DOCSLIB.ORG

Catch the Buzz — Pollinator Diversity, Distribution, And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Catch the Buzz – Pollinator Diversity, Distribution, and Phenology in Shenandoah National Park Natural Resource Report NPS/SHEN/NRR—2017/1441 ON THIS PAGE Top: Citizen scientists (Peg Clifton, Mary O’Meara, Carolyn Smith) running pollinator traps on Skyline Drive in August 2015, Shenandoah NP. Bottom: Bee bowl trap and informational sign. Photographs courtesy of J. Rykken. ON THE COVER Bumble bee (Bombus sp.) on nodding onion (Allium cernum) in Big Meadows, Shenandoah NP. Photograph courtesy of J. Rykken. Catch the Buzz – Pollinator Diversity, Distribution, and Phenology in Shenandoah National Park Natural Resource Report NPS/SHEN/NRR—2017/1441 Jessica J. Rykken Museum of Comparative Zoology Harvard University 26 Oxford Street Cambridge, MA 02155 May 2017 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service. The series supports the advancement of science, informed decision-making, and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series also provides a forum for presenting more lengthy results that may not be accepted by publications with page limitations. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received formal peer review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data, and whose background and expertise put them on par technically and scientifically with the authors of the information. Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. This report is available in digital format from the National Park Service Data Store, and the Natural Resource Publications Management website (http://www.nature.nps.gov/publications/nrpm/). To receive this report in a format that is optimized to be accessible using screen readers for the visually or cognitively impaired, please email [email protected]. Please cite this publication as: Rykken, J. J. 2017. Catch the buzz – pollinator diversity, distribution, and phenology in Shenandoah National Park. Natural Resource Report NPS/SHEN/NRR—2017/1441. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. NPS 134/138251, May 2017 ii Contents Page Figures.................................................................................................................................................... v Tables .................................................................................................................................................... vi Appendices ............................................................................................................................................ vi Abstract ................................................................................................................................................ vii Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................................. x Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1 Methods .................................................................................................................................................. 3 Study area ....................................................................................................................................... 3 Site selection and timing of collections .......................................................................................... 3 Sampling techniques for pollinators ............................................................................................. 11 Sample processing and specimen identification ........................................................................... 11 Data analysis ................................................................................................................................. 12 Techniques for outreach and education ........................................................................................ 12 Results .................................................................................................................................................. 13 Bee and syrphid fly diversity ........................................................................................................ 13 Comparison between sampling methods and habitats .................................................................. 18 Pollinator floral associations ........................................................................................................ 21 Monitoring sites and pollinator phenology ................................................................................... 22 Phenology ..................................................................................................................................... 24 Discussion ............................................................................................................................................ 26 Shenandoah’s pollinator diversity ................................................................................................ 26 Bees ......................................................................................................................................... 26 Syrphid flies............................................................................................................................. 28 Efficacy of sampling methods ...................................................................................................... 29 Habitat and floral associations ...................................................................................................... 30 Pollinator phenology .................................................................................................................... 31 Threats to pollinators and the need for monitoring ...................................................................... 32 Educating park staff and visitors about Shenandoah’s pollinators ............................................... 33 iii Contents (continued) Page Conclusions and Recommendations .................................................................................................... 34 Literature Cited .................................................................................................................................... 35 iv Figures Page Figure 1. Examples of syrphid fly diversity in Shenandoah NP. .......................................................viii Figure 2. Examples of bee diversity in Shenandoah NP. ..................................................................... ix Figure 3a. Approximate locations for sampling sites 1-19 plus two monitoring sites (N1, N2) located in the North District of Shenandoah NP ............................................................................. 4 Figure 3b. Approximate locations for sampling sites 20-79 plus two monitoring sites (C1, C2) located in the Central District of Shenandoah NP .................................................................. 5 Figure 3c. Approximate locations for sampling sites 80-98 plus two monitoring sites (S1, S2) located in the South District of Shenandoah NP ............................................................................. 6 Figure 4. Twenty-six genera of bees collected in Shenandoah NP in decreasing order of abundance.. .......................................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 5. Twenty-nine genera of syrphid flies collected in Shenandoah NP in decreasing order of abundance. .............................................................................................................................. 14 Figure 6. Comparison of observed and estimated absolute species richness for bees and syrphid flies, using Chao 1 species richness estimator ........................................................................ 15 Figure 7. Comparison of trapping methods for bees and syrphid flies in Shenandoah NP. ............... 19 Figure 8. Comparison of total abundance and species richness across four habitats in Shenandoah NP for bees and syrphid flies. .......................................................................................... 20 Figure 9. Rarefaction curves for total numbers of bee or
Recommended publications
  • Specialist Foragers in Forest Bee Communities Are Small, Social Or Emerge Early

