DOCSLIB.ORG

Assessment of Biodiversity at Different Stages of the Forest Cycle

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Assessment of Biodiversity at Different Stages of the Forest Cycle Assessment of Biodiversity at Different Stages of the Forest Cycle George Smith1, Tom Gittings2, Mark Wilson2, Laura French1, Anne Oxbrough2, Saoirse O’Donoghue1, Josephine Pithon2, Vicki O’Donnell3, Anne-Marie McKee1, Susan Iremonger1, John O’Halloran2, Daniel Kelly1, Fraser Mitchell1, Paul Giller2, Tom Kelly2 1 BIOFOREST Project, Department of Botany, Trinity College Dublin 2 BIOFOREST Project, Department of Zoology, Ecology and Plant Science, University College Cork 3 Coastal and Marine Resources Centre, University College Cork FINAL REPORT, FEBRUARY 2005 University College, Cork University of Dublin, Trinity College Project 3.1.2 Report CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................... 3 1.1 CONTEXT .................................................................................................................... 3 1.1.1 The concept of biodiversity .................................................................................. 3 1.1.2 Forest biodiversity and policy development in Ireland........................................ 5 1.1.3 Existing information on forest plantation biodiversity in Ireland ...................... 6 1.1.4 Need for the present study................................................................................... 6 1.2 OBJECTIVES................................................................................................................. 6 2 SURVEY DESIGN AND DATA ANALYSIS............................................................ 7 2.1 SELECTION OF FOREST TYPES AND AGE CLASSES ..................................................... 7 2.1.1 Forest type ........................................................................................................... 7 2.1.2 Age classes ........................................................................................................... 7 2.1.3 Survey objectives ................................................................................................. 8 2.2 SURVEY STRATEGY ..................................................................................................... 8 2.2.1 Age classes ........................................................................................................... 8 2.2.2 Geography and environment ............................................................................... 9 2.3 SITE SELECTION ........................................................................................................ 10 2.3.1 Desktop .............................................................................................................. 10 2.3.2 Field ................................................................................................................... 10 2.4 CHARACTERISATION OF BIODIVERSITY................................................................... 11 2.4.1 Taxonomic groups ............................................................................................. 11 2.4.2 Species richness ................................................................................................. 11 2.4.3 Species diversity ................................................................................................ 12 2.5 DATA ANALYSIS....................................................................................................... 13 2.5.1 Data organisation .............................................................................................. 13 2.5.2 Statistical tests................................................................................................... 13 2.5.3 Analysis of assemblage structure....................................................................... 14 2.5.4 Identification of indicators................................................................................. 14 3 GIS DATABASE AND DESCRIPTION OF STUDY SITES ................................ 16 3.1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 16 3.2 METHODS ................................................................................................................. 16 3.2.1 Data acquisition................................................................................................. 16 3.2.2 Construction of GIS database............................................................................ 19 3.3 RESULTS.................................................................................................................... 21 3.3.1 GIS database ...................................................................................................... 21 3.3.2 Site descriptions................................................................................................. 23 3.3.3 Site management ............................................................................................... 28 3.3.4 Stand structure.................................................................................................. 31 3.4 DISCUSSION.............................................................................................................. 38 3.4.1 Comparison of ash and Sitka spruce sites.......................................................... 38 3.4.2 Trends in afforestation and land use ................................................................. 39 3.4.3 Environmental changes over the forest cycle..................................................... 39 3.5 CONCLUSIONS.......................................................................................................... 39 4 VEGETATION.............................................................................................................. 41 4.1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 41 4.1.1 Importance of forest flora................................................................................... 41 4.1.2 Forest cycle and plant diversity......................................................................... 41 BIOFOREST PROJECT i Project 3.1.2 Report 4.1.3 Comparison of conifer and broadleaf plantations .............................................. 41 4.1.4 Diversity indicators........................................................................................... 42 4.2 METHODS ................................................................................................................. 