CURRICULUM VITAE University of Idaho
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Fauna Lepidopterologica Volgo-Uralensis" 150 Years Later: Changes and Additions
©Ges. zur Förderung d. Erforschung von Insektenwanderungen e.V. München, download unter www.zobodat.at Atalanta (August 2000) 31 (1/2):327-367< Würzburg, ISSN 0171-0079 "Fauna lepidopterologica Volgo-Uralensis" 150 years later: changes and additions. Part 5. Noctuidae (Insecto, Lepidoptera) by Vasily V. A n ik in , Sergey A. Sachkov , Va d im V. Z o lo t u h in & A n drey V. Sv ir id o v received 24.II.2000 Summary: 630 species of the Noctuidae are listed for the modern Volgo-Ural fauna. 2 species [Mesapamea hedeni Graeser and Amphidrina amurensis Staudinger ) are noted from Europe for the first time and one more— Nycteola siculana Fuchs —from Russia. 3 species ( Catocala optata Godart , Helicoverpa obsoleta Fabricius , Pseudohadena minuta Pungeler ) are deleted from the list. Supposedly they were either erroneously determinated or incorrect noted from the region under consideration since Eversmann 's work. 289 species are recorded from the re gion in addition to Eversmann 's list. This paper is the fifth in a series of publications1 dealing with the composition of the pres ent-day fauna of noctuid-moths in the Middle Volga and the south-western Cisurals. This re gion comprises the administrative divisions of the Astrakhan, Volgograd, Saratov, Samara, Uljanovsk, Orenburg, Uralsk and Atyraus (= Gurjev) Districts, together with Tataria and Bash kiria. As was accepted in the first part of this series, only material reliably labelled, and cover ing the last 20 years was used for this study. The main collections are those of the authors: V. A n i k i n (Saratov and Volgograd Districts), S. -
The Release and Recovery of Bradyrrhoa Gilveolella on Rush Skeletonweed in Southern Idaho
478 Session 9 Post-release Evaluation and Management The Release and Recovery of Bradyrrhoa gilveolella on Rush Skeletonweed in Southern Idaho J. L. Littlefield1, G. Markin2, J. Kashefi3, A. de Meij1 and J. Runyon2 1Montana State University, Department of Land Resources & Environmental Sciences, PO 173120, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA [email protected] [email protected] 2US Forest Service (retired), Rocky Mountain Research Station, Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 1648 S. 7th Ave, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA [email protected] [email protected] 3USDA-ARS, European Biological Control Laboratory, Tsimiski 43, 7th Floor, Thessaloniki, Greece [email protected] Abstract Rush skeletonweed (Chondrilla juncea L.) is a major noxious weed in Idaho and other areas of the Pacific Northwest. A biological control program was implemented during the late 1970s in an attempt to manage infestations of rush skeletonweed and to limit its spread into new areas. Three agents, Cystiphora schmidti (Rübsaamen) (a gall midge), Aceria chondrillae (Canestrini) (a gall mite), and Puccinia chondrillina Bubak & Sydenham (a rust fungus) have been established in Idaho and other areas of the western United States. However these agents have provided only limited control of the weed. One additional agent, the root-feeding moth Bradyrrhoa gilveolella (Treitschke) (Lepidoptera, Pyralidae), was approved by the USDA-APHIS for release in the United States in 2002. Initial releases were made in southern Idaho in November 2002 and during the summers of 2003 through 2009 (excluding 2005). Releases were made using infested plants (the 2002 initial release) then utilizing first instar larvae and adults from greenhouse colonies. In total we released the moth at eight sites utilizing nine infested plants (est. -
Appendix B Natural History and Control of Nonnative Invasive Species
