Vascular Plant and Vertebrate Inventory of Saguaro ... - USGS

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Figure 6.4. Locations of non-random small-mammal trapping sites, Saguaro National Park, Rincon Mountain District, 2001 and 2002. Table 6.1. Summary of small-mammal trapping effort, Saguaro National Park, Rincon Mountain District, 2001 and 2002. See Appendix I for additional detail. Elevation stratum Location type Number of trapping sites Total trap nights Low Random 4 721 Non‑random 3 284 Middle Random 7 1,094 Non‑random 5 1,102 High Random 5 869 Non‑random 4 521 Analysis We expressed effort as the number of trap nights (number of traps multiplied by number of nights they were open) after accounting for sprung traps (misfired or occupied; Beauvais and Buskirk 1999). Sprung traps reduce trap effort because they are no longer “available” to capture animals; 72 we account for this by multiplying the number of sprung traps by 0.5 (lacking specific information, we estimate sprung traps were available for half of the night; Nelson and Clark 1973). We calculated relative abundance for species by dividing the number of captures by the number of trap nights times 100. For this report we
calculated relative abundance by plot group, type of plot (random or non-random), and visit. Pitfall Trapping It is possible that the Arizona shrew (Sorex arizonae) and vagrant shrew (Sorex vagrans) occur in the Rincon Mountains; they have been found in adjacent mountain ranges in southern Arizona (Hoffmeister 1986). Also, pocket gophers (Thomomys spp.) are very difficult to capture using Sherman traps. To survey for shrews and pocket gophers we placed pitfall traps (3-quart buckets [19 cm tall x 14 cm wide]) in moist, north-facing slopes of the Rincon Mountains in 2001. We placed traps adjacent to a natural feature such as a fallen log or rock. We attempted to check traps every 10 days to two weeks. Effort We placed traps in three areas: North Slope Trail, Italian Spring, and Spud Rock Spring (Fig. 6.3). We placed 10 traps (22 May to 24 September) at the North Slope Trail site, and four traps each at Italian Spring and Spud Rock Spring (6 June to 10 October). Bats We surveyed for bats using two field methods: roost-site visits and netting. For netting, we concentrated our survey effort in areas that were most likely to have bats, mostly riparian areas with surface water present. We did not survey for bats near focal points because of the low probability of success in these areas. Roosts We visited roosts that were known to have bats, based on historic records, or were likely to have bats based on habitat characteristics. At roosts, we observed bats with the aid of infrared-filtered light and night-vision equipment or red-filtered light. When bats were present, we worked quickly to identify them to species, but if there were no bats we used bright light, then searched for and collected skeletal material. Mist Netting Because most insectivorous bats congregate at water sites, we selected sites known to have abundant surface water (Fig. 6.3). At most sites we set mist nets directly over water and varied the number of net hours among sites and visits depending on field conditions. We used monofilament nylon nets of three net sizes (5-m, 9-m, or 12-m) depending on the site and set nets singly or stacked, depending on conditions. For each bat captured, we recorded time of capture, species, and sex. When appropriate, we also recorded reproductive condition, forearm length, mass, body condition, tooth wear, presence of parasites, and other measurements. We determined whether individuals were adult, subadult (by closure of epiphyses), or juvenile (by appearance). We estimated age by tooth wear. For females, we recorded reproductive condition as pregnant (palpation for fetal bones), currently lactating (mammary gland with milk), previous evidence of lactation (misshapen or scarred nipples), or nulliparity (non-use of nipples). We determined reproductive condition for males by the degree of swelling of testes or the presence of black epididymides and used this information to determine if the male was not reproductive, semireproductive, or reproductive. We marked all captured bats with a temporary, non-lethal marker to prevent counting the same individual more than once in the same evening. We used sonar detectors (Anabat and/or QMC Mini) at all sites to aid