Species List
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
The Research of Wild Bees and Honeybee (Apis Mellifera Linnaeus, 1758) in the Selected Localities of Protected Area Štiavnica H
The Research of Wild Bees and Honeybee (Apis mellifera Linnaeus, 1758) in the Selected Localities of Protected Area Štiavnica Hills, Slovakia in 2007 and Research of their Ethology Done between 2002 And 2007 Zdeněk ŠAFAŘÍK Tomas Bata University in Zlín, Nám. T.G. Masaryka 5555, 76001 Zlín, Czech Republic; [email protected] Bulletin UASVM Animal Science and Biotechnologies 71(1) / 2014, 27-35 Print ISSN 1843-5262; Electronic ISSN 1843-536X Abstract Research of wild bees and honeybee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) was realized in the selected lo- ca li ties of Banská Štiavnica, Banská Belá, Banský Studenec and Beluj surroundings in the Protected Area (CHKO) the Štiavnica Hills in 2007. They were 7 different localities under study with the aim to specify the qualitative and quantitative composition of the representatives of Hymenoptera order. We wanted to broaden knowledge about entomofauna of the studied localities of the protected Area (CHKO). Locality N1 is non-cut meadow south-east of Banská Štiavnica, locality N2 –desolate orchard in Kysihýbel, locality N3 –forest and deforested places with area 80x80 metres, locality N4 –surrounding of the Jasenica water reservoir at the south-west border of the village Banská Belá, locality N5 –re-cultivated dump of mudApidae to the west of Banská Belá and locality N6 – cut meadow in the village Beluj and in its surroundings. Locality N7 –rocky spur in Kysihýbel.Keywords During our study we specified 18 species of Hymenoptera ( ). Hymenoptera, Apidae Bombidae , bee, , Štiavnica Hills, Slovakia, localities INTRODUCTION Northern part of The Protected Area (CHKO) the More research workers investigated Hymenop- Štiavnica Hills, which is the object of this research tera: Apidae on the territory of The Protected Area work is less examined in comparison with the (CHKO) the Štiavnica Hills, for example Beláková warmer localities of the protected area situated (1986), Smetana (1986a, b) and Beláková, Smetana farther to the south. -
Lepidoptera in Cheshire in 2002
Lepidoptera in Cheshire in 2002 A Report on the Micro-Moths, Butterflies and Macro-Moths of VC58 S.H. Hind, S. McWilliam, B.T. Shaw, S. Farrell and A. Wander Lancashire & Cheshire Entomological Society November 2003 1 1. Introduction Welcome to the 2002 report on lepidoptera in VC58 (Cheshire). This is the second report to appear in 2003 and follows on from the release of the 2001 version earlier this year. Hopefully we are now on course to return to an annual report, with the 2003 report planned for the middle of next year. Plans for the ‘Atlas of Lepidoptera in VC58’ continue apace. We had hoped to produce a further update to the Atlas but this report is already quite a large document. We will, therefore produce a supplementary report on the Pug Moths recorded in VC58 sometime in early 2004, hopefully in time to be sent out with the next newsletter. As usual, we have produced a combined report covering micro-moths, macro- moths and butterflies, rather than separate reports on all three groups. Doubtless observers will turn first to the group they are most interested in, but please take the time to read the other sections. Hopefully you will find something of interest. Many thanks to all recorders who have already submitted records for 2002. Without your efforts this report would not be possible. Please keep the records coming! This request also most definitely applies to recorders who have not sent in records for 2002 or even earlier. It is never too late to send in historic records as they will all be included within the above-mentioned Atlas when this is produced. -
Additions, Deletions and Corrections to An