Appendix B: Natural History and Control of Nonnative Invasive Plants Found in Ten Northern Rocky Mountains National Parks Introduction The Invasive Plant Management Plan was written for the following ten parks (in this document, parks are referred to by the four letter acronyms in bold): the Bear Paw Battlefield-BEPA (MT, also known as Nez Perce National Historical Park); Big Hole National Battlefield-BIHO (MT); City of Rocks National Reserve-CIRO (ID); Craters of the Moon National Monument and Preserve-CRMO (ID); Fossil Butte National Monument-FOBU (WY); Golden Spike National Historic Site-GOSP (UT); Grant-Kohrs Ranch National Historic Site-GRKO (MT); Hagerman Fossil Beds National Monument-HAFO (ID); Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument-LIBI (MT); and Minidoka National Historic Site-MIIN (ID). The following information is contained for each weed species covered in this document (1) Park presence: based on formal surveys or park representatives’ observations (2) Status: whether the plant is listed as noxious in ID, MT, UT, or WY (3) Identifying characteristics: key characteristics to aid identification, and where possible, unique features to help distinguish the weed from look-a-like species (4) Life cycle: annual, winter-annual, biennial, or perennial and season of flowering and fruit set (5) Spread: the most common method of spread and potential for long distance dispersal (6) Seeds per plant and seed longevity (when available) (7) Habitat (8) Control Options: recommendations on the effectiveness of a. Mechanical Control b. Cultural -
Desktop Biodiversity Report
Desktop Biodiversity Report Land at Balcombe Parish ESD/14/747 Prepared for Katherine Daniel (Balcombe Parish Council) 13th February 2014 This report is not to be passed on to third parties without prior permission of the Sussex Biodiversity Record Centre. Please be aware that printing maps from this report requires an appropriate OS licence. Sussex Biodiversity Record Centre report regarding land at Balcombe Parish 13/02/2014 Prepared for Katherine Daniel Balcombe Parish Council ESD/14/74 The following information is included in this report: Maps Sussex Protected Species Register Sussex Bat Inventory Sussex Bird Inventory UK BAP Species Inventory Sussex Rare Species Inventory Sussex Invasive Alien Species Full Species List Environmental Survey Directory SNCI M12 - Sedgy & Scott's Gills; M22 - Balcombe Lake & associated woodlands; M35 - Balcombe Marsh; M39 - Balcombe Estate Rocks; M40 - Ardingly Reservior & Loder Valley Nature Reserve; M42 - Rowhill & Station Pastures. SSSI Worth Forest. Other Designations/Ownership Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty; Environmental Stewardship Agreement; Local Nature Reserve; National Trust Property. Habitats Ancient tree; Ancient woodland; Ghyll woodland; Lowland calcareous grassland; Lowland fen; Lowland heathland; Traditional orchard. Important information regarding this report It must not be assumed that this report contains the definitive species information for the site concerned. The species data held by the Sussex Biodiversity Record Centre (SxBRC) is collated from the biological recording community in Sussex. However, there are many areas of Sussex where the records held are limited, either spatially or taxonomically. A desktop biodiversity report from SxBRC will give the user a clear indication of what biological recording has taken place within the area of their enquiry. -
Biological Control of Noxious Weeds in Oregon
Biological Control of What is Biological Weed Control? DALMATIAN TOADFLAX GORSE Linaria dalmatica Ulex europaeus Invasive noxious weeds in Oregon cost millions of dollars It is important to make sure the correct species of biocontrol Key to Biocontrol Agent Status Noxious Weeds in Oregon in economic and environmental damage. Biological agents are released, to use the most effective species, and to Gorse seed weevil control is a tool vegetation managers employ to help The following general information is provided for each document the release and establishment of weed biocontrol Exapion ulicis naturally suppress weed infestations. This pamphlet agents. biocontrol agent. shows many of the common biological agents you may Year: 1956 Distribution: Widespread A guide to common biological Since 1947, 77 species of biocontrol agents have been released Year: Year of introduction. encounter in Oregon. Attack rate: Heavy Control: Good control agents found in Oregon in Oregon against 32 species of targeted weeds. A total of Distribution: Distribution of agent in host infested counties. Collectability: Mass Release No. 100 Classical biological control is the use of selected natural Dalmatian toadflax stem weevil 67 species are established. The majority of the bioagents Widespread >50% Limited <50% Timing: Apr–May Method: Sweep net/ enemies to control targeted weeds. Most of our worst are insects (71), plus three mites, one nematode, and two Mecinus janthiniformis racquet Stage: Adult Comment: No need for Attack rate: noxious weeds originated from other continents. pathogens. Successful projects can generate 15:1 benefit to Percent of plants attacked. Year: 2001 Distribution: Widespread redistribution. Prospective biocontrol agents are thoroughly tested to cost ratios. -
