DOCSLIB.ORG

Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2020 Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2020 Hickory Nut Gorge Green Salamander (Aneides caryaensis) Photo by Austin Patton 2014 Compiled by Judith Ratcliffe, Zoologist North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources www.ncnhp.org C ur Alleghany rit Ashe Northampton Gates C uc Surry am k Stokes P d Rockingham Caswell Person Vance Warren a e P s n Hertford e qu Chowan r Granville q ot ui a Mountains Watauga Halifax m nk an Wilkes Yadkin s Mitchell Avery Forsyth Orange Guilford Franklin Bertie Alamance Durham Nash Yancey Alexander Madison Caldwell Davie Edgecombe Washington Tyrrell Iredell Martin Dare Burke Davidson Wake McDowell Randolph Chatham Wilson Buncombe Catawba Rowan Beaufort Haywood Pitt Swain Hyde Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Johnston Graham Henderson Jackson Cabarrus Montgomery Harnett Cleveland Wayne Polk Gaston Stanly Cherokee Macon Transylvania Lenoir Mecklenburg Moore Clay Pamlico Hoke Union d Cumberland Jones Anson on Sampson hm Duplin ic Craven Piedmont R nd tla Onslow Carteret co S Robeson Bladen Pender Sandhills Columbus New Hanover Tidewater Coastal Plain Brunswick THE COUNTIES AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NORTH CAROLINA Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2020 Compiled by Judith Ratcliffe, Zoologist North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org This list is dynamic and is revised frequently as new data become available. New species are added to the list, and others are dropped from the list as appropriate. The list is published periodically, generally every two years. Further information may be obtained by contacting the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Department of Natural and Cultural Resources, 1651 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699- 1651 and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, 1701 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1701. Additional information on rare species, as well as a digital version of this list, can be obtained from the Natural Heritage Program’s website at www.ncnhp.org. TABLE OF CONTENTS NORTH CAROLINA ANIMAL LIST - RARE ............................................................................................... 1 EXPLANATION OF STATUS AND RANK CODES FOR ANIMALS ........................................................ 2 Mammals ......................................................................................................................................................... 11 Birds ................................................................................................................................................................ 15 Reptiles ........................................................................................................................................................... 22 Amphibians ..................................................................................................................................................... 26 Freshwater Fishes ............................................................................................................................................ 30 Mollusks: Freshwater Bivalves ....................................................................................................................... 38 Mollusks: Freshwater and Terrestrial Gastropods .......................................................................................... 43 Arachnids ........................................................................................................................................................ 52 Crustaceans ..................................................................................................................................................... 54 Insects: Mayflies ............................................................................................................................................. 57 Insects: Stoneflies ........................................................................................................................................... 59 Insects: Caddisflies ......................................................................................................................................... 61 Insects: Dragonflies and Damselflies .............................................................................................................. 63 Insects: Flies .................................................................................................................................................... 67 Insects: Butterflies........................................................................................................................................... 68 Insects: Moths ................................................................................................................................................. 73 Insects: Grasshoppers and Katydids................................................................................................................ 83 Insects: Beetles ................................................................................................................................................ 85 Insects: True Bugs ........................................................................................................................................... 86 Insects: Bees .................................................................................................................................................... 