DOCSLIB.ORG

Draft Habitat Conservation Plan for Honua'ula (Wailea 670) Kihei, Maui

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Draft Habitat Conservation Plan for Honua'ula (Wailea 670) Kihei, Maui DRAFT HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN FOR HONUA‘ULA (WAILEA 670) KIHEI, MAUI JUNE 2018 PREPARED FOR U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources PREPARED BY SWCA Environmental Consultants DRAFT HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN FOR HONUA‘ULA (WAILEA 670) KIHEI, MAUI Submitted to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 300 Ala Moana Boulevard, Room 3-122 Honolulu, Hawaii 96850 and Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources 1151 Punchbowl Street, Room 325 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 Applicant Honua‘ula Partners, LLC 381 Huku Li‘i Place, Suite 202 Kihei, Maui 96753 Prepared by: SWCA Environmental Consultants Bishop Square: ASB Tower 1001 Bishop Street, Suite 2800 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 June 18, 2018 Revised Draft Habitat Conservation Plan for Honua‘ula (Wailea 670) Kihei, Maui CONTENTS 1 Project Overview ................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Applicant ....................................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Regulatory Context........................................................................................................................ 3 1.3.1 Federal Endangered Species Act ......................................................................................... 3 1.3.2 Federal National Environmental Policy Act ........................................................................ 5 1.3.3 Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act ...................................................................................... 5 1.3.4 Federal National Historic Preservation Act ......................................................................... 6 1.3.5 Hawaii Revised Statutes, Chapter 195D.............................................................................. 6 1.3.6 Hawaii Revised Statutes, Chapter 343 ................................................................................ 8 1.4 Project Description ........................................................................................................................ 9 1.4.1 Project History ..................................................................................................................... 9 1.4.2 Project Design and Components.......................................................................................... 9 1.4.3 Covered Activities ............................................................................................................. 10 1.4.4 Purpose and Need for Honuaʻula Project .......................................................................... 14 2 Description of Habitat Conservation Plan ........................................................................................ 16 2.1 Purpose of this Habitat Conservation Plan .................................................................................. 16 2.2 Scope and Term ........................................................................................................................... 17 2.3 Surveys and Resources ................................................................................................................ 17 3 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................................ 19 3.1 Location, Vicinity, and Climate .................................................................................................. 19 3.2 Topography and Geology ............................................................................................................ 19 3.3 Soils ............................................................................................................................................. 19 3.4 Hydrology, Drainage, and Water Resources ............................................................................... 22 3.4.1 Surface Water .................................................................................................................... 22 3.4.2 Flooding ............................................................................................................................. 22 3.4.3 Groundwater ...................................................................................................................... 22 3.5 Environmental Contaminants ...................................................................................................... 22 3.6 Land Use Designations ................................................................................................................ 22 3.7 Flora............................................................................................................................................. 23 3.7.1 Surveys Conducted ............................................................................................................ 23 3.7.2 Covered Plant Species ....................................................................................................... 31 3.7.2.1 ʻĀwikiwiki ................................................................................................................ 31 3.8 Fauna ........................................................................................................................................... 