DOCSLIB.ORG

Liste Rouge Des Coléoptères Saproxyliques De La Région Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Liste Rouge Des Coléoptères Saproxyliques De La Région Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Liste Rouge des coléoptères saproxyliques de la région Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Benoît Dodelin & Benjamin Calmont Janvier 2021 DREAL Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Dodelin B, Calmont B (2021) Liste Rouge des coléoptères saproxyliques de la région Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes. DREAL Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes, Lyon, 79 pp + Tableur Commanditaire : DREAL Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes. Coordination du projet : Dodelin Benoît, Calmont Benjamin (SHNAO), Happe David (DREAL ARA). Rédaction : Dodelin Benoît, Calmont Benjamin (SHNAO). Comité d’évaluation : Binon Michel, Blanc Michaël, Bouyon Hervé, Chambord Romain, Chittaro Yannick, Horellou Arnault, Lacoste Frederic, Sanchez Andréa, Saurat Rémy, Sautière Christophe, Secq Michel, Touroult Julien, Valladares Lionel. Relecture : Bal Bernard (Conservatoire des espaces naturels de Haute-Savoie – Asters), Darinot Fabrice (Réserve naturelle du Marais de Lavours). Conception graphique : Dodelin Benoît, Calmont Benjamin (SHNAO). Photographies : Calmont Benjamin (SHNAO), Dodelin Benoît. Labellisation par l’UICN Comité français le 22 juin 2020. Validation par le CSRPN (Conseil Scientifique Régional du Patrimoine Naturel d’Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes) le 10 décembre 2020 avec l’avis suivant : "En raison du nombre relativement faible de données analysées et de leur hétérogénéité spatiale, cette liste est à considérer comme provisoire en attendant son actualisation à court terme" Illustrations première de couverture : Ceruchus chrysomelinus (EN), Montagne de Valdrôme (26), découverte de Phloeostichus denticollis (VU). Images : B. Dodelin Illustrations dernière de couverture : Merohister ariasi (CR) et Rhysodes sulcatus (CR). Images : B. Calmont Dodelin & Calmont (2021) LR des coléoptères saproxyliques – Région AuRA 1/79 Table des matières Résumé.................................................................................................................................................4 Introduction........................................................................................................................................6 Méthodologie.......................................................................................................................................9 Principe général de la Liste Rouge régionale.............................................................................................9 Catégories de menaces..............................................................................................................................10 Familles de critères d’évaluation..............................................................................................................10 Données de la Liste Rouge........................................................................................................................12 Sélection des taxons évalués............................................................................................................................12 Bases de données.............................................................................................................................................13 Référentiels taxonomiques...............................................................................................................................14 Données d’observations...................................................................................................................................14 Doublons..........................................................................................................................................................15 Synonymie........................................................................................................................................................16 Prise en compte des sous-espèces....................................................................................................................16 Cartographie.....................................................................................................................................................16 Validations des données de distribution...........................................................................................................17 Calculs des EOO/AOO et analyse spatiale......................................................................................................17 Dates.................................................................................................................................................................17 Validation des données de biologies................................................................................................................17 Indice fonctionnel (IF) ou indice d’exigence écologique................................................................................18 Indice patrimonial (IP).....................................................................................................................................19 Autres éléments de valeur patrimoniale / rareté / menace...............................................................................20 Évaluation des statuts de menace..............................................................................................................20 Attribution de statuts provisoires.....................................................................................................................20 Attribution des statuts de menace....................................................................................................................20 Effet de secours : "Rescue effect"....................................................................................................................21 Espèces potentielles.........................................................................................................................................21 Approche partenariale......................................................................................................................................21 Analyse collégiale............................................................................................................................................22 Résultats............................................................................................................................................23 Bilan des données......................................................................................................................................23 Espèces menacées en Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes...........................................................................................25 