DOCSLIB.ORG

Endemic Flora and Fauna of Arkansas Henry W

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Endemic Flora and Fauna of Arkansas Henry W Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science Volume 36 Article 17 1982 Endemic Flora and Fauna of Arkansas Henry W. Robison Southern Arkansas University Kenneth L. Smith Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas Part of the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Recommended Citation Robison, Henry W. and Smith, Kenneth L. (1982) "Endemic Flora and Fauna of Arkansas," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 36 , Article 17. Available at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol36/iss1/17 This article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able to read, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 36 [1982], Art. 17 THE ENDEMIC FLORA AND FAUNA OF ARKANSAS HENRY W. ROBISON Department of Biological Sciences Southern Arkansas University Magnolia, Arkansas 71753 KENNETH L.SMITH Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission Suite 500, Continental Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 ABSTRACT Arkansas has an amazing diversity of plants and animals contained within its political boundaries. Forty-seven taxa are reported as Arkansas endemics, including seven plants, thirteen crustaceans (two amphipods, three isopods, eight crayfishes), nine insects (one mayfly, one caddisfly, three stoneflies, four beetles), ten snails, six fishes, and two salamanders. INTRODUCTION ANNOTATED LIST OF ARKANSAS' ENDEMIC FLORA ANDFAUNA Arkansas has been richly blessed withan amazing diversity ofplant and animal life. Primarily responsible for this rich diversity are the varied The following annotated listis provided with the names ofthe endemic physiography and topography within the state, a sufficiently long forms, type localities, date oforiginal collection, collector, and museum geological history of favorable climates and habitats, and the fact that number ofholotype, when known, as well as distribution and habitat. Arkansas was not affected greatly by Pleistocene glaciation. To save space the original literature reference for each taxon is given Contained within the diversity of Arkansas' —biological forms is an and combined with the name ofthe describer. The complete citation element identifiable as the "endemic" portion those life forms con- is provided in the "Literature Cited" section of the paper. fined to a particular geographic region or area. For example, the Interior Highlands region has long been recognized as an area of endemism for both plants and animals. Possibly 100-150 species may I. PLANTS be endemic to this region of the Central United States. For practical purposes, the politicalboundaries of Arkansas have been delineated Class Angiospermae - Flowering Plants as the "endemic area" to be considered. A first effort at providing a Order Campanulales list of state endemic forms was given by the Arkansas Department of Family Asteraceae - Sunflower Family Planning (1974) listingnine endemic species (four plants, four fishes, and one salamander). In this paper we list 47 taxa as endemic to 1. Helenium campestre Small (1903). Asneezeweed. The type Arkansas, including seven plants, 13 crustaceans (two amphipods, three locality is in low ground near Little Rock, Pulaski County. isopods, eight crayfishes), nine insects (one mayfly, one caddisfly, three Ithas been found in prairies and roadsides in several central stoneflies, four beetles), 10 snails, six fishes, and two salamanders. Such and eastern counties (Smith, 1978). endemic forms play a vitalrole in our state's natural heritage as they represent those biologicalentities whose entire populations have been fortuitously delineated withinour state's politicalboundaries. This paper Order Fagales is presented to: 1)serve as a first compilation ofall of those fauna and Family Fagaceae - Beech Family flora deemed endemic to Arkansas, 2) provide literature references to the original descriptions ofsuch biota, 3) indicate geographic distribu- 2. Quercus shumurclii Buckl. var. acerifolia Palmer (1927). tions of each form within the state, and 4) report general habitat Maple-leaved Oak. Known only from the type locality along occupied. rocky bluffs where it grows as an arborescent shrub on the It is hoped that exposure ofthese life forms as state endemics may north side of Magazine Mountain, Logan County (Palmer, have a positive effect in stimulating future research on them as we 1942). presently know little about these state treasures, and