DOCSLIB.ORG

I. Species. Rare False Truffle (Gautieriamagnicellaris) IE FEMAT Rating

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
I. Species. Rare False Truffle (Gautieriamagnicellaris) IE FEMAT Rating e~paremefl of @ 2 ::,::::es Final Supplemental I protester Environmental Impact 1i - epr3 o Statement Bureu .f nd od M..n°.ement on Management of Habitat for Late-Successional and Old-Growth | Febnhaql994 Forest Related Species Within the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl t Appendix J2 Results of Additional Species Analysis I - Appendix J2 Results of Additional Species Analysis Prepared by Species Analysis Team Richard S. Holthausen-Team Leader Forest Service, Washington Office Robert Anthony National Biological Survey, Corvalis, Oregon Keith Aubry Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Olympia, Washington Kelly Burnett Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Corvallis Oregon Nancy Fredricks Forest Service, Gifford Pinchot National Forest Joseph Furnish Bureau of Land Management, Oregon State Office and Salem District Robin Lesher Forest Service, Olympic and Mt. Baker-Snoqualnie National Forests E. Charles Meslow National Biological Survey, Corvallis, Oregon Martin Raphael Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Olympia, Washington Roger Rosentreter Bureau of Land Management, Idaho State Office Edward E. Starkey National Biological Survey,. Corvallis, Oregon Appendix J of the Final SEIS Methods of Additional Species Analysis for the Final SEIS Table of Contents Introduction and Objectives ............ ............................. J2-1 Description of the Process ............. ............................. J2-2 Step 1: Screen Species to Determine Which are to be Further Analyzed ..... J2-2 Step 2: Describe in Detail the Basis for the Species Rating and/or the Basis for Concern About the Cumulative Effects ..................... J2-4 Step 3: Describe Possible Mitigation Measures for Each Species ..... ...... J2-6 Step 4: Describe the Benefits of the Possible Mitigation ..... ............ J2-6 Step 5: Summarize Mitigation Measures for All Species ..... ............ J2-6 Step 6: Describe the Benefit Provided to Each Species/Species Group by Each Mitigation ........... ............................ J2-10 Summary of Findings for Each Species or Species Group ...... ........... J2-11 A. Bryophytes .......... J2-11 B. Fungi .J2-12 C. Lichens. J2-20 D. Vascular Plants. J2-23 E. Arthropods. J2-28 F. Mollusks . .. J2-39 G. Amphibians . J2-44 H. Fish .J2-46 I. Birds ............... J2,49 J. Bats ........... ,....... J2-49 K. Other Mamnmals .J2-52 Matrices of Benefits From Mitigation Measures for Each Species Group ...... J2-56 A. Bryophytes .J2-58 B. Fungi .J2-59 C. Lichens .J2-67 D. Vascular Plants .J2-70 E. Arthropods .J2-71 F. Mollusks .J2-72 G. Amphibians .............. J2-75 H. Fish ..... J2-76 1. Birds .......... J2-77 J. Bats ............... J2-78 K. Other Mammals ............... J2-79 Basis for Rating and Mitigation for Individual Species ................ ... J2-80 A. Table of Contents for Bryophytes ............. ................ J2-83 B. Table of Contents for Fungi . ................................ J2-95 C. Table of Contents for Lichens ................... ............. J2r-221 D. Table of Contents for Vascular Plants ........... ............... J2-247 E. Table of Contents for Arthropods .............. ............... J2-293 F. Table of Contents for Mollusks ..................... ........... J2-303 G. Table of Contents for Amphibians ........................... J2-412 H. Table of Contents for Fish .......................... .... J2-428 I. Table of Contents for Birds .............................. J2-451 J. Table of Contents for Bats ........................... ... J2-455 K. Table of Contents for Other Mammals ......................... J2-467 Table of Contents 1 List of Tables Table J2-1. Species and species groups for which additional analysis was considered to be appropriate ........................ ........ J2-4 Table J2-2. Consolidated lit of possible mitigation measures that were described for all species ................................ !.............. J2-7 Table J2-3. Categories used to summarize the benefit that would be provided to each species by each possible mitigation measure ................ J2-10 Table J2-4. Estimated costs of inventory mitigation for vascular plants ..... .... J2-26 Table J2-5. Estimated of number of acres that would require protection through the survey and manage provision ............................... J2-27 Table J2-6. Arthropod species closely associated with late-successional forests, and functional groups with which they are identified ...... ........... J2-29 Table J2-7. Estimate of acres that would be protected by mitigation measures for land snails and slugs . ................................... J2-41 Table J2-8a. Level of Benefit Afforded to Individual Species or Functional Groups by the 23 Possible Mitigation Measures - Bryophytes ..... .... J2-58 Table J2-8b. Level of Benefit Afforded to Individual Species or Functional Groups by the 23 Possible Mitigation Measures - Fungi...... ........ J2-59 Table J2-8c. Level of Benefit Afforded to Individual Species or Functional Groups by the 23 Possible Mitigation Measures - Lichens ..... ...... J2-67 Table J2-8d. Level of Benefit Afforded to Individual Species or Functional Groups by the 23 Possible Mitigation Measures - Vascular Plants . .......................................................... J2-70 Table J2-8e. Level of Benefit Afforded to Individual Species or Functional Groups by the 23 Possible Mitigation Measures - Arthropods .... .... J2-71 Table J2-8f. Level of Benefit Afforded to Individual Species or Functional Groups by the 23 Possible Mitigation Measures - Mollusks ..... ..... J2-72 Table J2-8g. Level of Benefit Afforded to Individual Species or 3 Functional Groups by the 23 Possible Mitigation Measures - Amphibians .... .... J2-75 Table J2-8h. Level of Benefit Afforded to Individual Species or Functional Groups by the 23 Possible Mitigation Measures - Fish ..... ......... J2-76 Table J2-8i. Level of Benefit Afforded to Individual Species or Functional Groups by the 23 Possible Mitigation Measures - Birds ..... ........ J2-77 Table of Contents 2 Table J2-8j. Level of Benefit Afforded to Individual Species or Functional Groups by the 23 Possible Mitigation Measures - Bats ......... ..... J2-78 Table J2-8k. Level of Benefit Afforded to Individual Species or Functional Groups by the 23 Possible Mitigation Measures - Other Mammals ..... ; ; ;2-79 J Table of Contents 3 3 Appendix J2 Methods of Additional Species Analysis | for the Final SEIS II Introduction and Objectives Additional analysis was conducted, between the Draft and Final SEIS, on many of the late- successional and old-growth related species within the range of the northern spotted owl. While the analysis was focused on responding to public comments on the preferred alternative (Alternative 9), much of it is also pertinent to the other nine alternatives. 1 The additional analysis had the following objectives: * Identify species for which additional consideration and analysis is appropriate; I * Generate additional information on the impacts of activities on nonfederal lands and other sources of cumulative effects; U . Explain, in more detail, the basis for the ratings provided in the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team (FEMAT) Report (Appendix A) and Draft SEIS for 5e selected species; and * Provide detailed specifications of mitigation measures that could be employed, and the 3 relative benefits and costs of implementing those measures. Because the original species assessments were done by the Assessment Team, original members were asked to provide additional analysis. Wherever possible, the Assessment Team member who originally dealt with a specific taxon was asked to provide the additional input for that taxon. In a few instances, assignments had to either be shifted, or new species I experts recruited, to deal with a specific taxon. The group that completed this additional analysis is hereafter referred to as the Species Analysis Team in order to distinguish it from the original Assessment Team. The individuals who contributed to this analysis are listed in the front of this Appendix. Wherever possible, information was sought from individuals who had participated in the original assessment panels. The assessment panels themselves, however, were not reconvened. The judgements reported here are not the result of the formal expert opinion process used during the Assessment Team's efforts. Instead, they reflect the judgements of the Species Analysis Team. These judgements were based on information contained in the 3 FEMAT report, individual knowledge, and consultation with some individual species experts. I N ~~~~~~~~~~~~AppendixJ2-1 Description of the Process The process had six main steps: Step 1: Screen Species for Further Analysis To identify species for further analysis, four separate screens were used. Although applicable laws were considered in the development of these screens, it is important to note that the screening levels do not represent a judgement about what is required by either the National Forest Management Ad (NFMA) or the Endangered Species Ad (ESA). Use of the screens was intended to produce a list of species for which further investigation might prove useful or necessary. Screen #1 - Species screened based on their rating in the FEMAT Report - The first screen was to identify those species for which additional analysis might be useful in light of the original assessment they received. The following screening levels were adopted: * For vertebrates, reexamine all species with a likelihood of Outcome
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Redalyc.Correct Authorship of Taxa of Lepidoptera, Described In
