wg JOURNAL
— OF THE
KENTUCKY
ACADEMY OF
SCIENCE
Official Publication of the Academy
ff
“*"4
Volume 61 Meee
ear ONIAR
Number 2
\ FEB 5 2001
Fall 2000 LIBRARIES
Oe A OO
The Kentucky Academy of Science
Founded 8 May 1914
GOVERNING BOARD
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
2000
President: Blaine R. Ferrell, Department of Biology, Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, KY
42101
President Elect: Ron Rosen, Department of Biology, Berea College, Berea, KY 40404
Vice President: Jerry W. Warner, Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Kentucky University,
Highland Heights, KY 41099
Past President: Gordon K. Weddle, Department of Biology, Campbellsville University, Campbellsville, KY
42718
Secretary: Stephanie Dew, Department of Biology, Centre College, Danville, KY 40422
Treasurer: William E. Houston, 161 Morningstar Court, Bowling Green, KY 42103
Executive Secretary (ex officio): Donald Frazier, Science Outreach Center, University of Kentucky, Lex-
ington, KY 40536-0078
Editor, JOURNAL (ex officio): John W. Thieret, Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Kentucky
University, Highland Heights, KY 41099; (859) 572-6390
Editor, NEWSLETTER (ex officio): Maria K. Falbo, Department of Physics and Geology, Northern
Kentucky University, Highland Heights, KY 41099
Chair, Junior Academy of Science (ex officio): Elizabeth K. Sutton, Department of Chemistry, Campbellsville
University, Campbellsville, KY 42718
Program Director (ex officio): Robert O. Creek, Department of Biological Sciences, Eastern Kentucky
University, Richmond, KY 40475
COMMITTEE ON PUBLICATIONS
Editor and John W. Thieret, Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Kentucky University,
Chair: Highland Heights, KY 41099
Associate Editor: James O. Luken, Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Kentucky University,
Highland Heights, KY 41099
Index Editor: Varley Wiedeman, Department of Biology, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY
40292
Abstract Editor: Robert Barney, Community Research Service, Kentucky State University, Frankfort,
KY 40601
Editorial Board: John P. Harley, Department of Biological Sciences, Eastern Kentucky University,
Richmond, KY 40475
Marcus T. McEllistrem, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of
Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506-0055
J.G. Rodriguez, Department of Entomology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY
40546-0091
John D. Sedlacek, Community Research Service, Kentucky State University,
Frankfort, KY 40601
Gordon K. Weddle, Department of Biology, Campbellsville University, Campbellsville,
KY 42718-2799
All manuscripts and correspondence concerning manuscripts should be addressed to the Editor.
The JOURNAL is indexed in BIOSIS, Cambridge Scientific Abstracts, and in State Academies of Science Abstracts.
Membership in the Academy is open to interested persons upon nomination, payment of dues, and election. Application
forms for membership may be obtained from the Secretary. The JOURNAL is sent free to all members in good standing.
Annual dues are $25.00 for Active Members; $15.00 for Student Members; $35.00 for Family; $350.00 for Life Mem-
bers. Subscription rates for nonmembers are: $50.00 domestic; $60.00 foreign. Back issues are $30.00 per volume.
The JOURNAL is issued semiannually in spring and fall. Two numbers comprise a volume.
Correspondence concerning memberships or subscriptions should be addressed to the Executive Secretary.
This paper meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-992 (Permanence of Paper).
INSTITUTIONAL AFFILIATES
Fellow
University of Kentucky University of Louisville
Sustaining Member
Eastern Kentucky University Northern Kentucky University
Morehead State University Western Kentucky University
Murray State University
Member
Bellarmine College Cumberland College
Berea College Somerset Community College
Campbellsville University Southeast Community College
Centre College
Associate Member
Georgetown College Midway College
Jefferson Community College | Owensboro Community College
Kentucky State University Spalding University
Kentucky Wesleyan College Thomas More College
Maysville Community College Transylvania University
INDUSTRIAL AFFILIATES
Associate Patron
Ashland Oil, Inc.
Member
Corhart Refractories Corporation
MPD, Inc.
Associate Member
All-Rite Pest Control
Wood Hudson Cancer Research Laboratory, Inc.
JOURNAL OF THE KENTUCKY ACADEMY OF SCIENCE
ISSN 1098-7096
Continuation of
Transactions of the Kentucky Academy of Science
Volume 61 Fall 2000 Number 2
J. Ky. Acad. Sci. 61(2):67-76. 2000.
Conservation Status and Nesting Biology of the Endangered Duskytail
Darter, Etheostoma percnurum, in the Big South Fork of the
Cumberland River, Kentucky
David J. Eisenhour
Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Morehead State University, Morehead, Kentucky 40351
and
Brooks M. Burr
Department of Zoology and Center for Systematic Biology, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale,
Carbondale, Illinois 62901-6501
ABSTRACT
In September 1995 and May and June 1998 and 1999 we conducted an intensive survey of a middle reach
of Big South Fork of the Cumberland River in Kentucky with the goal of finding the duskytail darter,
Etheostoma percnurum, a federally endangered species. Seventy-one specimens were observed in a 19-stream
km reach from the mouth of Station Camp Creek, Scott County, Tennessee, to the mouth of Bear Creek,
McCreary County, Kentucky. Using underwater observation and a kick-seining technique around slabrocks,
we concur with others that the primary habitat of E. percnurum includes clear, silt-free pools immediately
above riffles where it seeks cover undeér cobbles and slabrocks. Most Kentucky specimens (31 of 35) and all
nests were found in a 3-km reach from just upstream of the mouth of Troublesome Creek to the mouth of
Oil Well Branch. On 26 May 1998 five nests were found at two sites. All nests were located immediately
above riffles in silt-free glides with slabrock and cobble substrates and were guarded by males. Eggs, de-
posited in a monolayer on the underside of slabrocks, numbered from 79-103 eggs per nest. Slabrocks with
eggs had mean dimensions of 24 X 19 X 4.1 cm and were located in shallow water (51-70 cm) in areas of
low flow (5-14 cm/s). Because of the rarity of this darter within its restricted range in Kentucky, we rec-
ommend that it be added to Kentucky’s list of protected species as endangered. Morphological comparison
of E. percnurum from across its range revealed that specimens from Big South Fork have more lateral-line
scales, are larger, and are shaped differently than specimens from other populations. The morphological and
biological comparisons, along with zoogeographic evidence, indicate that the Big South Fork population of
E. percnurum is an independent evolutionary unit.
INTRODUCTION 1985; Page 1985). It is a member of one of
Etheostoma percnurum (Perciformes: Per- three recognized complexes in the subgenus,
cidae), the duskytail darter, is one of 18 spe- the flabellare complex, which includes the stri-
cies in the darter subgenus Catonotus petail darter, Etheostoma kennicotti, and the
(Braasch and Mayden 1985: Page et al. 1992), fantail darter, Etheostoma flabellare, in addi-
a group characterized by a derived spawning tion to E. percnurum. The duskytail darter,
habit of clustering eggs in a monolayer on the long known only by its common name, was
underside of slabrocks (Braasch and Mayden formally described and distinguished from its
67
68 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
closest relative, the wide-ranging E. flabellare,
by R. E. Jenkins in 1994 (Jenkins and Burk-
head 1994:877-881). At that time, E. percnu-
rum was known from six relict populations in
drainages of the Cumberland and Tennessee
rivers: one in Virginia, Copper Creek; and five
in Tennessee, Citico Creek, Abrams Creek,
Little River, South Fork Holston River, and
Big South Fork of the Cumberland River.
Populations in South Fork Holston River and
Abrams Creek are believed extirpated (Etnier
and Starnes 1993; Jenkins and Burkhead
1994). The only known site of occurrence in
the Cumberland River drainage is Big South
Fork. Because of this relict distribution, the
presumed extirpation of two populations, and
threats to water quality in streams it is known
to inhabit, E. percnurum is listed as Federally
Endangered (Biggins 1993). Biggins and
Shute (1994), Burkhead and Jenkins (1991),
Etnier and Starnes (1993), Jenkins (in Jenkins
and Burkhead 1994), Layman (1984, 1991),
and Simon and Layman (1995) summarized
aspects of life history, development, distribu-
tion, and abundance based largely on popula-
tions in either Copper Creek or Little River.
Despite numerous and intensive fish collec-
tions made over the past 40 years, E. perc-
nurum has been reported from only one lo-
cality on Big South Fork, the mouth of Station
Camp Creek, Scott County, Tennessee. In
1995, we were contracted by the Kentucky
Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources
(KDFWR) to conduct a status survey of E.
percnurum in the Kentucky reach of Big
South Fork. In this paper we document the
status of this species in Kentucky by present-
ing distributional, abundance, reproduction,
and recruitment data. We describe the habitat
and nesting biology for the species in Ken-
tucky. Finally, we identify unique morpholog-
ical, behavioral, and ecological features that
indicate the Big South Fork population may
be an independent evolutionary unit.
METHODS
Status Survey
From 7-9 Sep 1995 we conducted a nearly
comprehensive survey of a middle reach of
Big South Fork Cumberland River, Kentucky
and Tennessee. We surveyed 14 sites judged
to have suitable habitat for E. percnurum in a
19-km reach from the mouth of Station Camp
Creek, Scott County, Tennessee, to the mouth
of Bear Creek, McCreary County, Kentucky.
Four of these sites were resampled and two
new sites in Big South Fork were surveyed in
spring 1998 and 1999 during trips designed to
gather information on the nesting biology of
E. percnurum. Near the Tennessee-Kentucky
border, Big South Fork is a medium-sized riv-
er, 30-50 m wide, that flows through a deep
(200-300 m) gorge of the Cumberland Pla-
teau. Pools are long and deep, with house-
sized boulders and bedrock substrates; riffles
are fast, well defined, and flow over a substrate
of cobbles, boulders, and some pea gravel and
coarse sand. The mainstem has a completely
forested riparian zone and is protected as a
National River and Recreation Area under
management of the National Park Service. Be-
cause of limited access in this area, nearly all
sites required travelling via canoe.
Underwater visual sampling with snorkeling
gear was used at all sites for locating individ-
uals of E. percnurum. As many as 10 people
were involved in underwater sampling at one
time, thus increasing the efficiency of the
search. In suitable habitat, snorkelers fanned
out and turned over slabrocks in pools above
and below riffles, macrohabitats known to har-
bor the species (Jenkins and Burkhead 1994;
Layman 1991). This method was supplement-
ed at selected sites by kick-seining (Jenkins
and Burkhead 1994) isolated rocks serving as
potential cover for E. percnurum. About 20-
60 minutes of snorkel and/or kick-seining time
were spent at each site. Standard physical hab-
itat features (width, depth, area sampled) were
recorded at each site. The size of large spec-
imens observed was measured or judged to
the nearest millimeter with a plastic ruler.
Young-of-the-year (YOY) generally were noted
but not measured. Initially, identifications of
E. percnurum observed by snorkeling were
confirmed by capturing individuals with a dip-
net. We quickly discovered that even YOY
were easily identifiable while we were snor-
keling because of the distinctive appearance of
E. percnurum, the only member of Catonotus
present in Big South Fork mainstem.
Nesting Biology
Our initial status survey aided in the iden-
tification of potential nesting sites for E. perc-
Duskytail Darters—Eisenhour and Burr 69
nurum. Six sites were surveyed for nests in a
27-km reach between Station Camp Creek
and Blue Heron, McCreary County, Kentucky,
on 25-26 May 1998, 24 Jun 1998, and 18 Jun
1999. Underwater visual observation with
snorkeling gear was used to locate nesting
adults. Snorkelers concentrated on appropri-
ate habitat above riffles, turning over rocks
suitable for use as nesting substrate. About
60-230 minutes of snorkeling time were spent
at each site, and up to six people were in-
volved in underwater visual observation. All E.
percnurum adults observed were captured
with dipnets, measured, photographed, and
released. The number of eggs in a nest was
counted, and the diameter of eggs, nest rocks,
and other physical parameters of nest sites
were measured with a small plastic ruler or
meter tape. Current velocity was measured
over the nest with a Swoffer model 2100 flow-
meter at 0.6 of the depth above a nest site.
Systematics
To better understand the evolutionary units
under protection, we examined and compared
specimens from the drainages of the Cumber-
land and Tennessee rivers. Seventeen meristic
and 27 morphometric variables were taken
from 65 and 39 specimens, respectively, of E.
percnurum. Measurements and counts of me-
ristic features follow the methods of Hubbs
and Lagler (1974) except that scales above the
lateral-line were counted diagonally from the
origin of the second dorsal fin. Vertebrae were
visualized by the aid of soft x-rays (3A, 30 my,
15 seconds) and were counted using the meth-
ods of Jenkins and Lachner (1971). Cephalic
lateral pore counts followed the methods of
Page (1983).
Truss-geometric protocol (Humphries et al.
1981; Strauss and Bookstein 1982) was used
in part to archive body form and included 17
measurements distributed among three sagit-
tal truss cells with appended anterior and pos-
terior triangles. Ten additional measurements
were included in the morphometric analysis.
Multivariate analysis of the morphometric data
was accomplished using sheared principal
component analysis (PCA) (Bookstein et al.
1985; Humphries et al. 1981) to eliminate
overall size effects. Principal components were
factored from a covariance matrix of log-trans-
formed morphometric variables following the
recommendations of Bookstein et al. (1985).
Multivariate analyses were conducted with
programs available in SAS 6.01 (SAS Institute,
Inc. 1985) and as modified by D. L. Swofford.
Preliminary morphometric analysis revealed
strong sexual dimorphism and seasonal varia-
tion associated with reproduction in the Cop-
per Creek specimens (the only ones collected
in the spring). To reduce confounding varia-
tion associated with reproduction, we removed
the Copper Creek material from the analysis,
and only compared material from collections
made outside of the breeding season (August—
February).
RESULTS
Status Survey
We observed 60 individuals of E. percnu-
rum in September 1995 and 11 individuals in
May 1998 in the 19 stream km reach of the
Big South Fork between the mouth of Station
Camp Creek, Scott County, Tennessee, and
the mouth of Bear Creek, McCreary County,
Kentucky (Figure 1). Environmental condi-
tions were ideal because the river was at base
flow, water clarity was excellent (at least 2 m),
direct sunlight was present, and water tem-
perature was warm, averaging 22.2°C in Sep-
tember 1995 and 22.5°C in May 1998. All sites
sampled in Tennessee produced 1-10 E. perc-
nurum, but only 6 of 10 sites sampled in Ken-
tucky produced individuals, ranging from 1—
11 including both adults and YOY (Table 1).
Most (31 of 35) individuals observed in Ken-
tucky were in a 3-km reach from just above
the mouth of Troublesome Creek to the
mouth of Oil Well Branch.
Etheostoma percnurum, not common at any
site, was probably the least common darter
species observed. Considering that we ade-
quately sampled only 25-50% of the suitable
habitat at any one site, the species is presum-
ably more abundant than our results (Table 1)
might otherwise suggest. Our professional
judgment is that at least 5-10 times the num-
bers we observed almost certainly inhabit a
given site. This conservative estimate would
yield a total population of 300-600 individuals
of E. percnurum in a 19-km stretch of Big
South Fork.
Underwater observation proved to be a pro-
ductive method of finding and observing E.
70 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
@ E. percnurum present
O E. percnurum absent
kilometers
No Business Creek
Figure 1.
Tennessee, and McCreary County, Kentucky.
percnurum in most habitats. For comparison,
we kick-seined isolated rocks judged to poten-
tially harbor E. percnurum at three sites in
Kentucky. Initially, our success rate was high,
as 3 of 6 rocks sampled yielded E. percnurum
(site 8). Subsequently, at sites 9 and 11 only 2
of 14 rocks and 1 of 14 rocks sampled, re-
spectively, yielded E. percnurum. At these
three sites our yield per unit effort for kick-
seining (1 fish per 23.3 person-minutes) was
considerably higher than for underwater ob-
servation (1 fish per 80.8 person-minutes).
However, the stacked slabrocks and boulders
of most areas precluded sampling by the kick-
seining method.
Habitat
All E. percnurum were observed in silt-free
pools or raceways with low, but evident flow,
immediately above riffles where cobbles, boul-
ders, and slabrocks were available. These
pools averaged about 25 X 40 m in area and
about 54 cm deep, although specimens were
observed as deep as 1.5 m. All individuals
were under cover of cobbles, boulders, or sla-
brocks. Cover rocks ranged from fist-sized
Sampling sites for Etheostoma percnurum along Big South Fork of the Cumberland River, Scott County,
cobbles to 76 X 76 cm slabrocks and boulders,
with an average thickness of 5 cm. Eleven oth-
er darter species were found in association
with E. percnurum, including Etheostoma
baileyi, emerald darter; Etheostoma blennioi-
des, greenside darter; Etheostoma camurum,
bluebreast darter; Etheostoma caeruleum,
rainbow darter; Etheostoma cinereum, ashy
darter; Etheostoma sanguifluum, bloodfin
darter; Etheostoma stigmaeum, speckled dart-
er; Etheostoma tippecanoe, tippecanoe darter;
Etheostoma zonale, banded darter; Percina
caprodes, logperch; and Percina copelandi,
channel darter.
Nesting Biology
Five nests were located in 44.7 person-
hours of snorkeling, for a rate of one nest per
8.9 hours of snorkeling. Three nests were
found at site 8, just above the mouth of Trou-
blesome Creek, and two nests were found at
site 10, mouth of Annie Branch, all on 26 May
1998 (Table 2). All nests were in pools and
raceways, 5-50 m above riffles. Nests were in
water 51-70 cm (mean = 62 cm) deep with
current velocity at 5-14 cm/s (mean = 10 cm/
Duskytail Darters—Eisenhour and Burr 7
Table 1. Geographic location, date, number of individuals observed while snorkeling, unit of effort (snorkelers x
minutes), and approximate size of specimens of Etheostoma percnurum, Big South Fork Cumberland River, Kentucky
and Tennessee. Geographic location numbers correspond to those in Figure 1. Sexable adults are divided into males
(M) and females (F).
Number of Size of
Geographic individuals Unit of specimens
location Date (sex) effort (mm, TL)
1. Mouth of Station Camp 7 Sep 1995 6 9 x 60 35-50 + YOY
Creek, Scott Co., TN 25 May 1998 oF 8 X 30 50
2. Mouth of Parched Corn 7 Sep 1995 6 9 X 60 40-50
Creek, Scott Co., TN
3. Halfway between Cold Spring 7 Sep 1995 10 9 X 60 30-50 + YOY
and Big Branch, Scott Co.,
T™
4. Big Island, Scott Co., TN 7 Sep 1995 10 9 X 90 35-50 + YOY
5. Just above mouth of Williams 8 Sep 1995 1 9 X 60 30
Creek, Scott Co., TN
6. Near mouth of Hurricane & Sep 1995 1 9 X 60 35
Creek, Scott Co., TN
7. Mouth of Difficulty Creek, 8 Sep 1995 ] 9 X 60 40
McCreary Co., KY 25 May 1998 8) 6 X 60 35
8. 1 km above mouth of Trou- 8 Sep 1995 ll 9 X 110 40-60 YOY
blesome Creek, McCreary
Co., KY 25-26 May 1998 3M, 1F 6 X 180 50-65
9. Mouth of Troublesome 9 Sep 1995 0 10 X 75 30-55 + YOY
Creek, McCreary Co., KY
10. Mouth of Annie Branch, 26 May 1998 2M, 1F 6 X 35 54-67
McCreary Co., KY
11. Mouth of Oil Well Branch, 9 Sep 1995 6 10 < 20 40-60 + YOY
McCreary Co., KY
12. Huling Ford, McCreary Co., 9 Sep 1995 0 10 X 20 =
KY
13. Mouth of second unnamed 9 Sep 1995 0 10 X 30 =
tributary below Huling
Ford, McCreary Co., KY
14. Mouth of tributary near Slav- 9 Sep 1995 0 10 X 30 =
en’s Branch Trail, Mc- 26 May 1998 0 2x 20 =
Creary Co., KY .
15. Mouth of Bear Creek, Mc- 9 Sep 1995 1 10 X 120 50 mm
Creary Co., KY
16. Blue Heron, McCreary Co., 24 Jun 1998 0 2x 90 =
KY 18 Jun 1999 0 2X 150 —
Table 2. Summaries of physical habitat features and nest characteristics of five nests of Etheostoma percnurum at
sites 8 and 10 (see Figure 1 and Table 1) in Big South Fork Cumberland River, Kentucky, 26 May 1998.
Nest parameter Mean Range
Length of nest rock 186 mm 150-300 mm
Width of nest rock 240 mm 180-400 mm
Thickness of nest rock 41 mm 37-50 mm
Depth of nest 62 mm 51-70 mm
Height of nest rock cavity 21 mm 15-25 mm
Size of guardian male 57 mm 55-58 mm
Water temperature oly 22a ©
Length and width of egg mass 40 X 50 mm 30 X 40 mm-—50 X 75 mm
Diameter of eggs 9-3 mm 9-3 mm
Number of eggs in nest 101 79-132
Current velocity 9.6 cm/s 5.0-14 cm/s
72 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Table 3. Frequency distribution of lateral-line scales in four populations of Etheostoma percnurum, Virginia and
Tennessee.
Population 39 40 41 42 43, 44 45 46 47 45 49 50 n Mean SD
Copper Creek, VA 2 ] 5 3} 5 3 l 20 §©642.05 1.67
Big South Fork, TN 2 1 i 2 = ] 8 46.38 2.07
Little Rock, TN 3 ] 5 6 8 4 2 = 1 ] Ol) 43755) 2105
Citico Creek, TN ] i — ] ] 2, 6 4400 2.10
s). All nest rocks were slab-sided and ranged
from 15 X 18 cm to 30 X 40 cm and averaged
4.1 cm in thickness. A cavity 15-25 mm deep
was between the substrate (sand, coal, and de-
tritus) and the bottom of the nest rock. Nests
were located in a relatively small area at each
site; nests ranged from 2.4—7.0 m apart. Water
temperature was 22.5°C at both sites.
Eggs were adhesive, round, 2-3 mm in di-
ameter, and amber. They were deposited in a
monolayer on the underside of the nest rocks
except one nest had one egg laid on top of
another egg. Four of the five clutches con-
tained “eyed” embryos rapidly moving inside
their chorions. The number of eggs in the nest
clutches (or the complement of eggs) ranged
from 79-132 (mean = 101). Clutches were
oblong to round, ranged in size from 30 < 40
mm to 55 X 75 mm, and generally placed near
the center of the underside of the nest rock.
Each of the five nests was guarded by a sin-
gle male with nuptial colors and morphology
similar to other members of Catonotus. The
knobs on the tips of the first dorsal fin were
bright gold to amber, and the edges of the
pectoral, soft dorsal, and caudal fins were dis-
tinctly peppered with black margins. All males
had strong vertical bar development on their
sides and blackened heads. The bases of their
caudal and pectoral fins were light amber to
salmon; pelvic fins were an iridescent white.
Standard length (SL) for the five guarding
males ranged from 55-58 mm (64-67 mm to-
tal length). The four adult females (50-54 mm
SL) were found under rocks well away from
nests. None of the females were swollen with
mature ova and apparently already had
spawned.
Parasites
In May 1998 we observed black-spot dis-
ease in five of six specimens examined closely.
The number of black spots ranged from 1-4,
except that one female had about 25 spots.
This female was covered in fungus and ap-
peared to be near death. Black-spot disease
was present in only three of the eight speci-
mens vouchered in September 1995; the num-
ber of black spots ranged from 1-5.
Systematics
The Big South Fork population had higher
mean lateral-line scales than other populations
(Table 3). Specimens from Citico Creek were
distinctive in having fewer principal caudal
rays, scales above the lateral line, scales below
the lateral line, scales around the caudal pe-
duncle, and lateral-line scales and more pored »
lateral-line scales (Table 4). Other meristic
characters examined showed little intraspecific
variation. Principal component analysis of the
meristic variables was not informative.
Sheared PCA of the morphometric vari-
ables separated individuals from the Cumber-
land and Tennessee drainages into non-over-
lapping clusters, with most separation occur-
ring along the sheared PC 2 axis (Figure 2).
Examination of loadings indicates Big South
Fork specimens have shorter soft dorsal and
anal fins, a shorter anal fin base, a more pos-
teriorly placed anal fin, and a more robust
body (Table 5). In addition, a larger maximum
size was attained by males from Big South
Fork (58 mm SL) and Little River (56 mm SL;
Etnier and Starnes 1993) than males from
Copper Creek (48 mm SL; Jenkins and Burk-
head 1994). Females attained a larger maxi-
mum size in Big South Fork (maximum 54
mm SL) than Copper Creek (45 mm SL, Jen-
kins and Burkhead 1994) and Little River (47
mm SL; Layman 1991).
DISCUSSION
Conservation Status
Etheostoma percnurum occupies a greater
range in the Big South Fork than previously
known. We have established the existence of
the species over a 19-stream km reach at six
Duskytail Darters—Eisenhour and Burr
73
Table 4. Meristic counts displaying little intraspecific variation of 65 Etheostoma percnurum from four populations in
the drainages of the Tennessee and Cumberland rivers, Virginia and Tennessee. Means are followed by ranges in
parentheses.
Copper Creek,
VA
Meristic n = 20
Dorsal spines 6.9 (6-8)
Dorsal rays 11.50 (11-13)
Pectoral rays 12.75 (12-13)
Pelvic rays 6
Anal spines 1.95 (1-2)
Anal rays 7.25 (6-8)
Principal caudal rays 17.85 (17-18)
Pored lateral-line scales 94.20 (17-28)
Scales above lateral line 6.80 (6-8)
Scales below lateral line 8.95 (7-10)
Scales around caudal peduncle 94.05 (22-27)
Interorbital pores 6.05 (6-7)
Preoperculomandibular pores 10.00 (9-11)
Total vertebrae 33.55 (33-35; n = 11)
Precaudal vertebrae 13.82 (13-15; n = 11)
Caudal vertebrae 19.73 (19-20: n = 11)
sites in the Tennessee reach of Big South Fork
(five of these not previously reported) and re-
port it here for the first time from six sites in
the Kentucky reach of Big South Fork. A re-
cent survey by Shute et al. (unpublished data)
located E. percnurum as far upstream as the
mouth of Blevins Branch, Tennessee, expand-
ing the known range in the Big South Fork to
a 22-stream km reach. However, most Ken-
tucky specimens are known only from a 3-km
reach, and additional populations in Kentucky
are unlikely to be present. The Big South Fork
harbors the only known population of E. perc-
nurum in the Cumberland River drainage.
=
=
a
Less robust body
Taller soft dorsal and anal fins
More anterior anal fin
Longer anal fin base
o
o 2S
a |=Cl =
0
-0.05
-0.1
Sheared PC 3
-0.15
-0.15
0.1 -0.05 O 0.05 0.1
Sheared PC 2
0.15
Figure 2. Morphometric scores on sheared PC axes 2
and 3 for 27 Etheostoma percnurum from Big South Fork
of the Cumberland River, Little River, and Citico Creek,
Tennessee.
Big South Fork, Little Rock, Citico Creek,
TN TN
n= 8 ny oll n=6
7 6.61 (6-7) 6.50 (6-7)
11.75 (11-12) 11.62 (11-13) 11.67 (11-12)
13 12.52 (12-13) 12.67 (12-14)
6 6 6
2 2 2
7.25 (7-8) 7.19 (7-8) 7.50 (7-8)
17.25 (16-18) 17.87 (17-18) 16.33 (16-17)
27.63 (25-30) 25.94 (23-30) 31.00 (29-34)
6.63 (6-7) 6.48 (6-7) 6.00 (5-7)
8.25 (7-9) 8.71 (8-10) 8.00 (7-9)
23.13 (22-25) 23.52 (21-27) 21.83 (20-25)
6 6 6
10.13 (10-11) 10.03 (9-12) 9.50 (9-10)
33.63 (33-35) — =
14.13 (13-15) — —
19.50 (18-20) — —
The few other streams in this drainage that
might harbor a relict population of this species
have been well sampled (Burr and Warren
1986; Etnier and Starnes 1993). Our popula-
tion estimate (300-600) over a 19-km stretch,
though conservative, indicates considerably
lower density in Big South Fork than Little
River, Tennessee, where Layman (1991) esti-
mated a population of 1023 E. percnurum in
a 200-m reach in 1983. The highly restricted
and localized distribution (mostly in about 3
stream km) of E. percnurum in Kentucky as
well as its general rarity argue strongly for its
immediate inclusion on the Kentucky state en-
dangered/threatened species list as an endan-
gered species.
The small distribution and population size
of E. percnurum in Kentucky appears to be
due to limited suitable habitat in Kentucky.
Extensive alluvial streamside deposits (Pom-
erane 1964) are present from the mouth of Oil
Well Branch to about 0.5 km above the mouth
of Troublesome Creek, the reach with the
largest Kentucky populations of E. percnurum.
Similar alluvial deposits are almost entirely ab-
sent along the remainder of unimpounded
portions of Big South Fork in Kentucky. Be-
low the mouth of Bear Creek, suitable habitat
continues to decline. Big South Fork narrows
and becomes a series of long rapids strewn
with large boulders, essentially lacking cobble
and small boulder shoals. At Blue Heron, the
74 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Table 5.
Sheared principal component loadings for 27 morphometric variables for 27 Etheostoma percnurum from
Big South Fork Cumberland River, Little River, and Citico Creek, Kentucky and Tennessee.
Measurement
Standard length
Head length
Gape width
Pectoral fin length
Pelvic fin length
First dorsal fin height
Second dorsal fin height
Anal fin height at third ray
Interorbital width
Snout to occiput
Snout to origin of pelvic fin
First dorsal fin base length
Second dorsal fin base length
Pelvic fin origin to anal fin origin
Anal fin base length
Second dorsal fin insertion to hypural
Anal fin insertion to hypural
First dorsal fin origin to anal fin origin
Pelvic fin origin to second dorsal fin origin
Second dorsal fin origin to anal fin insertion
Anal fin origin to second dorsal fin insertion
Occiput to pelvic fin origin
First dorsal fin origin to pelvic fin origin
Second dorsal fin origin to anal fin origin
Second dorsal fin insertion to anal fin insertion
Head width
Body width under second dorsal fin origin
river widens, and some suitable habitat is pre-
sent, although E. percnurum was not observed
from this area. Below Blue Heron are the im-
pounded waters of Lake Cumberland, certain-
ly unsuitable for E. percnurum.
Although the mainstem of Big South Fork
is protected from disturbances by the National
Park Service, several tributaries (e.g., Bear
Creek) are discharging low-quality because of
mining in their watersheds. On 26 May 1998,
following a rain the previous night, we ob-
served extremely turbid water discharging
from Bear Creek into the otherwise clear Big
South Fork. Improvement in these impacted
streams will help maintain the high-quality
habitats in Big South Fork that are required
by E. percnurum and other species (e.g., No-
tropis sp. “sawfin shiner” and E. cinereum)
with restricted distributions in Kentucky.
We suggest periodic monitoring of the dis-
tribution and abundance of Kentucky E. perc-
nurum. We consider both underwater obser-
vation and kick-seining around potential rock
cover, our primary means of sampling in Big
South Fork, as effective and non-lethal. We
Sheared PC 2 Sheared PC 3
—0).005 —0.023
(0), ILI) 0.067
0.190 0.303
0.103 0.222
0.144 0.179
—(0.162 0.281
0.392 0.337
0.228 0.367
0.089 —0.099
—0.220 0.066
—(0.044 0.010
0.143 0.034
0.042 —0.161
—().344 0.068
0.334 — 0.258
—0.037 0.118
0.055 —0.290
—0.133 —0.012
—0.054 0.097
—0.178 —0.161
0.296 —0.197
—0.025 —0.126
—0.138 —(.045
—(0.007 —0.108
0.110 —0.411
=O 27 0.022
—0.352 0.103
recommend that electrofishing not be used to
sample this rare species because of the poten-
tial harm it can do to fishes (Snyder 1995).
Natural History
Medium to large streams with silt-free
rocky pools in the vicinity of riffles seem to be
requirements for viable populations of E.
percnurum. As pointed out by Etnier and
Starnes (1993), the habitat of E. percnurum is
essentially the same as that occupied by E. ci-
nereum, a species we found almost invariably
associated with E. percnurum in Big South
Fork. Our general habitat description is simi-
lar to the habitat of E. percnurum in Little
River (Etnier and Starnes 1993) and Copper
Creek (Jenkins and Burkhead 1994).
Egg counts in Big South Fork (79-132;
mean = 101) were higher than in Little River
(23-200; mean = 79; Layman 1991). The
higher egg counts per nest in Big South Fork
may be attributed to the larger body size of
those females. Using the equation of Layman
(1991) log C = —1.154 + 1.686 log SL, fe-
males observed in this study would have 51-
Duskytail Darters—Eisenhour and Burr 75
61 mature ova, as compared to the 19-44 ova
for the smaller females of Little River. Also,
nest rock size typically was larger in Big South
Fork (mean 24 X 19 em) than in Little
River (mean = 16 X 12 cm; Layman 1991).
Larger nest rock size in Big South Fork may
simply reflect an abundance of larger nest sub-
strata available. Alternately, this may be a be-
havioral adaptation in choosing more stable
nest rocks in an area with high flows and
prone to flash flooding. Additional studies are
needed to explore these possibilities. Other
nesting biology observations are generally con-
sistent with those of Layman (1991) from Lit-
tle River, Tennessee and Jenkins and Burk-
head (1994) from Copper Creek, Virginia, ex-
cept Jenkins and Burkhead reported nuptial
males from moderate to swift runs.
The heavy infestations and high rate of in-
fection of the black-spot disease observed in
this study indicate that it may be an important
source of mortality for E. percnurum. Al-
though not previously documented for E.
percnurum, the disease has been reported
from many species of North American fresh-
water fishes. We observed belted kingfishers
(Megaceryle alcyon) and snails, required in-
termediate hosts for the strigeid flukes that
cause black-spot disease (Berra and Au 1978),
to be common in Big South Fork. Heavy in-
festations have been reported to cause mor-
talities, particularly during the winter months,
in Esox lucius, northern pike (Harrison and
Hadley 1982), Lepomis macrochirus, bluegill
(Lemly and Esch 1984), and Campostoma an-
omalum, central stoneroller (Ferrara and Cook
1998). Monitoring of the Big South Fork pop-
ulation of E. percnurum should include as-
sessment of the extent of black-spot disease.
Systematics
The differences in squamation, body shape,
maximum size, and nesting biology reported
here indicate that Big South Fork populations
certainly represent an independent evolution-
ary unit. Considering the relict distribution of
this species it seems unlikely that any gene
flow has occurred between Cumberland and
Tennessee forms in thousands of generations.
The morphological variation uncovered in this
analysis supports the presence of deep phylo-
genetic partitions in E. percnurum. This pat-
tern suggests that most of the overall diversity
is located among the populations rather than
within populations (Meffe and Vrijenhoek
1988). Because the loss of even one of the
remaining four populations of E. percnurum
would cause a substantial loss in diversity of
the species, conservation efforts should be di-
rected to preserving as many populations as
possible. Protection of the Big South Fork
population seems particularly important in
maintenance of diversity of E. percnurum be-
cause of the population’s unique morphology
and ecology.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Success in finding E. percnurum would not
have been possible without the assistance of
many people and agencies. We are especially
appreciative of the underwater expertise of J.
R. Shute, P. W. Shute, P L. Rakes, and K.
Harpster (Conservation Fisheries, Inc.). Steve
Bakaletz and R. Emmott (National Park Ser-
vice) provided logistical support, canoes, and
river guidance. We thank T. Slone and D. Ste-
phens (Kentucky Department of Fish and
Wildlife Resources) and K. M. Cook, D. B.
Henry, J. B. Ladonski, K. R. Piller, and J. G.
Stewart (Southern Illinois University at Car-
bondale), K. A. McCafferty, (Morehead State
University), and L. V. Eisenhour for assistance
in field work. Permits to study E. percnurum
were provided by Kentucky Department of
Fish and Wildlife Resources. R. E. Jenkins, via
D. W. Nelson and D. A. Etnier, loaned spec-
imens of E. percnurum for comparative pur-
poses.
LITERATURE CITED
Berra, T. M., and R-J. Au. 1978. Incidence of black spot
disease in fishes in Cedar Fork Creek, Ohio. Ohio J.
Sci. 78:318—322.
Biggins, R. E. 1993. Endangered and threatened wildlife
and plants: determination of endangered status for the
duskytail darter, palezone shiner and pygmy madtom.
Federal Register 58:25758-25763.
Biggins, R. E., and P. W. Shute. 1994. Recovery plan for
Duskytail Darter (Etheostoma [Catonotus] sp.). United
States Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, GA.
Bookstein, F. L., B. Chernoff, R. L. Elder, J. M. Hum-
phries Jr., G. R. Smith, and R. E. Strauss. 1985. Mor-
phometrics in evolutionary biology. Spec. Publ. Acad.
Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 15:1-277.
Braasch, M. E., and R. L. Mayden. 1985. Review of the
subgenus Catonotus (Percidae) with descriptions of two
new darters of the Etheostoma squamiceps species
76 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
group. Occas. Paper Mus. Nat. Hist. Univ. Kansas 119:
1-83.
Burkhead, N. M., and R. E. Jenkins. 1991. Fishes. Pages
321-409 in K. Terwilliger (coordinator). Virginia’s en-
dangered species. McDonald and Woodward Publishing
Company, Blacksburg, VA.
Burr, B. M., and M. L. Warren Jr. 1986. A distributional
atlas of Kentucky fishes. Kentucky Nature Preserves
Comm. Sci. Techn. Ser. 4.
Etnier, D. A., and W. C. Starnes. 1993. The fishes of Ten-
nessee. Univ. Tennessee Press, Knoxville, TN.
Ferrara, A. M., and S. B. Cook. 1998. Comparison of
black-spot disease metapopulations in the central sto-
nerollers of two warm-water streams. J. Freshwater
Ecol. 13:299-305.
Harrison, E. J., and W. F. Hadley. 1982. Possible effects
of black-spot disease on northern pike. Trans. Am. Fish.
Soc.111:106—109.
Hubbs, C. L., and K. F. Lagler. 1974. Fishes of the Great
Lake region. Univ. Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI.
Humphries. J. M., F. L. Bookstein, B. Chernoff, G. R.
Smith, R. L. Elder, and S. G. Poss. 1981. Multivariate
discrimination by shape in relation to size. Syst. Zool.
30:291—308.
Jenkins, R. E., and N. M. Burkhead. 1994. Freshwater
fishes of Virginia. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda,
MD.
Jenkins, R. E., and E. A. Lachner. 1971. Criteria for anal-
ysis and interpretation of the American fish genera No-
comis Girard and Hybopsis Agassiz. Smithsonian. Contr.
Zool. 90:1—15.
Layman, S. R. 1984. The duskytail darter, Etheostoma
(Catonotus) sp. confirmed as an egg-clusterer. Copeia
1984:992-994.
Layman, S. R. 1991. Life history of the relict, duskytail
darter, Etheostoma (Catonotus) sp., in Little River, Ten-
nessee. Copeia 1991:471—-485.
Lemly, A. D., and G. W. Esch. 1984. Effects of the trem-
atode Uvulifer ambloplites (Hughes, 1927) on juvenile
bluegill sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus: ecological impli-
cations. J. Parasitol. 70:475—-492.
Meffe, G. K., and R. C. Vrijenhoek. 1988. Conservation
genetics in the management of desert fishes. Conser-
vation Biol. 2:157—169.
Page, L. M. 1983. Handbook of darters. Tropical Fish
Hobbyist Publications, Neptune City, NJ.
Page, L. M. 1985. Evolution of reproductive behaviors in
percid fishes. Illinois Nat. Hist. Surv. Bull. 33:275-295,
Page, L. M., P. A. Ceas, D. L. Swofford, and D. G. Buth.
1992. Evolutionary relationships within the Etheostoma
squamiceps complex (Percidae; subgenus Catonotus)
with descriptions of five new species. Copeia 1992:615—
646.
Pomerane, J. B. 1964. Geology of the Barthell Quadrangle
and part of the Oneida North Quadrangle, Kentucky.
U.S. Geol. Surv. Geol. Quad. Map GQ-314.
Poss, S. G., and B. B. Collette. 1995. Second survey of
fish collections in the United States and Canada. Copeia
1995:48-70.
SAS Institute. 1985. SAS user's guide: statistics, 1985 edi-
tion. SAS Institute, Cary, NC.
Simon, T. P., and S. R. Layman. 1995. Egg and larval
development of the striped fantail darter, Etheostoma
flabellare lineolatum (Agassiz), and duskytail darter, E.
percnurum Jenkins, with comments on the Etheostoma
flabellare species group. Trans. Kentucky Acad. Sci. 56:
28-40.
Snyder, D. E. 1995. Impacts of electrofishing on fish.
Fisheries (Bethesda) 20:26—27.
Strauss, R. E., and F. L. Bookstein. 1982. The truss: body
form reconstruction in morphometrics. Syst. Zool. 31:
113-135.
APPENDIX
Specimens of E. percnurum used in mor-
phological comparisons. Museum abbrevia-
tions follow Poss and Collette (1995). Paren-
thetical numbers after catalog numbers refer
to the number of specimens used in the me-
ristic and morphometric analyses, respectively.
Big South Fork of the Cumberland River.
McCreary County, Kentucky: SIUC 24744
(1,1), SIUC 24761 (1,1), SIUC 24773 (5,5).
Scott County, Tennessee: SIUC 24739 (1,1).
Copper Creek. Scott County, Virginia: UMMZ
22038 (20,12). Little River. Blount County,
Tennessee: UT 91.2719 (7,2), UT 91.2720
(9,4), UT 91.2721 (15,10). Citico Creek. Mon-
roe County, Tennessee: UT 91.2558 (3,3), UT
Hh ses) (BO).
J. Ky. Acad. Sci. 61(2):77-85. 2000.
Scientists of Kentucky
David Wendel Yandell, M.D.
Every autumn when the banks along the
Ohio blaze in color, the University of Louis-
ville invites to the Falls City one of the nation’s
renowned surgeons as guest speaker for the
annual Yandell Lecture.* The event celebrates
the career of David Yandell (1826-1898), who
taught clinical medicine and surgery at the
school for more than 30 years. Because he
cared passionately about improving medical
education, Yandell led a relentless crusade to
expand the knowledge of his professional col-
leagues and to upgrade the quality of care
available to their patients.”
Born near Murfreesboro, Tennessee, Yan-
dell spent his childhood in Lexington, where
his father, Lunsford, taught chemistry at Tran-
sylvania University. In 1837 the elder Yandell
and several of his colleagues founded the Lou-
isville Medical Institute and the family moved
to that city. The school attracted students from
across the South and throughout the Ohio Val-
ley because of its easy access and its fine fac-
ulty, which included Charles Caldwell, Jede-
diah Cobb, Daniel Drake, Samuel Gross, and
Lunsford Yandell. By 1844 when David ma-
triculated, the institute claimed an enrollment
of 350.
Despite a growing number of medical
schools throughout the nation, few 19th cen-
tury physicians were well trained. Anyone
could call himself a doctor and practice med-
icine. Most medical men learned their trade
by serving a 2-year apprenticeship to a prac-
titioner-preceptor. Some apprentices undoubt-
edly went along on house calls with their pre-
ceptors and thus learned to diagnose and
medicate; others probably did little more than
drive the doctor's buggy, attend his horse, and
sweep out his office. Apprenticeships may
have been inferior to medical schools, but no
licensing board measured the knowledge of
those that took advantage of either—or nei-
ther—program.
Throughout most of the century, medical
schools had no entrance requirements. They
were generally proprietary institutions plagued
by feuding faculties, financial handicaps, com-
Teel
petition for students, limited curricula, and in-
adequate teaching aides. To receive a degree,
students were required to attend two 4-month
sessions (an apprenticeship could be substi-
tuted for one session), pass an oral exam, and
pay a graduation fee. The exam, apparently
the only testing done by the faculty, could be
a frightening experience. One of Yandell’s
classmates compared it to swallowing poison
“with no stomach pump about, or [sleeping]
with a man with smallpox.” He described the
examining professors as “dried up specimens
of humanity who looked as if they had de-
scended for the occasion from some anatom-
ical museum and who have looked upon
death, suffering and the annual ranks of med-
ical aspirants” until their hearts were hard as
stone.
Although one of Yandell’s professors labeled
him a “damned unpromising specimen,” he
nevertheless passed the exam and graduated
from the Louisville Medical Institute in March
1846. A few weeks later he sailed to Europe
to further his education in the schools of Lon-
don and Paris. Many of his letters to his family
appeared in the Western Journal of Medicine
and Surgery and the Louisville Journal. The
cocky Kentuckian greatly admired Sir Robert
Lister’s surgical techniques and described
them in considerable detail, but he sneered at
English students who were neither as “intel-
ligent looking” nor as “fine in appearance” as
his peers at home. He praised the politeness
of French students and found the Parisian
professors far more eloquent and interesting
that their English brethren. Awed by the
teaching hospitals, clinics, and internships
available in Paris, Yandell claimed that in a sin-
gle morning an industrious student could ac-
company professors through both the medical
and surgical wards. And, if “fleet of limb he
may follow Roux though his wards at the Ho-
tel Dieu, Jobert through his at St. Louis and
hear Velpeau lecture at La Charité!”
By the time he returned to Louisville in au-
tumn 1848, Yandell enjoyed a reputation for
excellence among both practitioners and lay-
78 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
men. His medications probably were no more
successful than those of his colleagues, but his
credentials and charm convinced many Louis-
villians that he was very knowledgeable. Con-
Figure 1. David Wendel Yandell, ca. 1875.
sequently, medical apprentices as well as pa-
tients flocked to him.
One of the problems facing would-be doc-
tors was the lack of a practical method of
David Wendel Yandell—Baird 79
studying anatomy and surgical techniques. To
aid them—and anyone else who desired the
instruction—Yandell and a friend opened a
dissection laboratory where they conducted
classes in anatomy, physical diagnosis, and sur-
gery. Following his marriage in summer 1851,
Yandell closed the facility and moved briefly
to Middle Tennessee. However, on his re-
turned to Louisville in the mid 1850s, he
opened a free outpatient clinic for Louisville’s
indigents. Modeled after the private clinics of
Paris and financed by the fees of medical ap-
prentices and university students, the dispen-
sary supplemented rather than competed with
university offerings. Consequently, it and its
founder received considerable praise from lo-
cal practitioners and from doctors who toured
it during the 1859 state medical conclave in
Louisville.
The success of the dispensary was partially
responsible for Yandell being offered a posi-
tion on the faculty, the realization of a decade-
long dream. His major accomplishment as
professor of clinical medicine was to talk the
faculty into creating three “internships” for
the university's top graduates. Unfortunately,
the Civil War prevented implementation of
the internships.
In summer 1861 Yandell resigned his pro-
fessorship and received a commission in the
Confederate medical department. He spent a
few weeks with General Simon Bolivar Buck-
ner’s forces at Bowling Green, Kentucky, and
then accepted the medical directorship of Al-
bert Sidney Johnston’s Army of the West, a
command that extended from the Appalachian
Mountains to Indian Territory. The task for
this military monstrosity would have been a
difficult one for a medic with many years of
military experience and adequate resources; it
was a gargantuan job for a novice. Epidemic
diseases, shortage of medical supplies, inade-
quate hospital facilities, and poorly trained and
inexperienced doctors plagued Johnston's
army. To care for those felled by measles and
other infectious diseases, respiratory ailments,
and a variety of illnesses caused by bad food,
contaminated water, and inadequate clothing,
Yandell commandeered churches, public
buildings, and vacant homes across southern
Kentucky. When the number of ill exceeded
space in the Kentucky facilities, he arranged
with the L&N railroad to transport hundreds
of them to the hospitals and convalescent cen-
ters he created in the Nashville area.
Yandell also supervised the employment of
medical personnel. Regiments generally se-
lected their own officers, including their reg-
imental physician. Acknowledging the system's
fallacy, Yandell created a examining board to
screen all medical corps as well as civilian con-
tract applicants. He headed the board and ap-
parently was merciless in his questioning.
When asked what he would do for a “shot
right through there,” the medical director
pointing to his own knee, the victim of his
grilling about wounds answered, “Well, sir, if
it was you that was shot through there, I
would not do a d[amne]d thing.”
In mid February 1862 the Army of the West
retreated into central Tennessee and then to
the Corinth, Mississippi, area. In early April
the army encountered the enemy near Shiloh
Church, about 20 miles north of Corinth.
More than 1700 Confederates died during the
2-day Battle of Shiloh; General Albert Sydney
Johnston was among them, the victim of a torn
popliteal artery. Earlier that morning Yandell
had issued tourniquets to all of Johnston's
staff, but no one thought to use the lifesaving
device. With Johnston’s death Yandell lost a
friend as well as his coveted position in the
Confederate medical department. The Army
of the West was renamed and placed under
the leadership of General P.G.T. Beauregard,
who chose his own medical director. Yandell
joined William J. Hardee's corps and traveled
with the tactician’s forces into Kentucky in au-
tumn 1862. Following the battle of Perryville,
he worked day and night administering to the
wounded.
In spring 1863 Yandell was sent to Jackson,
Mississippi, to “watch over” the health of Gen-
eral Joseph E. Johnston. The two men shared
quarters, and the doctor often served as the
general's aide, reading aloud his dispatches
and writing the replies he dictated. Following
the fall of Vicksburg, Yandell analyzed the sad
state of affairs in Mississippi that culminated
in the river town’s loss; he laid the blame on
officials in Richmond. His unwise comments
reached Confederate president Jefferson Da-
vis. Sensitive to criticism, Davis “banished”
Yandell to the Trans Mississippi where the
meddling doctor would have “less opportunity
for exercising undue influence on the army
80 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
DEPARTMENT.
BITE DICAT.
Figure 2.
and community.” Yandell served the remain-
der of the war as medical director for the army
of Edmund Kirby Smith.
