DOCSLIB.ORG

Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2018

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2018 Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2018 Carolina Northern Flying Squirrel (Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus) photo by Clifton Avery Compiled by Judith Ratcliffe, Zoologist North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources www.ncnhp.org C ur Alleghany rit Ashe Northampton Gates C uc Surry am k Stokes P d Rockingham Caswell Person Vance Warren a e P s n Hertford e qu Chowan r Granville q ot ui a Mountains Watauga Halifax m nk an Wilkes Yadkin s Mitchell Avery Forsyth Orange Guilford Franklin Bertie Alamance Durham Nash Yancey Alexander Madison Caldwell Davie Edgecombe Washington Tyrrell Iredell Martin Dare Burke Davidson Wake McDowell Randolph Chatham Wilson Buncombe Catawba Rowan Beaufort Haywood Pitt Swain Hyde Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Johnston Graham Henderson Jackson Cabarrus Montgomery Harnett Cleveland Wayne Polk Gaston Stanly Cherokee Macon Transylvania Lenoir Mecklenburg Moore Clay Pamlico Hoke Union d Cumberland Jones Anson on Sampson hm Duplin ic Craven Piedmont R nd tla Onslow Carteret co S Robeson Bladen Pender Sandhills Columbus New Hanover Tidewater Coastal Plain Brunswick THE COUNTIES AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NORTH CAROLINA Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2018 Compiled by Judith Ratcliffe, Zoologist North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org This list is dynamic and is revised frequently as new data become available. New species are added to the list, and others are dropped from the list as appropriate. The list is published periodically, generally every two years. Further information may be obtained by contacting the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Department of Natural and Cultural Resources, 1651 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699- 1651 and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, 1701 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1701. Additional information on rare species, as well as a digital version of this list, can be obtained from the Natural Heritage Program’s website at www.ncnhp.org. TABLE OF CONTENTS NORTH CAROLINA ANIMAL LIST – RARE .............................................................................................. 1 EXPLANATION OF STATUS AND RANK CODES FOR ANIMALS ........................................................ 2 Mammals ..................................................................................................................................................... 11 Birds ............................................................................................................................................................ 15 Reptiles ....................................................................................................................................................... 22 Amphibians ................................................................................................................................................. 26 Freshwater Fishes ........................................................................................................................................ 30 Mollusks: Freshwater Bivalves ................................................................................................................... 38 Mollusks: Freshwater and Terrestrial Gastropods ...................................................................................... 43 Arachnids .................................................................................................................................................... 52 Crustaceans ................................................................................................................................................. 54 Insects: Mayflies ......................................................................................................................................... 57 Insects: Stoneflies ....................................................................................................................................... 59 Insects: Caddisflies ..................................................................................................................................... 61 Insects: Dragonflies and Damselflies .......................................................................................................... 63 Insects: Butterflies....................................................................................................................................... 67 Insects: Moths ............................................................................................................................................. 72 Insects: Grasshoppers and Katydids............................................................................................................ 82 Insects: Beetles ............................................................................................................................................ 85 Insects: True Bugs ....................................................................................................................................... 86 Insects: Bees ................................................................................................................................................ 87 NORTH CAROLINA ANIMAL LIST – WATCH ........................................................................................ 89 Mammals ..................................................................................................................................................... 91 Birds ............................................................................................................................................................ 93 Reptiles ....................................................................................................................................................... 97 Amphibians ................................................................................................................................................. 99 Freshwater Fishes ...................................................................................................................................... 101 Mollusks: Freshwater Bivalves ................................................................................................................. 