DOCSLIB.ORG

Nevada Test Site Wetlands Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nevada Test Site Wetlands Assessment DOE~/1 1718-124 - NEVADA TEST SITE WETLANDS ASSESSMENT .- RECEIVED . May 1997 ,-, Submitted to U.S. Department of Energy Nevada Operations Office Environmental Protection Division “ P.O. BOX 98518 Prepared by BechfelNevada Ecological Services P.O. BOX98521 .Las Vegas, NV 89193-8521 0 —.—....= ._. .-. —- . DISCLAIMER NOTICE “This Report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the U.S. Government. Neither the U.S. Gover- nmentnor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty or representation, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefidness of any iniiormation, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infkinge privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsemen~ recommendation, or favoring by the U.S. Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not . necessarily state or reflect those of the U.S. Government or any agency thereof” , This report has been reproduced from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Ir&ormation, Post Office Box 62, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831. (423) 576-8401: Available to the public from the National Technical Mormation Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161. (703) 487-4650. ! .. .’ DISCLAIMER Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best availabfe original document. .- ..” NEVADA TEST SITE WETLANDS ASSESSMENT By Dennis J. Hansen Paul D. Greger Cathy A. Wills W. Kent Ostler May 1997 WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT NO. DE-AC08-96NV1 1718 Submitted to U.S. Department of Energy Nevada Operations Office Environmental Protection Division P.O. BOX 98518 ,. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors wish to thank the following individuals who made significant contributions to this report. Dan C. Steen and Derek B. Hall produced the GIS-generated figures in this report. Dodie M. Witham assisted with the literature review and data management. CONTENTS EXECUTIVE S~Y . ..."..... xi 1.0 ~~ODUC~ON . ...1 1.1 DefinitionofaWetland . ..1 1.2 EcologicalImportanceofWetlands . ...1 1.4 NeedandPu.rposeforWetlandsSurveyontheNTS . ...2 1.5 Goals and ObjectivesoftheNTS Wetlands SurveyandReport . ...3 2.0 STUDYAREA . ...5 3.0 METHODS . ...9 3.1 Literature Searchto Identi&Study Sites andHistoricalUse . ...9 3.2.1 Deterrninin g Wetland Site Coordinates. 10 3.2.2 SelectingWetland DelineationMethods . .. 11 3.2.3 DelineatingWetlandBoundaries . 12 3.2.4 CharacterizingWetlandVegetation . 14 3.2.5 CharacterizingWetland Hydrology . 15 3.2.6 CharacterizingHydricSoils . 16 3.2:7 DelineatingJurisdictionalWetlands . 18 3.2.8 DescribingHistoricalUse . 19 3.2.9 CharacterizingWildlifeUse . 19 3.2.10 PhotographingWetlands . 19 3.2.11 CreatingaWetlands GeospatialDatabase . 20 4.0 RESULTS . 21 .’ 4.1 Previous Studies . 21 .. ,, 4.1.1 Hydrology . 21 4.1.2 Water Quality . 22 4.1.3 Vegetation . 22 4.1.4 WildlifeUse . 23 4.1.5 HistoricalUse . 23 4.2 DescriptionofStudySites . 24 4.2.1 AmmoniaTanks. ...24 4.2.1.1 Site DescriptionandHistoricalUse . ...24 4.2.1.2 HydrophyticVegetation . ...24 4.2.1.3 Hydrolog y. ...24 4.2.1.4 Hydric Soils . ...27 .. - — .-——. .— . —. .. —--- I ... .. .. .. .... : .,-. -. ---. —..=---=.- -, --...:..-,. : ,. ...-. .._— — CONTENTS 4.2.1.5 Determination of Jurisdictional Status . ...27 4.2.1.6 Wildlife Use . ...27 4.2.2 Cane Spring . ...28 4.2.2.1 Site Description and Historical Use . ...28 4.2.2.2 Hydrophytic Vegetation . ...28 4.2.2.3 Wetland Hydrology and Water Quality . ...33 4.2.2.4 Hydric Soils . ...33 4.2.2.5 Determination of Jurisdictional Status . ...34 4.2.2.6 Wildlife Use . ...34 4.2.3 Captain Jack Spring . ...34 4.2.3.1 Site Description and Historical Use . ...34 4.2.3.2 Hydrophytic Veget.ation . ...36 4.2.3.3 Wetland Hydrology and Water Q~ity . ...36 4.2.3.4 Hydric Soils . ...39 4.2.3.5 Determination of Jurisdictional Status . ...39 4.2.3.6 Wildlife Use . ...39 4.2.4 Cottonwood Sprin g. ...40 4.2.4.1 Site Description and Historical Use . ...40 4.2.4.2 Hydrophytic Vegetation . ...40 4.2.4.3 Wetland Hydrology and Water Quality . ...43 4.2.4.4 Hydric Soils . ...45 4.2.4.5 Determination of Jurisdictional Status . ...45 4.2.4.6 Wildlife Use . ...45 4.2.5 Coyote Spring . .. ...45 4.2.5.1 Site Description and Historical Use . .