Espèces disparues de Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes.................................................................................................27 Principales menaces identifiées.......................................................................................................................28 Distribution des coléoptères saproxyliques menacés en Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes.......................................29 Recommandations............................................................................................................................32 Protéger espaces et espèces......................................................................................................................32 Espèces disposant de statuts.............................................................................................................................32 Espèces à préserver..........................................................................................................................................34 Espaces protégés : des réserves aux îlots.........................................................................................................34 Forêts sub-naturelles ou en évolution naturelle...............................................................................................35 Bien gérer la forêt.....................................................................................................................................35 Une gestion forestière multi-services respectant les bonnes pratiques...........................................................35 Connections et corridors..................................................................................................................................37 Promouvoir l’amélioration de la qualité des écosystèmes forestiers..............................................................37 Bien gérer les arbres hors-forêt.................................................................................................................39 Aspects réglementaires....................................................................................................................................39 Bocages............................................................................................................................................................39 Dodelin & Calmont (2021) LR des coléoptères saproxyliques – Région AuRA 2/79 Arbres urbains et péri-urbains..........................................................................................................................40 Répertorier les arbres vétérans.........................................................................................................................41 Techniques de gestion......................................................................................................................................41 Restaurer...................................................................................................................................................43
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Elytra Reduction May Affect the Evolution of Beetle Hind Wings
    Zoomorphology https://doi.org/10.1007/s00435-017-0388-1 ORIGINAL PAPER Elytra reduction may affect the evolution of beetle hind wings Jakub Goczał1 · Robert Rossa1 · Adam Tofilski2 Received: 21 July 2017 / Revised: 31 October 2017 / Accepted: 14 November 2017 © The Author(s) 2017. This article is an open access publication Abstract Beetles are one of the largest and most diverse groups of animals in the world. Conversion of forewings into hardened shields is perceived as a key adaptation that has greatly supported the evolutionary success of this taxa. Beetle elytra play an essential role: they minimize the influence of unfavorable external factors and protect insects against predators. Therefore, it is particularly interesting why some beetles have reduced their shields. This rare phenomenon is called brachelytry and its evolution and implications remain largely unexplored. In this paper, we focused on rare group of brachelytrous beetles with exposed hind wings. We have investigated whether the elytra loss in different beetle taxa is accompanied with the hind wing shape modification, and whether these changes are similar among unrelated beetle taxa. We found that hind wings shape differ markedly between related brachelytrous and macroelytrous beetles. Moreover, we revealed that modifications of hind wings have followed similar patterns and resulted in homoplasy in this trait among some unrelated groups of wing-exposed brachelytrous beetles. Our results suggest that elytra reduction may affect the evolution of beetle hind wings. Keywords Beetle · Elytra · Evolution · Wings · Homoplasy · Brachelytry Introduction same mechanism determines wing modification in all other insects, including beetles. However, recent studies have The Coleoptera order encompasses almost the quarter of all provided evidence that formation of elytra in beetles is less currently known animal species (Grimaldi and Engel 2005; affected by Hox gene than previously expected (Tomoyasu Hunt et al.
    [Show full text]
  • 10 Anni Di Ricerche Entomologiche in Giardino (Insecta)
    Quaderno di Studi e Notizie di Storia Naturale della Romagna Quad. Studi Nat. Romagna, 51: 95-125 (giugno 2020) ISSN 1123-6787 Ilvio Bendazzi 10 anni di ricerche entomologiche in giardino (Insecta) Abstract [Ten years of entomological research in a garden] A list of the insects found in a home-garden during ten years. The garden, of about 850 sq meters, including also a small pond, is close to a house on the outskirts of a village in Romagna lowland. Despite several negative factors due to the human presence, the biodiversity is surprisingly rich. The list includes 566 species of insects, 262 belonging to the Order Lepidoptera, 187 to Coleoptera and 117 to other Orders. These species only represent material identified at least at Genus level, but the collected material includes also many insects not identified at such level, that do not appear on the list. Furthermore many species probably escaped the research because they were neither manually collected nor attracted by light-traps. So it is deemed that the actual over-all insect biodiversity of the garden includes at least some hundreds more additional species. No previous records from Romagna were known of the tortricid Cochylis millierana Peyerimhoff = sannitica Trematerra, and the zopherid Synchita mediolanensis A. & G.B. Villa . The caddis-fly Hydropsyche guttata Pictet is recorded for the first time south of the Po river. The dermestid beetle Paranovelsis aequalis Sharp is new to Italy. Key words: Insecta, garden, checklist, Romagna, Italy. Riassunto Si riporta l’elenco faunistico ottenuto in molti anni di osservazioni sugli insetti di un giardino situato nella bassa pianura romagnola, in ambiente antropizzato.
