DOCSLIB.ORG

Using Genetic Tools to Understand the Population Ecology of Stream Fishes James Henry Roberts III Dissertation Submitted To

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Using genetic tools to understand the population ecology of stream fishes James Henry Roberts III Dissertation submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Fish and Wildlife Conservation Paul L. Angermeier, Co-chairman Eric M. Hallerman, Co-chairman C. Andrew Dolloff J. Paul Grobler Marcella J. Kelly April 27th, 2012 Blacksburg, Virginia Keywords: darter, dispersal, endangered species, genetic diversity, landscape ecology, isolation- by-distance, metapopulation dynamics, persistence, population structure, stream fish Copyright 2012, James Roberts Using genetic tools to understand the population ecology of stream fishes James Henry Roberts III ABSTRACT Stream fishes are highly diverse, yet highly imperiled by human alterations of stream environments. Many species are poorly characterized with regard to the size and structure of populations and patterns of dispersal between populations, which complicates assessment of how human activities, both harmful and beneficial, will affect persistence. I used genetic tools to further this understanding in three case-study fish species of the southeastern United States: Roanoke logperch (Percina rex) of the greater Roanoke River basin and redline (Etheostoma rufilineatum) and greenside darters (E. blennioides) of the upper Tennessee River basin. I found that endangered P. rex persists in seven isolated populations. Within populations, individuals exhibit extensive dispersal and gene flow, which maintains connectivity throughout entire watersheds. Most populations exhibit small contemporary effective population sizes and occupy few stream channels, and thereby face an elevated risk of extinction. Genetic estimates of divergence indicate that fragmentation was recent, coincident with the construction of major dams throughout the species’ range. Close evolutionary relationships between most populations suggest that a translocation strategy could decrease extinction risks. I developed a framework to help guide the process of balancing small- population versus translocation risks when formulating conservation strategies. When the framework was applied to populations of P. rex, straightforward management prescriptions emerged. The framework also may prove useful for other fragmented species. Unlike P. rex, E. rufilineatum and E. blennioides are relatively abundant where they occur. However, both species were strongly affected by fragmentation due to hydroelectric dams and reservoirs. Populations in small streams flowing directly into a reservoir had lower genetic diversity than populations in larger, more fluvially connected streams. Furthermore, indices of watershed urbanization (e.g., percent impervious surface, road density) were negatively correlated with genetic diversity and with a genetic index of population stability. This suggests that darters occupying isolated streams and/or urbanizing watersheds experience smaller, more variable population sizes than darters elsewhere. Monitoring of such genetic responses could provide a useful early indicator of ecosystem stress and a useful complement to other biomonitoring techniques iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS A PhD is a long journey that no one makes alone. My journey took longer than most, which enabled me to cross paths with many kindred spirits along the way. Over such a long period, some emotional ups and downs are inevitable. It was the support and fellowship of my personal and professional network that kept me progressing toward my goals. My graduate committee showed respect for my ever-evolving ideas and patience as those ideas ran their course. Committee Co-Chair Paul Angermeier has borne with me for a particularly long time, from my Master’s through my research position and now to the end of my PhD. I am forever grateful for his mentorship and friendship. My other Co-Chair Eric Hallerman, another good friend, has helped develop me into the molecular ecologist that I am. Committee members Andy Dolloff, Marcella Kelly and Paul Grobler have stuck with me through a project perched precariously at the intersection of several disciplinary frontiers – I thank them for their inquisitiveness and wisdom. While at Tech I spent over a third of my life in the water, assisted by an army of venerable field technicians, volunteers, and fellow grad students. Special praise is due to Greg Anderson, Jane Argentina, Matt Bierlein, Jackie Brown, Amy Bush, Tye DeWebber, Corey Dunn, Dan Dutton, Jason Emmel, Mark Foster, Annie Grant, Dylan Hann, Pat Kroboth, Tim Lane, Michael Lang, Bryan Neuswanger, Brett Ostby, Phil Pegelow, Brandon Peoples, Jen Philhower-Gillen, Jeremy Pritt, Bjorn Schmidt, and Chris Williams, who put in extended details on Team Logperch. Baby Blood and I bid you thanks. Once the field work was done and the fin clips were in the freezer, the tedium began. To that end, I was blessed to have the assistance of Dan Dutton and Joanne Printz, my lab-work gurus. They performed the vast majority of my extractions, PCR, and molecular troubleshooting, thereby preserving my sanity. I raise my pipette to you both. The research the reader finds in this dissertation derived from a variety of small, cobbled-together projects that several agencies were kind enough to fund. I am thankful to have had the opportunity for collaboration with these agencies and the biologists that represent them. I particularly appreciate the iv efforts of Mike Pinder and Scott Smith of VDGIF, William Hester and Kim Smith of USFWS, Phil Payonk and Michael Hosey of USACE, and Doug Beard of USGS to work with me to develop projects that met applied needs while enhancing the basic science of fish conservation. I thank my friends near and far for keeping me centered over the years. I refrain from listing names to protect the innocent, but you know who you are. Finally, my profoundest appreciation goes to my family – the Roberts women – who have shown infinite support and patience through an educational journey that seemed sometimes to have no end. My love for harlequined darters in sparkling streams is exceeded only by my love and admiration for Tonja, Holly, and Riley Roberts. I hope that they realize how much this dissertation owes to them. We in southwest Virginia at the beginning of the 21st century are fortunate to live in a time and place where spectacular wildlife still swims in our backyards. This appreciation is not widely felt. Although this dissertation took a long time to write, it was but a millisecond of ecological time. I’m aware of no fish species that went extinct during the writing of this document, though some species undoubtedly moved farther down that path. As conservation biologists, we chronicle the status of the natural world via a series of snapshots. Some day my particular snapshots will seem quaint to the future reader. My hope, however, is that my photographic subjects still will be around, going about their mysterious lives on some gravelly shoal. v TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1 CHAPTER 1: Isolation by dams, not distance, creates discrete population structure in a riverine fish ....... 4 ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................................... 4 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................... 5 METHODS ......................................................................................................................................... 7 Study species and area..................................................................................................................... 7 Sample collection ............................................................................................................................ 8 Laboratory methods ........................................................................................................................ 8 Data analysis ................................................................................................................................... 9 RESULTS ......................................................................................................................................... 12 DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................................... 15 Spatial scale and mechanisms of discrete population structure ....................................................... 15 Lack of regional IBD due to strong drift ........................................................................................ 18 Lack of local IBD due to strong migration ..................................................................................... 19 Applicability of the IBD model to riverine biota ............................................................................ 20 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................................. 22 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................. 23 CHAPTER 2: Extensive dispersal of Roanoke logperch (Percina rex) inferred from genetic marker data .............................................................................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Energy Economics in Ecosystems By: J

