DOCSLIB.ORG

Butterfly!Survey!

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Butterfly!Survey! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Vermont!Butterfly!Survey! ! 2002!–!2007! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Final!Report!to!the!Natural!Heritage!Information! ! Project!of!the!Vermont!Department!of!Fish!and! Wildlife! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! September!30,!2010! ! Kent!McFarland,!Project!Director! ! Sara!Zahendra,!Staff!Biologist! Vermont!Center!for!Ecostudies! ! Norwich,!Vermont!05055! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Table!of!Contents! Acknowledgements!............................................................................................................................!4! Introduction!and!Methodology!..........................................................................................................!6! Project!Planning!and!Management!...............................................................................................................!6! Recording!Methods!and!Data!Collection!.......................................................................................................!7! Data!Processing!............................................................................................................................................!9! PreKProject!Records!....................................................................................................................................!11! Summary!of!Results!.........................................................................................................................!11! Conservation!of!Vermont!Butterflies!................................................................................................!19! Future!Work!.....................................................................................................................................!22! Species!Accounts!..............................................................................................................................!28! Interpreting!Species!Accounts!....................................................................................................................!28! Parnassians!and!Swallowtails:!Family!Papilionidae!.....................................................................................!30! Subfamily:!Swallowtails!(Papilioninae)!............................................................................................................!30! Whites!and!Sulphurs:!Family!Pieridae!.........................................................................................................!41! Subfamily:!Sulphurs!(Coliadinae)!.....................................................................................................................!41! Subfamily:!Whites!(Pierinae)!...........................................................................................................................!50! Gossamer!Wings:!Family!Lycaenidae!..........................................................................................................!57! Subfamily:!Harvesters!(Miletinae)!...................................................................................................................!57! Subfamily:!Coppers!(Lycaeninae)!....................................................................................................................!60! Subfamily:!Hairstreaks!(Theclinae)!..................................................................................................................!67! Subfamily:!Blues!(Polyommatinae)!.................................................................................................................!94! BrushKfooted!Butterflies:!Family!Nymphalidae!.........................................................................................!105! Subfamily:!Snouts!(Libytheinae)!....................................................................................................................!105! Subfamily:!Monarchs!and!relatives!(Danainae)!.............................................................................................!108! Subfamily:!Longwings!and!Fritillaries!(Heliconiinae)!.....................................................................................!111! Subfamily:!Admirals!and!Relatives!(Limenitidinae)!.......................................................................................!126! Subfamily:!Emperors!(Apaturinae)!................................................................................................................!131! Subfamily:!True!Brushfoots!(Nymphalinae)!..................................................................................................!136! Subfamily:!Satyrs!and!Wood!Nymphs!