Wet-Mesic Flatwoods Communitywet-Mesic Flatwoods, Abstract Page 1

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Wet-Mesic Flatwoods Communitywet-Mesic Flatwoods, Abstract Page 1 Wet-mesic Flatwoods CommunityWet-mesic Flatwoods, Abstract Page 1 Historical Range Prevalent or likely prevalent Infrequent or likely infrequent Absent or likely absent Photo by Suzan L. Campbell Overview: Wet-mesic flatwoods is a somewhat Rank Justification: The acreage of wet-mesic poorly drained to poorly drained forest on mineral flatwoods present in Michigan circa 1800 is difficult soils dominated by a mixture of lowland and upland to determine because the community type has hardwoods. The community occurs exclusively on characteristics that overlap those of several of the glacial lakeplain in southeastern Lower Michigan, forest types mapped based on General Land Office where an impermeable clay layer in the soil profile (GLO) survey notes, primarily hardwood swamp and contributes to poor internal drainage. Seasonal beech-sugar maple forest (Comer et al. 1995a, Kost hydrologic fluctuations and windthrow are important et al. 2007). Analysis of GLO survey notes reveals natural disturbances that influence community structure, that lowland forest dominated by hardwoods covered species composition, and successional trajectory of wet- approximately 570,000 ha (1,400,000 ac) of southern mesic flatwoods. Lower Michigan circa 1800 (Comer et al. 1995a). These stands were characterized by mixed hardwoods Global and State Rank: G2G3/S2 (490,000 ha or 1,200,000 ac), black ash (77,000 ha or 190,000 ac), elm (5,300 ha or 13,000 ac), and silver Range: Flatwoods communities characterized by maple-red maple (4,000 ha or 10,000 ac). The majority relatively flat topography, slowly permeable to of lowland forest acreage in southern Lower Michigan impermeable subsurface soil layers, and seasonal was associated with stream and river floodplains, hydrologic fluctuation occur scattered throughout the and is classified as floodplain forest (Tepley et al. eastern United States (NatureServe 2009). In the Great 2004, Kost et al. 2007). Extensive stands of lowland Lakes region, flatwoods communities on poorly drained hardwoods not associated with stream floodplains were glacial lakeplains and flat to undulating till plains concentrated on poorly drained lakeplain in Wayne, are distributed in Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Lenawee, Saginaw, St. Clair, Huron, Monroe, Sanilac, Pennsylvania, and Ontario, Canada (Fike 1999, Faber- and Macomb Counties (Comer et al. 1995a). These Langendoen 2001, NatureServe 2009). In Michigan, stands were characterized by southern hardwood swamp wet-mesic flatwoods is restricted to relatively flat on very poorly drained soils, and wet-mesic flatwoods glacial lakeplain in southeastern Lower Michigan in the on somewhat poorly to poorly drained soils. Wet-mesic Maumee Lake Plain ecological Sub-subsection (Albert flatwoods also likely occupied portions of the lakeplain 1995, Kost et al. 2007, Albert et al. 2008). characterized as mesic southern forest (i.e., beech-sugar maple forest) on the circa 1800 vegetation map (Comer et al. 1995a). Forests classified as hardwood swamp Michigan Natural Features Inventory P.O. Box 30444 - Lansing, MI 48909-7944 Phone: 517-373-1552 Wet-mesic Flatwoods, Page 2 Ecoregional map of Michigan (Albert 1995) depicting historical distribution of wet-mesic flatwoods (Albert et al. 2008) Michigan Natural Features Inventory P.O. Box 30444 - Lansing, MI 48909-7944 Phone: 517-373-1552 Wet-mesic Flatwoods, Page 3 and beech-sugar maple forest comprised a significant Currently, six occurrences of wet-mesic flatwoods proportion of the lakeplain in the early 1800s, covering are documented from Michigan, located in Macomb, > 60% of the land surface in Lenawee, Macomb, Wayne, and Monroe counties. These occurrences Monroe, St. Clair, and Wayne counties (Comer et al. range in size from 3 ha (7 ac) to 35 ac (87 ac), totaling 1995a). An additional natural community that may be approximately 96 ha (240 ac) (MNFI 