Yandell labeled the Civil War a “great
though terrible school.” During his 4 years
with the army he treated many medical and
surgical problems and broadened his under-
standing of hospital management. He also
made valuable contacts and won the admira-
tion of physicians and laymen on both sides.
The war's most profound effect, however, was
to sharpen Yandell’s awareness to the nation’s
large number of poorly trained and incompe-
tent doctors. To the correction of this short-
coming, he dedicated the remainder of his life.
Returning to Louisville and his medical
practice in July 1865, Yandell opened the Lou-
isville Clinic, a large and efficiently organized
facility; in 1869 he rejoined the University of
Louisville’s medical department. During the
war the university had built a small dispensary
and contracted two local doctors to operate it.
Within a few weeks after Yandell rejoined the
faculty, the contract doctors began to com-
plain. They believed that his position on the
CORNER OF EIGHTH AND CHESTNUT STREETS.
Medical Department, University of Louisville, Kentucky, ca. 1870.
faculty gave Yandell’s Louisville Clinic an “im-
mense advantage” over the one they operated.
Yandell offered to “divide the influence of his
name and services equally between the two
dispensaries, to lecture an equal number of
times at each and receive no fee from either.”
His university colleagues refused his offer and
passed a resolution that prohibited professors
from teaching private classes. Yandell com-
plained bitterly about the ex post facto ruling
and refused to sever his connection with the
Louisville clinic. Faculty pressure, however,
forced him to rescind his decision.
Because the university's dispensary was too
small to accommodate the students in small
groups, much less for class instruction, Yandell
began to push for an enlarged university clinic
and adjoining amphitheater. Clinical teaching
was the “alpha and omega’ of a good educa-
tion, he insisted. By studying medicine “in the
laboratory, under the microscope, at the dis-
section-table, in the wards of the hospital, and
in the dispensaries where patients are seen,
examined and prescribed for students
David Wendel Yandell—Baird 81
learn the diagnosis of disease as well as its
treatment,” he insisted.
When his colleagues whined that Yandell’s
building scheme would bankrupt them, he
suggested that perhaps the university could
convert its academic building, occupied rent-
free by Male High School, into a hospital
maintained by the city. Indigents could receive
free care provided by the faculty and could be
studied by students. The scheme would have
created one of the first teaching hospitals in
the nation. Yandell’s colleagues liked the idea
but unfortunately the city declined to consider
it.
Disappoined but not discouraged, Yandell
commenced talks with wealthy Louisvillian
Shakespeare Caldwell and convinced him that
a hospital was an appropriate memorial to his
recently deceased wife. At this facility, Yandell
argued, the university's faculty could provide
medical and surgical services for impoverished
patients and allow students to aid in treating
patients and to gain bedside experience. The
university offered land near the medical
school for the facility. Caldwell agreed to the
plan but vetoed the proposed site. Saints Mary
and Elizabeth Hospital opened in 1874 but
Yandell’s plan proved unsuccessful. The dis-
tance of several miles between the school and
hospital discouraged students from visiting it,
and many of the professors could not or would
not contribute time beyond their classroom
responsibilities to care for patients and super-
vise students.
Undaunted, Yandell continued his nagging.
He suggested that each professor make a con-
tribution and that the faculty thus underwrite
the construction of a clinic. The opposition
was overwhelming. In frustration, Yandell sub-
mitted his resignation with a blistering attack
on his colleagues, whom he accused of being
disinterested in the quality of medical educa-
tion. Undoubtedly a few of his harrassed col-
leagues welcomed Yandell’s decision but oth-
ers knew the university could ill afford to loose
its most distinguished professor. Yandell edit-
ed the widely read American Practitioner, had
been elected president of the American Med-
ical Association in 1872, served as its repre-
sentative to the 1881 International Confer-
ence in London, and was one of the founders
of the American Surgical Association (and
would be its president in 1889). Consequently,
his colleagues promised that if he rescinded
his resignation, they would reconsider his plea
and try to finance the clinic. Yandell agreed.
The university’ treasurer cashed city bonds
that the school had held for years and the fac-
ulty secured a loan for the remainder. H.P.
McDonald Brothers received a contract to de-
sign and build the clinic and amphitheater.
The facility for which Yandell crusaded for
nearly 2 decades opened in 1888.
Yandell fought with equal zeal for entrance
requirements, an expansion of the curriculum,
and a lengthened school year. Unfortunately,
competition for students was keen among the
citys many medical schools (10 medical
schools operated in Louisville during the post-
war decades); changes that might increase
overhead, raise tuition, or limit admission
threatened enrollment and thus the salaries of
the proprietary faculty. Yandell’s demand for
internships likewise met with resistance. The
various hospitals were eager to implement the
post-graduate positions but wished to make
them available to all of the citys medical
schools. After years of haggling on how the
recipients should be chosen and who would
supervise them, the university and the Ken-
tucky Medical School agreed to base the se-
lection on academic merit. Unfortunately,
there were only a half-dozen positions for the
several hundred graduates eager for the ex-
perience.
Yandell’s campaign for a more rigorous
medical curriculum transcended the common-
wealth’s borders. In his 1872 presidential ad-
dress before the delegates to the American
Medical Association in Philadelphia, he spoke
about the shortcomings of the nation’s edu-
cational system in general and medical edu-
cation in particular.
... there are grave defects in the education of many
of our students and many of our practitioners of med-
icine. Not a few of them, I am afraid, have a very
slight acquaintance with grammar or physical geog-
raphy and too many of them know little about ety-
mology and are bad spellers. It is a pity that this is
so and I should be glad to see a different state of
things.”
Answering colleagues who urged the addition
of math and Greek to the medical school cur-
riculum, Yandell championed the creation of
better primary and secondary schools, not the
82 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
a
A
a -
Mi in
if
Figure 3. Medical Department, University of Louisville, Kentucky, ca. 1890. The wing on the left is the clinic for
which David Yandell fought for 20 years.
teaching of “irrelevant topics” in medical
school. Instead, he urged the extension of the
lecture term, expansion of the requirements
for graduation, increase in the number of pro-
fessorships and course offering, and more in-
struction by demonstration. The graduates of
the newly inaugurated system at Harvard, he
stated, “may know less of Greek and mathe-
matics, [but] are far better trained than they
formerly were in clinical medicine and surgery
and are better qualified to enter their duties
as practitioners.Ӣ
Although medical education began in the
halls of academia, Yandell believed it should
continue throughout a doctor's professional
life. For 25 years he was the active senior ed-
itor of the American Practitioner, a monthly
journal that had 2000 subscribers in 1876 and
nearly 6000 by 1890. He filled the journal with
original articles, reviews of American and Eu-
ropean publications, synopses of clinical cases
gleaned from other journals, and miscella-
neous notes, editorials, and minutes of meet-
ings of local, state, and national medical or-
ganizations. Yandell gave his readers a gener-
ous and well-balanced feast of medical knowl-
edge and urged his readers to keep current
with developments in the profession. “Life is
too short and science too long to permit time
to be wasted,” he frequently admonished.
As an classroom teacher Yandell had “few
equals and no superiors,” his students re-
called, for he enriched their minds, made
them wish to learn more, and flavored his lec-
tures with bits of medical history and witty ad-
vice. A strong believer in human dignity, Yan-
dell constantly reminded students that indi-
gents deserved the same care and respect as
the wealthy. He also urged these future doc-
tors to stay abreast of and keep an open mind
to new techniques but to use discretion in
adopting them. “If one half of all the certain
cures were but certain, the practice of medi-
cine would be too simple to demand special
study or require trained followers,” he pointed
out.
Yandell also advised that practitioners must
know when to act with haste and when to pro-
ceed with deliberate caution. He delighted in
telling about George IV, whose regular physi-
cian was too busy to attend to a small tumor
on the royal derriére. Another doctor was
called, the growth was removed, and the new
doctor was knighted by his grateful sovereign.
David Wendel Yandell—Baird 83
The reward might have been excessive, Yan-
dell suggested, but a caring doctor never post-
poned “until the afternoon ... messages left
for you in the morning.”
In their reminiscences, his former students
lauded not only his teaching ability but also
wrote of Yandell’s surgical skills. He “cut to the
line and to the required depth with geometric
precission,” one recalled. For demonstration
purposes minor procedures were performed
on hospital inmates and dispensary patients
but for more difficult operations Yandell used
cadavers. Most of the students sat 15 to 30
feet away yet claimed that their teacher's ar-
ticulate and detailed explanations compensat-
ed for what they could not see. Student mem-
oirs also recalled that Yandell always wore a
freshly laundered coat in the “operating”
room, scrubbed his hands and instruments
with green soap before each procedure, and
treated all incisions with compounds of iodine,
bromine, and carbolic acid to prevent infec-
tion. He advised his students to do likewise.
Prior to the general acceptance of antiseptic
surgery, such cleanliness was unusual.
Yandell’s admirers included personal friends
and private patients, who recalled the bou-
quets he gave to shut-ins and the groceries he
took to indigent families under the tactful
guise that the patient needed special foods.
Involved in community organizations, he
served two terms on the city’s school board,
discussed history and literature with fellow
members of the Filson and Salmagundi clubs,
and founded the Louisville Kennel Club and
Louisville Surgical Society. He counted among
his close friends attorney Reuben Durrett, ed-
itor Henry Watterson, and former Confeder-
ates Basil Duke, William Preston, John B.
Castleman, and Governor J. Proctor Knott,
who appointed Yandell as surgeon general of
the Kentucky militia. During one of his trips
to Europe to attend a medical conclave, the
British Medical Journal proclaimed that Yan-
dell was a great favorite in local circles. The
Medical Society of London elected him to
honorary membership in 1883 and _ shortly
thereafter the London Medical-Chirurgical
Society named him an honorary fellow.
When an Englishman referred to him as a
Yankee, Yandell protested, assuring that all of
his blood “flowed through southern veins.”
The staunch Democrat served as one of Ken-
tucky’s hosts during the visits of three Repub-
lican presidents—Ulysses S. Grant, Ruther-
ford B. Hayes, and Chester A. Arthur. At an
official dinner in Louisville, Yandell enter-
tained Grant with tales of his own Civil War
escapades. While accompanying Arthur from
Washington to Louisville, a newsman mistook
the doctor for the president. Amused by the
error, Yandell declared he was the “next best
thing” to being president. He was the “Great
Presidential Fetcher.”
An articulate lecturer, talented surgeon,
dedicated educator, and highly respected citi-
zen, David Yandell was the most progressive
and influential member of the university’s
medical faculty in the postwar era. In 1887 as
part of the organization’s celebration of its
hundredth birthday, the College of Physicians
and Surgeons of Philadelphia elected 10
American doctors to honorary membership.
David Yandell was the only Kentuckian so
honored. In spring 1895 the University of
Louisville gratefully acknowledged his services
when it placed “upon the brow of this our
greatest son” the highest degree within its
power, the degree of Doctor of Laws.°
Nancy Disher Baird
Kentucky Library
Western Kentucky University
Bowling Green, Kentucky 42101
ENDNOTES
a. Further information about David Yandell is available
in: Nancy Disher Baird, David Wendel Yandell, phy-
sician of old Louisville (Lexington: University Press of
Kentucky, 1978). The major sources of information
for the book-length biography and this article were
the Yandell Family Papers (The Filson Club, Louis-
ville); the Minutes of the Board of Trustees of the
University of Louisville (University Archives); the
Minutes of the Medical Faculty (Kornhauser Health
Sciences Library, Louisville); General and Staff Offi-
cers File, Old Army Section (National Archives,
Washington); Andrew J. Foard Collection (Virginia
State Library, Richmond); and Louisville’s newspapers
and Yandell’s various published writings and speeches.
b. Few Kentucky families have had greater influence on
medical education than the Yandells of Louisville.
Lunsford Pitts Yandell (1798-1878) taught chemistry
and pharmacy at Transylvania’s medical department,
was one of the founders and teachers of the Louisville
Medical Institute (renaned the Medical Department
of the University of Louisville in 1846), edited two
medical journals, and preduced more than 100 sci-
34
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Figure 4. Plaster bust of David Yandell by his niece Enid Yandell. Presented to the University of Louisville ca. 1925.
entific treatises relating to medicine and paleontology.
His sons followed in his professional footsteps. Wil-
liam (1844-1901) became a well-known health officer
in El Paso and led a campaign to improve sanitation
and curb the spread of disease along the Texas-Mex-
ican border. Lunsford Jr. (1837-1885) taught medi-
cine for nearly two decades at the University of Lou-
isville. For additional information about Yandell’s fam-
ily members, see (1) Nancy Disher Baird, “A Ken-
tucky Physician Tennessee
Examines Memphis,
David Wendel Yandell—Baird 85
History Quarterly (autumn 1979), which concerns the
early career of David's brother, Lunsford, Jr.; (2)
“There Is No Sunday in the Army: The Civil War Let-
ters of Lunsford Pitts Yandell, Jr,” The Filson Club
History Quarterly (October 1980); (3) “Enid Yandell:
Kentucky Sculptor,” The Filson Club History Quar-
terly (January 1988). The best-known works by Enid
(Lunsford Jrs. daughter) are the statue of Daniel
Boone at the entrance to Louisville’s Cherokee Park,
Hogan’s Fountain inside the park, and the statue of
John Thomas in Nashville’s Centennial Park. The Fil-
son Club, Kentucky Historical Society, Georgetown
College, Speed Museum, and Vanderbilt University
(as well as scores of museums, parks, and private col-
lections from Maine to Missouri) also own pieces of
her works; and (4) Janet Brockmoller, “Doctor Wil-
liam Martin Yandell,” Password, 21 (1976). Password
is the quarterly publication of the El Paso County
(Texas) Historical Society.
In spring 1846 the state legislature created the Uni-
versity of Louisville. The “Academical Department”
did not materialize until 1907 but the law department
opened in autumn 1846 and the Louisville Medical
Institute was incorporated as the university's medical
department. The transaction for the latter was merely
a legal form, for the faculty members continued to
elect their own officers, choose new professors (whom
the university's trustees automatically approved), col-
lect student fees, and assess themselves when funds
were needed for repairs and improvements on their
building. In reality the medical school remained au-
tonomous; only its name changed.
d.
In closing his presidential address, Yandell comment-
ed on admitting women to medical school. He could
find no satisfactory reason, he said, why women might
not succeed “in some line of our profession” for they
were “able nurses,” but he predicted that a female
invasion of the traditional male domain would prob-
ably “end in no great results.” Certainly he hoped that
women would never embarrass the AMA by request-
ing membership. “I could not vote for that,” he prom-
ised! Thirteen years later he addressed the graduation
class of the short-lived Louisville School of Pharmacy
for Women and gave a reason why he believed women
might not be competent physicians or pharmacists:
“Silence secures accuracy,” and women were never
quiet, he believed. Wishing the members of his au-
dience good luck, he warned them against mixing a
career and marriage, for “if you require your husbands
to broil their own chops, you may expect them to wish
at least to bray you in one of your own mortars.”
Yandell’s last few years were marred by arterioscle-
rosis, which affected his memory and personality. In
1896 a stroke destroyed his remaining facilities. For
nearly 2 years his family nursed the empty shell of a
man who once charmed presidents and awed green-
horn medical students. Surrounded by those he loved
best, David Yandell died 2 May 1898. Two days later
a cortege of friends, colleagues, Confederate veterans,
and a regiment of state militia conducted his remains
to Louisville's Cave Hill Cemetery, where he was bur-
ied on a tree-dotted hillside overlooking a picturesque
lake.
J. Ky. Acad. Sci. 61(2):86-87. 2000.
A Field Checklist of Kentucky Butterflies (Lepidoptera)
Charles V. Covell Jr.
University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky 40292-0001
On this and following page is the updated
listing of all butterflies known from Kentucky.
This supersedes the listing in Covell (1974),
and consists of 144 butterfly species, 11 of
which are either strays that rarely occur in the
Commonwealth, or are known from old re-
cords and are not likely to be found in Ken-
tucky now. In my opinion, the known resident
and regularly transient butterfly fauna of Ken-
tucky now stands at 133 species.
Scientific names follow Opler (1992), and
English (common) names follow Glassberg
(ed., 1992). Detailed records and remarks are
available in Covell (1999).
I intend for this list to be photocopied by
anyone wishing a pocket-sized list of Kentucky
butterflies to use in the field. Anyone finding
additions or suspected additions to this list is
urged to contact me at the above address or
at my e-mail address: covell@louisville.edu. I
am sure there are a few other butterfly species
native to or occasionally established temporar-
ily in Kentucky.
LITERATURE CITED
Covell, C. V., Jr. 1974. A preliminary checklist of the but-
terflies of Kentucky. J. Lepid. Soc. 28:253-256.
Covell, C. V., Jr. 1999. The butterflies and moths (Lepi-
doptera) of Kentucky: an annotated checklist. Kentucky
State Nature Preserves Comm. Sci. Techn. Ser. 6.
Glassberg, J. (ed). 1995. North American Butterfly Asso-
ciation (NABA) checklist and English names of North
American butterflies. North American Butterfly Asso-
ciation, Morristown, NJ.
Opler, P. A. 1998. A field guide to eastern butterflies.
Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA.
FIELD CHECKLIST OF KENTUCKY
BUTTERFLIES
by Charles V. Covell Jr., Dept. of Biology, Univ. of Lou-
isville, Louisville, KY 40292-0001 Phone: (502) 852-5942.
Locality
Dates
Recorded by
Epargyreus clarus (Silver-spotted Skipper) A
86
Pee OPP AECEEEECPEE TPE EEA EEE Bei
Urbanus proteus (Long-tailed Skipper) S
Autochton cellus (Gold-banded Skipper) U
Achalarus lyciades (Hoary Edge) U
Thorybes bathyllus (Southern Cloudywing) C
Thorybes pylades (Northern Cloudywing) C
Thorybes confusis (Confused Cloudywing) U
Staphylus hayhurstii (Hayhurst’s Scallopwing) U
Erynnis icelus (Dreamy Duskywing) C
Erynnis brizo (Sleepy Duskywing) A
Erynnis juvenalis (Juvenal’s Duskywing) A
Erynnis horatius (Horace’s Duskywing) C
Erynnis martialis (Mottled Duskywing) U
Erynnis zarucco (Zarucco Duskywing) R
Erynnis funeralis (Funereal Duskywing) R
Erynnis lucilius (Columbine Duskywing) R
Erynnis baptisiae (Wild Indigo Duskywing) A
Pyrgus centaurae (Grizzled Skipper) R
Pyrgus communis (Common Checkered Skipper) C
Pholisora catullus (Common Sootywing) C
Nastrai lherminier (Swarthy Skipper) U
Lerema accius (Clouded Skipper) U
Ancyloxipha numitor (Least Skipper) A
Thymelicus lineola (European Skipper) F
Hylephila phyleus (Fiery Skipper) F
Hesperia leonardus (Leonard's Skipper) F
Hesperia metea (Cobweb Skipper) U
[Hesperia sassacus (Indian Skipper)| E
Polites peckius (Peck’s Skipper) A
Polites themistocles (Tawny-edged Skipper) A
Polites origenes (Crossline Skipper) F
Wallengrenia otho (Southern Broken-dash) S
Wallengrenia egeremet (NorthernBroken-dash) A
Pompeius verna (Little Glassywing) U
Atalopedes campestris (Sachem) A
Anatrytone logan (Delaware Skipper) U
Poanes hobomok (Hobomok Skipper) F
Poanes zabulon (Zabulon Skipper) C
Poanes yehl (Yehl Skipper) C
Poanes viator (Broad-winged Skipper) R
Euphyes dion (Dion Skipper) F
Euphyes dukesi (Duke’s Skipper) R
Euphyes vestris (Dun Skipper) C
Atrytonopsis hianna (Dusted Skipper) U
Amblyscirtes hegon (Pepper and Salt Skipper) U
Amblyscirtes aesculapius (Lace-winged Roadside
Skipper) U
Amblyscirtes vialis (Common Roadside Skipper) U
Amblyscirtes belli (Bells Roadside Skipper) U
Lerodea eufala (Eufala Skipper) R
Panoquina ocola (Ocola Skipper) U
Battus philenor (Pipevine Swallowtail) A
PATELLA EEE EEE ETT
Checklist of Kentucky Butterflies—Covell
[Battus polydamas (Polydamas Swallowtail)] S
Eurytides marcellus (Zebra Swallowtail) C
Papilio polyxenes asterius (Black Swallowtail) C
Papilio joanae (Joan's Swallowtail) R
Papilio cresphontes (Giant Swallowtail) F
Papilio glaucus (Tiger Swallowtail) C
Papilio troilus (Spicebush Swallowtail) C
Papilio palamedes (Palamedes Swallowtail) R
Pontia protodice (Checkered White) U
Pieris virginiensis (West Virginia White) C
Pieris rapae (Cabbage White) C
Euchloe olympia (Olympia Marble) U
Anthocharis midea (Falcate Orange Tip) C
Colias philodice (Clouded Sulphur) A
Colias ewrytheme (Orange Sulphur) A
Colias cesonia (Southem Dogface) U
Phoebis sennae (Cloudless Sulphur) C
[Phoebis philea (Orange-barred Sulphur)] S
[Phoebis agarithe (Large Orange Sulphur)] S
[Kricogonia lyside (Lyside Sulphur)| S
Eurema lisa (Little Yellow) F
Eurema nicippe (Sleepy Orange) F
Nathalis iole (Dainty Sulphur) U
Feniseca tarquinius (Harvester) U
Lycaena phlaeas americana (American Copper)
Lycaena hyllus (Bronze Copper) F
Atlides halesus (Great Purple Hairstreak) R
Satyrium titus mopsus (Coral Hairstreak) C
[Satyrium acadicum (Acadian Hairstreak)] S
Satyrium edwardsii (Edwards Hairstreak) C
Satyrium calanus falacer (Banded Hairstreak) C
Satyrium caryaevorum (Hickory Hairstreak) U
Satyrium liparops (Striped Hairstreak) U
Satyrium favonius ontario (Northem Hairstreak) U
Callophrys grynea (Juniper Hairstreak) C
Callophrys augustinus (Brown Elfin) U
Callophrys irus (Frosted Elfin) R
Callophrys henrici (Henry's Elfin) C
Callophrys niphon (Eastern Pine Elfin) U
Parrhasius m-album (White-M Hairstreak) R
Erora laetus (Early Hairstreak) R
Calycopis cecrops (Red-banded Hairstreak) U
Strymon melinus (Gray Hairstreak) C
Leptotes marina (Marine Blue) R
Everes comyntas (Eastern Tailed Blue) A
Celastrina argiolus ladon (Spring Azure) C
Celastrina ebenina (Dusky Azure) C
Celastrina neglectamajor (Appalachian Blue) U
Glaucopsyche lygdamus (Silvery Blue) U
Calephelis borealis (Northern Metalmark) U
Calephelis mutica (Swamp Metalmark) R
Libythaena carinenta bachmanii (American
Snout Butterfly) C
Agraulis vanillae (Gulf Fritillary) U
87
Euptoieta claudia (Variegated Fritillary) C
Speyeria diana (Diana Fritillary) C
Speyeria cybele (Great-spangled Fritillary) A
Speyeria aphrodite (Aphrodite Fritillary) U
Speyeria idalia (Regal Fritillary) E
Boloria bellona (Meadow Fritillary) C
[Boloria selene myrina (Silver-bordered Fritil-
lary)] S
Chlosyne gorgone (Gorgone Checkerspot) R
Charidryas nycteis (Silvery Checkerspot) C
Phyciodes tharos (Pearl Crescent) A
Phyciodes batesii (Tawny Crescent)] R
Euphydryas phaeton (Baltimore Checkerspot) U
Polygonia interrogationis (Question Mark) C
Polygonia comma (Eastern Comma) C
Polygonia faunus smythi (Green Comma) R
Polygonia progne (Gray Comma) R
[Nymphalis vau-album j-album (Compton Tor-
toise Shell)] S$
—— Nymphalis antiopa (Mourning Cloak) F
——— Aglais milberti (Milbert’s Tortoise Shell) S
—— Vanessa virginiensis (American Lady) U
— Vanessa cardui (Painted Lady) C
— Vanessa atalanta (Red Admiral) C
——_ Junonia coenia (Common Buckeye) C
—— Anartia jatrophae White Peacock) S
— Limenitis arthemis arthemis (White Admiral)S
—— Limenitis arthemis astyanax (Red Spotted Pur-
ple) C
—— Limenitis archippus (Viceroy) C (KYS STATE
BUTTERELY)
Anaea andria (Goatweed Leafwing) U
Asterocampa celtis (Hackberry Emperor) C
Asterocampa clyton (Tawny Emperor) C
Enodia portlandia missarkae (Southern Pearly-
Eye) U
Enodia anthedon (Norther Pearly-Eye) C
Enodia creola (Creole Pearly-Eye) U
Satyrodes appalachia (Appalachian Brown) C
Cyllopsis gemma (Gemmed Satyr) U
Hermeuptychia sosybius (Carolina Satyr) U
— Megisto cymela (Little Wood Satyr) C
Cercyonis pegala (Common Wood-Nymph) C
Danaus plexippus (Monarch) C
[Danaus gilippus (Queen)] S
Additions:
[brackets indicate questionable specimens or sight records
for Ky.|
A = Abundant; C = Common: F = Frequent; U = Un-
common; R = Rare; E = probably endangered or extir-
pated; S = stray, not native to Kentucky.
J. Ky. Acad. Sci. 61(2):88-98. 2000.
Notes on North American Elymus Species (Poaceae) with Paired
Spikelets: I. E. macgregorii sp. nov. and
E. glaucus ssp. mackenzii comb. nov.
Julian J.N. Campbell
The Nature Conservancy (Kentucky Chapter), 642 West Main Street, Lexington, Kentucky 40508
ABSTRACT
Elymus macgregorii R. Brooks & J.J.N. Campbell, sp. nov., is here described. Though widespread in
eastern North America, it has been generally confused with E. virginicus and E. glabriflorus. It has a
more open spike, with long awns, and there are other slight differences. It flowers about a month earlier
and occurs in woodlands on relatively mesic, fertile soils. The new combination E. glaucus Buckley ssp.
mackenzii (Bush) J.J.N. Campbell is provided for plants of rocky calcareous glades in the Ozark-Ouachita
region, disjunct by 800 km from the main range of E. glaucus in western North America. Compared to
other subspecies, ssp. mackenzii usually has narrower, pubescent leaf blades and longer glume awns.
INTRODUCTION
Elymus L. has been one of the most diffi-
cult genera of North American grasses to un-
derstand taxonomically. Published treatments
range from simplistic (e.g., Gould 1975) to
intricate (e.g., Bowden 1964). Elymus virgin-
icus L. and closely allied taxa—a group char-
acterized by relatively large, thick, basally in-
durate, bowed-out glumes that disarticulate
from erect spikes—have been especially trou-
blesome, although improvements in their
treatment were advanced by the master’s the-
sis of Brooks (1974). Variation within E. glau-
cus Buckley, a large complex species, also re-
mains poorly understood (Snyder 1950, 1951;
Stebbins 1957). I am currently completing a
treatment of North American Elymus species
with paired spikelets for the new Manual of
North American Grasses (M.E. Barkworth,
K.M. Kapels, and L.A. Vorobik, in prepara-
tion), which has already necessitated some
taxonomic notes (Campbell 1995, 1996). This
paper continues by (1) describing the follow-
ing new species related to E. virginicus and
(2) by providing a new subspecific combina-
tion in E. glaucus.
1. ELYMUS MACGREGORII sp. nov.
In the late 20th century, it is rare to rec-
ognize a new species of vascular plant that is
widespread in eastern North America. Nev-
ertheless, based on much morphological and
phenological study, Brooks (1974) showed
that the plants described below are distinct.
He initially treated them as Elymus virgini-
88
cus var. minor Vasey ex L.H. Dewey (1892,
p. 550), but later (in McGregor et al. 1986,
p. 1171) he noted that further study was
needed. The type of E. virginicus var. minor
has proven difficult to interpret: collected in
“northern Texas” [without date] by /S.B./
Buckley s.n. (US 1020445), it consists of just
one spike with an upper culm section and a
few leaves. Its rachis internode lengths and
awn lengths suggest that this specimen may
be transitional between the species described
below and E. virginicus var. jejunus (Ramal-
ey) Bush. Moreover, “minor” cannot be used
as a new specific epithet in this genus be-
cause it has already been used for a different
species, as E. minor (J.G. Smith) M.E. Jones
(1912), a name based on Sitanion minus J.G.
Smith, which is now an accepted synonym of
E. elymoides (Raf.) Swezey [=S. hystrix
(Nutt.) J.G. Smith. ].
Elymus macgregorii R. Brooks & J.J.N.
Campbell, sp. nov. Figure la.
Plantae caespitosae, plerumque glauco-
pruinosae. Culmi 40-120 cm longi, erecti vel
leviter decumbentes; nodi plerumque nudi.
Foliorum vaginae glabrae vel raro villosae;
ligulae minus quam 1 mm; auriculae 2-3 mm,
purpurascentae vel nigrescentae; laminae 7—
15 mm lata, laxae, supra glabrae vel interdum
villosae, nitido-atrovirides sub pruina pallido-
glauca. Spicae 4-12 cm longae, 2.5—-4 cm la-
tae, erectae, exsertae; nodi 9-18, unusqu-
isque 2(3) spiculis; internodiae 4-7 mm lon-
gae, tenuiae (sectionibus angustissimis ca. 0.3
New Elymus Taxa—C ampbell 89
mm), sine angulis dorsalis prominentis. Spic-
ulae 10-15 mm longae (minus aristae), effu-
sae, glaucae vel maturite stramineae-fuscae,
cum (2)3-4 flosculis, flosculus infirmus cad-
ens cum glumae et basa rachillae affixae. Glu-
mae 8-16 mm longae, 1—-1.8 mm latae, bas-
alia 1-3 mm induratae (nervis obscuris) et
moderate exarcuatae, corpe lineari-lanceola-
to, plerumque glabro vel scabro, venis (2)4—
5(8), arista 10-25 mm longa, stricta vel inter-
dum contorta in spiculae infimae; lemmae 6-—
12 mm longae, plerumque glabrae vel sca-
brae vel interdum villosae ad hirsutae, arista
(15)20-30 mm, stricta; paleae 6-10 mm lon-
gae, obtusae; antherae 2-4 mm longae, pler-
umque manifestae e mensis quintus serotinus
ad mensis sextus medius; chromosomatum
numerum, 2n = 28.
Plants cespitose, usually glaucous-prui-
nose. Culms 40-120 cm, erect or slightly de-
cumbent; nodes mostly exposed. Leaf sheaths
glabrous or rarely villous; ligules under 1 mm;
auricles 2-3 mm, purplish to black; blades 7—
15 mm wide, lax, glabrous or occasionally vil-
lous above, dark glossy green under the pale
glaucous waxy bloom. Spikes 4-12 cm long,
2.5-4 cm wide including awns, erect, exsert-
ed: nodes 9-18, each with 2(3) spikelets; in-
ternodes 4-7 mm, thin (narrowest section ca.
0.3 mm), without prominent dorsal angles.
Spikelets 10-15 mm (minus awns), spreading,
glaucous then maturing to pale yellowish
brown, with (2)3-4 florets, the ‘lowest floret
disarticulating with glumes and rachilla base
attached. Glumes subequal, 8-16 mm long,
1-1.8 mm wide, the basal 1-3 mm indurate
(with veins hidden) and moderately bowed
out, the body linear-lanceolate, usually gla-
brous or scabrous, (2)4—5(8)-veined, the awn
10-25 mm, straight or occasionallly contorted
in the lowest spikelets; lemmas 6-12 mm,
usually glabrous or scabrous, occasionally vil-
lous to hirsute, the awn (15)20-30 mm,
straight; paleas 6-10 mm, obtuse; anthers 2—
4 mm, usually evident from mid-May to mid-
June. Chromosome number, 2n = 28 (Brooks
1974).
TYPE: U.S.A., KENTUCKY, Fayette Co.,
wooded banks of West Hickman Creek near
Armstrong Mill Road, 31 May 1998, J. Camp-
bell 98-001 (HOLOTYPE: US; ISOTYPES:
KY, KANU, KNK, MADI, MO, NCU, WIS).
I have annotated many collections at
KANU, KNK, KY, ISC, MADI, MO, NCU,
OKL, TEX, UARK, US, UTC, VDB, WIS,
and elsewhere with the above name or with
the earlier suggested names E. virginicus var.
minor and “E. interior” ined. A distribution
map is provided in Figure 1b, and recorded
counties are listed in the Appendix. Elymus
macgregorii occurs mostly in the Mississippi
River and Ohio River drainages (Texas to
South Dakota, Alabama to Ohio), but it also
extends eastward to the Piedmont and New
England (North Carolina to Maine), and
westward to central Texas (Figure 1b). It has
not yet been confirmed from Canada, but
there is a possible atypical specimen from
Nova Scotia (see Appendix), and the illustra-
tion of “Elymus hystrix L.” in Dore and
McNeill (1980) appears to be E. macgregorii,
based on the long awns, distinct glumes, and
upward-pointing spikelets. Its typical habitats
are in mesic woodlands and thickets on fertile
alluvium or, in a few regions (such as the
“Bluegrass” of Kentucky, Indiana, and Ohio),
on unusually fertile, base-rich upland resid-
uum. In range and habitat, this species is
somewhat similar to two widespread oaks
(Little 1971), Quercus macrocarpa Michx.
(excluding Q. mandanensis Rydb.) and Q.
muhlenbergii Engelm. (excluding Q. prino-
ides Willd.).
Elymus macgregorii has been overlooked
largely because its morphological distinctions
are often not obvious at first inspection, es-
pecially in the herbarium. Yet, in 20 years of
experience with this species in Kentucky, near
the center of its range, I have found that, in
addition to having some slight visible differ-
ences, it consistently flowers about a month
earlier than its closest relatives, E. glabriflorus
(Vasey ex L.H. Dewey) Scribn. & C.R. Ball
and E. virginicus, including var. jejunus (Ra-
maley) Bush and var. intermedius (Vasey ex A.
Gray) Bush. By recording dates of anthesis in
the field and herbarium, I have confirmed the
results of Brooks’s (1974) garden studies that
first demonstrated this phenological differ-
ence. I have also observed that the habitat of
E. macgregorii is more restricted to woodlands
on highly fertile, mesic soils, which, due to
their productivity, are prone to much biotic
disturbance. For example, this species appears
to have been particularly abundant before set-
tlement, along with the globally threatened
90
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
A
ae S 7 B
f ‘
i
*
q
a |
New Elymus Taxa—C ampbell 91
aa
nuunaaeeeie We a
a
Figure Hb. Elymus macgregorit: mapped county records (eastern North America). Solid dots show counties recorded
with typical plants; open dots show counties recorded with only atypical plants that may be transitional to E. virginicus
var. jejunus (see text); crosses show counties with other atypical plants of uncertain identification, which may be hybrids
in some cases. This map is based on herbarium specimens examined by the author (see Appendix) (a complete search
of all major state herbaria has not yet been made).
<e
Figure la. Elymus macgregorii R. Brooks & J.J.N. Campbell.—A. Habit—B. Upper portion of culm with mature
spike, viewed on plane with alternating spread of spikelets —C. Sheath summit and blade base —D1. Mature rachis
intemmode and glumes, viewed in plane of spikelet spread (with abaxial view of central glume in spikelet, and largely
side view of lateral glume); arrow indicates disarticulation of right-hand glume pair and attached rachilla base from
rachis.—D2. Spikelet, with lateral view of florets—E. Mature floret in abaxial view (left) and adaxial view (right); note
rounded palea summit shorter than lemma body.—F. Cross-section of mature, indurate glume base, showing embedded
vascular bundles on abaxial side-—G. Cross-section of central rachis internode, showing only slight angles on abaxial
side. Drawn from unpressed robust material in the same population as the holotype.
92
Trifolium stoloniferum Mubhl., in the open, un-
gulate-browsed woodlands of Kentucky's In-
ner Bluegrass plains (Campbell et al. 1988).
Such vegetation is now virtually all cleared for
farmland, and E. macgregorii survives only in
forested stream corridors, woodlots, and
fencerows without frequent grazing or mow-
ing.
ees macgregorii has often been con-
fused with E. glabriflorus [syn. E. virginicus
var. glabriflorus (Vasey ex L.H. Dewey) Bush].
The latter is a species of the southeastern
United States, typical of native grasslands and
open woodlands on subhydric to subxeric sites
that need not have particularly high soil fer-
tility. Elymus macgregorii usually sheds pollen
and begins to set seeds in mid-May to mid-
June, as compared with mid-June to late July
in E. glabriflorus. It has a more open spike
with longer, more exposed rachis internodes
ca. 4-7 mm, compared with 3-5 mm in E.
glabriflorus. The spikes are often shorter and
ically have about 9-18 nodes; in contrast,
spikes of E. glabriforus typically have 15-30
nodes, unless unusually stunted. In many cas-
es, there may be little or no obvious vegetative
differences. However, in fresh condition the
leaves of E. macgregorii are generally lax and
dark, glossy green under the distinct, pale,
glaucous, waxy bloom, whereas those of E. gla-
briflorus range from lax (especially in shade)
to ascending and somewhat involute (espe-
cially in sun), and they are generally paler,
duller green with or without a waxy bloom.
The auricles of E. macgregorii are typically
prominent, Ca. 2-3 mm, and tur from pur-
plish to black at maturity, whereas those of E.
glabriflorus (and E. virginicus) are typically
less developed, ca. 0-2 mm, and only brown-
ish at maturity.
Both Elymus macgregorii and E. glabriflo-
rus can be distinguished from E. virginicus by
their fully exserted, wide spikes (ca. 2.5-6 cm
wide including awns), with more spreading
spikelets and longer lemma awns (ca. 15-40
mm). Spikes of E. virginicus vary from fully
exserted to remaining partly enclosed by the
upper leaf sheaths and are only 0.7-2 cm
wide; its spikelets are appressed to slightly
spreading, and lemma awns are 1-15(20) mm
long. While no consistent vegetative differenc-
es have been found, E. macgregorii and E. gla-
briflorus are sometimes pubescent in spikes
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
(especially lemmas) and leaves (sheaths and
upper blade surfaces), whereas E. virginicus is
generally glabrous to scabridulous except for a
few varieties or forms that have rather narrow
ranges in distribution or habitat. A later paper
in this series will present a detailed key to
these species and other Elymus spp. with
paired spikelets.
Variation within Elymus macgregorii de-
serves further study. Throughout much of its
range, plants with pubescent spikes (especially
lemmas) occur at scattered locations, but
these have not yet been reported in distinct
habitats or in large enough populations to war-
rant taxonomic recognition. However, some
plants from Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma,
and Texas, including the type of E. virginicus
var. minor, do deserve more detailed study for
possible recognition. These have smaller spike
dimensions (with internodes down to 3-4 mm
and awns down to 10 mm), and often less
glaucous foliage. They may represent a tran-
sition to E. virginicus var. jejunus, though of-
ten with distinctly villous leaves. Thus, sepa-
ration of E. macgregorii from E. virginicus var.
jejunus may remain difficult in this region
without further research.
My examination of herbarium material sug-
gests that Elymus macgregorii forms rare nat-
ural hybrids with E. virginicus, E. glabriflo-
rus, E. hystrix L., and perhaps E. villosus
Muhl. ex Willd. Also, while misidentified as
E. virginicus var. intermedius (Vasey ex A.
Gray) Bush, E. macgregorii appears to have
been artificially hybridized by Stebbins amd
Snyder (1956) with E. glaucus, E. stebbinsii
Gould, and Pseudoroegneria spicata (Pursh)
A. Léve [syn. Agropyron spicatum Pursh].
This misidentification is indicated by exami-
nation of their probable voucher material at
US (GL. Church s.n., Limington, Vermont),
and by its attributed characters in their Table
2: rachis internodes ca. 7 mm, glumes ca. 28
mm, and lemmas ca. 28 mm (including awns).
Elymus macgregorii is named in honor of
the Clan M[alcGregor, as represented by two
descendants: (1) Ronald Leighton McGregor,
emeritus professor and former herbarium di-
rector at the University of Kansas (Lawrence),
Great Plains botanist (McGregor et al. 1986),
and supervisor of Brooks (1974); and (2) John
MacGregor (of Nicholasville, Kentucky), an
outstanding Kentucky naturalist, explorer of
New Elymus Taxa—Campbell 93
Inner Bluegrass thickets and other disturbed
places, and my occasional collaborator (e.g.,
Campbell et al. 1994). An appropriate English
name is “early wild-rye” since this is the first
species of Elymus to flower in east-central
North America.
2. ELYMUS GLAUCUS ssp. MACKENZII
comb. nov.
Elymus glaucus ssp. glaucus is a widespread
taxon in western North America (Figure 2b).
There are two other described subspecies,
which are confined to regions along the Pacific
Coast and adjacent mountain ranges, and
there is much additional variation that de-
serves further attention (Snyder 1950, 1951;
Stebbins 1957). For example, some plants can
have solitary spikelets at most nodes, often re-
sembling E. trachycaulus (Link) Gould ex
Shinners according to M.E. Barkworth (Utah
State University, pers. comm., June 1997). The
main range of Elymus glaucus extends east to
the western Great Plains, but this species is
unknown or very rare in most of Texas,
Oklahoma, Kansas, and Nebraska. Its northern
range extends east to a few scattered records
in the Great Lakes region (e.g., Voss 1972).
Some Great Lakes records, however, are ques-
tionable due to possible confusion with E. tra-
chycaulus, or possible post-Columbian spread
of E. glaucus to the east.
This section of the paper is concerned with
the remarkably disjunct southeastern segre-
gate of this species in the Ozark Mountains
and Ouachita Mountains of eastern Oklahoma,
northwestern Arkansas, and southwestern
Missouri. These plants occur mostly in rocky,
calcareous, xeric openings. They were origi-
nally described as Elymus mackenzii Bush
(1926), based on Missouri specimens, but no
subsequent author has recognized them as dis-
tinct from E. glaucus. The taxon is resurrected
here as a subspecies of E. glaucus because of
its slight- morphological differences and_ its
great disjunction of about 800 km from the
nearest records of E. glaucus to the west and
north.
Elymus glaucus Buckley ssp. mackenzii
(Bush) J.J.N. Campbell, comb. nov. Figure
2a.
Basionym: Elymus mackenzii Bush, Am.
Midl. Naturalist 10:53, 1926.
TYPE: U.S.A., MISSOURI, [Barry Co.]| Ea-
gle Rock, 15 Jun 1897, B.F Bush 77 (HO-
LOTYPE: US 318128!).
OTHER COLLECTIONS EXAMINED.
U.S.A., ARKANSAS: Carroll Co., wooded
northeast facing slope along White River at
Catron Bend, 5 miles northwest of Eureka
Springs, 27 Jul 1953, M.J. May 12 (UARK);
Polk Co., Rich Mountain, margin of rich
woods, 30 Jun 1967, G.E. Tucker 5439 (APCR,
NCU). MISSOURI: Barry Co., 3 miles east of
Roaring Rv. State Park on high limestone Jun-
iperus glade, 10 miles southeast of Cassville,
H.H. Iltis et al. 1, 3 Jul 1960 (WIS, KY).
OKLAHOMA: Le Flore Co., summit of Rich
Mt. near Arkansas line, damp ledge, rock in
full sun, 24 Jun 1980, R. Kral 65492 (VDB).
Another Missouri record is from Moore
(1954), who listed “Elymus mackenzii” from
Stone Co. on xeric limestone bluffs along the
White River. I have not yet located voucher
collections by Moore, but H.H. Iltis (Univ. of
Wisconsin, pers. comm., Nov 1996) worked
with him and has confirmed the identification.
Also, Steyermark (1963) mapped E. glaucus
from eight counties in southwestern Missouri
(Barry, Barton, Jasper, Lawrence, Newton,
Ozark, Stone, and Taney). His collections,
mostly at UMO (and perhaps F), have been
partly examined by Yatskievych (1999), whose
description of E. glaucus suggests that all Mis-
souri plants belong to ssp. mackenzii, except
perhaps for a old collection from Jackson Co.
with unknown location and affinity: 21 Jul
1892, B.F. Bush 2849 (UMO). Steyermark
(1963) noted that the species is “usually found
on rocky limestone ledges of bluffs along
White River and tributaries and other
streams.”
The following key distinguishes the de-
scribed subspecies of Elymus glaucus. How-
ever, although ssp. jepsonii was recognized in
Hickman (1993), this taxon may not deserve
subspecies status according to M.E. Bark-
worth (pers. comm., April 1999). A complete
revision of this complex species is needed.
1. Lemma awns (0)1-5(7) mm; glume awns 0-2 mm;
blades glabrous to scabrid-puberulent above _._..
SE et ee ree ssp. virescens (Piper) Gould
1. Lemma awns (5)10-25(35) mm; glume awns
(0.5)1-8(9) mm; blades glabrous or variously pu-
bescent.
94
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
New Elymus Taxa—Campbell 95
y
nd
=i
Figure 2b. Elymus glaucus: mapped county records of ssp. mackenzii and outlying eastern records referable to ssp.
glaucus (central North America). Solid dots show ssp. mackenzii (see text for collection details); open dots show other
eastern records of E. glaucus, including plants that are similar to E. trachycaulus, based on authorities (e.g., Bowden
1954: Gould 1975; McGregor et al. 1986; Voss 1972), and on scattered collections seen by the author. The dashed line
shows approximate eastern boundary of main range of E. glaucus based on reliable data accumulated by M. E. Bark-
worth (pers. comm.); there are no other records between this line and ssp. mackenzii.
<<
Figure 2a. Elymus glaucus ssp. mackenzii (Bush) J.J.N. Campbell.—A. Habit.—B. Upper portion of culm with mature
spike, viewed on plane with alternating spread of spikelets —Cl. Sheath summit and blade base —C2. Adaxial blade
pubescence.—D1. Mature rachis internode and glumes, viewed in plane of spikelet spread (with abaxial view of central
glume of spikelet, and largely side view of lateral glume); note lack of prompt disarticulation by rachilla base from
rachis.—D2. Spikelet, with lateral view of florets.—E. Mature floret in abaxial view (left) and adaxial view (right); note
narrowly truncate palea summit almost equalling lemma body.—F. Cross-section of mature glume base, showing surficial
vascular bundles on abaxial side—G. Cross-section of central rachis internode, showing lack of angles on abaxial side.
Drawn from robust material of H.H. Iltis et al. 1 (WIS, KY).
96 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
. Blades usually 4-13 mm wide, glabrous to stri-
gose above, or occasionally pilose to hirsute
aah hairs of fairly uniform length; glume awns
1-5 mm.
3. Blades strigose, pilose, or hirsute; lemmas
AVUTIST COPA QIAO a2 <0 se eae ey ME ene
ee Sp. jepsonii (Burtt Davy) Gould
3. Blades glabrous, scabrous, or sparsely stri-
gose; lemma awns to 35 mm _._... ssp. glaucus
. Blades usually 3-8 mm wide, densely short-pi-
bo
lose and with scattered longer hairs above;
lume avs) S—6 Wanye eee tee eee
Very few vascular plants are known to have
such striking disjunctions from western ranges
to the Ozarks or Ouachitas, as is the case in
Elymus glaucus. Mimulus floribundus Douglas
ex Lindl. (Scrophulariaceae) is a widespread
species of the Rocky Mountains that occurs on
wet dripping cliffs in the Ozark Mountains of
Arkansas (Moore 1959; Smith 1991). Like E.
glaucus, the eastern plants of M. floribundus
appear to have some morphological distinc-
tion, but in this case a subspecific epithet has
not yet been published (H.H. Iltis, pers.
comm., April 1999).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
For their assistance and encouragement, I
am particularly grateful to Mary Barkworth,
Ralph Brooks, Hugh Iltis, Dan Nicholson,
Max Medley, John and Charlotte Reeder, Rob
Soreng, and George Yatskievych. I thank the
curators of the various herbaria where I have
studied material or obtained loans.
LITERATURE CITED
Bowden, W. M. 1964. Cytotaxonomy of the species and
interspecific hybrids of the genus Elymus in Canada and
neighboring areas. Canad. J. Bot. 42:547-601.
Brooks, R. E. 1974. Intraspecific variation in Elymus vir-
ginicus (Gramineae) in the central United States. M.A.
Thesis. University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS.
Bush, B. F. 1926. The Missouri species of Elymus. Am.
Midl. Naturalist 10:49-88.
Campbell, J. J. N., M. Evans, M. E. Medley, and N. L.
Taylor. 1988. Buffalo clovers in Kentucky (Trifolium sto-
loniferum and T. reflexum): historical records, presettle-
ment environment, rediscovery, endangered status, cul-
tivation and chromosome number. Rhodora 90:399-
418.
Campbell, J. J. N. 1995. New combinations in eastern
North American Elymus (Poaceae). Novon 5:128.
Campbell, J. J. N. 1996. Proposal to conserve Elymus vir-
ginicus (Poaceae) with a conserved type. Taxon 45:128—
129.
Jampbell, J. J. N., J. R. Abbott, R. R. Cicerello, J. D.
Kiser, J. R. MacGregor, and J. G. Palis. 1994. Cooper-
ative inventory of endangered, threatened, sensitive and
rare species, Daniel Boone National Forest, London
Ranger District. Kentucky State Nature Preserves
Commission, Frankfort, KY.
Dewey, L. H. 1892. [Gramineae.] In J. H. Coulter (ed).
Manual of the phanerogams and pteridophytes of west-
erm Texas. Contrib. U.S. Natl. Herb. 2(3):347-588.
Dore, W. G., and J. McNeill. 1980. Grasses of Ontario.
Biosystematics Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario. Re-
search Branch, Agriculture Canada, Monograph 26.
Gould, F. W. 1975. The grasses of Texas. Texas A&M Uni-
versity Press, College Station, TX.
Hickman, J .C. (ed). 1993. The Jepson manual of higher
plants of California. University of California Press,
Berkeley, CA.
