DOCSLIB.ORG

Copyrighted Material

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Copyrighted Material 1 1 Introduction – A Brief History of Revolutions in the Study of Insect Biodiversity Peter H. Adler1 and Robert G. Foottit2 1 Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina, USA 2 Canadian National Collection of Insects, Arachnids, and Nematodes, Agriculture and Agri‐Food Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada John Platt (1964), in his iconic paper “Strong Hennig’s procedural framework for inferring Inference,” asked “Why should there be such relationships. The revolutions of significance rapid advances in some fields and not in in understanding biodiversity (Fig. 1.1) have, others?” The answer, he suggested, was that therefore, largely been those that enabled and “Certain systematic methods of scientific enhanced (i) the discovery process, (ii) the con­ thinking may produce much more rapid pro­ ceptual framework, and (iii) the management of gress than others.” As a corollary to Platt’s information. (1964) query, we ask “Why, within a field, should there be such rapid advances at some times and not at others?” The answer, we sug­ 1.1 ­Discovery gest, is “revolutions” – revolutions in thinking and technology. Perhaps the most revolutionary of all the devel­ In the study of life’s diversity, what were the opments that enabled the discovery of insect revolutions that brought us to a 21st‐century biodiversity was the light microscope, invented understanding of its largest component – the in the 16th century. The first microscopically insects? Some revolutions were taxon specific, viewed images of insects, a bee and a weevil, such as the linkage of diseases to vectors were published in 1630 (Stelluti 1630). Other (e.g., mosquitoes), which necessitated the need excellent early examples of microscope‐enabled to discover and understand species. Others illustrations of insects, such as ants, fleas, flies, included all insect taxa, such as the develop­ and even a fold‐out centerfold of a louse, were ment of light microscopy.COPYRIGHTED Some were small, featured MATERIAL in Robert Hooke’s 1665 publication, such as the invention of the Malaise trap. Some Micrographia (Neri 2011). Improvements in were mighty, such as the molecular revolution. magnification and resolution over the next two As discovery revealed an ever‐increasing wealth centuries ensured that the microscope would of biodiversity, patterns began to emerge. The continue as the primary enabler of insect biodi­ organization and explanation of these pat­ versity research. By the time light microscopy terns received quantum boosts from Carolus had achieved its theoretical limit of resolution Linnaeus’s systems of classification and nomen­ in the late 1800s, the study of insects and their clature, Charles Darwin’s natural explanation diversity had become a well‐established enter­ for species and their relationships, and Willi prise, although still largely descriptive in nature. Insect Biodiversity: Science and Society, Volume II, First Edition. Edited by Robert G. Foottit and Peter H. Adler. © 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Published 2018 by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. c01.indd 1 3/22/2018 3:58:02 PM 2 Insect Biodiversity: Science and Society 1590 Light microscope is invented 1840s: “At the end of the abdomen are placed 1600 the anal appendages, an examination of which is First microscopically viewed imperative for the correct discrimination of 1630 insects are illustrated species. Already, in 1842, Rambur had become 1635 France's Muséum National d'Historie Naturelle fully alive to the importance of these charac­ becomes first modern museum ters…” (McLachlan 1874, p. 6). As genitalia were 1660 analyzed for each group, the number of species increased. For example, the number of spe­ First dichotomous identification key is produced 1689 cies of black flies (Simuliidae) described from 1700 Linnaeus’s “backyard” (Fennoscandia) doubled 1720 in 1911, the year genitalia were introduced as Réné Réaumur publishes natural history taxonomic characters for the family (Lundström 1734 monographs on insect species 1911). And following the introduction of geni­ Linnaeus's Systema Naturae 10th edition talic characters for leafhoppers (Cicadellidae) in 1758 establishes beginning of modern zoological nomenclature 1922 (DeLong 1922), the discovery of new spe­ 1780 cies surged. Thomas Say publishes first With the