Land Management Plan for Swamp Metalmark Butterfly Habitat
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Natural Communities of Michigan: Classification and Description
Natural Communities of Michigan: Classification and Description Prepared by: Michael A. Kost, Dennis A. Albert, Joshua G. Cohen, Bradford S. Slaughter, Rebecca K. Schillo, Christopher R. Weber, and Kim A. Chapman Michigan Natural Features Inventory P.O. Box 13036 Lansing, MI 48901-3036 For: Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Division and Forest, Mineral and Fire Management Division September 30, 2007 Report Number 2007-21 Version 1.2 Last Updated: July 9, 2010 Suggested Citation: Kost, M.A., D.A. Albert, J.G. Cohen, B.S. Slaughter, R.K. Schillo, C.R. Weber, and K.A. Chapman. 2007. Natural Communities of Michigan: Classification and Description. Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Report Number 2007-21, Lansing, MI. 314 pp. Copyright 2007 Michigan State University Board of Trustees. Michigan State University Extension programs and materials are open to all without regard to race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, marital status or family status. Cover photos: Top left, Dry Sand Prairie at Indian Lake, Newaygo County (M. Kost); top right, Limestone Bedrock Lakeshore, Summer Island, Delta County (J. Cohen); lower left, Muskeg, Luce County (J. Cohen); and lower right, Mesic Northern Forest as a matrix natural community, Porcupine Mountains Wilderness State Park, Ontonagon County (M. Kost). Acknowledgements We thank the Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Division and Forest, Mineral, and Fire Management Division for funding this effort to classify and describe the natural communities of Michigan. This work relied heavily on data collected by many present and former Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI) field scientists and collaborators, including members of the Michigan Natural Areas Council. -
Bibliographic Guide to the Terrestrial Arthropods of Michigan
The Great Lakes Entomologist Volume 16 Number 3 - Fall 1983 Number 3 - Fall 1983 Article 5 October 1983 Bibliographic Guide to the Terrestrial Arthropods of Michigan Mark F. O'Brien The University of Michigan Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle Part of the Entomology Commons Recommended Citation O'Brien, Mark F. 1983. "Bibliographic Guide to the Terrestrial Arthropods of Michigan," The Great Lakes Entomologist, vol 16 (3) Available at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle/vol16/iss3/5 This Peer-Review Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Biology at ValpoScholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Great Lakes Entomologist by an authorized administrator of ValpoScholar. For more information, please contact a ValpoScholar staff member at [email protected]. O'Brien: Bibliographic Guide to the Terrestrial Arthropods of Michigan 1983 THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST 87 BIBLIOGRAPHIC GUIDE TO THE TERRESTRIAL ARTHROPODS OF MICHIGAN Mark F. O'Brienl ABSTRACT Papers dealing with distribution, faunal extensions, and identification of Michigan insects and other terrestrial arthropods are listed by order, and cover the period of 1878 through 1982. The following bibliography lists the publications dealing with the distribution or identification of insects and other terrestrial arthropods occurring in the State of Michigan. Papers dealing only with biological, behavioral, or economic aspects are not included. The entries are grouped by orders, which are arranged alphabetically, rather than phylogenetic ally , to facilitate information retrieval. The intent of this paper is to provide a ready reference to works on the Michigan fauna, although some of the papers cited will be useful for other states in the Great Lakes region. -
You Can Help (PDF)