43 4.2.1 Fieldwork methods............................................................................................. 43 4.2.2 Species identification ......................................................................................... 44 4.2.3 Data organisation .............................................................................................. 45 4.2.4 Data analysis ..................................................................................................... 46 4.3 VEGETATION RESULTS............................................................................................. 48 4.3.1 Ordination of forest stands................................................................................ 48 4.3.2 Measuring vegetation diversity......................................................................... 55 4.3.3 Trends in species richness and diversity ........................................................... 57 4.3.4 Structural groups .............................................................................................. 60 4.3.5 Diversity indicators across the structural cycle ................................................ 65 4.3.6 Diversity indicators within the structural groups ............................................ 73 4.3.7 Species indicators............................................................................................... 79 4.4 DISCUSSION.............................................................................................................. 88 4.4.1 Overview of results............................................................................................ 88 4.4.2 Vegetation composition ..................................................................................... 89 4.4.3 Effects of site history and surrounding land use ............................................... 90 4.4.4 Biodiversity indicators....................................................................................... 91 4.5 CONCLUSIONS.......................................................................................................... 94 4.5.1 General conclusions........................................................................................... 94 4.5.2 Biodiversity indicators....................................................................................... 94 4.5.3 Management recommendations......................................................................... 95 4.5.4 Modifications to the Forest Biodiversity Guidelines ......................................... 96 5 SPIDERS ........................................................................................................................ 97 5.1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 97 5.2 METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................... 98 5.2.1 Sampling protocol.............................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Annals of Scottish Natural History." GEORGE HENDERSON, London
    RETURN TO LIBRARY OF MARINE BIOLOGICAL LABORATORY WOODS HOLE, MASS. LOANED BY AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY The Annals OF Scottish Natural History A QUARTERLY MAGAZINE WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED Baturaltet EDITED BY J. A. HARVIE-BROWN, F.R.S.E., F.Z.S. MEMBER OF THE BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS' UNION JAMES W. H. TRAIL, M.A., M.D., F.R.S., F.L.S. PROFESSOR OF BOTANY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN AND WILLIAM EAGLE CLARKE, F.L.S., MEM. BRIT. ORN. UNION NATURAL HISTORY DEPARTMENT, MUSEUM OF SCIENCE AND ART, EDINBURGH EDINBURGH DAVID DOUGLAS, CASTLE STREET LONDON: R. H. PORTER, 7 PRINCES ST., CAVENDISH SQUARE The Annals of Scottish Natural History No. 21] 1897 [JANUARY THE LATE PROFESSOR THOMAS KING. THOMAS KING was born on the I4th April 1834, at Yardfoot, Lochwinnoch, Renfrewshire, a farm which was owned and occupied by his father. He received his early education in a small school in the village of Glenhead. He was destined to be a teacher, and in 1855, after the sale of his birthplace, and the removal of the family to Glasgow, he entered the Normal Training College of the Free Church of Scotland. The early bent of his mind revealed itself in his attendance on the class of Botany in that Institution. In 1862 he was appointed teacher of English in the Garnet Bank Academy, where, in addition to the ordinary subjects, he taught an advanced class of Botany. The work of the session, however, proved too much for his strength, which had never been robust, and he was obliged to relinquish the position.
    [Show full text]
  • Notat 15 2019 I Pdf-Format
    Dag-Inge Øien, Kaare Aagaard, Kai Berggren, Anette Grimsrud Davidsen og Karstein Hårsaker Kulturlandskap i Storlia, Leksvik Status for naturverdier i 2019 og revisjon av skjøtselsplan 15 - 2019 notat NTNU Vitenskapsmuseet naturhistorisk NTNU Vitenskapsmuseet naturhistorisk notat 2019-15 Dag-Inge Øien, Kaare Aagaard, Kai Berggren, Anette Grimsrud Davidsen og Karstein Hårsaker Kulturlandskap i Storlia, Leksvik Status for naturverdier i 2019 og revisjon av skjøtselsplan NTNU Vitenskapsmuseet naturhistorisk notat Dette er en elektronisk serie fra 2013 som erstatter tidligere Botanisk notat og Zoologisk notat. Serien er ikke periodisk, og antall nummer varierer per år. Notatserien benyttes til rapportering fra mindre prosjekter og utredninger, datadokumentasjon, statusrapporter, samt annet materiale som ikke har en endelig bearbeidelse. Tidligere utgivelser: http://www.ntnu.no/web/museum/publikasjoner Referanse Øien, D.-I., Aagaard, K., Berggren, K., Davidsen, A.G & Hårsaker, K. 2019. Kulturlandskap i Storlia, Leksvik. Status for naturverdier i 2019 og revisjon av skjøtselsplan. – NTNU Vitenskapsmuseet naturhistorisk notat 2019-15: 1-59. Trondheim, desember 2019 Utgiver NTNU Vitenskapsmuseet Institutt for naturhistorie 7491 Trondheim Telefon: 73 59 22 80 e-post: [email protected] Ansvarlig signatur Hans K. Stenøien (instituttleder) Publiseringstype Digitalt dokument (pdf) Forsidefoto Geitene trives i Storlia! Foto: D.-I. Øien 10.07.2019 www.ntnu.no/museum ISBN 978-82-8322-216-6 ISSN 1894-0064 2 Sammendrag Øien, D.-I., Aagaard, K., Berggren, K., Davidsen, A.G & Hårsaker, K. 2019. Kulturlandskap i Storlia, Leksvik. Status for naturverdier i 2019 og revisjon av skjøtselsplan. – NTNU Vitenskapsmuseet naturhistorisk notat 2019-15: 1-59. Storlia i Leksvik kommune har et rikt kulturlandskap med ugjødsla slåtte- og beitemarker i god hevd.