concomitantly, tomake persons aware ofthe special importance these organisms have Order Graminales - as part of our state's natural heritage. Family Cyperaceae Sedge Family This list of endemic species is certain to change in years to come as several species are known from areas near state boundaries. Further, 3. Carex bicknellii var. opaca F. J. Hermann (1972). The type as intensive collecting continues this list willgradually increase. Final- locality is Prairie County; river terraces (never plowed), rice ly,various undescribed species inhabitingArkansas may eventually prove region. The type specimen was collected on 10 May 1969 by to be endemic to the state. Delzie Demaree (60141) and deposited in the United States Because oftheir special intrinsic value to Arkansas, protection of National Museum. Itis found in unplowed river terraces and all forms endemic to the state should be urged at the earliest opportunity. low wet areas in Prairie and Lonoke counties. 52 Arkansas Academy of Science Proceedings, Vol. XXXVI,1982 Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 1982 52 Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 36 [1982], Art. 17 Henry W. Robison and Kenneth L. Smith Order Ranales - Mountain Station, Polk County. The type specimens were Family Ranunculaceae Crowfoot Family collected by L. Hubricht on 26 April 1936. To date S. montanus is known only from springs on Rich Mountain. 4. Delphinium newtonianum D. M. Moore (1939). Moore's Delphinium. Moore's delphinium was originally discovered Order Isopoda - Isopods 2 mi. S. Jasper, Newton County on 4 July 1935 by D. M. Family Asellidae Moore (350074). The type specimen is deposited in the Missouri Botanical Garden. This species is restricted to the 3. Lirceus bicuspldalus Hubrichl and Mackin (1949). The type Boston Mountains in Johnson, Newton, Pope, and Searcy localityis a spring on a small stream behind the college chapel, counties (Smith, 1978). Itis usually found in lightto heavy Clarksville, Johnson County. It is found in small seeps, shade ofthe upland hardwood forest on moist, loamy clay springs, streams, and cave streams in the Ouachila and O/.ark with limestone influence (Moore, 1939). This is the only mountains in Conway, Jackson, Johnson, Logan, Newton, Delphinium inNorth America whichhas an inflorescence of Pope, Pulaski, Saline, Searcy, and Yell counties. cymose racemes. 4. Lirceus bidentatus Hubricht and Mackin (1949). This isopod is known only from the type locality, a seep in the Boston Order Rosales - Mountains, 9 mi. SW of Harrison, Boone County. Family Saxifragaceae Saxifrage Family 5. Caecidotea holtl (Fleming). Fleming (1972). This aquatic isopod is known only from the type locality,a small stream, 5. Heuchera villosa Michx. var. arkansana (Rydberg). E. B. 1.8 mi. E. of Casa, Perry County. The hololype (USNM Smith. Smith (1978). Arkansas alumroot. The original type 79308) was collected on 4 May 1940 by L. Hubrichl. locality is shady cliffsnear Springdale, Benton County. The holotype was collected on 16 August 1895 by J. W. - Blankenship and is deposited in the New York Botanical Order Decapoda Crayfishes and Shrimps Family Cambaridae Garden. It occurs in Benton, Faulkner, Newton, and Washington counties (Smith, 1978) and is confined to ledges 6. Bouchardina robisoni Hobbs (1977). This monotypic species streams rivers, of calcareous or sandy rock along upland and has its locality inLafayette County in borrow ditch usually type a inthe shade ofmixed hardwoods. Arkansas alumroot Road, Lewisville, by full species (Small along Sunray 4mi. (6.4 km) N.of off State is considered some taxonomists as a Route 29 (Sec. 14, R24W, T15S). It is known from Bayou and Rydberg, 1905; Rosendahl et al., 1936); however, Smith (1977) only variety of H. villosa, plant Bodcaw (Red River Basin) in Lafayette County and other considered it a a of Hempstead, Nevada, common in the western United States. areas and Columbia counties. 7. Cambarus causeyi Reimer (1966). The type locality is a spring Order Rubiales and natural pond 4 mi. W. of Sandgap on State Route 124 in Pope County. The holotype is USNM 116678. It inhabits Family Valerianaceae - Valerian Family complex burrows on a hillside and near the spring and pond Valerianella palmeri at the type locality. 6. Dyal (1938). A corn salad. The type Hobbs and Bedinger This locality is inMagnet Cove, Hot Spring County. It col- 8. Cambarus zophonasles (1964). was troglobiteis known only from the type locality, Hell Creek lected on 19 April 1926 by E. J. Palmer (29726) and is Cave, Stone County (Sec. 30, R10W, T15N). The holotype deposited at the Missouri