SHAPING THE LAKE HURON TO LAKE ERIE CORRIDOR’S FUTURE: YOU CAN HELP Swimming is a popular activity on beaches various citizen activities, such as It might seem like a lone individual’s efforts throughout the Lake Huron to Lake Erie wildlife monitoring and annual bird Corridor. Every summer, thousands flock counts, that help to gather important to the lakes and rivers around the region for relief from the summer heat. data for scientific research. At the same time, you will learn more about the have activities designed to monitor creatures that live in the region. and improve the health of rivers, could not affect the Lake Huron to Lake lakes and streams. • You can play a role in shaping future development in your community. • Help protect significant natural Development comes under the areas in your community by getting authority of your municipal council N O S involved with a local land N or local planning body, depending Erie Corridor’s environment, compared H conservancy or other conservation on where you live. Generally their JO N E organization. R decisions are guided by master A K • Volunteer for ecological projects in (or official) plans, policies and bylaws that are set through public processes. Students help install soil-bioengineering your area. These can include planting practices to improve coastal marsh habitat on trees, managing invasive plants, You and other citizens can have a say Grosse Ile, Michigan. with the powerful forces of nature and collecting seeds and removing litter in development decision-making by and trash from natural areas and attending public hearings and taking along waterways. -
Butterflies and Moths List
Lepidoptera of Kirchoff Family Farm Baseline Survey October 29-30, 2012 Butterflies & Moths Host Plant Species Present Date Butterflies Observed On Larval Host Plants Kirchoff FF observed Family Papilionidae (Swallowtails) Pipevine Swallowtail - Battus philenor Spiny Aster Pipevine √ Oct. 30, 2012 Family Pieridae (Whites & Sulfurs) Cloudless Sulfur - Phoebis sennae Spiny Aster Legumes, clovers, peas √ Oct. 29, 2012 Dainty Sulfur - Nathalis iole Spiny Aster Asters, other Com;posites √ Oct. 29, 2012 Little Yellow Sulfur - Eurema lisa Indian Mallow Legumes, partridge pea √ Oct. 29, 2012 Lyside Sulfur - Kirgonia lyside Spiny Aster Guayacan or Soapbush √ Oct. 29, 2012 Orange Sulfur - Colias eurytheme Spiny Aster Legumes √ Sept. 26, 2007 Family Lycaenidae (Gossamer Winged) Cassius Blue - Leptotes cassius Spiny Aster Legumes √ Oct. 30, 2012 Ceraunus Blue - Hemiargus ceraunus Kidney wood Legumes- Acacia, Mesquite √ Oct. 30, 2012 Fatal Metalmark - Calephelis nemesis Spiny Aster Baccharis, Clematis √ Oct. 29, 2012 Gray Hairstreak - Strymon melinus Frostweed, Aster Many flowering plants √ Oct. 29, 2012 Great Purple Hairstreak - Atlides halesus Spiny Aster Mistletoe (in oak/mesquite) √ Oct. 29, 2012 Marine Blue - Leptotes marina Frogfruit Legumes- Acacia, Mesquite √ Oct. 30, 2012 Family Nymphalidae (Nymphalids) American Snout - Libytheana carinenta Spiny Aster Hackberries √ Oct. 29, 2012 Bordered Patch - Chlosyne lacinia Zexmenia Ragweed, Sunflower √ Oct. 29, 2012 Common Mestra - Mestra amymone Frostweed Noseburn (Tragia spp.) X Oct. 29, 2012 Empress Leila - Asterocampa leilia Spiny Aster Spiny Hackberry √ Oct. 29, 2012 Gulf Fritillary - Agraulis vanillae Spiny Aster Passion Vine X Oct. 29, 2012 Hackberry Emperor - Asterocampa celtis spiny Hackberry Hackberries √ Oct. 29, 2012 Painted Lady - Vanessa cardui Pink Smartweed Mallows & Thistles √ Oct. 29, 2012 Pearl Crescent - Phycoides tharos Spiny Aster Asters √ Oct. -
Specimen Records for North American Lepidoptera (Insecta) in the Oregon State Arthropod Collection. Lycaenidae Leach, 1815 and Riodinidae Grote, 1895
Catalog: Oregon State Arthropod Collection 2019 Vol 3(2) Specimen records for North American Lepidoptera (Insecta) in the Oregon State Arthropod Collection. Lycaenidae Leach, 1815 and Riodinidae Grote, 1895 Jon H. Shepard Paul C. Hammond Christopher J. Marshall Oregon State Arthropod Collection, Department of Integrative Biology, Oregon State University, Corvallis OR 97331 Cite this work, including the attached dataset, as: Shepard, J. S, P. C. Hammond, C. J. Marshall. 2019. Specimen records for North American Lepidoptera (Insecta) in the Oregon State Arthropod Collection. Lycaenidae Leach, 1815 and Riodinidae Grote, 1895. Catalog: Oregon State Arthropod Collection 3(2). (beta version). http://dx.doi.org/10.5399/osu/cat_osac.3.2.4594 Introduction These records were generated using funds from the LepNet project (Seltmann) - a national effort to create digital records for North American Lepidoptera. The dataset published herein contains the label data for all North American specimens of Lycaenidae and Riodinidae residing at the Oregon State Arthropod Collection as of March 2019. A beta version of these data records will be made available on the OSAC server (http://osac.oregonstate.edu/IPT) at the time of this publication. The beta version will be replaced in the near future with an official release (version 1.0), which will be archived as a supplemental file to this paper. Methods Basic digitization protocols and metadata standards can be found in (Shepard et al. 2018). Identifications were confirmed by Jon Shepard and Paul Hammond prior to digitization. Nomenclature follows that of (Pelham 2008). Results The holdings in these two families are extensive. Combined, they make up 25,743 specimens (24,598 Lycanidae and 1145 Riodinidae). -
