f, ^ JOURNAL OF THE KENTUCKY ACADEMY OF SCIENCE Official Publication of the Academy Volume 72 Number 1 Spring 2011 The Kentucky Academy of Science Founded 8 May 1914 Governing Board 2011 Elected Officers President: Barbara Ramey, Eastern Kentucky University, barbara.ramey@eku.edu President Elect: Dawn Anderson, Berea College, Dawn_Anderson@berea.edu Vice President: Cheryl Davis, Western Kentucky University, cheryl.davis@wku.edu Past President: Nancy Martin, University of Louisville, nancymartin@louisville.edu Secretary: Robert Kingsolver, Bellarmine University, kingsolver@beUarmine.edu Treasurer: Ken Crawford, Western Kentucky University, kenneth.crawford@wku.edu Division and At-Large Representatives Biological Sciences: Ronald Jones, Eastern Kentucky University, ron.jones@eku.edu Biological Sciences: Richard Durtsche, Northern Kentucky University, durtsche@nku.edu Physical Sciences: Eric Jerde, Morehead State University, e.jerde@moreheadstate.edu Physical Sciences: KC RusseU, Northern Kentucky University, russeUk@nku.edu Social & Behavioral Sciences: Judy Voelker, Northern Kentucky University, voelkerjl@nku.edu Social ir Behavioral Sciences: Sean ReiUey, Morehead State University, s.reiUey@morehead-st.edu At-Large: Mary Janssen, KCTCS, marye.janssen@kctcs.edu At-Large: KatieAnn Skogsberg, Centre CoUege, katieann.skogsberg@centre.Edu Ex-Officio Officers Journal Editor: David White, Murray State University, david.white@murraystate.edu Program Coordinator: Bob Creek, Eastern Kentucky, University, robertcreek@beUsouth.net Director Junior KAS: Ruth Beattie, University of Kentucky, rebeatl@email.uky.edu Newsletter Editor: Susan Templeton, Kentucky State University, susan.templeton@kysu.edu Executive Director: Jeanne Harris, KAS, executivedirector@kyscience.org Webpage Editor: Claire Rinehart, Western Kentucky University, claire.rinehart@wku.edu Executive Secretary Emeritus: Don Frasier, University of Kentucky, dfrazie@uky.edu All manuscripts and correspondence concerning manuscripts should be addressed to the Editor (david.white@mur- raystate.edu). The JOURNAL is indexed in BioOne, Cambridge Scientific Abstracts, Selected Water Resource Abstracts, State Acad- emies of Science Abstracts, and Zoological Record. Membership in the Academy is open to anyone with an interest in science. Interested parties can join online at www. kyscience.org where membership options and benefits are listed. Please contact the executive director at executivedirec- tor@kyscience.org for additional information. The JOURNAL is made available as a PDF to all active members of the Academy (go to www.kentuckyscience.org). Hard copy subscriptions are available. Subscription rates for nonmembers are $50. 00/year domestic, $60.00/year for- eign. Back issues are $30.00 per volume. The JOURNAL is issued in spring and fall. Normally two issues comprise a volume. All other correspondence concerning memberships or subscriptions may be addressed to the Executive Director, Ken- tucky Academy of Science, PO Box 22579, Lexington, KY 40522-2579 or executivedirector@kyscience.org. @ This paper meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (Permanence of Paper). INSTITUTIONAL AFFILIATES Bellarmine University Berea College Brescia University Centre College Eastern Kentucky University Georgetown College Kentucky State University Morehead State University Kentucky Community 1 Members Midway College Murray State University Northern Kentucky University Spalding University Transylvania University University of Kentucky University of Louisville Western Kentucky University l Technical College System Sustaining Member Campbellsville University Members Asbury University Pikeville College Kentucky Wesleyan College Thomas More College Lindsey Wilson College University of the Cumberlands INDUSTRIAL AFFILIATES Honorary Patron- Lumins Associates Members Kentucky American Water Wood Hudson Cancer Research Laboratory Associate Members WKU Hoffman Environmental Research Institute WKU Crawford Hydrology Lab 1 Pachybrachis trinotatus (F. E. Melsheimer) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Cryptocephalinae) from Kentucky. See article by Barney, Clark, and Riley, page 3 of this issue. 2 J. Ky. Acad. Sci. 72(l):3-23. 2011. Annotated List of the Leaf Beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) of Kentucky: Subfamily Cryptocephalinae Robert J. Barney12 Community Research Service, Kentucky State University, Frankfort, Kentucky 40601 Shawn M. Clark Monte L. Bean Life Science Museum, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah 84602 and Edward G. Riley Department of Entomology, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843 ABSTRACT An examination of leaf beetle specimens (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) in the largest beetle collections in Kentucky, recent inventory work in state nature preserves and other protected areas, and a review of the literature revealed 59 species of Cryptocephalinae present in Kentucky, 27 of which were previously unreported for the state. Distribution maps and label data are presented for the 59 Kentucky species, including spatial (state and Kentucky county records), temporal (years and months of collection in Kentucky), and plant association information. The following species are reported from Kentucky for the first time: Griburius scutellaris (F.), Pachybrachis bivittatus (Say), Pachybrachis confusus Bowditch, Pachybrachis diversus Fall, Pachybrachis hepaticus hepaticus (F. E. Melsheimer), Pachybrachis luridus (F.), Pachybrachis morosus Haldeman, Pachybrachis obsoletus Suffrian, Pachybrachis othonus othonus (Say), Pachybrachis peccans Suffrian, Pachybrachis pectoralis (F. E. Melsheimer), Pachybrachis praeclarus Weise, Pachybrachis spumarius Suffrian, Pachybrachis trinotatus (F. E. Melsheimer), Pachybrachis viduatus (F.), Bassareus lituratus (F.), Cryptocephalus calidus Suffrian, Cryptocephalus fulguratus J. L. LeConte, Cryptocephalus gibbicollis decrescens R. White, Cryptocephalus mutabilis F. E. Melsheimer, Cryptocephalus notatus F., Cryptocephalus striatulus J. L. LeConte, Diachus catarius (Suffrian), Diachus chlorizans (Suffrian), Triachus atomus (Suffrian), Coleopthorpa dominicana franciscana (J. L. LeConte), and Neochlamisus gibbosus (F.). KEY WORDS: Kentucky, leaf beetles, Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae, Cryptocephalinae, biodiversity, new state records INTRODUCTION This paper is the seventh and final in a series intended to present a synopsis of the historical collection data on leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) from the major Coleoptera collections in Kentucky and aug- ment those data with new information gained from recent monitoring in state preserves and other protected locations. The first six papers presented information on the subfamilies Cassidinae (Barney et al. 2007), Donaciinae and Criocerinae (Barney et al. 2008a), Chrys- omelinae (Barney et al. 2008b), Galerucinae, tribes Galurucini and Luperini (Barney et al. 1 Corresponding author e-mail: rbarney@wvstateu.edu 2 Current address: GRDI Land-Grant Institute, West Virginia State University, Institute, WV 25112-1000 2009a), Galerucinae, tribe Alticini (Barney et al. 2009b), and Eumolpinae (Barney et al. 2010). The subfamily Cryptocephalinae is known as the case bearers due to the fact that the larvae inhabit self-constructed cases built from a combination of fecal pellets, soil particles and plant detritus (LeSage 1982, 1984a, 1984b, 1986; Stiefel 1993; LeSage and Stiefel 1996). Cryptocephalinae is a moderate- sized group with over 340 species in 22 genera in America north of Mexico (Riley et al. 2002). Several reviews of cryptocephaline genera have been conducted including those treating Pachybrachis (Fall 1915), Lexiphanes (Bals- baugh 1966), Exema (Karren 1966), and Cryptocephalus (White 1968), and the sub- families (now tribes) Clytrinae (Moldenke 1970) and Chlamisinae (Karren 1972). 3 4 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) The purpose of this study is to present historical and current knowledge of the distribution, abundance, and plant associa- tions of cryptocephaline leaf beetles in Ken- tucky. MATERIALS AND METHODS To establish a historical perspective, leaf beetle specimens from the major insect collections in Kentucky (and from collections located in other states but known to contain Kentucky specimens) were examined, re- identified, and their label data recorded. The following collections were studied with the timeframe of their Kentucky specimens listed: CMC Cincinnati Museum Center, Cin- cinnati, OH 1871-1931 UKIC University of Kentucky Insect Col- lection, Lexington, KY 1889-1993 WKUC Western Kentucky University Col- lection, Bowling Green, KY 1958- 2006 RJBC Robert J. Barney Collection, Win- field, WV (private) 1983-2009 BYUC Brigham Young University Collec- tion, Provo, UT 1988-2009 CWC Charles Wright Collection, Frank- fort, KY (private) 1991-2009 KYSU Kentucky State University Collec- tion, Frankfort, KY 2004-2009 The Cincinnati Museum Collection, for- merly known as the Cincinnati Museum of Natural History, houses the Charles Dury Collection comprising approximately 75,000 specimens primarily collected in the Cincin- nati/northern Kentucky area (Vulinec and Davis 1984). Most of the leaf beetles have a label reading “Ky. near Cin. O.” They usually have no date. When a Dury specimen was the first or only specimen collected for a partic- ular species, we have used “pre-1931” as an approximate collection date. The Kentucky State University Insect Collection is primarily the specimens gener- ated by the Kentucky Leaf Beetle Biodiver- sity Project. We conducted extensive collect- ing in many grass-dominated barrens and rock outcrop (glade) communities that are known for possessing uncommon plants and plant associations (Jones 2005) and have never been surveyed for leaf beetles. These sites are managed by the Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission, The Nature Conservancy, and the United States Army at Fort Campbell Military Reservation (Baskin et al. 1994). Most specimens were collected by the senior author within five state nature preserves in 2004-2009 and Fort Campbell in 2008-2009: Crooked Creek Barrens (Lewis County) and Blue Licks Battlefield (Robert- son County) in northeastern Kentucky, East- view Barrens (Hardin County) and TThomp- son Creek Glades (LaRue County) in central Kentucky, and Raymond Athey Barrens (Logan County) and Fort Campbell (Chris- tian and Trigg Counties) in western Ken- tucky. For each cryptocephaline species docu- mented for Kentucky, the following data are presented: state-level distribution in the United States (from Riley et al. 2003), Kentucky county records, abundance by year and month in Kentucky, and specimens per collection. Other pertinent information pres- ent on specimen labels, such as the method of collection and plant association information, is presented in the “Comments” section for each species. This information helps to determine abundance, seasonality, and distribution from a historical perspective. Barney and Hall (2011) reported host plant data for 23 species of cryptocephalinaes in Kentucky. One should note that plant collection records taken from specimen labels are notoriously inaccurate and may not reflect true host plants (Clark et al. 2004). RESULTS According to the “Catalog of Leaf Beetles of America North of Mexico” (Riley et al. 2003), there are 102 species of Cryptocepha- linae recorded in at least one of the seven states contiguous to Kentucky. However, only 32 species were reported from Kentucky. An examination of 2753 cryptocephalinae leaf beetle specimens from the major collections in the state and others known to contain Kentucky specimens revealed 59 species including 28 of the 32 recorded in Riley et al. (2003) and 27 new state records (Table 1). Three of the four species listed by Riley et al. (2003) as being from Kentucky but not recovered in this study were Neochlamisus, two of which were reported by Karren (1972). Kentucky Cryptocephalinae Leaf Beetles — Barney et al. 5 Table 1. List of Cryptocephalinae (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) recorded from Kentucky, with number of Kentucky specimens examined, number of Kentucky county records, range of years of collection in Kentucky, and new state records. Tribe Cryptocephalini Griburius scutellaris (F.) Pachybrachis atomarius (F. E. Melsheimer) Pachybrachis bivittatus (Say) Pachybrachis confusus Bowditch Pachybrachis diversus Fall Pachybrachis hepaticus hepaticus (F. E. Melsheimer) Pachybrachis luridus (F.) Pachybrachis m-nigrum (F. E. Melsheimer) Pachybrachis morosus Haldeman Pachybrachis nigricomis carbonarius Haldeman Pachybrachis obsoletus Suffrian Pachybrachis othonus othonus (Say) Pachybrachis peccans Suffrian Pachybrachis pectoralis (F. E. Melsheimer) Pachybrachis praeclarus Weise Pachybrachis relictus Fall Pachybrachis spumarius Suffrian Pachybrachis subfasciatus (J. L. LeConte) Pachybrachis tridens (F. E. Melsheimer) Pachybrachis trinotatus (F. E. Melsheimer) Pachybrachis viduatus (F.) Lexiphanes saponatus (F.) Bassareus clathratus (Melsheimer) Bassareus formosus (Melsheimer) Bassareus lituratus (F.) Bassareus mammifer (Newman) Cryptocephalus badius Suffrian Cryptocephalus calidus Suffrian Cryptocephalus fulguratus LeConte Cryptocephalus gibbicollis decrescens R. White Cryptocephalus guttulatus Olivier Cryptocephalus leucomelas leucomelas Suffrian Cryptocephalus mucoreus LeConte Cryptocephalus mutabilis Melsheimer Cryptocephalus nanus F. Cryptocephalus notatus F. Cryptocephalus quadruplex Newman Cryptocephalus striatulus LeConte Cryptocephalus venustus F. Diachus auratus (F.) Diachus catarius (Suffrian) Diachus chlorizans (Suffrian) Triachus atomus (Suffrian) Tribe Clytrini Anomoea flavokansiensis Moldenke Anomoea laticlavia laticlavia (Forster) Coleothorpa dominicana dominicana (F.) Coleothorpa dominicana franciscana (LeConte) Babia quadriguttata quadriguttata (Olivier) Saxinis omogera omogera Lacordaire Tribe Chlamisini Chlamisus foveolatus (Knoch) Exema canadensis Pierce Exema dispar Lacordaire Neochlamisus bebbianae (Brown) Neochlamisus bimaculatus Karren Neochlamisus chamaedaphnes (Brown) Neochlamisus eubati (Brown) Neochlamisus gibbosus (F.) Neochlamisus moestificus (Lacordaire) Neochlamisus platani (Brown) 71 specimens: 10 counties, 1970-2009 (new state record) 55 specimens: 3 counties, 1985-2009 11 specimens: 5 counties, 1971-1998 (new state record) 23 specimens: 3 counties, 1976-2009 (new state record) 2 specimens: 2 counties, 1972 (new state record) 8 specimens: 4 counties, 1894-2009 (new state record) 11 specimens: 4 counties, 1970-2009 (new state record) 74 specimens: 4 counties, 1971-2009 25 specimens: 2 counties, 2005-2009 (new state record) 286 specimens: 9 counties, 1971-2009 5 specimens: 3 counties, 1971-2008 (new state record) 33 specimens: 6 counties, 1971-2009 (new state record) 1 specimen: 1 county, 1998 (new state record) 10 specimens: 5 counties, 1891-2009 (new state record) 17 specimens: 2 counties, 2005-2009 (new state record) unknown 169 specimens: 12 counties, 1972-2009 (new state record) 3 specimens: 2 counties, 2003-2009 1 specimen: 1 county, pre-1931 78 specimens: 11 counties, 1966-2009 (new state record) 28 specimens: 2 counties, 2004-2009 (new state record) 17 specimens: 8 counties, 1893-2009 71 specimens: 17 counties, 1893-2009 10 specimens: 4 counties, pre-1931-2009 153 specimens: 11 counties, 1892-2009 (new state record) 12 specimens: 7 counties, 1907-2003 6 specimens: 2 counties, pre-1931-1971 2 specimens: 2 counties, 1985 (new state record) 1 specimen: 1 county, 2005 (new state record) 1 specimen: 1 county, 1892 (new state record) 12 specimens: 8 counties, 1915-1995 14 specimens: 9 counties, 1894-2008 4 specimens: 3 counties, 1983-2009 13 specimens: 8 counties, 1894—2008 (new state record) 5 specimens: 4 counties, 1970-2009 27 specimens: 11 counties, 1939-2009 (new state record) 24 specimens: 14 counties, 1891-2009 54 specimens: 4 counties, 2005-2008 (new state record) 339 specimens: 23 counties, 1891-2009 6 specimens: 4 counties, pre-1931-1995 4 specimens: 1 county, pre-1931 (new state record) 34 specimens: 4 counties, 1972-1995 (new state record) 1 specimen: 1 county, 2006 (new state record) 71 specimens: 18 counties, 1955-2009 115 specimens: 29 counties, 1892-2009 92 specimens: 18 counties, 1892-2009 1 specimen: 1 county, 2007 (new state record) 58 specimens: 16 counties, 1942-2009 274 specimens: 17 counties, pre-1931-2009 2 specimens: 2 counties, 1972-2004 198 specimens: 23 counties, 1971-2009 135 specimens: 31 counties, 1971-2009 9 specimens: 4 counties, 2005-2008 unknown unknown 49 specimens: 13 counties, 1971-2009 16 specimens: 7 counties, 1985-2008 (new state record) unknown 2 specimens: 2 counties, 1983-1992 6 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) The fourth species was Pachybrachis relictus Fall that may have been present but not confirmed. A breakdown of specimens, spe- cies, and records by collection examined is presented in Table 2. Griburius scutellaris (F.) (Figure 1A) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Bullitt, Christian, Grayson, Hardin, LaRue, Lewis, Logan, Meade, Robertson, Trigg Years. 1970 (1), 1972 (1), 1983 (1), 1985 (1), 2004 (3), 2005 (11), 2006 (32), 2007 (7), 2008 (9), 2009 (5) Months. May (32), June (35), July (4) Abundance. 71 specimens: 67-KYSU, 2- RJBC, 2-UKIC Comments. The majority of specimens were recently collected in barren areas of state nature preserves managed with pre- scribed burning. Clark et al. (2004) reported this species from Desmodium (Fabaceae), Quercus (Fagaceae) and Ceanothus (Rhamna- ceae). Pachybrachis atomarius (F. E. Melsheimer) (Figure IB) Kentucky Counties. Christian, Nelson, Trigg Years. 1985 (2), 2008 (38), 2009 (14) Months. June (53), July (1) Abundance. 55 specimens: 1-CMC, 52- KYSU, 2-RJBC Comments. The Dury specimen was la- beled as “Ky.” Table 2. The number of specimens, species and new Kentucky state records of Cryptocephalinae beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) found in the largest leaf beetle collections from Kentucky. Collection Specimens Species Records Kentucky State University Collection 2144 40 5 University of Kentucky Insect Collection 238 37 13 Robert J. Barney Collection 237 30 4 Charles Wright Collection 67 15 0 Brigham Young University Collection 30 13 2 Cincinnati Museum Center 29 14 2 Western Kentucky University Collection 8 6 1 Totals 2753 55 27 Pachybrachis bivittatus (Say) (Figure 1C) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Bracken, Pendleton, Scott, Trigg, Webster Years. 1971 (9), 1972 (1), 1998 (1) Months. June (8), July (2) Abundance. 11 specimens: 1-BYUC, 10- UKIC Comments. Normal hosts are species of Salix (Salicaceae). Pachybrachis confusus Bowditch (Figure ID) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Christian, Hardin, Trigg Years. 1976 (1), 2004 (2), 2008 (15), 2009 (5) Months. June (19), July (4) Abundance. 23 specimens: 22-KYSU, 1- RJBC Comments. All recently collected speci- mens were taken in barrens managed with prescribed burning. Minor feeding was ob- served in laboratory on Chamaecrist a fascicu- late (Michx.) Greene (Fabaceae) (Barney and Hall 2011). Pachybrachis diversus Fall (Figure IE) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Fulton, Hickman Year. 1972 (2) Months. May (1), July (1) Abundance. 2 specimens: 2-UKIC Comments. Normal hosts are species of Salix (Salicaceae). Pachybrachis hepaticus hepaticus (F. E. Melsheimer) (Figure IF) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Fayette, Hardin, LaRue, Robertson Years. 1894 (1), 1920 (2), 2004 (1), 2005 (1), 2006 (1), 2008 (1), 2009 (2) Months. June (7), July (1) Abundance. 8 specimens: 6-KYSU, 2- UKIC Comments. The specimen collected in 1894 had ‘on hemp’ written on the label. Pachybrachis luridus (F.) (Figure 1G) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Calloway, Christian, Hardin, Trigg Kentucky Cryptocephalinae Leaf Beetles — Barney et al. 7 Griburius Pachybrachis atomarius (F. E. Melsheimer) . Pachybrachis bivittatus (Say) Pachybrachis : ■ Pachybrachis diversus Fall Pachybrachis hepaticus hepaticus (F. E. Melsheimer) E Pachybrachis luridus Pachybrachis m-nigrum (F. E. Melsheimer) ®llf c Figure 1. The known distribution of Cryptocephalinae (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) illustrated in grey shading for Kentucky counties and states of the United States. New state records reported herein are shown in cross-hatch. 8 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) Years. 1970 (2), 2004 (1), 2006 (1), 2008 (3), 2009 (4) Months. May (1), June (10) Abundance. 11 specimens: 9-KYSU, 2- UKIC Comments. The recently collected speci- mens probably were collected on Quercus spp. (Fagaceae). Pachybrachis m-nigrum (F. E. Melsheimer) (Figure 1H) Kentucky Counties. Bullitt, LaRue, Law- rence, Logan Years. 1971 (1), 1983 (6), 2004 (11), 2005 (41), 2006 (8), 2007 (2), 2008 (4), 2009 (1) Months. May (31), June (26), July (6), August (1) Abundance. 74 specimens: 67-KYSU, 6- RJBC, 1-UKIC Comments. All recently collected speci- mens were taken in barrens managed with prescribed burning. Several specimens were collected by sweeping Hypericum (Clusia- ceae). Barney and Hall (2011) reported collection from and feeding on Hypericum dolabriforme Vent. Pachybrachis morosus Haldeman (Figure 2A) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Hardin, Logan Years. 