All 7-£Z number 22 June 1995 ___ 1&S0 EDITORIAL STAFF OCT * • Richard A. Lancia, Editor U C STATE UBBAKi Suzanne A. Fischer, Assistant Editor D&l ftfJH Eloise F. Potter, Production Manager EDITORIAL BOARD James W. Hardin Professor of Botany North Carolina State University William M. Palmer Director of Research and Collections North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences Rowland M. Shelley Curator of Invertebrates North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences Robert G. Wolk Director of Programs North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences Brimleyana, the Zoological Journal of the North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences, appears twice yearly in consecutively numbered issues. Subject matter focuses on systematics, evolution, zoogeography, ecology, behavior, and paleozoology in the southeastern United States. Papers stress the results of original empirical field studies, but synthesizing reviews and papers of significant historical interest to southeastern zoology are also included. Brief communications are accepted. All manuscripts are peer reviewed by specialists in the Southeast and elsewhere; final acceptability is determined by the Editor. Address manuscripts and related correspondence to Editor, Brimelyana, North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences, P.O. Box 29555, Raleigh, NC 27626. Information for contributors appears in the inside back cover. Address correspondence pertaining to subscriptions, back issues, and exchanges to Brimleyana Secretary, North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences, P.O. Box 29555, Raleigh, NC 27626. In citations please use the full name - Brimleyana. North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences Betsy Bennett, Director North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary CODN BRIMD 7 ISSN 0193-4406 Aspects of the Feeding Ecology of the Little Grass Frog, Pseudacris ocularis (Anura: Hylidae) Jeremy L. Marshall1 and Carlos D. Camp Department of Biology, Piedmont College Demorest, Georgia 30535 ABSTRACT— We report on the foods of the little grass frog, Pseudacris ocularis, from Georgia. Fifty specimens were collected from two isolated wetlands located in Evans and Grady counties, Georgia, during late spring and summer 1993. Analysis of stomach contents determined that the most abundant food items were small arthropods associated with leaf litter and soil. Almost 50% of the food items were collembolans, followed by hymenopterans (17%), acarines (9%), homopterans (8%), and coleopterans (8%). We compared foods of adult males with those of newly meta- morphosed juveniles collected at the same time from the Grady County site. Juvenile frogs ate more individual food items and a greater diversity of prey species than did adult males. This difference could be due to adult Pseudacris selecting larger, more profitable prey than juveniles select. Lower feeding activity exhibited by breeding males might also be a contributing factor. Little is known about the feeding ecology of many amphibians, especially intraspecific variability in foods and foraging (Duellman and Trueb 1986). Variation in dietary preferences among population subgroups (e.g., breeding males, non-breeding females, subadults, juveniles, larvae, etc.) has been reported to reflect differences in habitat preference (Lamb 1984), gape (Toft 1980), developmental condition (Brophy 1980, Davie 1991), and other factors. The little grass frog, Pseudacris ocularis (Bosc and Daudin), is the smallest North American anuran (Conant and Collins 1991). It occurs in a wide variety of ephemeral and semi-permanent wetlands in the southeastern Coastal Plain and favors grassy areas in and around cypress ponds and similar sites (Harper 1939, Mount 1975). In spite of its relative abundance in many of these areas, virtually nothing is known of the feeding ecology of this frog. The purpose of our study was to describe the diet of P. ocularis and to investigate any potential differences between the feeding of adult frogs and newly metamorphosed juveniles. 1 Present address: Biology Department, University of Mississippi, University, Mississippi 38677. Brimleyana 22:1-7, June 1995 1 Jeremy L. Marshall and Carlos D. Camp MATERIALS AND METHODS We collected 50 P. ocularis for stomach analysis from two localities during May-July 1993. Both sites were ephemeral wetlands in the lower Coastal Plain of Georgia. The first site, located in Grady County, was dominated by black gum (Nyssa sylvatica) and was situ- ated in a low pine flatwood having a canopy of slash pine (Pinus elliottii) and an understory of saw palmetto (Serenoa repens) and gallberry (Ilex glabra). The second, in Evans County, was a dome of pond cypress (Taxodium ascendens) surrounded by sandhills domi- nated by longleaf pine (P. palustris) and turkey oak (Quercus laevis). Areas similar to both sites were described in detail by Wharton (1978). After collection, all specimens were preserved in 10% formalin, and stored in 35% isopropanol. Each frog was measured for snout- vent length (SVL) and dissected for stomach analysis. Individual food items were counted and identified. Because prey items were too small to use volumetric displacement, relative importance of prey was de- termined by comparing each individual prey item to a paper grid and visually estimating the number of grid squares occupied (Camp and Bozeman 1981). Twenty of the Grady County frogs were collected between 2200 and 2400 EDT on 5 June. This sample consisted of 10 mature males and 10 juveniles that had just completed metamorphosis. We used this sample to make comparisons between feeding of adults and juve- niles. Because we did not independently test for prey availability, other collections were not used for comparisons because of possible complications arising from temporal or between-site differences in available prey items. In addition, although adult females were in- cluded in these samples, small numbers (n = 4) precluded between- sex comparisons. Correlation between the number of prey items eaten and body size was tested using the procedure described by Zar (1984). A comparison of diversity between adult male and juvenile prey species was made using the Shannon-Wiener Index of Diversity (H') (Zar 1984). RESULTS One hundred-forty individual prey items were identified and consisted entirely of arthropods, mainly insects (Table 1). Springtails (Collembola) were the most numerous group, making up 47% of the food items eaten and found in 56% of the stomachs. Because they are so small, however, they contributed less than 20% of the area occu- pied by all prey items. Hymenopterans, especially ants (Formicidae) Little Grass Frog Feeding Ecology Table 1. Stomach contents of 50 Pseudacris ocularis from the Coastal Plain of Georgia. Unless otherwise indicated, the smallest taxon in each order is represented by a single species; "i" repreesnts immature instars. Numbers (n) for higher taxa also include unidentified food items. Percentage of Food Item INSECTA Collembola Isotomidae Poduridae Sminthuridae Coleoptera Carabidae Cleridae Coccinellidae Staphylinidae (3) larvae Dictyoptera Blattidae Diptera (larvae) (3) Homoptera Delphacidae (i) Hymenoptera Diapriidae Dryinidae Encyrtidae Evaniidae Formicidae Scelionidae Orthoptera Acrididae (i) Phasmida Phasmatidae Siphonaptera Thysanoptera Phlaeothripidae ARACHNIDA ACARINA Mesostismata Oribatei (2) Araneida Anyphaenidae Palpigradi (n) Total Number Total Area Frequency 122 66 26 2 37 11 1 1 1 5 1 2 2 3 11 10 24 1 1 1 2 7 7 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 18 13 1 12 4 1 1 87.1 47.1 18.6 1.4 26.4 7.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 3.6 0.7 1.4 1.4 2.1 7.9 7.1 17.1 0.7 0.7 0.7 1.4 5.0 5.0 1.4 1.4 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 12.9 9.3 0.7 8.6 2.9 0.7 0.7 90.1 19.5 5.6 0.5 13.4 9.2 1.6 0.3 1.1 4.3 0.4 19.1 19.1 1.2 11.1 10.9 14.6 2.2 0.8 0.1 6.4 1.2 1.9 4.8 4.8 9.6 9.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 9.9 5.5 0.1 5.4 4.2 1.6 0.2 82.0 56.0 20.0 4.0 26.0 18.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 6.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 6.0 16.0 14.0 32.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 6.0 6.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 22.0 16.0 2.0 14.0 6.0 2.0 2.0 Jeremy L. Marshall and Carlos D. Camp and parasitic wasps (Scelionidae), were the second most important group, making up 17% numerically and occurring in 32% of the stomachs. Hymenopterans made up 15% of the relative area. Other important insect groups represented were coleopterans, particularly rove beetles (Staphylinidae), making up 8% of numbers, 9% of area, and occurring in 19% of the stomachs, and delphacid homopterans (7, 11, and 14%, respectively). Although found only occasionally, relatively large roaches (Dictyoptera) and walking sticks (Phasmida) made up a considerable amount of the total quantity of food eaten (19 and 10% of total area, respectively). The only non-insect food items found were arachnids. These consisted primarily of mites (Acarina), which made up 9% numerically, 6% of the area, and occurr- ed in 16% of stomachs. Juvenile frogs from the 5 June, Grady County sample had a mean SVL of 8.80 mm with a standard error (SE) of 0.21 mm. Adult males from this sample had a mean SVL of 14.87 mm and a SE of 0.23 mm. Food items eaten by these frogs are shown in Table 2. The Shannon-Wiener Index for juvenile prey species diversity (//' = 1.062) was significantly larger than that for adults {H' = 0.739; t = 3.27, df = 45, P < 0.01). There was a negative correlation between number of food items eaten and frog size (r2 = 0.25, t = 2.18, df = 14, P < 0.05). DISCUSSION Pseudacris ocularis is commonly found on lower tree trunks and foliage up to a height of 1 m or more (Harper 1939); males prefer these sites as calling perches (Harper 1939, Mount 1975). However, the majority of food items we found were arthropods that are associ- ated with leaf litter and/or soil (e.g., springtails, mites, dipteran lar- vae, staphylinids, ants, thrips, palpigrades, etc.). In addition, we found a large number of frogs on the ground, particularly during daytime collections. It is apparent, then, that P. ocularis spends a consider- able amount of its foraging time on the ground. According to optimal foraging theory (Pyke et al. 1977, Krebs 1978), a predator should choose prey that represent the greatest net energy gain and forage in areas where profitable prey are most fre- quently encountered. Considering the small size of these frogs, small abundant leaf litter arthropods such as springtails and mites might represent a relatively stable, predictable source of profitable prey. However, amphibians might find larger arthropod prey to be more profitable than small ones due to a proportionately smaller exoskel- eton (Jaeger and Barnard 1981). Therefore, little grass frogs should Little Grass Frog Feeding Ecology Table 2. Stomach contents of 10 juvenile and 10 adult P. ocularis collected 5 June 1993, Grady County, Georgia; "i" represents immature instars; * indicates two species represented. Numbers for higher taxa also include unidentified food items. r Juveniles Adults Food Item i % n % Collembola 9 27.3 10 45.5 Isotomidae 4 12.1 9 40.9 Sminthuridae 4 12.1 1 4.5 Coleoptera 2 6.1 2 9.1 Carabidae 1 3.0 0 0.0 Cleridae 1 3.0 0 0.0 Staphylinidae 0 0.0 2* 9.1 Diptera (larvae) 1 3.0 1 4.5 Homoptera 3 9.1 5 22.7 Delphacidae (i) 2 6.1 5 22.7 Hymenoptera 5 15.2 1 4.5 Formicidae 0 0.0 1 4.5 Scelionidae 4 12.1 0 0.0 Orthoptera 0 0.0 2 9.1 Acrididae (1) 2 9.1 Siphonaptera 1 3.0 0 0.0 Thysanoptera 1 3.0 0 0.0 Phlaeothripidae 1 3.0 Acarina 9 27.3 0 0.0 Meostigmata 1 3.0 Oribatei 8* 24.2 Araneida 1 3.0 1 4.5 Anyphaenidae 0 0.0 1 4.5 Palpigradi 1 3.0 0 0.0 feed more on larger prey when available. Our data would, in part, appear to confirm this hypothesis. For instance, relatively large im- mature delphacids made up < 7% of total food items. However, in the 5 June, Grady County sample of adults (Table 2), delphacids made up 23%, indicating these food items were probably more available at that time, although we do not have independent confirmation of prey abundance. Newly metamorphosed P. ocularis ate more individual food items and a greater diversity of prey species than did adult males. Two factors may explain these results. First, there may be an ontogenetic shift in foraging strategy during post-metamorphic growth of P. ocularis. Such a shift has been inferred in P. triseriata (Christian 1982) where Jeremy L. Marshall and Carlos D. Camp adults select more optimal (i.e., large) prey than do juveniles, which indiscriminately feed on prey they encounter. This may be the result of larger animals being able to choose from a greater range of prey sizes, whereas smaller individuals are largely restricted to small prey, as is apparent in P. crucifer (Oplinger 1967). This shift would account for the lower diversity of prey species taken by adult P. ocularis. Second, the adult sample used in our comparisons consisted entirely of males. Several authors have reported a sharp decline in feeding activity by adult male frogs during the breeding season (Jenssen and Klimstra 1966, Lamb 1984). The males in our study were not breeding (the pond was completely dry) and only sporadically calling at the time of collection (5 June), although breeding had been previously observed at this site in March. Mount (1975), however, reported breeding congregations of P. ocularis as late as 29 July in nearby Houston County, Alabama, and Harper (1939) recorded vigorous chorusing in the Okefenokee during August and September. Therefore, since P. ocularis does breed throughout the summer, we cannot rule out the possibility of lower feeding activity in adult males during the time of our collections. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS— Thanks are extended to Tyler Lee (Cairo, Georgia) and Ben Cash (Georgia Southern University) for help in collecting specimens, as well as Rob Wainberg (Piedmont College) for assistance in identifying prey items. In addition, Rob Wainberg and Rick Austin (University of Mississippi) critically read the manuscript. LITERATURE CITED Brophy, T. E. 1980. Food habits of sympatric larval Ambystoma tigrinum and Notophthalmus viridescens. Journal of Herpetology 14:1-6. Camp, C. D., and L. L. Bozeman. 1981. Foods of two species of Plethodon (Caudata: Plethodontidae) from Georgia and Alabama. Brimleyana 6:163-166. Christian, K. A. 1982. Changes in the food niche during post- metamorphic ontogeny of the frog Pseudacris triseriata. Copeia 1982:73-80. Conant, R., and J. T. Collins. 1991. Reptiles and amphibians of eastern/central North America. Houghton-Mifflin, Boston, Massa- chusetts. Little Grass Frog Feeding Ecology Davie, R. D. 1991. Ontogenetic shift in diet of Desmognathus quadramacula- tus. Journal of Herpetology 25:108-111. Duellman, W. E., and L. Trueb. 1986. Biology of amphibians. McGraw/ Hill, New York, New York. Harper, F. 1939. Distribution, taxonomy, nomenclature and habits of the little grass frog {Hyla ocularis). American Midland Naturalist 22:134-149. Jaeger, R. G., and D. E. Barnard. 1981. Foraging tactics of a terrestrial salamander: choice of diet in structurally simple envi- ronments. American Naturalist 117:639-664. Jenssen, T. A., and W. D. Klimstra. 1966. Food habits of the green frog, Rana clamitans, in southern Illinois. American Midland Naturalist 76:169-182. Krebs, J. R. 1978. Optimal foraging: decision rules for predators Pages 23-63 in Behavioral ecology: an evolutionary approach (J. R. Krebs and N. B. Davies, editors). Sinauer Publications, Sunderland, Massachusetts. Lamb, T. 1984. The influence of sex and breeding condition on microhabitat selection and diet in the pig frog Rana grylio. American Midland Naturalist 111:311-318. Mount, R. H. 1975. The reptiles and amphibians of Alabama. Ala- bama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama. Oplinger, C. S. 1967. Food habits and feeding activity of recently transformed and adult Hyla crucifer crucifer Wied. Herpetologica 23:209-217. Pyke, G. H., H. R. Pulliam, and E. L. Charnov. 1977. Optimal foraging: a selective review of theory and tests. Quarterly Re- view of Biology 52:137-154. Toft, C. A. 1980. Feeding ecology of thirteen syntopic species of anurans in a seasonal tropical environment. Oecologia 45:131-141. Wharton, C. H. 1978. The natural environments of Georgia. Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Atlanta. Zar, J. H. 1984. Biostatistical analysis, Second edition. Prentice- Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. Received 28 June 1994 Accepted 10 November 1994 Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2013 http://archive.org/details/brimleyana19nort_11 Corrections of Records of Occurrence of Peromyscus polionotus (Wagner) and P. gossypinus (LeConte) (Rodentia: Muridae) in the Blue Ridge Province of Georgia Joshua Laerm and James L. Boone Museum of Natural History and Institute of Ecology University of Georgia, Athens 30602 ABSTRACT — Reexamination of marginal records of Peromyscus polionotus and P. gossypinus previously reported from the Blue Ridge Province of Georgia indicate specimens were misidentified. Neither species occurs in the Blue Ridge Province. The distribution of P. polionotus is restricted to south of a line from Greenville and Spartanburg counties, South Carolina, southeast to Clarke, County, Georgia and west to Dawson and Cherokee counties, Georgia. The distributional limit of P. gossypinus is south of a line from Lincoln and Wilkes counties, Georgia west to Dekalb and Fulton counties and then west and north to Polk, Floyd, and Dade counties. Mice of the genus Peromyscus Gloger are among the most common and broadly studied small mammals in North America. Yet they are often difficult to distinguish on the basis of traditional morphological features, and consequently limits to their distribution are difficult to delineate. This is particularly true within Osgood's (1909) P. leucopus and P. maniculatus species groups (Hooper 1968, Laerm and Boone 1994). Frequently biologists depend upon range maps to rule out certain species; nevertheless, the correct identifica- tion of a taxon should be based upon morphological characteristics. Numerous regional studies have been undertaken to provide mensural discrimination between species of Peromyscus (Choate 1973, Linzey et al. 1976, Choate et al. 1979, Stromberg 1979, Engstrom et al. 1982, Feldhamer et al. 1983, McDaniel et al. 1983). Laerm and Boone (1994) recently used discriminant analysis to maximally distinguish between the four Peromyscus species that occur in the southeastern United States: P. gossypinus, leucopus, maniculatus, and polionotus. Based upon reexamination and correct identification of specimens representing marginal records of P. gossypinus and P. polionotus with this discriminant analysis model, we questioned the accuracy of existing range maps and marginal records for P. polionotus (Wagner) and P. gossypinus (LeConte). Brimleyana 22:9-14, June 1995 10 Joshua Laerm and James L. Boone Peromyscus polionotus — A black-eyed, white Peromyscus was reported from Tallulah Falls, Rabun County, Georgia by Dice (1934:246) who identified the specimen as P. polionotus polionotus. This specimen was noteworthy because the pelage was entirely white, and the feet, toes, and nails lacked any pigment. However, as Dice noted, the eyes, eye-ring, and outer parts of the ears were dark. Tallulah Falls, in the Tallulah River Gorge, is at the southern edge of the Blue Ridge Province in Georgia. While not specifically indicated by Dice, this would have been the northernmost record of the species, from a locality well outside the previously described range (Osgood 1909) and in habitat from which the species had never been reported. Typically, P. polionotus is restricted to sandy soils and does not occur north of the middle Piedmont of Georgia. Schwartz (1954) revised the Peromyscus polionotus complex and described several new subspecies. He provided external and cranial measurements of the six subspecies of polionotus he recognized and referred populations of polionotus in the northern portion of Georgia and South Carolina (essentially north of the Fall Line) to P. p. colemani. Schwartz (1954:568) commented on the Dice specimen which he ". . . presumed, on geographical grounds, to be assignable to P. p. colemani" Had Schwartz actually examined the Dice specimen, he probably would not have referred it to P. polionotus. However, Schwartz did not include the specimen in his mensural analysis. Thus, following Dice (1934) and Schwartz (1954), Hall and Kelson (1959), Golley (1962), and Hall (1981) continued to include the specimen as a marginal record for the species. We questioned the identification of the Dice specimen because (1) it was collected in quartzite sheer rock walls and talus of the Tallulah River Gorge in the Blue Ridge Province and (2) at a locality some 100 km north of any other specimen record. We compared our measurements of the Dice specimen (University of Michigan Museum of Zoology 68496) to measurements provided by Schwartz (1954) for P. p. colemani and subjected it to our discriminant function (Laerm and Boone 1994). For 8 of the 11 characters examined by Schwartz (1954:565), the Dice specimen was larger than the range of the com- parable measurements made on 11 P. p. colemani by Schwartz. Visual comparison of means and ranges of measurements of 110 P. polionotus and 107 P. leucopus, which were used to develop a discriminant function for mensural discrimination between these and other southeastern Peromyscus spp. (measurements provided in Laerm and Boone 1994), to the Dice specimen indicates that it generally falls inside the range of measurements available for both polionotus Occurrence of Peromyscus 11 and leucopus. Our discriminant analysis, however, strongly suggest the Dice specimen to be P. leucopus (P = 0.939). Concern over the correct identification of other northern marginal range records of P. polionotus in Georgia, South Carolina, and Alabama (see Schwartz 1954, Golley 1966, Wolfe and Rogers 1969, Hall 1981) prompted an examination of these specimens as well. We are satisfied that specimens reported from Jackson County, in extreme northeastern Alabama (Schwartz 1954, Hall and Kelson 1959, Hall 1981) are P. polionotus. Similarly, specimens from Greenville and Spartanburg counties South Carolina referred to by Schwartz (1954), Golley (1966), and Hall (1981) are correctly identified as P. polionotus. Review of currently available distributional records for P. polionotus in Georgia