DOCSLIB.ORG

Massachusetts Vulnerability Assessment 2016 Species of Greatest Conservation Need Animal Species Profiles

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Massachusetts Vulnerability Assessment 2016 Species of Greatest Conservation Need Animal Species Profiles Massachusetts Vulnerability Assessment 2016 Species of Greatest Conservation Need Animal Species Profiles Prepared by Toni Lyn Morelli and Jennifer R. Smetzer June 2016 1 Preface These species profiles were produced for the 2016 Massachusetts Rapid Assessment Protocol of their Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN). Each profile summarizes what is known about specific SGCN species responses to climate change to date and anticipated under future scenarios and highlights where other factors are expected to exacerbate the effects of climate change. This information was obtained through a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature, primarily using the ISI Web of Knowledge to search for papers on each species related to “climate”, “temperature”, “drought”, “flood”, or “precipitation”. A substantial amount of information was available from the Massachusetts Climate Action Tool, a project produced by Scott Jackson, Michelle Staudinger, Steve DeStefano, Toni Lyn Morelli, and others. In addition, Staudinger et al.'s 2015 Integrating Climate Change into Northeast and Midwest State Wildlife Action Plans was an important resource for these reports, including work by Colton Ellison and Stephen Jane. Funding for these reports was provided by Massachusetts Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Department of Interior Northeast Climate Science Center. 2 Species Profiles AMPHIBIANS ................................................................................................................................................... 9 Blue-spotted salamander ............................................................................................................................ 9 Eastern spadefoot ..................................................................................................................................... 11 Jefferson’s salamander ............................................................................................................................. 13 Marbled Salamander ................................................................................................................................ 15 Northern leopard frog ............................................................................................................................... 16 BIRDS ........................................................................................................................................................... 21 American bittern....................................................................................................................................... 21 American black duck................................................................................................................................ 22 American Oystercatcher ........................................................................................................................... 23 American woodcock................................................................................................................................. 24 Black-crowned night-heron ...................................................................................................................... 25 Blackpoll warbler ..................................................................................................................................... 27 Blue-winged teal ...................................................................................................................................... 28 Canada warbler......................................................................................................................................... 29 Common Gallinule ................................................................................................................................... 30 Common tern ............................................................................................................................................ 31 Eastern meadowlark ................................................................................................................................. 33 Glossy ibis ................................................................................................................................................ 34 Great egret ................................................................................................................................................ 36 King rail ................................................................................................................................................... 37 3 Least bittern .............................................................................................................................................. 39 Long-tailed Duck ..................................................................................................................................... 40 Louisiana waterthrush .............................................................................................................................. 41 Marsh wren............................................................................................................................................... 42 Northern harrier ........................................................................................................................................ 43 Olive-sided flycatcher .............................................................................................................................. 44 Pied-billed grebe ...................................................................................................................................... 45 Piping plover ............................................................................................................................................ 47 Prairie warbler .......................................................................................................................................... 48 Red knot ................................................................................................................................................... 49 Ruffed grouse ........................................................................................................................................... 50 Rusty Blackbird ........................................................................................................................................ 51 Saltmarsh sparrow .................................................................................................................................... 52 Seaside sparrow ........................................................................................................................................ 53 Sedge wren ............................................................................................................................................... 55 Snowy egret .............................................................................................................................................. 56 Sora .......................................................................................................................................................... 57 Willet ........................................................................................................................................................ 59 Wilson’s snipe .......................................................................................................................................... 61 Wood thrush ............................................................................................................................................. 62 References ................................................................................................................................................ 63 FISH .............................................................................................................................................................. 80 Alewife ..................................................................................................................................................... 80 4 American Brook Lamprey........................................................................................................................ 82 American eel ............................................................................................................................................ 83 American shad .......................................................................................................................................... 84 Atlantic salmon ........................................................................................................................................ 86 Atlantic sturgeon ...................................................................................................................................... 88 Blacknose dace ......................................................................................................................................... 90 Blueback herring ...................................................................................................................................... 91 Bridle shiner ............................................................................................................................................. 93 Brook trout ..............................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Carmine Shiner (Notropis Percobromus) in Canada
    COSEWIC Assessment and Update Status Report on the Carmine Shiner Notropis percobromus in Canada THREATENED 2006 COSEWIC COSEPAC COMMITTEE ON THE STATUS OF COMITÉ SUR LA SITUATION ENDANGERED WILDLIFE DES ESPÈCES EN PÉRIL IN CANADA AU CANADA COSEWIC status reports are working documents used in assigning the status of wildlife species suspected of being at risk. This report may be cited as follows: COSEWIC 2006. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the carmine shiner Notropis percobromus in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vi + 29 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm). Previous reports COSEWIC 2001. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the carmine shiner Notropis percobromus and rosyface shiner Notropis rubellus in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. v + 17 pp. Houston, J. 1994. COSEWIC status report on the rosyface shiner Notropis rubellus in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. 1-17 pp. Production note: COSEWIC would like to acknowledge D.B. Stewart for writing the update status report on the carmine shiner Notropis percobromus in Canada, prepared under contract with Environment Canada, overseen and edited by Robert Campbell, Co-chair, COSEWIC Freshwater Fishes Species Specialist Subcommittee. In 1994 and again in 2001, COSEWIC assessed minnows belonging to the rosyface shiner species complex, including those in Manitoba, as rosyface shiner (Notropis rubellus). For additional copies contact: COSEWIC Secretariat c/o Canadian Wildlife Service Environment Canada Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: (819) 997-4991 / (819) 953-3215 Fax: (819) 994-3684 E-mail: COSEWIC/[email protected] http://www.cosewic.gc.ca Également disponible en français sous le titre Évaluation et Rapport de situation du COSEPAC sur la tête carminée (Notropis percobromus) au Canada – Mise à jour.
