DOCSLIB.ORG

Fauna Assessment (Ecologia)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fauna Assessment (Ecologia) Photos at least 1 up to 3 project/survey specific to completely fill the white box, DO NOT CHANGE SIZE OF WHITE BOX BEAGLE BAY BIG TREE COUNTRY TROPICAL TIMBER PLANTATION PROJECT Fauna Assessment Survey March 2004 ecologiaecologia E N V I R O N M E N T i TROPICAL TIMBER PLANTATIONS PTY LTD. Beagle Bay: Big Tree Country Project Vertebrate Fauna Assessment Survey Document Status Rev Author Reviewer/s Date Approved for Issue No. Name Distributed To Date A Alexander Garry Connell G.Connell DoE, CALM, 10/01/04 Larcombe, Mitchell 8/01/04 Environs Kimberley Ladyman B Alexander Belinda Barnett G.Connell J. Brennan 10/03/04 Larcombe, Mitchell 10/03/04 Ladyman C Alexander Mitchell Ladyman 11/03/04 G. Connell Stakeholders 01/04/04 Larcombe, Mitchell John Brennan Ladyman Myles Menz 31/03/04 D Belinda Barnett 20/12/04 G. Connell CALM Peer Review 20/12/04 0 Jessica Oates 08/02/05 © ecologia Environment (2004). Reproduction of this report in whole or in part by electronic, mechanical or chemical means including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, in any language, is strictly prohibited without the express approval of ecologia Environment and/or Tropical Timber Plantations Pty Limited. Restrictions on Use This report has been prepared specifically for Tropical Timber Plantations Pty Limited. Neither the report nor its contents may be referred to or quoted in any statement, study, report, application, prospectus, loan, or other agreement document, without the express approval of ecologia Environmental Consultants and/or Tropical Timber Plantations Pty Limited. ecologia Environment 76 Thomas Street West Perth WA 6005 Ph: 08 9322 1944 Fax: 08 9322 1599 Email: [email protected] ecologia ii TROPICAL TIMBER PLANTATIONS PTY LTD. Beagle Bay: Big Tree Country Project Vertebrate Fauna Assessment Survey TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY...................................................................................................................................................................IV 1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 BEAGLE BAY – BIG TREE COUNTRY PROJECT ................................................................................... 1 1.1.1 Background............................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1.2 Location.................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................................................ 4 2.1 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT .....................................................................................................................4 2.1.1 Climate ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1.2 Geology and Soils..................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1.3 Hydrogeology........................................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT................................................................................................................. 5 2.2.1 Vegetation................................................................................................................................................. 5 2.2.2 Fire History............................................................................................................................................... 6 2.2.3 Previous Biological Surveys..................................................................................................................... 6 2.2.4 Landuse History........................................................................................................................................ 6 2.2.5 Trial Tropical Timber Plantation .............................................................................................................. 7 3.0 SURVEY METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................................... 9 3.1 SURVEY PROGRAMME ............................................................................................................................ 9 3.2 SITE SELECTION........................................................................................................................................ 9 3.3 SAMPLING METHODS ............................................................................................................................ 11 3.3.1 Systematic Data ...................................................................................................................................... 12 3.3.2 Non-systematic Data............................................................................................................................... 13 3.4 TAXONOMY AND NOMENCLATURE................................................................................................... 14 3.5 DATA ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................................................... 14 3.5.1 Species richness...................................................................................................................................... 14 3.5.2 Multivariate Analysis ............................................................................................................................. 14 3.6 ZOOGEOGRAPHY AND BIOGEOGRAPHY........................................................................................... 15 4.0 VERTEBRATE FAUNA ............................................................................................................................... 17 4.1 VERTEBRATE FAUNA WITHIN THE STUDY AREA........................................................................... 17 4.1.1 Fauna Habitat Composition and Use ...................................................................................................... 17 4.1.2 Site Specific Survey Effort ..................................................................................................................... 20 4.1.3 Sampling Adequacy................................................................................................................................ 20 4.2 FAUNA RECORDED................................................................................................................................. 21 4.2.1 Mammals ................................................................................................................................................ 21 4.2.2 Avifauna ................................................................................................................................................. 22 4.2.3 Herpetofauna .......................................................................................................................................... 23 4.2.4 Feral Fauna ............................................................................................................................................. 