DOCSLIB.ORG

Mountain Ponds and Lakes Monitoring 2016 Results from Lassen Volcanic National Park, Crater Lake National Park, and Redwood National Park

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mountain Ponds and Lakes Monitoring 2016 Results from Lassen Volcanic National Park, Crater Lake National Park, and Redwood National Park National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Mountain Ponds and Lakes Monitoring 2016 Results from Lassen Volcanic National Park, Crater Lake National Park, and Redwood National Park Natural Resource Data Series NPS/KLMN/NRDS—2019/1208 ON THIS PAGE Unknown Darner Dragonfly perched on ground near Widow Lake, Lassen Volcanic National Park. Photograph by Patrick Graves, KLMN Lakes Crew Lead. ON THE COVER Summit Lake, Lassen Volcanic National Park Photograph by Elliot Hendry, KLMN Lakes Crew Technician. Mountain Ponds and Lakes Monitoring 2016 Results from Lassen Volcanic National Park, Crater Lake National Park, and Redwood National Park Natural Resource Data Series NPS/KLMN/NRDS—2019/1208 Eric C. Dinger National Park Service 1250 Siskiyou Blvd Ashland, Oregon 97520 March 2019 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Data Series is intended for the timely release of basic data sets and data summaries. Care has been taken to assure accuracy of raw data values, but a thorough analysis and interpretation of the data has not been completed. Consequently, the initial analyses of data in this report are provisional and subject to change. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. Data in this report were collected and analyzed using methods based on well-established, peer- reviewed protocols and were analyzed and interpreted within the guidelines of the protocols. Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. This report is available in digital format from the Klamath Inventory & Monitoring Network and the Natural Resource Publications Management website. If you have difficulty accessing information in this publication, particularly if using assistive technology, please email [email protected]. Please cite this publication as: Dinger, E. C. 2019. Mountain ponds and lakes monitoring: 2016 results from Lassen Volcanic National Park, Crater Lake National Park, and Redwood National Park. Natural Resource Data Series NPS/KLMN/NRDS—2019/1208. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. NPS 111/150720, 106/150720, 167/150720, March 2019 ii Contents Page Figures.................................................................................................................................................... v Tables .................................................................................................................................................... vi Appendices ..........................................................................................................................................viii Abstract ................................................................................................................................................. ix Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................................. x 1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Methods............................................................................................................................................ 2 2.1 Implementation Schedule ......................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Site Selection and Lake Identifiers ........................................................................................... 2 2.2.1 Judgment Sites .................................................................................................................. 2 2.2.2 Non-Judgment Sites.......................................................................................................... 2 2.3 Site Set-up and Sampling Scheme ............................................................................................ 3 2.4 Water Chemistry and Water Quality Profile ............................................................................ 5 2.5 Aquatic Communities ............................................................................................................... 6 2.5.1 Zooplankton ...................................................................................................................... 6 2.5.2 Littoral Macroinvertebrates .............................................................................................. 6 2.5.3 Fish ................................................................................................................................... 7 2.5.4 Zooplankton and Macroinvertebrate reporting ................................................................. 8 2.6 Physical Habitat and Lake Morphometrics .............................................................................. 8 3.0 Results .............................................................................................................................................. 9 3.1 Lassen Volcanic National Park ................................................................................................ 9 3.1.1 Physical substrate ........................................................................................................... 17 3.1.2 Water Chemistry ............................................................................................................. 17 3.1.3 Water Quality ................................................................................................................. 17 3.1.4 Zooplankton .................................................................................................................... 26 3.1.5 Littoral Zone Macroinvertebrates ................................................................................... 26 iii Contents (continued) Page 3.1.6 Vertebrates ...................................................................................................................... 