Holmgren, P. K., N. H. Holmgren, and L. C. Barnett.
1990. Index herbariorum. Part I: The herbaria of the
world. International Association for Plant Taxonomy,
New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY.
Jones, M. E. 1912. [Elymus minor comb. nov.] Contrib.
Western Bot. 14:20.
Little, E. L. 1971. Atlas of United States trees. Vol. 1.
Conifers and important hardwoods. USDA Misc. Publ.
1146.
McGregor, R. L., T. M. Barkley, R. E. Brooks, and E. K.
Schofield. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains. Great Plains
Flora Association, University Press of Kansas,
Lawrence, KS.
Moore, D. M. 1954. An ecological and botanical survey:
Table Rock Reservoir. Technical Report to National
Park Service, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR.
Moore, D. M. 1959. Mimulus floribundus in Arkansas.
Southwest. Naturalist 3:217-219.
Smith, E. B. 1991. An atlas and annotated list of the vas-
cular plants of Arkansas, 2nd ed. University of Arkansas,
Fayetteville, AR.
Snyder, L. A. 1950. Morphological variability and hybrid
development in Elymus glaucus. Am. J. Bot. 37:628—
635.
Snyder, L. A. 1951. Cytology of inter-strain hybrids and
the probable origin of variability in Elymus glaucus.
Am. J. Bot. 38:195-202.
Stebbins, G. L., and L. A. Snyder. 1956. Artificial and
natural hybrids in the Gramineae, Tribe Hordeae. IX.
Hybrids between western and eastern North American
species. Am. J. Bot. 43:305-312.
Stebbins, G. L. 1957. The hybrid origin of microspecies
in the Elymus glaucus complex. Proc. Internat. Genet-
ics Symposia, 1956:336-340.
Steyermark, J. A. 1963. Flora of Missouri. Iowa State Uni-
versity Press, Ames, IA.
Voss, E. G. 1972. Michigan flora. Part I. Gymnosperms
and monocots. Cranbrook Institute of Science, Bloom-
field Hills, MI; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
oC
New Elymus Taxa—Campbell
Yatskievych, G. 1999. Steyermark’s flora of Missouri, Vol.
1. Missouri Botanical Garden Press, St. Louis, MO.
APPENDIX: COUNTIES AND
HERBARIUM SOURCES FOR
SPECIMENS OF ELYMUS
MACGREGORII ANNOTATED BY THE
AUTHOR.
I have annotated collections as Elymus mac-
gregorii (or E. virginicus var. minor) from the
following counties. Herbarium acronyms
(Holmgren et al. 1990) are in parentheses.
Uncertain identifications due to incomplete or
depauperate specimens or probable hybrids
are generally excluded unless they represent
possible county records (with caveats noted in
parentheses). However, a frequent, mostly
southwestern, variant that may be transitional
to E. virginicus var. jejunus is included and
shown by asterisks.
CANADA. NOVA SCOTIA: “Bass River”
(MADI, US)? [30 Jul 1875, J. Fowler s.n.—
this northernmost specimen is atypical and
might be at least transitional to E. virginicus,
but is included here as the only possible re-
cord seen so far from Canada.
U.S.A. ALABAMA: Bibb (VDB); St. Clair
(NCU). ARKANSAS: Ashley (UARK*); Baxter
(UARK*):; Benton (MADI, NCU,* UARK*):
Boone (KANU*); Bradley (VDB); Fulton
(UARK*); Hot Spring (US); Independence
(KANU); Montgomery (VDB); Newton (BE-
REA*, UARK*):; Polk (ISC, VDB); Prairie
(ISC); Washington (NCU,* UARK,* US*).
CONNECTICUT: New Haven (US). DIS-
TRICT OF COLUMBIA (ISC, MADI).
FLORIDA: Leon (TEX) [Godfrey 84158,
“common in ditches’—could this be adven-
tive?]|. GEORGIA: Clarke (US*). ILLINOIS:
Fulton (US); Jersey (KNK); Knox (MO); Pe-
oria (US); Union (MADI, KNK). INDIANA:
Parke (US); Putnam (US); Wayne (US).
IOWA: Boone (ISC); Clay (ISC, MO*); Dick-
inson (ISC); Emmet (ISC); Jefferson (ISC*);
Lee (ISC); Lyon (ISC); Mahaska (ISC); Story
(MO,* NCU*): Winneshiek (ISC*). KANSAS:
Allen (KANU); Anderson (KANU);: Atchison
(KANU*); Brown (KANU); Butler (KANU):
Cherokee (KANU); Cowley (KANU, MADI);
Dickinson (KANU); Doniphan (KANU*);
Douglas (KANU); Franklin (KANU); Jackson
(KANU); Jefferson (KANU); Kingman
(KANU); Leavenworth (KANU): Miami
oii
(KANU); Morris (KANU); Nemaha (KANU):
Shawnee (KANU); Wabaunsee (KANU); Wy-
andotte (KANU). KENTUCKY: Anderson
(EKY); Barren (KY); Boone (KNK); Calloway
(NCU); Campbell (KNK, NCU); Casey (BE-
REA, KY); Christian (VDB); Clark (KY); Clay
(MO); Fayette (KY, US); Franklin (KY); Ful-
ton (KY, VDB); Grant (KNK); Graves (VDB);
Green (EKY); Hickman (KY); Jefferson (KY,
NCU, TEX, UTC); Jessamine (KY); Kenton
(KNK, VDB); Laurel (BEREA); Livingston
(KY); McCracken (KY); Madison (KY); Old-
ham (KY); Owsley (KY); Pendleton (NCU);
Pulaski (KY); Rowan (KY); Spencer (KY);
Trimble (KY); Warren (WKY); Wayne
(MORE); Wolfe (KY); Woodford (KY). LOU-
ISIANA: Bienville (US); De Soto (US); Jeffer-
son? (VDB—perhaps transitional to E. glabri-
florus); Ouachita (NCU); St. Tammany (ISC).
MAINE: Knox (NCU); Oxford (GH); Penob-
scot (ISC); Piscataquis (US); Washington
(NCU); York (NCU, US). MARYLAND: Gar-
rett (US); Montgomery (TEX); Washington
(KANU). MASSACHUSETTS: Essex (US);
Hampshire (MADI); Worcester (MADI,
TEX). MISSISSIPPI: Forrest (US); Tunica
(NCU). MISSOURI: Barry (MADI*); Boone
(MO); Christian (ISC*); Cole (MO); Dade
(MO, US); Franklin (MO); Greene (NCU):
Jackson (ARIZ, ISC, MO, US); Jasper (MO,
US); Jefferson (KANU, MO, NCU, UTC*);
Lafayette (MO); McDonald (MO); Monroe
(MO); Morgan (MO); Oregon (MO); Pettis
(MO); Phelps (MO); Pike (MO); Platte (MO);
Ralls (MO, US, UTC); St. Charles (MO,
UTC); St. Clair (TENN); Ste. Genevieve
(MO); St. Louis (ISC, MO); Shannon (MO);
Taney (MO); Texas (MO); Warren (MO). NE-
BRASKA: Richardson (KANU, US*). NEW
HAMPSHIRE: Cheshire (GH); Coos (ISC,
TEX, US); Hillsborough (GH, MADI, MO,
TENN); Strafford (MADI). NEW YORK:
Cattaraugus (MO); Tompkins (MO). NORTH
CAROLINA: Alamance (US); Chatham
(NCU*); Harnett (NCU); Haywood (NCU);
Henderson (NCU); Jones (NCU); Lee (NCU);
Martin (NCU); Northampton (NCU); Polk
(NCU*): Stokes (NCU); Wilson (NCU).
NORTH DAKOTA: McClean? (KANU—at
least transitional to E. virginicus). OHIO: Ash-
land (TENN); Franklin (VDB); Hamilton
(US); Huron (NCU). OKLAHOMA: Coman-
che (US); Kay (KANU); Muskogee (US); Rog-
98 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
ers (VDB*). PENNSYLVANIA: Elk (ISC);
Luzerne (TEX); Snyder (TEX); Warren (ISC).
RHODE ISLAND: Providence (GH).
SOUTH DAKOTA: Clay? (MO—perhaps
transitional to E. virginicus); Roberts (ISC).
TENNESSEE: Bledsoe (VDB); Davidson
(KANU, MADI, US, VDB); Dickson (VDB);
Smith (VDB):; Williamson (VDB). TEXAS:
Austin (MO,* TEX, US); Bexar (MADI,*
MO,* TEX); Blanco (KANU, TEX); Brazoria
(TEX); Brazos (TEX*); Brown (TEX*); Bur-
leson (US*): Collin (MO*); Comal (MO,
TEX,* US*): Dallas (MO*): Dimmit (US*);
Fort Bend (TEX*); Galveston (TEX*); Gilles-
pie (TEX*); Gonzales (TEX); Harris (TEX*);
Hays (TEX); Jim Wells (US*); Llano (TEX);
Medina (TEX); Nacogdoches (US); Nueches
(MO); Refugio (TEX); San Patricio (ISC, MO,
TEX): San Saba (MO); Tarrant (TEX,* US*);
Taylor (ISC,* MO, TEX); Travis (ISC*, MO,*
TEX): Val Verde (TEX*); Wichita (TEX*).
VERMONT: Essex (US). VIRGINIA: Buck-
ingham (NCU); Clarke (NCU); Loudoun
(NCU); Montgomery (NCU*); Powhatan
(NCU). WEST VIRGINIA: Jefferson (NCU);
Morgan (NCU); Tucker (TEX); Upshur
(NCU). WISCONSIN: Dodge (MADI); Fond
Du Lac (MADI); Grant (MADI); Iowa
(MADI); Outagamie (MADI); Vernon
(MADI).
J. Ky. Acad. Sei. 61(2):99-104. 2000.
Proterometra macrostoma (Digenea: Azygiidae): Distome Emergence
From the Cercarial Tail and Subsequent Development in the
Definitive Host
Ronald Rosen, Kelly Adams, Emilia Boiadgieva, and Jessica Schuster
Department of Biology, Berea College, Berea, Kentucky 40404
ABSTRACT
The objectives of our study were (1) to evaluate effects of pH and pepsin on emergence of the Protero-
metra macrostoma distome body from its cercarial tail and (2) to examine morphological changes associated
with maturation of this worm in the sunfish definitive host. Distome emergence from the cercarial tail was
significantly faster at low pH (1.5-2.5). Addition of 0.5% pepsin appeared to accelerate this process. The
number and maximum size of eggs increased in adult worms over the initial 18 and 24 days, respectively,
in experimentally infected bluegill, Lepomis macrochirus. No other trends for change in worm size were
noted. Mature eggs containing miracidia were first observed by day 18 postinfection.
INTRODUCTION
Proterometra macrostoma is a digenetic
trematode widely distributed in eastern Unit-
ed States. The complete life cycle was first de-
scribed by Horsfall (1933, 1934). The adult
worm is found in the esophagus and stomach
of sunfishes (Family Centrarchidae). Eggs
containing fully developed miracidia are re-
leased into water with fecal material and are
subsequently ingested by snails in the genus
Elimia. Intramolluscan stages include sporo-
cysts, rediae, and cercariae. During emer-
gence from the snail, the distome body of the
cercaria enters a vesicle/cavity within the cer-
carial tail and detaches from the latter struc-
ture. After it is released into the water, the
cercarias swimming behavior and large size—
tailstem 4-8.9 mm long (LaBeau and Peters
1995)—make it attractive to potential defini-
tive hosts, which rapidly ingest the worm. The
progenetic (i.e., containing in uterus eggs in
early cleavage) distome body is then liberated
from the cercarial tail in the fish stomach and
matures directly into an adult worm in the
host stomach or esophagus.
The time frame and conditions that pro-
mote the emergence of the distome body from
the cercarial tail have not been quantified.
Horsfall (1934) reported emergence of P. ma-
crostoma from the cercarial tail in a 1.0% so-
lution of HCl, but it was unclear what pH,
temperature, and time frame were used. Sim-
ilarly, the subsequent development of this “lib-
erated” distome in the definitive host has been
based on morphological comparisons between
99
the distome body within the cercaria vs. the
adult worm (Horsfall 1934). The time frame
for changes associated with maturation of the
adult worm in sunfishes has not been previ-
ously described.
The objectives of our study were (1) to eval-
uate the effect of pH and pepsin on emer-
gence of the distome body from the cercarial
tail of P. macrostoma and (2) to establish a
time line for possible morphological changes
during maturation in sunfish definitive hosts.
METHODS
General Methods
Snails were collected in June and July 1998
from North Elkhom Creek (38° 11’ 00” N, 84°
29’ 19” W) in Scott County, Kentucky. Snails
were maintained under a protocol similar to
that described by Riley and Uglem (1995).
They were placed in white enamel pans filled
with filtered creek water, held at 20-25°C un-
der continuous light, and fed lettuce ad libi-
tum. The water in the pans was changed every
2 days. When cercariae were required for ex-
periments, any previously emerged worms
were removed from these pans. The snail cul-
tures were then placed in an environmental
chamber in the dark at 20°C, which promoted
a copious release of new cercariae within 2
hours.
Distome Emergence
To assess the effect of pH and pepsin on
distome emergence from the cercarial tail, a
Ringer's solution for cold-blooded vertebrates
100
(i.e., 6.5 g/liter NaCl, 0.05 g/liter KCI, 0.16 g/
liter CaCl, X 2H,0, 0.39 g/liter MgSO, X
7H,0, and 0.2 g/liter NaHCO,) was acidified
with concentrated HCl to obtain pHs of 1.5,
2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, and 4.0. These values were
within the physiological range (i.e., pH 1-5) of
bluegill gastric juice reported by Norris et al.
(1973). For the pH + pepsin experiments,
0.5% pepsin (Sigma: 1:2500; activity 600-1800
units per mg protein) solutions were made
with each of the acidified salines. Cercariae
less than 2.5 hours postemergence were used
in these experiments. They were pipetted into
individual beakers containing a particular pre-
cooled (20°C) acidified saline or acidified sa-
line + pepsin, incubated at 20°C, and checked
for complete distome emergence from the
cercarial tail every 5 minutes for 1 hour. Each
experiment consisted of six treatments and 60
worms, with 10 cercariae/treatment (=pH).
Both the pH and pH + pepsin experiments
were repeated three times.
A mean + SE (% distome emergence) was
calculated for each time period and pH based
on the three replicate treatments. A chi-
square goodness-of-fit test was used to deter-
mine if significant differences in the number
of emerging distomes existed due to pH at 5
and 30 minutes for both the acidified saline
and acidified saline + pepsin experiments. A
2 X 2 chi-square contingency test was used to
assess differences in numbers of digeneans
emerging from cercarial tails in acidified saline
vs. acidified saline + pepsin at 5 and 30 min-
utes for each pH level assessed. A probability
of P < 0.05 was considered significant for all
statistical tests.
Fish Infections
Young, hatchery-reared (Ken Jacobs, Bowl-
ing Green, KY) bluegill, Lepomis macrochirus
(mean fork length = 5.2 cm), were used in
this experiment. Fish were maintained in aer-
ated 10 and 15 liter aquariums at 24.6°C and
fed TetraMin (Tetra Sales, Blacksburg, VA).
Prior to infection, one bluegill was placed into
a 3.3 liter tank. After a 1-3 minute acclimation
period, two cercariae were released into this
tank. Visual confirmation of cercariae inges-
tion was made, and then the exposed fish was
placed into a new aquarium. In addition, sev-
eral bluegill were exposed to cercariae in mass
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
and subsequently maintained in the manner
described above.
Every 3 days, beginning at day 0 (at 5 and
15 minute postinfection [PI]) and ending on
day 24 PI, 3-5 fish were sacrificed and nec-
ropsied. Worms were removed from the stom-
ach, placed on a slide under a coverslip, and
examined with a compound microscope. The
number and developmental stage of eggs were
recorded. Developmental stages were based
on the descriptions of Horsfall (1934): (1)
Stage I—eggs containing a clear mass at their
anterior end and a large vitelline mass at the
posterior end, (2) Stage II—the vitelline mass
in eggs is less apparent and signs of advanced
cleavage are more obvious, and (3) Stage I—
further reduction in the vitelline mass, dark-
ening of the egg into a yellow color, and ap-
pearance of bristle plates associated with the
developing miracidium at the opercular end.
The worm was then fixed and flattened under
a coverslip with FAA (formalin-alcohol-acetic
acid). Flukes were stained with Semichon’s
carmine, and permanent slides were made.
Length and width measurements of worm
size, oral sucker, acetabulum, pharynx, testes,
and eggs were obtained from fixed/stained
specimens with an ocular micrometer. Means
+ SE in micrometers were calculated from
these measurements for five time-intervals.
RESULTS
The number of emergent distomes in the
six acidified salines without 0.5% pepsin (Fig-
ure 1) was significantly different at 5 minutes
(x? = 24.5714; df = 5) and 30 minutes (X? =
42.4286; df = 5). Similarly, the number of
emerging digeneans in the six acidified salines
with 0.5% pepsin (Figure 1) was significantly
different at 5 minutes (x? = 53.3019; df = 5)
and 30 minutes (xy? = 65.9895; df = 5). The
overall trend suggested that emergence of P.
macrostoma from the cercarial tail was facili-
tated at lower pH levels (i.e., 1.5-2.5; Figure
il).
Significant differences were noted in emer-
gence of digeneans from the cercarial tail
when the effect of acidified salines was com-
pared to acidified salines + 0.5% pepsin at 5
minutes (pH 1.5— x? = 20.3175, df = 1; pH
2.0—x2 = 13.6111, df = 1; pH 25-2 =
5.5430, df = 1) and 30 minutes (pH 1.5—x?
= 15.5556, clit = ils pH 2.0— x? = 12.0000, df
Proterometra macrostoma—Rosen et al.
——f—_ pH 1.5 mean % emergence
——ME—_ pH P15 mean % emergence
&
1e)
(4
i}
1S)
4
|
=
<|
=
4
<
i)
= ——O— pH 2.0 mean % emergence
—i— pH P 2.0 mean % emergence
pH 2.5 mean % emergence
pH P 2.5 mean % emergence
= 2 8 = ¢ z g z
TIME (MINUTES)
Figure 1.
101
—o
pH 3.0 mean % emergence
—— PH P'3.0 mean % emergence
—i—
pH 3.5 mean % emergence
—M—_ pH P35 mean % emergence
EMERGENCE
%
MEAN
pH 4.0 mean % emergence
pH P 4.0 mean % emergence
TIME (MINUTES)
Effect of pH and pepsin on méan % distome emergence from the tail of Proterometra macrostoma over
60 minutes at 20°C. Means represent the average % emergence + standard error (SE) from the three replicates with
10 cercariae/replicate. (pH = acidified saline only; pH P = acidified saline + 0.5% pepsin)
= 1; pH 2.5— ? = 4.320, df = 1). Emergence
of P. macrostoma appeared to be greatly en-
hanced by the addition of pepsin to the most
acidic pH’s (i.e., 1.5-2.5). No significant dif-
ferences were noted between these two treat-
ments at the less acidic pH’s (i.e., 3.0, 3.5, and
4.0), and overall emergence was minimal (Fig-
ure 1).
Within 15 minutes PI, all distomes had
emerged from their cercarial tails in experi-
mental infections of bluegill. No obvious
trends for subsequent size increases were not-
ed for worms in such infections other than
changes in maximum egg size (Figure 2). The
mean number of eggs/worm also showed a
gradual increase from day 0 (13.8) to days 14—
18 (120.7) PI, followed by a slight decline in
number between days 21-24 PI (Figure 3).
Changes in the general morphology/devel-
opment of eggs were noted over the course of
the experiment. Stage I eggs were the only
eggs observed in adult worms from days 0 to
9 PI. After day 9 PI, a transformation into
Stage II eggs was observed. It should be noted
that Stage I egg production continued during
this second stage, and thus two “populations”
of eggs were present in worms at this time.
Stage III (mature) eggs were apparent by day
18 PI. All three egg stages were observed in
worms by this time; mature eggs were dis-
persed at the anterior end of the adult worm;
immature eggs, at the posterior end.
102 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
=f EGG LENGTH
=—f—= EGG WIDTH
Dn
[a4
ea}
=
)
=
io)
=4
Y
3)
Q
N
7)
ie)
io)
fx)
TIME (DAYS POSTINFECTION)
Figure 2. Mean lengths and widths of largest eggs in developing distomes of Proterometra macrostoma from exper-
imental infections of bluegill, Lepomis macrochirus, over 24 days postinfection at 24.6°C. (number of eggs measured:
day 0, n = 17; days 3-6, n = 42; days 9-12, n = 30; days 14-18, n = 33; days 21-24, n = 30)
DISCUSSION
Trematodes in the family Azygiidae are un-
usual in that they bypass a metacercarial stage,
which is normally encysted in host tissue.
Worms in this family are “encysted” in the tail
of their own cercaria; thus there is no host
tissue to be digested. Only triggers in the
stornach (e.g., pH and pepsin) seem essential
for emergence and subsequent establishment
of the distome.
The high percentage of distome emergence
in more acidic salines (pH 1.5-2.5) with 0.5%
pepsin at 5 minutes and at 30 minutes (F igure
1) was similar to the rapid emergence ob-
served in the experimental infections of blue-
gill at day 0 PI. In vivo, some P. macrostoma
were recovered as emerged distomes at 5 min-
utes PI, and all had emerged from cercarial
tails by 15 minutes PI. The similarity in rate
of emergence in vivo vs. in vitro suggests that
a pH range of 1.5-2.5 with a pepsin concen-
tration of 0.5% approximates the conditions
inducing emergence of the worm in the fish
stomach. This is further corroborated by the
work of Norris et al. (1973), who examined the
rates of gastric acid and pepsin secretion into
the gastric juice of bluegills. They found that
bluegill gastric juice decreased from a pH of
5 to a pH of 1-2 immediately following inges-
tion of a simulated meal. Pepsin activity would
be most pronounced in such a strongly acidic
environment, further enhancing distome re-
lease from the cercarial tail.
Cercariae of P. dickermani (Anderson and
Anderson 1963) and P. autraini (LaBeau and
Peters 1995) contain eggs with fully developed
miracidia, while only undeveloped eggs have
been reported in cercariae from other species
in this genus (Anderson and Anderson 1967;
Horsfall 1934; Smith 1936). It has been sug-
gested that a signal from the fish definitive
host triggers maturation in some of these lat-
ter species of Proterometra (Braham et al.
1996). This “signal” must be focused on in-
creased egg production as well as on egg mat-
uration; other structures within these distomes
appear to be fully developed following their
emergence from the cercarial tail.
Dickerman (1934) observed that the only
differences between the distome of the P. ma-
crostoma cercaria and that of the adult worm
were size and number of eggs present in
utero. Similarly, Horsfall (1934) noted that,
“the numerous eggs of the adult (P. macros-
toma) mask certain structures which are con-
spicuous in the larval distome; otherwise the
Proterometra macrostoma—Rosen et al.
160
120
80
MEAN # EGGS/WORM
40
103
TIME (DAYS POSTINFECTION)
Figure 3. Mean + SE eggs/Proterometra macrostoma distomes obtained from experimental infections of bluegill,
Lepomis macrochirus, over 24 days postinfection at 24.6°C. (n = number of worms assessed at each time interval)
general appearance (of the worm) is the
same.” Our observation of increased egg pro-
duction in P macrostoma over the initial 2.5
weeks of infection in bluegill corroborates
these observations. Increased egg production
also occurs in P. albacauda (Anderson and An-
derson 1967), P. catenaria (Anderson and An-
derson 1967), P edneyi (Uglem, and Aliff
1984), P. sagittaria (Dickerman 1946), and P.
septimae (Anderson and Anderson 1967) fol-
lowing release from their cercarial tails in the
definitive host.
Egg production appears to be continuous
once the distome of P. macrostoma is released
in the fish stomach as evidenced by (1) the
steady increase in egg number over time (up
to day 18 PI) and (2) the presence of Type I
eggs (i.e., early cleavage) in older fish infec-
tions. Decrease in egg number between days
21-24 PI may coincide with initiation of egg
release from the adult worm into the host di-
gestive tract, but further work will be required
to verify this.
In our study, P. macrostoma eggs required
18-24 days at 24.6°C to develop miracidia.
Horsfall (1934) indicated that 15-30 days are
required depending on the number of eggs
contained within the digenean prior to its
emergence from the cercarial tail. In addition
to the progenetic state of these distomes, pro-
posed P. macrostoma strain differences (Dick-
erman 1945; Riley and Uglem 1995) may af-
fect maturation time.
Current work is being conducted in our lab
using molecular techniques to determine the
validity of these P. macrostoma strains.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Our study was supported by grants from the
Andrew Mellon Foundation (Appalachian Col-
lege Association) and the Undergraduate Re-
search Creative Projects Program (URCPP) at
Berea College. We also acknowledge the Hol-
lingsworth family for permitting collection of
snails on their property.
LITERATURE CITED
Anderson, M. G., and F. M. Anderson. 1963. Life history
of Proterometra dickermani Anderson, 1962. J. Parasi-
tol. 49:275-280.
Anderson, M. G., and F, M. Anderson. 1967. The life his-
tories of Proterometra albacauda and Proterometra sep-
timae, spp. n. (Trematoda: Azygiidae) and a redescrip-
tion of Proterometra catenaria Smith, 1934. J. Parasitol.
53:31-37.
Braham, G. L., M. Riley, and G. L. Uglem. 1996. Infec-
tivity and the cercarial tail chamber in Proterometra
macrostoma. J. Helminthol. 70:169-170.
Dickerman, E. E. 1934. Studies on the trematode family
104
Azygiidae. I. The morphology and life cycle of Proter-
ometra macrostoma Horsfall. Trans. Am. Microscop.
Soc. 53:8—21.
Dickerman, E. E. 1945. Studies on the trematode family
Azygiidae. II. Parthenitae and cercariae of Proterometra
macrostoma (Faust). Trans. Am. Microscop. Soc. 64:
138-144.
Dickerman, E. E. 1946. Studies on the trematode family
Azygiidae. IH. The morphology and life cycle of Pro-
terometra sagittaria n. sp. Trans. Am. Microscop. Soc.
65:37-44.
Horsfall, M. W. 1933. Development of Cercaria macros-
toma Faust into Proterometra (nov. gen.) macrostoma.
Science 78:175-176.
Horsfall, M. W. 1934. Studies on the life history and mor-
phology of the cystocercous cercariae. Trans. Am. Mi-
croscop. Soc. 53:311—347.
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
LaBeau, M. R., and L. E. Peters. 1995. Proterometra au-
traini n. sp. (Digenea: Azygiidae) from Michigan's up-
per peninsula and a key to species of Proterometra. J.
Parasitol. 81:442—445.
Norris, J. S., D. O. Norris, and J. T. Windell. 1973. Effect
of simulated meal size on gastric acid and pepsin se-
cretory rates in bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus). J. Fish.
Res. Board Canada. 30:201—204.
Riley, M. W,, and G. L. Uglem. 1995. Proterometra ma-
crostoma (Digenea: Azygiidae): variations in cercarial
morphology and physiology. Parasitology 110:429-436.
Smith, S. 1936. Life cycle studies of Cercaria hodgesiana
and Cercaria melanophora. J. Alabama Acad. Sci. §:30-
BY,
Uglem, G. L., and J. V. Aliff. 1984. Proterometra edneyi
n. sp. (Digenea: Azygiidae): behavior and distribution
of acetylcholinesterase in cercariae. Trans. Am. Micros-
cop. Soc. 103:383-391,
J. Ky. Acad. Sci. 61(2):105—-107. 2000.
New State Records and New Available Names for Species of Kentucky
Moths (Insecta: Lepidoptera)
Charles V. Covell Jr.
Department of Biology, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky 40292-0001
Loran D. Gibson
2727 Running Creek Drive, F lorence, Kentucky 41042
and
Donald J. Wright
3349 Morrison Avenue, Cincinnati, Ohio 45220-1430
ABSTRACT
The authors add records of 35 moth species to the list of Lepidoptera known in Kentucky, bringing the
total to 2423 from the 2388 published in the Covell (1999) annotated checklist. These are in the families
Gracillariidae (1), Oecophoridae (1), Gelechiidae (3), Tortricidae (4), Crambidae (16), Pterophoridae (2),
Geometridae (1) and Noctuidae (7). In addition scientific names are given for the three “Chionodes undes-
cribed species” (Gelechiidae) listed as such by Covell (1999) and recently made available by Hodges (1999).
INTRODUCTION
Intensive collecting, identification, and
monitoring of the moth and butterfly fauna of
Kentucky culminated in December 1999 with
the publication of Covell (1999), in which
2388 species of moths and butterflies were
documented. Even at that time there were ad-
ditional species to add. And since that publi-
cation came out names have been made avail-
able for three species that were indicated un-
der generic headings as “species” because we
could not cite unpublished names. Thirty-
eight species are added to the state list in this
paper, bringing the total to 2426. This is the
first supplement to Covell (1999).
We thank the following specialists for iden-
tifying specimens from which most of these
records resulted: Bernard Landry, William E.
Miller, Herb Neunzig, Eric L. Quinter, Mi-
chael Sabourin, David Wagner, and Reed Wat-
kins.
Below are listed the new additions and
names in order of the numbers assigned in the
Hodges et al. (1983) checklist. Specimens on
which these identifications are based are in
the Lovell Insect Museum at the University of
Louisville and in the private collections of
those cited as the collectors. Those cited from
Hodges (1999) are located in the National
Museum of Natural History, Washington,
D.C., and the Philadelphia Academy of Nat-
ural Sciences collection.
GRACILLARIIDAE
Caloptilia fraxinella (Ely)
Boone Co., Big Bone Lick State Park, larva col-
lected on Fraxinus 4 Jun 1995; adult emerged 5
Jun 1995; D.J. Wright.
0606
OECOPHORIDAE
1015 Antaeotricha osseela (Wlsm.)
Laurel Co., junction of forest service roads 121
and 4158, larva collected on Quercus montana,
18 May 1996, adult emerged 31 Jul 1996; Rowan
Co., east end of Clack Mountain Road West, 26
Aug 1994; both collected by D.J. Wright.
GELECHIIDAE
2061.1 Chionodes hapsus Hodges
A paratype female of this species was listed by
Hodges (1999, p. 56) from Fleming Co., Flem-
ing, 31 May 1938, A-F. Braun. This is not one of
the “C. undescribed species” listed in Covell
(1999, p. 37).
2061.3 Chionodes suasor Hodges
A paratype male of this species was listed by
Hodges (1999, p. 58) from Rowan Co., More-
head, 30 Jun 1960, collected by Lewis and Free-
man. This is not one of the “C. undescribed spe-
cies” listed in Covell (1999, p. 37).
105
2119.1
2119.3
2066.1
2795
2885
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Chionodes sevir Hodges
This name validates the entry under this checklist
number in Covell (1999, p. 37). A paratype male
is listed in Hodges (1999, p. 138) with the fol-
lowing data: Fulton Co., Fulton, 19 Sep 1975, C.
C. Cornett. See Covell (1999, p. 37).
Chionodes baro Hodges
A paratype male is listed by Hodges (1999, p.
145) from Bell Co., Pine Mountain State Park,
18 Jul 1975, A.J. Brownell. This is the name that
validates the entry under this checklist number
in Covell (1999, p. 37). The designation “Harlan
Co.” in that entry was an error.
Chionodes adamas Hodges
This is the name that validates the entry under
this checklist number in Covell (1999, p. 37).
Paratype data as published by Hodges (1999, p.
151) follow: “Clack Mountain, Rowan County;
19, 22 June 1941; A.F. Braun (2 females). Otter
Creek Park, Meade County, 8 October, 1979,
C.V. Covell Jr. (1 female). Same locality, 17
March, 1987, B.S. Nichols (1 male). Rd 9B, In-
dian East Fork, Kelley Br., 720°, Manifee [sic]
County; 9-18 August, 1985; J.S. Nordin (2 males,
1 female). Tunnel Ridge Road, Powell County;
4-1] March, 1989; D.J. Wright (1 male, 2 fe-
males).”
Chionodes aruns Hodges
Hodges (1999, p. 189) described this species
from Texas, and although he lists Kentucky spec-
imens of the species, they were not included in
the paratype series. Their data are quoted as fol-
lows: “Cumberland National Forest, Pulaski
County, Kentucky; 26 April 1939; A.F. Braun (1
female). Lick Fork, Rowan County, Kentucky; 4
April 1938; A.F. Braun (1 male). Cascade Caves,
Carter County, Kentucky; 5 May 1956; A.F.
Braun (1 female).”
TORTRICIDAE
Endopiza yaracana (Kft.)
Powell Co., Red River Gorge, Tunnel Ridge
Road; 3 May 1991, D.J. Wright.
Olethreutes tiliana (Heinr.)
Boone Co., Middle Creek Road, larvae collected
on Tilia neglecta 5 May 1993, two females
emerged on 30 May 1993; Laurel Co., Rockcastle
Campground, larva collected on Tilia 1 May
1993, adults emerged 27 May and 3 and 10 Jun
1993, D.J. Wright; Laurel Co., Daniel Boone Na-
tional Forest, Rockcastle Recreation Area, larva
on Tilia neglecta collected 1 May 1993, two fe-
males emerged 25 and 28 May 1993.
Rhyacionia aktita W.E. Miller
Laurel Co., Daniel Boone National Forest, Forest
Service Road 131, 2 miles from State Road 3497,
19 Apr 1992, D.J. Wright; powerline corridor east
side of south end of Forest Service Road 775, 11
3550
4754
4769
4981
5034
5173
5248
5450
5653
5766
5775
5794
Apr 1997, L.D. Gibson; Forest Service Road
615a, 30 Apr and 4 May 1996, D.J. Wright.
Acleris youngana (McDunnough)
Harlan Co., summit of Big Black Mountain, 12
Jul 1980, L.D. Gibson.
CRAMBIDAE
Synclita tinealis Munroe
Henderson Co., Frank Sauerheber Unit, Sloughs
Wildlife Management Area, 22 Aug 1992, L.D.
Gibson.
Neargyractis slossonalis (Dyar)
Hopkins Co., 2 miles SE Dawson Springs along
Caney Creek, 20 Aug 1999 in light trap, L.D.
Gibson. This record is a significant northern
range extension. Munroe (1972, p. 116) had re-
cords only from Florida but believed it would be
recorded in neighboring states.
Helvibotys pseudohelvialis (Capps)
Fulton Co., Willingham Bottoms, Rt. 94, 2.5
miles E of Cayce, 8 Sep 1991.
Pyrausta signatalis (Wlk.)
Laurel Co., Daniel Boone National Forest, pow-
erline corridor east side of south end of Forest
Service Road 775, 30 May, 27 Jun, and 10 Jul
1997 at UV and MV lights near Monarda (host
plant), L.D. Gibson.
Diasemiodes nigralis (Femald)
Bath Co., Cave Run Recreation Area, Forest Ser-
vice Road 918, 5 Sep 1987, D.J. Wright.
Lygropia tripunctata (Fabricius)
Henderson Co., Frank Sauerheber Unit, Sloughs
National Wildlife Area, 10 Sep 1983, C.V. Covell
Jr.
Parapediasia decorella (Zinck.)
Powell Co., Natural Bridge State Park, 7 Jul 1981,
in light trap, C.C. Cornett.
Acrobasis vaccinii Riley
Laurel Co., junction of Forest Service roads 121
and 4158; 18 May 1996; Forest Service Road 131,
30 May 1992; D.J. Wright.
Immyria nigrovittella Dyar
Laurel Co., Daniel Boone National Forest, Forest
Service Road 615a, 22 Apr 1995 and 4 May 1996,
D.J. Wright; powerline corridor E side of S end
of State Road 775, 30 May 1997, L.D. Gibson.
Salebriaria tenebrosella (Hulst)
Rowan Co., County Road 1274, 2 miles W of Rt.
519, 16 Jul 1994, L.D. Gibson; Rowan Co., 3.3
miles S of Rt. 519, and also east end of Clack
Mtn. Rd. West, 26 Aug 1994, D.J. Wright.
Salebriaria atratella Blanchard & Knudson
Laurel Co.; Bolton Branch, 18 May 1996, D.J.
Wright.
Nephopterix vetustella (Dyar)
Boone Co., Big Bone Lick State Park, 5 May
1980; Powell Co., Tunnel Ridge, Red River Gorge
3806
5944
5953
6122
6107
6168
6851
8658
9386
New Records for Kentucky Moths—Covell, Gibson, and Wright
Geological Area, 19 Jun 1993; both collected by
L.D. Gibson.
Nephopterix crassifasciella Ragonot
Laurel Co., Daniel Boone National Forest, pow-
erline corridor, E side of S end of State Road 775,
27 Jun and 10 Jul 1997, L.D. Gibson.
Homoeosoma deceptorium Heinrich
Boone Co., Camp Ernst, 17 Aug 1979, L.D. Gib-
son.
Laetilia fiskeella Dyar
Laurel Co., Daniel Boone National Forest, pow-
erline corridor, E side of S end of State Road 775,
17 May and 27 Jun 1997 at lights, L.D. Gibson.
Stenoptilodes brevipennis (Zeller)
Bullitt Co., Bernheim Arboretum and Research
Forest, 20-24 Apr 1976 in Malaise trap, A.J.
Brownell.
PTEROPHORIDAE
Gillmeria pallidactyla (Haworth)
Harlan Co., summit of Big Black Mountain, 28
Jun 1999, male and female, Reed A. Watkins.
Oidaematophorus eupatorii (Fernald)
Harlan Co., Big Black Mountain, 14 Jul 1979;
Pine Mountain Settlement School, 4 Jul 1977;
both collected at black light by C.V. Covell Jr.
GEOMETRIDAE
Philtraea monillata Buckett
Carlisle Co., Sandy Branch, Burkley, 4 Sep 1999,
numerous specimens in light traps, C.V. Covell
Jr., L.D. Gibson, and others.
NOCTUIDAE \
Selenisa sueroides (Guenée)
Carlisle Co., Sandy Branch, 10 Oct 1999, in light
trap, William R. Black Jr.
Luperina trigona Smith
Larvae were collected from Arundinaria (cane)
stalks by W.R. Black Jr. and Eric Quinter 10-18
May 1999 in the following localities: Ballard Co.,
Stovall Creek; Carlisle Co., Sandy Branch near
Burkley; Fulton Co., Willingham Bottoms, Rt. 94,
2.5 miles E of Cayce and Reelfoot Lake National
Wildlife Area; Graves Co., Boaz: Livingston Co.,
Burna; McCracken Co., Massac Creek Bottoms,
Paducah. An adult was collected in a light trap in
107
McCracken Co., 1 mile W of Clinton Rd., 4 Sep
1999 by W.R. Black Jr.
Apamea undescribed species K. Mikkola
Bullitt Co., Bemheim Arboretum and Research
Forest, 12-18 Jul 1976 in Malaise trap, A.J. Brow-
nell; Jefferson Co., Valley Station, “Aug.”, S.
Scholz; Russell Co., Lake Cumberland State Park,
11 Jun 1980, C.C. Cornett.
Oligia mactata (Guenée)
Jefferson Co., Valley Station, 26, 29 Sep, 2-5 and
20-29 Oct 1997, S. Scholz.
Meropleon cosmion Dyar
McCracken Co., Paducah, Massac Creek Bottoms
in cane, 13 Nov 1999 in light trap, W.R. Black Jr.
Elaphria cornutinis Saluke & Pogue.
Two male paratypes were listed from Kentucky
by Saluke and Pogue (2000): Metcalfe Co., High-
way 218 north of Center, 25 Apr and 6 May 1994,
C. Cook. This species is very similar to E. festi-
voides (Gn.). Some records listed under E. festi-
voides in Covell (1999, p. 160) will turn out to be
this newly described species.
Leucania calidior (Forbes)
Carlisle Co., Sandy Branch near Burkley, 2 Oct
1999, in light trap, W.R. Black Jr.; Livingston Co.,
Burna, 10-18 May 1999, larva in cane reared to
adult, E.L. Quinter and W.R. Black Jr. The spe-
cies name is misspelled as “callidior” in Hodges
et al. (1983) (fide E.L. Quinter).
LITERATURE CITED
Covell, C. V., Jr. 1984. A field guide to the moths of east-
erm North America. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA.
Covell, C. V., Jr. 1999. The butterflies and moths (Lepi-
doptera) of Kentucky: an annotated checklist. Kentucky
State Nat. Preserves Comm. Tech. Ser. 6.
Hodges, R. W. 1999. The moths of America north of Mex-
ico. Fasc. 7.6 Gelechioidea: Gelechiidae (part). Wedge
Entomol. Res. Found., Washington, DC.
Hodges, R. W. et al. 1983. Check list of the Lepidoptera
of America North of Mexico. Wedge Entomol. Res.
Found., Washington, DC.
Munroe, E. G. 1972. The moths of America north of Mex-
ico. Fasc 13.1A. Pyraloidea: Pyralidae (Part). Wedge
Entomol. Res. Found., Washington, DC.
Saluke, S. V., and M. G. Pogue. 2000. Resolution of the
Elaphria festivoides (Guenée) species complex (Lepi-
doptera: Noctuidae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Washington
102:233-270.
9329.1
9419
9681.1
10460
J. Ky. Acad. Sci. 61(2):108-114. 2000.
Comparative Effects of Zinc, Lead, and Cadmium on Body and Tissue
Weights of Weanling, Adult, and Aged Rats
F.N. Bebe and Myna Panemangalore'
Nutrition and Health Program, Kentucky State University, Frankfort, Kentucky 40601
ABSTRACT
The effects of feeding various levels of Zn in the diet and Pb and Cd in drinking water were determined
in weanling, adult, and aged rats for 4 or 8 weeks. Zn levels in the diet were: Zn-deficient diet or Zn0; 60
mg/kg high Zn diet (Zn60) for experiment 1 & 3; 4 mg/kg low Zn diet (Zn4); 24 mg/kg high Zn diet (Zn24)
for experiment 2; and 12 mg/kg Zn diet as control. ZnO diets reduced feed intake (FI) and body weight
(BW) in weanling rats by 35% and 80% and BW in aged rats by 60%; BW of Zn4 adult rats decreased by
40% (P = 0.05). Feed intake of adult and aged rats was comparable among all groups. Feed efficiency (FE)
decreased fourfold and twofold in weanling and adult rats, respectively. Liver and kidney weights were
significantly lower in weanling group fed ZnO diet as compared to the control or Zn60 groups (P = 0.05).
Weanling and adult rats given 20 mg/liter Pb and 5 mg/liter Cd in drinking water had lower water intake
(WI) than the control (P = 0.05). These results indicate that ZnO diet decreased FI, BW, and FE in weanling
rats; ZnO and Zn4 diets reduced BW in adult and aged rats but without a decline in FI. Lead and Cd in
drinking water did not affect growth or FI but decreased WI in weanling and adult rats. Although lead and
cadmium did not modify growth in either zinc-deficient or low zinc-fed rats, these diets decreased growth
and feed efficiency, which may partly be attributed to loss of appetite and altered Zn homeostasis.
INTRODUCTION
Trace elements have an important and crit-
ical role in maintaining nutrition and normal
health in animals. Zinc is essential for repro-
duction, growth, and development. As a com-
ponent of over 200 enzymes, it plays a vital
role in cell replication and differentiation and
in the structure and function of cellular mem-
branes. The metabolic and physiological status
of zinc could be modified or exacerbated by
the ingestion of toxic metals such as lead or
cadmium, which are widespread contaminants
of the food chain and potable water sources
(Underwood 1979). The cumulative retention
of lead and cadmium after chronic low-level
exposure can result in manifestations of tox-
icity such as disturbance of heme synthesis,
dysfunction of the nervous system, and renal
damage (Friberg et al. 1985). Concurrent ex-
posure to lead and cadmium may increase tox-
icity of one or both metals and produce sig-
nificant changes in the metabolism of zinc
(Mahaffey et al. 1982).
Coppen-Jaeger and Wilhelm (1989) report-
ed inhibition of zinc absorption in isolated rat
intestinal preparations after low-level cadmi-
um exposure. While high levels of zinc may
‘To whom correspondence should be addressed.
reduce some of the toxic effects of cadmium
(Sato and Nagai 1989), zinc deficiency may en-
hance toxic effects of even low levels of cad-
mium (Kunifuji et al. 1987; Tanaka et al.
1995). Zinc is reported to have a protective
effect on lead toxicity when both are present
in the diet at high levels due to inhibition of
lead absorption (Cerklewski and Forbes 1975).
Age may affect zinc metabolism because re-
lated changes in body composition are often
paralleled by a decline in physiological and
metabolic functions, which could also modify
growth and food conversion efficiency (Sand-
stead et al. 1982). Age-related differences in
response of rats to lead or cadmium exposure
were reported by Cory-Slechta et al. (1989)
and Song et al. (1986). However, most pub-
lished research has been done with pharma-
cological or toxic doses of lead or cadmium
using either oral (Sato and Nagai 1989) or par-
enteral methods (Kunifuji et al. 1987) of ex-
posure, which have little bearing on exposure
conditions in the environment and may not be
of much practical significance (Sabbioni et al.
1978). Therefore, we hypothesize that low-lev-
el exposure to lead and cadmium would not
alter zinc absorption and metabolism. To test
this hypothesis, we have determined the in-
teraction among lead, cadmium, and zinc in
108
Zn, Pb and Cd Effect on Rats—Bebe and Panemangalore
growing, adult, and aged rats fed increasing
levels of zinc in the diet.
In this paper, we present data on the inter-
action of low-level lead and cadmium in drink-
ing water on growth, feed intake, feed effi-
ciency, and tissue weights of weanling, adult,
and aged rats fed different levels of zinc in the
diet.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Male Sprague Dawley rats (Harlan Sprague
Dawley, Inc.) 27 days, 8 weeks, or 18 months
old were housed singly in suspended polypro-
pylene cages on stainless steel racks in tem-
perature controlled rooms with 12 h light/dark
cycles. During a 1-week period of acclimation,
rats were fed the control diet and given dis-
tilled drinking water. The experimental diets
(Harlan Teklad, Madison, WI) containing dif-
ferent levels of zinc were based on modifica-
tions of the zinc-deficient diet (AIN93 for-
mula), using egg white as the protein source
and a mixture of starch and dextrin as the car-
bohydrate source (Reeves et al. 1993). Zinc
sulfate was added to experimental diets as fol-
lows: Control group = 12 mg/kg (Zn12); zinc-
deficient group = 0 mg/kg (ZnO); low-zinc
group = 4 mg/kg (Zn4); and high-zine group
= 24 mg/kg (Zn24) or 60 mg/kg (Zn60). All
diets were analyzed for their zinc content by
atomic absorption spectrophotometry, which
was within a 5% range of the expected level.
Zinc content of the diets as mg Zn/kg diet
were ZnO = 0.8, Zn4 = 4.9, Znl2 = 12.7,
7n24 = 25.0, and Zn60 = 60.5.
After the acclimation period, the rats were
randomized and grouped such that the aver-
age initial body weights were similar in all
groups (six rats/group; the deficient and pair-
fed groups had weight-matched pairs) and
were assigned to the experimental diets de-
scribed above. The rats were given distilled
water containing 10 mg/liter sodium as NaCl,
or 20 mg/liter Pb as lead acetate, or 5 mg/liter
Cd as cadmium chloride (0 = control). Rats
had free access to feed and water as follows:
experiment 1 and 3, 30 days and experiment
2, 60 days. In experiment 1 (72 weanling) and
experiment 3 (36 aged) rats were fed diets
Zn0, Zn12, Zn60, or Zn12PF (pair-fed control
diet daily to the intake of the ZnO group); in
experiment 2 (72 adult) rats were fed diets
Zn4, Zn12, Zn24, or Zn12PF (pair-fed control
109
diet daily to the intake of the Zn4 group).
Feed intake (FI) was determined daily, where-
as body weight (BW) and water intake (WI)
were recorded weekly. Feed efficiency (FE)
was calculated as the ratio of FI to weight gain
(WG). The three experiments were conducted
separately under uniform conditions. For ease
of handling 72 rats, experiments 1 and 2 were
split in half such that each group had 3 rats,
and each batch was run under identical con-
ditions, 1 week apart. The procedures for
these animal experiments were approved by
the Kentucky State University Animal and Hu-
man Welfare Committee.
At the end of the experimental period, rats
were terminated under diethyl ether anesthe-
sia for removal of liver and kidneys. The or-
gans were cleansed of extraneous tissue,
weighed, and stored at —70°C. All data were
statistically analyzed by ANOVA using the SAS
program and a two-way, 4 (Zn levels) X 3 (Na/
Pb/Cd levels) factorial design. Significant dif-
ferences between means were obtained by the
Duncan's multiple range test.
RESULTS
The general appearance of the animals was
influenced by dietary zinc. Weanling rats were
especially affected by zinc deficiency as they
lost abdominal hair and had hairless patches
elsewhere on the body; those fed Zn12 and
Zn60 had smooth hair. Adult rats fed low zinc
diet (Zn4) did not lose hair but the texture of
the hair was rough. No physical difference in
appearance was noted in aged rats. Growth,
FI, FE, and tissue weight data are presented
here.
