DOCSLIB.ORG

Utilization of Abandoned Mine Drifts and Fracture Caves by Bats And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Utilization of Abandoned Mine Drifts and Fracture Caves by Bats And Abstract.-Twenty-seven abandoned mine drifts Utilization Of Abandoned and four fracture caves constitute one of the most Mine Drifts and Fracture unique habitats in and adjacent to the Ouachita National Forest, an area devoid of solutional caves, Caves By Bats and Six species of salamanders and nine species of bats Salamanders: were found to utilize these areas. Subterranean Ouachita Mountains1 David A. Sa~gey,~Gary A. HeidtS3Darrell R. Caves and mines play an important rush. During the period of greatest METHODS role in the ecology of many species, activity, 1885 to 1888, over a dozen serving as permanent or temporary gold mines were in operation, rang- During the past six years, 27 aban- habitats. Culver (1986) stated, "the ing from shallow test holes to exten- doned mines in Garland (S), variety of species that depends on sive linear and L-shaped drifts ex- Montgomery (31, Pike (4) and Polk caves during some critical time in tending up to 150 meters into the (12) counties, Arkansas (fig. 1) were their life cycle, such as hibernation in surrounding mountains (Harrington located and visited a minimum of bats, is impressive and usually 1986, Hudgins 197'1, U.S. Army eight times (at least once each sea- underestimated ." To this statement, Corps of Engineers 1980). The "gold son). In several cases, where endemic we add mines. and silver boom" effectively ended or Category I1 (U.S. Federal Register Bear Den Caves are located in with the issuance of a report which 1985) species occurred or breeding Winding Stair Mountain, LeFlore in effect stated there were no pre- populations were found, mines were County, in southeastern Oklahoma. cious metals in paying quantities to visited much more often. Mist net- These four caves occur in an outcrop be found in the area (Branner 1888). ting of entrances for bats was con- belt of a massive sandstone unit and Soon thereafter, many mines were ducted in spring, summer, and fall. were formed by a number of factors, abandoned as prospectors moved Bear Den Caves came to our atten- the most important being gravita- West (Harrington 1986, Hudgins tion during 1987 and were visited tional sliding and slumpage of sand- 1971).Through the years, other min- several times. Collections were mini- stone. These four caves have more erals, such as manganese and mer- mal (mines only) and voucher speci- than 365 meters of mapped passage- cury, have been mined from the Ou- way and represent the only known achitas resulting in the excavation of caves in the Ouachita National Forest numerous additional drifts; but for a (Puckette 1974-75). variety of reasons, most have been Additional subterranean habitat abandoned (Clardy and Bush 1976, was formed from 1870 to 1890, when Stone and Bush 1984).The legacy of the area extending west from Hot these mining activities has not been Springs to Mena, Arkansas was the riches and new-found wealth, but the scene of a gold, lead, silver and zinc creation of unusual and unique wild- life habitat. 'Paper presented at symposium, Man- agement of Amphibians, Reptiles, and The objectives of this study were Small Mammals in North America. [Flag- to review, compile, and consolidate staff, AZ,July 19-2 1, 1988). existing literature concerning utiliza- David A. Saugey is a Wildlife Biologist, tion of caves and mine drifts by bats US. Forest Service, Ouachita National For- and salamanders in the Ouachita est, Hot Springs, AR. 7 1902. Mountains. In addition, we provide 3GaryA. Heidt is Professor of Biology, University of Arkansas at Little Rock, A R. new data and propose recommenda- 72204. tions concerning management of caves and mines in the Ouachita Na- 4Danell R. Heath is an Undergraduate Figure 1 .