DNA Sequencing and Taxonomy of Unusual Serrate Juniperus from Mexico: Chloroplast Capture and Incomplete Lineage Sorting in J. Coahuilensis and Allied Taxa
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Woodlands Author: Kerry Dooley Historically the Primary Interest Area for National Inventories Was Timber
Woodlands Author: Kerry Dooley Historically the primary interest area for national inventories was timber. Consequently, the national inventory framework and collection protocols were focused on productive timber- lands (USDA Forest Service 2005). Over time, information such as estimations of carbon sequestration, wildfire fuel loads, and nontimber forest products and services (e.g., biofuels and wildlife habitat) has become topics of increasing interest. The FIA program—the national inventory used in the United States—broadened the focus of its surveys to include non- timberland forests, including woodlands, better aligning with these changing focus areas. Woodlands generally occur in less productive growing condi- tions, such as the arid Southwestern United States. Woodlands provide much, if not all, of the same services provided by forests; that is, they function as important wildlife habitat, improve water quality, serve as carbon sinks (or sources, in the event of wildfires), and provide fuel during wildfire season. The species that comprise woodlands differ in characteristics from most trees. On average, woodland species tend to be slower growing, smaller in stature, and of a form with more forks and branches near the base of the tree. Woodland species often grow as clumps of stems rather than one central stem. Beyond the characteristics of the trees classified as woodland species, specific parameters pertain to classification of the land use category of woodlands, while the Resources Planning Act (RPA) derives calculations of woodland for this report from the FIA data, the FIA and RPA definitions of woodland differ somewhat, as outlined in the following paragraphs. Forest Inventory and Analysis Definitions and Parameters FIA defines woodlands strictly along the lines of species com- position and associated forest types, and considers woodlands a subset of forest lands. -
Arizona Missing Linkages (US-93: Wickenburg to Santa Maria River Linkage Design)
ARIZONA MISSING LINKAGES US-93: Wickenburg to Santa Maria River Linkage Design Paul Beier, Daniel Majka submitted July 2006 last revised March 14, 2007 US-93: WICKENBURG TO SANTA MARIA RIVER LINKAGE DESIGN Acknowledgments This project would not have been possible without the help of many individuals. We thank Dr. Phil Rosen, Matt Good, Chasa O’Brien, Dr. Jason Marshal, Ted McKinney, and Taylor Edwards for parameterizing models for focal species and suggesting focal species. Catherine Wightman, Fenner Yarborough, Janet Lynn, Mylea Bayless, Andi Rogers, Mikele Painter, Valerie Horncastle, Matthew Johnson, Jeff Gagnon, Erica Nowak, Lee Luedeker, Allen Haden, and Shaula Hedwall helped identify focal species and species experts. Robert Shantz provided photos for many of the species accounts. Shawn Newell, Jeff Jenness, Megan Friggens, and Matt Clark provided helpful advice on analyses and reviewed portions of the results. Funding This project was funded by a grant from Arizona Game and Fish Department to Northern Arizona University. Recommended Citation Beier, P., and D. Majka. 2006. Arizona Missing Linkages: US-93: Wickenburg to Santa Maria River Linkage Design. Report to Arizona Game and Fish Department. School of Forestry, Northern Arizona University. Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................................ I LIST OF TABLES & FIGURES...............................................................................................................................II -
Phylogenetic Position of Geosmithia Spp. (Hypocreales) Living in Juniperus Spp