(Satyrinae)!.........................................................................................!170! Skippers:!Family!Hesperiidae!....................................................................................................................!185! Subfamily:!Spread[winged!Skippers!(Eudaminae)!.........................................................................................!185! Subfamily:!Spread[winged!Skippers!(Pyrginae)!.............................................................................................!192! Subfamily:!Skipperlings!(Heteropterinae)!.....................................................................................................!208! Subfamily:!Grass!Skippers!(Hesperiinae)!.......................................................................................................!211! Wild!Silk!Moths:!Family!Saturniidae!.........................................................................................................!260! Subfamily:!Giant!Silkmoths!(Saturniinae)!......................................................................................................!260! Literature!Cited!..............................................................................................................................!269! Appendices!....................................................................................................................................!271! AppendiX!1.!VBS!priority!blocks!(#)!for!USGS!1:24,000!quadrangles!(USGS!Quad!Name)!...........................!272! AppendiX!2.!Annotated!Checklist!of!Vermont!Butterflies.!.........................................................................!273! AppendiX!3.!Definitions!of!Conservation!Information!Ranks!and!Legal!Status.!..........................................!274! AppendiX!4.!The!Lepidopterists’!Society!Collecting!Guidelines!..................................................................!275! 2! AppendiX!5.!VBS!Manual!and!Standard!Field!Forms!..................................................................................!278! AppendiX!6.!Policy!on!the!Release,!Use!and!Publication!of!VBS!Data!by!Outside!Users!.............................!295! AppendiX!7.!Monthly!Climate!Summaries!(2002K2007)!.............................................................................!297! ! 3! Acknowledgements! ! Cooperating!Organizations!and!Agencies! Vermont!Center!for!Ecostudies!(VCE)! Vermont!Institute!of!Natural!Science!(VINS)! Natural!Heritage!Information!Project!of!the!Vermont!Department!of!Fish!and!Wildlife! Vermont!Entomological!Society!(VES)! Green!Mountain!National!Forest!(GMNF)! The!Nature!Conservancy!of!Vermont! Vermont!Department!of!Forest,!Parks,!and!Recreation! ! Major!Sponsors!and!Supporters! Financial!support!was!provided!by!the!Vermont!Department!of!Fish!and!Wildlife![!Wildlife!Conservation!and!Restoration! Program,!the!Vermont!Department!of!Fish!and!Wildlife![!State!Wildlife!Grants,!the!William!P.!Wharton!Trust,!the!Windham! Foundation,!and!individual!donors.!Generous!software!donations!by!Conservation!Program!at!Environmental!Systems! Research!Institute!(ESRI)!enable!us!to!conduct!detailed!geospatial!analysis!and!maps!for!visualizations.! ! Founding!Steering!Committee! Jon!Atwood,!Antioch(New(England(Graduate(School! Chip!Darmstadt,!North(Branch(Nature(Center! Mark!Ferguson,!Natural(Heritage(Information(Project(=(Vermont(Department(of(Fish(and(Wildlife! Scott!and!Rachael!Griggs,!Vermont(Entomological(Society! Clayton!Grove,!Green(Mountain(National(Forest! James!Hedbor,!Vermont(Entomological(Society! Kent!McFarland,!Vermont(Center(for(Ecostudies! Donald!Miller,!Professor(Emeritus(of(Zoology/Ecology,(Department(of(Sciences,(Lyndon(State(College! Rose!Paul,!The(Nature(Conservancy(of(Vermont! Bryan!Pfeiffer,!Vermont(Bird(Tours! Michael!Sabourin,!Vermont(Entomological(Society! Susan!Sawyer,!North(Branch(Nature(Center! Jerry!Schneider,!Inventor,(The(Butterfly(Game! Amy!L.!Seidl,!Biologist! ! Project!Staff! Kent!McFarland,!Director! Bryan!Pfeiffer,(Coordinator(and(Field(Biologist((2002=2007)( Sara!Zahendra,(Technician((2008(–(present)! Jessica!Miller,!Field(Biologist((2006=2007)! Brendan!Collins,!Field(Biologist((2005=2007)! Ainsely!Close,!Field(Biologist((2003)! Ryan!Gamble,!Field(Biologist((2003)! Sylvia!Harris,!Field(Biologist((2004=2005)! Julie!Hart,!Field(Biologist((2007)! ! Technical!Assistance! Alex!Grkovich,!Erynnis!(Duskywing)!determinations! Jane!O’Donnell,!Study!design,!Connecticut(Butterfly(Atlas(Project! Harry!Pavulaan,!Celastrina!and!Tiger!Swallowtail!complex!determinations! James!Scott,!Phyciodes!determinations! Mark!Wimer,!online!database,!USGS(PatuXent(Wildlife(Research(Center! ! 4! ! Contributors! This!project!could!not!have!been!accomplished!without!the!dedicated!contributions!of!many!thousands!of!hours!in!the!field! by!more!than!140!volunteer!butterfly!enthusiasts,!all!of!whom!are!listed!below.!The!22!individuals!highlighted!by!bold! lettering!each!collected!over!500!records!for!the!survey.!We!simply!could!not!have!achieved!our!project!goals!without!the!