2005 (2), 2006 (3), 2008 (3), 2009 (17) Month. May (25) Abundance. 25 specimens: 25-KYSU Comments. All specimens were collected from southern red oak, Quercus falcata Michx., or blackjack oak, Q. marilandica Muenchh. (Fagaceae), at Raymond Athey Barrens State Nature Preserve and Eastview Barrens State Nature Preserve. Feeding and mating were observed in laboratory on Q. falcata, Q. marilandica, and Q. stellata Wan- genh. (Barney and Hall 2011). Pachybrachis nigricornis carbonarius Haldeman (Figure 2B) Kentucky Counties. Christian, Grayson, Henry, LaRue, Lewis, Logan, Pendleton, Robertson, Trigg Years. 1971 (1), 1983 (11), 1985 (6), 2004 (1), 2005 (16), 2006 (69), 2007 (10), 2008 (95), 2009 (77) Months. May (100), June (178), July (8) Abundance. 286 specimens: 268-KYSU, 17-RJBC, 1-UKIC Comments. Barney and Hall (2009) re- ported this species to feed on Desmodium and Lespedeza (Fabaceae) in Kentucky. Pachybrachis obsoletus Suffrian (Figure 2C) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Fulton, Scott, Trigg Years. 1971 (1), 1972 (1), 2008 (3) Month. July (5) Abundance. 5 specimens: 3-KYSU, 2- UKIC Comments. The KYSU specimens were collected from Salix (Salicaceae). Pachybrachis othonus othonus (Say) (Figure 2D) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Carter, Grayson, Lewis, Lyon, Robertson, Trigg Years. 1971 (2), 1983 (1), 1985 (1), 2006 (14), 2008 (8), 2009 (7) Months. May (3), June (25), July (5) Abundance. 33 specimens: 29-KYSU, 2- RJBC, 2-UKIC Comments. Barney and Hall (2011) re- ported feeding, mating, and opposition in the lab on Desmodium marilandicum (L.) (Faba- ceae). Pachybrachis peccans Suffrian (Figure 2E) (new state record) Kentucky County. Bracken Year. 1998 (1) Month. July (1) Abundance. 1 specimen: 1-BYUC Comments. LeSage (1985) reported that larvae feed on dead or dying leaves of Salix (Salicaceae). Pachybrachis pectoralis (F. E. Melsheimer) (Figure 2F) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Fulton, Hardin, Gray- son, Logan, Robertson Years. 1891 (1), 1971 (2), 2003 (1), 2004 (2), 2007 (1), 2008 (1), 2009 (1) Months. June (3), July (5), September (1) Abundance. 10 specimens: 1-CMC, 1- CWC, 5-KYSU, 3-UKIC Comments. The Dury specimen was la- beled “Ky.” Clark et al (2004) reported this Kentucky Cryptocephalinae Leaf Beetles — Barney et al. 9 Pachybrachis Pachybrachis nigricornis carbonarius Hultlcman lUf . Pachybrachis obsoletus Suffrian £_jt- ^ Pachybrachis othonus of h anas (Say) Pachybrachis peccans Suffrian Pachybrachis pectoralis (F. E. Melsheimer) E Pachybrachis praeclarus VVeise Pachybrachis relictus Fall ,,,r « Figure 2. The known distribution of Cryptocephalinae (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) illustrated in grey shading for Kentucky counties and states of the United States. New state records reported herein are shown in cross-hatch. 10 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) species as associated with Robinia pseudoaca- cia L. (Fabaceae). Pachybrachis praeclarus Weise (Figure 2G) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Lewis, Robertson Years. 2005 (1), 2006 (11), 2008 (1), 2009 (4) Months. May (2), June (14), July (1) Abundance. 17 specimens: 17-KYSU Comments. This species has only been found in barrens managed with prescribed burning at Blue Licks Battlefield State Resort Park and Crooked Creek Barrens State Nature Preserve in northeast Kentucky. Pachybrachis relictus Fall (Figure 2H) Comments. Riley et al. (2003) listed this species from Kentucky. Pachijbrachis spumarius Suffrian (Figure 3 A) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Allen, Breathitt, Breck- inridge, Bullitt, Christian, Grayson, Hardin, Hart, Lewis, Logan, Robertson, Trigg Years. 1972 (2), 1983 (4), 1984 (2), 1985 (3), 2004 (31), 2005 (18), 2006 (15), 2007 (9), 2008 (65), 2009 (20) Months. June (54), July (113), August (2) Abundance. 169 specimens: 158-KYSU, 9-RJBC, 2-UKIC Comments. Many recently collected spec- imens were taken in abundance on Rhus copallina L. and R. glabra L. (Anacardiaceae). Feeding, mating, and oviposition were readily observed in the laboratory on these species. (Barney and Hall 2011). Pachybrachis subfasciatus (J. L. LeConte) (Figure 3B) Kentucky Counties. Hardin, Powell Years. 2003 (1), 2009 (2) Months. May (1), June (2) Abundance. 3 specimens: 1-CWC, 2-KYSU Comments. Clark et al. (2004) reported this species as associated with Juglans nigra L. (Juglandaceae). Pachybrachis tridens (F. E. Melsheimer) (Figure 3C) Kentucky Counties, unknown Years, pre-1931 (1) Months, unknown Abundance. 1 specimen: 1-CMC Comments. The Dury specimen was la- beled as “Ky. near Cin. O.” Clark et al. (2004) reported this species as associated with Toxico- dendron radicans (L.) Kuntze (Anacardiaceae). Pachybrachis trinotatus (F. E. Melsheimer) (Figure 3D) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Breathitt, Bullitt, Casey, Christian, Hart, LaRue, Lewis, Logan, Meade, Nelson, Trigg Years. 1966 (1), 1972 (3), 1985 (1), 2005 (24), 2006 (12), 2008 (25), 2009 (12) Months. June (40), July (37), August (1) Abundance. 78 specimens: 68-KYSU, 6- RJBC, 4-UKIC Comments. Many recently collected spec- imens were handpicked from Hypericum punctatum Lam. (Clusiaceae). Barney and Hall (2011) reported feeding, mating, and oviposition in the lab on Hypericum puncta- tum, H. perforatum L., and H. dolibriforme . Pachybrachis viduatus (F.) (Figure 3E) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Hardin, Logan Years. 2004 (2), 2005 (12), 2006 (3), 2007 (3), 2008 (5), 2009 (3) Months. May (2), June (16), July (10) Abundance. 28 specimens: 28-KYSU Comments. This species has only been found in barrens managed with prescribed burning at Eastview Barrens State Nature Preserve and Raymond Athey Barrens State Nature Preserve. Lexiphanes saponatus (F.) (Figure 3F) Kentucky Counties. Breckinridge, Bullitt, Christian, Hardin, Jessamine, Lewis, Pulaski, Trigg Years. 1893 (1), 1970 (1), 1972 (1), 1989 (2), 2005 (1), 2006 (1), 2008 (9), 2009 (1) Months. June (11), July (4), August (2) Abundance. 17 specimens: 2-BYUC, 12- KYSU, 3-UKIC Comments. Clark et al. (2004) reported this species to be primarily associated with Chamaedaphne calyculata (L.) Monench (Eri- caceae), but a wide assortment of other plant associations has been published. Kentucky Cryptocephalinae Leaf Beetles — Barney et al. 11 Pachybrachis spumarius Suffrian Pachybrachis subfasciatus (J. E. LeConte) B Pachybrachis tridens (F. E. Melsheimer) Pachybrachis trinotatus (F. E. Melsheimer) Pachybrachis viduatus (F.) Figure 3. The known distribution of Cryptocephalinae (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) illustrated in grey shading for Kentucky counties and states of the United States. New state records reported herein are shown in cross-hatch. Bassareus clathratus (Melsheimer) (Figure 4 A) Kentucky Counties. Barren, Breckinridge, Casey, Christian, Elliott, Fayette, Grayson, Hardin, Jessamine, Logan, Lyon, Meade, Monroe, Owsley, Russell, Trigg, Wayne Years. 1893 (1), 1894 (1), 1952 (2), 1961 (1), 1963 (1), 1970 (1), 1971 (2), 1972 (2), 1983 (3), 1985 (4), 1987 (1), 1994 (1), 2004 (7), 2005 (15), 2006 (5), 2007 (5), 2008 (16), 2009 (2) Months. June (29), July (38), August (2), November (1) Abundance. 71 specimens: 2-BYUC, 1- CMC, 1-CWC, 50-KYSU, 7-RJBC, 9-UKIC, 1-WKUC Comments. The Dury specimen was la- beled from “Ky. near Cin. O.” Some of the recent Kentucky specimens were sweep from winged sumac [Rhus copallina L.] (Anacar- diaceae). Clark et al. (2004) reported this species from alder [ Alnus ] (Betulaceae), Clethra (Clethraceae) and Salix nigra Marsh. (Salicaceae). Bassareus formosus (Melsheimer) (Figure 4B) 12 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) Bassareus el ath rates (F. E. Melsheimer) Bassareus formasus (F. E. Melsheimer) Bassareus lituratus (F.) Bassareus mammifer (Newman) c Figure 4. The known distribution of Cryptocephalinae (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) illustrated in grey shading for Kentucky counties and states of the United States. New state records reported herein are shown in cross-hatch. Kentucky Counties. Fulton, LaRue, Lyon, Rowan Years, pre-1931 (1), 1947 (1), 1971 (3), 2006 (1), 2009 (4) Months. May (5), June (3), July (1) Abundance. 10 specimens: 1-RYUC, 1- CMC, 5-KYSU, 3-UKIC Comments. The Dury specimen was la- beled as "Ky. near Cin. O.” Some of the recent Kentucky specimens were sweep from Ostrya virginiana (Mill.) K. Koch. (Betula- ceae), and captive beetles fed on this plant (Barney and Hall 2011). Clark et al. (2004) reported many plant associations, including those involving Rhus (Anacardiaceae) and Alnus (Betulaceae). Bassareus lituratus (F.) (Figure 4C) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Breathitt, Fayette, Grayson, Hardin, Jefferson, Kenton, Lewis, Lincoln, Logan, Robertson, Russell Years. 1892 (1), 1945 (1), 1972 (1), 1976 (1), 1981 (1), 1983 (6), 2004 (9), 2005 (15), 2006 (36), 2007 (7), 2008 (68), 2009 (7) Months. March (1), May (53), June (93), July (6) Abundance. 153 specimens: 141-KYSU, 9-RJBC, 3-UKIC Comments. Some of the recent Kentucky specimens were collected from Lespedeza virginica (L.) Britton (Fabaceae). Bassareus mammifer (Newman) (Figure 4D) Kentucky Counties. Bourbon, Bullitt, Fayette, Knott, Powell, Rowan, Whitley Years. 1907 (4), 1912 (1), 1939 (1), 1947 (2), 1955 (1), 1971 (1), 1998 (1), 2003 (1) Months. May (3), June (9) Abundance. 12 specimens: 1-BYUC, 4- CMC, 2-CWC, 5-UKIC Comments. The Dury specimens were labeled as from "Ky. near Cin. O.” Cryptocephalus badius Suffrian (Figure 5A) Kentucky Counties. Fayette, Hickman Years, pre-1931 (3), 1971 (3) Months. June (1), July (1), August (1) Abundance. 6 specimens: 3-CMC, 3-UKIC Comments. The Dury specimens were labeled as from "Ky. near Cin. O.” 13 Kentucky Cryptocephalinae Leaf Beetles — Barney et al. Crypt ocephalus calidus Suffrian (Figure 5B) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Grayson, Hardin Y ear. 1985 (2) Month. June (2) Abundance. 2 specimens: 2-RJBC Comments. These specimens were col- lected in railroad prairies. Clark et al. (2004) reported that this species has an association with Fabaceae. Cryptocephalus fulguratus LeConte (Figure 5C) (new state record) Kentucky County. Hart Year. 2005 (1) Month. September (1) Abundance. 1 specimen: 1-WKUC Comments. Clark et al. (2004) reported that this species is associated with Quercus (Fagaceae). Cryptocephalus gibbicollis decrescens R. White (Figure 5D) (new state record) Kentucky County. Barren Year. 1892 (1) Month. June (1) Abundance. 1 specimen: 1-UKIC Comments. Clark et al. (2004) reported rearing adults from larvae found on Vaccinium (Ericaceae). The only previous records of this subspecies are from Florida and Massachusetts. Cryptocephalus guttulatus Olivier (Figure 5E) Kentucky Counties. Breathitt, Fayette, Franklin, Jessamine, McCracken, Rowan, Union, Warren Years. 1915 (1), 1945 (2), 1967 (1), 1971 (1), 1979 (1), 1983 (1), 1984 (1), 1987 (2), 1995 (1) Months. May (3), June (3), July (3), August (1), October (1) Abundance. 12 specimens: 1-BYUC, 1- CMC, 4-RJBC, 5-UKIC, 1-WKUC Comments. The Dury specimen was la- beled as “Ky. near Cin. O.” One specimen was collected via Malaise trap. Cryptocephalus leucomelas leucomelas Suffrian (Figure 5F) Kentucky Counties. Crittenden, Franklin, Graves, Grayson, Jefferson, McLean, Powell, Rowan, Trigg Years. 1954 (4), 1971 (1), 1973 (3), 1985 (1), 1994 (1), 2005 (2), 2008 (2) Months. June (6), July (5), August (3) Abundance. 14 specimens: 1-CWC, 4- KYSU, 1-RJBC, 8-UKIC Comments. Several Kentucky specimens were collected directly from Salix (Salicaceae). Cryptocephalus mucoreus LeConte (Figure 5G) Kentucky Counties. Grayson, Hart, Trigg Years. 1983 (1), 1985 (1), 2008 (1), 2009 (1) Month. June (4) Abundance. 4 specimens: 2-KYSU, 2- RJBC Comments. Clark et al. (2004) reported that this species has been collected abundant- ly on Rhus glabra L. (Anacardiaceae). Cryptocephalus mutabilis Melsheimer (Figure 5H) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Breathitt, Fayette, Grayson, Hardin, LaRue, Logan, Powell, Warren Years. 1894 (1), 1916 (1), 1971 (1), 1972 (1), 2001 (1), 2004 (6), 2005 (1), 2008 (1) Months. June (2), July (4), August (4), September (3) Abundance. 13 specimens: 8-KYSU, 4- UKIC, 1-WKUC Comments. Some specimens were col- lected via Malaise trap. Cryptocephalus nanus F. (Figure 6A) Kentucky Counties. Calloway, Grayson, Pulaski, Trigg Years. 1970 (1), 1983 (1), 2008 (2), 2009 (1) Months. June (4), July (1) Abundance. 5 specimens: 3-KYSU, 1- RJBC, 1-UKIC Comments. Several Kentucky specimens were collected directly from Salix (Salicaceae). Cryptocephalus notatus F. (Figure 6B) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Breathitt, Carter, Fayette, Grayson, Hardin, Jessamine, Logan, Madison, McCreary, Mercer, Trigg Years. 1939 (1), 1941 (1), 1942 (4), 1943 (1), 1946 (1), 1950 (1), 1971 (1), 1983 (6), 1985 (1), 2005 (1), 2006 (1), 2008 (2), 2009 (5) 14 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) Cryptocephalus badius Suffrian Cryptocephalus calidus Suffrian f, ”r ■ - i T\JBL ^§lf Wpf Cryptocephalus fulguratus J. L. LeConte Cryptocephalus gibhicollis decrescens R. White c Cryptocephalus guttulatus Olivier w/** >\ J* m \ f* *. y Cryptocephalus leucomelas leucomelas Suffrian ^ f E - Cryptocephalus mucoreus J. L. LeConte Cryptocephalus mutabilis F. E. Melsheimer Figure 5. The known distribution of Cryptocephalinae (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) illustrated in grey shading for Kentucky counties and states of the United States. New state records reported herein are shown in cross-hatch. Kentucky Cryptocephalinae Leaf Beetles — Barney et al. 15 Cryptocephalus o Cryptocephalus notatus F. J_ h-jlI ( A f / b Cryptocephalus quadruplex Newman »» Cryptocephalus striate lu^ sj. LJLeOmte^ D (.ypfiH'uph.tu. ^ Figure 6. The known distribution of Cryptocephalinae (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) illustrated in grey shading for Kentucky counties and states of the United States. New state records reported herein are shown in cross-hatch. Months. May (13), June (13) Abundance. 27 specimens: 1-CMC, 9- KYSU, 7-RJBC, 10-UKIC Comments. The Dury specimen was la- beled as “Ky. near Cin. O.” Many Kentucky specimens were collected directly from Salix (Salicaceae). Cryptocephalus quadruple x Newman (Figure 6C) Kentucky Counties. Breathitt, Christian, Fayette, Hardin, LaRue, Laurel, Logan, Madi- son, McCracken, Menifee, Owsley, Pike, Pulas- ki, Whitley Years. 1891 (1), 1916 (1), 1945 (2), 1971 (2), 1972 (1), 1976 (1), 1983 (1), 1992 (1), 1994 (1), 1995 (2), 1999 (1), 2004 (1), 2005 (1), 2006 (3), 2008 (2), 2009 (3) Months. May (6), June (17), July (1) Abundance. 24 specimens: 1-BYUC, 4- CWC, 10-KYSU, 2-RJBC, 7-UKIC Comments. Some specimens were col- lected via Malaise trap. Cryptocephalus striatulus LeConte (Figure 6D) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Bullitt, Grayson, Lewis, Logan 16 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) Figure 7. The known distribution of Cryptocephalinae (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) illustrated in grey shading for Kentucky counties and states of the United States. New state records reported herein are shown in cross-hatch. Years. 2005 (15), 2006 (16), 2007 (2), 2008 (17), 2009 (4) Months. May (48), June (6) Abundance. 54 specimens: 54-KYSU Comments. All specimens were recently collected in barren areas of state nature preserves managed with prescribed burning. Cryptocephalus venustus F. (Figure 6E) Kentucky Counties. Barren, Bourbon, Breckinridge, Bullitt, Christian, Fayette, Fulton, Grayson, Hardin, Hart, Hopkins, Lewis, Logan, McCracken, Nelson, Perry, Powell, Pulaski, Robertson, Scott, Trigg, Warren, Wayne Years. 1891 (2), 1892 (3), 1894 (2), 1913 (2), 1917 (1), 1920 (9), 1925 (1), 1938 (1), 1971 (2), 1972 (6), 1976 (1), 1983 (11), 1985 (31), 2004 (5), 2005 (93), 2006 (68), 2007 (17), 2008 (62), 2009 (21) Months. May (2), June (192), July (134), August (9), September (1) Abundance. 339 specimens: 1-CMC, 264- KYSU, 42-RJBC, 30-UKIC, 2-WKUC Comments. The Dury specimen was la- beled as “Ky. near Cin. O.” Some\specimens were collected via Malaise trap. Diachus auratus (F.) (Figure 7 A) Kentucky Counties. Breckinridge, Powell, Rowan Years, pre-1931 (3), 1972 (1), 1984 (1), 1995 (1) Months. July (2), August (1) Abundance. 6 specimens: 2-BYUC, 3- CMC, 1-UKIC Comments. The Dury specimens were labeled as from “Ky.” Diachus catarius (Suffrian) (Figure 7B) (new state record) Kentucky County, unknown Year, pre-1931 (4) Month, unknown Abundance. 4 specimens: 4-CMC Comments. The Dury specimen was la- beled as “Ky.” and “Horn” and were presum- ably from the collection of George Henry Horn. Diachus chlorizans (Suffrian) (Figure 7C) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Crittenden, Grayson, Hardin, Trigg 17 Kentucky Cryptocephalinae Leaf Beetles — Barney et al. Years. 1972 (1), 1983 (1), 2004 (16), 2005 (7), 2006 (1), 2007 (1), 2008 (2), 2009 (5) Months. May (1), June (5), July (27), August (1) Abundance. 34 specimens: 32-KYSU, 1- RJBC, 1-UKIC Comments. Most Kentucky specimens were recently collected directly from Rhus copallina L. (winged sumac) at Eastview Barrens State Nature Preserve and Fort Campbell. Triachus atomus (Suffrian) (Figure 7D) (new state record) Kentucky County. Logan Year. 2006 (1) Month. June (1) Abundance. 1 specimen: 1-KYSU Comments. The single specimen was re- cently collected at Raymond Athey State Nature Preserve. Anomoea flavokansiensis Moldenke (Figure 8 A) Kentucky Counties. Barren, Bullitt, Chris- tian, Crittenden, Fayette, Franklin, Fulton, Grayson, Henry, Hopkins, McLean, Meade, Nelson, Ohio, Oldham, Russell, Trigg, Warren Years. 1955 (8), 1959 (5), 1962 (4), 1963 (5), 1971 (10), 1983 (2), 1984 (1), 1987 (9), 1992 (1), 1994 (3), 1998 (1), 2002 (1), 2003 (1), 2004 (1), 2005 (2), 2007 (9), 2008 (4), 2009 (4) Months. June (27), July (42), August (2) Abundance. 71 specimens: 9-BYUC, 7- CWC, 20-KYSU, 3-RJBC, 32-UKIC Comments. Several specimens were re- cently collected directly from Desmanthus illinoensis (Michx.) MacMill. ex. Robinson & Fern. (Fabaceae). Earlier label data listed Salix , mimosa, locust, and collection via Malaise trap. Anomoea laticlavia laticlavia (Forster) (Figure 8B) Kentucky Counties. Allen, Barren, Bath, Breathitt, Breckinridge, Bullitt, Calloway, Christian, Fayette, Grayson, Hardin, Jessa- mine, Kenton, LaRue, Lee, Lewis, Logan, Madison, McCracken, Meade, Owsley, Pow- ell, Pulaski, Rockcastle, Scott, Trigg, Whitley, Wolfe, Woodford Years. 1892 (3), 1895 (1), 1916 (2), 1929 (1), 1938 (3), 1939 (2), 1945 (11), 1968 (1), 1970 (1), 1971 (4), 1972 (4), 1979 (1), 1980 (1), 1983 (3), 1984 (1), 1985 (2), 1991 (2), 1992 (3), 2001 (2), 2003 (2), 2004 (7), 2005 (4) , 2006 (12), 2007 (5), 2008 (23), 2009 (14) Months. May (13), June (94), July (7), August (1) Abundance. 115 specimens: 9-CWC, 64- KYSU, 7-RJBC, 33-UKIC, 2-WKUC Comments. Early label data listed Salix , black locust, and collection via Malaise trap. Clark et al. (2004) reported that this species is normally associated with Fabaceae. Several specimens were recently collected directly from Diospyros virginica L. (Ebenaceae). Coleothorpa dominicana dominicana (F.) (Figure 8C) Kentucky Counties. Breckinridge, Bullitt, Carter, Fayette, Franklin, Grayson, Hardin, LaRue, Lewis, Lincoln, Logan, McCreary, Nelson, Pendleton, Powell, Robertson, Trigg, Whitley Years. 1892 (1), 1895 (4), 1908 (1), 1924 (1) , 1939 (1), 1942 (1), 1946 (1), 1947 (1), 1971 (5) , 1983 (4), 1985 (5), 1995 (2), 2004 (1), 2005 (7), 2006 (24), 2007 (3), 2008 (18), 2009 (11) Months. May (36), June (45), July (10) Abundance. 92 specimens: 2-CMC, 2- CWC, 64-KYSU, 9-RJBC, 15-UKIC Comments. The Dury specimens were labeled as from “Ky. near Cin. O.” and “Ky. near bridge.” Several specimens were recently collected directly from Quercus marilandica Miinchh. (Fagaceae) and Nyssa sp. (Nyssa- ceae). Early label data listed Quercus macro- carpa Michx. (Fagaceae) and raspberry (Ru- bus spp.) (Rosaceae). Coleothorpa dominicana franciscana (LeConte) (Figure 8D) (new state record) Kentucky County. Ohio Year. 2007 (1) Month. May (1) Abundance. 1 specimen: 1-BYUC Babia quadriguttata quadriguttata (Olivier) (Figure 8E) Kentucky Counties. Breathitt, Bullitt, Fayette, Franklin, Hardin, Knott, LaRue, Laurel, Lewis, Logan, Madison, Powell, Pu- laski, Robertson, Trigg, Whitley Years. 1942 (1), 1945 (1), 1947 (2), 1971 (2) , 1972 (1), 1995 (1), 2000 (2), 2001 (2), 18 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) Anomoea flavokamiensis Moldenke Anomoea latidavia latidavia (Forster) Coleothorpa dominicana dominicana (F.) Coleothorpa dominicana franciscana (J. L. LeConfe) Bahia quadriguttata quadriguttata (Oliv ier) Saxinis omogera omogera Lacordaire - W 1 f , Figure 8. The known distribution of Cryptocephalinae (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) illustrated in grey shading for Kentucky counties and states of the United States. New state records reported herein are shown in cross-hatch. 2003 (2), 2005 (1), 2006 (13), 2008 (9), 2009 (19) Months. May (30), June (23), July (3) Abundance. 