DOCSLIB.ORG

Identification of Areas of Very High Biodiversity Value To

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Identification of Areas of Very High Biodiversity Value To bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.14.202341; this version posted July 15, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC 4.0 International license. 1 Identification of areas of very high biodiversity value 2 to achieve the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 key 3 commitments. A case study using terrestrial Natura 4 2000 network in Romania 5 6 Iulia V. Miu1, Laurentiu Rozylowicz1, Viorel D. Popescu1,2, Paulina Anastasiu3 7 8 1 Center for Environmental Research, University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania 9 2 Department of Biological Sciences, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio, United States of America 10 3 Dimitrie Brândză Botanical Garden, University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania 11 12 Corresponding Author: 13 Laurentiu Rozylowicz1 14 1 N. Balcescu, Bucharest, 010041, Romania 15 Email address: [email protected] 16 17 Abstract 18 European Union seeks to increase the protected areas by 2030 to 30% of the EU terrestrial 19 surface, of which at least 10% of areas high biodiversity value should be strictly protected. 20 Designation of Natura 2000 network, the backbone of nature protection in the EU, was mostly an 21 expert-opinion process with little systematic conservation planning. The designation of the 22 Natura 2000 network in Romania followed the same non-systematic approach, resulting in a 23 suboptimal representation of invertebrates and plants. To help identify areas with very high 24 biodiversity without repeating past planning mistakes, we present a reproducible example of 25 spatial prioritization using Romania's current terrestrial Natura 2000 network and coarse-scale 26 terrestrial species occurrence. 27 The planning exercise uses 371 terrestrial Natura 2000 Sites of Community Importance (Natura 28 2000 SCI), designated to protect 164 terrestrial species listed under Annex II of Habitats 29 Directive in Romania. Species occurrences in terrestrial Natura 2000 and Natura 2000 sites were 30 aggregated at a Universal Traverse Mercator spatial resolution of 1 km2. To identify priority 31 terrestrial Natura 2000 sites for species conservation, and to explore if the Romanian Natura 32 2000 network sufficiently represents species included in Annex II of Habitats Directive, we used 33 Zonation v4, a decision support software tool for spatial conservation planning. We carried out bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.14.202341; this version posted July 15, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC 4.0 International license. 34 the analyses nationwide (all Natura 2000 sites) and separately for each biogeographic region 35 (i.e., Alpine, Continental, Pannonian, Steppic and Black Sea). 36 The performance of national-level planning of top priorities is low. On average, when 37 considering 10% of the landscape of Natura 2000 sites as protected, 20% of the distribution of 38 species listed in Annex II of Habitats Directive are protected. As a consequence, the 39 representation of species by priority terrestrial Natura 2000 sites is reduced when compared to 40 the initial set of species. When planning by taxonomic group, the top-priority areas include only 41 10% of invertebrate distribution in Natura 2000. When selecting top-priority areas by 42 biogeographical region, there are significantly fewer gap species than in the national level and by 43 taxa scenarios; thus, the scenario outperforms the national-level prioritization. The designation of 44 strictly protected areas as required by the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 should be followed 45 by setting clear targets for the representation of species and habitats at the biogeographical 46 region level. 47 48 Introduction 49 Protected areas, a critical tool for nature conservation strategies, are intended to ensure the long- 50 term persistence and viability of biodiversity. They should ideally support as many as possible 51 rare, threatened, or endemic taxa, particularly those with low mobility and high sensitivity to 52 environmental alterations (Geldmann et al. 2013; Gray et al. 2016; Possingham et al. 2006; 53 Rodrigues et al. 2004). When planning protected areas, states around the world are guided by 54 supranational policies such as Convention on Biological Diversity and EU Biodiversity Strategy 55 for 2030, which issue ambitious targets to increase the extent of protected areas. For example, 56 Convention on Biological Diversity (CDB) Aichi Target on Protected Areas calls for protection 57 of 17% of world terrestrial and inland water areas in key regions for biodiversity and ecosystem 58 services (UNEP 2011), while the EU Member States seek to increase the Natura 2000 network 59 by 2030 to 30% of EU terrestrial surface and designate the strict protection of areas of very high 60 biodiversity and climate value (European Commission 2020). 