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Biodiversity Work Group Report: Appendices
    Biodiversity Work Group Report: Appendices A: Initial List of Important Sites..................................................................................................... 2 B: An Annotated List of the Mammals of Albemarle County........................................................ 5 C: Birds ......................................................................................................................................... 18 An Annotated List of the Birds of Albemarle County.............................................................. 18 Bird Species Status Tables and Charts...................................................................................... 28 Species of Concern in Albemarle County............................................................................ 28 Trends in Observations of Species of Concern..................................................................... 30 D. Fish of Albemarle County........................................................................................................ 37 E. An Annotated Checklist of the Amphibians of Albemarle County.......................................... 41 F. An Annotated Checklist of the Reptiles of Albemarle County, Virginia................................. 45 G. Invertebrate Lists...................................................................................................................... 51 H. Flora of Albemarle County ...................................................................................................... 69 I. Rare
    [Show full text]
  • Papilio Glaucus, P. Marcellus, P. Philenor, Pieris Rapae, Colias Philo Dice, Antho­ Caris Genutia, Anaea Andria, Euptychia Gemma
    102 REMINGTON: 1952 Central Season Vol.7, nos.3·4 Papilio glaucus, P. marcellus, P. philenor, Pieris rapae, Colias philo dice, Antho­ caris genutia, Anaea andria, Euptychia gemma. One exception to the general scarcity was the large number of Erynnis brizo and E. juvenalis which were seen clustered around damp spots in a dry branch on April 9. MERRITT counted 67 Erynnis and 2 Papilio glaucus around one such spOt and 45 Erynnis around another. Only one specimen of Incisalia henrici was seen this spring. MERRITT was pleased to find Incisalia niphon still present in a small tract of pine although the area was swept by a ground fire in 1951. Vanessa cardui appeared sparingly from June 12 on, the first since 1947. In the late summer the season appeared normal. Eurema lisa, Nathalis iole, Lycaena thoe, and Hylephila phyleus were common. Junonia coenia was more abundant around Louisville than he has ever seen it. A rarity taken in Louisville this fall was Atlides halesus, the first seen since 1948. The latest seasonal record made by Merritt was a specimen of Colias eury­ theme flying south very fast on December 7. EDWARD WELLING sent a record of finding Lagoa crispata on June 27 at Covington. Contributors: F. R. ARNHOLD; E. G. BAILEY; RALPH BEEBE; S. M. COX; H. V. DALY; 1. W . GRIEWISCH; J. B. HAYES; R. W. HODGES; VONTA P. HYNES; R. LEUSCHNER; J. R. MERRITT; J. H. NEWMAN; M. C. NIEL­ SEN; 1. S. PHILLIPS; P. S. REMINGTON; WM. SIEKER; EDWARD VOSS; W. H . WAGNER, JR.; E. C.
    [Show full text]
  • Insect Survey of Four Longleaf Pine Preserves
    A SURVEY OF THE MOTHS, BUTTERFLIES, AND GRASSHOPPERS OF FOUR NATURE CONSERVANCY PRESERVES IN SOUTHEASTERN NORTH CAROLINA Stephen P. Hall and Dale F. Schweitzer November 15, 1993 ABSTRACT Moths, butterflies, and grasshoppers were surveyed within four longleaf pine preserves owned by the North Carolina Nature Conservancy during the growing season of 1991 and 1992. Over 7,000 specimens (either collected or seen in the field) were identified, representing 512 different species and 28 families. Forty-one of these we consider to be distinctive of the two fire- maintained communities principally under investigation, the longleaf pine savannas and flatwoods. An additional 14 species we consider distinctive of the pocosins that occur in close association with the savannas and flatwoods. Twenty nine species appear to be rare enough to be included on the list of elements monitored by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (eight others in this category have been reported from one of these sites, the Green Swamp, but were not observed in this study). Two of the moths collected, Spartiniphaga carterae and Agrotis buchholzi, are currently candidates for federal listing as Threatened or Endangered species. Another species, Hemipachnobia s. subporphyrea, appears to be endemic to North Carolina and should also be considered for federal candidate status. With few exceptions, even the species that seem to be most closely associated with savannas and flatwoods show few direct defenses against fire, the primary force responsible for maintaining these communities. Instead, the majority of these insects probably survive within this region due to their ability to rapidly re-colonize recently burned areas from small, well-dispersed refugia.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogenetic Relationships and Historical Biogeography of Tribes and Genera in the Subfamily Nymphalinae (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae)
