DOCSLIB.ORG

PSRP Biological Monitoring

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
PSRP Biological Monitoring Biological Monitoring of Aquatic and Terrestrial Fauna for the Picayune Strand Restoration Project (2005-2007) Biological Monitoring of Aquatic and Terrestrial Fauna for the Picayune Strand Restoration Project (2005-2007) Final Report for South Florida Water Management District Contract No. PC600891 Submitted to: Janet Starnes South Florida Water Management District Fort Myers Service Center 2301 McGregor Blvd. Fort Myers, Florida 33901 Submitted by: Ian A. Bartoszek, Melinda J. Schuman, David S. Addison, Kathy B. Worley and Jeffrey R. Schmid Environmental Science Division, Conservancy of Southwest Florida, 1450 Merrihue Drive, Naples, FL 34102 [E-mails: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]] Submitted: December 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES...................................................................................................................... v LIST OF FIGURES..................................................................................................................... vii LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS.................................................................... x EXECUTIVE SUMMARY......................................................................................................... xi INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................... 1 Project Background……………...................................................................................... 1 Study Goals and Objectives............................................................................................. 3 Biological Indicators........................................................................................................ 4 Amphibians.......................................................................................................... 4 Terrestrial Invertebrates....................................................................................... 6 Aquatic Fauna...................................................................................................... 9 MATERIALS AND METHODS................................................................................................. 11 Study Area....................................................................................................................... 11 Study Sites....................................................................................................................... 13 Plant Communities.............................................................................................. 13 Hydrology........................................................................................................................ 16 Water Quality................................................................................................................... 17 Biological Monitoring...................................................................................................... 17 Anuran Sampling................................................................................................. 17 Terrestrial Invertebrate Sampling........................................................................ 18 Aquatic Macroinvertebrate Sampling.................................................................. 19 Fish Sampling...................................................................................................... 19 ii Data Analysis................................................................................................................... 20 Water Quality....................................................................................................... 20 Faunal Communities............................................................................................ 21 RESULTS.....................................................................................................................................23 General Hydrology.......................................................................................................... 23 Water Quality................................................................................................................... 23 Anurans…………............................................................................................................ 27 Ants.................................................................................................................................. 28 Orthopterans..................................................................................................................... 31 Fishes............................................................................................................................... 33 CONCLUSIONS......................................................................................................................... 37 Sampling Overview......................................................................................................... 37 General Hydrology........................................................................................................... 37 Water Quality................................................................................................................... 39 Anurans............................................................................................................................ 41 Ants.................................................................................................................................. 44 Orthopterans..................................................................................................................... 47 Fishes............................................................................................................................... 48 LITERATURE CITED................................................................................................................ 53 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………….…………………….60 TABLES………………………………………………………………….