    Energy Economics in Ecosystems By: J

    Energy Economics in Ecosystems By: J. Michael Beman (School of Natural Sciences, University of California at Merced) © 2010 Nature Education Citation: Beman, J. (2010) Energy Economics in Ecosystems. Nature Education Knowledge 3(10):13 What powers life? In most ecosystems, sunlight is absorbed and converted into usable forms of energy via photosynthesis. These usable forms of energy are carbon­based. The laws of physics describe the interactions between energy and mass: the energy in a closed system is conserved, and matter can neither be created nor destroyed. Modern physics has shown that reality is more 2 complex at very large and very small scales (e.g., Einstein’s famous equation, E = mc demonstrated that mass can be converted to energy in the sun or nuclear reactors), but in the context of Earth’s ecosystems, energy is conserved and matter can neither be created nor destroyed. This seemingly simplistic statement has profound consequences when we study how ecosystems function. In particular, the energy present within an ecosystem is collected and shared by organisms in many different ways; this "sharing" takes place through ecological interactions, such as predator­prey dynamics and symbioses. When we move to the ecosystem level, however, we consider interactions among organisms, populations, communities, and their physical and chemical environment. These interactions have an important bearing on the structure of organisms, ecosystems, and, over geologic time, the planet itself. A primary example of this involves the energy currency in ecosystems, which is carbon. The amount and form of carbon present in different ecosystem pools — such as plants, animals, air, soil, and water — is controlled by organisms, and ultimately affects their ecological success.
  • Luth Wfu 0248D 10922.Pdf