-Location of Ouachita National Student University of Arkansas at Little tional Forest and on other public and Forest (backslashed area) and study area Rock, AR. 72204. private lands. (crosshatched area). mens are located in the Vertebrate given by Means (1974) and Trauth tional mine contained larvae of this Collections at the University of Ar- (1988) provided descriptions of species. A seepage stream in this kansas at Little Rock and Arkansas deposition sites in seepage areas dur- mine was approximately five centi- State University. ing the severe summer drought in meters wide, one centimeter deep, Following McDaniel and Smith 1980. Heath et al. (1986) reported the and extended a distance of sixty (1976), we include the probable eco- occurrence of this endemic salaman- centimeters before dropping into a logical position of the species in the der in four drifts, with egg clutches large pool at the entrance. The pool cave and mine environments. This is deposited on the underside of rocks connected directly to an epigean followed by comments concerning in one mine and the presence of lar- stream. the status or life history of each spe- vae in two others. In those mines cies. Following Barr (1963) and with larvae, pools contained abun- McDaniel and Smith (1976) the terms dant leaf litter and isopods. On one Plefhodon caddoensis Pope and "troglophile" (commonly found in occasion, larvae were observed feed- Pope. Troglophile. caves), "trogloxene" (may be com- ing on isopods. Since these observa- mon in caves but must leave to com- tions were made, numerous addi- Large aggregations of the endemic plete their life history), and "acciden- tional visits to these four mines re- Caddo Mountain salamander using tal" (unable to survive long in the vealed the presence of Dmnognathus drifts as refugia to escape heat and cave environment) have been em- when epigean conditions would be dryness during summer and fall ployed in the species accounts. considered ideal. The pools within were first reported by Saugey et al. these and other drifts are the result (1985). Over 100 individuals were of seepage through walls which, in discovered in each of two drifts, RESULTS some instances, provided sufficient from June through September 1983. volumes of water to have small Subsequent visits to these and other Nine species of bats and six species streams flowing from their entrances. drifts revealed limited use of three of salamanders were found to utilize However, unlike the preferred, additional drifts and use of one of caves and abandoned mine drifts gravel-bottomed stream habitat, the original aggregation sites for egg during some portion of their annual pools typically exhibited silted sub- deposition and breeding (Heath et al. cycles. strates with very little rubble and 1986). Since these observations were few rocks large enough for egg at- made, summer aggregations of this tachment. salamander have numbered as high Annotated List of Bats and as 383 individuals and additional egg Salamanders Utilizing Caves and clutches have been observed and Abandoned Mine Drifts Eurycea mulfiplicafa (Cope). monitored. Known only from the Troglophile. Novaculite Uplift area of the Ou- CLASS AMPHIBIA achita Mountains in Howard, The many-ribbed salamander is pri- Montgomery, and Polk counties in Order Urodela marily an aquatic species endemic to Arkansas (Blair and Lindsey 1965, the Interior Highland region and ad- Robison and Smith 1982), this sala- Family Plethodontidae jacent areas that contain suitable mander and its habitat are of special habitat. It may be found under concern to the Arkansas Natural Desmognafhus brimle yorum stones, logs, and other debris in Heritage Commission (ANHC) (Stejneger). Troglophile. clear, rock or gravel-bottomed (Smith 1984). In 1985, the U.S. Fish streams (Bishop 1943, Ireland 1971, and Wildlife Service (USFWS) desig- Means (1974) stated the Ouachita Reagan 1974). It inhabits essentially nated it a Category I1 species. In dusky salamander was confined to the same habitat as Desmognafhus 1986, the U.S. Forest Service (Ou- rocky, gravelly, streams in the Ou- brimleyorum (Strecker 1908). Hurter achita National Forest) began infor- achita Mountains. Rock falls along and Strecker (1909) noted mal consultation with the USFWS the upper portions of streams repre- Desrnogrlathus eating Eu ycea indi- (Jackson, Mississippi, Endangered sented particularly good adult habi- viduals with which they were con- Species Field Station) and requested tat. This species was most abundant fined. Heath et al. (1986) reported field assistance from the ANHC con- where water percolated through both larvae and adults in two mines cerning preservation of critical mine rocky substrate in streambeds and and in one, larvae shared the same aggregation sites and protection of along stream sides. Description of pools with Desmognathus larvae. Both their vulnerable populations. Place- egg clutch characteristics and mines contained shallow streams ment of a gate at one sensitive site is stream/streamside deposition were with a gravel substrate. One addi- planned in 1988 (fig. 2). Plethodon