now indicates the northernmost limit of its range should be amended to extend from Spartanburg and Greenville counties, South Carolina, southwest to Clarke County, Georgia, and west to Dawson and Cherokee counties, Georgia. Unfortunately, there are no records available for the Ridge and Valley or Cumberland Plateau provinces of Georgia west of Dawson and Cherokee counties (Fig. 1). The next records to the northwest are in Jackson County, Alabama (Hall 1981). Fig. 1 Distribution of Peromyscus gossypinus (a) and P. polionotus (b) in Georgia. Dots represent northernmost distributional records only. 12 Joshua Laerm and James L. Boone Peromyscus gossypinus — Hall and Kelson (1959), apparently following Osgood (1909), indicated the range of P. gossypinus in Georgia to be restricted to the Coastal Plain. At that time no speci- mens were known from the Piedmont, Blue Ridge, Ridge and Valley, or Cumberland Plateau provinces. Golley (1962) published new dis- tributional records for Georgia and indicated (Golley 1962:124) specimens occurring in the southeastern portion of the Piedmont (including Columbia, Lincoln, McDuffie, and Wilkes counties), Ridge and Valley (Floyd, Gordon, and Polk counties), Cumberland Plateau (Dade County), extreme upper Piedmont (Habesham County) as well as the Blue Ridge Province (Rabun County). Subsequently, Wolfe and Linzey (1977) mapped the distribution of the species, apparently following Hall and Kelson (1959). Wolfe and Linzey (1977) do not cite Golley (1962); however, Hall (1981) does cite the Golley (1962) records and maps them accordingly, indicating their range extends into the extreme northeastern Piedmont and Blue Ridge provinces. We used our discriminant function to examine virtually all P. gossypinus records from Georgia. Specimens from Dade County on the Cumberland Plateau and those from Floyd and Polk counties in the Ridge and Valley are P. gossypinus as noted by Golley (1962). We were unable to locate any museum specimens referred to by Golley (1962) from Habersham or Rabun counties either in University of Georgia Museum of Natural History collections or those of all other North American mammal collections housing specimens from Georgia. Examination of skin tags and records has not indicated any P. gossypinus from those counties to have been re-identified and/or relabeled. We are confident that the specimens of P. gossypinus from Ruban and Habersham counties in Golley (1962) were erroneously mapped because, in his verbal description of the range, Golley (1962:128) indicated P. gossypinus to be found "... on the coastal plain, but extending into the Piedmont on the eastern margin of the state and into the ridge and valley province on the west." He makes no mention of any records in the extreme northern Piedmont or Blue Ridge. Thus, the range of P. gossypinus in Georgia should be amended to extend across the middle portion of the Piedmont from Lincoln and Wilkes counties west to Dekalb and Fulton counties and then west and north into Polk, Floyd, and Dade counties in the Ridge and Valley and Cumberland Plateau (Fig. 1). This is essentially the range as previously depicted by Hall and Kelson (1959) and Wolfe and Linzey (1977). Occurrence of Peromyscus 13 LITERATURE CITED Choate, J. R. 1973. Identification and recent distribution of white- footed mice {Peromyscus) in New England. Journal of Mammalogy 54:41-49. Choate, J. R., R. C. Dowler, and J. E. Krause. 1979. Mensural discrimination between Peromyscus leucopus and P. maniculatus (Rodentia) in Kansas. Southwestern Naturalist 24:249-258. Dice, L. R. 1934. A black-eyed white Peromyscus. Journal of Mammalogy 15:246. Engstrom, M. D., D. J. Schmidly, and P. K. Fox. 1982. Nongeographic variation and discrimination of species within the Peromyscus leucopus species group (Mammalia: Cricetinae) in eastern Texas. Texas Journal of Science 34:149-162. Feldhamer, G. A., J. E. Gates, and J. H. Howard. 1983. Field iden- tification of Peromyscus maniculatus and P. leucopus in Maryland: Reliability of morphological characters. Acta Theriologica 28:417-423. Golley, F. B. 1962. Mammals of Georgia: A study of their distribution and functional role in the ecosystem. University of Georgia Press, Athens. Golley, F. B. 1966. South Carolina mammals. The Charleston Museum, Charleston, South Carolina. Hall, E. R. 1981. The Mammals of North America. Second edition. John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York. Hall, E. R., and K. R. Kelson. 1959. The Mammals of North America. Ronald Press, New York, New York. Hooper, E. T. 1968. Classification. Pages 27-74 in Biology of Peromyscus (Rodentia) (J. A. King, editor). Special Publication of the American Society of Mammalogists 2:1-593. Laerm, J., and J. L. Boone. 1994. Mensural discrimination of four species of Peromyscus (Rodentia: Muridae) in the southeastern United States. Brimleyana 21:107-124. Linzey, A. V., D. W. Linzey, and S. E. Perkins, Jr. 1976. The Peromyscus leucopus group in Alabama. Journal of the Alabama Academy of Science 47:109-113. McDaniel, V. R., R. Tumlison, and P. McLarty. 1983. Mensural discrimination of the skulls of Arkansas Peromyscus. Proceedings of the Arkansas Academy of Science 37:50-53. Osgood, W. H. 1909. Revision of the mice of the American genus Peromyscus. North American Fauna 28:1-285. Schwartz, A. 1954. Oldfield mice, Peromyscus polionotus, of South Carolina. Journal of Mammalogy 35:561-569. Stromberg, M. R. 1979. Field identification of Peromyscus leucopus and P. maniculatus with discriminant analysis. Wisconsin Academy of Science, Art and Letters 67:159-164. 14 Joshua Laerm and James L. Boone Wolfe, J. L., and A. V. Linzey. 1977. Peromyscus gossypinus. Mammalian Species 70:1-5. Wolfe, J. L., and D. T. Rogers. 1969. Oldfield mammals in western Alabama. Journal of Mammalogy 50:609-612. Received 25 July 1994 Accepted 28 November 1994 The Masked Shrew, Sorex cinereus (Insectivora: Soricidae), and Red-backed Vole, Clethrionomys gapperi (Rodentia: Muridae), in the Blue Ridge Province of South Carolina Joshua Laerm Museum of Natural History and Institute of Ecology University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602 Eric Brown, Michael A. Menzel Daniel B. Warnell School of Forest Resources University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602 Amanda Wotjalik Museum of Natural History University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602 William Mark Ford Daniel B. Warnell School of Forest Resources University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602 AND Mary Strayer Nongame and Heritage Trust Program, South Carolina Wildlife and Marine Resources Department P.O. Box 1806, Clemson, South Carolina 29633 ABSTRACT — The first records of Sorex cinereus Kerr are documented from South Carolina. Pitfall surveys throughout the Blue Ridge Province resulted in captures from two localities in markedly mesic, relict, boreal habitats. Additional records of Clethironomys gapperi (Vigors) were documented including the most southeastern record. Both S. cinereus and C. gapperi are rare in South Carolina, largely because of limited areas of appropriate habitats. The masked shrew, Sorex cinereus Kerr, has the largest range and exhibits the greatest geographic variation of any North American Sorex (Hall 1981, Junge and Hoffmann 1981, van Zyll de Jong and Kirkland 1989). It ranges throughout the transcontinental coniferous forests from the Canadian Arctic south to the extreme northern por- tions of the United States with significant extensions south into the Brimleyana 22:15-21, June 1995 15 16 Joshua Laerm, et al. montane forests of the Rocky and Appalachian mountains. In the southeastern United States including Virginia and West Virginia, eastern Kentucky and Tennessee, North Carolina and Georgia, S. cinereus is restricted primarily to high elevation montane communities of the Appalachian Highlands (van Zyll de Jong and Kirkland 1989). To date, however, there have been no records from South Carolina (Golley 1966, Mengak et al. 1987). Previously, the southernmost records of S. cinereus have been reported from Georgia based upon three specimens reported by Wharton (1968) from Beech Creek near its confluence with the Talulla River, Towns County, at an elevation of 807 m. More recently, Ford et al. (In press) have reported S. cinereus from numerous, widely scattered localities throughout the Blue Ridge Province of Georgia, including localities in close proximity to the South Carolina state line. Similarly, S. cinereus has been reported from several Blue Ridge Province counties in North Carolina (Polk, Henderson, Transylvania, Jackson, Macon, and Clay) which are contiguous to South Carolina (Lee et al. 1982 and unpublished University of Georgia, Museum of Natural History records). Because S. cinereus is known to occur in immediately adjacent areas of Georgia and North Carolina and because seemingly appropriate areas of high elevation habitat exist in the Blue Ridge Province of South Carolina, we surveyed the moun- tainous portions of Oconee, Pickens, and Greenville counties specifi- cally for S. cinereus. METHODS From 23 January to 1 May 1994 pitfall trap surveys were conducted throughout the Blue Ridge Province of extreme northwest- ern South Carolina including, from east to west, portions of Greenville, Pickens, and Oconee counties. We totalled 14,000 trap nights at 17 individual sites. At each site twenty, 32-ounce, plastic containers (14-cm lip diameter and 17-cm depth) were placed below ground level adjacent to forest floor debris including stumps, fallen logs, rocks, etc, for a minimum of 60 days. Approximately 0.14L of preservative was placed in the bottom of each pitfall. General habitat features, including dominant overstory and understory vegetation, aspect, and approximate stand age, of each site were recorded and elevations estimated from topographic maps. Traps were checked on a biweekly basis. Specimens were preserved in alcohol for subsequent reproductive and gut content analysis. Standard body measurements were taken, and skulls were prepared for confirmation of identifica- Masked Shrew and Red-backed Vole 17 tion. All specimens were reposited in the mammal collections of the University of Georgia Museum of Natural History. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION We recovered 15 S. cinereus at two of 17 Blue Ridge Province sites. Both S. cinereus localities were in the northwestern portion of Oconee County. Seven individuals were recovered from the grounds of the Walhala Fish Hatchery in a hemlock (Tsuga canadensis) and rhododendron (Rhododendron maximum) streamside community which grades upslope into a yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), mixed oak (Quercus spp.), hickory (Carya spp.), and white pine (Pinus strobus) community. Elevation was approximately 760 m. The second S. cinereus locality (eight captures) was approximately 1.3 km east of the Walhala Fish Hatchery site in a moderate to mesic mixed oak and yellow poplar hardwood community at approximately 800 m. Sorex cinereus was the dominant small mammal recovered in the Walhala Fish Hatchery site. Fifteen small mammals were recov- ered in 1,960 trap nights: seven S. cinereus, two S. fumeus, one Sorex hoyi, one Blarina brevicauda, two Peromyscus maniculatus, and one Clethrionomys gapperi. The recovery of S. cinereus was fairly evenly distributed over the trapping period with one or two captured during each sampling period. At the second site, also with 1,960 trap nights, 12 S. fumeus, four S. hoyi, two Peromyscus leucopus, one P. maniculatus, two Blarina brevicauda, and one Clethrionomys gapperi were captured in addition to the eight S. cinereus. Here all the cinereus were captured between 20 March and 3 April; six of which were taken in a single pitfall trap beneath a large, heavily rotted log. The breadth and intensity of our collection efforts indicate a restricted distribution of S. cinereus in South Carolina. Sorex cinereus is regarded as having a boreomontane distribution (Junge and Hoffman 1981). In the southern Appalachians it has been documented by Odum (1949), Johnston (1967), Gentry et al. (1968), Linzey and Linzey (1971), Whitaker et al. (1975), and Lee et al. (1982) in west- ern North Carolina; Conaway and Howell (1953), Smith et al. (1974), and Harvey et al. (1991, 1992), in the mountainous regions of eastern Tennessee; and Pagels and Tate (1976), Pagels and Handley (1989), Pagels (1991), Kalko and Handley (1993), and Pagels et al. (1994) in southwestern Virginia. It has not been recorded from elevations be- low 610 m in southwestern Virginia (Pagels and Handley 1989) or North Carolina (Linzey and Linzey 1971, Lee et al. 1982). Similarly, 18 Joshua Laerm, et al. in Georgia, S. cinereus is restricted to high elevation (790-1,370 m) in markedly mesic habitats with northern affinities (Ford et al. 1994). Kirkland (1985, 1991) indicated that soricids, in general, are most diverse in regions characterized by cool moist forests, possibly by supporting an abundant, stable, and diverse soil invertebrate fauna upon which shrews depend. Pagels et al. (1994) have shown that the presence of S. cinereus was significantly correlated with soil moisture holding capacity and total understory vegetation, and that habitat features that promote shaded, moist habitats were particularly important in relict, boreal forest habitats throughout the southern Appalachians. Although considerable areas of the Blue Ridge Province in South Carolina meet or exceed the minimum elevations at which S. cinereus is found elsewhere in the southern Appalachians, boreomontane habitats are limited there. At the southern limit of the Appalachian Mountains, much of the mountain habitat in South Carolina is charac- terized by south-facing aspects with more xeric, mixed oak and pine communities. Similar xeric south-facing or ridgeline habitats in Geor- gia yielded few, if any, S. cinereus in recent studies (Ford et al. 1994). In Georgia we encountered S. cinereus primarily at very high elevations (over 1200 m) or in rich, moist, streamside communities dominated by hemlock and rhododendron on the Rabun Bald Massif. West of the Little Tennessee River in Georgia, S. cinereus is restricted to higher (over 1000 m) elevations, and then they only occur in restricted habitats with marked northern affinities such as those described by Wharton (1968). Our collection site at the Walhala Fish Hatchery is located in a relatively narrow, steep-walled gorge of the East Fork of the Chat- tooga River. Wharton (1977) noted that similar streamside forest communities on the Georgia side of the Chattooga were kept cool and moist due to complete shading by the hemlock overstory and rhododendron shrub layer as well as by steep-walled gorges. He noted that such areas were refugia of more typical northern forest commu- nities. The Walhala Fish Hatchery, and its associated upslope north- ern aspect cove hardwood habitat, might represent a limited finger or refugia in South Carolina for boreal species such as S. cinereus. The region of the Walhala Fish Hatchery is one of the few sites in South Carolina that has yielded other small mammals with a typical boreal distribution including Clethrionomys gapperi (Pivorun et al. 1984) and Peromyscus maniculatus. Other high elevation sites in the Blue Ridge Province including Sassafrass Mountain, Jones Gap at Caesar's Head State Park, Saluda Mountain and Hogback Mountain were trapped but yielded no S. cinereus. Peromyscus maniculatus has Masked Shrew and Red-backed Vole 19 been recorded at many of these sites (Golley 1966), and we recovered several specimens at most of these localities. However, Clethriono- mys gapperi was not reported beyond the Walhalla Fish Hatchery site until we recovered one in the region of Sassafrass Mountain (Pickens County, US Hwy 178, 7.4 m north of State Hwy 11). This is most southeastern record for the species and, like S. cinereus, it apparently has a very limited distribution in South Carolina. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS— We appreciate the field assistance of numerous persons including E. Mitchell, J. Kimbrell, N. Lautenschlager, B. Smith, L. Grassman, and S. Chalmers. Collecting activities were conducted under South Carolina Permit #0016-94. We also thank biologists with the Walhala Fish Hatchery, Sumpter National Forest, and Caesar's Head State Park for permission to conduct surveys on United States Forest Service and South Carolina State Park lands. LITERATURE CITED Conaway, C. H., and J. C. Howell. 1953. Observations on the mammals of Johnston and Carter counties, Tennessee and Avery County, Virginia. Journal of the Tennessee Academy of Science 28:53-61. Ford, W. M., J. Laerm, D. C. Weinand, and K. G. Barker. 1994. Small mammal surveys in the Chatahoochee National Forest of Georgia. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeast- ern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (In press). Gentry, J. B., E. P. Odum, M. Mason, V. Nabholtz, S. Marshall, and J. T. McGinnis. 1968. The effect of altitude and forest manipulation on relative abundance of small mammals. Journal of Mammalogy 49:539-541. Golley, F. B. 1966. South Carolina mammals. Contributions from the Charleston Museum, Charleston, South Carolina. Hall, E. R. 1981. The mammals of North America. Second edition. John Wiley & Sons, New York, New York. Harvey, M. J., C. S. Chaney, and M. D. McGimsey. 1991. Distribution, status, and ecology of small mammals of the Cherokee National Forest, Tennessee (Southern Districts). Unpublished manuscript. Center for the Management, Utilization, and Protection of Water Resources, Tennessee Technological University, Cookeville. Harvey, M. J., M. D. McGimsey, and C. S. Chaney. 1992. Distribution, status, and ecology of small mammals of the Cherokee National Forest, Tennessee (Northern Districts). Unpublished manuscript. Center for the Management, Utilization, and Protection of Water Resources, Tennessee Technological University, Cookeville. 20 Joshua Laerm, et al. Johnston, D. W. 1967. Ecology and distribution of mammals at Highlands, North Carolina. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society 83:88-98. Junge, J. A., and R. S. Hoffmann. 1981. An annotated key to the long-tailed shrews (genus Sorex) of the United States and Canada, with notes on middle American Sorex. Occasional Papers of the Museum of Natural History, University of Kansas 94:1-48. Kalko, E. K. V., and C. O. Handley, Jr. 1993. Comparative studies of small mammal populations with transects of snap traps and pitfall arrays in southwest Virginia. Virginia Journal of Science 44:3-18. Kirkland, G. L., Jr. 1985. Small mammal communities in temperate North American forests. Australian Mammalogy 8:137-144. Kirkland, G. L., Jr. 1991. Competition and coexistence in shrews (Insectivora: Soricidae). Pages 15-22 in The biology of the Soricidae (J. S. Findley and T. L. Yates, editors). The Museum of Southwestern Biology, Albuquerque, New Mexico. Kirkland, G. L., Jr., and P. K. Sheppard. 1994. Proposed standard protocol for pitfall sampling of small mammal communities. Pages 277-281 in Advances in the biology of shrews (J. F. Merritt, G. L. Kirkland, Jr., and R. K. Rose, editors). Special Publication, Carnegie Museum of Natural History 18:1-485. Lee, D. S., J. B. Funderburg, and M. K. Clark. 1982. A distribu- tional survey of North Carolina mammals. Occasional Papers of the North Carolina Biological Survey, Raleigh. Linzey, A. V., and D. W. Linzey. 1971. Mammals of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville. Mengak, M. T., D. C. Guynn, Jr., J. K. Edwards, D. L. Sanders, and S. M. Miller. 1987. Abundance and distribution of shrews in western South Carolina. Brimelyana 13:63-66. Odum, E. P. 1949. Small mammals of the Highlands (North Caro- lina) Plateau. Journal of Mammalogy 30:179-192. Pagels, J. F. 1987. The pygmy shrew, rock shrew and water shrew: Virginia's rarest shrews (Mammalia: Soricidae). Virginia Journal of Science 38:364-368. Pagels, J. F. 1991. A high elevation record for the least shrew, Cryptotis parva (Say). Virginia Journal of Science 42:361-362. Pagels, J. F., and C. O. Handley, Jr. 1989. Distribution of the southeastern shrew, Sorex longirostris Bachman, in western Vir- ginia. Brimleyana 15:123-131. Pagels, J. F., and C. M. Tate. 1976. Shrews (Insectivora: Soricidae) of the Paddy Knob-Little Back Creek Area of western Virginia. Virginia Journal of Science 27:202-203. Masked Shrew and Red-backed Vole 21 Pagels, J. F., K. L. Uthus, and H. E. Duval. 1994. The masked shrew, Sorex cinereus, in a relictual habitat of the southern Ap- palachians. Pages 103-109 in Advances in the biology of shrews (J. F. Merritt, G. L. Kirkland, Jr., and R. K. Rose, editors). Special publication, Carnegie Museum of Natural History 18:1— 485. Pivorun, E. B., D. H. Allen, and D. T. Sawyer. 1984. First record of Clethrionomys gapperi (Mammalia: Rodentia) in South Caro- lina. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Society 100:33. Smith, C. R., J. Giles, and M. E. Richmond. 1976. The mammals of northeastern Tennessee. Journal of the Tennessee Academy of Science 49:88-94. van Zyll de Jong, C. G., and G. L. Kirkland, Jr. 1989. A morpho- metric analysis of the Sorex cinereus group in central and east- ern North America. Journal of Mammalogy 70:110-122. Wharton, C. H. 1968. First records of Microsorex hoyi and Sorex cinereus from Georgia. Journal of Mammalogy 49:158. Wharton, C. H. 1977. The natural environments of Georgia. Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Office of Planning and Re- sources, Atlanta. Whitaker, J. O., Jr., G. S. Jones, and D. D. Pascal. 1975. Notes on mammals of the Fires Creek Area, Nantahala Mountains, North Carolina, including their parasites. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society 91:13-17. Received 25 July 1994 Accepted 30 November 1994 Rediscovery of the Aquatic Gastropod Helisoma eucosmium (Bartsch, 1908), (Basommatophora: Planorbidae) William F. Adams Environmental Resources Branch United States Army Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 1890, Wilmington, North Carolina 28402 AND Susan G. Brady Department of Biology University of North Carolina at Wilmington 601 South College Road, Wilmington, North Carolina 28403 ABSTRACT — A population of Helisoma eucosmium (Bartsch, 1908), a small freshwater planorbid snail considered to be extinct by some authors, has been discovered in Town Creek, a tidal swamp stream in southeastern North Carolina. This rediscovery will permit a definitive determination of the proper systematic placement of the taxon. In the absence of live specimens, past analysis of this taxon during systematic revisions of the Planorbidae relied only on shell morphology of type material. Under this circumstance, this taxon was variously placed in both tropical and temperate genera and, compounding that problem, was treated as a full species by some authors and a subspecies by others. Its apparently limited range elevates concern for the conserva- tion of planorbid snail diversity in southeastern North Carolina because it is the second taxon with a severely restricted dis- tribution to be found in this rapidly urbanizing region. Helisoma eucosmium (Bartsch, 1908) is a small, distinctive planorbid snail which was collected and described from Greenfield Lake, a millpond constructed prior to 1750 (Adams 1990a). This site is located within the City of Wilmington, New Hanover County, North Carolina, and is on a tributary to the lower Cape Fear River. During the past few decades, repeated attempts to recollect H. eucosmium in Greenfield Lake and elsewhere within the region have been unsuccessful (Fuller 1977, Adams 1990a). This fact, combined with the water quality degradation in many regional streams, has led many investigators to treat the taxon as extinct (Opler 1976, Imlay 1977, Palmer 1985) or possibly extinct (Fuller 1977, Adams 19906). Brimleyana 22:23-29, June 1995 23 24 William F. Adams and Susan G. Brady During the spring of 1994, while performing a survey of the mollusks of Town Creek, a tidal swamp stream tributary to the lower Cape Fear River in adjacent Brunswick County, SGB discovered a population of Helisoma eucosmium approximately 14.5 km (9 mi) SSW of the type locality (Fig. 1). Although much of this stream system remains to be investigated, the taxon is known to occupy at least a 1.75 km (1.1 mi) stretch of the main creek. Five specimens were deposited in the invertebrate research collection at the North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences, Raleigh (NCSM). All conform precisely to the original shell description given by Bartsch (1908), particularly in displaying the chestnut-colored bands (Figs. 2 and 3). The largest specimen (NCSM #P1207), collected on 30 April 1994, has a greater diameter of 6.0 mm, a lesser diameter of 4.75 mm, and a height of 3.0 mm. It was probably an adult that overwintered, a likelihood suggested by its size and the minor pitting and corrosion of the shell surface. Three specimens taken in early July 1994 (NCSM #P1208) are smaller; average dimensions of three specimens are maximum diameter 3.8 mm, minimum diameter 3.0 mm, and height 1.9 mm (n = 3). Similarly-sized specimens taken from the same period laid eggs in captivity indicating that sexual maturity had been attained. The molluscan community in the freshwater part of Town Creek is diverse; species encountered to date are listed in Table 1. Continuing surveys may disclose additional species and most of those historically documented (Adams 1990a) from the type locality of Helisoma eucosmium may ultimately be found. In his description, Bartsch (1908) assigned Helisoma eucosmium and a subspecies from Louisiana, H. eucosmium vaughani, to the genus Planorbis Miiller 1774. F. C. Baker (1931) restricted that genus to species of European origin and, without examination of soft tissue anatomy, provisionally placed eucosmium in the genus Helisoma Swainson 1840. In his subsequent monograph on the Planorbidae, Baker (1945) retained this assignment, placing it alone with Helisoma anceps (Menke, 1830) in the subgenus Helisoma s.s.; however, he made no reference to anatomical examinations supporting this placement. On the strength of unpublished observations by J. P. E. Morrison of live individuals of H. e. vaughani from Louisiana, Fuller (1977) tentatively assigned the species to the Central American genus Taphius H. & A. Adams 1855. Taphius and other planorbid genera of tropical affinity (Afroplanorbis Thiele 1931, Biomphalaria Preston 1910, Australorbis Pilsbry 1934, Tropicorbis Pilsbry and Brown 1914, Planorbina Haldeman 1842, Armigerus Clessin 1884, and Platytaphius Pilsbry 1924) have long been the subjects of taxonomic debate and divergent systematic treatment, Helisoma eucosmium 25 Table 1. Freshwater mollusks of upper Town Creek, Brunswick County, North Carolina, 1994. Gastropods Bivalves Viviparidae Campeloma decision (Say) Hydrobiidae Amnicola limosus (Say) Gillia altilis (Lea) Physidae Physella hendersoni (Clench) Planorbidae Micromenetus dilitatus (Gould) Helisoma eucosmium (Bartsch) Planorbella trivolvis (Say) Ancylidae Laevapex fuscus (C. B. Adams) Unionidae Pyganodon cataracta (Say) Villosa delumbis (Conrad) Ligumia nasuta (Say) Unknown taxa of the Elliptio complanata and Elliptio icterina complexes Corbiculidae Corbicula fluminea (Muller) Sphaeriidae Eupera cubensis (Prime) Musculium securis (Prime) Unidentified sphaeriids a problem generated and sustained by years of inconclusive taxonomic studies resulting from the great similarity in chonchology and anatomy existing within a genus complex of worldwide distribution (Hubendick 1955, H. B. Baker 1960). While taxonomic and systematic problems are common in the freshwater gastropods, the need for nomenclatural stability within the tropical planorbids is a matter of great medical and economic importance because these snails are intermediate hosts of the human parasite Schistosoma mansoni. In response to a petition by Wright (1962), the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (1965) issued Opinion 735, ruling that Biomphalaria is to be given precedence over the generic names Taphius, Planorbina, and Armigera when any or all of these names are considered to apply to the same genus. Under this ruling, Fuller's (1977) binomen would be valid only if Taphius is determined to be separable from Biomphalaria at the genus level. Bypassing this issue, Burch (1982, 1989) stated Helisoma eucosmium may be a "form or juvenile" of Helisoma anceps (Menke, 1930) and, therefore, did not grant it specific status. Based on shell morphology and the reproductive maturity of the material collected from Town Creek, we find no evidence to support this possibility. Although the very oblique aperture of H. eucosmium is suggestive of the Biomphalaria group, the lack of vertically depressed whorls is not; therefore, we provisionally accept Baker's 26 William F. Adams and Susan G. Brady WILMINGTON Fig. 1. Town Creek and vicinity (* = known range of Helisoma eucosmium, ♦ = known sites of Planorbella magnifica. (1945) designation pending definitive studies of soft tissue anatomy. Over much of its length, Town Creek is a tidal system approximately 30-50 m wide with maximum depths varying between 5-7 m. Whereas the lower reaches are brackish, no salinity has been detected in the area where Helisoma eucosmium occurs. Physical parameters of the water are pH 5.1-7.0 (* = 6.1, n = 3), conductivity 217 //mhos/cm (n = 2), and calcium concentration 107.9 ppm (n = 2). All specimens of H. eucosmium came from a littoral community, occurring in less than 3 m of water, consisting of dense continuous mats of Brazilian elodea (Egeria densa Planchon), fanwort {Cabomba caroliniana Gray), fragrant waterlily (Nymphaea odorata Aiton), spatterdock (Nuphar luteum (Linnaeus)), and floating-heart (Nymphoides aquatica (Walter)). Helisoma euc osmium 27 Fig. 2. Dorsal, ventral, and apertural views of Helisoma eucosmium (NCSM #P1208). Lip aperture is incomplete. Sis Kh D mm--- vwi MHWj^^l^^^P^^^^^^'" "&•■''*'■■&' 1 1 > mm ^ Fig. 3. Foraging Helisoma eucosmium. 28 William F. Adams and Susan G. Brady Streambank forest cover, typical of southern swamps, consists of bald cypress (Taxodium distichum (Linnaeus)), tupelo gum (Nyssa aquatica Linnaeus), red maple {Acer rubrum Linnaeus), and water ash (Fraxinus caroliniana Miller). Our report of Helisoma eucosmium constitutes the second recent recollection of a likely "extinct" planorbid snail in the Cape Fear River drainage of southeastern North Carolina, the other being the rediscovery of Planorbella magnifica (Pilsbry) in Orton Pond (Adams 1988) and in Sandhill Creek Pond (Adams 1993), approximately 14.5 km (9.0 mi) SE and 12 km (7.5 mi) ESE, respectively (Fig. 1). Because of the heavy residential and industrial development that has occurred in southeastern North Carolina within the past half-century, these waterbodies might hold some of the few remaining populations of the original freshwater molluscan fauna of the lower Cape Fear Basin. If H. eucosmium is restricted to Town Creek and systematic research determines that it warrants full species rank, protection under state and federal conservation laws might be warranted. Although the Town Creek watershed is still very rural, covered primarily in crop and forest lands, the surrounding region is urbanizing rapidly, and the stream will surely be impacted by this trend. Consequently, additional surveys to determine the distribution of H. eucosmium and resolution of outstanding systematic issues are urgently needed. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS— Partial funding for this work has been provided by the University of North Carolina Center for Marine Science Research and the Wilmington District, United States Army Corps of Engineers. We would like to thank Dr. Eric Bolen for his administrative support, Mr. Shaun Cain for field assistance, Dr. Courtney Hackney for his ideas and encouragement, and Dr. Rowland Shelley for his constructive review of this manuscript. Photographs were taken by Mr. David M. DuMond. LITERATURE CITED Adams, W. F. 1988. Rediscovery of Planorbella magnifica (Pilsbry) in southeastern North Carolina. Nautilus 102(3): 125-126. Adams, W. F. 1990a. Recent changes in the freshwater molluscan fauna of the Greenfield Lake basin, North Carolina. Brimleyana 16:103-117. Adams, W. F. 1990fc. Helisoma eucosmium (Bartsch, 1908). Pages 16-17 in A report on the conservation status of North Carolina's freshwater and terrestrial molluscan fauna (W. F. Adams, editor). North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh. Helisoma eucosmium 29 Adams, W. F. 1993. A status survey for the magnificent ramshorn (Planorbella magnified), a freshwater snail endemic to North Carolina. North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh. Baker, F. C. 1931. The classification of the large planorbid snails of Europe and America. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 1931(2):575-592. Baker, F. C. 1945. The molluscan family Planorbidae. University of Illinois Press, Urbana. Baker, H. B. 1960. Planorbina (1843) vs. Australorbis (1934) vs. Biomphalaria (1910) vs. Taphius (1854). Nautilus 74(l):35-37. Bartsch, P. 1908. Notes on the fresh-water mollusk Planorbis magnificus and descriptions of two new forms of the same genus from the southern states. Proceedings of the U. S. National Museum 33:697- 700. Burch, J. B. 1982. Freshwater snails (Mollusca: Gastropoda) of North America. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-600/3-82-026. Burch, J. B. 1989. North American freshwater snails. Malacological Publications, Hamburg, Michigan. Fuller, S. L. H. 1977. Freshwater and terrestrial mollusks. Pages 143-194 in Endangered and threatened plants and animals of North Carolina (J. E. Cooper, S. S. Robinson, and J. B. Funderburg, editors). North Carolina State Museum of Natural History, Ra- leigh. Hubendick, B. 1955. Phylogeny in the Planorbidae. Transactions of the Zoological Society of London 28(6):453-542. Imlay, M. J. 1977. Competing for survival. Water Spectrum 9:7-14. International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. 1965. Opinion 735. Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 22(2):94-99. Opler, P. A. 1976. The parade of passing species: a survey of extinctions in the U.S. Science Teacher 43(9):30-34. Palmer, S. 1985. Some extinct molluscs of the U.S.A. Atala 13(1): 1-7. Wright, C. A. 1962. Planorbina Haldeman, 1852, Taphius Adams and Adams, 1955 and Armigerus Clessin, 1884 (Mollusca, Gastropoda): Proposed Suppression under the Plenary Powers. Z.N.(S.) 1392. Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 19(1):39-41. Received 27 September 1994 Accepted 19 January 1995 Effects of a Clearcut on the Herpetofauna of a South Carolina Bottomland Swamp Joseph P. Phelps1 North Carolina State University Hardwood Research Cooperative Raleigh, North Carolina 27695-8008 AND Richard A. Lancia Department of Forestry North Carolina State University Raleigh, North Carolina 27695-8002 ABSTRACT — Amphibians and reptiles were trapped during summer in a South Carolina bottomland swamp to assess the impacts of clearcut timber harvesting. Animals were captured using drift fences with pitfall traps, coverboards, and polyvinyl chloride pipes which simulated treefrog habitat. Twenty-nine species (10 amphibians and 19 reptiles) were detected on the site. Some were captured frequently enough to infer microhabitat preferences. Salamanders were much more frequent in the control area than in the clearcut. Other species showing preferences for the control were bronze frogs (Rana clamitans), gray treefrogs (Hyla chrysoscelis), and box turtles (Terrapene Carolina). Reptiles generally preferred the clearcut. This was especially true of lizards and large snakes. Diversities showed no significant differences between the control and clearcut. Small clearcuts done on long rotations are recommended. Machinery impact should be kept to a minimum, and down wood and snags should be left on the site. Bottomland hardwood forests have been recognized for their importance in floodwater and sediment retention, water quality protection, timber production, and wildlife habitat (Brinson et al. 1981, Clark and Benforado 1981, Harris and Gosselink 1986). At the same time, these ecosystems are being lost and degraded rapidly (Turner et al. 1981, Rudis 1993) due in large part to fragmentation. In the South- east, 75,000 acres of forested wetlands have been lost since 1982 (Cubbage and Flather 1993), not including acreage that was logged and regenerated. These logged wetlands may temporarily lose some functional value, and they contribute to fragmentation. 1 Present address: Weyerhaeuser Company, Southern Forest Research, P.O. Box 1060, Hot Springs, Arkansas 71902. Brimleyana 22:31-45, June 1995 31 32 J. P. Phelps and R. A. Lancia The research results presented here were obtained concurrent with other studies (Pavel 1993, Perison In Press) designed to document the impact of timber harvesting on the functional value of a bottom- land swamp. Amphibians and reptiles (herpetofauna) were chosen as the appropriate wildlife groups to study because of their abundance in the Southeast (Keister 1971, Vickers et al. 1985, Hairston 1987) and because of their importance in food chains (Pough et al. 1987, Blaustein and Wake 1990). Herpetofaunal species are also influenced by factors that are affected by timber harvest, including hydrology, soil quality, and vegetative structure. Herpetofaunal communities have been shown to be altered by clearcutting (Enge and Marion 1986, Pough et al. 1987, Petranka et al. 1993), ditching of wetlands (Vickers et al. 1985, Enge and Marion 1986), and changing forest cover (Bennett et al. 1980, Pough et al. 1987). In addition, much attention has been paid to a possible world- wide decline in amphibian diversity (Blaustein and Wake 1990, Pechmann et al. 1991, Hairston and Wiley 1993). Logging has been identified among the many possible causes of such a decline (Wake 1991, Hairston and Wiley 1993). Amphibians may be a good indicator of general environmental degradation, due to their exposure to terrestrial and aquatic toxins, and their sensitivity to habitat changes (Beiswenger 1988, Blaustein and Wake 1990). The objectives of our research were to evaluate whether clear- cutting in a hardwood swamp had any effect on community diversity or abundance of summer-active amphibians and reptiles. We also attempted to identify habitat variables that may have been related to changes in the herpetofaunal community. METHODS Study Site The study site was on the South Fork of the Edisto River, near Norway (Orangeburg County), South Carolina. "The site is re- presentative of blackwater swamps in the Carolinas that have timber management potential" (Perison et al. 1993). Predominant trees in the swamp forest included tupelo gum (Nyssa spp.), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), willow/water oak (Quercus phellos/nigra), and green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) (Pavel 1993). A clearcut of approximately 10 ha was completed in January 1991. Much of the clearcut area was impacted by skidder tire ruts. The adjacent control area was upstream of the clearcut and was a second growth stand approximately 45 years old. Second growth forest surrounded the clearcut. The sampled area of control was comparable to the size of the clearcut. The edge sampled was 650 m long. Clearcut Herpetofauna 33 Herpetofauna Sampling — Amphibians and reptiles were captured using three types of traps: drift fences, coverboards, and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe. Nine arrays of drift fences, measuring 270 m in total, were constructed of aluminum flashing (Gibbons and Semlitsch 1981). Each array consisted of two 15-m lengths placed at right angles to one another. Three of the arrays were placed in the clearcut, three in the control, and three along the edge between the clearcut and control. Twelve pitfall traps (19-L plastic paint buckets) were placed along each array, for a total of 108 traps. Arrays were centered in the clearcut, about 75 m from the edge. Control arrays averaged about 75 m from the edge. Forty-five coverboards were systematically placed across the study site, 30 in the clearcut and 15 in the control. Each coverboard con- sisted of a piece of plywood or particle-board (about 120 x 60 x 0.625 cm) placed flat on the ground to simulate the type of cover often used by ground-dwelling herpetofauna (DeGraff and Yamasaki 1992, Fitch 1992, Mitchell et al. 1993). Coverboards were placed a minimum of 20 m apart. Sixty 1.5-m lengths of PVC pipe were driven into the soil to capture treefrogs. The diameters of the pipes were 2.5 and 5 cm. Forty pipes were used in the clearcut, and 20 in the control. These pipes served as refuges for treefrogs, which were easily captured at the open top ends of the pipes. One nocturnal chorus survey (July 1993) was done to compare to habitat use trends indicated by the pipe captures. Frog choruses were monitored from the clearcut, control, and edge for 30 minutes each. Weather was humid, warm, clear, and calm. Each of the traps was checked daily during the summers of 1992 and 1993. All captured animals were released immediately. Adult anurans were toe-clipped, but no capture-recapture data will be pre- sented here (see below). In 1992, we trapped from 29 May until 13 August, with the exception of 14 days when the swamp was flooded. On those days, only the treefrog pipes were checked. In 1993, four drift fence arrays (one control, two edge, one clearcut) were checked from 20 May to 12 August. The remaining traps were checked from 20 June to 12 August. Again, sampling was impeded due to flooding. Sampling was replicated within the control, edge, and clearcut site, but not replicated with additional sites because of constraints imposed by the establishment of concurrent studies, which used small replicated treatment blocks within the clearcut (Pavel 1993, Phelps 1993, Perison In Press). These blocks were the reason for unequal 34 J. P. Phelps and R. A. Lancia sampling effort for coverboards and PVC pipes in the clearcut, edge, and control. Due to the lack of replication, the results and conclusions from this study apply to the particular site we studied. Generalization to other sites is risky. Data analysis — Capture data were analyzed using the Shannon- Weaver Diversity Index (Poole 1974). This allowed statistical com- parisons among drift fence arrays in the clearcut, on the edge, and in the control; and between coverboards in the clearcut and in the control. Variance for each treatment was calculated based on the number of captures in each treatment, and was used to calculate the ^-statistic (a = 0.05) for each comparison (Poole 1974). The formulas used are as follows: Var (//') = [rMPl ln2p,] - [g.lf>, lnp,]2 + s-1 N 2N2 H\-H\ [Var(/f ,) + Var(//'2)]1/2 d.f. = [Var(/f ,) + Var(/r2)]2 [VarCtf',)]2 + [Var(tf'2)]: N, N2 where i represents each species in the sample, pi = proportion of species i in the sample, s = number of species in the sample, N = number of captures in the sample. Assumptions of the Shannon-Weaver Index were that all species present were sampled, and all were equally catchable. These assumptions were not met because of the differing ability of the traps to catch various species (Gibbons and Semlitsch 1981). Also, two species caught by hand were never captured in a trap of any kind and were therefore excluded from calculations of H' . These were the brown water snake (Nerodia taxispilota) and the timber rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus). Their size explains the lack of pitfall captures, as no larger snakes were caught in pitfalls. Other large snakes were captured under coverboards. Poole (1974) states that "no great error" will occur in calculating Shannon-Weaver as if all the species available are present in the sample, even when, as in this case, some species are not represented. Unequal catchability of species should still allow relative diversity comparisons. Clearcut Herpetofauna 35 The lack of replication allowed only a rough comparison of capture frequencies, not a statistical test of differences in abundance (Hurlbert 1984). The original intent was to estimate abundances of anurans using mark-recapture methods, but a lack of sufficient recapture prevented this. To make direct comparisons of capture frequencies, we assumed that capture probabilities for each species were the same across habitats. This assumption could not be tested, so habitat preferences should be interpreted with caution. Habitat Characteristics Sampling — In an attempt to relate herpetofaunal diversity to microhabitat variability, the percent cover of midstory and overstory trees was measured with a spherical densiometer at five points around each drift fence array. One reading was taken in the center and one at a distance of 15 m in each cardinal direction. Percent cover of veg- etation less than 2 m tall was also measured, using a line intercept method (Barbour et al. 1987). There were four 15-m transects at each drift fence array, originating at the middle of the array and extending in each cardinal direction. A complete description of the vegetation of the site is given by Pavel (1993). The cross-sectional area