    [Show full text]
  • The Maria Curie-Skłodowska University Botanical Garden in Lublin As a Refuge of the Moths (Lepidoptera: Heterocera) Within the City
    Acta Biologica 23/2016 | www.wnus.edu.pl/ab | DOI: 10.18276/ab.2016.23-02 | strony 15–34 The Maria Curie-Skłodowska University Botanical Garden in Lublin as a refuge of the moths (Lepidoptera: Heterocera) within the city Łukasz Dawidowicz,1 Halina Kucharczyk2 Department of Zoology, Maria Curie-Skłodowska University, Akademicka 19, 20-033 Lublin, Poland 1 e-mail: [email protected] 2 e-mail: [email protected] Keywords biodiversity, urban fauna, faunistics, city, species composition, rare species, conservation Abstract In 2012 and 2013, 418 species of moths at total were recorded in the Botanical Garden of the Maria Curie-Skłodowska University in Lublin. The list comprises 116 species of Noctuidae (26.4% of the Polish fauna), 116 species of Geometridae (28.4% of the Polish fauna) and 63 species of other Macrolepidoptera representatives (27.9% of the Polish fauna). The remaining 123 species were represented by Microlepidoptera. Nearly 10% of the species were associated with wetland habitats, what constitutes a surprisingly large proportion in such an urbanised area. Comparing the obtained data with previous studies concerning Polish urban fauna of Lepidoptera, the moths assemblages in the Botanical Garden were the most similar to the one from the Natolin Forest Reserve which protects the legacy of Mazovian forests. Several recorded moths appertain to locally and rarely encountered species, as Stegania cararia, Melanthia procellata, Pasiphila chloerata, Eupithecia haworthiata, Horisme corticata, Xylomoia graminea, Polychrysia moneta. In the light of the conducted studies, the Botanical Garden in Lublin stands out as quite high biodiversity and can be regarded as a refuge for moths within the urban limits of Lublin.
    [Show full text]
  • Heathland 700 the Park & Poor's Allotment Species List
    The Park & Poor's Allotment Bioblitz 25th - 26th July 2015 Common Name Scientific Name [if known] Site recorded Fungus Xylaria polymorpha Dead Man's Fingers Both Amanita excelsa var. excelsa Grey Spotted Amanita Poor's Allotment Panaeolus sp. Poor's Allotment Phallus impudicus var. impudicus Stinkhorn The Park Mosses Sphagnum denticulatum Cow-horn Bog-moss Both Sphagnum fimbriatum Fringed Bog-moss The Park Sphagnum papillosum Papillose Bog-moss The Park Sphagnum squarrosum Spiky Bog-moss The Park Sphagnum palustre Blunt-leaved Bog-moss Poor's Allotment Atrichum undulatum Common Smoothcap Both Polytrichum commune Common Haircap The Park Polytrichum formosum Bank Haircap Both Polytrichum juniperinum Juniper Haircap The Park Tetraphis pellucida Pellucid Four-tooth Moss The Park Schistidium crassipilum Thickpoint Grimmia Poor's Allotment Fissidens taxifolius Common Pocket-moss The Park Ceratodon purpureus Redshank The Park Dicranoweisia cirrata Common Pincushion Both Dicranella heteromalla Silky Forklet-moss Both Dicranella varia Variable Forklet-moss The Park Dicranum scoparium Broom Fork-moss Both Campylopus flexuosus Rusty Swan-neck Moss Poor's Allotment Campylopus introflexus Heath Star Moss Both Campylopus pyriformis Dwarf Swan-neck Moss The Park Bryoerythrophyllum Red Beard-moss Poor's Allotment Barbula convoluta Lesser Bird's-claw Beard-moss The Park Didymodon fallax Fallacious Beard-moss The Park Didymodon insulanus Cylindric Beard-moss Poor's Allotment Zygodon conoideus Lesser Yoke-moss The Park Zygodon viridissimus Green Yoke-moss
    [Show full text]
  • T1)E Bedford,1)Ire Naturaii,T 45
