Native Orchids in Southeast Alaska Marlin Bowles & Bob Armstrong Juneau, Alaska 2019
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Native Orchids in Southeast Alaska with an Emphasis on Juneau
Native Orchids in Southeast Alaska with an Emphasis on Juneau Marlin Bowles & Bob Armstrong 2019 Acknowledgements We are grateful to numerous people and agencies who provided essential assistance with this project. Carole Baker, Gilbette Blais, Kathy Hocker, John Hudson, Jenny McBride and Chris Miller helped locate and study many elusive species. Pam Bergeson, Ron Hanko, & Kris Larson for use of their photos. Ellen Carrlee provided access to the Juneau Botanical Club herbarium at the Alaska State Museum. The U.S. Forest Service Forestry Sciences Research Station at Juneau also provided access to its herbarium, and Glacier Bay National Park provided data on plant collections in its herbarium. Merrill Jensen assisted with plant resources at the Jensen-Olson Arboretum. Don Kurz, Jenny McBride, Lisa Wallace, and Mary Willson reviewed and vastly improved earlier versions of this book. About the Authors Marlin Bowles lives in Juneau, AK. He is a retired plant conservation biologist, formerly with the Morton Arboretum, Lisle, IL. He has studied the distribution, ecology and reproductionof grassland orchids. Bob Armstrong has authored and co-authored several books about nature in Alaska. This book and many others are available for free as PDFs at https://www.naturebob.com He has worked in Alaska as a biologist, research supervisor and associate professor since 1960. Table of Contents Page The southeast Alaska archipellago . 1 The orchid plant family . 2 Characteristics of orchids . 3 Floral anatomy . 4 Sources of orchid information . 5 Orchid species groups . 6 Orchid habitats . Fairy Slippers . 9 Eastern - Calypso bulbosa var. americana Western - Calypso bulbosa var. occidentalis Lady’s Slippers . -
National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska Final Integrated Activity Plan/Environmental Impact Statement Errata
United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Alaska State Office 222 West Seventh Avenue, #13 Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7504 www.blrn .gov/alaska Dear Reader: The enclosed Errata Sheet documents minor corrections to the text of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska Integrated Activity Plan (TAP) that was publicly released on June 26. 2020. These corrections reflect errors that were discovered after the release of the Final EIS. We have utilized “tracked changes” (red text additions and green text crossed-out deletions) for the changes where we felt it would assist the reader to more easily identify the corrections. There are no changes or significant new circumstances or information identified in this Errata Sheet that affect the impact conclusions in the final EIS. In the Final EIS, an error was identified in Table 2-1 for the acreage available for leasing and infrastructure under Alternative E. Correcting this error required updates throughout the text of the EIS wherever acreage available for leasing and infrastructure under Alternative E was referenced. These changes are denoted with an asterisk (*) in the errata sheet. This Errata Sheet is part of the administrative record for the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska lAP Final EIS. These corrections will be posted on the BLM-Alaska website at www.blm.gov/alaska. For additional information or clarification regarding the attached Errata Sheet, please contact Stephanie Rice, Project Lead, at (907) 271-3202. Chad B. Padge t State Director Attachment: Errata Sheet ATTACHMENT: ERRATA SHEET In the Final EIS, an error was identified in Table 2-1 for the acreage available for leasing and infrastructure under Alternative E. -
Rich Conifer Swamp Communityrich Conifer Abstract Swamp, Page 1