microscope came the development comprehensive taxonomic treatment 1800 of insects in the New World of new preparation and preservation techniques (Bracegirdle 1998). Glass microscope slides, ini­ Insect genitalia are introduced as 1824 taxonomic characters tially with coverslips of mica, became dominant 1840 Chromosomes are discovered in the 1800s, and by the 20th century, coverslips Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species of glass with standardized thickness became the 1859 is published arrangement routinely used today. The early US Taxonomic value of non-morphological federal entomologist Theodore Pergande was 1880 characters (e.g., sound production) recognized Glass microscope slides with Canada balsam using microscope slides with Canada balsam to and glass coverslips are used for insects preserve and study aphids as early as the 1870s Figure 1.1 Selected highlights in the insect biodiversity (Miller and Foottit 2017). The early choice of time line. Canada balsam, a natural product from the bal­ sam fir (Abies balsamea), as a mounting medium has ensured that slides prepared more than 100 years ago are still interpretable today. Additional developments in microscopy, includ­ When human interests collide with insects, ing those used routinely by researchers, such as science progresses. Threats to food, fiber, phase‐contrast microscopy (invented in the health, and shelter have led to dramatic leaps in early 1930s) and scanning electron microscopy discovering and understanding insect biodiver­ (first commercially available in the 1960s), sity. In the early 1800s, Rafinesque described 36 improved the ability to interpret, although species of aphids, prompted by his recognition rarely to discover, structural characters. The that these tiny insects are often deleterious light microscope, however, remains the most to their host plants (Miller and Foottit 2017). fundamental tool in insect biodiversity research. Thaddeus Harris’s splendid 1841 book and sub­ The microscope enabled an explosion of dis­ sequent expanded editions provided the vade coveries of new species and new characters that mecum for dealing with the scourges of agri­ permitted refinements in classification and culturally important insects and a foundation identification. The study of insect genitalia, for for future biodiversity exploration. In Harris’s instance, would not have been possible before (1841) words, “Some knowledge of the classifi­ the microscope. The scientific value of insect cation of insects … seems to be necessary to the genitalia was well understood by the early farmer, to allow him to distinguish his friends c01.indd 2 3/22/2018 3:58:02 PM 1 Introduction 3 from his enemies of the insect race.” The Édouard-Gérard Balbiani discovers 1881 polytene chromosomes ­agricultural ravages of Lygus, for example, even­ 1883 Charles V. Riley suggests the existence of tually demanded deeper understanding of the what became known as cryptic species pests and helped to launch the career of noted 1893 Concept of type specimens is formalized mirid specialist Harry Knight (1917), who went 1897 Ronald Ross links malaria to mosquitoes on to describe 1345 species of plant bugs 1900 Berlese funnel is invented (Schuh 1995). 1905 Thomas H. Morgan initiates insect The year 1897 brought about a revolutionary genetic studies with Drosophila 1911 improvement to human health and ensured that Charles P. Alexander describes the first mosquitoes would become one of the taxonom­ of more than 10,000 crane fly species ically best‐known groups of insects on the 1920 planet. That was the year Ronald Ross (1897) Frits Zernike invents phase-contrast found malarial parasites in the gut of a “dappled‐ 1930 microscopy winged mosquito” (Anopheles sp.). As the focus 1934 Malaise trap is invented on vectors intensified, taxonomists bore down Ernst Mayr introduces the on the question of species and their differential 1942 biological species concept vectorial competency. Complexes of cryptic First edition of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature is published species eventually were revealed (Coluzzi et al. 1950 2002). The genera with the most notorious vec­ Scanning electron microscopes become commercially available tors, Aedes and Anopheles, became some of the English-language version of Willi Hennig’s taxonomically best‐known mosquitoes. At least 1961 Phylogenetic Systematics is published Electronic databases, keys and computer- 75 species of Anopheles are