32 3.8.1 Surveys Conducted ............................................................................................................ 32 3.8.2 Non-Listed Wildlife Species ............................................................................................. 32 3.8.2.1 Birds .......................................................................................................................... 32 3.8.2.2 Herpetofauna ............................................................................................................. 37 3.8.2.3 Mammals .................................................................................................................. 37 3.8.3 Listed Wildlife Species with No Requested Take ............................................................. 37 3.8.3.1 Hawaiian Hoary Bat ................................................................................................. 37 3.8.3.2 Hawaiian Petrel ......................................................................................................... 39 3.8.3.3 Newell’s Shearwater ................................................................................................. 40 3.8.3.4 Band-Rumped Storm-Petrel ...................................................................................... 42 3.8.3.5 Hawaiian Stilt ........................................................................................................... 43 3.8.3.6 Hawaiian Coot .......................................................................................................... 44 1 Revised Draft Habitat Conservation Plan for Honua‘ula (Wailea 670) Kihei, Maui 3.8.3.7 Hawaiian Duck ......................................................................................................... 45 3.8.4 Covered Animal Species ................................................................................................... 46 3.8.4.1 Blackburn’s Sphinx Moth ......................................................................................... 46 3.8.4.2 Nēnē .......................................................................................................................... 50 3.8.4.3 Yellow-faced bees (Hylaeus spp.) ............................................................................ 51 4 Biological Goals and Objectives ......................................................................................................... 53 5 Alternatives .......................................................................................................................................... 55 5.1 No Action (“no build”) Alternative ............................................................................................. 55 5.2 Alternative Preserve Layout ........................................................................................................ 55 6 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................................................. 56 6.1 Estimating Project-Related Impacts ............................................................................................ 56 6.1.1 Blackburn’s Sphinx Moth .................................................................................................. 56 6.1.2 ʻĀwikiwiki ......................................................................................................................... 56 6.1.3 Nēnē ................................................................................................................................... 59 6.1.3.1 Direct Take ............................................................................................................... 59 6.1.3.2 Indirect Take ............................................................................................................. 60 6.1.3.3 Estimated Total Take for Nēnē ................................................................................. 61 6.1.4 Yellow-Faced Bees (Hylaeus spp.) ..................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 'Alae 'Ula (Hawaiian Moorhen)
    NATIVE WATERBIRDS AVIAN NEWCOMERS These newly-created wetlands have been rapidly colonized by native waterbirds, Many non-native birds are attracted to the wetland restoration as well. The including four species that are highly endangered and found only in the Hawaiian long-necked white waders are Cattle Egrets, native to the Old World. Non-native Islands. The ‘Alae ‘Ula, or Hawaiian Moorhen (Gallinula chloropus sandvicensis), songbirds include the Common Myna, White-rumped Shama, two unrelated kinds of and Koloa Maoli, or Koloa Duck (Anas wyvilliana), have by now raised many broods cardinals, and three kinds of doves. Many of these exotic species probably became here, nesting among the native sedges. The Ae‘o, or Hawaiian Stilt (Himantopus established in recent decades as escaped cage birds. Before the accidental mexicanus knudseni), and the Nēnē, or Hawaiian Goose (Branta sandvicensis), stop introduction of mosquitoes in the 19th century and bird diseases they carry, by almost daily to rest and feed. In the morning and evening, watch for the ‘Auku‘u these coastal lowlands were home to native honeycreepers and other native or Black-crowned Night Heron (Nycticorax nycticorax). Long-distance migrants such songbirds, preserved abundantly in the fossil record of Makauwahi Cave. as the Kōlea or Pacific Golden Plover Pluvialis( fulva) stop to rest and often winter here, as part of their annual 10,000-mile migration from breeding grounds in the Arctic to wintering sites in the tropics. Bones of all these bird species occur as fossils in the sediment of adjacent Makauwahi Cave, showing that they have thrived here for thousands of years.
