DOCSLIB.ORG

Watching Western Colorado Butterflies

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Watching Western Colorado Butterflies Watching Western Colorado Butterflies Dr. Warren H. “Herb” Wagner Why? • Enhance the outdoor experience • Intro to butterfly conservation • Fun Three Steps to Conservation Xerxes Society for Invertebrate Conservation 1) Identify the resources The butterflies Their larval host plants The adult food sources floral & other 2) Protect the resources The landscape & nectar, host plants 3) Enhance the resources Larval & adult host plants Gardens What are the threats? Invasive weeds Knapweeds, bindweed, cheatgrasses, spurges, … Large scale hot-burning fire More frequent, smaller fires not a threat People Serious collecting benefits long term conservation efforts A few rare species are threatened by over-collecting Habitat destruction is a real and serious threat to many butterfly populations Collecting Butterflies With proper labeling & care COLO Mesa Co • Indisputable historical records Black Ridge Rd • Essential for proper ID 6 Apr 1996 • Genetic records JA & RW Hammon • Fun! • Pretty Paonia Colo 7/23/1932 If you are going to use a field guide, this is the one Colorado Butterflies 289 Species West slope - > 200 species Gunnison County 159 species Mesa County 155 species • Skippers 36 species • Skippers 36 species • Swallowtails 6 species • Swallowtails 7 species • Lycaenids 40 species • Lycaenids 39 species • Pierids 20 species • Pierids 16 species • Metalmarks 1 species • Metalmarks 1 species • Nymphalids 56 species • Nymphalids 56 species Metamorphosis naturallycuriouswithmaryholland Lepidoptera = Scale wing The proboscis, clubbed antenna Moths Thread or featherlike antennae Wings held tentlike Nocturnal Not as colorful One-eyed sphinx Smerinthus cerisyi Gnophaela vermiculata, Police Car Moth Hemaris thetis, Clear-winged Sphinx Columbia silkmoth Hyalophora columbia Photographing Butterflies • The camera in hand when a butterfly lands is the best one you have • If you are serious about insect photography, get a SLR with 100 mm macro • Patience, calmly move slowly quickly, more patience • Learn the best flowers • Revisit sites The Swallowtails Papilionidae Tiger Swallowtails Larvae feed on cottonwood, willow aspen and many other trees & shrubs Two-tailed Swallowtail Larvae love green ash, chokecherry & other common urban trees The Pale (Pallid) Swallowtail Larvae feed on many plants in rose and buckthorn families Anise Swallowtail Larval hosts – Carrot family (Apiaceae) Anise Swallowtail yellow form Papilio zelicaon Rocky Mountain Parnassian Parnassius smintheus Host plant is Sedum, aka stonecrop Checkered White: Pontia protodice Pieridae: Whites & Sulfurs Becker's White: Pontia beckerii; Larval hosts are crucifers Spring White, Pontia sisymbrii Margined White Pieris marginalis Cabbage White: Pieris rapae Large Marble Euchloe ausonides Southwestern Orangetip: Anthocharis thoosa Sulfurs : Colias Colias eriphyle, western clouded Sulphur Host plant legumes, especially alfalfa Mead's Sulphur: Colias meadii Mead’s Sulfur: Colias meadii Lycaenidae: Gossamer Winged Butterflies Lustrous Copper aka Snow’s Copper: Lycaena cupreus Alpine sorrel: Rumex sp. Ruddy Copper , Lycaenea rubidus Blue copper Lycaena heteronea Host plants – buckwheat family (Polyganaceae) Tailed copper, Lycaena arota on AYC Colorado Hairstreak: Hypaurotis