Rich Conifer Swamp CommunityRich Conifer Abstract Swamp, Page 1 Community Range Photo by Michael R. Penskar Prevalent or likely prevalent Infrequent or likely infrequent Absent or likely absent Overview: Rich conifer swamp is a groundwater- communities are minerotrophic wetlands but differ in influenced, or minerotrophic, forested wetland that is species composition because of the absence of northern dominated by northern white cedar (Thuja occidentalis) white cedar, which often forms a dense canopy. An- and occurs on organic soils (e.g., peat and muck). The other type of conifer-dominated wetland, poor conifer community is often referred to as cedar swamp. swamp, which occurs primarily in northern Michigan, can be distinguished from rich conifer swamp by its Global and State Rank: G4/S3 acidic organic soils, lack of groundwater influence (i.e., ombrotrophic), and prevalence of black spruce (Picea Range: Rich conifer swamp occurs throughout the up- mariana) and/or tamarack (Kost et al. 2007). Stands of per Midwest and northeast United States and adjacent mixed conifers and hardwoods that occur on saturated Canadian provinces (Faber-Langendoen 2001, Nature- mineral or muck soils are classified as hardwood- Serve 2001). The community varies in overall species conifer swamp and also occur primarily in northern composition across its range, which includes Michigan, Michigan (Kost et al. 2007). Boreal forest, which is Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ontario, Manitoba, Quebec, often dominated by northern white cedar, is sometimes New York, New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine, and confused with rich conifer swamp. Unlike rich conifer northern Illinois, Indiana and Ohio (Faber-Langendoen swamp, most boreal forests in Michigan are upland 2001, NatureServe 2001). -
D Classification Review in Seven Locations Across Io
Alaska LANDFIRE Application Project: Map and Classification Review in Seven Locations across Alaska Tina Boucher, Keith Boggs Lindsey Flagstad, Mike Duffy Alaska Natural Heritage Program CAS, University of Alaska Anchorage 707 A Street, Anchorage, AK 99515 907-257-2784 [email protected] 1 4°¢¨• ض #ØÆ¥•Æ¥≥ aa!wò hC CLb5LbD{ LbÇwh5Ü/ÇLhb a9ÇIh5{!//Üw!/ò !{{9{a9bÇ {ÇÜ5ò !w9! a9ÇIh5{ a9ÇIh5{v Ü![LÇ!ÇLë9 w9ëL9í {ÇÜ5ò !w9! a9ÇIh5{ w9{Ü[Ç{!//Üw!/ò !{{9{{a9bÇ{ 59b![L 9ëÇ a!t 59b![L t[hÇ !{{LDba9bÇ Çh 9/h[hDL/![ {ò{Ç9a 59b![L /[!{{LCL/!ÇLhb !bL!Y/I!Y 9ëÇ a!t !bL!Y/I!Y t[hÇ !{{LDba9bÇ Çh 9/h[hDL/![ {ò{Ç9a !bL!Y/I!Y /[!{{LCL/!ÇLhb w9{Ü[Ç{v Ü![LÇ!ÇLë9 w9ëL9í òÜYhb!/I!w[9ò b!ÇLhb![ t!wY Y9b!L CWhw5{ b!ÇLhb![ t!wY D[!/L9w .!ò b!ÇLhb![ t!wY D!Ç9{ hC ÇI9 !w/ÇL/ b!ÇLhb![ t!wY íw!bD9[[!{!LbÇ 9[L!{ b!ÇLhb![ t!wY w9/haa9b5!ÇLhb{ !/Ybhí[95D9a9bÇ{ $ w9C9w9b/9{ $ !tt9b5Ló 9wwhw a!ÇwL/9{ !bL!Y/I!Y 9wwhw a!ÇwLó 59b![L 9wwhw a!ÇwLó !tt9b5Ló íw!bD9[[!{Ç 9[L!{ 59Ç!L[95 {/w99b {IhÇ{ !b5 Ç9óÇ 2 aa!wò hC CLb5LbD{ We conducted accuracy assessments for two national park units (the north side of Denali National Park and Aniakchak National Monument) and qualitative assessments in five additional areas representing the major ecological zones across the state including boreal, boreal transition, maritime, arctic, and Aleutian. In each assessment we reviewed the Existing Vegetation Type (EVT) Map and the ecological system classification. -
Final 2012 Monitoring and Evaluation Report Full Document
United States Department Tongass National Forest of Agriculture Forest Service 2012 Annual & Five Year Monitoring and Alaska Region Evaluation Report R10-MB-757 July 2013 Monitoring Overview INSIDE THIS The 2012 Annual Monitoring and Evaluation The monitoring report can be found on the Tongass web REPORT Report summarizes specific monitoring site under Projects and Plans. A full reference report for completed during fiscal year 2012 in ac- each question is available by hyperlink. cordance with the Tongass Land and Re- If you have questions or comments about this report, source Management Plan (Forest Plan). please contact Carol Seitz-Warmuth at the Ketchikan Physical & Biologi- 2–20 Chapter 6 of the Forest Plan specifies an Forest Supervisor’s Office, 907-228-6341. cal Environment annual written summary of forest wide mon- itoring programs. As a result of the 2008 Forest Plan Amend- Human Uses and 20–28 ment, some monitoring protocols and ques- Land Manage- tions were updated to better ment define and focus the monitoring work. This report serves as both Economic and 29 the annual written summary of Social Environ- forest wide monitoring programs, and also the five year review of ment all monitoring done