DOCSLIB.ORG

The Caddisflies (Insecta: Trichoptera) of the Lake Itasca Region, Minnesota, and a Preliminary Assessment of the Conservation Status of Minnesota Trichoptera

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Caddisflies (Insecta: Trichoptera) of the Lake Itasca Region, Minnesota, and a Preliminary Assessment of the Conservation Status of Minnesota Trichoptera Conservation Biology Research Grants Program Nongame Wildlife Program Division of Ecological Services Minnesota Department of Natural Resources THE CADDISFLIES (INSECTA: TRICHOPTERA) OF THE LAKE ITASCA REGION, MINNESOTA, AND A PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF THE CONSERVATION STATUS OF MINNESOTA TRICHOPTERA A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY MARGOT PECK MONSON IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER MASTER OF SCIENCE SEPTEMBER 1994 1 © Margot Peck Monson 1994 2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my major advisor, Dr. Ralph Holzenthal, for taking me on as his student and for his time, effort, and patient guidance in helping me pursue this project. I also wish to thank Dr. Roger Moon for his helpful counsel and encouragement, as well as the other members of my examination committee, Dr. William Miller and Dr. Francesca Cuthbert, for their support. I am grateful to Dr. O. J. Flint, Dr. Steve Harris, Dr. David Etnier, and the Illinois Natural History Survey for their assistance in making specimens available and for verification of some determinations. Dr. Etnier was also most generous in making several donations to the University of Minnesota Insect Collection. I am thankful for the partial funding for this project, contributed by the Nongame Wildlife Program of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the Minnesota Chapter of The Nature Conservancy. The helpfulness of Dr. Phil Clausen, Curator of the University of Minnesota Insect Collection, was most appreciated (as was his willingness to answer my many questions). The friendship and good humor extended by my colleagues in the lab, Roger, Atilano, Jolanda, Sonia, John, and Marc, as well as Sue, Paul, Sujaya, and Diann will be fondly remembered. My friends Dave, Linda, Bill and Martha, were helpful from the first days of my study and the support of Ann and Ginner in the field was invaluable. Without the love and constant encouragement from my husband, Bjorn, and children, Amy and Bjorn, I would not have been able to complete this project. To them I will always be deeply grateful. i TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................................................................. i TABLE OF CONTENTS............................................................................................................................... ii LIST OF TABLES........................................................................................................................................ iv LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................v ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................................................1 PART I INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................................................3 Trichoptera.........................................................................................................................................7 Morphology .......................................................................................................................................7 Biology ..............................................................................................................................................8 Case and Retreat-making Behavior...................................................................................................9 Trophic Relations.............................................................................................................................13 Distribution ......................................................................................................................................16 MATERIALS AND METHODS..................................................................................................................17 Study Area.......................................................................................................................................17 Collection Sites................................................................................................................................17 Collection Techniques and Equipment ............................................................................................20 Species Determinations and