crysalus Host plant: Gambel’s oak Sheridan's Green Hairstreak: Callophrys sheridanii On Spring Beauty Claytonia sp. Larvae feed on buckwheats, often sulfur flower Juniper Hairstreak: Callophrys gryneus (= C. siva) Thicket Hairstreak: Callophrys spinetorum On: Fendlers Ceanothus, Ceanothus fendleri (left) Willow, Salix sp (below) Larvae feed on mistletoes parasitic on conifers Striped Hairstreak Satyrium liparops Gray Hairstreak: Strymon melinus Edwards Hairstreak Satyrium edwardsii Coral Hairstreak Satyrium titus Greenish Blue, Plebejus saepiolus Western Pygmy-Blue Brephidium exilis Boisduval's Blue: Plebejus icarioides Arctic Blue, Plebejus rustica Alpine Bistort, Bistorta vivipara Eastern Tailed-Blue: Cupido comyntas Northern Azure, Celastrina lucia Greenish blue, Plebejus saepiolus Marine Blue, Leptotes marina Melissa Blue :Plebejus melissa Spalding’s Dotted Blue: Euphilotes spalding[ Host plant: Eriogonum ovalifolium Hoary Elfin, Callophyrys polio Mormon Metalmark: Apodemia mormo Host plant : buckwheats Photos: Melissa Franklin Nymphalidae: Brush Footed Butterflies Silverspot Fritillaries: Speyeria Speyeria callipe Speyeria mormona eurynome Speyeria cybele charlottei Speyeria sp. on thistles Speyeria callipe Cerro Summit, July 7 2018 Silver spot frittilaries on showy milkweed Speyeria cybele charlottei The Lesser Fritillaries – Boloria sp Variegated Fritillary: Euptoieta claudia Anicia Checkerspot: Euphydryas anicia , Euphydryas anicia Rockslide aka Damoetas Checkerspot: Chlosyne whitneyi Sagebrush Checkerspot: Chlosyne acastus Easter Daisy Townsendia annua Pearl Crescent: Phyciodes tharos Bates’ Crescent: Phyciodes batesii field crescent Phyciodes pulchella Polygonia: Anglewings Comma: Polygonia comma Satyr Comma: Polygonia satyrus Hoary Comma: Polygonia gracicis zephyrus NymphalidaeMonarch:: Danainae Danaus plexippusMonarch: Danaus plexxipusDanaidaeHost plant = Nymphalidae:Danainae MIlkweeds Queen: Danaus gilippus Weidemeyer's Admiral:Limenitis weidemeyerii Admirals: Limenitis AKA Basilarchia Viceroy: Limenitis archippus White Admiral / Red Spotted Purple White Admiral: Limenitis arthemis Red-spotted Purple: Limenitis arthemis Hackberry butterfly: Asterocampa celtis Mourning Cloak: Nymphalis antiopa Larval host: Wilows & various trees Milbert's Tortoiseshell: Aglais (Nymphalis) milberti The first butterfly of spring, overwinters as adult, larvae feed on stinging nettle Avid hill topper, at top of every hill and mountain Stinging nettles Red Admiral: Vanessa atalanta Painted Lady: Vanessa cardui Painted Ladies Larval hosts: Composites West Coast Lady: Vanessa annabella Gray Buckeye: Junonia grisea Larval hosts are various scrophs & buckwheats Satyrs, Alpines, Arctics & Wood Nymphs Ringlets: Coenonympha tullia Nymphalidae: Satyrinae Larval hosts are “grasses” Wyoming Satyr: Neominois ridingsii Canyonland Satyr: Cyllopsis pertepida Little wood nymph, Cercyonis sthenele: Great Basin Wood-Nymph ????? small wood-nymph Cercyonis oetus Erigeron sp. Ringlets: Coenonympha tullia Common Ringlet Magdalena Alpine: Erebia magdalena Colorado Alpine Erebia callias Common Alpine aka Butlers Alpine Erebia epipsodea Arctics: Oeneis White-veined Arctic: Oeneis bore Polixenes Arctic: Oeneis polixenes ? Hesperia juba: Juba Skipper Checkered Skipper: Burnsius communis Juba skipper: Hesperia juba Thank You for joining us Questions? Email me: [email protected].