since the Forest Plan Amendment. The five year review is a compre- hensive description of results for each monitoring question, and an evaluation of the last five years of data. Monitoring efforts are currently underway for most of the ques- tions in this report. In some cases, monitoring protocols are still being developed or under review. Monitoring and Evaluation Program Monitoring and evaluation is a ment of plans and budgets, or gathered during the year and quality control process for im- both, to facilitate feasible and identification of issues requiring plementation of the Tongass meaningful action on the immediate attention, while a Forest Plan. -
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Species List, Version 2018-07-24
Kenai National Wildlife Refuge Species List, version 2018-07-24 Kenai National Wildlife Refuge biology staff July 24, 2018 2 Cover image: map of 16,213 georeferenced occurrence records included in the checklist. Contents Contents 3 Introduction 5 Purpose............................................................ 5 About the list......................................................... 5 Acknowledgments....................................................... 5 Native species 7 Vertebrates .......................................................... 7 Invertebrates ......................................................... 55 Vascular Plants........................................................ 91 Bryophytes ..........................................................164 Other Plants .........................................................171 Chromista...........................................................171 Fungi .............................................................173 Protozoans ..........................................................186 Non-native species 187 Vertebrates ..........................................................187 Invertebrates .........................................................187 Vascular Plants........................................................190 Extirpated species 207 Vertebrates ..........................................................207 Vascular Plants........................................................207 Change log 211 References 213 Index 215 3 Introduction Purpose to avoid implying -
Biosystematic Studies in the Genus Piperia (Orchidaceae)
BIOSYSTEMATIC STUDIES IN THE GENUS PIPERIA (ORCHIDACEAE) by James D. Ackerman A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of Humboldt State University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts June, 1976 BIOSYSTEMATIC STUDIES IN THE GENUS PIPERIA (ORCHIDACEAE) by James D. Ackerman Approved by the Master's Thesis Committee Chairman Approved by the Graduate Dean ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Dennis E. Anderson's patience, guidance and support throughout this project is most gratefully acknowledged. I appreciate members of my committee, Richard L. Hurley, Robert A. Rasmussen, and Farris R. Meredith for lively discussions and reading the manuscript. I also thank William V. Allen for access to laboratory equipment, Jerry A. Powell for identifying the moths, Arlee M. Montalvo for aid through various aspects of this work, and the curators and staffs of those herbaria that provided specimens for study. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Acknowledgements Introduction 1 Taxonomic History 7 Materials and Methods 12 Results and Discussion 22 Osmophors 22 Chromosomes 22 Chromatography 27 Interfertility 37 Field Studies 46 Morphology 49 Character analysis 49 Taxonomic concepts 60 Summary 66 Distribution 68 Conclusions 74 Taxonomy 79 Keys to Piperia taxa 79 Piperia 81 Piperia elegans 82 Piperia unalascensis 86 Piperia maritima 89 Piperia maritima var. multiflora 92 Piperia transversa 94 Piperia michaeli 96 iii Table of Contents. Continued. Page Appendices 98 Literature Cited 107 INTRODUCTION Piperia Rydberg is a polymorphic genus and presents complex taxonomic and nomenclatural problems. Variability exists in nearly all morphological aspects including the usually conservative features of the column. Many species have been proposed based on plants showing limited ranges of continuous characters; this has resulted in considerable confusion. -