now known to trans­ 1966 based analyses introduced mit malarial agents to humans (Foster and 1970 Electrophoresis-based taxonomy of insects Walker 2009). At a finer scale, the Anopheles becomes widely used gambiae complex includes the most efficient 1977 Fred Sanger introduces the chain-termination method for DNA sequencing 1982 malarial vectors. From genes to organisms, this Terry Erwin’s fogging of tropical canopy 1983 species complex ranks among the most taxo­ suggests 30 million insect species nomically well‐studied groups of insects. The Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) developed inevitable conclusion is that the degree of taxo­ by biochemist Kary Mullis nomic activity and sophistication is correlated Genome sequenced for Drosophila melanogaster with
Load more

Recommended publications
  • New Species Described from Photographs: Yes? No? Sometimes? a Fierce Debate and a New Declaration of the ICZN
    Copyedited by: OUP Insect Systematics and Diversity, 1(1), 2017, 3–19 doi: 10.1093/isd/ixx004 Taxonomy Forum New Species Described From Photographs: Yes? No? Sometimes? A Fierce Debate and a New Declaration of the ICZN Frank-Thorsten Krell,1,3 and Stephen A. Marshall2 Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/isd/article-abstract/1/1/3/4563770 by guest on 11 November 2019 1Department of Zoology, Denver Museum of Nature & Science, 2001 Colorado Blvd, Denver, CO 80205-5798, 2Department of Environmental Biology, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON H1G 2W1, Canada, and 3Corresponding author, e-mail: frank.krell@dmns. org Subject Editor: István Mikó Received 25 May 2017; Editorial decision 17 August 2017 Abstract The option of describing new taxa using photographs as proxies for lost or escaped (‘unpreserved’) type specimens has been rarely used but is now undergoing renewed scrutiny as taxonomists are increasingly equipped to capture descriptive information prior to capturing and preserving type specimens. We here provide a historical perspective on this practice from both nomenclatural and practical points of view, culminating in a summary and discussion of a new Declaration of the International Commission of Zoological Nomenclature containing recommendations about descriptions without preserved specimens. We conclude that although descriptions using photographs as proxy types are Code-compliant and occasionally justified, the conditions under which such descriptions are justified are likely to remain relatively rare. Increasing restrictions on specimen collecting, which we deplore because of the centrality of collecting and collections to all of biodiversity science, could lead to more ‘proxy type’ descriptions in those taxa in which photographs can provide sufficient information for descriptions, but we predict that such cases will remain infrequent exceptions.
    [Show full text]
  • Multi-National Conservation of Alligator Lizards
    MULTI-NATIONAL CONSERVATION OF ALLIGATOR LIZARDS: APPLIED SOCIOECOLOGICAL LESSONS FROM A FLAGSHIP GROUP by ADAM G. CLAUSE (Under the Direction of John Maerz) ABSTRACT The Anthropocene is defined by unprecedented human influence on the biosphere. Integrative conservation recognizes this inextricable coupling of human and natural systems, and mobilizes multiple epistemologies to seek equitable, enduring solutions to complex socioecological issues. Although a central motivation of global conservation practice is to protect at-risk species, such organisms may be the subject of competing social perspectives that can impede robust interventions. Furthermore, imperiled species are often chronically understudied, which prevents the immediate application of data-driven quantitative modeling approaches in conservation decision making. Instead, real-world management goals are regularly prioritized on the basis of expert opinion. Here, I explore how an organismal natural history perspective, when grounded in a critique of established human judgements, can help resolve socioecological conflicts and contextualize perceived threats related to threatened species conservation and policy development. To achieve this, I leverage a multi-national system anchored by a diverse, enigmatic, and often endangered New World clade: alligator lizards. Using a threat analysis and status assessment, I show that one recent petition to list a California alligator lizard, Elgaria panamintina, under the US Endangered Species Act often contradicts the best available science.
