DOCSLIB.ORG

Arizona Hydrobiidae (Prosobranchia: Rissoacsa) Robert Hershier and J

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Arizona Hydrobiidae (Prosobranchia: Rissoacsa) Robert Hershier and J. Jerry Landye ABSTRACT - - Hr..7h1P-r, Robert. and J. Jerry Landye. Arizona Hydrobii , (Frosobranchia: Rissoacea).-A diverse fauna of Arizona Hydrobiidae is doritmentr-d as a result of recent collecting from numerous springs in the state. The fauna is comPosed of 14 smecies in two g.=ner,... , Evrmulomr4i= CA.11 and Filsbrv and Trvonia 4 .4.-_ 5tiMPSOM. ,n r =mxciPs are described as new nerein arc tne fourteenth represents a new record for the state. All of thi= sPecies have relatively rr-.=.trir- ted distributors. and two are sinsle sPring endemics. All congeners are allcmatrir- to one anr,ther. StaPwise canonical discriminant function analyses using sets of and anatomical data confirmed the distinctiveness of the 12 species' of Arizona FyrguloPsis. as classification of (grlip,=.d) topotypes was 89-93% based on analyses using shell data. and 100% for analyses using anatomical data. The discriminant analyses also confirmed that diff nti...-ttir,n ,amonp congeners largely involves male anatomy (especially menial features), as this data set yielded the best separatirn of species in plots of scores on the first two discriminant functions. 2 Robert Hershler, Department of Invertebrate Zoology, National Museum of Natural History. The Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 20560. J. Jerry Landye, Arizona Game and Fish DePartment, HC 66. Box 2205, Cornvills. AZ 66325. 3 Arizona ;yOrotiidae (Fri sobranchia: Rissoacea Robert Hershier and J. j:=rr.,,, -=1 .ndv.=, Introduction caobranch sn: i of the -F asnil , Hvdrobiidae comPrise a diverse 3 4444411. id to71)414411L-Via component of the .gr..-44.1i,=;..4.- -F auna (di the American with A numerous locally ehd:=171i7 ieoleted complexee or drainage te!:1- t'T-J- d-u=nout tn-E r;A.4 1966; Land 1977 in P rt H11.= t71 4.4.0:- 0 - colisctr and studying thess minute nei la. th,=,v remain Poorly known in the 44--- VeT4P- N . - , The:-e are no publienedA mods:n. r7 nem=ivi= - - 1441.4.0 systemat c tratmen o " -f aunas - - but ass A Taylor, 1987Aand what little work has teen done larei 0=Si-57E of isolat;.d ecies descriPtions based cn study emt shell. There is a clear and urgent need to address the systematics of this fauna given the f=(f- t that many .B.4-44=b4i.ci.e OAR, , - . r=c- r LT.-rcl;..t..14: threatened or endA.ngerd as a r,==,,Itit of A deterioration or disaPpearance of natural aquatic habitats 4.A.-44-gra. (Taylor, 137('a). As an illustration, 12 of 21 southwestern species being considered for federal listing threatened or endangeredcre und;=srribedie(lai., 1984) A To further this end, we present ir a systematic description of Arizona Hydrobiidae. To date, this fauna has been largely ignored by malacologist=.. Prior to 197, the __le published record of live-collected hydrobiids from the state was by Pilsbry and Ferriss (1909)A who obtained Paludestrina stearnsiana from a i)v single spring in the Huachuca Mountains. In their monograph on 4 Arizona mollusks, ;;;...guart and Miller (1973) listed EiX additional such record far the family. rePresentinp sP.vPr,:kl possible species. Additional records of collections of Recent or subfossil shell are listed Taylor (1970b, 1975). In the past 20 years the junior authar has intensively surveyed permanent Arizona waters and found 4.0reol a lar:pe hydrobiid fauna) with P.,:timatx.ri SCCI1C divf=rsity raning upwards to 18 sPecies (see Landv,.. 1973; Landve. 1581; William= ea al.. 192E). The bulk of thi=, coll ection. larPe alcohol holdinpE from localities in the state and PeriPheral areas ;Fig. 1). WSE made available to the senior author- whose taxonomic work is .- - pr.=---,=ni-:,=d herein. rt .=.,=p.....r:A.t-,= p.,-4.pr tr .-.-4.ting .. ologic=.1 :,nri biopeograpical aspects of the fauna will be published elsewhere. -c Fourteen sPecies are recognized 47; t.7 iii 4--'r representing two -.> genera, Tryonia Stimpson, 1865 and Fyrpulopsis Call and PilEbry, 1886. Thirteen of the species are new. and the fourteenth. sea& PyrPulapsis deserta (Pilsbry). represents a new record. A _,■0=' tot S tepwise discriminant function analyses using separate shell and anatomical data sets were performed in order to examine -, - , pat tern a of variation and tR.= t tql 0=th:=r the 12 new. alloPatric FyrpuloPsis app. are distinct -From one another. F 1.1'7,T OF RED:GNU:ED SPECIES Fyrgulomsis glandulosus Hershler, n. sm. Fvrgulomsis deserts (Pilsbry) Fvrquiomsis bac:hus Hersrier. n. SP. P'yrpulomsis conicus Hersrler, n. sm. Fvrpulopsis morrisori Hersrier, n.sm. PvrpuloPsis mon1e7 srsHs Hsrshlsr, m. P',rg loPsis sol_a Hershier, n. sp. F\irmuloPsis simPlex Hersrier, n. sp. Fvrgulomsis sancarlr,sersIs Hershler, r. sp. Pyrmulomsis cflrHluentis H fliCr fl. Esp Fvrmulomsis cocrisi Her-shier. n. SP. FYr7U1OPSiS CMPSC:i Hersrler, n. sm. Trycnia milae Hershisr, n. SP. Tryonia guitobamuitae Hershler, n. sp. MATERIALS AND METHODS MATERIAL EXAMINED. Material from 35 localities (Fig. 1), totalling 48 lots, was collected uci/114 a fine-meshed hand sieve, relaxed with menthol crystals, fixed in dilute formalin and preserved in 70% ethanol. Most eii.40felre lots --- t erreht.