DOCSLIB.ORG

Talone Lake Vector Habitat Remediation Project Biological Technical Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Talone Lake Vector Habitat Remediation Project Biological Technical Report Talone Lake Vector Habitat Remediation Project Biological Technical Report October 20, 2017 | WSO-02 Prepared for: Weston Solutions, Inc. 5871 Dryden Place, Suite 101 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Prepared by: HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. 7578 El Cajon Boulevard La Mesa, CA 91942 Talone Lake Vector Habitat Remediation Project Biological Technical Report Prepared for: Weston Solutions, Inc. 5871 Dryden Place, Suite 101 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Prepared by: HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. 7578 El Cajon Boulevard La Mesa, CA 91942 October 20, 2017 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page ES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ ES-1 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 History ................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Location............................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Existing and Surrounding Land Use .................................................................................... 2 1.4 Topography and Soils .......................................................................................................... 2 1.5 Current Site Conditions ....................................................................................................... 2 1.6 Ownership ........................................................................................................................... 3 1.7 Project Description ............................................................................................................. 3 2.0 METHODS ......................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 General Biological Survey ................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Jurisdictional Delineation .................................................................................................... 4 2.3 Focused Surveys .................................................................................................................. 4 2.4 Nomenclature ..................................................................................................................... 5 3.0 RESULTS ........................................................................................................................................... 6 3.1 Vegetation Communities/Habitats ..................................................................................... 6 3.1.1 Southern Riparian Forest ....................................................................................... 6 3.1.2 Cismontake Alkali Marsh ....................................................................................... 7 3.1.3 Freshwater Marsh .................................................................................................. 7 3.1.4 Mule Fat Scrub ....................................................................................................... 7 3.1.5 Open Water ........................................................................................................... 7 3.1.6 Baccharis Scrub ...................................................................................................... 7 3.1.7 Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub - including Landscaped and Disturbed ....................... 8 3.1.8 Non-native Grassland ............................................................................................ 8 3.1.9 Disturbed ............................................................................................................... 9 3.1.10 Developed .............................................................................................................. 9 3.2 Plants .................................................................................................................................. 9 3.3 Animals ............................................................................................................................... 9 3.4 Jurisdictional Areas ............................................................................................................. 9 4.0 SENSITIVE RESOURCES ................................................................................................................... 11 4.1 Sensitive Vegetation Communities/Habitats .................................................................... 11 4.2 Sensitive Plant Species ...................................................................................................... 11 4.3 Sensitive Animal Species ................................................................................................... 12 5.0 REGIONAL AND REGULATORY CONTEXT ....................................................................................... 13 5.1 Federal Government ......................................................................................................... 13 5.2 State of California ............................................................................................................. 14 5.3 City of Oceanside .............................................................................................................. 15 i TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) 6.0 IMPACTS ......................................................................................................................................... 17 6.1 Direct Impacts ................................................................................................................... 