    [Show full text]
  • Fauna of Longicorn Beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) of Mordovia
    Russian Entomol. J. 27(2): 161–177 © RUSSIAN ENTOMOLOGICAL JOURNAL, 2018 Fauna of longicorn beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) of Mordovia Ôàóíà æóêîâ-óñà÷åé (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) Ìîðäîâèè A.B. Ruchin1, L.V. Egorov1,2 À.Á. Ðó÷èí1, Ë.Â. Åãîðîâ1,2 1 Joint Directorate of the Mordovia State Nature Reserve and National Park «Smolny», Dachny per., 4, Saransk 430011, Russia. 1 ФГБУ «Заповедная Мордовия», Дачный пер., 4, г. Саранск 430011, Россия. E-mail: [email protected] 2 State Nature Reserve «Prisursky», Lesnoi, 9, Cheboksary 428034, Russia. E-mail: [email protected] 2 ФГБУ «Государственный заповедник «Присурский», пос. Лесной, 9, г. Чебоксары 428034, Россия. KEY WORDS: Coleoptera, Cerambycidae, Russia, Mordovia, fauna. КЛЮЧЕВЫЕ СЛОВА: Coleoptera, Cerambycidae, Россия, Мордовия, фауна. ABSTRACT. This paper presents an overview of Tula [Bolshakov, Dorofeev, 2004], Yaroslavl [Vlasov, the Cerambycidae fauna in Mordovia, based on avail- 1999], Kaluga [Aleksanov, Alekseev, 2003], Samara able literature data and our own materials, collected in [Isajev, 2007] regions, Udmurt [Dedyukhin, 2007] and 2002–2017. It provides information on the distribution Chuvash [Egorov, 2005, 2006] Republics. The first in Mordovia, and some biological features for 106 survey work on the fauna of Longicorns in Mordovia species from 67 genera. From the list of fauna are Republic was published by us [Ruchin, 2008a]. There excluded Rhagium bifasciatum, Brachyta variabilis, were indicated 55 species from 37 genera, found in the Stenurella jaegeri, as their habitation in the region is region. At the same time, Ergates faber (Linnaeus, doubtful. Eight species are indicated for the republic for 1760), Anastrangalia dubia (Scopoli, 1763), Stictolep- the first time.
    [Show full text]
  • Start 2013.Qxd 31.05.15 13:27 Seite 173
    Monnerat et al_2.qxp_Start 2013.qxd 31.05.15 13:27 Seite 173 Mitteilungen der SchweizeriSchen entoMologiSchen geSellSchaft BULLETIN DE LA SOCIETE ENTOMOLOGIQUE SUISSE 88: 173–228, 2015 liste commentée des lucanidae, cetoniidae, Buprestidae et cerambycidae (coleoptera) de Suisse annotated checklist of the lucanidae, cetoniidae, Buprestidae and cerambycidae (coleoptera) of Switzerland chriStian Monnerat , Y annick chittaro , a ndreaS Sanchez & Y veS gonSeth info fauna – cScf, Passage Maximilien-de-Meuron 6, ch-2000 neuchâtel; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] a critical list of Swiss lucanidae, cetoniidae, Buprestidae and cerambycidae is presented. this work is based on an extensive survey conducted on specimens deposited in museums and private collec - tions or mentioned in the literature and notes available in the cScf database. Seven species of luca - nidae, 18 cetoniidae, 89 Buprestidae and 179 cerambycidae are considered as valid for Switzerland. one species of cetoniidae, one Buprestidae and 18 cerambycidae are considered as imported. finally, 74 species (three cetoniidae, 44 Buprestidae, and 30 cerambycidae) often misidentified in the litera - ture or for which available specimens are of doubtful origin, are listed and discussed. keywords: Buprestidae, cerambycidae, cetoniidae, lucanidae, checklist, Switzerland, faunistics, new records. introduction les quatre familles de coléoptères traitées dans cette liste correspondent aux groupes cibles du projet de liste rouge des coléoptères du bois. elles appartiennent aux superfamilles des Scarabaeoidea, Buprestoidea et chrysomeloidea et ne for - ment donc pas d’entité systématique homogène. comparativement à d’autres familles de coléoptères, elles ont de longue date suscité l’intérêt des coléoptéristes.