Depositions.........................................................................................24 Diversity and Similarity Indices ......................................................................................................26 RESULTS .....................................................................................................................................................28 Annotated Species List ....................................................................................................................28 Species Richness and Relative Abundance......................................................................................63 Seasonal Distribution.......................................................................................................................77 ii DISCUSSION...............................................................................................................................................87 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ...........................................................................................................98 LITERATURE CITED ...............................................................................................................................100 PART II A NEW SPECIES AND NEW RECORDS OF OXYETHIRA (TRICHOPTERA:HYDROPTILIDAE) FROM MINNESOTA.................................................................................................................................112 ABSTRACT................................................................................................................................................113 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................113 METHODS .................................................................................................................................................113 DISCUSSION.............................................................................................................................................116 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................................................................................117 LITERATURE CITED ...............................................................................................................................117 PART III A PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF THE CONSERVATION STATUS OF MINNESOTA TRICHOPTERA.........................................................................................................................................119 LITERATURE CITED ...............................................................................................................................135 iii LIST OF TABLES PART I Table 1. All caddisfly species and their abundances in collections from four sites in Minnesota during 1988 and 1989.................................................................................29 Table 2. Species richness, diversity, and evenness.......................................................................................64 Table 3. The 15 most abundant species collected at each site ......................................................................70 Table 4. Ratios of females to males for those species most abundant and collected in 1988 and 1989 at each creek site, and from Beaver Lake.....................................................................................................................................75 Table 5. Similarity of caddisfly fauna between sites based on Sorensen’s Coefficient of similarity...................................................................................................................76 Table 6. Seasonal distribution of caddisfly species collected from the Itasca region of Minnesota, 1988 & 1989........................................................................................78 Table 7. A comparison of caddisfly species richness at regional and Local scales......................................................................................................................................88 PART III Table 1. Annotated checklist of the Trichoptera of Minnesota...................................................................123 iv LIST OF FIGURES PART I Fig. 1. Phylogeny of the Trichoptera ...........................................................................................................11 Fig. 2. Collection sites for Trichoptera in the Lake Itasca region in northern Minnesota.....................................................................................................................18 Fig. 3. Collection sites. A. Nicollet Creek; B. Beaver Lake .......................................................................19 Fig. 4. Collection sites. A. Sucker Creek; B. LaSalle Creek.......................................................................21 Fig. 5. A. Light trap; B. Malaise trap. .........................................................................................................23