Bulletin of the Irish Biogeographical Society No. 36 (2012) ADDITIONS, DELETIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO AN ANNOTATED CHECKLIST OF THE IRISH BUTTERFLIES AND MOTHS (LEPIDOPTERA) WITH A CONCISE CHECKLIST OF IRISH SPECIES AND ELACHISTA BIATOMELLA (STAINTON, 1848) NEW TO IRELAND K. G. M. Bond1 and J. P. O’Connor2 1Department of Zoology and Animal Ecology, School of BEES, University College Cork, Distillery Fields, North Mall, Cork, Ireland. e-mail: <[email protected]> 2Emeritus Entomologist, National Museum of Ireland, Kildare Street, Dublin 2, Ireland. Abstract Additions, deletions and corrections are made to the Irish checklist of butterflies and moths (Lepidoptera). Elachista biatomella (Stainton, 1848) is added to the Irish list. The total number of confirmed Irish species of Lepidoptera now stands at 1480. Key words: Lepidoptera, additions, deletions, corrections, Irish list, Elachista biatomella Introduction Bond, Nash and O’Connor (2006) provided a checklist of the Irish Lepidoptera. Since its publication, many new discoveries have been made and are reported here. In addition, several deletions have been made. A concise and updated checklist is provided. The following abbreviations are used in the text: BM(NH) – The Natural History Museum, London; NMINH – National Museum of Ireland, Natural History, Dublin. The total number of confirmed Irish species now stands at 1480, an addition of 68 since Bond et al. (2006). Taxonomic arrangement As a result of recent systematic research, it has been necessary to replace the arrangement familiar to British and Irish Lepidopterists by the Fauna Europaea [FE] system used by Karsholt 60 Bulletin of the Irish Biogeographical Society No. 36 (2012) and Razowski, which is widely used in continental Europe. -
Exhibit List
EXHIBIT LIST Reference No: HOL/00521 Petitioner: Ms Sarah Green on behalf of Arthur Daily Trips (Canal Boat Company) Published to Collaboration Area: Wednesday 23-Nov-2016 Page 1 of 163 No Exhibit Name Page 1 A728 Exhibits List.pdf (A728) 3 2 A729 Exhibit 1 route map google.pdf (A729) 4 3 A730 Exhibit 2 water environment water courses.pdf (A730) 5 4 A731 Exhibit 3 cultural heritage.pdf (A731) 6 - 7 5 A732 Exhibit 4 metropolitan Open Land.pdf (A732) 8 - 9 6 A733 Exhibit 5 dragonflies.pdf (A733) 10 - 15 7 A734 Exhibit 6 quality of water.pdf (A734) 16 8 A735 Exhibit 7 Customer activities.pdf (A735) 17 9 A736 Exhibit 8 pylons.pdf (A736) 18 - 24 10 A737 Exhibit 9 Species-List.pdf (A737) 25 - 84 11 A738 Exhibit 10 magic maps.pdf (A738) 85 - 86 12 A739 Exhibit 11 Leisure and tourism Destination.pdf (A739) 87 13 A740 Exhibit 12 continuity through time.pdf (A740) 88 - 91 14 A741 Exhibit 13 The Plans for Denham Country Park.pdf (A741) 92 - 93 15 A742 Exhibit 14 Enabling Works.pdf (A742) 94 - 95 16 A743 Exhibit 15 Water Framework Directive.pdf (A743) 96 - 97 17 A744 Exhibit 16 Ecological_baseline_data_Mammals.pdf (A744) 98 - 108 18 A745 Exhibit 17 Wetlands_Programmes of measures_170907.pdf (A745) 109 - 117 19 A746 Exhibit 18 Guidance_protection animal species.pdf (A746) 118 - 136 20 A747 Exhibit 19 ODPM Circular 06_2005.pdf (A747) 137 - 151 HOL/00521/0001 EXHIBIT LIST Reference No: HOL/00521 Petitioner: Ms Sarah Green on behalf of Arthur Daily Trips (Canal Boat Company) Published to Collaboration Area: Wednesday 23-Nov-2016 Page 2 of 163 No Exhibit -
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. -
Butterfly and Moth Recording Report 2011
Lancashire, Manchester and Merseyside Butterfly and Moth Recording Report 2011 Laura Sivell Graham Jones Stephen Palmer 1 Butterfly Recording Laura Sivell County Butterfly Recorder Record Format More recorders who have computers chose to send their records by email. This is certainly preferred for ease of data input. The new version of Levana now has an excellent import facility, that can convert pages of records in a few seconds. MS Excel, MS Works, or tables in MS Word or tab-text are all acceptable file types. It not only makes my life much easier, it is a joy to use! Please remember to include your name in the file name of your records. On days where several different recorders send a file called ‘butterfly records 11’, it’s chaos! It also helps if you include a header with your name on so that your printed records can be easily attributed to you. Woefully few people have taken this on board. Thanks to those that have, it takes so little to bring joy and relief to this poor recorder. Any recorders with computers but not currently sending their records electronically, please consider doing so. Even if you don’t have email, records can be sent on disc. The following format is ideal Joe Bloggs 12/5/10 SD423456 Pilling Moss Orange Tip 3 all females, eggs also seen Joe Bloggs 12/5/10 SD423456 Pilling Moss Green-veined white 4 Sheila Bloggs 14/9/10 SD721596 Hasgill Fell Small heath 2 mating pair Joe Bloggs 11/10/10 SD5148 Grizedale Speckled Wood C please don’t put m or f for male or female, or anything else, in the numbers column as it makes the programme crash. -