    [Show full text]
  • Quaderni Del Museo Civico Di Storia Naturale Di Ferrara
    ISSN 2283-6918 Quaderni del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Ferrara Anno 2018 • Volume 6 Q 6 Quaderni del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Ferrara Periodico annuale ISSN. 2283-6918 Editor: STEFA N O MAZZOTT I Associate Editors: CARLA CORAZZA , EM A N UELA CAR I A ni , EN R ic O TREV is A ni Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Ferrara, Italia Comitato scientifico / Advisory board CE S ARE AN DREA PA P AZZO ni FI L ipp O Picc OL I Università di Modena Università di Ferrara CO S TA N ZA BO N AD im A N MAURO PELL I ZZAR I Università di Ferrara Ferrara ALE ss A N DRO Min ELL I LU ci O BO N ATO Università di Padova Università di Padova MAURO FA S OLA Mic HELE Mis TR I Università di Pavia Università di Ferrara CARLO FERRAR I VALER I A LE nci O ni Università di Bologna Museo delle Scienze di Trento PI ETRO BRA N D M AYR CORRADO BATT is T I Università della Calabria Università Roma Tre MAR C O BOLOG N A Nic KLA S JA nss O N Università di Roma Tre Linköping University, Sweden IRE N EO FERRAR I Università di Parma In copertina: Fusto fiorale di tornasole comune (Chrozophora tintoria), foto di Nicola Merloni; sezione sottile di Micrite a foraminiferi planctonici del Cretacico superiore (Maastrichtiano), foto di Enrico Trevisani; fiore di digitale purpurea (Digitalis purpurea), foto di Paolo Cortesi; cardo dei lanaioli (Dipsacus fullonum), foto di Paolo Cortesi; ala di macaone (Papilio machaon), foto di Paolo Cortesi; geco comune o tarantola (Tarentola mauritanica), foto di Maurizio Bonora; occhio della sfinge del gallio (Macroglossum stellatarum), foto di Nicola Merloni; bruco della farfalla Calliteara pudibonda, foto di Maurizio Bonora; piumaggio di pernice dei bambù cinese (Bambusicola toracica), foto dell’archivio del Museo Civico di Lentate sul Seveso (Monza).