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ARTHROPOD COMMUNITIES and PASSERINE DIET: EFFECTS of SHRUB EXPANSION in WESTERN ALASKA by Molly Tankersley Mcdermott, B.A./B.S
    Arthropod communities and passerine diet: effects of shrub expansion in Western Alaska Item Type Thesis Authors McDermott, Molly Tankersley Download date 26/09/2021 06:13:39 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/11122/7893 ARTHROPOD COMMUNITIES AND PASSERINE DIET: EFFECTS OF SHRUB EXPANSION IN WESTERN ALASKA By Molly Tankersley McDermott, B.A./B.S. A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Biological Sciences University of Alaska Fairbanks August 2017 APPROVED: Pat Doak, Committee Chair Greg Breed, Committee Member Colleen Handel, Committee Member Christa Mulder, Committee Member Kris Hundertmark, Chair Department o f Biology and Wildlife Paul Layer, Dean College o f Natural Science and Mathematics Michael Castellini, Dean of the Graduate School ABSTRACT Across the Arctic, taller woody shrubs, particularly willow (Salix spp.), birch (Betula spp.), and alder (Alnus spp.), have been expanding rapidly onto tundra. Changes in vegetation structure can alter the physical habitat structure, thermal environment, and food available to arthropods, which play an important role in the structure and functioning of Arctic ecosystems. Not only do they provide key ecosystem services such as pollination and nutrient cycling, they are an essential food source for migratory birds. In this study I examined the relationships between the abundance, diversity, and community composition of arthropods and the height and cover of several shrub species across a tundra-shrub gradient in northwestern Alaska. To characterize nestling diet of common passerines that occupy this gradient, I used next-generation sequencing of fecal matter. Willow cover was strongly and consistently associated with abundance and biomass of arthropods and significant shifts in arthropod community composition and diversity.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Fact Sheet for Homoplectra Schuhi
    SPECIES FACT SHEET Common Name: Schuh’s Homoplectran Caddisfly Scientific Name: Homoplectra schuhi Denning 1965 Phylum: Mandibulata Class: Insecta Order: Trichoptera Suborder: Annulipalpia Family: Hydropsychidae Subfamily: Diplectroninae Conservation Status Global Status (2005): G3Q – Vulnerable, but taxonomic questions persist (last reviewed 25 Mar 2005) National Status (United States): N3 - Vulnerable (23 Feb 2005) State Status (Oregon): S3 - Vulnerable (NatureServe 2015) Oregon Biodiversity Information Center: List 3 IUCN Red List: NE – Not evaluated Taxonomic Note This species has been given a global status of G3Q due to the limited number of specimens that have been reviewed to date, and the variability of diagnostic characteristics (NatureServe 2015). This genus is in need of additional collecting and taxonomic review, which may lead to synonymization with older described species (Wisseman 2015, Ruiter 2015). For example, specimens identified as H. luchia Denning 1966 may in fact be synonyms of H. schuhi (Ruiter 2015). Technical Description A microscope is required to identify Homoplectra schuhi, as identifications are based on genitalia anatomy. The advice of a Trichoptera expert is suggested. See Denning (1965) for lateral view drawings of the male and female genitalia. Adult: The adults of this species are small, moth-like insects in the caddisfly family Hydropsychidae. Homoplectra males are recognized by the complexity of the phallic apparatus, which can be complicated by very strong development of several sclerotized branches (Schmid 1998). Holotype male: Length 6 mm. General color of head, thorax and abdomen dark brown, wings tan with no pattern, legs and antennae varying shades of brownish. Pubescence of head, thorax and legs aureous. Fifth sternite with a dorsal filament enlarged distally and curved dorso-caudad.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement of Need and Reasonableness: August 10, 2012