17 6.1.1 Sensitive Vegetation Communities/Habitats ....................................................... 17 6.1.2 Sensitive Plant Species ......................................................................................... 18 6.1.3 Sensitive Animal Species ...................................................................................... 18 6.1.4 Sensitive Plant and Animal Species with Potential to Occur ............................... 18 6.1.5 Jurisdictional Areas .............................................................................................. 18 6.2 Cumulative Impacts .......................................................................................................... 19 7.0 PROPOSED AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES ...................................... 20 7.1 Mitigation for Habitat Impacts ......................................................................................... 20 7.1.1 Sensitive Vegetation Communities/Habitats and Jurisdictional Areas ................ 20 7.2 Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures During Construction ...................... 22 8.0 CERTIFICATION/QUALIFICATION .................................................................................................... 26 9.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................... 27 LIST OF APPENDICES A Bird Survey Reports (2017 and 2013) B Plant Species Observed – Talone Lake Project Area C Animal Species Observed/Detected – Talone Lake Project Area D Sensitive Species Potential to Occur – Talone Lake Project Area ii TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) LIST OF FIGURES No. Title Follows Page 1 Regional Location ............................................................................................................................. 2 2 Project Vicinity (USGS Topography) ................................................................................................. 2 3 Project Vicinity (Aerial Photograph) ................................................................................................ 2 4 Vegetation and Sensitive Resources ................................................................................................ 6 5 USACE Waters of the U.S. .............................................................................................................. 10 6 CDFW Jurisdictional Habitats ......................................................................................................... 10 7 Vegetation and Sensitive Resources/Impacts ................................................................................ 18 8 USACE Waters of the U.S./Impacts ................................................................................................ 18 9 CDFW Jurisdictional Habitats/Impacts ........................................................................................... 18 10 Proposed Revegetation .................................................................................................................. 20 LIST OF TABLES No. Title Page 1 Vegetation Communities/Habitats .................................................................................................. 6 2 Waters of The U.S. and CDFW Jurisdictional Habitats .................................................................. 10 3 Proposed Impacts to Vegetation Communities/Habitats .............................................................. 17 4 Project Impacts to Jurisdictional Areas .......................................................................................... 19 5 Project Changes to Wetland Habitat ............................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hummingbird (Family Trochilidae) Research: Welfare-Conscious Study Techniques for Live Hummingbirds and Processing of Hummingbird Specimens
    Special Publications Museum of Texas Tech University Number xx76 19xx January XXXX 20212010 Hummingbird (Family Trochilidae) Research: Welfare-conscious Study Techniques for Live Hummingbirds and Processing of Hummingbird Specimens Lisa A. Tell, Jenny A. Hazlehurst, Ruta R. Bandivadekar, Jennifer C. Brown, Austin R. Spence, Donald R. Powers, Dalen W. Agnew, Leslie W. Woods, and Andrew Engilis, Jr. Dedications To Sandra Ogletree, who was an exceptional friend and colleague. Her love for family, friends, and birds inspired us all. May her smile and laughter leave a lasting impression of time spent with her and an indelible footprint in our hearts. To my parents, sister, husband, and children. Thank you for all of your love and unconditional support. To my friends and mentors, Drs. Mitchell Bush, Scott Citino, John Pascoe and Bill Lasley. Thank you for your endless encouragement and for always believing in me. ~ Lisa A. Tell Front cover: Photographic images illustrating various aspects of hummingbird research. Images provided courtesy of Don M. Preisler with the exception of the top right image (courtesy of Dr. Lynda Goff). SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS Museum of Texas Tech University Number 76 Hummingbird (Family Trochilidae) Research: Welfare- conscious Study Techniques for Live Hummingbirds and Processing of Hummingbird Specimens Lisa A. Tell, Jenny A. Hazlehurst, Ruta R. Bandivadekar, Jennifer C. Brown, Austin R. Spence, Donald R. Powers, Dalen W. Agnew, Leslie W. Woods, and Andrew Engilis, Jr. Layout and Design: Lisa Bradley Cover Design: Lisa A. Tell and Don M. Preisler Production Editor: Lisa Bradley Copyright 2021, Museum of Texas Tech University This publication is available free of charge in PDF format from the website of the Natural Sciences Research Laboratory, Museum of Texas Tech University (www.depts.ttu.edu/nsrl).