-.....45 4.2.5.2 Hydrophytic Vegetation . ...45 4.2.5.3 Wetland Hydrology and Water Quality . ...48 4.2.5.4 Hydric Soils . ...48 4.2.5.5 Determination of Jurisdictional Status.. ...48 4.2.5.6 Wildlife Use . ...49 4.2.6 Fortymile Canyon Tanks . ...49 4.2.6.1 Site Description and Historical Use . ...49 4.2.6.2 Hydrophytic Vegetation . ...49 4.2.6.3 Hydrology . ...49 4.2.6.4 Hydric Soils . ...52 ii ,/ ,’ ~:” CONTENTS 4.2.6.5 Jurisdictional Wetland Determination . ...52 4.2.6.6 Wildlife Use . ..y ... .. i........ ...52 4.2.7 Gold Meadows Spring . ...53 4.2.7.1 Site Description and Historical Use . ...53 4.2.7.2 HydrophyticVegetation . ...53 4.2.7.3 Wetland Hydrolog and Water Quality . ...53 4.2.7.4 Hydric Soils . ...53 4.2.7.5 DeterrninationofJurisdictional Status . ...56 4.2.7.6 WildlifeUse . ..l.. ...56 4.2.8 John’s spring . ...56 4.2.8.1 SiteDescriptionandHistoricalUse . ...56 4.2.8.2 HydrophyticVegetation . ...59 4.2.8.3 Wetland Hydrology and Water Quality . ...59 4.2.8.4 Hydric Soils . ...59 4.2.8.5 DeterrninationofJurisdictional Status . ...60 4.2.8.6 WildlifeUse . ...60 4.2.9 oakspring . ...60 4.2.9.1 SiteDescriptionandHistoricalUse . ...60 4.2.9.2 HydrophyticVegetation . ...61 4.2.9.3 WetlandHydrologyandWaterQuali~ . ...64 4.2.9.4 Hydric Soils . ...64 4.2.9.5 DeterminationofJurisdictionalStatus . ...64 4.2.9.6 WildlifeUse . ...65 4.2.10 pavitsspring . ~. .. - . ...65 4.2.10.1 SiteDescriptionandHistoricalUse . ...65 4.2.10.2 HydrophyticVegetation. ...65 4.2.10.3 WetlandHydrologyAndWaterQuali~ . ...65 4.2.10.4 Hydric Soils . ...65 4.2.10.5 Determi.nationofJurisdictionalSta~ . ...@ 4.2.10.6 WildlifeUse . ...69 4.2.11 RainierSpring . ...69 4.2.11.1 SiteDescriptionand HistoricalUse . ...69 4.2.11.2 HydrophyticVegetation . ...72 4.2.11.3 Hy&ologY . ...72 4.2.11.4 Hydric Soils . ..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts
    The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: A County Checklist • First Revision Melissa Dow Cullina, Bryan Connolly, Bruce Sorrie and Paul Somers Somers Bruce Sorrie and Paul Connolly, Bryan Cullina, Melissa Dow Revision • First A County Checklist Plants of Massachusetts: Vascular The A County Checklist First Revision Melissa Dow Cullina, Bryan Connolly, Bruce Sorrie and Paul Somers Massachusetts Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program The Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program (NHESP), part of the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, is one of the programs forming the Natural Heritage network. NHESP is responsible for the conservation and protection of hundreds of species that are not hunted, fished, trapped, or commercially harvested in the state. The Program's highest priority is protecting the 176 species of vertebrate and invertebrate animals and 259 species of native plants that are officially listed as Endangered, Threatened or of Special Concern in Massachusetts. Endangered species conservation in Massachusetts depends on you! A major source of funding for the protection of rare and endangered species comes from voluntary donations on state income tax forms. Contributions go to the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Fund, which provides a portion of the operating budget for the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program. NHESP protects rare species through biological inventory,
    [Show full text]
  • Chromosome Numbers in Compositae, XII: Heliantheae
    SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO BOTANY 0 NCTMBER 52 Chromosome Numbers in Compositae, XII: Heliantheae Harold Robinson, A. Michael Powell, Robert M. King, andJames F. Weedin SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION PRESS City of Washington 1981 ABSTRACT Robinson, Harold, A. Michael Powell, Robert M. King, and James F. Weedin. Chromosome Numbers in Compositae, XII: Heliantheae. Smithsonian Contri- butions to Botany, number 52, 28 pages, 3 tables, 1981.-Chromosome reports are provided for 145 populations, including first reports for 33 species and three genera, Garcilassa, Riencourtia, and Helianthopsis. Chromosome numbers are arranged according to Robinson’s recently broadened concept of the Heliantheae, with citations for 212 of the ca. 265 genera and 32 of the 35 subtribes. Diverse elements, including the Ambrosieae, typical Heliantheae, most Helenieae, the Tegeteae, and genera such as Arnica from the Senecioneae, are seen to share a specialized cytological history involving polyploid ancestry. The authors disagree with one another regarding the point at which such polyploidy occurred and on whether subtribes lacking higher numbers, such as the Galinsoginae, share the polyploid ancestry. Numerous examples of aneuploid decrease, secondary polyploidy, and some secondary aneuploid decreases are cited. The Marshalliinae are considered remote from other subtribes and close to the Inuleae. Evidence from related tribes favors an ultimate base of X = 10 for the Heliantheae and at least the subfamily As teroideae. OFFICIALPUBLICATION DATE is handstamped in a limited number of initial copies and is recorded in the Institution’s annual report, Smithsonian Year. SERIESCOVER DESIGN: Leaf clearing from the katsura tree Cercidiphyllumjaponicum Siebold and Zuccarini. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Main entry under title: Chromosome numbers in Compositae, XII.
    [Show full text]
  • The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition Supplement II December 2014
    The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition Supplement II December 2014 In the pages that follow are treatments that have been revised since the publication of the Jepson eFlora, Revision 1 (July 2013). The information in these revisions is intended to supersede that in the second edition of The Jepson Manual (2012). The revised treatments, as well as errata and other small changes not noted here, are included in the Jepson eFlora (http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/IJM.html). For a list of errata and small changes in treatments that are not included here, please see: http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/JM12_errata.html Citation for the entire Jepson eFlora: Jepson Flora Project (eds.) [year] Jepson eFlora, http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/IJM.html [accessed on month, day, year] Citation for an individual treatment in this supplement: [Author of taxon treatment] 2014. [Taxon name], Revision 2, in Jepson Flora Project (eds.) Jepson eFlora, [URL for treatment]. Accessed on [month, day, year]. Copyright © 2014 Regents of the University of California Supplement II, Page 1 Summary of changes made in Revision 2 of the Jepson eFlora, December 2014 PTERIDACEAE *Pteridaceae key to genera: All of the CA members of Cheilanthes transferred to Myriopteris *Cheilanthes: Cheilanthes clevelandii D. C. Eaton changed to Myriopteris clevelandii (D. C. Eaton) Grusz & Windham, as native Cheilanthes cooperae D. C. Eaton changed to Myriopteris cooperae (D. C. Eaton) Grusz & Windham, as native Cheilanthes covillei Maxon changed to Myriopteris covillei (Maxon) Á. Löve & D. Löve, as native Cheilanthes feei T. Moore changed to Myriopteris gracilis Fée, as native Cheilanthes gracillima D.
    [Show full text]
  • 197 Section 9 Sunflower (Helianthus
    SECTION 9 SUNFLOWER (HELIANTHUS ANNUUS L.) 1. Taxonomy of the Genus Helianthus, Natural Habitat and Origins of the Cultivated Sunflower A. Taxonomy of the genus Helianthus The sunflower belongs to the genus Helianthus in the Composite family (Asterales order), which includes species with very diverse morphologies (herbs, shrubs, lianas, etc.). The genus Helianthus belongs to the Heliantheae tribe. This includes approximately 50 species originating in North and Central America. The basis for the botanical classification of the genus Helianthus was proposed by Heiser et al. (1969) and refined subsequently using new phenological, cladistic and biosystematic methods, (Robinson, 1979; Anashchenko, 1974, 1979; Schilling and Heiser, 1981) or molecular markers (Sossey-Alaoui et al., 1998). This approach splits Helianthus into four sections: Helianthus, Agrestes, Ciliares and Atrorubens. This classification is set out in Table 1.18. Section Helianthus This section comprises 12 species, including H. annuus, the cultivated sunflower. These species, which are diploid (2n = 34), are interfertile and annual in almost all cases. For the majority, the natural distribution is central and western North America. They are generally well adapted to dry or even arid areas and sandy soils. The widespread H. annuus L. species includes (Heiser et al., 1969) plants cultivated for seed or fodder referred to as H. annuus var. macrocarpus (D.C), or cultivated for ornament (H. annuus subsp. annuus), and uncultivated wild and weedy plants (H. annuus subsp. lenticularis, H. annuus subsp. Texanus, etc.). Leaves of these species are usually alternate, ovoid and with a long petiole. Flower heads, or capitula, consist of tubular and ligulate florets, which may be deep purple, red or yellow.