    Blackwell Science, LtdOxford, UKBIJBiological Journal of the Linnean Society 0024-4066The Linnean Society of London, 2005? 2005 862 227251 Original Article PHYLOGENY OF NYMPHALINAE N. WAHLBERG ET AL Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2005, 86, 227–251. With 5 figures . Phylogenetic relationships and historical biogeography of tribes and genera in the subfamily Nymphalinae (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) NIKLAS WAHLBERG1*, ANDREW V. Z. BROWER2 and SÖREN NYLIN1 1Department of Zoology, Stockholm University, S-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden 2Department of Zoology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331–2907, USA Received 10 January 2004; accepted for publication 12 November 2004 We infer for the first time the phylogenetic relationships of genera and tribes in the ecologically and evolutionarily well-studied subfamily Nymphalinae using DNA sequence data from three genes: 1450 bp of cytochrome oxidase subunit I (COI) (in the mitochondrial genome), 1077 bp of elongation factor 1-alpha (EF1-a) and 400–403 bp of wing- less (both in the nuclear genome). We explore the influence of each gene region on the support given to each node of the most parsimonious tree derived from a combined analysis of all three genes using Partitioned Bremer Support. We also explore the influence of assuming equal weights for all characters in the combined analysis by investigating the stability of clades to different transition/transversion weighting schemes. We find many strongly supported and stable clades in the Nymphalinae. We are also able to identify ‘rogue’
    [Show full text]
  • 2017, Jones Road, Near Blackhawk, RAIN (Photo: Michael Dawber)
    Edited and Compiled by Rick Cavasin and Jessica E. Linton Toronto Entomologists’ Association Occasional Publication # 48-2018 European Skippers mudpuddling, July 6, 2017, Jones Road, near Blackhawk, RAIN (Photo: Michael Dawber) Dusted Skipper, April 20, 2017, Ipperwash Beach, LAMB American Snout, August 6, 2017, (Photo: Bob Yukich) Dunes Beach, PRIN (Photo: David Kaposi) ISBN: 978-0-921631-53-7 Ontario Lepidoptera 2017 Edited and Compiled by Rick Cavasin and Jessica E. Linton April 2018 Published by the Toronto Entomologists’ Association Toronto, Ontario Production by Jessica Linton TORONTO ENTOMOLOGISTS’ ASSOCIATION Board of Directors: (TEA) Antonia Guidotti: R.O.M. Representative Programs Coordinator The TEA is a non-profit educational and scientific Carolyn King: O.N. Representative organization formed to promote interest in insects, to Publicity Coordinator encourage cooperation among amateur and professional Steve LaForest: Field Trips Coordinator entomologists, to educate and inform non-entomologists about insects, entomology and related fields, to aid in the ONTARIO LEPIDOPTERA preservation of insects and their habitats and to issue Published annually by the Toronto Entomologists’ publications in support of these objectives. Association. The TEA is a registered charity (#1069095-21); all Ontario Lepidoptera 2017 donations are tax creditable. Publication date: April 2018 ISBN: 978-0-921631-53-7 Membership Information: Copyright © TEA for Authors All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be Annual dues: reproduced or used without written permission. Individual-$30 Student-free (Association finances permitting – Information on submitting records, notes and articles to beyond that, a charge of $20 will apply) Ontario Lepidoptera can be obtained by contacting: Family-$35 Jessica E.
    [Show full text]
  • Campbell Et Al. 2020 Peerj.Pdf
    A novel curation system to facilitate data integration across regional citizen science survey programs Dana L. Campbell1, Anne E. Thessen2,3 and Leslie Ries4 1 Division of Biological Sciences, School of STEM, University of Washington, Bothell, WA, USA 2 The Ronin Institute for Independent Scholarship, Montclair, NJ, USA 3 Center for Genome Research and Biocomputing, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA 4 Department of Biology, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA ABSTRACT Integrative modeling methods can now enable macrosystem-level understandings of biodiversity patterns, such as range changes resulting from shifts in climate or land use, by aggregating species-level data across multiple monitoring sources. This requires ensuring that taxon interpretations match up across different sources. While encouraging checklist standardization is certainly an option, coercing programs to change species lists they have used consistently