    CADDISFLIES ONLY Notations Used E Endangered T Threatened SC Special Concern N None (location records maintained by DNR, in most cases) N (X) None, and probably extirpated from Minnesota (location records maintained by DNR, in most cases) -- None (location records not yet maintained by DNR) * Change in scientific name accompanies change in status CHANGE IN STATUS; STATUS SHEET PROVIDED Common Name Scientific Name Current Proposed Status Status A Species of Northern Caddisfly Anabolia ozburni -- SC * A Species of Northern Caddisfly Asynarchus rossi SC T A Species of Long Horned Caddisfly Ceraclea brevis SC N Vertrees's Ceraclean Caddisfly Ceraclea vertreesi SC N Headwaters Chilostigman Caddisfly Chilostigma itascae E T A Species of Caddisfly Goera stylata -- T A Species of Purse Casemaker Caddisfly Hydroptila novicola SC N A Species of Purse Casemaker Caddisfly Hydroptila quinola -- SC A Species of Purse Casemaker Caddisfly Hydroptila rono -- T A Species of Purse Casemaker Caddisfly Hydroptila waskesia -- E A Species of Northern Caddisfly Ironoquia punctatissima -- T A Species of Caddisfly Lepidostoma libum -- T A Species of Northern Caddisfly Limnephilus janus -- E A Species of Northern Caddisfly Limnephilus secludens -- E A Species of Purse Casemaker Caddisfly Ochrotrichia spinosa -- E A Species of Long Horned Caddisfly Oecetis ditissa -- T A Species of Purse Casemaker Caddisfly Oxyethira ecornuta SC T A Species of Netspinning Caddisfly Parapsyche apicalis -- T A Species of Tube Casemaker Caddisfly Polycentropus glacialis -- T A Species
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Evaluation for US Trunk Highway 2 Passing Lane and Turn Lane Improvements
    Draft Biological Evaluation for US Trunk Highway 2 Passing Lane and Turn Lane Improvements Prepared by: Minnesota Department of Transportation Prepared for: US Forest Service, Chippewa National Forest Minnesota Department of Natural Resources May 2014 US Highwy 2 Passing Lane and Turn Lane Improvements Biological Evaluation This Biological Evaluation was prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act, National Forest Management Act, and other applicable laws and regulations. For additional information, please contact the team leader for the US Trunk Highway 2 Passing Lane and Turn Lane Improvements Project. Ms. Christine Brown Chippewa National Forest Address: 200 Ash Avenue NW Cass Lake, MN 56633 Phone: (218) 335-8600 TTY: (218) 335-8632 FAX: (218)335-8637 Prepared by: ______________________________________ _______________ Antony Randazzo, HDR Engineering, Inc. Date Reviewed by: ______________________________________ _______________ Kirk W. Larson, U.S. Forest Service Date Chippewa National Forest Reviewed by: ______________________________________ _______________ Cory Mlodik, U.S. Forest Service Date Chippewa National Forest May 2014 Signature Page Page i US Highwy 2 Passing Lane and Turn Lane Improvements Biological Evaluation Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Purpose of this Report ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • (Contd.) David DUDGEON Dr., Lecturer in Zoology Department Of
    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: Trichoptera Newsletter Jahr/Year: 1982 Band/Volume: 09 Autor(en)/Author(s): Anonym Artikel/Article: List of research workers (contd.) 9-11 © Hans Malicky/Austria; download- 9 unter- www.biologiezentrum.at LIST OP RESEARCH WORKERS (contd.) David DUDGEON Dr., Lecturer in Zoology Department of Zoology, University of Hong Kong, HONG KONG Present interests: Ecology, of stream and river dwelling Tricho- ptera in HongKongj ecological studies of fresh waters (lentie and lotie) in HongKong, freshwater macroinvertebrate ecology. Investigantion areas Asia. Willing to identify material for other workers: Yes, Asian material (larvae only). Information wanted: Any information dealing with Asian Tricho- ptera (and other freshwater insects). Other activities and interests: Freshwater molluscs, biology of decomposition, land-water interactive systems. Sue ELDIN, Miss M.Sc, research (towards Ph.D«,) Dept of Zoology, Chelsea College, University of London, Hortensia Road, London SW1O, England. Present interests: Agapetus fuscipes, Limnephilus lunatus, L.extricatus, Agraylea multipunctata, Hydroptila vectis and several others. Rearing of Trichoptera, distribution of Trichoptera along a tributary of the River Medway. Investigation" area: South-East England (partie.R.Medway,Kent). information wanted: Any information on light trap catches/lab rearing of any groups, pollution studies involving caddis. Other activities and interests: General aquatic entomology, limnology. Porntip CHMTARAMONGKOL, Miss M.Sc, University lecturer c/o Biologische Station Lunz, A - 3293 Lunz, Austria. Present interests:Taxonomy and ecological significance of all groups of caddisflies. Establishing a system of environ- ment indicators (doctoral thesis). Investigation area: Southern Asia. Material wanted: Any adult caddisflies from Southern Asia, in particular light trap material (including by-catches).