- 100 specimens; Aocality data -ibt-i4a—tizsdabzia•-e7:..*--e-i-tr.F-A- ." are in Al! Appendix 1. Th.s. cf this material is housed in the United States National Museum collection (USNM catalog numbers ma, are referred to below), ;Ether relevant material from thOlar collection and that of the Academy of Natural Sciences of 6 Philadelphia ( ANSR) was also examined. MORPHOLOGIC STUDY. Shells and animals were studied and measured at 50X using WILD M-5 and M-7 dissecting microscopes egitipged with ocular micrometers. Shells. ogerculae and radulae were photographed using a HITACHI 5-570 scanning electron esem) micrcscoPe. Ts obtain intact bodies for disssctisn 4 shells were A de.dalciiied by scakinT in ccncentrataz Eduin = .A.P.4.4404,4" th ,= r=maininq pe=1 1-idle was AMiM:4, 1:7" were di===,... ,,,Jd in dilute Ebuin's Sclittif7n. 7c examine penial mor7,holo.=%/ and aA44.444A ciliation patt ,=rn= on tn= neni and w=re dried g=inq nr-7NTTIN DCF-1 Critical Foint Drier 4f.pf tni=m • C ,7ntinurots and ( to a lesser extent maristiz data were obtained 544,erid 71. 4 1/ from hei 1 and anatomy sgesimens Pvrgitlogsi= ( Table 1) for use in d scriminant function analyses. _____________ She 1 La were cleaned with CLOROX to remove surface dePcsits) .F4102.001i44 41=0Me*w*Or5+ oriented in the standard aPertural aspect. 4strweca44.1wavaliwuket(werse am14.a... first pinPointe477-777;77a0 necessary points 44..em or aspects of 44.4., shell outlin:r:nto paper using a camera lucida. Distances between 411: aQ. points were then determined using a fine-scaled millimeter ruler. The following characters were measured or counted: (1) number of whorls (NW) (2) shell hei9ht (SW 7 (3) shell width (SW) (4) aperture heiciht (AH) (5) aperture width (AW) (6) height of bddy whorl (LEW) (7) width of body whorl (WELL) (I;) 1,=ngtn of line ronn=cting sutures at posterior ends o+ body and Penultimate whorls (9) maximum Pe!-- gendiduiar distance between line joining the a 7vc= =utur S. and outline c+ penultimate whorl The +allowing ratios ware -F ormed UEiMq the above data: (1) =n=.11 height _shell width (ZH/EW nc ht (:::( H/EH) (3) body whorl lenqth/sh= 1 1 height (L7M/SH) (4) whorl convexity (CD/ AE), +allowing measure provided n and Riggs (1975: F. 352) Anatomical counts and measurements were taken from five males 4416‘ and five females from lot. Body and gonad lengths were 6 measured with the animal pinned iiihmost in 5 41.. apical aspect. The penis was cut from the neck. and 40,A measured in 4.19,e- dorsal aspect. The pallial roof and visceral coil were removed from the head/foot and 4400 separated from one another along the end of the pallial cavity. Fallial structures were measured with the pallial roof flattened eftm4 and pinned. The following counts and measurements were made (1-7, both sexes; 8-21, females: 23-30, males): (1) body length (EL) (2) oePhrabium length (CI L) (3) osPhradium width (DEW) (4) distance from posterior end of osphradium to Posterior tip of ctenidium (OCT) (';) ctenidium length (CTL) (6) ctenitium width (1-7W) 7 C, number of ctenidial i'laments (8) ovary ienqr (CL. (9) caPsule l no lenczth (Cf;L) (1()) capsuis glanc widtn G2GW) 1 - ,7 ( 11 ;,11.;UM=7 p1 -Ino lemsrh ( CL) (12) albumen sland width (Jf Eli,; (13) diameter (anterior-postrior) anterior coil of oviduct (EC' ) (14) distance from anterior End of oviduct coil to posterior end of capsule gland (COP) (15) maximum diameter of anterior portion of oviduct (COD) (16) bursa copulatrix length (BUL) (17) bursa copulatrix width (KM) (18) width of bursa cogulatrix duct (BDW) (19) distance from posterior end of albumen gland to posterior tip of bursa (BAG) (20) seminal receptacle (body plus duct) length ( SRL) (21) seminal receptacle width (SRW) (22) testis length (TS) (23) prostate gland length (LPR) (24) prostate gland width (WRR) 5 (25) 1em3th of Fenis from ditse to tip Fenial lobe (L2) (26) Penis width (at base) (EW) (27) distance from base of penis to b..=,.se of Penial filament (L3) (28) Fenial filament lerczth ( LFI) (29) penial filament width (WFI) (30) number of glandular r1d9es on penis (GLR) - , - -, Ti s followin7t fi7rmr.-d it ing these amatomii t1 (i both sexes: 4-. females: 10-14. males): (1) osphradium 1F-TIgt, 1 enidium lenth (DELSCTL) (2) distance from posterior tip of osphradium to ctenitium t iF 1A,ngth (OCT 'CTL) (3) ctenitium 1 1-1qth (171-1 ) (4) ovary length/body 1=,ngth (n)/7,1
Recommended publications
  • Springs Distribution, Flow, and Associated Species in the Verde River Basin, Arizona