    [Show full text]
  • 13. Els Coleòpters Del Delta Del Llobregat. Aproximació Històrica I Noves Aportacions
    13. ELS COLEÒPTERS DEL DELTA DEL LLOBREGAT. APROXIMACIÓ HISTÒRICA I NOVES APORTACIONS Miguel Prieto Manzanares1 1. Museu de Ciències Naturals de Barcelona. delta-llobregat.indb 407 12/12/2018 16:51:22 408 ELS SISTEMES NATURALS DEL DELTA DEL LLOBREGAT 13.1. INTRODUCCIÓ Els treballs esmentats no es limiten a una llista taxonòmica, sinó que també inclouen El valor natural del delta del Llobregat va ser informació sobre l’hàbitat i la biologia de les reconegut ben aviat pels entomòlegs, que des espècies. Mateu (1947), en particular, ofereix de mitjan segle xix van freqüentar la zona una descripció exhaustiva del territori i el per a la recol·lecció i l’estudi dels coleòpters. seus ecosistemes a propòsit de l’estudi de la La proximitat amb els nuclis metropolitans família dels caràbids (de la qual va citar gai- de les comarques del Baix Llobregat i el Bar- rebé 150 espècies). Amb vocació conserva- celonès, especialment amb la ciutat de Barce- cionista, aquest i altres entomòlegs alerten de lona, va afavorir la presència dels naturalis- la degradació i l’empobriment del Delta cau- tes, atrets per la gran diversitat d’hàbitats, sats pel creixement industrial i la urbanitza- aleshores inalterats o sotmesos a transforma- ció, ja evidents en aquella època (Mateu, cions incipients. El primer catàleg de coleòp- 1947; Español, 1949a; Lagar, 1967a, 1970 i ters de Catalunya (Cuní Martorell i Martorell 1976; Lagar i Lucas, 1981). A partir del anys Peña, 1876) recull, de fet, nombrosos regis- setanta disminueixen els estudis sobre els co- tres de la desembocadura del Llobregat i leòpters de la zona, coincidint amb un nou àrees adjacents, la majoria corresponents a impuls en els plans de desenvolupament, localitats clàssiques de l’hemidelta esquerre.
    [Show full text]
  • Layman's Report
    THE RED LIST STATUS OF EUROPE’S OVERLOOKED SPECIES LIFE14 PRE BE 001 – Layman’s report This project was co-funded by the European Union under the LIFE Financial Instrument and the Grant Agreement n. LIFE14 PRE BE 001 About IUCN Created in 1948, IUCN represents one of the world’s largest and most diverse environmental networks. It harnesses the experience, resources and reach of more than 1,300 member organisations and the input of over 15,000 volunteer experts, organised in six commissions. IUCN is the global authority on the status of the natural world and the measures needed to safeguard it. The IUCN Global Species Programme supports the activities of the IUCN Species Survival Commission and individual Specialist Groups, as well as implementing global species conservation initiatives. It is an integral part of the IUCN Secretariat and is managed from IUCN’s international headquarters in Gland, Switzerland. What is the IUCN Red List? The European Red List The IUCN Red List of Threatened SpeciesTM is the When conducting regional or national assessments, world’s most comprehensive information source on and to ensure that the criteria are applied the extinction risk of plant and animal species. It is a appropriately at such scales, the IUCN has compilation of the conservation status of species at developed the Guidelines for Application of IUCN Red the global level, based on the best scientific List Criteria at Regional Levels.1 information available. The IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria are based on a set of quantitative criteria linked to population trends, size and structure, threats, and geographic ranges of species.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildfire Yields a Distinct Turnover of the Beetle Community in a Semi-Natural