Article Phylogenetic Position of Geosmithia spp. (Hypocreales) Living in Juniperus spp. Forests (Cupressaceae) with Bark Beetles of Phloeosinus spp. (Scolytinae) from the Northeast of Mexico Hernández-García Juan Alfredo 1,2,3 , Cuellar-Rodríguez Gerardo 1 , Aguirre-Ojeda Nallely Guadalupe 1, Villa-Tanaca Lourdes 2 , Hernández-Rodríguez César 2 and Armendáriz-Toledano Francisco 3,* 1 Departamento de Silvicultura, Facultad de Ciencias Forestales, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, Carretera Nacional No. 85, Km. 145, Linares, Nuevo León C.P. 67700, Mexico; [email protected] (H.-G.J.A.); [email protected] (C.-R.G.); [email protected] (A.-O.N.G.) 2 Departamento de Microbiología, Escuela Nacional de Ciencias Biológicas, Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Ciudad de Mexico C.P. 11340, Mexico; [email protected] (V.-T.L.); [email protected] (H.-R.C.) 3 Colección Nacional de Insectos, Departamento de Zoología, Instituto de Biología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Cto. Zona Deportiva S/N, Ciudad Universitaria. CDMX, Mexico C.P. 04510, Mexico * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +55-56-22-92-50 (ext. 47833) Received: 11 September 2020; Accepted: 22 October 2020; Published: 28 October 2020 Abstract: Geosmithia members are mitosporic filamentous fungi commonly recorded and isolated from bark beetles of the Scolytinae subfamily and their respective host’s species. This genus includes 18 species formally described and 38 phylogenetic species recorded in several localities from Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, and North and South America, where they exhibit frequent associations with phloeophagous and wood-boring bark beetles. Among phloephagous bark beetle species, specifically, in members of the genus Phloeosinus Chapuis, almost 10% of Geosmithia strains have been isolated. -
Arizona Missing Linkages: Patagonia – Santa Rita Linkage Design
ARIZONA MISSING LINKAGES Patagonia – Santa Rita Linkage Design Paul Beier, Emily Garding, Daniel Majka 2008 PATAGONIA – SANTA RITA LINKAGE DESIGN Acknowledgments This project would not have been possible without the help of many individuals. We thank Dr. Phil Rosen, Matt Good, Chasa O’Brien, Dr. Jason Marshal, Ted McKinney, Michael Robinson, Mitch Sternberg, Dr. Robert Harrison, and Taylor Edwards for parameterizing models for focal species and suggesting focal species. Catherine Wightman, Fenner Yarborough, Janet Lynn, Mylea Bayless, Andi Rogers, Mikele Painter, Valerie Horncastle, Matthew Johnson, Jeff Gagnon, Erica Nowak, Lee Luedeker, Allen Haden, Shaula Hedwall, Bill Broyles, Dale Turner, Natasha Kline, Thomas Skinner, David Brown, Jeff Servoss, Janice Pryzbyl, Tim Snow, Lisa Haynes, Don Swann, Trevor Hare, and Martin Lawrence helped identify focal species and species experts. Robert Shantz provided photos for many of the species accounts. Shawn Newell, Jeff Jenness, Megan Friggens, and Matt Clark, and Elissa Ostergaard provided helpful advice on analyses and reviewed portions of the results. Funding This project was funded by a grant from Arizona Game and Fish Department to Northern Arizona University. Recommended Citation Beier, P., E. Garding, and D. Majka. 2008. Arizona Missing Linkages: Patagonia – Santa Rita Linkage Design. Report to Arizona Game and Fish Department. School of Forestry, Northern Arizona University. Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................................... -
Prescott Area Plant List Bulletin #32A
Prescott Area Plant List Bulletin #32A Landscape Trees 9/6/05 Drought Height Width Scientific Name Common Name Comments Tolerance (feet) (feet) Abies concolor White Fir somewhat 60 30 Short lived, some unknown disease problems encountered Acer negundo Box Elder none 50 50 Nice deciduous tree, female trees attract box elder bugs Acer palmatum Japanese Maple none 20 20 Many named varieties with unusual characteristics Acer plantanoides Norway Maple none 50 50 Subject to aphids, may not perform well in wind and alkaline soils Acer rubrum Red Maple none 40 40 Reddish twigs, red fall color Acer saccharinum Silver Maple none 60 60 Large tree, have seen trunk damage that may have been caused by spring freeze Acer saccharum Sugar Maple none 50 50 Source of maple sugar Ailanthus altissima Tree of Heaven very 40 20 Invasive Species – DO NOT PLANT Albizia julibrissin Mimosa somewhat 30 40 Fluffy pink flowers, flat topped Betula nigra River Birch none 40 25 Darker flaky bark, attractive foliage White bark, attractive foliage, good alternative to aspen because of fewer Betula pendula European White Birch none 30 20 diseases Calocedrus decurrens Incense Cedar somewhat 60 30 Rich green foliage in flat sprays, wood smells like pencils Catalpa speciosa Western Catalpa somewhat 40 40 Large heart-shaped leaves, attractive flowers and bark Cedrus atlantica Atlas Cedar somewhat 50 30 Shorter needles than Deodar Cedar, more erect leader Cedrus deodara Deodar Cedar somewhat 60 40 Droopy leader, softer texture than Atlas Cedar Celtis occidentalis Hackberry somewhat -