Symphytum Tuberosum Complex in Central Europe: Cytogeography, Morphology, Ecology and Taxonomy
Preslia 88: 77–112, 2016 77 Symphytum tuberosum complex in central Europe: cytogeography, morphology, ecology and taxonomy Symphytum tuberosum ve střední Evropě – cytogeografie, morfologie, ekologie a taxonomie LucieKobrlová1,MichalHroneš1,PetrKoutecký2, Milan Š t e c h2 & Bohumil T r á v n í č e k1 1Department of Botany, Faculty of Science, Palacký University, Šlechtitelů 27, CZ-783 71 Olomouc, Czech Republic, e-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]; 2Department of Botany, Faculty of Science, University of South Bohemia, Branišovská 1760, CZ-370 05 České Budějovice, Czech Republic, email: [email protected], [email protected] Kobrlová L., Hroneš M., Koutecký P., Štech M. & Trávníček B. (2016): Symphytum tuberosum complex in central Europe: cytogeography, morphology, ecology and taxonomy. – Preslia 88: 77–112. The Symphytum tuberosum complex is a highly polyploid and taxonomically intriguing group. At least eight ploidy levels were recorded previously within this complex. Based on flow cytometric screening of 271 central-European populations, two dominant ploidy levels were revealed: tetraploid (2n = 4x = 32) and widespread dodecaploid (2n = 12x = 96). The tetraploid cytotype is mainly distributed along the southern and south-western margins of the West Carpathians where they abut the Pannonian basin, and found only in Slovakia, the Czech Republic (south-eastern Moravia) and Hungary; our findings represent the first records of this ploidy level for the latter two countries. In contrast, the dodecaploid cytotype occurs throughout the whole area studied. In addition to their geographic distributions, differences between the cytotypes in morphology and habitat requirements were detected using a multivariate morphometric analysis and analysis of a phytosociological database, respectively. -
Protection of Biodiversity in the Risk Management
TEXTE 76 /2015 Protection of Biodiversity in the Risk Assessment and Risk Management of Pesticides (Plant Protection Products & Biocides) with a Focus on Arthropods, Soil Organisms and Amphibians TEXTE 76/2015 Environmental Research of the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety Project No. (FKZ) 3709 65 421 Report No. (UBA-FB) 002175/E Protection of Biodiversity in the Risk Assessment and Risk Management of Pesticides (Plant Protection Products & Biocides) with a Focus on Arthropods, Soil Organisms and Amphibians by Carsten A. Brühl, Annika Alscher, Melanie Hahn Institut für Umweltwissenschaften , Universität Koblenz-Landau, Landau, Germany Gert Berger, Claudia Bethwell, Frieder Graef Leibniz-Zentrum für Agrarlandschaftsforschung (ZALF) e.V., Müncheberg, Germany Thomas Schmidt, Brigitte Weber Harlan Laboratories, Ittingen, Switzerland On behalf of the Federal Environment Agency (Germany) Imprint Publisher: Umweltbundesamt Wörlitzer Platz 1 06844 Dessau-Roßlau Tel: +49 340-2103-0 Fax: +49 340-2103-2285 [email protected] Internet: www.umweltbundesamt.de /umweltbundesamt.de /umweltbundesamt Study performed by: Institut für Umweltwissenschaften, Universität Koblenz-Landau Fortstr. 7 76829 Landau, Germany Study completed in: August 2013 Edited by: Section IV 1.3 Plant Protection Products Dr. Silvia Pieper Publication as pdf: http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/publikationen/protection-of-biodiversity-in-the-risk-assessment ISSN 1862-4804 Dessau-Roßlau, September 2015 The Project underlying this report was supported with funding from the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear safety under project number FKZ 3709 65 421. The responsibility for the content of this publication lies with the author(s). Table of Contents Table of Contents 1. -
BSBI News 123