104 Mollusks: Freshwater and Terrestrial Gastropods .................................................................................... 105 Arachnids .................................................................................................................................................. 108 Crustaceans ............................................................................................................................................... 109 Insects: Mayflies ....................................................................................................................................... 112 Insects: Stoneflies ..................................................................................................................................... 114 Insects: Caddisflies ................................................................................................................................... 116 Insects: Dragonflies and Damselflies ........................................................................................................ 122 Insects: Flies .............................................................................................................................................. 125 Insects: Butterflies..................................................................................................................................... 126 Insects: Moths ........................................................................................................................................... 128 Insects: Grasshoppers and Katydids.......................................................................................................... 140 Insects: Beetles .......................................................................................................................................... 143 ENDEMIC ANIMALS IN NORTH CAROLINA ........................................................................................ 145 EXTIRPATED ANIMALS IN NORTH CAROLINA ................................................................................. 149 POTENTIAL NEW TO NORTH CAROLINA ANIMALS ......................................................................... 151 SIGNIFICANT 2018 REVISIONS TO THE ANIMAL LIST ..................................................................... 155 INDEX OF SCIENTIFIC NAMES ............................................................................................................... 159 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Biologists who graciously provided review of species statuses and ranks in this 2018 version, listed alphabetically, are Jeff Beane, Steven Beaty, Tyler Black, Art Bogan, Alvin Braswell, Kathrine Caldwell, Ed Corey, Eric Fleek, Mary Frazer, Jeff Hall, Steve Hall, Victor Holland, Harry LeGrand, Brena Jones, Gabriela Hogue, Chris Kelly, Sarah McRae, T.R. Russ, Curtis Smalling, Bryn Tracy, David Webster, and Lori Williams. Many staff members of the N.C. Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) were involved in the preparation and creation of this document. Dr. Harry LeGrand, former NCNHP Vertebrate Zoologist, developed the foundation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Biodiversity Work Group Report: Appendices
    Biodiversity Work Group Report: Appendices A: Initial List of Important Sites..................................................................................................... 2 B: An Annotated List of the Mammals of Albemarle County........................................................ 5 C: Birds ......................................................................................................................................... 18 An Annotated List of the Birds of Albemarle County.............................................................. 18 Bird Species Status Tables and Charts...................................................................................... 28 Species of Concern in Albemarle County............................................................................ 28 Trends in Observations of Species of Concern..................................................................... 30 D. Fish of Albemarle County........................................................................................................ 37 E. An Annotated Checklist of the Amphibians of Albemarle County.......................................... 41 F. An Annotated Checklist of the Reptiles of Albemarle County, Virginia................................. 45 G. Invertebrate Lists...................................................................................................................... 51 H. Flora of Albemarle County ...................................................................................................... 69 I. Rare
    [Show full text]
  • Rare Native Animals of RI
    RARE NATIVE ANIMALS OF RHODE ISLAND Revised: March, 2006 ABOUT THIS LIST The list is divided by vertebrates and invertebrates and is arranged taxonomically according to the recognized authority cited before each group. Appropriate synonomy is included where names have changed since publication of the cited authority. The Natural Heritage Program's Rare Native Plants of Rhode Island includes an estimate of the number of "extant populations" for each listed plant species, a figure which has been helpful in assessing the health of each species. Because animals are mobile, some exhibiting annual long-distance migrations, it is not possible to derive a population index that can be applied to all animal groups. The status assigned to each species (see definitions below) provides some indication of its range, relative abundance, and vulnerability to decline. More specific and pertinent data is available from the Natural Heritage Program, the Rhode Island Endangered Species Program, and the Rhode Island Natural History Survey. STATUS. The status of each species is designated by letter codes as defined: (FE) Federally Endangered (7 species currently listed) (FT) Federally Threatened (2 species currently listed) (SE) State Endangered Native species in imminent danger of extirpation from Rhode Island. These taxa may meet one or more of the following criteria: 1. Formerly considered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for Federal listing as endangered or threatened. 2. Known from an estimated 1-2 total populations in the state. 3. Apparently globally rare or threatened; estimated at 100 or fewer populations range-wide. Animals listed as State Endangered are protected under the provisions of the Rhode Island State Endangered Species Act, Title 20 of the General Laws of the State of Rhode Island.