Database of Irish Lepidoptera. 1 - Macrohabitats, Microsites and Traits of Noctuidae and Butterflies
Database of Irish Lepidoptera. 1 - Macrohabitats, microsites and traits of Noctuidae and butterflies Irish Wildlife Manuals No. 35 Database of Irish Lepidoptera. 1 - Macrohabitats, microsites and traits of Noctuidae and butterflies Ken G.M. Bond and Tom Gittings Department of Zoology, Ecology and Plant Science University College Cork Citation: Bond, K.G.M. and Gittings, T. (2008) Database of Irish Lepidoptera. 1 - Macrohabitats, microsites and traits of Noctuidae and butterflies. Irish Wildlife Manual s, No. 35. National Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Dublin, Ireland. Cover photo: Merveille du Jour ( Dichonia aprilina ) © Veronica French Irish Wildlife Manuals Series Editors: F. Marnell & N. Kingston © National Parks and Wildlife Service 2008 ISSN 1393 – 6670 Database of Irish Lepidoptera ____________________________ CONTENTS CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................................................1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................2 The concept of the database.....................................................................................................................2 The structure of the database...................................................................................................................2 -
Scottish Macro-Moth List, 2015
Notes on the Scottish Macro-moth List, 2015 This list aims to include every species of macro-moth reliably recorded in Scotland, with an assessment of its Scottish status, as guidance for observers contributing to the National Moth Recording Scheme (NMRS). It updates and amends the previous lists of 2009, 2011, 2012 & 2014. The requirement for inclusion on this checklist is a minimum of one record that is beyond reasonable doubt. Plausible but unproven species are relegated to an appendix, awaiting confirmation or further records. Unlikely species and known errors are omitted altogether, even if published records exist. Note that inclusion in the Scottish Invertebrate Records Index (SIRI) does not imply credibility. At one time or another, virtually every macro-moth on the British list has been reported from Scotland. Many of these claims are almost certainly misidentifications or other errors, including name confusion. However, because the County Moth Recorder (CMR) has the final say, dubious Scottish records for some unlikely species appear in the NMRS dataset. A modern complication involves the unwitting transportation of moths inside the traps of visiting lepidopterists. Then on the first night of their stay they record a species never seen before or afterwards by the local observers. Various such instances are known or suspected, including three for my own vice-county of Banffshire. Surprising species found in visitors’ traps the first time they are used here should always be regarded with caution. Clerical slips – the wrong scientific name scribbled in a notebook – have long caused confusion. An even greater modern problem involves errors when computerising the data. -
Field Guidecontrol of Weeds