Since exposure to oral lead and cadmium
did not influence BW or FI, all data presented
in Figure 1 were merged ignoring lead and
cadmium exposure (n = 18). Weanling rats
fed ZnO and Zn12PF diets had significantly
lower FI (Figure 1A), weight gain (WG) (Fig-
ure 1B), and FE as compared to control (Fig-
ure 1C; P <= 0.05): Feed intake was about 35%
lower, while WG was reduced by 80% and
54%, respectively. Weanling rats fed diet Zn60
grew throughout the 4-week experiment and
their Fl, WG, and FE were comparable to
those of the control group. Feed efficiency
was lower among rats fed ZnO and Zn12PF,
and both were two-fold and four-fold lower
than the control. Growth and FI data of adult
110
zni2 EXXd zn6o zn12
Eel Zno
Feed intake, g/week
5
ao
ro)
aX
LAA AAA
W262
EZ
Weanling
> 40
$
oan BS
s Roxy
oO RS
oO Kese9
rege! eee
D RS
2 sees
= 10 RS ‘Wy
BEE 4 Ypres BOW
9 L_-EEEZZONN_ EEBY7ZSON REZ NY
Weanling Adult Aged
oO
=
2
iL
a}
(=
a
2
; Y/
= 7
@O >.
fo)
£ 7
WA
Weanling Adult
Figure 1. Feed intake (A), weight gain (B), and feed ef-
ficiency (C) of weanling, adult, and aged rats fed Zn0 (Zn4
for adult rats), Znl12PF, Zn60, and Zn12 (control) for 4
weeks (8 weeks for adult rats). Means + SD: n = 18
(weanling and adult groups). Means + SD; n = 9 (aged
groups). Means in different diet groups not sharing the
same superscript are significantly different at (P < 0.05).
rats fed low and high zinc diets for 8 weeks
are presented in Figure 1A, 1B, 1C. Weight
gain and FE of rats fed Zn4 and Zn12PF diets
were 40% and two-fold lower than those fed
the control diet (P = 0.05), respectively. There
was no significant difference in Fl among all
the groups (P = 0.05). Aged rats showed a
similar BW and FI pattern as adult rats (Fig-
ure 1A, 1B, 1C). Feed intake was comparable
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
among aged rats in the different diet groups
irrespective of zinc level, but WG was 60%
and 43% lower in ZnO and Zn12PF groups
than the control or Zn60 group (P = 0.05).
Rats (especially the ZnO fed groups) experi-
enced a day-to-day increase or decrease in
feed consumption, which indicated cycling of
feed intake. Due to wide variation in Fl, FE
values of aged rats could not be calculated ac-
curately and therefore are not reported here.
Low-level oral exposure to lead or cadmium
had no effect on growth and FI of weanling,
adult, or aged rats.
Tissue weights of rats are presented in Ta-
ble 1. In weanling rats (experiment 1), average
liver weights were about 54% lower in the Zn0
and Znl2PF groups than in the control or
Zn60 groups (P = 0.05). Similarly, kidney
weights were a third lower in the ZnO and
Znl2PF groups compared to the control (P =
0.05). Also, mean liver and kidney wet weight/
body weight ratios were comparable among all
dietary groups. Such differences in tissue
weights were not observed in adult or aged
rats. Lead and cadmium exposure had no ef-
fect on tissue weights.
Water intake data of rats for experiments 1
and 2 are presented in Table 2. There was sig-
nificant interaction between dietary zinc levels
and the concentration of lead and cadmium in
drinking water, especially in the zinc-deficient
group. Water intake was significantly lower in
weanling and adult rats given lead and cad-
mium in drinking water than those given so-
dium in water (control), regardless of the level
of zinc in the diet (P < 0.05). The data also
indicated that, in weanling rats, WI was sig-
nificantly influenced not only by the presence
of lead and cadmium in drinking water but
also by the amount of zinc in the diet. Water
intake for experiment 3 could not be accu-
rately measured because of excessive spillage,
so these data are not presented.
DISCUSSION
Cellular homeostasis, 2 major regulator of
zinc metabolism, ensures that over a wide
range of zinc intake, tissue or cellular zinc lev-
els are maintained at physiological concentra-
tions by either enhancing absorption or de-
creasing loss through the gastrointestinal tract
(Golden 1989). In our study, we found that
ZnO diet significantly decreased feed intake,
Zn, Pb and Cd Effect on Rats—Bebe and Panemangalore ul
Table 1. Tissue weights of weanling (n = 18), and aged (n = 9) rats fed zinc deficient (ZnO), high zinc (Zn60), or
control (Zn12) zine diets for 4 weeks, and adult rats (n = 18) fed low zinc (Zn4), high zine (Zn24), and control zinc
(Zn12) for 8 weeks. Data are presented as Mean + SD.
Zinc levels in the diet
Parameters Experiment Zn 0 Zn12PF' Zn 60 Zn12!
Liver, ¢ 1 (W)? 5.4 + 0.8? ‘Hl se 11 ODe=leae OWiesaaleos
2 (A) WAG, BE Mss) 10.4 + 1.1 16 = 15 11-8 = 1.5
3 (AG) M8) 223 16.8 + 2.4 179 = 0:8 Wi/ PA 3E 2D)
Kidney, g 1 (W)? 1.2 + 0.1 1.3 + 0.2> 8) ae (O22 19) = 10128
2 (A) Dep, ae (OIL Pil se OY 2.2 + 0.02 D2) = OY,
3 (AG) 3.9 + 0.9 3.1 = 0.5 3.2 = 0.01 3.2 + 0.4
Liver wt/body wt ratio 1 (W)? 0.04 + 0.007 0.03 = 0.005 0.04 + 0.002 0.04 + 0.003
2 (A) 0.03 + 0.004 0.03 + 0.002 0.03 + 0.002 0.03 + 0.003
3 (AG) 0.04 + 0.005 0.03 + 0.005 0.04 = 0.003 0.03 + 0.004
Kidney wt/body wt ratio 1 (W)? 0.01 + 0.001 0.01 = 0.001 0.01 + 0.001 0.01 + 0.001
2 (A) 0.01 + 0.001 0.01 + 0.005 0.01 + 0.004 0.01 + 0.003
3 (AG) 0.01 + 0.003 0.01 + 0.001 0.01 + 0.001 0.01 + 0.001
Dennen eee eee ee ee eee ee eee ee ee ee eee eee eee
Data were grouped ignoring Pb, Cd, exposure as no significant differences were observed between these groups. Means in rows with letter superscripts
indicate significant differences; absence of letters indicates means are not significantly different at P = 0.05.
| Rats in pair-fed (Zn12PF) control group were fed control diet (Zn12) in the amount equal to that eaten by either Zn0 or Zn4 groups.
2W = weanling; A = Adult; AG = Aged rats (see materials and methods for details.
body weights, and feed conversion efficiency
of weanling rats and that long-term (8 week)
Zn4 feeding also reduced body weights with-
out a concomitant decline in Fl, which sug-
gests alteration of zinc homeostasis or a de-
crease in the availability of zinc for growth and
maintenance. While exposure to low levels of
lead and cadmium did not affect Fl] or BW in
any age group, it decreased WI significantly in
weanling and adult rats.
Guigliano and Millward (1984) reported
that in zinc deficient animals, zinc-may be re-
distributed from bone and conserved in mus-
cles, being released only for the growth and
vital functioning of essential tissues in a cata-
bolic state. It is not clear if the failure of zinc-
deprived rats to grow is a result of zinc on
appetite or an effect of impaired cell division
on growth (O'Dell and Reeves 1989). Rains
and Shay (1994) initially suggested that re-
duced FI in Zn deficient rats could be because
of impaired function of neuropeptide Y, a
known stimulator of appetite and carbohy-
drate consumption. More recently, neuropep-
tide Y has been shown to increase in zinc de-
ficiency, probably to restore normal FI, but
this is prevented by receptor binding of this
peptide (Lee et al. 1998). Our data suggest
that reduction in growth could be due to re-
duced FI as well as impaired cell division chief-
ly in weanling rat, since pair-fed groups lost
less weight than did the Zn0 (weanling) and
Table 2. Water intake of weaning rats fed zinc-deficient (ZnO) or high zinc (Zn60) diets for 4 weeks, or adult rats fed
low zine (Zn4) or high zinc (Zn24) diets for 8 weeks, and exposed to lead or cadmium in drinking water. Means +
SD; n = 18/group.
Zinc levels in the diet
(ml water intake/wk
Experiment Metals in water Zn 0 Zn 12 PF! Zn 60 Zn12!'
1 (W)? Na 130 + 7! 140 = 28s! 161 + 13*° 178 = 16*4
Pb 100 + 22> 131 + 10> 153 + 9b.d 162 + 15>4
Cd 89 + 20°! 118 + 1l6c,e 150 + 13b,d IE, Se jane!
2 (A)? Na 180 + 27" 167 + 35" 160 + 158 166 + 20*
Pb 154 + 20> 149 + 20> 160 + 11" 148 + 1l*
Cd 150 + 25» 144 + 20> 130 + 15> 144 = 13>
ANOVA indicates interaction between zinc levels, and lead and cadmium in water. a, b, c, denote significant differences in each row; d, e, f, denote significant
differences in each column (P = 0.05), within each experiment.
' Rats in pair-fed (Zn12PF) control group were fed control diet (Zn12) in the amount equal to the intake by either ZnO or Zn4 groups. (See materials and
methods for details).
2W = weanling; A = Adult. Data for Experiment 3 are not available.
112
Zn4 (adult) rats, respectively. Thus, the higher
weight loss in the ZnO group may be attribut-
ed partly to zinc deprivation and lowered FI;
that in the pair-fed group, to lowered FI.
Numerous reports (Abdel-Mageed and
Oehme 1991; Faraji and Swendseid 1983;
Guigliano and Millward 1984) attest to the sig-
nificant decline of Fl and growth in Zn0 wean-
ling rats and support our observations. In our
study, aged rats on ZnO diet for 4 weeks also
lost weight but, unlike weanling and adult rats,
without a significant decrease in Fl. One rea-
son for this may be the variation and cycling
of Fl we found in all groups of aged rats ir-
respective of zinc level in the diet; whereas,
cycling of FI was found only in zinc-deficient
weanling and adult rats. However, recent stud-
ies analyzing food-intake patterns of zinc de-
ficient rats have shown that the characteristic
cyclical variation in FI and body weight chang-
es were found not only by group but also in
each individual rat fed zinc-deficient diets (Ta-
maki et al. 1995) and that body weight change
is generally well synchronized with that of FI
(Aiba et al. 1997). The reduction in feed con-
version efficiency we found in weanling rats
was reported previously by William and Mills
(1970). Conflicting reports in the literature
suggest that zinc levels as high as 1000 wg/g
diet fed for 8 weeks do not alter F! or growth,
while zinc levels up to 2500 wg/g diet for 3
weeks decrease growth (Abdel-Mageed and
Oehme 1991; Song et al. 1986; Story and Gre-
ger 1987). Toxicity of such high zinc levels
may have influenced their results. Our results
support those of Abdel-Mageed and Oehme
(1991), since moderately high zinc (60 wg/g)
diets did not produce any change in growth or
FI.
In our study, low levels of lead and cadmi-
um in drinking water did not alter feed intake
or body weight when dietary zinc levels were
deficient or low or when the diets contained
high zinc levels, indicating a lack of interaction
between zinc and toxic metals. Previous re-
ports have shown that high levels of lead and
cadmium administered through drinking wa-
ter or parenterally reduce zinc absorption and
thereby body weight (Kunifuji et al. 1987; Ta-
naka et al. 1995) or increase the toxic effect
of cadmium (Sato and Nagai 1989). High zinc
intake is known to protect against toxic effects
of lead (Cerklewski and Forbes 1975). In rats
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
fed normal zinc diets, Kirchgessner et al.
(1987) found that age did not modify the ef-
fects of increasing levels of lead or cadmium
in the diet. This report supports our observa-
tions that at low levels of lead or cadmium
exposure there is no interaction between die-
tary zinc levels or age of the animal on body
weight and feed intake.
Although organ weight is known to decline
with BW, higher organ to BW ratios in wean-
ling rats fed zinc-deficient diets have been re-
ported (Abdel-Mageed and Oehme 1991;
Meydani et al. 1983), but our data do not com-
pletely agree with these observations since we
found that, in weanling rats, liver and kidney
weights were significantly lower in Zn0 or pair-
fed groups as compared to the controls. This
parallel and proportional decrease or increase
in organ and body weights is indicated by the
similar kidney and body weight ratios of all
groups in the three experiments irrespective
of age; it refutes the effect of zine deficiency
on decline of only skeletal mass suggested by
Abdel-Mageed and Oehme (1991) who did
not include a pair-fed group for comparison.
Our observation that lead and cadmium had
no significant effect on organ weights in all age
groups is similar to reports by Rader et al.
(1981), Vyskocil et al. (1991), and Cory-Slech-
ta et al. (1989) in weanling, adult, and aged
rats, respectively. Age-related changes begin
to accelerate in rodents after 16 months of age
(Cory-Slechta et al. 1989). The aged rats in
our study were 18 months old and yet showed
no adverse effects of short-term exposure to
low lead and cadmium levels.
Addition of low levels of toxic metals in
drinking water is assumed not to alter WI, but
our data demonstrate that WI decreased sig-
nificantly in both weanling and adult rats when
low levels of lead and cadmium salts were add-
ed to drinking water. These data are largely
supported by the reports of Vyskocil et al.
(1990) in weanling rats, Kotsonis and Klaassen
(1978) in adult rats, and Cory-Slechta (1990)
in aged rats using much higher (10-100 times)
concentrations of lead or cadmium than we
used. We were unable to measure WI accu-
rately in aged rats; thus the decrease in WI in
this group cannot be confirmed. It is apparent
that reduced FI produced by Zn0 diet also sig-
nificantly decreased WI in weanling rats, while
increasing Zn in the diet did not alter WI. We
Zn, Pb and Cd Effect on Rats—Bebe and Panemangalore
found no such changes in adult or aged rats,
indicating a direct relationship between FI
and WI in weanling rats.
From our data, it is apparent that zinc-de-
ficient or low-zinc diets fed for a prolonged
period can significantly decrease weight gain
and feed conversion efficiency in weanling and
adult rats, respectively. These effects may be
attributed to impaired cell division and metab-
olism caused by altered Zn homeostasis due to
Zn deficiency, as well as reduced FI resulting
from loss of appetite. Low-level oral lead and
cadmium exposure was not toxic to all age
groups of rats. Significant reduction in water
intake after addition of lead or cadmium sug-
gests that this may not be an appropriate
method of oral exposure when quantitative
toxic metal exposure is critical, as actual intake
may vary significantly within and between
groups. Addition of toxic metals to the diet
may perhaps be a preferable method.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank Joyce Owens (Animal Facilities
manager), and students K. Mahal, A. Mutiso,
and C. Moore for assisting with animal exper-
iments. This research was funded by USDA
Grant 90-38814-5540.
LITERATURE CITED
Abdel-Mageed, A.B., and F.W. Oehme. 1991. The effect
of various dietary zinc concentrations on the biological
interactions of zinc, copper and iron in rats. Biol. Trace
Elem. Res. 29:239-256.
Aiba, K., M. Kimura, S. Sakata, K. Matsuda, M. Kaneko,
S. Onosaka, Y. Yamaoka, and N. Tamaki. 1997. Cosinor
analysis of feed intake cycle of rats fed a zinc deficient
diet and the effect of zinc supplementation. J. Nutr. Sci.
Vitaminol. 43:327—343.
Bebe, F.N., and M. Panemangalore. 1996. Modulation of
tissue trace metal concentrations in weanling rats fed
different levels of zinc and exposed to oral lead and
cadmium. Nutr. Res. 16:1369-1380.
Cerklewski, F.L., and R.M. Forbes. 1975. Influence of di-
etary zinc on lead absorption in the rat. J. Nutr. 106:
689-696.
Coppen-Jaeger, D.E., and M. Wilhelm. 1989. The effects
of cadmium on zinc absorption in isolated rat intestinal
preparations. Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 21:207—212.
Cory-Slechta, D.A. 1990. Alterations in tissue lead distri-
bution and hematopoietic indices during advanced age.
Arch. Toxicol. 64:31—37.
Cory-Slechta, D.A., B. Weiss, and C. Cox. 1989. Tissue
distribution of lead in adult vs old rats: a pilot study.
Toxicology 59:139-150.
113
Faraji, B., and M.E. Swendseid. 1983. Growth rate, tissue
zinc levels and activities of selected enzymes in rats fed
a zinc deficient diet by gastric tube. J. Nutr. 113:447—
455.
Friberg, L., C.G. Elinder, T. Kjellstrom, and G. Nordberg.
1985. Cadmium and health. CRC Press, Boca Raton,
FL.
Golden, M.H.N. 1989. Diagnosis of zinc deficiency. Pages
393-332 in C.F. Mills (ed). Zinc in human biology.
Springer-Verlag, London, U.K.
Guigliano, R., and D.J. Millward. 1984. Growth and zinc
homeostasis in the severely zinc-deficient rat. British J.
Nutr. 52:545-560.
Kirchgessner, M., A.M. Reichlmayr-Lais, and K. Stockl.
1987. Retention of lead in growing and adult rats on
varying lead supply. Pages 689-690 in L.S. Hurley, C.L.
Keen, B. Lonnerdal, and R.B. Rucker (eds). Trace el-
ements in animals and man. Plenum, New York, NY.
Kotsonis, F.N., and C.D. Klaassen. 1978. The relationship
of metallothionein to the toxicity of cadmium after pro-
longed oral administration to rats. Toxicol. Appl. Phar-
macol. 46:39-54.
Kunifuji, Y., T. Nakamura, and M. Takasugi. 1987. Influ-
ence of cadmium in the distribution of essential trace
elements in the liver and kidneys of rats. Biol. Trace
Elem. Res. 14:237-248.
Lee, R.G., T.M. Rains, C. Towar-Palacio, J.L Beverly, and
N.F. Shay. 1998. Zinc deficiency increases hypothalamic
neuropeptide Y and neuropeptide Y mRNA levels and
does not block neuropeptide Y-induced feeding in rats.
J. Nutr. 128:1218—-1223.
Mahaffey, K.R., S.G. Caper, B.C. Gladen, and B.A. Fowl-
er. 1982. Concurrent exposure to lead, cadmium and
arsenic. Effect on toxicity and tissue metal concentra-
tions in the rat. J. Lab. Clin. Med. 66:463-481.
Meydani, S.N., M. Meydani, and J. Dupont. 1983. Effect
of prostaglandin modifiers and zine deficiency on pos-
sibly related functions in rats. J. Nutr. 113:494—500.
O'Dell, B.L., and B.G. Reeves. 1989. Zinc status and food
intake. Pages 173-179 in C.F. Mills (ed). Zinc in human
biology. Springer-Verlag, London, U.K.
Panemangalore, M. 1993. Interaction among zinc, copper
and cadmium in rats: effect of low zinc and copper diets
and oral cadmium exposure. J. Trace Elem. Exp. Med.
6:125-139.
Rader, J.I., J.T. Peeler, and K.R. Mahaffey. 1981. Com-
parative toxicity and tissue distribution of lead acetate
in weanling and adult rats. Environ. Health Perspect.
42:187-195.
Rains, T.M., and N.F. Shay. 1994. Macronutrient prefer-
ence in the rat during zinc deficiency-induced anorexia.
FASEB J. 8:A730.
Reeves, P.G., F.H. Nielsen, and G.C. Fahey, Jr. 1993. AIN
93 purified diets for laboratory rodents: final report of
the American Institute of Nutrition ad hoc writing com-
mittee on reformulation of AIN 76 rodent diet. J. Nutr.
123:1939-1951.
Sabbioni, E., E. Marafante, L. Amantini, L. Ubertalli, and
114
R. Pietra. 1978. Cadmium toxicity under long term low
level exposure (LLE) conditions. Metabolic patterns in
rats exposed to present environmental dietary levels of
cadmium for two years. Sci. Total Environ. 10:135-161.
Sandstead, H.H., L.K. Henrickson, J.L. Greger, A.S. Pra-
sad, and R.A. Good. 1982. Zinc nutriture in elderly in
relation to taste acuity, immune response and wound
healing. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 36:1046-1059.
Sato, M., and Y. Nagai. 1989. Effect of zinc deficiency on
the accumulation of metallothionein and cadmium in
the rat liver and kidney. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxi-
col. 18:587-593.
Song, M.K., N.F. Adham, and M.E. Ament. 1986. Levels
and distribution of zinc, copper, magnesium and cad-
mium in rats fed different levels of dietary zinc. Biol.
Trace Elem. Res. 11:75-88.
Story, M.L., and J.L. Greger. 1987. Iron, zine and copper
interactions: chronic versus acute responses of rats. J.
Nutr. 117;1434—-1442.
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Tamaki, N., S. Fujimoto-Sakata, M. Kikugawa, M. Kane-
ko, S. Onosaka, and T. Takagi. 1995. Analysis of cyclic
feed intake in rats fed on a zinc deficient diet and the
level of dihydropyrimidinase. Brit. J. Nutr. 73:71 1-722.
Tanaka, M., M. Yanagi, K. Shirota, Y. Une, Y. Nomura, T.
Masaoka, and F Akahori. 1995. Effect of cadmium in
the zinc deficient rat. Vet. Human Toxicol. 37:203-208.
Underwood, E.J. 1979. Environmental sources of heavy
metals and toxicity to man. Prog. Water Technol. 11:
33-45.
Vyskocil, A., Z. Fiala, V. Lacinova, and E. Ettlerova. 1991.
A chronic study of lead acetate in female rats. J. Appl.
Toxicol. 11:385-386.
Vyskocil, A., Z. Fiala, E. Ettlerova, and I. TeRejnorova.
1990. Influence of chronic lead exposure on hormone
levels in developing rats. J. Appl. Toxicol. 10:301—302.
Williams, R.B., and C.F. Mills. 1970. The experimental
production of zinc deficiency in the rat. Brit. J. Nutr.
24:989-1003.
J. Ky. Acad. Sci. 61(2):115-132. 2000.
Rare and Extirpated Biota of Kentucky
Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission
801 Schenkel Lane, Frankfort, Kentucky 40601
ABSTRACT
The Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission has updated and revised the lists of rare and extinct
or extirpated biota last published in 1996 and updated in 1997 and 1999. The newly revised lists include a
lichen, and 389 plant and 282 animal taxa considered rare in Kentucky, and 4 plant and 42 animal taxa
considered extirpated from Kentucky or extinct.
INTRODUCTION
The Kentucky State Nature Preserves Com-
mission (KSNPC) is mandated to identify and
protect natural areas to conserve Kentucky's
natural heritage. To accomplish this mandate
KSNPC works in cooperation with many sci-
entific authorities in the public, private, and
academic sectors. To help focus its conserva-
tion activities, KSNPC has developed a list of
taxa native to the state that are considered
rare. A list of species presumed extinct or ex-
tirpated from Kentucky is also maintained to
document the loss of biodiversity, much of
which is attributable to human activities. The
overall goal of publishing these lists is to assist
in the recovery and preservation of Kentucky's
rich natural diversity.
KSNPC uses The Nature Conservancy's
standardized Natural Heritage Program
(NHP) methodology (TNC 1988) to manage
distributional and ecological information on
rare taxa, high quality natural communities,
and other unique natural features in map,
manual, and computer files. This information
is used to locate aggregations of these entities
for monitoring and protection. The NHP
methodology is well suited for the revision
process outlined below.
METHODS
Each taxon listed by KSNPC (1996, 1997,
1999), as well as other unlisted organisms,
were evaluated to assign a conservation status.
The evaluation criteria used included the
number, age, and accuracy of occurrences; his-
torical and present geographic distribution;
habitat requirements; threats to the taxon in-
cluding habitat loss; and ecological fragility.
The information used to make the evaluation
was that available as of 1 Jan 2000. The re-
sultant list and proposed status designations
were submitted to knowledgeable individuals
for peer review and suggestions for taxa to add
and delete. All comments received were con-
sidered and in many cases discussed with the
reviewer before the list was finalized.
Sources consulted for the plant and lichen
names are: Anderson (1990); Crum et. al.
(1990); Egan (1987); and Kartesz (1994). The
sources consulted for the common and scien-
tific names of animals are as follows: gastro-
pods—Hubricht (1985) and Turgeon et al.
(1998): freshwater mussels—Gordon (1995)
and Turgeon et al. (1998); crustaceans—Barr
(1968), Holsinger (1972), Taylor and Sabaj
(1998), USFWS (1994), and Williams et al.
(1989): insects—Amett (1983); Barr (1996),
Cassie et al. (1995), Krekeler (1973), Mc-
Cafferty (1996), Miller (1992), Morse (1993),
Paulson and Dunkle (1999), Schuster (1997),
and Schweitzer (1989); fishes—Ceas and Page
(1997), Page and Burr (1991), Robins et al.
(1991), USFWS (2000), and Warren (1992):
amphibians and reptiles—Collins (1990),
Frost (1985), and King and Burke (1989);
breeding birds—AOU (1998); mammals—
Hall (1981), Jones et al. (1992), and Wilson
and Reeder (1993).
Status Designations
The intent of assigning status designations
is to (1) indicate the degree of rarity of the
taxon, (2) indicate the degree of threat to the
continued survival of the taxon, and (3) aid in
establishing conservation priorities. The five
KSNPC status designations defined below
have no legal or statutory implication.
Endangered (E). A taxon in danger of extira-
tion and/or extinction throughout all or a
significant part of its range in Kentucky.
115
116
Threatened (T). A taxon likely to become en-
dangered within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant part of its
range in Kentucky.
Special Concern (S). A taxon that should be
monitored because (1) it exists in a limited
geographic area in Kentucky, (2) it may be-
come threatened or endangered due to
modification or destruction of habitat, (3)
certain characteristics or requirements
make it especially vulnerable to specific
pressures, (4) experienced researchers have
identified other factors that may jeopardize
it, or (5) it is thought to be rare or declining
in Kentucky but insufficient information ex-
ists for assignment to the threatened or en-
dangered status categories.
Historical (H). A taxon that has not been re-
liably reported in Kentucky since 1980 but
is not considered extinct or extirpated—see
next designation.
Extinct/Extirpated. A taxon for which habitat
loss has been pervasive and/or concerted ef-
forts by knowledgeable biologists to collect
or observe specimens within appropriate
habitat have failed.
Federal statuses (NMFS 1999: USFWS
1999, 2000) are defined below. Non-breeding
birds with a federal status occurring as mi-
grants or visitors in Kentucky (e.g., Charad-
rius melodus, Mycteria americana) are not in-
cluded on the list.
Endangered (E). “... any species ... in dan-
ger of extinction throughout all or a signif-
icant portion of its range ...” (USFWS
1992).
Threatened (T). “... any species .. . likely to
become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a sig-
nificant portion of its range” (USFWS
1992).
Proposed Endangered (PE). A taxon proposed
for listing as endangered.
Candidate (C). Taxa for which the USFWS has
“... sufficient information on biological vul-
nerability and threats to support proposals
to list them as endangered or threatened”
(USFWS 1999).
DISCUSSION
The list of rare biota includes a lichen and
389 plant and 282 animal taxa considered rare
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
in Kentucky (Tables 1, 2). Based on generally
accepted estimates of the number of native
taxa in Kentucky and excluding extinct/extir-
pated members of each group, the following
approximate percent of the groups indicated
can be considered Endangered, Threatened,
of Special Concern, or Historical: vascular
plants—16.5%, gastropods—9.7%, freshwater
mussels—42.9%, fishes—26.6%, amphibians
and reptiles—28.4%, breeding birds—30.6%,
and mammals—21.5%. Although KSNPC con-
tinues to refine and expand this list to include
new groups, the list does not adequately treat
or include several groups of organisms found
in Kentucky. The fungi, liverworts, insects,
amphipods, isopods, and other groups are im-
portant elements of our natural heritage but
are poorly known in Kentucky. Researchers
are encouraged to continue to gather and pub-
lish information about these groups to assist in
the evaluation and inclusion of rare taxa on
future lists.
Four plants and 42 animals are presumed
extinct or extirpated from Kentucky (Tables 2,
3). Most extinct or extirpated animals are
freshwater mussels or fishes that have experi-
enced range-wide declines caused by habitat
destruction, stream modification, and pollu-
tion (Richter et al. 1997). Extirpation and ex-
tinction are difficult to prove definitively, so
biologists should continue to seek these plants
and animals during field activities.
We invite recommendations from knowl-
edgeable individuals regarding native taxa they
believe deserve a status change or should be
added to or deleted from the list. Each rec-
ommendation should include the scientific
name of the organism, its habitat require-
ments, collection information (i.e., localities,
number of specimens, dates, disposition of
specimens), historical and present distribu-
tion, whether the taxon has been specifically
sought during field work, threats to its surviv-
al, and recommended status. Recommenda-
tions should be forwarded to the Director,
KSNPC, who will pass the information on to
appropriate staff members for timely review
and response.
-KSNPC intends to publish updated lists in
the Journal every 4 years. The present lists will
be updated annually by submitting a note to
the Journal listing status and name changes.
Interested persons can contact KSNPC for the
Rare and Extirpated Biota of Kentucky—KSNPC Ee
Table 1. Endangered, threatened, special concern, and historical biota of Kentucky, 2000.
KSNPC KSNPC US
OE ———————————————
Lichens Ageratina luciae-brauniae S —
Phaeophyscia leana E Lucy Braun's white snakeroot
iaieiormallernal lic ere Agrimonia gryposepala il —
Tall hairy groovebur
Plants Amianthium muscitoxicum AP —
Mosses Fly-poison
Abietinella abietina T Amsonia tabernaemontana var. T =
Wire fern moss gattingeri
Anomodon rugelii T Eastern blue-star
A moss Anemone canadensis H —
Brachythecium populeum E Canada anemone
Matted feather moss Angelica triquinata E =
Bryum cyclophyllum E Filmy angelica
A moss Apios priceana E a
Bryum miniatum E Price's potato-bean
A moss Arabis hirsuta var. adpressipilis E —
Cirriphyllum piliferum T Hairy rock-cress
A moss Arabis missouriensis E —=
Dicranodontium asperulum E Missouri rock-cress
A moss Arabis perstellata T E
Entodon brevisetus E Braun’s rock-cress
A moss Aristida ramosissima H =
Herzogiella turfacea E Branched three-awn grass
A moss Armoracia lacustris a =
Neckera pennata T Lake cress
A moss Aster acuminatus T —
Oncophorus raui E Whorled aster
A moss Aster concolor T —
Orthotrichum diaphanum E Eastern silvery aster
A moss Aster drummondii var. texanus T —
Polytrichum pallidisetum T Texas aster
A haircap moss Aster hemisphericus E _
Polytrichum piliferum 1D Tennessee aster
A haircap moss Aster pilosus var. priceae T —
Polytrichum strictum E White heath aster
A haircap moss Aster pratensis S —
Sphagnum quinquefarium 13 Barrens silky aster
A peatmoss Aster radula E _
Tortula norvegica E Low rough aster
A tortula Aster saxicastellii T =
Vascular Plants Rockcastle aSEr
Aureolaria patula S —
Acer spicatum E Spreading false foxglove
Mountain maple Baptisia australis var. minor S —
Aconitum uncinatum T aha walldl indigo
Blue monkshood ’ Baptisia bracteata var. leucophaea S =
Adiantum capillus-veneris T Cream wild indigo
Southern maidenhair fern Baptisia tinctoria T es
Adlumia fungosa E Yellow wild indigo
Climbing fumitory Bartonia virginica T —
Aesculus pavia T Yellow screwstem
Red buckeye Berberis canadensis E =
Agalinis auriculata E Avmersigern berinteiiey
Earleaf False F oxglove Berchemia scandens Tt —
Agalinis obtusifolia E Supplejack
Ten-lobe false foxglove Botrychium matricariifolium E —
Agalinis skinneriana E Nintcieanat grapefern
Pale false foxglove Nor Botrychium oneidense E —
Agastache scrophulariifolia S
Purple giant hyssop
Blunt-lobe grapefern
118 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Bouteloua curtipendula
Side-oats grama
Boykinia aconitifolia
Brook saxifrage
Cabomba caroliniana
Carolina fanwort
Calamagrostis canadensis var.
macouniana
Blue-joint reed grass
Calamagrostis portert ssp. insperata
Reed bent grass
Calamagrostis porteri ssp. porteri
Porter's reed grass
Callirhoe alcaeoides
Clustered poppy-mallow
Calopogon tuberosus
Grass-pink
Calycanthus floridus var. glaucus
Sweetshrub
Calylophus serrulatus
Yellow evening primrose
Carex aestivalis
Summer sedge
Carex alata
Broadwing sedge
Carex appalachica
Appalachian sedge
Carex atlantica ssp. capillacea
Prickly bog sedge
Carex austrocaroliniana
Tarheel sedge
Carex buxbaumii
Brown bog sedge
Carex comosa
Bristly sedge
Carex crawei
Crawe’s sedge
Carex crebriflora
Coastal Plain sedge
Carex decomposita
Epiphytic sedge
Carex gigantea
Large sedge
Carex hystericina
Porcupine sedge
Carex joorii
Cypress-swamp sedge
Carex juniperorum
Cedar sedge
Carex lanuginosa
Woolly sedge
Carex leptonervia
Finely-nerved sedge
Carex reniformis
Reniform sedge
Carex roanensis
Roan sedge
Carex rugosperma
Umbel-like sedge
KSNPC
S
ili
lef SS] SS] [es
nN
|
a
Continued.
Carex seorsa
Weak stellate sedge
Carex stipata var. maxima
Stalkgrain sedge
Carex straminea
Straw sedge
Carex tetanica
Rigid sedge
Carya aquatica
Water hickory
Castanea dentata
American chestnut
Castanea pumila
Allegheny chinkapin
Castilleja coccinea
Scarlet indian paintbrush
Ceanothus herbaceus
Prairie redroot
Cheilanthes alabamensis
Alabama lip fern
Cheilanthes feei
Fée’s lip fern
Chelone obliqua var. obliqua
Red turtlehead
Chelone obliqua var. speciosa
Rose turtlehead
Chrysogonum virginianum
Greeen-and-gold
Chrysosplenium americanum
American golden-saxifrage
Cimicifuga rubifolia
Appalachian bugbane
Circaea alpina
Small enchanter’s-nightshade
Clematis crispa
Blue jasmine leather-flower
Coeloglossum viride var. virescens
Long-bract green orchis
Collinsonia verticillata
Whorled horse-balm
Comptonia peregrina
Sweet-fern
Conradina verticillata
Cumberland rosemary
Convallaria montana
American lily-of-the-valley
Corallorhiza maculata
Spotted coralroot
Coreopsis pubescens
Star tickseed
Corydalis sempervirens
Pale corydalis
Cymophyllus fraserianus
Fraser's sedge
Cyperus plukenetii
Plukenet’s cyperus
Cypripedium candidum
Small white lady’s-slipper
Cypripedium kentuckiense
Kentucky lady’s slipper
KSNPC
en] fan} [esl
N
Rare and Extirpated Biota of Kentucky—KSNPC 119
Table 1. Continued.
Status Status
KSNPC US KSNPC US
Cypripedium parviflorum T Gentiana flavida E
Small yellow lady’s-slipper Yellow gentian
Cypripedium reginae H Gentiana puberulenta E
Showy lady’s-slipper Prairie gentian
Dalea purpurea S Glandularia canadensis T
Purple prairie-clover Rose verbena
Delphinium carolinianum T Gleditsia aquatica S
Carolina larkspur Water locust
Deschampsia cespitosa ssp. glauca E Glyceria acutiflora dl
Tufted hair grass Sharp-scaled manna grass
Deschampsia flexuosa T Gnaphalium helleri var. micradenium He
Crinkled hair grass Small rabbit-tobacco
Dichanthelium boreale S Gratiola pilosa T
Northern witch grass Shaggy hedge-hyssop
Didiplis diandra S Gratiola viscidula S
Water-purslane Short’s hedge-hyssop
Disporum maculatum S Gymnopogon ambiguus S
Nodding mandarin Bearded skeleton grass
Dodecatheon frenchii S Gymnopogon brevifolius E
French's shooting-star Shortleaf skeleton grass
Draba cuneifolia E Halesia tetraptera T
Wedge-leaf whitlow-grass Common silverbell
Drosera brevifolia E Hedeoma hispidum a
Dwarf sundew Rough pennyroyal
Drosera intermedia H Helianthemum bicknellii le
Spoon-leaved sundew Plains frostweed
Dryopteris carthusiana S Helianthemum canadense E
Spinulose wood fern Canada frostweed
Dryopteris ludoviciana H Helianthus eggertii T
Southern shield wood fern Eggert’s sunflower
Echinodorus berteroi T Helianthus silphioides E
Burhead Silphium sunflower
Echinodorus parvulus E Heracleum lanatum E
Dwarf burhead Cow-parsnip
Eleocharis olivacea \S Heteranthera dubia S
Olivaceous sedge Grassleaf mud-plantain
Elodea nuttallii T Heteranthera limosa S
Waterweed Blue mud-plantain
Elymus svensonii S Heterotheca subaxillaris var. latifolia T
Svenson’s wild rye Broad-leaf golden-aster
Eriophorum virginicum E Hexastylis contracta E
Tawny cotton-grass Southern heartleaf
Eryngium integrifolium E Hexastylis heterophylla S
Blue-flower coyote-thistle Variable-leaved heartleaf
Erythronium rostratum S Hieracium longipilum T
Golden-star Hairy hawkweed
Eupatorium maculatum H Houstonia serpyllifolia E
Spotted joe-pye-weed Michaux’s bluets
Eupatorium semiserratum E Hydrocotyle americana E
Small-flowered thoroughwort American water-pennywort
Eupatorium steelei E Hydrolea ovata E
Steele’s joe-pye-weed Ovate fiddleleaf
Euphorbia mercurialina T Hydrolea uniflora S
Mercury spurge One-flower fiddleleaf
Fimbristylis puberula T Hydrophyllum virginianum S
Hairy fimbristylis Virginia waterleaf
Forestiera ligustrina T Hypericum adpressum H
Upland privet Creeping St. John’s-wort
Gentiana decora S Hypericum crux-andreae T
Showy gentian
St. Peter’s-wort
120 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Hypericum nudiflorum
Pretty St. John’s-wort
Hypericum pseudomaculatum
Large spotted St. John’s-wort
Tris fulva
Copper iris
Isoetes butleri
Butler's quillwort
Isoetes melanopoda
Blackfoot quillwort
Juglans cinerea
White walnut
Juncus articulatus
Jointed rush
Juncus elliottii
Bog rush
Juncus filipendulus
Long-styled rush
Juniperus communis var. depressa
Ground juniper
Koeleria macrantha
June grass
Krigia occidentalis
Western dwarf dandelion
Lathyrus palustris
Vetchling peavine
Lathyrus venosus
Smooth veiny peavine
Leavenworthia exigua var. laciniata
Glade cress
Leavenworthia torulosa
Necklace glade cress
Leiophyllum buxifolium
Sand-myrtle
Lespedeza capitata
Round-head bush-clover
Lespedeza stuevei
Tall bush-clover
Lesquerella globosa
Lesquereux’s bladderpod
Lesquerella lescurii
Lescur’s bladderpod
Leucothoe recurva
Fetterbush
Liatris cylindracea
Slender blazingstar
Lilium philadelphicum
Wood lily
Lilium superbum
Turk’s cap lily
Limnobium spongia
American frog’s-bit
Liparis loeselii
Loesel’s twayblade
Listera australis
Southern twayblade
Listera smallii
Kidney-leaf twayblade
Lobelia appendiculata var. gattingeri
Gattinger’s lobelia
KSNPC
H
H
a) tes} tes Sy) fac
Nn
mA A
HoH 4A
|
Continued.
Lobelia nuttallii
Nuttall’s lobelia
Lonicera dioica var. orientalis
Wild honeysuckle
Lonicera reticulata
Grape honeysuckle
Ludwigia hirtella
Hairy ludwigia
Lycopodiella appressa
Southern bog club-moss
Lycopodiella inundata
Northern bog club-moss
Lycopodium clavatum
Running-pine
Lysimachia fraseri
Fraser's loosestrife
Lysimachia radicans
Trailing loosestrife
Lysimachia terrestris
Swamp-candles
Maianthemum canadense
Wild lily-of-the-valley
Maianthemum stellatum
Starry false solomon-seal
Malus angustifolia
Southern crabapple
Malvastrum hispidum
Hispid false mallow
Marshallia grandiflora
Barbara’s-buttons
Matelea carolinensis
Carolina anglepod
Melampyrum lineare var. latifolium
American cow-wheat
Melampyrum lineare var. pectinatum
American crow-wheat
Melanthera nivea
Snow melanthera
Melanthium parviflorum
Small-flowered false hellebore
Melanthium virginicum
Virginia bunchflower
Melanthium woodii
False hellebore
Minuartia cumberlandensis
Cumberland sandwort
Minuartia glabra
Appalachian sandwort
Mirabilis albida
Pale umbrella-wort
Monarda punctata
Spotted beebalm
Monotropsis odorata
Sweet pinesap
Muhlenbergia bushii
Bush's muhly
Muhlenbergia cuspidata
Plains muhly
Muhlenbergia glabriflora
Hair grass
KSNPC
1
2 | Sl lel oles! OE es) des} a is Sit!
ea]
ie]
| les} =} a
N
Rare and Extirpated Biota of Kentucky—KSNPC AL
Table 1. Continued.
Status Status
KSNPC US KSNPC US
Myriophyllum heterophyllum S = Platanthera cristata T oss
Broadleaf water-milfoil Yellow-crested orchid
Myriophyllum pinnatum H = Platanthera integrilabia WD C
Cutleaf water-milfoil White fringeless orchid
Najas gracillima S — Platanthera psycodes E _
Thread-like naiad Small purple-fringed orchid
Nemophila aphylla T = Poa saltuensis E =
Small-flower baby-blue-eyes Drooping blue grass
Nestronia umbellula E = Podostemum ceratophyllum S =
Conjurer’s-nut Threadfoot
Oenothera linifolia E — Pogonia ophioglossoides E —
Thread-leaf sundrops Rose pogonia
Oenothera oakesiana H — Polygala cruciata E =
Evening primrose Cross-leaf milkwort
Oenothera perennis E — Polygala nuttallii H =
Small sundrops Nuttall’s milkwort
Oenothera triloba aD; — Polygala paucifolia E —
Stemless evening-primrose Gaywings
Oldenlandia uniflora 12 — Polygala polygama ab —
Clustered bluets Racemed milkwort
Onosmodium molle ssp. E — Polymnia laevigata E ==
hispidissimum Tennessee leafcup
Hairy false gromwell Pontederia cordata T ==
Onosmodium molle ssp. molle E — Pickerel-weed
Soft false gromwell Potamogeton illinoensis S =
Onosmodium molle ssp. occidentale E = Illinois pondweed
Western false gromwell Potamogeton pulcher T =
Orobanche ludoviciana H — Spotted pondweed
Louisiana broomrape Prenanthes alba E =
Orontium aquaticum T — White rattlesnake-root
Goldenclub Prenanthes aspera E —
Oxalis priceae H — Rough rattlesnake-root
Price’s yellow wood sorrel Prenanthes barbata E _—
Parnassia asarifolia E — Barbed rattlesnake-root
Kidney-leaf grass-of-parnassus Prenanthes crepidinea T —
Parnassia grandifolia B — Nodding rattlesnake-root
Largeleaf grass-of-parnassus Psoralidium tenuiflorum E _
Paronychia argyrocoma E — Few-flowered scurf-pea
Silvering Ptilimnium capillaceum T =
Paspalum boscianum S — Mock bishop’s-weed
Bull paspalum Ptilimnium costatum S ==
Paxistima canbyi T — Eastern mock bishop’s-weed
Canby’s mountain-lover Ptilimnium nuttallii E —
Pedicularis lanceolata H — Nuttall’s mock bishop’s-weed
Swamp lousewort Pycnanthemum albescens E —
Perideridia americana T = White-leaved mountain-mint
Eastern eulophus Pycnanthemum muticum tt ==
Phacelia ranunculacea S — Blunt mountain-mint
Blue scorpion-weed Pyrola americana H —
Philadelphus inodorus T — American wintergreeen
Mock orange Ranunculus ambigens S —
Philadelphus pubescens E = Water-plantain spearwort
Hoary mock orange Rhododendron canescens E —
Phlox bifida ssp. bifida 1 -- Hoary azalea
Cleft phlox Rhynchosia tomentosa E =
Phlox bifida ssp. stellaria T “= Hairy snout-bean
Starry cleft phlox Rhynchospora globularis S —
Plantago cordata H = Globe beaked-rush
Heartleaf plantain Rhynchospora macrostachya E —
Tall beaked-rush
122 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Table 1. Continued.
Status Status
KSNPC US KSNPC US
Rubus canadensis E Silene regia E
Smooth blackberry Royal catchfly
Rubus whartoniae T Silphium laciniatum var. laciniatum E
Wharton’s dewberry Compassplant
Rudbeckia subtomentosa E Silphium laciniatum var. robinsonii T
Sweet coneflower Compassplant
Sabatia campanulata E Silphium pinnatifidum S
Slender marsh-pink Tansy rosinweed
Sagittaria graminea T Silphium wasiotense S
Grass-leaf arrowhead Appalachian rosinweed
Sagittaria platyphylla w Solidago albopilosa Tr
Delta arrowhead White-haired goldenrod
Sagittaria rigida E Solidago buckleyi S
Sessile-fruit arrowhead Buckley's goldenrod
Salix amygdaloides H Solidago curtisii T
Peachleaf willow Curtis’ goldenrod
Salix discolor H Solidago gracillima S
Pussy willow Southern bog goldenrod
Salvia urticifolia E Solidago puberula S
Nettle-leaf sage Downy goldenrod
Sambucus racemosa ssp. pubens E Solidago roanensis T
Red elderberry Roan Mountain goldenrod
Sanguisorba canadensis E Solidago shortii E
Canada bumet Short'’s goldenrod
Saxifraga michauxii iD Solidago simplex ssp. randii S
Michaux's saxifrage Rand's goldenrod
Saxifraga micranthidifolia E Solidago squarrosa H
Lettuce-leaf saxifrage Squarrose goldenrod
Saxifraga pensylvanica H Sparganium eurycarpum E
Swamp saxifrage Large bur-reed
Schisandra glabra E Sphenopholis pensylvanica S
Bay starvine Swamp wedgescale
Schizachne purpurascens T Spiraea alba var. alba E
Purple-oat Narrow-leaved meadowsweet
Schwalbea americana H Spiraea virginiana a
American chaffseed Virginia spiraea
Scirpus expansus E Spiranthes lucida T
Woodland beak-rush Shining ladies’-tresses
Scirpus fluviatilis E Spiranthes magnicamporum T
River bulrush Great Plains ladies’-tresses
Scirpus hallii E Spiranthes ochroleuca S
Hall’s bulrush Yellow nodding ladies’-tresses
Scirpus heterochaetus 19, Spiranthes odorata E
Slender bulrush Sweetscent ladies’-tresses
Scirpus microcarpus E Sporobolus clandestinus T
Small-fruit bulrush Rough dropseed
Scirpus verecundus E Sporobolus heterolepis E
Bashful bulrush Northern dropseed
Scleria ciliata var. ciliata E Stachys eplingii E
Fringed nut-rush Epling’s hedge-nettle
Scutellaria arguta T Stellaria fontinalis T
Hairy skullcap Water stitchwort
Scutellaria saxatilis I Stellaria longifolia Ss
Rock skullcap Longleaf stitchwort
Sedum telephioides a Streptopus roseus var. perspectus E
Allegheny stonecrop Rosy twistedstalk
Sida hermaphrodita S Symphoricarpos albus E
Virginia-mallow Snowberry
Silene ovata il Talinum calearicum E
Ovate catchfly
Limestone fameflower
Rare and Extirpated Biota of Kentucky—KSNPC 123
Table 1. Continued.
Status
KSNPC US KSNPC US
Talinum teretifoliwm iE _— Vitis labrusca S be
Roundleaf fameflower Northern fox grape
Taxus canadensis ar a8 Vitis rupestris T pe.
Canadian yew Sand grape
Tephrosia spicata E — Woodsia appalachiana E zs
Spiked hoary-pea Mountain woodsia
Thaspium pinnatifidum T — Xerophyllum asphodeloides H =
nas phy p
Cutleaf meadow-parsnip Eastern turkeybeard
Thermopsis mollis E = Xyris difformis E os
Soft-haired thermopsis Carolina yellow-eye-grass
Thuja occidentalis T — Zizania palustris var. interior H ae
Northern white-cedar Indian wild rice
Torreyochloa pallida E — Zizaniopsis miliacea ah pe
Pale manna grass Southecnwild ice
Toxicodendron vernix E ag acer t
Poison sumac Cen
Tragia urticifolia E we P
Nettle-leaf noseburm Anguispira rugoderma ih ==
Trepocarpus aethusae T ty Pine Mountain tigersnail
Trepocarpus Antroselatus spiralis S a
Trichostema setaceum E nay Shaggy cavesnail
Narrow-leaved bluecurls Appalachina chilhoweensis S feel
Trientalis borealis E en Queen crater
Northern starflower Fumonelix wetherbyi S =
Trifolium reflexum E ome Clifty covert .
Buffalo clover Glyphyalinia raderi S va
Trifolium stoloniferum T E Maryland glyph
Running buffalo clover Glyphyalinia rhoadsi T et
Trillium nivale E wat Sculpted glyph
Snow trillium Helicodiscus notius specus T ae
Trillium pusillum var. ozarkanum E — A snail
Ozark least trillium Helicodiscus punctatellus S =
Trillium pusillum var. pusillum E es Punctate coil
Least trillium Leptoxis praerosa S _
Trillium undulatum cE 5S Onyx rocksnail
Painted trillium Lithasia armigera S —_
Triplasis purpurea H 29 Armored rocksnail
Purple sand grass Lithasia geniculata S ee.