    [Show full text]
  • Danaus Plexippus) in Milkweed Gardens and Conservation Areas
    Journal of Insect Conservation https://doi.org/10.1007/s10841-018-0102-8 ORIGINAL PAPER Recruitment, survival, and parasitism of monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus) in milkweed gardens and conservation areas Emily A. Geest1 · L. LaReesa Wolfenbarger1 · John P. McCarty1 Received: 10 July 2018 / Accepted: 24 October 2018 © The Author(s) 2018 Abstract Monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus) are suffering from declining populations and conservationists have encouraged planting milkweed gardens in urban and suburban landscapes to help offset habitat loss across the breeding range. The effectiveness of gardens as a conservation strategy depends on their ability to attract ovipositing adults and the survival of monarch larvae in these gardens. Larvae are susceptible to a variety of predators as well as to parasitism by a tachinid fly (Lespesia archippivora) and a protozoan parasite (Ophryocystis elektroscirrha) which cause lethal or sublethal effects, yet the severity of these risks in gardens is not well understood. We compared egg abundance and larval survival in traditional conservation areas to gardens that incorporated milkweed to attract monarchs. Additionally, we collected late instar larvae and reared them in the lab to compare parasitism rates between monarch gardens and conservation areas. Both gardens and conservations sites varied widely in recruitment and survival of monarchs and there were no significant differences between the garden and conservation sites. Tachinid fly parasitism ranged from 30% of larvae from conservation sites in 2016 to 55% of larvae from gardens in 2017, but did not differ between the two categories of sites. Parasitism byO. elektroscirrha was detected in fewer than 2% of larvae. The density of milkweed had no effect on the number of monarch eggs in conservation areas or gardens in either year.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Ala'alahua, Mahoe
    Plants ʹAlaʹalahua, mahoe Alectryon macrococcus var. auwahiensis SPECIES STATUS: Federally Listed as Endangered Genetic Safety Net Species IUCN Red List Ranking ‐ CR B2ab(i,ii,iii,iv,v) Hawai‘i Natural Heritage Ranking ‐ Critically Imperiled (G1T1) Endemism ‐ Maui Kim and Forest Starr, USGS Critical Habitat ‐ Designated SPECIES INFORMATION: Alectryon macrococcus of the soapberry family (Sapindaceae) is a tree up to 36 ft (11 m) tall with reddish brown branches. The leaves are usually 8 to 22 in (20 to 55 cm) long, typically with two to five pairs of egg‐shaped, slightly asymmetrical leaflets. Glossy and smooth above, the leaves have a conspicuous netted pattern of veins. A dense covering of rust‐colored hairs persists on the lower surfaces of mature leaves of A. macrococcus var. auwahiensis, whereas the mature leaves of A. macrococcus var. macrococcus lack hairs or are only slightly hairy. In both varieties, the flowers, which may be either bisexual or male, are borne in branched clusters up to l2 in (30 cm) long and lack petals. The fruit of this tree provided food for the early Hawaiians, as both the seed and the scarlet‐colored, fleshy aril around it have mild but slightly sweet flavors. The two varieties recognized for this species are Federally Listed as Endangered. The first, variety macrococcus, is found on four Hawaiian islands. The second, discussed here, is variety auwahiensis, found only on the island of Maui, and is much rarer. DISTRIBUTION: A. macrococcus var. auwahiensis is found only on the island of Maui, on the south slope of the volcano Haleakalā, at elevations of 1,017 and 3,562 m (1,168 and 3,337 ft).
    [Show full text]
  • Cassia Fistula (Golden Shower): a Multipurpose Ornamental Tree
    Floriculture and Ornamental Biotechnology ©2007 Global Science Books Cassia fistula (Golden Shower): A Multipurpose Ornamental Tree Muhammad Asif Hanif1,2 • Haq Nawaz Bhatti1* • Raziya Nadeem1 • Khalid Mahmood Zia1 • Muhammad Asif Ali2 1 Department of Chemistry, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad - 38040, Pakistan 2 Institute of Horticultural Sciences, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad - 38040, Pakistan Corresponding author : * [email protected] ABSTRACT Cassia fistula Linn is a multipurpose, ornamental, fast growing, medium sized, deciduous tree that is now widely cultivated world wide for its beautiful showy yellow fluorescent flowers. This paper reviews the phenolic antioxidants, metal sorption, medicinal and free radical propensities of plant parts and cell culture extracts. This paper also appraises antimicrobial activities and commercial significance of C. fistula parts. The main objectives of present review study are to: (1) critically evaluate the published scientific research on C. fistula, (2) highlight claims from traditional, tribal and advanced medicinal lore to suggest directions for future clinical research and commercial importance that could be carried out by local investigators in developing regions. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Keywords: antioxidant, medicinal plant, water treatment CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Growth Patterns of Hawaiian Stilt Chicks