    Springs Distribution, Flow, and Associated Species in the Verde River Basin, Arizona

    --- Springs of the Verde River Basin --- Springs Distribution, Flow, and Associated Species in the Verde River Basin, Arizona This document was created by: Springs Stewardship Institute Museum of Northern Arizona 3101 N. Fort Valley Dr. Flagstaff, AZ 86001 Under contract to: One for the Verde P.O. Box 2535 Cottonwood, AZ 86326 10/31/2018 Recommended Citation: Schenk, E.R.; Jenness, J.S.; and Stevens, L.E. 2018. Springs Distribution, Flow, and Associated Species in the Verde River Basin, Arizona. Springs Stewardship Institute Technical Report to One for the Verde. Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff, AZ. 47 p. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27113.95846 Springs Distribution, Flow, and Springs-dependent Species in the Verde River Basin, Arizona Edward R. Schenk, Jeff S. Jenness, and Lawrence E. Stevens Springs Stewardship Institute Museum of Northern Arizona 3101 N. Fort Valley Dr. Flagstaff, AZ 86001 10/31/2018 Contents Executive Summary: .................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 3 The Springs Stewardship Institute and Springs Online ..................................................... 7 Methods ......................................................................................................................................... 9 Results .........................................................................................................................................
  • (Caenogastropoda: Cochliopidae) from the Atacama Desert, Northern Chile