Guide for Constructed Wetlands
A Maintenance Guide for Constructed of the Southern WetlandsCoastal Plain Cover The constructed wetland featured on the cover was designed and photographed by Verdant Enterprises. Photographs Photographs in this books were taken by Christa Frangiamore Hayes, unless otherwise noted. Illustrations Illustrations for this publication were taken from the works of early naturalists and illustrators exploring the fauna and flora of the Southeast. Legacy of Abundance We have in our keeping a legacy of abundant, beautiful, and healthy natural communities. Human habitat often closely borders important natural wetland communities, and the way that we use these spaces—whether it’s a back yard or a public park—can reflect, celebrate, and protect nearby natural landscapes. Plant your garden to support this biologically rich region, and let native plant communities and ecologies inspire your landscape. A Maintenance Guide for Constructed of the Southern WetlandsCoastal Plain Thomas Angell Christa F. Hayes Katherine Perry 2015 Acknowledgments Our thanks to the following for their support of this wetland management guide: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (grant award #NA14NOS4190117), Georgia Department of Natural Resources (Coastal Resources and Wildlife Divisions), Coastal WildScapes, City of Midway, and Verdant Enterprises. Additionally, we would like to acknowledge The Nature Conservancy & The Orianne Society for their partnership. The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of DNR, OCRM or NOAA. We would also like to thank the following professionals for their thoughtful input and review of this manual: Terrell Chipp Scott Coleman Sonny Emmert Tom Havens Jessica Higgins John Jensen Christi Lambert Eamonn Leonard Jan McKinnon Tara Merrill Jim Renner Dirk Stevenson Theresa Thom Lucy Thomas Jacob Thompson Mayor Clemontine F. -
Little Metalmark, Calephelis Virginiensis (Guérin- Ménéville) (Insecta: Lepidoptera: Riodinidae)1 Donald W
EENY-407 Little Metalmark, Calephelis virginiensis (Guérin- Ménéville) (Insecta: Lepidoptera: Riodinidae)1 Donald W. Hall, Jerry F. Butler, and Marc Minno2 Introduction The little metalmark, Calephelis virginiensis (Guérin- Ménéville), is one of three allopatric metalmarks found in the eastern United States. Although the little metalmark is one of our tiniest butterflies, it is one of our most beautiful. It is the only metalmark found in the southeastern coastal plain. Distribution Southeastern coastal plain from southeastern Virginia to eastern Texas in uplands and marginal wetlands, sandhills, flatwoods, pine savannas, prairies, and on roadsides. Figure 1. Adult little metalmark, Calephelis virginiensis (Guérin- Description Ménéville). Adults Credits: Jerry F. Butler, UF/IFAS The wings vary in color from rusty orange to orange-brown and have metallic silver lines on the wings (Figure 1)—the characteristic from which the family gets the common name “metalmarks”. The wingspan is 12–25 mm. Eggs The flattened eggs are reddish-brown with white sculptur- ing (Figure 2). Figure 2. Egg of the little metalmark, Calephelis virginiensis (Guérin- Ménéville). Credits: Jerry F. Butler, UF/IFAS 1. This document is EENY-407, one of a series of the Entomology and Nematology Department, UF/IFAS Extension. Original publication date May 2007. Revised December 2016. Reviewed October 2019. Visit the EDIS website at https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu for the currently supported version of this publication. This document is also available on the Featured Creatures website at http://entomology.ifas.ufl.edu/creatures. 2. Donald W. Hall and Jerry F. Butler, Entomology and Nematology Department, UF/IFAS Extension, Gainesville, FL; and Marc Minno, Suwannee River Water Management District. -
Mitchell's Satyr Butterfly, Neonympha Mitchellii Mitchellii French, in Southwestern Michigan