    T1)e Bedford,1)ire NaturaIi,t 45 Journal for the year 1990 Bedfordshire Natural History Society 1991 'ISSN 0951 8959 I BEDFORDSHffiE NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY 1991 Chairman: Mr D. Anderson, 88 Eastmoor Park, Harpenden, Herts ALS 1BP Honorary Secretary: Mr M.C. Williams, 2 Ive! Close, Barton-le-Clay, Bedford MK4S 4NT Honorary Treasurer: MrJ.D. Burchmore, 91 Sundon Road, Harlington, Dunstable, Beds LUS 6LW Honorary Editor (Bedfordshire Naturalist): Mr C.R. Boon, 7 Duck End Lane, Maulden, Bedford MK4S 2DL Honorary Membership Secretary: Mrs M.]. Sheridan, 28 Chestnut Hill, Linslade, Leighton Buzzard, Beds LU7 7TR Honorary Scientific Committee Secretary: Miss R.A. Brind, 46 Mallard Hill, Bedford MK41 7QS Council (in addition to the above): Dr A. Aldhous MrS. Cham DrP. Hyman DrD. Allen MsJ. Childs Dr P. Madgett MrC. Baker Mr W. Drayton MrP. Soper Honorary Editor (Muntjac): Ms C. Aldridge, 9 Cowper Court, Markyate, Herts AL3 8HR Committees appointed by Council: Finance: Mr]. Burchmore (Sec.), MrD. Anderson, Miss R. Brind, Mrs M. Sheridan, Mr P. Wilkinson, Mr M. Williams. Scientific: Miss R. Brind (Sec.), Mr C. Boon, Dr G. Bellamy, Mr S. Cham, Miss A. Day, DrP. Hyman, MrJ. Knowles, MrD. Kramer, DrB. Nau, MrE. Newman, Mr A. Outen, MrP. Trodd. Development: Mrs A. Adams (Sec.), MrJ. Adams (Chairman), Ms C. Aldridge (Deputy Chairman), Mrs B. Chandler, Mr M. Chandler, Ms]. Childs, Mr A. Dickens, MrsJ. Dickens, Mr P. Soper. Programme: MrJ. Adams, Mr C. Baker, MrD. Green, MrD. Rands, Mrs M. Sheridan. Trustees (appointed under Rule 13): Mr M. Chandler, Mr D. Green, Mrs B.
    [Show full text]
  • Wide-Ranging Barcoding Aids Discovery of One-Third Increase Of
    OPEN Wide-ranging barcoding aids discovery SUBJECT AREAS: of one-third increase of species richness TAXONOMY SYSTEMATICS in presumably well-investigated moths MOLECULAR EVOLUTION Marko Mutanen1, Lauri Kaila2 & Jukka Tabell3 PHYLOGENETICS 1Biodiversity Unit, Department of Biology, PO Box 3000, University of Oulu, Finland, 2Finnish Museum of Natural History, Zoology 3 Received Unit, PO Box 17, University of Helsinki, Finland, Laaksotie 28, FI-19600 Hartola, Finland. 3 July 2013 Accepted Rapid development of broad regional and international DNA barcode libraries have brought new insights 19 September 2013 into the species diversity of many areas and groups. Many new species, even within well-investigated species groups, have been discovered based initially on differences in DNA barcodes. We barcoded 437 collection Published specimens belonging to 40 pre-identified Palearctic species of the Elachista bifasciella group of moths 9 October 2013 (Lepidoptera, Elachistidae). Although the study group has been a subject of several careful morphological taxonomic examinations, an unexpectedly high number of previously undetected putative species is revealed, resulting in a 34% rise in species number in the study area. The validity of putative new species was subsequently supported with diagnostic morphological traits. We show that DNA barcodes provide a Correspondence and powerful method of detecting potential new species even in taxonomic groups and geographic areas that requests for materials have previously been under considerable morphological taxonomic scrutiny. should be addressed to M.M. (marko. [email protected]) stimates of the number of species on Earth vary from 3 to 100 million, the most recent survey concluding that there are about 8.7 million (61.3 million SE) species based on a quantitative extrapolation of current taxonomic knowledge1.