glutinosus glutinosus ened" in Oklahoma. Sievert (1986) Plethodon serratus Grobrnan. (Green). Troglophile. proposed it as a species of "special Troglophile. concern," conditional on his recom- The slimy salamander, a woodland mendations concerning silvicultural The endemic Ouachita Red-backed species, is widely distributed, ex- practices on National Forest lands. salamander is commonly found be- ploiting virtually every available ter- Black (1974) reported this salaman- neath rocks, logs, and in leaf litter at restrial habitat. This species is com- der in Bear Den Caves where they all elevations throughout the Ou- monly found under rocks, in and were found throughout, but most achita Mountains. This species has under well rotted logs and stumps, commonly within the first 19 meters been observed in one mine on two and buried deep in moist layers of or twilight zone. A small juvenile separate occasions. In both cases, it leaf litter. During hotter and drier with a snout-vent length (SVL) of < 7 has been in association with large portions of the year, they usually re- mm was found in an entrance and aggregations of the Caddo Mountain treat deeper into the substrate.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • State Overview and Ecological Framework Table IN2. Oklahoma's
    24 Table IN2. Oklahoma's Species of Greatest Conservation Need Cross-referenced by Region grass - Cross Prairie Prairie Prairie WGCP Ozarks Timbers Tallgrass Taxonomic Ouachita Mountains Shortgrass Mixed Common Name Group Large Rivers Bird-voiced Treefrog Amphibian X (Hyla avivoca) Crawfish Frog Amphibian X X X X (Lithobates areolata) Four-toed Salamander Amphibian X (Hemidactylium scutatum) Green Toad Amphibian X X X (Anaxyrus debilis) Grotto Salamander Amphibian X (Eurycea spelaeus) Hurter's Spadefoot Amphibian X X (Scaphiopus hurterii) Kiamichi Slimy Salamander Amphibian X (Plethodon kiamichi) Lesser Siren Amphibian X X (Siren intermedia) Many-ribbed Salamander Amphibian X (Eurycea multiplicata) Mole Salamander Amphibian X (Ambystoma talpoideum) Oklahoma Salamander Amphibian X (Eurycea tynerensis) Ouachita Dusky Salamander Amphibian X (Desmognathus brimleyorum) Ozark Zigzag Salamander Amphibian X (Plethodon angusticlavius) Rich Mountain Salamander Amphibian X (Plethodon ouachitae) Ringed Salamander Amphibian X X (Ambystoma annulatum) Sequoyah Slimy Salamander Amphibian X (Plethodon sequoyah) Southern Red-backed Amphibian X Salamander (Plethodon serratus) Texas Toad Amphibian X (Anaxyrus speciosus) Three-toed Amphiuma Amphibian X (Amphiuma tridactylum) American Golden Plover Bird X X X X X X X (Pluvialis dominica) American Woodcock Bird X X X X X (Scolopax minor) Bachman's Sparrow Bird X X X X (Aimophila aestivalis) Baird's Sparrow Bird X X (Ammodramus bairdii) State Overview and Ecological Framework 25 grass - ntains Cross Large Rivers
    [Show full text]
  • Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment December 2003
    Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment December 2003 Ouachita Ecoregional Assessment Team Arkansas Field Office 601 North University Ave. Little Rock, AR 72205 Oklahoma Field Office 2727 East 21st Street Tulsa, OK 74114 Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment ii 12/2003 Table of Contents Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment............................................................................................................................i Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................................................iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..............................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................3 BACKGROUND ...........................................................................................................................4 Ecoregional Boundary Delineation.............................................................................................................................................4 Geology..........................................................................................................................................................................................5 Soils................................................................................................................................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 14. Wildlife and Forest Communities 341