    [Show full text]
  • A Protocol for Online Documentation of Spider Biodiversity Inventories Applied to a Mexican Tropical Wet Forest (Araneae, Araneomorphae)
    Zootaxa 4722 (3): 241–269 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) https://www.mapress.com/j/zt/ Article ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2020 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4722.3.2 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:6AC6E70B-6E6A-4D46-9C8A-2260B929E471 A protocol for online documentation of spider biodiversity inventories applied to a Mexican tropical wet forest (Araneae, Araneomorphae) FERNANDO ÁLVAREZ-PADILLA1, 2, M. ANTONIO GALÁN-SÁNCHEZ1 & F. JAVIER SALGUEIRO- SEPÚLVEDA1 1Laboratorio de Aracnología, Facultad de Ciencias, Departamento de Biología Comparada, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Circuito Exterior s/n, Colonia Copilco el Bajo. C. P. 04510. Del. Coyoacán, Ciudad de México, México. E-mail: fap@ciencias.unam.mx 2Corresponding author Abstract Spider community inventories have relatively well-established standardized collecting protocols. Such protocols set rules for the orderly acquisition of samples to estimate community parameters and to establish comparisons between areas. These methods have been tested worldwide, providing useful data for inventory planning and optimal sampling allocation efforts. The taxonomic counterpart of biodiversity inventories has received considerably less attention. Species lists and their relative abundances are the only link between the community parameters resulting from a biotic inventory and the biology of the species that live there. However, this connection is lost or speculative at best for species only partially identified (e. g., to genus but not to species). This link is particularly important for diverse tropical regions were many taxa are undescribed or little known such as spiders. One approach to this problem has been the development of biodiversity inventory websites that document the morphology of the species with digital images organized as standard views.
    [Show full text]
  • The Life and Travels of John Bartram (1699-1777), „His Majesty´S Botanist for North America“, and His Sons Isaac, Moses and William
    The Life and Travels of John Bartram (1699-1777), „His Majesty´s Botanist for North America“, and his Sons Isaac, Moses and William Holger Goetzendorff, Pulheim (Alemania) holger@goetzendorff.de John Bartram, a Quaker, came from Derbyshire, England and settled 1681 in America. He had established himself as one of the leaders of the new community of Darby Creek near Philadelphia. He had five children among them William who was the father of the future botanist John. John Bartram John received the average education in a Quaker school. By the time he reached twelve years, his interest developed to ‚Physick ‛ and surgery and later to ‚Botanicks ‛. In 1709 his father William moved to Carolina. There was a lot of trouble between the indians and the white settlers, some of their land had been purchased, but much had simply been taken. 22.9.1711: Indians attacked the area and William was killed. His second wife and the children were taken prisoners for half a year. John Bartram and Mary Maris were maried 1722. Their son Isaac was born in 1724. She died five years later in 1727. 1728 John Bartram purchased land at Kingsessing near Philadelphia. One year later John Bartram and his second wife Ann Mendenhall were married. Residence of John Bartram, built in 1730 John built a house on his farm which is still standing today. The farm behind the house was accompanied by a large garden and one of the first botanical gardens in America. He bought a lot of land round the farm and in Philadelphia where he built houses.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Say and Thoreau’S Entomology
    THOMAS SAY AND THOREAU’S ENTOMOLOGY “Entomology extends the limits of being in a new direction, so that I walk in nature with a sense of greater space and freedom. It suggests besides, that the universe is not rough-hewn, but perfect in its details. Nature will bear the closest inspection; she invites us to lay our eye level with the smallest leaf, and take an insect view of its plain. She has no interstices; every part is full of life. I explore, too, with pleasure, the sources of the myriad sounds which crowd the summer noon, and which seem the very grain and stuff of which eternity is made. Who does not remember the shrill roll-call of the harvest fly? ANACREON There were ears for these sounds in Greece long ago, as Anacreon’s ode will show” — Henry Thoreau “Natural