87 NORTH CAROLINA ANIMAL LIST – WATCH ........................................................................................ 89 Mammals ......................................................................................................................................................... 91 Birds ................................................................................................................................................................ 93 Reptiles ........................................................................................................................................................... 97 Amphibians ..................................................................................................................................................... 99 Freshwater Fishes .......................................................................................................................................... 101 Mollusks: Freshwater Bivalves ..................................................................................................................... 104 Mollusks: Freshwater and Terrestrial Gastropods ........................................................................................ 105 Arachnids ...................................................................................................................................................... 108 Crustaceans ................................................................................................................................................... 109 Insects: Mayflies ........................................................................................................................................... 112 Insects: Stoneflies ......................................................................................................................................... 114 Insects: Caddisflies ....................................................................................................................................... 117 Insects: Dragonflies and Damselflies ............................................................................................................ 123 Insects: Butterflies......................................................................................................................................... 126 Insects: Moths ............................................................................................................................................... 128 Insects: Grasshoppers and Katydids.............................................................................................................. 140 Insects: Beetles .............................................................................................................................................. 143 Insects: Bees .................................................................................................................................................. 145 ENDEMIC ANIMALS IN NORTH CAROLINA ........................................................................................ 148 EXTIRPATED ANIMALS IN NORTH CAROLINA ................................................................................. 151 POTENTIAL NEW TO NORTH CAROLINA ANIMALS ......................................................................... 153 SIGNIFICANT 2020 REVISIONS TO THE ANIMAL LIST ..................................................................... 156 INDEX OF SCIENTIFIC NAMES ............................................................................................................... 159 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Biologists who graciously provided review of species statuses and ranks in this 2020 version, listed alphabetically, are: Nancy Adamson, Jeff Beane, Brian Bockhahn, Art Bogan, John Carpenter, Ed Corey, Katharine Etchison, Michael Fisk, Eric Fleek, Jeff Hall, Steve Hall, Victor Holland, Jeff Humphries, Sarina Jepsen, Christine
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Monte L. Bean Life Science Museum Brigham Young University Provo, Utah 84602 PBRIA a Newsletter for Plecopterologists
    No. 10 1990/1991 Monte L. Bean Life Science Museum Brigham Young University Provo, Utah 84602 PBRIA A Newsletter for Plecopterologists EDITORS: Richard W, Baumann Monte L. Bean Life Science Museum Brigham Young University Provo, Utah 84602 Peter Zwick Limnologische Flußstation Max-Planck-Institut für Limnologie, Postfach 260, D-6407, Schlitz, West Germany EDITORIAL ASSISTANT: Bonnie Snow REPORT 3rd N orth A merican Stonefly S ymposium Boris Kondratieff hosted an enthusiastic group of plecopterologists in Fort Collins, Colorado during May 17-19, 1991. More than 30 papers and posters were presented and much fruitful discussion occurred. An enjoyable field trip to the Colorado Rockies took place on Sunday, May 19th, and the weather was excellent. Boris was such a good host that it was difficult to leave, but many participants traveled to Santa Fe, New Mexico to attend the annual meetings of the North American Benthological Society. Bill Stark gave us a way to remember this meeting by producing a T-shirt with a unique “Spirit Fly” design. ANNOUNCEMENT 11th International Stonefly Symposium Stan Szczytko has planned and organized an excellent symposium that will be held at the Tree Haven Biological Station, University of Wisconsin in Tomahawk, Wisconsin, USA. The registration cost of $300 includes lodging, meals, field trip and a T- Shirt. This is a real bargain so hopefully many colleagues and friends will come and participate in the symposium August 17-20, 1992. Stan has promised good weather and good friends even though he will not guarantee that stonefly adults will be collected during the field trip. Printed August 1992 1 OBITUARIES RODNEY L.