23 4.3 BIOGEOGRAPHIC AFFINITIES .............................................................................................................. 24 4.4 SURVEY LIMITATIONS AND CONSTRAINTS..................................................................................... 24 5.0 RARE AND SPECIALLY PROTECTED FAUNA .................................................................................... 27 5.1 SPECIES PROTECTED BY INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS........................................................... 27 5.2 COMMONWEALTH EPBC ACT .............................................................................................................. 27 5.3 WA WILDLIFE CONSERVATION ACT .................................................................................................. 29 5.3.1 Schedule 1 Species ................................................................................................................................. 29 5.3.2 Schedule 4 Species ................................................................................................................................. 29 5.4 CALM PRIORITY FAUNA........................................................................................................................ 29 5.5 SPECIES OF REGIONAL OR LOCAL SIGNIFICANCE.......................................................................... 31 6.0 CONSERVATION SIGNIFICANCE........................................................................................................... 33 6.1 INTERNATIONAL/NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE................................................................................... 33 ecologia iii TROPICAL TIMBER PLANTATIONS PTY LTD. Beagle Bay: Big Tree Country Project Vertebrate Fauna Assessment Survey 6.2 STATE SIGNIFICANCE...........................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bat Calls of New South Wales
    Bat calls of New South Wales Region based guide to the echolocation calls of microchiropteran bats Michael Pennay1 , Brad Law2 & Linda Reinhold3 1 New South Wales Department of Environment and Conservation 2 State Forests of New South Wales 3 Queensland Department of Natural Resources and Mines Bat calls of New South Wales Bat calls of New South Wales Published by the NSW Department of Environment and Conservation May 2004 Copyright © NSW Department of Environment and Conservation ISBN 0 7313 6786 3 This guide is the result of a co-operative project between NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, now the NSW Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC) and State Forests of NSW (SFNSW). DEC provided project funding, management, staff, reference calls, preparation and printing. SFNSW provided part funding and granted support of staff time and expertise, reference calls and editing. Research was conducted under NPWS scientific licence number A2753 and SFNSW special purpose permit for research number 05466. Material presented in this publication may be copied for personal use or republished for non-commercial purposes provided that NSW Department of Environment and Conservation is fully acknowledged as the copyright owner. Apart from these purposes or for private study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under the Australian Copyright Act, no part of this publication may be reproduced by any process without written permission from NSW Department of Environment and Conservation. Inquiries should be addressed to the NSW Department of Environment and Conservation. This publication should be cited as follows: Pennay, M., Law, B., Reinhold, L. (2004). Bat calls of New South Wales: Region based guide to the echolocation calls of Microchiropteran bats.
    [Show full text]
  • Bat Conservation 2021
    Bat Conservation Global evidence for the effects of interventions 2021 Edition Anna Berthinussen, Olivia C. Richardson & John D. Altringham Conservation Evidence Series Synopses 2 © 2021 William J. Sutherland This document should be cited as: Berthinussen, A., Richardson O.C. and Altringham J.D. (2021) Bat Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions. Conservation Evidence Series Synopses. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. Cover image: Leucistic lesser horseshoe bat Rhinolophus hipposideros hibernating in a former water mill, Wales, UK. Credit: Thomas Kitching Digital material and resources associated with this synopsis are available at https://www.conservationevidence.com/ 3 Contents Advisory Board.................................................................................... 11 About the authors ............................................................................... 12 Acknowledgements ............................................................................. 13 1. About this book ........................................................... 14 1.1 The Conservation Evidence project ................................................................................. 14 1.2 The purpose of Conservation Evidence synopses ............................................................ 14 1.3 Who this synopsis is for ................................................................................................... 15 1.4 Background .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Cravens Peak Scientific Study Report
    Geography Monograph Series No. 13 Cravens Peak Scientific Study Report The Royal Geographical Society of Queensland Inc. Brisbane, 2009 The Royal Geographical Society of Queensland Inc. is a non-profit organization that promotes the study of Geography within educational, scientific, professional, commercial and broader general communities. Since its establishment in 1885, the Society has taken the lead in geo- graphical education, exploration and research in Queensland. Published by: The Royal Geographical Society of Queensland Inc. 237 Milton Road, Milton QLD 4064, Australia Phone: (07) 3368 2066; Fax: (07) 33671011 Email: [email protected] Website: www.rgsq.org.au ISBN 978 0 949286 16 8 ISSN 1037 7158 © 2009 Desktop Publishing: Kevin Long, Page People Pty Ltd (www.pagepeople.com.au) Printing: Snap Printing Milton (www.milton.snapprinting.com.au) Cover: Pemberton Design (www.pembertondesign.com.au) Cover photo: Cravens Peak. Photographer: Nick Rains 2007 State map and Topographic Map provided by: Richard MacNeill, Spatial Information Coordinator, Bush Heritage Australia (www.bushheritage.org.au) Other Titles in the Geography Monograph Series: No 1. Technology Education and Geography in Australia Higher Education No 2. Geography in Society: a Case for Geography in Australian Society No 3. Cape York Peninsula Scientific Study Report No 4. Musselbrook Reserve Scientific Study Report No 5. A Continent for a Nation; and, Dividing Societies No 6. Herald Cays Scientific Study Report No 7. Braving the Bull of Heaven; and, Societal Benefits from Seasonal Climate Forecasting No 8. Antarctica: a Conducted Tour from Ancient to Modern; and, Undara: the Longest Known Young Lava Flow No 9. White Mountains Scientific Study Report No 10.