    (Caenogastropoda: Cochliopidae) from the Atacama Desert, Northern Chile

    Zootaxa 3925 (3): 445–449 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Correspondence ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2015 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3925.3.9 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:09962D19-6BDF-4E06-B9B1-2760DDD3236E A new freshwater snail (Caenogastropoda: Cochliopidae) from the Atacama Desert, northern Chile GONZALO A. COLLADO Departamento de Ciencias Básicas, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad del Bío-Bío, Avenida Andrés Bello s/n, Casilla 447, Chillán, Chile. Fundación Chile Natura. E-mail: [email protected] In the family Cochliopidae, Heleobia Stimpson, 1865 is the most speciose genus in South America, with about 90 species (Hershler & Thompson 1992; Cazzaniga 2011). A recent molecular and morphological analysis performed in northern Chile (Atacama Desert) showed that the previously undescribed springsnails from Aguada de Chorrillos belong to Heleobia (Collado et al. 2013). In this study I formally describe this new species. Although this paper does not treat morphology in detail, the anatomical characters, in combination with the previously published molecular data provides a strong basis for recognizing this population as a distinct species. Material and methods The snails were collected alive from Aguada de Chorrillos (27°12′32.40″ S; 70°57′03.30″ W), Atacama Desert, northern Chile using a sieve of 0.5 mm mesh width and stored in absolute ethanol. The shells, opercula and penes were photographed and measured using a Motic SMZ–168 Stereo Microscope with a Moticam 2000 integrated digital camera. Type specimens were deposited in the Museo de Zoología de la Universidad de Concepción (MZUC), Concepción, Chile.
  • Red Gap Ranch Biological Resource Evaluation

    Red Gap Ranch Biological Resource Evaluation

    RED GAP RANCH BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE EVALUATION Prepared for: Southwest Ground-water Consultants, Inc. Prepared by: WestLand Resources, Inc. Date: February 14, 2014 Project No.: 1822.01 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................ 1 2. EXISTING ENVIRONMENT AND BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ................................................... 2 2.1. Approach ...................................................................................................................................... 2 2.2. Physical Environment ................................................................................................................... 2 2.3. Biological Environment and Resources ....................................................................................... 3 3. SCREENING ANALYSIS FOR SPECIES OF CONCERN ................................................................ 5 3.1. Approach ...................................................................................................................................... 5 3.2. Screening Analysis Results .......................................................................................................... 7 3.2.1. USFWS-listed Species ...................................................................................................... 7 3.2.2. USFS Coconino National Forest Sensitive Species ........................................................ 15 3.2.3. USFS Management Indicator Species ............................................................................
  • Blue River Native Fish Restoration Project

    Blue River Native Fish Restoration Project

    Draft Environmental Assessment Blue River Native Fish Restoration Project Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests Greenlee and Apache Counties, Arizona U. S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Phoenix Area Office July 2010 Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitments to island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Draft Environmental Assessment Blue River Native Fish Restoration Project Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests Greenlee and Apache Counties, Arizona U. S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Phoenix Area Office July 2010 Draft Environmental Assessment Blue River Native Fish Restoration TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................ iv CHAPTER 1 – PURPOSE AND NEED .................................................................................. 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1 1.2 BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................... 2 1.3 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION .......................................................................
  • Conservation Status of Freshwater Gastropods of Canada and the United States Paul D

    Conservation Status of Freshwater Gastropods of Canada and the United States Paul D

