DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter 3 Maryland's Wildlife and Species of Greatest Conservation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chapter 3 Maryland's Wildlife and Species of Greatest Conservation Chapter 3 Maryland’s Wildlife and Species of Greatest Conservation Need MARYLAND’S WILDLIFE AND SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED Table of Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................................................1 Distribution of Maryland’s Wildlife ................................................................................................1 Conservation Status of Maryland’s Wildlife ...................................................................................2 Maryland’s Extinct and Extirpated Species .............................................................................2 Endangered, Threatened, and In Need of Conservation Species .............................................3 Declining Species (and our opportunity to reverse that trend) ........................................................5 Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN).............................................................................7 SGCN Selection: Conservation Ranks...........................................................................................11 Conservation Status Groups ...................................................................................................14 Regional Context for Species of Greatest Conservation Need ......................................................16 Mammals of Maryland ...................................................................................................................18 SGCN Mammals of Maryland ...............................................................................................19 SGCN Montane Mammals .....................................................................................................19 SGCN Bats .............................................................................................................................21 SGCN Marine Mammals .......................................................................................................22 Threats to SGCN Mammals ...................................................................................................24 Conservation Actions and Information Needs for SGCN Mammals.....................................25 Birds of Maryland ..........................................................................................................................28 SGCN Birds of Maryland ......................................................................................................29 SGCN Montane Birds ............................................................................................................30 SGCN Birds of the Piedmont .................................................................................................31 SGCN Birds of the Coastal Plain ...........................................................................................32 SGCN Marine Birds ...............................................................................................................34 Threats to SGCN Birds ..........................................................................................................35 Conservation Actions and Information Needs for SGCN Birds ............................................37 Reptiles and Amphibians of Maryland ..........................................................................................45 Reptiles ..................................................................................................................................45 Amphibians ............................................................................................................................46 SGCN Reptiles and Amphibians of Maryland.......................................................................47 SGCN Marine and Estuarine Reptiles ...................................................................................47 SGCN Freshwater Reptiles and Amphibians .........................................................................48 SGCN Reptiles of Upland Habitats .......................................................................................49 i MARYLAND’S WILDLIFE AND SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED Threats to SGCN Reptiles and Amphibians ..........................................................................49 Conservation Actions and Information Needs for SGCN Reptiles and Amphibians ............51 Case Study: Maryland Amphibian and Reptile Atlas (MARA) ..............................................52 Fishes of Maryland ........................................................................................................................56 Freshwater Fishes...................................................................................................................57 Marine and Estuarine Fishes ..................................................................................................58 SGCN Fishes of Maryland .....................................................................................................59 Threats to SGCN Fishes.........................................................................................................60 Conservation Actions and Information Needs for SGCN Fishes ..........................................61 Invertebrates of Maryland ..............................................................................................................64 SGCN Insects of Maryland ....................................................................................................66 SGCN Aquatic Insects (Odonates and Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera) .................66 Case Study: SGCN