Cop15 Prop. Xx
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Tennessee's Extinct Species
Tennessee's Extinct Species The following species Birds: once occurred in Carolina parakeet Conuropsis carolinensis Ectopistes migratorius Tennessee and are now Passenger pigeon believed to be extinct. Mammals: Following this list are two Eastern elk species descriptions-one Fishes: describing the Carolina Harelip sucker parakeet and another describing the extinct Mussels: Acornshell Epioblasma haysiana freshwater mussels Angled riffleshell Epioblasma biemarginata of Tennessee. Cumberland leafshell Epioblasma stewardsoni Leafshell Epioblasma flexuosa Narrowcat's paw Epioblasma lenoir Rough rockshell Quadrula tuberosa Round combshell Epioblasma personata Sugarspoon Epioblasma arcaeformis Tennessee riffleshell Epioblasma propinqua Carolina Parakeet Status Habitat The Carolina parakeet is an The Carolina parakeet was found Learn rrwreabout extinct species. in riverine forests, cypress swamps, Tennessee's diverse and other woodlands over much of Description the Eastern and Midwest Regions of ecosyster.n3.Su~ort The Carolina parakeet was a the United States. It was the only conservation in your small parrot, about 12inches in parrot native to the United States. community and state! length. Its head was lemon yellow, The parakeets rested at night in with an orange forehead and cheeks. groups, with as many as 30 birds The rest of its body was green. Its sleeping inside one hollowtree, while legs and beak were pale pinkish- others would hang on the outside. white. These curious birds lived and Nests were placed in hollowtrees, traveled in flocks. and three to five white eggs were laid. Up to 50 nests were often crowded into one tree. Role in the Ecosystem Carolina parakeets enjoyed a variety of different foods-apples, peaches, mulberries, pecans, grapes, dogwood fruit, and grains. -
Checklist of Fish and Invertebrates Listed in the CITES Appendices
JOINTS NATURE \=^ CONSERVATION COMMITTEE Checklist of fish and mvertebrates Usted in the CITES appendices JNCC REPORT (SSN0963-«OStl JOINT NATURE CONSERVATION COMMITTEE Report distribution Report Number: No. 238 Contract Number/JNCC project number: F7 1-12-332 Date received: 9 June 1995 Report tide: Checklist of fish and invertebrates listed in the CITES appendices Contract tide: Revised Checklists of CITES species database Contractor: World Conservation Monitoring Centre 219 Huntingdon Road, Cambridge, CB3 ODL Comments: A further fish and invertebrate edition in the Checklist series begun by NCC in 1979, revised and brought up to date with current CITES listings Restrictions: Distribution: JNCC report collection 2 copies Nature Conservancy Council for England, HQ, Library 1 copy Scottish Natural Heritage, HQ, Library 1 copy Countryside Council for Wales, HQ, Library 1 copy A T Smail, Copyright Libraries Agent, 100 Euston Road, London, NWl 2HQ 5 copies British Library, Legal Deposit Office, Boston Spa, Wetherby, West Yorkshire, LS23 7BQ 1 copy Chadwick-Healey Ltd, Cambridge Place, Cambridge, CB2 INR 1 copy BIOSIS UK, Garforth House, 54 Michlegate, York, YOl ILF 1 copy CITES Management and Scientific Authorities of EC Member States total 30 copies CITES Authorities, UK Dependencies total 13 copies CITES Secretariat 5 copies CITES Animals Committee chairman 1 copy European Commission DG Xl/D/2 1 copy World Conservation Monitoring Centre 20 copies TRAFFIC International 5 copies Animal Quarantine Station, Heathrow 1 copy Department of the Environment (GWD) 5 copies Foreign & Commonwealth Office (ESED) 1 copy HM Customs & Excise 3 copies M Bradley Taylor (ACPO) 1 copy ^\(\\ Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No. -
Endangered Species (Protection, Conser Va Tion and Regulation of Trade)
ENDANGERED SPECIES (PROTECTION, CONSER VA TION AND REGULATION OF TRADE) THE ENDANGERED SPECIES (PROTECTION, CONSERVATION AND REGULATION OF TRADE) ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS Preliminary Short title. Interpretation. Objects of Act. Saving of other laws. Exemptions, etc., relating to trade. Amendment of Schedules. Approved management programmes. Approval of scientific institution. Inter-scientific institution transfer. Breeding in captivity. Artificial propagation. Export of personal or household effects. PART I. Administration Designahem of Mana~mentand establishment of Scientific Authority. Policy directions. Functions of Management Authority. Functions of Scientific Authority. Scientific reports. PART II. Restriction on wade in endangered species 18. Restriction on trade in endangered species. 2 ENDANGERED SPECIES (PROTECTION, CONSERVATION AND REGULA TION OF TRADE) Regulation of trade in species spec fled in the First, Second, Third and Fourth Schedules Application to trade in endangered specimen of species specified in First, Second, Third and Fourth Schedule. Export of specimens of species specified in First Schedule. Importation of specimens of species specified in First Schedule. Re-export of specimens of species specified in First Schedule. Introduction from the sea certificate for specimens of species specified in First Schedule. Export of specimens of species specified in Second Schedule. Import of specimens of species specified in Second Schedule. Re-export of specimens of species specified in Second Schedule. Introduction from the sea of specimens of species specified in Second Schedule. Export of specimens of species specified in Third Schedule. Import of specimens of species specified in Third Schedule. Re-export of specimens of species specified in Third Schedule. Export of specimens specified in Fourth Schedule. PART 111. -