58 specimens: 2-CMC, 7- CWC, 42-KYSU, 7-UKIC Comments. The Dury specimens were labeled as from “Ky. near bridge.” Several specimens were recently collected directly from Ulmus americana L. (Ulmaceae), Quer- cus falcata Michx. (Fagaceae), and Canja tomentosa (Poir.) Nutt. (Juglandaceae). Labo- ratory feeding was observed on Quercus falcata, Q. stellata, and Q. marilandica (Bar- ney and Hall 2011). Saxinis omogera omogera Lacordaire (Figure 8F) Kentucky Counties. Breathitt, Bullitt, Christian, Grayson, Hardin, Hart, Jefferson, LaRue, Lewis, Lincoln, Logan, Martin, Meade, Muhlenberg, Pike, Robertson, Trigg Years, pre-1931 (3), 1938 (1), 1943 (3), 1971 (7), 1972 (3), 1976 (2), 1983 (5), 1985 (2), 2003 (5), 2004 (12), 2005 (49), 2006 (104), 2007 (24), 2008 (52), 2009 (2) Months. May (91), June (167), July (13) Abundance. 274 specimens: 3-CMC, 7- CWC, 239-KYSU, 11-RJBC, 13-UKIC Kentucky Cryptocephalinae Leaf Beetles — Barney et al. 19 Figure 9. The known distribution of Cryptocephalinae (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) illustrated in grey shading for Kentucky counties and states of the United States. New state records reported herein are shown in cross-hatch. Comments. The Dury specimens were labeled “Ky. near bridge.” Several specimens were recently collected directly from Desmo- dium (Fabaceae) and Quercus muhlenbergii Englem. (Fagaceae). Chlamisus foveolatus (Knoch) (Figure 9A) Kentucky Counties. Breathitt, Hardin Years. 1972 (1), 2004 (1) Months. June (1), July (1) Abundance. 2 specimens: 1-KYSU, 1- UKIC Comments. In his review of the tribe, Karren (1972) listed “KENTUCKY: state record, no date” for this species. The UKIC specimen was collected via Malaise trap. Exema canadensis Pierce (Figure 9B) Kentucky Counties. Boone, Breckinridge, Bullitt, Christian, Fleming, Grayson, Hardin, Hart, Jefferson, Kenton, LaRue, Laurel, Lewis, Lincoln, Logan, Madison, Marion, McCreary, Owen, Pulaski, Robertson, Rowan, Trigg Years. 1971 (2), 1976 (3), 1981 (10), 1982 (2), 1983 (10), 1985 (1), 1992 (2), 1993 (1), 1995 (1), 1998 (3), 2003 (2), 2004 (15), 2005 (43), 2006 (45), 2007 (4), 2008 (48), 2009 (6) Months. March (3), April (4), May (71), June (59), July (57), August (4) Abundance. 198 specimens: 6-BYUC, 4- CWC, 156-KYSU, 30-RJBC, 2-UKIC Comments. Clark et al. (2004) reported that this species is associated with Asteraceae. Exema dispar Lacordaire (Figure 9C) Kentucky Counties. Anderson, Bath, Boone, Breathitt, Breckinridge, Bullitt, Chris- tian, Clark, Daviess, Franklin, Grant, Grayson, Hardin, Henry, Jefferson, LaRue, Lewis, Logan, McCreary, Monroe, Nicholas, Owen, Perry, Pike, Powell, Robertson, Russell, Trigg, Union, Wayne, Woodford Years. 1971 (5), 1972 (1), 1981 (8), 1983 (10), 1984 (1), 1985 (1), 1993 (2), 1994 (1), 2000 (1), 2002 (1), 2003 (10), 2004 (15), 2005 (15), 2006 (40), 2007 (3), 2008 (17), 2009 (4) Months. April (1), May (78), June (45), July (9), August (2) Abundance. 135 specimens: 2-BYUC, 18- CWC, 85-KYSU, 24-RJBC, 6-UKIC 20 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) Comments. Clark et al. (2004) reported that this species is associated with Asteraceae. Neochlamisus bebbianae (Brown) (Figure 10 A) Kentucky Counties. Franklin, Hardin, LaRue, Logan Years. 2005 (1), 2006 (3), 2007 (2), 2008 (3) Months. May (5), June (2), July (2) Abundance. 9 specimens: 9-KYSU Comments. All specimens were recently collected in barren areas of state nature preserves managed with prescribed burning. In his review of the tribe, Karren (1972) listed “KENTUCKY: state record, no date” for this species. Neochlamisus bimaculatus Karren (Figure 10B) Comments. Riley et al. (2003) listed his species as found in Kentucky. Neochlamisus chamaedaphnes (Brown) (Figure 10C) Comments. In his review of the tribe, Karren (1972) listed “KENTUCKY: state record, no date” for this species. Neochlamisus eubati (Brown) (Figure 10D) Kentucky Counties. Bullitt, Christian, Franklin, Hardin, Henry, LaRue, Laurel, Lewis, Logan, McCreary, Pulaski, Robertson, Whitley Years. 1971 (1), 1978 (1), 1983 (4), 2004 (2), 2005 (9), 2006 (21), 2007 (2), 2008 (5), 2009 (4) Months. April (15), May (17), June (13), July (3), September (1) Abundance. 49 specimens: 25-KYSU, 23- RJBC, 1-UKIC Comments. A long series of specimens was recently collected directly from a culti- vated variety of thornless blackberry, Rubus sp. (Rosaceae). In his review of the tribe, Karren (1972) listed “KENTUCKY: Bullitt Co., 9 May” for this species. Neochlamisus gibbosus (F.) (Figure 10E) (new state record) Kentucky Counties. Christian, Daviess, Grayson, Hardin, Logan, Powell, Trigg Years. 1985 (1), 1993 (2), 2004 (3), 2005 (1), 2007 (4), 2008 (5) Months. May (4), June (6), July (5), August (1) Abundance. 16 specimens: 2-CWC, 11- KYSU, 3-RJBC Comments. The majority of specimens were recently collected in barren areas of state nature preserves managed with pre- scribed burning. Clark et al. (2004) reported that this species is associated with Rubus sp. (Rosaceae). Neochlamisus moestificus (Lacordaire) (Figure 10F) Comments. In his review of the tribe, Karren (1972) listed “KENTUCKY: state record, no date” for this species. Neochlamisus platani (Brown) (Figure 10G) Kentucky Counties. Butler, Menifee, Whitley Years. 1983 (1), 1992 (1) Month. May (2) Abundance. 2 specimens: 1-CWC, 1- RJBC Comments. In his review of the tribe, Karren (1972) listed “Butler Co, 16 June” for this species. Clark et al. (2004) reported that this species fed on Plantanus (Plantanceae). DISCUSSION The data presented here are the most complete representation of the cryptocepha- line leaf beetles known from Kentucky. The large number of new state records document- ed here (27 of 59 species, or 46%), and the fact that 30 species were first collected after 1970, reflect a historical lack of leaf beetle collecting in Kentucky. A large percentage of the new records (14 of 20 species) is for species of Pachybrachis . The last revision of Pachybrachis was done by Fall (1915) almost 100 years ago. The fact that three species of Neochlamisus were cited in the literature but not recovered in this study may reflect how difficult species identification is in this genus. This is due to the similarity among species, as well as to the variability within species. The situation is further complicated by the possibility of as yet undescribed species, very similar to those that are currently being recognized. This is especially so with regards to N. bebbianae. Kentucky Cryptocephalinae Leaf Beetles — Barney et al. 21 Neochlamisus bebbiunae^ Brovn^^ Neochlamisus himu^ K an t e Neochlamisus chamaedaphnes (Brown) Neochlamisus euhati (Brown) ■ Neochlamisus gibbosus Neochlamisus moestificus (Lacordaire) . p Neoch lamisus /7/atani(Brw ifg f G Figure 10. The known distribution of Cryptocephalinae (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) illustrated in grey shading for Kentucky counties and states of the United States. New state records reported herein are shown in cross-hatch. 22 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) When Brown (1943) named this species, he also described N. alni (Brown). A few years later (Brown 1946), he described N. tecta (Brown). Subsequently, in a taxonomic revi- sion of the genus, Karren (1972) regarded all three of these names to be synonymous with each other. Notwithstanding this proposed synonymy, LeSage (1984a) reinstated N. alni as a valid species. The recent investigations of Adams and Funk (1997), Funk (1998, 1999), and Funk et al. (2002) suggest that N. bebbianae, as currently recognized, is actually a complex of several sibling species. CONCLUSIONS This is the final paper in a series intended to present a synopsis of the historical collec- tion data on Kentucky leaf beetles and augment these with new information from recent monitoring. A total of 283 species were found in the 12,910 specimens examined and re-identified, and 132 were new state records for Kentucky. Prior to this study, Riley et al. (2003) reported Kentucky to have the sixth most depauperate leaf beetle fauna in the lower 48 states. However, the results of this study, with 47% of the species found being new state records, demonstrate the historical lack of collecting done in Kentucky. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thanks are extended to Michael Sharkey and Martha Potts (UKIC), Keith Philips (WKUC), Greg Dahlem (CMC), and Charles Wright (CWC) for access to their collections. We thank the following people for granting access to the protected habitats they manage: Joyce Bender, Lane Linnenkohl and Zeb Weese, Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission; Jeff Sole and John Burnett, The Nature Conservancy Kentucky Chapter; Steve McMillen, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife; Andrew Leonard, Fort Campbell Fisheries and Wildlife Program; and Steve Bloemer, USD A Forest Service. We also thank Joyce Owens (KYSU) for sorting, organizing and transcribing, and Sarah Hall (KYSU) for creation of the distribution maps and plant identifications. This research was supported by USDA- CSREES/NIFA Project KYX-10-05-39P. LITERATURE CITED Adams, D. C., and D. J. Funk. 1997. Morphometric inferences on sibling species and sexual dimorphism in Neochlamisus bebbianae leaf beetles: multivariant applications of the thin-plate spline. Systematic Biology 46:180-194. Balsbaugh, E. U., Jr. 1966. Genus Lexiphanes of American north of Mexico (Coleoptera: Chrysomeli- dae). Proceedings of the United States National Museum 117:655-680. Barney, B. J., S. M. Clark, and E. G. Riley. 2007. Annotated list of the leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chiys- omelidae) of Kentucky: subfamily Cassidinae. Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 68: 132-144. Barney, R. J., S. M. Clark, and E. G. Riley. 2008a. Annotated list of the subfamilies Donaciinae and Criocerinae. Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 69:29-36. Barney, R. J., S. M. Clark, and E. G. Riley. 2008b. Annotated list of the leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomel- idae) of Kentucky: subfamily Chrysomelinae. Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 69:91-100. Barney, R. J., S. M. Clark, and E. G. Riley. 2009a. Annotated list of the leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrys- omelidae) of Kentucky: subfamily Galerucinae, tribes Galerucini and Luperini. Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 70:17-28. Barney, R. J., S. M. Clark, and E. G. Riley. 2009b. Annotated list of the leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomel- idae) of Kentucky: subfamily Galerucinae, tribe Alticini. Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 70:29-55. Barney, R. J., S. M. Clark, and E. G. Riley. 2010. Annotated list of the leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrys- omelidae) of Kentucky: subfamily Eumolpinae. Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 71:3-18. Barney, R. J., and S. L. Hall. 2009. Pachybrachis nigricomis carbonarius Haldeman (Coleoptera: Chrys- omelidae): abundance, distribution, and host plant associations with legumes (Fabales: Fabaceae) in Kentucky. The Coleopterists Bulletin 63:467-474. Barney, R. J., and S. L. Hall. 2011. New host plant records for selected Cryptocephalinae leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) in Kentucky. The Coleopterists Bulle- tin 65:15-19. Baskin, J. M., C. C. Baskin, and E. W. Chester. 1994. The Big Barrens Region of Kentucky and Tennessee: further observations and considerations. Castanea 59:226-254. Brown, W. J. 1943. The Canadian species of Exema and Arthrochlamys (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae). The Ca- nadian Entomologist 75:119-131. Brown, W. J. 1946. Some new Chrysomelidae, with notes on other species (Coleoptera). The Canadian Entomol- ogist 78:47-54. Clark, S. M„ D. G. LeDoux, T. N. Seeno, E. G. Riley, A. J. Gilbert, and J. M. Sullivan. 2004. Host plants of leaf beetle species occurring in the United States and Kentucky Cryptocephalinae Leaf Beetles — Barney et al. 23 Canada. The Coleopterists Society, Special Publication No. 2. 476 pp. Fall, H. C. 1915. A revision of the North American species of Pachybrachys . Transactions of the American Ento- mological Society 41:291-486. Funk, D. J. 1998. Isolating a role for natural selection in speciation: host adaptation and sexual isolation in Neochlamisus bebbianae leaf beetles. Evolution 52:1744-1759. Funk, D. J. 1999. Molecular systematics of cytochrome oxidase I and 16S from Neochlamisus leaf beetles and importance of sampling. Molecular Biology and Evolu- tion 16:67-82. Funk, D. J., K. E. Filchak, and J. L. Feder. 2002. Herbivorous insects: model systems for the com- parative study of speciation ecology. Genetica 116:251- 267. Jones, R. L. 2005. Plant Life of Kentucky. University Press of Kentucky. 834 pp. Karren, J. B. 1966. A revision of the genus Exema of America, north of Mexico (Chrysomelidae, Coleoptera). The University of Kansas Science Bulletin 46:647- 695. Karren, J. B. 1972. A revision of the subfamily Chlami- sinae of America north of Mexico (Coleoptera: Chrys- omelidae). The University of Kansas Science Bulletin 49:875-988. LeSage, L. 1982. The immature stages of Exema canadensis Pierce (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). The Coleopterists Bulletin 36:318-327. LeSage, L. 1984a. Immature stages of Canadian Neo- chlamisus Karren (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). The Canadian Entomologist 116:383-409. LeSage, L. 1984b. Egg, larva, and pupa of Lexiphanes saponatus (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Cryptocephali- nae). The Canadian Entomologist 116:537-548. LeSage, L. 1985. The eggs and larvae of Pachybrachis peccans and P. bivittatus, with key to the known immature stages of the Nearctic genera of Cryptoce- phalinae (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). The Canadian Entomologist 117:203-220. LeSage, L. 1986. The eggs and larvae of Cryptocephalus quadruplex Newman and C. venustus Fabricius, with a key to the known immature stages of the nearctic genera of cryptocephaline leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomel- idae). The Canadian Entomologist 118:97-111. LeSage, L., and V. L. Stiefel. 1996. Biology and immature stages of the North American clytrines Anomoea laticlavia (Forster) and A. flavokansiensis Moldenke (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Clytrinae). Pages 217-238 in P. H. A. Jolivet and M. L. Cox (eds). Chrysomelidae Biology, Academic Publishing, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Moldenke, A. R. 1970. A revision of the Clytrinae of North America north of the Isthmus of Panama. Stanford University, Stanford. 210 pp. Riley, E. G., S. M. Clark, R. W. Flowers, and A. J. Gilbert. 2002. Chrysomelidae Latreille 1802. Pages 617-691 in R. H. Arnett and M. C. Thomas (eds). American Beetles. CRC press. Riley, E. G., S. M. Clark, and T. N. Seeno. 2003. Catalog of the leaf beetles of America north of Mexico. The Coleopterists Society, Special Publication No. 1. 290 pp. Stiefel, V. L. 1993. The larval habitat of Pachybrachis pectoralis (Melsheimer) and Cryptocephalus fulguratus LeConte (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 66:450-453. Vulinec, K., and R. A. Davis. 1984. Coleoptera types in the Charles Dury Collection of the Cincinnati Museum of Natural History. The Coleopterists Bulletin 38:232-239. White, R. E. 1968. A review of the genus Cryptocephalus in America north of Mexico (Chrysomelidae: Coleoptera). United States National Museum Bulletin no. 290:1-124. J. Ky. Acad. Sci. 72(l):2A-38. 2011. Leaf Beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) Biodiversity within Isolated Remnant Grasslands in Kentucky State Nature Preserves Sarah L. Hall1,2 and Robert J. Barney1 2 3 Community Research Service, Kentucky State University, Frankfort, Kentucky 40601 ABSTRACT Leaf beetle collection data from five Kentucky State Nature Preserves are summarized over a four-year period (2005 to 2008) encompassing a total of 57 collection events. Our primary objective was to survey leaf beetle populations found within the five preserves. We also wanted to assess impacts of prescribed fire management within these habitats on leaf beetles. We used means ANOVA procedures, species richness estimators, NMS ordinations, and contingency tables analyses. There were clear differences between the five preserves, with Raymond Athey State Nature Preserve (Logan Co.) being the most diverse (87 species) and having the greatest number of rare species (30). Ordination analyses revealed very minimal impacts of prescribed burns on leaf beetle composition in the four preserves where it is used as a management practice. Overall, leaf beetle composition appeared linked with Nature Preserves sampling/management units across years, overriding any year to year differences due to weather or other influences. The only significant year to year difference within a preserve occurred at Blue Licks State Park Nature Preserve, which had a lower number of beetles in 2007, possibly due to drought that summer. In total, we found 143 species, with 9 species unique to only one preserve (four of the five preserves contained unique species). These results demonstrate the importance of protected areas such as state nature preserves as refugia not only for known threatened or endangered plants and animals, but also for associated biota in little-studied groups, such as leaf beetles. KEY WORDS: Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae, diversity, grasslands, Kentucky, leaf beetle, preserves INTRODUCTION Nature preserves in the United States are typically protected due to the presence of rare plants or animals, or high biological diversity compared to surrounding areas. The primary purpose of the Kentucky State Nature Pre- serves Commission (KSNPC) is to preserve populations of rare native species and com- munity types which serve as “the best- protected repository for Kentucky’s biological diversity” (KSNPC 2009, p. 30). Several state nature preserves in Kentucky contain grass- dominated communities, which are believed to have covered 6-10% of the state at European settlement, but now remain in only scattered remnants (Jones 2005). These pre- serves include so-called barrens and glades (Evans 1991) and/or xeric limestone prairies (Lawless et al. 2006), which contain a number of species of concern listed by KSNPC, as well 1 Current Address: Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, University of Kentucky, N-222 Ag Science Center North, Lexington, KY 40546-0091 2 Corresponding author e-mail: Sarah.L.Hall@uky.edu 3 Current address: GRDI Land-Grant Institute, West Virginia State University, Institute, WV 25112-1000 as two federally-listed plant species. Histori- cally, grassland communities in Kentucky relied on periodic fires and grazing of large mammals to prevent succession to forest (KSNPC 2009). Prescribed burning and herbicides are often used as management tools to control woody plants and restore formerly cultivated areas typically dominated by tall fescue. The KSNPC often configures its management units to divide a barren or glade into two or more units on the theory that the untreated portion can serve as a refuge and reservoir for the recolonization of the burned portion (J. Bender, KSNPC pers. comm. 19 January 2010). Management units vary greatly in size, dependent primarily in the overall size of a given glade or barren. The flora of Kentucky is relatively well known and estimated to be comprised of 2030 species of vascular plants, 386 (19%) of which are listed as threatened by the KSNPC (KSNPC 2009). Comparatively speaking, the insect fauna is much more species-rich with estimates of 10,000 (UK Entomology 2008) to 15,000 (KSNPC 2009) species in the state, however only 74 species of insects (<0.74%) are listed as threatened by the KSNPC. 