    Specialist Foragers in Forest Bee Communities Are Small, Social Or Emerge Early

    Received: 5 November 2018 | Accepted: 2 April 2019 DOI: 10.1111/1365-2656.13003 RESEARCH ARTICLE Specialist foragers in forest bee communities are small, social or emerge early Colleen Smith1,2 | Lucia Weinman1,2 | Jason Gibbs3 | Rachael Winfree2 1GraDuate Program in Ecology & Evolution, Rutgers University, New Abstract Brunswick, New Jersey 1. InDiviDual pollinators that specialize on one plant species within a foraging bout 2 Department of Ecology, Evolution, and transfer more conspecific and less heterospecific pollen, positively affecting plant Natural Resources, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey reproDuction. However, we know much less about pollinator specialization at the 3Department of Entomology, University of scale of a foraging bout compared to specialization by pollinator species. Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, CanaDa 2. In this stuDy, we measured the Diversity of pollen carried by inDiviDual bees forag- Correspondence ing in forest plant communities in the miD-Atlantic United States. Colleen Smith Email: [email protected] 3. We found that inDiviDuals frequently carried low-Diversity pollen loaDs, suggest- ing that specialization at the scale of the foraging bout is common. InDiviDuals of Funding information Xerces Society for Invertebrate solitary bee species carried higher Diversity pollen loaDs than Did inDiviDuals of Conservation; Natural Resources social bee species; the latter have been better stuDied with respect to foraging Conservation Service; GarDen Club of America bout specialization, but account for a small minority of the worlD’s bee species. Bee boDy size was positively correlated with pollen load Diversity, and inDiviDuals HanDling EDitor: Julian Resasco of polylectic (but not oligolectic) species carried increasingly Diverse pollen loaDs as the season progresseD, likely reflecting an increase in the Diversity of flowers in bloom.
  • List of Insect Species Which May Be Tallgrass Prairie Specialists

    List of Insect Species Which May Be Tallgrass Prairie Specialists

    Conservation Biology Research Grants Program Division of Ecological Services © Minnesota Department of Natural Resources List of Insect Species which May Be Tallgrass Prairie Specialists Final Report to the USFWS Cooperating Agencies July 1, 1996 Catherine Reed Entomology Department 219 Hodson Hall University of Minnesota St. Paul MN 55108 phone 612-624-3423 e-mail [email protected] This study was funded in part by a grant from the USFWS and Cooperating Agencies. Table of Contents Summary.................................................................................................. 2 Introduction...............................................................................................2 Methods.....................................................................................................3 Results.....................................................................................................4 Discussion and Evaluation................................................................................................26 Recommendations....................................................................................29 References..............................................................................................33 Summary Approximately 728 insect and allied species and subspecies were considered to be possible prairie specialists based on any of the following criteria: defined as prairie specialists by authorities; required prairie plant species or genera as their adult or larval food; were obligate predators, parasites
  • Wild Bee Declines and Changes in Plant-Pollinator Networks Over 125 Years Revealed Through Museum Collections

    Wild Bee Declines and Changes in Plant-Pollinator Networks Over 125 Years Revealed Through Museum Collections