2010). Only two successionally related to wet-mesic flatwoods, lakeplain occurrences are estimated to be of good to fair viability oak openings, covered significant acreage in Monroe (BC-rank), with the remaining occurrences estimated to (13%) and Wayne (5%) counties on sand lakeplain be of fair or fair to poor viability (C- to CD-rank). All of prone to frequent fires (Comer et al. 1995a, Kost et al. these sites are isolated woodlots in agricultural or urban 2007). The historic prevalence of hardwood swamp, landscapes, degraded by landscape-scale fragmentation beech-sugar maple forest, and lakeplain oak openings and hydrologic alteration (MNFI 2010). Additional in southeastern Lower Michigan suggests wet-mesic disturbances that have reduced viability of remnant flatwoods was common at the time of the GLO surveys. wet-mesic flatwoods over the past century include the introduction of non-native pests and pathogens (e.g., Conversion of the southeastern Michigan glacial elm blight and emerald ash borer), invasive plants, lakeplain for agricultural production accelerated in the and excessive deer herbivory, which have significantly early 1800s and resulted in the loss and degradation altered community structure, species composition, of wet-mesic flatwoods. Extensive drainage networks and successional trajectory (Barnes 1976, Rooney and created to expand agriculture lowered regional water Waller 2003, McCullough and Katovich 2004). For tables and reduced wet-mesic flatwoods to small, these reasons, the community is considered imperiled in isolated woodlots (Comer et al. 1995b, Knopp 1999). the state (Kost et al. 2007). This development led to the reduction of wetland acreage in southeastern Lower Michigan by 80-90%, the Physiographic Context: The Michigan range of wet- highest percentage loss of wetlands among all regions mesic flatwoods is in southeastern Lower Michigan, of the state (Comer et al. 1995b). Despite the significant in the Maumee Lake Plain Sub-subsection within the loss of wetlands statewide and in southeastern Lower Washtenaw Subsection (Albert 1995). This region has Michigan, MIRIS data (MDNR 1978) indicate that the longest growing season in the state, ranging from approximately 500,000 ha (1,200,000 ac) of lowland 160 to 170 days, averaging 163 days (Comer et al. hardwood forest occurred in southern Lower Michigan 1995b, Barnes and Wagner 2004). The daily maximum in the 1970s. This figure includes 28,000 ha (69,000 ac) temperature in July ranges from 28° to 29° C (82° to in the Maumee Lake Plain ecological Sub-subsection. 85° F), the daily minimum temperature in January The portion of this acreage represented by wet-mesic ranges from -10° to -7° C (14° to 19° F), and the annual flatwoods cannot be determined because wet-mesic average temperature is 9.3° C (48.7° F). Mean annual flatwoods does not correspond closely to any of total precipitation is 820 mm (32 in), with average the MIRIS cover type classifications. More recent seasonal snowfall less than 100 cm (40 in) (Eichenlaub data indicate 340,000 ha (840,000 ac) of lowland et al. 1990, Albert 1995, Barnes and Wagner 2004, MSU deciduous forest exists at present in the southern Climatology Office 2008). Lower Peninsula, including 17,000 ha (42,000 ac) in the Maumee Lake Plain (MDNR 2001). Again, the Wet-mesic flatwoods occurs exclusively in the portion of this acreage characterized by wet-mesic Maumee Lake Plain Sub-subsection in southeastern flatwoods cannot be determined with precision due to Lower Michigan (Kost et al. 2007, MNFI 2010). This broad cover type classification and resolution of the Sub-subsection is characterized by a broad, flat clay spectral data. However, the majority of lowland forest lakeplain containing broad channels of lacustrine in the ecoregion is comprised of fragmented, degraded sand that support low beach ridges and small dunes woodlots that do not closely approximate undisturbed (Albert 1995). Portions of the lakeplain with thick conditions. Some areas of wet-mesic flatwoods may clay deposits near the surface are characterized