24 Leaf Beetles in State Nature Preserves — Hall and Barney 25 Figure 1. Location of five state nature preserves (SNPs) within Kentucky, U.S.A. included in leaf beetle biodiversity assessment. Clearly this low number is more a reflection of the lack of understanding of these populations than their actual situation. The relatively well studied Kentucky cave beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Trechinae) (which even Charles Darwin (1859) mentioned twice), represent 27 (36.5%) of the 74 listed insect species (KSNPC 2005). Given the relative smallness of this group of insects, it seems likely there are many more insects that would be consid- ered threatened if they were better studied. Leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) may represent one such group. Although they are a diverse and conspicuous phytophagous insect family (Riley et al. 2002), occurring in habitats ranging from conventional agricultur- al fields to prairie remnants, many of the smaller species have been neglected due to difficulty in taxonomy. According to Riley et al. (2003), 158 species of leaf beetles were documented from Kentucky, while 575 spe- cies have been found in at least one of the seven states contiguous to Kentucky. In an effort to document the richness and distribu- tion of chrysomelids across the Common- wealth, the Kentucky Leaf Beetle Biodiversity Project was initiated at Kentucky State University. The project’s focus was on exten- sive collecting in many grass-dominated com- munities, such as barrens and glades, which are known for possessing uncommon plant species and plant communities (Jones 2005). Preliminary collecting began in 2004 at several nature preserves across the state, and five sites were chosen for extensive monitoring from 2005 to 2008: Raymond Athey Barrens State Nature Preserve (Logan County) in western Kentucky, Crooked Creek State Nature Preserve (Lewis County) and Blue Licks State Park Nature Preserve (Robertson County) in northeastern Kentucky, and Thompson Creek Glades State Nature Pre- serve (LaRue County), and Eastview Barrens State Nature Preserve (Hardin County) in central Kentucky (Figure 1). Our primary objective was to compare the leaf beetle populations of the five preserves based on leaf beetle abundance and diversity. Our secondary objectives were to assess impacts of prescribed fire management within these five habitats on leaf beetles, and to assess variability in leaf beetle abundance year to year. MATERIALS AND METHODS Site Descriptions and Management The five preserves in this study are managed by KSNPC with the goals of preserving and enhancing known populations of rare plants or animals, discouraging non- natives, and encouraging recruitment of native grassland species (J. Bender, KSNPC pers. comm. 19 January 2010). Of the five pre- serves, three include both remnant high quality grassland communities as well as areas with recent use (prior to KSNPC purchase) as pasture. Due to their proximity to high quality glades or barrens, the KSNPC manages recent pastures (which we refer to as “restorations”) through the use of herbicide, prescribed fire, and physical removal of woody stems. Re- cruitment of native plant species occurs via 26 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) rootstock, the seedbank, and seed rain; seeds are not introduced to any management units. Remnant areas are managed with the same practices, although herbicide use is more limited — typically to resprouts of woody species following prescribed burns (whereas it may be more broadly applied in restoration units depending on the cover of invasive species). Raymond Athey Barrens State Nature Preserve (Athey SNP) is a 63-ha preserve with limestone barrens (Evans 1991) of open- grown post ( Quercus stellata Wangenh) and black jack ( Q . marilandica Miinchh) oaks, with thin soils and bedrock at or near the surface (KSNPC 2007). Originally dedicated in 1990, nine rare species of plants are known to inhabit Athey SNP, which is accessible by written permission only. We collected leaf beetles in four barrens divided into seven management units, including both high qual- ity remnant areas and restorations, comprising a total of 5.1 ha. During the study period six of the seven management units were burned. Crooked Creek State Nature Preserve started as a 24-ha tract in 1999 that has expanded to include 161 ha of unique oak barrens and oak-hickory forest (KSNPC 2007). Prairie species such as big bluestem (. Andropogon gerardii Vitman) and prairie dock ( Silphium terehinthinaceum Jacq var. luciae-brauniae Steyermark) occur in barren areas. Eleven rare species of plants are listed for Crooked Creek, and it is accessible by written permission only. Although included in an examination of 18 xeric limestone prairies in Kentucky (Lawless 2005), Crooked Creek SNP separated from all other sites in ordina- tion (plant composition was different from all other sites) and was simply labeled as a glade by Rhoades et al. (2005). We collected leaf beetles in six management units, including both remnants and restorations, totaling 3.4 ha. One unit was burned during the study. Blue Licks State Park Nature Preserve (Blue Licks SPNP) was dedicated in 1981 and consists of 21 ha within Blue Licks Battlefield State Resort Park. The preserve was established to protect a near-endemic federally endangered plant, Short’s Goldenrod ( Solidago shortii Torr. & A. Gray) (KSNPC 2007). We collected leaf beetles in two management units totaling 1.3 ha: a glade containing part of the original pre-settlement buffalo trace and a stand of Short’s goldenrod and a restoration site 0.5 miles distant across a two lane highway. Both management units are managed with periodic prescribed fire, and each was burned once during the period. Thompson Creek Glades State Nature Preserve (Thompson Creek SNP) has been described as a xeric limestone prairie (Lawless 2005), a calcareous glade (Lyon 2004), and a limestone slope glade (Evans 1991). It con- tains several hill glades (south and west- facing) on thin-bedded Salem limestone, characterized by shallow, rocky soils (KSNPC 2007). The original 26-ha tract was acquired with assistance from The Nature Conservancy in 1992 and its size has increased to a total of 69 ha. Glade openings are maintained from encroaching woody vegetation via selective cutting but not burning. Four rare species of plants are listed for Thompson Creek SNP, which is accessible by written permission only. We collected leaf beetles in four small isolated glades comprising a total of 1.3 ha. The 49-ha Eastview Barrens State Nature Preserve (Eastview SNP) was dedicated in 1997 and includes sandstone barrens and sandstone prairie (Evans 1991). Twelve rare species of plants are listed for Eastview SNP, which is not open to the public. Prescribed fire is used throughout this preserve to maintain its grassland communities. We col- lected leaf beetles in three barrens divided into seven management units comprising a total of 1.6 ha. Sampling units did not completely correspond to the seven separate management units in all four years, so we combined collection data to represent the three barrens for the preserve-wide NMS ordination (see Statistical Analyses below). Parts of all three barrens were burned during the study period. Overall Sampling Methodology We sampled leaf beetles in selected grass- dominated habitats in each preserve during the months of May, June and July from 2005 to 2008. Each preserve was sampled 10-13 times total during the four years. A collecting visit consisted of the second author randomly walking across a management unit while sweeping the vegetation with a 15" diameter Leaf Beetles in State Nature Preserves — Hall and Barney 27 Table 1. Total number of specimens and species (with those considered rare, state records, and only found in that preserve-“unique locale” separated) of leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) found in five state nature preserves during 2005-2008 (n = number of sampling dates in May-July). Means with different letters in the last column are significantly different (P < 0.05, Tukey-Kramer HSD). n Total specimens Total species Rare species State records Unique locale Mean species per sampling date Athey SNP 12 1263 87 30 10 5 30.3 a Crooked Creek SNP 11 671 70 13 3 0 19.8 b Blue Licks SPNP 10 229 45 6 1 1 10.9 c Thompson Creek SNP 12 363 65 22 5 1 15.2 be Eastview SNP 13 770 72 20 4 2 18.1 be Total 3296 143 50 23 9 sweep net. Periodically the net was carefully opened and the leaf beetles were directed into a vial containing 70% EtOH. All other taxa were released unharmed. All vials were returned to the laboratory where specimens were pinned, labeled and identified by the second author. Voucher specimens are housed in the Kentucky State University Beetle Collection (KYSU), Frankfort, Kentucky. Statistical Analyses Mean species richness and specimen num- ber were compared using means ANOVA procedures and Tukey-Kramer HSD means comparisons (JMP 7.0.2, SAS Institute, Cary, NC), with each sampling date constituting a sample. These included comparisons within preserves between all years sampling took place, as well as between preserves for 2005- 2008. Species rarefaction curves were created for each preserve using EstimatesS (Colwell 2006). We chose to report Chao 1 curves based on Hortal et al. (2006). They found this estimator to be insensitive to changes in sample grain size, and although all of our samples are at the preserve level, the area encompassed by each is quite different. We also quantified the number of new state records and rare species found within each preserve. Each species was characterized as abundant, frequent, infrequent, local or rare as described by Hall and Barney (2010). A species was characterized as a new state record for Kentucky if it was not listed by Riley et al. (2003) for Kentucky and had not been found in the historical review of all collections known to contain Kentucky spec- imens (Barney et al. 2007, 2008a, 2008b, 2009a, 2009b). We performed a contingency tables analysis (JMP 7.0.2, SAS Institute, Cary, NC) to detect significant differences in the proportions of beetles from different abundance categories between years for each site and between the five different sites. NMS ordinations (PC-ORD 4.41, MjM Software, Glenedon Beach, OR) were used to display leaf beetle composition within preserves by management unit and year. Only management units sampled all four years in a preserve were included in the ordination. Given the large variation in specimen number and management unit size, we adjusted the data to provide the most meaningful ordina- tion results. We first took the sum of specimens for each species per management unit per year, divided that by the number of sampling visits, and then divided that by the area (ha) contained within the management unit (as determined using ArcGIS 9.3 and 2004 FSA aerial photos). This provided us with a mean specimen number per visit per ha for each management unit, and these data made up the main data matrix for each preserve. Sorenson distance measure was chosen and a Monte Carlo test was performed to provide a test statistic for final stress obtained by NMS versus that obtained with randomized versions of the data. Units that had been burned in a given sampling year were symbolized as such in the ordination plot. For Eastview SNP, we performed separate ordinations for the preserve across all years (with management units combined into the three barrens), and for one barren alone (with two management units) from 2006-2008. We performed the separate anal- ysis on the ‘middle’ barren as it was unique in having uniform topography, geology, and soils (as determined with SSURGO soils maps, 24 K Topo maps, and 24 K Geologic Maps in 28 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) Figure 2. Chao 1 species rarefaction curves of five state nature preserves in Kentucky, created using all sampling dates (x-axis) between 2005-2008. Numbers on the y-axis are mean species richness, with bars being standard error of the mean. ArcGIS 9.3). In 2005, this barren was collectively sampled, whereas in the following years it was sampled in its two different management units. KSNPC performed a prescribed burn on half of the barren (unit N3E) in 2007, which allowed for an analysis of prescribed fire effects on leaf beetle compo- sition (that wasn’t possible in the preserve wide analysis because collection data from the barren as a whole was combined). RESULTS A total of 3296 specimens representing 143 species of leaf beetles were collected during this four-year study (Table 1, see Appendix for complete inventory list). The greatest number of specimens and species richness was found at Raymond Athey Barrens SNP. The mean number of 30.3 species recovered per sampling date at Athey SNP was signifi- cantly greater than that collected at the other preserves ( P < 0.001, Table 1). Chao 1 species rarefaction curves (Figure 2) reflected the same pattern with Raymond Athey having the greatest species richness, Blue Licks having the lowest, and the other three preserves falling intermediate between these two. Table 2. Mean number of species of leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) per sampling date within nature preserves between four collection years. Means with different letters within a row are significantly different (P < 0.05, Tukey-Kramer HSD). 2005 2006 2007 2008 Athey SNP 30.8 36.0 27.5 25.7 Crooked Creek SNP 20.3 27.7 10.0 17.0 Blue Licks SPNP 10.7b 12.3ab 4.5c 15.5a Thompson Creek SNP 16.2 17.7 6.5 17.5 Eastview SNP 11.6 19.7 23.7 23.5 Leaf Beetles in State Nature Preserves — Hall and Barney 29 CN BU06 A BU08 A FBG08 :BG07 BU05 A A BU07 i LG05 FBG05 ^.G08 GU08 ♦ FBG06 GU06 ♦ GU07 o GU05 ♦ NGU07 □ EBF06 ▼ WBF07 A JN BF08 EBF08 T WBF05 A Axis 1 Figure 3. NMS ordination of leaf beetle collection data 2005-2008 (indicated by numbers at end of each label) at Raymond Athey Barrens SNP in Kentucky. Symbol types vary for different management units (labeled with letters), and hollow symbols indicate years in which a unit was burned late winter/early spring (prior to sampling). The mean number of species per sampling date between years for each preserve did not change significantly except for Blue Licks SPNP (Table 2). Mean species in 2007 were significantly lower there, perhaps due to drought that year, as the entire state was under moderate to severe drought (based on Palmer Drought Severity Index) for all weeks of June and July (Kentucky DOW 2008). However, given that all preserves didn’t display a consistent drop in species means, we are unable to pinpoint this as the reason for the drop (even ignoring statistical differ- ences, 2007 mean was lowest for only three of the five). Overall, species means are quite variable from year to year within a given preserve (i.e., Thompson Creek SNP, ranging from 6.5 to 17.7). The absence of significant differences, despite wide ranges in means, demonstrates this variability as well (not only between years but between sampling dates as well). Contingency analyses revealed no sig- nificant differences for each preserve between years (data not shown) or between the five preserves over the four year period (Pearson X2 = 16.2, P = 0.698, data not shown). While there were clearly substantial differences in the numbers of species present at preserves, all had some species in all five abundance categories. NMS ordinations reached two-dimensional solutions for all preserves except Blue Licks, which resulted in a one-dimensional solution (Figures 3-7). At Athey SNP (Figure 3), the restoration units (WBF and EBF) appear generally separated from the other (remnant) units. No clear separation of burned units appears in either the remnant or restoration 30 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) Figure 4. NMS ordination of leaf beetle collection data 2005-2008 (indicated by numbers at end of each label) at Crooked Creek SNP in Kentucky. Symbol types vary for different management units (labeled with letters), and hollow symbols indicate years in which a unit was burned late winter/early spring (prior to sampling). units. Composition within units between years appears fairly consistent, with units BU and LG well clustered, with FBG, NGU, and GU being more scattered. The restorations gener- ally appear more dissimilar, being spread out over more space than the remnant units. Leaf beetle composition from units at Crooked Creek SNP (Figure 4) appears quite spread both within and between units, and with no clear separation of restoration units (FS and FN). The two units of Blue Licks SPNP (Figure 5) do separate as the higher quality remnant (OT) and restoration unit (Smoot). Composition at Thompson Creek SNP (Fig- ure 6) appears quite similar between years for units SP and NE, the main larger glades, while composition of the smaller isolated glades (NW and NNW) appears more variable between years. The three barrens at Eastview SNP (Figure 7a) are generally grouped to- gether in ordination space, although they appear fairly spread out. All three units in years burned appear somewhat separated from their unburned years, but the separate analysis of the middle barren (Figure 7b) reveals virtually no difference in leaf beetle composition between the burned and un- burned half in 2007. A closer look at the species considered rare (Hall and Barney 2010), revealed a number of state records for Kentucky from each preserve (Table 1). Of these 23 state records, nine species have only been found in a single preserve (‘unique locale’), while the remain- der have been found in multiple state nature preserves or other protected areas. The nine unique locale species (with number of spec- imens in parentheses) by preserve are: Ray- mond Athey: Chrijsolina quadrigemina (Suf- frian) (5), Erepsocassis rubella (Boheman) (14), Graphops simplex J. L. LeConte (2), Microrhopala rileyi S. Clark (11), and Tria- Leaf Beetles in State Nature Preserves — Hall and Barney 31 Figure 5. NMS ordination of leaf beetle collection data 2005-2008 (indicated by numbers at end of each label) at Blue Licks SPNP in Kentucky. Symbol types vary for different management units (labeled with letters), and hollow symbols indicate years in which a unit was burned late winter/early spring (prior to sampling). chus atomus (Suffrian) (1); Blue Licks: Phyllohrotica stenidea Schaeffer (5); Thomp- son Creek: Ceraltica insolita (F. E. Melshei- mer) (1); and Eastview Barrens: Colaspis suilla suilla F. (1) and Metachroma orientale Blake (1). Of these, all but three species at Athey SNP were not only unique to one preserve, but to one management unit within the preserve. DISCUSSION All five state nature preserves in this study were home to many rare chrysomelids. We found differences in species richness and composition that identified Raymond Athey Barrens SNP as having the highest diversity of leaf beetles, Blue Licks SPNP having the lowest, and the other three preserves falling somewhere in the middle. The presence of rare species (including ones for which a single preserve was their unique locale) in all five preserves demonstrates the important role they each play in providing habitat for this little-studied group of organisms. The vari- ability in species and specimen number within preserves between years demonstrates the highly dynamic nature of leaf beetles. While very little is known about the life cycle of many species, in general they display very short periods of activity when they can be easily captured by sweep nets. Our results generally suggest that popula- tions of leaf beetles within native grasslands in Kentucky are persisting in managed preserves. We were somewhat surprised and encouraged by the lack of a clear drought effect in 2007 on leaf beetles across preserves. In general, leaf beetle composition appeared more similar within management units between years than within years between units, suggesting stron- ger effects of vegetation and other in situ factors compared to weather or other broader- scale patterns. Given the perennial nature of most plants, including a number of known host plants (Barney and Hall 2011) within these grassland habitats, this is not entirely surprising. The results of NMS ordinations suggest the possibility that leaf beetle compo- 32 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) CNJ NW08 ♦ Unit Yne • nnw ♦ nw ■ sp 1P07 NNW08 NW05 ♦ NNW06 NW06 ♦ SP08 NE05 ▼ SP05 SP06 NE06 Y NW07 ♦ NE08 Y NE07 Y NNW05 NNW07 Axis 1 Figure 6. NMS ordination of leaf beetle collection data 2005-2008 (indicated by numbers at end of each label) at Thompson Creek Glades SNP in Kentucky. Symbol types vary for different management units (labeled with letters). sition is more variable in restoration units compared to remnant habitats (at Athey SNP) and in very small units compared to larger ones (at Thompson Creek SNP). In addition, the presence of three out of five unique locale species in more than one management unit at Athey SNP compared to none at the other preserves suggests larger barrens (present at Athey SNP) are able to support larger and more widespread populations of rare beetles. This coupled with the high species richness and sample area of Athey SNP demonstrate support for the species-area relationship presented by MacArthur and Wilson (1967). Finally, we did not find a clear impact of prescribed fire on leaf beetle species compo- sition based on NMS ordinations. The subset from Eastview SNP showed that in the year one-half of the middle barren was burned, both halves/units were more similar in com- position than in any other sampling years. In previous analyses, we found no significant effect of prescribed burns on species richness of leaf beetles or vegetation at Raymond Athey SNP and Eastview SNP (Hall and Barney, unpublished data). Panzer (1998) and Swengel and Swengel (2001) have noted difficulty in assessing insect abundance before and after burning due to low numbers beforehand. We also encountered difficulty in examining species-specific impacts due to low numbers, but NMS ordinations should reveal any large impacts reflected in species composition, and we did not find evidence of any. Tooker and Hanks (2004) found no impacts of burning on insects living within stems of Silphium spp. They even found live insects in stems collected directly after the burn. While very little is known about the life history of many chrysomelids, many overwin- ter in the litter layer, and may be present as adults or pupae during late winter when burns are typically conducted. There is much literature and research on fire behavior, and Leaf Beetles in State Nature Preserves — Hall and Barney 33 Axis 1 Figure 7. NMS ordination of leaf beetle collection data 2005-2008 (indicated by numbers at end of each label) at Eastview Barrens SNP (a.). A subset of data from Eastview SNP was also examined to detect differences in burned units (b). Symbol types vary within each ordination for different management units (labeled with letters), and hollow symbols indicate years in which a unit was burned late winter/early spring (prior to sampling). in general the effects of prescribed fire are patchy — with intensity in a given spot depen- dent on many variables which change over the course of a landscape and during the time it takes for the fire to burn. Rhoades et al. (2002) found temperatures at 10 cm height to range from 250 to 400°C (using fire-sensitive paints), and in monitoring temperatures at the groundlayer using the same paints during a prescribed burn conducted by KSNPC at Crooked Creek SNP in 2009, we found differences of 264°C. While we did not find clear impacts of prescribed burns in the current study, we cannot rule out direct negative impacts on leaf beetle populations. It may be that burned units were recolonized in the same year by individuals from adjacent unburned units. For this reason, we encour- age the continued use of small management units by KSNPC to minimize impacts on leaf beetles. Given that six of the nine unique locale species were found in only one management unit within the preserve, use of small management units is likely better for leaf beetles compared to large ones. We posit that leaf beetles can serve as a useful indicator of overall biodiversity in grassland habitats. They are inextricably linked with vascular plant diversity, as each species must have its associated host plant(s) in order to persist. In efforts to identify host plants for some of these beetles, we have found a number of families and genera which are species rich in native grassland communi- 34 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) ties. These include legumes (Fabaceae), oaks (Quercus spp.), and St. John’s worts ( Hyper- icum spp.) (Barney and Hall 2011). In addition, when we compared composition of vascular plants listed on the KSNPC species lists for each preserve and leaf beetle com- position in terms of relative abundance (we used categories of Jones 2005 for plants and Hall and Barney 2010 for leaf beetles) we found a significant regression for the rare (P = 0.005, R2 - 0.70) and infrequent (P - 0.01, R2 = 0.63) categories (Hall and Barney, unpublished data). In addition, of all leaf beetles known to occur in Kentucky only seven of 253 (2.8%) are non-native (Hall and Barney 2010). In conclusion, we found clear differences in leaf beetle diversity between the five state nature preserves included in this study. Year to year changes in leaf beetle composition did not appear significantly influenced by a statewide drought in 2007. All five preserves contained multiple rare leaf beetle species, with four of the five containing beetle species found only there. Ordinations revealed vari- ation in beetle composition, sometimes be- tween restorations and remnant habitats, and sometimes clearly between different manage- ment units. Prescribed burns conducted to manage these grassland habitats had no clear negative impact on their populations. We encourage continued management using small units to minimize any negative impact. The high number of rare species highlights the importance of nature preserves as habi- tats for this group, with a need for more study in order to identify species of concern for state listing. Finally, due to the dependence of this insect group on vascular plants, as well as their role in trophic interactions, leaf beetles are an underutilized group of biota that should serve as good indicators of overall biodiversity. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank Joyce Bender, Lane Linnenkohl, and Zeb Weese from the Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission for providing access and permission to collect in State Nature Preserves. We also thank Ed Riley (Texas A&M University) and Shawn Clark (Brigham Young University) for identifying beetles. LITERATURE CITED Barney, R. J., and S. L. Hall. 2011. New host plant records for selected Cryptocephaline leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) in Kentucky. Coleopterists Bulletin 65:15-19. Barney, R. J., S. M. Clark, and E. G. Riley. 2007. Annotated list of the leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrys- omelidae) of Kentucky: subfamily Cassidinae. Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 68:132-144. Barney, R. J., S. M. Clark, and E. G. Riley. 2008a. Annotated list of the leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrys- omelidae) of Kentucky: subfamilies Donaciinae and Criocerinae. Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 69:29-36. Barney, R. J., S. M. Clark, and E. G. Riley. 2008b. Annotated list of the leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrys- omelidae) of Kentucky: subfamily Chrysomelinae. Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 69:91-100. Barney, R. J., S. M. Clark, and E. G. Riley. 2009a. Annotated list of the leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrys- omelidae) of Kentucky: subfamily Galerucinae, Tribes Galerucini and Luperini. Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 70:17-28. Barney, R. J., S. M. Clark, and E. G. Riley. 2009b. Annotated list of the leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrys- omelidae) of Kentucky: subfamily Galerucinae, Tribe Alticini. Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 70:29-55. Colwell, R. K. 2006. EstimateS: statistical estimation of species richness and shared species from samples. Version 8. Persistent URL . Darwin, C. 1859. On The Origin of Species. John Murray, London. Evans, M. 1991. Kentucky Ecological Communities, May 1991 Draft. Unpublished document of Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission, Frankfort, KY. Hall, S. L., and R. J. Barney. 2010. A quantitative method for assigning abundance classifications to leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) in Kentucky. Natural Areas Journal 30(1): 95-105. Hortal, J., P. A. V. Borges, and C. Gaspar. 2006. Evaluating the performance of species richness estima- tors: sensitivity to sample gain size. Journal of Applied Ecology 75:274-287. Jones, R. N. 2005. Plant life of Kentucky. University Press of Kentucky, Lexington. Kentucky Department of Water (DOW). 2008. Drought tracking website, Drought 2007 Archive. . Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission (KSNPC). 2005. Rare and Extirpated Biota of Kentucky. Cited 23 December 2009. Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission (KSNPC). 2007. State Nature Preserves & State Natural Areas Di- 35 Leaf Beetles in State Nature Preserves — Hall and Barney rectory, . Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission (KSNPC). 2009. KSNPC’s Biennial Report. Available online . Lawless, P. J. 2005. Xeric limestone prairies of eastern United States. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Ken- tucky, Lexington. Lawless, P. J., J. M. Baskin, and C. C. Baskin. 2006. Xeric Limestone Prairies of Eastern United States: Review and Synthesis. The Botanical Review 72(3): 235-272. Lyon, D. 2004. Persistent effects of eastern redcedar on calcareous glade soils and plant community. M.S. Thesis. University of Kentucky, Lexington. MacArthur, R. H., and E. O. Wilson. 1967. The theory of island biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton. Panzer, R. J. 1998. Insect conservation within the severely fragmented eastern tallgrass prairie landscape. Disser- tation. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Rhoades, C. C., T. Barnes, and B. Washburn. 2002. Pre- scribed fire and herbicide effects on soil processes during barrens restoration. Restoration Ecology 10:656-664. Rhoades, C. C., S. P. Miller, and D. L. Skinner. 2005. Forest vegetation and soil patterns across glade-forest ecotones in the Knobs region of northeastern Kentucky, USA. The American Midland Naturalist 154:1-10. Riley, E. G., S. M. Clark, R. W. Flowers, and A. J. Gilbert. 2002. Chrysomelidae Latreille 1802. Pages 617-691 in R. H. Arnett, M. C. Thomas, P. E. Skelley and J. H. Frank (eds). Polyphaga: Scarabadeoidea through Cur- culionoidea. American Beetles, Vol. 2. CRC Press, Washington, D.C. Riley, E. G., S. M. Clark, and T. N. Seeno. 2003. Catalog of the leaf beetles of America north of Mexico. The Coleopterists Society, Special Publication No. 1. Sacra- mento, CA. Swengel, A. B., and S. R. Swengel. 2001. Effects of prairie and barrens management on butterfly faunal composi- tion. Biodiversity and Conservation 10:1757-1785. Tooker, J. F., and L. M. Hanks. 2004. Impact of prescribed burning on endophytic insect communities of prairie perennials (Asteraceae: Silphium spp.). Biodiversity and Conservation 13:1875-1888. University of Kentucky (UK) Entomology. 2008. Ken- tucky Critter Files: Kentucky Insects, . 36 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) Appendix. List of leaf beetles species (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) collected in five state nature preserves in Kentucky during 2005-2008. Number given is total specimens. * denotes state record. Athey SNP Crooked Creek SNP Blue Licks Thompson Creek SNP Eastview SNP Total Agroiconota bivittata (Say) 42 5 0 1 2 50 Altica knabii Blatchley* 0 3 0 0 0 3 Altica litigata Fall 1 0 0 0 0 1 Altica sp. 1 0 1 1 0 1 3 Anisostena ariadne (Newman)* 17 0 0 0 0 17 Anisostena nigrita (Olivier) 0 6 0 23 4 33 Anomoea laticlavia laticlavia (Forster) 4 1 0 4 13 22 Babia quadriguttata quadriguttata (Olivier) 2 8 0 0 2 12 Bassareus clathratus (F. E. Melsheimer) 3 0 0 0 19 22 Bassareus formosus (F. E. Melsheimer) 0 0 0 1 0 1 Bassareus lituratus (F.) 21 18 4 0 25 68 Blepharida rhois (Forster) 0 0 0 1 13 14 Brachypnoea clypealis (Horn) 17 2 0 5 8 32 Brachypnoea convexa (Say) 2 0 0 0 0 2 Brachypnoea margaretae (Schultz) 1 126 16 8 137 288 Brachypnoea puncticollis (Say) 41 2 0 42 0 85 Brachypnoea tristis (Olivier) 1 0 1 0 0 2 Calligrapha bidenticola Brown 0 1 0 0 0 1 Capraita circumdata (Randall)* 0 1 0 4 0 5 Capraita sexmaculata (Illiger) 1 2 2 1 0 6 Capraita thyamoides (Crotch) 9 7 2 4 2 24 Ceraltica insolita (F. E. Melsheimer)* 0 0 0 1 0 1 Cerotoma trifurcata (Forster) 27 0 8 9 10 54 Chaetocnema confinis Crotch 0 1 0 0 1 2 Chaetocnema denticulata (Illiger) 1 0 1 5 0 7 Chaetocnema fuscata R. White 1 0 0 0 0 1 Chaetocnema pinguis J. L. LeConte 0 0 0 1 0 1 Chaetocnema pulicaria F. E. Melsheimer 0 1 0 0 0 1 Chalepus bicolor (Olivier) 1 0 1 2 0 4 Charidotella purpurata (Boheman) 1 0 0 0 0 1 Charidotella sexpunctata bicolor (F.) 9 0 0 0 2 11 Chelymorpha cassidea (Fabricius) 23 1 0 0 0 24 Chrysochus auratus (F.) 6 14 4 0 0 24 Chrysolina cribaria (Rogers) 1 0 0 1 0 2 Chrysolina quadrigemina (Suffrian)* 5 0 0 0 0 5 Colaspis brunnea (F.) 46 16 12 10 22 106 Colaspis suilla suilla F.* 0 0 0 0 1 1 Coleothorpa dominicana dominicana (F.) 10 6 5 0 13 34 Crepidodera browni Parry 0 26 0 1 0 27 Crepidodera longula Horn 0 13 0 0 0 13 Cryptocephalus notatus F. 0 0 0 0 1 1 Cryptocephalus quadruplex Newman 3 0 0 1 1 5 Cryptocephalus striatulus J. L. LeConte* 41 1 0 0 0 42 Cryptocephalus venustus F. 96 19 13 1 2 131 Deloyala guttata (Olivier) 19 1 0 4 4 28 Derocrepis erythropus (F. E. Melsheimer) 0 1 2 0 0 3 Diabrotica cristata (Harris) 22 0 0 0 24 46 Diabrotica undecimpunctata howardi Barber 3 0 1 0 1 5 Diachus chlorizans (Suffrian) 0 0 0 0 9 9 Dibolia borealis Chevrolat 1 0 1 0 0 2 Disonycha admirabila Blatchley 17 11 6 6 12 52 Disonycha discoidea (F.) 0 0 0 1 0 1 Disonycha glabrata (F.) 1 0 2 6 1 10 Disonycha xanthomelas (Dalman) 0 0 0 1 0 1 Epitrix brevis Schwarz 1 0 0 0 1 2 Epitrix fuscula Crotch 1 0 0 1 0 2 Erepsocassis rubella (Boheman)* 14 0 0 0 0 14 Exema canadensis Pierce 30 35 15 0 7 87 Exema dispar Lacordaire 12 13 1 2 17 45 Glyptoscelis pubescens (F.) 0 0 0 1 0 1 Leaf Beetles in State Nature Preserves — Hall and Barney Appendix. Continued. 37 Athey Crooked Creek Blue Thompson Eastview SNP SNP Licks Creek SNP SNP Total Graphops curtipennis curtipennis (F. E. Melsheimer) 13 Graphops marcassita marcassita (Crotch) 4 Graphops simplex J. L. LeConte* 2 Graphops varians J. L. LeConte* 13 Griburius scutellaris (F.) 19 Jonthonota nigripes (Olivier) 1 Kuschelina perplexa (Blake) 3 Kuschelina petaurista (F.) 4 Kuschelina suturella (Say)* 0 Kuschelina vians (Illiger) 0 Lema daturaphila Kogan & Goeden 6 Lexiphanes saponatus (F.) 0 Longitarsus melanurus (F. E. Melsheimer) 3 Longitarsus sp. 1 0 Longitarsus sp. 2 12 Luperaltica nigripalpis (J. L. LeConte) 0 Metachroma orientale Blake* 0 Metachroma pallidum (Say) 2 Metrioidea brunnea (Crotch) 16 Microrhopala excavata excavata (Olivier) 0 Microrhopala rileyi S. Clark* 11 Microrhopala vittata (Fabricius) 1 Microrhopala xerene (Newman) 0 Myochrous denticollis (Say) 1 Neochlamisus bebbianae (Brown) 2 Neochlamisus eubati (Brown) 0 Neochlamisus gibbosus (F.) 0 Odontota dorsalis Thunberg 0 Odontota homi j. Smith 4 Opacinota bisignata (Boheman) 24 Ophraella americana (F.) 0 Ophraella communa LeSage 20 Ophraella conferta (LeConte) 1 Ophraella cribrata (LeConte) 33 Ophraella notata (F.) 0 Orsodacne atra (Ahrens) 0 Orthaltica melina Horn 4 Oulema melanopus (Linnaeus) 1 Oulema palustris (Blatchley) 0 Pachybrachis hepaticus hepaticus (F. E. Melsheimer) 0 Pachybrachis luridus (F.) 0 Pachybrachis m-nigrum (F. E. Melsheimer) 1 Pachybrachis morosus Haldeman* 5 Pachybrachis nigricomis carbonarius Haldeman 77 Pachybrachis othonus othonus (Say) 0 Pachybrachis pectoralis (F. E. Melsheimer) 1 Pachybrachis praeclarus Weise* 0 Pachybrachis spumarius Suffrian 12 Pachybrachis trinotatus (F. E. Melsheimer) 20 Pachybrachis viduatus (F.)* 8 Pachybrachis EGR #29* 114 Pachybrachis EGR #30* 0 Pachybrachis EGR #135* 0 Pachybrachis sp. 1* 0 Paria sellata (Horn) 11 Paria thoracica (F. E. Melsheimer) 92 Paria fragariae fragariae Wilcox 22 Paria quadrinotata (Say) 0 7 0 0 8 28 0 4 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 1 17 7 4 1 15 46 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 5 2 1 11 3 21 1 0 1 0 2 2 0 1 0 3 1 0 2 2 11 1 0 0 0 1 3 0 6 1 13 1 0 23 3 27 0 1 0 2 15 0 0 0 7 7 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 4 6 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 11 33 0 5 0 39 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 4 8 1 1 6 4 12 0 0 0 5 5 2 1 0 0 3 6 0 17 2 29 0 0 1 0 25 21 13 2 96 132 3 0 2 12 37 5 0 0 7 13 50 12 22 38 155 0 0 0 17 17 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 4 8 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 50 0 51 0 0 0 2 7 3 12 0 8 100 8 4 0 0 12 0 1 0 0 2 12 1 0 0 13 0 1 0 27 40 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 9 17 0 0 0 0 114 3 2 3 1 9 15 0 0 12 27 0 1 2 0 3 6 9 3 5 34 42 26 0 3 163 21 6 4 16 69 2 1 0 0 3 38 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) Appendix. Continued. Athey SNP Crooked Creek SNP Blue Licks Thompson Creek SNP Eastview SNP Total Paria sexnotata (Say) 4 3 0 15 1 23 Phyllecthris gentilis J. L. LeConte 0 0 2 0 11 13 Phyllobrotica limbata (F.) 5 5 0 1 2 13 Phyllobrotica stenidea Schaeffer* 0 0 5 0 0 5 Phyllotreta striolata (F.) 1 0 0 0 0 1 Plateumaris metallica (Ahrens) 0 1 0 0 0 1 Pseudodibolia opima (J. L. LeConte)* 0 1 0 1 0 2 Rhabdopterus deceptor Barber 4 1 0 0 0 5 Saxinis omogera omogera Lacordaire 45 48 19 5 55 172 Scelolyperus liriophilus Wilcox 0 0 0 1 0 1 Stenispa metallica (Fabricius) 1 3 1 8 1 14 Strabala rufa rufa (Illiger) 1 0 0 1 0 2 Strongylocassis atripes (LeConte) 28 5 0 1 3 37 Sumitrosis ancoroides (Schaeffer) 0 0 0 1 0 1 Sumitrosis inaequalis (Weber) 1 1 0 4 3 9 Sumitrosis rosea (Weber) 0 0 0 1 0 1 Systena elongata (F.) 7 0 0 0 9 16 Systena hudsonias (Forster) 0 0 0 0 6 6 Triachus atomus (Suffrian)* 1 0 0 0 0 1 Trichaltica scabricula (Crotch) 1 0 0 0 0 1 Tymnes metastemalis (Crotch) 2 0 0 0 0 2 Typophorus nigritus viridicyaneus (Crotch) 26 0 0 0 0 26 Xanthonia striata Staines & Weisman 2 0 0 0 0 2 Xanthonia villosula (F. E. Melsheimer) 1 0 0 0 0 1 Zy go gramma suturalis (F.) 16 1 2 0 2 21 # Specimens 1263 671 229 363 770 3296 # Species 87 70 45 63 72 143 # State Records 10 3 1 5 4 23 J. Ky. Acad. Sci. 72(l):39-45. 2011. Descriptions of Three New Land Snails from Kentucky Daniel C. Dourson1 Belize Foundation for Research and Environmental Education, PO Box 129, Punta Gorda, Belize, Central America ABSTRACT Two new species of land snails, Patera estillensis , Stenotrema macgregori, and one new subspecies, Appalachina say ana kentucki, found in the family Polygyridae are described from eastern Kentucky. Patera estillensis is currently known from Estill and Jackson counties only and, therefore, endemic to Kentucky. Stenotrema macgregori and A. sayana kentucki are currently known from Pike, Letcher, and portions of Harlan County, Kentucky, and Wise County, Virginia. KEY WORDS: Polygyridae, new species, land snails. Patera estillensis , Stenotrema macgregori , Appalachina sayana kentucki INTRODUCTION In Kentucky, as elsewhere, land snails have largely been ignored, frequently being over- shadowed by more charismatic wildlife. This has resulted in a substantial deficiency of information on the 194 described land snail species reported from Kentucky, in terms of their distribution, ecology, and shell diver- gence. Furthermore, it is not uncommon to find land snails that don’t fit well within the parameters of a described species. These nonconformist gastropods are often grouped with known taxa (considered only as localized variants) or described as forms, occasionally attaining full species status later (Hubricht 1985). This results when disparities observed in shells are constant but more importantly observed across a larger geographic region. At this point, it becomes necessary to revisit the current taxa for clarification. This is the case for the proposed Patera estillensis, Stenotrema macgregori, and Appalachina sayana kentucki and the rationale I used for describing the three new species from Kentucky. Study Area Woods et al. (2002) placed the study areas (Figure 1) within two ecoregions of eastern Kentucky, the Cumberland Mountain Thrust Block and the Knobs-Lower Scioto Dissected Plateau. The Cumberland Mountain Thrust Block is characterized by steep ridges, hills, coves, narrow valleys, and the Pine Mountain Overthrust Fault. Maximum elevation is greater than elsewhere in Kentucky, Black 1 Corresponding author email: jdourson@earthlink.net Mountain reaching 1265 m. Many streams in this ecoregion are cool and high gradient; with a substrate commonly consisting of cobble and boulder. The underlying geology consists of Pennsylvanian shale, siltstone, sandstone, con- glomerate, and coal. In particular, the study area is located on Pine Mountain that, in Kentucky, follows a northeast to southwest path, stretching 177 km from Breaks Inter- state Park to the Kentucky-Tennessee border. Much of the mountain is the geographic border between Kentucky and Virginia. The forests in this region are considered to be the most biologically diverse of any in the United States (Jones 2005). The Knobs-Lower Scioto Dissected Plateau is characterized by steep rounded hills and ridges and narrow valleys with high gradient streams. Maximum elevation is around 488 m. Limestone cliffs are common especially in the southern portions of this ecoregion and the high levels of topographic and geologic variation create substantial ecological diversi- ty. On a per site basis, these high knobs in the vicinity of Powell and Estill counties contain the highest reported land snail faunas in North America (Dourson 2007). METHODS Multiple shell specimens (in ten separate locations) of the proposed Patera estillensis were collected from the base of limestone clifflines above Red Lick drainage in Estill County and compared with known specimens of the closely related Patera appressa (Say) and Patera laevior Hubricht, found within two kilometers of the same locality of P. estillensis sites. 