of coarse woody debris was measured using the same transects. In this case, the transects were thought of as vertical planes that extended from the ground to the highest piece of downed wood. Each piece of wood greater than 8-cm diameter (at the point of intersection) was measured to the nearest centimeter and classified as "sound" or "rotten" (Brown 1974). Surface soil temperatures and soil densities were measured by Perison (In Press) in the control and clearcut areas. All habitat data were analyzed using Mests at the 0.05 alpha level. Each measurement was considered to be independent, and means and standard errors were calculated for each variable. In the clearcut, soil temperature and density were measured in areas with skidder traffic, but not in skidder ruts. These variables were not measured at the edge. RESULTS Herpetofauna Shannon-Weaver Diversity Indices calculated for the drift fence and coverboard captures are given in Table 1. There was no significant difference between clearcut and control diversity indices for either of the two trapping methods. The diversity of the edge drift fences was lower than either the control (t = 8.70, d.f. = 1,538) or clearcut drift fences (t = 9.70, d.f. = 2,209). The reason for this difference was the 36 J. P. Phelps and R. A. Lancia Table 1. Summary of herpetofauna capture data, Edisto River swamp, South Carolina, 1992-1993. H' is the value of the Shannon-Weaver diversity index. Values of H' with the same letter were not different at 5% alpha level. Captures Species (N) (s) H' Control drift fences Clearcut drift fences Edge drift fences All drift fences Control coverboards Clearcut coverboards All coverboards 930 16 0.9161a 1,172 16 0.9109a 2,647 17 0.4738b 4,749 23 0.7153c 150 9 1.7077d 129 16 1.7710e 279 19 1.9832e heavy weighting toward one species, the southern toad {Bufo terrestris), on the edge. Clearcut and control drift fence diversities were not different at the 0.05 alpha level. Coverboard diversities were higher than drift fence diversities (f = 18.5, d.f. = 333). Drift fences captured more species (23) and individuals (4,749) than coverboards (19 and 279, respectively). The inclusion of the clearcut increased the richness of the capture sample. Twenty-three species were captured on the site in drift fences, but only 16 species were captured in the clearcut, and 16 in the control. Nineteen species were captured under coverboards, but only 16 were captured in the clearcut, and nine in the control. Several species showed clear preferences for either the control or the clearcut (Table 2). All types of salamanders were detected more often in the control area. A total of 112 salamanders was captured in pitfall traps and under coverboards. Ninety-two (82.1%) of these were captured in the control area, with only 9 (8.0%) in the clearcut (Table 2). Bronze frogs {Rana clamitans) were captured more frequently in the control (104 control captures to 17 in the clearcut), while southern leopard frogs (R. utricularia) were less common in the control (33 drift fence captures compared to 52 on the edge and 51 in the clearcut). Other frog species showing preferences were eastern narrow- mouth toads {Gastrophryne carolinensis) and green treefrogs (Hyla cinerea), which preferred the clearcut, and gray treefrogs (H. chrysoscelis), which preferred the control. Southern toads, most of which were juveniles, were captured most frequently in the edge pitfalls. Southern toads were abundant in all three areas. The data on frog and toad species were supported by the breeding chorus monitoring. Clearcut Herpetofauna 37 Reptiles generally seemed to prefer the clearcut. Eastern mud turtles (Kinosternon subrubrum) were captured 41 times in the clearcut, 35 times on the edge, and only 10 times in the control area. Common musk turtles {Sternotherus odoratus) and eastern box turtles (Terrapene Carolina) showed the opposite trend. Lizards (Eumeces fasciatus and Anolis carolinensis) and large snakes (chiefly Agkistrodon piscivorus and Nerodia spp.) were more common in the clearcut. Because they were rarely captured in traps but often seen, habitat preferences of large snakes, lizards, and box turtles are largely inferred from hand captures, rather than trapping data. Habitat Characteristics Microhabitat variables measured in each area are given in Table 3. Over- and mid-story canopy cover was highest in the control (95%), followed by the edge (74%), and clearcut (6%). Understory canopy cover followed the reverse trend, being highest in the clearcut (95%), followed by the edge (48%), and the control (5%). Cross-sectional area of sound coarse woody debris was significantly higher in the clearcut, and not significantly different between the edge and control. The mount of rotten coarse woody debris was not different among the three areas. Soil surface temperature and soil compaction were not measured on the edge, but were not significantly different between the clearcut and the control, or between rutted and non-rutted areas in the clearcut. DISCUSSION Habitat Preferences Fewer salamanders were captured in the clearcut, as compared to the control. High temperatures and insolation, and low relative humidity may all have contributed to this, as these factors increase the risk of desiccation. Salamanders need to keep their skin moist for gas exchange, and their large surface areas to volume ratios make moisture retention difficult (Duellman and Trueb 1986). Moisture is a key factor in determining where salamanders can live (Wyman 1988, Petranka et al. 1993). Petranka et al. (1993) speculated that 75% to 80% of southern Appalachian salamanders die of physiological stress due to desiccation following clearcuts. Ecological differences may explain the varying preferences of frog species. Southern toads are generalists, and their common occurrence along the edge suggests that individuals were using both habitats. Bronze frogs and southern leopard frogs showed opposing preferences, for the control and clearcut respectively. Bronze frogs 38 J. P. Phelps and R. A. Lancia B "*} 03 .2 so c * i— < C/D 2 u £3 Si On G ' * Os 3 S f-> rH Oh O 09 Gh o- _^ (30 o O t-i •M c O CO (N O O rH U-> tt lO of rH O rH O 1-- CO rH ^H o i^M \0(0 O O co co -^ o IH co rf oo cn a r- o U ^J eg §.3 5 -^ « ^ ^ CJ o fc a a\<3 a w v. 5£ -5 Cj CJ « « Q <3 ^^ cqOQ^ft;^^ v. cj ca a cj <^ CJ CJ a a to kq a GO'S S e CJ > co m rH \o m vo o h ^ io vo r^ o OOOrHOrH OC0 H 00 s en a ina ratu rubr <3 •*» cs 03 -= o rfa « R G, s c o ^s a IS ej ■» CJ Q ^ o g ° * s ^ ^ C c w c ys guttc 'ra serp mys scr .5*3 ^ CO in (Nododdcndo 000(N^OC400 ^-HO^HOOOOr-lO ooooooooo t-hOOOOOOO^h V >3 &a <3 3 k a S o k •2 >•, O S "St <3 -5 &a S « <3 O « & k V ^ ^ ^ ^ -St -O o 0 0 ^ F^ a !<. Is. k k ~~i V V q o > a -a > +- 2 * 2 8 o >> 50 a O 03 03 jrl 3.SP oj <» 03 *- J3 O O 1=1 *-> i) 03 1-1 *3 ^h r- tj- r^ r^ d o o ed X X) X) On On Tf 00 d T— 1 l> Ti- PJ ON q in en 00 T— 1 1— 1 t— 1 rH (N 0 0 1-H > O O 0 0 l-H 03 a 0 0 1-1 03 "o3 a "cd M ex 1) O 03 M 3 0 C/3 c * 0 -0 6 0 a> 03 J-l 03 0 0 0 a> V3 1 03 C/3 O t> a> ca c 03 H O 0 it in rH 0 CV5 S in '0 'O C/3 40 J. P. Phelps and R. A. Lancia are a forest wetland species, whereas leopard frogs are more ubiquitous (Mount 1975). Enge and Marion (1986) found fewer southern leopard frogs in clearcuts than in control areas in southern pine flatwoods. Eastern narrowmouth toads emerge from burrows only when ground water is sufficiently pooled for breeding. Reduced evapotranspiration in the clearcut (Perison et al. 1993) may have increased the likelihood of these frogs receiving the cue to emerge. Skidder tire ruts may have had a similar effect on these and the other frog species, as they were a source of fish-free breeding pools (Phelps 1993). Two species of treefrogs were captured, and these showed opposing preferences. Green treefrogs may have predominated in the clearcut because the traps (treefrog pipes) were level with their habitat (leafy sprouting vegetation). Green treefrogs may have been equally abundant in the control (as suggested by the number of control captures, Table 2), but may have been living higher than the traps were sampling. Gray treefrogs were rarely captured, and the reason again may have been that the traps were too low. The removal of trees in the clearcut may have excluded gray treefrogs because their habitat (tree boles) was removed. In the case of the green treefrogs in the clearcut, their habitat quickly returned, but at a lower height. Overall, the treefrog pipe method showed promise, as it was inexpensive and trapped significant numbers of frogs while causing them no apparent stress. Reptiles may have preferred the clearcut because of increased temperature and insolation. A basking reptile would be at an advantage in the direct sun of the clearcut because it could achieve active temperatures faster and remain active longer through the day. Bury and Corn (1988), working in the Pacific Northwest, found that "reptiles predominate in clearcuts, most likely responding to increased ambient tempera- tures in such areas." The presence of a large amount of slash in the clearcut may have provided a valuable habitat component in the form of cover for reptiles or their prey. Reptiles that seemed to prefer the control included ringneck snakes (Diadophis punctatus), copperheads (Agkistrodon contortix), common musk turtles, and eastern box turtles. The reasons for these preferences are not clear, although ringneck snakes were the smallest and most fossorial reptile species regularly captured, and may have been less dependent on basking and more dependent on an undisturbed forest floor. Recommendations and Conclusions Clearcut size is one factor to be considered when planning for natural forest regeneration in forested wetlands. Amphibians and reptiles have relatively small home range sizes (Duellman and Trueb 1986) and, therefore, cannot disperse from or quickly recolonize impacted Clearcut Herpetofauna 41 areas. Hairston (1987) found that salamanders return to their home range even after disturbance and handling. Small clearcuts with undisturbed sources of recolonization nearby were advocated by Buhlmann et al. (1988) and Enge and Marion (1986). A mosaic of small clearcuts, second growth, and undisturbed areas would likely create increased landscape diversity, as compared to a single homogeneous stand. Recovery times of about 60 years for salamander populations in clearcut areas are given by Petranka et al. (1993) in the southern Appalachian and Pough et al. (1987) in New York. This suggests that long rotation times are needed to avoid a long-term decline of sala- mander populations over several rotations. Enge and Marion (1986) also recommended long rotation times that allow adequate recovery of herpetofaunal populations. Controlling certain aspects of the harvest operation can minimize the adverse effects of a clearcut. Most importantly, snags and coarse woody debris should be left on the site (Enge and Marion 1986). Woody debris should be of large size and in an advanced state of decay (Bury and Corn 1988, Welsh and Lind 1988). Aubry et al. (1988) suggested that "the abundance levels of salamanders are more likely a function of the availability of woody debris for cover than age of the overstory." Since suitable woody debris is more abundant in older stands, longer rotation times are important. Leaf litter on the forest floor is another important component of herpetofaunal habitat (Pough et al. 1987, DeGraaf and Rudis 1990, Petranka et al. 1993), and can be destroyed by ground machinery such as skidders (Buhlmann et al. 1988). Skidders should be restricted to small areas, and helicopters should be used when practical. Buhlmann et al. (1988) recommended harvesting in the season of inactivity for the local herpetofauna, but some southern Coastal Plain species are active at all times of the year. Further studies in which capture probabilities can be estimated would allow direct comparison of capture data among species in the same habitat, and within species across habitats. Remaining research opportunities include determining the fate of salamanders in the face of clearcutting, and monitoring subsequent recovery of populations through recolonization. Also, a study similar to ours, focusing on winter-active amphibians, would be valuable. In addition, the habitat value of skidder ruts should be studied. The possible benefit of extra standing water (Phelps 1993) may mitigate the effects of soil degradation (Buhlmann et al. 1988). Finally, additional work with PVC pipes for capturing treefrogs should be done, including their use in various habitats, with different species, and the possible effect of pipe height on trap efficiency. 42 J. P. Phelps and R. A. Lancia The key to expanding knowledge in the area of wildlife habitat/ forestry relationships is to replicate treatments. In this case, conclusions could have been strengthened by having several clearcuts and several control areas (Hurlbert 1984). Specific factors such as woody debris, size of clearcuts, and skidder rut impact could be studied with such a design. Ideally, each area would be sampled prior to the installation of the clearcut (Buhlmann et al. 1988). This would allow comparison of data from the clearcut before and after treatment, and from the control. Effects of space, time, and the treatment itself could be separated. Replication and the collection of baseline data could be achieved more easily within the framework of Adaptive Resource Management (Walters 1986). This is a system of research integrated with management, wherein management decisions are treated as hypotheses and tested with replicated trials. After several iterations of hypothesis and experiment, predictions involved with policy can become prescriptions based on hard data. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS— funding for this project was provided by the Hardwood Research Cooperative of North Carolina State University. Harvest treatments were done by Georgia-Pacific Corporation, and housing for researchers was provided by the South Carolina Forestry Commission. Dr. Robert Kellison of the Hardwood Cooperative provided valuable support and a review of the manuscript. Two anonymous reviewers provided valuable comments. LITERATURE CITED Aubry, K. B., L. L. C. Jones, and P. A. Hall. 1988. Use of woody debris by plethodontid salamanders in Douglas-fir forests in Washington. Pages 32-37 in Management of amphibians, reptiles and small mammals in North America (R. C. Szaro, K. E. Severson, and D. R. Patton, editors). United States Department of Agricul- ture Forest Service, Technical Report RM166. Barbour, M. G., J. H. Furke, and W. D. Pitts. 1987. Terrestrial plant ecology (second edition). The Benjamin/Cummings Publish- ing Co., Inc., Menlo Park, California. Beiswenger, R. E. 1988. Integrating anuran amphibian species into environmental assessment programs. Pages 159-165 in Manage- ment of amphiabians, reptiles and small mammals in North America (R. C. Szaro, K. E. Severson, and D. R. Patton, editors). United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Technical Report RM166. Clearcut Herpetofauna 43 Bennett, S. H., J. W. Gibbons, and J. Glanville. 1980. Terrestrial activity, abundance, and diversity of amphibians in differently managed forest types. American Midland Naturalist 103:412-416. Blaustein, A. R., and D. B. Wake. 1990. Declining amphibian popu- lations: a global phenomenon? Trends in Ecological Evolution 5:203- 204. Brinson, M., B. Swift, R. Plantico, and J. Barclay. 1981. Riparian ecosystems: their ecology and status. United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-81/17. Brown, J. K. 1974. Handbook for inventoring downed woody mate- rial. United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Technical Report INT16. Buhlmann, K. A., C. A. Payne, J. C. Mitchell, and R. B. Glasgow. 1988. Forestry operations and terrestrial salamanders: techniques in a study of the Cow Knob salamanders, Plethodon punctatus. Pages 38^4 in Management of amphibians, reptiles and small mammals in North America (R. C. Szaro, K. E. Severson, and D. R. Patton, editors). United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Technical Report RM166. Bury, R. B., and P. S. Corn. 1988. Douglas-fir forests in the Oregon and Washington Cascades: relation of the herpetofauna to stand age and moisture. Pages 11-22 in Management of amphib- ians, reptiles and small mammals in North America (R. C. Szaro, K. E. Severson, and D. R. Patton, editors). United States Depart- ment of Agriculture Forest Service, Technical Report RM166. Clark, J. R., and J. Benforado (editors). 1981. Wetlands of bottom- land hardwood forests. Elsevier Publishing Company, Amsterdam, Netherlands. Cubbage, F. W., and C. H. Flather. 1993. Distribution of and trends in southern forested wetlands. Page 13-19 in Proceedings of the seventh biennial southern silvicultural research conference (J. C. Brissett, editor). United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, General Technical Report SO-93. DeGraaf, R. M., and D. D. Rudis. 1990. Herpetofaunal species com- position and relative abundance among three New England forest types. Forest Ecology and Management 32:155-165. DeGraaf, R. M., and M. Yamasaki. 1992. A nondestructive tech- nique to monitor the relative abundance of terrestrial salamanders. Wildlife Society Bulletin 20:260-264. Duellman, W. E., and L. Trueb. 1986. Biology of amphibians. McGraw- Hill, Inc., New York, New York. Enge, K. M., and W. R. Marion. 1986. Effects of clearcutting and site preparation on herpetofauna of a north Florida flatwoods. Forest Ecology and Management 14:177-192. Fitch, H. S. 1992. Methods of sampling snake populations and their relative success. Herpetological Review 23:17-19. 44 J. P. Phelps and R. A. Lancia Gibbons, J. W., and R. D. Semlitsch. 1981. Terrestrial drift fences with pitfall traps: an effective technique for quantitative sampling of animal populations. Brimleyana 7:1-16. Hairston, N. G. 1987. Community ecology and salamander guilds. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, England. Hairston, N. G., and R. H. Wiley. 1993. No decline in salamander (Amphibia: Caudata) populations: a twenty year study in the southern Appalachians. Brimleyana 18:59-64. Harris, L., and J. G. Gosselink. 1986. Cumulative impacts of bot- tomland hardwood conversion on hydrology, water quality, and terrestrial wildlife. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, D.C. Unpublished. Hurlbert, S. H. 1984. Pseudoreplication and the design of ecological field experiments. Ecological Monographs 54:187-211. Keister, A. R. 1971. Species density of North American amphibians and reptiles. Systematic Zoology 20:127-137. Mitchell, J. C, S. Y. Erdle, and J. F. Pagels. 1993. Evaluation of capture techniques for amphibian, reptile and small mammal communities in saturated forested wetlands. Wetlands 13:130-136. Mount, R. H. 1975. The reptiles and amphibians of Alabama. Au- burn University Agricultural Experiment Station, Alabama. Pavel, C. M. 1993. An assessment of timber harvest on the biomass, species diversity, and stand structure of the vegetation in a South Carolina bottomland hardwood forest. M.S. Thesis. North Caro- lina State University, Raleigh. Pechmann, J. H. K., D. E. Scott, R. D. Semlitsch, J. P. Caldwell, L. J. Vitt, and J. W. Gibbons. 1991. Declining amphibian popula- tions: the problem of separating human impacts from natural fluctuations Science 253:892-895. Perison, D. M. In Press. The effects of timber harvest and soil disturbance on soil processes and water quality in a South Caro- lina blackwater swamp. Ph.D. Thesis. North Carolina State Uni- versity, Raleigh. Perison, D. M., R. Lea, and R. Kellison. 1993. The response of soil physical and chemical properties and water quality to timber harvest and soil disturbance: preliminary results. Page 143-146 in Proceedings of the seventh biennial southern silvicultural research conference (J. C. Bissette, editor). United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Technical Report SO-93. Petranka, J. W., M. E. Eldridge, and K. E. Haley. 1993. Effects of timber harvesting on southern Appalachians salamanders. Conser- vation Biology 7:363-370. Phelps, J. P. 1993. The effect of clearcutting on the herpetofauna of a South Carolina blackwater bottomland. M.S. Thesis. North Carolina State University, Raleigh. Clearcut Herpetofauna 45 Poole, R. W. 1974. An introduction to quantitative ecology. McGraw- Hill, Inc., New York, New York. Pough, F. H., E. M. Smith, D. H. Rhodes, and A. Collazo. 1987. The abundance of salamanders in forest stands with different his- tories of disturbance. Forest Ecology and Management 20:1-9. Rudis, V. A. 1993. Forest fragmentation of southern U.S. bottom- land hardwoods. Page 35-46 in Proceedings of the seventh bien- nial southern silvicultural research conference (J. C. Brissett, editor). United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Technical Report SO-93. Turner, R. E., S. Forsythe, and N. Craig. 1981. Bottomand hard- wood forest land resources of the southeastern U.S. Pages 13-28 in Wetlands of bottomland hardwood forests (J. R. Clark and J. Benforado, editors). Elsevier Publishing Company, Amsterdam, Netherlands. Vickers, C. R., L. D. Harris, and B. F. Swindel. 