    SHILAP Revista de Lepidopterología ISSN: 0300-5267 [email protected] Sociedad Hispano-Luso-Americana de Lepidopterología España Volynkin, A. V.; Yakovlev, R. V. Correct authorship of taxa of Lepidoptera, described in publications by Julius Lederer in 1853 and 1855 from Western Altai (Insecta: Lepidoptera) SHILAP Revista de Lepidopterología, vol. 43, núm. 172, diciembre, 2015, pp. 673-681 Sociedad Hispano-Luso-Americana de Lepidopterología Madrid, España Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=45543699011 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative SHILAP Revta. lepid., 43 (172), diciembre 2015: 673-681 eISSN: 2340-4078 ISSN: 0300-5267 Correct authorship of taxa of Lepidoptera, described in publications by Julius Lederer in 1853 and 1855 from Western Altai (Insecta: Lepidoptera) A. V. Volynkin & R. V. Yakovlev Abstract The article considers correct authorship of taxa, described from Kazakhstan Altai in works by Julius Lederer in 1853 and 1855. The real author to 12 among 54 taxa, described in the works, is proved to be Albert Kindermann. KEY WORDS: Insecta, Lepidoptera, Lederer, Kindermann, authorship, Kazakhstan, Altai, Russia. Autoría correcta de taxones de Lepidoptera, descritas en las publicaciones de Julius Lederer en 1853 y 1855 del oeste de Altai (Insecta: Lepidoptera) Resumen Se aclara la autoría de los taxones de Lepidoptera descritos a partir de los artículos del oeste de Altái por Julius Lederer en 1853 y 1855. Está comprobado que el author real de 12 de las 54 taxa que se describen en los trabajos, es Albert Kindermann.
    [Show full text]
  • Topic Paper Chilterns Beechwoods
    . O O o . 0 O . 0 . O Shoping growth in Docorum Appendices for Topic Paper for the Chilterns Beechwoods SAC A summary/overview of available evidence BOROUGH Dacorum Local Plan (2020-2038) Emerging Strategy for Growth COUNCIL November 2020 Appendices Natural England reports 5 Chilterns Beechwoods Special Area of Conservation 6 Appendix 1: Citation for Chilterns Beechwoods Special Area of Conservation (SAC) 7 Appendix 2: Chilterns Beechwoods SAC Features Matrix 9 Appendix 3: European Site Conservation Objectives for Chilterns Beechwoods Special Area of Conservation Site Code: UK0012724 11 Appendix 4: Site Improvement Plan for Chilterns Beechwoods SAC, 2015 13 Ashridge Commons and Woods SSSI 27 Appendix 5: Ashridge Commons and Woods SSSI citation 28 Appendix 6: Condition summary from Natural England’s website for Ashridge Commons and Woods SSSI 31 Appendix 7: Condition Assessment from Natural England’s website for Ashridge Commons and Woods SSSI 33 Appendix 8: Operations likely to damage the special interest features at Ashridge Commons and Woods, SSSI, Hertfordshire/Buckinghamshire 38 Appendix 9: Views About Management: A statement of English Nature’s views about the management of Ashridge Commons and Woods Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), 2003 40 Tring Woodlands SSSI 44 Appendix 10: Tring Woodlands SSSI citation 45 Appendix 11: Condition summary from Natural England’s website for Tring Woodlands SSSI 48 Appendix 12: Condition Assessment from Natural England’s website for Tring Woodlands SSSI 51 Appendix 13: Operations likely to damage the special interest features at Tring Woodlands SSSI 53 Appendix 14: Views About Management: A statement of English Nature’s views about the management of Tring Woodlands Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), 2003.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix K. Survey and Manage Species Persistence Evaluation
    Appendix K. Survey and Manage Species Persistence Evaluation Establishment of the 95-foot wide construction corridor and TEWAs would likely remove individuals of H. caeruleus and modify microclimate conditions around individuals that are not removed. The removal of forests and host trees and disturbance to soil could negatively affect H. caeruleus in adjacent areas by removing its habitat, disturbing the roots of host trees, and affecting its mycorrhizal association with the trees, potentially affecting site persistence. Restored portions of the corridor and TEWAs would be dominated by early seral vegetation for approximately 30 years, which would result in long-term changes to habitat conditions. A 30-foot wide portion of the corridor would be maintained in low-growing vegetation for pipeline maintenance and would not provide habitat for the species during the life of the project. Hygrophorus caeruleus is not likely to persist at one of the sites in the project area because of the extent of impacts and the proximity of the recorded observation to the corridor. Hygrophorus caeruleus is likely to persist at the remaining three sites in the project area (MP 168.8 and MP 172.4 (north), and MP 172.5-172.7) because the majority of observations within the sites are more than 90 feet from the corridor, where direct effects are not anticipated and indirect effects are unlikely. The site at MP 168.8 is in a forested area on an east-facing slope, and a paved road occurs through the southeast part of the site. Four out of five observations are more than 90 feet southwest of the corridor and are not likely to be directly or indirectly affected by the PCGP Project based on the distance from the corridor, extent of forests surrounding the observations, and proximity to an existing open corridor (the road), indicating the species is likely resilient to edge- related effects at the site.