    [Show full text]
  • Gliding Dragons and Flying Squirrels: Diversifying Versus Stabilizing Selection on Morphology Following the Evolution of an Innovation
    vol. 195, no. 2 the american naturalist february 2020 E-Article Gliding Dragons and Flying Squirrels: Diversifying versus Stabilizing Selection on Morphology following the Evolution of an Innovation Terry J. Ord,1,* Joan Garcia-Porta,1,† Marina Querejeta,2,‡ and David C. Collar3 1. Evolution and Ecology Research Centre and the School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales, Kensington, New South Wales 2052, Australia; 2. Institute of Evolutionary Biology (CSIC–Universitat Pompeu Fabra), Passeig Marítim de la Barceloneta, 37–49, Barcelona 08003, Spain; 3. Department of Organismal and Environmental Biology, Christopher Newport University, Newport News, Virginia 23606 Submitted August 1, 2018; Accepted July 16, 2019; Electronically published December 17, 2019 Online enhancements: supplemental material. Dryad data: https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.t7g227h. fi abstract: Evolutionary innovations and ecological competition are eral de nitions of what represents an innovation have been factors often cited as drivers of adaptive diversification. Yet many offered (reviewed by Rabosky 2017), this classical descrip- innovations result in stabilizing rather than diversifying selection on tion arguably remains the most useful (Galis 2001; Stroud morphology, and morphological disparity among coexisting species and Losos 2016; Rabosky 2017). Hypothesized innovations can reflect competitive exclusion (species sorting) rather than sympat- have drawn considerable attention among ecologists and ric adaptive divergence (character displacement). We studied the in- evolutionary biologists because they can expand the range novation of gliding in dragons (Agamidae) and squirrels (Sciuridae) of ecological niches occupied within communities. In do- and its effect on subsequent body size diversification. We found that gliding either had no impact (squirrels) or resulted in strong stabilizing ing so, innovations are thought to be important engines of selection on body size (dragons).