    [Show full text]
  • Description of Source Water System
    CHAPTER 2 DESCRIPTION OF THE SOURCE WATER SYSTEM 2.0 Description of the Source Water System During the last 100 years, the CSD’s water system has evolved into a very complex system. It is now estimated to serve a population of 1.4 million people spread out over 370 square miles (Table 2.1). The CSD treats imported raw water and local runoff water at three City WTPs which have a combined capacity of 378 MGD. The CSD treats water by conventional technologies using coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, filtration and disinfection. Recently, all CSD water treatment plants have been modified to provide for the addition of fluoride to the potable water supply. To ensure safe and palatable water quality, the CSD collects water samples at its reservoirs, WTPs, and throughout the treated water storage and distribution system. The CSD’s use of local and imported water to meet water demand is affected by availability, cost, and water resource management policies. Imported water availability decreases the need to carry over local water for dry years in City reservoirs. CSD policy is to use local water first to reduce imported water purchases; this policy runs the risk of increased dependence on imported water during local droughts. Table 2.1 - City of San Diego General Statistics Population (2010) 1,301,621 Population (Estimated 2014) 1,381,069 Population percent change 6.1 Land Area Square Miles 370 Population Density per Square Mile 3733 Water Distribution Area Square Miles 403 Number of Service Connections (2015) 279,102 2.1 Water Sources (Figure 2.1) Most of California's water development has been dictated by the multi-year wet/dry weather cycles.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Husbandry Guidelines Apodiformes Hummingbirds-Trochilidae Karen
    Husbandry Guidelines Apodiformes Hummingbirds-Trochilidae Karen Krebbs, Conservation Biologist / Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum / Tucson, AZ Dave Rimlinger, Curator of Ornithology / San Diego Zoo / San Diego, CA Michael Mace, Curator of Ornithology / San Diego Wild Animal Park / Escondido, CA September, 2002 1. ACQUISITION AND ACCLIMATIZATION Sources of birds & acclimatization procedures - In the United States local species of hummingbirds can be collected with the proper permits. The Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum usually has species such as Anna's (Calypte anna), Costa's (Calypte costae), and Broad-billed (Cynanthus latirostris) for surplus each year if these species have nested in their Hummingbird Exhibit. In addition to keeping some native species, the San Diego Zoo has tried to maintain several exotic species such as Sparkling violet-ear (Colibri coruscans), Emerald (Amazilia amazilia), Oasis (Rhodopis vesper), etc. The San Diego Wild Animal Park has a large mixed species glass walk-through enclosure and has kept and produced hummingbirds over the years. All hummingbirds are on Appendix II of CITES and thus are covered under the Wild Bird Conservation Act (WBCA). An import permit from USFWS and an export permit from the country of origin must be obtained prior to the importation. Permits have been granted in the past, but currently it is difficult to find a country willing to export hummingbirds. Hummingbirds are more commonly kept in European collections, particularly private collections, and could be a source for future imports. Weighing Hummingbirds can be placed in a soft mesh bag and weighed with a spring scale. Electronic digital platform scales can also be used. A small wooden crate with a wire mesh front can also be used for weighing.
    [Show full text]
  • Dated Phylogenetic and Biogeographic Inference of Migratory Behavior in Bee Hummingbirds Yuyini Licona-Vera and Juan Francisco Ornelas*
    Licona-Vera and Ornelas BMC Evolutionary Biology (2017) 17:126 DOI 10.1186/s12862-017-0980-5 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access The conquering of North America: dated phylogenetic and biogeographic inference of migratory behavior in bee hummingbirds Yuyini Licona-Vera and Juan Francisco Ornelas* Abstract Background: Geographical and temporal patterns of diversification in bee hummingbirds (Mellisugini) were assessed with respect to the evolution of migration, critical for colonization of North America. We generated a dated multilocus phylogeny of the Mellisugini based on a dense sampling using Bayesian inference, maximum- likelihood and maximum parsimony methods, and reconstructed the ancestral states of distributional areas in a Bayesian framework and migratory behavior using maximum parsimony, maximum-likelihood and re-rooting methods. Results: All phylogenetic analyses confirmed monophyly of the Mellisugini and the inclusion of Atthis, Calothorax, Doricha, Eulidia, Mellisuga, Microstilbon, Myrmia, Tilmatura,andThaumastura. Mellisugini consists of two clades: (1) South American species (including Tilmatura dupontii), and (2) species distributed in North and Central America and the Caribbean islands. The second clade consists of four subclades: Mexican (Calothorax, Doricha)and Caribbean (Archilochus, Calliphlox, Mellisuga)sheartails,Calypte,andSelasphorus (incl. Atthis). Coalescent-based dating places the origin of the Mellisugini in the mid-to-late Miocene, with crown ages of most subclades in the early Pliocene, and subsequent species splits in the Pleistocene. Bee hummingbirds reached western North America by the end of the Miocene and the ancestral mellisuginid (bee hummingbirds) was reconstructed as sedentary, with four independent gains of migratory behavior during the evolution of the Mellisugini. Conclusions: Early colonization of North America and subsequent evolution of migration best explained biogeographic and diversification patterns within the Mellisugini.
