F.A. Walker, "The Botany and Entomology of Iceland,"
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Fung Yuen SSSI & Butterfly Reserve Moth Survey 2009
Fung Yuen SSSI & Butterfly Reserve Moth Survey 2009 Fauna Conservation Department Kadoorie Farm & Botanic Garden 29 June 2010 Kadoorie Farm and Botanic Garden Publication Series: No 6 Fung Yuen SSSI & Butterfly Reserve moth survey 2009 Fung Yuen SSSI & Butterfly Reserve Moth Survey 2009 Executive Summary The objective of this survey was to generate a moth species list for the Butterfly Reserve and Site of Special Scientific Interest [SSSI] at Fung Yuen, Tai Po, Hong Kong. The survey came about following a request from Tai Po Environmental Association. Recording, using ultraviolet light sources and live traps in four sub-sites, took place on the evenings of 24 April and 16 October 2009. In total, 825 moths representing 352 species were recorded. Of the species recorded, 3 meet IUCN Red List criteria for threatened species in one of the three main categories “Critically Endangered” (one species), “Endangered” (one species) and “Vulnerable” (one species” and a further 13 species meet “Near Threatened” criteria. Twelve of the species recorded are currently only known from Hong Kong, all are within one of the four IUCN threatened or near threatened categories listed. Seven species are recorded from Hong Kong for the first time. The moth assemblages recorded are typical of human disturbed forest, feng shui woods and orchards, with a relatively low Geometridae component, and includes a small number of species normally associated with agriculture and open habitats that were found in the SSSI site. Comparisons showed that each sub-site had a substantially different assemblage of species, thus the site as a whole should retain the mosaic of micro-habitats in order to maintain the high moth species richness observed. -
Dipterists Digest
Dipterists Digest 2019 Vol. 26 No. 1 Cover illustration: Eliozeta pellucens (Fallén, 1820), male (Tachinidae) . PORTUGAL: Póvoa Dão, Silgueiros, Viseu, N 40º 32' 59.81" / W 7º 56' 39.00", 10 June 2011, leg. Jorge Almeida (photo by Chris Raper). The first British record of this species is reported in the article by Ivan Perry (pp. 61-62). Dipterists Digest Vol. 26 No. 1 Second Series 2019 th Published 28 June 2019 Published by ISSN 0953-7260 Dipterists Digest Editor Peter J. Chandler, 606B Berryfield Lane, Melksham, Wilts SN12 6EL (E-mail: [email protected]) Editorial Panel Graham Rotheray Keith Snow Alan Stubbs Derek Whiteley Phil Withers Dipterists Digest is the journal of the Dipterists Forum . It is intended for amateur, semi- professional and professional field dipterists with interests in British and European flies. All notes and papers submitted to Dipterists Digest are refereed. Articles and notes for publication should be sent to the Editor at the above address, and should be submitted with a current postal and/or e-mail address, which the author agrees will be published with their paper. Articles must not have been accepted for publication elsewhere and should be written in clear and concise English. Contributions should be supplied either as E-mail attachments or on CD in Word or compatible formats. The scope of Dipterists Digest is: - the behaviour, ecology and natural history of flies; - new and improved techniques (e.g. collecting, rearing etc.); - the conservation of flies; - reports from the Diptera Recording Schemes, including maps; - records and assessments of rare or scarce species and those new to regions, countries etc.; - local faunal accounts and field meeting results, especially if accompanied by ecological or natural history interpretation; - descriptions of species new to science; - notes on identification and deletions or amendments to standard key works and checklists. -
Millichope Park and Estate Invertebrate Survey 2020