by be classified as upland deciduous forest in the MIRIS nearly level topography. In these areas, differences in and IFMAP land cover classifications due to the elevation of as little as 30 cm separate “upland flats” community’s naturally variable canopy composition from low, wet areas and depressions, and vernal pools (MDNR 1978, MDNR 2001). were historically common (Knopp 1999). Areas of Michigan Natural Features Inventory P.O. Box 30444 - Lansing, MI 48909-7944 Phone: 517-373-1552 Wet-mesic Flatwoods, Page 4 the lakeplain characterized by deep sand deposits on the forest floor. Seasonal water level fluctuations are better-drained and more topographically diverse, lead to mottling of the mineral soil layers. Soils on with development of beach ridges and low dunes on clay and sand/clay lakeplain contain a significant sand the otherwise level surface. Areas of the lakeplain fraction in the upper layers, and tend to be medium characterized by a relatively thin sand veneer over clay acid (pH= 5.6-6.0) to slightly acid (pH= 6.1-6.5) at are distributed throughout the clay plain, and exhibit the surface, although pH may be greater in sites with variable topography with level plains and low ridges high clay content in the upper layers. Clay fraction and (Knopp 1999). Wet-mesic flatwoods is concentrated on alkalinity increase with depth; soils are typically mildly the clay and sand/clay lakeplain, where impermeable alkaline (pH= 7.4-7.8) to moderately alkaline (pH= subsurface layers and low stream density impedes 7.9-8.4) 1 m below the surface (Knopp 1999). Soils on drainage and causes seasonal ponding (Albert et al. the sand lakeplain are characterized by very high sand 1986, Comer et al. 1995b). In these areas, wet-mesic fractions at all depths and pH ranging from strongly flatwoods occupies a topographic position between acid (pH= 5.1-5.5) at the surface to neutral (pH= 6.6- very poorly drained southern hardwood swamp in the 7.3) at greater depth. The neutral to alkaline subsurface wettest depressions and mesic southern forest where layers across the lakeplain are derived from calcareous slope and stream density permit favorable drainage.
Recommended publications
  • Identification of Insect-Plant Pollination Networks for a Midwest Installation: Fort Mccoy, WI 5B
    1 - 16 - ERDC TN ERDC Center for the Advancement of Sustainability Innovations (CASI) Identification of Insect-Plant Pollination Networks for a Midwest Installation Fort McCoy, WI Irene E. MacAllister, Jinelle H. Sperry, and Pamela Bailey April 2016 Results of an insect pollinators bipartite mutualistic network analysis. Construction Engineering Construction Laboratory Research Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. The U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) solves the nation’s toughest engineering and environmental challenges. ERDC develops innovative solutions in civil and military engineering, geospatial sciences, water resources, and environmental sciences for the Army, the Department of Defense, civilian agencies, and our nation’s public good. Find out more at www.erdc.usace.army.mil. To search for other technical reports published by ERDC, visit the ERDC online library at http://acwc.sdp.sirsi.net/client/default. Center for the Advancement of ERDC TN-16-1 Sustainability Innovations (CASI) April 2016 Identification of Insect-Plant Pollination Networks for a Midwest Installation Fort McCoy, WI Irene E. MacAllister and Jinelle H. Sperry U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) Construction Engineering Research Laboratory (CERL) 2902 Newmark Dr. Champaign, IL 61822 Pamela Bailey U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center Environmental Laboratory (EL) 3909 Halls Ferry Road Vicksburg, MS 39180-6199 Final Report Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. Prepared for U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center Vicksburg, MS 39180-6199 Under Center for the Advancement of Sustainability Innovations (CASI) Program Monitored by U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center Construction Engineering Research Laboratory (ERDC-CERL) 2902 Newmark Drive Champaign, IL 61822 ERDC TN-16-1 ii Abstract Pollinating insects and pollinator dependent plants are critical compo- nents of functioning ecosystems yet, for many U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Animal List