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arkansas Species Listed Under the Endangered Species Act and Pending Evaluations of Other Species
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service December 2012 Arkansas Species listed under the Endangered Species Act and Pending Evaluations of Other Species Taxonomic Species in Multi- Species Other Listed Group District Litigation in Mega- Petitioned Species and Other Candidates Petition Species Mammals - - 4 4 Birds 1 1 1 5 Fishes 1 9 1 5 Amphibians - 1 3 1 Plants - 4 - 5 Reptiles - 1 1 - Mussels/ Snails 2 8 - 14 Ouachita Madtom, by Brian Wagner/ Arkansas Game and Fish Commission Crayfish - 9 - 2 Insects - 2 2 1 Total 4 35 12 37 Note: All numbers are subject to change based on new petitions, litigation and findings. Legal actions brought under the deadlines have been set for those final Endangered Species Act have listing decisions. dramatically increased the workload of the Southeast Region of the U.S. Fish Mega-Petition Caddo Mountain Salamander, by Stan and Wildlife Service. Under the 1973 Act, The Mega-Petition is a large petition Trauth, Arkansas State University any citizen may petition the Service to list filed in 2010 by several advocacy groups species as threatened or endangered. In that requested the Service to list 404 addition, the Service’s decisions may be aquatic and aquatic-dependent species challenged in a court of law. found mostly in the Southeast. In 2011, the Service determined 374 of those Multi-District Litigation species need to be further evaluated. No and Other Candidates deadlines have been set. In 2009 and 2010, two advocacy groups filed lawsuits related to the Service’s Other Petitions missed deadlines under the Act, and The Service continues to receive other the national backlog of 251 species petitions to list species as threatened or categorized as candidates for the Federal endangered under the Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species
    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquatic Fish Report
    Aquatic Fish Report Acipenser fulvescens Lake St urgeon Class: Actinopterygii Order: Acipenseriformes Family: Acipenseridae Priority Score: 27 out of 100 Population Trend: Unknown Gobal Rank: G3G4 — Vulnerable (uncertain rank) State Rank: S2 — Imperiled in Arkansas Distribution Occurrence Records Ecoregions where the species occurs: Ozark Highlands Boston Mountains Ouachita Mountains Arkansas Valley South Central Plains Mississippi Alluvial Plain Mississippi Valley Loess Plains Acipenser fulvescens Lake Sturgeon 362 Aquatic Fish Report Ecobasins Mississippi River Alluvial Plain - Arkansas River Mississippi River Alluvial Plain - St. Francis River Mississippi River Alluvial Plain - White River Mississippi River Alluvial Plain (Lake Chicot) - Mississippi River Habitats Weight Natural Littoral: - Large Suitable Natural Pool: - Medium - Large Optimal Natural Shoal: - Medium - Large Obligate Problems Faced Threat: Biological alteration Source: Commercial harvest Threat: Biological alteration Source: Exotic species Threat: Biological alteration Source: Incidental take Threat: Habitat destruction Source: Channel alteration Threat: Hydrological alteration Source: Dam Data Gaps/Research Needs Continue to track incidental catches. Conservation Actions Importance Category Restore fish passage in dammed rivers. High Habitat Restoration/Improvement Restrict commercial harvest (Mississippi River High Population Management closed to harvest). Monitoring Strategies Monitor population distribution and abundance in large river faunal surveys in cooperation
    [Show full text]
  • Five Fish Species Proposed As Endangered
    DEPARTMENT of the INTERIOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE news release For Release December 30, 1977 Levitt 202/343-5634 FIVE FISH SPECIES PROPOSEDAS ENDANGERED Five species of fish found in North Carolina, Arkansas, and Tennessee have been proposed for the endangered list by the Interior Department’s U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, .Keith M. Schreiner, Associate Director, announced today. The proposal, published in the December 30, 1977, Federal Register, also lists critical habitat for the Waccamaw darter, Waccamaw killifish. Waccamaw silverside, Ouachita madtom, and Barrens topminnow. Interested persons have until February 28, 1978, to comment on this rulemaking. North Carolina’s Lake Waccamaw, where three of the species occur, is a shallow, mostly sandy bottomed, coastal plain lake that is spring-fed. Its clear water is in contrast to the bog-stained “black