    [Show full text]
  • Rvk-Diss Digi
    University of Groningen Of dwarves and giants van Klink, Roel IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below. Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Publication date: 2014 Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database Citation for published version (APA): van Klink, R. (2014). Of dwarves and giants: How large herbivores shape arthropod communities on salt marshes. s.n. Copyright Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). The publication may also be distributed here under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license. More information can be found on the University of Groningen website: https://www.rug.nl/library/open-access/self-archiving-pure/taverne- amendment. Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum. Download date: 01-10-2021 Of Dwarves and Giants How large herbivores shape arthropod communities on salt marshes Roel van Klink This PhD-project was carried out at the Community and Conservation Ecology group, which is part of the Centre for Ecological and Environmental Studies of the University of Groningen, The Netherlands.
    [Show full text]
  • Phragmites Australis
    Journal of Ecology 2017, 105, 1123–1162 doi: 10.1111/1365-2745.12797 BIOLOGICAL FLORA OF THE BRITISH ISLES* No. 283 List Vasc. PI. Br. Isles (1992) no. 153, 64,1 Biological Flora of the British Isles: Phragmites australis Jasmin G. Packer†,1,2,3, Laura A. Meyerson4, Hana Skalov a5, Petr Pysek 5,6,7 and Christoph Kueffer3,7 1Environment Institute, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia; 2School of Biological Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia; 3Institute of Integrative Biology, Department of Environmental Systems Science, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) Zurich, CH-8092, Zurich,€ Switzerland; 4University of Rhode Island, Natural Resources Science, Kingston, RI 02881, USA; 5Institute of Botany, Department of Invasion Ecology, The Czech Academy of Sciences, CZ-25243, Pruhonice, Czech Republic; 6Department of Ecology, Faculty of Science, Charles University, CZ-12844, Prague 2, Czech Republic; and 7Centre for Invasion Biology, Department of Botany and Zoology, Stellenbosch University, Matieland 7602, South Africa Summary 1. This account presents comprehensive information on the biology of Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. ex Steud. (P. communis Trin.; common reed) that is relevant to understanding its ecological char- acteristics and behaviour. The main topics are presented within the standard framework of the Biologi- cal Flora of the British Isles: distribution, habitat, communities, responses to biotic factors and to the abiotic environment, plant structure and physiology, phenology, floral and seed characters, herbivores and diseases, as well as history including invasive spread in other regions, and conservation. 2. Phragmites australis is a cosmopolitan species native to the British flora and widespread in lowland habitats throughout, from the Shetland archipelago to southern England.
    [Show full text]
  • List of the Specimens of the British Animals in the Collection of The
    LIST SPECIMENS BRITISH ANIMALS THE COLLECTION BRITISH MUSEUM '^r- 7 : • ^^ PART XVL — LEPIDOPTERA (completed), 9i>M PRINTED BY ORDER OF THE TRUSTEES. LONDON, 1854. -4 ,<6 < LONDON : PRINTED BY EDWARD NEWMAN, 9, DEVONSHIRE ST., BISHOPSGATE. INTRODUCTION. The principal object of the present Catalogue has been to give a complete Hst of all the smaller Lepidopterous Insects that have been recorded as found in Great Britain, indicating at the same time those species that are contained in the Collection. This Catalogue has been prepared by H. T. STAiNTON^ sq., so well known for his works on British Micro-Lepidoptera, for the extent of his cabinet, and the hberahtj with which he allows it to be consulted. Mr. Stainton has endeavom-ed to arrange these insects ac- cording to theh natural affinities, so far as is practicable with a local collection ; and has taken great pains to ascertain every name which has been applied to the respective species and their varieties, the author of the same, and the date of pubhcation ; the references to such names as are unaccompanied by descrip- tions being included in parentheses : all are arranged chronolo- gically, excepting those to the illustrations and to the figures which invariably follow their authorities. The species in the British Museum Collection are indicated by the letters B. M., annexed. JOHN EDWARD GRAY. British Museum, May 2Qrd, 1854. CATALOGUE BRITISH MICRO-LEPIDOPTERA § III. Order LEPIDOPTERA. (§ MICKO-LEPIDOPTERA). Sub-Div. TINEINA. Tineina, Sta. I. B. Lep. Tin. p. 7, 1854. Tineacea, Zell. Isis, 1839, p. 180. YponomeutidaB et Tineidae, p., Step. H. iv.