Supplementary Table S2 Details of 455 Conifer Species Used in the Phylogene�C and Physiological Niche Modelling to Es�Mate Drivers of Diversifica�On
Supplementary Table S2 Details of 455 conifer species used in the phylogene�c and physiological niche modelling to es�mate drivers of diversifica�on. Shown are: the clade calcifica�on (10 and 42 clade); number of cleaned georeferenced presence records; the confusion matrix which describes the model fit in terms of true posi�ves, true nega�ves, false posi�ves and false nega�ves; and the es�mated niche area in quarter degree grid squares for the globe (projected) and for version of the globe where all environmental zones are equally common (resampled), see main text for further details. Clade classifica�on Confusion matrix niche area (# grid cells) 42 (68*) Number of True True False False Species 10 clades clades records posi�ves nega�ves posi�ves nega�ves Projected Resampled Abies alba 10 65 119 117 111 4 2 6658 7622 Abies amabilis 10 65 80 79 74 2 0 11783 13701 Abies bracteata 10 65 4 4 15 0 0 1610 1846 Abies concolor 10 65 98 90 86 8 8 13825 15410 Abies fabri 10 65 4 4 17 0 0 2559 2641 Abies fargesii 10 65 13 13 18 0 0 14450 15305 Abies firma 10 65 163 161 163 1 0 2270 2436 Abies fraseri 10 65 15 15 16 0 0 1914 2075 Abies grandis 10 65 77 75 70 2 2 11654 13629 Abies holophylla 10 65 12 12 16 1 0 23899 24592 Abies homolepis 10 65 31 31 34 0 0 791 851 Abies kawakamii 10 65 17 17 26 0 0 700 1164 Abies koreana 10 65 10 10 18 0 0 985 1048 Abies lasiocarpa 10 65 105 100 95 6 5 11422 12454 Abies magnifica 10 65 47 47 58 2 0 11882 14353 Abies mariesii 10 65 16 16 17 0 0 3833 4114 Abies nebrodensis 10 65 1 1 17 0 0 1094 973 Abies nephrolepis 10 65 -
American Forests 2020 National Register of Champion Trees
AMERICAN FORESTS 2020 NATIONAL REGISTER OF CHAMPION TREES Record Reference Number Year Nominated Nominated By Scientific Name Circumference (Inches) Height (Feet) Crown Spread (Feet) Total Points Year Last Verified Current Status Date Crowned County State 2915 1999 Steve Sillett and Robert Van Pelt Abies amabilis 212 222 38 444 2011 Champion 2012-03-23 Clallam WA 2907 1992 R.O. Brooks and C. Keeran Abies balsamea 160 104 53 277 2018 Champion 2019-09-13 Adams PA 3770 2006 Alan R. Washburn Abies bracteata 150 127 36 286 2016 Champion 2016-09-01 Monterey CA 5325 2013 Barbara Gardner Abies concolor 244 101 55.5 359 2013 Champion 2013-09-01 Utah UT 6582 2020 Carl Casey and Martin Crawford Abies concolor var. lowiana 229 227 42 467 2020 Co-Champion 2020-09-16 Mariposa CA 6581 2020 Carl Casey Abies concolor var. lowiana 236 220 46 468 2020 Co-Champion 2020-09-16 Mariposa CA 6361 2018 Carl Casey Abies concolor var. lowiana 261 201 37 471 2018 Co-Champion 2019-09-13 Tuolumne CA 6289 2018 Carl Casey, Martin Crawford, and Robert Van Pelt Abies concolor var. lowiana 259 199.5 48.5 471 2018 Co-Champion 2018-09-06 Mariposa CA 4638 2009 Byron Carmean, J. Murray, and Gary Williamson Abies fraseri 116 96 45 223 2012 Champion 2012-09-01 Harrisonburg VA 5250 2013 Robert Van Pelt Abies grandis 265 227 48 504 2018 Co-Champion 2019-11-12 Clallam WA 2912 1997 Dale Thornburg and Robert Van Pelt Abies grandis 245 257 36 511 2015 Co-Champion 2015-09-01 Humboldt CA 2917 1965 Stephen Arno and Oscar Sedergren Abies lasiocarpa 252 125 26 384 2015 Champion 2015-09-01 Jefferson WA 2908 1999 R. -
Vegetation Classification List Update for Big Bend National Park and Rio Grande National Wild and Scenic River