    [Show full text]
  • A Survey of Odonata of the Patoka River National Wildlife Refuge and Management Area
    2012. Proceedings of the Indiana Academy of Science 121(1):54–61 A SURVEY OF ODONATA OF THE PATOKA RIVER NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE AND MANAGEMENT AREA Donald L. Batema* and Amanda Bellian: Department of Chemistry, Environmental Studies Program, University of Evansville, 1800 Lincoln Avenue, Evansville, IN 47722 USA Lindsey Landowski: Mingo National Wildlife Refuge, Puxico, MO. 63960 USA ABSTRACT. The Patoka River National Wildlife Refuge and Management Area (hereafter Patoka River Refuge or the Refuge) represents one of the largest intact bottomland hardwood forests in southern Indiana, with meandering oxbows, marshes, ponds, managed moist-soil units, and constructed wetlands that provide diverse and suitable habitat for wildlife. Refuge personnel strive to protect, restore, and manage this bottomland hardwood ecosystem and associated habitats for a variety of wildlife. The Patoka River National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) lists many species of management priority (McCoy 2008), but Odonata are not included, even though they are known to occur on the Refuge. The absence of Odonata from the CCP is the result of lack of information about this ecologically important group of organisms. Therefore, we conducted a survey, from May to October 2009, to document their presence, with special attention being paid to rare, threatened, and endangered species. A total of 43 dragonfly and damselfly species were collected and identified. No threatened or endangered species were found on the Refuge, but three species were found that are considered imperiled in Indiana based on Nature Serve Ranks (Stein 2002). Additionally, 19 new odonate records were documented for Pike County, Indiana. The results of this survey will be used by Refuge personnel to assist in management decisions and to help establish priorities for the Patoka River Refuge activities and land acquisition goals.
    [Show full text]
  • Tc & Forward & Owls-I-IX
    USDA Forest Service 1997 General Technical Report NC-190 Biology and Conservation of Owls of the Northern Hemisphere Second International Symposium February 5-9, 1997 Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada Editors: James R. Duncan, Zoologist, Manitoba Conservation Data Centre Wildlife Branch, Manitoba Department of Natural Resources Box 24, 200 Saulteaux Crescent Winnipeg, MB CANADA R3J 3W3 <[email protected]> David H. Johnson, Wildlife Ecologist Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 600 Capitol Way North Olympia, WA, USA 98501-1091 <[email protected]> Thomas H. Nicholls, retired formerly Project Leader and Research Plant Pathologist and Wildlife Biologist USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station 1992 Folwell Avenue St. Paul, MN, USA 55108-6148 <[email protected]> I 2nd Owl Symposium SPONSORS: (Listing of all symposium and publication sponsors, e.g., those donating $$) 1987 International Owl Symposium Fund; Jack Israel Schrieber Memorial Trust c/o Zoological Society of Manitoba; Lady Grayl Fund; Manitoba Hydro; Manitoba Natural Resources; Manitoba Naturalists Society; Manitoba Critical Wildlife Habitat Program; Metro Propane Ltd.; Pine Falls Paper Company; Raptor Research Foundation; Raptor Education Group, Inc.; Raptor Research Center of Boise State University, Boise, Idaho; Repap Manitoba; Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada; USDI Bureau of Land Management; USDI Fish and Wildlife Service; USDA Forest Service, including the North Central Forest Experiment Station; Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife; The Wildlife Society - Washington Chapter; Wildlife Habitat Canada; Robert Bateman; Lawrence Blus; Nancy Claflin; Richard Clark; James Duncan; Bob Gehlert; Marge Gibson; Mary Houston; Stuart Houston; Edgar Jones; Katherine McKeever; Robert Nero; Glenn Proudfoot; Catherine Rich; Spencer Sealy; Mark Sobchuk; Tom Sproat; Peter Stacey; and Catherine Thexton.
    [Show full text]
  • South Carolina Department of Natural Resources
    FOREWORD Abundant fish and wildlife, unbroken coastal vistas, miles of scenic rivers, swamps and mountains open to exploration, and well-tended forests and fields…these resources enhance the quality of life that makes South Carolina a place people want to call home. We know our state’s natural resources are a primary reason that individuals and businesses choose to locate here. They are drawn to the high quality natural resources that South Carolinians love and appreciate. The quality of our state’s natural resources is no accident. It is the result of hard work and sound stewardship on the part of many citizens and agencies. The 20th century brought many changes to South Carolina; some of these changes had devastating results to the land. However, people rose to the challenge of restoring our resources. Over the past several decades, deer, wood duck and wild turkey populations have been restored, striped bass populations have recovered, the bald eagle has returned and more than half a million acres of wildlife habitat has been conserved. We in South Carolina are particularly proud of our accomplishments as we prepare to celebrate, in 2006, the 100th anniversary of game and fish law enforcement and management by the state of South Carolina. Since its inception, the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SCDNR) has undergone several reorganizations and name changes; however, more has changed in this state than the department’s name. According to the US Census Bureau, the South Carolina’s population has almost doubled since 1950 and the majority of our citizens now live in urban areas.