    chapteR 14. Wildlife and Forest Communities 341 Chapter 14. Wildlife and Forest communities Margaret Trani Griep and Beverly Collins1 key FindingS • Hotspot areas for plants of concern are Big Bend National Park; the Apalachicola area of the Southern Gulf Coast; • The South has 1,076 native terrestrial vertebrates: 179 Lake Wales Ridge and the area south of Lake Okeechobee amphibians, 525 birds, 176 mammals, and 196 reptiles. in Peninsular Florida; and coastal counties of North Species richness is highest in the Mid-South (856) and Carolina in the Atlantic Coastal Plain. The Appalachian- Coastal Plain (733), reflecting both the large area of these Cumberland highlands also contain plants identified by subregions and the diversity of habitats within them. States as species of concern. • The geography of species richness varies by taxa. • Species, including those of conservation concern, are Amphibians flourish in portions of the Piedmont and imperiled by habitat alteration, isolation, introduction of Appalachian-Cumberland highlands and across the Coastal invasive species, environmental pollutants, commercial Plain. Bird richness is highest along the coastal wetlands of development, human disturbance, and exploitation. the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico, mammal richness Conditions predicted by the forecasts will magnify these is highest in the Mid-South and Appalachian-Cumberland stressors. Each species varies in its vulnerability to highlands, and reptile richness is highest across the forecasted threats, and these threats vary by subregion. Key southern portion of the region. areas of concern arise where hotspots of vulnerable species • The South has 142 terrestrial vertebrate species coincide with forecasted stressors. considered to be of conservation concern (e.g., global • There are 614 species that are presumed extirpated from conservation status rank of critically imperiled, imperiled, selected States in the South; 64 are terrestrial vertebrates or vulnerable), 77 of which are listed as threatened or and 550 are vascular plants.
    [Show full text]
  • Identifying Priority Ecoregions for Amphibian Conservation in the U.S. and Canada
    Acknowledgements This assessment was conducted as part of a priority setting effort for Operation Frog Pond, a project of Tree Walkers International. Operation Frog Pond is designed to encourage private individuals and community groups to become involved in amphibian conservation around their homes and communities. Funding for this assessment was provided by The Lawrence Foundation, Northwest Frog Fest, and members of Tree Walkers International. This assessment would not be possible without data provided by The Global Amphibian Assessment, NatureServe, and the International Conservation Union. We are indebted to their foresight in compiling basic scientific information about species’ distributions, ecology, and conservation status; and making these data available to the public, so that we can provide informed stewardship for our natural resources. I would also like to extend a special thank you to Aaron Bloch for compiling conservation status data for amphibians in the United States and to Joe Milmoe and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program for supporting Operation Frog Pond. Photo Credits Photographs are credited to each photographer on the pages where they appear. All rights are reserved by individual photographers. All photos on the front and back cover are copyright Tim Paine. Suggested Citation Brock, B.L. 2007. Identifying priority ecoregions for amphibian conservation in the U.S. and Canada. Tree Walkers International Special Report. Tree Walkers International, USA. Text © 2007 by Brent L. Brock and Tree Walkers International Tree Walkers International, 3025 Woodchuck Road, Bozeman, MT 59715-1702 Layout and design: Elizabeth K. Brock Photographs: as noted, all rights reserved by individual photographers.
    [Show full text]
  • Southeast Priority Species (RSGCN): Amphibians