Ulmus serotina S ay Omate rocksnail
September elm Lithasia salebrosa S aa
Utricularia macrorhiza E ie Muddy rocksnail
Greater bladderwort Lithasia verrucosa S =
Vallisneria americana S Ls, Varicose rocksnail
Eel-grass Mesomphix rugeli TT al
Vernonia noveboracensis S = Wrinkled button
New York ironweed Neohelix dentifera ar =
Veronica americana H ne: Big-tooth whitelip
American speedwell Patera panselenus S =5
Viburnum molle Ast, Virginia bladetooth
Missouri arrow-wood Pilsbryna sp. E =
Viburnum nudum E ac} A snail (undescribed)
Possum haw viburnum Pleurocera alveare S ==
Viburnum rafmesquianum var. T = Rugged hornsnail
rafinesquianum Pleurocera curta S =
Downy arrowwood Shortspire hornsnail
Viola septemloba var. egglestonii S a Rabdotus dealbatus i =
Eggleston's violet Whitewashed rabdotus
Viola walteri T a Rhodacme elatior S _
Walter's violet
Domed ancylid
124 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Vertigo bollesiana
Delicate vertigo
Vertigo clappi
Cupped vertigo
Vitrinizonites latissimus
Glassy grapeskin
Webbhelix multilineata
Striped whitelip
Freshwater Mussels
Alasmidonta atropurpurea
Cumberland elktoe
Alasmidonta marginata
Elktoe
Anodontoides denigratus
Cumberland papershell
Cumberlandia monodonta
Spectaclecase
Cyprogenia stegaria
Fanshell
Epioblasma brevidens
Cumberlandian combshell
Epioblasma capsaeformis
Oyster mussel
Epioblasma obliquata obliquata
Catspaw
Epioblasma torulosa rangiana
Northern riffleshell
Epioblasma triquetra
Snuffbox
Fusconaia subrotunda subrotunda
Longsolid
Lampsilis abrupta
Pink mucket
Lampsilis ovata
Pocketbook
Lasmigona compressa
Creek heelsplitter
Lasmigona subviridis
Green floater
Lexingtonia dolabelloides
Slabside pearlymussel
Obovaria retusa
Ring pink
Pegias fabula
Littlewing pearlymussel
Plethobasus cooperianus
Orangefoot pimpleback
Plethobasus cyphyus
Sheepnose
Pleurobema clava
Clubshell
Pleurobema oviforme
Tennessee clubshell
Pleurobema plenum
Rough pigtoe
Pleurobema rubrum
Pyramid pigtoe
Potamilus capax
Fat pocketbook
KSNPC
E
E
C3 |
3)
Continued.
Potamilus purpuratus
Bleufer
Ptychobranchus subtentum
Fluted kidneyshell
Quadrula cylindrica cylindrica
Rabbitsfoot
Simpsonaias ambigua
Salamander mussel
Toxolasma lividus
Purple lilliput
Toxolasma texasiensis
Texas lilliput
Villosa fabalis
Rayed bean
Villosa lienosa
Little spectaclecase
Villosa ortmanni
Kentucky creekshell
Villosa trabalis
Cumberland bean
Villosa vanuxemensis
Mountain creekshell
Crustaceans
Barbicambarus cornutus
Bottlebrush crayfish
Bryocamptus morrisoni elegans
A copepod
Caecidotea barri
Clifton cave isopod
Cambarellus puer
A dwarf crayfish
Cambarellus shufeldtii
Cajun dwarf crayfish
Cambarus parvoculus
A crayfish
Cambarus veteranus
A crayfish
Gammarus bousfieldi
Bousfield’s amphipod
Macrobrachium ohione
Ohio shrimp
Orconectes australis
A crayfish
Orconectes bisectus
Crittenden crayfish
Orconectes burri
A crayfish
Orconectes inermis
A crayfish
Orconectes jeffersoni
Louisville crayfish
Orconectes lancifer
A crayfish
Orconectes palmeri
A crayfish
Orconectes pellucidus
A crayfish
Palaemonias ganteri
Mammoth Cave shrimp
KSNPC
Soo Sl isl ial
Rare and Extirpated Biota of Kentucky—KSNPC
Table 1.
Continued.
125
oe ee nn
Status
Procambarus viaeviridis
A crayfish
Stygobromus vitreus
An amphipod
Insects
Calephelis mutica
Swamp metalmark
Callophrys irus
Frosted elfin
Celithemis verna
Double-ringed pennant
Cheumatopsyche helma
Helma’s net-spinning caddisfly
Dryobius sexnotatus
Sixbanded longhorn beetle
Ephemerella inconstans
An ephemerellid mayfly
Erora laeta
Early hairstreak
Euphyes dukesi
Duke's skipper
Litobrancha recurvata
A burrowing mayfly
Lordithon niger
Black lordithon rove beetle
Lytrosis permagnaria
A geometrid moth
Manophylax butleri
A limnephilid caddisfly
Nicrophorus americanus
American burying beetle
Ophiogomphus aspersus
Brook snaketail
Ophiogomphus howei
Pygmy snaketail
Papaipema eryngit
Rattlesnake-master borer moth
Phyciodes batesii
Tawny crescent
Polygonia faunus
Green comma
Polygonia progne
Gray comma
Pseudanophthalmus audax
Bold cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus calcareus
Limestone cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus catoryctos
Lesser Adams cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus conditus
Hidden cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus desertus major
Beaver cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus exoticus
Exotic cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus frigidus
Icebox cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus globiceps
Round-headed cave beetle
KSNPC
T
S
ec al jae
N
N
fsb: Steele etme eetacl ge. jact mac i aenil3|
ie fede cele ey is
US
Pseudanophthalmus horni abditus
Concealed cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus horni caecus
Clifton Cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus horni horni
Garman’s cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus hypolithos
Ashcamp cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus inexpectatus
Surprising cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus parvus
Tatum Cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus pholeter
Greater Adams Cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus pubescens
intrepidus
A cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus puteanus
Old Well Cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus rogersae
Rogers’ cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus scholasticus
Scholarly cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus simulans
Cub Run Cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus tenebrosus
Stevens Creek Cave beetle
Pseudanophthalmus troglodytes
Louisville cave beetle
Pyrgus wyandot
Appalachian grizzled skipper
Raptoheptagenia cruentata
A heptageniid mayfly
Satyrium favonius ontario
Northern hairstreak
Speyeria idalia
Regal fritillary
Stenonema bednariki
A heptageniid mayfly
Stylurus notatus
Elusive clubtail
Traverella lewisi
A leptophlebiid mayfly
Fishes
Acipenser fulvescens
Lake sturgeon
Alosa alabamae
Alabama shad
Amblyopsis spelaea
Northern cavefish
Ammocrypta clara
Western sand darter
Atractosteus spatula
Alligator gar
Cyprinella camura
Bluntface shiner
Cyprinella venusta
Blacktail shiner
KSNPC
T
1
S
isl Sl tel
4
it IS) Sh he teh Te tS
N
US
126 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Table 1. Continued.
Status Status
KSNPC US KSNPC US
Erimystax insignis E — Macrhybopsis gelida H ©}
Blotched chub Sturgeon chub
Erimyzon sucetta T = Macrhybopsis meeki H C
Lake chubsucker Sicklefin chub
Esox niger S = Menidia beryllina T =
Chain pickerel Inland silverside
Etheostoma chienense E E Moxostoma poecilurum E —
Relict darter Blacktail redhorse
Etheostoma cinereum S — Nocomis biguttatus S —
Ashy darter Hornyhead chub
Etheostoma fusiforme E — Notropis albizonatus E E
Swamp darter Palezone shiner
Etheostoma lynceum E = Notropis hudsonius S —
Brighteye darter Spottail shiner
Etheostoma maculatum T = Notropis maculatus T —-
Spotted darter Taillight shiner
Etheostoma microlepidum E = Notropis sp. E ==
Smallscale darter Sawfin shiner (undescribed)
Etheostoma nigrum susanae E C Noturus exilis E —
Johnny darter Slender madtom
Etheostoma parvipinne E — Noturus hildebrandi E =
Goldstripe darter Least madtom
Etheostoma percnurum E E Noturus phaeus E —
Duskytail darter Brown madtom
Etheostoma proeliare il = Noturus stigmosus S ==
Cypress darter Northern madtom
Etheostoma pyrrhogaster E = Percina macrocephala T =
Firebelly darter Longhead darter
Etheostoma swaini E — Percina squamata E —
Gulf darter Olive darter
Etheostoma tecumsehi T — Percopsis omiscomaycus S =
Shawnee darter Trout-perch
Fundulus chrysotus E = Phenacobius uranops S —
Golden topminnow Stargazing minnow
Fundulus dispar E = Phoxinus cumberlandensis T T
Northern starhead topminnow Blackside dace
Hybognathus hayi E — Platygobio gracilis S —
Cypress minnow Flathead chub
Hybognathus placitus S — Rhinichthys cataractae E —
Plains minnow Longnose dace
Hybopsis amnis H — Scaphirhynchus albus E E
Pallid shiner Pallid sturgeon
Ichthyomyzon castaneus S — Thoburnia atripinnis S =
Chestnut lamprey Blackfin sucker
Ichthyomyzon fossor Tr _— Typhlichthys subterraneus S —
Northern brook lamprey Southern cavefish
Ichthyomyzon gagei H — Umbra limi T —
Southern brook lamprey Central mudminnow
Ichthyomyzon greeleyi in = Amphibians
Mountain brook lamprey
Ictiobus niger S ee Amphiuma tridactylum E =
Bieceipatelo Three-toed amphiuma
Lampetra appendix T = Cryptobranchus alleganiensis S =
American brook lamprey alleganiensis
Lepomis marginatus E _ _Eastern hellbender
olla ene Eurycea guttolineata T =
Lepomis miniatus T iy Three-lined salamander
Redspotted sunfish Hyla GO WO Ce T rey
Tatailoin S aes Bird-voiced treefrog
Burbot
Rare and Extirpated Biota of Kentucky—KSNPC
Hyla cinerea
Green treefrog
Hyla gratiosa
Barking treefrog
Hyla versicolor
Gray treefrog
Plethodon cinereus
Redback salamander
Plethodon wehrlei
Wehrle’s salamander
Rana areolata circulosa
Northern crawfish frog
Rana pipiens
Northern leopard frog
Reptiles
Apalone mutica mutica
Midland smooth softshell
Chrysemys picta dorsalis
Southern painted turtle
Clonophis kirtlandii
Kirtland’s snake
Elaphe guttata guttata
Corn snake
Eumeces anthracinus anthracinus
Northem coal skink
Eumeces anthracinus pluvialis
Southem coal skink
Eumeces inexpectatus
Southeastern five-lined skink
Farancia abacura reinwardtii
Western mud snake
Lampropeltis triangulum elapsoides
Scarlet kingsnake
Macroclemys temminckii
Alligator snapping turtle
Nerodia cyclopion
Mississippi green water snake
Nerodia erythrogaster neglecta
Copperbelly water snake
Nerodia fasciata confluens
Broad-banded water snake
Ophisaurus attenuatus longicaudus
Eastern slender glass lizard
Pituophis melanoleucus melanoleucus
Northern pine snake
Sistrurus miliarius streckeri
Western pigmy rattlesnake
Thamnophis proximus proximus
Western ribbon snake
Thamnophis sauritus sauritus
Eastern ribbon snake
Breeding Birds
Accipiter striatus
Sharp-shinned hawk
Actitis macularia
Spotted sandpiper
Aimophila aestivalis
Bachman’s sparrow
KSNPC
S
S
ep) lel ey n ie) 4 n
ea]
=] SI
Table 1.
US
Continued.
Ammodramus henslowii
Henslow’s sparrow
Anas clypeata
Northern shoveler
Anas discors
Blue-winged teal
Ardea alba
Great egret
Ardea herodias
Great blue heron
Asio flammeus
Short-eared owl
Asio otus
Long-eared owl
Bartramia longicauda
Upland sandpiper
Botaurus lentiginosus
American bittern
Bubulcus ibis
Cattle egret
Certhia americana
Brown creeper
Chondestes grammacus
Lark sparrow
Circus cyaneus
Northern harrier
Cistothorus platensis
Sedge wren
Corvus corax
Common raven
Corvus ossifragus
Fish crow
Dendroica fusca
Blackbumian warbler
Dolichonyx oryzivorus
Bobolink
Egretta caerulea
Little blue heron
Empidonax minimus
Least flycatcher
Falco peregrinus
Peregrine falcon
Fulica americana
American coot
Gallinula chloropus
Common moorhen
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Bald eagle
Ictinia mississippiensis
Mississippi kite
Ixobrychus exilis
Least bittern
Junco hyemalis
Dark-eyed junco
Lophodytes cucullatus
Hooded merganser
Nyctanassa violacea
Yellow-crowned night-heron
Nycticorax nycticorax
Black-crowned night-heron
Status
KSNPC
S
E
W
E
Zp)
al est esl
| jseh desl
3
at StS
127
US
128
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Table 1. Continued.
Status Status
KSNPC. US KSNPC US
Pandion haliaetus T — Mammals
Osprey ; Clethrionomys gapperi maurus S —
Passerculus sandwichensis S — Kentucky red-backed vole
Savannah sparrow Corynorhinus rafinesquii S —
Phalacrocorax auritus H a Rafinesque’s big-eared bat
Double-crested cormorant Corynorhinus townsendii virginianus E E
Pheucticus ludovicianus S — Virginia big-eared bat
Rose-breasted grosbeak Mustela nivalis S —
Picoides borealis E E Least weasel
Red-cockaded woodpecker Myotis austroriparius E =
Podilymbus podiceps E — Southeastern myotis
Pied-billed grebe Myotis grisescens E E
Pooecetes gramineus 10; = Gray myotis
Vesper sparrow Myotis leibii T =
Rallus elegans E aan Eastern small-footed myotis
King rail Myotis sodalis E E
Riparia riparia S = Indiana myotis
Bank swallow Nycticeius humeralis T —
Sitta canadensis E — Evening bat
Red-breasted nuthatch Peromyscus gossypinus T —
Sterna antillarum KE E Cotton mouse
Least tern Sorex cinereus S) =
Thryomanes bewickii S = Masked shrew
Bewick’s wren Sorex dispar blitchi E —
Tyto alba S) ao Long-tailed shrew
Barn owl Spilogale putorius S =
Vermivora chrysoptera ai = Eastern spotted skunk
Golden-winged warbler Ursus americanus S 7
Vireo bellii S = Black bear
Bell’s vireo
Wilsonia canadensis S =
Canada warbler
current status of Kentucky's rare organisms.
Information about delisted and other taxa are
maintained in manual files for use in the event
that changes in distribution or status occur.
Each edition of these lists (Branson et al.
1981; Warren et al. 1986; KSNPC 1996, 1997,
1999) has been refined and enhanced with sta-
tus changes and the addition of new taxonomic
groups. As previously noted, these lists are im-
portant conservation tools used by KSNPC to
focus protection efforts. We hope this infor-
mation is used by planners and decision mak-
ers to conserve Kentucky's unique natural her-
itage through research, protection, and avoid-
ance.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We gratefully acknowledge the following
contributors to this effort: Danny Barrett, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers; Steve R. Bloemer,
Tennessee Valley Authority; Hal D. Bryan,
Eco-Tech, Inc.; Brooks M. Burr and Jeff G.
Stewart, Southern Illinois University at Car-
bondale; Samuel M. Call and Michael C.
Compton, Kentucky Division of Water; Julian
J.N. Campbell, Kentucky Chapter of TNC;
Ross C. Clark, Ronald L. Jones, Guenter A.
Schuster, and Matthew R. Thomas, Eastern
Kentucky University; H. Carl Cook, Florida
State Collection of Arthropods; Charles V.
Covell, Jr., University of Louisville; David J.
Eisenhour, Les E. Meade, and Allen C. Risk,
Morehead State University; Loran D. Gibson;
James D. Kiser; Lewis E. Kornman, Kerry W.
Prather, Douglas E. Stephens, Steven C.
Thomas, and Traci A. Wethington, Kentucky
Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources;
James B. Layzer, Tennessee Technological
University; John R. MacGregor and David D.
Taylor, United States Forest Service; Christine
129
‘(0006 OANSM) sfeurueur pur ‘sp.iiq SuUIpsalq ‘sopndax ‘sueiqrydure “Sous “sjassnul
LIJEMYSLY ‘spodoxjse3 ‘(S66I Ad|[PaN) sjurjd Ivjnosea *(8gET [Be 12 TEplUs “EGET ASH) Sessour ssotoadsexv} SALLU JO S[e}O} LO} SoOINOS ‘suauttoads [ISSoj UO paseq Ayonquey WOOL} papsloda1 satoads apnjour jou op
s[PIOL, ‘s[PULURUL pure ‘sp.iq SuIpadtq ‘sapydax ‘suriqryduie ‘syuryd Ap[NOsRA ‘sassoul ‘suUsYI] LO} satoads ATuo Jnq seysy puR ‘sfassnul 1ayeMYsesy ‘spodo.yses JO} saaLeA pur satoadsqns aaygounstp au0s apnypoul speyoy,
O
i
Z
YD
ne
t 0 0 0 0 Fr 0 0 Z Q@ & 0 0 ayepipue’y [elope jurj}xXq
3 00 00 00 00 0/0 0/0 0/0 1/0 00 00 0/0 0/0 pouayeart{], 10
is) porosuepuy pesodorg Aypesrope,f
5 poyedinxg que]
ns o/E C/E 0/0 0/0 0/S O/T 0/1 S/F 0/0 0/01 0/0 0/0 POU AS PATTI
os JO parosurpuy ATpe1ope,f
= poyedinxy jquery |
3 c 9 it 0 9 I 0 6L 0 Ff 0 0 poyedinxy 10 jouNXY poumnsorg
ac) 0 V 0 0 iZ oll 0 I 0 8 0 0 [POO STH ONS
no) 9 OT Ei: Li 91 Il 9 4 VI L9 0 0 uzaou0, jeloeds OdNS¥
g (S II 8 G 1 0G s) G Seoul g 0 pousresr4, OdNSH
Qu g 81 € 6 8G V 6 9G ie (SIL GL I pezesuepuy OdNSM
5 ial 6F SI Il 19 SV 0G Os GG GLE LL I oreYy Se potoyUuoW OANSYH
ig g v I 0 €G yen yeaa 0 Ol Sik; 0 team o0xy
ao) OL 891 6S 1g LEG qe fen €or 6S6 ~ 6966 9CE jean oAQRN
= STPRULUIE JAY Sp1iq, sanday sueiqnyduny SOS] SyOosuyT SUBIDP}STLIT) S[essnut spodonsey sjurd SOSSO| susyory {PX} 10 satoads Ayonjuay jo Joquinyy
© SUIpeatg JoyMYSaly Ie[noseA,
a
fae
‘000G ‘Ayonjuey ur surstue's10 Jo sdnois 1o0feur ay} Jo snjzeys UORAISUOD puR AYISIOAIG, “Z I[GRL,
130 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Table 3.
Plants
Caltha palustris var. palustris
Marsh marigold
Orbexilum stipulatum
Stipuled scurf-pea
Physostegia intermedia
Slender dragon-head
Polytaenia nuttallii
Prairie parsley
Animals
Freshwater Mussels
Dromus dromas
Dromedary pearlymussel
Epioblasma arcaeformis
Sugarspoon
Epioblasma biemarginata
Angled riffleshell
Epioblasma flexuosa
Leafshell
Epioblasma florentina florentina
Yellow blossom
Epioblasma florentina walkeri
Tan riffleshell
Epioblasma haysiana
Acornshell
Epioblasma lewisii
Forkshell
Epioblasma obliquata perobliqua
White catspaw
Epioblasma personata
Round combshell
Epioblasma propinqua
Tennessee riffleshell
Epioblasma sampsonii
Wabash riffleshell
Epioblasma stewardsonii
Cumberland leafshell
Epioblasma torulosa torulosa
Tubercled blossom
Hemistena lata
Cracking pearlymussel
Leptodea leptodon
Scaleshell
Plethobasus cicatricosus
White wartyback
Quadrula fragosa
Winged mapleleaf
Quadrula tuberosa
Rough rockshell
Insects
Pentagenia robusta
Robust pentagenian burrowing mayfly
US Status
Plants and animals presumed extinct or extirpated from Kentucky.
Fishes
Ammocrypta vivax
Scaly sand darter
Crystallaria asprella
Crystal darter
Erimystax x-punctatus
Gravel chub
Etheostoma microperca
Least darter
Hemitremia flammea
Flame chub
Moxostoma lacerum
Harelip sucker
Moxostoma valenciennesi
Greater redhorse
Percina burtoni
Blotchside logperch
Reptiles
Masticophis flagellum flagellum
Eastern coachwhip
Breeding Birds
Anhinga anhinga
Anhinga
Campephilus principalis
Ivory-billed woodpecker
Chlidonias niger
Black tem
Conuropsis carolinensis
Carolina parakeet
Ectopistes migratorius
Passenger pigeon
Elanoides forficatus forficatus
Swallow-tailed kite
Tympanuchus cupido
Greater prairie-chicken
Vermivora bachmanii
Bachman’s warbler
Mammals
Bos bison
American bison
Canis lupus
Gray wolf
Canis rufus
Red wolf
Cervus elaphus
Elk
Puma concolor couguar
Eastern puma
Rare and Extirpated Biota of Kentucky—KSNPC
A. Mayer and Christopher A. Taylor, Illinois
Natural History Survey; Robert F.C. Naczi
and John W. Thieret, Northern Kentucky Uni-
versity; Ralph Thompson, Berea College; and
Charles E. Wright, Kentucky Department for
Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforce-
ment.
LITERATURE CITED
Anderson, L. E. 1990. A checklist of Sphagnum in North
America north of Mexico. Bryologist 93:500-501.
[AOU] American Ornithologists’ Union. 1998. Check-list
of North American birds, 7th ed. American Ornitholo-
gists Union, Washington, DC.
Amett, R. H., Jr. (ed). 1983. Checklist of the beetles of
North and Central America and the West Indies. Flora
and Fauna Publications, Gainesville, FL.
Barr, T. C., Jr. 1968. Ecological studies in the Mammoth
Cave system of Kentucky. I. The biota. Int. J. Speleol.
3:147-204.
Barr, T. C., Jr. 1996. Cave beetle status survey and prel-
isting recovery project. Report prepared for the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service and Kentucky Department of
Fish and Wildlife Resources, Frankfort, KY.
Branson, B. A., D. F. Harker, Jr, J. M Baskin, M. E.
Medley, D. L. Batch, M. L Warren, Jr., W. H. Davis,
W. C. Houtcooper, B. L. Monroe, Jr., L. R. Phillipe,
and P. Cupp. 1981. Endangered, threatened, and rare
animals and plants of Kentucky. Trans. Kentucky Acad.
Sci. 42:77-89.
Cassie, B., J. Glassberg, P. A. Opler, R. K. Robbins, and
G. Tudor. 1995. North American Butterfly Association
(NABA) checklist and English names of North Ameri-
can butterflies. North American Butterfly Association,
Morristown, NJ.
Ceas, P: A., and L. M. Page. 1997. Systematic studies of
the Etheostoma spectabile complex (Percidae; subgenus
Oligocephalus), with descriptions of four new species.
Copeia 1997:496—-522.
Collins, J. T. (ed). 1990. Standard common and current
scientific names for North American amphibians and
reptiles, 3rd ed. Society for the Study of Amphibians
and Reptiles Herpetol. Circ. 19.
Crum, L. A., H. A. Anderson, and W. R. Buck. 1990. List
of mosses of North America north of Mexico. Bryologist
93:448—499.
Egan, R. S. 1987. A fifth checklist of the lichen-forming
and allied fungi of the continental United States and
Canada. Bryologist 90:77-173.
Frost, D. R. (ed). 1985. Amphibian species of the world:
a taxonomic and geographical reference. Allen Press
and the Association of Systematics Collections,
Lawrence, KS. ;
Gordon, M. E. 1995. Anodontoides denigratus (Lea) (Biv-
alvia: Unionoida) from the upper Cumberland River
system. Report submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Asheville, NC.
Hall, E. R. 1981. The mammals of North America, 2nd
ed. John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.
131
Holsinger, J. R. 1972. The freshwater amphipod crusta-
ceans (Gammaridae) of North America. Water Pollution
Control Research Series 18050 ELD04/72. U.S. Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH.
Hubricht, L. 1985. The distributions of the native land
mollusks of the eastern United States. Fieldiana: Zool.
24:1-191.
Jones, J. K., Jr., R. S. Hoffmann, D. W. Rice, C. Jones, R.
J. Baker, and M. D. Engstrom. 1992. Revised checklist
of North American mammals north of Mexico, 1991.
Occas. Papers Mus. Texas Tech Univ. 146.
Kartesz, J. T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vas-
cular flora of the United States, Canada, and Green-
land, 2nd ed. Timber Press, Portland, OR.
King, W. F., and R. L. Burke (eds). 1989. Crocodilian,
tuatara, and turtle species of the world: a taxonomic and
geographic reference. Association of Systematics Col-
lections, Washington, DC.
Krekeler, C. H. 1973. Cave beetles of the genus Pseudan-
ophthalmus (Coleoptera, Carabidae) from the Kentucky
bluegrass and vicinity. Fieldiana: Zool. 62:35-83.
[KSNPC] Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission.
1996. Rare and extirpated plants and animals of Ken-
tucky. Trans. Kentucky Acad. Sci. 57:69-91.
[KSNPC] Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission.
1997. Rare and extirpated plants and animals of Ken-
tucky: 1997 update. Trans. Kentucky Acad. Sci. 58:96—
99.
[KSNPC] Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission.
1999. Rare and extirpated plants and animals of Ken-
tucky: 1999 update. J. Kentucky Acad. Sci. 60:124-126.
[KSNPC] Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission.
2000. Kentucky natural heritage database, Frankfort,
KY.
McCafferty, W. P. 1996. The Ephemeroptera species of
North America and index to their complete nomencla-
ture. Trans. Am. Entomol. Soc. 122:1—54.
Medley, M. E. 1993. An annotated catalog of the known
or reported vascular flora of Kentucky. Ph.D. Disser-
tation. University of Louisville, Louisville, KY.
Miller, J. Y. (ed). 1992. The common names of North
American butterflies. Smithsonian Institution Press,
Washington, DC.
Morse, J. C. 1993. A checklist of the Trichoptera of North
America, including Greenland and Mexico. Trans. Am.
Entomol. Soc. 119:47-93.
[NMFS] National Marine Fisheries Service. 1999. Endan-
gered and threatened species; revision of candidate spe-
cies list under the Endangered Species Act. Federal
Register 64:33466—33468.
Page, L. M., and B. M. Burr. 1991. A field guide to fresh-
water fishes. North America north of Mexico. Houghton
Mifflin, Boston, MA.
Paulson, D. R., and S. W. Dunkle. 1999. A checklist of
North American Odonata: including English name, et-
ymology, type locality, and distribution. Slater Mus. Nat.
Hist., Univ. Puget Sound Occas. Paper 56.
Richter, B. D., D. P. Braun, M. A. Mendelson, and L. L.
Master. 1997. Threats to imperiled freshwater fauna.
Conservation Biol. 11:1081—1093.
132
Risk, A. C. 1999. Notes on new and rare mosses to Ken-
tucky. Evansia 16:49-58.
Robins, C. R., R. M. Bailey, C. E. Bond, J. R. Brooker,
E. A. Lachner, R. N. Lea, and W. B. Scott. 1991. Com-
mon and scientific names of fishes from the United
States and Canada, 5th ed. Am. Fish. Soc. Spec. Publ.
20.
Schuster, G. A. 1997. Description of a new species of ter-
restrial limnephilid caddisfly eee from Ken-
tucky and West Virginia (USA). Pages 417-424 in R. W.
Holzenthal, and O. S. Flint, Jr. (eds). Proceedings of
the Sth International Symposium on Trichoptera, 1995.
Ohio Biological Survey, Columbus, OH.
Schweitzer, D. F. 1989. A review of category 2 Insecta in
USFWS regions 3, 4, 5. Report prepared for the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Newton Corners, MA.
Snider, J. A., S. M. Studlar, and M. Medley. 1988. A list
of Kentucky bryophytes. Bryologist 91:98—105.
Taylor, C. A., and M. H. Sabaj. 1998. A new crayfish of
the genus Orconectes from the Blood River drainage of
western Kentucky and Tennessee (Decapoda: Cae
idae). Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington 111:645-652.
[TNC] The Nature Conservancy. 1988. Natural heritage
program operations manual. The Nature Conservancy,
Arlington, VA.
Turgeon, D. D., J. F. Quinn, Jr., A. E. Bogan, E. V. Coan,
F. G. Hochberg, W. G. Lyons, P. M. Mikkelsen, 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 aquat-
ic invertebrates from the United States and Canada:
mollusks, 2nd ed. Am. Fish. Soc. Spec. Publ. 26.
[USFWS] United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1992.
Endangered Species Act of 1973 as amended through
the 100th Congress. Department of the Interior, Wash-
ington, DC.
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
[USFWS] United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994.
Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; animal
candidate review for listing as endangered or threat-
ened species, proposed rule. Federal Register 59:
58982-59028.
[USFWS] United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1999.
Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; review
of plant and animal taxa that are candidates or proposed
for listing as endangered or threatened; annual notice
of findings on recycled petitions; annual description of
progress on listing actions; proposed rule. Federal Reg-
ister 64:57533-570547.
[USFWS] United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2000.
Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants. De-
partment of the Interior, Washington, DC.
Warren, M. L., Jr. 1992. Variation of the spotted sunfish,
Lepomis punctatus complex (Centrarchidae): meristics,
morphometrics, pigmentation and species limits. Bull.
Alabama Mus. Nat. Hist. 12.
Warren, M. L., Jr., W. H. Davis, R. R. Hannan, M. Evans,
D. L. Batch, B. D. Anderson, B. Palmer-Ball, Jr., J. R.
MacGregor, R. R. Cicerello, R. Athey, B. A. Branson,
G. J. Fallo, B. M. Burr, M. E. Medley, and J. M. Baskin.
1986. Endangered, threatened, and rare plants and an-
imals of Kentucky. Trans. Kentucky Acad. Sci. 47:83-
98.
Williams, A. B., L. G. Abele, D. L. Felder, H. H. Hobbs,
Jr., R. B. Manning, P. A. McLaughlin, and I. P. Farfante.
1989. Common and scientific names of aquatic inver-
tebrates from the United States and Canada: decapod
crustaceans. Am. Fish. Soc. Spec. Publ. 17.
Wilson, D. E., and D. M. Reeder (eds). 1993. Mammal
species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic ref-
erence, 2nd ed. Smithsonian Institution Press, Wash-
ington, DC.
J. Ky. Acad. Sci. 61(2):133-145. 2000.
First Observations with the Morehead Radio Telescope,
Morehead State University, Morehead, Kentucky
Benjamin K. Malphrus, Michael S. Combs, Michael A. James, D. Shannon Murphy,
and D. Kevin Brown
Morehead Astrophysical Laboratory, Morehead State University, Morehead, Kentucky 40351
Jeff Kruth
Kruth-Microwave Electronics, Ellicott City, Maryland 21043
R. Douglas Kelly
Louisville Male High School, Louisville, Kentucky 40213
ABSTRACT
Herein we report initial astronomical observations made with the Morehead Radio Telescope (MRT). The
first radio signals from space were observed with the Morehead Radio Telescope in 1997. The MRT has to
date observed a variety of cosmic objects, including galactic sources such as supernova remnants, emission
nebula, planetary nebula, extended HI emission from the Milky Way, and the sun, and extragalactic sources
such as quasars and radio galaxies. Observations of galactic sources herein reported include Taurus A, Cygnus
X, and the Rosette Nebula. Additionally, we report observations of extragalactic phenomena, including Cyg-
nus A, 3C 147, and 3C 146. These initial observations serve as a performance and capability test-bed of the
MRT. In addition to the astronomical results of these experiments, tests of the positional accuracy, system
sensitivity, and receiver response are inherent in this series of experiments. This paper provides a brief
overview of the MRT, including upgrades of major systems, performance characteristics, and a brief discus-
sion of these initial observations.
INTRODUCTION
The Morehead Radio Telescope (MRT),
Morehead State University, is an instrument
designed by faculty and students of Morehead
State University and industrial partriers to pro-
vide a research instrument for undergraduate
astronomy and physics students. The MRT
also serves as an active laboratory for physics,
engineering, and computer science under-
graduates and faculty. The telescope operates
in the radio regime at a central frequency of
1420 MHz, which corresponds to the hyper-
fine transition of atomic hydrogen (HI). The
HI spatial distribution and flux density asso-
ciated with cosmic phenomena can be ob-
served with the instrument. The dynamics and
kinematics of objects in space can be investi-
gated by observing over a range of frequen-
cies. The sensitivity and versatility of the tele-
scope design facilitate investigation of a wide
variety of astrophysically interesting phenom-
ena. The MRT design provides an instrument
capable of supporting scientific research in ob-
servational astrophysics at radio frequencies.
First light was achieved in October of 1997
with routine observations beginning in January
1998. A brief overview of the current MRT
instrumentation, description of major subsys-
tems (antenna, alt-azimuth drive and control
systems, receiver systems, and controlling
computer and interface), is provided that fo-
cuses on instrumentation upgrades at the
MRT, followed by a discussion of the first ob-
servations and results. A more detailed tech-
nical overview of the instrument has been pre-
viously published (Malphrus et al. 1998). A
brief discussion of the instrumentation is in-
cluded here, as several major systems have
evolved beyond the previously described sys-
tems.
The 21 cm Atomic Hydrogen Line
The MRT is designed to operate over a fre-
quency band centered at the 21 cm (1420
MHz) spectral line of atomic hydrogen. Van
de Hulst first suggested that the 21 cm line
might be detectodl in the interstellar medium
(ISM) in 1945 (Van de Hulst 1945). Unfortu-
nately, Van de Hulst was working in occupied
Holland at the time. Searches ensued after
133
134
WWII in both the Netherlands and the U.S.
The first unambiguous detection of the 21 cm
line in the ISM occurred in the U.S. in 1951
and is credited to Ewen and Purcell (Ewen
and Purcell 1951). Their experiments were
performed with a horn antenna and a sensitive
superheterodyne receiver. Subsequently, the
HI distribution associated with an ever- in-
creasing number of galactic and extragalactic
phenomena have been extensively explored.
The 21 cm emission line arises from a spin-
parity reversal of hydrogen in the atomic state
that corresponds to a transition between the
F = 0 and F = 1 hyperfine structures of the
electron ground state 1°S,,.. A transition can
occur between the two hyperfine states be-
cause they differ slightly in energy, owing to
the interaction between the electron spin and
the nuclear spin. When the spin parities align,
a higher energy state is achieved at F = 1.
The electron spin parity reversal to the lower
hyperfine state occurs naturally on the order
of once every 10 million years. Atomic colli-
sions in the radiant medium can greatly ac-
celerate this process to the point of producing
a continuous emission. Although the emission
frequency can be calculated in terms of well-
understood fundamental constants, a correc-
tion for the electron spin g factor must be in-
cluded. Realization that this anomalous factor
must be accounted for resulted when compar-
isons of the 21 cm line first made in 1947 did
not agree with the theoretical value. The dis-
crepancy between the theory and empirical
values led to the development of quantum
electrodynamics (QED). The currently ac-
cepted standard frequency of the 21 cm spec-
tral line is 1420.40575186(30) MHz (Storey et
al. 1994). The MRT operates a receiver with
a 6 MHz bandwidth centered on this frequen-
cy.
The science of cm-wave astronomy has pro-
vided significant insight into the structure and
evolution of cosmic phenomena and afforded
a new perspective of the universe. This per-
spective is considered significant as roughly
three-quarters of the material in the universe
exists in the form of hydrogen. The MRT sci-
entific goals are predicated upon low resolu-
tion, high sensitivity views of the distribution
of HI associated with cosmic phenomena.
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
MRT INSTRUMENTATION
The basic design of the MRT includes a
wire-mesh parabolic reflecting antenna, alt-az-
imuth tracking positioner, control and drive
systems, receiver and signal processing system,
a controlling computer with an interface de-
vice, and supporting electronics and hardware.
The system is designed around a total power
receiver that converts radiation from space
concentrated by the antenna system to an
electrical signal, which is amplified, modified
and interpreted. The basic measurement that
the telescope is capable of is an induced an-
tenna temperature, which is translated into an
output voltage at the post-detection stage of
the back-end receiver. This voltage corre-
sponds to the total integrated flux density in-
trinsic to the object over the observed fre-
quency band. A detailed technical overview of
the instrument has been previously published
(Malphrus et al. 1998). A brief discussion of
the instrumentation is included here, as sev-
eral major systems have evolved beyond the
previously described systems.
The MRT system is positioned by a now-
second generation system incorporating a con-
trolling computer, optical isolation system, and
robotic drive and control systems developed
by MSU faculty and students. The current
controlling computer is a 450 MHz Pentium
II processor with 128 MB of RAM and 9 GB
of hard disk space. A multifunction analog,
digital, and timing Input/Output (I/O) data ac-
quisition board is installed in the computer. It
contains a 12-bit successive approximation A/
D converter with 16 analog inputs, two 12-bit
D/A converters with voltage outputs, 8 lines of
transistor-transistor logic compatible I/O, and
two counter/timer channels for timing I/O.
The board has a 500kS/s single channel sam-
pling rate. The controlling computer positions
the telescope, instructs it in robotic tracking
of cosmic sources, and controls data collection
and storage. The data from a particular exper-
iment are then transferred via ftp to a Sun
Sparcstation or high-end PC for imaging and
analysis.
Parabolic Reflecting Antenna
The MRT employs a high-gain 40 X 11 foot
antenna designed for L-Band operation. A
Observations with the Morehead Radio Telescope—Malphrus et al.
surplused Army NIKE-Hercules ANS-17 Ra-
dar antenna was obtained and modified for ra-
dio astronomy applications. The antenna was
selected because of its relatively large aper-
ture, excellent aperture efficiency (afforded by
its innovative offset feed design), and low cost.
It includes a parabolic reflector, feed horn and
waveguide assembly, and azimuth and eleva-
tion positioning system. The positioning sys-
tem provides azimuth coverage of 360° and el-
evation coverage of now greater than 0-90°.
Improvements beyond the previously de-
scribed system (Malphrus et al. 1998) include
the inclusion of a waveguide dehydrator and
second-generation digital electronics that
drive the positioning system.
MRT Receiver System
The MRT receiver system design and fab-
rication program was a joint effort between
MSU faculty and Kruth-Microwave Electron-
ics Company of Ellicott City, Maryland. The
system design is comprised of single receiver
with integral low-noise amplifier directly cou-
pled to the waveguide terminus of the MRT
antenna system. The overall receiver system
design utilizes a low noise, sensitive, stable re-
ceiver to convert the 1420 MHz Hydrogen
line frequency to a frequency region suitable
for processing by standard laboratory equip-
ment. The system is comprised of two major
subsystems—the front and back-end receiver
systems. The front-end receiver is coupled to
the waveguide terminus, which is mounted on
the focal feed support of the MRT superstruc-
ture. The MRT front-end receiver system in-
corporates a GaAs FET low-noise amplifier
(LNA) design. The back-end IF receiver con-
sists of a processor with four output signals is
housed in the Astrophysics Laboratory Control
Room. These output singals consist of 3 RF
output ports and one DC detector output. The
RF output ports provide accessible signals at
160 MHz (6 MHz bandwidth), 21.4 MHz (6
MHz bandwidth), and 21.4 MHz (2 MHz
bandwidth). This strategy permits flexibility in
signal processing as evolving experimental
needs require. The back-end processor also
utilizes a frequency synthesizer, associated
power supplies, monitor circuitry, and the con-
trolling computer. The DC voltage is derived
from an envelope detector and incorporated
135
into the final stage. Upgrades of the receiver
system include a second detector scheme—a
digital square law detector, from which the fi-
nal DC voltage is derived and transmitted to
the data acquisition board. All initial observa-
tions were made with the MRT receiver sys-
tem operating in total power mode, using the
square law detector.
Performance Characteristics
The MRT primary system performance
characteristics have been empirically mea-
sured to assist in understanding the results of
astronomical observations. The primary sys-
tem performance characteristics include sys-
tem temperature, antenna radiation pattern,
and antenna gain. The overall system temper-
ature is measured at a respectable 67.3 K
(Kruth 1994). The antenna radiation pattern,
which is essentially its directivity function on
the sky, has been extensively mapped in 2-D
and 3-D to determine the main beam and si-
delobe structure. These experiments indicated
an elliptical beam pattem with a half-power
beamwidth (HPBW) of 0.9° and 3.62° for the
major and minor axes respectively (Malphrus
et al. 1999). This measurement implies good
spatial resolution along the horizontal axis of
the antenna and less than ideal resolution
along the minor axis. The gain of the antenna
has been measured at 41dB, which correlates
to good sensitivity to objects with relatively
low radio frequency flux.
Observations
The performance characteristics of the tele-
scope have made possible observations of a va-
riety of cosmic phenomena. Observations of
Taurus A, Virgo A, Cygnus A, Cygnus X, the
Rosette Nebula, and two quasars—3C 196 and
3C 147—are herein reported. Analysis of the
data is very encouraging in that the transit pro-
files and maximum voltage deflections mea-
sured for objects are comparable to values ob-
tained from observations of the same objects
on different days and from observations made
with other instruments. Reproducibility in the
transit profiles of these objects is apparent. In
addition, data taken on consecutive days reveal
a sidereal shift in the peaks expected as the
earth progresses through the ecliptic plane.
The observation techniques are described be-
136
low. Samples of these data are presented in
the Results section.
Three basic modes of observation of celes-
tial objects available with the MRT were used
in these experiments: transit, tracking, and
mapping. Observing celestial objects in transit
mode simply involves pointing the telescope
due south (180° azimuth), to the appropriate
altitude and observing the object as the rota-
tion of the earth moves (apparently) the object
through the telescope’s field of view (meridian
transit). Observing celestial objects in tracking
mode involves using the positioning system of
the telescope to compensate for the earth’s ro-
tation. The computer controls the telescope’s
motion as it tracks an object as the object (ap-
parently) moves across the sky. Mapping the
HI distribution of a radio source involves scan-
ning the telescope’s beam across the source’s
position repeatedly in a manner similar to the
raster scan process utilized to produce televi-
sion images. Each observational mode is de-
scribed in some detail below.
Transit Observations
After a target object is selected, the position
of the object must be determined as well as the
time of meridian transit. Some understanding
of coordinate systems is essential to these as-
tronomical observations. The sky operates on
the Equator Coordinate System. The MRT op-
erates on the Horizon Coordinate System (as
the antenna is alt-azimuth mounted). There-
fore, an object's celestial position must be con-
verted to local horizon coordinates to be ob-
served. The values, then, that are important for
observing in transit mode are the object’s alti-
tude (converted from declination) and local si-
dereal time of meridian transit.
Determination of transit times in
L.S.T. For the given date and zone time
(Z.T.) the local sidereal time (L.S.T.) can be
calculated for the observer's longitude. L.S.T.
is the local hour angle (L.H.A.) of the vernal
equinox, that is, the right ascension of the ob-
servers meridian. To calculate L.S.T. from
E.S.T. is non-trivial. The following is one of
numerous algorithms that may be used:
eS eo Ke ee O02 7309 (Ua)
(0.06570982 <X D) — Longitude/
15S?
where:
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
UT = Universal time in decimal hours
(UME: by hourss—) EeSaie)
D = Number of days since Decem-
ber 31 of the previous year
Longitude = Geographic west longitude (83°
26" for Morehead, KY)
K = 17.369382 (1998):
17.385297 (1999);
17.401211 (2000)
The transit time (time at which an object
crosses one’s local meridian) may be deter-
mined from the object’s hour angle. The re-
lationship between sidereal time, hour angle,
and right ascension of an object is given:
HA, = 5.10 — Reve
Transit occurs when the object crosses the
local meridian, i.e., when the H.A. = 0; there-
fore transit occurs when the L.S.T. equals the
R.A. of the object. Transit times may be de-
termined by, calculating the E.S.T. of an ob-
ject when L.S.T. equals the objects R.A. Al-
ternately, an object achieves meridian transit
when the L.S.T. is equal to the object’s right
ascension. Using the Sidereal clock (designed
and constructed by students at the Astrophys-
ics Laboratory) to determine transit time sim-
plifies this process.
Determination of transit altitudes. To re-
cord the voltage profile of an object at merid-
ian transit, one must know the object’s altitude
(a) above the local horizon. To find the alti-
tude, one must know the hour angle (H), the
declination (8) of the object, and the geo-
graphic latitude of the telescope (@) must be
known. The hour angle of an object at merid-
ian transit by definition is 0. Transit altitudes
were calculated using the following equation:
a = sin '((sin 6)(sin )
+ (cos 5)(cos @)(cos H))
The values of L.S.T. transit and transit altitude
are required to position the telescope to ob-
serve an object in transit mode. Values ob-
tained for the celestial objects observed are
given in Table 1.
Instrumental Procedures
After the coordinate conversion was com-
plete, the MRT Operator program was in-
voked and the telescope was driven to the ap-
Observations with the Morehead Radio Telescope—Malphrus et al.
Table 1.
137
Coordinates and flux density values for the initial objects observed with the Morehead Radio Telescope,
Morehead State University, Morehead, Kentucky by Malphrus et al. from 1997-2000. Right Ascension and Declination
represent fixed values while transit altitude was calculated.
Right Transit time Transit RF flux (Jy)®
Cosmic object ascension! Declination? (LST) altitude (20 em)
Virgo A (M87) 12> 28™ 18s +12° 40" 126 28” 18s 64.4° 970
Taurus A O05 31™ 305 +21° 58™ 05" 31™ 305 TE 1,420
Rosette Nebula 06" 29" 18: +04° 57™ 06" 29" 18° 56.7° 105
3C 147 05> 38™ 43.25 +49° 49.6™ 05 38™ 43.25 78.4° 58
3C 196 08 10™ 00.15 +48° 22™ 08" 10™ 00.15 79.8° 59
Cygnus A 19" 57™ 45s +40° 36™ 19" 57™ 45s 87.4° 8,100
Cygnus X 20" 19" 36 +40° 06" 20" 19" 36° 87.4° 410
Cygnus B 20 48™ 12s +29° 30™ 20' 48™ 125 82.3° 252,
California Institute of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
3 RF fluxes at 20 cm reported are taken from the Third Cambridge Catalog (3C) produced by the Cavendish Laboratory of Cambridge University, UK.
propriate position for each object. Pre- and
post detection gains were set (on the back-end
receiver IF processor and square law detector,
respectively) based upon published values for
the flux density at 20 cm for each of the ob-
served sources (Kraus 1986). These values are
reported in Table 1. for each astronomical
source. Each source was observed for approx-
imately one hour to provide baseline data be-
fore and after each meridian transit. The pro-
cedures followed for tracking and mapping
runs involve the same initial procedures as
those for transit observations, but also include
additional, more elaborate procedures de-
scribed below.
_
Tracking Observations
Tracking observations involve continuously
calculating the object’s azimuth and elevation
as time progresses and driving the telescope
to the calculated position. The telescope can
also be “manually” driven from the back-end
with the drive and control system to maintain
“peak on source”. A combination of using the
computer-generated coordinates and nudging
the telescope with the manual drive system
has proven most effective thus far. All peak
voltages herein reported were measured dur-
ing tracking observations utilizing a variety of
integration times.
Mapping Observations
Observing with the MRT in mapping mode
is the most challenging but rewarding obser-
vational procedure. A pre-determined area
(usually rectangular) is scanned with the tele-
scope beam as the object is tracked across the
sky. The target area is scanned in a manner
similar to the raster scan process utilized by
monitors and television sets to produce im-
ages. A single eleveation is scanned over a pre-
determined range of azimuths in one direction
(i.e. CW). The telescope is then driven to a
lower elevation (typically 1°) and the same
range of azimuth values is scanned by driving
the telescope in the opposite (CCW) direc-
tion. This process is repeated until the entire
target area is scanned. 2-D (contour) and 3-D
(topographic) maps of the HI associated with
the astronomical object can be produced with
these data. These maps represent the spatial
distribution of HI in the target region (inte-
grated over the entire receiver post-detection
bandwidth). The data reduction and imaging
software utilized in these experiments is the
HiQ package developed by National Instru-
ments. Additional software that allows the ob-
server to reduce and edit the data as well as
transform the raw data into an appropriate
matrix format was developed by MSU stu-
dents. A more detailed description of the map-
ping procedure, including the details of data
reduction, is described in a later publication.
RESULTS
To date, observations of a variety of cosmic
phenomena have been undertaken. Herein,
we describe observations of Virgo A, the Cyg-
nus A Complex, Taurus A, the Rosette Neb-
ula, 3C 196, and 3C 147. Telescope receiver
138
Table 2.
Integra-
Post-detec- tion
tion gain time (s)
Pre-detec-
Cosmic object tion gain
Virgo A (M87) 40% 900x IIs
Taurus A 40% 900x 10°
Rosette Nebula 40% 1000x Is
3C 147 40% 1000x ls
3C 196 40% 1000x Is
Cygnus A 50% 900x lis
Cygnus X 50% 900x is
Cygnus B 50% 900x ks
settings, integration times, and other obser-
vational parameters such as time on source are
listed in Table 2. Also listed are induced volt-
ages, and calculated signal-to-noise ratios. Pre-
detection gain, post-detection gain, and inte-
gration time are telescope values set by the
observer. Time on source (TOS) is determined
by the spatial extent of the object when ob-
os in transit mode. V,,,., Nin, AV, and S/
N represent experimental results. V,,,,, repre-
sents the maximum or peak voltage induced
by the cosmic object and is proportional to the
flux density of the object as explained below.
Nyns is the baseline width, which also corre-
sponds to the rms noise temperature of the
system. AV is the peak voltage minus the av-
eraged baseline voltage level.
The peak voltage AV, the basic measure-
ment in total power mode is a function of the
induced antenna temperature (AT). The an-
tenna and front- and back-end receivers of a
radio telescope system together act as a radi-
ometer for measuring the temperature of dis-
tant regions of space coupled to the system
through the radiation resistance of the anten-
na. The temperature of the radiation resis-
tance is determined by the temperature of the
emitting region seen by the beam of the an-
tenna as defined by its directivity function, i.e.,
its radiation pattern. The temperature of the
antenna radiation resistance is referred to as
induced antenna temperature. A mathematical
expression describing induced antenna tem-
perature demonstrates that the induced tem-
perature is a function of the cosmic radiator
convolved with the antenna’s directivity func-
tion (Kraus 1986):
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Telescope settings and results obtained for the initial astronomical observations made with the Morehead
Radio Telescope, Morehead State University, Morehead, Kentucky by
Malphrus et al. from 1997-2000.