    [Show full text]
  • List of Animal Species with Ranks October 2017
    Washington Natural Heritage Program List of Animal Species with Ranks October 2017 The following list of animals known from Washington is complete for resident and transient vertebrates and several groups of invertebrates, including odonates, branchipods, tiger beetles, butterflies, gastropods, freshwater bivalves and bumble bees. Some species from other groups are included, especially where there are conservation concerns. Among these are the Palouse giant earthworm, a few moths and some of our mayflies and grasshoppers. Currently 857 vertebrate and 1,100 invertebrate taxa are included. Conservation status, in the form of range-wide, national and state ranks are assigned to each taxon. Information on species range and distribution, number of individuals, population trends and threats is collected into a ranking form, analyzed, and used to assign ranks. Ranks are updated periodically, as new information is collected. We welcome new information for any species on our list. Common Name Scientific Name Class Global Rank State Rank State Status Federal Status Northwestern Salamander Ambystoma gracile Amphibia G5 S5 Long-toed Salamander Ambystoma macrodactylum Amphibia G5 S5 Tiger Salamander Ambystoma tigrinum Amphibia G5 S3 Ensatina Ensatina eschscholtzii Amphibia G5 S5 Dunn's Salamander Plethodon dunni Amphibia G4 S3 C Larch Mountain Salamander Plethodon larselli Amphibia G3 S3 S Van Dyke's Salamander Plethodon vandykei Amphibia G3 S3 C Western Red-backed Salamander Plethodon vehiculum Amphibia G5 S5 Rough-skinned Newt Taricha granulosa
    [Show full text]
  • ( ) Hydropsychidae (Insecta: Trichoptera) As Bio-Indicators Of
    ว.วิทย. มข. 40(3) 654-666 (2555) KKU Sci. J. 40(3) 654-666 (2012) แมลงน้ําวงศ!ไฮดรอบไซคิดี้ (อันดับไทรคอบเทอร-า) เพื่อเป2นตัวบ-งชี้ทางชีวภาพของคุณภาพน้ํา Hydropsychidae (Insecta: Trichoptera) as Bio-indicators of Water QuaLity แตงออน พรหมมิ1 บทคัดยอ การประเมินคุณภาพน้ําในแมน้ําและลําธารควรที่จะมีการใชปจจัยทางกายภาพ เคมีและชีวภาพควบคูกัน ไป ปจจัยทางชีวภาพที่มีศักยภาพในการประเมินคุณภาพน้ําในแหลงน้ําคือกลุมสัตว+ไมมีกระดูกสันหลังขนาดใหญที่ อาศัยอยูตามพื้นทองน้ํา โดยเฉพาะแมลงน้ําอันดับไทรคอบเทอรา ซึ่งเป3นกลุมสัตว+ที่มีความหลากหลายมากกลุม หนึ่งในแหลงน้ํา ระยะตัวออนของแมลงกลุมนี้ทุกชนิดอาศัยอยูในแหลงน้ํา เป3นองค+ประกอบหลักในแหลงน้ําและ เป3นตัวหมุนเวียนสารอาหารในแหลงน้ํา ระยะตัวออนของแมลงน้ํากลุมนี้จะตอบสนองตอปจจัยของสภาพแวดลอม ในแหลงน้ําทุกรูปแบบ ระยะตัวเต็มวัยอาศัยอยูบนบกบริเวณตนไมซึ่งไมไกลจากแหลงน้ํามากนัก หากินเวลา กลางคืน ความรูทางดานอนุกรมวิธานและชีววิทยาไมวาจะเป3นระยะตัวออนหรือตัวเต็มวัยของแมลงน้ําอันดับไทร คอบเทอราในประเทศแถบยุโรปตะวันตกและอเมริกาเหนือสามารถวินิจฉัยไดถึงระดับชนิด โดยเฉพาะแมลงน้ํา วงศ+ไฮดรอบไซคิดี้ มีการประยุกต+ใชในการติดตามตรวจสอบทางชีวภาพของคุณภาพน้ํา เนื่องจากชนิดของตัวออน แมลงน้ําวงศ+นี้มีความทนทานตอมลพิษในชวงกวางมากกวาแมลงน้ําชนิดอื่น ๆ 1สายวิชาวิทยาศาสตร+ คณะศิลปศาสตร+และวิทยาศาสตร+ มหาวิทยาลัยเกษตรศาสตร+ วิทยาเขตกําแพงแสน จ.นครปฐม 73140 E-mail: [email protected] บทความ วารสารวิทยาศาสตร+ มข. ปQที่ 40 ฉบับที่ 3 655 ABSTRACT Assessment on rivers and streams water quality should incorporate aspects of chemical, physical, and biological. Of all the potential groups of freshwater organisms that have been considered for
    [Show full text]
  • 2009 Land Management Plan
    2009 LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN (Updated Annual Harvest Plan -2014) Itasca County Land Department 1177 LaPrairie Avenue Grand Rapids, MN 55744-3322 218-327-2855 ● Fax: 218-327-4160 LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN Itasca County Land Department Acknowledgements This Land Management Plan was produced by Itasca County Land Department employees Garrett Ous, Dave Marshall, Michael Gibbons, Adam Olson, Bob Scheierl, Roger Clark, Kory Cease, Steve Aysta, Tim Stocker, Perry Leone, Wayne Perreault, Blair Carlson, Loren Eide, Bob Rother, Andrew Brown, Del Inkman, Darlene Brown and Meg Muller. Thank you to all the citizens for their sincere input and review during the public involvement process. And thank you to Itasca County Commissioners Lori Dowling, Karen Burthwick, Rusty Eichorn, Catherine McLynn and Mark Mandich for their vision and final approval of this document. Foreword This land management plan is designed for providing vision and direction to guide strategic and operational programs of the Land Department. That vision and direction reflects a long standing connection with local economic, educational and social programs. The Land Department is committed to ensuring that economic benefits and environmental