    [Show full text]
  • A Preliminary List of Lepidopteran Insects from Palkot Wildlife
    Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies 2017; 5(3): 654-661 E-ISSN: 2320-7078 P-ISSN: 2349-6800 A preliminary list of lepidopteran insects from JEZS 2017; 5(3): 654-661 © 2017 JEZS Palkot Wildlife Sanctuary, Jharkhand Received: 01-03-2017 Accepted: 02-04-2017 Navneet Singh Navneet Singh and Jalil Ahmad Zoological Survey of India, Gangetic Plains Regional Centre, Abstract Sector-8, Bahadurpur Housing Colony, Patna-800 026, Bihar, The present research paper deals with the preliminary data on the diversity of Lepidopteran insects of India Palkot WLS. The information is based on a survey tour conducted during October 11-13, 2015. Around 0 the Palkot three sites were selected for the collection. Two sites were selected on Gobarsilli (22 53.058N, 0 0 0 Jalil Ahmad 084 39.229E), and one site was selected on Kura Pahar (22 51.621 N, 084 38.123 E).The collection Zoological Survey of India, survey and identification yielded a total of 89 species of Lepidoptera including 30 species of Butterflies Gangetic Plains Regional Centre, under 26 genera and 59 species of Moths under 42 genera. As far as Butterflies are concerned, Sector-8, Bahadurpur Housing Nymphalidae with 64% of total reported Butterflies dominated the group whereas, in moths, Erebidae Colony, Patna-800 026, Bihar, dominated with 73% of the collected moth species. India Keywords: Inventory, Lepidoptera, Jharkhand, Gumla, Palkot Wildlife Sanctuary 1. Introduction The Palkot Wildlife Sanctuary falls within the districts of Gumla and Simdega of state of 0 0 0 0 [1] Jharkhand and lies between 22 45’N and 23 N longitude and 84 30’E to 84 45E latitude .
    [Show full text]
  • Relationship of Insects to the Spread of Azalea Flower Spot
    TECHNICAL BULLETIN NO. 798 • JANUARY 1942 Relationship of Insects to the Spread of Azalea Flower Spot By FLOYD F. SMITH Entomologist» Division of Truck Crop and Garden Insect Investigations Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine and FREJEMAN WEISS Senior Pathologist, Division of Mycology and Disease Survey Bureau of Plant Industry UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, WASHINGTON* D* C. For sale by the Superintendent of'Documents, Washington, D. G. • Price 10 cents Technical Bulletin No. 798 • January 1942 Relationship of Insects to the Spread of Azalea Flower Spot ^ By FLOYD F. SMITH, entomologist, Division of Truck Crop and Garden Insect Investigations, Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine, and FREEMAN WEISS, senior pathologist. Division of Mycology and Disease Survey, Bureau of Plant Industry ^ CONTENTS Page Page Introduction ' 1 Disease transmission by insects II Insects visiting azaleas and observations on Preliminary studies, 1934 and 1935 11 their habits 2 Improved methods for collecting insects Bumblebees 2 and testing their infectivity 12 Carpenter bees 4 Studies in 1936 18 Ground-nesting bees 5 Transmission of flower spot on heads or Honeybees 5 legs or on pollen from insects- 20 Thrips 5 Transmission tests in 1937 and 1938 20 Ants 5 Relationship of insects to primary infection. 29 Flies 6 Other relationships of insects to the disease 33 Activity of bees in visiting flowers 6 Control experiments with insects on azaleas -. 39 Cause of insect abrasions and their relationship * E fîect of insecticid al dusts on bees 39 to flower spot infection < 7 Eiïect of poisoned sprays on bees 40 Occurrence on insects of conidia of the organ- Discussion of results 40 ism causing azalea flower spot 10 Summary 41 INTRODUCTION A serious spot disease and tlight was first reported in April 1931 near Charleston, S.