History of Massachusetts” July 1842 issue of The Dial1 “There is as much to be discovered and to astonish in magnifying an insect as a star.” — Dr. Thaddeus William Harris 1. Franklin Benjamin Sanborn reported that “one of Harvard College’s natural historians” (we may presume this to have been Dr. Thaddeus William Harris, Thoreau’s teacher in natural science in his senior year) had remarked to Bronson Alcott that “if Emerson had not spoiled him, Thoreau would have made a good entomologist.” HDT WHAT? INDEX THOMAS SAY AND THOREAU’S ENTOMOLOGY “NARRATIVE HISTORY” AMOUNTS TO FABULATION, THE REAL STUFF BEING MERE CHRONOLOGY “Stack of the Artist of Kouroo” Project Thomas Say and Thoreau’s Entomology HDT WHAT? INDEX THOMAS SAY AND THOREAU’S ENTOMOLOGY 1690 8mo 5-31: Friend William Say and Friend Mary Guest (daughter of the widow Guest) posted their bans and became a married couple in the Burlington, New Jersey monthly meeting of the Religious Society of Friends, across the river from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    PDF file from Evenhuis, N.L. & D.J. Greathead, 1999, World Catalog of Bee Flies (Diptera: Bombyliidae). Backhuys Publishers, Leiden. xlviii + ix 756 pp. INTRODUCTION Bombyliids, or bee flies as they are commonly called, comprise a diverse and speciose assemblage of brachycerous flies. With more than 4,500 species known worldwide, they are one of the largest families of Diptera, surpassed in numbers of species only by the Tipulidae (14,000), Tachinidae (9,200), Syrphidae (5,800), Asilidae (5,600), Ceratopogonidae (5,300), and Dolichopodidae (5,100). They occur in a variety of habitats and ecosystems (from ca. 10 km from the Arctic Ocean in Canada through all latitudes as far south as Tierra del Fuego; and at altitudes from over 3500 m in the Himalayas to 200 m below sea level at the shores of the Dead Sea). They are found on all continents except Antarctica and also many oceanic islands. The family has a remarkable range in size (from some Exoprosopa with wingspans of more than 60 mm to the tiny Apolysis that can be as small as 1.5 mm in length) and variety of shapes (e.g., Systropus mimicking ammophiline wasps; Bombomyia mimic- king bumblebees). The adults of the larger species are powerful and agile fliers, rivaling the syrphid flies in their ability to hover and move in all directions while in flight. With many species possessing colorful patterns of stripes and spots on the wings and bodies, bee flies are often some of the most striking in appearance of all the Diptera. Individuals can often be seen either resting in the open on trails or on rocks or twigs sunning themselves, or feeding on a variety of flowering plants.
    [Show full text]
  • Science at Engineer Cantonment [Part 5] Hugh H
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Mammalogy Papers: University of Nebraska State Museum, University of Nebraska State Museum Spring 2018 Science at Engineer Cantonment [Part 5] Hugh H. Genoways University of Nebraska - Lincoln, h.h.genoways@gmail.com Brett .C Ratcliffe University of Nebraska - Lincoln, bratcliffe1@unl.edu Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/museummammalogy Genoways, Hugh H. and Ratcliffe, Brett .,C "Science at Engineer Cantonment [Part 5]" (2018). Mammalogy Papers: University of Nebraska State Museum. 279. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/museummammalogy/279 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Museum, University of Nebraska State at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Mammalogy Papers: University of Nebraska State Museum by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Part 5 Science at Engineer Cantonment HUGH H. GENOWAYS AND BRETT C. RATCLIFFE Introduction ong’s Expedition was the first party with trained scientists to explore the American LWest in the name of the United States government.1 Historians have not been particularly kind to the expedition. William Goetzmann described the party as “A curious cavalcade of disgruntled career officers, eccentric scientists, and artist-playboys, . .”2 Hiram Chittenden believed that the expedition of 1819 had failed, and that “a small side show was organized for the season of 1820 in the form of an expedition to the Rocky Mountains.”3 On the other hand, biologists have had a much more positive view of the expedition’s results.4 However, biologists have concentrated their interest, not surprisingly, on the summer expedition, because members of the party were Many new taxa of plants and animals were the first to study and collect in the foothills of the discovered in the vicinity of the cantonment.