61 A promising tool to help to build an ecologically-sound network of protected areas meeting the 62 CDB or EU targets is systematic conservation planning (Margules & Pressey 2000). Systematic 63 conservation planning maximizes conservation benefits while minimizing impacts on other 64 resources, such as the availability of productive land. Spatial conservation prioritization, as a part bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.14.202341; this version posted July 15, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC 4.0 International license. 65 of systematic conservation planning, mostly relies on the complementarity concept (i.e., 66 selection of complementary areas to avoid duplication of conservation effort) and is considered 67 an efficient instrument for identifying spatial priorities and achieving conservation goals 68 (Margules & Pressey 2000; Pressey et al. 2007). 69 One of the most extensive networks of conservation areas in the world is the Natura 2000 70 network, which has been created to operationalize EU Birds (Directive 2009/147/EC) and 71 Habitats Directives (Council Directive 92/43/EEC). To date, Natura 2000 covers 18% of EU 72 terrestrial areas, thus meeting the CDB Aichi Target on Protected Areas (UNEP 2011). The 73 effectiveness and representativity of Natura 2000 were evaluated for different taxonomic groups 74 and geographic areas, and except for an agreement on better than random planning performance, 75 the conclusions tended to highlight suboptimal planning (D'Amen et al. 2013; Dimitrakopoulos 76 et al. 2004; Kukkala et al. 2016; Lisón et al. 2013; Müller et al. 2018; Müller et al. 2020; Votsi et 77 al. 2016). The suboptimal planning of Natura 2000 at the EU and member states level originates 78 from an uncoordinated designation process (Apostolopoulou & Pantis 2009; Ioja et al. 2010; 79 Lisón et al. 2017; Orlikowska et al. 2016), which was partially solved by selecting new sites after 80 expert-opinion evaluations during the Natura 2000 biogeographical seminars (Kenig-Witkowska 81 2017; Manolache et al. 2017). Furthermore, the efficacy of the Natura 2000 network was 82 extensively evaluated from other perspectives, for example, for understanding the effect of 83 climate change on representativity (Araújo et al. 2011; Popescu et al. 2013) and for coordinating 84 conservation investments (Hermoso et al. 2017; Nita et al. 2016). 85 The designation of the Natura 2000 network in Romania followed the same non-systematic 86 approach. The process began between 2007 and 2009 with designating 316 Sites of Community 87 Importance covering Habitats Directive, Special Protection Areas, and Birds Directive. This 88 process has continued to today; there are 606 designated Natura 2000 sites that encompass 23% 89 of the total country's area (54214 km2) (DG Environment 2020; Manolache et al. 2017). Of 90 these, 426 are terrestrial Natura 2000 Sites of Community Importance, covering 40310 km2 (17% 91 of Romania's terrestrial surface) (DG Environment 2020; EIONET 2020). During the first two 92 designation stages, the process was highly biased towards overlapping existing national protected 93 areas (Ioja et al. 2010; Manolache et al. 2017), and thus, even if the 17% targets are met, the 94 effectiveness of Natura 2000 in representing habitats and species is questionable. For example, 95 Ioja et al. (2010) confirmed that overlapping existing national protected areas resulted in a bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.14.202341; this version posted July 15, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC 4.0 International license. 96 suboptimal representation of plants and invertebrates; Miu et al. (2018) highlighted 97 underrepresentation of agricultural landscape in Dobrogea, while Manzu et al. (2013) and 98 Popescu et al. (2013) found that the Natura 2000 network will not protect plants, reptiles, and 99 amphibians if species ranges shift under climate change scenarios. 100 With the latest extensions, the Romanian Natura 2000 network covers all species and habitats 101 listed in Habitats and Birds Directives (DG Environment 2020; Manolache et al. 2017); however, 102 the new EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 requires an expansion from 23% to 30% of the total 103 country's area and the strict protection designation for areas with very high biodiversity and 104 climate value within the network (European Commission 2020). To help identify areas with very 105 high biodiversity and to provide an example of systematic planning of a protected area network, 106 we present a reproducible example of spatial prioritization using Romania's current terrestrial 107 Natura 2000 network and coarse-scale terrestrial species occurrence.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arthropod Diversity and Conservation in Old-Growth Northwest Forests'