………………….......61 FIGURES…………………………………………………….………………………………….95 iii APPENDICES..……………………………………………………..….………………………125 APPENDIX A. Water Level Data at Restoration Sites………………………………... 125 APPENDIX B. Water Quality Physical Parameters…………………………………… 151 APPENDIX C. Site Summary…………………………………………………………. 156 iv LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Site codes, habitat designation, associated wells and GPS coordinates at study sites.... 61 2. Surface water flooding, duration, frequency and inundation at study sites..................... 62 3. Total abundance of treefrogs collected at reference sites and saltwater marsh sites....... 63 4. Total abundance of treefrogs collected at restoration sites.............................................. 63 5. Percent composition of treefrogs collected at reference sites and saltwater marsh sites...................................................................................................................................64 6. Percent composition of treefrogs collected at restoration sites........................................ 64 7. Percent composition based on CPUE of ant species collected with baited vials at reference sites...................................................................................................................65 8. Percent composition based on CPUE of ant species collected with baited vials at restoration sites................................................................................................................ 66 9. Percent composition based on CPUE of ant species collected by sweep net at reference sites...................................................................................................................68 10. Percent composition based on CPUE of ant species collected by sweep net at restoration sites................................................................................................................ 69 11. Combined ant species presence/absence and species richness at reference sites.............72 12. Combined ant species presence/absence and species richness at restoration sites.......... 73 13. Abundance of Orthopteran OTU’s collected at reference sites....................................... 76 14. Abundance of Orthopteran OTU’s collected at restoration sites..................................... 78 15. Percent composition of Orthopteran OTU’s collected at reference sites......................... 82 16. Percent composition of Orthopteran OTU’s collected at restoration sites...................... 84 17. Values of species richness, abundance, Margalef richness index, Pielou evenness index, Shannon diversity index, and Simpson evenness index for Orthopteran (OTU's) collected at sample sites..................................................................................... 88 v Table Page 18. Total abundance of fish species collected at reference and saltwater marsh sites........... 89 19. Total abundance of fish species collected at restoration sites in PSSF............................ 90 20. Percent composition based on the total abundance of fish collected at reference and saltwater marsh sites.................................................................................. 91 21. Percent composition based on the total abundance of fish collected at restoration sites................................................................................................................ 92 22. Values of species richness, abundance, Margalef richness index, Pielou
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Failure to Launch? the Influence of Limb Autotomy on the Escape Behavior of a Semiaquatic Grasshopper Paroxya Atlantica
    Behavioral Ecology doi:10.1093/beheco/arr045 Advance Access publication 4 May 2011 Original Article Failure to launch? The influence of limb autotomy on the escape behavior of a semiaquatic grasshopper Paroxya atlantica (Acrididae) Philip W. Batemana,b,c and Patricia A. Flemingb aDepartment of Zoology and Entomology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0002, South Africa, bSchool of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, Murdoch University, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia, and cArchbold Biological Station, Lake Placid, PO Box 2057, Lake Placid, FL 33862, USA Downloaded from Autotomy is an extreme escape tactic where an animal sheds an appendage to escape predation. Many species alter their behavior postautotomy to compensate for this loss. We examined the escape behavior in the field of a semiaquatic grasshopper (Paroxya atlantica) that could escape either by flight and landing in vegetation or flight and landing in water and swimming to safety. We predicted that animals missing a hind limb would be more reactive (i.e., have longer flight initiation distances; FID) and would beheco.oxfordjournals.org prefer to escape to vegetation rather than to water as loss of a limb is likely to reduce swimming ability. However, our predictions were not supported. FID in autotomized animals was not different from that in intact animals. Furthermore, although autotom- ized grasshoppers paused more often and swam slower than intact individuals, autotomized grasshoppers more often escaped to water, reaching it via shorter flights that were lateral to the approach of the observer (intact grasshoppers more often flew directly away from the observer). We also noted differences in behavior before disturbance: Autotomised animals perched lower on emergent vegetation than did intact ones, presumably in readiness for escape via water, and also showed a greater likelihood to at Murdoch University on June 19, 2011 hide (squirreling) from the approaching observer prior to launch into flight.
    [Show full text]
  • Insect Survey of Four Longleaf Pine Preserves