    Wilson Bull., 11 l(4), 1999, pp. 478487 GROWTH PATTERNS OF HAWAIIAN STILT CHICKS J. MICHAEL REED,,2,8‘ ELIZABETH M. GRAY,334 DIANNE LEWIS3 LEWIS W. ORING,3 RICHARD COLEMAN,5 TIMOTHY BURR,6 AND PETER LUSCOMB7 ABSTRACT-We studied chick growth and plumage patterns in the endangered Hawaiian Stilt (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni). Body mass of captive chicks closely fit a Gompertz growth curve, revealing a growth coefficient (K) of 0.065 day- ’ and point of inflection (T) of 17 days. When chicks fledged about 28 days after hatching, they weighed only 60% of adult body mass; at 42 d, birds still were only 75% of adult mass; culmen, tarsus, and wing chord at fledging also were less than adult size. This trend of continued growth to adult size after fledging is typical for most shorebirds. After hatching, captive chicks grew more rapidly than wild chicks, probably because of an unlimited food supply. We found no evidence for adverse effects of weather on the growth of wild chicks. As with other shorebirds, the tarsus started relatively long, with culmen and then wing chord growing more rapidly in later development. Tarsal and wing chord growth were sigmoidal, whereas culmen growth was linear. We describe plumage characteristics of weekly age classes of chicks to help researchers age birds in the wild. Received 28 Dec. 1998, accepted 20 April 1999. Avian growth patterns have been studied (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni), a precocial primarily because of their relationships to the bird that is an endangered subspecies of the ecology and evolutionary history of different Black-necked Stilt.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Presence and Distribution of 23 Hawaiian Yellow-Faced Bee Species on Lands Adjacent to Military Installations on O‘Ahu and Hawai‘I Island
    The Hawai`i-Pacific Islands Cooperative Ecosystems Studies Unit & Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI`I AT MĀNOA Dr. David C. Duffy, Unit Leader Department of Botany 3190 Maile Way, St. John #408 Honolulu, Hawai’i 96822 Technical Report 185 Assessing the presence and distribution of 23 Hawaiian yellow-faced bee species on lands adjacent to military installations on O‘ahu and Hawai‘i Island September 2013 Karl N. Magnacca1 and Cynthia B. K. King 2 1 Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Department of Botany, 3190 Maile Way Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96822 2 Hawaii Division of Forestry & Wildlife Native Invertebrate Program 1151 Punchbowl Street, Room 325 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 PCSU is a cooperative program between the University of Hawai`i and U.S. National Park Service, Cooperative Ecological Studies Unit. Author Contact Information: Karl N. Magnacca. Phone: 808-554-5637 Email: [email protected] Hawaii Division of Forestry & Wildlife Native Invertebrate Program 1151 Punchbowl Street, Room 325 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813. Recommended Citation: Magnacca, K.N. and C.B.K. King. 2013. Assessing the presence and distribution of 23 Hawaiian yellow- faced bee species on lands adjacent to military installations on O‘ahu and Hawai‘i Island. Technical Report No. 185. Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit, University of Hawai‘i, Honolulu, Hawai‘i. 39 pp. Key words: Hylaeus, Colletidae, Apoidea, Hymenoptera, bees, insect conservation Place key words: Oahu, Schofield Barracks, Hawaii, Puu Waawaa, Mauna Kea, Pohakuloa, North Kona Editor: David C. Duffy, PCSU Unit Leader (Email: [email protected]) Series Editor: Clifford W. Morden, PCSU Deputy Director (Email: [email protected]) About this technical report series: This technical report series began in 1973 with the formation of the Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit at the University of Hawai'i at Mānoa.
    [Show full text]
  • Pacific Sheath-Tailed Bat American Samoa Emballonura Semicaudata Semicaudata Species Report April 2020
    Pacific Sheath-tailed Bat American Samoa Emballonura semicaudata semicaudata Species Report April 2020 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office Honolulu, HI Cover Photo Credits Shawn Thomas, Bat Conservation International. Suggested Citation USFWS. 2020. Species Status Assessment for the Pacific Sheath Tailed Bat (Emballonura semicaudata semicaudata). April 2020 (Version 1.1). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, Honolulu, HI. 57 pp. Primary Authors Version 1.1 of this document was prepared by Mari Reeves, Fred Amidon, and James Kwon of the Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, Honolulu, Hawaii. Preparation and review was conducted by Gregory Koob, Megan Laut, and Stephen E. Miller of the Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office. Acknowledgements We thank the following individuals for their contribution to this work: Marcos Gorresen, Adam Miles, Jorge Palmeirim, Dave Waldien, Dick Watling, and Gary Wiles. ii Executive Summary This Species Report uses the best available scientific and commercial information to assess the status of the semicaudata subspecies of the Pacific sheath-tailed bat, Emballonura semicaudata semicaudata. This subspecies is found in southern Polynesia, eastern Melanesia, and Micronesia. Three additional subspecies of E. semicaudata (E.s. rotensis, E.s. palauensis, and E.s. sulcata) are not discussed here unless they are used to support assumptions about E.s. semicaudata, or to fill in data gaps in this analysis. The Pacific sheath-tailed bat is an Old-World bat in the family Emballonuridae, and is found in parts of Polynesia, eastern Melanesia, and Micronesia. It is the only insectivorous bat recorded from much of this area.