    AMER. ZOOL., 33:578-587 (1993) Arthropod Diversity and Conservation in Old-Growth mon et al., 1990; Hz Northwest Forests complex litter layer 1973; Lattin, 1990; JOHN D. LATTIN and other features Systematic Entomology Laboratory, Department of Entomology, Oregon State University, tural diversity of th Corvallis, Oregon 97331-2907 is reflected by the 14 found there (Lawtt SYNOPSIS. Old-growth forests of the Pacific Northwest extend along the 1990; Parsons et a. e coastal region from southern Alaska to northern California and are com- While these old posed largely of conifer rather than hardwood tree species. Many of these ity over time and trees achieve great age (500-1,000 yr). Natural succession that follows product of sever: forest stand destruction normally takes over 100 years to reach the young through successioi mature forest stage. This succession may continue on into old-growth for (Lattin, 1990). Fire centuries. The changing structural complexity of the forest over time, and diseases, are combined with the many different plant species that characterize succes- bances. The prolot sion, results in an array of arthropod habitats. It is estimated that 6,000 a continually char arthropod species may be found in such forests—over 3,400 different ments and habitat species are known from a single 6,400 ha site in Oregon. Our knowledge (Southwood, 1977 of these species is still rudimentary and much additional work is needed Lawton, 1983). throughout this vast region. Many of these species play critical roles in arthropods have lx the dynamics of forest ecosystems. They are important in nutrient cycling, old-growth site, tt as herbivores, as natural predators and parasites of other arthropod spe- mental Forest (HJ cies.
    [Show full text]
  • Boring Beetles (Coleoptera: Scolytidae, Buprestidae, Cerambycidae) in White Spruce (Picea Glauca (Moench) Voss) Ecosystems of Alaska
    United States Department of Agriculture Effect of Ecosystem Disturbance Forest Service on Diversity of Bark and Wood- Pacific Northwest Research Station Boring Beetles (Coleoptera: Research Paper PNW-RP-546 April 2002 Scolytidae, Buprestidae, Cerambycidae) in White Spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss) Ecosystems of Alaska Richard A. Werner This publication reports research involving pesticides. It does not contain recommenda- tions for their use, nor does it imply that the uses discussed here have been registered. All uses of pesticides must be registered by appropriate state and federal agencies, or both, before they can be recommended. CAUTION: Pesticides can be injurious to humans, domestic animals, desirable plants, and fish or other wildlife—if they are not handled or applied properly. Use all pesticides selectively and carefully. Follow recommended practices for the disposal of surplus pesticides and pesticide containers. Author Richard A. Werner was a research entomologist (retired), Pacific Northwest Research Station, 8080 NW Ridgewood Drive, Corvallis, OR 97330. He is currently a volunteer at the Pacific Northwest Research Station conducting research for the Long Term Ecological Research Program in Alaska. Abstract Werner, Richard A. 2002. Effect of ecosystem disturbance on diversity of bark and wood-boring beetles (Coleoptera: Scolytidae, Buprestidae, Cerambycidae) in white spruce (Picea glauca (Moench) Voss) ecosystems of Alaska. Res. Pap. PNW-RP-546. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 15 p. Fire and timber harvest are the two major disturbances that alter forest ecosystems in interior Alaska. Both types of disturbance provide habitats that attract wood borers and bark beetles the first year after the disturbance, but populations then decrease to levels below those in undisturbed sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity and Coarse Woody Debris in Southern Forests Proceedings of the Workshop on Coarse Woody Debris in Southern Forests: Effects on Biodiversity
    Biodiversity and Coarse woody Debris in Southern Forests Proceedings of the Workshop on Coarse Woody Debris in Southern Forests: Effects on Biodiversity Athens, GA - October 18-20,1993 Biodiversity and Coarse Woody Debris in Southern Forests Proceedings of the Workhop on Coarse Woody Debris in Southern Forests: Effects on Biodiversity Athens, GA October 18-20,1993 Editors: James W. McMinn, USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, Athens, GA, and D.A. Crossley, Jr., University of Georgia, Athens, GA Sponsored by: U.S. Department of Energy, Savannah River Site, and the USDA Forest Service, Savannah River Forest Station, Biodiversity Program, Aiken, SC Conducted by: USDA Forest Service, Southem Research Station, Asheville, NC, and University of Georgia, Institute of Ecology, Athens, GA Preface James W. McMinn and D. A. Crossley, Jr. Conservation of biodiversity is emerging as a major goal in The effects of CWD on biodiversity depend upon the management of forest ecosystems. The implied harvesting variables, distribution, and dynamics. This objective is the conservation of a full complement of native proceedings addresses the current state of knowledge about species and communities within the forest ecosystem. the influences of CWD on the biodiversity of various Effective implementation of conservation measures will groups of biota. Research priorities are identified for future require a broader knowledge of the dimensions of studies that should provide a basis for the conservation of biodiversity, the contributions of various ecosystem biodiversity when interacting with appropriate management components to those dimensions, and the impact of techniques. management practices. We thank John Blake, USDA Forest Service, Savannah In a workshop held in Athens, GA, October 18-20, 1993, River Forest Station, for encouragement and support we focused on an ecosystem component, coarse woody throughout the workshop process.