National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Program Center Vegetation Classification List Update for Big Bend National Park and Rio Grande National Wild and Scenic River Natural Resource Report NPS/CHDN/NRR—2011/299 ON THE COVER Chisos Basin, as viewed from Casa Grande Peak. Image provided by NPS Vegetation Classification List Update for Big Bend National Park and Rio Grande National Wild and Scenic River Natural Resource Report NPS/CHDN/NRR—2011/299 James Von Loh Cogan Technology, Inc. 8140 East Lightening View Drive Parker, Colorado 80134 Dan Cogan Cogan Technology, Inc. 21 Valley Road Galena, Illinois 61036 February 2011 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 Report Series is used to disseminate high-priority, current natural resource management information with managerial application. The series targets a general, diverse audience, and may contain NPS policy considerations or address sensitive issues of management applicability. 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. This report received informal peer review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data. -
C:\Mike's Documents\Book\Thirdedition\Temp
Insert as an Additional Taxa For Juniperus virginiana: Juniperus deppeana E. von Steudel Alligator Juniper (Juniperus mexicana, Juniperus pachyphloea) C This species is also known as Checkerbark Juniper, Mountain Cedar, Oakbark Juniper, Sperry Juniper, Tascate, Thickbark Juniper, or Western Juniper; although this long-lived tree is capable of growing to heights of 50N at maturity, it is usually a 15N to 20N tall broadly conical tree in most landscape settings; trees become more spreading with age and the characteristic alligator hide-like bark pattern develops; the foliage is usually a handsome bluish green and selections have been made that have a stunning silver-gray coloration; the fruit are initially blue-green ripening to a reddish brown over the course of two years on mature trees. C Alligator Juniper is a native of Northern Mexico and the Southwestern U.S., including high elevations in West Texas; trees show good heat and drought tolerance, but may languish in high humidity climates and are generally slow growers; avoid poorly drained soils were trees are prone to develop root rots; this species is useful in at least USDA zones 6 to 9; the specific epithet honors the 19th century German plant collector Ferdinand Deppe; this species is reported to be a popular landscape tree in Australia. Juniperus flaccida D. von Schlechtendal Weeping Juniper (Juniperus gracilis, Sabina flaccida) C This species is also known as Cedro, Drooping Cedar, Drooping Juniper, Mexican Drooping Juniper, Tascate, or Weeping Cedar; although more common in Northern Mexico, this is a rare species found only in the Chisos Mountains in Texas; trees typically mature at 25N to 30N tall in landscapes, but can potentially reach 55N tall under the best of conditions; the weeping branchlets give this species its common name and are the source of the specific epithet which means flaccid, weak or feeble; trees develop irregular spreading rounded crowns; seeds are black at maturity. -
New Natural Products Isolated from One-Seeded Juniperus of the Southwestern United States: Isolation and Occurrence of 2-Ethenyl-3-Methyl Phenol and Its Derivatives
J. Essent. Oil Res.,Adams 19, 146–152 et al. (March/April 2007) New Natural Products Isolated from One-Seeded Juniperus of the Southwestern United States: Isolation and Occurrence of 2-Ethenyl-3-Methyl Phenol and Its Derivatives Robert P. Adams* Biology Department, Baylor University, Box 727, Gruver, TX, 79040, USA Philip S. Beauchamp, Vasu Dev and Stephen M. Dutz Department of Chemistry, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, CA, 91768, USA Abstract Re-examination of the leaf essential oils of the one-seeded, serrate leaf junipers of the Southwestern United States and northern Mexico, by GC, GC/MS and NMR, has yielded 2-ethenyl-3-methyl phenol (coahuilensol), 2-ethenyl- 3-methyl anisole (coahuilensol, methyl ether), and 2-(1’-acetoxyethyl)-3-methyl anisole (pinchotene acetate) as new natural products. A survey of Juniperus oils revealed that these compounds were found in: three serrate leaf junipers (J. angosturana, two varieties of J. coahuilensis, and J. pinchotii). Coahuilensol was also found in the oils of two smooth leaf junipers of the western hemisphere (J. virginiana var. virginiana and J. v. var. silicicola); three multiple seeded, smooth leaf junipers of the eastern hemisphere (J. semiglobosa, J. semiglobosa var. talassica, and J. thurifera). The phenolic compounds were not found in section Juniperus, section Caryocedrus or in the one seeded, smooth leaf junipers of the eastern hemisphere. Coahuilensol has been previously reported as 2-(2-propenyl)-phenol (tentative). The leaf oils of J. angosturana J. coahuilensis, J. coahuilensis var. coahuilensis, J. monosperma and J. pinchotii were re-examined based on fresh oil collections and the compositions are reported. -