1985. Changes in herpetofauna resulting from ditching of cypress ponds in coastal plains flatwoods. Forest Ecology and Management 11:17-29. Wake, D. B. 1991. Declining amphibian populations. Science 253:860. Walters, C. J. 1986. Adaptive management of renewable resources. Macmillian, New York, New York. Welsh, H. H., Jr., and A. J. Lind. 1988. Old-growth forests and the distribution of terrestrial herpetofauna. Pages 439-458 in Manage- ment of amphibians, reptiles and small mammals in North America (R. C. Szaro, K. E. Severson, and D. R. Patton, editors). United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Technical Report RM166. Wyman, R. L. 1988. Soil acidity and moisture and the distribution of amphibians in five forests of southcentral New York. Copeia 1988:394-399. Received 16 November 1994 Accepted 19 January 1995 First Record of the Water Shrew, Sorex palustris Richardson (Insectivora: Soricidae), in Georgia with Comments on its Distribution and Status in the Southern Appalachians Joshua Laerm, Charles H. Wharton Museum of Natural History and Institute of Ecology AND William Mark Ford Daniel B. Warnell School of Forest Resources University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602 ABSTRACT— The first state record of Sorex palustris is reported from Georgia, in a markedly boreal habitat in the upper headwaters of the Tallulah River in Towns County. Records in the southern Appalachians indicate the species to be rare and its distribution characterized by a series of disjunct populations. On 30 May 1994 one adult male water shrew (Sorex palustris Richardson) was recovered from a sunken pitfall trap adjacent to Mare Cove Branch at its junction with Burnt Cabin Branch, a tributary of the Tallulah River in extreme northern portion of Towns County, Georgia, at an elevation of 808 m. The specimen was recovered under a rotting log and other woody debris immediately adjacent to the base of a 25 m waterfall in rocky talus. Standard body measurements were: 138-64-19. This is the first record of the species from Georgia and represents an extension of its range approximately 25 km southeast from its nearest reported locality along a short section of Fires Creek in Clay County, North Carolina, at an elevation of 1,160 m (Whitaker et al. 1975) During the period 30 October 1993 through 30 May 1994 we established a transect of 20 pitfall traps (a total of 5,420 trap nights) along Burnt Cabin Branch. Pitfalls were 946 cm3 plastic cups (11-cm lip diameter and 14-cm depth) filled with approximately 0.13-L formalin solution and set flush to the ground adjacent to fallen logs, rocks stumps, or other forest floor debris within 5 m of the stream edge. Traps were checked biweekly. The collection locality, which was selectively logged in the past, is a mature, predominantly northern hardwood forest community dominated by yellow birch Brimleyana 22:47-51, June 1995 47 48 Joshua Laerm, C. H. Wharton, and W. M. Ford (Betula luted), black birch (B. lenta), liden {J ilia heterophylla), and hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), with a rhododendron (Rhododendron maximum) understory. The mammalian fauna of Burnt Cabin Branch has marked boreal affinities. Wharton (1968) reported the first Georgia records of the masked shrew (Sorex cinereus) and pygmy shrew (S. hoyi) from Beech Creek, another tributary of the Tallulah River within 500 m of the present locality, and Laerm (1992) reported the first Georgia record of the hairy-tailed mole (Parascalops brewerii) from the present locality. Other small mammals recovered in pitfalls and snap traps at Burnt Cabin Branch include Sorex cinereus, S. fumeus, Blarina brevicauda, Tamiasciurus hudsonicus, Peromyscus maniculatus, Napaeozapus insignis, and Clethrionomys gapperi. Sorex palustris is distributed in the transcontinental Canadian boreal forest from Nova Scotia westward to southeastern Alaska and southward throughout much of the Sierra Nevada and Rocky Mountains in the western United States as well as the Appalachian Mountains to Tennessee, North Carolina (Hall 1981, Beneski and Stinson 1987), and now Georgia in the eastern United States. Populations throughout the Appalachian Mountains from southwestern Pennsylvania to Georgia are referable to S. palustris punctulatus Hooper 1942, the West Virginia water shrew. Based on available published sources, museum records, and personal communications it appears that S. p. punctulatus is rare and its distribution characterized by a series of apparently disjunct populations. The northernmost record for S. p. punctulatus is a single specimen from Cove Run in the Negro Mountains, Somerset County, Pennsyl- vania (Doutt et al. 1966, Enders 1985). More recently, two additional specimens have been obtained from Somerset County (C. Bier and S. McLaren, personal communication; specimens in Carnegie Museum of Natural History). Apparently, the distribution of this subspecies is disjunct from that of S. p. albibarbis which is reported from central and northeastern Pennsylvania and northward (Hall 1981, Beneski and Stinson 1987, Merritt 1987). Mansuetti (1958), Paradiso (1969), and Feldhamer et al. (1984) discussed the questionable occurrence of S. palustris in Maryland. However, seven individuals of S. p. punctulatus are now known from seven sites in Maryland, all from Garrett County (E. Thompson, Maryland Natural Heritage Program, personal communication). At least 12 individuals are known from five counties (Pendleton, Pocahantas, Preston, Randolph, and Tucker) in West Virginia (Kellogg 1937, Hooper 1942, McKeever 1952, and records on file with West Virginia Water Shrew 49 Heritage Inventory Program). Three individuals are known from a single locality in Bath County, Virginia, and five from three localities in Highlands County, Virginia (Pagels and Tate 1976, Pagels 1987, Handley 1991, and J. Pagels, personal communication). Thirteen records are known from the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Sevier County, Tennessee (Conaway and Pfitzer 1952, Linzey and Linzey 1968), and Harvey et al. (1991) report an additional 18 speci- mens from four localities in Monroe County, Tennessee. In North Carolina it is known from five individuals from Clay County and one specimen from Great Smoky Mountains National Park in Swain County (Whitaker et al. 1975, Linzey 1983, Webster 1987). Compared to other soricids in the southeastern United States, Sorex palustris appears to be rare. Sorex p. punctulatus is considered a Category 2 taxon by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, is listed as endangered in Virginia (Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries), and is considered a species of special concern in North Carolina (North Carolina Natural Heritage Program) and Tennessee (Tennessee Wildlife Resource Agency). Although other soricids, such a Sorex hoyi and Sorex dispar, that historically have been considered extremely rare are now known to be more widely distributed and more common than previously believed (Pagels 1987, Handley 1991, Laerm et al 1994), the water shrew appears to be the rarest and most localized shrew in the southeastern United States. Additional surveys for the water shrew are required to assess its true status. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS— This study was supported through a cooperative funding agreement between the United States Forest Service, Chatahoochee National Forest, and The University of Georgia Museum of Natural History. LITERATURE CITED Beneski, J. T., Jr., and D. W. Stinson. 1987. Sorex palustris. Mam- malian Species 296:1-6. Conaway, C. S., and D. W. Pfitzer. 1952. Sorex palustris and Sorex dispar from the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Journal of Mammalogy 33:106-108. Doutt, J. K., C. A. Heppenstall, and J. E. Guilday. 1966. Mammals of Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania Game Commission, Harrisburg. 50 Joshua Laerm, C. H. Wharton, and W. M. Ford Enders, J. E. 1985. Water shrew Sorex palustris punctulatus (Hooper). Pages 383-385 in Species of special concern in Pennsylvania (H. H. Genoways and F. J. Brenner, editors). Special Publication of the Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Number 11, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Feldhamer, G. A., J. E. Gates, and J. A. Chapman. 1984. Rare, threatened and extirpated mammals from Maryland. Pages 395-438 in Threatened and endangered plants and animals of Maryland (A. W. Norden, D. C. Forester, and G. H. Fenwick, editors). Maryland Natural Heritage Program Special Publication 84-1. Hall, E. R. 1981. The mammals of North American. Second edition. John Wiley & Sons, New York, New York. Handley, C. O., Jr. 1991. Mammals. Pages 539-613 in Virginia's endangered species (K. Terwilliger, editor). McDonald and Woodward, Blacksburg, Virginia. Harvey, M. J., C. S. Chaney, and M. D. McGimsey. 1991. Distribu- tion, status, and ecology of small mammals of the Cherokee Na- tional Forest, Tennessee (Southern Districts). Report to the United States Forest Service. Manuscript on file, Center for the Manage- ment, Utilization, and Protection of Water Resources, Tennessee Technological University, Cookville. Hooper, E. T. 1942. The water shrew {Sorex palustris) of the south- ern Allegheny Mountains. Occasional Papers of the Museum Zo- ology, University of Michigan 463:1-4. Kellogg, R. 1937. Annotated list of West Virginia mammals. Pro- ceedings of the United States National Museum 84:443-479. Laerm, J. 1992. Georgia's rarest mammal. Georgia Wildlife 2(2):46-53. Laerm, J., W. M. Ford, and D. W. Weinand. 1994. Additional records of the pygmy shrew, Sorex hoyi winnemana Preble (In- sectivora: Soricidae), in western North Carolina. Brimleyana 21:91- 96. Linzey, D. W. 1983. Status and distribution of the northern water shrew {Sorex palustris) and two subspecies of northern flying squirrel {Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus and Glaucomys sabrinus fuscus). Final report under United States Fish and Wildlife Ser- vice Contract No. 14-16-005-79-068. Linzey, D. W., and A. V. Linzey. 1968. Mammals of Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scien- tific Society 84:384-414. Mansueti, R. 1958. The Craneville Pine Swamp. Atlantic Naturalist 13:72-84. McKeever, S. 1952. A survey of West Virginia mammals. West Virginia Conservation Commission, Pitman-Roberstson Project 22- R. Unpublished report on file, United States National Museum of Natural History, Washington, D.C. Water Shrew 51 Pagels, J. F. 1987. The pygmy shrew, rock shrew, and water shrew: Virginia's rarest shrews (Mammalia: Soricidae). Virginia Journal of Science 38:364-368. Pagels, J. F., and C. M. Tate. 1986. Shrews (Insectivora: Soricidae) of the Paddy Knob-Little Back Creek Area of western Virginia. Virginia Journal of Science 27:202-203. Paradiso, J. L. 1969. Mammals of Maryland. North American Fauna 66:1-193. Webster, W. D. 1987. Sorex palustris punctulatus. Pages 36-38 in Endangered, threatened and rare fauna of North Carolina. Part 1. A reevaluation of the mammals (M. K. Clark, editor). Occasional Papers of the North Carolina Biological Survey, Raleigh. Wharton, C. H. 1968. First records of Microsorex hoyi and Sorex cinereus from Georgia. Journal of Mammalogy 49:158. Whitaker, J. O., Jr., G. S. Jones, and D. D. Pascal, Jr. 1975. Notes on the mammals of the Fires Creek Area, Nantahala Mountains, North Carolina, including their ectoparasites. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society 91:13-17. Received 25 July 1994 Accepted 26 January 1995 Florida Manatees, Trichechus manatus (Sirenia: Trichechidae), in North Carolina 1919-1994 Frank J. Schwartz Institute of Marine Sciences University of North Carolina Morehead City, North Carolina 28557 ABSTRACT— Florida manatees, first reported in 1919 from North Carolina, are now known to have frequented 59 sites (68 indi- viduals) during the period of 1919-1994. All but two have been subadults of about 1.8-2.4-m lengths. Only seven deaths have been recorded. Eleven coastal counties have harbored manatees. Four occurrences have been at inlets and six in the open ocean. Pelletier Creek, a Carteret County tributary of Bogue Sound, along with the Atlantic Ocean have been the most frequented sites (6); eight manatees occurred at a lush vegetation site in the Trent River (Craven County), a tributary of the Neuse River. Four records came from Wrightsville Beach and Sound, three manatees entered the state from Chesapeake Bay via the canal and Intracoastal Waterway into Currituck Sound. Farthest inland river penetrations have been 94.4 km, 6.4 km north of Wilmington; 92 km, Neuse River at Fort Barnwell Bridge, 33 km northeast of New Bern (Craven County); and one each penetrated the Tar River at Washington (58 km, Beaufort County) and Greenville (88 km, Pitt County). The increased frequency of occurrences in later years may be the result of an in- creased public awareness of the federally-protected species rather than a seemingly increasing population. The Florida manatee, Trichechus manatus, can attain a size of 4.1 m, 1,620 kg, and ranges from Maryland (Chester River, Chesapeake Bay) to Louisiana in the northern Gulf of Mexico (C. Beck, National Biological Service, personal communication; Jefferson et al. 1993). Northernmost manatee records in North Carolina have been in Currituck Sound (Dare County) (Brimley 1905, 1946; Brimley 1931; Caldwell and Golley 1965) (Table 1, Fig. 1). My study summarizes early records, adds 44 new records (total 59) and comments on where, when, and what size manatees have occurred in North Carolina. Brimleyana 22:53-60, June 1995 53 54 Frank J. Schwartz ■<— > CJ 03 c CD 3 CD « o o CD CD rH B CD X) — 1 — I i — i i — i i — ' Tt oooo x oo 51 oo oooooooooo as OS 0\ 0> C\ ^ Os OnOsOsOsOs ^H t— I i— I Hrt i— ' _ ^H ^^ '- Mr I - _. _. __. _. -; _. on __. _. rt. _. ^_. ^r cd cd cd cd cd ^h cd cd ^ cQ cd CO On as^^o^^u^^^,^^^^ ^H CD CO VO CO *>"> as c +* vp td -a >% >> >%>>>%>-. T3 *0 "O T3 T3 X) >-. 3 3 ^d 3 3 3 3 co co 3 3 3333 BBBSS^tetfl *S *2 S\ ^h C/3 C/3 c^ C/3 -|X1X)X!X1X)££J£X1^X1£H J Exijs-JS^^JSuiJSij:^ , « w y; > > > O m O O k> o C o C C o 3 cd ^_» "ph cd cd *"-* cd £ r § £ £ § £ co cd C 83 U C > > m m m 2 2 2 O o o 3 3 3 re rteret unswi unswi unswi w Ha w Ha w Ha mlico de co co i-i i— CD co 1— Vh re aven rteret mlico rteret rteret W«^l,l > a • O w yi " « o, +* *j on *■* cd S to cd PQ « > o 4= « >H cd cd jj n o ^ — *3 S *i O1^ i-> Q r^ ° U on ^ £ £ £ U « « > w > PQ ^ cd • jp •* ca «5 id ,_ pq oa cd cd O cd cd u o u u PQ fe a cd O a> QJ PQ J3 Ch ^ cd > y) U O C/l OJ t>n c a> 2 c > T3 O cd >> co cd O I2 D on a u s/ „ c u rt cd W S u 3 E o 3 o ali/S < TD T3 TD T3 TD T3 3 3 3 3 3 3 %>-.>-. S >> ^. >•. U T3 T3 T3 T3 T3 u -o -a ■o 3 3 3 z 3 3 3 2 3 3 09 05 US 09 09 03 09 tS 03 vi c/3 ^ M ^ M 09 OS 09 ~4 ■^ 05 05 o O o u a IS IS IS CD <3 cd cfl « fl n U Q Q Q U (U O cd Z Q ■a .£; S 9 (5 -2 3 P"H 05 " S) « .§£ § « T3 cd ^h £ °* g •P|° £■ « -I 5 P Ov , 3 55 cd a "g o cd u e w o2 c *- •-h 03 in o S 5 2 - KX) T3 i- cd o i! u - pel U «3 i_ O C 3 o * O u « Ph O > £ "p P a cd P »-> P- o fcH 3 "^ cd n „ 05 pq U t: K 0033 ^5 pq z z s "O ^ ^J c u u 3 u u c S a a (Si cd ►>». cd cd cd -2 u u C3 U U Dh 0- P^ X) P u S & s 6 O © w Z p-> >-j o-O 00 N M IT) VO (N h C/3 ON tl Oh cd cd 00 00 OS On -> >> >> >-. T3 -o T3 T3 TD T3 T3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 c/2 t/3 t? q/5 > o o c ^ c ed *- o *- cd Bfite 3 1) tu c c c c ? K »- c a •c 3 tH t-C cd > > > >> T— I o £ CN pg <~Z O „ _ o <<< m .5 -a I- .2 D Cd jaffi *° E « > ■go 3 „ O T3 00 C cd ^_ »-; *- CQ CQ z z aj to « (U o 5 o > o 2 CO 00.* •c o kT cd £ CQ X> £ >> > 3£ « Cm 8.2 g *- > _ ed pj 2 5 X) 5 « ffi -■SO Z H W 3 « C O 8 2* ta o S £ IISS Ch m IH •- Cd g fo L> *° }> 'S — ex S tS > o 5 S « o K K o OT w r» ^ . co § § p .S .5 ^ * rt o *- — C 3 0) -o 5 m - 00 ^ 3 U 4) X) X) e a 3 Q\ 00 H Tf 3 t/5NHHN< X3 X) _u 0.1). However, cray- fish numbers have not returned to their pre- 1991 levels in the cave passage where the highest crayfish density occurred before the kill. Also, the scarcity of small (<1.5 cm total length) crayfish suggests that the return to pre-1991 levels may reflect dispersal of animals from inaccessible portions of the cave and not replacement of crayfish through reproduction. The troglobitic pallid cave crayfish, Procambarus pallidus, inhabits flooded caves in the Suwannee River drainage in north Florida (Franz and Lee 1982). These caves also are inhabited by other troglobitic and troglophillic species, including several species of catfish (Hale and Streever 1994), ostracods (Walton and Hobbs 1959), the American eel Anguilla rostrata (Franz et al. 1994), the Asiatic clam Corbicula fluminea (Streever 1992a), tubificidae worms (Streever 19926), and the colonial cnidarian Cordylophora lacustris (Streever 1992c). Franz et al. (1994) provide an extensive review of Florida's cave fauna, emphasizing distributional records for all species report- ed in association with caves. Little is known about the ecology or population dynamics for most of these species. The Peacock Springs cave system consists of over 3,300 m of fully-flooded passage, with depths down to about 60 m. Eight openings provide access to the cave system. A surface channel connects open- ings commonly called Peacock I, II, and III to the Suwannee River. Water from the Floridan aquifer normally flows out of the Peacock I opening and drains into the Peacock III opening and the Suwannee Brimleyana 22:61-65, June 1995 61 62 W. J. Streever River. However, during periods of high river levels, water from the Suwannee River overcomes the head of pressure generated by aquifer water. Flow in the surface channel reverses, and Suwannee River water enters the cave system. Following a flow reversal in February 1991, virtually all of the animals in accessible portions of the Peacock Springs cave system were killed. Animals affected by the kill include crayfish, catfish, and Asiatic clams (Streever 19926). The cause of the kill is unknown. This paper addresses two issues. First, I present 1994 P. pallidus census data and subjective observations of other taxa, and second I discuss a possible mechanism for the increase in crayfish population density following the 1991 kill. METHODS In 1990, divers established eight belt transects (100 x 4 m) in association with permanent guidelines in the Peacock Springs cave system. Transects were numbered 1-8. Both before and after the fauna kill in February 1991, crayfish were visually censused along transects by divers carrying 50-watt lights. Because cave crayfish roam in the open on the cave floor, visual censusing provides a simple method of estimating population density. After the kill, two additional belt tran- sects, called 2-a (240 m long) and 8-a (350 m long), were established in a tunnel north of the Peacock I opening and north of the Peacock III opening, respectively. Transect 2-a incorporated transect 2, and transect 8-a incorporated transects 7 and 8. All crayfish that were visible from the cave's permanent guidelines were included in censuses along transects 2-a and 8-a, making their width dependent on water clarity and size of the cave passage. In general, the width of transects 2-a and 8-a varied between 4 and 10 m. The large size of the new transects was intended to allow censusing of the smaller crayfish densities occurring after the 1991 kill. A map of the cave showing transect locations was provided by Streever (19926). The 1994 transect censuses were made between 9 January 1994 and 25 November 1994. During the 1994 censuses, crayfish were recorded as belonging to a size class of less than or greater than 1.5 cm in overall length, estimated from the anterior edge of the rostrum to the posterior edge of the telson. All censuses along each of the original transects were averaged to yield values for each transect before the kill and in 1994. The null hypothesis of no difference between censuses taken before the 1991 kill and those taken in 1994 was tested by a paired Mest, with averages of before and after censuses along individual transects comprising pairs (Zar 1984). Crayfish Population 63 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Differences in censuses (Table 1) before the 1991 kill and in 1994 are not statistically significant (P > 0.1). The increase in crayfish population density immediately after the kill and in 1994 suggests that the population is recovering. However, 1994 censuses in the Peacock III tunnel indicate that populations have not recovered to pre-kill levels along transects 7 and 8. Transect 8a, which encompassed transects 7 and 8 as well as an additional 100 m of cave passage, contained only a fraction of the number of crayfish that were present along transects 7 and 8 before the kill. This indicates that the large crayfish population found in the Peacock III tunnel before the kill is not recovering, nor is the overall population in the cave system. Of the 138 crayfish censused after the 1991 kill, only one animal was smaller than 1.5 cm. Although animals smaller than 1.5 cm in total length may be missed during censusing, the scarcity of Table 1. Census data for Procambarus pallidus in the Peacock Springs, Florida, cave system before the 1991 kill, immediately after the kill, and in 1994. Numbe r of crayfish counted Immediately after Before 1991 x S.D. kill n 1991 X kill 1994 Transects n x S.D. n 1 1.0 1.0 3 0 1 1.0 1 2 6.5 0.5 2 0 1 1.0 2 2a1 not counted 0 1 9.7 5.4 3 3 1.5 0.5 2 0 1 7.0 1 4 4.0 0.0 3 0 1 0.0 0.0 2 5 1.0 0.0 4 0 1 1.0 1 6 6.2 0.8 5 0 1 6.0 1.0 2 7 34.5 2.7 8 0 1 0.0 0.0 8 8 49.5 7.1 8 0 1 0.0 0.0 8 8a1 not counted 0 1 10.1 6.6 8 These transects were established after the 1991 kill to cover a larger area than original transects. 64 W. J. Streever small animals suggests that recovery of crayfish population density is not dependent on replacement through reproduction. Cave popula- tions frequently display size distributions with many large individuals and few small individuals, suggesting infrequent reproduction (Poulson 1963, Culver 1982). The fecundity of P. pallidus is unknown, but an extensive study of the cave-adapted crayfish Orconectes australis australis in Shelta Cave, Alabama, suggests that reproduction in cave crayfishes may be infrequent and that clutch sizes may be small (Cooper 1975). If a similar pattern occurs in P. pallidus, crayfish population recovery that depends on reproduction could be slow. Be- cause crayfish population densities in the Peacock Springs cave sys- tem do not appear to be recovering through reproduction, the increase in numbers along transects 1 through 6 may not represent a true recovery of the crayfish population. Instead, crayfish density may be the result of colonization by individuals that survived the kill and are now moving into the portion of the cave where transects were located. Catfish were not counted as part of this study. However, they were common along transects before the 1991 kill, they were absent from transects immediately after the kill, and they were common during the 1994 census dives. An Asiatic clam population near the mouth of Peacock III had an estimated density of 161 individuals/m 2 before the 1991 kill (Streever 1992a), but no live Asiatic clams were found immediately after the kill or in 1994. Empty clam shells, pre- sumably remaining from before the kill, were abundant. The causes of the kill and the factors affecting recovery are unknown. However, intrusion of river water into caves typically full of groundwater appears to be linked to cave kills in the Peacock system. On 19 November 1994, two dead crayfish and a dead catfish were found along transect 6, immediately after a period of flooding during which Suwannee River water entered the cave. However, seven live crayfish were found along the transect on the same day, so this event did not have the intensity of the 1991 kill. Despite this apparent association, the link between river water and crayfish mortality is not clear. P. pallidus has been observed in two siphon-spring cave systems flooded by Sante Fe River water throughout the year (personal observation), so intolerance of low temperatures and other environmental factors associated with river water may not be the cause of mortality. Furthermore, kills have been observed in other caves without flooding by river water (Franz et al. 1994). Establish- ment of the cause of cave crayfish kills requires further investigation. Crayfish Population 65 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS—! thank cave divers Jason Hale, Wendy Short, Steve Brooker, and Rob Korn for their assistance with field work. The State of Florida Department of Parks and Recreation allowed access to the Peacock Springs cave system. This work was funded in part by a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship. LITERATURE CITED Cooper, J. E. 1975. Ecological and behavioral studies in Shelta Cave, Alabama, with emphasis on decapod crustaceans. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Kentucky, Lexington. Culver, D. C. 1982. Cave life, evolution and ecology. Harvard Uni- versity Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Franz, R., J. Bauer, and T. Morris. 1994. Review of biologically significant caves and their faunas in Florida and south Georgia. Brimleyana 20:1-109. Franz, R., and D. S. Lee. 1982. Distribution and evolution of Florida's troglobitic crayfishes. Bulletin of the Florida State Museum Bio- logical Sciences 28:53-78. Hale, J. A., and W. J. Streever. 1994. Cave fauna distribution within fully-flooded cave systems in Florida. Journal of Freshwa- ter Ecology 9:171-174. Poulson, T. L. 1963. Cave adaptation in amblyopsid fishes. Ameri- can Midland Naturalist. 70:257-290. Streever, W. J. 1992a. First record of Corbicula clams within flooded cave systems. Florida Scientist 55:35-37. Streever, W. J. 1992/?. Report of a cave fauna kill at Peacock Springs cave system, Suwannee County, Florida. Florida Scientist 55:125-128. Streever, W. J. 1992c. First record of the colonial cnidarian Cordylophora lacustris within a flooded cave system. NSS Bulletin 54:77-78. Walton, M., and H. H. Hobbs, Jr. 1959. Two new eyeless Ostracods of the genus Entocythere from Florida. Quarterly Journal of the Florida Academy of Sciences 22:114-120. Zar, J. H. 1974. Biostatistical analysis. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. Received 1 January 1995 Accepted 14 February 1995 Premolar Cementum and Noncementum Lengths As Potential Indicators of Age for Beavers, Castor canadensis (Rodentia: Castoridae) Allan E. Houston Ames Plantation, Agricultural Experiment Station, The University of Tennessee, P. O. Box 389, Grand Junction, Tennessee 38039-0389 AND Michael R. Pelton Department Forestry, Wildlife, and Fisheries, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee 37901-1071 ABSTRACT — Jaws from 28 beavers (Castor canadensis), >4 years old as determined from cementum annuli on premolars and molars, were collected in west Tennessee. An exponential model predicting age was developed based on the independent vari- ables cementum length and noncementum length as measured along the estimated, maximum longitudinal centerline of cross- sectioned premolars: AGE = 0 + 6.1784 * e (:o.io3i*noncemen) + 2 6513 * e (0.1U9*CEMENTUAf) Several methods of aging beavers have been attempted with varying degrees of accuracy, including pelt size (Buckley and Libby 1955), tail dimensions, total body mass, skull measurements (Patric and Webb 1960), and baculum size and mass (Friley 1949). Probably the most accurate method was developed by van Nostrand and Stephenson (1964) using tooth eruption and closure of basal openings of premolars and molars for beavers up to 3 years old, and cementum layering in premolars and molars for specimens >4 years. Larson and van Nostrand (1968) further refined this technique to include criteria dealing with cementum deposition around basal openings. They noted that age estimations may be complicated by multi-annual cementum layering, but that the ratio of cementum to noncementum on molars and premolars might be used to estimate age in older specimens. Our objective was to use premolar cementum length (aggregate of all annual cementum depositions) and noncementum length (remains of the original tooth) as independent variables to evaluate a model for estimating age of beavers >4 years. Brimleyana 22:67-72, June 1995 67 68 Allan E. Houston and Michael R. Pelton METHODS This study was conducted in the upper headwater basin of the North Fork of the Wolf River in west Tennessee, largely on the Ames Plantation. From November 1984 through May 1985, beaver jaws from 169 beavers were collected from legal trapping efforts on approximately 1,619 ha of the watershed. Molars and premolars from lower mandibles were extracted and cleaned. If tooth basal openings indicated a specimen to be >4 years old, age was determined by grinding the lingual surface of premolars or molars with a 120-grit stone to expose longitudinal cross-sections. Ground surfaces were polished with a 400-grit emery cloth and cementum layers were carefully counted using hand-held magnification (Larson and van Nostrand 1968). Twenty-eight beavers, >4 years old as aged in this manner (Table 1), provided the samples (i.e., dependent variables) for our study. Premolar cementum length and noncementum length were measured to the nearest millimeter along the estimated maximum longitudinal cross-sectional centerline of one premolar per specimen (Fig. 1). An exponential model predicting age in years was developed by combining a growth curve for cementum length and a decay curve for noncementum, using nonlinear regression (PROC NLIN) and the multivariate secant method (DUD) to set initial parameters (SAS Institute, Inc. 1985). Intercept was specified at zero to prevent predicted ages from dipping below zero. An "r2 like" statistic was calculated by taking [1 - (residual SS/corrected total SS)]. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The following model was developed using cementum length and noncementum length of premolars as independent variables: AGE = 0 + 6 1784 * e (-o.io37*noncemen) + 2.6513 * e (°ul9*CEMENTUM)t The "r2 like" statistic was 0.93. The predicted curves are combined to produce a response surface (Fig. 2). Our data were obtained from specimens on the headwaters of a single watershed. Although beavers can travel considerable distances, we assumed our sample represented only a small region. The study area may not fully represent variation existing range-wide or within adjacent watersheds. It is possible that genetic differences and dietary regimes will yield different tooth size, wear, and cementum accretion Aging Beaver Teeth 69 Table 1. Age, as estimated by cementum annuli, cementum and noncementum length, measured to the nearest millimeter along the maximum longitu- dinal cross-section of one premolar per specimen, and predicted ages and residuals for beavers captured in west Tennessee, November 1984 through May 1985. Specimen Age Cementum Noncementum Predicted Age1 Residual 1 4 3 22 4.34 -0.34 2 4 3 22 4.34 -0.34 3 4 1 24 3.48 0.52 4 4 3 22 4.34 -0.34 5 4 2 21 4.02 -0.02 6 4 3 21 4.41 -0.41 7 4 3 19 4.57 -0.57 8 4 1 24 3.48 0.52 9 4 1 24 3.48 0.52 10 4 2 20 4.09 -0.09 11 4 1 22 3.60 0.40 12 4 2 22 3.95 0.05 13 4 3 21 4.41 -0.41 14 5 4 14 5.59 -0.59 15 5 6 16 6.36 -1.36 16 5 5 20 5.42 -0.42 17 7 6 19 6.05 0.95 18 8 7 13 7.41 0.59 19 8 9 11 9.23 -1.23 20 9 9 10 9.45 -0.45 21 9 8 13 8.10 0.90 22 9 9 8 9.95 -0.95 23 9 9 9 9.69 -0.68 24 10 8 9 8.92 1.08 25 10 9 11 9.23 0.77 26 10 8 11 8.46 1.54 27 11 10 10 10.31 0.69 28 12 12 10 12.35 -0.35 AGE = 6.174*e<-°-1037*"°"C£M£") + 2.6513V0 1U9*CEMENTUM) 70 Allan E. Houston and Michael R. Pelton Fig. 1. Schematic representation of cementum length and noncementum length as measured along longitudinal cross-sections of premolars for beaver. Aging Beaver Teeth 71 PREDICTEDAGE (YEARS) V 12.00 CEMENTUM LENGTH 67 (MM) 18.67 NONCEMENTUM LENGTH (MM) Fig. 2. Response surface of an exponential model predicting age of west Tennessee beaver using cementum length and noncementum length measured along the estimated maximum longitudinal cross-sections of premolars as independent variables. patterns. Comparative study is needed to document potential variation of these criteria. Also, the method should be validated using known- age specimens. However, these results suggest that this technique could be developed as a reliable method to age beavers. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS— -The project was funded by the Hobart Ames Foundation and The University of Tennessee Agricultural Experiment Station. J. Schneider gave invaluable assistance with statistical analyses. R. Henry, J. Morrow, and T. Sain provided the majority of data collections. R. Maxey contributed the drawing in Figure 1. LITERATURE CITED Buckley, J. J., and W. L. Libby. 1955. Growth rates and age determi- nation in Alaska beaver. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 20:495-505. Friley, C. E., Jr. 1949. Use of the baculum in age determination of Michigan beaver. Journal of Mammalogy 30(3):261-267. Larson, J. S., and F. C. van Nostrand. 1968. An evaluation of beaver aging techniques. The Journal of Wildlife Management 32(1):99-103. 72 Allan E. Houston and Michael R. Pelton Patric, E. F., and W. L. Webb. 1960. An evaluation of three age determination criteria in live beavers. The Journal of Wildlife Management 24:37-44. SAS Institute, Inc. 1985. SAS User's Guide: Statistics. SAS Institute, Inc., Box 8000, Cary, North Carolina, van Nostrand, F. C, and A. B. Stephenson. 1964. Age determination for beavers by tooth development. The Journal of Wildlife Management 28(3):430-434. Received 11 January 1994 Accepted 8 March 1995 Record Clutch Size for Chelydra serpentina (Testudines: Chelydridae) in Virginia Joseph C. Mitchell Department of Biology University of Richmond, Richmond, Virginia 23173 AND Michael C. Odom U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 11110 Kimages Road Charles City, Virginia 23030 ABSTRACT — A record clutch size of 67 is reported for a common snapping turtle {Chelydra serpentina serpentina) from Charles City County, Virginia, 12 larger than previously reported for this chelonian. The new average for this species in the Commonwealth is 29.9 ± 16.6 ( x ± SD). The snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina) occurs from Florida north to southern Canada and Nova Scotia in eastern North America and from the Mexican border north to extreme southern Saskatchewan in western North America (Conant and Collins 1991, Iverson 1992, Russell and Bauer 1993). Clutch size varies latitudinally, with the largest sizes reported for northern populations in Canada, South Dakota, and Nebraska (Zug 1993; J. B. Iverson, Earlham College, personal communication). Ash (1951) reported an average clutch size of 28.6 and a range of 13-48 for 85 specimens presumably caught in the Virginia area. However, these data were presented only in an abstract. A complete paper was never published, and no docu- mentation is available for us to determine the source of his specimens. Information provided by the late John T. Wood (formerly a retired medical doctor in Victoria, British Columbia and Virginia in the 1950s, personal communication) indicated that Ash's specimens could have been from multiple locations in and out of Virginia. Mitchell (1994) reported an average clutch size of 27.0 ± 13.2 (range = 7-55) for 13 females collected from various locations in Virginia. On 3 June 1994, a gravid female (271-mm carapace length, 201-mm plastron length) was inadvertently killed by a vehicle at Harrison Lake National Fish Hatchery, Charles City County, Virginia. Subsequent dissection revealed 67 shelled eggs. One egg Brimleyana 22:73-75, June 1995 73 74 Joseph C. Mitchell and Michael C. Odom was opened on the date of collection, and the rest were placed in a closed plastic container with a 3:1 mixture of top soil and vermiculite. The soil was kept moist during the incubation period so that the relative humidity was maintained at nearly 100%. Incubation temperatures varied from 25 to 30° C. During the course of incubation, 12 of the 66 eggs died and were discarded; 54 eggs survived. Hatching commenced on 20 August (78 days incubation), and the last egg pipped on 24 August (82 days). Hatchlings showed considerable variation in development, with larger individuals bearing a small yolk sac and smaller individuals bearing a large, cumbersome yolk sac. Of the 54 hatchlings, four failed to survive through yolk sac absorption. The remaining turtles began exogenous feeding as their yolk sac diminished, taking a diet of chopped nightcrawlers and miscellaneous live aquatic macroinvertebrates collected from ponds. The surviving juvenile turtles were released the following spring. A documented clutch size of 67 eggs is 12 larger than the largest reported for Virginia (Mitchell 1994). Incorporation of the large clutch size reported here yields a new state average of 29.9 ± 16.6 (range = 7-67). The maximum known clutch size for Virginia populations lies between those known for northern populations (83: Quebec (Bleakney 1957); 73: New York and Wisconsin (Yntema 1970); 109: Nebraska (Packard et al. 1990)) and southern populations (43: North Carolina (Brown 1992); 21: Florida (Punzo 1975)). Reports of average clutch sizes for snapping turtles in different geographic areas based on small sample sizes should be used with caution. Such averages will almost always change with additional data. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS— Viz thank Kurt A. Buhlmann and John B. Iverson for their comments on the manuscript, and Thomas F. Burnett for assistance in the collection of the adult turtle and maintenance of the eggs and hatchlings. LITERATURE CITED Ash, R. P. 1951. A preliminary report on the size, egg number, incu- bation period, and hatching in the common snapping turtle, Chelydra serpentina. Virginia Journal of Science 2:312 (abstract). Bleakney, S. 1957. A snapping turtle, Chelydra serpentina serpentina, containing eighty-three eggs. Copeia 1957:143. Chelydra serpentina clutch 75 Brown, E. E. 1992. Notes on amphibians and reptiles of the western Piedmont of North Carolina. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Sci- entific Society 108:38-54. Conant, R., and J. T. Collins. 1991. A field guide to the reptiles and amphibians of eastern and central North America. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, Massachusetts. Iverson, J. B. 1992. A revised checklist with distribution maps of the turtles of the world. Privately Printed, Richmond, Indiana. Mitchell, J. C. 1994. The reptiles of Virginia. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. Packard, G. C, M. J. Packard, and K. Miller. 1990. Life history: Chelydra serpentina, fecundity. Herpetological Review 21:92. Punzo, F. 1975. Studies on the feeding behavior, diet, nesting habits and temperature relationships of Chelydra serpentina osceola (Chelonia: Chelydridae). Journal of Herpetology 9:207-210. Russell, A. P, and A. M Bauer. 1993. The amphibians and reptiles of Alberta. University of Calgary Press, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Yntema, C. L. 1970. Observations on females and eggs of the com- mon snapping turtle Chelydra serpentina. American Midland Naturalist 84:68-76. Zug, G. R. 1993. Herpetology, an introductory biology of amphibians and reptiles. Academic Press, San Diego, California. Received 12 January 1995 Accepted 9 March 1995 New Distributional Records for the Star-nosed Mole, Condylura cristata (Insectivora: Talpidae), in North Carolina, with Comments on its Occurrence in the Piedmont Region Jeffrey C. Beane North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences P.O. Box 29555 Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0555 ABSTRACT — The distribution of the star-nosed mole (Condylura cristata) in North Carolina is updated, including specimen-supported records for seven new counties and sight records for several additional counties. The species is locally common in the Mountains, spottily distributed throughout much of the Coastal Plain, and apparently rare to absent in much of the Piedmont. A specimen from just off the Blue Ridge escarpment in western Surry County represents the first Piedmont record supported by a specimen, although there are additional sight records and unverified reports from that region. This mole is sympatric with the state's other two mole species in many areas, but usually occurs in wetter habitats than either. INTRODUCTION The star-nosed mole (Condylura cristata) ranges from eastern Manitoba and Minnesota eastward to Labrador and Nova Scotia, and southeastward along the Atlantic coast to southeastern Georgia (Paradiso 1959, Burt and Grossenheider 1976, Petersen and Yates 1980, Hall 1981, Yates and Pedersen 1982). In North Carolina, its distribution has frequently been reported as consisting of two distinct popula- tions— one in the Mountains, where the species is locally common, and one in the Coastal Plain, where it is uncommon to rare — with a conspicuous hiatus in the Piedmont (Lee et al. 1982, Webster et al. 1985, Lee 1987, Webster 1987). The scarcity of records from the Coastal Plain and complete absence of Piedmont records resulted in the species being recommended for listing as status Undetermined by the Nongame Advisory Committee to the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (Webster 1987), and in 1990 the species was granted protection as a species of Special Concern under the North Carolina Endangered Species Act (G.S. 113-331 to 113-337). I here report on the current known distribution of Condylura cristata in North Carolina by providing a list of existing records from the state, and a dot distribution map (Fig. 1) updated from maps provided by Lee et al. (1982) and Webster (1987). Brimleyana 22:77-86, June 1995 77 78 Jeffrey C. Beane Fig. 1. Known distribution of Condylura cristata in North Carolina. Solid dots indicate localities documented by specimens in curated collections. Open circles indicate literature records or sight records not supported by specimens. A single dot or circle may represent two or more records in close proximity. A "C" indicates a literature record, not supported by a specimen, for which only the county and no further information was given. Question marks accompany records for which no specimen was observed, or which are unverifiable or otherwise questionable. RECORDS OF OCCURRENCE The following North Carolina localities are supported by voucher specimens, many of them in the North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences (NCSM), and are represented by solid dots on the distribution map: Alleghany Co.: New River, "Sparta" (The New River is actually, at its nearest point, 4 mi. NW of Sparta), 30 May 1968, H. M. Tyus (NCSM 1762). Ashe Co.: "3A mi. from jet. NC 16 and Friendship Church Rd." (= ca. 2 mi. ENE Jefferson), 4 Oct. 1991, E. Marsh (Appalachian State University 16731). Avery Co.: 2.6 mi. NNE Heaton, Pisgah National Forest, 27 May 1975, R. Jordan and J. Pentecost (Auburn University Museum 1-281); 3A mi. SE Linville, 24 July 1984, D. S. Lee and J. P. Kumhyr (NCSM 4875). Brunswick Co.: ca. 6 mi. NNW Supply, Green Swamp Ecological Preserve off NC 211, "Moon Island." 16 May 1993, T. M. Padgett (TMP 511; to be deposited at NCSM). Buncombe Co.: W of Asheville (University of Michigan Mu- seum of Zoology); Biltmore (Harvard Museum of Comparative Zool- ogy 6635); ca. 2.6 mi. WNW Swannanoa, Warren Wilson College campus, Aug. 1977, D. S. Lee and B. Lee (NCSM 7837); Weaverville, 6 Feb. 1896, Mrs. J. S. Cairns (Harvard Museum of Comparative Zoology 5399). Dare Co.: ca. 7 mi. SW Manns Harbor, Alligator Star-nosed Mole 79 River National Wildlife Refuge, Milltail Rd., 20 March 1991, P. R. Trail, M. L. Dunn, et al. (NCSM 6710). Haywood Co.: 5 mi. SW Waynesville on U.S. 23, 30 Aug. 1951, F. S. Barkalow, Jr. (North Carolina State University 274). Henderson Co.: Hoopers Creek near Fletcher, 8 Oct. 1974, B. A. Sanders (NCSM 4937); 1 mi. S Gerton, Little Bearwallow Mtn., 8 July 1994, P. B. Spivey (to be deposited at NCSM); 1 mi. W. NW Mills River (town), near jet. SR 1336 and SR 1338, 25 May 1993, K. A. Buhlmann, D. W. Herman, and J. L. Warner (NCSM 7868). Hoke Co.: 9.2 mi. NE Ashley Heights, Ft. Bragg Mili- tary Reservation, 29 May 1992, LCTA survey crew (NCSM 7213). Jackson Co.: 0.7 mi. NE Balsam, Blue Ridge Parkway at Balsam Gap, 22 May 1991, A. C. Boynton (NCSM 7528). Macon Co.: High- lands, 1 June 1946 (University of Georgia Museum of Natural History 192); Highlands, ca. 1 June 1946, R. Bridges (NCSM 6575); ca. 0.5 mi. E center Highlands, Highlands Biological Station, 23 Oct. 1982, S. Morrison (University of Georgia Museum of Natural History 7595); 1 mi. E.NE Highlands, SR 1603, 0.3 rdmi. E jet. SR 1604, 20 Sept. 1984, A. L. Braswell and J. E. Cooper (NCSM 7462). New Hanover Co.: near Carolina Beach, 16 Nov. 1956, G. Tregembo (NCSM 3243). Mitchell Co.: Roan Mtn. (Wake Forest University); Roan Mtn. near Magnetic City, 15 March 1894 (U. S. National Museum 66300); Roan Mtn. near Magnetic City, 15 Aug. 1895 (U. S. National museum 91519). Polk Co.: Green River Valley near Saluda, 28 May 1974, G. G. Shaw and M. Bradley (NCSM 1237). Rutherford Co.: Chimney Rock, Southside Drive, 19 Dec. 1989, M. Jaeger-Gale (NCSM 6336). Richmond Co.: 3.7 mi. NE Hoffman, U.S. 1, 0.1 rdmi. S Lumber River, 18 May 1980, A. L. Braswell (NCSM 3283). Sampson Co.: 5.5 km W Faison (Duplin Co.) off SR 1734, 9 June 1994, W. D. Webster (University of North Carolina at Wilmington 3370). Scotland Co.: "Laurinburg, Mr. Newton's farm" [the farm referred to was located ca. 8 mi. N Laurinburg, or 4.5 mi. W Wagram (NCSM files, W. M. Palmer, pers. comm.)], 12 April 1975, R. B. Julian (NCSM 3047). Surry Co.: 0.8 mi. NNW Low Gap near jet. NC 89 and SR 1433, A. B. Somers et al., 7 June 1994 (NCSM 7744). Swain Co.: Deep Creek; Kephart Prong Hatchery; Smokemont; Charlies Bunion Mtn. at Sevier Co., TN line; and Appalachian Trail between Newfound Gap and Indian Gap at Sevier Co., TN line; all in Great Smoky Mountains National Park (Great Smoky Mountains National Park collection, Linzey and Linzey 1968); Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Appalachian Trail, lA mi. S Boulevard Trail (= ca. 6.8 mi. NW Smokemont), 20 Aug. 1961, J. B. Westbrook (University of Georgia Museum of Natural History 3112). Watauga Co.: Blowing 80 Jeffrey C. Beane Rock (Wake Forest University); Boone (Appalachian State University 7606); Boone, Hidden Valley Circle, 14 March 1981, D. Notrichia (Appalachian State University 7591); Boone, 1987, R. W. Van Devender (Appalachian State University 14633); ca. 1 mi. WSW Boone, jet. NC 105 and Poplar Grove Rd., 16 Sept. 1978 (Appalachian State University 5125 ); ca. 3 mi. WSW Boone, Laurel Cr. along NC 105, 13 Sept. 1985, F. Authenreith (Appalachian State University 12086); Blue Ridge TWP, Jakes Mtn. Rd. near jet. SR 1511, Dec. 1986, M. P. Rowe (Appalachian State University 12786); Blue Ridge TWP, SR 1511 along Sand Spit Branch and Blue Ridge Parkway, 27 Sept. 1987, R. W. Van Devender (Appalachian State University 14205); Sugar Grove, jet. U.S. 321 and Edmiston Rd., 24 Nov. 1978, H. Rogers (Appalachian State University 7601); Sugar Grove, Edmiston Rd., 5 Sept. 1985, R. N. Henson (Appalachian State University 12485); Watauga Co., no further data (Appalachian State University 16751). Yancey Co.