    Southeast Priority Species (RSGCN): Amphibians Updated as of February 3, 2021 The following amphibian species were identified as Regional Species of Greatest Conservation Need (RSGCN) through a collaborative assessment process carried out by the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (SEAFWA) Wildlife Diversity Committee. “Regional Stewardship Responsibility" refers to the portion of a species' range in the Southeast relative to North America as a whole. Additional details of this assessment can be found at: http://secassoutheast.org/2019/09/30/Priorities-for-Conservation-in-Southeastern-States.html Very High Concern Scientific Name Common Name Federal Listing Southeast State Range Regional Stewardship Status* Responsibility Eurycea waterlooensis Austin blind salamander LE TX SEAFWA Endemic Eurycea sosorum Barton Springs Salamander LE TX SEAFWA Endemic Gyrinophilus gulolineatus Berry Cave Salamander TN SEAFWA Endemic Necturus alabamensis Black Warrior Waterdog LE AL SEAFWA Endemic Eurycea robusta Blanco blind Salamander TX SEAFWA Endemic Ambystoma cingulatum Flatwoods Salamander (Frosted) LT FL GA SC SEAFWA Endemic Lithobates okaloosae Florida Bog Frog At-risk FL SEAFWA Endemic Plethodon fourchensis Fourche Mountain Salamander AL AR SEAFWA Endemic Eurycea naufragia Georgetown Salamander LT TX SEAFWA Endemic Lithobates capito Gopher Frog At-risk AL FL GA MS NC SC TN 75-100% of Range Cryptobranchus alleganiensis Hellbender (including Eastern AL AR GA KY MO MS NC TN VA WV 50-75% of Range (including alleganiensis and and Ozark)
    [Show full text]
  • DEPARTMENT of the INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife
    This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 01/13/2016 and available online at http://federalregister.gov/a/2016-00452, and on FDsys.gov DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 16 RIN 1018–BA77 [Docket No. FWS–HQ–FAC–2015–0005] [FXFR13360900000–156–FF09F14000] Injurious Wildlife Species; Listing Salamanders Due to Risk of Salamander Chytrid Fungus AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Interim rule; request for comments; notice of availability of economic analysis. 1 SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is amending its regulations under the Lacey Act to add all species of salamanders from 20 genera, of which there are 201 species, to the list of injurious amphibians. With this interim rule, both importation into the United States and interstate transportation between States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any territory or possession of the United States of any live or dead specimen, including parts, of these 20 genera of salamanders are prohibited, except by permit for zoological, educational, medical, or scientific purposes (in accordance with permit conditions) or by Federal agencies without a permit solely for their own use. This action is necessary to protect the interests of wildlife and wildlife resources from the introduction, establishment, and spread of the chytrid fungus Batrachochytrium salamandrivorans into ecosystems of the United States. The fungus affects salamanders, with lethal effects on many species, and is not yet known to be found in the United States. Because of the devastating effect that we expect the fungus will have on native U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 2.1 SGCN List
    Appendix 2.1 SGCN List List of species of greatest conservation need ranked by Species Priority Score. A higher score implies a greater need for conservation concern and actions. Priority Common Name Scientific Name Taxa Association Score 100 Curtis Pearlymussel Epioblasma florentina curtisii Mussel 100 Turgid Blossom Epioblasma turgidula Mussel 100 Yellowcheek Darter Etheostoma moorei Fish 80 Bowed Snowfly Allocapnia oribata Insect 80 Winter Stonefly Allocapnia warreni Insect 80 Foushee Cavesnail Amnicola cora Invertebrate - other 80 Ouachita Rock Pocketbook Arcidens wheeleri Mussel 80 Magazine Mountain Mold Beetle Arianops sandersoni Insect 80 Benton County Cave Crayfish Cambarus aculabrum Crayfish 80 Hell Creek Cave Crayfish Cambarus zophonastes Crayfish 80 Ozark Big-eared Bat Corynorhinus townsendii ingens Mammal 80 Slenderwrist Burrowing Crayfish Fallicambarus petilicarpus Crayfish 80 Sulphur Springs Diving Beetle Heterosternuta sulphuria Insect 80 Magazine Mountain Shagreen Inflectarius magazinensis Invertebrate - other 80 Magazine Stripetail Isoperla szczytkoi Insect 80 Speckled Pocketbook Lampsilis streckeri Mussel 80 Isopod Lirceus bidentatus Invertebrate - other 80 Ozark Pyrg Marstonia ozarkensis Invertebrate - other 80 Caddo Madtom Noturus taylori Fish 80 Striate Supercoil Paravitrea aulacogyra Invertebrate - other 80 Microcaddisfly Paucicalcaria ozarkensis Insect 80 Irons Fork Burrowing Crayfish Procambarus reimeri Crayfish 80 Winged Mapleleaf Quadrula fragosa Mussel 80 Ground Beetle Rhadine ozarkensis Insect 80 Ouachita Pebblesnail
    [Show full text]
  • Download the Parcas Criteria and Implementation Plan Here!