    [Show full text]
  • Flora of the Stansbury Mountains, Utah
    Great Basin Naturalist Volume 43 Number 4 Article 11 10-31-1983 Flora of the Stansbury Mountains, Utah Alan C. Taye U.S. Army Intelligence Center and School, Fort Huachuca, Arizona Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn Recommended Citation Taye, Alan C. (1983) "Flora of the Stansbury Mountains, Utah," Great Basin Naturalist: Vol. 43 : No. 4 , Article 11. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn/vol43/iss4/11 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Basin Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. FLORA OF THE STANSBURY MOUNTAINS, UTAH Alan C. Taye' Abstract.— The Stansbury Mountains of north central Utah rise over 2000 m above surrounding desert valleys to a maximum elevation of 3362 m on Deseret Peak. Because of the great variety of environmental conditions that can be found in the Stansburys, a wide range of plant species and vegetation types (from shadscale desert to alpine mead- ow) exist there. This paper presents an annotated list of 594 vascular plant species in 315 genera and 78 families. The largest families are Asteraceae (98 species), Poaceae (71), Brassicaceae (33), Fabaceae (27), and Rosaceae (26). Elymiis flcwescens was previously unreported from Utah. Statistical comparison of the Stansbury flora with neighboring mountain floras indicates that the Wasatch Mountains lying 65 km to the east have probably been the primary source area for development of the Stansbury flora.
    [Show full text]
  • Vascular Plants and a Brief History of the Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands
    United States Department of Agriculture Vascular Plants and a Brief Forest Service Rocky Mountain History of the Kiowa and Rita Research Station General Technical Report Blanca National Grasslands RMRS-GTR-233 December 2009 Donald L. Hazlett, Michael H. Schiebout, and Paulette L. Ford Hazlett, Donald L.; Schiebout, Michael H.; and Ford, Paulette L. 2009. Vascular plants and a brief history of the Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS- GTR-233. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 44 p. Abstract Administered by the USDA Forest Service, the Kiowa and Rita Blanca National Grasslands occupy 230,000 acres of public land extending from northeastern New Mexico into the panhandles of Oklahoma and Texas. A mosaic of topographic features including canyons, plateaus, rolling grasslands and outcrops supports a diverse flora. Eight hundred twenty six (826) species of vascular plant species representing 81 plant families are known to occur on or near these public lands. This report includes a history of the area; ethnobotanical information; an introductory overview of the area including its climate, geology, vegetation, habitats, fauna, and ecological history; and a plant survey and information about the rare, poisonous, and exotic species from the area. A vascular plant checklist of 816 vascular plant taxa in the appendix includes scientific and common names, habitat types, and general distribution data for each species. This list is based on extensive plant collections and available herbarium collections. Authors Donald L. Hazlett is an ethnobotanist, Director of New World Plants and People consulting, and a research associate at the Denver Botanic Gardens, Denver, CO.