Millichope Park and Estate Invertebrate survey 2020 (Coleoptera, Diptera and Aculeate Hymenoptera) Nigel Jones & Dr. Caroline Uff Shropshire Entomology Services CONTENTS Summary 3 Introduction ……………………………………………………….. 3 Methodology …………………………………………………….. 4 Results ………………………………………………………………. 5 Coleoptera – Beeetles 5 Method ……………………………………………………………. 6 Results ……………………………………………………………. 6 Analysis of saproxylic Coleoptera ……………………. 7 Conclusion ………………………………………………………. 8 Diptera and aculeate Hymenoptera – true flies, bees, wasps ants 8 Diptera 8 Method …………………………………………………………… 9 Results ……………………………………………………………. 9 Aculeate Hymenoptera 9 Method …………………………………………………………… 9 Results …………………………………………………………….. 9 Analysis of Diptera and aculeate Hymenoptera … 10 Conclusion Diptera and aculeate Hymenoptera .. 11 Other species ……………………………………………………. 12 Wetland fauna ………………………………………………….. 12 Table 2 Key Coleoptera species ………………………… 13 Table 3 Key Diptera species ……………………………… 18 Table 4 Key aculeate Hymenoptera species ……… 21 Bibliography and references 22 Appendix 1 Conservation designations …………….. 24 Appendix 2 ………………………………………………………… 25 2 SUMMARY During 2020, 811 invertebrate species (mainly beetles, true-flies, bees, wasps and ants) were recorded from Millichope Park and a small area of adjoining arable estate. The park’s saproxylic beetle fauna, associated with dead wood and veteran trees, can be considered as nationally important. True flies associated with decaying wood add further significant species to the site’s saproxylic fauna. There is also a strong -
The State of Scotland's Soil
The State of Scotland’s Soil Ed(s) Dobbie, K.E., Bruneau, P.M.C., Towers, W. 22 March 2011 This report should be cited as: Dobbie, K.E., Bruneau, P.M.C and Towers, W. (eds) 2011. The State of Scotland’s Soil. Natural Scotland, www.sepa.org.uk/land/land_publications.aspx Contributors: Chapter 1 Editorial Group Chapter 2 Editorial Group Chapter 3 R.M. Rees (6), H. Black (5), S.J. Chapman (5), H. Clayden (3), A.C. Edwards (5), S. Waldron (12) Chapter 4 W. Towers (5), P. Lewis (10), J. Mackay (8) Chapter 5 A. Cundill (8), J. Bacon (5), P. Dale (8), F.M. Fordyce (1), D. Fowler (2), A. Hedmark (8), A. Hern (8), U. Skiba (2) Chapter 6 C. Erber (8), H. Black (5), P.M.C. Bruneau (10) Chapter 7 A. Lilly (5), C.A. Auton (1), N.J. Baggaley (5), J.P. Bowes (8), C. Foster (1), M. Haq (8), H.J. Reeves (1) Chapter 8 P. D. Hallett (7), B.C. Ball (6) Chapter 9 I. Oliver (8), A. Cross (11), A. Searl (4), S. Shackley (11), C. Smith (10), S. Sohi (11) Chapter 10 P. Griffiths(8) , Editorial Group Chapter 11 M. Aitken (8), Editorial Group In addition, Jean Le Roux (8) contributed to the socio-economic sections in each chapter. Editorial Group K.E. Dobbie (8), P.M.C. Bruneau (10), W. Towers (5) Management Group M. Aitken (8), F. Brewis (9), C. Campbell (5), K.E. Dobbie (8), D. Crothers (8), M. Marsden (8), J.A. Shepherd (8) (1) British Geological Survey (BGS) (2) Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH) (3) Forestry Commission Scotland (FCS) (4) Institute of Occupational Medicine (IOM) (5) Macaulay Land Use Research Institute (MLURI) (6) Scottish Agricultural College (SAC) (7) Scottish Crop Research Institute (SCRI) (8) Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) (9) Scottish Government (SG) (10) Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) (11) UK Biochar Research Centre (UKBRC) (12) University of Glasgow, Department of Geographical and Earth Sciences Acknowledgements The preparation of this report was supported by a Soil Report Working Group consisting of representatives from BGS, CEH, FCS, Historic Scotland (HS), MLURI, SAC, SCRI, SEPA, SG and SNH. -
Catalogue of Eastern and Australian Lepidoptera Heterocera in The
XCATALOGUE OF EASTERN AND AUSTRALIAN LEPIDOPTERA HETEROCERA /N THE COLLECTION OF THE OXFORD UNIVERSITY MUSEUM COLONEL C. SWINHOE F.L.S., F.Z.S., F.E.S. PART I SPHINGES AND BOMB WITH EIGHT PLAJOES 0;cfor5 AT THE CLARENDON PRESS 1892 PRINTED AT THE CLARENDON PRKSS EY HORACE HART, PRINT .!< TO THE UNIVERSITY PREFACE At the request of Professor Westwood, and under the orders and sanction of the Delegates of the Press, this work is being produced as a students' handbook to all the Eastern Moths in the Oxford University Museum, including chiefly the Walkerian types of the moths collected by Wal- lace in the Malay Archipelago, which for many years have been lost sight of and forgotten for want of a catalogue of reference. The Oxford University Museum collection of moths is very largely a collection of the types of Hope, Saunders, Walker, and Moore, many of the type specimens being unique and of great scientific value. All Walker's types mentioned in his Catalogue of Hetero- cerous Lepidoptera in the British Museum as ' in coll. Saun- ders ' should be in the Oxford Museum, as also the types of all the species therein mentioned by him as described in Trans. Ent. Soc, Lond., 3rd sen vol. i. The types of all the species mentioned in Walker's cata- logue which have a given locality preceding the lettered localties showing that they are in the British Museum should also be in the Oxford Museum. In so far as this work has proceeded this has been proved to be the case by the correct- vi PREFACE. -