    MICHIGAN'S SPECIAL ANIMALS Endangered, Threatened, Special Concern, and Probably Extirpated This list presents the Endangered (E), Threatened (T), and Probably Extirpated (X) animal species of Michigan, which are protected under the Endangered Species Act of the State of Michigan (Part 365 of PA 451, 1994 Michigan Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act). The current list became effective on April 9, 2009, after extensive review by technical advisors to the Michigan Department of Natural Resources and the citizenry of the state. Also included in this list are animal species of Special Concern (SC). While not afforded legal protection under the Act, many of these species are of concern because of declining or relict populations in the state. Should these species continue to decline, they would be recommended for Threatened or Endangered status. Protection of Special Concern species now, before they reach dangerously low population levels, would prevent the need to list them in the future by maintaining adequate numbers of self-sustaining populations within Michigan. Some other potentially rare species are listed as Special Concern pending more precise information on their status in the state; when such information becomes available, they could be moved to threatened or endangered status or deleted from the list. This list was produced by the Endangered Species Program of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources and the Michigan Natural Features Inventory. English names in common usage or from published sources have been incorporated, when possible, to promote public understanding of and participation in the Endangered Species Program. To comment on the list or request additional copies, or for information on the Endangered Species Program, contact the Endangered Species Coordinator, Wildlife Division, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Communities of Michigan: Classification and Description
    Natural Communities of Michigan: Classification and Description Prepared by: Michael A. Kost, Dennis A. Albert, Joshua G. Cohen, Bradford S. Slaughter, Rebecca K. Schillo, Christopher R. Weber, and Kim A. Chapman Michigan Natural Features Inventory P.O. Box 13036 Lansing, MI 48901-3036 For: Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Division and Forest, Mineral and Fire Management Division September 30, 2007 Report Number 2007-21 Version 1.2 Last Updated: July 9, 2010 Suggested Citation: Kost, M.A., D.A. Albert, J.G. Cohen, B.S. Slaughter, R.K. Schillo, C.R. Weber, and K.A. Chapman. 2007. Natural Communities of Michigan: Classification and Description. Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Report Number 2007-21, Lansing, MI. 314 pp. Copyright 2007 Michigan State University Board of Trustees. Michigan State University Extension programs and materials are open to all without regard to race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, marital status or family status. Cover photos: Top left, Dry Sand Prairie at Indian Lake, Newaygo County (M. Kost); top right, Limestone Bedrock Lakeshore, Summer Island, Delta County (J. Cohen); lower left, Muskeg, Luce County (J. Cohen); and lower right, Mesic Northern Forest as a matrix natural community, Porcupine Mountains Wilderness State Park, Ontonagon County (M. Kost). Acknowledgements We thank the Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Division and Forest, Mineral, and Fire Management Division for funding this effort to classify and describe the natural communities of Michigan. This work relied heavily on data collected by many present and former Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI) field scientists and collaborators, including members of the Michigan Natural Areas Council.