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidoptera of North America 5
    Lepidoptera of North America 5. Contributions to the Knowledge of Southern West Virginia Lepidoptera Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Lepidoptera of North America 5. Contributions to the Knowledge of Southern West Virginia Lepidoptera by Valerio Albu, 1411 E. Sweetbriar Drive Fresno, CA 93720 and Eric Metzler, 1241 Kildale Square North Columbus, OH 43229 April 30, 2004 Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Cover illustration: Blueberry Sphinx (Paonias astylus (Drury)], an eastern endemic. Photo by Valeriu Albu. ISBN 1084-8819 This publication and others in the series may be ordered from the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity, Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523 Abstract A list of 1531 species ofLepidoptera is presented, collected over 15 years (1988 to 2002), in eleven southern West Virginia counties. A variety of collecting methods was used, including netting, light attracting, light trapping and pheromone trapping. The specimens were identified by the currently available pictorial sources and determination keys. Many were also sent to specialists for confirmation or identification. The majority of the data was from Kanawha County, reflecting the area of more intensive sampling effort by the senior author. This imbalance of data between Kanawha County and other counties should even out with further sampling of the area. Key Words: Appalachian Mountains,
    [Show full text]
  • Orden TRICHOPTERA Manual
    Revista IDE@ - SEA, nº 64 (30-06-2015): 1–21. ISSN 2386-7183 1 Ibero Diversidad Entomológica @ccesible www.sea-entomologia.org/IDE@ Clase: Insecta Orden TRICHOPTERA Manual CLASE INSECTA Orden Trichoptera Carmen Zamora-Muñoz1, Marta Sáinz-Bariáin1 & Núria Bonada2 1 Departamento de Zoología. Facultad de Ciencias. Universidad de Granada. Campus de Fuentenueva, 18071 Granada (España). [email protected] 2 Grup de Recerca Freshwater Ecology and Management (FEM), Departament d’Ecologia, Facultat de Biologia, Universitat de Barcelona (UB), Diagonal 643, 08028 Barcelona, Catalonia (España). Imagen superior: Óleo con larva y adulto de tricóptero. Autora: Ana Sánz. 1. Breve definición del grupo y principales caracteres diagnósticos Los tricópteros o frigáneas (Trichoptera, del griego trichos, "pelo" y pteron, "ala") son artrópodos de la Clase Insecta cuyos adultos portan alas cubiertas de pilosidad. Casi todas sus especies dependen del medio acuático para su desarrollo. La mayoría habitan en ríos y arroyos de aguas limpias y bien oxigena- das, aunque también se pueden encontrar en ambientes lénticos, terrestres e incluso marinos. Forman un grupo natural y están cercanamente emparentados con las mariposas y polillas (Lepi- doptera), que tienen escamas en sus alas y, como ellos, son capaces de producir seda. Ambos forman el superorden Amphiesmenoptera. De hecho, el grupo es sobre todo conocido por la habilidad de sus larvas para fabricar, con seda y diversos materiales, una gran variedad de construcciones como estuches portáti- les (Figura 1), refugios fijos, redes para la recogida de alimento y galerías, por lo que también se les ha denominado “arquitectos subacuáticos” (Mackay & Wiggins, 1979; Wiggins, 2004). Aunque para la cons- trucción de los estuches los tricópteros utilizan el material disponible en el lecho del río, el tipo y disposi- ción de las piezas que usan suele tener un marcado carácter filogenético (https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=3vr6Z54LJtM&spfreload=10).
    [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]
  • Acronicta Euphorbiae ([Den. & Schiff.], 1775) Beobachtung, Kenntnisstand Und Zucht (Insecta: Lepidoptera, Noctuidae)
    ©Kreis Nürnberger Entomologen; download unter www.biologiezentrum.at Acronicta euphorbiae ([Den. & Schiff.], 1775) Beobachtung, Kenntnisstand und Zucht (Insecta: Lepidoptera, Noctuidae) R u d o l f F r ie d r ic h T a n n e r t Zusammenfassung: Der Verfasser schildert seine Erfahrungen mit Acronicta euphorbiae ([Den. & Schiff.], 1775). Angesprochen werden auch die aus ein­ schlägiger Literatur gewonnenen Kenntnisse, sowie Erfahrungen mit verschiedenen erfolgreichen aber auch weniger erfolgreichen Zuchten der Art. Abstract: The author informs about his experiences in raising Acronicta euphorbiae ([Den. & Schiff.], 1775), especially about the problem to find the right feeding plant for the Caterpillars. Advices in the basic literature proved to be wrong. Key Words: Noctuidae, Acronicta euphorbiae Namen und Verbreitung Nach neuerer Nomenklatur (K a rsholt & Ra zo w sk i , 1996) trägt die Art den im Titel genannten Namen Acronicta euphorbiae ([Den. & Schiff.], 1775.) In K o ch , 1991 heißt sieAcronycta euphorbiae F., in FÖRSTER & W ohlfah rt , 1979, Pharetra euphorbiae Schiff., weitere frühere Benennungen lauteten Apatele euphorbiae Schiff., Acronycta euphrasiae Brahm, Chamaepora euphorbiae F.. Sicher fanden sich noch einige andere. In „Die Schmetterlinge Baden-Württembergs“, Band 6, Nachtfalter IV, 1997, lautet der deutsche Name „Wolfsmilch-Rindeneule“ A. euphorbiae ist west-palaearktisch verbreitet. In Europa ist sie nach K. & R. aus nahezu allen Ländern gemeldet. Ob sie in Luxemburg, Ungarn und Griechenland vorkommt ist unbekannt. Allerdings liegen Meldungen aus Belgien und den Niederlanden, sowie aus den Ungarn und Griechenland umgebenden Ländern vor. Daher kann angenommen werden, dass die Art in 31 Luxemburg wie auch©Kreis NürnbergerUngarn Entomologen; und Griechenland download unter www.biologiezentrum.at verbreitet ist.