    Luth Wfu 0248D 10922.Pdf

    SCALE-DEPENDENT VARIATION IN MOLECULAR AND ECOLOGICAL PATTERNS OF INFECTION FOR ENDOHELMINTHS FROM CENTRARCHID FISHES BY KYLE E. LUTH A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY GRADAUTE SCHOOL OF ARTS AND SCIENCES in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Biology May 2016 Winston-Salem, North Carolina Approved By: Gerald W. Esch, Ph.D., Advisor Michael V. K. Sukhdeo, Ph.D., Chair T. Michael Anderson, Ph.D. Herman E. Eure, Ph.D. Erik C. Johnson, Ph.D. Clifford W. Zeyl, Ph.D. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost, I would like to thank my PI, Dr. Gerald Esch, for all of the insight, all of the discussions, all of the critiques (not criticisms) of my works, and for the rides to campus when the North Carolina weather decided to drop rain on my stubborn head. The numerous lively debates, exchanges of ideas, voicing of opinions (whether solicited or not), and unerring support, even in the face of my somewhat atypical balance of service work and dissertation work, will not soon be forgotten. I would also like to acknowledge and thank the former Master, and now Doctor, Michael Zimmermann; friend, lab mate, and collecting trip shotgun rider extraordinaire. Although his need of SPF 100 sunscreen often put our collecting trips over budget, I could not have asked for a more enjoyable, easy-going, and hard-working person to spend nearly 2 months and 25,000 miles of fishing filled days and raccoon, gnat, and entrail-filled nights. You are a welcome camping guest any time, especially if you do as good of a job attracting scorpions and ants to yourself (and away from me) as you did on our trips.
  • Fishing Guide Dale Hollow Lake Tn

    Fishing Guide Dale Hollow Lake Tn

    Fishing Guide Dale Hollow Lake Tn High-principled Ethelbert knock-down imperatively. Wilburt misconstruing unrepentingly. Commendatory Turner spanks: he caping his majority damn and blamefully. Maybe he gained the. Dale Hollow Lake Bass Fishing Resource Guide. From Dale Hollow Lake which gave up doing world-record smallie to Maryland's. TN Charters & Guides Fishing Status. Check out the founder of year on his teaching philosophy is dale hollow fishing guide lake tn for any budget and we also at dale hollow have a permit. The bass fishing but lake Seminole is as quaint as the weather this past weekend for. Reserve your account by the next day i dipped it is very important thing, hollow fishing lake guide tn a place seemed like this time api key is free! Famous Dale Hollow lake guide Bob Coan seems to dislike that terminology. I will speak with some friends who fish Dale Hollow and housewife in TN for more. Cumberland County KY Tourism & Convention Commision. Hi are'm going to Dale Hollow but in 10 days for a 3 day fishing just for the smallies I sense new. Chattanooga Fishing Guides is a professional bass fishing and service in. Payments are some night after lands of dale hollow fishing lake guide tn best conditions of. Of the carp fish he caught on his first away trip to Dale Hollow Lake. The Dale Hollow there is located in Tennessee and the largest part since the 52542-acre. Dale Hollow Lake Mitchell Creek Marina. About 130 miles south of Lexington the lake straddles the Kentucky-Tennessee border The waters lap Kentucky's Cumberland and Clinton Counties and four.
  • Information on the NCWRC's Scientific Council of Fishes Rare

    Information on the NCWRC's Scientific Council of Fishes Rare

    A Summary of the 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes in North Carolina Submitted by Bryn H. Tracy North Carolina Division of Water Resources North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Raleigh, NC On behalf of the NCWRC’s Scientific Council of Fishes November 01, 2014 Bigeye Jumprock, Scartomyzon (Moxostoma) ariommum, State Threatened Photograph by Noel Burkhead and Robert Jenkins, courtesy of the Virginia Division of Game and Inland Fisheries and the Southeastern Fishes Council (http://www.sefishescouncil.org/). Table of Contents Page Introduction......................................................................................................................................... 3 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes In North Carolina ........... 4 Summaries from the 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes in North Carolina .......................................................................................................................... 12 Recent Activities of NCWRC’s Scientific Council of Fishes .................................................. 13 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part I, Ohio Lamprey .............................................. 14 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part II, “Atlantic” Highfin Carpsucker ...................... 17 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part III, Tennessee Darter ...................................... 20 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part
  • Endangered Species

    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.
  • Aquatic Fish Report

    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
  • Low-Head Dams Facilitate Round Goby Neogobius Melanostomus Invasion