Gene Family Amplification Facilitates Adaptation in Freshwater Unionid
Gene family amplification facilitates adaptation in freshwater unionid bivalve Megalonaias nervosa Rebekah L. Rogers1∗, Stephanie L. Grizzard1;2, James E. Titus-McQuillan1, Katherine Bockrath3;4 Sagar Patel1;5;6, John P. Wares3;7, Jeffrey T Garner8, Cathy C. Moore1 Author Affiliations: 1. Department of Bioinformatics and Genomics, University of North Carolina, Charlotte, NC 2. Department of Biological Sciences, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA 3. Department of Genetics, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 4. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Midwest Fisheries Center Whitney Genetics Lab, Onalaska, WI 5. Department of Biology, Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO 6. Donald Danforth Plant Science Center, St. Louis, MO 7. Odum School of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 8. Division of Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries, Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Florence, AL *Corresponding author: Department of Bioinformatics and Genomics, University of North Carolina, Charlotte, NC. [email protected] Keywords: Unionidae, M. nervosa, Evolutionary genomics, gene family expansion, arXiv:2008.00131v2 [q-bio.GN] 16 Nov 2020 transposable element evolution, Cytochrome P450, Population genomics, reverse ecological genetics Short Title: Gene family expansion in Megalonaias nervosa 1 Abstract Freshwater unionid bivalves currently face severe anthropogenic challenges. Over 70% of species in the United States are threatened, endangered or extinct due to pollution, damming of waterways, and overfishing. These species are notable for their unusual life history strategy, parasite-host coevolution, and biparental mitochondria inheritance. Among this clade, the washboard mussel Megalonaias nervosa is one species that remains prevalent across the Southeastern United States, with robust population sizes. We have created a reference genome for M. -
Restoring the Endangered Oyster Mussel (Epioblasma Capsaeformis) to the Upper Clinch River, Virginia: an Evaluation of Population Restoration Techniques Caitlin S
RESEARCH ARTICLE Restoring the endangered oyster mussel (Epioblasma capsaeformis) to the upper Clinch River, Virginia: an evaluation of population restoration techniques Caitlin S. Carey1,2,3,JessW.Jones4, Robert S. Butler5, Eric M. Hallerman6 From 2005 to 2011, the federally endangered freshwater mussel Epioblasma capsaeformis (oyster mussel) was reintroduced at three sites in the upper Clinch River, Virginia, using four release techniques. These release techniques were (1) translocation of adults (site 1, n = 1418), (2) release of laboratory-propagated sub-adults (site 1, n = 2851), (3) release of 8-week-old laboratory-propagated juveniles (site 2, n = 9501), and (4) release of artificially infested host fishes (site 3, n = 1116 host fishes). These restoration efforts provided a unique research opportunity to compare the effectiveness of techniques used to reestablish populations of extirpated and declining species. We evaluated the relative success of these four population restoration approaches via monitoring at each release site (2011–2012) using systematic 0.25-m2 quadrat sampling to estimate abundance and post-release survival. Abundances of translocated adult and laboratory-propagated sub-adult E. capsaeformis at site 1 ranged 577–645 and 1678–1700 individuals, respectively, signifying successful settlement and high post-release survival. Two untagged individuals (29.1 and 27.3 mm) were observed, indicating that recruitment is occurring at site 1. No E. capsaeformis were found at sites where 8-week-old laboratory-propagated juveniles (site 2) and artificially infested host fishes (site 3) were released. Our results indicate that translocations of adults and releases of laboratory-propagated sub-adults were the most effective population restoration techniques for E. -
Guiding Species Recovery Through Assessment of Spatial And
Guiding Species Recovery through Assessment of Spatial and Temporal Population Genetic Structure of Two Critically Endangered Freshwater Mussel Species (Bivalvia: Unionidae) Jess Walter Jones ( [email protected] ) United States Fish and Wildlife Service Timothy W. Lane Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries N J Eric M. Hallerman Virginia Tech: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Research Article Keywords: Freshwater mussels, Epioblasma brevidens, E. capsaeformis, endangered species, spatial and temporal genetic variation, effective population size, species recovery planning, conservation genetics Posted Date: March 16th, 2021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-282423/v1 License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Read Full License Page 1/28 Abstract The Cumberlandian Combshell (Epioblasma brevidens) and Oyster Mussel (E. capsaeformis) are critically endangered freshwater mussel species native to the Tennessee and Cumberland River drainages, major tributaries of the Ohio River in the eastern United States. The Clinch River in northeastern Tennessee (TN) and southwestern Virginia (VA) harbors the only remaining stronghold population for either species, containing tens of thousands of individuals per species; however, a few smaller populations are still extant in other rivers. We collected and analyzed genetic data to assist with population restoration and recovery planning for both species. We used an 888 base-pair sequence of the mitochondrial NADH dehydrogenase 1 (ND1) gene and ten nuclear DNA microsatellite loci to assess patterns of genetic differentiation and diversity in populations at small and large spatial scales, and at a 9-year (2004 to 2013) temporal scale, which showed how quickly these populations can diverge from each other in a short time period. -