    Model Criteria and Implementation Guidance for a Priority Amphibian and Reptile Conservation Area (PARCA) System in the U.S.A. V.4 October 2012 PARCA Task Team Prepared by Ron Sutherland and Phillip deMaynadier In collaboration with National PARC’s "Priority Amphibian and Reptile Conservation Areas" Task Team: Co-Leads: Ron Sutherland , Wildlands Network Phillip deMaynadier, Maine Dept. of Inland Fisheries & Wildlife Team Members: Margaret Trani Griep, U.S. Forest Service Southern Region Audrey Hatch, formerly Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Randy Jennings, Western New Mexico University Karen Kinkead , Iowa Dept. of Natural Resources Priya Nanjappa, Assoc. of Fish & Wildlife Agencies Cover Photographs: Blanding’s Turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) – J. Mays Coastal Tailed Frog (Ascaphus truei) – B. McCreary Eastern Indigo Snake (Drymarchon couperi) – J.D. Willson Blue-spotted Salamander (Ambystoma laterale) – L. Kenney Reticulate Gila Monster (Heloderma s. suspectum) – K. Stohlgren Suggested citation: R. Sutherland and P. deMaynadier. 2012. Model Criteria and Implementation Guidance for a Priority Amphibian and Reptile Conservation Area (PARCA) System in the USA. Partners in Amphibian and Reptile Conservation, Technical Publication PARCA-1. 28 pp. 2 V.4 October 2012 PARCA Task Team Contents: Acknowledgments ………………………………………………………………………….....................…...3 Introduction…………..……. ……………………………………………………………………………………3 Criteria for PARCA Selection…………………… …………………………………………………………5 Criteria Overview and PARCA Scale.............……………………………………………………….…..8
    [Show full text]
  • Section 8. Appendices
    Section 8. Appendices Appendix 1.1 — Acronyms Terminology AWAP – Arkansas Wildlife Action Plan BMP – Best Management Practice CWCS — Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy EO — Element Occurrence GIS — Geographic Information Systems SGCN — Species of Greatest Conservation Need LIP — Landowner Incentive Program MOA — Memorandum of Agreement ACWCS — Arkansas Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy SWG — State Wildlife Grant LTA — Land Type Association WNS — White-nose Syndrome Organizations ADEQ — Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality AGFC — Arkansas Game and Fish Commission AHTD — Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department ANHC — Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission ASU — Arkansas State University ATU — Arkansas Technical University FWS — Fish and Wildlife Service HSU — Henderson State University NRCS — Natural Resources Conservation Service SAU — Southern Arkansas University TNC — The Nature Conservancy UA — University of Arkansas (Fayetteville) UA/Ft. Smith — University of Arkansas at Fort Smith UALR — University of Arkansas at Little Rock UAM — University of Arkansas at Monticello UCA — University of Central Arkansas USFS — United States Forest Service 1581 Appendix 2.1. List of Species of Greatest Conservation Need by Priority Score. List of species of greatest conservation need ranked by Species Priority Score. A higher score implies a greater need for conservation concern and actions. Priority Common Name Scientific Name Taxa Association Score 100 Curtis Pearlymussel Epioblasma florentina curtisii Mussel 100
    [Show full text]
  • Movement, Occupancy, and Detectability of Green Salamanders (Aneides Aeneus) in Northern Alabama by Rebecca Renée John a Thesis
    Movement, Occupancy, and Detectability of Green Salamanders (Aneides aeneus) in Northern Alabama by Rebecca Renée John A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science Auburn, Alabama August 5, 2017 Keywords: daily movement, philopatry, plethodontid salamander, occupancy modeling, detection probability, Alabama Copyright 2017 by Rebecca Renée John Approved by Robert Gitzen, Assistant Professor, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences Todd Steury, Associate Professor, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences Craig Guyer, Emeritus Professor, Department of Biological Sciences J. J. Apodaca, Professor, Environmental Sciences, Warren Wilson College Abstract Green salamanders (Aneides aeneus) are a species of concern throughout their range due to habitat modification and population declines. With few short-term movement studies on the species, the information is vital to better understanding the natural history of green salamanders. Understanding movement patterns and their distribution better are crucial to effectively managing and conserving the species. We studied nightly movements of the species in northern Alabama during the spring breeding season in 2015-2016. During summer (2015-2016), we conducted presence-absence surveys of green salamanders and explored habitat characteristics important to the species distribution in northern Alabama. Adult green salamanders moved on average 4.98 m (SE=0.56) per night, but ended up on average about 1.62 m (SE=0.42) from their start locations at W. B. Bankhead National Forest in Winston County, Alabama. There was strong philopatry and general circular movement patterns. There were no strong environmental factor relationships influencing overnight movement or tortuosity during spring.