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ANTC Environmental Assessment
    U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NV-B010-2013-0024-EA Telecommunication Facilities at Kingston, Dyer, and Hickison Summit July 2013 Applicant: Arizona Nevada Tower Corporation 6220 McLeod Drive Ste. 100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89120 Battle Mountain District Bureau of Land Management 50 Bastian Road Battle Mountain, Nevada 89820 Table of Contents Page Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Background 1 1.3 Identifying Information 2 1.4 Location of Proposed Action 2 1.5 Preparing Office 2 1.6 Case File Numbers 2 1.7 Applicant 2 1.8 Proposed Action Summary 3 1.9 Conformance 3 1.10 Purpose & Need 3 1.11 Scoping, Public Involvement & Issues 4 Chapter 2 Proposed Action & Alternatives 11 2.1 Proposed Action 11 2.1.1 Best Management Practices 13 2.2 No Action Alternative 13 2.3 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Analysis 14 Chapter 3 Affected Environment & Environmental Consequences 15 3.1 Project Site Descriptions 15 3.2 Issues 16 3.2.1 Air Quality 18 3.2.1.1 Affected Environment 18 3.2.1.2 Environmental Consequences 18 3.2.2 Cultural/Historical Resources 18 3.2.2.1 Affected Environment 18 3.2.2.2 Environmental Consequences 18 3.2.3 Noxious Weeds/Invasive Non-native Plants 19 3.2.3.1 Affected Environment 19 3.2.3.2 Environmental Consequences 20 3.2.4 Native American Religious Concerns 20 3.2.4.1 Affected Environment 20 3.2.4.2 Environmental Consequences 20 3.2.5 Migratory Birds 21 3.2.5.1 Affected Environment 21 3.2.5.2 Environmental Consequences 22 3.2.6 Solid/Hazardous
    [Show full text]
  • Butterflies and Moths of Ada County, Idaho, United States
    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]
  • 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.
    [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]
  • List of Animal Species with Ranks October 2017
    Washington Natural Heritage Program List of Animal Species with Ranks October 2017 The following list of animals known from Washington is complete for resident and transient vertebrates and several groups of invertebrates, including odonates, branchipods, tiger beetles, butterflies, gastropods, freshwater bivalves and bumble bees. Some species from other groups are included, especially where there are conservation concerns. Among these are the Palouse giant earthworm, a few moths and some of our mayflies and grasshoppers. Currently 857 vertebrate and 1,100 invertebrate taxa are included. Conservation status, in the form of range-wide, national and state ranks are assigned to each taxon. Information on species range and distribution, number of individuals, population trends and threats is collected into a ranking form, analyzed, and used to assign ranks. Ranks are updated periodically, as new information is collected. We welcome new information for any species on our list. Common Name Scientific Name Class Global Rank State Rank State Status Federal Status Northwestern Salamander Ambystoma gracile Amphibia G5 S5 Long-toed Salamander Ambystoma macrodactylum Amphibia G5 S5 Tiger Salamander Ambystoma tigrinum Amphibia G5 S3 Ensatina Ensatina eschscholtzii Amphibia G5 S5 Dunn's Salamander Plethodon dunni Amphibia G4 S3 C Larch Mountain Salamander Plethodon larselli Amphibia G3 S3 S Van Dyke's Salamander Plethodon vandykei Amphibia G3 S3 C Western Red-backed Salamander Plethodon vehiculum Amphibia G5 S5 Rough-skinned Newt Taricha granulosa
    [Show full text]