    A SURVEY OF THE MOTHS, BUTTERFLIES, AND GRASSHOPPERS OF FOUR NATURE CONSERVANCY PRESERVES IN SOUTHEASTERN NORTH CAROLINA Stephen P. Hall and Dale F. Schweitzer November 15, 1993 ABSTRACT Moths, butterflies, and grasshoppers were surveyed within four longleaf pine preserves owned by the North Carolina Nature Conservancy during the growing season of 1991 and 1992. Over 7,000 specimens (either collected or seen in the field) were identified, representing 512 different species and 28 families. Forty-one of these we consider to be distinctive of the two fire- maintained communities principally under investigation, the longleaf pine savannas and flatwoods. An additional 14 species we consider distinctive of the pocosins that occur in close association with the savannas and flatwoods. Twenty nine species appear to be rare enough to be included on the list of elements monitored by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (eight others in this category have been reported from one of these sites, the Green Swamp, but were not observed in this study). Two of the moths collected, Spartiniphaga carterae and Agrotis buchholzi, are currently candidates for federal listing as Threatened or Endangered species. Another species, Hemipachnobia s. subporphyrea, appears to be endemic to North Carolina and should also be considered for federal candidate status. With few exceptions, even the species that seem to be most closely associated with savannas and flatwoods show few direct defenses against fire, the primary force responsible for maintaining these communities. Instead, the majority of these insects probably survive within this region due to their ability to rapidly re-colonize recently burned areas from small, well-dispersed refugia.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of Complex Calls in Meadow
    THE EVOLUTION OF COMPLEX CALLS IN MEADOW KATYDIDS _______________________________________ A Dissertation presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School at the University of Missouri-Columbia _______________________________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy _____________________________________________________ by NATHAN HARNESS Dr. Johannes Schul, Dissertation Supervisor July 2018 The undersigned, appointed by the dean of the Graduate School, have examined the dissertation entitled THE EVOLUTION OF COMPLEX CALLS IN MEADOW KATYDIDS presented by Nathan Harness, a candidate for the degree of doctor of philosophy, and hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance. Professor Johannes Schul Professor Sarah Bush Professor Lori Eggert Professor Patricia Friedrichsen For my family Rachel and Mayr have given me so much. They show me unselfish affection, endless support, and generosity that seems to only grow. Without them the work here, and the adventure we’ve all three gone on surrounding it, would not have been possible. They have sacrificed birthdays, anniversaries, holidays, and countless weekends and evenings. They’ve happily seen me off to weeks of field work and conference visits. I am thankful to them for being so generous, and completely lacking in resentment at all the things that pull their husband and dad in so many directions. They have both necessarily become adept at melting away anxiety; I will forever be indebted to the hugs of a two-year-old and the kind words of his mom. Rachel and Mayr both deserve far more recognition than is possible here. I also want to thank my parents and brother and sisters.
    [Show full text]
  • September-October 2006
    New Hope Audubon Society Newsletter Volume 32, Number 5: September-October 2006 Field Trip Goals for Fall 2006-2007 by Dianne Byrne, Field Trip Chair Planning field trips for New Hope Audubon Society members is fun. That’s one reason why I volunteered to be the Field Trip Chair. I meet some of the best birders in NC (like Curtis Smalling, who led a marvelous field trip in the NC mountains last Fall), local butterfly experts like Will Cook and Jeff Pippen (who are both leading events in August and September), dragonfly guru Josh Rose, and bug enthusiasts like Patrick Coin who captures amazing creatures of the night in his photographs. Cynthia Fox and Tom Driscoll, superb birders both, lead trips for NHAS each month. Carol Ann McCormick from the NC Botanical Gardens invites NHAS members on her beautiful wildflower walks every year. Besides rubbing elbows, or sharing spotting scopes, with such naturalists extraordinaire, I also hear about fascinating places to visit. One member suggested a trip to the Carnivore Preservation Trust, a place I thoroughly enjoyed and had not heard about before. Then there is the thrill of visiting an internationally known wildlife research center like the Duke Lemur Center and hearing participants tell how much they loved seeing the amazing animals that reside there. My work is easy because NC is blessed with a variety of unique wildlife habitats, and because there are many nature experts willing to share their knowledge by leading field trips. Besides having a good time as Field Trip Chair, what other field trip goals do I have for the upcoming year? I described some of them at the annual planning meeting of the Board of Directors in July and solicited comments and suggestions from Board members.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological, Ecological, and Morphological Investigations of the Rice Water Weevil, Lissorhoptrus Oryzophilus Kuschel, on Two Rice Genotypes
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1983 Biological, Ecological, and Morphological Investigations of the Rice Water Weevil, Lissorhoptrus Oryzophilus Kuschel, on Two Rice Genotypes. Gary Leonard Cave Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Cave, Gary Leonard, "Biological, Ecological, and Morphological Investigations of the Rice Water Weevil, Lissorhoptrus Oryzophilus Kuschel, on Two Rice Genotypes." (1983). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 3879. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/3879 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This reproduction was made from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this document, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark, it is an indication of either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, duplicate copy, or copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed.