TOS AV... INC S/N
2160s 4.1v 0.3v 13.6/1
864s 4.9v O.1v 49/1
684s 5.7v 0.05v 114/1
1200s 3.8v 1.5v 2.5/1
1200s 5.8v 0.3v 19.3/1
2400s 2. 5v O.1v 25/1
1080s 0.5v O.1lv 5/1
2400s 0.3Vv 0.1v 3/1
AV = kAT =
Ww
7 [| B(0, b)Pn(0, b) dO
where: AV = induced post-detection volt-
age, volts
AT = induced antenna tempera-
ture, K
w = received power per unit
bandwidth, w <x Hz"!
A, = effective aperture (physical
aperture X aperture efficien-
cy), m?
(0, 6) = source brightness distribu-
tion, dimensionless
(8, b) = antenna radiation pattern, di-
mensionless
dQ = sin@ dé dd = element of sol-
id angle, rad?
Boltzman’s constant 1.38 X
10-8 JXK—
Given that the cosmic object's energy flux den-
sity is also a function of the cosmic radiator’s
brightness convolved with the antenna’s direc-
tivity function (Kraus 1986)
as= || a (0, b)Pn(0, b) d
Source
where: AS = total source flux density, w
x< inn >< Ble!
B(8, 6) = source brightness distribu-
tion, dimensionless
Pn(8, 6) = antenna radiation pattern,
dimensionless
Observations with the Morehead Radio Telescope—Malphrus et al.
139
Virgo A 1/05/99
— 1/05/99 Virgo A
Figure 1. Morehead Radio Telescope, Morehead State University, Morehead, KY. A transit observation of Virgo A
taken with the MRT on January 5, 1999.
dQ = sind d@ dd = element of
solid angle, rad?
It follows that ASsimplifies to
ZEAE
Ae ‘
A relative value as opposed to an absolute
value for AT, and therefore ASwas obtainable
during these experiments. AT can be calibrat-
ed against a standard induced voltage or as-
tronomical flux calibrator in future experi-
ments. The S/N,,,., however, can be measured
from the voltage profiles because AV.,,, cor-
responds to the signal (S), and N,,,, the rms
noise corresponds to the baseline width. The
calculated S/N values for each observation are
given in Table 2. The S/N is expressed as a
ratio. A variety of graphical representations of
the data as well as a brief description of the
astronomical objects observed are provided
below. j
AS
Virgo A
Virgo A is the fifth brightest radio object in
the sky, with a flux density of 970 Jy. The ob-
ject is a radio galaxy with some strange fea-
tures that make it highly visible in the radio
spectrum. Virgo A has an odd jet that extends
from the west-side of the nucleus. This jet,
apparent at extremely high spatial resolutions,
is thought to be associated with material eject-
ed from the nucleus. The system is an ex-
tremely powerful emitter of both waves and
X-rays. A transit observation of Virgo A taken
with the MRT on 5 Jan 1999 is provided in
Figure 1.
Taurus A
Taurus A is a supernova remnant (SNR) in
the constellation Taurus; it is also known as
the Crab Nebula. Taurus A is located about
6300 light years away and is the fourth bright-
est radio object in the sky. It has a flux density
of 1420 Jy. Successive transit observations of
Taurus A were made on 19-20 Aug 1997.
These observations are provided in Figure 2.
An expected sidereal shift of 4 minutes of time
in the transit peaks is observed.
The Rosette Nebula
The Rosette nebula is a supernova remnant
(SNR) within our galaxy that has some inter-
140
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Taurus A 8/19 & 20/97
= C/G
== SIZ0ISiG
Figure 2.
Taurus A made on August 19th and 20th, 1997.
esting features. It is also classified as an emis-
sion nebula—a cloud of high temperature gas.
The atoms in the cloud are energized by ul-
traviolet light from a nearby star and emit ra-
diation as they fall back into lower energy
states; hence we can see the Rosette Nebula
in the radio regime. Emission nebulae are
usually sites of star formation; the Rosette
Nebula does in fact have star formation oc-
curring in its outer regions. A transit obser-
vation made of the Rosette Nebula is shown
in Figure 3.
3C 147
3C 147 (also known as [HB89] 0538 + 498
and QSO OG +465) is a distant quasar that
has been previously observed by numerous in-
vestigators. The quasar is extremely distant
and faint in the optical spectrum exhibiting a
visual magnitude of 17.8 and a redshift of z =
0.54500 79 (NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Data-
base (NED), 1999). It is optically variable and
unresolved by most instruments. The object
shows an unusually complex, nonlinear struc-
ture that varies with time. Superluminal sep-
Morehead Radio Telescope, Morehead State University, Morehead, KY. Successive transit observations of
aration of two components in the core region
has been observed. A jet is embedded in the
diffuse emission region. VLA images at 1 GHz
indicate a weak component north of the main
component opposite the jet with respect to the
core. Although the object is spatialy unre-
solved by the MRT, its luminous output in the
radio spectrum is well above the detection
limits of the instrument. Figure 4 depicts a
transit observation of 3C 147 in which a fa-
vorable signal to noise ratio of 2.5:1 was
achieved.
3C 196
3C 196 (also known as [HB89] 0809+483)
is a distant quasar in the constellation Lynx. It
is an extremely distant and faint object, exhib-
iting a redshift of z = 0.87100 and an apparent
visual magnitude of 17.79 79 (NASA/TPAC Ex-
tragalactic Database (NED) 1999). The object
has a famous and well-studied absorption sys-
tem at z = 0.43685, which gives rise to a host
of metal line species. The 21 cm absorption is
especially significant because it occurs in a re-
solved background source, which allows useful
Observations with the Morehead Radio Telescope—Malphrus et al. 141
Rosette Nebula 6/25/98
— Rosette Nebula
6/25/98
Figure 3. Morehead Radio Telescope, Morehead State University, Morehead, KY. A transit observation of the Rosette
Nebula taken with the MRT on June 25, 1998.
3C 147 4/08/99
— 147B 4/08/99
Ss Sloe
= Go Sr
o © ©
Ne ed x
Azimuth
Figure 4. Morehead Radio Telescope, Morehead State University, Morehead, KY. A scan observation made of the
quasar 3C 147 on April 8, 1999.
142
3C 196 6/21/99
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Voltage
— 3C 196 6/21/99
Onn an © O - SFE
I~ CF} O&O] SS & x lo Coe) ©)
~ hn CO CO OO OO O CO CO CO
Swot CA Ar Se i ee ee ae A
Azimuth
Figure 5.
Morehead Radio Telescope, Morehead State
196 on June 21, 1999.
limits to be placed on the absorber size. There
is also an associated absorber in this object at
z = 0.8714 with an apparent infall velocity of
100 kmsec~!. A transit observation made with
the MRT of 3C 196 is presented in Figure 5.
The Cygnus A Complex
The Cygnus A Complex, a very active region
in the radio sky, contains at least three major
components, Cygnus A, Cygnus B, and Cyg-
nus X. Cygnus A is a distant radio galaxy ap-
proximately 1 billion light years away. It is one
of the best-known radio sources in the sky but
it has no bright visible object that corresponds
to the radio emission. No visible object was
associated with the radiation until 1951 when
astronomers at the Palomar Observatory
found an object that appeared as a pair of un-
resolved 18th magnitude objects. Cygnus A is
the second most luminous radio object that is
observable, with a flux density of 8100 Jy, sec-
ond only to Cassiopeia A. Cygnus A represents
the largest peak in the topographical repre-
sentation of the data. Cygnus X, the second
strongest peak in the data, is associated with
190.9
192.3
193.6
194.9
196.2
196.5
University, Morehead, KY. A scan observation made of 3C
the famous Cygnus X black hole. The radio
waves emanate from the accretion disk asso-
ciated with the black hole. The accretion disk
is produced as the black hole’s gravity well ac-
cretes matter from its companion star, swirling
it into a flattened disk and heating the infalling
material to 10° K, causing it to radiate in the
X-ray and radio regions. Cygnus X is consid-
ered among the most convincing candidates
for a galactic black hole. Since Cygnus X lies
close to the line of sight of Cygnus A, it is
almost impossible to observe one object and
not the other in a transit observation. Since
these objects lie close to each other in line of
sight, but not in physical space, their com-
bined observable radiation is called the Cyg-
nus A Complex. We interpret the component
labeled Cygnus B in the data to be associated
with the Cygnus Loop, an ancient supernova
remnant in the galaxy some 770 pc distant
from earth. A transit profile of the Cygnus
complex as well as three other perspectives of
the HI distribution as produced with the MRT
is shown in Figure 6. Complex structural de-
Observations with the Morehead Radio Telescope—Malphrus et al.
143
uol}eAS|3
Figure 6. Morehead Radio Telescope, Morehead State University, Morehead, KY. Four perspectives of a map of the
spatial distribution of HI associated with the Cygnus A, B, and X radio sources.
tail is evident in the HI associated with these
regions.
DISCUSSION
Results of these initial observations are very
promising. The HI profiles and distributions
compare favorably to transit profiles and HI
distribution maps produced with comparable
instruments. Transit profiles of the Cygnus A
Complex and Virgo A are extremely similar in
structure to ones produced with the NRAO
Green Bank 40-foot Radio Telescope and the
University of Indianapolis 5-meter antenna.
The HI distribution map compares very fa-
vorably to those produced with the NRAO
Green Bank 40-ft. Radio Telescope and the
Ohio State University “Big Ear.” These HI
profiles and maps compare favorably to pre-
viously produced images despite the MRT's
rather elliptical beam.
Results of these initial observations are en-
couraging in that they attest to the perfor-
mance characteristics of the MRT. The repro-
ducibility apparent in the data attests to the
MRT receiver stability and pointing accuracy.
The results of these initial experiments are
very exciting in that the capabilities of the in-
strument to perform more extensive and per-
144
spicacious experiments is realized. Challenges
still exist, however, in the procedural elements
of each observing mode. The results of obser-
vations in transit mode are haunted by the el-
liptical, vertically-oriented beam. Circular
beams are ideal for these type experiments.
Observations made in scanning mode are chal-
lenging in that it is difficult to scan the tele-
scope at a constant rate and produce the same
number of data points for each scan. Reducing
the data and preparing the data matrix for 3-
D maps is complicated by this problem. In
tracking mode, there are the inherent prob-
lems of pointing accuracy. Even still, these
early observations are encouraging and indi-
cate that the MRT systems have, even at this
formative stage, exceeded expectations.
A limitation of the current data is that the
observations are essentially unclaibrated. Fu-
ture experiments may attempt to “bracket”
observations of the astronomical sources with
observations of known flux calibrators, a strat-
egy utilized at the National Radio Astronomy
Observatory’ Very large Array (VLA). Other
possibilities include injecting a noise source of
a standard voltage directly into the waveguide
to coaxial transition via a hardware (calibra-
tion) switch. This strategy is employed with
the National Radio Astronomy Observatory’s
40-foot Radio Telescope. Still another possi-
bility involves generating a test (calibration)
signal with an RF generator in the Laboratory
Control Room and coupling it to a quasi-di-
rectional test antenna. Observations of the as-
tronomical sources could then be bracketed by
observations of the calibration signal.
Next Experiments
A next generation of experiments is indicat-
ed as a result of analysis of these early data.
MRT systems experiments to be performed
include determining the electrical focus of the
antenna system, determining the mechanical
focus of the antenna system, empirically de-
termining the minimum detectable flux den-
sity, and mathematically modelling the anten-
na surface. The future, in terms of the possi-
bilities of astronomical observations, is very
exciting. The instrument is capable of observ-
ing many of the most exotic and energetic as-
tronomical phenomena in the universe. Astro-
nomical investigations include observations of
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
a wider variety of cosmic sources (including
such galactic objects as black holes, pulsars,
supernova remnants, starbirth nebulae, and
extragalactic objects such as active galaxies, ra-
dio galaxies, and interacting galaxy systems),
the production of a map of the HI distribution
associated with the Milky Way, an all-sky
northern hemisphere map, and SETI projects.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The Morehead Radio Telescope Project was
funded by the National Science Foundation
under the Instruments and Laboratory Im-
provements Program, NASA and by More-
head State University. The MRT receives con-
tinued support from Morehead State Univer-
sity’s College of Science and Technology, De-
partment of Physical Sciences and
Department of Industrial Education and
Technology and from Kruth-Microwave Elec-
tronics of Hanover, Maryland, and Dan Puck-
ett Engineering, Morehead, Kentucky. This
research has made use of the NASA/IPAC Ex-
tragalactic Database (NED), which is operat-
ed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Califor-
nia Institute of Technology, under contract
with the National Aeronautics and Space Ad-
ministration.
LITERATURE CITED
[ARRL] The ARRL antenna book. 1998, 18th ed. The
American Radio Relay League, Newington, CT.
Ewen, H. I., and E. M. Purcell. 1951. Observation of a
line in the galactic radio spectrum. Nature 168(4270):
356-358.
Kraus, J. D. 1986. Radio Astronomy, 2nd ed. Cygnus-Qua-
sar Books, Powell, OH.
Kruth, J. 1994. A receiver system for radio astronomy.
Kruth Microwave Corporation. Internal Document, El-
licott City, MD.
Malphrus, B. K., M. S. Combs, R. P. Lillard, and J. Kruth.
1999. Empirical measurements of the antenna radiation
pattern of the Morehead Radio Telescope. J. Kentucky
Acad. Sci. 60:113-123.
Malphrus, B. K., E. Thomas, M. S. Combs, B. Ratliff, B.
Roberts, C. Pulliam, J. Carter, D. Preece, V. Hullur, R.
Brengelman, D. Cutts, C. J. Whidden, R. Stanley, W.
Grizes, D. Henderson, D. Puckett, and J. Kruth. 1998.
The Morehead Radio Telescope: design and fabrication
of a research instrument for undergraduate faculty and
student research in radio frequency astrophysics. J.
Kentucky Acad. Sci. 59:77-92.
Observations with the Morehead Radio Telescope—Malphrus et al. 145
[NED] NASA/IPAC extragalactic database. Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under
contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Ad-
ministration, Pasadena, CA.
Van de Hulst, H. C. 1945. Radio waves from space. Ned.
Tijdschr. Natuurk. 11:201—202.
Malphrus, B. K. 1996. The history of radio astronomy and
the National Radio Astronomy Observatory: evolution
toward big science. Krieger Publishers, Melbourne, FL.
Storey, J. W., M. C. B. Ashley, M. Naray, and J. P. Lloyd.
1994. 21 cm line of atomic hydrogen. Am. J. Phys.
62(12):1077-1081.
J. Ky. Acad. Sci. 61(2):146-162. 2000.
Agrimonia (Rosaceae) in Kentucky with Notes on the Genus
Mark V. Wessel and John W. Thieret
Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Kentucky University, Highland Heights, Kentucky 41099
ABSTRACT
The genus Agrimonia (Rosaceae) consists of about 15 species worldwide, 7 in the U.S., and 4 in Kentucky:
A. gryposepala, A. parviflora, A. pubescens, and A. rostellata. The reported presence in Kentucky of three
additional species—A. eupatoria, A. microcarpa, and A. striata—could not be verified. Included are a key
to and descriptions of the Kentucky taxa and notes on biology and uses of Agrimonia.
INTRODUCTION
The genus Agrimonia (Rosaceae), with
about 15 species, occurs in North America,
South America, Eurasia, and South Africa. Be-
cause of the problems of identification of
some species of the genus and the uncertainty
concerning which species actually occur in
Kentucky, we decided to examine the Ken-
tucky species to determine their taxonomy and
distribution. Additionally we began a survey of
previous work on Agrimonia, presenting here
stray notes—not an exhaustive literature re-
view—on the genus.
AGRIMONIA IN KENTUCKY
Species of Agrimonia—the agrimonies—
were early recorded as components of the
Kentucky flora. M’Murtrie (1819), in his Flo-
rula Louisvillensis, listed three: A. eupatoria
(a European taxon, almost certainly a misiden-
tification for one of the native Kentucky spe-
cies), A. parviflora, and A. sylvatica (the last
mentioned name we have as yet been unable
to trace). Short, Peter, and Griswold’s (1833)
catalog of the phaenogamous [sic] plants of
Kentucky—which, so far as we are aware, is
the earliest attempt to account for the flora of
a U.S. state—has two: A. eupatoria and A.
parviflora. The following year Short and Peter
(1834) changed A. parviflora to A. suaveolens
(the latter now regarded as a synonym of the
former). According to Medley (1993), Short’s
specimens labelled A. eupatoria and deposited
at PH have been annotated as A. striata, an
identification we regard as suspect. Kentucky
specimens collected in the 1830s by either
Short or Peter and sent to us on loan from PH
are A. parviflora, A. pubescens, and A. rostel-
lata; A. striata was not represented, Price
(1893) had only A. eupatoria for Warren
County; almost certainly this too is a misiden-
tification. Half a century later McFarland
(1942) listed the four species that we recog-
nize as representing the genus in Kentucky;
Braun (1943) listed only three, not including
A. gryposepala. Browne and Athey (1992) list-
ed seven species for the state: the four we rec-
ognize in our paper and three others—A. eu-
patoria, A. microcarpa, and A. striata—the oc-
currence of which in Kentucky we have not
been able to confirm; the listing of these three
is, we believe, based on misidentification. In
the most recent summary of the Kentucky flo-
ra Medley (1993) accepted for the state A.
gryposepala, A. microcarpa, A. parviflora, A.
pubescens, and A. rostellata.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The data herein are based on 421 herbari-
um specimens (ca. 12% misidentified) of Ken-
tucky Agrimonia borrowed from 14 herbaria;
on the 46 collections of Agrimonia we and col-
leagues made from 1996 through 1999 in 18
counties of Kentucky (specimens in KNK);
and on previously published accounts of the
genus (Bicknell 1896, 1901a, 1901b; Bush
1916; Fernald 1950; Gleason and Cronquist
1991: Kline and Sgrensen 2000; K.R. Robert-
son 1974; Robinson 1900, 1901; Rydberg
1913; Skalicky 1973; Svenson 1941; Torrey and
Gray 1838-1840). From herbarium sheets we
recorded the following data: county, location,
collector(s), date; leaf length; leaflet count,
length, and width; sepal length; hair length;
and fruit length and width (“fruit” = fruiting
hypanthium with enclosed achene(s) but ex-
cluding bristles and sepals).
When collecting specimens of Agrimonia,
one should be certain to obtain the roots,
which are helpful in identification, and, if pos-
146
Agrimonia in Kentucky—Wessel and Thieret
sible, mature, fully reflexed fruits that are at
least half mature.
We saw no specimens of Agrimonia from 35
of Kentucky's too many (120) counties: Adair,
Boyd, Carroll, Christian, Clay, Cumberland,
Elliott, Fulton, Graves, Grayson, Hancock,
Harrison, Henderson, Hopkins, Johnson,
Knott, Knox, Leslie, Livingston, Logan, Mar-
tin, Mason, Mercer, Metcalfe, Monroe, Ows-
ley, Perry, Russell, Scott, Shelby, Simpson,
Trimble, Union, Washington, and Webster.
TAXONOMY
In North America Agrimonia can easily be
distinguished from other, sympatric genera of
the Rosaceae by its herbaceous habit, its five
yellow petals, its five sepals, and its hypanthi-
um (“fruit”) armed with hooked bristles. To
identify Agrimonia correctly, one must learn
to distinguish the different types of stem ves-
titure (see Jain and Singh [1973] for a study
of the hairs of A. eupatoria): (1) minute gland-
tipped hairs, the stalk short, few-celled; (2)
long, straight or curved, eglandular hairs 1.0—
4.0 mm; and (3) short, often curved, some-
times matted, eglandular hairs < 0.5 mm.
Our species of Agrimonia flower from July
to August or September. Individuals are rare
to frequent, but never, in our experience,
common or abundant.
Figures 1 and 2 are of Agrimonia parviflora,
a representative member of the genus.
XX
Agrimonia Linnaeus
Herbs perennial, erect, hemicryptophytic,
with crystals of calcium oxalate in parenchy-
matous tissues (Murata and Umemoto 1983).
Roots fibrous, sometimes with fusiform tu-
bers. Stems branched or unbranched. Leaves
alternate, stipulate, odd 1-pinnate, of 2 main
sizes, major (larger) leaflets 3-19(21), toothed,
terminal leaflet often the largest, minor (small-
er) leaflets 0-37, sometimes bractletlike, in-
terspersed among major leaflets. Inflores-
cence racemose, terminal and often axillary,
few to many flowered; flowers nearly sessile,
pedicels bracteate at base, ascending, stipe
spreading or reflexed in fruit. Flowers subop-
posite to alternate, 4-9 mm in diameter, bi-
bracteolate, perigynous; sepals 5, persistent,
forming a beak in fruit; petals 5, yellow (very
rarely white); stamens 5-20; pollen 3-colpor-
ate; ovaries 2, enclosed by hypanthium, styles
147
exserted. Fruit (i.e., fruiting hypanthium plus
enclosed achene[s] but excluding bristles and
sepals) constricted at the throat, indurate,
hemispheric to top-shaped, stipitate, rim bear-
ing erect to reflexed, hooked bristles; achenes
1 or 2. Type species: Agrimonia eupatoria L.
For illustrations of this species see Phelouzat
(1963) and Ross-Craig (1956).
Key to Kentucky Species of Agrimonia
The |:w data in the key and in each descrip-
tion below refer to the average length:width
ratio (plus range of values) of the blade of the
largest terminal leaflet on a plant.
1. Major leaflets mostly 9-19; l:w = 4.0 (3.3-
AES) oe: acs Pe he ek ae eee A. parviflora
1. Major leaflets mostly leaves 3-9; I:w < 3.0
TT So ARO ec nN Ns 2,
2. Rachis of inflorescence copiously pubes-
cent, eglandular or nearly so or the
glands concealed by hairs; leaflets
downy pubescent beneath; roots with
fusiform tubers ........ A. pubescens
2. Rachis of inflorescence glandular, pu-
bescence sparse or absent; leaflets glan-
dular beneath, glabrous to sparsely hir-
sute along veins; roots with or without
fusiform tubers
3. Rachis of inflorescence with glands and
long spreading hairs to 2 mm; fruits more
than 6 mm, the bristles to 4.0 mm; sepals
in fruit 2-3 mm; roots without fusiform tu-
bers A. gryposepala
3. Rachis of inflorescence with glands only or
also with a few hairs to 1 mm; fruits less
than 5 mm, the bristles 2 mm or less; sepals
in fruit 1.5-1.8 mm; roots with fusiform tu-
DCiSHeE Alta pote tee. A. rostellata
1. Agrimonia gryposepala Wallr. [Greek
grypos, curved, and New Latin sepalum,
sepal] Figures 3, 7, 11
Herb 3-18 dm, roots without tubers. Stem:
vestiture of 2 types: (1) minute, gland-tipped
hairs; and (2) long, stiff hairs to 3.2 mm.
Leaves: to 21 cm; major leaflets 3-9, ovate or
obovate to elliptic or rhombic, 1-10.5 X 0.8—
5.2 cm, adaxially glabrous or nearly so or with
a few scattered long hairs, abaxially with
148
(
LAY Ny hg D
Ww 42
Za
qj
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Figure 1. Agrimonia parviflora, a representative species of the genus, X %. From Zardini 1971, with permission.
fo} fo)
gland-tipped hairs and with long hairs 0.5-2
mm; |:w = 2.0 (1.8—2.5): minor leaflets 0-9,
to 2.3 cm, 0-3 pairs between major leaflets.
Inflorescense abundantly glandular and with
sparse, long, stiff hairs to 2 mm. Fruit (ex-
cluding bristles sepals) 6.8-7.5 X 3.5-5.8 mm,
glandular, the hypanthium top-shaped to cam-
panulate, deeply grooved, the ridges, base,
and pedicel with a few scattered, stiff, white
hairs to 0.5 mm, the grooves glandular, oth-
erwise glabrous; sepals in fruit 2-3 mm; bris-
tles 2.5-3.7(4.0) mm, in 4-5 rows, lowermost
row sharply reflexed. 2n = 56 (Brittan 1953).
Woodland margins, thickets, clearings,
fields, and disturbed sites.
Agrimonia gryposepala is rare and of lim-
ited occurrence in Kentucky. Harlan is the
only Kentucky county from which we have
seen a herbarium specimen to document the
occurrence of the species in the state.
Agrimonia gryposepala is considered a
threatened species in Kentucky (KSNPC
1996). Kline and Sgrensen (1990) discussed
lectotypification and synonymy of this species.
2. Agrimonia parviflora Sol. In Ait. [Latin
Agrimonia in Kentucky—Wessel and Thieret
149
Figure 2. Agrimonia parviflora. Details of flower and leaflet. (A) Flower with 2 forward petals removed, X 10. (B)
Longitudinal section through flower, with bracteoles, X 10. (C) Stamen, X 15. (D) “Fruit,” with bracteoles, < 10. (E)
Achene, X 10. (F) Leaflet, adaxial surface, X 2. (G) Leaflet, abaxial surface, X 2. (H) Trichome from abaxial surface
of leaflet, X 20. From Zardini 1971, with permission.
parvus, small, and flos, flower, alluding to
size of the flowers] Figures 1, 2, 4, 8, 12,
15
Herb 5-20 dm; roots without tubers. Stem:
vestiture of 3 types, each sometimes sparse:
(1) minute, gland-tipped hairs; (2) long, + stiff
hairs to 3.5(4) mm; and (3) short hairs < 0.5
mm. Leaves: to 28 cm; major leaflets (5)9-
19(21), lanceolate or oblanceolate to narrowly
elliptic (rhombic), 1-8.5 X 0.6-2.5 cm, adax-
ially minutely pubescent, abaxially with copi-
ous gland-tipped hairs and with long hairs 1—
3 mm; l:w = 4.0 (3.3-4.8): minor leaflets 15—
43, to 2.5 cm, 1 pairs between major leaf-
lets. Inflorescence minutely glandular, with
sparse, short hairs < 0.5 mm and long, stiff,
more or less straight or curved hairs to 2 mm.
Fruit (excluding bristles and sepals) 2.3-
4.0(5.0) X 2.5-4.0(4.5) mm, glandular, the hy-
panthium top-shaped to campanulate, shal-
lowly grooved, the ridges, base, and pedicel
often with a few scattered, stiff, white hairs to
0.5 mm, the grooves glandular, otherwise gla-
brous; sepals in fruit 1.5—1.7 mm; bristles 1.0-
3.0 mm, in 3-4 rows, lowermost row spreading
to ca. 90° or reflexed. 2n = 28 (Hara and Ku-
rosawa 1968).
Moist or wet soil at swamp or stream edges,
grassy areas, meadows, thickets, and roadside
ditches; sometimes in dry, open places.
Agrimonia parviflora is widely distributed
in Kentucky. The documented county-distri-
bution of the species in the state is as follows:
Allen, Bath, Bell, Bourbon, Breckinridge, But-
ler, Calloway, Campbell, Casey, Clark, Ed-
monson, Fleming, Floyd, Franklin, Garrard,
150
Greene, Hardin, Harlan, Jackson, Jefferson,
Kenton, Laurel, Lee, Lincoln, Lyon, Madison,
Magoffin, Marion, McCracken, McCreary,
Meade, Menifee, Montgomery, Morgan,
Muhlenberg, Pike, Powell, Pulaski, Rockcas-
tle, Rowan, Trigg, Warren, Whitley, and
Wolfe.
A study of the reproductive success and
breeding system of A. parviflora was recently
completed by Brann (1998) (see under Biol-
ogy: Pollination below).
3. Agrimonia pubescens Wallroth [Latin
pubis, downy] Figures 5, 9, 13
Herb 3-16 dm; roots with fusiform tubers.
Stem: vestiture of 2 or 3 types: (1) minute,
gland-tipped hairs, these sparse or sometimes
lacking; (2) long, stiff hairs to 3 mm, these
often sparse; and (3) short hairs < 0.5 mm;
types 2 and 3 not always clearly distinguished.
Leaves: to 24 cm; major leaflets (3)5—-9(13),
lanceolate or oblanceolate to oblong or elliptic
or sometimes obovate, 1.4—10.7 X 24.9 cm,
adaxially sparsely pubescent, abaxially downy-
pubescent, the hairs 1-2 mm; I:w = 2.2 (1.7—
3.0); minor leaflets 4-11, to 1.7 cm, 1-3 pairs
between major leaflets. Infloresence minute-
ly glandular, the glands often sparse or even
lacking, with short hairs < 0.5 mm and long,
stiff hairs to 2 mm, the long hairs sometimes
sparse or even lacking. Fruit (excluding bris-
tles and sepals) 4.0-5.5(6.0) X 2.34.0 mm,
glandular (sometimes sparsely so), the hypan-
thium top-shaped to campanulate, shallowly to
deeply grooved, the ridges, base, and pedicel
with a few scattered, stiff, hairs 0.5-0.8 mm,
the grooves often with a strip of conspicuous
to inconspicuous white, upwardly appressed
hairs <0.5 mm (rarely seemingly white fari-
nose); sepals in fruit 1.5-1.7 mm; bristles 1.0—
3.2 mm, in 3-4 rows, lowermost row spreading
to ca. 90°.
Dry to mesic woodlands, woodland edges,
disturbed sites.
Agrimonia pubescens is widely distributed
in Kentucky. The documented county-distri-
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
bution of the species in the state is as follows:
Anderson, Barren, Boone, Boyle, Bracken,
Breathitt, Breckinridge, Bullitt, Caldwell,
Campbell, Clark, Clinton, Edmonson, Estill,
Fayette, Floyd, Franklin, Gallatin, Green,
Greenup, Hardin, Harlan, Hart, Henry, Jack-
son, Jefferson, Jessamine, LaRue, Laurel,
Letcher, Lincoln, Lyon, Madison, Marshall,
McLean, McCreary, Meade, Menifee, Muhl-
enberg, Nelson, Nicholas, Ohio, Oldham,
Owen, Pendleton, Pike, Pulaski, Robertson,
Todd, Trigg, Warren, Wayne, Wolfe, and
Woodford.
4. Agrimonia rostellata Wallroth [Latin ros-
tellum, beak, alluding to the connivent se-
pals on the fruit] Figures 6, 10, 14
Herb 2-10 dm; roots with fusiform tubers.
Stem: vestitute of 3 types: (1) minute, gland-
tipped hairs, these sparse to abundant; (2)
long, stiff hairs to 2.5(3) mm, these sometimes
sparse; and (3) sparse, short hairs < 0.5 mm.
Leaves: to 24 cm; major leaflets 3-9(11), ob-
ovate to broadly elliptic, 2.5-10.5 X 1.5-5.6
cm, adaxially glabrous or sometimes with a few
long hairs, abaxially with copious gland-tipped
hairs and with long hairs + 1 mm; l:w = 1.9
(1.6-2.5); minor leaflets 0-8, to 2.5 cm, 1(0—
2) pair between major leaflets. Inflorescense
sparingly to copiously glandular, with sparse,
short hairs < 0.5 mm and long, stiff hairs to
1 mm, both types sometimes absent. Fruit
(excluding bristles and sepals) 3.2-4.0 x 2.0—
3.0 mm, obscurely to conspicuously glandular,
otherwise glabrous or sometimes with a few
short hairs <0.2 mm at base or on the pedicel,
the hypanthium hemispherical, shallowly
grooved; sepals in fruit 1.5-1.8 mm; bristles
1.7-2.0 mm, in 3-4 rows, lowermost row
spreading to ca. 90°.
Dry to mesic woodlands, woodland edges,
disturbed sites.
Agrimonia rostellata is widely distributed in
Kentucky. The documented county-distribu-
tion of the species in the state is as follows:
-
Figures 3-6. Agrimonia. Median portions of stems, showing vestiture. Figure 3, A. gryposepala (stem diam. 2.5 mm).
Figure 4, A. parviflora (stem diam. 3.5 mm). Figure 5, A. pubescens (stem diam. 2 mm). Figure 6, A. rostelllata (stem
diam. 2 mm).
Agrimonia in Kentucky—Wessel and Thieret
U4 Ee bah bn £64 So ~~ |
te Ae Cee a ” 5 BS A, Shee, .
=“ . o. <, . =e. Nos ries 4 7 3 ”
oe, aaa j
+
ee D
a
Loa
oe}
o
oO
=)
a
oO
WY
ey
ie)
=
=
)
oO
ia]
1S)
<
&
oO
=
+)
=
o
2
ed)
-&
ee
Qe
e)
E
=
iS)
J
153
Agrimonia in Kentucky—Wessel and Thieret
Figures 11-14. Agrimonia. “Fruits.” Figure 11, A. gryposepala (length 7 mm). Figure 12, A. parviflora (length 3
mm). Figure 13, A. pubescens (length 4.5 mm). Figure 14, A. rostelllata (length 3.2 mm).
Hardin, Hart, Hickman, Jefferson, Jessamine,
Kenton, LaRue, Laurel, Lawrence, Letcher,
Lewis, Lyon, Madison, McCreary, McLean,
Meade, Menifee, Morgan, Nelson, Nicholas,
Oldham, Pike, Powell, Pulaski, Robertson,
Allen, Anderson, Ballard, Barren, Bath, Bell,
Breathitt, Breckinridge, Bullitt, Caldwell, Cal-
loway, Campbell, Carlisle, Carter, Clark, Clin-
ton, Crittenden, Daviess, Edmonson, Estill,
Fayette, Floyd, Garrard, Grant, Greenup,
con
Figures 7-10. Agrimonia. Median portions of inflorescence axis, showing vestiture. Figure 7, A. gryposepala (axis
diam 1.5 mm). Figure 8, A. parviflora (axis diam. 2 mm). Figure 9, A. pubescens (axis diam. 2 mm). Figure 10, A.
rostelllata (axis diam. 1 mm).
154
Rockcastle, Rowan, Spencer, Taylor, Todd,
Trigg, Warren, Wayne, and Woodford.
EXCLUDED SPECIES
Agrimonia eupatoria L.
Agrimonia eupatoria has been ascribed to
Kentucky several times starting with
M’Murtrie (1819), but no documenting Ken-
tucky specimens are known to us. The species
may not even be naturalized in North America
(Kline and Sgrensen 1990) in spite of the
many reports that it is so. It was, however,
recorded in 1924 as a wool-waste plant from
Massachusetts (Weatherby 1924), which may
explain, in part, Fernald’s (1950) attributing it
to “waste places and old fields, local, Mass.,
Wisc. and Minn.” (We have seen century-old
Minnesota specimens at MU labelled as A. eu-
patoria; they are A. gryposepala.) Gleason and
Cronquist (1991) wrote merely that the spe-
cies is “occasionally intr. In our range.” Kar-
tesz and Meacham (1999) ascribed the spe-
cies, in eastern North America, to three Ca-
nadian provinces and eight U.S. states (but not
Kentucky); and, in the west, to one province
and two states; most of these reports are based
on literature records, not on first-hand study
of specimens. But Kline and Sgrensen (n.d.),
in their account of Agrimonia for Flora of
North America, excluded the taxon from the
FNA area: “Agrimonia eupatoria, a European
species, has been sporadically cultivated in the
flora area. We can find no evidence that this
introduced species, which rarely escapes cul-
tivation, has become an established element of
the flora.” Earlier, Bicknell (1896) reached the
same conclusion: “... the true Agrimonia Eu-
patoria is not known at all as an American
plantnees
Of A. eupatoria Weatherby (1924) wrote
that “it resembles our native A. gryposepala in
that the stem and the rachis of the inflores-
cence are clothed with minute glandular pub-
erulence mixed with long, non-glandular hairs.
It is readily recognized, however, by its com-
monly more compact habit, the lower inter-
nodes of the stem tending to be short, thus
bringing the leaves close together, by its gen-
erally smaller leaflets, and by the characters of
the fruiting calyx. The body of the mature hy-
panthium is rather narrowly top-shaped and
measures from the base to the point of inser-
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
tion of the hooked bristles about 5 mm. In A.
gryposepala the corresponding measurement
is about 3 mm.”
With respect to Kentucky, the species is one
that could have been—or is—cultivated here
in medicinal plant or other gardens. But we
know of no evidence for such cultivation.
(Seeds said to be of A. eupatoria are available
from several websites.)
In 19th century U.S. floristic literature the
accounts of Agrimonia were hopelessly con-
fused as to both nomenclature and taxonomy
(Bush 1916), with “A. eupatoria” being often
a catch-all name for any U.S. agrimony except
the distinct A. parviflora. Clarification of the
nomenclature and taxonomy of the U.S. rep-
resentatives of the genus began in the last
years of the 19th century and the early years
of the 20th century (Bicknell 1896, 1901a,
1901b; Britton and Brown 1897: Robinson
1900, 1901; Robinson and Fernald 1908; Ryd-
berg 1913). Some authors, though, are still
somewhat confused; we hide their identity to
protect the guilty.
The 19th century confusion in Agrimonia is
best illustrated by the accounts of the genus
published in the 1890s in two major floristic
works for northeastern U.S. The sixth edition
of Gray's Manual (Gray 1890) includes only
two species of the genus—A. eupatoria and A.
parviflora. The first edition of the Britton and
Brown Illustrated flora (Britton and Brown
1897) includes six species, excluding A. eupa-
toria and commenting that “The European A.
Eupatoria L. differs markedly in foliage and
fruit from any of our species.” Following the
lead of the Illustrated flora, the 7th edition of
Grays manual (Robinson and Fernald 1908)
included six species but not A. eupatoria. The
most recent edition of the Manual (Fermald
1950) includes seven, A. eupatoria having
been reinstated—probably in error—as a
member of the flora.
Agrimonia microcarpa Wall.
This species has been ascribed to Kentucky
in several works (e.g, Browne and Athey
1991; Fernald 1950; Greenwell 1935; Kearney
1893; Medley 1993; Radford et al. 1968).
Even a county of occurrence—Bullitt—has
been mentioned. We made an unsuccessful at-
tempt to locate confirming specimens. Ac-
cording to Kline and Sgrensen (1990), this
Agrimonia in Kentucky—Wessel and Thieret
southeastern species ranges north to North
Carolina, Tennessee, and Missouri.
Agrimonia microcarpa would key to A. pu-
bescens in the key above. Although recognized
as a distinct taxon by various authors, its dis-
tinguishing characters seem to us to be rather
weak, overlapping in most cases with those of
A. pubescens; it has been considered a variety
of that species (Ahles 1964; Radford et al.
1968). To separate A. microcarpa from A. pu-
bescens the following features have been
among those used: stem hairs 3-4 mm (m) vs.
1-3 mm (p); major leaflets 3-7 (m) vs. 3-13
(p); major leaflets broadly rounded distally (m)
vs. acute to obtuse (p); stipules + falcate to +
half round and deeply incised (m) vs. + broad-
ly half ovate, incised but not deeply (p); and
mature hypanthium with a distinct rim and as
broad as long (m) vs. mature hypanthium with
a obsolete rim and usually longer than broad
(p).
Agrimonia striata Michx.
Agrimonia striata is a northern and western
species ranging south, in eastern U.S., to Iowa,
Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, West Virginia, Penn-
sylvania, and New Jersey (Kline and Sgrensen
1995). Its roots are slender (non-tuberous); it
has (3)5-9(11) major leaflets; its abaxial leaflet
surfaces are sparingly pubescent, the hairs to
1 mm and confined mostly to veins; its inflo-
rescence is glandular and pubescent, the hairs
1-2 mm; and its hypanthium grooves have a
strip of minute, appressed hairs. Voss (1985)
pointed out that the stipules of its mid-cauline
leaves usually have a prolonged lanceolate ter-
minal tooth or lobe.
BIOLOGY
Biological data on Agrimonia, at least on
our North American species, are relatively
scarce. The best sources of such data on the
European species known to us are the ac-
counts of Agrimonia in two editions of Hegi
(1923, 1995). Only A. eupatoria, long used
medicinally in Europe and elsewhere, has
been studied with any degree of thoroughness.
Pollination
Few observations on pollination of agrimo-
nies are available. The species, at least in Eu-
rope, bears pollen flowers, which do not pro-
duce nectar and are visited by pollen-eating
155
insects. “Flies and bees are attracted to the
slender spikes of flowers [of A. eupatoria] by
a scent reminiscent of apricots” (RDA 1981).
The pollination mechanism of A. eupatoria
was described thus by Knuth (1908):
At the base of the two styles in this species there is
a fleshy ring that looks like a nectary, though no se-
cretion has been observed. The 5-7 stamens on the
margin of this disk attain the same level as the stig-
mas, and their anthers dehisce laterally. The anthers
incline inwards, and therefore come into contact with
the stigmas. The individual flowers bloom for a single
day only, and open very early in the morning. The
stamens, which are at first divergent, bend inwards
in the course of the day, until they touch one another
and the stigmas. Comparatively few insects visit the
flowers, but these may bring about either cross- or
self-pollination. From the above description it is clear
that the latter occurs automatically, and it is obviously
effective.
Palynological data on Agrimonia (i.e., A. eu-
patoria) are included in Hegi (1995; light mi-
croscope and SEM photos of pollen); Erdt-
man (1952; description of pollen); and Reits-
ma (1966; line drawings of pollen).
The pollen of A. eupatoria was described
thus by Erdtman (1952): “3-colpor(oid)ate
(constricticopate), prolate (48 X 31 w). Sexine
thicker than nexine, tegillate; endosexine con-
siderably thinner than ectosexine. The latter
finely striate.”
We include, as Figure 15, a photomicro-
graph of pollen of A. parviflora.
Mueller (1883) recorded as pollinators of
European A. eupatoria the following: Dip-
tera—Syrphidae, nine species representing six
genera (Ascia, Eristalis, Melanostoma, Meli-
threptus, Rhyngia, Syritta); Muscidae, one
species (Anthomyia); and Hymenoptera—Api-
dae (a “small” species of Halictus). To these
Knuth (1908) added a species of Syrphus
(Diptera: Syrphidae) and a species of Apis,
one of Bombus, and one of Prosopis (Hyme-
noptera: Apidae). Clapham et al. (1987) men-
tioned “Diptera and Hymenoptera.”
North American data on pollination of ag-
rimonies are even fewer than those from Eu-
rope. Indeed, we have found only two reports:
C. Robertson (1928), working near Carlinville,
Illinois, recorded a species of Chloralictus
(Hymenoptera: Halictidae) as a visitor to A.
striata: and Macroberts and Macroberts
(1997) wrote that “captured pollinators [of A.
156 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
AccV(:--- =a 00 ae
20.0 kV POLLEN2K.TIF oui
ae ad
f.
Figure 15. Agrimonia parviflora. Pollen grains, X 2000. (Voucher: Thieret 52394, Rowan County, Kentucky, 29 Aug
1980 [KNK]). Photomicrograph by Brenda K. Racke.
Agrimonia in Kentucky—Wessel and Thieret
incisa, a southeastern U.S. species] were small
bees of the subfamily Halictinae (Hymenop-
tera, Apoidea, Halictidae), all probably the
same species.”
In a study of the breeding system of A. par-
viflora, Brann (1998) found the species to be
self-compatible. Its flowers opened by 0900
and closed by 1400 and were open for only 1
day. Once a flower opened, the availability of
its pollen for dispersal and the receptivity of
its stigmas were synchronous.
Dispersal
The fruits of Agrimonia, with their hooked
bristles, are dispersed by animals, including
humans, to the fur or clothing of which they
readily become attached (Coffey 1993; Keville
1991; Macroberts and Macroberts 1997; RDA
1981; Ridley 1930; S.M. Robertson 1973).
Dispersal even by birds on rare occasions
might be possible as suggested by the follow-
ing quote from Swink and Wilhelm (1994):
“The senior author once rescued a Goldfinch
that was hopelessly trapped in the prickly
fruits of [A. gryposepala].” Macroberts and
Macroberts (1997) suggested that many of the
fruits, though seemingly well adapted for long-
range dispersal, probably simply drop near the
parent stem. Such in-situ dispersal, it seems to
us, would result in close groups of plants,
but—except in one instance, a group of ca. 20
individuals of A. parviflora—the agrimonies
we have seen in Kentucky occur as scattered
plants.
Dispersal by water, at least for streamside
plants, is presumably possible, the fruits being
able to float for about a week, at least in the
case of A. eupatoria (Ridley 1930).
Tuberous Rocts
Half of the North American species of Agri-
monia (A. incisa, A. microcarpa, A. pubescens,
and A. rostellata) have tuberous roots the
function of which is unknown. Macroberts and
Macroberts (1997) suggested that “all of these
species might occur in fire-dependent or
droughty areas where food reserves or the al-
ternatives of clonal reproduction might be im-
portant.” Perhaps water storage is important,
too: Our Kentucky species, except often A.
parviflora, grow in dry—sometimes impres-
sively dry—sites.
157
Cytology
The base chromosome number of Agrimon-
ia is x = 7 (Darlington and Wylie 1955; Hegi
1995; Iwatsubo et al. 1993). The U.S. species
with reported counts are A. parviflora, a tet-
raploid (2n = 28; Hara and Kurosawa 1968),
A. gryposepala, an octoploid (2n = 56; Brittan
1953), and A. striata, a tetraploid or octoploid
(2n = 28, 56; Hegi 1995). Agrimonia in Japan
includes species at the 4X, 6X, and 8 levels.
In Eurasia, A. eupatoria is a tetraploid (2n =
28) and A. pilosa is an octoploid (Hegi 1995;
Léve and Léve 1961). A hybrid, A. eupatoria
x A. procera, is a hexaploid (2n = 42) as is
A. nipponica X A. pilosa var. japonica (Iwat-
subo et al. 1993).
MEDICINAL
The best-known species of Agrimonia is the
Eurasian A. eupatoria. In older herbal litera-
ture it was almost panacean, being used in a
number of ways for an impressive array of ills
from A (asthma) almost to Z (warts) (Hegi
1995). In recent literature (e.g., Bartram 1995;
Bown 1995; Duke 1985, 1997: Foster and
Duke 2000; Keville 1991; Ody 1993; Schauen-
berg and Paris 1977; Swanston-Flatt et al.
1990; Wood 1997) it is said to have been used
to treat a diversity of ailments including amen-
orrhea, bed-wetting, conjunctivitis, cystitis, di-
abetes, diarrhea, eczema, gallstones, gout,
hemorrhoids, incontinence, laryngitis, mi-
graines, nosebleed, rheumatism, skin inflam-
mation, sore throats, and ulcers. A somewhat
more restrained assessment of the virtues of
the species (LRNP 1995) concludes that “it
does appear to have justifiable use as a mild
antiseptic and topical astringent” but cautions
that “internal uses of this herb require further
verification.” Commission EF approves A. eu-
patoria to treat diarrhea, inflamed mucous
membranes of the mouth and throat, and
mild, superficial inflammation of the skin (Blu-
menthal 1998). The astringent properties of A.
eupatoria presumably derive from its high tan-
nin content: roots, 25.8%; rhizome, 16.4%;
leaves, 16%; and stem, 5.8% (Hegi 1995).
Wood's (1997) 27-page discussion of the
medicinal and other virtues of Agrimonia is
the most detailed and wide-ranging that we
have seen.
A tea made from A. eupatoria has been
158
used to treat dysentery (Anonymous 1856).
The plant, in a mixture of powdered frogs and
human blood, was once “recommended for all
internal hemmorrhages” (Johnson 1862).
Hartwell (1982), in a survey of plants used
against cancer, included many data from his-
torical literature on A. eupatoria.
Langer and Kubelka (1998) described rhi-
zome anatomy of A. eupatoria in comparison
to that of Potentilla erecta (Radix Tormentil-
lae), another medicinal plant.
Within the past 2 decades or so, A. pilosa,
another Eurasian species, has been increasing-
ly written about, e.g., the effect of a water ex-
tract of the plant on tumors (Miyamoto et al.
1987) and acute pulmonary thrombosis (Hsu
et al. 1987). In Chinese herbal medicine A.
pilosa is used to expel tapeworms (Nigg and
Seigler 1992, and “Agrimonia” is one of the
herbs that “regulate” the blood (Ehling and
Swart 1996).
The mention of A. eupatoria in older liter-
ature on North American medicinal plants
may or may not refer to this European species,
which is quite similar to some of our indige-
nous taxa of the genus. The plant may well
have been introduced early to the continent as
a medicinal plant (S.M. Robertson 1973), but
problems with identification remain. Eri-
chsen-Brown (1989) referred these early re-
cords unequivocally to the native A. striata.
Why she chose this species and not any of the
several other indigenous ones is not explained;
her selection is another unverifiable datum.
Agrimonia was early noted in reports of the
uses of American medicinal plants by Euro-
peans. In the “first systematic publication con-
cerning the American materia medica” (Lloyd
in Smith 1812), that of Johann David Schoepf
(1787), A. eupatoria is described as having as-
tringent, roborant, prophylactic, diuretic, and
vulnerary properties; the name A. eupatoria is
probably a misidentification for one of the
North American taxa. Cutler (1785), in his
work on some of the “vegetable productions”
of New England, wrote of Agrimonia (no spe-
cific epithet given but presumably a native
species) as growing “by fences” and being use-
ful to treat fevers and jaundice. Smith (1812),
in his “dispensatory” on Ohio Valley plants,
described “agrimoney” (again no species in-
dicated) as “a native of the woods [and thus
certainly an indigenous species], but friendly
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
to cultivation.” Its virtues included being use-
ful as a tonic and in diabetes, involuntary
emission of urine, and dysentery and “other
fluxes.” Rafinesque (1828) called A. eupatoria
a “mild astringent, tonic, and corborant” and
noted its use for diarrhea, dysentery, “relaxed
bowels,” and asthma. He included a color il-
lustration in his account of the species, but
this is unidentifiable to species. His descrip-
tion of the range and habitat of the plant—
“The Agrimonia Eupatoria is spread from
Canada to Missouri and Carolina, and grows
in woods, fields, glades and near streams”—is
obviously based on an indigenous species. In
several Shaker communities (1847-1874) A.
eupatoria was “highly recommended in bowel
complaints, gravel, asthma, coughs, and gon-
orrhea.” Again, that this “A. Ewpatoria” was a
native U.S. species is made almost certain by
the statement that it was “found by the road-
sides and borders of fields, Can. and U.S.”