water” that is characteristic of most lakes and ponds in the area. The three species depend upon the water quality of the lake which is being threatened by a rapidly growing seasonal tourist and resident population. The area is without a modern waste disposal system, and much of the domestic waste seeps into the lake. Run-off from fertilizer applied to gardens and lawns along the developed northern lake shore creates additional problems in the lake. Excavation of drainage canals for real estate development also jeopardizes these species by increasing siltation. Herbicides used for vegetation control in canals which drain into the lake have also severely depleted fish populations. The Ouachita madtom, which is found in south-central Arkansas, is threatened by stream alteration projects and construction activities.
    [Show full text]
  • DISTRIBUTION, ECOLOGY, and REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY of the ORANGEFIN MADTOM (NOTURUS GILBERTI) by Timothy Dale Simonson
    DISTRIBUTION, ECOLOGY, AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY OF THE ORANGEFIN MADTOM (NOTURUS GILBERTI) by Timothy Dale Simonson Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences APPROVED: Richard J. Neves, Chair Dona:;[d J. Orth Johm J. Ney Louis A. Hel:frich April 1987 Blacksburg, Virginia DISTRIBUTION, ECOLOGY, AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY OF THE ORANGEFIN MADTOM (NOTURUS GILBERTI) by Timothy Dale Simonson Richard J. Neves, Chair Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences (ABSTRACT) Distribution of the orangefin madtom (Noturus gilberti) was determined from 347 sites sampled in Virginia and North Carolina. This species inhabited 264 stream kilometers, over twice the reported range, in the following systems: Craig Creek, Roanoke River, Dan River, Big Chestnut Creek, South Mayo River, Pigg River, and Smith River. The orangefin madtom was somewhat common; 33% (Dan River) to 70% (Craig Creek) of the sites sampled were occupied. Negative interspecific associates of orangefin madtoms included chubs, mountain redbelly dace, rosyside dace, crescent shiners, and crayfish; only Roanoke darters were considered positive associates. Sand and silt levels were significantly lower at sites with !L. gilberti, while per- centage of small cobble, local gradient, and depth were sig- nificantly higher. Discriminant function analysis identified large gravel, local gradient, silt, and occurrence of rosyside dace and crayfish, as significant predictors of the occurrence of the orangefin madtom. Seasonal samples from Craig Creek consisted of three age groups. The smallest individual captured was 33 mm total length (TL) and the largest was 111 mm TL.
    [Show full text]
  • Species of Greatest Conservation Need
    APPENDIX A. VIRGINIA SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED Taxa Common Scientific Name Tier Cons. Opp. Habitat Descriptive Habitat Notes Name Ranking Amphibians Barking Hyla gratiosa II a Forest Forests near or within The Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information System indicates treefrog shallow wetlands the loss suitable wetlands constitute the greatest threats to this species. DGIF recommends working to maintain or restore forested buffers surrounding occupied wetlands. These needs are consistent with action plan priorities to conserve and restore wetland habitats and associated buffers. Recently discovered populations within its known range, may indicate this species is more abundant than previously believed. An in-depth investigation into its status may warrant delisting. This species will be prioritized as Tier 2a. Amphibians Blue Ridge Desmognathus IV c Forest High elevation seeps, This species' distribution is very limited. Other than limiting dusky orestes streams, wet rock faces, logging activity in the occupied areas, no conservation salamander and riparian forests actions have been identified. Unless other threats or actions are identified, this species will be listed as Tier 4c. Amphibians Blue Ridge Eurycea III a Wetland Mountain streams and The needs of this species are consistent with priorities for two-lined wilderae adjacent riparian areas maintaining and enhancing riparian forests and aquatic salamander with mixed hardwood or habitats. This species will be listed as Tier 3a. spruce-fir forests up to 6000 feet. Amphibians Carpenter Lithobates III a Wetland Freshwater wetlands with The needs of this species are consistent with action plan frog virgatipes sphagnum moss priorities to preserve and restore aquatic and wetland habitats and water quality.