Microsoft Outlook
Jason Gregory From: Jemma Cox Sent: 23 August 2019 14:02 To: PlanningComments Cc: Russell Stock; Patricia Logie Subject: FW: Objections to Four Number Planning Applications within Little London Attachments: PAMBER Biodiversity Audit Overview.pdf; 2 Pamber BAO Appendices 1 to 4.pdf; 3 Pamber BAO Appendix 5.pdf From: Karl Hughes < > Sent: 23 August 2019 12:19 To: Mike Townsend < [email protected] >; Jemma Cox < [email protected] >; Patricia Logie < [email protected] >; Russell Stock < [email protected] > Subject: Objections to Four Number Planning Applications within Little London **** PLEASE NOTE: This message has originated from a source external to Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council, and has been scanned for viruses. Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council reserves the right to store and monitor e-mails **** Dear Sir/Madam, I understand the following applications, 19/01546/RET , 19/00237/FUL and 19/00370/FUL are Possibly being proposed for approval and that the recently submitted application number 19/02278/PIP involves even further development in Little London. As a local resident I am very concerned about the extent of this development which is in a relatively small area and within open countryside. I believe the accumulative effect of these proposals has not be considered. Taken as a whole these proposals will drastically alter the character of Little London. In addition these significant applications come at a time when residents are engaged in formulating a neighbourhood plan. One of these applications [19/00237/FUL ] has been operating without permission for a number of years and has been previously turned down with enforcement action proposed. -
The Major Arthropod Pests and Weeds of Agriculture in Southeast Asia
The Major Arthropod Pests and Weeds of Agriculture in Southeast Asia: Distribution, Importance and Origin D.F. Waterhouse (ACIAR Consultant in Plant Protection) ACIAR (Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research) Canberra AUSTRALIA The Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) was established in June 1982 by an Act of the Australian Parliament. Its mandate is to help identify agricultural problems in developing countries and to commission collaborative research between Australian and developing country researchers in fields where Australia has a special research competence. Where trade names are used this constitutes neither endorsement of nor discrimination against any product by the Centre. ACIAR MO'lOGRAPH SERIES This peer-reviewed series contains the results of original research supported by ACIAR, or deemed relevant to ACIAR's research objectives. The series is distributed internationally, with an emphasis on the Third World. © Australian Centre for 1I1lernational Agricultural Resl GPO Box 1571, Canberra, ACT, 2601 Waterhouse, D.F. 1993. The Major Arthropod Pests an Importance and Origin. Monograph No. 21, vi + 141pI- ISBN 1 86320077 0 Typeset by: Ms A. Ankers Publication Services Unit CSIRO Division of Entomology Canberra ACT Printed by Brown Prior Anderson, 5 Evans Street, Burwood, Victoria 3125 ii Contents Foreword v 1. Abstract 2. Introduction 3 3. Contributors 5 4. Results 9 Tables 1. Major arthropod pests in Southeast Asia 10 2. The distribution and importance of major arthropod pests in Southeast Asia 27 3. The distribution and importance of the most important arthropod pests in Southeast Asia 40 4. Aggregated ratings for the most important arthropod pests 45 5. Origin of the arthropod pests scoring 5 + (or more) or, at least +++ in one country or ++ in two countries 49 6. -
BHS Guidelines for Site Selection May 2018