    [Show full text]
  • Ouachita Mountains Ecoregion
    Ouachita Mountains (Ecoregion 36) The Ouachitas are made up of ridges, hills and valleys formed by the erosion of folded and faulted Paleozoic sandstone, shale and chert, known locally as novaculite. They are a continuation of the Appalachians, formed during the late Paleozoic Era when an ocean closed and continents collided, causing marine sediments to be folded, faulted and thrust northward. The Ouachitas are structurally different from the Boston Mountains (38), more folded and rugged than the lithologically distinct Ozark Highlands (39) and physiographically unlike the Arkansas Valley (37), South Central Plains (35) and Mississippi Alluvial Plain (73). Potential natural vegetation is oak–hickory–pine forest; it contrasts with the oak– hickory forest that dominates Ecoregion 39 and the northern part of Ecoregion 38. Today, loblolly pine and shortleaf pine grow in a distinctive mix of thermic Ultisols and Inceptisols. Figure 3.13. Ouachita Mountains ecoregion. 1169 Athens Plateau - Ouachita Mountains Logging and recreation are major land uses and pastureland and hayland are found in broader valleys. Regional water quality is influenced by lithology, soil composition and land use activities. In most reaches, water quality is exceptional; typically, total phosphorus, turbidity, total suspended solids and biological oxygen demand values are lower whereas dissolved oxygen levels are higher than in Ecoregions 35, 37 and 73. Water hardness varies by level IV ecoregion; Ecoregions 36d and 36e tend to have the lowest hardness values while progressively higher values occur in Ecoregions 36a, 36b and 36c. Stream substrates are made up of gravel, cobbles, boulders, or bedrock; they contrast with the fine-grained substrates of lower gradient streams in Ecoregions 35 and 73.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Vol. 6, No. 3
    BULLETIN OF THE FLORIDA STATE MUSEUM BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES Volume 6 Number 3 REVISION OF NORTH AMERICAN SALAMANDERS OF THE GENUS PLETHODON Richard Highton *,1 Of * /853 UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA Gainesville 1963 Numbers of the BULLETIN OF THE FLORIDA STATE MUSEUM are pub- lished at irregular intervals. Volumes contain about 300 pages and are not nec- essarily completed in any one calendar year. WILLIAM J . RIEMER , Managing Editor OLIVER L. AUSTIN, JR., Editor Consultant for. this issue: Wilfred T. Neill Communications concerning purchase or exchange of the publication and all man- uscripts should be addressed to the Managing Editor of the Bulletin, Florida State Museum, Seagle Building, Gainesville, Florida. Published 81 December 1962 Price for this issue $1.55 REVISION OF NORTH AMERICAN SALAMANDERS OF THE GENUS PLETHODON RICHARD HIGHTON 1 SYNOPSIS: Systematic study of the North American salamander genus Plethodon reveals three major groups in the genus, designated the western plethodons, the eastern small plethodons, and the eastern large plethodons. The western plethodons occur in the northwestern United States and adjacent Canada and include five species (vandykei, larselli, dunni, ©ehiculum, and elongatus) in thre6 species groups. Five species in three species groups also comprise the eastern small plethodons. Four of these (weHeri, dorsalis, cinereus, and richmondi) occur in eastern North America; the fifth (neomexicanus) is kn6wn only from the Jemez Mountains of New Mexico. The eastern large plethodons include six species (wehrlet, vonahlossee,.ouachitae, caddoensis, iordani. and glutinosus) in three species groups and occur only east of the Rocky Mountains. The eastern large and small plethodons are more closely related to each othei than either is to the western plethodons, but of the two, the small group appears to be closer to the Western plethodons.
    [Show full text]