26 3.2 Crater Lake National Park ...................................................................................................... 34 3.2.1 Physical Substrate ........................................................................................................... 37 3.2.2 Water Chemistry ............................................................................................................. 37 3.2.3 Water Quality ................................................................................................................. 37 3.3.4 Zooplankton .................................................................................................................... 37 3.3.5 Littoral Zone Macroinvertebrates ................................................................................... 42 3.3.6 Vertebrates ...................................................................................................................... 42 3.3 Redwood National Park .......................................................................................................... 44 3.3.1 Physical Substrate ........................................................................................................... 44 3.3.2 Water Chemistry ............................................................................................................. 44 3.3.3 Water Quality ................................................................................................................. 48 3.3.4 Zooplankton and Littoral Zone Macroinvertebrates ....................................................... 48 3.3.5 Vertebrates ...................................................................................................................... 51 4.0 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 53 5.0 Literature Cited .............................................................................................................................. 54 iv Figures Page Figure 1. Layout schematic of a pond-lake showing the location and type of sampling completed during each site visit. ............................................................................................................ 4 Figure 2. 2013 Field Crew Lead Kirsten Underwood finishing horizontal zooplankton tow sampling at Lily Pond, Lake 10430 (from 2013 field season). ....................................................... 6 Figure 3. 2013 Crew Leader Kirsten Underwood sampling littoral zone macroinvertebrates in Summit Lake (10793) (left) and Lily Pond (10430) (right) (from 2013 field season). ................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Atlas of the Copepods (Class Crustacea: Subclass Copepoda: Orders Calanoida, Cyclopoida, and Harpacticoida)
    Taxonomic Atlas of the Copepods (Class Crustacea: Subclass Copepoda: Orders Calanoida, Cyclopoida, and Harpacticoida) Recorded at the Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve and State Nature Preserve, Ohio by Jakob A. Boehler and Kenneth A. Krieger National Center for Water Quality Research Heidelberg University Tiffin, Ohio, USA 44883 August 2012 Atlas of the Copepods, (Class Crustacea: Subclass Copepoda) Recorded at the Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve and State Nature Preserve, Ohio Acknowledgments The authors are grateful for the funding for this project provided by Dr. David Klarer, Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve. We appreciate the critical reviews of a draft of this atlas provided by David Klarer and Dr. Janet Reid. This work was funded under contract to Heidelberg University by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources. This publication was supported in part by Grant Number H50/CCH524266 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve in Ohio is part of the National Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS), established by Section 315 of the Coastal Zone Management Act, as amended. Additional information about the system can be obtained from the Estuarine Reserves Division, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1305 East West Highway – N/ORM5, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Financial support for this publication was provided by a grant under the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act, administered by the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Silver Spring, MD.
    [Show full text]
  • An Analysis of Primary and Secondary Production in Lake Kariba in a Changing Climate
    AN ANALYSIS OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY PRODUCTION IN LAKE KARIBA IN A CHANGING CLIMATE MZIME R. NDEBELE-MURISA A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor Philosophiae in the Department of Biodiversity and Conservation Biology, University of the Western Cape Supervisor: Prof. Charles Musil Co-Supervisor: Prof. Lincoln Raitt May 2011 An analysis of primary and secondary production in Lake Kariba in a changing climate Mzime Regina Ndebele-Murisa KEYWORDS Climate warming Limnology Primary production Phytoplankton Zooplankton Kapenta production Lake Kariba i Abstract Title: An analysis of primary and secondary production in Lake Kariba in a changing climate M.R. Ndebele-Murisa PhD, Biodiversity and Conservation Biology Department, University of the Western Cape Analysis of temperature, rainfall and evaporation records over a 44-year period spanning the years 1964 to 2008 indicates changes in the climate around Lake Kariba. Mean annual temperatures have increased by approximately 1.5oC, and pan evaporation rates by about 25%, with rainfall having declined by an average of 27.1 mm since 1964 at an average rate of 6.3 mm per decade. At the same time, lake water temperatures, evaporation rates, and water loss from the lake have increased, which have adversely affected lake water levels, nutrient and thermal dynamics. The most prominent influence of the changing climate on Lake Kariba has been a reduction in the lake water levels, averaging 9.5 m over the past two decades. These are associated with increased warming, reduced rainfall and diminished water and therefore nutrient inflow into the lake. The warmer climate has increased temperatures in the upper layers of lake water, the epilimnion, by an overall average of 1.9°C between 1965 and 2009.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 3.6: Chronic Effects Benchmarks