    [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]
  • Phylogeny of Ensifera (Hexapoda: Orthoptera) Using Three Ribosomal Loci, with Implications for the Evolution of Acoustic Communication
    Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 38 (2006) 510–530 www.elsevier.com/locate/ympev Phylogeny of Ensifera (Hexapoda: Orthoptera) using three ribosomal loci, with implications for the evolution of acoustic communication M.C. Jost a,*, K.L. Shaw b a Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, USA b Department of Biology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA Received 9 May 2005; revised 27 September 2005; accepted 4 October 2005 Available online 16 November 2005 Abstract Representatives of the Orthopteran suborder Ensifera (crickets, katydids, and related insects) are well known for acoustic signals pro- duced in the contexts of courtship and mate recognition. We present a phylogenetic estimate of Ensifera for a sample of 51 taxonomically diverse exemplars, using sequences from 18S, 28S, and 16S rRNA. The results support a monophyletic Ensifera, monophyly of most ensiferan families, and the superfamily Gryllacridoidea which would include Stenopelmatidae, Anostostomatidae, Gryllacrididae, and Lezina. Schizodactylidae was recovered as the sister lineage to Grylloidea, and both Rhaphidophoridae and Tettigoniidae were found to be more closely related to Grylloidea than has been suggested by prior studies. The ambidextrously stridulating haglid Cyphoderris was found to be basal (or sister) to a clade that contains both Grylloidea and Tettigoniidae. Tree comparison tests with the concatenated molecular data found our phylogeny to be significantly better at explaining our data than three recent phylogenetic hypotheses based on morphological characters. A high degree of conflict exists between the molecular and morphological data, possibly indicating that much homoplasy is present in Ensifera, particularly in acoustic structures. In contrast to prior evolutionary hypotheses based on most parsi- monious ancestral state reconstructions, we propose that tegminal stridulation and tibial tympana are ancestral to Ensifera and were lost multiple times, especially within the Gryllidae.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact De La Densité De Cerfs De Virginie Sur Les Communautés D'insectes De L'île D'anticosti
    PIERRE-MARC BROUSSEAU IMPACT DE LA DENSITÉ DE CERFS DE VIRGINIE SUR LES COMMUNAUTÉS D'INSECTES DE L'ÎLE D'ANTICOSTI Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures de l’Université Laval dans le cadre du programme de maîtrise en biologie pour l’obtention du grade de maître ès sciences (M. Sc.) DÉPARTEMENT DE BIOLOGIE FACULTÉ DES SCIENCES ET GÉNIE UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL QUÉBEC 2011 © Pierre-Marc Brousseau, 2011 Résumé Les surabondances de cerfs peuvent nuire à la régénération forestière et modifier les communautés végétales et ainsi avoir un impact sur plusieurs groupes d'arthropodes. Dans cette étude, nous avons utilisé un dispositif répliqué avec trois densités contrôlées de cerfs de Virginie et une densité non contrôlée élevée sur l'île d'Anticosti. Nous y avons évalué l'impact des densités de cerfs sur les communautés de quatre groupes d'insectes représentant un gradient d'association avec les plantes, ainsi que sur les communautés d'arthropodes herbivores, pollinisateurs et prédateurs associées à trois espèces de plantes dont l'abondance varient avec la densité de cerfs. Les résultats montrent que les groupes d'arthropodes les plus directement associés aux plantes sont les plus affectés par le cerf. De plus, l'impact est plus fort si la plante à laquelle ils sont étroitement associés diminue en abondance avec la densité de cerfs. Les insectes ont également démontré une forte capacité de résilience. ii Abstract Deer overabundances can be detrimental to forest regeneration and can modify vegetal communities and consequently, have an indirect impact on many arthropod groups. In this study, we used a replicated exclosure system with three controlled white-tailed deer densities and an uncontrolled high deer density on Anticosti Island.