    [Show full text]
  • Iucn Bat Specialist Group Newsletter
    IUCN BAT SPECIALIST GROUP NEWSLETTER ISSUE 1 NOVEMBER 2014 CHALLENGES IN BAT CONSERVATION: A WORLDWIDE PERSPECTIVE Dear Readers, It is a pleasure to introduce the first issue of the IUCN Bat Specialist Group Newsletter. Our aim is to inform the BSG community about the status and major threats of bats, as well as conservation and policy efforts to recover and maintain bat populations around the world. We hope you enjoy the reading, Maria Sagot, Editor of the IUCN Bat Specialist Group Newsletter BSG EDITORIAL BOARD BSG CO-CHAIRS LATIN AMERICA AND THE Prof. Dr. Paul Racey CARIBBEAN University of Exeter in Cornwall Bs. Luis R. Víquez Rodríguez Cornwall, England Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Email: [email protected] México México DF, México Prof. Dr. Rodrigo Medellín Email: [email protected] Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México NORTH AMERICA México DF, México Prof. Dr. Winifred Frick Email: [email protected] University of California Santa Cruz x California, United States Email: [email protected] WEB MASTER Dr. Allyson Walsh OCEANIA San Diego ZOO California, United States Dr. Colin O’Donnell Email: [email protected] New Zealand Department of Conservation Wellington, New Zealand Email: [email protected] EDITOR IN-CHIEF Prof. Dr. Maria Sagot SOUTHEAST ASIA State University of New York at Oswego New York, United States Prof. Dr. Faisal Ali Anwarali Email: [email protected] Khan Universiti Malaysia Sarawak AFRICA Sarawak, Malaysia Email: [email protected] Ms. Iroro Tanshi University of Benin Benin, Nigeria Email: [email protected] EUROPE Ms. Daniela Hamidović State Institute for Nature Protection Zagreb, Croatia Email: [email protected] Cover Photos: Colin O’Donell, Tigga Kingston and Iroro Tanshi.
    [Show full text]
  • £Arasites Associated with Lepidopterous Pests of Alfalfa in .Qklahoma
    £ARASITES ASSOCIATED WITH LEPIDOPTEROUS PESTS OF ALFALFA IN .QKLAHOMA By KATHLEEN MARY SENST I' Bachelor of Arts Wartburg College Waverly, Iowa 1974 Master of Science Oklahoma State University Stillwater, Oklahoma 1978 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY July, 1982 PARASITES ASSOCIATED WITH LEPIDOPTEROUS PESTS OF ALFALFA IN OKLAHOMA Thesis Approved: . ~ \ . ii 1143730 j ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I w.isb. to expres.s. my deep appreciation to my major adviser, Dr. Ricb.ard Berberet, for hi:s willi.ngness. to advise and help, and for his friendsb.i.p duri.ng thi:s: s:tudy and preparation of this manuscript. Appreciation is. expressed to Ors. Ray Eikenbary, Jerry Young, Robert Burton, and John Caddel for serving as members of my graduate committee, and to Or. Ron McNeu for his help in analyzing the data. Thanks. are extended to Mary Hininger, Melinda Davis, Donna Ridge, Phoebe Courtney, and Debbie Lauchner for their assistance in the lab­ oratory, and to Doug Sander and Kevin Mussett for their assistance in the fi.el d. Special thanks goes to Ms. Anne Hunt for clerical review and typing of this manuscript. My most sincere appreciation is reserved for my husband, John (Soteres}, for his encouragement, understanding, and patience while I was completing this work. I share the credit for this work with my family, whose love and support have been a constant source of encourage­ ment in my life. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1 II.
    [Show full text]
  • Survey of Roadside Alien Plants in Hawai`I Volcanoes National Park and Adjacent Residential Areas 2001–2005
    Technical Report HCSU-032 SURVEY OF ROADSIDE ALIEN PLANts IN HAWAI`I VOLCANOES NATIONAL PARK AND ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL AREAS 2001–2005 Linda W. Pratt1 Keali`i F. Bio2 James D. Jacobi1 1 U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center, Kilauea Field Station, P.O. Box 44, Hawaii National Park, HI 96718 2 Hawai‘i Cooperative Studies Unit, University of Hawai‘i at Hilo, P.O. Box 44, Hawai‘i National Park, HI 96718 Hawai‘i Cooperative Studies Unit University of Hawai‘i at Hilo 200 W. Kawili St. Hilo, HI 96720 (808) 933-0706 September 2012 This product was prepared under Cooperative Agreement CA03WRAG0036 for the Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center of the U.S. Geological Survey. Technical Report HCSU-032 SURVEY OF ROADSIDE ALIEN PLANTS IN HAWAI`I VOLCANOES NATIONAL PARK AND ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL AREAS 2001–2005 1 2 1 LINDA W. PRATT , KEALI`I F. BIO , AND JAMES D. JACOBI 1 U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center, Kīlauea Field Station, P.O. Box 44, Hawai`i Volcanoes National Park, HI 96718 2 Hawaii Cooperative Studies Unit, University of Hawai`i at Hilo, Hilo, HI 96720 Hawai`i Cooperative Studies Unit University of Hawai`i at Hilo 200 W. Kawili St. Hilo, HI 96720 (808) 933-0706 September 2012 This article has been peer reviewed and approved for publication consistent with USGS Fundamental Science Practices ( http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1367/ ). Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.