    [Show full text]
  • Sborník SM 2013.Indb
    Sborník Severočeského Muzea, Přírodní Vědy, Liberec, 31: 67–168, 2013 ISBN 978-80-87266-13-7 Příspěvek k fauně motýlů (Lepidoptera) severních Čech – I On the lepidopteran fauna (Lepidoptera) of northern Bohemia – I Jan Šumpich1), Miroslav Žemlička2) & Ivo Dvořák3) 1) CZ-582 61 Česká Bělá 212; e-mail: [email protected] 2) Družstevní 34/8, CZ-412 01 Litoměřice 3) Vrchlického 29, CZ-586 01 Jihlava; e-mail: [email protected] Abstract. Faunistic records of butterflies and moths (Lepidoptera) found at nine localities of northern Bohemia (Czech Republic) are presented. In total, 1258 species were found, of which 527 species were recorded in Želiňský meandr (Kadaň environs), 884 species in the Oblík National Nature Reserve (Raná environs), 313 species in the Velký vrch National Nature Monument (Louny environs), 367 species in the Třtěnské stráně Nature Monument (Třtěno environs), 575 species in Eváňská rokle (Eváň environs), 332 species in Údolí Podbrádeckého potoka (Mšené-lázně environs), 376 species in Vrbka (Budyně nad Ohří environs), 467 species in Holý vrch (Encovany environs) and 289 species in Skalky u Třebutiček (Encovany environs). The records of Triaxomasia caprimulgella (Stainton, 1851), Cephimallota praetoriella (Christoph, 1872), Niphonympha dealbatella (Zeller, 1847), Oegoconia caradjai Popescu- Gorj & Capuse, 1965, Fabiola pokornyi (Nickerl, 1864), Hypercallia citrinalis (Scopoli, 1763), Pelochrista obscura Kuznetsov, 1978, Thymelicus acteon (Rottemburg, 1775), Satyrium spini (Denis & Schiffermüller, 1775), Pseudo- philotes vicrama (Moore, 1865), Polyommatus damon (Denis & Schiffermüller, 1775), Melitaea aurelia Nickerl, 1850, Hipparchia semele (Linnaeus, 1758), Chazara briseis (Linnaeus, 1764), Pyralis perversalis (Herrich-Schäffer, 1849), Gnophos dumetata Treitschke, 1827, Watsonarctia casta (Esper, 1785), Euchalcia consona (Fabricius, 1787), Oria musculosa (Hübner, 1808) and Oligia fasciuncula (Haworth, 1809) are exceptionally significant in a broader context, not only in terms of the fauna of northern Bohemia.
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidoptera: Elachistidae)
    LIETUVOS ENTOMOLOGŲ DRAUGIJOS DARBAI. 3 (31) tomas 73 NEW DATA ON NEW AND INSUFFICIENTLY KNOWN FOR LITHUANIAN FAUNA SPECIES OF ELACHISTINAE (LEPIDOPTERA: ELACHISTIDAE) VIRGINIJUS SRUOGA1, POVILAS IVINSKIS2, JOLANTA RIMŠAITĖ3 1Vytautas Magnus University, Education Academy. Donelaičio 58, LT-442448 Kaunas, Lithuania; 2, 3Institute of Ecology of Nature Research Centre, Akademijos 2, LT-08412 Vilnius, Lithuania. E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Introduction The subfamily Elachistinae (family Elachistidae) belongs to the megadiverse lepidopteran superfamily Gelechioidea and contains presently 805 described species considered valid (Kaila, 2019). The larvae are obligate leaf miners, most species feed on monocotyledonous grasses and only some on dicotyledonous plants (Parenti & Varalda, 1994; Sruoga & Ivinskis, 2005). The moths are small, often cryptic, with a wingspan usually between 4 and 20 mm. Adults are poorly attracted to light and usually escape the general moth surveys and are poorly represented in museum and private collections. Therefore, the knowledge on species distribution is still insufficient. Since the monograph on Elachistidae of Lithuania (Sruoga & Ivinskis, 2005), only few papers dealing with the distribution of elachistid species in Lithuania have been published (Paulavičiūtė, 2006, 2008a, 2008b; Paulavičiūtė et al., 2017; Paulavičiūtė & Inokaitis, 2018; Ostrauskas et al., 2010a, 2010b; Sruoga & Ivinskis, 2011, 2017). The purpose of this paper is to provide new distribution data on two new and another eleven Elachistinae species reported from 11 administrative districts in Lithuania. Material and Methods Adult moths were collected by attracting them to mercury-vapour light and swept from low vegetation in the evening before sunset. The specimens were collected by Povilas Ivinskis (P.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]