\ Burnsville, 3 Feb. 1976, L. P. Hartis (NCSM 2409). In addition to localities supported by voucher specimens, the following literature and sight records are considered valid, and most are included as open circles on the distribution map: "Mountains near the border of South Carolina" (Audubon and Bachman 1851). Avery Co.: Elk Park (Lee 1987, NCSM files). Bladen Co.: ca. 2 mi. N.NE White Lake (town) off SR 1517 near jet. U.S. 701, 30 April 1992, T. M. Padgett and R. Rageot (Thomas M. Padgett, pers. comm.). Buncombe Co.: 2-3 mi. N Black Mountain at Montreat, ca. 1915-1920, E. E. Brown (Elmer E. Brown, pers. comm.); Swannanoa, ca. 20 April 1931, C. S. Clapp (Lee 1987, NCSM files). Cherokee Co.: Topton, 13 May 1934, E. B. King (Brimley 1944-1946). Clay Co.: Hayesville, 3 Aug. 1947, R. G. Vick (Paradiso 1959, NCSM files; specimen formerly at NCSM but apparently lost). Macon Co.: Highlands vicinity, specimens "not infrequently" taken by H. C. Harbison prior to May 1908 (Brimley 1944-1946); Highlands vicinity, three specimens reported by Johnston (1967); one of these, formerly in the Highlands Museum, is now NCSM 6575; the same specimen was also reported by Odum (1949). McDowell Co.: just N Ashford along U.S. 221, ca. 1800' elev., two specimens taken from the stomach of a black rat snake (Elaphe obsoleta), 23 May 1960, E. E. Brown. These specimens were reported by Brown (1979), but their specific locality was not included in that paper (Elmer E. Brown, pers. comm.). Mecklenburg Co.: Davidson (east side near golf course branch), ca. 1950-1955, E. E. Brown (Elmer E. Brown, pers. comm.). New Hanover Co.: near Carolina Beach, 7 June 1959, G. Tregembo (Lee 1987, NCSM files). Pitt Co.: no further data (Lee et al. 1982, Clark et al. 1985, Lee 1987, Star-nosed Mole 81 Webster 1987). The original source of this record seems uncertain, and it is accompanied by a question mark on the distribution map in Fig. 1. Robeson Co.: near Lumberton, early Dec. 1943, A. M. Ivey (Brimley 1944-1946). Sampson Co.: near Garland, 13 May 1918, J. F. Johnson (Brimley 1923, Brimley 1944-1946, Paradiso 1959). Washington Co.: Wenona, early Nov. 1992, E. R. Rainey (Brimley 1923, Brimley 1944-1946, Paradiso 1959). Watauga Co.: Boone, four specimens, 19 May 1918, (Brimley 1944-1946). Yancey Co.: ca. 7 mi. W. Burnsville along Lickskillet Branch, ca. 1981. J. McFee (Allen C. Boynton, pers. comm.). Lee (1987) and Webster (1987) reported C. cristata from Moyock in Currituck County, based on a specimen from the digestive tract of a mink obtained from a fur dealer in that town and reported by Wilson (1954). However, Wilson (1954) indicated that some of the mink in his study were taken in Camden and Dare counties, and no specific locality was given for the specimen from which the mole was retrieved. That it was from Currituck County is possibly an erroneous assumption. It is therefore accompanied by a question mark on the distribution map. Regardless, this record affirms the presence of Condylura in the northeastern corner of the state. Clark et al. (1985) suggested the occurrence of Condylura in Bladen and Hoke counties (no specific localities given) based on the presence of mole runs "almost certainly made by this species." Lee (1987) reported C. cristata from McCain, Hoke County, citing Clark et al. (1985) as the source. That paper does not, however, contain a clear reference to the species' occurrence at McCain. Lee (1987) further reported observation of "burrows and mounds of Condylura" from West End, Moore County, in 1980. Since these records did not involve the observation of actual specimens, they are accompanied by question marks on the distribution map. Lee (1987) also reported C. cristata from Green [sic] County, "pre-1950," citing Clark et al. (1985) as the source, but that paper contains no reference to the species occurring in Greene County. Neither are there records from that county in the North Carolina State Museum's files, hence, it is not included on the distribution map. Two additional reports of C. cristata from the Piedmont of North Carolina are as follows. Randolph Co.: 2.1 mi. SSE Ulah, off SR 2843 < 0.1 rdmi. SE jet. NC 159. John Schneider, a horticulturist with the North Carolina Zoological Park, reported (personal communication) a specimen that was captured and badly mangled by his dog in March or April, 1991. I visited the site in July, 1994, and found no obvious signs of fresh 82 Jeffrey C. Beane mole activity, but no serious collecting efforts have yet been undertaken there. Wake Co.: 1.25 mi. SW Millbrook (= 4.0 mi. N.NE center Raleigh), 4001 Quail Hollow Drive along Big Branch. Dr. Wesley E. Kloos, a genetics professor at North Carolina State University, reported (personal communication, NCSM files) having captured two specimens in his back yard between 1989 and 1991, and released both in nearby Eastgate City Park. A photograph sent to the North Carolina State Museum, of Kloos holding one of the captured animals, was too small and blurred for positive identification. Frequent pitfall trapping on the site during 1992-1993 yielded no specimens. Although neither Kloos nor Schneider is a mammalogist, both are scientifically oriented individuals, and each seemed certain of the animals's identity. The star-nosed mole is certainly a difficult animal to misidentify. Their reports are therefore included here, and are probably valid, although they remain unverified, and are accompanied by question marks on the distribution map. Except for the Surry County record, and the Mecklenburg County sight record by Brown, they represent the only reports from the Piedmont region of the state. However, the records from Polk and Rutherford counties (NCSM 1237 and 6336, respectively) are very near the eastern edge of the escarpment, and the sight record of burrows and mounds from West End in Moore County (Lee 1987) is at the extreme inner edge of the Coastal Plain. The locality for the Surry County specimen (NCSM 7744) lies just off the Blue Ridge escarpment in the extreme western Piedmont, and is the first specimen-supported record for that geographic province in the state. The specimen was found dead along a bog at the edge of a hayfield. Evidence of considerable mole activity was apparent at this site during 1994 and 1995 (personal observation), and the landowners reported that these moles were commonly killed by house cats on the property, as was possibly the case with this specimen (Ann B. Somers, personal communication). The specimens from Ashe, Brunswick, Dare, Hoke, Jackson, and Rutherford counties also represent new county records. The sight records for Bladen, McDowell, Mecklenburg, Randolph, and Wake counties, though not supported by specimens, represent previously unpublished county records as well (see Lee et al. 1982, Webster 1987). DISCUSSION The range of the star-nosed mole overlaps that of the eastern mole (Scalopus aquaticus) throughout North Carolina, and that of the hairy-tailed mole (Parascalops breweri) in the Mountains. The hairy- Star-nosed Mole 83 tailed mole is currently known from Avery, Buncombe, Caldwell, Jackson, Haywood, Macon, Mitchell, Swain, Transylvania, Watauga, Wilkes, and Yancey counties in the Mountains (Lee et al. 1982, NCSM files). The late Joseph M. Bauman (personal communication) also reported specimens from Cherokee County. The eastern mole apparently occurs throughout the state (Lee et al. 1982, Webster et al, 1985), and is in most places the most common mole. Differences in habitat preference by the three have been noted by several authors. Star-nosed moles are known to prefer, if not require, wet areas as habitat (Hamilton 1931, Burt and Grossenheider 1976, Yates and Pedersen 1982, Webster et al. 1985). Nearly all North Carolina specimens for which habitat information is available were collected in such areas. A possible exception is the Bladen County specimen listed above, which was found dead in a dry, sandy area apparently not near a wetland (T. M. Padgett, personal communication). The eastern mole has been reported to avoid "the wet soils preferred by the Star-nosed Mole" (Lee et al. 1982). The hairy-tailed mole reportedly occurs in similar habitats as the eastern mole, but usually at higher elevations, with most specimens being taken at above 2,000 ft. (610 m) (Lee et al. 1982, Webster et al. 1985, NCSM files). Lee et al. (1982) reported the hairy-tailed mole to be "considerably more common than the Star-nosed Mole," but this may not hold true at all montane localities. In Watauga County, for instance, Condylura apparently is more frequently encountered than Parascalops (R. W. Van Devender, personal communication), and there are overall more Condylura than Parascalops from the North Carolina mountains in the State Museum's collections. The ecological niches of the three moles may thus be loosely described as Parascalops and Scalopus frequenting well-drained soils, often with an altitudinal separation between them, and Condylura utilizing wet, low-lying areas at a wide range of elevations. However, some syntopy may occur. All three species may occur at some montane localities, as is the case in the vicinity of Highlands Biological Station in Macon County at ca. 3,900 ft. (1,190 m) in elevation (NCSM files). In Ashe County at ca. 2,880 ft. (878 m), I found a dead eastern mole (NCSM 7251) in a wet sedge meadow bog, a site which appeared more suitable for a star-nosed mole. Eadie (1939) reported having trapped Condylura and Parascalops in the same tunnel at a New Hampshire site. Undoubtably, the distributions and interspecific zrelationships of North Carolina's three mole species merit further study. The possibility that Condylura cristata occurs at low densities or at scattered localities throughout the state, and that the Mountain 84 Jeffrey C. Beane and Coastal Plain populations are not disjunct, should not be ignored. Although Lee et al. (1982) stated that "absence of records from the piedmont is certainly not an artifact of collecting," there have probably been few serious efforts to collect C. cristata in the North Carolina Piedmont, other than the recent trapping efforts at the Wake County site. Moreover, specific attempts to collect Condylura in the Mountains and Coastal Plain have seldom if ever proven successful, and Clark et al. (1985) commented on the difficulty encountered in trapping the species. Most available specimens for which the method of collection is known were found dead on roads or otherwise accidentally encountered. Even in the Mountains where the species may be fairly common, there are still several counties for which specimens have not been reported. Much of the Piedmont, particularly the western part, has been largely overlooked or ignored by biologists, and its fauna remains poorly documented. Small, fossorial or otherwise secretive vertebrates may long elude detection in any region. As examples, the eastern tiger salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum) was first discovered in the Piedmont in Wake County by me in 1982 (NCSM files) after that area had been heavily collected by herpetologists for nearly a century; and the bog turtle (Clemmys muhlenbergii) was discovered in three new Piedmont counties during 1992-1993 (Beane 1993). Although some areas, such as the Raleigh vicinity, have been heavily collected by mammalogists and other biologists for more than a century, little effort has been specifically aimed at star-nosed mole trapping. The North Carolina Piedmont has been heavily altered for agriculture and urbanization — probably more so overall than either the Mountains or the Coastal Plain, and many Piedmont wetlands have been drained or otherwise destroyed in the process. It is possible that wetlands alteration or other human activities may have eliminated the star- nosed mole from many areas of the Piedmont in recent times. If populations of this mole do occur throughout the Piedmont of North Carolina, it is likely that they exist as scattered relicts (either Pleistocene relicts or more recent anthropogenic relicts) and at low densities. It is hoped that this paper will help stimulate biologists working in North Carolina (and other southern states) to make every reasonable effort to collect evidence of Condylura, and to photograph or collect specimens wherever they are encountered, especially at undocumented localities. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS—^ am grateful to Allen C. Boynton, Elmer E. Brown, Kurt A. Buhlmann, Dennis W. Herman, Elizabeth McGhee, Thomas M. Padgett, Philip B. Spivey, R. Wayne Van Devender, W. David Webster, and David K. Woodward for their assistance in locating Star-nosed Mole 85 specimens and providing sight records. The discovery of the Surry County specimen was a result of the Surry County Natural Areas Inventory, for which Ann Berry Somers and J. Richard Everhart (among numerous others) deserve special credit. William M. Palmer and two anonymous reviewers provided helpful comments on earlier drafts of the manuscript. LITERATURE CITED Audubon, J. J., and J. Bachman. 1851. The quadrupeds of North America. Volume II. New York, New York. Beane, J. C. 1993. A survey of bog turtle (Clemmys muhlenbergii) habitat in the western Piedmont of North Carolina. Bulletin of the Chicago Herpetological Society 28(ll):240-242. Brimley, C. S. 1923. The star-nosed mole in eastern North Carolina. Journal of Mammalogy 4(3): 183-184. Brimley, C. S. 1944-1946. The mammals of North Carolina. 18 installments. Carolina Tips. Carolina Biological Supply Co., Elon College, North Carolina. Brown, E. E. 1979. Some snake food records from the Carolinas. Brimleyana 1:113-124. Burt, W. H., and R. P. Grossenheider. 1976. A field guide to the mammals. Third edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, Massachusetts. Clark, M. K., D. S. Lee, and J. B. Funderburg, Jr. 1985. The mammal fauna of Carolina bays, pocosins, and associated com- munities in North Carolina: An overview. Brimleyana 11:1-38. Eadie, W. R. 1939. A contribution to the biology of Parascalops breweri. Journal of Mammalogy 20(2): 150-173. Hall, E. R. 1981. The mammals of North America. John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York. Hamilton, W. J. 1931. Habits of the star-nosed mole, Condylura cristata. Journal of Mammalogy 12(4):345-355. Johnston, D. W. 1967. Ecology and distribution of mammals of Highlands, North Carolina. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scien- tific Society 83(2):88-98. Lee, D. S. 1987. The star-nosed mole on the Delmarva Peninsula: zoogeographic and systematic problems of a boreal species in the South. The Maryland Naturalist 31(2):44-57. Lee, D. S., J. B. Funderburg, Jr., and M. K. Clark. 1982. A distri- butional survey of North Carolina mammals. Occasional Papers of the North Carolina Biological Survey 1982-10. North Carolina State Museum, Raleigh. Linzey, D. W., and A. V. Linzey. 1968. Mammals of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society 84(3):384-414. 86 Jeffrey C. Beane Odum, E. P. 1949. Small mammals of the Highlands (North Caro- lina) Plateau. Journal of Mammalogy 30(2): 179-192. Paradiso, J. 1959. A new star-nosed mole (Condylura) from the southeastern United States. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 72:103-108. Petersen, K. E., and T. L. Yates. 1980. Condylura cristata. Mamma- lian Species 129:1-4. Webster, W. D. 1987. Condylura cristata parva Paradiso, southern star-nosed mole. Pages 42-43 in Endangered, threatened, and rare fauna of North Carolina, Part I. A re-evaluation of the mammals (M. K. Clark, editor). Occasional Papers of the North Carolina Biological Survey 1987-3. North Carolina State Museum, Raleigh. Webster, W. D., J. F. Parnell, and W. C. Biggs, Jr. 1985. Mam- mals of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Maryland. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill. Wilson, K. A. 1954. The role of the mink and otter as muskrat predators in northeastern North Carolina. The Journal of Wildlife Management 18(2):199-207. Yates, T. L., and R. J. Pedersen. 1982. Moles (Talpidae). Pages 37- 51 in Wild mammals of North America. (J. A. Chapman and G. A. Feldhamer, editors). John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland. Received 20 October 1994 Accepted 11 April 1995 Observations on North Carolina Crayfishes (Decapoda: Cambaridae) John E. Cooper 418 Wayne Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27608 AND Alvin L. Braswell North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences P.O. Box 29555, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626 ABSTRACT — Cambarus {Tubericambarus) acanthura, Orconectes (Procericambarus) spinosus, and an apparently undescribed species of Orconectes (O. sp. B), are reported for the first time from North Carolina. Six additional specimens of Orconectes (Crockerinus) virginiensis are reported from the Chowan and Roanoke basins, and its range in North Carolina is clarified. Orconectes (C.) erichsonianus, for which a North Carolina locality has been published, is deleted from the State list. Cambarus {Jugicambarus) asperimanus is reported from the Watauga and New rivers in Watauga County, and localities are provided that expand its known range in the Piedmont Plateau. New locality data, distributional clarifications, or natural history notes are provided for Cambarus (Depressicambarus) latimanus, C (D) reduncus, Cambarus {Jugicambarus) carolinus, C (J) dubius, C. (/.) nodosus, Cambarus (Puncticambarus) georgiae, C (P.) parrishi, C. (P) reburrus, Procambarus (Ortmannicus) medialis, P. (O.) pearsei, and P. (O.) plumimanus. A blue specimen of C. latimanus is reported from the Neuse River basin. The North Carolina crayfish fauna is correlated with the State's major river basins and physiographic provinces. Thanks largely to the efforts of the late Horton H. Hobbs, Jr., U. S. National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, with whom the modern era in crayfish studies essentially began, the composition of the crayfish fauna of North Carolina is relatively well known. As indicated in his most recent checklist of the American crayfishes (Hobbs 1989:89), the North Carolina fauna consists of 27 described native species, a putative subspecies of one of them, and one introduced species. Hobbs, sometimes with coworkers, described one of the four genera, six of the 11 native subgenera, and 11 of the 27 native species known to occur in the State at the time of his checklist. Brimleyana 22:87-132, June 1995 87 88 J. E. Cooper and A. L. Braswell In addition to the described species, at least four and probably five known but undescribed species from North Carolina await description. Hobbs and Peters (1977:8-9) mentioned Cambarus (Cambarus) sp. A, close to Cambarus (Cambarus) bartonii Fabricius; Cambarus (Depressicambarus) sp. B, close to Cambarus (Depressicambarus) reduncus Hobbs; and Cambarus (Puncticambarus) sp. C. The latter, C. (P.) sp. C, refers not to a single undescribed species but to an undiagnosed species complex that includes Cambarus (Puncticambarus) acuminatus Faxon, which is one of the 27 species listed for North Carolina. In fact, however, Hobbs (1969:135) said that C. (P.) acuminatus (sensu stricto) may be "confined to the Saluda drainage" of South Carolina, and later (Hobbs 1989:25) added, "Even in the Santee Cooper basin (of which the Saluda River is a tributary), . . . more than one rather distinct 'variant' is recognizable." We see no reason in our paper to depart from using C. (P.) sp. C for this complex until a diagnosis has been completed. Considering that the species in the complex range from the mountains to the coast in North Carolina, there probably are several awaiting description. Cooper and Cooper (1977a: 198-199) and Cooper and Ashton (1985:9) commented on the undescribed Orconectes sp. A, and North Carolina localities for another apparently undescribed Orconectes (herein designated O. sp. B) are presented in our paper. One of us (JEC) is investigating a number of other new species, but further comment on them at this time would be premature. It is a certainty that other undescribed species await discovery in North Carolina. About another widespread crayfish that occurs in parts of North Carolina, Procambarus (Ortmannicus) acutus acutus (Girard), Hobbs (1989:64) said, "With little doubt, the populations currently assigned to this subspecies constitute a species complex." The complex was under study by Hobbs and Hobbs (1990:608). Hobbs (1989:24) also said that Cambarus (Lacunicambarus) diogenes Girard, a broadly distributed crayfish whose range includes eastern North Carolina, "is a species complex and needs considerable attention." Jezerinac (1993:532) "concluded that the complex consists of two subgenera Lacunicambarus and Tubericambarus, new subgenus, and at least five additional species or subspecies." Another extremely variable crayfish that occurs in parts of North Carolina, C. (C.) bartonii, is also in dire need of revision. Hobbs (1969:146) referred to "the depauperate state of our knowledge of the relationships of those crayfishes which are currently being tentatively designated as C. b. bartonii . . . ." Hobbs (1989:82, 89) included Cambarus bartonii cavatus Hay in his list of crayfishes occurring in North Carolina, but North Carolina Crayfishes 89 North Carolina was not included in his statement of the range of this putative subspecies (Hobbs 1989:14). We have opted to omit it as a member of the North Carolina cambarid fauna until specific evidence appears to support its inclusion. Four described species are North Carolina endemics: Cambarus {Depressicambarus) catagius Hobbs and Perkins, of the upper Cape Fear River basin; Cambarus (Puncticambarus) reburrus Prins, of the French Broad and Savannah basins; Procambarus (Ortmannicus) medialis Hobbs, of the Neuse and Tar-Pamlico basins; and Procambarus {Ortmannicus) plumimanus Hobbs and Walton, of the Northeast Cape Fear and New (White Oak) basins, which, as we explain later, may be expanding its range