    [Show full text]
  • Phytophagous Mirid Bugs Nymphs Mullein Plant Bug: Campylomma Verbasci (Meyer) MPB Nymphs Are Small ( L-2 Mm; 0
    http://hdl.handle.net/1813/43117 Insect Identification Sheet No. 125 TREE FRUIT IPM 1998 fMtegrated est CORNELL COOPERATIVE EXTENSION RManagement Phytophagous Mirid Bugs Nymphs Mullein plant bug: Campylomma verbasci (Meyer) MPB nymphs are small ( l-2 mm; 0. 04-0.08 in.) and lime Apple brown bug: Atractotomus mali (Meyer) green (fig. 2a). They might be confused with rosy apple Heteroptera: Miridae aphid or white apple leafhopper nymphs (which appear in limb-tapping samples at about the same time), but David P. Kain and Joseph Kovach they move much more rapidly. They may have a reddish cast after feeding on European red mites. Department of Entomology, New York State Agricultural Experiment Station, Geneva ABB nymphs are mahogany brown, are larger than MPB at the same sampling period, and have enlarged Introduction second antennal segments (fig. 2b). Mullein plant bug (MPB) and apple brown bug (ABB) are Both species pass through five nymphal ins tars, which occasional pests of apple and pear in New York. Because take about four weeks to complete, depending largely on they occur in the same place at the same time and cause temperature. the same kind of damage, they are collectively referred to here as "mirid bugs." In western New York, MPB is more prevalent than ABB. Both are considered beneficial for part of the season, being predators of pest mites and aphids. From bloom (when overwintering eggs hatch) until shortly after petal fall, however, they may severely damage fruit by feeding on flower parts or young fruit­ lets. Figure 2a Eggs ..... "·'.. .. \':····~·. MPB eggs are laid, singly, in the fall under the bark ..
    [Show full text]
  • Universidad Pol Facultad D Trabajo
    UNIVERSIDAD POLITÉCNICA DE MADRID FACULTAD DE INFORMÁTICA TRABAJO FINAL DE CARRERA ESTUDIO DEL PROTOCOLO XMPP DE MESAJERÍA ISTATÁEA, DE SUS ATECEDETES, Y DE SUS APLICACIOES CIVILES Y MILITARES Autor: José Carlos Díaz García Tutor: Rafael Martínez Olalla Madrid, Septiembre de 2008 2 A mis padres, Francisco y Pilar, que me empujaron siempre a terminar esta licenciatura y que tanto me han enseñado sobre la vida A mis abuelos (q.e.p.d.) A mi hijo icolás, que me ha dejado terminar este trabajo a pesar de robarle su tiempo de juego conmigo Y muy en especial, a Susana, mi fiel y leal compañera, y la luz que ilumina mi camino Agradecimientos En primer lugar, me gustaría agradecer a toda mi familia la comprensión y confianza que me han dado, una vez más, para poder concluir definitivamente esta etapa de mi vida. Sin su apoyo, no lo hubiera hecho. En segundo lugar, quiero agradecer a mis amigos Rafa y Carmen, su interés e insistencia para que llegara este momento. Por sus consejos y por su amistad, les debo mi gratitud. Por otra parte, quiero agradecer a mis compañeros asesores militares de Nextel Engineering sus explicaciones y sabios consejos, que sin duda han sido muy oportunos para escribir el capítulo cuarto de este trabajo. Del mismo modo, agradecer a Pepe Hevia, arquitecto de software de Alhambra Eidos, los buenos ratos compartidos alrrededor de nuestros viejos proyectos sobre XMPP y que encendieron prodigiosamente la mecha de este proyecto. A Jaime y a Bernardo, del Ministerio de Defensa, por haberme hecho descubrir las bondades de XMPP.