    [Show full text]
  • Acronicta Rubticoma Guenee. Black Light; Lakehurst, June 4. Acronicta Dactylina Grote, Melanic Form
    VOLUME 24, NUMBER 1 3 NOcruIDAE Acronicta rubTicoma Guenee. Black light; Lakehurst, June 4. Acronicta dactylina Grote, melanic form. Black light; Lebanon, June 27. A new record for the State. Eurois occulta Linnaeus. Black light; Montague, August 27. Oncocnemis saundersiana Grote. Black light; Lebanon, October 28. Agrotis buchholzi Barnes & Benjamin. Black light, Lakehurst, June 4. Eupsilia morrisoni Grote. Black light; Lebanon, November 18 and 23. Neperigea costa Barnes & Benjamin. Black light; Montague, July 27. A new record for the State. Magusa orbifera, "divaricata" Grote. Black light, Lebanon, August 21. Amolita roseola Smith. Black light; Montague, July 30. A new record for the State. Abrostola urentis Guenee. Black light; Montague, October 10. Catocala maestosa Hulst. Bait trap; Lebanon, August 28. A new record for the State. Zale phaeocapna Franclemont. Black light; Lebanon, April 27. Deter­ mined by genitalic dissection. A new record for the State. Zale metatoides McDunnough. Black light; Montague, June 10. A new record for the State. Gabara pulverosalis Walker. Black light; Lakehurst August 14. A new record for the State. Rivula propinqaZis Guenee. Black light; Lebanon, October 28. I wish to thank C. F. dos Passos and A. E. Brower for determining some of the specimens. A NEW SUBSPECIES OF BREPHIDIUM EXILIS FROM YUCATAN (LEPIDOPTERA: LYCAENIDAE) HARTIY K. CLENCH Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213 Some years ago Eduardo C. Welling, of Merida, Yucatan, Mexico, sent me a few specimens of a Brephidium he had taken on the north coast of Yucatan. It was obvious, as soon as they had been examined genitalically, that they represented exilis Boisduval, but they belonged to 4 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS' SOCIETY Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • TWO NEW SPECIES of MOTHS (NOCTUIDAE: ACRONICTINAE, CUCULLIINAE) from MIDLAND UNITED STATES Since Their Origins, the Ohio Lepidop
    Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 46(3), 1992, 220-232 TWO NEW SPECIES OF MOTHS (NOCTUIDAE: ACRONICTINAE, CUCULLIINAE) FROM MIDLAND UNITED STATES CHARLES y, COVELL JR. Department of Biology, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky 40292 AND ERIC H. METZLER Ohio Department of Natural Resources, 1952 Belcher Drive, Columbus, Ohio 43224 ABSTRACT. Two new species of noctuid moths are described and illustrated. Ac­ ronicta heitzmani, new species, in the subfamily Acronictinae, is known from Missouri, Arkansas, Illinois and Ohio. Lithophane joannis, new species, in the subfamily Cucul­ Iiinae, is known from Ohio, Kentucky, and Michigan. Both species are compared with morphologically similar congeners. Additional key words: Acronicta heitzmani, Lithophane joannis, faunal survey. Since their origins, the Ohio Lepidopterists and the Society of Ken­ tucky Lepidopterists ha ve promoted regional surveys of the Lepidoptera fauna of midland United States. These efforts have resulted in numerous new records and range extensions and in the discovery of several new taxa, The purpose of this paper is to describe and illustrate two recently discovered species of the family Noctuidae. Both apparently are re­ stricted to midland United States, Acronicta heitzmani, new species, is known from Missouri, Arkansas, Illinois and Ohio. Lithophane joan­ nis, new species, is known from Ohio, Kentucky, and Michigan. Both species are morphologically distinct from, and sympatric with, con­ geners, In 1964, J. R, Heitzman collected a series of an unusual Acronicta species in Missouri. The specimens superficially resembled A. fragilis (Guenee) which was not recorded from Missouri. In 1967, the first author collected a specimen of the same species in Kentucky; the second author took the first Ohio specimen in 1975, The specimens were de­ termined as a possibly undescribed species near A.
