangewide eastern Orange County. The beautiful pawpaw is threatened with extinction because of habitat loss due to agricultural, residential, and commercial conversion of land. The exclusion of fire is also responsible for habitat Figure 1. County distribution of the beautiful degradation throughout much of the species range. Habitat pawpaw. conservation and management are conservation measures that will ensure survival of this species. This account represents a revision of the existing recovery plan for the beautiful pawpaw (FWS 1988). Description The beautiful pawpaw is a low-growing, diminutive shrub rarely exceeding 0.5 m in height. In mowed areas the plant grows more prostrate with decumbent woody stems, whereas in fire-maintained habitat it grows more erect with arching stems. In both growth forms, the stems may be annual or perennial. The stems arise from a stout taproot that averages 32.5 cm long and is about 2.5 cm wide at its widest point (Passarella and Associates, Inc. 1996). The leaves are alternate, leathery, deciduous, and 4.0-7.0 cm long with slightly revolute (curving under) margins. The leaf shape is oblong to oblong-ovate or spatulate, with a rounded or notched end.
  • Standard Common and Current Scientific Names for North American Amphibians, Turtles, Reptiles & Crocodilians

    Standard Common and Current Scientific Names for North American Amphibians, Turtles, Reptiles & Crocodilians

    STANDARD COMMON AND CURRENT SCIENTIFIC NAMES FOR NORTH AMERICAN AMPHIBIANS, TURTLES, REPTILES & CROCODILIANS Sixth Edition Joseph T. Collins TraVis W. TAGGart The Center for North American Herpetology THE CEN T ER FOR NOR T H AMERI ca N HERPE T OLOGY www.cnah.org Joseph T. Collins, Director The Center for North American Herpetology 1502 Medinah Circle Lawrence, Kansas 66047 (785) 393-4757 Single copies of this publication are available gratis from The Center for North American Herpetology, 1502 Medinah Circle, Lawrence, Kansas 66047 USA; within the United States and Canada, please send a self-addressed 7x10-inch manila envelope with sufficient U.S. first class postage affixed for four ounces. Individuals outside the United States and Canada should contact CNAH via email before requesting a copy. A list of previous editions of this title is printed on the inside back cover. THE CEN T ER FOR NOR T H AMERI ca N HERPE T OLOGY BO A RD OF DIRE ct ORS Joseph T. Collins Suzanne L. Collins Kansas Biological Survey The Center for The University of Kansas North American Herpetology 2021 Constant Avenue 1502 Medinah Circle Lawrence, Kansas 66047 Lawrence, Kansas 66047 Kelly J. Irwin James L. Knight Arkansas Game & Fish South Carolina Commission State Museum 915 East Sevier Street P. O. Box 100107 Benton, Arkansas 72015 Columbia, South Carolina 29202 Walter E. Meshaka, Jr. Robert Powell Section of Zoology Department of Biology State Museum of Pennsylvania Avila University 300 North Street 11901 Wornall Road Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 Kansas City, Missouri 64145 Travis W. Taggart Sternberg Museum of Natural History Fort Hays State University 3000 Sternberg Drive Hays, Kansas 67601 Front cover images of an Eastern Collared Lizard (Crotaphytus collaris) and Cajun Chorus Frog (Pseudacris fouquettei) by Suzanne L.
  • Phylogeny and Geographic History of Annonaceae Phylogénie Et Histoire Géographique Des Annonaceae Phylogenie Und Geographische Geschichte Der Annonaceae James A

    Phylogeny and Geographic History of Annonaceae Phylogénie Et Histoire Géographique Des Annonaceae Phylogenie Und Geographische Geschichte Der Annonaceae James A

    Document generated on 09/30/2021 2:57 p.m. Géographie physique et Quaternaire Phylogeny and Geographic History of Annonaceae Phylogénie et histoire géographique des Annonaceae Phylogenie und geographische Geschichte der Annonaceae James A. Doyle and Annick Le Thomas Volume 51, Number 3, 1997 Article abstract Whereas Takhtajan and Smith situated the origin of angiosperms between URI: https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/033135ar Southeast Asia and Australia, Walker and Le Thomas emphasized the DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/033135ar concentration of primitive pollen types of Annonaceae in South America and Africa, suggesting instead a Northern Gondwanan origin for this family of See table of contents primitive angiosperms. A cladistic analysis of Annonaceae shows a basal split of the family into Anaxagorea, the only genus with an Asian and Neotropical distribution, and a basically African and Neotropical line that includes the rest Publisher(s) of the family. Several advanced lines occur in both Africa and Asia, one of which reaches Australia. This pattern may reflect the following history: (a) Les Presses de l'Université de Montréal disjunction of Laurasian (Anaxagorea) and Northern Gondwanan lines in the Early Cretaceous, when interchanges across the Tethys were still easy and the ISSN major lines of Magnoliidae are documented by paleobotany; (b) radiation of the Northern Gondwanan line during the Late Cretaceous, while oceanic 0705-7199 (print) barriers were widening; (c) dispersal of African lines into Laurasia due to 1492-143X (digital) northward movement of Africa and India in the Early Tertiary, attested by the presence of fossil seeds of Annonaceae in Europe, and interchanges between Explore this journal North and South America at the end of the Tertiary.