    [Show full text]
  • MOTHS and BUTTERFLIES LEPIDOPTERA DISTRIBUTION DATA SOURCES (LEPIDOPTERA) * Detailed Distributional Information Has Been J.D
    MOTHS AND BUTTERFLIES LEPIDOPTERA DISTRIBUTION DATA SOURCES (LEPIDOPTERA) * Detailed distributional information has been J.D. Lafontaine published for only a few groups of Lepidoptera in western Biological Resources Program, Agriculture and Agri-food Canada. Scott (1986) gives good distribution maps for Canada butterflies in North America but these are generalized shade Central Experimental Farm Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C6 maps that give no detail within the Montane Cordillera Ecozone. A series of memoirs on the Inchworms (family and Geometridae) of Canada by McGuffin (1967, 1972, 1977, 1981, 1987) and Bolte (1990) cover about 3/4 of the Canadian J.T. Troubridge fauna and include dot maps for most species. A long term project on the “Forest Lepidoptera of Canada” resulted in a Pacific Agri-Food Research Centre (Agassiz) four volume series on Lepidoptera that feed on trees in Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Canada and these also give dot maps for most species Box 1000, Agassiz, B.C. V0M 1A0 (McGugan, 1958; Prentice, 1962, 1963, 1965). Dot maps for three groups of Cutworm Moths (Family Noctuidae): the subfamily Plusiinae (Lafontaine and Poole, 1991), the subfamilies Cuculliinae and Psaphidinae (Poole, 1995), and ABSTRACT the tribe Noctuini (subfamily Noctuinae) (Lafontaine, 1998) have also been published. Most fascicles in The Moths of The Montane Cordillera Ecozone of British Columbia America North of Mexico series (e.g. Ferguson, 1971-72, and southwestern Alberta supports a diverse fauna with over 1978; Franclemont, 1973; Hodges, 1971, 1986; Lafontaine, 2,000 species of butterflies and moths (Order Lepidoptera) 1987; Munroe, 1972-74, 1976; Neunzig, 1986, 1990, 1997) recorded to date.
    [Show full text]
  • Systematic Entomology Laboratory. PSI, Agricultural Research Service
    PROC. ENTOMOL. SOC. WASH 99(4). 1997. pp 693- 696 BIOLOGICAL NOTES ON SPARASION LATREILLE (HYMENOPTERA: SCELIONIDAE), AN EGG PARASITOID OF ATLANTICUS GIBBOSUS SCUDDER (ORTHOPTERA: TETTIGONII DA E) E. E. GRISSELL Systematic Entomology Laboratory. PSI, Agricultural Research Service. U.S. Depart­ ment of Agriculture, c/o National Museum of Natural History. MRC 168, Washington. DC 20560 U.S.A. Abstract.—The first behavioral observations for any species of Sparasion and the first report of the genus Atlanticus (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae) as a host of Sparasion are pre­ sented. In Florida, a number of female wasps were observed burrowing headfirst into sandy areas. In every instance where a female burrowed into sand and the area subse­ quently was excavated, an egg of Atlanticus, oriented vertically, was found at 12 to 15 mm beneath the surface. Females emerged headfirst from the sand if they remained un­ derground for more than a few minutes. A single female was excavated from the ground while in the process of ovipositing into an egg; she was at its uppermost end with her head oriented toward the surface. Key Words: Hymenoptera, Scelionidae. Sparasion, Tettigoniidae, Atlanticus gibbosus, egg. parasitoid The genus Sparasion Latreille is repre­ except the host record itself (Cowan 1929) sented by over 100 species throughout the and subsequent citations of this record Hoi arctic and Oriental regions (Johnson (Milts 1941. Hitchcock 1942. Wakeland 1992). eight of which occur in America 1959, Muesebeck 1979). Although a few north of Mexico (Muesebeck 1979). Essen­ additional papers refer to Sparasion in re­ tially nothing is known about the biology lation to a potential host, these were merely or behavior of these wasps.