    October 2013 SHELL CANADA ENERGY Appendix 3.6: Chronic Effects Benchmarks Project Number: 13-1346-0001 REPORT APPENDIX 3.6: CHRONIC EFFECTS BENCHMARKS Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 CHRONIC EFFECTS BENCHMARKS ............................................................................................................................. 1 2.1 Updated Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment Protocol .................................................................. 2 2.2 Application ........................................................................................................................................................... 2 2.3 Screening of Constituents for Chronic Effects Benchmark Development ............................................................ 3 2.4 Assessment Methods .......................................................................................................................................... 6 2.4.1 General Approach .......................................................................................................................................... 6 2.5 Procedure ............................................................................................................................................................ 9 2.5.1 Step 1: Creation of a Toxicological Database ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mideopsis Milankovici Sp. Nov. a New Water Mite
    Mideopsis milankovici sp. nov. a new water mite from Montenegro based on morphological and molecular data (Acariformes, Hydrachnidia, Mideopsidae) Vladimir Pešić, Harry Smit To cite this version: Vladimir Pešić, Harry Smit. Mideopsis milankovici sp. nov. a new water mite from Montenegro based on morphological and molecular data (Acariformes, Hydrachnidia, Mideopsidae). Acarologia, Acarologia, 2020, 60 (3), pp.566-575. 10.24349/acarologia/20204387. hal-02911643 HAL Id: hal-02911643 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02911643 Submitted on 4 Aug 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution| 4.0 International License Acarologia A quarterly journal of acarology, since 1959 Publishing on all aspects of the Acari All information: http://www1.montpellier.inra.fr/CBGP/acarologia/ [email protected] Acarologia is proudly non-profit, with no page charges and free open access Please help us maintain this system by encouraging your institutes to subscribe to the print version of the journal
    [Show full text]
  • CHIRONOMUS Newsletter on Chironomidae Research
    CHIRONOMUS Newsletter on Chironomidae Research No. 25 ISSN 0172-1941 (printed) 1891-5426 (online) November 2012 CONTENTS Editorial: Inventories - What are they good for? 3 Dr. William P. Coffman: Celebrating 50 years of research on Chironomidae 4 Dear Sepp! 9 Dr. Marta Margreiter-Kownacka 14 Current Research Sharma, S. et al. Chironomidae (Diptera) in the Himalayan Lakes - A study of sub- fossil assemblages in the sediments of two high altitude lakes from Nepal 15 Krosch, M. et al. Non-destructive DNA extraction from Chironomidae, including fragile pupal exuviae, extends analysable collections and enhances vouchering 22 Martin, J. Kiefferulus barbitarsis (Kieffer, 1911) and Kiefferulus tainanus (Kieffer, 1912) are distinct species 28 Short Communications An easy to make and simple designed rearing apparatus for Chironomidae 33 Some proposed emendations to larval morphology terminology 35 Chironomids in Quaternary permafrost deposits in the Siberian Arctic 39 New books, resources and announcements 43 Finnish Chironomidae 47 Chironomini indet. (Paratendipes?) from La Selva Biological Station, Costa Rica. Photo by Carlos de la Rosa. CHIRONOMUS Newsletter on Chironomidae Research Editors Torbjørn EKREM, Museum of Natural History and Archaeology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway Peter H. LANGTON, 16, Irish Society Court, Coleraine, Co. Londonderry, Northern Ireland BT52 1GX The CHIRONOMUS Newsletter on Chironomidae Research is devoted to all aspects of chironomid research and aims to be an updated news bulletin for the Chironomidae research community. The newsletter is published yearly in October/November, is open access, and can be downloaded free from this website: http:// www.ntnu.no/ojs/index.php/chironomus. Publisher is the Museum of Natural History and Archaeology at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology in Trondheim, Norway.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitat Comparison of Mideopsis Orbicularis (O. F. Müller, 1776) and M
    Belg. J. Zool., 145(2) : 94-101 July 2015 Habitat comparison of Mideopsis orbicularis (O. F. Müller, 1776) and M. crassipes Soar, 1904 (Acari: Hydrachnidia) in the Krąpiel River Andrzej Zawal1,*, Przemysław Śmietana2, Edyta Stępień3, Vladimir Pešić4, Magdalena Kłosowska1, Grzegorz Michoński1, Aleksandra Bańkowska1, Piotr Dąbkowski1 & Robert Stryjecki5 1 Department of Invertebrate Zoology & Limnology, University of Szczecin, 71-415 Szczecin, Wąska 13, Poland. 2 Deparment of Ecology & Environmental Protection, University of Szczecin, 71-415 Szczecin, Wąska 13, Poland. 3 Department of Plant Taxonomy and Phytogeography, University of Szczecin, 71-415 Szczecin, Wąska 13, Poland. 4 Department of Biology, University of Montenegro, Cetinjski put b.b., 81000 Podgorica, Montenegro. 5 Department of Zoology, Animal Ecology and Wildlife Management, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, Akademicka 13, 20-950 Lublin, Poland. * Corresponding author: Andrzej Zawal, e-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT. Ecological studies of water mites have a very long tradition. However, no explicit data have been obtained to date with regard to specific ecological parameters defining autoecological values for particular species, and therefore such values have not been compared between closely related species. The present study is an attempt at making such comparisons between two closely related species: Mideopsis orbicularis and Mideopsis crassipes. Both species are psammophilous; M. orbicularis prefers stagnant waters, while M. crassipes prefers running waters. The research was conducted during 2010 in 89 localities distributed along the Krąpiel River and in water reservoirs found in its valley. The two species were collected solely in the river, where they were found in 26 localities and only these localities were analyzed.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Aspects of Ecology and Genetics of Chironomidae (Diptera) in Rice Field and the Effect of Selected Herbicides on Its Population