    [Show full text]
  • A Commentary on the Practice of Using the So-Called Typeless Species
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 693: 129–139 (2017)A commentary on the practice of using the so-called typeless species 129 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.693.10945 SHORT COMMUNICATION http://zookeys.pensoft.net Launched to accelerate biodiversity research A commentary on the practice of using the so-called typeless species Anatoly I. Shatalkin1, Tatiana V. Galinskaya2 1 Zoological Museum, Lomonosov Moscow State University, 6 Bol’shaya Nikitskaya St., Moscow, 125009, Russia 2 Lomonosov Moscow State University, Biological faculty, Entomology department, Leninskie gory 1-12, Moscow, 119234, Russia Corresponding author: Tatiana V. Galinskaya (nuha1313@gmail.com) Academic editor: A. Minelli | Received 27 October 2016 | Accepted 2 March 2017 | Published 23 August 2017 http://zoobank.org/AAD7E722-4775-43D2-94F0-209C3A75B74F Citation: Shatalkin AI, Galinskaya TV (2017) A commentary on the practice of using the so-called typeless species. ZooKeys 693: 129–139. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.693.10945 Abstract The fears expressed by Santos et al. (2016) that description of typeless species (new species described based on field photographs) can be fatal for the practice of taxonomy which will succumb to an uncontrollable stream of “species of questionable delimitation” are, in our opinion, exaggerated. The Code already pro- tects taxonomic practice from subjectivity quite well by limiting opportunities for descriptions of new spe- cies based on field photos by rigid requirements, and only skilled taxonomists with extensive knowledge of a group are capable of fulfilling them. If a taxonomist has omitted to compare the new typeless species with the known species externally similar to it, the latter cannot be diagnosed and its name in that case becomes nomen nudum.
    [Show full text]
  • Colorado Field Ornithologists
    N0.7 WINTER 1970 the Colorado Field Ornithologist SPECIAL ISSUE JOINT MEETING COLORADO FIELD ORNITHOLOGISTS 8th Annual Meeting COOPER ORNITHOLOGICAL SOCIETY 41 st 'Annual Meeting WILSON ORNITHOLOGICAL SOCIETY 51 st Annual Meeting FORT COLLINS, COLORADO June 18 - 21, 1970 WINTER, 1970 No, 7 IN THIS ISSUE: Page ORNITHOLOGY AND GEOGRAPHY IN COLORADO George R. Shier • 1 SUMMER BIRD-FINDING IN COLORADO Donald M. Thatcher 5 BIRD CLUBS IN COLORADO David W, Lupton • 11 THE FOUNDERS OF COLORADO ORNITHOLOGY Thomps.on G. Marsh • 16 COLORADO TYPE BIRD LOCALITIES Harold R. Holt 18 SURVEY OF COLLECTIONS OF BIRDS IN COLORADO Donald W. Janes •.•.• 23 RESEARCH THROUGH BIRD BANDING IN COLORADO Allegra Collister • • • • • 26 The Colorado Field Ornithologist is a semiannual journal devoted to the field study of birds in Colorado. Articl~s and notes of scientific or general interest, and reports of unusual observations are solicited, Send manu­ scripts, with photos and drawings, to D. W. Lupton, Editor, Serials Section, Colorado State University Libraries, Fort Collins, Colorado 80521. Membership and subscription fees: Full member $3.00; Library subscription fees $1.50. Submit payments to Robbie Elliott, Executive Secretary , The Colorado Field Ornithologist, 220-3lst Street, Boulder, Colorado 80303. Request for exchange or for back numbers should be addressed to the Editor. All exchange publications should likewise be sent to the Editor's address. I WINTER, 1970 No. 7 ORNITHOLOGY AND GEOGRAPHY IN COLORADO George R. Shier Golden, Colorado Colorado is divided into many climatic and geographic provinces. In this brief article only a few representative locations can be mentioned. The northeast holds the rich irrigated South Platte Valley.