    [Show full text]
  • East County Advanced Water Purification Project Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration SCH# 2018091029
    Attachment 1 East County Advanced Water Purification Project Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration SCH# 2018091029 December 2018 Prepared for: Padre Dam Municipal Water District 9300 Fanita Parkway Santee, CA 92071 Prepared by: HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. 7578 El Cajon Boulevard La Mesa, CA 91942 East County Advanced Water Purification Project Final Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration SCH# 2018091029 Prepared for: Padre Dam Municipal Water District 9300 Fanita Parkway Santee, CA 92071 Prepared by: HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. 7578 El Cajon Boulevard La Mesa, CA 91942 December 2018 | KJC-24.1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page FOREWORD ................................................................................................................................................ F-1 1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION .................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................................................... 3 3.0 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ............................................................................... 18 I. Aesthetics .......................................................................................................................... 19 II. Agriculture and Forest Resources ..................................................................................... 23 III. Air Quality ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Syllable Sharing and Inter-Individual Syllable Variation in Anna's
    Folia Zool. – 56(3): 307–318 (2007) Syllable sharing and inter-individual syllable variation in Anna’s hummingbird Calypte anna songs, in San Francisco, California Xiao-Jing YANG1, 2, 3, Fu-Min LEI1*, Gang WANG4 and Andrea J. JESSE5 1 Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China; *e-mail: [email protected] 2 Graduate University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China; e-mail: [email protected] 3 School of Environmental Studies, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, China 4 Department of Biology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195-1800, U.S.A. 5 Department of Ornithology and Mammalogy, California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, CA 94118, U.S.A. Received 23 November 2006; Accepted 3 August 2007 A b s t r a c t. We examined the song sharing and variation pattern of 44 Anna’s hummingbird males at syllable level in San Francisco, California. Full songs of Anna’s hummingbird were composed of repeated blocks of phrases. Each male sang from three to six syllable types and syllable repertoire size averaged 5.1. A total of 38 syllable types were identified in songs of the population examined, which can be classified into five basic syllable categories. Each syllable category exhibited different variability among individuals. We quantified the variation of each category and found the variability was highest in the first phrase of song. Using Jaccard’s similarity coefficient, we found the syllable sharing among birds was significantly greater within one sample site than between sites. Using Mantel tests, we demonstrated that syllable sharing among birds tended to decline with the increase of inter-individual geographic distance.
    [Show full text]
  • Gut Microbiota Composition Is Correlated to Host Hummingbird Protein Requirements
    1 Gut Microbiota Composition is Correlated to Host Hummingbird Protein Requirements ABSTRACT: The gut microbiome shapes and is shaped by a host animal’s physiology. Avian taxa hold physiological characteristics unique from mammals and might inform novel pressures experienced by microbial communities. Further, the symbionts’ relative abundance and their abilities to adapt to available resources are of critical importance to a holobiont’s fitness in rapidly changing climates. Therefore, wild populations of hummingbirds Selasphorus rufus and Calypte anna were studied. The two systems differ in S. rufus’s annual migrations from wintering grounds to their breeding grounds in the Pacific Northwest, whereas C. anna are resident in the latter region. Previous findings have indicated host microbiome composition varied with hummingbird fat score and the month during which fecal sampling occurred. Although fat is an important resource, especially for S. rufus in their migrations, protein requirements are critical because other annual activities, pressuring the organism to access nitrogen. Three of these activities are producing an egg, replacing molted feathers, and carrying parasites. The hypothesis for this study was that birds performing these activities will have microbiota that will make nitrogen available to them. Analysis of OTUs from 16S rDNA V3-V5 amplicon sequencing showed Actinobacteria are more abundant in these hummingbird species than in mammals, replicating our lab’s previous findings. Notably, S. rufus adult females with evidence of recent or current egg production had significantly lower relative levels of Actinobacteria and significantly higher abundances of five of the other ten most abundant bacterial phyla than S. rufus males. The composition of major bacterial phyla in C.