for decades is rarely successful. Here we demonstrate a novel approach for tracking equivalent names and concepts, applied to a network of 10 regional programs that use the same protocols (so-called “Pollard walks”) to monitor butterflies across America north of Mexico. Our system involves, for each monitoring program, associating the taxonomic authority (in this case one of three North American butterfly fauna treatments: Pelham, 2014; North American Butterfly Association, Inc., 2016; Opler & Warren, 2003) that shares the most similar overall taxonomic interpretation to the program’s working species list. This allows us to define each term on each program’s list in the context of the appropriate authority’s species concept and curate the term alongside its authoritative concept. We then aligned the names representing equivalent taxonomic Submitted 30 July 2019 concepts among the three authorities.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix A: Common and Scientific Names for Fish and Wildlife Species Found in Idaho
    APPENDIX A: COMMON AND SCIENTIFIC NAMES FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SPECIES FOUND IN IDAHO. How to Read the Lists. Within these lists, species are listed phylogenetically by class. In cases where phylogeny is incompletely understood, taxonomic units are arranged alphabetically. Listed below are definitions for interpreting NatureServe conservation status ranks (GRanks and SRanks). These ranks reflect an assessment of the condition of the species rangewide (GRank) and statewide (SRank). Rangewide ranks are assigned by NatureServe and statewide ranks are assigned by the Idaho Conservation Data Center. GX or SX Presumed extinct or extirpated: not located despite intensive searches and virtually no likelihood of rediscovery. GH or SH Possibly extinct or extirpated (historical): historically occurred, but may be rediscovered. Its presence may not have been verified in the past 20–40 years. A species could become SH without such a 20–40 year delay if the only known occurrences in the state were destroyed or if it had been extensively and unsuccessfully looked for. The SH rank is reserved for species for which some effort has been made to relocate occurrences, rather than simply using this status for all elements not known from verified extant occurrences. G1 or S1 Critically imperiled: at high risk because of extreme rarity (often 5 or fewer occurrences), rapidly declining numbers, or other factors that make it particularly vulnerable to rangewide extinction or extirpation. G2 or S2 Imperiled: at risk because of restricted range, few populations (often 20 or fewer), rapidly declining numbers, or other factors that make it vulnerable to rangewide extinction or extirpation. G3 or S3 Vulnerable: at moderate risk because of restricted range, relatively few populations (often 80 or fewer), recent and widespread declines, or other factors that make it vulnerable to rangewide extinction or extirpation.
    [Show full text]
  • Plant Inventory at Missouri National Recreational River
    Inventory of Butterflies at Fort Union Trading Post and Knife River Indian Villages National Historic Sites in 2004 --<o>-- Final Report Submitted by: Ronald Alan Royer, Ph.D. Burlington, North Dakota 58722 Submitted to: Northern Great Plains Inventory & Monitoring Coordinator National Park Service Mount Rushmore National Memorial Keystone, South Dakota 57751 October 1, 2004 Executive Summary This document reports inventory of butterflies at Knife River Indian Villages National Historic Site (NHS) and Fort Union Trading Post NHS, both administered by the National Park Service in the state of North Dakota. Field work consisted of strategically timed visits throughout Summer 2004. The inventory employed “checklist” counting based on the author's experience with habitat for the various species expected from each site. This report is written in two separate parts, one for each site. Each part contains an annotated species list for that site. For possible later GIS use, noteworthy species encounters are reported by UTM coordinates, all of which are provided conveniently in a table within the report narrative for each site. An annotated listing is also included for each species at each site. Each of these provides a brief description of typical habitat, principal larval host(s), and information on adult phenology. This information is followed by abbreviated citations for published works in which more detailed information may be located. Recommendations are then made for each site on the basis of endemism, prairie butterfly conservation and
    [Show full text]
  • Butterflies and Moths of San Bernardino County, California