    University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository Master's Theses and Capstones Student Scholarship Spring 2018 WILD BEE DECLINES AND CHANGES IN PLANT-POLLINATOR NETWORKS OVER 125 YEARS REVEALED THROUGH MUSEUM COLLECTIONS Minna Mathiasson University of New Hampshire, Durham Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/thesis Recommended Citation Mathiasson, Minna, "WILD BEE DECLINES AND CHANGES IN PLANT-POLLINATOR NETWORKS OVER 125 YEARS REVEALED THROUGH MUSEUM COLLECTIONS" (2018). Master's Theses and Capstones. 1192. https://scholars.unh.edu/thesis/1192 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses and Capstones by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WILD BEE DECLINES AND CHANGES IN PLANT-POLLINATOR NETWORKS OVER 125 YEARS REVEALED THROUGH MUSEUM COLLECTIONS BY MINNA ELIZABETH MATHIASSON BS Botany, University of Maine, 2013 THESIS Submitted to the University of New Hampshire in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Biological Sciences: Integrative and Organismal Biology May, 2018 This thesis has been examined and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Biological Sciences: Integrative and Organismal Biology by: Dr. Sandra M. Rehan, Assistant Professor of Biology Dr. Carrie Hall, Assistant Professor of Biology Dr. Janet Sullivan, Adjunct Associate Professor of Biology On April 18, 2018 Original approval signatures are on file with the University of New Hampshire Graduate School.
  • Bees in the Trees: Diverse Spring Fauna in Temperate Forest Edge Canopies

    Bees in the Trees: Diverse Spring Fauna in Temperate Forest Edge Canopies

    Forest Ecology and Management 482 (2021) 118903 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Forest Ecology and Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/foreco Bees in the trees: Diverse spring fauna in temperate forest edge canopies Katherine R. Urban-Mead a,*, Paige Muniz~ a, Jessica Gillung b, Anna Espinoza a, Rachel Fordyce a, Maria van Dyke a, Scott H. McArt a, Bryan N. Danforth a a Cornell Department of Entomology, Ithaca, NY 14853, United States b Department of Natural Resource Sciences at McGill University in Quebec, Canada ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Temperate hardwood deciduous forest is the dominant landcover in the Northeastern US, yet its canopy is usually Temperate deciduous forests ignored as pollinator habitat due to the abundance of wind-pollinated trees. We describe the vertical stratifi­ Wild bees cation of spring bee communities in this habitat and explore associations with bee traits, canopy cover, and Forest management coarse woody debris. For three years, we sampled second-growth woodlots and apple orchard-adjacent forest Canopy ecology sites from late March to early June every 7–10 days with paired sets of tri-colored pan traps in the canopy (20–25 m above ground) and understory (<1m). Roughly one fifthof the known New York state bee fauna were caught at each height, and 90 of 417 species overall, with many species shared across the strata. We found equal species richness, higher diversity, and a much higher proportion of female bees in the canopy compared to the understory. Female solitary, social, soil- and wood-nesting bees were all abundant in the canopy while soil- nesting and solitary bees of both sexes dominated the understory.
  • Creating a Pollinator Garden for Native Specialist Bees of New York and the Northeast

    Creating a Pollinator Garden for Native Specialist Bees of New York and the Northeast

    Creating a pollinator garden for native specialist bees of New York and the Northeast Maria van Dyke Kristine Boys Rosemarie Parker Robert Wesley Bryan Danforth From Cover Photo: Additional species not readily visible in photo - Baptisia australis, Cornus sp., Heuchera americana, Monarda didyma, Phlox carolina, Solidago nemoralis, Solidago sempervirens, Symphyotrichum pilosum var. pringlii. These shade-loving species are in a nearby bed. Acknowledgements This project was supported by the NYS Natural Heritage Program under the NYS Pollinator Protection Plan and Environmental Protection Fund. In addition, we offer our appreciation to Jarrod Fowler for his research into compiling lists of specialist bees and their host plants in the eastern United States. Creating a Pollinator Garden for Specialist Bees in New York Table of Contents Introduction _________________________________________________________________________ 1 Native bees and plants _________________________________________________________________ 3 Nesting Resources ____________________________________________________________________ 3 Planning your garden __________________________________________________________________ 4 Site assessment and planning: ____________________________________________________ 5 Site preparation: _______________________________________________________________ 5 Design: _______________________________________________________________________ 6 Soil: _________________________________________________________________________ 6 Sun Exposure: _________________________________________________________________
  • Citizen Scientists Document Geographic Patterns in Pollinator Communities