    SOME ASPECTS OF ECOLOGY AND GENETICS OF CHIRONOMIDAE (DIPTERA) IN RICE FIELD AND THE EFFECT OF SELECTED HERBICIDES ON ITS POPULATION By SALMAN ABDO ALI AL-SHAMI Thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master August 2006 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First of all, Allah will help me to finish this study. My sincere gratitude to my supervisor, Associate Professor Dr. Che Salmah Md. Rawi and my co- supervisor Associate Professor Dr. Siti Azizah Mohd. Nor for their support, encouragement, guidance, suggestions and patience in providing invaluable ideas. To them, I express my heartfelt thanks. I would like to thank Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia, for giving me the opportunity and providing me with all the necessary facilities that made my study possible. Special thanks to Ms. Madiziatul, Ms. Ruzainah, Ms. Emi, Ms. Kamila, Mr. Adnan, Ms. Yeap Beng-keok and Ms. Manorenjitha for their valuable help. I am also grateful to our entomology laboratory assistants Mr. Hadzri, Ms. Khatjah and Mr. Shahabuddin for their help in sampling and laboratory work. All the staff of Electronic Microscopy Unit, drivers Mr. Kalimuthu, Mr. Nurdin for their invaluable helps. I would like to thank all the staff of School of Biological Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, who has helped me in one way or another either directly or indirectly in contributing to the smooth progress of my research activities throughout my study. My genuine thanks also go to the specialists, Prof. Saether, Prof Anderson, Dr. Mendes (Bergen University, Norway) and Prof. Xinhua Wang (Nankai University, China) for kindly identifying and verifying Chironomidae larvae and adult specimens.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Newsletter and Bibliography of the International Society of Plecopterologists PERLA NO. 28, 2010
    PERLA Annual Newsletter and Bibliography of The International Society of Plecopterologists Pteronarcella regularis (Hagen), Mt. Shasta City Park, California, USA. Photograph by Bill P. Stark PERLA NO. 28, 2010 Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 USA PERLA Annual Newsletter and Bibliography of the International Society of Plecopterologists Available on Request to the Managing Editor MANAGING EDITOR: Boris C. Kondratieff Department of Bioagricultural Sciences And Pest Management Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 USA E-mail: [email protected] EDITORIAL BOARD: Richard W. Baumann Department of Biology and Monte L. Bean Life Science Museum Brigham Young University Provo, Utah 84602 USA E-mail: [email protected] J. Manuel Tierno de Figueroa Dpto. de Biología Animal Facultad de Ciencias Universidad de Granada 18071 Granada, SPAIN E-mail: [email protected] Kenneth W. Stewart Department of Biological Sciences University of North Texas Denton, Texas 76203, USA E-mail: [email protected] Shigekazu Uchida Aichi Institute of Technology 1247 Yagusa Toyota 470-0392, JAPAN E-mail: [email protected] Peter Zwick Schwarzer Stock 9 D-36110 Schlitz, GERMANY E-mail: [email protected] 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Subscription policy……………………………………………………………………….4 Publication of the Proceedings of the International Joint Meeting on Ephemeroptera and Plecoptera 2008…………………………………….………………….………….…5 Ninth North American Plecoptera Symposium………………………………………….6
    [Show full text]
  • Elimination of Dengue by Control of Aedes Vector Mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae) Utilizing Copepods (Copepoda: Cyclopidae)
    International Journal of Bioinformatics and Biomedical Engineering Vol. 1, No. 2, 2015, pp. 101-106 http://www.aiscience.org/journal/ijbbe Elimination of Dengue by Control of Aedes Vector Mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae) Utilizing Copepods (Copepoda: Cyclopidae) Muhammad Sarwar * Nuclear Institute for Agriculture & Biology, Faisalabad, Punjab, Pakistan Abstract This paper reports on the information and result of long-term laboratory and field studies on copepods (Copepoda: Cyclopidae) as predators for mosquito control inhabiting in tropic and subtropic environments. Mosquitoes have long been vectors of numerous diseases that affect human health and well-being in many parts of the world. Reducing the use of pesticides against insect vectors is one of the big demands of the society because public has always been against the heavy use of insecticides. Copepods are natural and tiny shrimp-like crustacean with a hearty appetite for feeding on mosquito larvae in water holding areas. The copepods thrive in fresh and marine water, and are valuable tool in battling mosquitoes in artificial containers, roadside ditches, small water pools, clogged downspouts and other wet areas that can breed plenty of mosquitoes. These are especially helpful tools in fighting mosquitoes near public places, where use of certain pesticides is restricted. Copepods are relatively easy to culture, maintain and deliver to the target areas, but getting the cultures started requires some effort and time. Copepods are more efficient predator of younger than of older larvae of mosquito and predation drops considerably for 4 days and older larvae. Copepods though prefer to prey on younger larvae, yet also increasingly attack on older larvae as greater predator densities reduce the supply of younger ones.