    [Show full text]
  • And Chalcophora Virginiensis (Drury) with a Review and Key to the North American Species of Chalcophora Dejean (Coleoptera:Buprestidae)
    The Coleopterists Bulletin, 67(4): 457–469. 2013. REEVALUATION OF CHALCOPHORA ANGULICOLLIS (LECONTE) AND CHALCOPHORA VIRGINIENSIS (DRURY) WITH A REVIEW AND KEY TO THE NORTH AMERICAN SPECIES OF CHALCOPHORA DEJEAN (COLEOPTERA:BUPRESTIDAE) CRYSTAL A. MAIER Division of Entomology Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology University of Kansas 1501 Crestline Drive, Suite 140 Lawrence, KS 66045, U.S.A. AND MICHAEL A. IVIE Montana Entomology Collection 1601 S. 19th Ave., Room 50 Marsh Laboratory Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717-3020, U.S.A. [email protected] ABSTRACT Chalcophora angulicollis (LeConte) and Chalcophora virginiensis (Drury) are shown to be valid allopatric species in the western and eastern forests of North America, respectively. The historic uncertainty regarding their status is reviewed, and new characters of the aedeagus, penultimate maxillary palpomere, and elytral serrations are utilized for their identification. This information is combined with redescriptions, diagnoses, illustrations, and a key for all species of Chalcophora Dejean in North America north of Mexico. Key Words: taxonomy, metallic wood-boring beetles, Nearctic, key, coniferous forests Chalcophora Dejean, 1833 (see Bellamy 2003 (Bellamy 2003, 2008): Chalcophora fortis for information on the correct authorship of the LeConte, Chalcophora georgiana (LeConte), genus) includes a group of common, rather large, Chalcophora liberta (Germar), and the prob- and economically important species in North lematic pair C. angulicollis and C. virginiensis. America (Bright 1987), but the status of two of Kerremans (1909) synonymized the latter two these species, the western Chalcophora angulicollis of these North American Chalcophora species, (LeConte) and eastern Chalcophora virginiensis proposing one transcontinental species under the (Drury), has been confused.