    [Show full text]
  • 18-Prothero Et Al (Massacre).P65
    Lucas et al., eds., 2008, Neogene Mammals. New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science Bulletin 44. 239 MAGNETIC STRATIGRAPHY OF THE MASSACRE LAKE BEDS (LATE HEMINGFORDIAN, EARLY MIOCENE), NORTHWEST NEVADA, AND THE AGE OF THE “PROBOSCIDEAN DATUM” IN NORTH AMERICA DONALD R. PROTHERO1, EDWARD BYRD DAVIS2 AND SAMANTHA S.B. HOPKINS2 1 Department of Geology, Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA 90041; 2 Department of Geological Sciences, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403 Abstract—The “Proboscidean Datum” was proposed by Tedford et al. (1987) and Woodburne and Swisher (1995) as a marker of the late Barstovian (middle Miocene, about 14.5 Ma) in North America. Subsequently, a number of pre-late Barstovian proboscidean fossils have been reported, casting doubt on the validity of the Proboscidean Datum. The oldest of these is from the late Hemingfordian Massacre Lake local fauna of northwest Nevada, which produced a single proboscidean tooth fragment. Magnetic stratigraphy was conducted on these beds, which yielded a stable remanence held mainly in magnetite that was entirely reversed in polarity. Based on the 40Ar/39Ar date of 16.474 ±0.035 Ma at the top of the section, we correlate the Massacre Lake beds with earliest Chron C5Cr (16.4-17.3 Ma). In addition, a number of other early Barstovian magnetostratigraphic sections with Proboscidea are reviewed, and quite a few yield fossils that date between 15.8 and 16.2 Ma. Our analysis of faunal data suggests that these early occurrences are simply the first places colonized by the immigrating proboscideans and not marked by a unique ecological or taphonomic history.
    [Show full text]
  • Annotated List of the Fishes of Nevada
    14 June 1984 PROC. BIOL. SOC. WASH. 97(1), 1984, pp. 103-118 ANNOTATED LIST OF THE FISHES OF NEVADA James E. Deacon and Jack E. Williams Abstract.-160 native and introduced fishes referable to 108 species, 56 genera, and 19 families are recorded for Nevada. The increasing proportion of introduced fishes continues to burden the native ichthyofauna. The first list of all fishes known from Nevada by La Rivers and Trelease (1952) eventually culminated in La Rivers' Fishes and Fisheries of Nevada, published in 1962. Over the past twenty years, a number of changes have occurred in the fish fauna of the state. These include additions through "official" actions as well as by "unofficial" means. Some taxa have become extinct and many have become much less abundant (Deacon 1979, Deacon et al. 1979). Numerous changes have also occurred in our understanding of probable taxonomic relationships of the fishes. The increased number of subspecies recognized since the 1962 list reflects a better understanding of distribution and geographic variation of the ichthyo- fauna. Our purpose is to produce a checklist that includes all taxa known from the state within historical times. The list includes all fishes native to Nevada and those that have been introduced into the state, whether or not they have become established. Our checklist reflects current understanding of the fauna and high- lights those areas where additional work is needed. Including subspecies, we record 160 fishes in the present fauna of Nevada referable to 108 species, 56 genera, and 19 families. We recognize 67 subspecies referable to 15 species.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Plants for Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve
    Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve Plant Checklist DRAFT as of 29 November 2005 FERNS AND FERN ALLIES Equisetaceae (Horsetail Family) Vascular Plant Equisetales Equisetaceae Equisetum arvense Present in Park Rare Native Field horsetail Vascular Plant Equisetales Equisetaceae Equisetum laevigatum Present in Park Unknown Native Scouring-rush Polypodiaceae (Fern Family) Vascular Plant Polypodiales Dryopteridaceae Cystopteris fragilis Present in Park Uncommon Native Brittle bladderfern Vascular Plant Polypodiales Dryopteridaceae Woodsia oregana Present in Park Uncommon Native Oregon woodsia Pteridaceae (Maidenhair Fern Family) Vascular Plant Polypodiales Pteridaceae Argyrochosma fendleri Present in Park Unknown Native Zigzag fern Vascular Plant Polypodiales Pteridaceae Cheilanthes feei Present in Park Uncommon Native Slender lip fern Vascular Plant Polypodiales Pteridaceae Cryptogramma acrostichoides Present in Park Unknown Native American rockbrake Selaginellaceae (Spikemoss Family) Vascular Plant Selaginellales Selaginellaceae Selaginella densa Present in Park Rare Native Lesser spikemoss Vascular Plant Selaginellales Selaginellaceae Selaginella weatherbiana Present in Park Unknown Native Weatherby's clubmoss CONIFERS Cupressaceae (Cypress family) Vascular Plant Pinales Cupressaceae Juniperus scopulorum Present in Park Unknown Native Rocky Mountain juniper Pinaceae (Pine Family) Vascular Plant Pinales Pinaceae Abies concolor var. concolor Present in Park Rare Native White fir Vascular Plant Pinales Pinaceae Abies lasiocarpa Present
    [Show full text]
  • Giant Camels from the Cenozoic of North America SERIES PUBLICATIONS of the SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION
    Giant Camels from the Cenozoic of North America SERIES PUBLICATIONS OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION Emphasis upon publication as a means of "diffusing knowledge" was expressed by the first Secretary of the Smithsonian. In his formal plan for the Institution, Joseph Henry outlined a program that included the following statement: "It is proposed to publish a series of reports, giving an account of the new discoveries in science, and of the changes made from year to year in all branches of knowledge." This theme of basic research has been adhered to through the years by thousands of titles issued in series publications under the Smithsonian imprint, commencing with Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge in 1848 and continuing with the following active series: Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology Smithsonian Contributions to Astrophysics Smithsonian Contributions to Botany Smithsonian Contributions to the Earth Sciences Smithsonian Contributions to the H^arine Sciences Smithsonian Contributions to Paleobiology Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology Smithsonian Folklife Studies Smithsonian Studies in Air and Space Smithsonian Studies in History and Technology In these series, the Institution publishes small papers and full-scale monographs that refXJrt the research and collections of its various museums and bureaux or of professional colleagues in the world of science and scholarship. The publications are distributed by mailing lists to libraries, universities, and similar institutions throughout the worid. Papers or monographs submitted for series publication are received by the Smithsonian Institution Press, subject to its own review for format and style, only through departments of the various Smithsonian museums or bureaux, where the manuscripts are given substantive review. Press requirements for manuscript and art preparation are outlined on the inside back cover.