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Keeping Venomous Snakes in the NT
    GUIDELINES FOR KEEPING VENOMOUS SNAKES IN THE NT Venomous snakes are potentially dangerous to humans, and for this reason extreme caution must be exercised when keeping or handling them in captivity. Prospective venomous snake owners should be well informed about the needs and requirements for keeping these animals in captivity. Permits The keeping of protected wildlife in the Northern Territory is regulated by a permit system under the Territory Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 2006 (TPWC Act). Conditions are included on permits, and the Parks and Wildlife Commission of the Northern Territory (“PWCNT”) may issue infringement notices or cancel permits if conditions are breached. A Permit to Keep Protected Wildlife enables people to legally possess native vertebrate animals in captivity in the Northern Territory. The permit system assists the PWCNT to monitor wildlife kept in captivity and to detect any illegal activities associated with the keeping of, and trade in, native wildlife. Venomous snakes are protected throughout the Northern Territory and may not be removed from the wild without the appropriate licences and permits. People are required to hold a Keep Permit (Category 1–3) to legally keep venomous snakes in the Northern Territory. Premises will be inspected by PWCNT staff to evaluate their suitability prior to any Keep Permit (Category 1– 3) being granted. Approvals may also be required from local councils, the Northern Territory Planning Authority, and the Department of Health and Community Services. Consignment of venomous snakes between the Northern Territory and other States and Territories can only be undertaken with an appropriate import / export permit. There are three categories of venomous snake permitted to be kept in captivity in the Northern Territory: Keep Permit (Category 1) – Mildly Dangerous Venomous Keep Permit (Category 2) – Dangerous Venomous Keep Permit (Category 3) – Highly Dangerous Venomous Venomous snakes must be obtained from a legal source (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna Survey for Anketell Point Rail Alignment and Port Projects
    Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna Survey for Anketell Point Rail Alignment and Port Projects Prepared for Australian Premium Iron Management Pty Ltd FINAL REPORT 26 July 2010 Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna Survey for Anketell Point Rail Alignment and Port Projects Australian Premium Iron Management Pty Ltd Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna Survey for Anketell Point Rail Alignment and Port Projects Final Report Prepared for Australian Premium Iron Management Pty Ltd by Phoenix Environmental Sciences Pty Ltd Authors: Greg Harewood, Karen Crews Reviewer: Melanie White, Stewart Ford Date: 26 July 2010 Submitted to: Michelle Carey © Phoenix Environmental Sciences Pty Ltd 2010. The use of this report is solely for the Client for the purpose in which it was prepared. Phoenix Environmental Sciences accepts no responsibility for use beyond this purpose. All rights are reserved and no part of this publication may be reproduced or copied in any form without the written permission of Phoenix Environmental Sciences or Australian Premium Iron Management. Phoenix Environmental Sciences Pty Ltd 1/511 Wanneroo Road BALCATTA WA 6914 P: 08 9345 1608 F: 08 6313 0680 E: [email protected] Project code: 925-AP-API-FAU Phoenix Environmental Sciences Pty Ltd ii Terrestrial Vertebrate Fauna Survey for Anketell Point Rail Alignment and Port Projects Australian Premium Iron Management Pty Ltd TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..........................................................................................................................v 1.0 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Broad-Headed Snake (Hoplocephalus Bungaroides)', Proceedings of the Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales (1946-7), Pp
    Husbandry Guidelines Broad-Headed Snake Hoplocephalus bungaroides Compiler – Charles Morris Western Sydney Institute of TAFE, Richmond Captive Animals Certificate III RUV3020R Lecturers: Graeme Phipps, Jacki Salkeld & Brad Walker 2009 1 Occupational Health and Safety WARNING This Snake is DANGEROUSLY VENOMOUS CAPABLE OF INFLICTING A POTENTIALLY FATAL BITE ALWAYS HAVE A COMPRESSION BANDAGE WITHIN REACH SNAKE BITE TREATMENT: Do NOT wash the wound. Do NOT cut the wound, apply substances to the wound or use a tourniquet. Do NOT remove jeans or shirt as any movement will assist the venom to enter the blood stream. KEEP THE VICTIM STILL. 1. Apply a broad pressure bandage over the bite site as soon as possible. 2. Keep the limb still. The bandage should be as tight as you would bind a sprained ankle. 3. Extend the bandage down to the fingers or toes then up the leg as high as possible. (For a bite on the hand or forearm bind up to the elbow). 4. Apply a splint if possible, to immobilise the limb. 5. Bind it firmly to as much of the limb as possible. (Use a sling for an arm injury). Bring transport to the victim where possible or carry them to transportation. Transport the victim to the nearest hospital. Please Print this page off and put it up on the wall in your snake room. 2 There is some serious occupational health risks involved in keeping venomous snakes. All risk can be eliminated if kept clean and in the correct lockable enclosures with only the risk of handling left in play.