These Guidelines have been subject to revision since their original publication. The pages covering the revised sections have been inserted into this document. Lancashire County Heritage Sites Scheme Biological Heritage Sites Guidelines for Site Selection Errata Page Guideline Error 34 Po1 Entries in Table 4. For U and V have been swapped (V appears before U). 43 Ff3 Add: Stellaria palustris Marsh Stitchwort 44 Ff3 Persicaria minor Small Water-pepper should read: Persicaria minor Small Water-pepper 44 Ff3 Plantanthera bifolia Lesser Butterfly-orchid should read: Plantanthera bifolia Lesser Butterfly-orchid 45 Ff4(a) Rhinanthus minor ssp. stenophyllusa Yellow-rattle should read: Rhinanthus minor ssp. stenophyllus a Yellow-rattle 46 Ff4b Polstichum setiferum should read Polystichum setiferum 51 Li6 The species listed under Application should form part of the Guideline. The Application text should read “All sites with six or more of the species listed above recorded since 1987 should be included.“ 60 Ma3 Delete the first sentence of the Justification which refers to water vole. 70 Am1a Guideline should read “...”good” or “exceptional” population...”. 71 Am2 Application reads: “...amphibians not included in (see Guideline Am1a or Am1b), as defined in Table 7.” Should read: “...amphibians (not included in Guideline Am1a or Am1b), as defined in Table 7.” 80 Mo4 Zenobiella Subrufescens now Perforatella subrufescens 82 In2 Add Hydroporus longicornis. 22/1/01 Lancashire County Heritage Sites Scheme Biological Heritage Sites Guidelines for Site -
Importation of Citrus Spp. (Rutaceae) Fruit from China Into the Continental
Importation of Citrus spp. (Rutaceae) United States fruit from China into the continental Department of Agriculture United States Animal and Plant Health Inspection A Qualitative, Pathway-Initiated Pest Risk Service Assessment January 14, 2020 Version 5.0 Agency Contact: Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory Center for Plant Health Science and Technology Plant Protection and Quarantine Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service United States Department of Agriculture 1730 Varsity Drive, Suite 300 Raleigh, NC 27606 Pest Risk Assessment for Citrus from China Executive Summary The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prepared this risk assessment document to examine plant pest risks associated with importing commercially produced fruit of Citrus spp. (Rutaceae) for consumption from China into the continental United States. The risk ratings in this risk assessment are contingent on the application of all components of the pathway as described in this document (e.g., washing, brushing, disinfesting, and waxing). Citrus fruit produced under different conditions were not evaluated in this risk assessment and may have a different pest risk. The proposed species or varieties of citrus for export are as follows: Citrus sinensis (sweet orange), C. grandis (= C. maxima) cv. guanximiyou (pomelo), C. kinokuni (Nanfeng honey mandarin), C. poonensis (ponkan), and C. unshiu (Satsuma mandarin). This assessment supersedes a qualititative assessment completed by APHIS in 2014 for the importation of citrus from China. This assessment is independent of the previous assessment, however it draws from information in the previous document. This assessment is updated to be inline with our current methodology, incorporates important new research, experience, and other evidence gained since 2014. -
Introduction
A provisional atlas and account of the craneflies of Shropshire 2007: Pete Boardman INTRODUCTION identification guide; however it does provide pointers to some of the more obvious Craneflies are probably familiar to most people as identification features. This may help the “daddy‐long‐legs”, those gangly flying insects beginner come to terms with what can seem a that come into houses on warm, late summer confusing and daunting fauna. The taxonomy evenings. Whilst this is true, it is by no way a true within the species accounts mostly follows that representation of the group as a whole, which published in Chandler 1998, however some comprises of at least 349 within Britain taxonomic uncertainties have been resolved since (www.buglife.org.uk), and approximately 17,000 then and are highlighted within ‘British worldwide (www.ip30.eti.uva.nl/ccw). Many Craneflies’ (Stubbs in prep). species are habitat specialists and as such are not normally encountered. Others are really very The status of species used is a combination of that common or abundant at certain