Dawn Goldman and Joni Ward the Lime Creek Study Site
A SURVEY OF THE VASCULAR PLANTS IN THE AREA OF LIME CREEK, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA: A UNIQUE UPLAND SONORAN DESERT ENVIRONMENT Dawn Goldman and Joni Ward Desert Botanical Garden 1201 N. Galvin Parkway Phoenix, Arizona 85008 ABSTRACT A survey of the vascular plants of the exposed late Tertiary limestone lacustrine unit and surrounding areas near Lime Creek in Tonto National Forest near Horseshoe Lake Recreation Area, Maricopa County, Arizona, was conducted from September 2003 to September 2006. The survey area comprises 1280 acres (two square miles) of Upland Sonoran Desert environment with washes and riparian habitats. We identified 254 native species and 17 introduced species from 199 genera and 68 families. This flora is unique in that it includes some species indicative of semidesert grasslands and interior chaparral that are presumed to be relicts of a Miocene pine-oak-juniper woodland (Juniperus coahuilensis, Rhus ovata); others that are endemics to this soil type (Lotus mearnsii var. equisolensis, Purshia ×subintegra); and finally species that are disjuncts from both higher elevations and other deserts (Eriogonum ripleyi, Lesquerella cinerea, Packera neomexicana, Polygala rusbyi, Polygala macradenia, Polygala scoparioides, Thamnosma texanum). Here we also report on two more disjunct species, Agave chrysantha and Parthenium incanum. In addition, the Lime Creek area flora includes one federally listed endangered species, Purshia ×subintegra, and two rare species of concern, Eriogonum ripleyi and Lotus mearnsii var. equisolensis, occur in the survey area. INTRODUCTION The Lime Creek study site (LCSS) is an area of limestone rocks degraded to various degrees that were originally formed in the Tertiary geologic period as deposits in a small lake. -
Identification Key to the Cypress Family (Cupressaceae)1
Feddes Repertorium 116 (2005) 1–2, 96–146 DOI: 10.1002/fedr.200411062 Weinheim, Mai 2005 Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Lehrstuhl für Spezielle Botanik, Bochum C. SCHULZ; P. KNOPF & TH. STÜTZEL Identification key to the Cypress family (Cupressaceae)1 With 11 Figures Summary Zusammenfassung The identification of Cupressaceae taxa, except for Bestimmungsschlüssel für die Familie der Cup- some local and easily distinguishable taxa, is diffi- ressaceae cult even for specialists. One reason for this is the lack of a complete key including all Cupressaceae Die Bestimmung von Cupressaceae-Taxa ist mit taxa, another reason is that diagnoses and descrip- Ausnahme einiger lokaler und leicht bestimmbarer tions are spread over several hundred publications Taxa schwierig, selbst für Spezialisten. Ein Grund, which are sometimes difficult to access. Based on warum es noch keinen vollständigen Bestimmungs- morphological studies of about 3/4 of the species and schlüssel mit allen Cupressaceae-Taxa gibt ist, dass a careful compilation of the most important descrip- die Sippen-Beschreibungen sich auf mehrere hundert tions of Cupressaceae, a first identification key for Publikationen verteilen, welche teilweise schwierig the entire Cypress family (Cupressaceae) could be zu beschaffen sind. Etwa 3/4 der Cupressaceae-Ar- set up. The key comprises any of the 30 genera, 134 ten wurden morphologisch untersucht und die wich- species, 7 subspecies, 38 varieties, one form and thus tigsten Beschreibungen zusammengefasst, daraus all 180 taxa recognized by FARJON (2001). The key wurde dann der erste vollständige Bestimmungs- uses mainly features of adult leaves, female cones schlüssel für Cupressaceae erstellt. Der Bestim- and other characters which are all relatively easy to mungsschlüssel enthält 30 Gattungen, 134 Arten, be used.