    [Show full text]
  • President's Message
    ISSN 2372-2517 (Online), ISSN 2372-2479 (Print) METALEPTEAMETALEPTEA THE NEWSLETTER OF THE ORTHOPTERISTS’ SOCIETY * Table of Contents is now clickable, which will President’s Message take you to a desired page. By MICHAEL SAMWAYS President [1] PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE [email protected] [2] SOCIETY NEWS n this age of decline of biodi- [2] New Editor’s Vision for JOR by versity worldwide, it is es- CORINNA S. BAZELET [3] Orthopteroids set to steal the spot- sential that we have in place light once again at ESA, 2015 by sentinels of change. We require DEREK A. WOLLER organisms to measure deterio- [4] Open Call for Proposals for Sympo- I ration of landscapes, but also sia, Workshops, Information Sessions at I ICO 2016 by MARCOS LHANO their improvement. Improvement can [5] Announcing the publication of be through land sparing (the setting “Jago’s Grasshoppers & Locusts of aside of land for the conservation of East Africa: An Identification Hand- biodiversity in an agricultural produc- book” by HUGH ROWELL focal species varies with area, but the tion landscape) and land sharing (the cross section of life history types is [8] REGIONAL REPORTS combining of production and conser- remarkably similar. [8] India by ROHINI BALAKRISHNAN vation within agricultural fields). We What this means, apart from the also need to measure optimal stocking [9] T.J. COHN GRANT REPORTS enormous practical value of grasshop- rates for domestic livestock. [9] Evaluating call variation and female pers, is that we need to keep abreast decisions in a lekking cricket by KIT It is fascinating how researchers of taxonomy, simply because we must KEANE around the world are finding that have actual identities.
    [Show full text]
  • Creating Economically and Ecologically Sustainable Pollinator Habitat District 2 Demonstration Research Project Summary Updated for Site Visit in April 2019
    Creating Economically and Ecologically Sustainable Pollinator Habitat District 2 Demonstration Research Project Summary Updated for Site Visit in April 2019 The PIs are most appreciative for identification assistance provided by: Arian Farid and Alan R. Franck, Director and former Director, resp., University of South Florida Herbarium, Tampa, FL; Edwin Bridges, Botanical and Ecological Consultant; Floyd Griffith, Botanist; and Eugene Wofford, Director, University of Tennessee Herbarium, Knoxville, TN Investigators Rick Johnstone and Robin Haggie (IVM Partners, 501-C-3 non-profit; http://www.ivmpartners.org/); Larry Porter and John Nettles (ret.), District 2 Wildflower Coordinator; Jeff Norcini, FDOT State Wildflower Specialist Cooperator Rick Owen (Imperiled Butterflies of Florida Work Group – North) Objective Evaluate a cost-effective strategy for creating habitat for pollinators/beneficial insects in the ROW beyond the back-slope. Rationale • Will aid FDOT in developing a strategy to create pollinator habitat per the federal BEE Act and FDOT’s Wildflower Program • Will demonstrate that FDOT can simultaneously • Create sustainable pollinator habitat in an economical and ecological manner • Reduce mowing costs • Part of national effort coordinated by IVM Partners, who has • Established or will establish similar projects on roadside or utility ROWS in Alabama, Arkansas, Maryland, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Idaho, Montana, Virginia, West Virginia, and Tennessee; studies previously conducted in Arizona, Delaware, Michigan, and New Jersey • Developed partnerships with US Fish & Wildlife Service, Army Corps of Engineers, US Geological Survey, New Jersey Institute of Technology, Rutgers University, Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Chesapeake Wildlife Heritage, The Navajo Nation, The Wildlife Habitat Council, The Pollinator Partnership, Progressive Solutions, Bayer Crop Sciences, Universities of Maryland, Ohio, West Virginia, and the EPA.