    [Show full text]
  • Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment December 2003
    Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment December 2003 Ouachita Ecoregional Assessment Team Arkansas Field Office 601 North University Ave. Little Rock, AR 72205 Oklahoma Field Office 2727 East 21st Street Tulsa, OK 74114 Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment ii 12/2003 Table of Contents Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment............................................................................................................................i Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................................................iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..............................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................3 BACKGROUND ...........................................................................................................................4 Ecoregional Boundary Delineation.............................................................................................................................................4 Geology..........................................................................................................................................................................................5 Soils................................................................................................................................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • 1994 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals
    The lUCN Species Survival Commission 1994 lUCN Red List of Threatened Animals Compiled by the World Conservation Monitoring Centre PADU - MGs COPY DO NOT REMOVE lUCN The World Conservation Union lo-^2^ 1994 lUCN Red List of Threatened Animals lUCN WORLD CONSERVATION Tile World Conservation Union species susvival commission monitoring centre WWF i Suftanate of Oman 1NYZ5 TTieWlLDUFE CONSERVATION SOCIET'' PEOPLE'S TRISr BirdLife 9h: KX ENIUNGMEDSPEaES INTERNATIONAL fdreningen Chicago Zoulog k.J SnuicTy lUCN - The World Conservation Union lUCN - The World Conservation Union brings together States, government agencies and a diverse range of non-governmental organisations in a unique world partnership: some 770 members in all, spread across 123 countries. - As a union, I UCN exists to serve its members to represent their views on the world stage and to provide them with the concepts, strategies and technical support they need to achieve their goals. Through its six Commissions, lUCN draws together over 5000 expert volunteers in project teams and action groups. A central secretariat coordinates the lUCN Programme and leads initiatives on the conservation and sustainable use of the world's biological diversity and the management of habitats and natural resources, as well as providing a range of services. The Union has helped many countries to prepare National Conservation Strategies, and demonstrates the application of its knowledge through the field projects it supervises. Operations are increasingly decentralised and are carried forward by an expanding network of regional and country offices, located principally in developing countries. I UCN - The World Conservation Union seeks above all to work with its members to achieve development that is sustainable and that provides a lasting Improvement in the quality of life for people all over the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Asellota, Asellidae)
    The Freshwater lsopods of the Genus Lirceus (Asellota, Asellidae) LESLIE HUBRICHT and J. G. MACKIN V Reprinted from "THE AMERICAN MIDLAND NATURALIST" Vol. 42, No. 2, pp. 334-349, September, 1949 Notre Dame, Ind. The Freshwater lsopods of the Genus Lirceus (Asellota, Asellidae) Leslie Hubricht 912 Main St., Danville, Virginia J. G. Mackin Texas A & M Research Foundation, Grande Isle, Louisiana In the genus Asellus we have, in the first and second pleopoda of the male, characters which can be relied upon to distinguish the species, but in Lirceus these appendages are so similar in different species that they are, with one exception, useless as a means of separation. This is not because the species of Lirceus are less distinct than Asellus, but requires that the animal as a whole be studied rather than a single appendage. To an experienced observer the various species are easily distinguished in the field by those subtile differences in form and color which are almost impossible to describe. Difficulties begin when one brings specimens into the laboratory and attempts to define the dif- ferences. The commonest cause of difficulty is depauperate specimens. Under adverse conditions the animals are stunted, the gnathopoda do not develop their processes, and the uropoda remain in juvenile form. When this depau- perization is extreme the collection cannot be determined, but must be as- sumed to belong to the species in the range of which it was found. The isopods discussed herein have, in the past, been treated under the generic name Mancasellus Harger, rather than the prior Lirceus of Rafinesque.