integrity are available to both present and future generations. That will be accomplished through actively managing county land and forests for a balance of benefits to the citizens and for providing them with a sustained supply of quality products and services. The Department will apply quality forestland stewardship practices, employ modern technology and information, and partner with other forest organizations to provide citizens with those quality products and services. ________________________________ Garrett Ous September, 2009 Itasca County Land Commissioner 1177 LaPrairie Avenue Grand Rapids, MN 55744-3322 218-327-2855 ● Fax: 218-327-4160 ICLD - LMP Section i., page 1 of 3 Itasca County Land Department Land Management Plan Table of Contents i.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix A: Common and Scientific Names for Fish and Wildlife Species Found in Idaho
    APPENDIX A: COMMON AND SCIENTIFIC NAMES FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SPECIES FOUND IN IDAHO. How to Read the Lists. Within these lists, species are listed phylogenetically by class. In cases where phylogeny is incompletely understood, taxonomic units are arranged alphabetically. Listed below are definitions for interpreting NatureServe conservation status ranks (GRanks and SRanks). These ranks reflect an assessment of the condition of the species rangewide (GRank) and statewide (SRank). Rangewide ranks are assigned by NatureServe and statewide ranks are assigned by the Idaho Conservation Data Center. GX or SX Presumed extinct or extirpated: not located despite intensive searches and virtually no likelihood of rediscovery. GH or SH Possibly extinct or extirpated (historical): historically occurred, but may be rediscovered. Its presence may not have been verified in the past 20–40 years. A species could become SH without such a 20–40 year delay if the only known occurrences in the state were destroyed or if it had been extensively and unsuccessfully looked for. The SH rank is reserved for species for which some effort has been made to relocate occurrences, rather than simply using this status for all elements not known from verified extant occurrences. G1 or S1 Critically imperiled: at high risk because of extreme rarity (often 5 or fewer occurrences), rapidly declining numbers, or other factors that make it particularly vulnerable to rangewide extinction or extirpation. G2 or S2 Imperiled: at risk because of restricted range, few populations (often 20 or fewer), rapidly declining numbers, or other factors that make it vulnerable to rangewide extinction or extirpation. G3 or S3 Vulnerable: at moderate risk because of restricted range, relatively few populations (often 80 or fewer), recent and widespread declines, or other factors that make it vulnerable to rangewide extinction or extirpation.
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity of Minnesota Caddisflies (Insecta: Trichoptera)
    Conservation Biology Research Grants Program Division of Ecological Services Minnesota Department of Natural Resources BIODIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA CADDISFLIES (INSECTA: TRICHOPTERA) A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY DAVID CHARLES HOUGHTON IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Ralph W. Holzenthal, Advisor August 2002 1 © David Charles Houghton 2002 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS As is often the case, the research that appears here under my name only could not have possibly been accomplished without the assistance of numerous individuals. First and foremost, I sincerely appreciate the assistance of my graduate advisor, Dr. Ralph. W. Holzenthal. His enthusiasm, guidance, and support of this project made it a reality. I also extend my gratitude to my graduate committee, Drs. Leonard C. Ferrington, Jr., Roger D. Moon, and Bruce Vondracek, for their helpful ideas and advice. I appreciate the efforts of all who have collected Minnesota caddisflies and accessioned them into the University of Minnesota Insect Museum, particularly Roger J. Blahnik, Donald G. Denning, David A. Etnier, Ralph W. Holzenthal, Jolanda Huisman, David B. MacLean, Margot P. Monson, and Phil A. Nasby. I also thank David A. Etnier (University of Tennessee), Colin Favret (Illinois Natural History Survey), and Oliver S. Flint, Jr. (National Museum of Natural History) for making caddisfly collections available for my examination. The laboratory assistance of the following individuals-my undergraduate "army"-was critical to the processing of the approximately one half million caddisfly specimens examined during this study and I extend my thanks: Geoffery D. Archibald, Anne M.