BSBI News April 2013 No. 123 Edited by Trevor James & Gwynn Ellis ISSN 0309-930X Eric Clement botanising at Thorney Island in October 2011. Photo G. Hounsome © 2011 (see p. 66) Spartina patens in saltmarsh on the east side of Thorney Island. Photo G. Hounsome © 2012 (see p. 66) Frankenia laevis (Sea-heath) growing over roadside kerb, Helmsley-Kirbymoorside road, North Yorks. Photo N.A. Thompson © 2009 (see p. 48) Paul Green (acting Welsh Officer) at The Carex ×gaudiniana Glen Shee, Cairnwell, Raven, Co. Wexford. Photo O. Martin © 2008 v.c.92. Photo M. Wilcox © 2012 (see p. 28) (see p. 86) Alchemilla wichurae, Teesdale, showing 45° angle of main veins. Photo M. Lynes © 2012 (see p. 25) Pentaglottis sempervirens, Kirkcaldy, Fife (v.c.85). Photo G. Ballantyne © 2012 (see p. 64) CONTENTS Important Notices Changing status and ecology of Blysmus rufus From The President.....................................I. Bonner 2 (Saltmarsh Flat-sedge) in South Lancashire (v.c.59) Notes from the Editors....................T. James & G. Ellis 2 ...........................................................P.H. Smith 55 Notes...........................................................................3–63 Aliens.................................................................... 64–67 Eleocharis mitracarpa Steud., not a British plant Malling Toadflax population in Oxfordshire ...........................................................F.J. Roberts 3 ........................................A. Baket & G. Southon 64 Eleocharis: problems with the Flora Europaea account -
Species List
1 of 40 Glasgow Botanic Gardens 21/01/2021 Species List Group Taxon Common Name Earliest Latest Records acarine Brevipalpus oncidii 2019 2019 1 acarine Eriophyes leiosoma 1994 1994 1 acarine Eriophyes tiliae 2011 2011 1 acarine Eriophyes tiliae subsp. tiliae 1994 1994 1 acarine Hydrachnidae 2015 2015 1 amphibian Lissotriton helveticus Palmate Newt 2018 2018 1 amphibian Rana temporaria Common Frog 1963 2018 7 annelid Aporrectodea caliginosa s.l. Grey Worm 2017 2017 1 annelid Eisenia fetida Brandling 1987 1988 2 annelid Hirudinea Leech 2018 2018 1 annelid Lumbricus terrestris Common Earthworm 2017 2017 1 annelid Oligochaeta 2015 2015 1 annelid Stylaria lacustris 1995 1995 1 annelid Tubifex 1994 1994 1 bird Acanthis cabaret Lesser Redpoll 1998 2020 1 bird Accipiter nisus Sparrowhawk 1894 2020 7 bird Actitis hypoleucos Common Sandpiper 1894 1901 1 bird Aegithalos caudatus Long-tailed Tit 1966 2020 16 bird Alauda arvensis Skylark 1894 1901 1 bird Alcedo atthis Kingfisher 1883 2020 31 bird Anas platyrhynchos Mallard 1894 2020 30 bird Anthus pratensis Meadow Pipit 1894 1901 1 bird Apus apus Swift 1894 1998 4 bird Ardea cinerea Grey Heron 1966 2020 11 bird Aythya ferina Pochard 1982 1982 1 bird Aythya fuligula Tufted Duck 1966 2020 2 bird Bombycilla garrulus Waxwing 1966 2020 15 bird Carduelis carduelis Goldfinch 1894 2020 14 bird Certhia familiaris Treecreeper 1894 2017 4 bird Chloris chloris Greenfinch 1894 2020 12 bird Chroicocephalus ridibundus Black-headed Gull 1894 2020 5 bird Cinclus cinclus Dipper 1966 2020 9 bird Coloeus monedula Jackdaw 1894 2020 3 bird Columba livia Feral Pigeon 1966 2020 31 bird Columba oenas Stock Dove 2019 2020 6 2 of 40 Glasgow Botanic Gardens 21/01/2021 Species List Group Taxon Common Name Earliest Latest Records bird Columba palumbus Woodpigeon 1894 2020 29 bird Corvus corone agg. -
Moth Report, 2018
MOTH REPORT 2018 Paula Banza 1 1. Introduction The present report shows the results of Moth Trapping during 2018 in Cruzinha grounds, the headquarters of A Rocha Portugal. The number of sessions throughout the year were only 38, given the lack of volunteers to perform this type of work. We used a Skinner type moth trap with a 125 mercury vapor lamp, placed in the garden area of Cruzinha. Most of the captures were made by a volunteer named Sara Roda and some by Paula Banza, the person in charge of the project. Moth identifications were done by Sara Roda, with the supervision of Paula Banza and the help of Bert Van der Auwermeulen and the photos are from Ana Valadares (www.anavaladaresfotografia.com). The main objective of this work is to gain some knowledge of the diversity, abundance and distribution of moths in some habitats of the Algarve. At the same to use this knowledge as an environmental education tool with students, tourists and other people with interest in the subject. In total we caught 4812 moths, of 328 species belonging to 32 families. The majority of the moths were identified to the species level, with the exception of the genera Agdistis and Hellinsia, of which was not possible to determine the species. In some cases it wasn´t possible to confirm the identification to date. They are included in the statistical report of the study and represented on table 2 with the notation *. 2. Trap location Table 1 registers the Geographical Coordinates for the location of the moth traps.