    [Show full text]
  • Indiana Species April 2007
    Fishes of Indiana April 2007 The Wildlife Diversity Section (WDS) is responsible for the conservation and management of over 750 species of nongame and endangered wildlife. The list of Indiana's species was compiled by WDS biologists based on accepted taxonomic standards. The list will be periodically reviewed and updated. References used for scientific names are included at the bottom of this list. ORDER FAMILY GENUS SPECIES COMMON NAME STATUS* CLASS CEPHALASPIDOMORPHI Petromyzontiformes Petromyzontidae Ichthyomyzon bdellium Ohio lamprey lampreys Ichthyomyzon castaneus chestnut lamprey Ichthyomyzon fossor northern brook lamprey SE Ichthyomyzon unicuspis silver lamprey Lampetra aepyptera least brook lamprey Lampetra appendix American brook lamprey Petromyzon marinus sea lamprey X CLASS ACTINOPTERYGII Acipenseriformes Acipenseridae Acipenser fulvescens lake sturgeon SE sturgeons Scaphirhynchus platorynchus shovelnose sturgeon Polyodontidae Polyodon spathula paddlefish paddlefishes Lepisosteiformes Lepisosteidae Lepisosteus oculatus spotted gar gars Lepisosteus osseus longnose gar Lepisosteus platostomus shortnose gar Amiiformes Amiidae Amia calva bowfin bowfins Hiodonotiformes Hiodontidae Hiodon alosoides goldeye mooneyes Hiodon tergisus mooneye Anguilliformes Anguillidae Anguilla rostrata American eel freshwater eels Clupeiformes Clupeidae Alosa chrysochloris skipjack herring herrings Alosa pseudoharengus alewife X Dorosoma cepedianum gizzard shad Dorosoma petenense threadfin shad Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Campostoma anomalum central stoneroller
    [Show full text]
  • Species-Specific Effects of Turbidity on the Physiology of Imperiled Blackline Shiners Notropis Spp. in the Laurentian Great Lakes
    Vol. 31: 271–277, 2016 ENDANGERED SPECIES RESEARCH Published November 28 doi: 10.3354/esr00774 Endang Species Res OPENPEN ACCESSCCESS Species-specific effects of turbidity on the physiology of imperiled blackline shiners Notropis spp. in the Laurentian Great Lakes Suzanne M. Gray1,4,*, Laura H. McDonnell1, Nicholas E. Mandrak2, Lauren J. Chapman1,3 1Department of Biology, McGill University, Montreal, QC H3A 1B1, Canada 2Department of Biological Sciences, University of Toronto Scarborough, Toronto, ON M1C 1A4, Canada 3Wildlife Conservation Society, Bronx, NY 10460, USA 4Present address: School of Environment and Natural Resources, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA ABSTRACT: Increased sedimentary turbidity associated with human activities is often cited as a key stressor contributing to the decline of fishes globally. The mechanisms underlying negative effects of turbidity on fish populations have been well documented, including effects on behavior (e.g. visual impairment) and/or respiratory function (e.g. clogging of the gills); however, the long- term physiological consequences are less well understood. The decline or disappearance of sev- eral blackline shiners Notropis spp. in the Laurentian Great Lakes has been associated with increased turbidity. Here, we used non-lethal physiological methods to assess the responses of 3 blackline shiners under varying degrees of threat in Canada (Species at Risk Act; pugnose shiner N. anogenus: endangered; bridle shiner N. bifrenatus: special concern; blacknose shiner N. het- erolepis: common) to increased turbidity. Fish were exposed for 3 to 6 mo to continuous low levels of turbidity (~7 nephelometric turbidity units, NTU). To test for effects on respiratory function, we measured both resting metabolic rate (RMR) and critical oxygen tension (the oxygen partial pres- sure at which the RMR of fish declines).