    [Show full text]
  • Insects of Western North America 4. Survey of Selected Insect Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma 2
    Insects of Western North America 4. Survey of Selected Insect Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma 2. Dragonflies (Odonata), Stoneflies (Plecoptera) and selected Moths (Lepidoptera) Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Survey of Selected Insect Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma 2. Dragonflies (Odonata), Stoneflies (Plecoptera) and selected Moths (Lepidoptera) by Boris C. Kondratieff, Paul A. Opler, Matthew C. Garhart, and Jason P. Schmidt C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 March 15, 2004 Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Cover illustration (top to bottom): Widow Skimmer (Libellula luctuosa) [photo ©Robert Behrstock], Stonefly (Perlesta species) [photo © David H. Funk, White- lined Sphinx (Hyles lineata) [photo © Matthew C. Garhart] ISBN 1084-8819 This publication and others in the series may be ordered from the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity, Department of Bioagricultural Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 Copyrighted 2004 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY……………………………………………………………………………….…1 INTRODUCTION…………………………………………..…………………………………………….…3 OBJECTIVE………………………………………………………………………………………….………5 Site Descriptions………………………………………….. METHODS AND MATERIALS…………………………………………………………………………….5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION………………………………………………………………………..…...11 Dragonflies………………………………………………………………………………….……..11
    [Show full text]
  • ANOTHER NEW EUPHYES from the SOUTHERN UNITED STATES COASTAL PLAIN (HESPERIIDAE) the Southern Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains Ar
    Journal of the Lepidopteri'ts' Society .50(1 ), 1996, 46- 53 ANOTHER NEW EUPHYES FROM THE SOUTHERN UNITED STATES COASTAL PLAIN (HESPERIIDAE) JOHN A. SHUEY The Nature ConselVancy, Indiana Field Office, 1330 West 38th Street, Indianapolis, Indiana 46208, USA ABSTRACT. The taxon Euphyes dukesi calhouni Shuey, new subspecies endemic to FIOlida, is described. This subspecies is amply differentiated from Euphyes dukesi dukesi and the two taxa are allopatric. In northeaste rn F lorida and sout eastern G eorgia, whe re their known ranges closely approach one another, there is almost no evidence of inte r­ gradation. Euphyes dukesi calhouni is limited to swamp habitats that support large stands of the sedge hostplants, various Rhynchospora and Carex specie:; (Cype raceae). Additional key words: biogeography, we tlands, conservation. The southern Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains are rich regions for wetland butterflies, especially for genera such as Euphyes, Poanes, and Problema. For example , as currently known, eight named Euphyes spe­ cies or subspecies occur in the wetlands of these coastal plains. Four of these taxa are restricted to the coastal plain: Euphyes palatka palatka (Edwards), Euphyes palatka klotsi Mille r, Harvey and Miller, Euphyes berryi (Bell), and Euphyes bayensis Shuey. Just as interesting as their limited coastal distributions is the presence in these wetland skippers of well differentiated p eripheral populations, many of which have only recently bee n recognized and described. These peripheral populations are most probably the end result of allopatric diffe rentiation. For example, Euphyes palatka klotsi repre sents its spe­ cies on a few of the lower Florida Keys, separated from the nominate mainland subspecies by just tens of miles.
    [Show full text]
  • Number 35 July-September
    THE BULB NEWSLETTER Number 35 July-September 2001 Amana lives, long live Among! ln the Kew Scientist, Issue 19 (April 2001), Kew's Dr Mike Fay reports on the molecular work that has been carried out on Among. This little tulip«like eastern Asiatic group of Liliaceae that we have long grown and loved as Among (A. edulis, A. latifolla, A. erythroniolde ), but which took a trip into the genus Tulipa, should in fact be treated as a distinct genus. The report notes that "Molecular data have shown this group to be as distinct from Tulipa s.s. [i.e. in the strict sense, excluding Among] as Erythronium, and the three genera should be recognised.” This is good news all round. I need not change the labels on the pots (they still labelled Among), neither will i have to re~|abel all the as Erythronlum species tulips! _ Among edulis is a remarkably persistent little plant. The bulbs of it in the BN garden were acquired in the early 19605 but had been in cultivation well before that, brought back to England by a plant enthusiast participating in the Korean war. Although not as showy as the tulips, they are pleasing little bulbs with starry white flowers striped purplish-brown on the outside. It takes a fair amount of sun to encourage them to open, so in cool temperate gardens where the light intensity is poor in winter and spring, pot cultivation in a glasshouse is the best method of cultivation. With the extra protection and warmth, the flowers will open out almost flat.