in determining bat presence/absence and relative activity as compared to the visual or mistnet results. We listened passively for the call of pallid bats, the only species in the area that can be definitively identified by its directive call. Effort We visited three roosts that were known, or were likely, to have bats. We netted bats at six sites for a total of 13 nights of netting in 2001 and four nights of netting in 2002 (Appendix J). Most of our netting effort was at lower Rincon Creek and at Manning Camp Pond; we netted at each site for five nights. Deer Creek was the only site at which we netted on the east slope of the Rincon Mountains. Analyses We report the number of species and individuals caught by site, but because of the extreme differences in trapping effort among sites we 73
Page 1:
Powell, Halvorson, Schmidt Vascular
Page 4 and 5:
U.S. Department of the Interior DIR
Page 7 and 8:
Table of Contents Report Dedication
Page 9 and 10:
Table 5.8. Number of breeding behav
Page 11 and 12:
Figure 6.5. Locations of non-random
Page 13 and 14:
Report Dedication Eric Wells Albrec
Page 15 and 16:
Acknowledgements Thanks to Saguaro
Page 17 and 18:
Executive Summary This report summa
Page 19 and 20:
Chapter 1: Introduction to the Inve
Page 21 and 22:
them out. This information, in conj
Page 23 and 24:
communities and is especially usefu
Page 25 and 26:
Chapter 2: Park Overview Brian F. P
Page 27 and 28:
Figure 2.2. Aerial photograph showi
Page 29 and 30:
Figure 2.4. Diagram of the major ve
Page 31:
Non-native Species and Changes to V
Page 34 and 35:
General Botanizing Methods We colle
Page 36 and 37:
Figure 3.3. Locations of modified-W
Page 38 and 39:
Focal-points: General Patterns We f
Page 40 and 41: Percent 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Plant
Page 42 and 43: well (Swantek et al. 1999). The mos
Page 45 and 46: Chapter 4: Amphibian and Reptile In
Page 47 and 48: Figure 4.2. Locations of intensive
Page 49 and 50: features. We based extensive survey
Page 51 and 52: B). Reptilian species included two
Page 53 and 54: Table 4.6. Relative abundance (mean
Page 57 and 58: Cumulative number of species 50 40
Page 59 and 60: elevation range of the district all
Page 61: in recent years due to sedimentatio
Page 64 and 65: Spatial Sampling Designs We establi
Page 66 and 67: Figure 5.2. Location of section bre
Page 68 and 69: the relative abundance by repeat-vi
Page 70 and 71: Analysis We report relative abundan
Page 72 and 73: with some pine trees, mostly pinyon
Page 74 and 75: Riparian Sonoran Desertscrub Oak Pi
Page 76 and 77: Table 5.5. Mean relative abundance
Page 80 and 81: Nest Adults carrying objects Other
Page 82 and 83: Cumulative number of species Cumula
Page 84 and 85: can impact other native plant and v
Page 87 and 88: Chapter 6: Mammal Inventory Don E.
Page 89: Figure 6.3. Locations of random (fo
Page 93 and 94: Figure 6.5. Locations of non-random
Page 95 and 96: (2) Receiver triggers camera to tak
Page 97 and 98: Excluding the results for the white
Page 99 and 100: Table 6.5. Number of photographs of
Page 101 and 102: Cumulative number of species Cumula
Page 103 and 104: point out that the pond at Manning
Page 105 and 106: There is some suggestion that popul
Page 107 and 108: Chapter 7: Literature Cited Albrech
Page 109 and 110: Davis, R., and C. Dunford. 1987. An
Page 111 and 112: Kirkpatrick, C., C. J. Conway, and
Page 113 and 114: Rice, J., B. W. Anderson, and R. D.
Page 115: orderlands. Pp. 15-16. In effects o
Page 118 and 119: 100 Family Scientific name Common n
Page 140 and 141:
122 Family Scientific name Common n
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
130 Order Voucher Specimen (S), Fam
Page 150 and 151:
132 UA survey type Survey or specie
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
138 Survey type Documentation type
Page 158 and 159:
Voucher Collection type Taxon Speci
Page 160 and 161:
Appendix F. List of existing vouche
Page 162 and 163:
Taxon Common name Collectiona Colle
Page 164 and 165:
Appendix G. Mean frequency of detec
Page 166 and 167:
Species Total transects observed Lo
Page 168 and 169:
Oak Savannah Pine-oak Woodland Coni
Page 170 and 171:
Appendix I. Details of small-mammal
Page 172 and 173:
Random or Camera Number of Number o
Page 174:
156
show all

Vascular Plant and Vertebrate Inventory of Saguaro ... - USGS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?