    Citizen Scientists Document Geographic Patterns in Pollinator Communities

    Journal of Pollination Ecology, 23(10), 2018, pp 90-97 CITIZEN SCIENTISTS DOCUMENT GEOGRAPHIC PATTERNS IN POLLINATOR COMMUNITIES Alison J. Parker* and James D. Thomson University of Toronto, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, 25 Harbord Street, Toronto, Ontario M5S 3G5 Canada Abstract—It is widely recognized that plants are visited by a diverse community of pollinators that are highly variable in space and time, but biologists are often unable to investigate the pollinator climate across species’ entire ranges. To study the community of pollinators visiting the spring ephemerals Claytonia virginica and Claytonia caroliniana, we assembled a team of citizen scientists to monitor pollinator visitation to plants throughout the species’ ranges. Citizen scientists documented some interesting differences in pollinator communities; specifically, that western C. virginica and C. caroliniana populations are visited more often by the pollen specialist bee Andrena erigeniae and southern populations are visited more often by the bombyliid fly Bombylius major. Differences in pollinator communities throughout the plants’ range will have implications for the ecology and evolution of a plant species, including that differences may affect the male fitness of individual plants or the reproductive success of plant populations, or both. Keywords: citizen science, plant-pollinator interactions INTRODUCTION Looking for and documenting large-scale patterns in A rich history of research has explored the role of a pollinator communities requires a great deal of observational pollinator species in determining the reproductive success of a data. Studies are often limited to just one or a few plant plant, selecting for plant traits, and in some cases influencing populations (Herrera et al.
  • Unique Bee Communities Within Vacant Lots and Urban Farms Result from Variation in Surrounding Urbanization Intensity

    Unique Bee Communities Within Vacant Lots and Urban Farms Result from Variation in Surrounding Urbanization Intensity

    sustainability Article Unique Bee Communities within Vacant Lots and Urban Farms Result from Variation in Surrounding Urbanization Intensity Frances S. Sivakoff ID , Scott P. Prajzner and Mary M. Gardiner * ID Department of Entomology, The Ohio State University, 2021 Coffey Road, Columbus, OH 43210, USA; [email protected] (F.S.S.); [email protected] (S.P.P.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-330-601-6628 Received: 1 May 2018; Accepted: 5 June 2018; Published: 8 June 2018 Abstract: We investigated the relative importance of vacant lot and urban farm habitat features and their surrounding landscape context on bee community richness, abundance, composition, and resource use patterns. Three years of pan trap collections from 16 sites yielded a rich assemblage of bees from vacant lots and urban farms, with 98 species documented. We collected a greater bee abundance from vacant lots, and the two forms of greenspace supported significantly different bee communities. Plant–pollinator networks constructed from floral visitation observations revealed that, while the average number of bees utilizing available resources, niche breadth, and niche overlap were similar, the composition of floral resources and common foragers varied by habitat type. Finally, we found that the proportion of impervious surface and number of greenspace patches in the surrounding landscape strongly influenced bee assemblages. At a local scale (100 m radius), patch isolation appeared to limit colonization of vacant lots and urban farms. However, at a larger landscape scale (1000 m radius), increasing urbanization resulted in a greater concentration of bees utilizing vacant lots and urban farms, illustrating that maintaining greenspaces provides important habitat, even within highly developed landscapes.
  • Etude Systematique Des Insectes