Pollinators ..............................................................................................67 Other SGCN Invertebrates of Maryland ................................................................................69 SGCN Subterranean and Groundwater Species .....................................................................69 SGCN Freshwater Mussels ....................................................................................................70 SGCN Land Snails .................................................................................................................71 Other SGCN Invertebrates, Including Other Insects .............................................................71 Threats to SGCN Invertebrates ..............................................................................................72 Conservation Actions and Information Needs for SGCN Invertebrates ................................73 Maryland’s Plants ..........................................................................................................................91 Citations and Sources .....................................................................................................................94 ii MARYLAND’S WILDLIFE AND SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED List of Figures Figure 3.1 Matrix used to categorize species into five conservation status categories. .......... 14 Figure 3.2 Percentages of species by taxa groups in each conservation status group. ........... 16 Figure 3.3 Regional importance of fall migration stopover sites for birds from the analysis of weather surveillance radar data ............................................................................................... 36 Figure 3.4 New Jersey chorus frog distribution map comparison .......................................... 53 List of Tables Table 3.1 Summary of federal and state-listed species.. ........................................................... 5 Table 3.2 Categories considered for inclusion on Maryland's list of Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) ..................................................................................................... 7 Table 3.3 Comparison of 2005 and 2015 Species of Greatest Conservation Need lists ........... 9 Table 3.4 Wildlife diversity of Maryland ............................................................................... 10 Table 3.5 Definitions of global and state conservation ranks and rank qualifiers .................. 11 Table 3.6 Cross-reference of Conservation Status Ranks and their use in SGCN listing ...... 13 Table 3.7 Definitions of the five conservation status categories from Figure 3.1 based on grouping global and state conservation status ranks. .............................................................. 15 Table 3.8 RSGCN by major taxonomic group........................................................................ 18 Table 3.9 Existing federal recovery plans for SGCN mammal species. ................................. 26 Table 3.10 Mammal Species of Greatest Conservation Need in Maryland ............................ 26 Table 3.11 Existing federal recovery plans for SGCN birds. ................................................. 38 Table 3.12 Bird Species of Greatest Conservation Need in Maryland. .................................. 38 Table 3.13 Existing federal recovery plans for SGCN reptiles. ............................................. 54 Table 3.14 Reptile and Amphibian Species of Greatest Conservation Need in Maryland. .... 54 Table 3.15 Existing federal recovery plans for SGCN fishes. ................................................ 62 Table 3.16 Fish Species of Greatest Conservation Need in Maryland. .................................. 63 Table 3.17 Existing federal recovery plans for SGCN invertebrates. ..................................... 75 Table
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Herpetofaunal Survey of the Santee National Wildlife Refuge Submitted
    A Herpetofaunal Survey of the Santee National Wildlife Refuge Submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service October 5, 2012 Prepared by: Stephen H. Bennett Wade Kalinowsky South Carolina Department of Natural Resources Introduction The lack of baseline inventory data of herpetofauna on the Santee National Wildlife Refuge, in general and the Dingle Pond Unit specifically has proven problematic in trying to assess priority species of concern and direct overall management needs in this system. Dingle Pond is a Carolina Bay which potentially provides unique habitat for many priority reptiles and amphibians including the federally threatened flatwoods salamander, the state endangered gopher frog, state threatened dwarf siren and spotted turtle and several species of conservation concern including the tiger salamander, upland chorus frog (coastal plain populations only), northern cricket frog (coastal plain populations only), many-lined salamander, glossy crayfish snake and black swamp snake. The presence or abundance of these and other priority species in this large Carolina Bay is not known. This project will provide for funds for South Carolina DNR to conduct baseline surveys to census and assess the status of the herpetofauna in and adjacent to the Dingle Pond Carolina Bay. Surveys will involve a variety of sampling techniques including funnel traps, hoop traps, cover boards, netting and call count surveys to identify herpetofauna diversity and abundance. Herpetofauna are particularly vulnerable to habitat changes including climate change and human development activities. Many unique species are endemic to Carolina Bays, a priority habitat that has been greatly diminished across the coastal plain of South Carolina. These species can serve as indicator species of habitat quality and climate changes and baseline data is critical at both the local and regional level.