39 40 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) o/_ X ^ 1 Legend imi Cumberland Mountain Thrust Block 1— Knobs-Lower Scioto Dissected Plateau 200 HD Kilometers Map created by: Figure 1. Study Area A, Furnace Mountain in Powell County, Kentucky; Study Area B, Bad Branch Falls State Nature Reserve, Letcher County, Kentucky and Breaks Interstate Park, Pike County, Kentucky. Specimens of the proposed Stenotrema macgregori were collected from hillsides at Breaks Interstate Park in Pike County and from mountainsides at Bad Branch Falls Nature Preserve in Letcher County and compared with the closely related Stenotrema stenotrema (Pfeiffer) from the same localities. Shells of the proposed S. macgregori also were compared with shells of Stenotrema angellum Hubricht collected from Powell and Fayette Counties, which are similar in size and form. Shells of the proposed Appalachina saijana kentucki were collected from hillsides at Breaks Interstate Park in Pike County and from mountainsides at Bad Branch Nature Preserve in Letcher County and compared with known specimens of Appalachina sayana Pilsbry collected from the Cumberland Pla- teau region of Kentucky. Patera estillensis, Stenotrema macgregori, and Appalachina sayana kentucki are de- scribed based entirely on their external shell morphology. RESULTS The results of the study found that Patera estillensis, Stenotrema macgregori, and Appa- lachina sayana kentucki all exhibited constant and reliable differences between closely related and described taxa and are not localized variations in shell morphology. For each of the three new species, detailed descriptions, similar species, habitat, overall status, and their type localities are given below. All three species described belong to the family, Polygyridae which in turn belongs to the superfamily Helicoidea. Polygyridae is native to North America, making up a significant proportion of the land snail fauna in the eastern portions. They also are found in western North America, northern Central Descriptions of Three New Land Snail Species from Kentucky — Dourson 41 America, and are present on some Caribbean islands. The members of this family can be found in a wide range of habitats, from humid, mixed-hardwood forests to desert mountain tops. Polygyrids are medium to large (~5- 45 mm diameter), with reflected lips, and with shells ranging in shape from subglobose to discoidal. Most polygyrids are known to be mycophagous with foraging behavior occur- ring mostly at night, when moisture is most abundant. However, they can be found active at any time in more humid conditions. Several species in this family are ranked as G1 or G2 indicating that they may be imperiled (Perez 2004). The family Polygyridae is distinguished from other gastropods on the basis of several anatomical features: no dart apparatus, mus- cles united in a single band that allows the eyes and pharynx to be retracted, and jaws that are ribbed. This family is further defined by an absent diverticulum and absent stimulatory organ. The two subfamilies, Polygyrinae and Trio- dopsinae, are distinguished on the basis of reproductive anatomy, as some species in the subfamily Polygirinae show a penial append- age. According to Emberton (1991), this family is monophyletic. It contains 23 genera and 277 species (Turgeon et al. 1998). Patera estillensis, carinate bladetooth, new species (Figure 2G, H, I) Description: The shell is 15 to 20 mm in diameter, depressed heliciform with a broadly reflected lip. The shell has 4.5-5 whorls and the umbilicus is imperforate. Aperture with a large parietal tooth, the basal tooth is small and poorly defined but an important and constant feature. The shell surface is some- what glossy, having no hairs at any stage of growth. The transverse striae are well devel- oped on top of shell but weakly defined on the base, and, although the spiral papillae are present, they are sometimes only faintly visible (microscope required to see this micro-feature). The shell periphery is strongly angular to carinate the entire length of the shell (a key feature for the identification of the species). Specimens shown in Figure 2G, H, I are from the type locality. Similar species: Patera estillensis appears to be most closely related to P. appressa but has a flatter shell and the entire periphery is strongly angular whereas the shell periphery of P. appressa is typically rounded (although some populations of P. appressa have weakly angular peripheries). Patera laevior has a rounded periphery and spiral striae (incised lines) whereas P. estillensis has spiral papillae. Patera estillensis was not found to co-exist with P. appressa or P. laevior. Habitat: Shells are found among sheltered areas such as rock talus, at the base of limestone cliffs, or in small cracks within the cliff face; live individuals can be found in narrow crevices or around the entrances of small grottos and caves, especially during the dryer mouths of July and August. The species was not found far from carbonate outcrop sources. From the base of the cliffline, P. estillensis becomes scarce at downhill sites further than 10 m and at 30 m (from the cliffline), as the species was generally absent where as other land snail species such as Mesodon zaletus A. Binney, Allogona pro- funda Say and Inflectarius rugeli Shuttleworth remained common. The flat, carinate shape of P. estillensis is thought to be an evolutionary response to the snail’s compressed habitat of rock crevices. Status: Endemic to Kentucky. Although in some localities shells are rather common, live individuals in these same locations are un- common to rare. The copious number of shells found at some sites may be a result of the protective conditions of overhanging cliffs, which are thought to slow the shells rate of decay. Its range in Kentucky appears to be restricted to only a few narrow ridge systems and high knobs above Red Lick Creek in Estill County and a small portion of Jackson County. The species was first discovered by Allen Risk, Morehead State University, who was sampling for mosses in Estill County, Kentucky. Type locality: Estill County (Figure 1A), Kentucky, Happy Top Mountain above Red Lick Creek, 1.5 km SE of Jinks (located on Daniel Boone National Forest); NAD 83/WGS84, UTM 16 762984E, 4164841N; Elevation 393 meters: Winchester Quad. Both the paratype and holotype will be deposited in the Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, Illinois. Etymology: The species’ name is derived from the type locality located in Estill County, Kentucky. An estimated 95% of the total 42 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) Figure A Figure B Figure C Figure D Figure G Figure H Figure E Figure I Figure F Figure J Figure K Figure L Figure 2. A-L. Three standard views of Appalachina sayana (A, B, C), Appalachina sayana kentucki (D, E, F), Patera estillensis (G, H, I), Stenotrema macgregori (J, K, L). Shell figures A through I are proportionate to each other. Figures J through L are not proportionate to figures A through I and are enlarged to show better shell detail. known range of the snail lies in Estill County with the remaining 5% found in Jackson County. Key: Refer to Kentucky’s Land Snails and their Ecological Communities (Dourson 2011) Stenotrema macgregori, fraudulent slitmouth, new species (Figure 2J, K, L) Description: The shell is 8 to 10 mm in diameter, pill-shaped, with a slightly reflected lip. The shell has 5-6 whorls and the umbilicus is imperforate. The aperture has a long parietal tooth as in all Stenotrema species. The shell is cinnamon-buff and short stiff hairs are present on the entire surface, but hairs are often lost in older shells. The transverse striae are poorly 43 Descriptions of Three New Land Snail Species from Kentucky — Dourson developed. The basal notch is shallow and the interdenticular sinus is indistinct in most specimens. The fulcrum is well developed but short. Specimens shown in Figure 2J, K, L are from the type locality. Similar species: Stenotrema stenotrema (which Stenotrema macgregori has likely been confused with in the past) is 2-3 mm larger, has a deeper basal notch, more-closed aperture and the interdenticular sinus is notably deeper. The two species are often found together and can readily be separated by size alone. Stenotrema macgregori refers to S. angellum but has a more compact shape, is more hirsute, has a higher shell profile and a darker periostracum. Habitat: A habitat generalist found at mid-elevation, rich hardwood forests under a variety of forest litter but apparently is absent from the dryer mountain tops, dense rhodo- dendron thickets, hemlock, and Virginia pine forests of Pine Mountain. The highest num- bers of shells were found in mixed-mesophytic sites, suggesting a partiality for this habitat. Status: This species appears to be restrict- ed to upper elevation hardwood forest of Pine Mountain, from Breaks Interstate Park to Bad Branch SNP and is generally uncommon where it occurs. Type locality: Pike County (Figure 1C), Kentucky, hillside above Russell Fork, 1.6 km SE of Elkhorn City, (located on Breaks Interstate Park); NAD 83/WGS84, UTM 17 381718E, 4128162N; Elevation 335 meters; Pikeville Quad. Both the paratype and holo- type will be deposited in the Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, Illinois. Etymology: Stenotrema macgregori is named in honor of my good friend and mentor, John Macgregor. Key: Refer to Kentucky’s Land Snails and their Ecological Communities (Dourson 2011). Appalachina sayana kentucki, Pine Mountain crater, new subspecies (Figure 2D, E, F) Description: The shell is 18 to 22 mm wide, Heliciform with a reflected lip. The mature shell has 5.5 whorls is thin, umbilicate to rimate and is usually without a parietal tooth. There is a small basal tooth present but the shell is without a palatal tooth. The color is a pale-yellow to pale olive-tan and there are no hairs at any stage of growth. The transverse and minute spiral striae are always present and the shell periphery is well rounded. Specimens shown in Figure 2G, H, I are from the type locality. Similar species: Appalachina sayana (Fig- ure 2A, B, C) is around 10 mm larger, has a wider umbilicus, a parietal tooth (A. sayana kentucki is typically without this tooth), smaller basal tooth and a thin wire-like lip (the lip of A. sayana kentucki is wider, remaining somewhat concave in shape its entire length). The umbilicus of A. sayana is umbilicate where as the umbilicus of A. sayana kentucki is more or less rimate. Appalachina chilhoweensis (Lewis) is 15 to 22 mm larger, has a wider umbilicus and is without teeth. Habitat: A relatively common species of rich upland and higher elevation mixed hardwood forests. It is generally found under moist leaf litter and other forest debris, becoming less common in dryer sites such as ridgetops and Virginia pine forests. The highest numbers of shells were found in mixed-mesophytic sites, suggesting a partiality for this habitat. Status: In Kentucky this species appears restricted to Pine and Black Mountains, al- though it is a relatively common species when found. This gastropod merits further investiga- tion into its range and overlap with A. sayana. Type locality: Letcher County (Figure IB), Kentucky, Pine Mountain, 2 km SE of Ermine (located on Bad Branch Falls State Nature Preserve); NAD 83/WGS84, UTM 17 341910E, 4107625N; Elevation 606 meters; Pikeville Quad. Etymology: Appalachina sayana was a species first documented and studied more closely in the mountain counties of Kentucky and appears to be restricted to this region. Type: Both the paratype and holotype will be deposited in the Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, Illinois. Key: Refer to Kentucky’s Land Snails and their Ecological Communities (Dourson 2011). DISCUSSION Not since 1962, when John B. Burch published his classic work, “How to Know the Eastern Land Snails,” has there been a single source for the identification of eastern land snails. Since then, many new species have been described (Hubricht 1985), forms have 44 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) been elevated to species, and there have been a number of taxon revisions. Most of these species were originally described on external shell morphology only (Pilsbry 1940, 1946, 1948; Hubricht 1985), and, although many of these species have been revisited by later investigators who did anatomical work (Em- berton 1991; Nekola and Coles 2010), nearly all have survived (at a species level) taxonomic revision. Describing new snail species based exclusively on shell morphology is still used and a accepted practice (Fred Thompson pers. comm.). In Kentucky, at least three species have escaped taxonomic review, resulting in this paper. For example, there are consistent discrepancies found between Appalachina say ana and Appalachina say ana kentucki , and, although some of the incongruities were noted by past collectors, they were inade- quately discussed in the literature (Pilsbry 1940; Branson 1973; Branson and Batch 1968; Hubricht 1985; Branson and Batch 1988). The differences I have observed between A. sayana (from the Cumberland Plateau) and A. sayana kentucki (from Pine Mountain) however have been distinct and remarkably constant, making their separation straightfor- ward. Areas of overlap for the two species have not yet been found in Kentucky but likely occur around Pine Mountain State Park, Breaks Interstate Park and the Cumberland Plateau. Other species such as Stenotrema macgre- gori were perhaps lumped with more common and widespread land snails such as Stenotrema stenotrema. It superficially resembles that species but was probably seen as an anomaly within the S. stenotrema clan, the differences in their shell morphology thought to be a localized variation. A closer examination of the external characteristics between the two species however has clearly shown distinctive and constant dissimilarity across all localities collected to date but more importantly also show dissimilarity when found together. Past snail inventories by Branson, Hubricht, and others have more than likely included S. macgregori in their collections but may have missed collecting the two species together. When S. stenotrema and S. macgregori are found coexisting, the shells remain divergent in size and aperture structure. In particular. they have a dissimilar basal notch and interdenticular sinus. Patera estillensis was not likely in past collections, a result of the snail’s small geographic range (currently known as only several square miles) and its affinity for isolated carbonate cliffs located on steep and narrow ridge systems (where there are gener- ally no roads or trails) high above the valley floor. No specimens of this species were found in the Branson collections at Eastern Ken- tucky University nor did Branson, Hubricht, or Pilsbry refer to this noteworthy land snail in any of their publications. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I express my gratitude to the following people and organizations: Kentucky Nature Preserves Commission for granting permis- sion to study the land snail fauna of Bad Branch Nature Preserves, Piper Roby, Cop- perhead Consulting, for maps, Ronald S. Caldwell for assistance with literature search, the staff of Breaks Interstate Park, David Hayes of Eastern Kentucky University for access to the collections located in the Branson Museums, Joel Beverly, for assis- tance in collections from Bad Branch Falls State Nature Preserve and Breaks Interstate Park, Chris Leftwich, Copperhead Consult- ing, for assistance in collections of specimens in Jackson County, and finally, Judy Dourson for her word processing skills. LITERATURE CITED Branson, B. A. 1973. Kentucky land mollusca: checklist, distribution and keys for identification. Kentucky De- partment of Fish and Wildlife Resources, Frankfort, KY. Branson, B. A., and D. L. Batch. 1968. Land snails from Pine and Big Black Mountains, Kentucky. Sterkiana 32:7-17. Branson, B. A., and D. L. Batch. 1988. Distribution of Kentucky land snails (Mollusca: Gastropoda). Transac- tions of the Kentucky Academy of Science 49:101- 116. Burch, J. B. 1962. How to know the eastern land snails. Wm. C. Brown Company Publishers, Dubuque, IA. Dourson, D. 2007. A selected land snail compilation of the Central Knobstone Escarpment on Furnace Mountain in Powell County Kentucky. Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Sciences 68:119-131. Dourson, D. 2011. Kentucky’s Land Snails and their Ecological Communities. IIF Group, Manchester, IN. 298 pp. Descriptions of Three New Land Snail Species from Kentucky — Dourson 45 Emberton, K. C. 1991. Polygyrid relations: a Phylogenetic analysis of 17 subfamilies of land snails (Mollusca:Gas- tropoda:Stylommatophora). Zoological Society Journal of the Linnean Society 103(3):207-224. Hubricht, L. 1985. The distribution of the native land mollusks of the eastern United States. Fieldiana Publication 1359. Jones, R. L. 2005. Plant life of Kentucky: an illustrated guide to the vascular flora. The University Press of Kentucky, Lexington, KY. Nekola, J. C., and B. F. Coles. 2011. Pupillid land snails of eastern North America. American Malalogical Bulletin 28:29-57. Perez, K. 2004. Systematic Relationships within the Genus Praticolella (Gastropoda: Pulmonata: Polygyr- idae) from the Southern United States & Mexico. Centenary Research Grant Report. The Malacological Society of London Bulletin. 42. Pilsbry, H. A. 1940. Land Mollusca of North America (north of Mexico). Vol. I, Part II. Academy of National Science of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA. Turgeon, D. D., J. F. Quinn, Jr., A. E. Bogan, E. V. Coan, F. G. Hochberg, W. G. Lyons, P. M. Mikkelson, R. J. Neves, C. F. E. Roper, G. Rosenberg, B. Roth, A. Scheltema, F. G. Thompson, M. Vecchione, and J. D. Williams. 1998. Common and scientific names of aquatic invertebrates from the United States and Canada: Mollusks, 2nd ed. American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 26. Woods, A. J., J. M. Omernick, W. H. Martin, G. J. Pond, W. M. Andrews, S. M. Call, J. A. Comstock, and D. D. Taylor. 2002. Ecoregions of Kentucky (color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photo- graphs). U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. (map scale 1:1,000,000). J. Ky. Acad. Sci. 72(l):46-58. 2011. A Critical Evaluation of the Kentucky Phosphorus Index Carl H. Bolster1 Animal Waste Management Research Unit, USDA-ARS, 230 Bennett Lane, Bowling Green, Kentucky 42104 ABSTRACT The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS) is currently revising its 590 Nutrient Management Conservation Standard. As part of this revision, USDA-NRCS is considering requiring states to test the accuracy of their phosphorus (P) indices using either measured P loss data or simulated P loss data generated from process-based models. The objective of this study was to critically evaluate the KY P index by comparing index output with simulated P loss data obtained from a validated P loss model. Furthermore, the general formulation of the index was evaluated against current research on the processes controlling P transport in the environment. Results suggested that in some areas the index does a good job in assigning P loss risk; however, this analysis also showed some important deficiencies in the index, primarily the neglect of important factors known to affect P loss (e.g., soil erosion and P application rates) and how the different factors in the index are weighted. To reduce the amount of P that is exported from agricultural fields to waterways within Kentucky, resources should be devoted to revising the KY P index to address these limitations as well as developing long-term monitoring sites where the P index and more process-based models can be evaluated against measured P loss data. KEY WORDS: Phosphorus, P Index, 590 Standard, phosphorus loss, phosphorus modeling INTRODUCTION Accelerated eutrophication due to excess P loading is widespread among freshwater bodies of the U.S. (National Research Council 2008) with a sizeable portion of the P originating from agricultural fields (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2010). In response to water-quality concerns over P export from agricultural fields to surface waters, the USDA’s Natural Resource Con- servation Service (USDA-NRCS) revised its 590 Nutrient Management Conservation Standard to include P-based planning strate- gies to restrict P application to fields where the risk of P loss is high (USDA and USEPA 1999). The resulting 590 Standard prescribed three different strategies which states could adopt to rate a field’s vulnerability to P loss: agronomic soil test P, environmental thresh- old soil test P, and the P index. Kentucky has adopted both the environmental P threshold and P index for P-based planning strategies. In general, the P index is considered to be less restrictive than an environmental P threshold (Sharpley et al. 2001). The P index is an assessment tool developed to identify fields which are most vulnerable to P loss by accounting for the major source and ' Corresponding author e-mail: carl.bolster@ars.usda. gov transport factors controlling P movement in the environment (Lemunyon and Gilbert 1993). Each factor included in the index is weighted in such a way as to reflect that factor’s perceived importance on P loss. Since its inception, the P index has been revised several times and has been adopted in many different forms throughout the U.S. (Sharpley et al. 2003). Revisions include multiplying source and transport factors rather than summing them, including a contributing distance factor in the index, use of continuous values for some input variables, inclusion of factors to account for best management practices, and calculating an actual P load rather than a relative risk. The flexibility of the P index allows states to tailor their indices to reflect the dominant factors governing P transport in their region. In developing a P index, a state must determine which field characteristics to include and how to weight each of them. Ideally, a P index should be developed by correlating measured edge-of-field P losses to field-specific charac- teristics. Given the dearth of available P loss data, however, many P indices have been developed based on professional judgment. This includes the factors within the index, how each factor is weighted, how the final P index value is calculated, and what the final values mean in relation to P planning. 