Freshwater Mussel Survey of Clinchport, Clinch River, Virginia: Augmentation Monitoring Site: 2006
Freshwater Mussel Survey of Clinchport, Clinch River, Virginia: Augmentation Monitoring Site: 2006 By: Nathan L. Eckert, Joe J. Ferraro, Michael J. Pinder, and Brian T. Watson Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries Wildlife Diversity Division October 28th, 2008 Table of Contents Introduction....................................................................................................................... 4 Objective ............................................................................................................................ 5 Study Area ......................................................................................................................... 6 Methods.............................................................................................................................. 6 Results .............................................................................................................................. 10 Semi-quantitative .................................................................................................. 10 Quantitative........................................................................................................... 11 Qualitative............................................................................................................. 12 Incidental............................................................................................................... 12 Discussion........................................................................................................................ -
1988007W.Pdf
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE LIST OF FIGURES n LIST OF TABLES w LIST OF APPENDICES iv ABSTRACT 1 INTRODUCTION 1 I OBJECTIVES OF STUDY 3 ∎ METHODS 3 I DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA 7 RESULTS 7 SPECIES ACCOUNTS 13 Federally Endangered Species 13 Federal Candidate Species 15 I Proposed State Endangered Species 15 Proposed State Threatened Species 16 Watch List Species 16 Other Species 17 I Introduced Species 33 ∎ DISCUSSION 33 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 35 LITERATURE CITED 36 I I I I LIST OF FIGURES PAGE Figure 1 . Collection sites in the Little Wabash River drainage, 1988 6 Figure 2. The Little Wabash River and its tributaries 8 Figure 3. Number of individuals collected liver per site in the Little Wabash River (main channel) in 1988 12 I Figure 4 . Number of species collected per site in the Little Wabash River (main channel) in 1988 12 I I I I I I LIST OF TABLES PAGE Table 1 . Comparison of the mussel species of the Little Wabash River reported by Baker (1906) and others [pre-1950], Fechtner (1963) [1951-53], Parmalee [1954], Matteson [1956], INHS [1957-88], and this study 4 Table 2 . Collection sites in the Little Wabash River drainage, 1988 5 Table 3 . Total,rank order of abundance and percent composition of the mussel species collected live in the Little Wabash River drainage, 1988 9 Table 4. Site by site listing of all mussel species collected in the Little Wabash River drainage, 1988 10-11 Table 5. Site by site listing of all mussel species collected by M .R . Matteson in the Little Wabash River, 1956 14 I I iii LIST OF APPENDICES PAGE Appendix I . -
Atlas of the Freshwater Mussels (Unionidae)
1 Atlas of the Freshwater Mussels (Unionidae) (Class Bivalvia: Order Unionoida) Recorded at the Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve & State Nature Preserve, Ohio and surrounding watersheds by Robert A. Krebs Department of Biological, Geological and Environmental Sciences Cleveland State University Cleveland, Ohio, USA 44115 September 2015 (Revised from 2009) 2 Atlas of the Freshwater Mussels (Unionidae) (Class Bivalvia: Order Unionoida) Recorded at the Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve & State Nature Preserve, Ohio, and surrounding watersheds Acknowledgements I thank Dr. David Klarer for providing the stimulus for this project and Kristin Arend for a thorough review of the present revision. The Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve provided housing and some equipment for local surveys while research support was provided by a Research Experiences for Undergraduates award from NSF (DBI 0243878) to B. Michael Walton, by an NOAA fellowship (NA07NOS4200018), and by an EFFRD award from Cleveland State University. Numerous students were instrumental in different aspects of the surveys: Mark Lyons, Trevor Prescott, Erin Steiner, Cal Borden, Louie Rundo, and John Hook. Specimens were collected under Ohio Scientific Collecting Permits 194 (2006), 141 (2007), and 11-101 (2008). The Old Woman Creek National Estuarine Research Reserve in Ohio is part of the National Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS), established by section 315 of the Coastal Zone Management Act, as amended. Additional information on these preserves and programs is available from the Estuarine Reserves Division, Office for Coastal Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U. S. Department of Commerce, 1305 East West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. -