    [Show full text]
  • Odonatological Abstract Service
    Odonatological Abstract Service published by the INTERNATIONAL DRAGON FLY FUND (IDF) in cooperation with the WORLDWIDE DRAGONFLY ASSOCIATION (WDA) Editors: Dr. Mart in Lindeboom, Landhausstr. 10, D-72074 Tübingen, Germany. Tel. ++49 (0)7071 552928; E-mail: Lindeboom @aol.com and Martin Schorr, Waldfrieden 25, D-54314 Zerf, Germany. Tel. ++49 (0)6587 1025; E-mail: [email protected] Published in Rheinfelden, Germany and printed in Tübingen, Germany. ISSN 1438-0269 1997 1986. Endersby, I.D. (1998): Dragonflies of Mount Buffalo National Park. Victorian Entomologist 28(5): 83- 85. (in English). [At 6 localities situated within the Mount 1983. Paternoster, T. (1997): 1996 une année Baffalo National Park, Victoria, Australia, 12 odonate exceptionelle pour l'observation des odonates du species were recorded. The habitats of Synthemis marais d'Harchies-Hensies-Pommeroeul. Naturalistes eustalacta and Austroaeschna flavomaculata are de Mons et du Borinage 99: 8-15. (in French). [27 shortly discussed.] Address: Endersby, I., 56 Looker odonate species are recorded in 1996 in the swamps of Rd, Montgomery, Victoria 3094, Australia. E-mail: Harchies, Belgium. Of special interest are the records of endersby@ Brachytron pratense (supposed extinct in the Wallonia), werple.net.au Aeshna affinis, Anax parthenope, and Sympetrum 1987. Holusa, O. (1998): On the occurrence of fonscolombii. The distribution of these species in dragonfly Leucorrhinia pectoralis (Charpentier, 1825) Belgium und Luxemburg is mapped.] Address: (Odonata: Libellulidae) in the Czech and Slovak Paternoster, T., Direc tion Générale des Resources Republics. Sbornik Prírodovedného klubu v Uh. Hradisti naturelles et de l'environement, Centre Recherche de la 3: 45-53. (in Czech with extensive English summary).
    [Show full text]
  • This Table Contains a Taxonomic List of Benthic Invertebrates Collected from Streams in the Upper Mississippi River Basin Study
    This table contains a taxonomic list of benthic invertebrates collected from streams in the Upper Mississippi River Basin study unit as part of the USGS National Water Quality Assessemnt (NAWQA) Program. Invertebrates were collected from woody snags in selected streams from 1996-2004. Data Retreival occurred 26-JAN-06 11.10.25 AM from the USGS data warehouse (Taxonomic List Invert http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/data). The data warehouse currently contains invertebrate data through 09/30/2002. Invertebrate taxa can include provisional and conditional identifications. For more information about invertebrate sample processing and taxonomic standards see, "Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory -- Processing, taxonomy, and quality control of benthic macroinvertebrate samples", at << http://nwql.usgs.gov/Public/pubs/OFR00-212.html >>. Data Retrieval Precaution: Extreme caution must be exercised when comparing taxonomic lists generated using different search criteria. This is because the number of samples represented by each taxa list will vary depending on the geographic criteria selected for the retrievals. In addition, species lists retrieved at different times using the same criteria may differ because: (1) the taxonomic nomenclature (names) were updated, and/or (2) new samples containing new taxa may Phylum Class Order Family Subfamily Tribe Genus Species Taxon Porifera Porifera Cnidaria Hydrozoa Hydroida Hydridae Hydridae Cnidaria Hydrozoa Hydroida Hydridae Hydra Hydra sp. Platyhelminthes Turbellaria Turbellaria Nematoda Nematoda Bryozoa Bryozoa Mollusca Gastropoda Gastropoda Mollusca Gastropoda Mesogastropoda Mesogastropoda Mollusca Gastropoda Mesogastropoda Viviparidae Campeloma Campeloma sp. Mollusca Gastropoda Mesogastropoda Viviparidae Viviparus Viviparus sp. Mollusca Gastropoda Mesogastropoda Hydrobiidae Hydrobiidae Mollusca Gastropoda Basommatophora Ancylidae Ancylidae Mollusca Gastropoda Basommatophora Ancylidae Ferrissia Ferrissia sp.
    [Show full text]