    [Show full text]
  • The Developmental and Genetic Bases of Apetaly in Bocconia Frutescens
    Arango‑Ocampo et al. EvoDevo (2016) 7:16 DOI 10.1186/s13227-016-0054-6 EvoDevo RESEARCH Open Access The developmental and genetic bases of apetaly in Bocconia frutescens (Chelidonieae: Papaveraceae) Cristina Arango‑Ocampo1, Favio González2, Juan Fernando Alzate3 and Natalia Pabón‑Mora1* Abstract Background: Bocconia and Macleaya are the only genera of the poppy family (Papaveraceae) lacking petals; how‑ ever, the developmental and genetic processes underlying such evolutionary shift have not yet been studied. Results: We studied floral development in two species of petal-less poppies Bocconia frutescens and Macleaya cordata as well as in the closely related petal-bearing Stylophorum diphyllum. We generated a floral transcriptome of B. frutescens to identify MADS-box ABCE floral organ identity genes expressed during early floral development. We performed phylogenetic analyses of these genes across Ranunculales as well as RT-PCR and qRT-PCR to assess loci- specific expression patterns. We found that petal-to-stamen homeosis in petal-less poppies occurs through distinct developmental pathways. Transcriptomic analyses of B. frutescens floral buds showed that homologs of all MADS-box genes are expressed except for the APETALA3-3 ortholog. Species-specific duplications of other ABCE genes inB. frute- scens have resulted in functional copies with expanded expression patterns than those predicted by the model. Conclusions: Petal loss in B. frutescens is likely associated with the lack of expression of AP3-3 and an expanded expression of AGAMOUS. The genetic basis of petal identity is conserved in Ranunculaceae and Papaveraceae although they have different number of AP3 paralogs and exhibit dissimilar floral groundplans.
    [Show full text]
  • A Landscape-Based Assessment of Climate Change Vulnerability for All Native Hawaiian Plants
    Technical Report HCSU-044 A LANDscape-bASED ASSESSMENT OF CLIMatE CHANGE VULNEraBILITY FOR ALL NatIVE HAWAIIAN PLANts Lucas Fortini1,2, Jonathan Price3, James Jacobi2, Adam Vorsino4, Jeff Burgett1,4, Kevin Brinck5, Fred Amidon4, Steve Miller4, Sam `Ohukani`ohi`a Gon III6, Gregory Koob7, and Eben Paxton2 1 Pacific Islands Climate Change Cooperative, Honolulu, HI 96813 2 U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center, Hawaii National Park, HI 96718 3 Department of Geography & Environmental Studies, University of Hawai‘i at Hilo, Hilo, HI 96720 4 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service —Ecological Services, Division of Climate Change and Strategic Habitat Management, Honolulu, HI 96850 5 Hawai‘i Cooperative Studies Unit, Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center, Hawai‘i National Park, HI 96718 6 The Nature Conservancy, Hawai‘i Chapter, Honolulu, HI 96817 7 USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, Hawaii/Pacific Islands Area State Office, Honolulu, HI 96850 Hawai‘i Cooperative Studies Unit University of Hawai‘i at Hilo 200 W. Kawili St. Hilo, HI 96720 (808) 933-0706 November 2013 This product was prepared under Cooperative Agreement CAG09AC00070 for the Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center of the U.S. Geological Survey. Technical Report HCSU-044 A LANDSCAPE-BASED ASSESSMENT OF CLIMATE CHANGE VULNERABILITY FOR ALL NATIVE HAWAIIAN PLANTS LUCAS FORTINI1,2, JONATHAN PRICE3, JAMES JACOBI2, ADAM VORSINO4, JEFF BURGETT1,4, KEVIN BRINCK5, FRED AMIDON4, STEVE MILLER4, SAM ʽOHUKANIʽOHIʽA GON III 6, GREGORY KOOB7, AND EBEN PAXTON2 1 Pacific Islands Climate Change Cooperative, Honolulu, HI 96813 2 U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Island Ecosystems Research Center, Hawaiʽi National Park, HI 96718 3 Department of Geography & Environmental Studies, University of Hawaiʽi at Hilo, Hilo, HI 96720 4 U.
    [Show full text]