Conservation Status Assessment and a New Method for Establishing Conservation Priorities for Freshwater Mussels
Received: 8 March 2018 Revised: 9 November 2019 Accepted: 17 December 2019 DOI: 10.1002/aqc.3298 RESEARCH ARTICLE Conservation status assessment and a new method for establishing conservation priorities for freshwater mussels (Bivalvia: Unionida) in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River drainage Xiongjun Liu1,2 | Xue Yang3 | David T. Zanatta4 | Manuel Lopes-Lima5 | Arthur E. Bogan6 | Alexandra Zieritz7,8 | Shan Ouyang3 | Xiaoping Wu1,2,3 1Key Laboratory of Poyang Lake Environment and Resource Utilization, School of Resources Abstract Environmental and Chemical Engineering, 1. The freshwater mussel (Unionida) fauna of the Yangtze River is among the most Nanchang University, Nanchang, People's Republic of China diverse on Earth. In recent decades, human activities have caused habitat degra- 2School of Resources Environmental & dation in the river, and previous studies estimated that up to 80% of the mussel Chemical Engineering, Nanchang University, species in the Yangtze River are Threatened or Near Threatened with extinction. Nanchang, People's Republic of China 3School of Life Sciences, Nanchang University, However, a comprehensive and systematic evaluation of the conservation status Nanchang, People's Republic of China of this fauna has yet to be completed. 4 Central Michigan University, Institute for 2. This study evaluated the conservation status of the 69 recognized freshwater Great Lakes Research, Mount Pleasant, MI mussel species in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River, using the 5CIBIO/InBIO – Research Center -
Environmental Report (ER) (TVA 2003) in Conjunction with Its Application for Renewal of the BFN Ols, As Provided for by the Following NRC Regulations
Biological Assessment Browns Ferry Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal Review Limestone County, Alabama October 2004 Docket Numbers 50-259, 50-260, and 50-296 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Rockville, Maryland Biological Assessment of the Potential Effects on Endangered or Threatened Species from the Proposed License Renewal for the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant 1.0 Introduction The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licenses the operation of domestic nuclear power plants in accordance with the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and NRC implementing regulations. The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) operates Browns Ferry Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1, 2, and 3 (BFN) pursuant to NRC operating license (OL) numbers DPR-33, DPR-52, DPR-68, which expire on December 20, 2013, June 28, 2014, and July 2, 2016, respectively. TVA has prepared an Environmental Report (ER) (TVA 2003) in conjunction with its application for renewal of the BFN OLs, as provided for by the following NRC regulations: C Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 54, “Requirements for Renewal of Operating Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants,” Section 54.23, Contents of application - environmental information (10 CFR 54.23). C Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51, “Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions,” Section 51.53, Postconstruction environmental reports, Subsection 51.53(c), Operating license renewal stage (10 CFR 51.53(c)). The renewed OLs would allow up to 20 additional years of plant operation beyond the current licensed operating term. No major refurbishment or replacement of important systems, structures, or components are expected during the 20-year BFN license renewal term. -
CITES Appendices I, II and III Valid from 10 March 2016
CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN ENDANGERED SPECIES OF WILD FAUNA AND FLORA Appendices I, II and III valid from 2 January 2017 Interpretation 1. Species included in these Appendices are referred to: a) by the name of the species; or b) as being all of the species included in a higher taxon or designated part thereof. 2. The abbreviation “spp.” is used to denote all species of a higher taxon. 3. Other references to taxa higher than species are for the purposes of information or classification only. The common names included after the scientific names of families are for reference only. They are intended to indicate the species within the family concerned that are included in the Appendices. In most cases this is not all of the species within the family. 4. The following abbreviations are used for plant taxa below the level of species: a) “ssp.” is used to denote subspecies; and b) “var(s).” is used to denote variety (varieties). 5. As none of the species or higher taxa of FLORA included in Appendix I is annotated to the effect that its hybrids shall be treated in accordance with the provisions of Article III of the Convention, this means that artificially propagated hybrids produced from one or more of these species or taxa may be traded with a certificate of artificial propagation, and that seeds and pollen (including pollinia), cut flowers, seedling or tissue cultures obtained in vitro, in solid or liquid media, transported in sterile containers of these hybrids are not subject to the provisions of the Convention.