    [Show full text]
  • Arthropod Diversity and Conservation in Old-Growth Northwest Forests'
    AMER. ZOOL., 33:578-587 (1993) Arthropod Diversity and Conservation in Old-Growth mon et al., 1990; Hz Northwest Forests complex litter layer 1973; Lattin, 1990; JOHN D. LATTIN and other features Systematic Entomology Laboratory, Department of Entomology, Oregon State University, tural diversity of th Corvallis, Oregon 97331-2907 is reflected by the 14 found there (Lawtt SYNOPSIS. Old-growth forests of the Pacific Northwest extend along the 1990; Parsons et a. e coastal region from southern Alaska to northern California and are com- While these old posed largely of conifer rather than hardwood tree species. Many of these ity over time and trees achieve great age (500-1,000 yr). Natural succession that follows product of sever: forest stand destruction normally takes over 100 years to reach the young through successioi mature forest stage. This succession may continue on into old-growth for (Lattin, 1990). Fire centuries. The changing structural complexity of the forest over time, and diseases, are combined with the many different plant species that characterize succes- bances. The prolot sion, results in an array of arthropod habitats. It is estimated that 6,000 a continually char arthropod species may be found in such forests—over 3,400 different ments and habitat species are known from a single 6,400 ha site in Oregon. Our knowledge (Southwood, 1977 of these species is still rudimentary and much additional work is needed Lawton, 1983). throughout this vast region. Many of these species play critical roles in arthropods have lx the dynamics of forest ecosystems. They are important in nutrient cycling, old-growth site, tt as herbivores, as natural predators and parasites of other arthropod spe- mental Forest (HJ cies.
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the United States National Museum
    Proceedings of the United States National Museum SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION • WASHINGTON, D.C. Volume 112 I960 Number 3431 LACE-BUG GENERA OF THE WORLD (HEMIPTERA: TINGIDAE) « By Carl J. Drake and Florence A. Ruhoff Introduction A treatise of the generic names of the family Tingidae from a global standpoint embodies problems similar to those frequently encountered in corresponding studies in other animal groups. The more im- portant criteria, including such basic desiderata as fixation of type species, synonyms, priority, and dates of technical publications implicate questions concomitant with recent trends toward the clarification and stabilization of zoological nomenclature. Zoogeography, predicated and authenticated on the generic level by the distribution of genera and species, is portrayed here by means of tables, charts, and maps of the tingifauna of the world. This visual pattern of distribution helps one to form a more vivid concept of the family and its hierarchic levels of subfamilies and genera. To a limited extent the data indicate distributional concentrations and probable centers of evolution and dispersal paths of genera. The phylogenetic relationship of genera is not discussed. The present treatise recognizes 216 genera (plus 79 synonyms, homonyms, and emendations) of the Tingidae of the world and gives 1 Research for this paper was supported In part by the National Science Foundation, grant No. 4095. 2 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM vol. 112 the figure of 1,767 as the approximate number of species now recog- nized. These figures, collated with similar categories in Lethierry and Severin (1896), show that there has been an increase of many genera and hundreds of species of Tingidae during the past three- quarters of a century.
    [Show full text]
  • Arachnida: Araneae) from the Middle Eocene Messel Maar, Germany
    Palaeoentomology 002 (6): 596–601 ISSN 2624-2826 (print edition) https://www.mapress.com/j/pe/ Short PALAEOENTOMOLOGY Copyright © 2019 Magnolia Press Communication ISSN 2624-2834 (online edition) PE https://doi.org/10.11646/palaeoentomology.2.6.10 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:E7F92F14-A680-4D30-8CF5-2B27C5AED0AB A new spider (Arachnida: Araneae) from the Middle Eocene Messel Maar, Germany PAUL A. SELDEN1, 2, * & torsten wappler3 1Department of Geology, University of Kansas, 1475 Jayhawk Boulevard, Lawrence, Kansas 66045, USA. 2Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, UK. 3Hessisches Landesmuseum Darmstadt, Friedensplatz 1, 64283 Darmstadt, Germany. *Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] The Fossil-Lagerstätte of Grube Messel, Germany, has Thomisidae and Salticidae (Schawaller & Ono, 1979; produced some of the most spectacular fossils of the Wunderlich, 1986). The Pliocene lake of Willershausen, Paleogene (Schaal & Ziegler, 1992; Gruber & Micklich, produced by solution of evaporites and subsequent collapse, 2007; Selden & Nudds, 2012; Schaal et al., 2018). However, has produced some remarkably preserved arthropod fossils few arachnids have been discovered or described from this (Briggs et al., 1998), including numerous spider families: World Heritage Site. An araneid spider was reported by Dysderidae, Lycosidae, Thomisidae and Salticidae (Straus, Wunderlich (1986). Wedmann (2018) reported that 160 1967; Schawaller, 1982). All of these localities are much spider specimens were known from Messel although, sadly, younger than Messel. few are well preserved. She figured the araneid mentioned by Wunderlich (1986) and a nicely preserved hersiliid (Wedmann, 2018: figs 7.8–7.9, respectively). Wedmann Material and methods (2018) mentioned six opilionids yet to be described, and figured one (Wedmann, 2018: fig.