US Department of Agriculture FOR THE BIOLOGICALFIELD GUIDECONTROL OF WEEDS IN THE NORTHWEST Rachel Winston, Carol Bell Randall, Rosemarie De Clerck-Floate, Alec McClay, Jennifer Andreas and Mark Schwarzländer Forest Health Technology FHTET-2014-08 Enterprise Team May 2014 he Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team (FHTET) was created in T1995 by the Deputy Chief for State and Private Forestry, USDA, Forest Service, to develop and deliver technologies to protect and improve the health of American forests. This book was published by FHTET as part of the technology transfer series. http://www.fs.fed.us/foresthealth/technology/ Cover photos: Aphthona nigriscutis (R. Richard, USDA APHIS), Mecinus spp. (Bob Richard, USDA APHIS PPQ), Chrysolina hypericic quadrigemina, Eustenopus villosus (Laura Parsons & Mark Schwarzländer, University of Idaho), Cyphocleonus achates (Jennifer Andreas, Washington State University Extension) The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326- W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call 202-720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. The use of trade, firm, or corporation names in this publication is for the information and convenience of the reader. -
Notices Federal Register Vol
76376 Notices Federal Register Vol. 67, No. 239 Thursday, December 12, 2002 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The environmental assessment and contains documents other than rules or finding of no significant impact may be Background proposed rules that are applicable to the viewed on the Internet at http:// public. Notices of hearings and investigations, The Animal and Plant Health www.aphis.usda.gov/ppq by following committee meetings, agency decisions and Inspection Service (APHIS) is the link for ‘‘Documents/Forms rulings, delegations of authority, filing of considering an application from the petitions and applications and agency Retrieval System’’ then clicking on the statements of organization and functions are University of Montana for a permit to triangle beside ‘‘6—Permits— examples of documents appearing in this release a nonindigenous organism, Environmental Assessments,’’ and section. Chondrilla root moth (Bradyrrhoa selecting document number 0037. You gilveolella), to reduce the severity of may request paper copies of the rush skeletonweed (Chondrilla juncea) environmental assessment and finding DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE in the continental United States. of no significant impact by calling or Native to Eurasia, rush skeletonweed writing to the person listed under FOR Animal and Plant Health Inspection has become established in the District of FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Please Service Columbia and several States including refer to the title of the environmental [Docket No. 02–060–2] California, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, assessment when requesting copies. The Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, environmental assessment and finding Availability of an Environmental New Jersey, New York, Oregon, of no significant impact are also Assessment and Finding of No Pennsylvania, Virginia, Washington, available for review in our reading room Significant Impact and West Virginia. -
APHIS Actions (Updated August 3, 2021) TAG No. P
Technical Advisory Group for Biological Control Agents of Weeds TAG Petitions - APHIS Actions (Updated August 3, 2021) ESA Sect. 7 Consultation NEPA Process TAG No. Petitioner Petition Type Agent (Biological Control Target Weed TAG APHIS Decision Biological F&WS PPQ initiates FONSI Date Permit Organism) Recommendation Letter (date)/ Assessment to Concurrence process (date) signed Issued/ (date) Action F&WS (date) NLAA (date) with Draft EA Release Authorized 21-01 John Gaskin Host Test Plant N/A: no specific identification at this Field bindweed, Convolvulus 8/3/21: List time. arvensis (Convolvulaceae) Recommendation for the Petitioner to examine all comments provided and proceed with testing with the understanding that concerns raised by the reviewers should be considered, and addressed where possible and reasonable. 20-02 Mark Schwarzlander Field Release Mogulones borraginis (Fabricius) Cynoglossum officinale L. Recommended for (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) (weevil) (houndstongue) Release (2/25/2021) 20-01 Mark Schwarzlander Field Release Ceutorhynchus cardariae (weevil) Lepidium draba, L. Not recommended for chalepense and L. Release (8/13/20) appelianum (hoary cress species) 19-03 Timothy Collier Field Release Aceria angustifoliae (mite) Elaeagnus angustifolia Recommended for (Russian olive) Release (5/27/2020) 19-02 Melissa C. Smith Host Test Plant N/A: no specific identification at this Acacia auriculiformis A. 3/11/20: List time. Cunn. ex Benth. (Fabaceae) Recommendation for Common name: Earleaf the Petitioner to acacia examine all comments provided and proceed with testing with the understanding that concerns raised by the reviewers should be considered, and addressed where possible and reasonable. 19-01 Melissa C. Smith Field Release Lophodiplosis indentata Gagné Melaleuca quinquenervia Recommended for 11/18/2020 (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) (Cav) S.T. -