    Low-Head Dams Facilitate Round Goby Neogobius Melanostomus Invasion

    Biol Invasions (2018) 20:757–776 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-017-1573-3 ORIGINAL PAPER Low-head dams facilitate Round Goby Neogobius melanostomus invasion Dustin Raab . Nicholas E. Mandrak . Anthony Ricciardi Received: 9 July 2017 / Accepted: 23 September 2017 / Published online: 3 October 2017 Ó Springer International Publishing AG 2017 Abstract Round Goby Neogobius melanostomus inclusion of both reservoir-associated abiotic variables invasion of the Grand River (Ontario, Canada) and Round Goby abundance as model terms. To presents an opportunity to assess the role of abiotic determine establishment potential of the uninvaded gradients in mediating the establishment and impact of reach immediately upstream, four environmental nonnative benthic fishes in rivers. In this system, habitat characteristics were used in discriminant sequential low-head dams delineate uninvaded and function analysis (DFA) to predict three potential invaded river reaches and create upstream gradients of outcomes of introduction: non-invaded and either increasing water velocity. We hypothesized that flow lower or higher Round Goby abundance (low and high refugia created by impounded reservoirs above low- invasion status, respectively) than the median number head dams enhance local Round Goby abundance. of Round Goby at invaded sites. Our DFA function Round Goby influence on the native fish community correctly classified non-invaded and high-abundance was determined by variance partitioning, and we used invasion status sites [ 85% of the time, with lower generalized additive models to identify small-bodied (73%) success in classifying low-abundance invasion benthic fish species most likely to be impacted by status sites, and the spatial pattern of our results Round Goby invasion.
  • Meta-Ecosystems: a Theoretical Framework for a Spatial Ecosystem Ecology

    Meta-Ecosystems: a Theoretical Framework for a Spatial Ecosystem Ecology

    Ecology Letters, (2003) 6: 673–679 doi: 10.1046/j.1461-0248.2003.00483.x IDEAS AND PERSPECTIVES Meta-ecosystems: a theoretical framework for a spatial ecosystem ecology Abstract Michel Loreau1*, Nicolas This contribution proposes the meta-ecosystem concept as a natural extension of the Mouquet2,4 and Robert D. Holt3 metapopulation and metacommunity concepts. A meta-ecosystem is defined as a set of 1Laboratoire d’Ecologie, UMR ecosystems connected by spatial flows of energy, materials and organisms across 7625, Ecole Normale Supe´rieure, ecosystem boundaries. This concept provides a powerful theoretical tool to understand 46 rue d’Ulm, F–75230 Paris the emergent properties that arise from spatial coupling of local ecosystems, such as Cedex 05, France global source–sink constraints, diversity–productivity patterns, stabilization of ecosystem 2Department of Biological processes and indirect interactions at landscape or regional scales. The meta-ecosystem Science and School of perspective thereby has the potential to integrate the perspectives of community and Computational Science and Information Technology, Florida landscape ecology, to provide novel fundamental insights into the dynamics and State University, Tallahassee, FL functioning of ecosystems from local to global scales, and to increase our ability to 32306-1100, USA predict the consequences of land-use changes on biodiversity and the provision of 3Department of Zoology, ecosystem services to human societies. University of Florida, 111 Bartram Hall, Gainesville, FL Keywords 32611-8525,
  • Biogeography: an Ecosystems Approach (Geography 338)

    Biogeography: an Ecosystems Approach (Geography 338)

    WELCOME TO GEOGRAPHY/BOTANY 338: ENVIRONMENTAL BIOGEOGRAPHY Fall 2018 Schedule: Monday & Wednesday 2:30-3:45 pm, Humanities 1641 Credits: 3 Instructor: Professor Ken Keefover-Ring Email: [email protected] Office: Science Hall 115C Office Hours: Tuesday 3:00-4:00 pm & Wednesday 12:00-1:00 pm or by appointment Note: This course fulfills the Biological Science breadth requirement. COURSE DESCRIPTION: This course takes an ecosystems approach to understand how physical -- climate, geologic history, soils -- and biological -- physiology, evolution, extinction, dispersal, competition, predation -- factors interact to affect the past, present and future distribution of terrestrial biomes and all levels of biodiversity: ecosystems, species and genes. A particular focus will be placed on the role of disturbance and to recent human-driven climatic and land-cover changes and biological invasions on differences in historical and current distributions of global biodiversity. COURSE GOALS: • To learn patterns and mechanisms of local to global gene, species, ecosystem and biome distributions • To learn how past, current and future environmental change affect biogeography • To learn how humans affect geographic patterns of biodiversity • To learn how to apply concepts from biogeography to current environmental problems • To learn how to read and interpret the primary literature, that is, scientific articles in peer- reviewed journals. COURSE POLICY: I expect you to attend all lectures and come prepared to participate in discussion. I will take attendance. Please let me know if you need to miss three or more lectures. Please respect your fellow students, professor, and guest speakers and turn off the ringers on your cell phones and refrain from texting during class time.
  • Of Tennessee Boating Laws and Responsibilities