    [Show full text]
  • An Annotated Type Catalogue of the Dragon Lizards (Reptilia: Squamata: Agamidae) in the Collection of the Western Australian Museum Ryan J
    RECORDS OF THE WESTERN AUSTRALIAN MUSEUM 34 115–132 (2019) DOI: 10.18195/issn.0312-3162.34(2).2019.115-132 An annotated type catalogue of the dragon lizards (Reptilia: Squamata: Agamidae) in the collection of the Western Australian Museum Ryan J. Ellis Department of Terrestrial Zoology, Western Australian Museum, Locked Bag 49, Welshpool DC, Western Australia 6986, Australia. Biologic Environmental Survey, 24–26 Wickham St, East Perth, Western Australia 6004, Australia. Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT – The Western Australian Museum holds a vast collection of specimens representing a large portion of the 106 currently recognised taxa of dragon lizards (family Agamidae) known to occur across Australia. While the museum’s collection is dominated by Western Australian species, it also contains a selection of specimens from localities in other Australian states and a small selection from outside of Australia. Currently the museum’s collection contains 18,914 agamid specimens representing 89 of the 106 currently recognised taxa from across Australia and 27 from outside of Australia. This includes 824 type specimens representing 45 currently recognised taxa and three synonymised taxa, comprising 43 holotypes, three syntypes and 779 paratypes. Of the paratypes, a total of 43 specimens have been gifted to other collections, disposed or could not be located and are considered lost. An annotated catalogue is provided for all agamid type material currently and previously maintained in the herpetological collection of the Western Australian Museum. KEYWORDS: type specimens, holotype, syntype, paratype, dragon lizard, nomenclature. INTRODUCTION Australia was named by John Edward Gray in 1825, The Agamidae, commonly referred to as dragon Clamydosaurus kingii Gray, 1825 [now Chlamydosaurus lizards, comprises over 480 taxa worldwide, occurring kingii (Gray, 1825)].
    [Show full text]
  • Chiroptera Vespertilionadae
    Rec. West. Aust. Mus. 1985,12 (1): 85-146 Systematic Revision of Australian Scoteanax and Scotorepens (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae), with Remarks on Relationships to other Nycticeiini DJ. Kitchener* and N. Caputit Abstract Classical and numerical taxonomic approaches based on morphology and utilising electrophoretic information have been applied to clarify the status of Australian species hitherto placed in the genus Nycticeius. Eight named forms have been reduced to five species; these are placed in existing genera: Scateanax (rueppellii) and Scatarepens (arian, balstani, sanbarni and greyii). Phylogenetic analysis of species representative of other Nycticeiini genera, and of geographic groupings of these Australian species, provides additional support for the above generic conclusions. Indicators of gross morphology (skull, radius and lower tooth row lengths) in Scatarepens spp. vary in relation to their sex, and to latitude, longitude and several climatic variables, particularly average minimum temperatures inJuly. Introduction The named forms of vespertilionids considered in this study are: Scotoph£lus grey££ Gray, 1843; Nyct£ce£us rueppell££ Peters, 1866; Scote£nus balston£ Thomas, 1906; Scoteinus £nfluatus Thomas, 1924; Scoteinus or£on Troughton, 1937; Scote£nus sanborn£ Troughton, 1937; Scote£nus balston£ caprenus Troughton, 1937; and Scote£nus or£on aqu£lo Troughton, 1937. These forms have long been the cause of great taxonomic confusion, both at the generic and specific levels. Dobson (1875) referred rueppell££ and grey££ to Scotoph£lus by placing them in the subgenus Scote£nus. Thomas (1906) placed rueppell££ and grey££ in the genus Scote£nus as did Miller (1907) who raised Scote£nus to generic rank (based principally on a study of the Australian species balston£ and grey££, but without reference to the type species, Nyct£ce£us emar­ g£natus Dobson, 1871).