(Miller 1976).
Eastern and central North American Native
Americans included at least two species of
Agrimonia—A. gryposepala and A. parviflo-
ra—among the plants they used medicinally
(Erichsen-Brown 1989; Moerman 1998).
Snakebite, jaundice, diabetes, nosebleed, uri-
nary troubles, nephritis, and diarrhea were
among the problems for which the agrimonies
were taken; they were also used—confiictingly,
it seems to us—as an antidiarrheal medication
and as an emetic, though probably not simul-
taneously.
“Agrimony” (presumably A. eupatoria) is
one of the the “Twelve Healers” divinely re-
vealed to the British physician Edward Bach,
M.D. (Harrar and O'Donnell 1999). Bach
wrote of this herb in his system of healing with
flower essences: “An herb ... for cheerful,
peaceful people who loathe discord and whose
jovial exterior covers inner torment, some-
times resulting in problems with drugs or al-
cohol.”
Various “Agrmonia” websites list sources of
seeds (A. eupatoria, A. pilosa) and medicinal
preparations and uses including even a ho-
meopathic remedy from A. eupatoria.
MISCELLANEOUS
Although the species of Agrimonia, as we
know them in Kentucky, are anything but
“weedy,” at least A. gryposepala can, on oc-
Agrimonia in Kentucky—Wessel and Thieret
casion, be troublesome. Of this species
Muenscher (1955) wrote: “badly infested
fields should be plowed and planted to a cul-
tivated crop for a season.” A color illustration
of this species is given in Alexander (1932).
Drawings of the seedling stages of A. grypo-
sepala are given in Kummer (1951).
Agrimonia eupatoria was even used as a
sleep aid, as the following Old English verse
testifies (Addison 1985):
If it be leyd under a mann’s head
He shall sleepyn as he were dead.
He shall never drede ne wakyn,
Till fro under his head it be taken.
Almost certainly any of our North American
species would be as soporifically efficaceous.
Anti-ophidian properties were even as-
cribed to A. eupatoria (Law 1973). The plant
was used in a charm to ward off snakes. One
of its old English names was. sticklewort,
hence this bit of doggerel:
He that hath sticklewort by
Knows no snake shall draw him nigh.
Agrimonia eupatoria was implicated by
O’Donovan (1942) in the production of phy-
tophotodermatitis in humans, but he estab-
lished a probable connection between plant
and patient in only one of 14 cases. Mitchell
and Rook (1979) suggested that irritation
(from the plant’s trichomes?) rather than pho-
tosensitization was the cause of the condition.
Later research showed that an alcoholic ex-
tract of A. eupatoria has “a very slight photo-
sensitizing action” (Dijk 1963). Dijk and Ber-
rens (1964) “assumed” but did not demon-
strate that “Agrimonia contain[s] photosensi-
tizing furocoumarins” as do other, much more
potent photosensitizing plants, e.g., Ammi ma-
jus, Pastinaca sativa, and Ruta graveolens. Ob-
viously more study of the problem is needed.
A tea can be made by steeping leaves and
stems of A. parviflora and A. rostellata in boil-
ing water, cooling, and serving with sugar or
lemon (Cheatham and Johnston 1995). A sim-
ilar tea, from A. eupatoria, is used in Britain
as a “purifier of the blood” (Hulme 1912) and
is said to be “particularly adapted to people
who live poorly, and imperfectly digest their
bad food” (Anonymous 1856).
Agrimonia eupatoria (leaves and stems) is a
159
minor dye plant, giving a stable yellow, gold,
or orange depending on the mordant (Addison
1985; BBG 1984; Hutchinson 1972; S.M. Rob-
ertson 1973; Keville 1991: Lushchevskaya
1937; Usher 1974) and on the month of har-
vest (Johnson 1862). Our native species would
probably be similarly useful.
Agrimonia eupatoria “contains tannin, and
has been used in dressing leather” (Pratt
1905). Flowers of the species, with their “hon-
ey flavour,” were once added to mead; the
dried plant, with its fragrance, was included in
“sweet sachets and pot-pourri” (Huxley 1992).
Several abnormalities have been noted in
the development of flowers/inflorescences of
Agrimonia, the reports all European (and thus
the plant being probably A. eupatoria). Mas-
ters (1869) wrote that the genus is among
those in which suppression of the androecium
occurs most frequently and that leaves may
develop in the center of a flower. Anomalies
in the number of sepals, the position of bracts,
and the number of bractlets are known (Phel-
ouzat 1963). Fasciation in the inflorescence
results in a compact, terminal mass of flowers,
the whole being somewhat reminiscent of a
head of a member of the Asteraceae (Phel-
ouzat 1963; Schimper 1854). Fusion of two
petals can form a structure similar to the keel
of a legume flower (Moquin-Tandon 1842).
The petals of A. eupatoria, normally yellow,
can on rare occasions, be white. Seeds of this
white-flowered fon when planted, “bred
true to white flower-colour” (Nelmes 1929).
Of the origin of the name Agrimonia we
may choose from the four possibilities listed
by Quattrocchi (2000): “Possibly from the
Greek argemone, argemon, ancient name used
by Dioscorides, Plinius and Galenus for the
poppy; or from argemonion ancient Greek
name applied by Dioscorides to the anemone;
or from agros “field” and monos “alone, lone-
ly’; or from agrios, agrimaios (agra) “wild.”
Another source (HcVN 2000) derived “agri-
mony” from a “Greek word describing plants
which healed the eyes.”
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank the Lloyd Library, Cincinnati,
Ohio, for literature; Dr. David M. Branden-
burg, Dr. Jerry H. Carpenter, Dr. David Hew-
itt, Dr. Miriam S. Kannan, Dr. Genevieve J.
Kline, Brenda K. Racke, Annette D. Skinner,
160
Dr. Paul Sgrensen, Dr. Ralph Thompson, and
Dr. Michael A. Vincent for aid; Dr. Elsa M.
Zardini for permission to reproduce her draw-
ings of A. parviflora as Figures 1 and 2; and
the curators of the following herbaria for loans
of specimens: APSC, BEREA, Cumberland
College, DHL, EKY, KSNPC, KNK, KY,
MDKY, MOR, MU, NCU, PH, WKU, and
private herbarium of Randy Seymour, Upton,
Kentucky (repeated requests [by phone, FAX,
and e-mail] for loan of specimens from Mur-
ray State University went unacknowledged).
LITERATURE CITED
Addison, J. 1985. The illustrated plant lore. Sidgwick and
Jackson, London, U.K.
Ahles, H. E. 1964. New combinations for some vascular
plants of southeastern United States. J. Elisha Mitchell
Sci. Soe. 80:172-173.
Alexander, E. J. 1932. Agrimonia gryposepala. Addisonia
17:19-20, plate 554.
Anonymous. 1856. Agrimony tea. Gard. Chron. 1856:584.
Bartram, T. 1995. Encyclopedia of herbal medicine. Grace
Publishers, Christchurch, Dorset, U.K.
[BBG} Brooklyn Botanic Garden. 1984. Handbook on dye
plants and dyeing. Brooklyn Bot. Gard. Rec. 20(3).
Bicknell, E. P. 1896. The North American species of Agri-
monia. Bull. Torrey Botanical Club 23:508-523.
Bicknell, E. P. 1901a. The nomenclature of the New Eng-
land agrimonies. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 28:102-108.
Bicknell, E. P. 1901b. Still further notes on the agrimo-
nies. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 28:514-518.
Blumenthal, M., senior ed. 1998. The complete Commis-
sion E monographs. American Botanical Council, Aus-
tin, TX; Integrative Medicine Communications, Boston,
MA.
Bown, D. 1995. Encyclopedia of herbs and their uses.
Dorling Kindersley, London, U.K.
Brann, M. 1998. The reproductive success and breeding
system of Agrimonia parviflora Aiton under different
environmental conditions. M.S. Thesis. Truman State
Univ., Kirksville, MO.
Braun, E. L. 1943. An annotated catalog of spermato-
phytes of Kentucky. Published by the author, Cincin-
nati, OH.
Brittan, N. H. 1953. Cytotaxonomy of some species of
Agrimonia L. Proc. Seventh Internat. Bot. Congr.
[1950]: 278.
Britton, N. L., and A. Brown. 1897. An illustrated flora of
the northern United States, Canada and the British Pos-
sessions. Volume II: Portulacaceae to Menyanthaceae.
Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, NY.
Browne, E. T., Jr., and R. Athey. 1992. Vascular plants of
Kentucky. Univ. Press of Kentucky, Lexington, KY.
Bush, B. F. 1916. The Missouri agrimonies. Ann. Missouri
Bot. Gard. 3:309-318.
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Cheatham, S., and M. C. Johnston. 1995. The useful wild
plants of Texas. Useful wild plants, Austin, TX.
Clapham, A. R., T. G. Tutin, and D. M. Moore. 1987.
Flora of the British Isles. 3rd ed. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, U.K.
Coffey, T. 1993. The history and folklore of North Amer-
ican wildflowers. Facts on File, New York, NY.
Cutler, M. 1785. An account of some of the vegetable
productions naturally growing in this part of America
li.e., New England]. Reprint, with biography of Ma-
nasseh Cutler by J.U. Lloyd, as Bull. Lloyd Libr. 7 (Re-
production Ser. 4). 1903.
Darlington, C. D., and A. P. Wylie. 1955. Chromosome
atlas of flowering plants. George Allen and Unwin, Lon-
don, U.K.
Dijk, E. van. 1963. Phytophotodermatitis. Excerpta Med.,
Sect. 13, Dermatol. Venereol. 18:371-373.
Dijk, E., and L. Berrens. 1964. Plants as an ecological
factor in phytophotodermatitis. Dermatologica 129:
321-328.
Duke, J. A. 1985. CRC handbook of medicinal herbs.
CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Duke, J. A. 1997. The green pharmacy. Rodale Press, Em-
maus, PA.
Ehling, D., and S. Swart. 1996. The Chinese herbalist’s
handbook. InWord Press, Santa Fe, NM.
Erdtman, G. 1952. Pollen morphology and plant taxono-
my. Angiosperms. Chronica Botanica, Waltham, MA.
Erichsen-Brown, C. 1989. Medicinal and other uses of
North American plants. Dover Publications, New York,
NY. Reprint of a work first published in 1979.
Fernald, M. L. 1950. Gray's manual of botany. American
Book Co., New York, NY.
Foster, S., and J. A. Duke. 2000. A field guide to medicinal
plants and herbs of eastern and central North America.
Houghton Mifflin Company, New York, NY.
Gleason, H. A., and A. Cronquist. 1991. Manual of vas-
cular plants of northeastern United States and adjacent
Canada. New York Botanical Garden, New York, NY.
Gray, A. 1890. Manual of the botany of the northern Unit-
ed States. 6th ed., revised by S. Watson and J.M. Coul-
ter. Ivison, Blakeman, and Company, New York, NY.
Greenwell, R. A. 1935. A flora of Nelson County, Ken-
tucky. Nazareth College, Louisville, KY.
Hara, H., and S. Kurosawa. 1968. Cytotaxonomical notes
on some Asiatic species of Agrimonia. J. Jap. Bot. 43:
392-400.
Harrar, S., and S. A. O'Donnell. 1999. The woman’s book
of healing herbs. Rodale Press, Emmaus, PA.
Hartwell, J. L. 1982. Plants used against cancer. Quart-
erman Publications, Lawrence, MA.
(HeVN) HeVN Health and Healing Tips. 2000. Agrimonia
eupatoria. Website (hcvn.com) accessed 15 Aug 2000.
Hegi, G. 1923. Illustrierte Flora von Mittel-Europa. Vol-
ume 4(2). A. Pichler’s Witwe & Sohn, Wien, Austria.
Hegi, G. 1995. Illustrierte Flora von Mittel-Europa. Vol-
ume 4(2A). 3rd ed. Blackwell Wissenschafts-Verlag,
Berlin, Germany.
Agrimonia in Kentucky—Wessel and Thieret
Hsu, M. F,, J. H. Young, J. P. Wang, and C. M. Teng.
1987. Effect of hsien-ho-t’sao (Agrimonia pilosa) on ex-
perimental thrombosis in mice. Am. J. Chin. Med. 15:
43-51. [Original not seen; abstract in Medline (su: Agri-
monia, 88074110), accessed 6 Jun 2000.]
Hulme, F. E. 1912. Familiar wild flowers. Cassell and
Company, London, U.K.
Hutchinson, J. 1972. British wild flowers. Volume 1. David
and Charles, Newton Abbot, U.K.
Huxley, A., editor-in-chief. 1992. The new Royal Horti-
cultural Society dictionary of gardening. Macmillan,
London, U.K.
Iwatsubo, Y., M. Mishima, and N. Naruhashi. 1993. Chro-
mosome studies of Japanese Agrimonia (Rosaceae). Cy-
tologia 58:453-461.
Jain, D. K., and V. Singh. 1973. Structure and develop-
ment of hairs in Agrimonia eupatorium [sic] L. Curr.
Sci. 42:434-436.
Johnson, C. P. 1862. The useful plants of Great Britain.
William Kent, London, U.K.
Kartesz, J. T., and C. A. Meacham. 1999. Synthesis of the
North American flora. Version 1.0. CD-ROM. North
Carolina Botanical Garden, Univ. North Carolina,
Chapel Hill, NC.
Kearney, T. H., Jr. 1893. Notes on the flora of southeast-
em Kentucky, with a list of plants collected in Harlan
and Bell counties in 1893. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 20:
474-485.
Keville, K. 1991. The illustrated herb encyclopedia. Mal-
lard Press, New York, NY.
Kline, G. J., and P. D. Sgrensen. 1990. Lectotypification
and synonymy of Agrimonia gryposepala Wallroth (Ro-
saceae). Taxon 39:512-515.
Kline, G. J., and P. D. Sgrensen. 2000. The genus Agri-
monia (Rosaceae) in Illinois. Erigenia 18:13-19.
Kline, G. J., and P. D. Sgrensen. n.d. Agrimonia. Account
prepared for and submitted to Flora of North America.
Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis, MO.
Knuth, P. 1908. Handbook of flower pollination. Translat-
ed by J.R. Ainsworth Davis. Volume 2. Clarendon Press,
Oxford, U.K.
[KSNPC] Kentucky State Nature Preserves Commission.
1996. Rare and extirpated plants and animals of Ken-
tucky. Trans. Kentucky Acad. Sci. 57:69-91.
Kummer, A. P. 1951. Weed seedlings. Univ. Chicago
Press, Chicago, IL.
Langer, R., and W. Kubelka. 1998. Rhizomanatomie von
Vertretern der Gattungen Potentilla, Geum, Agrimonia,
and Filipendula im Vergleich mit Radix Tormentillae.
Sci. Pharm. 66:387-398. Original not seen; abstract in
ArticleFirst, su: Agrimonia; accessed 6 Jun 2000.
Law, D. 1973. The concise herbal encyclopedia. St. Mar-
tin’s Press, New York, NY.
Love, A., and D. Léve. 1961. Chromosome numbers of
central and northwest European plant species. Opera
Bot. 5:1-581.
[LRNP] Lawrence Review of Natural Products. 1995. Ag-
161
rimony. In Lawrence Review of Natural Products, Au-
gust 1995.
Lushchevskaya, G. 1937. Dyestuff-yielding plants in the
Ukraine S.S.R. Chem. Abstr. 31:6883. (Abstract.)
Macroberts, M. H., and B. R. Macroberts. 1997. The ecol-
ogy of Agrimonia incisa Torrey & A. Gray (Rosaceae)
in the West Gulf Coastal Plain. Phytologia 82:114—128.
Masters, M. T. 1869. Vegetable teratology. Robert Hard-
wicke, London, U.K.
McFarland, F. T. 1942. A catalogue of the vascular plants
of Kentucky. Castanea 7:77-108.
Medley, M. E. 1993. An annotated catalog of the known
or reported vascular flora of Kentucky. Ph.D. disserta-
tion. Univ. Louisville, Louisville, KY.
Miller, A. B. 1976. Shaker herbs. Clarkson N. Potter, New
York, NY.
Mitchell, J., and A. Rook. 1979. Botanical dermatology.
Greengrass, Vancouver, Canada.
Miyamoto, K., N. Kishi, and R. Koshiura. 1987. Antitumor
effect of agrimoniin, a tannin of Agrimonia pilosa Led-
eb., on transplantable rodent tumors. Jap. J. Pharmacol.
43:187-195. [Original not seen; abstract in Medline (su:
agrimonia) 87199472. Accessed 4 Jun 2000.]
M’Murtrie, H. 1819. Sketches of Louisville and its envi-
rons. S. Penn Jr., Louisville, KY. [“Florula Louisvillen-
sis,” 207-229. |
Moerman, D. E. 1998. Native American ethnobotany.
Timber Press, Portland, OR.
Moquin-Tandon, A. 1842. Pflanzen-teratologie. Translated
from the French by J. C. Schauer. Haude und Spener-
sche Buchhandlung, Berlin, Germany.
Mueller, H. 1883. The fertilisation of flowers. Translated
and edited by D. W. Thompson. Macmillan and Com-
pany, London, U.K.
Muenscher, W. C. 1955. Weeds. Cornell Univ. Press, Ith-
aca, NY.
Murata, G., and K. Umemoto. 1983. Critical notes on the
Asiatic Agrimonia with special reference to the distri-
bution of calcium oxalate crystals. Acta Phytotax. Geo-
bot. 34:166—-177. (In Japanese.)
Nelmes, E. 1929. Agrimonia eupatoria Linn. with white
flowers. J. Bot. 67:341.
Nigg, H. N., and D. Seigler. 1992. Phytochemical resoure-
es for medicine and agriculture. Plenum Press, New
York, NY.
O'Donovan, W. J. 1942. Dermatitis bullosa striata praten-
sis. Agrimony dermatitis. Brit. J. Dermatol. Syph. 54:
39-46.
Ody, P. 1993. The complete medicinal herbal. Dorling
Kindersley, London, U.K.
Phelouzat, R. 1963. Morphologie, Phyllotaxie, ontogénie
de trois rosacées. Agrimonia eupatoria L., Poterium
sanguisorba L., Geum urbanum L. Rev. Cytol. Biol.
Vég. 26:101-347, 15 plates. [A. eupatoria, 115-293. |
Pratt, A. 1905. The flowering plants. Grasses, sedges and
ferns of Great Britain. Frederick Warne & Company,
London, U.K.
162
Price, S. F. 1893. Flora of Warren County, Kentucky. Pub-
lished by the author.
Quattrocchi, U. 2000. CRC world dictionary of plant
names. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Radford, A. E., H. E. Ahles, and C. R. Bell. 1968. Manual
of the vascular flora of the Carolinas. Univ. North Car-
olina Press, Chapel Hill, NC.
Rafinesque, C. S. 1828. Medical flora. Volume 1, A-H.
Atkinson and Alexander, Philadelphia, PA.
[RDA] Reader's Digest Association. 1981. Field guide to
the wild flowers of Britain. Reader's Digest Association,
London, U.K.
Reitsma, T. 1966. Pollen morphology of some European
Rosaceae. Acta Bot. Neerl. 15:290-307.
Ridley, H. N. 1930. The dispersal of plants throughout the
world. L. Reeve and Company, Ashford, Kent, U.K.
Robertson, C. 1928. Flowers and insects. n.p., Carlinville,
IL.
Robertson, K. R. 1974. The genera of Rosaceae in the
southeastern United States. J. Arnold. Arbor. 55:303—
332, 344-401, 611-662.
Robertson, S. M. 1973. Dyes from plants. Van Nostrand
Reinhold, New York, NY.
Robinson, B. L. 1900. The nomenclature of the New Eng-
land agrimonies. Rhodora 2:235-238.
Robinson, B. L. 1901. Further notes on the agrimonias.
Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 28:295-300.
Robinson, B. L., and M. L. Fernald. 1908. Gray’s new
manual of botany. American Book Company, New York,
NY.
Ross-Craig, S. 1956. Agrimonia eupatoria L. Drawings of
British plants IX Rosaceae (2): plate 9. G. Bell, London,
U.K.
Rydberg, P. A. 1913. North Am. FI. 22(5):391-396.
Schauenberg, P., and F. Paris. 1977. Guide to medicinal
plants. Keats Publishing, New Canaan, CT.
Schimper, C. 1854. Discentration (unzureichend Fascia-
tion genannt). Flora 37:76.
Schoepf, J. D. 1787. Materia medica americana. Reprint,
with biography of Johann David Schoepf by E. Kre-
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
mers, as Bull. Lloyd Libr. 6 (Reproduction Ser. 3).
1903.
Short, C. W., R. Peter, and H. A. Griswold. 1833. A cat-
alogue of the native phaenogamous plants and ferns of
Kentucky. Reprint in R. L. Stuckey, Scientific publica-
tions of Charles Wilkins Short. Arno Press, New York,
NY, 1978.
Short, C. W., and R. Peter. 1834. A supplementary cata-
logue of the plants of Kentucky. Transylvania J. Med.
Assoc. Sci. 7:598—-600.
Skalicky, V. 1973. Amerikanischer Arten der Gattung
Agrimonia L. ser. Tuberosae ser. nova. Folia Geobot. Phy-
totax. 8:95—-104.
Smith, P. 1812. The Indian doctor’s dispensatory. Reprint,
with biography of Peter Smith by J. U. Lloyd, as Bull.
Lloyd Libr. 2 (Reproduction Ser. 2). 1901.
Svenson, H. K. 1941. Report of the local flora committee.
Torreya 41:3-7.
Swanston-Flatt, S. K., C. Day, C. J. Bailey, and P. R. Flatt.
1990. Traditional plant treatments for diabetes. Diabe-
tologia 33:462—464. [Original not seen; abstract in Med-
line (su: Agrimonia, 91006942); accessed 4 Jun 2000.]
Swink, F., and G. Wilhelm. 1994. Plants of the Chicago
region. 4th ed. Indiana Academy of Science, Indian-
apolis, IN.
Torrey, J., and A. Gray. 1838-1840. Agrimonia. Pages
430-431 in A flora of North America. Volume 1. Wiley
and Putnam, New York, NY.
Usher, G. 1974. A dictionary of plants used by man. Haf-
ner Press, New York, NY.
Voss, E. G. 1985. Michigan flora. Part II Dicots (Saurur-
aceae—Cornaceae). Cranbrook Institute of Science (Bul-
letin 59) and University of Michigan Herbarium, Ann
Arbor, MI.
Weatherby, C. A. 1924. Two more wool-waste plants from
Westford, Mass. Rhodora 26:38-39.
Wood, M. 1997. The book of herbal wisdom. North At-
lantic Books, Berkeley, CA.
Zardini, E. M. 1971. Especies nuevas o criticas de la flora
Jujenia II. Bol. Soc. Argentina Bot. 14:107—110. [A. par-
viflora. |
J. Ky. Acad. Sci. 61(2):163-164. 2000.
NOTE
Barn Owl (Tyto alba) Feeding Habits at Yellow-
bank Wildlife Management Area, Breckinridge
County, Kentucky.—This study used pellet analysis to
determine feeding habits of barn owls (Tyto alba) at the
Yellowbank Wildlife Management Area (YWMA), Breck-
inridge County, Kentucky. We found that barn owl diets
at YWMA consisted mainly of voles (Microtus spp.). These
results are consistent with many past barn owl feeding
habit studies.
Past studies suggest that barn owls consume a preva-
lence of small mammals (1, 2). However, larger animals
(e.g., birds, reptiles, and amphibians), and insects (e.g.,
grasshoppers, beetles) are also often eaten (2, 3). Little is
known, however, about barn owl feeding habits in the
east-central U.S. We are unaware of any reports of barn
owl feeding habits for Kentucky and Indiana, and there
are only single reports for southern Illinois (4) and Ohio
(5). The purpose of this study was to determine whether
prey selection of barn owls in YWMA is consistent with
other barn owl feeding habit studies.
Feeding habits of barn owls are generally examined
through the dissection of regurgitated pellets. Bam owls
consume their prey whole or largely so. Relatively weak
digestive fluids secreted in the stomach dissolve the nu-
tritious soft parts of the prey (1, 2). This is followed by
the regurgitation of a tightly packed pellet consisting of
indigestible fur, bones, insect exoskeleton, and/or feathers.
Typically, two pellets are formed and cast each day, ca.
6.5 hr after ingestion of prey. One pellet is cast at a ha-
bitual roosting or nesting area, the other at night while
the owl is foraging (6). Consumption of more than one
meal during a 6.5-hr period may result in the casting of
larger pellets containing remains of multiple meals (6).
Thus, a record of past meals is created frem undigested
portions of prey (2, 7). The proportion of prey items cap-
tured by barn owls closely matches the proportion regur-
gitated, providing a relatively unbiased sampling of feed-
ing habits (1, 2).
Pellets were gathered from beneath a nesting platform
at YWMA during the 1998 nesting season. Two adult barn
owls and seven young regurgitated the pellets.
Each dry pellet was weighed to the nearest 0.1 g, mea-
sured along the longest and shortest axes to the nearest 1
mm, soaked in water, then dissected using tweezers and
dissecting probes. Skull and lower mandible remnants
were counted and identified.
Small mammal capture records for YWMA and a list of
mammal species occurring in Breckinridge County (both
provided by the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wild-
life) were used as a guide for preliminary identification.
We used a reference skull collection (Mammal Collection,
Southern Illinois University, Carbondale) to assist in spe-
cies identification of bone fragments (8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13).
We determined the percentage of each species within
pellets by number and by mass, with estimates of mean
mass (14, 15). Skull and mandible counts from large pel-
lets (= 2.0 g) were compared to those of small pellets (<
2.0 g) with one-tailed t-tests adjusted for unequal sample
size. Correlation analysis was used to assess the relation-
ship between pellet mass and the number of prey items
per pellet. Species proportions between small and large
pellets were examined with chi-square, with a 2.0 g cut-
off arbitrarily chosen after inspection of the distribution
of pellet masses.
We examined 52 large and 151 small pellets for a total
of 203 pellets. An average dry pellet weighed 1.6 + 0.1
g, and was 29.8 + 0.5 mm long X 20.9 + 0.4 mm wide.
Small pellets contained fewer skulls (mean = 0.63) than
large pellets (mean = 1.49); t,, = —6.79, P < 0.001).
Small pellets also had fewer mandibles (mean = 0.94)
than large pellets (mean = 3.06; t,, = —7.80, P <
0.001).
The most common genus among all pellets was Micro-
tus (64%), primarily M. ochrogaster (n = 87), and M. pi-
netorum (n = 36; Table 1). Southern bog lemmings (Syn-
aptomys cooperi; n =
diversity increased as a function of pellet mass (r? = 0.24,
P < 0.001). We were unable to classify remains from 29
of the 203 (14%) pellets. The proportion of unidentified
specimens in small pellets was higher than in large pellets
(27.9 vs. 3.8%, respectively; x? = 20.02, P < 0.001). The
proportion of unidentified microtines in small pellets was
nearly double that of large pellets (13% vs. 7.5%), though
this difference was not significant, (x? = 1.60, P < 0.21).
Composition of identified species was similar between
small and large pellets, aside from a greater number of
southern bog lemmings in the smaller pellets (13.0 vs. 2.0;
xX? = 6.35, P < 0.01). Pellets were rarely devoid of bones
(n = 4). The only apparent difference in prey composition
between pellet class sizes was in proportion of southern
bog lemmings.
Barn owls are opportunistic foragers. Prevalence of
prairie and woodland voles in the barn ow] diet is likely a
function of their relative ease of capture, concurrence of
predator and prey activity periods, and prey abundance.
Barn owls are most active at night and favor open country
for foraging (3). Likewise, prairie and woodland voles re-
main on the ground (versus escaping up into the trees)
when pursued. Woodland voles are also common in most
stages of forest succession (12). Our data suggest that pop-
ulations of shrews (Blarina sp.; Sorex spp.) and harvest
mice (Reithrodontomys spp.) are not active during the
same time period that barn owls hunt, do not forage in
15) were also prevalent. Species
the same areas as barn owls, or use specific habitat com-
ponents successfully to evade predation. In conclusion,
our results indicate a preponderance of microtines in the
diet of barn owls at YWMA and are consistent with other
barn owl feeding habit studies (2, 4, 5, 16, 17).
We thank Dr. G. A. Feldhamer, and J. C. Whittaker,
Department of Zoology, SIUC, and Dr. Alan Woolf, Co-
operative Wildlife Research Laboratory and Department
163
164
Table 1.
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Numbers and percentages of known prey species found in 203 pellets from a pair of barn owls and their
seven young at Yellowbank Wildlife Management Area, Breckinridge County, Kentucky.
Species (mean live mass [g]) Common name Number % by number % by mass!
Microtus ochrogaster (42.5) Prairie vole 87 50 61
Microtus pinetorum (32) Woodland vole 36 21 19
Synaptomys cooperi (35.5) Southern bog lemming 15 9 9
Blarina brevicauda (21.5) Short-tailed shrew 9 5 3
Mus musculus (20.5) House mouse 8 5 3
Cryptotis parva (5.3) Least shrew W 4 <i\|
Microtus pennsylvanicus (45) Meadow vole 7 4 5
Reithrodontomys megalotis (13) Harvest mouse 1 <l <I
Unidentified bird? 4 2 NA
Total’ 174
' For identified specimens only.
> One specimen was likely a red-winged blackbird (Ageaius phoeniceus).
‘Excluding plant and insect contents.
of Zoology, SIUC, and numerous volunteers for laboratory
assistance.
LITERATURE CITED. (1) Bunn, D. S., A. B. War-
burton, and R. D. S. Wilson. 1982. The barn owl. Buteo,
Vermillion, SD. (2) Taylor, I. 1994. Barn Owls, predator-
prey relationships and conservation. Cambridge Univer-
sity Press, Cambridge, UK. (3) Bent, A. C. 1938. Life
histories of North American birds of prey. Bull. U.S. Natl.
Mus. 170:140-153. (4) Feldhamer, G. A. 1985. Summer
feeding habits of barn owls (Tyto alba) from White Coun-
ty, Illinois. Trans. Illinois Acad. Sci. 78:133-137. (5) Col-
vin, B. A., and E. B. McClean. 1986. Food habits and
prey specificity of the common barn owl in Ohio. Ohio J.
Sci. 86:76-80. (6) Marti, C. D. 1992. Barn owl. Pages 1—
16 in A. Poole, P. Stettenheim, and F. Gill (eds). The birds
of North America. The American Ornithologists’ Union
and Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA. (7)
Sparks, J., and T. Soper. 1970. Barn owls, their natural
and unnatural history. Taplinger, New York. (8) Barbour,
R. W., and W. H. Davis. 1974. Mammals of Kentucky.
Univ. Kentucky Press, Lexington, KY. (9) Martin, R. A.
1974. Fossil mammals from the Coleman IIA fauna, Sum-
ter County. Pages 35-99 in S. D. Webb (ed). Pleistocene
mammals of Florida. Univ. Florida Press, Gainesville, FL.
(10) Hazard, E. B. 1982. The mammals of Minnesota.
Univ. Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN. (11) Carraway,
L. N. 1995. A key to recent Soricidae of the western Unit-
ed States and Canada based primarily on dentaries. Occas.
Papers Mus. Nat. Hist. Univ. Kansas. 175. (12) Hoffmeis-
ter, D. F. 1989. Mammals of Illinois. Univ. Illinois Press,
Urbana, IL. (13) Feldhamer, G. A., L. C. Drickamer, S.
H. Vessey, and J. F. Merritt. 1999. Mammalogy. McGraw-
Hill, Boston, MA. (14) Burt, W. H., and R. P. Grossen-
heider. 1980. A field guide to the mammals, North Amer-
ica north of Mexico. Houghton Mifflin, New York. (15)
Whitaker, J. O., Jr. 1996. National Audubon Society field
guide to North American mammals. Knopf, New York.
(16) Wallace, G. J. 1948. The barn owl in Michigan. Page
61 in Craighead, J. J., and F. C. Craighead, Jr. (eds).
Hawks, barn owls, and wildlife. Dover, New York. (17)
Craighead, J. J., and F. C. Craighead, Jr. 1969. Hawks,
barn owls, and wildlife. Dover, New York.—Anita T.
Morzillo, Department of Zoology; Hetti A. Brown, De-
partment of Biological Sciences; Wayne E. Thogmartin,
Department of Zoology & Cooperative Wildlife Research
Laboratory; and Jennifer H. Herner-Thogmartin, Co-
operative Wildlife Research Laboratory, Southern Ilinois
University, Carbondale, Illinois 62901.
J. Ky. Acad. Sci. 61(2):165-172. 2000.
Abstracts of Some Papers Presented at the
1999 Meeting of the
Kentucky Academy of Science
AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES
Pesticide residue in soil and runoff: measurement and
mitigation. GEORGE F. ANTONIOUS, Community Re-
search Service, Atwood Research F acility, Department of
Plant and Soil Science, Kentucky State University, Frank-
fort, KY 40601.
Soil erosion and runoff are some of the major means
by which pesticides from agricultural fields enter streams,
ponds, or lakes. The Water Quality Project at Kentucky
State University (KSU) is evaluating best management
practices for the growing of vegetable crops on highly
erodible land (10% slope). Studies were conducted to de-
termine the influence of landscape features on pesticide
movement into runoff and infiltration water. Soil treat-
ments (black plastic mulch and living fescue mulch) were
used to reduce soil erosion and surface water runoff. Pes-
ticides infiltration into the vadose zone were monitored
using pressure-vacuum lysimeters (n = 27). A tipping
bucket metering apparatus was used to collect runoff wa-
ter following natural rainfall events. The impact of the soil
mulches on movement of clomazone (a soil applied her-
bicide), dacthal (a pre-emergence non-systemic herbi-
cide), and endosulfan (an insecticide) was measured under
field conditions. Black plastic covers had no clear effect
on reducing runoff volume or concentration of clomazone
in runoff, while grass strips of 30-cm wide were very ef-
fective at reducing amounts of sediment in runoff. Plots
planted with pepper intercropped with tomato as cover
crop had 72% less runoff water and 79% less runoff sed-
iment compared to plots planted with pepper only. Results
indicated the vertical movement of clomazone, dacthal,
and endosulfan through the soil into the vadose zone. Cul-
tivation of turf reduced runoff but did not reduce leaching
of pesticides into the vadose zone. Our future objective at
KSU is to study the potential of using soil amendments
to improve soil quality, detoxify contaminants, and reduce
erosion.
Identification of molecular markers that segregate in a
simple Mendelian fashion in controlled crosses of pawpaw
(Asimina triloba). SHAWN BROWN,* TERA M. BON-
NEY, SNAKE C. JONES, and KIRK W. POMPER, Ken-
tucky State University, Atwood Research Facility, Frank-
fort, KY 40601-2335.
The pawpaw (Asimina triloba) is a native plant found
mainly in the southeastern and eastern United States. Its
fruit has great potential as a new high-value crop in these
regions. Although there are about 45 named pawpaw cul-
tivars, breeding for improvement of desirable traits, such
as improved fruit size and quality, is desirable. Our long-
term goal is to utilize molecular marker systems to identify
markers that can be used for germplasm diversity analysis
and for the construction a molecular genetic map, where
markers are correlated with desirable pawpaw traits. The
objective of this study was to identify random amplified
polymorphic DNA (RAPD) markers that segregate in a
simple Mendelian fashion in a controlled A. triloba cross.
DNA was extracted from young leaves collected from
field-planted parents and 20 progeny of the cross 1-7-1 X
2-54, as well as 10 progeny of the reciprocal cross. The
DNA extraction method used gave acceptable yields of
about 7 pg g_! of leaf tissue. Additionally, sample 260/280
ratios were about 1.4, which indicated that the DNA was
of high enough purity to be subjected to the RAPD meth-
odology. Screening of 10-base oligonucleotide RAPD
primers with template DNA from the parents and progeny
of the cross is proceeding in an effort to identify RAPD
markers that segregate in a simple Mendelian fashion.
The effect of transport density on survival of juvenile
freshwater prawns (Macrobrachium rosenbergii). SHAWN
COYLE, JAMES H. TIDWELL, AARON VANARN-
UM,* and CHARLES WEIBEL. Aquaculture Research
Center, Kentucky State University, Frankfort, KY 40601.
In production of the freshwater prawn Macrobrachium
rosenbergii, prawns (20.3 g) are nursed in indoor tanks
then transported to ponds for growout. Stress during
transport can produce immediate and undetected mortal-
ity after pond stocking. This study was designed to eval-
uate the effect of density on transport survival. Nine rep-
licate styrofoam transport containers were prepared. Each
contained a plastic bag with oxygen-saturated 22°C water
with an atmosphere of 10-liter pure oxygen. Juvenile
prawns weighing 0.26 + 0.02 g were randomly stocked
inte each of three replicate transport containers at 10, 25
or 50 g/liter of water, then sealed for 8 hours (maximum
in-state transport period). At 8 hours post-stocking, bags
were opened, water was sampled, and live and dead ani-
mals were separated and counted. Total ammonia-nitro-
gen and nitrite-nitrogen were significantly higher (P <
0.05) in containers stocked at 50 g/liter than in containers
stocked at either 10 or 25 g/liter, which were also signif-
icantly different (P < 0.05). Dissolved oxygen was signif-
icantly lower (P < 0.05) in transport containers stocked
at 50 g/liter (1.3 mg/liter) than those stocked at 25 g/liter
or 10 g/liter (1.6 mg/liter and 3.2 mg/liter, respectively),
which were also significantly different (P < 0.05). Survival
was significantly reduced (P < 0.05) in transport contain-
ers stocked at 50 g/liter (86.6%). Survival in containers
stocked at 25 g/liter (93%) was significantly lower than
containers stocked at 10 mg/liter (97.2%). These data in-
dicate that transport densities greater than 10 g/liter
should be avoided for transport =8 hours.
Suitability of the copepod Orthocyclops modestus as a
live food for larval freshwater prawns, Macrobrachium ro-
165
166
senbergii. SHAWN COYLE,* JAMES H. TIDWELL,
AARON VANARNUM, and CHARLES WEIBEL, Aqua-
culture Research Center, Kentucky State University,
Frankfort, KY 40601.
The cyclopoid copepod Orthocyclops modestus was
evaluated for its suitability as a live food for larval fresh-
water prawns (Macrobrachium rosenbergii). Orthocyclops
modestus was identified in preliminary screening as one
of the few indigenous zooplanktors which tolerated the
temperature (28—30°C) and salinity (10-14 ppt) conditions
of larval prawn culture. To evaluate the suitability of these
copepods as live food for larval prawns, mixed zooplank-
ton were collected from a reservoir with a 250 wm zoo-
plankton net. Zooplanktors were held at 10 ppt salinity for
24 hours to remove cladocerans and then screened (335
ym) to remove rotifer species leaving only copepods. The
test system consisted of nine individual 250 ml rearing
units in a recirculating system, with three replicates of
each of three treatments. Treatment | contained only lar-
val prawns (five 10-d old larvae, Stage 5.4 + 0.9), Treat-
ment 2 contained only copepods (185), and Treatment 3
a combination (5 larval prawns and 185 copepods). Den-
sities for prawns were based on recommended prawn
hatchery practices. Densities for copepods were based on
recommended artemia feeding rates for Stage 5 prawn
larvae. After 48 hours, prawn survival in Treatment 3
(87%) was significantly lower (P < 0.05) than in Treat-
ment 1 (100%). Copepod survival was not significantly dif-
ferent between treatments (93.7%) indicating copepods
were not consumed. Reduced prawn survival in Treatment
3 was likely due to high energy demands or physical trau-
ma as prawn larvae attempted to capture active and well-
armored copepods. It appears that indigenous zooplank-
ton show little promise as live foods in prawn hatchery
production.
Use of hempseed meal, poultry by-product meal, and
canola meal in practical diets without fish meal for sun-
shine bass. ANN M. MORGAN,* CARL D. WEBSTER,
KENNETH R. THOMPSON, and EBONY J. GRISBY,
Aquaculture Research Center, Kentucky State University,
Frankfort, KY 40601.
Sunshine bass (Morone chrysops X M. saxatilis) is one
cross of hybrid striped bass. Diets for sunshine bass use
high percentages of fish meal (FM); however, FM is the
most expensive ingredient in aquaculture diets. If FM can
be replaced, diet costs may decrease. Four practical float-
ing diets were formulated to contain 40% protein, similar
energy levels, and without FM. A fifth diet was formulated
to contain 30% FM and served as the control diet. Ten
fish (21 g) were stocked into each of twenty 110-liter
aquaria and were fed twice daily (07.30 and 16.00 hr) for
10 weeks. Diets were formulated to contain: Diet 1, soy-
bean meal (SBM) and meat-and-bone meal (MBM): Diet im
2, SBM + MBM + hempseed meal (HSM); Diet 3, SBM
and poultry by-product meal (PBM); and Diet 4, and
SBM + MBM + canola meal (CM). At the conclusion of
the feeding trial, percentage weight gain of fish fed Diet
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
1 was significantly (P < 0.05) higher (299%) compared to
fish fed Diet 3 and Diet 4, but not different from fish fed
Diet 2 and Diet 5. Percentage survival, amount of diet
fed, and hepatosomatic index (HSI) of sunshine bass were
not different (P > 0.05) among treatments and averaged
95%, 111 g of diet/fish, and 2.0% of body weight, respec-
tively. Results from the present study indicate that diets
without FM have potential for use in growing juvenile
sunshine bass. Further research needs to be conducted on
the diet formulations used in the present study and should
be conducted in ponds.
The Kentucky State University pawpaw (Asimina trilo-
ba) project. KIRK W. POMPER,* SNAKE C. JONES,
EDDIE B. REED, and TERA M. BONNEY, Kentucky
State University, Atwood Research Facility, Frankfort, KY
40601-2355.
Kentucky State University (KSU) has had a compre-
hensive pawpaw (Asimina triloba) research project since
1990, with the goal of developing the pawpaw into a new
high-value tree fruit crop for limited resource farmers in
Kentucky. An overview of recent developments at KSU
concerning pawpaw variety trials, propagation, web site
development, and germplasm collection and assessment,
was presented. A pawpaw regional variety trial (RVT) was
planted at KSU in 1998, consisting of 8 replicate trees of
28 standard pawpaw cultivars and advanced selections
from the PawPaw Foundation breeding program. The
RVT establishment rate, flowering, and growth data by
variety was reported. The positive influence of shade on
the growth and development of pawpaw seedlings in con-
tainer production was discussed. A web site, http://
www.pawpaw.kysu.edu, has been developed and expanded
for the dissemination of information on pawpaw to sci-
entists, commercial growers and marketers. The National
Clonal Germplasm Repository for Asimina spp. is located
at KSU and hence, germplasm evaluation, preservation,
and dissemination are a high priority for our program. In
the spring of 1999, volunteers collected pawpaw leaf sam-
ples from 270 trees in 17 different states that will be used
in molecular marker methodologies in order to assess ge-
netic diversity across the pawpaw’s native range. Pawpaw
seedlings with promising fruit characteristics have been
identified in our germplasm collection and have been
propagated for further evaluation as potential cultivars for
release by KSU.
Relative effectiveness of plant and animal source oils
for control of air breathing insects. LEIGH ANNE VI-
TATOE,* AARON VANARNUM, SHAWN COYLE, and
JAMES TIDWELL, Aquaculture Research Center, Ken-
tucky State University, Frankfort, KY 40601.
Freshwater prawn juveniles (Macrobrachium rosenber-
gii) are stocked into ponds at extremely small sizes (0.2—
0.5 g) and predation by air breathing insects can be a
significant problem. The use of petroleum products to cre-
ate a thin surface film and prevent insect respiration is an
effective control but causes environmental concern. If
Abstracts, 1999 Annual Meeting
proven effective, plant- or animal-based oils may be safer.
Menhaden fish oil (MO) and corn oil (CO) were evaluated
at two application rates and compared to previously rec-
ommended petroleum product mixes for their ability to
eliminate air-breathing insects. Petroleum product appli-
cations (controls) included 2:1 motor oil/diesel fuel com-
bination (PCI) and 1:20 motor oil/diesel fuel combination
(PCII) (previously recommended procedures). Glass
aquaria with 0.107 m? surface area were used and filled
with 6 liters of reservoir water. Each tank was stocked with
five adult notonectids. Low rate applications were applied
at 0.01 ml/m? and high rate applications at 0.03 ml/m’.
There were three replications per treatment. Control
tanks were stocked but not treated with oil. At the low
rate the PCII and MO treatments both produced com-
plete mortality by 2 hours post treatment while treatments
PCI and CO did not result in complete mortality. At the
high rate there was no significant difference (P > 0.05)
among treatments in amount of time required to attain
complete mortality. Menhaden fish oil appears to be an
effective alternative to petroleum products for control of
predaceous air breathing insects in larval shrimp and fish
ponds. At a high rate of application corn oil may also be
effective.
The effect of water temperature on the survival of adult
freshwater prawns (Macrobrachium rosenbergii) held in
tanks. CHARLES WEIBEL,* JAMES H. TIDWELL,
SHAWN COYLE, and AARON VANARNUM, Aquacul-
ture Research Center, Kentucky State University, Frank-
fort, KY 40601.
Pond production of freshwater prawns (Macrobrachium
rosenbergii) is becoming increasingly popular in Kentucky.
As a seasonal crop, prawns must be harvested by mid-
October to prevent losses. However, the highest demand
for the product is during the holiday period of November
through December. The ability to hold live freshwater
prawns would allow producers to address this lucrative
market. Temperature directly affects the metabolism of
poikilothermic animals and reduced temperatures might
increase survival under stressful conditions. Also, females
carrying eggs at harvest are not considered desirable by
some consumers and temperature could affect this trait.
To address this, the effect of temperature on survival of
adult freshwater prawns was evaluated under controlled
conditions in tanks for 11 weeks. Freshwater prawns re-
cently harvested from ponds (21.3 + 1.7 g) were randomly
stocked into nine 5700-liter tanks at 500 prawns/tank.
There were three replicate tanks per temperature (17, 20,
and 23°C). Prawns were fed a percentage of body weight
at maintenance levels. After 76 days, average weight was
not significantly different (P > 0.05) between treatments.
Survival was significantly higher (P < 0.05) for animals
held at 20° and 23°C (58 and 56%, respectively) than at
17°C (29%). The percentage of berried (egg carrying) fe-
males was significantly greater (P < 0.05) at 23° (13.2%)
than at 20° or 17°C (0.2 and 0%, respectively). These data
indicate that 20°C may be optimum for holding freshwater
167
prawns for market if berried females are undesirable.
Holding temperatures near 17°C appear to represent
stress conditions and result in high mortality.
BOTANY & MICROBIOLOGY
Inheritance of morphological and physiological charac-
teristics in Taraxacum officinalee ANTON M. CLEM-
MONS#* and DAVID L. ROBINSON, Department of Bi-
ology, Bellarmine College, Louisville, KY 40205.
Dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), an asexual species,
produces achenes (seeds) apomictically. Three experi-
ments were performed to explore the genetic variability
and heritability of various morphological/ physiological
traits that occur in natural populations. In the first study,
achenes from a single dandelion population were subject-
ed to a warm temperature treatment (37°C) for different
time periods (0, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 14, 16 d), followed by a 4-
d incubation at 21°C, and a final cold treatment (5°C).
Germination was assessed at the end of each temperature
treatment. The experimental control (constant 21°C) ex-
hibited the highest percent germination. In the other
treatments, a positive correlation was found between the
percent of ungerminated achenes and the duration of ex-
posure to high temperature. To examine the heritability
of achene heat tolerance, germinated achenes exposed to
8 d at 37°C, and then 21°C, were collected, grown to
maturity, and allowed to flower and set seed. Achenes
from these heat-tolerant plants (as well as control plants)
were grown to maturity to evaluate the next generation.
In the second study, achenes collected from dandelion
populations occurring in five U.S. states were germinated
and grown to maturity in a controlled environment. Anal-
ysis of leaf morphology revealed more variability between
the five populations than within them. In the third exper-
iment, achenes from 19 different fasciated (deformed)
plants were germinated and grown in a controlled envi-
ronment to examine the inheritance of their expressed fas-
ciation. These experiments help to delineate the amount
of genetic diversity in dandelion populations.
Biological effects of volatile emissions from cut turf.
MARIA L. DAVIS* and DAVID L. ROBINSON, Biology
Department, Bellarmine College, Louisville, KY 40205.
Current research on the volatile emissions emanating
from recently-mowed turfgrass indicates that these gases
may have a significant impact on the environment. The
primary purpose of this study was to observe the effect of
gaseous emissions from different species on the rate of
seed germination. In the first study, dandelion (Taraxacum
officinale) and white snakeroot (Ageratina altissima [Eu-
patorium rugosum]) seeds were placed into sealable, plas-
tic bags containing the freshly harvested foliage (cut into
ca. 4 cm lengths) from a species of plant that commonly
grows in turf. Seeds were treated with the emissions from
one of seven plant species: Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers.,
Lolium perenne, Leptochloa fascicularis, Taraxacum offt-
cinale, Trifolium repens, Glechoma hederacea, or Plantago
lanceolata. Germination rates were examined over a 18-d
168
period, and the foliage-gas treatments that incurred the
greatest effects were examined in more detail in a second
experiment. In that study, A. altissima seeds were germi-
nated in a replicated trial in the presence of cut foliage
from one of four different species (L. perenne, T. officin-
ale, T. repens, P. lanceolata) or an experimental control.
No statistically significant differences were observed for
rate of germination in any of the foliage treatments (in-
cluding the control). In addition, the effect of these gases
on crickets, a common grass-dwelling insect, will be dis-
cussed.