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidoptera of North America 5
    Lepidoptera of North America 5. Contributions to the Knowledge of Southern West Virginia Lepidoptera Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Lepidoptera of North America 5. Contributions to the Knowledge of Southern West Virginia Lepidoptera by Valerio Albu, 1411 E. Sweetbriar Drive Fresno, CA 93720 and Eric Metzler, 1241 Kildale Square North Columbus, OH 43229 April 30, 2004 Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Cover illustration: Blueberry Sphinx (Paonias astylus (Drury)], an eastern endemic. Photo by Valeriu Albu. ISBN 1084-8819 This publication and others in the series may be ordered from the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity, Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523 Abstract A list of 1531 species ofLepidoptera is presented, collected over 15 years (1988 to 2002), in eleven southern West Virginia counties. A variety of collecting methods was used, including netting, light attracting, light trapping and pheromone trapping. The specimens were identified by the currently available pictorial sources and determination keys. Many were also sent to specialists for confirmation or identification. The majority of the data was from Kanawha County, reflecting the area of more intensive sampling effort by the senior author. This imbalance of data between Kanawha County and other counties should even out with further sampling of the area. Key Words: Appalachian Mountains,
    [Show full text]
  • DNA Barcoding of the Leaf-Mining Moth Subgenus Ectoedemia S. Str
    Contributions to Zoology, 81 (1) 1-24 (2012) DNA barcoding of the leaf-mining moth subgenus Ectoedemia s. str. (Lepidoptera: Nepticulidae) with COI and EF1-α: two are better than one in recognising cryptic species Erik J. van Nieukerken1, 2, Camiel Doorenweerd1, Frank R. Stokvis1, Dick S.J. Groenenberg1 1 Netherlands Centre for Biodiversity Naturalis, PO Box 9517, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands 2 E-mail: [email protected] Key words: pairwise difference, Palearctic Abstract Species recognition ..................................................................... 7 The Ectoedemia angulifasciella group ................................... 7 We sequenced 665bp of the Cytochrome C Oxidase I (COI) The Ectoedemia suberis group .............................................. 10 barcoding marker for 257 specimens and 482bp of Elongation The Ectoedemia populella group .......................................... 10 Factor 1-α (EF1-α) for 237 specimens belonging to the leaf- The Ectoedemia subbimaculella group ................................ 11 mining subgenus Ectoedemia (Ectoedemia) in the basal Lepi- Discussion ........................................................................................ 13 dopteran family Nepticulidae. The dataset includes 45 out of 48 One or two genes ...................................................................... 13 West Palearctic Ectoedemia s. str. species and several species Barcoding gap ........................................................................... 15 from Africa, North America and Asia.
    [Show full text]
  • Insect Survey of Four Longleaf Pine Preserves
    A SURVEY OF THE MOTHS, BUTTERFLIES, AND GRASSHOPPERS OF FOUR NATURE CONSERVANCY PRESERVES IN SOUTHEASTERN NORTH CAROLINA Stephen P. Hall and Dale F. Schweitzer November 15, 1993 ABSTRACT Moths, butterflies, and grasshoppers were surveyed within four longleaf pine preserves owned by the North Carolina Nature Conservancy during the growing season of 1991 and 1992. Over 7,000 specimens (either collected or seen in the field) were identified, representing 512 different species and 28 families. Forty-one of these we consider to be distinctive of the two fire- maintained communities principally under investigation, the longleaf pine savannas and flatwoods. An additional 14 species we consider distinctive of the pocosins that occur in close association with the savannas and flatwoods. Twenty nine species appear to be rare enough to be included on the list of elements monitored by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (eight others in this category have been reported from one of these sites, the Green Swamp, but were not observed in this study). Two of the moths collected, Spartiniphaga carterae and Agrotis buchholzi, are currently candidates for federal listing as Threatened or Endangered species. Another species, Hemipachnobia s. subporphyrea, appears to be endemic to North Carolina and should also be considered for federal candidate status. With few exceptions, even the species that seem to be most closely associated with savannas and flatwoods show few direct defenses against fire, the primary force responsible for maintaining these communities. Instead, the majority of these insects probably survive within this region due to their ability to rapidly re-colonize recently burned areas from small, well-dispersed refugia.
    [Show full text]
  • Building a Predictive Model of Delmarva Fox Squirrel (Sciurus Niger Cinereus) Occurrence Using Infrared Photomonitors
    Building a Predictive Model of Delmarva Fox Squirrel (Sciurus niger cinereus) Occurrence Using Infrared Photomonitors Charisa M. Morris Thesis submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science In Fisheries and Wildlife Science Dean F. Stauffer, Chair James D. Fraser Marcella J. Kelly September 11, 2006 Blacksburg, Virginia Keywords: Delmarva fox squirrel, Sciurus niger cinereus, Delmarva peninsula, habitat model, logistic regression, AIC, endangered species Copyright 2006, Charisa M. Morris ii Building a Predictive Model of Delmarva Fox Squirrel (Sciurus niger cinereus) Occurrence Using Infrared Photomonitors Charisa M. Morris ABSTRACT Habitat modeling can assist in managing potentially widespread but poorly known biological resources such as the federally endangered Delmarva fox squirrel (DFS; Sciurus niger cinereus). The ability to predict or identify suitable habitat is a necessary component of this species’ recovery. Habitat identification is also an important consideration when evaluating impacts of land development on this species distribution, which is limited to the Delmarva Peninsula. The goal of this study was to build a predictive model of DFS occurrence that can be used towards the effective management of this species. I developed 5 a′ priori global models to predict DFS occurrence based on literature review, past models, and professional experience. I used infrared photomonitors to document habitat use of Delmarva fox squirrels at 27 of 86 sites in the southern Maryland portion of the Delmarva Peninsula. All data were collected on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Chesapeake Marshlands National Wildlife Refuge in Dorchester County, Maryland.