    [Show full text]
  • Classification and Phylogeny of the Buprestoidea (Insecta: Coleoptera)
    ISSN 1211-8788 Acta Musei Moraviae, Scientiae biologicae (Brno) 85: 113–184, 2000 Classification and phylogeny of the Buprestoidea (Insecta: Coleoptera) JIØÍ KOLIBÁÈ Moravian Museum, Department of Entomology, Hviezdoslavova 29a, 627 00 Brno, Czech Republic; e-mail: [email protected] KOLIBÁÈ J. 2000: Classification and phylogeny of the Buprestoidea (Insecta: Coleoptera). Acta Musei Moraviae, Scientiae biologicae (Brno) 85: 113–184. – Selected species of 19 buprestid genera were studied in holomorphological fashion. The genera represent all the subfamilies described within the Buprestidae LEACH: Schizopodinae LECONTE (Schizopus LECONTE), Julodinae LACORDAIRE (Julodis SOLIER), Thrincopyginae LECONTE (Thrincopyge LECONTE), Acmaeoderinae KERREMANS (Acmaeoderella COBOS), Polycestinae LACORDAIRE (Ptosima SOLIER, Polycesta SOLIER, Sponsor LAPORTE & GORY, Paratrachys SAUNDERS), Buprestinae LEACH (Buprestis LINNAEUS, Melanophila ESCHSCHOLTZ), Chrysobothrinae LAPORTE & GORY (Chrysobothris ESCHSCHOLTZ), Chalcophorinae LACORDAIRE (Chalcophora SOLIER), Sphenopterinae LACORDAIRE (Sphenoptera SOLIER), Mastogeniinae LECONTE & HORN (Mastogenius SOLIER), Galbellinae REITTER (Galbella WESTWOOD), Agrilinae LAPORTE & GORY (Coraebus LAPORTE & GORY, Agrilus CURTIS), Trachyinae GORY & LAPORTE (Trachys FABRICIUS) a Cylindromorphinae PORTEVIN (Cylindromorphus THÉRY). Some of the body parts studied were figured. Eighty seven characters of larvae and adults were used in a character state matrix. The matrix was mostly based on the material studied, although, literature data were also used (especially for larval and anatomical characters). The families Derodontidae, Bostrichidae, Dermestidae, Dascillidae, Byrrhidae, Elateridae, and Dryopidae were used as outgroups. The Hennig86 program (commands mhennig*bb*, successive weighting) was used for computing the matrix. Only one tree is a result of the matrix and that shows high congruence of matrix data. The resulting tree is congruent with a general opinion on a higher taxonomy for Buprestoidea. Family rank is confirmed for Schizopodidae.
    [Show full text]
  • Structural and Health Pests
    Management Structural and Health Store beans and peas in insect-proof containers. Heating beans or peas to 130°F for 30 minutes prior to storage will kill all stages of beetles. When disposing of any product containing stored product Pests pests, make sure to remove any infected items from the home entirely. Nuisance and household pests—Bed Bug Nuisance and Household Pests See: Public health pests—Bed Bug Craig Hollingsworth and Rene Kesecker Latest revision—March 2020 Nuisance and household pests—Booklouse Order Psocodea (formerly Psocoptera) Pest description and damage Booklice (Psocids) are brownish In all cases, follow the instructions on the pesticide label. The PNW yellow insects about the size of a pinhead. They prefer moist, Insect Management Handbook has no legal status, whereas the undisturbed conditions. pesticide label is a legal document. Read the product label before making any pesticide applications. Management Eliminate entry points with caulk. Reduce moisture and increase light and air circulation. Fans and dehumidifiers are recommended. The National Pesticide Information Center provides guidance in pest Apply labelled pesticides to cracks and crevices where appropriate. identification, control options, pesticides and contracting professional pest management services at http://npic.orst.edu/. For further information: Booklice. Insect Advice from Extension. Pennsylvania State Nuisance and household pests—Ant University. https://ento.psu.edu/extension/factsheets/booklice Many species, including Carpenter ant (Camponotus spp.) Nuisance and household pests—Boxelder bug Cornfield ant (Lasius alienus) Boisea rubrolineata Odorous house ant (Tapinoma sessile) Pest description and damage About 0.5 inch long and dark Velvety tree ant (Liometopum spp.) color with red longitudinal lines on the back.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamic Processes As a Key Factor of Biodiversity