    [Show full text]
  • Female Song in Costa's Hummingbird (Calypte Costae)
    Female song in Costa's Hummingbird (Calypte costae) Authors: Christopher J. Clark, David Rankin, and Katherine Johnson Source: The Wilson Journal of Ornithology, 130(4) : 987-992 Published By: The Wilson Ornithological Society URL: https://doi.org/10.1676/1559-4491.130.4.987 BioOne Complete (complete.BioOne.org) is a full-text database of 200 subscribed and open-access titles in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Complete website, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/terms-of-use. Usage of BioOne Complete content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/The-Wilson-Journal-of-Ornithology on 20 Sep 2019 Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-use Access provided by University of California Riverside Short Communications 987 Rivera-Milan´ FF. 1992. Distribution and relative abundance of feral sheep (Ovis aries) and stout iguana (Cyclura patterns of columbids in Puerto Rico. Condor. 94:224– pinguis) on Guana Island, British Virging Islands. 238. IRCF Reptiles and Amphibians. 20:7–15. Rivera-Milan´ FF. 1995. Spatial and temporal variation in the Steadman DW, Montambault JR, Robinson SK, Oswalt SN, detectability and density of columbids in Puerto Rico and on Vieques Island.
    [Show full text]
  • U N S U U S E U R a C S
    DISTRICT 45 RIVERSIDE Salton Sea 109thRainbow Congress of the United States Desert Shores Salton Sea Beach Pauma and Yuima Res StHwy 86 Torres-Martinez Res Salton Oneill Lake City Fallbrook Pala Res Pauma and Yuima Res Bo rreg Pauma and Yuima Res o S alt StHwy 76 on 6 Los Coyotes Res Se 7 aw Camp Pendleton y Fonts Point Wash ay w San Luis Riverey River S t Regional MdCtr H H t w S y 79 5 9 3 y Bonsall a w La Jolla Res h ig H d l O y Rive is Rivere r Lu n a S n ssio Mi ) Rincon Res ey Ave uis R on n L ssi a (Mi S xwy E Lake Henshaw Valley Center Borrego Springs Hidden Oceanside Meadows DISTRICT 49 Chimney Rock Rd Borreg Montezuma Valley Rd o S p rin Wilson Rd gs R Vista d San Pasqual Res Santa Ysabel Res Lake Wohlford Santa Ysabel Res StHwy 78 8 Dixon Reservoir y 7 G Hw rap t ev S ine Ca ny Benson Lake C on Agua Hedionda Lagoon e R n d t r e Mesa Grande Res C San Marcos it y Escondido P Santa Ysabel Res k w y Carlsbad Mesa Grande San Marcos Res Lake Lake San Marcos Sutherland Reservoir S tH w 7 y 8 S tHw y 7 Batiquitos Lagoon 8 S tH Bandy Canyon Rd w y 7 8 (B a Hw n Bandy Canyon Rd y 7 ne 8 r-G Washington (J r Pine St Pamo Rd u a lia de Lake 15 ey S Pile St n Julian ) Hodges all Rd a St R Highland V n d t ) a M a emesc C r T al C a i r li a Wash Hollow Cr f S o aw r C Little Page Rd d a y TkT Orinoco Cr n Magnolia Ave Magnolia r i r Julian Rd l a Encinitas West Side Rd Eagle Peak Rd R i d i n H t) g S a R a n t Old Julian Hwy i n StHwya 78 f o i g d (M e B e i H l o u i d D k l d i C r n n Va D a e g land lley Rd W r h V d 4 S ig Del Amo
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Resources Survey Report - Negative Findings
    1118 N. Anza Street Townhomes Project CULTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT - NEGATIVE FINDINGS PDS2018-TM-5628;REZ-18-003 June 2018 | HELIX Project No. HMC-10 Project Proponent: Mr. Sean Santa Cruz Hall Land Company 740 Lomas Santa Fe Drive, Suite 204 Mary Robbins-Wade Solana Beach, CA 92075 Director of Cultural Resources Prepared for: County of San Diego Planning & Development Services 5510 Overland Avenue, Suite 310 San Diego, California 92123 Dominique Diaz de Leon Staff Archaeologist Prepared by: HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. 7578 El Cajon Boulevard La Mesa, CA 91942 Cultural Resources Survey Report – Negative Findings, 1118 N. Anza Street Townhomes Project, El Cajon, San Diego County, California PDS2018-TM-5628; REZ-18-003 Lead Agency: County of San Diego Department of Planning & Development Services 5510 Overland Avenue, Suite 310 San Diego, California 92123 Contact: Denise Russell (858) 694-2019 Preparer: Mary Robbins-Wade _______________________________ and Dominique Diaz de Leon ______________________________ HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. 7578 El Cajon Boulevard La Mesa, CA 91942 (619) 462-1515 Project Proponent: Mr. Sean Santa Cruz Hall Land Company 740 Lomas Santa Fe Drive, Suite 204 Solana Beach, CA 92075 June 2018 | HELIX Project No. HMC-10 National Archaeological Data Base Information Author: Mary Robbins-Wade and Dominique Diaz de Leon Firm: HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. 7578 El Cajon Boulevard La Mesa, CA 91942 (619) 462-1515 Client/Project Proponent: Mr. Sean Santa Cruz Hall Land Company 740 Lomas Santa Fe Drive, Suite 204 Solana Beach, CA 92075 Report Date: June 2018 Report Title: Cultural Resources Survey Report – Negative Findings, 1118 N. Anza Street Townhomes Project, El Cajon, San Diego County, California.