    [Show full text]
  • Systematics and Biology of the Ectoedemia (Fomoria) Vannifera Group
    Robert J. B. HOARE Australian National University, & C.S.I.R.O. Entomology, Canberra, Australia GONDWANAN NEPTICULIDAE (LEPIDOPTERA)? SYSTEMATICS AND BIOLOGY OF THE ECTOEDEMIA (FOMORIA) VANNIFERA GROUP Hoare, R. J. B., 2000. Gondwanan Nepticulidae (Lepidoptera)? Systematics and biology of the Ectoedemia (Fomoria) vannifera (Meyrick) group. – Tijdschrift voor Entomologie 142 (1999): 299-316, figs. 1-39, table 1. [ISSN 0040-7496]. Published 22 March 2000. The Ectoedemia (Fomoria) vannifera species-group is reviewed. Three species are recognized from South Africa (E. vannifera (Meyrick), E. fuscata (Janse) and E. hobohmi (Janse)), one from central Asia (E. asiatica (Puplesis)), and one from India (E. glycystrota (Meyrick) comb. n., here redescribed); three new species are described and named from Australia (E. pelops sp. n., E. squamibunda sp. n., and E. hadronycha sp. n.). All species share a striking synapomorphy in the male genitalia: a pin-cushion-like lobe at the apex of the valva. Two of the Australian species and one of the South African species have been reared from larvae mining the leaves of Brassi- caceae sensu lato. A phylogeny of all currently recognized species is presented: this taken to- gether with known distribution suggests either that the group is very ancient and antedates the split between the African and Indian parts of Gondwana (ca. 120 million years ago), or that it has dispersed more recently and has been overlooked in large parts of its range. Correspondence: R. J. B. Hoare, Landcare Research Ltd, Private Bag 92-170, Auckland, New Zealand. E-mail: [email protected] Key words. – Lepidoptera; Nepticulidae; Ectoedemia; Fomoria; new species; phylogeny; bio- geography; Gondwana; host-plants; Brassicaceae; Capparaceae.
    [Show full text]
  • Charismatic Megafauna
    KIDS CORNER CHARISMATIC MEGAFAUNA This document aims to teach you about megafauna. This presentation has the following structure: Slide 1 - What Are Megafauna? Slide 2 - Charismatic Megafauna Slide 3 - Megafauna Extinction Theories Slide 4 - Timeline Slide 5 - Living Megafauna Slide 6 - Extinct Australian Megafauna Slide 7 - Extinct African Megafauna Slide 8 - Case Study: Diprotodon optatum Slide 9 - Australian Curriculum Mapping KIDS CORNER CHARISMATIC MEGAFAUNA What Are Megafauna? Combining the Latin words for “large” (mega) and “animals” (fauna) creates the word “megafauna.” Megafauna are the largest animals on Earth – the ones that dominate the landscape during the time in which they live. Dinosaurs were certainly the megafauna of their time. And after the dinosaurs all died off in the mass extinction at the end of the Cretaceous period, new megafauna arose. They looked a lot like their modern descendants but were much bigger. Imagine wombats the size of a compact car, birds that stood taller than a human being, or snakes that make modern pythons look puny. Scientists consider animals that weigh more than 44 kilograms as adults to be megafauna. The term applies not only to mammals, but also to birds, reptiles, and amphibians—in short, all vertebrates, or animals with a backbone. By that definition, there are plenty of megafauna walking the Earth and swimming in its oceans today. Gorillas, elephants, and whales are prime examples. KIDS CORNER CHARISMATIC MEGAFAUNA Charismatic Megafauna The word “charismatic” means “charming” or “fascinating.” Conservationists coined the term “charismatic megafauna” during the 1980s to acknowledge that people find large animals very interesting, especially large animals that exhibit endearing or intriguing behaviour.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife Habitat Plan