    [Show full text]
  • Trichoptera: Hydropsychidae) in the Carpathians
    Eur. J. Entomol. 112(1): 106–113, 2015 doi: 10.14411/eje.2015.006 ISSN 1210-5759 (print), 1802-8829 (online) Spatial ecology of Hydropsyche incognita (Trichoptera: Hydropsychidae) in the Carpathians MÃLINA PÎRVU 1, 2, CLAUDIA ZAHARIA3, ALINA SATMARI 4 and LUCIAN PÂRVULESCU 1 1 Department of Biology-Chemistry, Faculty of Chemistry, Biology, Geography, West University of Timișoara, Timișoara, Romania; e-mails: [email protected]; [email protected] 2 Department of Systems Ecology and Sustainability, Faculty of Biology, University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania 3 Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, West University of Timișoara, Timișoara, Romania; e-mail: [email protected] 4 Department of Geography, Faculty of Chemistry, Biology, Geography, West University of Timișoara, Timișoara, Romania; e-mail: [email protected] Key words. Trichoptera, Hydropsychidae, Hydropsyche incognita, ecological preferences, spatial analysis, species distribution modelling Abstract. Caddisflies are often used in studies on freshwater ecosystem ecology because of their aquatic-dependent larvae. The pre- sent study addresses the ecological affinities of larvae of Hydropsyche incognita in terms of the pattern of distribution of this species in the Romanian Carpathians using a boosted regression trees (BRT) model. A population cluster located in the western Romanian Carpathians was identified by the spatial analysis. The statistical model revealed that this species prefers a neutral to low-alkaline pH, high levels of dissolved oxygen, low conductivity, fast flowing water, moderate sized rivers at an altitude below 600 m a.s.l. and low concentrations of organic pollutants. An eastward decrease in the frequency of H.
    [Show full text]
  • 100 Characters
    40 Review and Update of Non-mollusk Invertebrate Species in Greatest Need of Conservation: Final Report Leon C. Hinz Jr. and James N. Zahniser Illinois Natural History Survey Prairie Research Institute University of Illinois 30 April 2015 INHS Technical Report 2015 (31) Prepared for: Illinois Department of Natural Resources State Wildlife Grant Program (Project Number T-88-R-001) Unrestricted: for immediate online release. Prairie Research Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign Brian D. Anderson, Interim Executive Director Illinois Natural History Survey Geoffrey A. Levin, Acting Director 1816 South Oak Street Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-6830 Final Report Project Title: Review and Update of Non-mollusk Invertebrate Species in Greatest Need of Conservation. Project Number: T-88-R-001 Contractor information: University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign Institute of Natural Resource Sustainability Illinois Natural History Survey 1816 South Oak Street Champaign, IL 61820 Project Period: 1 October 2013—31 September 2014 Principle Investigator: Leon C. Hinz Jr., Ph.D. Stream Ecologist Illinois Natural History Survey One Natural Resources Way, Springfield, IL 62702-1271 217-785-8297 [email protected] Prepared by: Leon C. Hinz Jr. & James N. Zahniser Goals/ Objectives: (1) Review all SGNC listing criteria for currently listed non-mollusk invertebrate species using criteria in Illinois Wildlife Action Plan, (2) Assess current status of species populations, (3) Review criteria for additional species for potential listing as SGNC, (4) Assess stressors to species previously reviewed, (5) Complete draft updates and revisions of IWAP Appendix I and Appendix II for non-mollusk invertebrates. T-88 Final Report Project Title: Review and Update of Non-mollusk Invertebrate Species in Greatest Need of Conservation.
    [Show full text]