    ©Hohe Tauern National Park; download unter www.biologiezentrum.at 5th Symposium Conference Volume for Research in Protected Areas pages 29 - 38 10 to 12 June 2013, Mittersill Dynamic processes as a key factor for biodiversity? A zoological case study in the largest rockslip area of the Eastern Alps (Dobratsch, Austria; Arachnida: Araneae, Opiliones, Scorpiones; Insecta: Coleoptera) Sandra Aurenhammer & Christian Komposch Abstract The calcareous, protected rockslip area “Schütt” at the Dobratsch mountain impresses with its remarkable landscape, marks a striking zoogeographical borderline and is one of the most important biodiversity hot-spots in Austria. Beside its geographical position inside the endemic-rich Southern Alps it is the dynamic processes which provide this long-term-habitat to enhance the richness of invertebrate fauna in this area. Taking the long view, the southern part of the Dobratsch mountain in the Eastern Gailtal Alps in Carinthia, Austria was formed by two great rockslip events: a prehistoric one at the end of the last glaciation period and later by the greatest historical landslip of the Eastern Alps in January 1348. The Schütt-area features the only Austrian locality with two scorpion species occurring sympatrically, Euscorpius germanus and E. tergestinus. The rare harvestmen species Carinostoma carinatum and Leiobunum roseum can there be found in what are probably the biggest national populations. Selected examples of a remarkable heliophilic and thermophilic spider fauna of the vegetation free rock debris include the salticid Philaeus chrysops. Piny, open screes of the Natura-2000-sites “Schütt-Graschelitzen” and “Villacher Alpe (Dobratsch)” are further characterised by large-dimensioned, sunlit deadwood structures. They promote the occurrence of rare and endangered Urwald-relict buprestids like Buprestis novemmaculata and Dicerca moesta, a xerothermophilic, Southeast European faunal element.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Species of <I>Buprestis</I> (S. Str.) Linnaeus, 1758 (Coleoptera
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Center for Systematic Entomology, Gainesville, Insecta Mundi Florida 7-31-2020 A new species of Buprestis (s. str.) Linnaeus, 1758 (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) from the southwestern United States Richard L. Westcott Entomology Museum, IPPM Program, [email protected] Clint Burfitt USDA, APHIS, PPQ, Portland, OR, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/insectamundi Part of the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, and the Entomology Commons Westcott, Richard L. and Burfitt, Clint, A" new species of Buprestis (s. str.) Linnaeus, 1758 (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) from the southwestern United States" (2020). Insecta Mundi. 1273. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/insectamundi/1273 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for Systematic Entomology, Gainesville, Florida at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Insecta Mundi by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. June Day 2020 INSECTA 5 ######## MUNDI A Journal of World Insect Systematics 0780 A new species of Buprestis (s. str.) Linnaeus, 1758 (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) from the southwestern United States Richard L. Westcott IPPM Program, Entomology Museum Oregon Department of Agriculture 635 Capitol Street NE Salem, OR 97301-2532 Clint Burfitt USDA, APHIS, PPQ 6800 NE 59th Place Portland, OR 97218s Date of issue: July 31, 2020 CENTER FOR SYSTEMATIC ENTOMOLOGY, INC., Gainesville, FL Richard L. Westcott and Clint Bur itt A new species of Buprestis (s. str.) Linnaeus, 1758 (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) from the southwestern United States Insecta Mundi 0780: 1–5 ZooBank Registered: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:C93E8584-E740-40FA-944E-19A273F35FEF Published in 2020 by Center for Systematic Entomology, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • REPORT No 41
    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: Newsletter Buprestis Jahr/Year: 2003 Band/Volume: 42 Autor(en)/Author(s): diverse Artikel/Article: Newsletter Buprestis 42 1 REPORT No. 41 January 2003 BUPRESTIS A semi-annual newsletter devoted to the dissemination of information about buprestids and students of this group Editor: Hans Mühle Hofangerstr.22a D-81735 München Germany Dear friends, First of all I want to wish you a Happy New Year, good health and peace for you and your family. And – of course – always good luck in collecting beetles and brilliant ideas for the publications. If there are some minutes left, ask yourself what your contribution was to make BUPRESTIS successful. This paper will be of minor interest only, if there are too many things (literature, research interests or current research activities) are missing. Therefore, please send me your news and let our colleagues share in your works, problems or results. I guess you are not writing a publication for yourself, so make it better known by our newsletter’s literature service. But then I should get a copy of your paper or at least a message with the quotation. It is very time consuming for myself to pass through journals from Australia and Japan to South America to find out papers dealing with buprestids. Please check your addresses in the mailing list. Moreover, if you will have an email contact meanwhile, let me know it. The new deadline for the next issue of BUPRESTIS will be 15. June 2003.