    [Show full text]
  • Rare Native Animals of RI
    RARE NATIVE ANIMALS OF RHODE ISLAND Revised: March, 2006 ABOUT THIS LIST The list is divided by vertebrates and invertebrates and is arranged taxonomically according to the recognized authority cited before each group. Appropriate synonomy is included where names have changed since publication of the cited authority. The Natural Heritage Program's Rare Native Plants of Rhode Island includes an estimate of the number of "extant populations" for each listed plant species, a figure which has been helpful in assessing the health of each species. Because animals are mobile, some exhibiting annual long-distance migrations, it is not possible to derive a population index that can be applied to all animal groups. The status assigned to each species (see definitions below) provides some indication of its range, relative abundance, and vulnerability to decline. More specific and pertinent data is available from the Natural Heritage Program, the Rhode Island Endangered Species Program, and the Rhode Island Natural History Survey. STATUS. The status of each species is designated by letter codes as defined: (FE) Federally Endangered (7 species currently listed) (FT) Federally Threatened (2 species currently listed) (SE) State Endangered Native species in imminent danger of extirpation from Rhode Island. These taxa may meet one or more of the following criteria: 1. Formerly considered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for Federal listing as endangered or threatened. 2. Known from an estimated 1-2 total populations in the state. 3. Apparently globally rare or threatened; estimated at 100 or fewer populations range-wide. Animals listed as State Endangered are protected under the provisions of the Rhode Island State Endangered Species Act, Title 20 of the General Laws of the State of Rhode Island.
    [Show full text]
  • Iowa's Curious Record for Lake Chub
    5 American Currents Vol. 41, No. 4 IOWA’S CURIOUS RECORD FOR LAKE CHUB (COUESIUS PLUMBEUS) John Olson Iowa Department of Natural Resources, Des Moines The Lake Chub Couesius( plumbeus) is a relatively large, slender-bodied minnow (Family: Cyprinidae) commonly reaching lengths of 4–5 inches and reaching a reported maximum of nearly 9 inches (Figure 1). There is usually a slender barbel near the tip of the maxillary. The Lake Chub is dark olive dorsally and is dusky white ventrally with a dark lateral band extending from the base of the caudal fin to the snout. Although superficially resembling the Creek Chub (Semotilus atromaculatus), the Lake Chub lacks the Figure 1. Lake Chub (Couesius plumbeus). (Photo by Konrad Creek Chub’s dark spot at the base of the caudal fin and the Schmidt) dark spot at the anterior base of the dorsal fin. The North- ern Pearl Dace (Margariscus nachtriebi) also bears a re- record is based on a collection made in 1954 just west of semblance to the Lake Chub but has a shorter, more blunt Dubuque in northeastern Iowa. snout, has a somewhat less laterally compressed body, and According to published accounts, the Lake Chub is a lacks the red streak along the lower side of the body of habitat generalist, at least within its northern-trending and the large male Pearl Dace (Page and Burr 2011). The Lake Chub has the most northerly and widespread distribution of any North American cyprinid and it ranges from Alas- ka east to Nova Scotia and south to the Great Lakes of the northern United States with scattered relict populations known from the upper Missouri River basin drainage of Wyoming, Colorado, South Dakota, and Nebraska (Figure 2).