    This article was downloaded by: [69.144.7.122] On: 24 July 2013, At: 12:35 Publisher: Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Fisheries Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ufsh20 Conservation Status of Freshwater Gastropods of Canada and the United States Paul D. Johnson a , Arthur E. Bogan b , Kenneth M. Brown c , Noel M. Burkhead d , James R. Cordeiro e o , Jeffrey T. Garner f , Paul D. Hartfield g , Dwayne A. W. Lepitzki h , Gerry L. Mackie i , Eva Pip j , Thomas A. Tarpley k , Jeremy S. Tiemann l , Nathan V. Whelan m & Ellen E. Strong n a Alabama Aquatic Biodiversity Center, Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (ADCNR) , 2200 Highway 175, Marion , AL , 36756-5769 E-mail: b North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences , Raleigh , NC c Louisiana State University , Baton Rouge , LA d United States Geological Survey, Southeast Ecological Science Center , Gainesville , FL e University of Massachusetts at Boston , Boston , Massachusetts f Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources , Florence , AL g U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service , Jackson , MS h Wildlife Systems Research , Banff , Alberta , Canada i University of Guelph, Water Systems Analysts , Guelph , Ontario , Canada j University of Winnipeg , Winnipeg , Manitoba , Canada k Alabama Aquatic Biodiversity Center, Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources , Marion , AL l Illinois Natural History Survey , Champaign , IL m University of Alabama , Tuscaloosa , AL n Smithsonian Institution, Department of Invertebrate Zoology , Washington , DC o Nature-Serve , Boston , MA Published online: 14 Jun 2013.
  • Species Risk Assessment

    Species Risk Assessment

    Ecological Sustainability Analysis of the Kaibab National Forest: Species Diversity Report Ver. 1.2 Prepared by: Mikele Painter and Valerie Stein Foster Kaibab National Forest For: Kaibab National Forest Plan Revision Analysis 22 December 2008 SpeciesDiversity-Report-ver-1.2.doc 22 December 2008 Table of Contents Table of Contents............................................................................................................................. i Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 1 PART I: Species Diversity.............................................................................................................. 1 Species List ................................................................................................................................. 1 Criteria .................................................................................................................................... 2 Assessment Sources................................................................................................................ 3 Screening Results.................................................................................................................... 4 Habitat Associations and Initial Species Groups........................................................................ 8 Species associated with ecosystem diversity characteristics of terrestrial vegetation or aquatic systems ......................................................................................................................
  • American Fisheries Society • JUNE 2013

    American Fisheries Society • JUNE 2013

    VOL 38 NO 6 FisheriesAmerican Fisheries Society • www.fisheries.org JUNE 2013 All Things Aquaculture Habitat Connections Hobnobbing Boondoggles? Freshwater Gastropod Status Assessment Effects of Anthropogenic Chemicals 03632415(2013)38(6) Biology and Management of Inland Striped Bass and Hybrid Striped Bass James S. Bulak, Charles C. Coutant, and James A. Rice, editors The book provides a first-ever, comprehensive overview of the biology and management of striped bass and hybrid striped bass in the inland waters of the United States. The book’s 34 chapters are divided into nine major sections: History, Habitat, Growth and Condition, Population and Harvest Evaluation, Stocking Evaluations, Natural Reproduction, Harvest Regulations, Conflicts, and Economics. A concluding chapter discusses challenges and opportunities currently facing these fisheries. This compendium will serve as a single source reference for those who manage or are interested in inland striped bass or hybrid striped bass fisheries. Fishery managers and students will benefit from this up-to-date overview of priority topics and techniques. Serious anglers will benefit from the extensive information on the biology and behavior of these popular sport fishes. 588 pages, index, hardcover List price: $79.00 AFS Member price: $55.00 Item Number: 540.80C Published May 2013 TO ORDER: Online: fisheries.org/ bookstore American Fisheries Society c/o Books International P.O. Box 605 Herndon, VA 20172 Phone: 703-661-1570 Fax: 703-996-1010 Fisheries VOL 38 NO 6 JUNE 2013 Contents COLUMNS President’s Hook 245 Scientific Meetings are Essential If our society considers student participation in our major meetings as a high priority, why are federal and state agen- cies inhibiting attendance by their fisheries professionals at these very same meetings, deeming them non-essential? A colony of the federally threatened Tulotoma attached to the John Boreman—AFS President underside of a small boulder from lower Choccolocco Creek, 262 Talladega County, Alabama.
  • Ipac Resource List