    Fredriksson et al. Ecological Processes (2020) 9:44 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-020-00246-5 RESEARCH Open Access Wildfire yields a distinct turnover of the beetle community in a semi-natural pine forest in northern Sweden Emelie Fredriksson1* , Roger Mugerwa Pettersson1, Jörgen Naalisvaara2 and Therese Löfroth1 Abstract Background: Fires have been an important natural disturbance and pervasive evolutionary force in the boreal biome. Yet, fire suppression has made forest fires rare in the managed landscapes in Fennoscandia, causing significant habitat loss for saproxylic species such as polypores and insects. To better understand how the beetle community changes (species turnover) after a wildfire in a landscape with intense fire suppression, we monitored beetles with flight intercept traps the first 3 years as well as 12 years after a large wildfire in a national park in northern Sweden (a control/unburnt area was set up for the last year of sampling). Results: Species composition changed significantly among all studied years with a continuous turnover of species following the wildfire. The indicator species analysis showed that year 1 post-fire was mostly associated with cambium consumers and also the pyrophilous species Batrisodes hubenthali. Year 2 was the most abundant and species-rich year, with Tomicus piniperda as the most important indicator species. The indicator species year 3 were mostly secondary successional species, fungivores, and predators and were characterized by lower species diversity. Year 12 had higher diversity compared with year 3 but lower species richness and abundance. A control area was established during year 12 post-fire, and our analyses showed that the control area and burned area differed in species composition suggesting that the beetle community needs longer than 12 years to recover even after a low- intensive ground fire.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparison of Three Trapping Methods Used to Survey Forest-Dwelling Coleoptera
    Eur. J. Entomol. 103: 397–407, 2006 ISSN 1210-5759 A comparison of three trapping methods used to survey forest-dwelling Coleoptera ESKO HYVÄRINEN, JARI KOUKI and PETRI MARTIKAINEN Faculty of Forest Sciences, University of Joensuu, P.O. Box 111, FIN – 80101 Joensuu, Finland; e-mail: [email protected] Keywords. Abundance distribution, beetles, biodiversity inventories, boreal forest, Coleoptera, interception traps, pitfall traps, sampling, species richness, window traps Abstract. Sampling of insect communities is very challenging and for reliable interpretation of results the effects of different sam- pling protocols and data processing on the results need to be fully understood. We compared three different commonly used methods for sampling forest beetles, freely hanging flight-intercept (window) traps (FWT), flight-intercept traps attached to trunks (TWT) and pitfall traps placed in the ground (PFT), in Scots pine dominated boreal forests in eastern Finland. Using altogether 960 traps, forming 576 sub-samples, at 24 study sites, 59760 beetles belonging to 814 species were collected over a period of a month. All of the material was identified to species, with the exception of a few species pairs, to obtain representative data for analyses. Four partly overlapping groups were used in the analyses: (1) all, (2) saproxylic, (3) rare and (4) red-listed species. In terms of the number of species collected TWTs were the most effective for all species groups and the rarer species the species group composed of (groups 1-2-3-4) the larger were the differences between the trap types. In particular, the TWTs caught most red-listed species. However, when sample sizes were standardized FWTs and TWTs caught similar number of species of all species groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Histoires Naturelles N°16 Histoires Naturelles N°16
    Histoires Naturelles n°16 Histoires Naturelles n°16 Essai de liste des Coléoptères de France Cyrille Deliry - Avril 2011 ! - 1 - Histoires Naturelles n°16 Essai de liste des Coléoptères de France Les Coléoptères forment l"ordre de plus diversifié de la Faune avec près de 400000 espèces indiquées dans le Monde. On en compte près de 20000 en Europe et pus de 9600 en France. Classification des Coléoptères Lawrence J.F. & Newton A.F. 1995 - Families and subfamilies of Coleoptera (with selected genera, notes, references and data on family-group names) In : Biology, Phylogeny, and Classification of Coleoptera. - éd. J.Pakaluk & S.A Slipinski, Varsovie : 779-1006. Ordre Coleoptera Sous-ordre Archostemata - Fam. Ommatidae, Crowsoniellidae, Micromathidae, Cupedidae Sous-ordre Myxophaga - Fam. Lepiceridae, Torridincolidae, Hydroscaphidae, Microsporidae Sous-ordre Adephaga - Fam. Gyrinidae, Halipidae, Trachypachidae, Noteridae, Amphizoidae, Hygrobiidae, Dytiscidae, Rhysodidae, Carabidae (Carabinae, Cicindelinae, Trechinae...) Sous-ordre Polyphaga Série Staphyliniformia - Superfam. Hydrophyloidea, Staphylinoidea Série Scarabaeiformia - Fam. Lucanidae, Passalidae, Trogidae, Glaresidae, Pleocmidae, Diphyllostomatidae, Geotrupidae, Belohinidae, Ochodaeidae, Ceratocanthidae, Hybrosoridae, Glaphyridae, Scarabaridea (Scarabaeinae, Melolonthinae, Cetoniinae...) Série Elateriformia - Superfam. Scirtoidea, Dascilloidea, Buprestoidea (Buprestidae), Byrrhoidea, Elateroidea (Elateridae, Lampyridae, Cantharidae...) + Incertae sedis - Fam. Podabrocephalidae, Rhinophipidae