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliographic Guide to the Terrestrial Arthropods of Michigan
    The Great Lakes Entomologist Volume 16 Number 3 - Fall 1983 Number 3 - Fall 1983 Article 5 October 1983 Bibliographic Guide to the Terrestrial Arthropods of Michigan Mark F. O'Brien The University of Michigan Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle Part of the Entomology Commons Recommended Citation O'Brien, Mark F. 1983. "Bibliographic Guide to the Terrestrial Arthropods of Michigan," The Great Lakes Entomologist, vol 16 (3) Available at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle/vol16/iss3/5 This Peer-Review Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Biology at ValpoScholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Great Lakes Entomologist by an authorized administrator of ValpoScholar. For more information, please contact a ValpoScholar staff member at [email protected]. O'Brien: Bibliographic Guide to the Terrestrial Arthropods of Michigan 1983 THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST 87 BIBLIOGRAPHIC GUIDE TO THE TERRESTRIAL ARTHROPODS OF MICHIGAN Mark F. O'Brienl ABSTRACT Papers dealing with distribution, faunal extensions, and identification of Michigan insects and other terrestrial arthropods are listed by order, and cover the period of 1878 through 1982. The following bibliography lists the publications dealing with the distribution or identification of insects and other terrestrial arthropods occurring in the State of Michigan. Papers dealing only with biological, behavioral, or economic aspects are not included. The entries are grouped by orders, which are arranged alphabetically, rather than phylogenetic ally , to facilitate information retrieval. The intent of this paper is to provide a ready reference to works on the Michigan fauna, although some of the papers cited will be useful for other states in the Great Lakes region.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Landscapes of Maine a Guide to Natural Communities and Ecosystems
    Natural Landscapes of Maine A Guide to Natural Communities and Ecosystems by Susan Gawler and Andrew Cutko Natural Landscapes of Maine A Guide to Natural Communities and Ecosystems by Susan Gawler and Andrew Cutko Copyright © 2010 by the Maine Natural Areas Program, Maine Department of Conservation 93 State House Station, Augusta, Maine 04333-0093 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system without written permission from the authors or the Maine Natural Areas Program, except for inclusion of brief quotations in a review. Illustrations and photographs are used with permission and are copyright by the contributors. Images cannot be reproduced without expressed written consent of the contributor. ISBN 0-615-34739-4 To cite this document: Gawler, S. and A. Cutko. 2010. Natural Landscapes of Maine: A Guide to Natural Communities and Ecosystems. Maine Natural Areas Program, Maine Department of Conservation, Augusta, Maine. Cover photo: Circumneutral Riverside Seep on the St. John River, Maine Printed and bound in Maine using recycled, chlorine-free paper Contents Page Acknowledgements ..................................................................................... 3 Foreword ..................................................................................................... 4 Introduction ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Life History Observations on Hemaris Gracilis (Sphingidae)
    Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 33(4), 1979, 254-257 LIFE HISTORY OBSERVATIONS ON HEMARIS GRACILIS (SPHINGIDAE) BENJAMIN D. WILLIAMS The Lawrence Academy, Groton, Massachusetts 01450 ABSTRACT. The mature larva of Hemaris gracilis is described and figured from material at Groton, Middlesex County, Massachusetts. The foodplant is low bush blue­ berry, Vaccinium vacillans Torrey. According to recently published material (Hodges, 1971), the im­ mature stages of Hemaris gracilis are unknown. There is uncertainty about the identity of its foodplant. This report describes the larval stages and identifies a foodplant for this species. On 27 May 1978 in Groton, Middlesex Co., Mass., I was looking for Hemaris gracilis adults since for several years previously I had taken individuals of this species feeding at the blossoms of early low bush blueberry, Vaccinium vacillans. At approximately 1300 I observed a female hovering over the V. vacillans but obviously not feeding. As I observed her, she oviposited on the underside of new growth at the extremity of a twig. The egg was retrieved; in the process I lost sight of the adult. With the exception of its very small size the egg was typically sphingiform-pale green and slightly oblong in shape. The color perfectly matched that of the leaf on which it was placed. I returned to the same area on 30 May and captured a female of H. gracilis which I subsequently placed in a "flying" cage. On 1 June 1978 a third female was observed ovipositing on V. vacillans at 1630; I was able to retrieve four eggs before the female disappeared.