into the lower Neuse basin. The undescribed Orconectes sp. A is another North Carolina endemic, found only in the Neuse and Tar-Pamlico basins. This article adds two described and one undescribed native species to the State list, provides additional distributional and natural history information for them and 13 other species, deletes a species for which a North Carolina locality has been published, correlates the State's crayfish fauna with its major hydrologic units, and summarizes the distribution of this fauna in the State's three major physiographic provinces. Abbreviations used are as follows. SR = secondary road (formerly CR for county road); NC = North Carolina state highway; US = United States highway (an A after the number means alternate highway); I = interstate highway; FRS = United States Forest Service Road; cntr = center of town or city; NCSM C- = crustacean collections, North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences, Raleigh; USNM = collections, U. S. National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C. Collector's names are given in first usage, initials thereafter. Cambarus {Depressicambarus) latimanus (LeConte) Hobbs (1981:120), reporting observations made in a thesis by J. L. Boyce (1969), stated that in Yellow River, Georgia, C. latimanus "becomes relatively inactive during December, January, and February," Hobbs (1981:119) also provided monthly capture data for a large number of specimens that suggested the same thing: 77 collected in November, five in December, 21 in January, and none in February, as opposed to 164 in March, 1,079 in April, and relatively high numbers in most other months. These kinds of collecting data, however, can be more a reflection of seasonal activities of the collectors than of the collected. If we can equate "activity" with "catchability," 90 J. E. Cooper and A. L. Braswell and in the case of animals taken in traps we feel justified in so doing, C. latimanus is not inactive during winter months in eastern North Carolina. Intensive sampling was conducted in the Neuse River basin from late December 1978 through May 1979, and in the Tar- Pamlico basin from January through April 1980, most of it part of a study of the distribution and ecology of the salamander, Necturus lewisi (Brimley) (Braswell and Ashton 1985). This effort yielded considerable winter and spring capture ("activity") data for 409 adult and 279 juvenile C. latimanus, the majority of them caught in traps (Table 1). Bouchard (1978:37) remarked on a dearth of ovigerous females in collections of this species, saying, "Of the numerous collections of C. latimanus that have been made, only three specimens are females with eggs (or young)." One of these females was collected in a tributary of the Neuse River in Wake County, North Carolina, on 16 April 1977, the other two were collected in Alabama on 22 April 1973. Hobbs (1981:119), who examined 2,424 specimens of this species from approximately 400 localities, remarked, "I have no records of ovigerous females or of those carrying young anywhere within its range .... This paucity of such females in collections almost certainly reflects inadequate sampling of burrows in the banks of streams." Most of the smallest juveniles collected in the Neuse and Tar-Pamlico surveys were taken in late April and May. This, combined with the few available dates of capture of ovigerous females, Bouchard's (1978:47) report of a copulating pair found on 2 November 1974 in Alabama, and the fact that nearly 50 percent of the males in the January sample reported in Table 1 were form I, leads us to suggest that in eastern North Carolina (1) mating and egg production occur in winter and perhaps late fall, (2) incubation occurs during winter and early spring, Table 1. Summary of winter and spring captures of C. latimanus in the Neuse and Tar-Pamlico river basins, 1978-1980. Month SI SU 9 juv N Jan 46 48 81 21 196 Feb 15 20 39 46 120 Mar 14 40 50 22 126 Apr 9 19 23 168 219 May 1 2 2 22 27 Totals 85 129 195 279 688 North Carolina Crayfishes 91 and (3) the young are produced later in the spring (a time of high water, expanded habitat, and increased availability of food). This supports Thorp's (1978:278) statement that in the lower Savannah River basin of South Carolina this species "enters the reproductive period as temperatures are dropping in fall and winter." On 17 February 1982, a blue specimen of C. latimanus was found by a worker clearing a muddy ditch at the south end of the Wayne Community College campus in Goldsboro, Wayne County (Neuse River basin). It was taken to Gary W. Woodyard of the college biology faculty, who generously donated it to the N. C. State Museum. The animal, a form II male (NCSM C-775), was generally cobalt blue, with the pigment obviously in the exoskeleton since the underlying chromatophore pattern of blotches and abdominal stripes was clearly visible. The right cheliped was missing, but the left cheliped and all pereiopods were whitish on the ventral surfaces, with a pale bluish tint at the base of the coxa of each limb. The lateral margin of the palm and propodus was very light blue, but the entire dactyl was darker except at the ventral tip. The gonopods (first pleopods), eyestalks, antennae, antennules, and antennal scales were pale blue. There was a small white area on the anterolateral carapace just below the suborbital angle and along part of the margin of the carapace. The small tubercles and punctations of the carapace were points of white, as were the small cervical spines. Most of the ventral abdomen was clear, but the transverse ridges between segments were blue. This is the first blue individual reported for this species, and the first blue crayfish reported for any non-blue species in North Carolina. One North Carolina crayfish, Cambarus (Jugicambarus) dubius Faxon, is known to have a cobalt blue color morph. In the area where the blue C. latimanus was found, the species normally is light tan or greenish, with dark brown or green carapace markings and abdominal stripes. Hundreds of normal-colored specimens of this species have been collected in the Neuse River and its tributaries, including a number from Wayne County. Fitzpatrick (1987) summarized most of the known records for the "blue color phase" in six crayfish genera, and discussed environ- mental (diet and illumination) versus genetic causes of such color variations. Penn (1951) reported a blue color variant of Procambarus (Scapulicambarus) clarkii (Girard), a normally red species, in Louisiana. Penn later (1959:10) said, "In recent years anomalous bright blue specimens have appeared in several parts of the state . . . ." (That someone may be culturing this obviously genetic variant is 92 J. E. Cooper and A. L. Braswell indicated by the fact that in April 1984 JEC examined several bright blue specimens of this species, said to be from "Thailand," that were for sale as exotic novelties in a Raleigh tropical fish shop. A form I male was purchased and is in the NCSM collections, C-1295.) Smiley and Miller (1971:221) estimated the frequency of blue variants in normally non-blue P. a. acutus as 1 in 50,000. Black (1975) experimentally demonstrated that blue color in this species is a mutation, in which the gene controlling the chemical composition of a carotenoid pigment in the exoskeleton behaves as a single recessive allele, with complete penetrance of the dominant normal allele. He estimated the ratio of blue to normal crayfish in the pond of origin of his parental stocks at 1:5,600. Anthony D'Agostino has bred cobalt blue Homarus americanus, and the Fx offspring inherit this coloration as a homozygous recessive trait (Porterfield 1982:38), which is what Black found in P. a. acutus. With a nod to William of Occam, we find it considerably more parsimonious to conclude that the Wayne County C. latimanus was a genetically blue individual than that its abnormal color was produced by diet or environmental conditions. In North Carolina, C. latimanus is a common, widespread inhabitant of the eastern Piedmont Plateau and much of the Coastal Plain. It is possible, though, that it also occurs in the Hiwassee River basin of the Blue Ridge, as we discuss later. Cambarus (Depressicambarus) reduncus Hobbs Bouchard (1978:40) gave the range of this species as "in the Piedmont province from the Cape Fear River drainage in North Carolina southward to the Santee River basin . . . .," and in the latest American checklist Hobbs (1989:16) gave it as "Piedmont Province from Orange County, North Carolina to Richland County, South Carolina." Concerning the northern terminus of its range, these statements almost certainly were based on specimens from the upper Cape Fear basin in and around Chapel Hill, Orange County, earlier reported by Hobbs (1956:66-67) and Hobbs and Peters (1977:50). Although Cooper and Ashton (1985:9) had reported C. reduncus from the Neuse and Tar-Pamlico basins, north of the Cape Fear, they gave no particulars. The following localities extend the known range of this species north into the Piedmont headwaters of these two rivers, very close to the Roanoke River basin. NEUSE RIVER BASIN. Durham Co.— (1) Lick Crk at SR 1905, 10 air mi (16 air km) E Durham; 1 6 I (NCSM C-520), 27 Jan 1979, A. P. Capparella. Granville Co. — (2) burrow in roadside ditch along North Carolina Crayfishes 93 SR 1721, 3.5 air mi (5.6 air km) SE cntr Creedmoor, near Wake Co line; 1 6 I (NCSM C-860), 23 Apr 1978, R. E. Ashton, Jr.; (3) swamp at E edge Lake Rogers (on Ledge Crk), 1 air mi (1.6 air km) NW Creedmoor; 1 j ^ 9 Mar 1991, D. G. Cooper, JEC. Wake Co.— (4) burrow in lawn, Morrisville; 1 9 (NCSM C-907), 27 Mar 1978, J. Clayton; (5) alive on SR 1300 (Hemlock Bluffs Rd) N of bridge; 1 6 I (NCSM C-909), night 3 Nov 1977, R. W. Laney, D. F. Lockwood; (6) alive on road, 0.5 mi (0.8 km) W jet SR 1379 & Kildaire Rd; 1 6 I (NCSM C-910), night 3 Nov 1977, RWL, DFL. TAR-PAMLICO RIVER BASIN. Granville Co.— (7) alive on road, jet SR 1304 & 1307, 1.8 air mi (2.9 air km) W Hebron; 1 6 II (NCSM C-1262), night 23 Apr 1983, J. P. Kumyhr, D. Smith. Person Co.— (8) Tar R at SR 1565, 1.7 air mi (2.7 air km) WSW Dennys Store; 1 6 I, I 9 (NCSM C-665), 20 Feb 1980, trap, E. Rawls. Vance Co.— (9) Tabbs Crk at SR 1101, 2.3 air mi (3.7 air km) W Kittrell; 1 6 I, 1 9 (NCSM C-655), 24 Jan 1980, trap, ER. Hobbs and Peters (1977:18) reported C. reduncus from "Mont- gomery County: (2) Hamer Creek, 3 mi (4.8 km) N Richmond Co line on St Rte 73," Assigning the locality to the "CATAWBA BASIN." This locality, though, like nearly all of Montgomery County, is in the Yadkin-Pee Dee basin. The following collections of C. reduncus, however, are known from the Catawba basin in North Carolina: Gaston Co. — (1) small stream (trib South Crowders Crk) near office Crowders Mountain State Park, off SR 1125, 0.6 rd mi (0.9 rd km) SW jet SR 1106, 5.2 air mi (8.3 air km) S Bessemer City; 1 6 II, 1 j 6, 3 9, 4 j 9 (NCSM C-2300), 22 Apr 1985, ALB. Mecklenburg Co.— (2) plowed field along dirt rd at E end SR 3629 (Sixmile Crk dr), ca. 6.3 air mi (10.1 air km) SE cntr Pineville; 1 6 II, 4 j 8, 1 9 , 2j 9 (NCSM C-1043), 19 Apr 1980, from burrows with chimneys, N. L. Elliott; (3) ditch along SR 3629 (Sixmile Crk dr), ca. 5.6 air mi (8.9 air km) SE cntr Pineville; 9 j 8, 1 9, 11 j 9 (NCSM C-1045), 19 Apr 1980, NLE. Union Co.— (4) along SR 1624, 0.5 rd mi (0.8 rd km) NW jet NC 200, 2.0 air mi (3.2 air km) NNE Monroe; 1 8 I (NCSM C-311), 15 Jul 1978, J. W. Braswell, Jr., ALB; (5) East Fk Twelve Mile Crk at SR 1329, ca. 2.1 air mi (3.4 air km) SSW Wesley Chapel; 1 j 8, 3 j 9 (NCSM C-1031), 18 Apr 1980, in roadside ditch fed by woodland pool; 1 j 8, 3 j 9 (NCSM C-1047), 18 Apr 1980, in shallow, temporary floodplain pools; 1 8 II, 1 j 9 (NCSM C-1027), 26 Apr 1980, dug from burrows with chimneys in old-field, NLE; (6) small branch Little Twelve Mile Crk at SR 1329, ca. 2.9 air mi (4.6 air km) SSW Wesley Chapel; 4 j 8, 7 j 9 (NCSM C-1037), 18 Apr 1980, NLE; (7) woodland pool off Little Twelve Mile Crk at SR 1328, 94 J. E. Cooper and A. L. Braswell ca. 3.1 air mi (5.0 air km) SW Wesley Chapel; 3 j 8, 1 j 9 (NCSM C-1040), 18 Apr 1980, NLE; (8) damp ditch at East Fk Twelve Mile Crk at SR 1336, ca. 1.6 air mi (2.6 air km) SW Wesley Chapel; 1 j 8, 1 j 9 (NCSM C-1038), 20 Apr 1980, from burrows, NLE. Cambarus (Jugicambarus) asperimanus Faxon This crayfish occurs in the Watauga River basin in Tennessee (Hobbs 1989:20), but no localities for the species have been reported from this system in North Carolina. Additionally, no one unequivocally has reported its occurrence anywhere in the New River basin. With respect to the latter, in a discussion of "Cambarus (Cambarus) bartoni asperimanus" Ortmann (1931:138) stated, " I have a male (I) and two females from Blowing Rock (in the headwaters of New River, some distance northeast of Asheville), in which the inner margin of the palm has the tubercles somewhat more strongly develop- ed than is usual in bartoni. This indicates a transition toward asperimanus. However, I prefer to leave these with bartoni; the character being much less distinct here than in the specimens from Asheville and Canton" (Buncombe and Haywood counties, respectively, French Broad River basin). There is one other published locality for C. asperimanus that could be in the New River basin, but it was not reported as such. Hobbs and Peters (1977:57) recorded the species from "Watauga County: (8) creek at Deep Gap," but placed this locality in the Pee Dee (Yadkin) basin. This citation does not indicate whether "creek at Deep Gap" refers to the community of Deep Gap, or the mountain gap of the same name. The community is in eastern Watauga County on Deep Gap Creek, a tributary that joins South Fork New River in Ashe County. The mountain gap lies southeast of the Blue Ridge, in the drainage of Stony Fork Creek, a headwater tributary that enters the Yadkin River in western Wilkes County. On 25 July 1984, we collected C. asperimanus in both the Watauga and New River basins at the following localities. WATAUGA RIVER BASIN. Watauga Co.— (1) small stream entering N bank Watauga R at NC 105 bridge, jet SR 1112, ca. 2.4 air mi (3.8 air km) SE Valle Crucis; 2 $ (NCSM C-1811), from under separate rocks at mouth of stream. NEW RIVER BASIN. Watauga Co.— (2) small, shallow creek (South Fk New River dr) in hardwood ravine and meadow on E side Howard Knob, off Hidden Valley Circle, 0.3 rd mi (0.5 rd km) from jet Chestnut Drive in north Boone; 1 cM, 5 j 8,1 9, 1 j 9 (NCSM C-1814), 1 9 with attached young (NCSM C-1815), 3 9, 1 j 9 (NCSM C-1816), with R. W. VanDevender. North Carolina Crayfishes 95 At the Watauga River locality, the only other crayfish collected was Cambarus (Puncticambarus) robustus Girard, all specimens of which were taken from the river itself. At the New River locality, the orangish-tan C. asperimanus were "associated" with cobalt blue C. dubius. The two species were dug from burrows within a few meters of each other, but their habitats differed. The C. asperimanus that came from burrows were in simple, shallow burrows at or just above water level along the banks of the creek, while the C. dubius were dug from more complex burrows in a mucky seepage area near the same creek. Some C. asperimanus were found under rocks in the creek, but no C. dubius were in this habitat, and no C. asperimanus were dug from the seep. The limits of the range of C. asperimanus east of the Blue Ridge escarpment in North Carolina are not yet clear, but we made a number of collections of the species at the base of the eastern foothills and in the Piedmont as far east as western Catawba County. Hobbs and Peters (1977:57) first recorded the species in this area, from a locality in the upper Catawba basin in northwestern Burke County. Our collections at the following new localities extend the range of C. asperimanus farther east in the Catawba basin, and south and east into the Broad River basin. CATAWBA RIVER BASIN. Burke Co.— (1) Jacob Fk nr office South Mountain State Park, 3.4 air mi (5.4 air km) SW Pleasant Grove; 1 S I, 3 S II, 1 j S, 4 9 (NCSM C-2281), 23 Apr 1985; (2) Laurel Crk along NC 18, 2.0 rd mi (3.2 rd km) ESE jet SR 1929, 3.2 air mi (5.1 air km) N Pleasant Grove; 2 S I, 5 jS, 6 j 9 (NCSM C- 2286), 1 ovig 9 (NCSM C-2309), 26 Apr 1985. Catawba Co.— (3) small stream (trib Henry Fk) along I 40 at milepost 120 near Burke Co line, ca. 4.0 air mi (6.4 air km) SW cntr Hickory; IS II, 3 j S, 1 9, 1 j 9 (NCSM C-1257), 12 Apr 1983. McDowell Co.— (4) trib Swannanoa Crk along SR 1400, 1.3 rd mi (2.1 rd km) W jet E end SR 1407, 2.1 air mi (3.4 air km) WNW cntr Old Fort; 2 S I, 2 S II, 1 j 6 (NCSM C-807), 20 Aug 1977; (5) trib Catawba R along US 70, 3.1 mi (5.0 km) E Buncombe Co line, 2.3 air mi (3.7 air km) WSW cntr Old Fort; 2 9 (NCSM C-949), 24 Nov 1978, with D. L. Stephan; (6) small cascading stream (trib Swannanoa Crk) along SR 1407, ca. 0.4 rd mi (0.6 rd km) NE Buncombe Co line, ca. 5.0 air mi (8.0 air km) W cntr Old Fort; 1 j 6,3 9, 1 j 9 (NCSM C-1251), 12 Apr 1983; (7) Long Br (trib Mill Crk) along SR 1407, 0.4 rd mi (0.6 rd km) S railroad crossing, 1.5 air mi (2.4 air km) SE Graphite & 3.2 air mi (5.1 air km) WNW cntr Old Fort; IS II, 1 j 9 (NCSM C-1258), 12 Apr 1983; (8) Buck Crk at NC 80 bridge, 0.4 rd mi 96 J. E. Cooper and A. L. Braswell (0.6 rd km) N jet SR 1437, ca. 0.2 air mi (0.3 air km) E Sunny Vale; 1 9 (NCSM C-2200), 26 Sep 1984. BROAD RIVER BASIN. Cleveland Co. — (9) small stream (Buffalo Crk dr) in hardwoods, 0.8 rd mi (1.3 rd km) S Lincoln Co line, 2.3 air mi (3.7 air km) NNE Belwood; 1 8 II, 3 j 8, 3 j 9 (NCSM C-2283), 22 Apr 1985. McDowell Co.— (10) intermittent creek (trib Cane Crk) in hardwood ravine along NC 226, 0.1 rd mi (0.2 rd km) WNW Rutherford Co line, 3.4 air mi (5.4 air km) SE Dysartville; 4 8 II (NCSM C-987), 25 Jun 1977, 2 8 I, 5 8 II, 11 j 8, 9 9, 14 j 9 (NCSM C-1821), 1 9 with attached young (NCSM C-1823), 1 8 II, 1 j8, 2 $ (NCSM C-1824), 26 Jul 1984. Rutherford Co.— (11) trib Broad R at NC 9, ca. 0.3 air mi (0.5 air km) S town Lake Lure; 1 8 II (NCSM C-64), 6 Aug 1976; (12) small stream in steep ravine at NC 9, 0.8 rd mi (1.3 rd km) W cntr town Chimney Rock; 1 9 (NCSM C-959), 3 8 II, 1 9 (NCSM C-960), 5 Jun 1977, with E. Messersmith. Polk Co.— (13) unnamed trib Green R near Raccoon Mountain; 1 8 I (NCSM C-2012), summer 1974, G. G. Shaw. We conclude, based on the apparently broad temporal distribution of ovigerous females and those with young, that C. asperimanus either has an extended breeding season or has a long development time for the ova and young. Hobbs (1981:190) reported an ovigerous female taken in Rabun County, Georgia, in April 1977, and said that "elsewhere" such females have been taken in April, June, and December. The latter statement may have been based on Bouchard (1972:47), who reported ovigerous females (presumably in Tennessee) in "April to June and December." As indicated above, we collected a female with attached young in Watauga County on 25 July 1984, and another a day later in McDowell County. David G. Cooper collected a female with three attached young in Jackson County on 10 August 1993. In addition, we found a number of individual females closely associated with groups of tiny young in Macon County on 19 September 1984, and on this same date we found free-living young of the same size. The Jackson County female collected by DGC on 10 August 1993 is the largest C. asperimanus we have seen, with a total carapace length (TCL) of 42.0 mm and a postorbital carapace length (PCL) of 37.0 mm. Another very large specimen, a form I male measuring 38.0 mm TCL (32.5 mm PCL), was collected by DGC at the same site on the same date. We collected a form I male in Macon County that measured 36.0 mm TCL (31.5 mm PCL). The only other size data we know of for this species are those of Hobbs (1981:190). His largest North Carolina Crayfishes 97 Georgia specimen, an ovigerous female, measured 30.5 mm TCL (26.7 mm PCL), and his largest form I male was 27.6 mm TCL (24.1 mm PCL). Cambarus (Jugicambarus) carolinus (Erichson) Although Hobbs and Bouchard (1973:42), Bouchard (1976:594), and Hobbs (1989:21) included southwestern North Carolina, south and west of the French Broad River, within the range of this species, no one has yet reported precise locality or natural history data for this primary burrower in North Carolina. Faxon (1890:624) reported a form I male of his Cambarus dubius, collected by James Mooney from " 'Among the Cherokees,' Indian Territory," and said, "According to the label accompanying the specimen it is called Tsisgdgili (red crayfish) by the Cherokee Indians." The same author later (Faxon 1914:396) included this specimen (USNM 14314) under C. carolinus, said "I am advised by Mr. Mooney that it was in reality obtained in Swain Co. or in Jackson Co., N. C, " and added (Faxon 1914:397) that "The living color . . . was red . . . ." Ortmann (1931:147) reported Faxon's specimen under "Cambarus (Cambarus) carolinus ," and inexplicably indicated that it was from "Cherokee Co.; North Carolina." He added, "I have seen, at Murphy, Cherokee Co., crawfish-chimneys, and tried unsuccessfully to dig out specimens .... The owner of the place told me, that these were red crawfish, and thus probably this species." Ortmann (1931:147) also recorded the species from "Swampy ground near springs, Marion, McDowell Co. . . . Swamp, Ashville [sic], Buncombe Co., . . .," and "Blowing Rock, Watauga Co., . . . ." These three localities are outside the range of C. carolinus as currently understood, but the last two are within the known range of C. dubius (sensu lato). The McDowell County locality is in the western Piedmont Plateau, in the headwaters of the Catawba River basin, beyond the known ranges of both C. carolinus and C. dubius. Brimley (1938) recorded C. carolinus at "Judson," and Hobbs and Bouchard (1973:21) called for confirmation of this record. This would have been a reasonable place to find C. carolinus, since Judson was a community on the Little Tennessee River in southwestern Swain County, but it is now beneath the waters of Fontana Lake (Powell 1968:259). The reference by Harris (1903:142) to "C. carolinus" in the Tar-Pamlico River basin was clearly in error. We made the following collections of specimens referred to this species at the indicated localities, all within the basin of the Little Tennessee River: Clay Co. — (1) boggy spring seep in Riley Cove, off unnumbered dirt road reached from US 64, 3.3 rd mi (5.3 rd 98 J. E. Cooper and A. L. Braswell km) S jet SR 1359 & 1.2 rd mi (1.9 rd km) W jet FSR 71 (old US 64), Natahala National Forest; 1 8 II (NCSM C-948), 16 Aug 1977, 1 8 I, 1 8 II, 5 j 8, 4 9, 3 j 9 (NCSM C-2165), 1