Calcareous Fens in Southeast Alaska
United States Department of Agriculture Calcareous Fens in Southeast Forest Service Pacifi c Northwest Alaska Research Station 1 Research Note Michael H. McClellan, Terry Brock, and James F. Baichtal PNW-RN-536 February 2003 Abstract Calcareous fens have not been identifi ed previously in southeast Alaska. A limited survey in southeast Alaska identifi ed several wetlands that appear to be calcare- ous fens. These sites were located in low-elevation discharge zones that are below recharge zones in carbonate highlands and talus foot-slopes. Two of six surveyed sites partly met the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources water chemistry criteria for calcareous fens, with pH values of 6.7 to 7.4 and calcium concentrations of 41.8 to 51.4 mg/L but fall short with regard to specifi c conductivity (315 to 380 μS/cm). Alkalinity was not determined. The vegetation was predominately herbaceous, with abundant Sitka sedge (Carex aquatilis) and scattered shrubs such as Barclay’s willow (Salix barclayi) and redosier dogwood (Cornus sericea ssp. sericea). The taxa found in these fens have been reported at other sites in southeast Alaska, although many were at the southern limits of their known ranges. The soils were Histosols composed of 0.6 to greater than 1 m of sedge peat. We found no evidence of calcium carbonate precipitates (marl or tufa) in the soil. Keywords: Alaska (southeast), fens, calcareous fens, wetlands, peatlands, karst. Introduction Calcareous fens, a subtype of extremely rich fen, are important because of their rarity, their distinctive water chemistry, and because they frequently harbor rare or endangered plants (Calcareous Fen Technical Committee 1994). -
Response of Cypripedium and Goodyera to Disturbance in the Thunder Bay Area
Lakehead University Knowledge Commons,http://knowledgecommons.lakeheadu.ca Electronic Theses and Dissertations Undergraduate theses 2018 Response of Cypripedium and Goodyera to disturbance in the Thunder Bay area Davis, Danielle http://knowledgecommons.lakeheadu.ca/handle/2453/4426 Downloaded from Lakehead University, KnowledgeCommons 5(63216(2)&<35,3(',80$1'*22'<(5$72',6785%$1&(,1 7+(7+81'(5%$<$5($ E\ 'DQLHOOH'DYLV )$&8/7<2)1$785$/5(6285&(60$1$*(0(17 /$.(+($'81,9(56,7< 7+81'(5%$<217$5,2 0D\ RESPONSE OF CYPRIPEDIUM AND GOODYERA TO DISTURBANCE IN THE THUNDER BAY AREA by Danielle Davis An Undergraduate Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Honours Bachelor of Environmental Management Faculty of Natural Resources Management Lakehead University May 2018 Major Advisor Second Reader ii LIBRARY RIGHTS STATEMENT In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the HBEM degree at Lakehead University in Thunder Bay, I agree that the University will make it freely available for inspection. This thesis is made available by my authority solely for the purpose of private study and research and may not be copied or reproduced in whole or in part (except as permitted by the Copyright Laws) without my written authority. Signature: Date: iii A CAUTION TO THE READER This HBEM thesis has been through a semi-formal process of review and comment by at least two faculty members. It is made available for loan by the Faculty of Natural Resources Management for the purpose of advancing the practice of professional and scientific forestry. -
Conservation Assessment for White Adder's Mouth Orchid (Malaxis B Brachypoda)
Conservation Assessment for White Adder’s Mouth Orchid (Malaxis B Brachypoda) (A. Gray) Fernald Photo: Kenneth J. Sytsma USDA Forest Service, Eastern Region April 2003 Jan Schultz 2727 N Lincoln Road Escanaba, MI 49829 906-786-4062 This Conservation Assessment was prepared to compile the published and unpublished information on Malaxis brachypoda (A. Gray) Fernald. This is an administrative study only and does not represent a management decision or direction by the U.S. Forest Service. Though the best scientific information available was gathered and reported in preparation for this document and subsequently reviewed by subject experts, it is expected that new information will arise. In the spirit of continuous learning and