    Ipac Resource List

    IPaC Information for Planning and Consultation U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service IPaC resource list This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly affected by activities in the project area. However, determining the likelihood and extent of effects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional site-specific (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-specific (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information. Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the USFWS office(s) with jurisdiction in the defined project area. Please read the introduction to each section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section. Location Arizona and New Mexico Local offices Arizona Ecological Services Field Office (602) 242-0210 (602) 242-2513 9828 North 31st Ave #c3 Phoenix, AZ 85051-2517 http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/ http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/EndangeredSpecies_Main.html New Mexico Ecological Services Field Office (505) 346-2525 (505) 346-2542 2105 Osuna Road Ne Albuquerque, NM 87113-1001 http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/NewMexico/ http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/ES_Lists_Main2.html Endangered species This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project level impacts.
  • Department of the Interior

    Department of the Interior

    Friday J uary 6, 1989 MEN Part IV Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Animal Notice of Review • 554 Federal Register / Vol. 54, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 1989 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Regional Director (FWE/SE), U.S. Fish least at times, to merit conSideration for and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 1306, addition to the List of Endangered and Fish and Wildlife Service Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103 (505/ Threatened Wildlife. The accompanying 766-2321 or FTS 474-2321). table identifies many of these taxa 50 CFR Part 17 Region 3. Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, (including, by definition, biological Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, subspecies and certain populations of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Wisconsin. vertebrate animals) and assigns each to and Plants; Animal Notice of Review Regional Director (AE/SE), U.S. Fish one of the three categories described AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, and Wildlife Service, Federal Building, below. Unless it is the subject of a Interior. Fort Snelling, Twin Cities, Minnesota current published proposed or final rule 55111 (612/725-3276 or FTS 725-3276). determining endangered or threatened Notice of review. ACTION: Region 4. Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, status, none of these taxa receives Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, SUMMARY: The Service issues a revised substantive or procedural protection notice identifying vertebrate and Mississippi, North Carolina, South pursuant to the Act (those species that invertebrate animal taxa, native to the Carolina, Tennessee, Puerto Rico, and are the subject of a proposed or final the Virgin Islands.
  • Animal Candidate Review for Listing As Endangered Or Threatened

    Animal Candidate Review for Listing As Endangered Or Threatened

    58982 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 219 / Tuesday, November 15, 1994 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OFTHE INTERIOR ADDRESSES: Interested persons or Street, Anchorage. Alaska 99501 (907— organizations should submit comments 786—3605). Fish and Wildlife Service regarding particular taxa to the Regional FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Director of the Region specified with Jamie Rappaport Clark, Chief, Division 5OCFRPartI7 each taxon as having the lead of Endangered Species (703—358—2171) Endangered and Threatened Wildlife responsibility for that taxon. Comments or Endangered Species Coordinator(s) in and Plants; Animal Candidate Review of a more general nature maybe the appropriate Regional Office(s) listed for Listing as Endangered or submitted to: Chief—Division of above. Endangered Species, U.S. Fish and Threatened Species SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Wildlife Service, Mail Stop 452 ARLSQ AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington. D.C. 20240. Written Background Interior. comments and materials received in The Endangered Species Act (16 ACTION: Notice of review. response to this notice will be available U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires the for public inspection by appointment in Secretary of the Interior (or Commerce SL.YMARY: In this notice the U.S. Fish the Regional Offices listed below. according to vested program and Wildlife Service (Service) presents Region 1.—California, Hawaii, Idaho, responsibilities) to determine whether an updated compilation of vertebrate Nevada, Oregon, Washington, wildlife and plant species are and iA~vertebrateanimal taxa native to Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana endangered or threatened, based on the the United States that are being Islands, and Pacific Territories of the best available scientific and commercial reviewed for possible addition to the United States.
  • View a Partial List of Recent Publications