    [Show full text]
  • Studies on the Biology and Morphology
    STUDIES ON THE BIOLOGY AND MORPHOLOGY OF SCHISTOCERCA OBSctTRA. FABR~ OCT ~-'/ 1939 \,. STODI]S ON fflE BIOLOGY AND UORPHOLOGf OF SOHISTOCERCA OBSCURA FABR. By LESTER GLEN DUCK 1, Bachelor ot Science Northwestern State Teacher's College Alva, Oklahoma. A THESIS Submitted to the Department of" Entomology Oklahoma .Agricultural and Mechanical College In Partial J!ultillment of" the Requirements FOr the Degree ot MASTER OF SCIENCE C 1939 o" -: o "e ((.f!) ~ r ~ 0 0 , 0 ,, {,] 0 . 0 0 0' 0 ,._< )",-- : ,." - ' ' O r c> o " O ,, C> 0 ~ ·'" "•i" U U O D 0 0 ' 0 C ,-- 0 0 <l 0 r: ' Cl , 0 O O ' 0 O C' OQ<.,1:~ ll~ STUDIES ON mE BIOLOGY AND MORPHOLOGY OF SCHISTOCERCA OBSCURA. J'ABR. CCLLEGE OCT ;.;,'/ 1939 .._ STUDIES ON 'IRE BIOLOGY AND MORPHOLOGY OF SOHISTOCERCA OBSCURA ll"ABR. By LESTER GLEN DUCK I\ Bachelor of Science Northwestern State Teacher's College Alva, Oklahoma 1937 A THESIS Submitted to the Department of Entomology Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical College In Partial Jfu.lfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of 0 MASTER OF SCIENCE : e. r:, 0 J 0 • , ... ,"- ~ ~ 1939 0-'"';_, 0~0°,~ IJO 1 0 0 0 _, ·~ 0 ' c~ O ()" c_, O O D c 0 (' C~ 0 <:I Or 11 OCT ~11939 l APPROVED: In Charge of Thesis Head or Department ot 1!ntomology Dean or Graduate School 119466 111 PREFACE This thesis grew out ot a suggestion b1 Professor F. A. !'enton concern­ ing the need tor information on certain members of the Orthopteran genus Schistocerca. As the work progressed, it became Dl)re and more evident that a thorough understanding ot the genus can coma only through a close e:xam.1.nation of the biology of each species.
    [Show full text]
  • New Canadian and Ontario Orthopteroid Records, and an Updated Checklist of the Orthoptera of Ontario
    Checklist of Ontario Orthoptera (cont.) JESO Volume 145, 2014 NEW CANADIAN AND ONTARIO ORTHOPTEROID RECORDS, AND AN UPDATED CHECKLIST OF THE ORTHOPTERA OF ONTARIO S. M. PAIERO1* AND S. A. MARSHALL1 1School of Environmental Sciences, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1 email, [email protected] Abstract J. ent. Soc. Ont. 145: 61–76 The following seven orthopteroid taxa are recorded from Canada for the first time: Anaxipha species 1, Cyrtoxipha gundlachi Saussure, Chloroscirtus forcipatus (Brunner von Wattenwyl), Neoconocephalus exiliscanorus (Davis), Camptonotus carolinensis (Gerstaeker), Scapteriscus borellii Linnaeus, and Melanoplus punctulatus griseus (Thomas). One further species, Neoconocephalus retusus (Scudder) is recorded from Ontario for the first time. An updated checklist of the orthopteroids of Ontario is provided, along with notes on changes in nomenclature. Published December 2014 Introduction Vickery and Kevan (1985) and Vickery and Scudder (1987) reviewed and listed the orthopteroid species known from Canada and Alaska, including 141 species from Ontario. A further 15 species have been recorded from Ontario since then (Skevington et al. 2001, Marshall et al. 2004, Paiero et al. 2010) and we here add another eight species or subspecies, of which seven are also new Canadian records. Notes on several significant provincial range extensions also are given, including two species originally recorded from Ontario on bugguide.net. Voucher specimens examined here are deposited in the University of Guelph Insect Collection (DEBU), unless otherwise noted. New Canadian records Anaxipha species 1 (Figs 1, 2) (Gryllidae: Trigidoniinae) This species, similar in appearance to the Florida endemic Anaxipha calusa * Author to whom all correspondence should be addressed.