    [Show full text]
  • HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN Green Bay and Gravel Island
    HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN Green Bay and Gravel Island National Wildlife Refuges October 2017 Habitat Management Plans provide long-term guidance for management decisions; set forth goals, objectives, and strategies needed to accomplish refuge purposes; and, identify the Fish and Wildlife Service’s best estimate of future needs. These plans detail program planning levels that are sometimes substantially above current budget allocations and as such, are primarily for Service strategic planning and program prioritization purposes. The plans do not constitute a commitment for staffing increases, operational and maintenance increases, or funding for future land acquisition. The National Wildlife Refuge System, managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is the world's premier system of public lands and waters set aside to conserve America's fish, wildlife, and plants. Since the designation of the first wildlife refuge in 1903, the System has grown to encompass more than 150 million acres, 556 national wildlife refuges and other units of the Refuge System, plus 38 wetland management districts. This page intentionally left blank. Habitat Management Plan for Green Bay and Gravel Island National Wildlife Refuges EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Habitat Management Plan (HMP) provides vision and specific guidance on enhancing and managing habitat for the resources of concern (ROC) at the refuge. The contributions of the refuge to ecosystem- and landscape-scale wildlife and biodiversity conservation, specifically migratory waterfowl, are incorporated into this HMP. The HMP is intended to provide habitat management direction for the next 15 years. The HMP is also needed to ensure that the refuge continues to conserve habitat for migratory birds in the context of climate change, which affects all units of the National Wildlife Refuge System.
    [Show full text]
  • (Neonympha M. Mitchellii) in Michigan: Final Report — 2000
    Surveys for the Recovery of Mitchells Satyr Butterfly (Neonympha m. mitchellii) in Michigan: Final Report - 2000 Prepared by: Daria A. Hyde, Mary L. Rabe, David L. Cuthrell, Michael A. Kost Michigan Natural Features Inventory P.O. Box 30444 Lansing, MI 48909-7944 For: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 3 Endangered Species Office Federal Building, Fort Snelling Twin Cities, MN 55111 Report Number 2001-05 Submitted March 31, 2001 Cover Photo Identification and Credits: Prairie fen habitat photo by: Michael A. Kost Mitchells satyr photo by: Daria A. Hyde Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Methods ........................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Mitchells Satyr Surveys and Threat Assessment ......................................................................................................... 4 Surveys for Associated Rare Species ........................................................................................................................... 4 Mitchells Satyr Monitoring ......................................................................................................................................... 6 Michells Satyr Oviposition Observations and Larval Searches .................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Rapid Wetland Assessment for Michigan: Section 1 Biological
    RAPID WETLAND ASSESSMENT FOR MICHIGAN SECTION 1: BIOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK Prepared by: Dennis A. Albert, Paul Adamus, David Campbell, John Christy, Joshua G. Cohen, Theadore Cook, Helen Enander, Linda Hardison, Michael A. Kost, Katie Mitchell, Jennifer Sackinger, and Bradford S. Slaughter Of: Michigan Natural Features Inventory Oregon State University, and Adamus Resource Assessment, Inc. For: Michigan Department of Transportation September 2008 Report Number 2008-06 Cover image taken by: D. Albert Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction................................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Literature Review........................................................................................................................................ 1 3.0 Field Sampling ............................................................................................................................................ 2 4.0 Plant Community Classification and Distribution Map Development ........................................................ 4 5.0 Quantitative Metrics for Wetland Quality, Function, and Value ................................................................. 5 6.0 Hydrologic Metric - Relationship to Plant Communities and Species ........................................................ 5 7.0 Characteristic Plant Species for Each Wetland Type ................................................................................ 10 8.0 Photos and Diagrams of Plant
    [Show full text]
  • 2010 Season Summary Index NEW WOFTHE~ Zone 1: Yukon Territory