    [Show full text]
  • Vincent Derreumaux
    Palpares libelluloides - Envergure réelle : 100 à 120 mm - Photo : Vincent Derreumaux 98 Courrier scientifique du Parc naturel régional du Luberon et de la Réserve de biosphère Luberon-Lure, n° 14 - 2016, p. 98 à 126 Actualisation de la liste des insectes patrimoniaux pour la Réserve de biosphère Luberon-Lure 3LHUUH)5$3$ RÉSUMÉ L’auteur actualise la liste d’espèces présentée antérieurement en fonction de différents nouveaux éléments en y ajoutant 197 taxons, alors que 79 autres en sont retirés, le nombre total s’établissant alors à 705. Mots-clés : insectes, protection, espèces menacées, patrimoine, listes. TITLE Insect heritage for Biosphere reserve Luberon-Lure (Addenda) ABSTRACT The author updates the list of species previously presented according to various new elements by adding 197 new taxa, and by removing 79 taxa, the total number rising to 705. Keywords : insects, protection, endangered species, patrimony, lists. *(QWRPRORJLVWHPHPEUHGX&RQVHLOVFLHQWLÀTXHGX315/HWGHOD5%/XEHURQ/XUH²FROHRBHWBFLH#RUDQJHIU 99 Introduction un peu trop sévères et qu’il semblait préférable d’envisager parfois une présence potentielle même si elle n’était pas Dans le numéro 11 de la présente publication j’avais pré- formellement avérée, par exemple pour des taxons dont senté une liste d’espèces d’insectes dont la « valeur patri- l’aire connue de répartition nationale, voire européenne, moniale » pouvait être considérée comme attestée par leur englobe le territoire Luberon-Lure où leur biotope existe mention dans une des listes publiées qui étaient présentées. a priori. (Frapa, 2012) La démarche me semble encore d’actualité, À l’énumération des listes prises en considération, il même si les listes utilisées sont susceptibles de subir des convient d’ajouter celle établie par Masselot & Brulin changements importants.
    [Show full text]
  • Pseudotsuga Menziesii
    SPECIAL PUBLICATION 4 SEPTEMBER 1982 INVERTEBRATES OF THE H.J. ANDREWS EXPERIMENTAL FOREST, WESTERN CASCADE MOUNTAINS, OREGON: A SURVEY OF ARTHROPODS ASSOCIATED WITH THE CANOPY OF OLD-GROWTH Pseudotsuga Menziesii D.J. Voegtlin FORUT REJEARCH LABORATORY SCHOOL OF FORESTRY OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY Since 1941, the Forest Research Laboratory--part of the School of Forestry at Oregon State University in Corvallis-- has been studying forests and why they are like they are. A staff or more than 50 scientists conducts research to provide information for wise public and private decisions on managing and using Oregons forest resources and operating its wood-using industries. Because of this research, Oregons forests now yield more in the way of wood products, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Wood products are harvested, processed, and used more efficiently. Employment, productivity, and profitability in industries dependent on forests also have been strengthened. And this research has helped Oregon to maintain a quality environment for its people. Much research is done in the Laboratorys facilities on the campus. But field experiments in forest genetics, young- growth management, forest hydrology, harvesting methods, and reforestation are conducted on 12,000 acres of School forests adjacent to the campus and on lands of public and private cooperating agencies throughout the Pacific Northwest. With these publications, the Forest Research Laboratory supplies the results of its research to forest land owners and managers, to manufacturers and users of forest products, to leaders of government and industry, and to the general public. The Author David J. Voegtlin is Assistant Taxonomist at the Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign, Illinois.
    [Show full text]