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species
    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Kansas Stream Fishes
    A POCKET GUIDE TO Kansas Stream Fishes ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ By Jessica Mounts Illustrations © Joseph Tomelleri Sponsored by Chickadee Checkoff, Westar Energy Green Team, Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism, Kansas Alliance for Wetlands & Streams, and Kansas Chapter of the American Fisheries Society Published by the Friends of the Great Plains Nature Center Table of Contents • Introduction • 2 • Fish Anatomy • 3 • Species Accounts: Sturgeons (Family Acipenseridae) • 4 ■ Shovelnose Sturgeon • 5 ■ Pallid Sturgeon • 6 Minnows (Family Cyprinidae) • 7 ■ Southern Redbelly Dace • 8 ■ Western Blacknose Dace • 9 ©Ryan Waters ■ Bluntface Shiner • 10 ■ Red Shiner • 10 ■ Spotfin Shiner • 11 ■ Central Stoneroller • 12 ■ Creek Chub • 12 ■ Peppered Chub / Shoal Chub • 13 Plains Minnow ■ Silver Chub • 14 ■ Hornyhead Chub / Redspot Chub • 15 ■ Gravel Chub • 16 ■ Brassy Minnow • 17 ■ Plains Minnow / Western Silvery Minnow • 18 ■ Cardinal Shiner • 19 ■ Common Shiner • 20 ■ Bigmouth Shiner • 21 ■ • 21 Redfin Shiner Cover Photo: Photo by Ryan ■ Carmine Shiner • 22 Waters. KDWPT Stream ■ Golden Shiner • 22 Survey and Assessment ■ Program collected these Topeka Shiner • 23 male Orangespotted Sunfish ■ Bluntnose Minnow • 24 from Buckner Creek in Hodgeman County, Kansas. ■ Bigeye Shiner • 25 The fish were catalogued ■ Emerald Shiner • 26 and returned to the stream ■ Sand Shiner • 26 after the photograph. ■ Bullhead Minnow • 27 ■ Fathead Minnow • 27 ■ Slim Minnow • 28 ■ Suckermouth Minnow • 28 Suckers (Family Catostomidae) • 29 ■ River Carpsucker •
    [Show full text]
  • Otter Slough Conservation Area (Stoddard County, Missouri) by Hugo L
    SOUTHERN LEPIDOPTERISTS’ NEWS VOLUME 43 NO. 2 (2021), PG. 159 A LEPIDOPTERA BIODIVERSITY BLITZ AT THE OTTER SLOUGH CONSERVATION AREA (STODDARD COUNTY, MISSOURI) BY HUGO L. KONS JR. 1 & ROBERT J. BORTH 2 ABSTRACT We conducted a Lepidoptera biodiversity blitz on 3 and Catocala crataegi complex, representing the most 4 June 2018 at the Otter Slough Conservation Area in northerly locality that we are aware of for these Stoddard County, Missouri. We documented as many phenotypes. Recent material was needed for DNA Lepidoptera species as possible with MV/UV lights, sequencing. rotten banana/brown sugar bait, and diurnal collecting with nets. We present records for 235 species, including From 3-4 June 2018 we visited the Otter Slough 193 Macrolepidoptera and 19 Rhopalocera 3. Habitats Conservation Area to sample Catocala and document as sampled include hydric hardwood forest, cypress many other co-occurring Lepidoptera species as swamp, open wetlands, and field. Examples of some possible. This paper reports the Macrolepidoptera and species are shown on 15 color plates of live photos and Rhopalocera species recorded during this survey. This pinned specimens research was conducted under Wildlife Collectors Permit #17910 issued by the Missouri Department of INTRODUCTION Conservation. The Otter Slough Conservation Area is a 4,866 acre area MATERIALS AND METHODS including hydric hardwood forest (Figure 2:B, E-H), cypress-tupelo swamp (Figure 2:A), open marsh with Lepidoptera were sampled with a 400 watt MV cattails, sedge meadow, and cypress (Figure 2:D), illuminated sheet, 175 watt MV light trap, 15 watt UV mowed field (Figure 2:C (middle)), and slough habitats.
    [Show full text]
  • Botanist Interior 43.1
    2011 THE MICHIGAN BOTANIST 1 EDWARD G. VOSS (1929 –2012) Anton A. Reznicek and Richard K. Rabeler University of Michigan Herbarium 3600 Varsity Drive Ann Arbor, MI 48108-2228 Edward Groesbec k Voss (Fig. 1), Professor and Curator Emeritus at the Uni - versity of Michigan Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and Uni - versity of Michigan Herbarium, died on February 13, 2012 at his home in Ann Arbor, after a brief illness. He was born on February 22, 1929 in Delaware, Ohio. Ed’s abilities were clear early in his life. He attended Woodward High School in Toledo, Ohio. He received the Achievement Award as the outstanding senior in his 1946 high school class, and was later elected to the Woodward High Hall of Fame. He then graduated with a bachelor’s degree with honors from Denison University (1950); his undergraduate honors thesis, On the classifica - tion of the Hesperiidae , became a significant paper on Lepidoptera (Voss 1952). He completed his education with a master’s in Biology (1951) and a doctoral de - gree in Botany (1954), both from the University of Michigan working with Rogers McVaugh. He was awarded an honorary Doctor of Science from Denison University in 2003. In 1956, he began his long association with the University of Michigan and Michigan’s flora when he was appointed as a research associate at the Herbar - ium, beginning what was expected to be a five-year project to document the flora of Michigan. He joined the Botany faculty in 1960 as assistant professor and was promoted to associate professor (1963), and later, professor (1969).
    [Show full text]