    [Show full text]
  • Orthoptera: Acrididae)
    204 Florida Entomologist 88(2) June 2005 MANDIBULAR MORPHOLOGY OF SOME FLORIDIAN GRASSHOPPERS (ORTHOPTERA: ACRIDIDAE) TREVOR RANDALL SMITH AND JOHN L. CAPINERA University of Florida, Department of Entomology and Nematology, Gainesville, FL 32611 The relationship between mouthpart structure zen until examination. Mandibles were removed and diet has been known for years. This connec- from thawed specimens by lifting the labrum and tion between mouthpart morphology and specific pulling out each mandible separately with for- food types is incredibly pronounced in the class In- ceps. Only young adults were used in an effort to secta (Snodgrass 1935). As insects have evolved avoid confusion of mandible type due to mandible and adapted to new food sources, their mouthparts erosion (Chapman 1964; Uvarov 1977). An exam- have changed accordingly. This is an extremely im- ple of moderate erosion can be seen in Figure 1 (I). portant trait for evolutionary biologists (Brues This process was replicated with 10 individuals 1939) as well as systematists (Mulkern 1967). from each species. After air-drying, each mandi- Isley (1944) was one of the first to study grass- ble was glued to the head of a #3 or #2 insect pin, hopper mouthparts in detail. He described three depending on its size, for easier manipulation, groups of mandibles according to general struc- and examined microscopically. ture and characteristic diet. These three groups, We used Isley’s (1944) description of mandible still used today, were graminivorous (grass-feed- types and their adaptive functions to divide the ing type) with grinding molars and incisors typi- mandibles into 3 major categories: forbivorous cally fused into a scythe-like cutting edge, for- (forb-feeding), graminivorous (grass-feeding), bivorous (forb or broadleaf plant-feeding type) and herbivorous (mixed-feeding).
    [Show full text]
  • Kopulation Und Sexualethologie Von Rotflügeliger/Blauflügeliger
    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: Galathea, Berichte des Kreises Nürnberger Entomologen e.V. Jahr/Year: 2019 Band/Volume: 35 Autor(en)/Author(s): Mader Detlef Artikel/Article: Kopulation und Sexualethologie von Rotflügeliger/Blauflügeliger Ödlandschrecke, anderen Heuschrecken, Gottesanbeterin, anderen Fangschrecken, Mosaikjungfer, Prachtlibelle und anderen Libellen 121-201 gal athea Band 35 • Beiträge des Kreises Nürnberger Entomologen • 2019 • S. 121-201 Kopulation und Sexualethologie von Rotflügeliger/Blauflügeliger Ödlandschrecke, anderen Heuschrecken, Gottesanbeterin, anderen Fangschrecken, Mosaikjungfer, Prachtlibelle und anderen Libellen DETLEF MADER Inhaltsverzeichnis Seite Zusammenfassung ................................................................................................................................................. 124 Abstract ........................................................................................................................................................................ 124 Key Words .................................................................................................................................................................. 125 1 Kopulation und Sexualethologie von Insekten ................................................................ 125 1.1 Die wichtigsten Stellungen bei der Kopulation von Insekten ................................. 127 1.1.1 Antipodale
    [Show full text]
  • President's Message
    ISSN 2372-2517 (Online), ISSN 2372-2479 (Print) METALEPTEAMETALEPTEA THE NEWSLETTER OF THE ORTHOPTERISTS’ SOCIETY * Table of Contents is now clickable, which will President’s Message take you to a desired page. By MICHAEL SAMWAYS President [1] PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE [email protected] he Orthopterists’ Soci- [2] SOCIETY NEWS th ety (OS) Congress in [2] The 12 International Congress of Orthopterology “Orthoptera in a Brazil is almost here! Changing World” by MARCOS LHANO The OS congresses are always wonderfully [10] REGIONAL REPORTS TT interactive, with a great [10] Eastern Europe, North and Central exchange of ideas and knowledge on Asia by MICHAEL G. SERGEEV [11] Northern Africa by MOHAMED this fascinating group of insects. Bra- ABDELLAHI EBBE zil is particularly exciting as its biodi- versity is legendary and its orthopter- [13] T.J. COHN GRANT REPORTS an fauna vast and still largely in need [13] Give it all we got tonight? A shifting terminal investment thresh- actively chaired by Axel Hochkirch. of exploration. Also, there have been old in male cricket calling effort by many vigorous developments in Bra- Singing species also have something KRISTIN DUFFIELD zilian Orthoptera research in recent unique to offer: an acoustic profile of years, giving the country a dynamic the landscape. Acoustically-profiling [15] OSF GRANT REPORTS buzz…Orthopterology and Olympics! a landscape for conservation is a non- [15] Photo documentation of types in the Hungarian Natural History Museum The OS is today a truly international invasive assessment method, known as well as the Otto Herman collec- society with members from all across as ecoacoustics, that can be used tion and collecting distributional and the globe.
    [Show full text]