    [Show full text]
  • Expert Report of Professor Woinarski
    NOTICE OF FILING This document was lodged electronically in the FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA (FCA) on 18/01/2019 3:23:32 PM AEDT and has been accepted for filing under the Court’s Rules. Details of filing follow and important additional information about these are set out below. Details of Filing Document Lodged: Expert Report File Number: VID1228/2017 File Title: FRIENDS OF LEADBEATER'S POSSUM INC v VICFORESTS Registry: VICTORIA REGISTRY - FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Dated: 18/01/2019 3:23:39 PM AEDT Registrar Important Information As required by the Court’s Rules, this Notice has been inserted as the first page of the document which has been accepted for electronic filing. It is now taken to be part of that document for the purposes of the proceeding in the Court and contains important information for all parties to that proceeding. It must be included in the document served on each of those parties. The date and time of lodgment also shown above are the date and time that the document was received by the Court. Under the Court’s Rules the date of filing of the document is the day it was lodged (if that is a business day for the Registry which accepts it and the document was received by 4.30 pm local time at that Registry) or otherwise the next working day for that Registry. No. VID 1228 of 2017 Federal Court of Australia District Registry: Victoria Division: ACLHR FRIENDS OF LEADBEATER’S POSSUM INC Applicant VICFORESTS Respondent EXPERT REPORT OF PROFESSOR JOHN CASIMIR ZICHY WOINARSKI Contents: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relationship Between Echolocation-Call Frequency and Moth Predation of a Tropical Bat Fauna
    425 The relationship between echolocation-call frequency and moth predation of a tropical bat fauna C.R. Pavey, C.J. Burwell, and D.J. Milne Abstract: The allotonic frequency hypothesis proposes that the proportion of eared moths in the diet should be highest in bats whose echolocation calls are dominated by frequencies outside the optimum hearing range of moths i.e., <20 and >60 kHz. The hypothesis was tested on an ecologically diverse bat assemblage in northern tropical Australia that consisted of 23 species (5 families, 14 genera). Peak frequency of signals of bats within the echolocation assemblage ranged from 19.8 to 157 kHz but was greatest between 20 and 50 kHz. A strong positive relationship existed between peak call frequency and percentage of moths in the diet for a sample of 16 bats from the assemblage representing 13 genera (R2 = 0.54, p = 0.001). The relationship remained strong when the three species with low-intensity calls were excluded. When the two species with high duty cycle, constant-frequency signals were removed, the relationship was weaker but still significant. In contrast to previous research, eared moths constituted only 54% of moth captures in light traps at bat foraging grounds, and eared moths were significantly larger than non-eared individuals. These results show that the pattern of moth predation by tropical bats is similar to that already established for bat faunas in subtropi- cal and temperate regions. Résumé : L’hypothèse de la fréquence allotonique veut que la proportion de papillons de nuit à organes tympaniques soit maximale dans le régime alimentaire des chauves-souris dont les appels d’écholocation sont dominés par des fré- quences hors du registre d’audition optimal des papillons, c.-à-d.
    [Show full text]
  • Literature Cited in Lizards Natural History Database
    Literature Cited in Lizards Natural History database Abdala, C. S., A. S. Quinteros, and R. E. Espinoza. 2008. Two new species of Liolaemus (Iguania: Liolaemidae) from the puna of northwestern Argentina. Herpetologica 64:458-471. Abdala, C. S., D. Baldo, R. A. Juárez, and R. E. Espinoza. 2016. The first parthenogenetic pleurodont Iguanian: a new all-female Liolaemus (Squamata: Liolaemidae) from western Argentina. Copeia 104:487-497. Abdala, C. S., J. C. Acosta, M. R. Cabrera, H. J. Villaviciencio, and J. Marinero. 2009. A new Andean Liolaemus of the L. montanus series (Squamata: Iguania: Liolaemidae) from western Argentina. South American Journal of Herpetology 4:91-102. Abdala, C. S., J. L. Acosta, J. C. Acosta, B. B. Alvarez, F. Arias, L. J. Avila, . S. M. Zalba. 2012. Categorización del estado de conservación de las lagartijas y anfisbenas de la República Argentina. Cuadernos de Herpetologia 26 (Suppl. 1):215-248. Abell, A. J. 1999. Male-female spacing patterns in the lizard, Sceloporus virgatus. Amphibia-Reptilia 20:185-194. Abts, M. L. 1987. Environment and variation in life history traits of the Chuckwalla, Sauromalus obesus. Ecological Monographs 57:215-232. Achaval, F., and A. Olmos. 2003. Anfibios y reptiles del Uruguay. Montevideo, Uruguay: Facultad de Ciencias. Achaval, F., and A. Olmos. 2007. Anfibio y reptiles del Uruguay, 3rd edn. Montevideo, Uruguay: Serie Fauna 1. Ackermann, T. 2006. Schreibers Glatkopfleguan Leiocephalus schreibersii. Munich, Germany: Natur und Tier. Ackley, J. W., P. J. Muelleman, R. E. Carter, R. W. Henderson, and R. Powell. 2009. A rapid assessment of herpetofaunal diversity in variously altered habitats on Dominica.
    [Show full text]