  • Hawk Moths of North America Is Richly Illustrated with Larval Images and Contains an Abundance of Life History Information
    08 caterpillars EUSA/pp244-273 3/9/05 6:37 PM Page 244 244 TULIP-TREE MOTH CECROPIA MOTH 245 Callosamia angulifera Hyalophora cecropia RECOGNITION Frosted green with shiny yellow, orange, and blue knobs over top and sides of body. RECOGNITION Much like preceding but paler or Dorsal knobs on T2, T3, and A1 somewhat globular and waxier in color with pale stripe running below set with black spinules. Paired knobs on A2–A7 more spiracles on A1–A10 and black dots on abdomen cylindrical, yellow; knob over A8 unpaired and rounded. lacking contrasting pale rings. Yellow abdominal Larva to 10cm. Caterpillars of larch-feeding Columbia tubercle over A8 short, less than twice as high as broad. Silkmoth (Hyalophora columbia) have yellow-white to Larva to 6cm. Sweetbay Silkmoth (Callosamia securifera) yellow-pink instead of bright yellow knobs over dorsum similar in appearance but a specialist on sweet bay. Its of abdomen and knobs along sides tend to be more white than blue (as in Cecropia) and are yellow abdominal tubercle over A8 is nearly three times as set in black bases (see page 246). long as wide and the red knobs over thorax are cylindrical (see page 246). OCCURRENCE Urban and suburban yards and lots, orchards, fencerows, woodlands, OCCURRENCE Woodlands and forests from Michigan, southern Ontario, and and forests from Canada south to Florida and central Texas. One generation with mature Massachusetts to northern Florida and Mississippi. One principal generation northward; caterpillars from late June through August over most of range. two broods in South with mature caterpillars from early June onward.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxonomy, Distribution and Biology of the Genus Cercyonis (Satyridae)
    1969 Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 165 TAXONOMY, DISTRIBUTION AND BIOLOGY OF THE GENUS CERCYONIS (SATYRIDAE). 1. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GENUS THOMAS C. EMMEL Department of Zoology, The University of Florida, Gainesville Evolution of butterflies in the satyrid genus Cercyonis has produced a complex of species groups and variable populations in North America that has not been reviewed thoroughly since the last century. The pur­ pose of this paper and others to follow in the series is to provide a critical, modern synthesis of taxonomic, distributional and biological information on all species and subspecies within the genus, based on extensive studies by the author from 1960 to the present. In future papers, each species group will be treated intensively, with plates of both sexes of adults of all subspecies, larvae, pupae, figures of eggs, genitalia, androconia, antennae and other important morphological characters, and chromosomes. Genetic data and hyblidization crosses will also be summarized in the present series from mateIial to be pub­ lished in full elsewhere. TAXONOMY The Nearctic genus Cercyonis has had over thirty specific, subspecif'ic, or varietal names applied to it, and no taxonomic revision has been at­ tempted since the 1880s (Edwards, 1880). On the basis of extensive field work, examination of over 5,000 adult C ercyonis specimens, rearing of many of the named forms, and studies of external and internal morphology of all these forms, the following new taxonomic treatment is proposed.l 1. Cercyonis sthenele (Boisduval, 1852) a. sthenele sthenele (Boisduval, 1852) b. sthenele silvestris (Edwards, 1861) c. sthenele paulus (Edwards, 1879) behrii (Grinnell, 19(5) d.