    [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]
  • •Not! Ptdition, X:213-230
    78 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY Carman, S. Knjyer, H. 1889. Cave Animal j from South we item Missouri. Bulle­ 1838. Gronlands Amphipoder. Kongelige danske viden* tin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, skabernes Selskabbiologiske Skrifter, 7:229-326. 17(6):225-239. Latreille, P. A. Geoffrey Saint-Hilaire, E. L. 1803. Histoire naturelle, ginirale et particuliire, des 1764. Histoire abrigie dts Insectes qui se troitvcnt aux Cruslacis et dts Insectes, 6:1-391. Paris.* environs de Paris. Pari*.* Leonard, A. B,, and L. H. Ponder Gould, A. A, 1949. Crustacea of Eastern Kansas. Transactions of the 1841. Report on the Invertebrate Animals of Massachu­ Kansas Academy of Science, 52:168-204. setts. Cambridge: Massachusetts. Levi, H. W. Gruner, H. £. 1949. Two New Species of Cave Isopods from Pennsyl­ 1965. Die Tierwelt Deutschlands. Krebstiere oder Crus­ vania. Notulae Naturae, 220:1-fi. tacea. V, Isopoda. 53. Teil, 2 Lf. Jena. Linnaeus, C. Hansen, H. J. 1758. Systema Naturae. 10th Edition, 824 pages* 1888. Oversigt over det vestlige Gronlands Fauna. Mac Lin, J. G. Videnskabelige Meddeletier jra dansk Naturhis- 1940. A Key to the Oklahoma Species of the Family torisk Forening Kjobenhacn, 1887:177-198. Asellidae. Proceedings of the Oklahoma Academy Harford, W. G. W. of Science, 20:17-18. 1877. Description of a New Genus and Three New Spe­ Mackin, J. G, and L. Hubricht cies of Sessile Eyed Crustacea. Proceedings of the 1938. Records of Distribution of Species of Isopods in California Academy of Science, 7:53-55. Central and Southern United States, with Descrip­ Harger, O. tions of Four New Species of Mancasellus and 1874.
    [Show full text]
  • Status Survey and Population Characteristics of the Paleback Darter (Etheostoma Pallididorsum) and the Caddo Madtom (Noturus Taylori)
    Title: Status survey and population characteristics of the Paleback Darter (Etheostoma pallididorsum) and the Caddo Madtom (Noturus taylori) Project Summary: This project seeks to provide updated information on the status and population characteristics of two of Arkansas’ Species of Greatest Conservation Need, the Paleback Darter and Caddo Madtom. The main objectives of this project include: (1) conducting surveys of historic localities throughout their range; (2) obtaining size-distribution (estimating age classes) data and relative abundance for both species at select locations on a seasonal basis; and (3) generating population characteristics for each species via non-lethal genetic methods (e.g. genetic variation, effective population sizes, patterns of migration). The overall objective is to provide data for both species that will inform potential listing decisions under the Endangered Species Act by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, in addition to state ranking decisions by the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission. Principle Investigator: Dr. Brook L. Fluker (Assistant Professor of Aquatic Ecology) Arkansas State University, Department of Biological Sciences Po Box 599, State University, AR 72467 Phone: (870)-972-3253 email: [email protected] Project Partners: 1. Betty Crump (Stream Ecologist) US Forest Service, Ouachita National Forest, 100 Reserve Street, Hot Springs, AR 71901 Phone: 501-321-5236 email: [email protected] 2. Mitzi Cole (Fishery Biologist) US Forest Service, Ouachita National Forest, 100 Reserve Street, Hot Springs,
    [Show full text]