Entomologiske Meddelelser
Entomologiske Meddelelser Indeks for Bind 1-67 (1887-1999) Entomologisk Forening København 2000 FORORD Tidsskriftet "Entomologiske Meddelelser" - Entomologisk Forenings medlemsblad - blev grundlagt i 1887, og er således det ældste danske entomologiske tidsskrift, som stadig udgives. Det har siden sin start haft til formål at udbrede kendskabet til entomologien i almindelighed og dansk entomologi i særdeleshed. De første 5 bind udkom i årene 1887-1896 og omhandlede primært artikler af særlig relevans for dansk entomologi. Herefter skiftede det format, såvel rent fysisk som (mere gradvis) indholdsmæssigt, og fik efterhånden et mere internationalt tilsnit med en vis andel af bl.a. tysk- og engelsksprogede artikler. I forbindelse med overgangen til det nye format, benævntes tidsskriftet nu som "Entomologiske Meddelelser, 2. Række" og nummereringen af de enkelte bind startede forfra. Efter at have praktiseret denne nummerering i nogle år, droppedes dog betegnelsen "2. Række", og man vendte tilbage til at nummerere bindene fortløbende fra det først udkomne bind. Efter at tidsskriftet op igennem 1900-tallet havde fået et stigende indhold af artikler med internationalt sigte, blev det fra bind 39 (1971) besluttet at koncentrere indholdet til primært dansksprogede artikler af særlig relevans for den danske fauna. Samtidig overgik de enkelte bind til at udgøre årgange i stedet for, som tidligere, at være flerårige. "Entomologiske Meddelelser" har siden sin start bragt hen mod 1600 originale, videnskabelige artikler eller mindre meddelelser, næsten 500 boganmeldelser, over 100 biografier eller nekrologer over primært danske entomologer, samt enkelte meddelelser af anden slags. For at lette overskueligheden over den meget betydelige mængde af information disse publikationer rummer, har Entomologisk Forenings bestyrelse fundet tiden moden til at sammenstille et indeks over indholdet af samtlige udkomne numre af "Entomologiske Meddelser" til og med bind 67 (årgang 1999). -
Western US Invasive Plant EDRR Weed ID Guide Ii Intro When Applicable Information, Biocontrol Agent Scientifi C Names Common and Card Card Oregon Alert Oregon Key
Western US Invasive Plant EDRR Weed ID Guide Photo credits 1. Michael Frank, Galileo Group Inc. Aquatics Card key 2. Univ. of FL IFAS Center Intro 3. Allison Fox 4. Steve Hurst @ NRCS PLANTS Hydrilla 5. C. Evans, River to River CWMA Hydrilla verticillata 6. G. Buckingham, USDA-ARS 7. USDA-NRCS PLANTS Plant category Common and ❶ scientifi c names ❷ ❸ Page number A—3 ❹ ❺ CA NV Hydrilla OR Aquatics WA US HHydrillaydrilla vverticillataerticillata ❶ DDescriptionescription Western states Perennial aquatic plant. Rooted to the bottom with long stems that reach water’s surface. Leaves are 1̸16 to 1̸8 in wide, ¼ to ¾ in long and occur where plant Biocontrol agent in whorls of fi ve. Small, axillary leaf scales are found next to the stem and inserted at the base of the leaf, distinguishing hydrilla from other family members. The nut-like turions are a key identifying feature. is listed as a information, Impacts Hydrilla is the most serious threat to aquatic ecosystems in temperate climate noxious weed when applicable zones. Dense stands of hydrilla provide poor habitat for fi sh and other wildlife and create stagnant water (which is good breeding grounds for mosquitoes). Hydrilla interferes with recreational activities and will clog irrigation ditches and intake pipes. Biological controls Tuber and stem weevils (Bagous affi nis and B. H. pakistanae hydrillae), and two leaf-mining fl ies (Hydrellia ❻ ❼ balciunasi aandnd H. pakistanae) are approved for release on hydrilla where it is established. H. pakistanae has had the greatest impact on US populations. Distribution in the US PLEASE CALL 1-866-INVADER IF YOU FIND THIS SPECIES IN OREGON.