    [Show full text]
  • Engineer Cantonment, Missouri Territory, 1819-1820: America's First Biodiversity Ineventory
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Great Plains Research: A Journal of Natural and Social Sciences Great Plains Studies, Center for 2008 Engineer Cantonment, Missouri Territory, 1819-1820: America's First Biodiversity Ineventory Hugh H. Genoways University of Nebraska - Lincoln, h.h.genoways@gmail.com Brett C. Ratcliffe University of Nebraska - Lincoln, bratcliffe1@unl.edu Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/greatplainsresearch Part of the Other International and Area Studies Commons, Plant Sciences Commons, and the Zoology Commons Genoways, Hugh H. and Ratcliffe, Brett C., "Engineer Cantonment, Missouri Territory, 1819-1820: America's First Biodiversity Ineventory" (2008). Great Plains Research: A Journal of Natural and Social Sciences. 927. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/greatplainsresearch/927 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Great Plains Studies, Center for at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Plains Research: A Journal of Natural and Social Sciences by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Great Plains Research 18 (Spring 2008):3-31 © 2008 Copyright by the Center for Great Plains Studies, University of Nebraska-Lincoln ENGINEER CANTONMENT, MISSOURI TERRITORY, 1819-1820: AMERICA'S FIRST BIODIVERSITY INVENTORY Hugh H. Genoways and Brett C. Ratcliffe Systematic Research Collections University o/Nebraska State Museum Lincoln, NE 68588-0514 hgenoways1@unl.edu and bratcliffe1@unl.edu ABSTRACT-It is our thesis that members of the Stephen Long Expedition of 1819-20 completed the first biodiversity inventory undertaken in the United States at their winter quarters, Engineer Cantonment, Mis­ souri Territory, in the modern state of Nebraska.
    [Show full text]
  • Biblioqraphy & Natural History
    BIBLIOQRAPHY & NATURAL HISTORY Essays presented at a Conference convened in June 1964 by Thomas R. Buckman Lawrence, Kansas 1966 University of Kansas Libraries University of Kansas Publications Library Series, 27 Copyright 1966 by the University of Kansas Libraries Library of Congress Catalog Card number: 66-64215 Printed in Lawrence, Kansas, U.S.A., by the University of Kansas Printing Service. Introduction The purpose of this group of essays and formal papers is to focus attention on some aspects of bibliography in the service of natural history, and possibly to stimulate further studies which may be of mutual usefulness to biologists and historians of science, and also to librarians and museum curators. Bibli• ography is interpreted rather broadly to include botanical illustration. Further, the intent and style of the contributions reflects the occasion—a meeting of bookmen, scientists and scholars assembled not only to discuss specific examples of the uses of books and manuscripts in the natural sciences, but also to consider some other related matters in a spirit of wit and congeniality. Thus we hope in this volume, as in the conference itself, both to inform and to please. When Edwin Wolf, 2nd, Librarian of the Library Company of Phila• delphia, and then Chairman of the Rare Books Section of the Association of College and Research Libraries, asked me to plan the Section's program for its session in Lawrence, June 25-27, 1964, we agreed immediately on a theme. With few exceptions, we noted, the bibliography of natural history has received little attention in this country, and yet it is indispensable to many biologists and to historians of the natural sciences.
    [Show full text]
  • Peter Dances Books 1
    DELIGHTS FOR THE EYES AND THE MIND A brief survey of conchological books by S. Peter Dance Many years ago virtually every English town of any size supported at least one or two second-hand book- shops. It was still possible to find wonderful things lying neglected on their dusty shelves or on their even dustier floors. Such shops had an irresistible allure for the impecunious youth with a liking for natural history books that I was then. How well I remember the day when I wandered around one of these magical caves and carried off, for the princely sum of two shillings and sixpence, my first shell book, a copy of Jacques Philippe Raymond Draparnaud's Histoire Naturelle des Mollusques terrestres et fluviatiles de la France. Published in 1805 but still in pristine condition, written by a pioneer of European conchology, containing engraved plates of shells, it had been delicately annotated in pencil by a former owner, Sylvanus Hanley. The most exotic purchase I had ever made, I sensed then that it was an almost perfect acquisition for the dedicated collector of such things, for it was old and in fine condition, was illustrated (albeit not in colour), contained interesting annotations by a former owner who had himself acquired a degree of fame in the conchological world, and was a bargain at the price. Half a century later I know that it will be very difficult to repeat so satisfying a transaction for so small an outlay but interesting items will still come onto the market to tempt discerning purchasers.
    [Show full text]