    Heliothis ononis Flax Bollworm Moth Coptotriche aenea Blackberry Leafminer Argyresthia canadensis Apyrrothrix araxes Dull Firetip Phocides pigmalion Mangrove Skipper Phocides belus Belus Skipper Phocides palemon Guava Skipper Phocides urania Urania skipper Proteides mercurius Mercurial Skipper Epargyreus zestos Zestos Skipper Epargyreus clarus Silver-spotted Skipper Epargyreus spanna Hispaniolan Silverdrop Epargyreus exadeus Broken Silverdrop Polygonus leo Hammock Skipper Polygonus savigny Manuel's Skipper Chioides albofasciatus White-striped Longtail Chioides zilpa Zilpa Longtail Chioides ixion Hispaniolan Longtail Aguna asander Gold-spotted Aguna Aguna claxon Emerald Aguna Aguna metophis Tailed Aguna Typhedanus undulatus Mottled Longtail Typhedanus ampyx Gold-tufted Skipper Polythrix octomaculata Eight-spotted Longtail Polythrix mexicanus Mexican Longtail Polythrix asine Asine Longtail Polythrix caunus (Herrich-Schäffer, 1869) Zestusa dorus Short-tailed Skipper Codatractus carlos Carlos' Mottled-Skipper Codatractus alcaeus White-crescent Longtail Codatractus yucatanus Yucatan Mottled-Skipper Codatractus arizonensis Arizona Skipper Codatractus valeriana Valeriana Skipper Urbanus proteus Long-tailed Skipper Urbanus viterboana Bluish Longtail Urbanus belli Double-striped Longtail Urbanus pronus Pronus Longtail Urbanus esmeraldus Esmeralda Longtail Urbanus evona Turquoise Longtail Urbanus dorantes Dorantes Longtail Urbanus teleus Teleus Longtail Urbanus tanna Tanna Longtail Urbanus simplicius Plain Longtail Urbanus procne Brown Longtail
    [Show full text]
  • Sugarberry Plant Fact Sheet
    Plant Fact Sheet Wildlife: Many species of songbirds including SUGARBERRY mockingbirds and robins eat the fruit and use the tree for nesting habitat. It is a larval and nectar host for two Celtis laevigata Willd. butterflies: hackberry emperor (Asterocampa celtis) and Plant Symbol = CELA American snout (Libytheana carineta). White-tailed deer browse the leaves and fruit. Contributed by: USDA NRCS Plant Materials Program Other Uses: Sugarberry is used for furniture, athletic goods, firewood, and plywood. It has limited use for flooring, creating, and for wood posts. It is used as an ornamental and as a street tree in residential areas in the lower South Status Please consult the PLANTS Web site and your State Department of Natural Resources for this plant’s current status (e.g. threatened or endangered species, state noxious status, and wetland indicator values). Description and Adaptation Sugarberry is a native tree that can grow up to 80 feet in height and up to 3 feet in diameter. It is a short lived tree, probably living not more than 150 years. It has a broad crown formed by spreading branches that are often drooped. The bark is light gray in color and can be smooth or covered with corky warts. The branchlets are covered with short hairs at first and eventually they become smooth. The leaves are alternated, simple, and slightly serrate. The leaves are 2-4 inches long and 1 to 2 Robert H. Mohlenbrock. USDA SCS, 1989. Midwest wetland flora: inches wide. The lance-shaped leaves gradually taper to a Field office illustrated guide to plant species.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vascular Flora of Rarău Massif (Eastern Carpathians, Romania). Note Ii
    Memoirs of the Scientific Sections of the Romanian Academy Tome XXXVI, 2013 BIOLOGY THE VASCULAR FLORA OF RARĂU MASSIF (EASTERN CARPATHIANS, ROMANIA). NOTE II ADRIAN OPREA1 and CULIŢĂ SÎRBU2 1 “Anastasie Fătu” Botanical Garden, Str. Dumbrava Roşie, nr. 7-9, 700522–Iaşi, Romania 2 University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Iaşi, Faculty of Agriculture, Str. Mihail Sadoveanu, nr. 3, 700490–Iaşi, Romania Corresponding author: [email protected] This second part of the paper about the vascular flora of Rarău Massif listed approximately half of the whole number of the species registered by the authors in their field trips or already included in literature on the same area. Other taxa have been added to the initial list of plants, so that, the total number of taxa registered by the authors in Rarău Massif amount to 1443 taxa (1133 species and 310 subspecies, varieties and forms). There was signaled out the alien taxa on the surveyed area (18 species) and those dubious presence of some taxa for the same area (17 species). Also, there were listed all the vascular plants, protected by various laws or regulations, both internal or international, existing in Rarău (i.e. 189 taxa). Finally, there has been assessed the degree of wild flora conservation, using several indicators introduced in literature by Nowak, as they are: conservation indicator (C), threat conservation indicator) (CK), sozophytisation indicator (W), and conservation effectiveness indicator (E). Key words: Vascular flora, Rarău Massif, Romania, conservation indicators. 1. INTRODUCTION A comprehensive analysis of Rarău flora, in terms of plant diversity, taxonomic structure, biological, ecological and phytogeographic characteristics, as well as in terms of the richness in endemics, relict or threatened plant species was published in our previous note (see Oprea & Sîrbu 2012).
    [Show full text]