    WILDLIFE HABITAT PLAN City of Novi, Michigan A QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE 21ST CENTURY WILDLIFE HABITAT PLAN City of Novi, Michigan A QUALIlY OF LIFE FOR THE 21ST CENTURY JUNE 1993 Prepared By: Wildlife Management Services Brandon M. Rogers and Associates, P.C. JCK & Associates, Inc. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS City Council Matthew C. Ouinn, Mayor Hugh C. Crawford, Mayor ProTem Nancy C. Cassis Carol A. Mason Tim Pope Robert D. Schmid Joseph G. Toth Planning Commission Kathleen S. McLallen, * Chairman John P. Balagna, Vice Chairman lodia Richards, Secretary Richard J. Clark Glen Bonaventura Laura J. lorenzo* Robert Mitzel* Timothy Gilberg Robert Taub City Manager Edward F. Kriewall Director of Planning and Community Development James R. Wahl Planning Consultant Team Wildlife Management Services - 640 Starkweather Plymouth, MI. 48170 Kevin Clark, Urban Wildlife Specialist Adrienne Kral, Wildlife Biologist Ashley long, Field Research Assistant Brandon M. Rogers and Associates, P.C. - 20490 Harper Ave. Harper Woods, MI. 48225 Unda C. lemke, RlA, ASLA JCK & Associates, Inc. - 45650 Grand River Ave. Novi, MI. 48374 Susan Tepatti, Water Resources Specialist * Participated with the Planning Consultant Team in developing the study. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii PREFACE vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY viii FRAGMENTATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES " ., , 1 Consequences ............................................ .. 1 Effects Of Forest Fragmentation 2 Edges 2 Reduction of habitat 2 SPECIES SAMPLING TECHNIQUES ................................ .. 3 Methodology 3 Survey Targets ............................................ ., 6 Ranking System ., , 7 Core Reserves . .. 7 Wildlife Movement Corridor .............................. .. 9 FIELD SURVEY RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS , 9 Analysis Results ................................ .. 9 Core Reserves . .. 9 Findings and Recommendations , 9 WALLED LAKE CORE RESERVE - DETAILED STUDy.... .. .... .. .... .. 19 Results and Recommendations ............................... .. 21 GUIDELINES TO ECOLOGICAL LANDSCAPE PLANNING AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION.
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species
    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Are Represented by 47 Spp. India’S Independence,Pp
    Odonatological Abstracts 1997 mation Lanthus and abundance on sp. Cordulegastersp. and biomass is included. (14416) ALFRED, J.R.B. & A. KUMAR, 1997. Fauna 1998 ofDelhi: faunal analysis (basedon available data). Slate Fauna Ser. zool. Surv. India 6: 891-903. — (Second Author: Northern Regional Stn, Zool. Surv. India, (14420) ALFRED, A.K. DAS & A.K. Dehra Dun-248195,India). SANYAL, [Eds], 1998. [Faunal diversity in India:] Odonata. In\ J.R.B. Alfred Faunal A tabelar review of animal spp. recorded from Delhi, et al., [Eds], diversity fam. The odon. in India: commemorative volume in the 50th India;no species lists, numbers per only. a year of 172-178, ENVIS Centre, are represented by 47 spp. India’s independence,pp. Zool. Surv. India, Calcutta. — (First Author: Director, (14417) KUMAR, A., 1997. Fauna of Delhi: Odonata, Zool. Surv. India, 234/4, A.J.C. Bose Rd, Calcutta- imagos. State Fauna Ser. zool. Surv. India 6: 147-159. -700020, India). in — (Northern Regional Stn, Zool. Surv. India, Dehra The earliest reference to Indian dragonflies appears Dun-248195,India). the Sangam literature, dated prior to the 8th century and known from the A revised and updatedchecklist (47 spp.) ofthe odon. AD. At present, 449 spp. sspp. are inch 4 for the first Indian 23% of which endemic. A review fauna ofDelhi, India, spp. published territory, are and is ofthe numbers of known from various time. Precise locality data, descriptive notes presented spp. for 21 remarks onbionomy are presented spp. regions, and some considerations on conservation future studies strategies and are provided. (14418) KUMAR, A., 1997.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Climate Change on a Tropical Carnivore: from Individual to Species