Mitchell’s Satyr Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement This Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement, effective and binding on the date of last signature below, is between U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s East Lansing Field Office Project Leader and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Permittee: Scott Hicks, Project Leader U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service East Lansing Field Office 2651 Coolidge Road, Suite 101 East Lansing, Michigan 48823 (517) 351-2555 The Service designates the following as the Agreement Contact: Laura Ragan, Recovery Coordinator U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Region 3 5600 American Blvd. West, Suite 990 Bloomington, Minnesota 55437-1458 Tracking Number: Summary of Purpose of the SHA: The purpose of this agreement is to outline conservation actions that participating property owners will implement and monitor on their enrolled properties for Mitchell’s satyr (Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii). The goal of the agreement is to encourage property owners to engage in conservation actions for the Mitchell’s satyr that provide a net conservation benefit to recovery. 1.0 Introduction The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Safe Harbor Program (64 FR 32717) provides regulatory flexibility to non-federal landowners who voluntarily commit to implementing or avoiding specific activities, over a defined timeframe, that are reasonably expected to provide a net conservation benefit to species listed under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). In exchange for this commitment, enrolled landowners (Cooperators) receive assurances from the Service that no additional future regulatory restrictions will be imposed or commitments required for species covered under a Safe Harbor Agreement. -
Asteraceae – Aster Family
ASTERACEAE – ASTER FAMILY Plant: herbs (annual or perennial), some shrubs, rarely vines or trees. Stem: Root: Often with tubers, rhizomes, stolons, or fleshy roots Leaves: mostly simple, some compound, alternate or opposite, rarely whorled. Flowers: flower head supported by an involucre (whorl of green bracts or phyllaries); each head composed of small flowers (composite) of flat ray-like (ligulate) flowers on the outside (ray flowers) and central tube-like flowers (disk flowers) – some species may have only one or the other. Calyx absent or modified into hairs, bristles, scales or a crown (pappus); 5 stamens (syngenesious -united by anthers); 5 united petals (sympetalous), receptacle may also have hairs or bristles. Both pappus and receptacle hairs/bristles may be used in ID. Fruit: achene (small, one-seeded, inferior ovule, 2 carpels, hard shell fruit) often with persisting crowned pappus which helps with seed dispersal. Other: Very large family, divided into sub-families and tribes, once named Compositae; 1-2,000 genera, 20,000+ species. Dicotyledons Group WARNING – family descriptions are only a layman’s guide and should not be used as definitive ASTERACEAE – ASTER FAMILY Straggler Daisy; Calyptocarpus vialis Less. (Introduced) Nodding [Plumeless] Thistle; Carduus nutans L. (Introduced) Garden Cornflower [Bachelor’s Button; Blue Bottle]; Centaurea cyanus L. (Introduced) Spotted Knapweed; Centaurea stoebe L. ssp. micranthos (Gugler) Hayek (Introduced) Woody [Bush] Goldenrod; Chrysoma pauciflosculosa (Michx.) Greene (Solidago pauciflosculosa) Green and Gold; Chrysogonum virginianum L. Soft Goldenaster; Chrysopsis pilosa Nutt. Chicory; Cichorium intybus L. (Introduced) Tall Thistle; Cirsium altissimum (L.) Hill Canada Thistle; Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. Soft [Carolina] Thistle; Cirsium carolinianum (Walter) Fernald & B.G. -
Sensitive Species That Are Not Listed Or Proposed Under the ESA Sorted By: Major Group, Subgroup, NS Sci
Forest Service Sensitive Species that are not listed or proposed under the ESA Sorted by: Major Group, Subgroup, NS Sci. Name; Legend: Page 94 REGION 10 REGION 1 REGION 2 REGION 3 REGION 4 REGION 5 REGION 6 REGION 8 REGION 9 ALTERNATE NATURESERVE PRIMARY MAJOR SUB- U.S. N U.S. 2005 NATURESERVE SCIENTIFIC NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME(S) COMMON NAME GROUP GROUP G RANK RANK ESA C 9 Anahita punctulata Southeastern Wandering Spider Invertebrate Arachnid G4 NNR 9 Apochthonius indianensis A Pseudoscorpion Invertebrate Arachnid G1G2 N1N2 9 Apochthonius paucispinosus Dry Fork Valley Cave Invertebrate Arachnid G1 N1 Pseudoscorpion 9 Erebomaster flavescens A Cave Obligate Harvestman Invertebrate Arachnid G3G4 N3N4 9 Hesperochernes mirabilis Cave Psuedoscorpion Invertebrate Arachnid G5 N5 8 Hypochilus coylei A Cave Spider Invertebrate Arachnid G3? NNR 8 Hypochilus sheari A Lampshade Spider Invertebrate Arachnid G2G3 NNR 9 Kleptochthonius griseomanus An Indiana Cave Pseudoscorpion Invertebrate Arachnid G1 N1 8 Kleptochthonius orpheus Orpheus Cave Pseudoscorpion Invertebrate Arachnid G1 N1 9 Kleptochthonius packardi A Cave Obligate Pseudoscorpion Invertebrate Arachnid G2G3 N2N3 9 Nesticus carteri A Cave Spider Invertebrate Arachnid GNR NNR 8 Nesticus cooperi Lost Nantahala Cave Spider Invertebrate Arachnid G1 N1 8 Nesticus crosbyi A Cave Spider Invertebrate Arachnid G1? NNR 8 Nesticus mimus A Cave Spider Invertebrate Arachnid G2 NNR 8 Nesticus sheari A Cave Spider Invertebrate Arachnid G2? NNR 8 Nesticus silvanus A Cave Spider Invertebrate Arachnid G2? NNR -