    [Show full text]
  • Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 1 Table 1. Current Taxonomic Keys and the Level of Taxonomy Routinely U
    Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 Table 1. Current taxonomic keys and the level of taxonomy routinely used by the Ohio EPA in streams and rivers for various macroinvertebrate taxonomic classifications. Genera that are reasonably considered to be monotypic in Ohio are also listed. Taxon Subtaxon Taxonomic Level Taxonomic Key(ies) Species Pennak 1989, Thorp & Rogers 2016 Porifera If no gemmules are present identify to family (Spongillidae). Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Cnidaria monotypic genera: Cordylophora caspia and Craspedacusta sowerbii Platyhelminthes Class (Turbellaria) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Nemertea Phylum (Nemertea) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Phylum (Nematomorpha) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Nematomorpha Paragordius varius monotypic genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Ectoprocta monotypic genera: Cristatella mucedo, Hyalinella punctata, Lophopodella carteri, Paludicella articulata, Pectinatella magnifica, Pottsiella erecta Entoprocta Urnatella gracilis monotypic genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Polychaeta Class (Polychaeta) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Annelida Oligochaeta Subclass (Oligochaeta) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Hirudinida Species Klemm 1982, Klemm et al. 2015 Anostraca Species Thorp & Rogers 2016 Species (Lynceus Laevicaudata Thorp & Rogers 2016 brachyurus) Spinicaudata Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Williams 1972, Thorp & Rogers Isopoda Genus 2016 Holsinger 1972, Thorp & Rogers Amphipoda Genus 2016 Gammaridae: Gammarus Species Holsinger 1972 Crustacea monotypic genera: Apocorophium lacustre, Echinogammarus ischnus, Synurella dentata Species (Taphromysis Mysida Thorp & Rogers 2016 louisianae) Crocker & Barr 1968; Jezerinac 1993, 1995; Jezerinac & Thoma 1984; Taylor 2000; Thoma et al. Cambaridae Species 2005; Thoma & Stocker 2009; Crandall & De Grave 2017; Glon et al. 2018 Species (Palaemon Pennak 1989, Palaemonidae kadiakensis) Thorp & Rogers 2016 1 Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 Taxon Subtaxon Taxonomic Level Taxonomic Key(ies) Informal grouping of the Arachnida Hydrachnidia Smith 2001 water mites Genus Morse et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of the Family Chironomidae (Diptera) of Finland
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 441: 63–90 (2014)Checklist of the family Chironomidae (Diptera) of Finland 63 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.441.7461 CHECKLIST www.zookeys.org Launched to accelerate biodiversity research Checklist of the family Chironomidae (Diptera) of Finland Lauri Paasivirta1 1 Ruuhikoskenkatu 17 B 5, FI-24240 Salo, Finland Corresponding author: Lauri Paasivirta ([email protected]) Academic editor: J. Kahanpää | Received 10 March 2014 | Accepted 26 August 2014 | Published 19 September 2014 http://zoobank.org/F3343ED1-AE2C-43B4-9BA1-029B5EC32763 Citation: Paasivirta L (2014) Checklist of the family Chironomidae (Diptera) of Finland. In: Kahanpää J, Salmela J (Eds) Checklist of the Diptera of Finland. ZooKeys 441: 63–90. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.441.7461 Abstract A checklist of the family Chironomidae (Diptera) recorded from Finland is presented. Keywords Finland, Chironomidae, species list, biodiversity, faunistics Introduction There are supposedly at least 15 000 species of chironomid midges in the world (Armitage et al. 1995, but see Pape et al. 2011) making it the largest family among the aquatic insects. The European chironomid fauna consists of 1262 species (Sæther and Spies 2013). In Finland, 780 species can be found, of which 37 are still undescribed (Paasivirta 2012). The species checklist written by B. Lindeberg on 23.10.1979 (Hackman 1980) included 409 chironomid species. Twenty of those species have been removed from the checklist due to various reasons. The total number of species increased in the 1980s to 570, mainly due to the identification work by me and J. Tuiskunen (Bergman and Jansson 1983, Tuiskunen and Lindeberg 1986).
    [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]