    [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]
  • Contributions Toward a Lepidoptera (Psychidae, Yponomeutidae, Sesiidae, Cossidae, Zygaenoidea, Thyrididae, Drepanoidea, Geometro
    Contributions Toward a Lepidoptera (Psychidae, Yponomeutidae, Sesiidae, Cossidae, Zygaenoidea, Thyrididae, Drepanoidea, Geometroidea, Mimalonoidea, Bombycoidea, Sphingoidea, & Noctuoidea) Biodiversity Inventory of the University of Florida Natural Area Teaching Lab Hugo L. Kons Jr. Last Update: June 2001 Abstract A systematic check list of 489 species of Lepidoptera collected in the University of Florida Natural Area Teaching Lab is presented, including 464 species in the superfamilies Drepanoidea, Geometroidea, Mimalonoidea, Bombycoidea, Sphingoidea, and Noctuoidea. Taxa recorded in Psychidae, Yponomeutidae, Sesiidae, Cossidae, Zygaenoidea, and Thyrididae are also included. Moth taxa were collected at ultraviolet lights, bait, introduced Bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum), and by netting specimens. A list of taxa recorded feeding on P. notatum is presented. Introduction The University of Florida Natural Area Teaching Laboratory (NATL) contains 40 acres of natural habitats maintained for scientific research, conservation, and teaching purposes. Habitat types present include hammock, upland pine, disturbed open field, cat tail marsh, and shallow pond. An active management plan has been developed for this area, including prescribed burning to restore the upland pine community and establishment of plots to study succession (http://csssrvr.entnem.ufl.edu/~walker/natl.htm). The site is a popular collecting locality for student and scientific collections. The author has done extensive collecting and field work at NATL, and two previous reports have resulted from this work, including: a biodiversity inventory of the butterflies (Lepidoptera: Hesperioidea & Papilionoidea) of NATL (Kons 1999), and an ecological study of Hermeuptychia hermes (F.) and Megisto cymela (Cram.) in NATL habitats (Kons 1998). Other workers have posted NATL check lists for Ichneumonidae, Sphecidae, Tettigoniidae, and Gryllidae (http://csssrvr.entnem.ufl.edu/~walker/insect.htm).
    [Show full text]
  • Check List of Noctuid Moths (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae And
    Бiологiчний вiсник МДПУ імені Богдана Хмельницького 6 (2), стор. 87–97, 2016 Biological Bulletin of Bogdan Chmelnitskiy Melitopol State Pedagogical University, 6 (2), pp. 87–97, 2016 ARTICLE UDC 595.786 CHECK LIST OF NOCTUID MOTHS (LEPIDOPTERA: NOCTUIDAE AND EREBIDAE EXCLUDING LYMANTRIINAE AND ARCTIINAE) FROM THE SAUR MOUNTAINS (EAST KAZAKHSTAN AND NORTH-EAST CHINA) A.V. Volynkin1, 2, S.V. Titov3, M. Černila4 1 Altai State University, South Siberian Botanical Garden, Lenina pr. 61, Barnaul, 656049, Russia. E-mail: [email protected] 2 Tomsk State University, Laboratory of Biodiversity and Ecology, Lenina pr. 36, 634050, Tomsk, Russia 3 The Research Centre for Environmental ‘Monitoring’, S. Toraighyrov Pavlodar State University, Lomova str. 64, KZ-140008, Pavlodar, Kazakhstan. E-mail: [email protected] 4 The Slovenian Museum of Natural History, Prešernova 20, SI-1001, Ljubljana, Slovenia. E-mail: [email protected] The paper contains data on the fauna of the Lepidoptera families Erebidae (excluding subfamilies Lymantriinae and Arctiinae) and Noctuidae of the Saur Mountains (East Kazakhstan). The check list includes 216 species. The map of collecting localities is presented. Key words: Lepidoptera, Noctuidae, Erebidae, Asia, Kazakhstan, Saur, fauna. INTRODUCTION The fauna of noctuoid moths (the families Erebidae and Noctuidae) of Kazakhstan is still poorly studied. Only the fauna of West Kazakhstan has been studied satisfactorily (Gorbunov 2011). On the faunas of other parts of the country, only fragmentary data are published (Lederer, 1853; 1855; Aibasov & Zhdanko 1982; Hacker & Peks 1990; Lehmann et al. 1998; Benedek & Bálint 2009; 2013; Korb 2013). In contrast to the West Kazakhstan, the fauna of noctuid moths of East Kazakhstan was studied inadequately.