    [Show full text]
  • Fiftee N Vertebrate Beginnings the Chordates
    Hickman−Roberts−Larson: 15. Vertebrate Beginnings: Text © The McGraw−Hill Animal Diversity, Third The Chordates Companies, 2002 Edition 15 chapter •••••• fifteen Vertebrate Beginnings The Chordates It’s a Long Way from Amphioxus Along the more southern coasts of North America, half buried in sand on the seafloor,lives a small fishlike translucent animal quietly filtering organic particles from seawater.Inconspicuous, of no commercial value and largely unknown, this creature is nonetheless one of the famous animals of classical zoology.It is amphioxus, an animal that wonderfully exhibits the four distinctive hallmarks of the phylum Chordata—(1) dorsal, tubular nerve cord overlying (2) a supportive notochord, (3) pharyngeal slits for filter feeding, and (4) a postanal tail for propulsion—all wrapped up in one creature with textbook simplicity. Amphioxus is an animal that might have been designed by a zoologist for the classroom. During the nineteenth century,with inter- est in vertebrate ancestry running high, amphioxus was considered by many to resemble closely the direct ancestor of the vertebrates. Its exalted position was later acknowledged by Philip Pope in a poem sung to the tune of “Tipperary.”It ends with the refrain: It’s a long way from amphioxus It’s a long way to us, It’s a long way from amphioxus To the meanest human cuss. Well,it’s good-bye to fins and gill slits And it’s welcome lungs and hair, It’s a long, long way from amphioxus But we all came from there. But amphioxus’place in the sun was not to endure.For one thing,amphioxus lacks one of the most important of vertebrate charac- teristics,a distinct head with special sense organs and the equipment for shifting to an active predatory mode of life.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 AOS Classification Committee – North and Middle America Proposal
    AOS Classification Committee – North and Middle America Proposal Set 2020-B 27 January 2020 No. Page Title 01 02 Transfer Buff-fronted Foliage-gleaner Philydor rufum to the genus Dendroma (as D. rufa) 02 05 Treat American Comb-Duck Sarkidiornis sylvicola as a separate species from S. melanotos 03 09 Transfer White-shouldered Tanager Tachyphonus luctuosus to the genus Loriotus 04 12 Revise the taxonomy of species currently placed in Locustella: (a) transfer L. ochotensis to Helopsaltes, and (b) revise the linear sequence of species 05 15 Change the taxonomy of the Phasianidae: (a) eliminate subfamilies and (b) revise the linear sequence of species 06 20 Revise the linear sequence of the macaws (Ara spp.) 07 23 Revise the taxonomy of hummingbird genera Atthis and Selasphorus: (a) Merge Atthis into Selasphorus, and (b) change the linear sequence of species in these genera 08 28 Split Aegolius acadicus brooksi from Northern Saw-Whet Owl A. acadicus acadicus 09 33 Change the generic taxonomy of Puerto Rican Screech-Owl Megascops nudipes: (a) remove it from the genus Megascops, and (b) place it in a monospecific Gymnasio 10 38 Revise the linear sequence of Megascops and related genera 11 40 Split Formicarius moniliger from Black-faced Antthrush F. analis 1 2020-B-1 N&MA Classification Committee p. 352 Transfer Buff-fronted Foliage-gleaner Philydor rufum to the genus Dendroma (as D. rufa) Note: This proposal is a modified version of SACC Proposal 819. New Information: Derryberry et al. (2011) found Philydor to be polyphyletic. One of the problems is that Philydor erythropterum and P.
    [Show full text]