    [Show full text]
  • Multivariate Discriminant Function Analysis of Camelid Astragali
    Palaeontologia Electronica palaeo-electronica.org A method for improved identification of postcrania from mammalian fossil assemblages: multivariate discriminant function analysis of camelid astragali Edward Byrd Davis and Brianna K. McHorse ABSTRACT Character-rich craniodental specimens are often the best material for identifying mammalian fossils to the genus or species level, but what can be done with the many assemblages that consist primarily of dissociated postcrania? In localities lacking typi- cally diagnostic remains, accurate identification of postcranial material can improve measures of mammalian diversity for wider-scale studies. Astragali, in particular, are often well-preserved and have been shown to have diagnostic utility in artiodactyls. The Thousand Creek fauna of Nevada (~8 Ma) represents one such assemblage rich in postcranial material but with unknown diversity of many taxa, including camelids. We use discriminant function analysis (DFA) of eight linear measurements on the astragali of contemporaneous camelids with known taxonomic affinity to produce a training set that can then be used to assign taxa to the Thousand Creek camelid material. The dis- criminant function identifies, at minimum, four classes of camels: “Hemiauchenia”, Alforjas, Procamelus, and ?Megatylopus. Adding more specimens to the training set may improve certainty and accuracy for future work, including identification of camelids in other faunas of similar age. For best statistical practice and ease of future use, we recommend using DFA rather than qualitative analyses of biplots to separate and diag- nose taxa. Edward Byrd Davis. University of Oregon Museum of Natural and Cultural History and Department of Geological Sciences, 1680 East 15th Avenue, Eugene, Oregon 97403. [email protected] Brianna K.
    [Show full text]
  • Annotated Checklist of Vascular Flora, Cedar Breaks National
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Program Center Annotated Checklist of Vascular Flora Cedar Breaks National Monument Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NCPN/NRTR—2009/173 ON THE COVER Peterson’s campion (Silene petersonii), Cedar Breaks National Monument, Utah. Photograph by Walter Fertig. Annotated Checklist of Vascular Flora Cedar Breaks National Monument Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NCPN/NRTR—2009/173 Author Walter Fertig Moenave Botanical Consulting 1117 W. Grand Canyon Dr. Kanab, UT 84741 Editing and Design Alice Wondrak Biel Northern Colorado Plateau Network P.O. Box 848 Moab, UT 84532 February 2009 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Program Center Fort Collins, Colorado The Natural Resource Publication series addresses natural resource topics that are of interest and applicability to a broad readership in the National Park Service and to others in the management of natural resources, including the scientifi c community, the public, and the NPS conservation and environmental constituencies. Manuscripts are peer-reviewed to ensure that the information is scientifi cally credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and is designed and published in a professional manner. The Natural Resource Technical Report series is used to disseminate the peer-reviewed results of scientifi c studies in the physical, biological, and social sciences for both the advancement of science and the achievement of the National Park Service’s mission. The reports provide contributors with a forum for displaying comprehensive data that are often deleted from journals because of page limitations. Current examples of such reports include the results of research that addresses natural resource management issues; natural resource inventory and monitoring activities; resource assessment reports; scientifi c literature reviews; and peer- reviewed proceedings of technical workshops, conferences, or symposia.
    [Show full text]