46 Evaluating the Kentucky P Index — Bolster 47 The Kentucky P index includes 10 field characteristics and 4 ratings (NRCS 2001). The index is used to assign risk of P loss based on a field’s runoff potential, soil erosion potential, soil test P (STP) concentration, distance to receiving water body, location, P application method, impairment status of receiving water body, and width of vegetative buffer (Table 1). Each field characteristic is weighted by a factor of 1, 2, or 3 to reflect that factor’s perceived importance on P loss. Each site characteristic is assigned a value rating of 1, 2, 4, or 8 points representing low, medium, high, and very high risk of P loss, respectively. The weighted value ratings for each charac- teristic are summed to obtain a final P index value. The value of the P index is then used to determine whether P application needs to be restricted (Table 2). The weighted factors included in the index were based on the professional judgment of the technical spe- cialists who developed the 590 Standard for KY (NRCS 2001). To this author’s knowledge, the KY P index has not been modified since its initial formulation, nor has it been critically evaluat- ed. Given the large amount of research that has been conducted since the KY P index was first developed, it seems reasonable that the index should be critically evaluated in light of this recent research. Ideally, a P index should be evaluated against observed P loss data. However, due to the lack of edge-of-field P loss data, only a handful of studies exist that compare observed edge-of-field P loss data with a P index (Sharpley et al. 2001; Eghball and Gilley 2002; DeLaune et al. 2004a, 2004b; Harmel et al. 2005; Sonmez et al. 2009). While several of these studies do show a good correlation between the P index and observed P loss, the P index is still far from being considered a validated model. When observed P loss data are not available to test P indices, simulated P loss data generated from process- based models may be a suitable alternative provided the model has been validated for the region of interest (Veith et al. 2005). Indeed, as part of the 590 Standard revision process a Working Group of scientists within the Southern Extension-Research Activity Group 17 (SERA- 17) recently recommended that states be required to evaluate their P index against simulated P loss data when measured P loss data are unavailable (Sharpley et al. 2011). Therefore, the objective of this study was to critically evaluate the KY P index by comparing the output with simulated P loss data obtained from a validated P loss model to identify areas where the index may need revising. Moreover, the general formulation of the KY P index was evaluated against current understandings of the processes controlling P transport in the environment. MATERIALS AND METHODS The potential for P loss from an agricultural field will depend on the amount of P available in the soil, applied fertilizers, and applied manures as well as the transport potential from runoff, leaching, and erosion. In this study the KY P index was evaluated by assessing how well the index accounts for these different source and transport factors. Where appropriate, the KY P index was evaluated against output from a process-based model. This involved comparing KY P index values with P loss data generated using a process-based P loss model for hypothetical fields with varying runoff rates, erosion rates, STP values, and field slopes. When output from the index could not be directly compared with output from the model, the index was evaluated against current understandings of the processes controlling P movement through the landscape. This included P application method, timing, and amount; distance from P application to surface water; potential for P leaching through the subsur- face; and formulation of the index. In this study the Annualized Phosphorus Loss Equation (APLE) model of Vadas et al. (2009) was used to evaluate the KY P index. The APLE model is a spreadsheet model comprised of a suite of empirical and process- based equations that estimate annual P loss from the landscape when surface runoff is the dominant pathway of P loss. These equations have been calibrated and validated from multiple experiments ranging from soil boxes to field plots and have proven to be robust in their prediction of P runoff under a variety of conditions. Output from the KY P index and the APLE model were compared under field conditions in which soil P is the only available P source and surface runoff is the dominant loss Table 1. Kentucky P index (NRCS 2001). 48 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) CO CO CM £ «§& 2 d c V, "S Cti ,2h '"h >"7 cu’ e£ 8 .s o c/5 o g H £ G in ■— i rTl >— i m g A A 6 V >h Q c/5 a .a* G G o ’I O aJ O S e< ll 8 ^ s a Vh > 7 T) JO ^ G G & 03 ■ 5 2 no o 0 XfH o 05 1 CD CM -—i in i i _ in i o o PQ CM CM CO CM 5! g 5 o Oh c CM O I ^ 05 _ § CM I CM O <8 V§AZ Oh o 13 22 o o 3 o p“d T3 ■■■ * g "O O-. > •G G 03 s- 'p *>> CD ffi PC fn j > c3 bJD Qh G Oh Oh < where DPspa is annual dissolved P loss from soil (kg/ha), C is an extraction coefficient equal to the slope of a line relating labile P to runoff P (assumed here to be 5 X 10-4; Vadas et al. 2009), LP is labile P (mg/kg) and was assumed to equal 50% of Mehlich-3 STP (Vadas et al. 2009), Q is annual runoff in mm, and 0.1 is a unit conversion factor to obtain units of kg/ha. The APLE model calculates annual partic- ulate P loss using the sediment loading function of McElroy et al. (1976) and Williams Evaluating the Kentucky P Index — Bolster 49 Table 2. Risk of P loss based on P index and cor- responding nutrient application rate. Final P index value Risk of P loss Nutrient application rate <30 Low Nitrogen based 30-60 Medium Nitrogen based 61-112 High P based (crop removal) >112 Very High No P application and Hann (1978): Psed = SLSPPER\06 (2) where Psed is annual sediment-bound P lost in runoff (kg/ha); SL is annual soil lost through erosion (kg/ha); SP is total soil P (mg/kg) determined as the sum of active, stable, and organic P pools and is generally correlated with LP; 106 is a unit conversion factor to obtain units of kg/ha; and PER is the P enrichment ratio representing the ratio of P in eroded sediment to that in the soil calculated as (Vadas et al. 2009): PER = EXP( 2.2 - 0.25- In (SL)) (3) Annual runoff required for Eq. [1] was calculated with the SCS curve number method (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service 1972): (Prf-4)2 (Pj-Ia + S) for Pd>0.2S otherwise Q = 0 (4) where Qd is daily runoff (mm), Pd is daily precipitation in (mm), and la is initial abstraction (mm) of water assumed to equal 20% of the maximum potential water reten- tion by the soil (S; mm). The maximum potential water retention parameter is calcu- lated from the curve number (CN) by: £ = 25.4- (5) where CN is a function of hydrologic soil group, cover type, treatment, hydrologic condition, and antecedent moisture condition. To evaluate whether the KY P index ade- quately accounts for the effect of field slope on P loss, S values were modified for slopes of 1.5, 3.5, 9, and 13% following the method used in the Annualized Policy/Environmental Extender (APEX) model (Gassman et al. 2009): ^(3 7+0.021. ffi) <6> where Sp is the slope-adjusted retention parameter and is field slope. Annual soil loss needed for the APLE model was calculated using the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation Version 2 (RUSLE2) (USDA-ARS 2006). Erosion rates were calculated for field slopes of 1.5, 3.5, 9, and 13% representing low, medium, high, and very high index risk values, respectively. Curve numbers required for equation 5 were also obtained from RUSLE2. The KY P index was evaluated by deter- mining whether risk values generated by the index were positively correlated with output generated from the APLE model for varying STP, runoff potential, and field slope. Specif- ically, simulated P loss data were generated using erosion and runoff data calculated for four soil series found in Grayson County, KY representing three hydrologic soil groups (B, C, and D) and a range in soil erodibility factors (Table 3). Simulations were performed for three standard 1-yr crop rotations available for Crop Management Zone 63 in RUSLE2. These included tall fescue forage hay, no-till winter wheat, and no-till corn grain with fall weeds. Runoff data were generated using a 30-yr daily precipitation record for Leitch- field, KY (average annual precipitation is approximately 1200 mm). Average daily runoff values were summed over the entire year for each year to obtain annual runoff values. The average of these annual runoff values was then used in the simulations. Index values for the simulated fields were calculated by assigning a high risk rating (8 points) to vegetative buffer width and downstream distance because the APLE model generates edge-of-field P loss data and does not account for vegetative buffers or distance to receiving water body. Thus, the 50 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) comparisons in this study ignore any setback requirements to focus solely on how well the index represents edge-of-field P loss. Appli- cation method was also assigned a high risk rating whereas impaired watershed, applica- tion timing, and county location were all assigned a risk rating of low (1 point). Land cover rating was assigned a medium risk value (2 points) for the forage hay simulations whereas a low risk rating was assigned to the wheat and corn simulations based on the RUSLE2-calculated vegetative surface cover- age at time of P application. Rainfall and soil data used for comparing the KY P index and the APLE model were chosen from Grayson County strictly for convenience and not intended to be repre- sentative of the entire Commonwealth. In- stead, the objective of this study was to assess the general trend of the KY P index against output from a process-based model to identify potential limitations with the index. Compar- isons between the index and simulated data for a few hypothetical fields are sufficient for such an analysis, although a more exhaustive comparison may be warranted in future studies. RESULTS The KY P index was first evaluated against simulated P loss data generated with the APLE model for a range of STP values. Increasing STP values resulted in increases in both the P index and the APLE simulated P loss data for each soil series (Figure 1). For the simulated data, P loss increased asymp- totically with increasing STP due to how APLE treats particulate P loss as increasing nonlinearly with soil P. On the other hand, due to the exponential weighting used in the KY P index, the increase in index value with increasing STP is greatest at the highest STP value. The KY P index, as with many other state P indices, treats STP as a discrete rather than continuous variable; thus the index may underestimate the risk of P loss from soil for a given range in STP values. For instance, the index calculated the risk of P loss from soils with STP values ranging from 501 to 800 lbs/ acre as being equivalent whereas simulated P loss values increased by 25 to 40% over this range of STP values depending on soil type, field slope, and crop type. Table 3. Soil series used in for generating simulated P loss data using the APLE model. Soil series HSG1 K2 T Johnsburg silt loam (Jo) D 0.48 3.0 Ramsey loam (RaD) D 0.22 1.0 Shelocta gravelly silt loam (ShB) B 0.35 4.0 Zanesville silt loam (ZaB) C 0.48 3.0 1 Hydrologic soil group. 2 RUSLE2 soil erodibility factor. 3 Soil loss tolerance (tons/acre/yr). Increasing field slope increased both runoff and erosion as predicted by the SCS curve number method and RUSLE2, respectively. For each crop type and soil series, erosion rates as predicted by RUSLE2 increased linearly with increasing field slope from 1.5 to 9% but a greater increase in erosion rates when field slope increased from 9 to 13% was observed (Figure 2). For runoff, increasing field slope resulted in linear increases in runoff as calculated by the SCS curve number method using the slope modification method employed by the APEX model (Figure 2). Increasing field slope resulted in a near linear increase in simulated P loss data for all four soils simulated with tall fescue and winter wheat (Figure 3). With soils simulated with corn grain, however, increasing field slope from 9 to 13% resulted in a greater increase in simulated P loss than at lower slopes. For all soils and crop types, increasing field slope from 9 to 13% resulted in a greater increase in the P index than did increases at lower slopes. Comparing the Shelocta (HSG R), Zanes- ville (HSG C), and Johnsburg (HSG D) soils showed that soils with greater runoff potential resulted in greater simulated P loss and P index values (Figures 1, 3), although differ- ences between soils with different runoff potentials varied depending on STP and field slope for the simulated data whereas for the KY P index differences were independent of STP and field slope. For instance, the difference in simulated P loss between the Shelocta (HSG B) and Johnsburg (HSG D) soils when planted with winter wheat was 0.70 kg/ha for STP of 400 and 1.6 kg/ha for STP of 1000 lbs/acre (Figure 1C), yet the KY P index is weighted in such a way that the difference in index values between HSG B and D is 6 for any given STP value (Figure ID). Similarly, for the corn Simula- Evaluating the Kentucky P Index — Bolster 51 STP (Ibs/acre) STP (Ibs/acre) Figure 1. Effect of increasing soil test P (STP) on simulated P loss data (left panels) and the KY P index (right panels) for each soil series (Johnsburg (Jo), Ramsey (RaD), Shelocta (ShB), and Zanesville (ZaB) for the (A, B) forage hay, (C, D) winter wheat, and (E, F) com grain simulations for a field slope of 3.5%. For these simulations vegetative buffer width, application method, and downstream distance were all assigned a risk rating of very high (8 points) whereas impaired watershed, application timing, and county location were all assigned a risk rating of low (1 point). Land cover rating was assigned a medium risk value (2 points) for the forage hay simulations whereas a low risk rating was assigned to the winter wheat and com simulations. tions the difference in simulated P loss between the Shelocta (HSG B) and Johnsburg (HSG D) soils was 1.1 kg/ha for a field slope of 1.5% and 3.7 kg/ha for a field slope of 13% (Figure 3E) while the difference in index values remained constant (Figure 3F). While runoff from both the Johnsburg and Ramsey soils was the same due to both soils 52 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) being classified as HSG D, RUSLE2 calcu- lated erosion rates for the Ramsey soil 40 to 50% lower than the Johnsburg soil for each crop type (Figure 2). The reduced erosion rate for the Ramsey soil was due to the lower erodibility factor for this soil (0.22 compared with 0.48 for Johnsburg soil, Table 3). Soil erodibility is a function of soil texture, soil organic matter content, subsoil structure, and soil permeability and is an important factor controlling soil loss. This decrease in erosion explains why simulated P loss for the Ramsey soil was noticeably lower than the Johnsburg soil (Figures 1, 3). The KY P index, however, rated risk of P loss from these two soils as being equal because the KY P index does not account for soil erodibility (Figures 1, 3) and thus does not adequately capture the differ- ences in risk between these two soils. To better represent risk of P loss by eroding soil will require incorporation of erosion rates into the KY P index; most state P indices currently use RUSLE or RUSLE2 to calculate erosion rates (Sharpley et al. 2003). Analyzing data from all the simulations combined, a mild but significant correlation (r = 0.29, P < 0.001) was observed between the simulated data and index values (Fig- ure 4). The correlation between simulated data and index values increased dramatically when data for each crop type were analyzed separately with r values of 0.78, 0.74 and 0.62 for the forage hay, wheat, and corn simula- tions, respectively. This further highlights the inability of the KY P index to account for differences in P loss risk among different crop rotations. Inclusion of erosion rates into the KY P index will likely increase its correlation with output from the APLE model. DISCUSSION The objective of any P index is to simply and accurately estimate the risk of P loss from the landscape. Although the P index is used in the majority of states to assess risk of P loss from agricultural fields, most state P indices have not been rigorously evaluated against measured P loss data to determine how well the index assigns risk — a major reason being the lack of field data available for such an analysis. Recognizing this, a Working Group of scientists within the Southern Extension- Research Activity Group 17 (SERA-17) re- cently recommended that P indices be eval- uated against simulated P loss data using accepted P transport models when measured P loss data are unavailable (Sharpley et al. 2011). Veith et al. (2005) used this approach to evaluate the Pennsylvania P index by comparing index values with P loss values calculated with the SWAT model and ob- served good correlations between the P index and output from SWAT and concluded that the Pennsylvania P index was generally accurate. Comparing KY P index values with simulated P data generated with the APLE model for a handful of hypothetical fields with ranges in STP values, runoff potential, erosion rates, and field slopes, showed that index values were generally correlated with the simulated data. This analysis, however, also showed some important limitations with the index including how the different factors in the index are weighted and how erosion is accounted for in the index. In addition to comparing the KY P index against output from a process-based model, the index can be further evaluated by assessing whether the formulation of the index is consistent with published research and whether the index accounts for all the importance source and transport factors expected to control P movement through* the landscape in Kentucky. This includes P application method, timing, and amount; distance from P application to surface water; potential for P leaching through the subsur- face; and formulation of the index. The application of mineral fertilizer or animal manure to agricultural fields can result in significant increases in dissolved runoff P concentrations. Loss of P from applied fertilizers and manures will depend on appli- cation method, rate, and timing. While the KY P index accounts for both P application method and timing it does not include P application rate. Application method is ac- counted for in the KY P index by assigning the lowest value rating when P is injected into the soil and the highest value rating when P is surface applied and left unincorporated for more than 1 month. This approach is consis- tent with studies which have shown that incorporation of manure into the subsurface results in reduced dissolved runoff P concen- Evaluating the Kentucky P Index — Bolster 53 Field slope (%) Field slope (%) Figure 2. Relationship between field slope and RUSLE2-predicted erosion rates (left panels) and runoff predicted using the SCS curve number method modified for slope (right panels) for each soil for the (A, B) forage hay, (C, D) winter wheat, and (E, F) corn grain simulations. trations compared with surface applications (Kleinman et al. 2002; Pote et al. 2003; Daverede et al. 2004; Torbert et al. 2005; Sistani et al. 2009; Sistani et al. 2010). A potential limitation with the index is that it does not allow for partial incorporation of P. That is, P is assumed to be either fully incorporated or remain completely on the surface. In developing the APLE model Vadas et al. (2009) assumed an inverse linear relationship between fraction of P incorporat- ed and runoff P concentrations in their model. Further studies are needed, however, to determine the relationship between P loss and fraction of P incorporated into the soil. Another potential limitation with the index is 54 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) Figure 3. Effect of field slope on simulated P loss data (left panels) and the KY P index (right panels) for each soil series soil for the (A, B) forage hay, (C, D) winter wheat, and (E, F) corn grain simulations for STP value of 600 lbs/acre. For these simulations vegetative buffer width, application method, and downstream distance were all assigned a risk rating of very high (8 points) whereas impaired watershed, application timing, and county location were all assigned a risk rating of low (1 point). Land cover rating was assigned a medium risk value (2 points) for the forage hay whereas a low risk rating was assigned to the winter wheat and com simulations. that it does not account for the possible increase in particulate P loss that may occur when P is incorporated into the soil due to increased soil erosion (Andrasla et al. 1985; Cox and Hendricks 2000). Incorporation of erosion rates into the index would help address this limitation. Application timing is another important factor to include when assessing risk of P loss from applied P sources. When P applications Evaluating the Kentucky P Index — Bolster 55 Figure 4. Relationship between simulated P loss data and the KY P index. Results show that the KY P index is in general directionally consistent with the simulated P loss data with a correlation coefficient of 0.29 (P < 0.001). However, a large amount of scatter exists highlighting potential limitations with the index. are made during periods when runoff-gener- ating precipitation events are common, risk of P loss will be greater. The KY P index accounts for application timing by assigning risk based on the month of planned P application. Low values are assigned to summer months when runoff is generally low due to reduced precipitation and increased evapotranspiration and high values are as- signed to winter months when precipitation is greater and evapotranspiration is low. Fur- thermore, plant nutrient uptake will be lowest during the winter season thereby also increas- ing risk of P loss. In addition to runoff volume, the time interval between P application and the next runoff event has been shown to greatly affect P loss for surface applied P, with P loss decreasing with increasing time between application and runoff event (Schroeder et al. 2004; Sharpley 1997; Sistani et al. 2009); for incorporated P sources, however, timing between P application and runoff may not be as