    [Show full text]
  • Lodgepole Pine Dwarf Mistletoe in Taylor Park, Colorado Report for the Taylor Park Environmental Assessment
    Lodgepole Pine Dwarf Mistletoe in Taylor Park, Colorado Report for the Taylor Park Environmental Assessment Jim Worrall, Ph.D. Gunnison Service Center Forest Health Protection Rocky Mountain Region USDA Forest Service 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 2 2. DESCRIPTION, DISTRIBUTION, HOSTS ..................................................................................... 2 3. LIFE CYCLE....................................................................................................................................... 3 4. SCOPE OF TREATMENTS RELATIVE TO INFESTED AREA ................................................. 4 5. IMPACTS ON TREES AND FORESTS ........................................................................................... 4 5.1 TREE GROWTH AND LONGEVITY .................................................................................................... 4 5.2 EFFECTS OF DWARF MISTLETOE ON FOREST DYNAMICS ............................................................... 6 5.3 RATE OF SPREAD AND INTENSIFICATION ........................................................................................ 6 6. IMPACTS OF DWARF MISTLETOES ON ANIMALS ................................................................ 6 6.1 DIVERSITY AND ABUNDANCE OF VERTEBRATES ............................................................................ 7 6.2 EFFECT OF MISTLETOE-CAUSED SNAGS ON VERTEBRATES ............................................................12
    [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]
  • 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]
  • Papilio (New Series) #24 2016 Issn 2372-9449
    PAPILIO (NEW SERIES) #24 2016 ISSN 2372-9449 MEAD’S BUTTERFLIES IN COLORADO, 1871 by James A. Scott, Ph.D. in entomology, University of California Berkeley, 1972 (e-mail: [email protected]) Table of Contents Introduction………………………………………………………..……….……………….p. 1 Locations of Localities Mentioned Below…………………………………..……..……….p. 7 Summary of Butterflies Collected at Mead’s Major Localities………………….…..……..p. 8 Mead’s Butterflies, Sorted by Butterfly Species…………………………………………..p. 11 Diary of Mead’s Travels and Butterflies Collected……………………………….……….p. 43 Identity of Mead’s Field Names for Butterflies he Collected……………………….…….p. 64 Discussion and Conclusions………………………………………………….……………p. 66 Acknowledgments………………………………………………………….……………...p. 67 Literature Cited……………………………………………………………….………...….p. 67 Table 1………………………………………………………………………….………..….p. 6 Table 2……………………………………………………………………………………..p. 37 Introduction Theodore L. Mead (1852-1936) visited central Colorado from June to September 1871 to collect butterflies. Considerable effort has been spent trying to determine the identities of the butterflies he collected for his future father-in-law William Henry Edwards, and where he collected them. Brown (1956) tried to deduce his itinerary based on the specimens and the few letters etc. available to him then. Brown (1964-1987) designated lectotypes and neotypes for the names of the butterflies that William Henry Edwards described, including 24 based on Mead’s specimens. Brown & Brown (1996) published many later-discovered letters written by Mead describing his travels and collections. Calhoun (2013) purchased Mead’s journal and published Mead’s brief journal descriptions of his collecting efforts and his travels by stage and horseback and walking, and Calhoun commented on some of the butterflies he collected (especially lectotypes). Calhoun (2015a) published an abbreviated summary of Mead’s travels using those improved locations from the journal etc., and detailed the type localities of some of the butterflies named from Mead specimens.
    [Show full text]
  • 2010 Animal Species of Concern
    MONTANA NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM Animal Species of Concern Species List Last Updated 08/05/2010 219 Species of Concern 86 Potential Species of Concern All Records (no filtering) A program of the University of Montana and Natural Resource Information Systems, Montana State Library Introduction The Montana Natural Heritage Program (MTNHP) serves as the state's information source for animals, plants, and plant communities with a focus on species and communities that are rare, threatened, and/or have declining trends and as a result are at risk or potentially at risk of extirpation in Montana. This report on Montana Animal Species of Concern is produced jointly by the Montana Natural Heritage Program (MTNHP) and Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks (MFWP). Montana Animal Species of Concern are native Montana animals that are considered to be "at risk" due to declining population trends, threats to their habitats, and/or restricted distribution. Also included in this report are Potential Animal Species of Concern -- animals for which current, often limited, information suggests potential vulnerability or for which additional data are needed before an accurate status assessment can be made. Over the last 200 years, 5 species with historic breeding ranges in Montana have been extirpated from the state; Woodland Caribou (Rangifer tarandus), Greater Prairie-Chicken (Tympanuchus cupido), Passenger Pigeon (Ectopistes migratorius), Pilose Crayfish (Pacifastacus gambelii), and Rocky Mountain Locust (Melanoplus spretus). Designation as a Montana Animal Species of Concern or Potential Animal Species of Concern is not a statutory or regulatory classification. Instead, these designations provide a basis for resource managers and decision-makers to make proactive decisions regarding species conservation and data collection priorities in order to avoid additional extirpations.
    [Show full text]