    The Impact of Climate Change on a Tropical Carnivore: From Individual to Species Daniella Dakin Rabaiotti A dissertation submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy UCL 2 Declaration I, Daniella Rabaiotti, confirm the work presented in this thesis is my own. The research was supported by NERC through the London NERC DTP. All data analysis data visualisation and modelling was done by Daniella Rabaiotti. Tim Coulson provided training in individual based modelling. Mike Croucher assisted in code optimisation for the individual based model. All chapters of this thesis were written by Daniella Rabaiotti, with guidance and comments from Rosie Woodroffe and Richard Pearson. Tim Coulson provided comments on Chapter 4, and Rosemary Groom, J.W. McNutt and Jessica Watermeyer provided comments on Chapter 3. Data from Laikipia, Kenya, on wild dog survival and movements were collected by Rosie Woodroffe and the Kenya Rangelands Wild Dog and Cheetah Project. Data on wild dog mortality in Savé Valley, Zimbabwe were collected by Rosemary Groom and the Savé Valley team at the African Wildlife Conservation Fund. Data on wild dog mortality in the Okavango, Botswana, were collected by J.W. McNutt and the Botswana Predator Conservation Trust. Data on wild dog distributions were provided by the Rangewide Conservation Programme for Cheetah and African Wild Dogs. Cover art was designed by Daniella Rabaiotti and created by Selina Betts. Graphical abstracts were designed by Daniella Rabaiotti and Gaius J. Augustus and created by Gaius J. Augustus. 3 4 Abstract Climate change is impacting species globally. Predicting which species will be impacted, where, when, and by how much, is vital to conserve biodiversity in a warming world.
    [Show full text]
  • A Checklist of North American Odonata
    A Checklist of North American Odonata Including English Name, Etymology, Type Locality, and Distribution Dennis R. Paulson and Sidney W. Dunkle 2009 Edition (updated 14 April 2009) A Checklist of North American Odonata Including English Name, Etymology, Type Locality, and Distribution 2009 Edition (updated 14 April 2009) Dennis R. Paulson1 and Sidney W. Dunkle2 Originally published as Occasional Paper No. 56, Slater Museum of Natural History, University of Puget Sound, June 1999; completely revised March 2009. Copyright © 2009 Dennis R. Paulson and Sidney W. Dunkle 2009 edition published by Jim Johnson Cover photo: Tramea carolina (Carolina Saddlebags), Cabin Lake, Aiken Co., South Carolina, 13 May 2008, Dennis Paulson. 1 1724 NE 98 Street, Seattle, WA 98115 2 8030 Lakeside Parkway, Apt. 8208, Tucson, AZ 85730 ABSTRACT The checklist includes all 457 species of North American Odonata considered valid at this time. For each species the original citation, English name, type locality, etymology of both scientific and English names, and approxi- mate distribution are given. Literature citations for original descriptions of all species are given in the appended list of references. INTRODUCTION Before the first edition of this checklist there was no re- Table 1. The families of North American Odonata, cent checklist of North American Odonata. Muttkows- with number of species. ki (1910) and Needham and Heywood (1929) are long out of date. The Zygoptera and Anisoptera were cov- Family Genera Species ered by Westfall and May (2006) and Needham, West- fall, and May (2000), respectively, but some changes Calopterygidae 2 8 in nomenclature have been made subsequently. Davies Lestidae 2 19 and Tobin (1984, 1985) listed the world odonate fauna Coenagrionidae 15 103 but did not include type localities or details of distri- Platystictidae 1 1 bution.
    [Show full text]