    View a Partial List of Recent Publications

    PUBLICATIONS CITING THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MUSEUM OF ZOOLOGY (2010-2015) Ahumada-Carrillo, I. T., River-Perez, N., Reyes-Velasco, J., Grünwald, C. I., and J. M. Jones. 2014. Notable Records of Amphibians and Reptiles from Colima, Nayarit, Jalisco, and Zacatecas, Mexico. Herpetological Review 45:287-291. Albrechtova, J, et al. 2012. Sperm-related phenotypes implicated in both maintenance and breakdown of a natural species barrier in the house mouse. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 279:4803-4810. Aliabadian, M., et al. 2012. Convergent evolution of morphological and ecological traits in the open- habitat chat complex (Aves, Muscicapidae: Saxicolinae). Mol. Phylog. Evol. 65:35- 45. Allsteadt, J., Savitzky, A. H., Petersen, C. E., and D. N. Naik. 2010. Geographic variation in the morphology of Crotalus horridus (Serpentes: Viperidae). Alstrom, P. et al. 2015. Integrative taxonomy of the Russet Bush Warbler Locustella mandelli complex reveals a new species from central China. Avian Research 6:1-32. Alvarado-Serrano, D. F., L. Luna and L. L. Knowles. 2013. Localized versus generalist phenotypes in a broadly distributed tropical mammal: how is intraspecific variation distributed across disparate environments? BMC Evolutionary Biology 13:160. Alvarez-Cataneda. S. T., et al. 2010. Rediscovery of the Neotoma population on Datil [Turner] Island, Sonora, Mexico. Western North American Naturalist 70:437-440. Andena, S.R., and J.M. Carpenter. 2012. A phylogenetic analysis of the social wasp genus Brachygastra Perty, 1833, and description of a new species (Hymenoptera: Vespidae: Epiponini). Americam Museum Novitates No. 3753, 38 pp. Andersen, M. J., A. Naikatini, and R. G.

  • The 2021 FMCS Checklist of 729 Freshwater Gastropods from Canada and the United States

    The 2021 FMCS checklist of 729 freshwater gastropods from Canada and the United States. Column headings are taxon (binomen) and species author(s), and AFS common names (Classification Uncertain denotes uncertain taxonomic status under common names), Family names are followed by the number of genera and species (or monotypic). Species names denoted in BLUE LETTERS signify petition changes completed in 2019. Species names denoted in RED LETTERS signify petitioned changes completed in 2021. The goal of the FMCS Names Subcommittee is to improve science communication, provide up-to- date authoritative checklists and promote freshwater mollusk systematics research. Stakeholders are under no obligation to follow the taxonomic opinions expressed in this list. Species Author AFS Common Name Change Notes Family Acroloxidae 1 Genus 1 Species Acroloxus coloradensis (Henderson, 1930) Rocky Mountain Capshell Family Lymnaeidae 14 Genera 62 Species Acella haldemani (Binney, 1867) Spindle Lymnaea Bulimnaea megasoma (Say, 1824) Mammoth Lymnaea Erinna aulacospira (Ancey, 1899) Hawaiian Bugle Erinna newcombi H. Adams & A. Adams, 1855 Newcomb's Bugle Fisherola nuttalli (Haldeman, 1841) Shortface Lanx Galba alberta F.C. Baker, 1919 Alberta Fossaria Galba bulimoides (I. Lea, 1841) Prairie Fossaria Galba cockerelli (Pilsbry & Ferriss, 1906) Classification Uncertain Galba cubensis (L. Pfeiffer, 1839) Carib Fossaria Galba cyclostoma (Walker, 1908) Bugle Fossaria Galba dalli (F.C. Baker, 1907) Dusky Fossaria Galba exigua (I. Lea, 1841) Graceful Fossaria Galba galbana (Say, 1825) Boreal Fossaria Galba humilis (Say, 1822) Marsh Fossaria Galba modicella (Say, 1825) Rock Fossaria Galba obrussa (Say, 1825) Golden Fossaria Galba parva (I. Lea, 1841) Pygmy Fossaria Galba peninsulae (B. Walker, 1908) Classification Uncertain Galba perplexa (Baker & Henderson, 1929) Classification Uncertain Galba perpolita (Dall, 1905) Glossy Fossaria Galba rustica (I.