important (Sistani et al. 2009). Because the time interval between P application and a runoff event is impossible to account for in a P index, it is important that best management practices are followed that prevent P applica- tion on fields during or immediately prior to expected precipitation events. One approach would be to develop a Web-based program in which a producer enters the geographic location and the program calculates whether P application can occur on a given day based on recent and forecasted weather conditions. Phosphorus application rate is another important factor controlling risk of P loss with increasing fertilizer or manure application rates resulting in increased P in runoff, as well as elevated runoff P concentrations for extended periods of time following application (Schroeder et al. 2004). Indeed, recently applied P can override soil P as the dominant factor controlling runoff P concentrations (Kleinman et al. 2002; DeLaune et al. 2004a), yet the KY P index is one of only a few P indices that does not include P application rate in its calculations (Sharpley et al. 2003). Therefore, consideration should be given to including P application rate in the KY P index. Because runoff P loss from applied fertilizers and manures varies depend- ing on the solubility of the P source (Kleinman et al. 2002; Shigala et al. 2006), a weighting factor should be included to account for the relative solubility of the applied P source (Leytem et al. 2004; Elliot et al. 2006; Vadas et al. 2009). Inclusion of such a factor also can be used to evaluate the impact that manure management strategies such as addition of P- sorbing amendments (Moore et al. 2000; DeLaune et al. 2004a) or manipulation of animal diets (Wu et al. 2000; DeLaune et al. 2004a) has on P loss risk assessment and thus allowable manure application rates. Another important factor controlling the potential of applied P to adversely affect a water body is the distance between the water body and location where nutrient application occurred. The KY P index ranks fields adjacent to water bodies as very high risk, those within 0 to 50 ft as high risk, 50 to 150 ft as medium risk, and those 150 feet or greater as low risk of P loss. Because the impact of distance between field and receiving water body on P transport will depend on numerous factors including field slope and land cover, it is difficult to determine what distance repre- sents a reasonable estimate of high risk of P loss and what distance represents a low risk of P loss. Based on observations from a small watershed in Pennsylvania, Gburek et al. (2000) assigned a risk of very high to fields within 150 ft of a receiving water body and low risk to fields greater than 500 ft from a receiving water body in the Pennsylvania P 56 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) index. These distances are much greater than the distances used for calculating risk in the KY P index. Research must be conducted on agricultural fields in KY to obtain a better understanding of how transport distance affects risk of P loss to receiving water bodies. The KY P index, along with the majority of state P indices, does not consider the risk of P loss through leaching. This is primarily due to the long-held assumption that P is so strongly sorbed to sediments that its translocation through the subsurface is minimal and there- fore poses minimal risk to surface waters. This assumption, however, may not be true in soils with low P sorption capacities, soils with high infiltration rates, and/or shallow soils. For instance, in tile-drained fields where leaching distance is short and drainage water is diverted directly to nearby surface waters, P loads from leaching can be substantial (Sims et al. 1998). Moreover, in well-developed karst areas where soils are thin and groundwater moves primarily through large underground conduits, the retention of P may be minimal. Given the presence of both tile-drained fields and shallow soils in well developed karst areas in Kentucky, consideration should be given to including risk of P loss by subsurface leaching in the KY P index. Pennsylvania (Weld et al. 2002) and North Carolina (N.C. PLAT Committee 2005) are two of several states that have included risk of leaching loss in their P index, and these indices can serve as examples. Another important factor to consider when evaluating a P index is how the final index value is calculated. The KY P index follows the formulation of the original P index in that the final index value is calculated as the sum of the rated transport and source factors, with each weighted factor treated separately (Le- munyon and Gilbert 1993). Gburek et al. (1998) demonstrated that a multiplicative formulation, where a P index is calculated as the product of the summed transport and source factors, better captures the role that transport plays on P loss. Incorporating this multiplicative approach into the Pennsylvania P index, the authors found improvements in the index’s ability to predict P loss (Gburek et al. 2000), and as a result, many states have adopted the multiplicative formulation for calculating their index (Sharpley et al. 2003). A third formulation used in a handful of states sums P loss from each individual component contributing to P loss. In this formulation, each component is calculated as the product of both transport and source factors and best reflects the processes governing P transport in the environment and is consistent with how P loss is calculated in process-based P loss models. CONCLUSIONS The objective of this paper was to critically evaluate the KY P index to identify where the index may need revising and to encourage discussion and research for updating it. Given the lack of available P loss data, this evaluation relied on comparing results from the KY P index with P loss data generated using estab- lished models such as APLE, RUSLE2, and the SCS curve number method. While this analysis was limited to a few hypothetical fields and field and management conditions, this analysis did provide valuable insight into some potential limitations with the index - primarily the neglect of important factors known to affect P loss [i.e., soil erosion and P application rates) and in how the different factors in the index are weighted. To reduce the amount of P that is exported from agricultural fields to waterways within Kentucky, effort and resources should be devoted to updating the KY P index as well as developing long-term monitoring sites where the index and process-based models can be evaluated against measured P loss data. When considering modifications to the KY P index, however, it is important that environ- mental concerns be balanced with consider- ations regarding the potential economic impact to landowners and producers. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am grateful for the helpful comments I received from anonymous reviewers. This re- search was part of USDA-ARS National Pro- gram 206: Manure and By-product Utilization. LITERATURE CITED Andraski, B. J„ D. H. Mueller, and T. C. Daniel. 1985. Phosphorus losses in runoff as affected by tillage. Soil Science Society of America Journal 49:1523-1527. Cox, F. R., and S. Hendricks. 2000. Soil test phosphorus and clay contents effects on runoff water quality. Journal of Environmental Quality 29:1582-1586. Evaluating the Kentucky P Index — Bolster 57 Daverede, I. C., A. N. Kravchenko, R. G. Hoeft, E. D. Nafziger, D. G. Bullock, J. J. Warren, and L. C. Gonzini. 2004. Phosphorus runoff from incorporated and surface-applied liquid swine manure and phospho- rus fertilizer. Journal of Environmental Quality 33:1535-1544. DeLaune, P. B., P. A. Moore, Jr., D. K. Carmen, A. N. Sharpley, B. E. Haggard, and T. C. Daniel. 2004a. Development of a phosphorus index for pastures fertilized with poultry litter — factors affecting phosphorus runoff. Journal of Environmental Quality 33:1947-1953. DeLaune, P. B., P. A. Moore, Jr., D. K. Carmen, A. N. Sharpley, B. E. Haggard, and T. C. Daniel. 2004b. Evaluation of the phosphorus source component in the phosphorus index for pastures. Journal of Environmen- tal Quality 33:2192-2200. Eghball, B., and J. E. Gilley. 2002. Phosphorus risk assessment index evaluation using runoff measure- ments. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 56:202-206. Elliot, H. A., R. C. Brandt, P. J. A. Kleinman, A. N. Sharpley, and D. B. Beegle. 2006. Estimating source coefficients for phosphorus site indices. Journal of Environmental Quality 35:2195-2201. Gassman, P. W„ J. R. Williams, X. Wang, A. Saleh, E. Osei, L. M. Hauck, R. C. Izaurralde, and J. D. Flowers. 2009. The Agricultural Policy Environmental Extender (APEX) Model: an emerging tool for landscape and watershed environmental analyses. Technical Report 09-TR 49. Center for Agricultural and Rural Develop- ment, Iowa State University, Ames, IA. Gburek, W. J., and A. N. Sharpley. 1998. Hydrologic controls on phosphorus loss from upland agricultural watersheds. Journal of Environmental Quality 27:267-277. Gburek, W. J., A. N. Sharpley, L. Heathwaite, and G. J. Folman. 2000. Phosphorus management at the water- shed scale: a modification of the phosphorus index. Journal of Environmental Quality 29:130-144. Harmel, R. D., H. A. Torbert, P. B. DeLaune, B. E. Haggard, and R. Haney. 2005. Field evaluation of three phosphorus indices on new application sites in Texas. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 60:29-42. Kleinman, P. J. A., A. N. Sharpley, B. G. Moyer, and G. F. Elwinger. 2002. Effect of mineral and manure phos- phorus sources on runoff phosphorus. Journal of Environmental Quality 31:2026-2033. Lemunyon, J. L., and R. G. Gilbert. 1993. The concept and need for a phosphorus assessment tool. Journal of Production Agriculture 6:483-496. Leytem, A. B., J. T. Sims, and F. J. Coale. 2004. Determination of phosphorus source coefficients for organic phosphorus sources: laboratory studies. Journal of Environmental Quality 33:380-388. McElroy, A. D., S. Y. Chiu, and J. W. Nebgen, et al. 1976. Loading function for assessment of water pollution from nonpoint sources. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 600/2-76-151, Washington, DC. Moore, Jr., P. A., T. C. Daniel, and D. R. Edwards. 2000. Reducing phosphorus runoff and inhibiting ammonia loss from poultry manure with aluminum sulfate. Journal of Environmental Quality 29:37-49. National Research Council. 2008. Nutrient control actions for improving water quality in the Mississippi River Basin and Northern Gulf of Mexico. Committee on the Mississippi River and the Clean Water Act: Scientific, Modeling and Technical Aspects of Nutrient Pollutant Load Allocation and Implementation. National Re- search Council, Washington, DC. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2001. Kentucky phosphorus (P) matrix. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Conservation practice standard: nutrient management code 590, Lexington, KY. North Carolina PLAT Committee. 2005. North Carolina Phosphorus Loss Assessment: I. Model description and II. Scientific basis and supporting literature. North Carolina Agricultural Research Service Technical Bulletin 323, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC. Pote, D. H„ W. L. Kingery, G. E. Aiken, F. X. Han, P. A. Moore, Jr, and K. Buddington. 2003. Water-quality effects of incorporating poultry litter into perennial grassland soils. Journal of Environmental Quality 32:2392-2398. Schroeder, P. D., D. E. Radcliffe, and M. L. Cabrera. 2004. Rainfall timing and poultry litter application rate effects phosphorus loss in surface runoff. Journal of Environmental Quality 33:2201-2209. Sharpley, A. N. 1997. Rainfall frequency and nitrogen and phosphorus in runoff from soil amended with poultry litter. Journal of Environmental Quality 26:1127-1132. Sharpley, A. N., R. W. McDowell, J. L. Weld, and P. J. A. Kleinman. 2001. Assessing site vulnerability to phos- phorus loss in an agricultural watershed. Journal of Environmental Quality 30:2026-2036. Sharpley, A. N., J. L. Weld, D. B. Beegle, P. J. A. Kleinman, W. J. Gburek, P. A. Moore, Jr., and G. Mullins. 2003. Development of phosphorus indices for nutrient management planning strategies in the United States. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 58: 137-152. Sharpley, A. N., D. Beegle, C. Bolster, L. Good, B. Joem, Q. Ketterings, J. Lory, R. Mikkelsen, D. Osmond, and P. Vadas. 2011. Revision of the 590 Nutrient Management Standard: SERA-17 Recommendations. Southern Cooperative Series Bulletin No. 412. Published by SERA-IEG-17, Virginia Tech. University, Blacksburg, VA. Available at http://www.seral7.ext.vt.edu/Documents/ 590Recommends2011.pdf. Accessed 05/11/2011. Shigaki, F., A. Sharpley, and L. I. Prochnow. 2006. Source- related transport of phosphorus in surface runoff. Journal of Environmental Quality 35:2229-2235. Sims, J. T., R. R. Simard, and B. C. Joem. 1998. Phosphorus loss in agricultural drainage: historical perspective and current research. Journal of Environ- mental Quality 27:277-293. 58 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) Sistani, K. R., C. H. Bolster, T. R. Way, H. A. Torbert, D. H. Pote, and D. B. Watts. 2010. Influence of poultry litter application methods on the longevity of nutrient and E. coli in runoff from tall fescue pasture. Water Air Soil Pollution 206:3-12. Sistani, K. R., H. A. Torbert, T. R. Way, C. H. Bolster, D. H. Pote, and }. G. Warren. 2009. Broiler litter application method and runoff timing effects on nutrient and Escherichia coli losses from tall fescue pasture. Journal of Environmental Quality 38:1216- 1223. Sonmez, O., G. M. Pierzynski, L. Frees, B. Davis, D. Leikam, D. W. Sweeney, and K. A. Janssen. 2009. A field-based assessment tool for phosphorus losses in runoff in Kansas. Journal of Soil and Water Conserva- tion 64:212-222. Torbert, H. A., R. D. Harmel, K. N. Potter, and M. Dozier. 2005. Evaluation of some P index criteria in cultivated agriculture in clay soils. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 60:21-29. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 2006. RUSLE2. Available at http://fargo.nser!. purdue.edu/rusle2_dataweb/RUSLE2_Index.htm. Ac- cessed 05/05/2011. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1972, National Engineering Handbook, Hy- drology Section 4, Chapters 4-10. U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. Unified national strategy for animal feeding operations. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. Available at http://cfpub.epa. gov/npdes/afo/ustrategy.cfm?program_id= 7. Accessed 05/05/2011. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2010. Chapter 2: Agriculture. In Guidance for Federal land management in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. EPA841-R- 10-002., 247 pp. Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds, Washington, DC. Available at http://www.epa.gov/nps/ chesbay502/pdf/chesbay_chap02.pdf. Accessed 05/05/ 2011. Vadas, P. A., L. W. Good, P. A. Moore, Jr, and N. Widman. 2009. Estimating phosphorus loss in runoff from manure and fertilizer for a phosphorus loss quantification tool. Journal of Environmental Quality 38:1645-1653. Veith, T. L„ A. N. Sharpley, J. L. Weld, and W. J. Gburek. 2005. Comparison of measured and simulated phos- phorus losses with indexed site vulnerability. Transac- tions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 48:557-565. Weld, J. L., R. L. Parsons, D. B. Beegle, A. N. Sharpley, W. J. Gburek, and W. R. Clouser. 2002. Evaluation of phosphorus management strategies in Pennsylvania. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 57:448-454. Williams, J. R., and R. W. Hann. 1978. Optimal operations of large agricultural watersheds with water quality constraints. Texas Water Resources Institute, Texas A&M University, Tech. Report No. 96. Wu, Z., L. D. Satter, and R. Soja. 2000. Milk production, reproductive performance, and fecal excretion of phosphorus by dairy cows fed three amounts of phosphorus. Journal of Dairy Science 83:1028-1041. J. Ky. Acad. Sci. 72(l):59-62. 2011. New County Distribution Records of Dragonflies and Damselflies (Odonata) in Florida, Kentucky, and Tennessee Paul D. McMurray, Jr.1 and Thomas P. Simon Indiana State University, Biology Department, 600 Chestnut Street, Science Building Room 281, Terre Haute, Indiana 47809 ABSTRACT A total of 30 new odonate county distribution records are presented for counties in Florida, Kentucky, and Tennessee. The known odonate fauna of Madison County, Kentucky, is increased from 16 to 27 species and the fauna of Claiborne County, Tennessee, is increased from 18 to 27 species. Libellulidae and Coenagrionidae species accounted for the majority of the new records, 15 and 7, respectively. KEY WORDS: Odonata, Central Kentucky Wildlife Management Area, Blue Grass Army Depot, Powell River, Lake Griffin, Florida, Tennessee, county records INTRODUCTION Annotated lists of the odonate fauna of Florida, Kentucky, and Tennessee are pub- lished in Dunkle (1992), Resener (1970), and Trogdon (1961), respectively. These lists were updated by Donnelly (2004a, 2004b, 2004c) who compiled all of the known Odonata distribution records for North America. Cur- rently, 153 odonate species are recorded from Kentucky, 154 species from Tennessee, and 170 species from Florida. These diverse faunas contain 34-37% of the odonate species known from the continental United States (Abbott 2007). Yet, despite the advanced listings available for these three southeastern states, disproportionate sampling intensity has limited our knowledge of the faunal compo- sitions within each state. Donnelly (2004a, 2004b, 2004c) and Abbott (2007) reported that more than 50 percent of Kentucky’s and Tennessee’s counties have records of 20 or fewer odonate species; 31% of Kentucky’s counties and 26% of Tennessee’s counties have records of 10 or fewer species. METHODS AND MATERIALS In the course of the first author’s study of the odonate fauna of the upper Rockcastle River system in Kentucky (McMurray and Schuster 2009), opportunities were presented for additional collections to be made within the Commonwealth. During this time collec- tions were also made at locations in Claiborne 1 Corresponding author e-mail: paul.mcmurray79@ gmail.com County, Tennessee, and Lake County, Flor- ida. A total of 30 new odonate county distribution records were accumulated from 2002 to 2009. Adult odonates were collected from a variety of habitats (small and medium sized streams, wetlands, ponds, and lakes) with a large (45 cm wide) aerial net (Bioquip Tropics Net, #7324). Collected odonates were put into glassine envelopes and submerged in acetone for 8-24 hours, depending on the size of the specimen. After drying, specimens were stored in clear cellophane envelopes with pertinent collection information typed on a 3" X 5" index card (Needham et al. 2000). Identifications of adult odonates were made using Westfall and May (1996), Needham et al. (2000), and Glotzhober and McShaffrey (2002). Photographs of potential county rec- ords with complete collection dates were submitted to the Odonata Central website (www.odonatacentral.org) for verification. Odonata Central record numbers (OC #) are given with those records listed below. Spec- imens with incomplete collection dates were sent to Ellis Laudermilk (Kentucky State Nature Preserve Commission, Frankfort, Kentucky) for verification. All specimens are currently held in the personal collection of the first author. Collector’s initials correspond to those of the first author and Chris Distel (CD), Quinten Tolliver (QT), Rusty Johns (RJ), and Sandra Bowman (SB). RESULTS The 30 new county records were distributed across seven odonate families and included a 59 60 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 72(1) total of 24 species. Libellulidae was the most well represented family with 11 species account- ing for 15 of the new records. Coenagrionidae was the next most abundant family represented by five species and seven new records. Eleven new species were documented for Madison County, Kentucky (69% increase from 16 to 27 records), and nine new species were documented for Claiborne County, Tennessee (50% increase from 18 to 27 records) (Abbott 2007). Four odonate species were added to the known fauna of Rowan County, while one species was added to the known faunas of Laurel, Rockcastle, and Metcalfe counties, Kentucky (Abbott 2007; McMurray and Schuster 2009). The fauna of Lake County, Florida, was increased by three species (Abbott 2007). The additions to the known distributions of odonate species in the southern United States suggest that more intensive collection efforts are needed in certain counties that have previously been sparsely sampled. The new records document a significant increase in species composition for Madison County, Kentucky (69% increase), and Claiborne County, Tennessee (50% increase) compared with the previously known odonate faunas. Increased effort, even in well studied areas, has the potential to reveal cryptic species and additional species with limited ranges. Annotated List of New Odonata Records Kentucky Madison County: pond at Central Kentucky Wildlife Management Area; 11.3 km northeast of Berea (37.631295 N, -84.192352 W). Coenagrionidae Argia fumipennis violacea (Burmeister) (Variable Dancer): Icy, 2003, QT. Argia sedula (Hagen) (Blue-ringed Danc- er): 2cycy, 2003, QT. Enallagma basidens Calvert (Double- striped Bluet): 3