    [Show full text]
  • Serbia and Montenegro Biodiversity Analysis, 2002
    FAA SECTION 119 BIODIVERSITY ANALYSIS FOR SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO Prepared for: United States Agency for International Development Mission to the Federal Republics of Yugoslavia Submitted By: Loren L. Schulze and The Environmental Information Systems and Networking Project (Contract No. EE-C-00-98-00001-00) DevTech Systems, Inc. May 2002 Final Report Note This document was prepared under the auspices of United States Agency for International Development (USAID) by a Biodiversity Analysis Team. The team was comprised of Dr. Loren L. Schulze, team leader and consultants from the Environmental Information Systems and Networking Project managed by DevTech Systems, Inc. Dr. Bruce A Byers consultant ecologist was responsible for the ecological analysis and Violeta Orlovic was responsible for the institutional analysis. The statements and opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of either USAID or DevTech Systems, Inc. Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................... 1 List of Appendices ............................................................................................................................. 3 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 5 Section One: Conservation
    [Show full text]
  • Identifying the Flatheaded Appletree Borer (Chrysobothris Femorata) and Other Buprestid Beetle Species in Tennessee
    SP503-I Insects Identifying the Flatheaded Appletree Borer (Chrysobothris femorata) and Other Buprestid Beetle Species in Tennessee Jason A. Hansen, Frank A. Hale1, Professor, Entomology and Plant Pathology, and William E. Klingeman, Associate Professor, Plant Sciences Introduction predation. Inside the host, larvae feed on the actively The flatheaded appletree borer, Chrysobothris femorata dividing cambium tissues, in addition to sapwood. (Olivier) (FHATB) is a well-documented, native pest of Galleries, which are feeding paths made by larvae, deciduous trees. It has a wide host range and is particularly maintain optimal humidity for larval growth. Feeding problematic in commercial nurseries and urban landscapes, activity continues even in cold winter months on sun- where it can cause rapid decline of economically important warmed portions of the trunk. When fully developed, hosts. When infestations are high, FHATB has been known larvae bore into the heartwood and form pupal chambers to attack healthy trees as well as those stressed by drought, with entrances that are tightly plugged with frass. Frass plant disease, mechanical injury and other environmental appears as sawdust particles after passage of the plant factors. Its distribution is ubiquitous, covering the entire tissues through the beetle digestive tract. Pupation occurs continental United States and extending into Canada. in late spring to early summer and lasts 1-2 weeks, after which the adult emerges by cutting a distinctive D-shaped Life History exit hole in the bark (Fig. 1). Throughout its range, FHATB completes one Photo by generation per year. Adult females lay eggs on the sunny Frank Hale, side of trees in late spring and throughout the summer Entomology months, ovipositing after a meal of tender bark is taken and Plant from the host plant.
    [Show full text]
  • The Buprestidae (Coleoptera) of Missouri
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Center for Systematic Entomology, Gainesville, Insecta Mundi Florida June 1991 The Buprestidae (Coleoptera) of Missouri Ted C. MacRae Davis, California Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/insectamundi Part of the Entomology Commons MacRae, Ted C., "The Buprestidae (Coleoptera) of Missouri" (1991). Insecta Mundi. 411. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/insectamundi/411 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for Systematic Entomology, Gainesville, Florida at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Insecta Mundi by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Vol. 5, No. 2, June 1991 101 The Buprestidae (Coleoptera) of Missouri Ted C. MacRae Entotech, Inc. 1497 Drew Ave. Davis, California 9561 6 Abstract Bellamy 1987; Kurosawa 1988; Nelson 1989). The distribution and seasonal occurrence of Subgenera and species are arranged alphabetically Missouri buprestids are discussed. Keys are pre- within each genus. Under each species discussion, sented for the eight subfamilies, 16 tribes, 23 information is presented on Missouri counties in genera, and 131 described species and subspecies which the species has been collected, dates of known to occur in the state. Three additional collection, and seasonal abundance. Information is species previously recorded from Missouti are also provided on host associations. Except as excluded. Distribution within the state is cited by indicated, discussions of hosts are limited only to counties. Information on collecting techniques, associations which have been determined from seasonal abundance, and adult and larval host Missouri specimens. In cases where no host as- associations is presented and discussed.
    [Show full text]