    2010 Season Summary Index NEW WOFTHE~ Zone 1: Yukon Territory ........................................................................................... 3 Alaska ... ........................................ ............................................................... 3 LEPIDOPTERISTS Zone 2: British Columbia .................................................... ........................ ............ 6 Idaho .. ... ....................................... ................................................................ 6 Oregon ........ ... .... ........................ .. .. ............................................................ 10 SOCIETY Volume 53 Supplement Sl Washington ................................................................................................ 14 Zone 3: Arizona ............................................................ .................................... ...... 19 The Lepidopterists' Society is a non-profo California ............... ................................................. .............. .. ................... 2 2 educational and scientific organization. The Nevada ..................................................................... ................................ 28 object of the Society, which was formed in Zone 4: Colorado ................................ ... ............... ... ...... ......................................... 2 9 May 1947 and formally constituted in De­ Montana .................................................................................................... 51 cember
    [Show full text]
  • Species of Greatest Conservation Need
    APPENDIX A. VIRGINIA SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED Taxa Common Scientific Name Tier Cons. Opp. Habitat Descriptive Habitat Notes Name Ranking Amphibians Barking Hyla gratiosa II a Forest Forests near or within The Virginia Fish and Wildlife Information System indicates treefrog shallow wetlands the loss suitable wetlands constitute the greatest threats to this species. DGIF recommends working to maintain or restore forested buffers surrounding occupied wetlands. These needs are consistent with action plan priorities to conserve and restore wetland habitats and associated buffers. Recently discovered populations within its known range, may indicate this species is more abundant than previously believed. An in-depth investigation into its status may warrant delisting. This species will be prioritized as Tier 2a. Amphibians Blue Ridge Desmognathus IV c Forest High elevation seeps, This species' distribution is very limited. Other than limiting dusky orestes streams, wet rock faces, logging activity in the occupied areas, no conservation salamander and riparian forests actions have been identified. Unless other threats or actions are identified, this species will be listed as Tier 4c. Amphibians Blue Ridge Eurycea III a Wetland Mountain streams and The needs of this species are consistent with priorities for two-lined wilderae adjacent riparian areas maintaining and enhancing riparian forests and aquatic salamander with mixed hardwood or habitats. This species will be listed as Tier 3a. spruce-fir forests up to 6000 feet. Amphibians Carpenter Lithobates III a Wetland Freshwater wetlands with The needs of this species are consistent with action plan frog virgatipes sphagnum moss priorities to preserve and restore aquatic and wetland habitats and water quality.
    [Show full text]
  • Century-Old Mystery of Puccinia Striiformis Life History Solved with the Identification of Berberis As an Alternate Host
    Mycology Century-Old Mystery of Puccinia striiformis Life History Solved with the Identification of Berberis as an Alternate Host Yue Jin, Les J. Szabo, and Martin Carson U.S. Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service, Cereal Disease Laboratory, University of Minnesota, St. Paul 55108. Accepted for publication 7 January 2010. ABSTRACT Jin, Y., Szabo, L. J., and Carson, M. 2010. Century-old mystery of and B. vulgaris after inoculation using germinating telia of P. striiformis Puccinia striiformis life history solved with the identification of Berberis f. sp. tritici. Wheat inoculated with aeciospores from B. chinensis resulted an an alternate host. Phytopathology 100:432-435. in uredinia, which demonstrated that Berberis spp. also serve as alternate hosts for the wheat stripe rust pathogen. The elucidation of the complete The life history of Puccinia striiformis remains a mystery because the life history for P. striiformis f. sp. tritici will provide a powerful tool to alternate host has never been identified. Inoculation of grasses using rapidly advance our knowledge of the genetics of this rust fungus, and aeciospores from naturally infected Berberis chinensis and B. koreana will lead to the development of improved strategies for a better control of resulted in infection on Poa pratensis, producing uredinia typical of stripe stripe rust. rust caused by P. striiformis. Analyses using real-time polymerase chain reaction and DNA sequence confirmed the rust fungus as P. striiformis. Additional keywords: aecial host, life cycle. Pycnia and aecia were produced on B. chinensis, B. holstii, B. koreana, Life histories (or life cycles) of most rust fungi attacking cereal MATERIALS AND METHODS crops and grasses have been well understood for more than a century.
    [Show full text]