    Of Tennessee Boating Laws and Responsibilities

    of Tennessee Boating Laws and Responsibilities SPONSORED BY 2021 EDITION Copyright © 2021 Kalkomey Enterprises, LLC and its divisions and partners, www.kalkomey.com Published by Boat Ed®, a division of Kalkomey Enterprises, LLC, 740 East Campbell Road, Suite 900, Richardson, TX 75081, 214-351-0461. Printed in the U.S.A. Copyright © 2001–2021 by Kalkomey Enterprises, LLC. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any process without permission in writing from Kalkomey Enterprises, LLC. Effort has been made to make this publication as complete and accurate as possible. All references contained in this publication have been compiled from sources believed to be reliable, and to represent the best current opinion on the subject. Kalkomey Enterprises, LLC is not responsible or liable for any claims, liabilities, damages, or other adverse effects or consequences to any person or property caused or alleged to be caused directly or indirectly from the application or use of the information contained in this publication. P0321-DP0921 www.kalkomey.com Copyright © 2021 Kalkomey Enterprises, LLC and its divisions and partners, www.kalkomey.com of Tennessee Boating Laws and Responsibilities Disclaimer: This publication is NOT a legal document. It is a summary of Tennessee’s current boating safety rules and regulations at the time of printing. Equal opportunity to participate in and benefit from programs of the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency is available to all persons without regard to their race, color, national origin, sex, age, disability, or military service. TWRA is also an equal opportunity/equal access employer.
  • Plant Species Traits Are the Predominant Control on Litter Decomposition Rates Within Biomes Worldwide

    Plant Species Traits Are the Predominant Control on Litter Decomposition Rates Within Biomes Worldwide

    Ecology Letters, (2008) 11: 1065–1071 doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01219.x LETTER Plant species traits are the predominant control on litter decomposition rates within biomes worldwide Abstract William K. Cornwell,1* Johannes Worldwide decomposition rates depend both on climate and the legacy of plant functional H. C. Cornelissen,1 Kathryn traits as litter quality. To quantify the degree to which functional differentiation among Amatangelo,2 Ellen Dorrepaal,1 species affects their litter decomposition rates, we brought together leaf trait and litter mass 3 4 Valerie T. Eviner, Oscar Godoy, loss data for 818 species from 66 decomposition experiments on six continents. We show Sarah E. Hobbie,5 Bart Hoorens,1 6,7 that: (i) the magnitude of species-driven differences is much larger than previously thought Hiroko Kurokawa, Natalia and greater than climate-driven variation; (ii) the decomposability of a speciesÕ litter is Pe´ rez-Harguindeguy,8 Helen M. consistently correlated with that speciesÕ ecological strategy within different ecosystems Quested,9 Louis S. Santiago,10 David A. Wardle,11,12 Ian J. globally, representing a new connection between whole plant carbon strategy and Wright,13 Rien Aerts,1 Steven D. biogeochemical cycling. This connection between plant strategies and decomposability is Allison,14 Peter van Bodegom,1 crucial for both understanding vegetation–soil feedbacks, and for improving forecasts of Victor Brovkin,15 Alex Chatain,16 the global carbon cycle. Terry V. Callaghan,17,18 Sandra Dı´az,7 Eric Garnier,19 Diego E. Keywords Gurvich,8 Elena Kazakou,19 Julia Carbon cycling, decomposition, leaf economic spectrum, leaf traits, meta-analysis.
  • Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation Final Programmatic

    Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation Final Programmatic

    Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation Final Programmatic Biological Opinion and Conference Opinion on the United States Department of the Interior Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement’s Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act Title V Regulatory Program U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Program Division of Environmental Review Falls Church, Virginia October 16, 2020 Table of Contents 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................3 2 Consultation History .........................................................................................................4 3 Background .......................................................................................................................5 4 Description of the Action ...................................................................................................7 The Mining Process .............................................................................................................. 8 4.1.1 Exploration ........................................................................................................................ 8 4.1.2 Erosion and Sedimentation Controls .................................................................................. 9 4.1.3 Clearing and Grubbing ....................................................................................................... 9 4.1.4 Excavation of Overburden and Coal ................................................................................