    Etude Systematique Des Insectes

    République Algérienne démocratique et populaire Ministère de l’enseignement supérieur et de la recherche scientifique Université de Mohamed Kheider –BISKRA- Réf :………….. Faculté des Sciences Exactes et des Sciences de la Nature et de la Vie Département des Sciences de la Nature et de la Vie Mémoire de Magistère en Biologie Spécialité : Biologie Animale Option : Arthropodologie ETUDE SYSTEMATIQUE DES INSECTES ANDRENIDAE (HYMENOPTERA : APOIDEA) DE LA REGION DE BISKRA. Présenté par : DJOUAMA Hana Membres de jury : Président : Mr. BELHAMRA Mohammed Maitre de conférences. Université de Biskra Rapporteur : Mr. LOUADI Kamel Professeur. Université Mentouri Constantine Examinateurs : Mlle. BERCHI Selima Professeur. Université Mentouri Constantine Mr. LAAMARI Malik Professeur. Université de Batna Soutenue le : 08 / 01 / 2011 Tout d’abord, je tiens à remercier mon directeur de mémoire Mr. le professeur Louadi Kamel qui m’a guidé durant toute la période de réalisation de ce travail et qui était généreux et compréhensif, Je remercie les membres de jury : Mr. Belhamra Mohamed, Maitre de Conférence à l’Université de Biskra, notre père spirituel, Mlle le professeur Berchi Selima de l’Université Mentouri Constantine et Mr le Professeur Lâammari Malik de l’Université de Batna qui ont aimablement accepté de faire partie de ce jury. Bien sûr, et sans doute je remercie, afin de réaliser ce modeste travail , mes parents pour leur soutien moral, pour leur présence, pour leur générosité, pour toute chose grande était-elle ou petite,…à vous Papa Abdesselem qui n’a rien garder pour m’aider et Maman Djouama Nouara, je vous offre ce petit cadeau. Comme je remercie l’e laboratoire de Biosystématique et Ecologie des Arthropodes de Constantine et son équipage ; Le Docteur Scheuchl Erwin du muséum d’Autriche pour qui a identifié et confirmé une partie des espèces d’Andrenidae.
  • Complementary Crops and Landscape Features Sustain Wild Bee Communities

    Complementary Crops and Landscape Features Sustain Wild Bee Communities

    Complementary crops and landscape features sustain wild bee communities 1,3 2 1 1 KYLE T. M ARTINS, CECILE H. ALBERT, MARTIN J. L ECHOWICZ, AND ANDREW GONZALEZ 1Department of Biology, McGill University, 1205 Docteur Penfield Avenue, Montreal, Quebec H3A 1B1 Canada 2Aix Marseille Univ, Univ Avignon, CNRS, IRD, IMBE, Technopole^ Arbois-Mediterranee Bat,^ Villemin – BP 80, F-13545 Aix-en-Provence Cedex 04, France Abstract. Wild bees, which are important for commercial pollination, depend on floral and nest- ing resources both at farms and in the surrounding landscape. Mass-flowering crops are only in bloom for a few weeks and unable to support bee populations that persist throughout the year. Farm fields and orchards that flower in succession potentially can extend the availability of floral resources for pollinators. However, it is unclear whether the same bee species or genera will forage from one crop to the next, which bees specialize on particular crops, and to what degree inter-crop visitation patterns will be mediated by landscape context. We therefore studied local- and landscape-level drivers of bee diversity and species turnover in apple orchards, blueberry fields, and raspberry fields that bloom sequentially in southern Quebec, Canada. Despite the presence of high bee species turnover, orchards and small fruit fields complemented each other phenologically by supporting two bee genera essential to their pollination: mining bees (Andrena spp.) and bumble bees (Bombus spp.). A number of bee spe- cies specialized on apple, blueberry, or raspberry blossoms, suggesting that all three crops could be used to promote regional bee diversity. Bee diversity (rarefied richness, wild bee abundance) was high- est across crops in landscapes containing hedgerows, meadows, and suburban areas that provide ancil- lary nesting and floral resources throughout the spring and summer.
  • Diversified Floral Resource Plantings Support Bee Communities After