    [Show full text]
  • Downloaded from BOLD Or Requested from Other Authors
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Towards a global DNA barcode reference library for quarantine identifcations of lepidopteran Received: 28 November 2018 Accepted: 5 April 2019 stemborers, with an emphasis on Published: xx xx xxxx sugarcane pests Timothy R. C. Lee 1, Stacey J. Anderson2, Lucy T. T. Tran-Nguyen3, Nader Sallam4, Bruno P. Le Ru5,6, Desmond Conlong7,8, Kevin Powell 9, Andrew Ward10 & Andrew Mitchell1 Lepidopteran stemborers are among the most damaging agricultural pests worldwide, able to reduce crop yields by up to 40%. Sugarcane is the world’s most prolifc crop, and several stemborer species from the families Noctuidae, Tortricidae, Crambidae and Pyralidae attack sugarcane. Australia is currently free of the most damaging stemborers, but biosecurity eforts are hampered by the difculty in morphologically distinguishing stemborer species. Here we assess the utility of DNA barcoding in identifying stemborer pest species. We review the current state of the COI barcode sequence library for sugarcane stemborers, assembling a dataset of 1297 sequences from 64 species. Sequences were from specimens collected and identifed in this study, downloaded from BOLD or requested from other authors. We performed species delimitation analyses to assess species diversity and the efectiveness of barcoding in this group. Seven species exhibited <0.03 K2P interspecifc diversity, indicating that diagnostic barcoding will work well in most of the studied taxa. We identifed 24 instances of identifcation errors in the online database, which has hampered unambiguous stemborer identifcation using barcodes. Instances of very high within-species diversity indicate that nuclear markers (e.g. 18S, 28S) and additional morphological data (genitalia dissection of all lineages) are needed to confrm species boundaries.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of the Stoneflies of the Rock River, Illinois
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship Repository ILLINOI S UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN PRODUCTION NOTE University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library Large-scale Digitization Project, 2007. A REVIEW OF THE STONEFLIES OF THE ROCK RIVER, ILLINOIS Dr. Donald W. Webb Center For Biodiversity Illinois Natural History Survey 607 East Peabody Drive Champaign, Illinois 61820 TECHNICAL REPORT 2002 (11) ILLINOIS NATURAL HISTORY SURVEY CENTER FOR BIODIVERSITY PREPARED FOR Division of Natural Heritage Office of Resource Conservation Illinois Department of Natural Resources One Natural Resources Way Springfield, IL 62702 Abstract During the 1990's, collecting was done along the Rock River in a effort to collect winter stoneflies (those species emerging from December through March). In 1997, collecting was done in and around Rock Island in an effort to collect Alloperla roberti. During April, May, and June of 2002, collecting for spring emerging stoneflies was conducted at nine sites along the Rock River from Rock Island to Rockton. Historically, 25 species of stoneflies (Insecta: Plecoptera) have been reported from the Rock River. Based on collecting from 1990-2002 eleven species (Acroneuria abnormis, Allocapnia granulata,Allocapnia vivipara Isoperla bilineata, Isoperla richardsoni,Perlesta golconda, Perlesta decipiens, Perlinella ephyre, Pteronarcys pictetii, Taeniopteryx burksi, Taeniopteryx nivalis) remain established within the Rock River. Acroneuria abnormis was previously very abundant along the length of the Rock River, but now is considered very rare. Allocapnia vivipara, the most common species of stonefly in Illinois and primarily a small stream species, appears to have been replaced by Allocapnia granulata in the Rock River.
    [Show full text]