times of the year. within British Craneflies (Stubbs in prep), © Some are indeed rare (about 15% of the total Mapmate software ( Tecknica Ltd), and that fauna are Red Data Book (RDB) (Shirt et al 1987) used in Falk (1991) and Falk & Chandler (2005). species (Stubbs in prep)), whilst others have Recording and data searches were carried out for declined due to habitat loss and particularly the Watsonian Vice County (V.C.) 40 (Fig.1). The drainage of wetland habitats (Stubbs 1992). boundary is slightly different to the political Occasionally craneflies hit the news, generally boundary of Shropshire and also includes the when the most commonly encountered species, Unitary Authority of Telford and Wrekin. -
Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature
, ji"-'.jr. 2r-"i; TIOZ THE BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE The Official Organ of THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE VOLUME 22 LONDON: * Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications OfiSce, 14, Belgrave Square, London, S.W.I 1965 {All rights reserved) : Ill TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Appointment of a Secretary to the Commission 1 Acting Secretary's Note and the By-Laws of the International Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature 3 Opinion 717. Arizona elegans Kennicott, 1859 (Reptiha): Validated under the plenary powers 19 Opinion 718. Eucypris Yiwra., 1891 (Crustacea, Ostracoda): Designation of a type-species under the plenary powers 22 Opinion 719. Aelia rostrata Boheman, 1852 (Insecta, Hemiptera): Validated under the plenary powers 24 Opinion 720. Tetrastichus Walker, 1842 (Insecta, Hymenoptera): Suppressed under the plenary powers 26 Opinion 721. Dicellomus Hall, 1871 (Brachiopoda) : Designation of a type-species under the plenary powers 28 Opinion 722. Orbiculoidea d'Orbigny, 1847 (Brachiopoda): Designation of a type-species under the plenary powers 30 Opinion 723. Repeal of the RuUng given in Opinion 47 together with the stabihsation of the generic names Carcharhinus Blainville, 1816, Carcharodon Smith, 1838, and Odontaspis Agassiz, 1838, in their accustomed sense (Pisces) 32 Opinion 724. Endothyra bowmani PhilUps, [1846] (Foraminifera) Validated under the plenary powers 37 Opinion 725. spondyliaspidinae Schwarz, 1898 (Insecta, Hemiptera): StabiUsed in its accustomed usage 40 Opinion 726. Jovellania Bayle, 1879 (Cephalopoda): VaUdated under the plenary powers 43 Opinion 727. Three specific names of Spanish Palaeozoic Crinoidea: Suppressed under the plenary powers 45 Opinion 728. -
Moths of Bukit Timah Nature Reserve, Singapore
Gardens’ Bulletin Singapore 71(Suppl. 1):317-330. 2019 317 doi: 10.26492/gbs71(suppl.1).2019-012 Moths of Bukit Timah Nature Reserve, Singapore R. Karam & J.H. Chong Saint Joseph’s Institution, 38 Malcolm Road, 308274 Singapore [email protected] ABSTRACT. The moth fauna of Bukit Timah Nature Reserve, Singapore, was studied using light trapping. Specimens and photographs were sorted into morphospecies including macro and micro moths. A total of 399 species has been found, of which nearly 200 have been identified to species level. Several are notably rare or otherwise of interest. The figures do not reach an asymptote, suggesting that the total moth fauna may be considerably greater. The nature reserve may be too small to yield statistically significant differences in the moth fauna between forest vegetation zones. Keywords. Biodiversity, insects, Lepidoptera, survey techniques, tropical rain forest Introduction Although Alfred Russel Wallace investigated extensively the fauna and flora of the Malay Archipelago between 1854 and 1862, collecting at least 110,000 insects, including more than 3,000 Lepidoptera (Wallace, 1869), his emphasis was not upon moths. Some moths were mentioned and/or collected by him but not in significant numbers (Wallace, 1869). Except for several months after his first arrival, in 1854, when he was based near what is now Bukit Timah Nature Reserve (BTNR), his trips to Singapore seem to have been largely for practical reasons, such as replenishing supplies, rather than focussing on nature. This is understandable in the context that, relative to the richness of the surrounding islands, Singapore was likely to yield fewer and fewer new species for a given time or effort.