    Diversified Floral Resource Plantings Support Bee Communities After

    www.nature.com/scientificreports Corrected: Publisher Correction OPEN Diversifed Floral Resource Plantings Support Bee Communities after Apple Bloom in Commercial Orchards Sarah Heller1,2,5,6, Neelendra K. Joshi1,2,3,6*, Timothy Leslie4, Edwin G. Rajotte2 & David J. Biddinger1,2* Natural habitats, comprised of various fowering plant species, provide food and nesting resources for pollinator species and other benefcial arthropods. Loss of such habitats in agricultural regions and in other human-modifed landscapes could be a factor in recent bee declines. Artifcially established foral plantings may ofset these losses. A multi-year, season-long feld study was conducted to examine how wildfower plantings near commercial apple orchards infuenced bee communities. We examined bee abundance, species richness, diversity, and species assemblages in both the foral plantings and adjoining apple orchards. We also examined bee community subsets, such as known tree fruit pollinators, rare pollinator species, and bees collected during apple bloom. During this study, a total of 138 species of bees were collected, which included 100 species in the foral plantings and 116 species in the apple orchards. Abundance of rare bee species was not signifcantly diferent between apple orchards and the foral plantings. During apple bloom, the known tree fruit pollinators were more frequently captured in the orchards than the foral plantings. However, after apple bloom, the abundance of known tree fruit pollinating bees increased signifcantly in the foral plantings, indicating potential for foral plantings to provide additional food and nesting resources when apple fowers are not available. Insect pollinators are essential in nearly all terrestrial ecosystems, and the ecosystem services they provide are vital to both wild plant communities and agricultural crop production.
  • Hymenoptera: Apoidea) Habitat in Agroecosystems Morgan Mackert Iowa State University

    Hymenoptera: Apoidea) Habitat in Agroecosystems Morgan Mackert Iowa State University

    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Graduate Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 2019 Strategies to improve native bee (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) habitat in agroecosystems Morgan Mackert Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd Part of the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, and the Entomology Commons Recommended Citation Mackert, Morgan, "Strategies to improve native bee (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) habitat in agroecosystems" (2019). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 17255. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/17255 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Strategies to improve native bee (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) habitat in agroecosystems by Morgan Marie Mackert A thesis submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Major: Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Program of Study Committee: Mary A. Harris, Co-major Professor John D. Nason, Co-major Professor Robert W. Klaver The student author, whose presentation of the scholarship herein was approved by the program of study committee, is solely responsible for the content of this thesis. The Graduate College will ensure this thesis is globally accessible and will not permit alterations after a degree is conferred. Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2019 Copyright © Morgan Marie Mackert, 2019. All rights reserved ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... iv ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... vi CHAPTER 1.
  • Biological Opinion

    Biological Opinion

    Biological Opinion Francis Marion National Forest Revised Land Management Plan FWS Log No.04ES1000-2016-F-0628 U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service December 2, 2016 Prepared by: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service South Carolina Ecological Services Field Office 176 Croghan Spur Road, Suite 200 Charleston, South Carolina 29407 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1. Ecosystems (not including rivers and streams) on the Francis Marion National Forest. FIGURE 2. Management areas on the Francis Marion National Forest. FIGURE 3. Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) demographic populations on Francis Marion, spatially defined as aggregations of active clusters within 6 km (3.7 miles), and important areas (red arrows) to either establish or maintain demographic connectivity. FIGURE 4: Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) Francis Marion population size and trend, active clusters. Data and graph prepared Mark Danaher, FMNF, 2014. FIGURE 5: Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) Francis Marion population size and trend, potential breeding groups. Data and graph prepared Mark Danaher, FMNF, 2014. 2 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1. Summary of Effects Determinations. TABLE 2. Fire-adapted ecosystems by Management Area. TABLE 3. Threatened or endangered species considered in this analysis. TABLE 4. American chaffseed (Schwalbea americana) monitoring trends from 1999-2016, Francis Marion National Forest. Data and table prepared by Robin Mackie, Forest Botanist/Ecologist, Francis Marion National Forest. TABLE 5. American chaffseed (Schwalbea americana) site prescribed burning trends, Francis Marion National Forest, 1996-2012. Data and table prepared by Robin Mackie, Forest Botanist/Ecologist, Francis Marion National Forest. TABLE 6. Roads and system type within Francis Marion managed cluster polygons.