adaptive management, if the reader has information that will assist in conserving the subject taxon, please contact: Eastern Region, USDA Forest Service, Threatened and Endangered Species Program, 310 Wisconsin Avenue, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53203. Conservation Assessment for White Adder’s Mouth Orchid (Malaxis Brachypoda) (A. Gray) Fernald 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..............................................................................................................2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..............................................................................................................3 INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................3 -
Insights Into the Taxonomy and Evolution Within an Orchid, Platanthera Dilatata, Based on Orphometrics and Molecular Markers
Mississippi State University Scholars Junction Theses and Dissertations Theses and Dissertations 1-1-2012 Insights into the Taxonomy and Evolution within an Orchid, Platanthera Dilatata, based on Orphometrics and Molecular Markers Binaya Adhikari Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsjunction.msstate.edu/td Recommended Citation Adhikari, Binaya, "Insights into the Taxonomy and Evolution within an Orchid, Platanthera Dilatata, based on Orphometrics and Molecular Markers" (2012). Theses and Dissertations. 2746. https://scholarsjunction.msstate.edu/td/2746 This Graduate Thesis - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Scholars Junction. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholars Junction. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Insights into the taxonomy and evolution within an orchid, Platanthera dilatata, based on morphometrics and molecular markers By Binaya Adhikari A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Mississippi State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Masters of Science in Biological Sciences in the Department of Biological Sciences Mississippi State, Mississippi August 2012 Copyright by Binaya Adhikari 2012 Insights into the taxonomy and evolution within an orchid, Platanthera dilatata, based on morphometrics and molecular markers By Binaya Adhikari Approved: _________________________________ _________________________________ Lisa E. Wallace -
Alternative Methods’ of Carrying out the Undertaking
Draft Environmental Assessment Lakeview Waterfront Connection 5.0 DESCRIPTION, EVALUATION AND RATIONALE FOR ‘ALTERNATIVE METHODS’ OF CARRYING OUT THE UNDERTAKING ‘Alternative Methods’ are different ways of doing the same activity. In the context of the LWC Project, ‘Alternative Methods’ are similar ways of designing a new natural waterfront park on created land with ecological habitat and public linkages within the LWC Project Study Area. For the purpose of the EA, different ‘Alternative Methods’ were identified by modelling different fill volumes and alternative shoreline treatments in relation to the coastal processes that will ultimately dictate their configuration. The initial identification of ‘Alternative Methods’ considered the amount of fill required to establish a footprint upon which other LWC Project objectives could be achieved. Different combinations of hard and soft shorelines (i.e. revetment vs. beach) and the incorporation of different fill volumes produced a series of alternative footprints upon which the various LWC Project objectives could be achieved. LWC Project objectives were addressed as subsequent layers applied to the alternative footprints. The identification and evaluation of ‘Alternative Methods’ was carried out in a four-step process depicted in Figure 5.1. 5.1 STEP 1: DETERMINE FOOTPRINT FOR ALTERNATIVES The first step in defining the Alternative LWC Project Configurations was to develop a range of footprints12 up to a maximum spatial extent. This range of footprints was determined through consideration of coastal processes, effects on water quality and the economical use of fill. The LWC Project footprint can be affected by and/or can affect coastal processes to the detriment of the broader LWC Regional Study Area or to the detriment of the LWC Project footprint itself.