    [Show full text]
  • International Symposium on Biological Control of Arthropods 424 Poster Presentations ______
    POSTER PRESENTATIONS ______________________________________________________________ Poster Presentations 423 IMPROVEMENT OF RELEASE METHOD FOR APHIDOLETES APHIDIMYZA (DIPTERA: CECIDOMYIIDAE) BASED ON ECOLOGICAL AND BEHAVIORAL STUDIES Junichiro Abe and Junichi Yukawa Entomological Laboratory, Kyushu University, Japan ABSTRACT. In many countries, Aphidoletes aphidimyza (Rondani) has been used effectively as a biological control agent against aphids, particularly in greenhouses. In Japan, A. aphidimyza was reg- istered as a biological control agent in April 1999, and mass-produced cocoons have been imported from The Netherlands and United Kingdom since mass-rearing methods have not yet been estab- lished. In recent years, the effect of imported A. aphidimyza on aphid populations was evaluated in greenhouses at some Agricultural Experiment Stations in Japan. However, no striking effect has been reported yet from Japan. The failure of its use in Japan seems to be caused chiefly by the lack of detailed ecological or behavioral information of A. aphidimyza. Therefore, we investigated its ecological and behavioral attributes as follows: (1) the survival of pupae in relation to the depth of pupation sites; (2) the time of adult emergence in response to photoperiod during the pupal stage; (3) the importance of a hanging substrate for successful mating; and (4) the influence of adult size and nutrient status on adult longev- ity and fecundity. (1) A commercial natural enemy importer in Japan suggests that users divide cocoons into groups and put each group into a plastic container filled with vermiculite to a depth of 100 mm. However, we believe this is too deep for A. aphidimyza pupae, since under natural conditions mature larvae spin their cocoons in the top few millimeters to a maxmum depth of 30 mm.
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter of the Biological Survey of Canada (Terrestrial Arthropods)
    Spring 1999 Vol. 18, No. 1 NEWSLETTER OF THE BIOLOGICAL SURVEY OF CANADA (TERRESTRIAL ARTHROPODS) Table of Contents General Information and Editorial Notes ............(inside front cover) News and Notes Activities at the Entomological Societies’ Meeting ...............1 Summary of the Scientific Committee Meeting.................2 EMAN National Meeting ...........................12 MacMillan Coastal Biodiversity Workshop ..................13 Workshop on Biodiversity Monitoring.....................14 Project Update: Family Keys ..........................15 Canadian Spider Diversity and Systematics ..................16 The Quiz Page..................................28 Selected Future Conferences ..........................29 Answers to Faunal Quiz.............................31 Quips and Quotes ................................32 List of Requests for Material or Information ..................33 Cooperation Offered ..............................39 List of Email Addresses.............................39 List of Addresses ................................41 Index to Taxa ..................................43 General Information The Newsletter of the Biological Survey of Canada (Terrestrial Arthropods) appears twice yearly. All material without other accreditation is prepared by the Secretariat for the Biological Survey. Editor: H.V. Danks Head, Biological Survey of Canada (Terrestrial Arthropods) Canadian Museum of Nature P.O. Box 3443, Station “D” Ottawa, Ontario K1P 6P4 TEL: 613-566-4787 FAX: 613-364-4021 E-mail: [email protected] Queries,
    [Show full text]