Wisconsin's Strategy for Wildlife Species of Greatest Conservation Need
Prepared by Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources with Assistance from Conservation Partners Natural Resources Board Approved August 2005 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Acceptance September 2005 Wisconsin’s Strategy for Wildlife Species of Greatest Conservation Need Governor Jim Doyle Natural Resources Board Gerald M. O’Brien, Chair Howard D. Poulson, Vice-Chair Jonathan P Ela, Secretary Herbert F. Behnke Christine L. Thomas John W. Welter Stephen D. Willet Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Scott Hassett, Secretary Laurie Osterndorf, Division Administrator, Land Paul DeLong, Division Administrator, Forestry Todd Ambs, Division Administrator, Water Amy Smith, Division Administrator, Enforcement and Science Recommended Citation: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 2005. Wisconsin's Strategy for Wildlife Species of Greatest Conservation Need. Madison, WI. “When one tugs at a single thing in nature, he finds it attached to the rest of the world.” – John Muir The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources provides equal opportunity in its employment, programs, services, and functions under an Affirmative Action Plan. If you have any questions, please write to Equal Opportunity Office, Department of Interior, Washington D.C. 20240. This publication can be made available in alternative formats (large print, Braille, audio-tape, etc.) upon request. Please contact the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Endangered Resources, PO Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707 or call (608) 266-7012 for copies of this report. Pub-ER-641 2005 -
Habitat Characterization of Five Rare Insects in Michigan (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae, Riodinidae, Satyridae; Homoptera: Cercopidae)
The Great Lakes Entomologist Volume 32 Number 3 - Fall 1999 Number 3 - Fall 1999 Article 13 October 1999 Habitat Characterization of Five Rare Insects in Michigan (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae, Riodinidae, Satyridae; Homoptera: Cercopidae) Keith S. Summerville Miami University Christopher A. Clampitt The Nature Conservancy Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle Part of the Entomology Commons Recommended Citation Summerville, Keith S. and Clampitt, Christopher A. 1999. "Habitat Characterization of Five Rare Insects in Michigan (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae, Riodinidae, Satyridae; Homoptera: Cercopidae)," The Great Lakes Entomologist, vol 32 (2) Available at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle/vol32/iss2/13 This Peer-Review Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Biology at ValpoScholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Great Lakes Entomologist by an authorized administrator of ValpoScholar. For more information, please contact a ValpoScholar staff member at [email protected]. Summerville and Clampitt: Habitat Characterization of Five Rare Insects in Michigan (Lepido 1999 THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST 225 HABITAT CHARACTERIZATION OF FIVE RARE INSECTS IN MICHIGAN (LEPIDOPTERA: HESPERIIDAE, RIODINIDAE, SATYRIDAE; HOMOPTERA: CERCOPIDAE) Keith S. Summerville 1,2 and Christopher A. Clampitt! ABSTRACT Over 80 species ofinsects are listed as endangered, threatened, or special concern under Michigan's endangered species act. For the majority of these species, detailed habitat information is scant or difficult to interpret. We de scribe the habitat of five insect species that are considered rare in Michigan: Lepyronia angulifera (Cercopidae), Prosapia ignipectus (Cercopidae), Oarisma poweshiek (Hesperiidae), Calephelis mutica (Riodinidae), and Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii (Satyridae). Populations of each species were only found within a fraction of the plant communities deemed suitable based upon previous literature.