Identification of fecal coliform species from Lee’s
Branch at Midway, Kentucky. BEVERLY W. JUETT,*
DEBORAH EVEN, and GLENDA MARKER, Depart-
ment of Biological Sciences, Midway College, Midway, KY
40347.
Coliform species were isolated and identified from 60
total coliform counts performed in Lee’s Branch at Mid-
way, KY. Water sampling was conducted six different times
beginning in July 1996 and ending in September 1997.
Total coliform counts were determined by the Standard
Total Coliform Membrane Filter Procedure. Coliform
species isolated from Endo agar plates were transferred
to trypticase soy and MacConkey agar. The isolates were
identified by conventional biochemical methods and En-
terotube II. Identification of bacterial species in stream
water provides basic knowledge of the microbial environ-
ment of freshwater and may serve as baseline data in de-
termining if the fecal contamination of this stream is from
animals or humans.
Continuation of a study on inheritance of achene char-
acteristics in Ageratina altissima. JOANN M. LAU* and
DAVID L. ROBINSON, Department of Biology, Bellar-
mine College, Louisville, KY 40205.
Seed dormancy is a powerful means by which plants
control when and where they occur. Three major sources
for a population’s variability for dormancy are genetic di-
versity, somatic polymorphism, and microsite/temporal/bi-
ological variability. The goal of this research was to explore
the relative importance of these sources in regulating
achene (seed) germination and dormancy in white snake-
root (Ageratina altissima [Eupatorium rugosum). Last
year, white snakeroot achenes were selected for different
germination and dormancy traits, grown to maturity and
allowed to reproduce. The progeny (achenes) of these se-
lections were then examined for different germination
characteristics. Most (54%) of the progeny germinated be-
fore any cold treatment, whereas 12% germinated after a
single cold treatment. Although, on average, there were
no noticeable differences between the parental groups,
there were obvious differences between individual selec-
tions. For instance, one plant (from a non-cold-requiring
achene) produced achenes that exhibited 100% germina-
tion at room temperature, whereas another plant's prog-
eny (selected for germination after 1 cold treatment) ex-
hibited 32, 20 and 16% germination after 0, 1, and 2 cold
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
treatments, respectively. In another study, the effect of
achene size on germinability was examined by partitioning
achenes from a single population into four size categories.
Even though the weight of the largest achenes was more
than double the smallest there were no statistically signif-
icant differences in cumulative germination between any
of the size categories. Therefore, if there is somatic poly-
morphism for achene dormancy in white snakeroot it may
involve characteristics other than achene size.
CELLULAR & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
The GABAc rhol and rho2 subunit genes are differ-
entially expressed during pre- and postnatal development
in the mouse. CHRISTY COLE,* Transylvania University,
Lexington, KY 40508; and MAUREEN McCALL, Uni-
versity of Louisville, Louisville, KY.
Most inhibitory neurotransmission in the central ner-
vous system (CNS) is mediated either by glycine or gam-
ma aminobutyric acid (GABA). GABA inhibition is me-
diated by one of three receptors: GABAa, GABAb, or GA-
BAc. In the rodent, the GABAc receptor regulates the
flow of chloride ions in the bipolar cells of the retina. The
GABAc receptor may be made up of three types of sub-
units: rhol, rho2, and rho3. The GABAc rho2 subunit is
predominant throughout the CNS, however, the GABAc
tho] subunit seems to be predominant in only the bipolar
cells of the retina. These subunits are expressed at differ-
ent times in the development of the mouse. To determine
at which point in the development of the mouse the GA-
BAc rhol and rho2 subunits are expressed, total RNA was
extracted from mice at embryonic ages (E): E12.5, E14.5,
E17.5 and from retinas of mice at postnatal ages (P): P1,
P6, P13, P20. cDNA was reverse transcribed from all
RNA samples and used in a PCR based strategy to deter-
mine the time course of the expression of both the GA-
BAc rhol and rho2 subunit genes. As a control for the
amount of cDNA transcribed from each RNA sample,
beta-actin was amplified from each cDNA sample. The
expression of all three genes were tested individually using
PCR, and the amplified products were visualized using
electrophoresis. We have found that the GABAc rhol
gene and the rho2 gene are differentially expressed during
pre- and postnatal development of the mouse. The GA-
BAc rhol gene appears to begin to be expressed between
Pl and P6. The GABAc rho2 expression is present in the
youngest sample that we tested, E12.5. Although the GA-
BAc rhol and rho2 genes are thought to assemble into
functional receptors in the adult, their differential expres-
sion during development suggests that the GABAc rho2
gene may play a different role in the developing embryo
-and may assemble homomeric receptors or associate with
other GABA subunits to assemble functional receptors.
These results will also aide in further research with trans-
genic and knockout mice which are being tested to de-
termine the function of the GABAc receptor in retinal
processing.
Abstracts, 1999 Annual Meeting
CHEMISTRY
Photoacoustic measurements in biological tissues and
fluids. ANGELA L. NEWCOMB,* Department of Sci-
ence, Campbellsville University, Campbellsville, KY
49718: and JOEL MOBLEY and TUAN VO-DINH, Life
Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak
Ridge, TN 37831.
The photoacoustic (PA) effect is the generation of
acoustic waves by electromagnetic radiation. The magni-
tude of the PA response in a material is determined by its
optical absorption. We have investigated the thermally-
mediated PA response of mammalian brain tissue and glu-
cose solutions to explore the utility of PA methods for
biomedical sensing applications. We measured the PA
spectra of tissues from the cerebrum of sheep between
500-700 nm using a tunable pulsed laser for excitation.
We were able to differentiate between the gray and white
matter in our samples, which could be useful in minimally
invasive surgery. We were also able to detect the presence
of glucose in solution, which may lead to a noninvasive
method of measuring blood sugar.
HEALTH SCIENCES
Analysis of a functional digital model of the mammalian
basilar membrane. SHELLY FERRELL,* MATTHEW
E. KOGER, DAVID RICE, KENNETH M. MOOR-
MAN, and PEGGY SHADDUCK PALOMBI, Transylva-
nia University, Lexington, KY 40508.
The human auditory system functions as a processor of
sound. The processing occurs in an analog setting where
the sound stimulus is generated from a source and is di-
rected toward the ear. From the pinna, the sound travels
in the outer ear to the middle ear, through the cochlea
where the basilar membrane vibrates to stimulate the hair
cells. In this pathway the signal is transduced from a wave
front to an electrical signal. This is also the critical point
where the information is translated into a signal that the
brain can process. The sound signal has a non-linear re-
lation to the cochlear output. For a fully functioning com-
puter model to simulate the process of basilar membrane
function, it must contain the non-linear properties that the
basilar membrane incorporates into the signal processing.
Other minor inputs to the main sound wave are from
sources such as pinna vibration, skull vibration, ossicular
vibration, and residual tympanic membrane vibration. We
attempted to evaluate a “best” computer model of audi-
tory processing for accurate models that incorporate con-
sistent non-linear properties and accurately use the other
input conditions to fine tune and purify the simulation.
We determined that the LUTEar model developed by Ray
Meddis and his colleagues, contains a developed program
that has moderately accurate non-linear properties. The
consistency of the digital diagrams compared to physio-
logical data is not as accurate as we would like. The overall
processing shape is similar; however, the actual numbers
are not within an acceptable percent error. Our next steps
will be to reprogram portions of the models to achieve a
169
more accurate model, to correct minor non-linear prop-
erty errors, and to increase incorporation of other stimuli
to the processing output.
Examination of the validity of the pre-emphasis filter in
an auditory system model. MATTHEW E. KOGER,*
SHELLY FERRELL, DAVID RICE, KENNETH M.
MOORMAN, and PEGGY SHADDUCK PALOMBI,
Transylvania University, Lexington, KY 40508.
LUTEar, a mammalian auditory system computer mod-
el, was examined to determine whether it could be ma-
nipulated to correctly model aged hearing. The validity of
the pre-emphasis filter in LUTEar was investigated using
previously published physiological data. The pre-emphasis
filter corresponded with the outer and middle ear in the
mammalian auditory system. It takes the input signal and
passes it through a mathematical filter. This output is next
sent to the basilar membrane filter. An investigation of the
literature led to an understanding of the structure and
function of the outer and middle ear; based on this un-
derstanding, physiological data was gathered from the lit-
erature and compared to data from LUTEar gathered by
Meddis and Hewitt (1991). It was determined that LU-
TEar amplified incoming sound in the outer and middle
ear ten to twenty decibels less than what physiological
data has found. However, it was determined that the basic
filter shape of the amplification curve of the pre-emphasis
filter closely matched the curve in physiological data.
Next, the feasibility of altering the parameters of the pre-
emphasis filter for aged hearing was explored. The pre-
emphasis filter is a mathematical equation derived from a
digital band-pass filter. The difficulty in altering this equa-
tion to accurately represent aged hearing was centered in
the non-physiological based variables in the filter. It was
determined that a greater study of this was needed.
Therefore, changes that incorporate biological variables
will have to be made to the digital band-pass filter in order
to correctly model aged hearing.
A radioprotective drug combination in mice. K. S. KU-
MAR, V. SRINIVASAN, D. L. PALAZZOLO,* E. P.
CLARK, and T. M. SEED, Radiation Medicine Depart-
ment, Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute, Be-
thesda, MD 20889; and Pikeville College School of Os-
teopathic Medicine, Pikeville, KY 41501.
Thiol drugs are very effective radioprotective agents.
However, the doses required to protect are also very toxic.
One approach to minimize toxicity is to combine low dos-
es of thiols with other non-thiol radioprotective agents.
The thiol drug used was S-2-(3-methylaminopropylami-
no)-ethylphosphorothioic acid (WR-3689; 50 mg/kg), a
methylated derivative of amifostine, which is used in che-
motherapy to reduce the cis-platinum-induced nephrotox-
icity. The non-thiols used were monophosphoryl lipid A
(MPL, 0.5 mg/kg), an immunomodulator, and two pros-
taglandins—iloprost (ILO, 0.1 mg/kg), and misoprostol
(MIS, 0.1 mg/kg). Individually, these doses of WR-3689
and MPL are known to be non-toxic, while ILO and
170
MISO are known to be toxic. In this study, male CD2F1
mice were given these agents intraperitoneally (IP) 30
minutes before irradiation with 10 Gy of 60Co at 1 Gy/
minute, and survival was monitored for 30 d. When given
individually, none of drugs were protective, as indicated
by 0% survival. However, when all four agents were com-
bined and given as a single IP injection, the survival rate
increased to 50% and a dose reduction factor of 1.23 was
calculated indicating significant radioprotection. In addi-
tion, the combined drug treatment appeared to be less
toxic. These results indicate that the toxicity of radiopro-
tectants at higher doses can be reduced by combining
them at lower doses without compromising the radiopro-
tective efficacy.
MATHEMATICS
Superficial coset curiosities. JAMES B. BARKSDALE
JR., Department of Mathematics, Western Kentucky Uni-
versity, Bowling Green, KY 42101.
This presentation exhibits several rudimentary propo-
sitions conceming coset notions from elementary group
theory. Superficial curiosities which result from slight
statement modifications of these fundamental theorems
and relationships are then noted and discussed. Such pre-
sentation content could serve as an enrichment theme (or
as a special project topic) for undergraduate mathematics
courses.
Open mindedness to low-tech teaching methods. AUS-
TIN FRENCH, Department of Mathematics/Physics/
CSC, Georgetown College, Georgetown, KY 40324.
An effective teaching method involving (1) no note-tak-
ing by students (but the students have a clear set of notes),
(2) no homework grading by the instructor for outside
work, (3) a text that costs a maximum of $9, (4) a system
where it is extremely hard for a student to cheat and
where the student's grade measures what the student
knows (not that the student was in a group with someone
that knew something and they got that student's grade),
(5) a mixture of practice and creativity is expected by the
student, (6) knowing absolutely perfectly some hard prob-
lem types is rewarded, (7) where two overhead projectors
are used, and (8) transparencies are made from neat pen-
cil-written notes . . . will be introduced. The concept of
overheads as the text will be shown. Surgical strike class
questions, microquizzes, presentations, and jugular prob-
lems will be described in this unique grading system,
which is simply fun to teach by and does not squeeze all
of the blood out of the teacher's turnip to use this method.
Two overheads are used in conjunction with transparen-
cies from pencil-written overheads comprising the text for
the course. This talk should help you to inform the tech-
nologically gullible that just because something involves
high-tech methods, it does not necessarily mean it is best
to use technology and that all need to be open-minded
about other teaching methods.
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
PHYSICS & ASTRONOMY
Searching for hydrogen gas in shell galaxies. SEPPO
LAINE,* Department of Physics and Astronomy, Univer-
sity of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506, STEPHEN T.
GOTTESMAN and KARL E. HAISCH JR., Department
of Astronomy, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
32611; and BENJAMIN K. MALPHRUS, Department of
Physical Sciences, Morehead State University, Morehead,
KY 40351.
Recent images of the hydrogen line emission from shell
galaxies have given new clues about the origin of the
shells. Detection of gaseous material associated with these
optical features gives us an opportunity to investigate the
formation mechanism of shells and even of the associated
lenticular or elliptical galaxies. Therefore, we sought to
expand the sample of shell galaxies that could be mapped
in the 21-cm hydrogen line. We used the 140-ft telescope
of the National Radio Astronomy Observatory at Green
Bank, WV to attempt to detect the 21-cm emission line
in 9 shell galaxies. The observations were centered at the
frequency of the spectral line, corresponding to the sys-
temic velocity of the underlying galaxy. The total on-
source integration times varied between 3 and 11 hours.
We detected emission from the direction of two shell sys-
tems, NGC 3610 and NGC 4382. However, NGC 4382
has a nearby disk galaxy within the 20 aremin beam of the
telescope. Therefore, the more likely candidate for detec-
tion of gas associated with shells is in NGC 3610. Since
the signal extends over a rather narrow range of velocities
and the optical images show a small, possibly interacting
galaxy within the radio telescope beam, the explanation
for this detection is unclear. Recent Very Large Array 21-
cm observations of NGC 3610 should resolve the source
of the hydrogen line emission.
PHYSIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY
Effect of Tamoxifen, Genistein, and vitamin E on the
activity of the cysteine proteases Cathepsin L and Ca-
thepsin B and their endogenous inhibitors in human an-
drogen-independent prostate cancer cell lines. T. BURC-
CHIO,* E. HUGO, M. MARKEY, B. PHILLIPS, A.
BURNS, D. DARIA, J. THOMPSON, T. HOLDEN, E.
McDONOUGH, G. HENSON, D. FRITZ, B. HURST,
and J. H. CARTER, Wood Hudson Cancer Research Lab-
oratory, Newport, KY 41071.
Metastatic prostate cancer is a leading cause of death
in men. Initially, most forms of this cancer are repressed
by the removal of androgens and several treatment cours-
es are based on this phenomenon. Growth inhibition by
androgen removal, however, is often transient, with the
carcinoma growth becoming independent of exogenous
androgens. The proliferation of tumor cells correlates with
the levels of the lysosomal proteases Cathepsin B (CB)
and Cathepsin L (CL) as well as the endogenous inhibitors
(CPI) of these enzymes. The role of these proteins in the
progression of prostate carcinoma (CaP) is most likely one
of protein turnover, however, we cannot rule out the pos-
Abstracts, 1999 Annual Meeting
sibility of some interaction with the process of metastasis.
We have previously demonstrated that Tamoxifen ((Z)2-
[4-(1,2-diphenyl-1-buteny]) phenoxy]-N, N-dimethyle-
thanamine 2-hydroxy-1,2,3- propanetricarboxylate) (Tam),
an antiestrogen, Genistein (4",5,7-trihydroxyisoflavone)
(Gen), a soy phytoestrogen, and vitamin E (a-tocopherol
succinate) (VitE) have a potent growth inhibitory effect
on three cell lines derived from metastatic prostate ad-
enocarinomas: LNCaP, DU-145, and PC-3. In this study,
we have examined the effects of these compounds on the
levels of CB, CL and CPI both intracellularly and secreted
into the medium. We find that after exposure to these
compounds the levels of CB and CL drop below the level
of detection. CPI levels, while falling dramatically, remain
detectible and are found to have the same specific activity
(% protease inhibition/mg protein) as in growing cells.
Examination of the stability of the acidic domain of N-
arginine dibasic convertase, an opioid specific peptidase.
KELLI CARPENTER* and EVA CSUHAI, Department
of Chemistry, Transylvania University, 300 North Broad-
way, Lexington, KY 40508.
N-arginine dibasic convertase (NRDc) is a metallopep-
tidase. NRDc has been cloned and sequenced and has
been shown to contain an unusually large number of acid-
ic residues. It has been suggested that polyamines may
regulate the activity of NRDc by binding to acidic residues
located at the anionic domain of the enzyme [Csuhai et
al. (1998) Biochemistry 37, 3787-3794]. The acidic do-
main of NRDe was produced and purified as a GST fusion
protein in these experiments in order to run stability tests
in the future by placing the fusion protein in a variety of
media. The GST fusion proteins containing the acidic do-
main of mouse NRDc or human NRDc, as well as a con-
trol containing GST alone were scanned in a Circular Di-
chroism Spectrophotometer with and without the poly-
amine spermine in order to determine any structural ef-
fects spermine may have on the enzyme. There was no
significant change in the percentage of alpha-helix, beta-
turn, beta-sheet, or random portions in the enzyme.
Therefore, spermine does not appear to have any signifi-
cant effect on the secondary structure of the fragment
containing the acidic domain of NRDc. Mouse NRDc was
scanned in a Circular Dichroism Spectrophotometer with
a temperature gradient in order to determine the effect
that spermine has on the enzyme’s heat stability. A con-
centration of 1 mM of spermine was used in the tests.
There was no distinct heat transition observed under these
conditions. Therefore, based on these results, spermine
does not appear to affect the structure and stability of the
acidic domain of NRDc.
SCIENCE EDUCATION
Classroom cheating: A survey. JOHN G. SHIBER,
Prestonsburg Community College, Prestonsburg, KY
41653.
A survey of 877 high school students from four eastern
Kentucky counties was conducted to determine the stu-
ial
dents’ attitude toward classroom cheating. Results: 38%
said cheating in school is alright; 62% said it is wrong but
82% have done it; 95% have witnessed it; 67% would let
friends copy their test answers if asked; 81% agreed pla-
giarism is cheating, and 56% admitted having done it, al-
though 34% didn’t know at the time they were plagiariz-
ing; 33% do not regard copying friends’ homework as
cheating; 65% believe teachers cheat when they give
grades higher or lower than students earn; 41% have been
given a higher grade than they deserved at one time or
other but only half brought it to the teacher's attention:
and 47% have noticed teachers overlooking cheating, and,
of these, 41% attribute it to teachers not caring what stu-
dents do, 35% to favoritism, and 24% to their not wanting
to embarrass the student or their desire to help the stu-
dent pass the course. Compared to responses of 630 com-
munity college students to the same survey questions (Shi-
ber 1999), those reported here suggest that high schoolers
have a far more liberal attitude towards cheating and
much greater experience with it than their older counter-
parts. The two groups’ ideas about why students cheat are
similar, however, with laziness to do work ranking first,
lack of study time due to extra-curricular activities or fam-
ily/job obligations second, too much pressure on good
grades third, ineffective test-monitoring fourth, and, fi-
nally, many said students cheat because everybody cheats.
Megalitter: An Appalachian deformity. J. SMITH* and
J. SHIBER, Prestonsburg Community College, Prestons-
burg, KY 41653.
Three designated points, located on or near the banks
of eastern Kentucky’s Paintsville Lake, were systematically
investigated for the first time for the presence, type, and
abundance of megalitter over a 2-month period. Megal-
itter was collected by hand from each site every 2 weeks
in March/ April 1999. It was sorted according to the type
of material it was made from, counted, and recorded. By
far, the most abundant type of megalitter was plastic, then
styrofoam, paper/clothing, metals, and glass. As the weath-
er warmed and more people frequented the park, the oc-
currence of megalitter tripled at the three locations. The
incidence of plastic more than quadrupled. This pilot
study indicates that a severe megalitter problem continues
to exist within the environs of Paintsville Lake Park, de-
spite the annual community clean-ups and daily efforts of
the park personnel. The seriousness of illegal dumping
and littering, not only in this park, but all over eastern
Kentucky and other regions of the state, as witnessed by
volunteers in the government-funded P.R.LD.E. Program,
makes it imperative that a mandatory educational program
on waste management be implemented by the Common-
wealth in the earliest stages of public schooling and main-
tained within the science curriculum throughout high
school. Furthermore, appropriate penalties for littering
and dumping can only be truly effective if more manpow-
er is provided to enforce them, both in our public recre-
ation facilities and the outlying communities.
172
ZOOLOGY & ENTOMOLOGY
The effects of pH levels on diversity and density of
aquatic microorganisms. CHRIS ALTMAN and POLLY
FROSTMAN,* Department of Biology, Transylvania Uni-
versity, Lexington, KY 40508.
To look at the potential effects of acid rain, we designed
an experiment to determine whether or not there is a sig-
nificant correlation between pH levels and diversity and/
or density of aquatic microorganisms. Water was collected
from a man-made lake and divided into nine equal sam-
ples. Each sample was examined to determine density and
diversity under normal pH conditions. Then 20 ml of each
sample (1-9) were removed. Half of these samples had
their pH lowered to 6-6.5 and the other half had their
pH lowered to 4 by adding aqueous sulfuric acid
(H2S04). Then the density and diversity of microorgan-
isms present in each acidified sample was examined. Each
set of data showed significant differences between the
control samples and the acidified samples suggesting that
the pH levels do affect the diversity and density of aquatic
microorganisms. The pH levels used in this experiment
are comparable to levels that could be caused by acid rain
suggesting that acid rain can overcome the buffering ca-
pacity of water and affect aquatic ecosystems.
Optimal foraging in chickens (Gallus domesticus). SU-
MEET R. BHATT and BRIAN A. CAUDILL,* Department
of Biology, Transylvania University, Lexington, KY, 40508.
We conducted a series of experiments to determine wheth-
er domesticated chickens (Gallus domesticus) were able to
forage optimally under three different feeding conditions.
Our study was conducted on three barnyard roosters and 10
hens fed at two feeding stations 3 m apart. In our first ex-
periment, the chickens were presented with three times as
much food at one feeding station as at the other. In the
second experiment, chickens were fed twice as fast at one
station as at the other. And in the third experiment, whole
com kemels were fed at one station, and an equivalent num-
ber of half com kemels were fed at the other. The chickens
showed a significant preference for feeding at the high quan-
tity feeding station (first experiment) and the high feeding
rate station (second experiment), but showed no significant
preference for large food items over small (third experiment).
This suggests that chickens are capable of making some basic
decisions about where to forage to maximize their energy
intake per unit time, although they did not seem very capable
at discriminating between different sizes of food items that
were presented in equal quantities.
Effects of continual food restriction on reproductive de-
velopment and body organs in male house mice (Mus mus-
culus). MICHAEL B. BOONE* and TERRY L. DERTING,
Department of Biological Sciences, Murray State University,
Murray, KY 42071.
Prior research has shown that moderate levels of inter-
mittent food restriction have no negative effect on the repro-
ductive development of male house mice. We determined
the effects of moderate but continual food restriction on de-
Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
velopment of the reproductive and digestive systems in post-
weaning male house mice. We tested the null hypothesis that
continual food restriction does not affect the level of testos-
terone or the masses of reproductive and body organs. Food
intake of post-weaning males was restricted daily in a manner
that prevented growth in overall body mass of the male. The
males were sacrificed after 21 d and their level of testoster-
one and the wet and dry masses of their reproductive and
other body organs were measured and compared with similar
data from control males. The wet and dry masses of the testes
were significantly lower in the food-restricted males. In con-
trast, testosterone levels of the food-restricted males were
55% higher, but not significantly different, compared with
control males. The wet and dry mass of the stomach, but not
the cecum, small intestine, and colon, was significantly heavi-
er in food-restricted males compared with control males. Our
results, in combination with those of studies using intermit-
tent food-restriction, indicate that when food resources are
limited energy is allocated preferentially to processes neces-
sary for reproduction (e.g., testosterone production for sper-
matogenesis). A negative impact of food restriction on repro-
ductive processes in mammals may only occur when food
restriction is severe.
Richness of terrestrial vertebrate species in Kentucky.
MATTHEW L. COLE,* TERRY L. DERTING, and HOW-
ARD WHITEMAN, Department of Biological Sciences,
Murray State University, Murray, KY 40271.
To explore the diversity of terrestrial vertebrate species in
Kentucky, we examined the distribution of species using rich-
ness (number of species) as an index of diversity. We evalu-
ated species richness for amphibians, breeding birds, mam-
mals, reptiles, and all terrestrial vertebrates combined using
two different regional delineations from the US Forest Ser-
vice: ecoregions and physiographic provinces. Using species
ranges obtained from the scientific literature, species richness
was calculated for each pixel (600 X 600 m) across the state.
We overlaid the species richness maps with coverages of the
ecoregions and provinces of Kentucky using a geographic in-
formation system (GIS). Among the ecoregions and provinc-
es, mean species richness differed most for reptiles, partic-
ularly among the squamates. Mean species richness was high-
est for reptiles in the Mississippi Embayment and lowest in
the Cumberland Mountains, a difference of 78%. In contrast,
mean species richness was highest for amphibians and mam-
mals in the Cumberland Mountains and lowest in the Blue-
grass Region, a difference of approximately 20%. The varia-
tion in mean species richness for breeding birds was minimal,
differing by no more than 10% among the physiographic
provinces. Largely due to the high number of reptile species,
mean species richness was 10-15% higher in the western-
most ecoregion and provinces compared with other geo-
graphic areas. Areas of highest species richness of terrestrial
‘vertebrates were the Mississippi Embayment, Mississippi Al-
luvial Basin, and Cumberland Mountains. Management plans
that protect these “hotspots” of species diversity will be nec-
essary if the biodiversity of vertebrates in Kentucky is to be
maintained.
J. Ky. Acad. Sci. 61(2):173. 2000.
List of Reviewers for Volume 61 of Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science
David M. Brandenburg
Laura Burford
Jerry Carpenter
Sunni L. Carr
Ronald R. Cicerello
Maria Falbo
Blaine Ferrell
Michael A. Flannery
Larry A. Giesmann
Stanley Hedeen
Miriam S. Kannan
Laurie Lawrence
Barney Lipscomb
James O. Luken
Brainerd Palmer-Ball
Debra K. Pearce
173
Thomas C. Rambo
Patrick Schultheis
Thomas Sproat
Karl Vogler
Mel L. Warren Jr.
Gordon K. Weddle
Gary L. Uglem
George Yatskievych
J. Ky. Acad. Sci. 61(2):174-194. 2000.
INDEX TO VOLUME 61
Compiled by Varley Wiedeman
Abies fraseri, 52
Abietinella abietina, 117
ABSTRACTS FROM 1999 KAS
MEETING, 165-172
Acadian, 87
Accipiter striatus, 127
Acentrella ampla, 20
Acer pensylvanicum, 54
A. rubrum, 11, 54
A. saccharum, 11, 54
A. spicatum, 117
Achalarus lyciades, 86
Acipenser fulvescens, 125
Acleris youngana, 106
Aconitum uncinatum, 117
Acornshell, 130
Acorus calamus, 23, 26, 27
Acrobasis vaccinii, 106
Acroneuria, 14, 15
A. caroliniensis, 20
Actinastrum gracillimum, 36, 37
Actitis macularia, 127
Adams cave beetle, lesser, 125
ADAMS, KELLY, 62, 99
Adiantum capillus-veneris, 117
Adlumia fungosa, 117
Admiral
red, 87
white, 87
Aeschnidae, 21
Aesculus octandra, 11
A. pavia, 117
Agalinis auriculata, 117
A. obtusifolia, 117
A. skinneriana, 117
Agalis milberti, 87
Agastache scrophulariifolia, 117
Ageaius phoeniceus, 164
Ageratina altissima, 167, 168
inheritance of achene character-
istics in, 168
A. luciae-brauniae, 117
Agraulis vanillae, 87
Agricultural sciences, 165—167
Agrimonia, 146-162
in Kentucky, 146-162
A. eupatoria, 144, 147, 154, 155,
157-159
A. eupatoria X A. procera, 157
A. gryposepala, 117, 146, 147, 150,
151-154, 157, 158
A. incisa, 156
A. microcarpa, 146, 154, 155, 157
A. nipponica x A. pilosa var. japoni-
ca, 157
A. parviflora, 146-148, 150, 151—
158
A. pilosa, 157, 158
A. pubescens, 146, 147, 150, 151—
153, 157
. rostellata, 146, 147, 150, 151-153
. striata, 146, 155, 157, 158
. suaveolens, 146
> Sr PSS
. sylvatica, 146
Agropyron spicatum, 92
Aimophila aestivalis, 127
Air breathing insects, control of,
166-167
Alabama lip fern, 118
Alabama shad, 125
Alasmidonta marginata, 124
A. atropurpurea, 124
Algae, of Land Between the Lakes,
34-45
Allegheny chinkapin, 118
Allegheny stonecrop, 122
Alligator gar, 125
Alligator snapping turtle, 127
Allocapnia sp., 20
Alloperla sp., 20
Alosa alabamae, 125
ALTMAN, CHRIS, 171
Amblyopsis spelaea, 125
Amblyscirtes aesculapius, 86
A. belli, 86
A. hegon, 86
A. vialis, 86
Amelanchier laevis, 54
Ameletidae, 20
Ameletus, 15
A. sp., 20
American barberry, 117
American bison, 130
American bitten, 127
American brook trout, 126
American burying beetle, 125
American chaffseed, 122
American chestnut, 52, 118
American coot, 127
American copper, 87
American cow-wheat, 120
American crow, 53, 54
American crow-wheat, 120
American frog’s-bit, 120
American golden-saxifrage, 118
American goldfinch, 56
174
American lady, 87
American lily-of-the-valley, 118
American redstart, 56
American snout butterfly, 87
American speedwell, 123
American water-pennywort, 119
American wintergreen, 121
Amianthium muscitoxicum, 117
Ammi majus, 159
Ammocrypta clara, 125
A. vivax, 130
Ammodramus henslowii, 127
Amphibians, 126-127
Amphinemura, 15
A. delosa, 20
Amphipod, 125
Amphipod, Bousfield’s, 124
Amphiuma, three-toed, 126
Amphiuma tridactylum, 126
Amsonia tabernaemontana var. gat-
tingeri, 117
Anaea andria, 87
Anartia jatrophae, 87
Anas clypeata, 127
A. discors, 127
Anatrytone logan, 86
Ancylid, domed, 123
Ancyloxipha numitor, 86
Anemone, Canada, 117
Anemone canadensis, 117
Angelica, filmy, 117
Angelica triquinata, 117
Angled riffleshell, 130
Anglepod, Carolina, 120
Anguispira rugoderma, 123
Anhinga, 130
Anhinga anhinga, 130
Animal source oils, 166—167
effectiveness on air breathing in-
sects, 166-167
Animals, 123-128, 130
Ankistrodesmus falcatus, 34, 35
A. spiralis, 36, 37
Anodontoides denigratus, 124
Anomodon rugelii, 117
Antaeotricha osseela, 105
Anthocharis midea, 87
Anthomyia, 155
ANTONIOUS, GEORGE F., 23,
165
Antroselatus spiralis, 123
Apalone mutica mutica, 127
Apamea, undescribed species, 107
Aphrodite fritillary, 87
Apidae, 155
Apioblasma haysiana, 130
Apios priceana, 117
Apis, 155
Aporrectodea, 3
Appalachian blue, 87
Appalachian brown, 87
Appalachian bugbane, 118
Appalachian grizzled skipper, 125
Appalachian rosinweed, 122
Appalachian sandwort, 120
Appalachian sedge, 118
Appalachina chilhoweensis, 123
Aquatic microorganisms, 171
density, 171
diversity, 171
effects of pH levels on, 171
Arabis hirsuta var. adpressipilis, 117
A. missouriensis, 117
A. perstellata, 117
Archilochus colubris, 53
Ardea alba, 127
A. herodias, 127
Aristida ramosissima, 117
Armoracia lacustris, 117
Armored rocksnail, 123
Arrow head, 27
Arrow-wood, Missouri, 123
Arrowhead, delta, 122
grass-leaf, 122
sessile-fruit, 122
Arrowwood, downy, 123
Arthrodesmus convergens, 40, 41
A. extensus, 40, 41
A. octocomis, 40, 41
Artificial nest density, 46-49
effect on Canada Goose, 46-49
Ascia, 155
Asellidae, 22
Ashcamp cave beetle, 127
Ashy darter, 70, 126
Asimina triloba, 163, 164
Asio flammeus, 127
A. otus, 127
Aster
barrens silky, 117
eastern silvery, 117
low rough, 117
Rockcastle, 117
Tennessee, 117
Texas, 117
white heath, 117
whorled, 117
Aster acuminatus, 117
A. concolor, 117
A. drummondii var. texanus, 117
A. hemisphericus, 117
Index to Volume 61
A. pilosus var. priceae, 117
A. pratensis, 117
A. radula, 117
A. saxicastellii, 117
Asterocampa celtis, 87
A. clyton, 87
Atalopedes campestris, 86
Atlides halesus, 87
Atractosteus spatula, 125
Atrichapogon sp., 21
Atrytonopsis hianna, 86
Auditory system model, 169
pre-emphasis filter in, 169
Aureolaria patula, 117
Autochton cellus, 86
Azalea, hoary, 121
Azure
dusky, 87
spring, 87
Azygiidae, 60-62, 99-104
Baby-blue-eyes, small-flower, 121
Bachman’s sparrow, 127
Bachman’s warbler, 130
Baetidae, 20
Baetis sp., 20
B. flavistriga, 20
B. intercalaris, 15, 20
B. tricaudatus, 15, 20
BAIRD, NANCY DISHER, 83
Bald eagle, 127
Baltimore checkerspot, 87
Bambusina brebissonii, 44, 45
Banded darter, 70
Banded 87
Bank swallow, 128
Baptisia australis var. minor, 117
B. bracteata var. leucophaea, 117
B. tinctoria, 117
Barbara’s-buttons, 120
Barbed rattlesnake-root, 121
Barberry, American, 117
Barbicambarus comatus, 124
Barking treefrog, 127
BARKSDALE, JAMES B., JR., 170
Barn owl, 128
feeding habits, 163-164
Barrens silky aster, 117
Bartonia virginica, 117
Bartramia longicauda, 127
Bashful bulrush, 122
Bass
hybrid striped, 166
sunshine, 166
diets for, 166
Basswood, 54
Bat
evening, 128
Rafinesque’s big-eared, 128
Virginia big-eared, 128
Battus philenor, 86
B. polydamas, 87
175
Bay starvine, 122
Beak-rush, woodland, 122
Beaked-rush
globe, 121
tall, 121
Bean
Cumberland, 124
rayed, 124
Bear, black, 128
Bearded skeleton, 119
Beaver cave beetle, 125
BEBE, F. N., 108
Beebalm, spotted, 120
Beetle
American burying, 125
Ashcamp cave, 125
beaver cave, 125
bold cave, 125
cave, 125
Clifton cave, 125
concealed cave, 125
Cub Run Cave, 125
Garman’s cave, 125
Greater Adams Cave, 125
hidden cave, 125
icebox cave, 125
lesser Adams cave, 125
limestone cave, 125
Louisville cave, 125
Old Well Cave, 125
Roger's cave, 125
round-headed cave, 125
scholarly cave, 12
sixbanded longhorn, 125
Stevens Creek Cave, 125
surprising cave, 125
Tatum Cave, Little Black Moun-
tain, 50-59
Bird-voiced treefrog, 126
Birds, breeding, 127-128, 130
Bishops-weed
eastern mock, 121
mock, 121
Nuttall’s mock, 121
Bison, American, 130
Bittern
~ American, 127
least, 127
Bivalva, 20
Black bear, 128
Black buffalo, 126
Black locust, 54, 56
Black lordithon rove beetle, 125
Black swallowtail, 87
Black tern, 130
Black-and-white warbler, 56
Black-crowned night-heron, 127
Black-throated blue warbler, 54-56
Blackberry, smooth, 122
Blackbird, red-winged, 164
Blackburnian warbler, 50, 53, 55,
127
Blackfin sucker, 126
Blackfoot quillwort, 120
176 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Blackside dace, 126
Blacktail redhorse, 126
Blacktail shiner, 125
Bladderpod
Lescur's, 120
Lesquereux’s, 120
Bladderwort, greater, 123
Bladetooth, Virginia, 123
Blarina sp., 163
B. brevicaudad, 164
Blazingstar, slender, 120
Bleufer, 124
Bloodfin darter, 70
Blossom
tubercled, 130
yellow, 130
Blotched chub, 126
Blotchside logperch, 130
Blue grass, drooping, 121
Blue heron
great, 127
little, 127
Blue jasmine leather-flower, 118
Blue jay, 54
Blue monkshood, 117
Blue mud-plantain, 117
Blue scorpion-weed, 121
Blue water I., 23, 26, 27
Blue wild indigo, 117
Blue
Appalachian, 87
eastern tailed, 87
marine, 87
silvery, 87
Blue-flower coyote-thistle, 119
Blue-headed vireo, 55
Blue-joint reed 118
Blue-star, eastern, 117
Blue-winged teal, 127
Blue-winged warbler, 55
Bluebreast darter, 70
Bluecurls, narrow-leaved, 123
Bluegill, 73
Bluets
clustered, 121
Michaux’s, 119
Blunt mountain-mint, 121
Blunt-lobe grapefern, 117
Bluntface shiner, 125
Bobolink, 127
Bog club-moss
northern, 120
southern, 120
Bog goldenrod, southern, 122
Bog lemming, southern, 163, 164
Bog rush, 120
Bog sedge
brown, 118
prickly, 118
BOIADGIEVA, EMILIA 62, 99
Bold cave beetle, 125
Boloria bellona, 87
B. selene myrina, 87
Boluteloua curtipendula, 118
Bombus, 155
Bonasa umbellus, 53
BONNEY, TERA M., 165, 166
BOONE, MICHAEL B., 171
Borer moth, rattlesnake-master, 125
Bos bison, 130
Botany & Microbiology, 167—168
Botaurus lentiginosus, 127
Botrychium matricariifolium, 117
B. oneidense, 117
Botryococcus braunii, 36, 37
Bottlebrush crayfish, 124
Bottomland lichen, 117
Bousfield’s amphipod, 124
Boyeria vinosa, 21
Boykinia aconitifolia, 118
Brachythecium populeum, 117
Branched three-awn 117
Branta canadensis, 46
Braun’s rock-cress, 117
Breeding birds, 127-128, 130
Brighteye darter, 126
Brilla sp., 22
Bristly sedge, 118
Broad-banded water snake, 127
Broad-leaf golden-aster, 119
Broad-winged skipper, 86
Broadleaf water-milfoil, 121
Broadwing sedge, 118
Broken-dash
northerm, 86
southern, 86
Bronze copper, 87
Brook lamprey
mountain, 126
northern, 126
southern, 126
Brook saxifrage, 118
Brook snaketail, 125
Brook trout, American, 126
Broomrape, Louisiana, 121
Brown bog sedge, 118
Brown creeper, 127
Brown elfin, 87
Brown madtom, 126
Brown, Appalachian, 87
BROWN, D. KEVIN, 133
BROWN, HETTI A., 164
BROWN, SHAWN, 165
Brown-headed cowbird, 50, 54, 56
Bryocamptus morrisoni elegans, 124
Bryum cyclophyllum, 117
B. miniatum, 117
Bubulcus ibis, 127
Buckeye
common, 87
red, 117
Buckley's goldenrod, 122
Buffalo clover, 123—
running, 123
Buffalo, black, 126
Bugbane, Appalachian, 118
Bulbochaete varians, 36, 38
Bull paspalum, 121
Bulrush
bashful, 122
Hall’s, 122
river, 122
slender, 122
softstem, 23, 26, 27
Bunchflower, Virginia, 120
Bunting, indigo, 56
Bur-reed, large, 122
Burbot, 126
Burhead, 119
dwarf, 119
Burnet, Canada, 122
BURNS, A., 170
BURRCCHIO, T., 170
Burrowing mayfly, 125
robust pentagenian, 130
Burying beetle, American, 125
Bush’s muhly, 120
Bush-clover
round-head, 120
tall, 120
Butler's quillwort, 120
Buttercup, 27
Butterflies, Kentucky, 86-87
Butterfly, American snout, 87
Button, wrinkled, 123
Cabbage white, 87
Cabomba caroliniana, 118
Caddisflies, 15
Helma’s net-spinning, 125
limnephilid, 125
Cadmium, effect of on rats, 108—
114
Caecidotea sp., 22
C. barri, 124
Cajun dwarf crayfish, 124
Calamagrostis canadensis var. ma-
couniana, 118
C. porteri ssp. insperata, 118
C. porteri ssp. porteri, 118
Calephelis borealis, 87
C. mutica, 87
Calla lily, 27
Callirhoe alcaeoides, 118
Callophrys augustuius, 87
C. grynea, 87
C. henrici, 87
C. irus, 87
C. niphon, 87
Calopogon tuberosus, 118
Calopterygidae, 21
Calopteryx sp., 21
Caloptilia fraxinella, 105
Caltha palustris var. palustris, 130
Calycanthus floridus var. glaucus,
118
Calycopis cecrops, 87
Calylophus serrulatus, 118
Cambarellus puer, 124
C. shufeldtii, 124
Cambaridae, 22
Cambarus parvoculus, 124
C. veteranus, 124
CAMPBELL, JULIAN J. N., 88
Campephilus principalis, 130
Campostoma anomalum, 75
Canada anemone, 117
Canada burnet, 122
Canada frostweed, 119
Canada goose, 46-49
effect of artificial nest density on,
46-49
effect of wetland size on, 46-49
in constructed wetlands, 46-49
Canada warbler, 50, 53, 55, 128
Canadian yew, 123
Canby’s mountain-lover, 121
Canis lupus, 130
C. rufus, 130
Canola meal, 166
in diets for fish, 166
Capniidae, 20
Caprifoliaceae, 30-33
Cardinal flower, 27
Cardinal, northern, 53, 56
Cardinalis cardinalis, 53
Carduelis tristis, 53, 56
Carex aestivalis, 118
. alata, 118
appalachica, 118
. atlantica ssp. capillacea, 118
. austrocaroliniana, 118
buxbaumii, 118
comosa, 118
crawei, 118
crebriflora, 118
decomposita, 118
gigantea, 118
hystericina, 118
joonii, 118
juniperorum, 118
lanuginosa, 118
leptonervia, 118
reniformis, 118
roanensis, 118
rugosperma, 118
. seorsa, 118
stipata var. maxima, 118
. Straminea, 118
. tetanica, 118
Carolina anglepod, 120
Carolina fanwort, 118
Carolina larkspur, 119
Carolina parakeet, 130
Carolina satyr, 87
Carolina wren, 56
Carolina yellow-eye, 123
CARPENTER, KELLI, 171
Carya spp., 11, 54
Carya aquatica, 118
Castanea dentata, 52, 118
C. pumila, 118
Castilleja coccinea, 118
Catchfly
ovate, 122
royal, 122
QNNNAANANNANAAANAAAANANANANAO
Index to Volume 61
Catharus fuscescens, 53, 55
Catspaw, 124
white, 130
Cattails, 23-27
Cattle egret, 127
CAUDILL, BRIAN A., 171
CAUDILL, TERESA L., 46
Cave beetle, 125
Ashcamp, 125
beaver, 125
bold, 125
Clifton, 125
concealed, 125
Garman’s, 125
hidden, 125
icebox, 125
lesser Adams, 125
limestone, 125
Louisville, 125
Roger's, 125
round-headed, 125
scholarly, 125
surprising, 125
Cave isopod, Clifton, 124
Cavefish
northerm, 125
southern, 126
Cavesnail, shaggy, 123
Ceanothus herbaceus, 118
Cedar sedge, 118
Celastrina argiolus ladon, 87
Celastrina ebenina, 87
C. neglectamajor, 87
Celephelis mutica, 125
Celithemis verna, 125
Cellular & Molecular Biology, 168
Central mudminnow, 126
Central stoneroller, 75
Centroptilum sp., 20
Ceratopogonidae, 21
Ceratopsyche spama, 21
Cercyonis peagala, 87
Certhia americana, 127
Cerulean warbler, 50, 53
Cervus elaphus, 130
Chaetophorales, 36
Chaffseed, American, 122
Chain pickerel, 126
Chalosyne gorgone, 87
Channel darter, 70
Charadrius melodus, 116
Charidryas nycteis, 87
Chat, yellow-breasted, 53
Checkered white, 87
Checkerspot
Baltimore, 87
Gorgone, 87
silvery, 87.
Cheilanthes alabamensis, 118
C. feei, 118
Chelone obliqua
var. obliqua, 118
var. speciosa, 118
Chestnut lamprey, 126
177
Chestnut, American, 52, 118
Chestnut-sided warbler, 54, 55, 56
Cheumatopsyche sp., 21
C. helma, 125
Chickens, optimal foraging in, 171
Chinkapin, Allegheny, 118
Chionodes, undescribed species,
105
. adamas, 106
. aruns, 106
. baro, 106
. hapsus, 105
. sevir, 106
. suasor, 105
Chlidonias niger, 130
Chironomidae, 22
Chloralictus, 155
Chlorococcales, 34
Chlorogonium euchlorum, 34, 35
Chloroperlidae, 20
Chlorophyta, 34-45
Chondestes grammacus, 127
Chrysemys picta dorsalis, 127
Chrysogonum virginianum, 118
Chrysosplenium americanum, 118
Chub
blotched, 126
flame, 130
flathead, 126
gravel, 130
hornyhead, 126
sicklefin, 126
sturgeon, 126
Chubsucker, lake, 126
Cimicifuga rubifolia, 118
Cinygmula, 15
C. subaequalis, 20
Circaea alpina, 118
Circus cyaneus, 127
Cirriphyllum piliferum, 117
Cistothorus platensis, 127
CLARK, E. P., 169
Classroom cheating, 171
Cleft phlox, 121
starry, 121]
Clematis crispa, 118
CLEMMONS, ANTON M.., 167
Clethrionomys gapperi maurus, 128
Clifton cave beetle, 125
Clifton cave isopod, 124
Clifty covert, 123
Climbing fumitory, 117
Clioperla clio, 20
Cloak, mourning, 87
Clonophis kirtlandii, 127
Closteriopsis longissima, 36, 37
Closterium abruptum, 36, 39
C. ehrenbergii, 36, 39
C. setaceum, 36, 39
Clouded skipper, 86
Clouded sulphur, 87
Cloudless sulphur, 87
Cloudywing
confused, 86
AAOAAE©
178 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
northern, 86
southern, 86
Clover
buffalo, 123
running buffalo, 123
Club-moss
northern bog, 120
southern bog, 120
Clubshell, 124
Tennessee, 124
Clubtail, elusive, 125
Clustered bluets, 121
Clustered poppy-mallow, 118
Coachwhip, eastern, 130
Coal skink
northern, 127
southern, 127
Coastal Plain sedge, 118
Cobweb skipper, 86
Coccyzus americanus, 53
Coelastrum cambricum, 36, 37
C. microporum, 36, 37
Coeloglossum viride var. virescens,
118
Coil, punctate, 123
Colaptes auratus, 53
COLE, CHRISTY, 168
COLE, MATTHEW L.., 171
Coleochaete orbicularis, 36, 38
C. scutata, 36, 38
Coleoptera, 21
Colias cesonia, 87
C. eurytheme, 87
C. philodice, 87
Collinsonia verticillata, 118
Columbine duskywing, 86
COMBS, MICHAEL S., 133
Combshell
Cumberlandian, 124
round, 130
Comma
buckeye, 87
checkered skipper, 86
eastern, 87
gray, 125
green, 87, 125
gray, 87
Common moorhen, 127
Common raven, 127
Common roadside skipper, 86
Common silverbell, 119
Common sootywing, 86
Common wood-nymph, 87
Common yellowthroat, 53
Compassplant, 122
Compton tortoise shell, 87
Comptonia peregrina, 118
Concealed cave beetle, 125
Conchapelopia sp., 22
Coneflower, sweet, 122
Confused cloudywing, 86
Conjurers-nut, 121
Conradina verticillata, 118
Constempellina sp., 22
Constructed wetlands, 23-29
Canada Goose in, 46—49
Contopus virens, 53
Conuropsis carolinensis, 130
Convallaria montana, 118
Coot, American, 127
Copepod, 124
Copper iris, 120
Copper
American, 87
bronze, 87
Copperbelly water snake, 127
Coral, 87
Corallorhiza maculata, 118
Cordulegaster, 14
C. sp., 21
Cordulegasteridae, 21
Coreopsis pubescens, 118
Cormorant, double-crested, 128
Corn snake, 127
Corvus brachyrhynchos, 53
C. corax, 127
C. ossifragus, 127
Corydalidae, 21
Corydalis, pale 118
Corydalis sempervirens, 118
Corynoneura sp., 22
Corynorhinus rafinesquii, 128
C. townesendii virginianus, 128
Cosmarium baileyi, 39, 40
. bipunctatum, 39, 40
. biretum, 39, 40
. blyttii, 39, 40
. botrytis, 39, 40
. depressum, 39, 40
. granatum, 39, 40
margaritatum, 39, 40
meneghinii, 40, 41
. moniliforme, 40, 41
nymannianum, 40, 41
obtusatum, 40, 41
. orthostichum, 40, 41
. ovale, 40, 41
. phaseolus, 40, 41
. porrectum, 40, 41
. portianum, 40, 41
. pyramidatum, 40, 41
. subtumidum, 40, 41
. turpinii, 40, 41
Cosmocladium pusillum, 40, 41
Cotton mouse, 128
Cotton- tawny, 119
COVELL, CHARLES V., JR., 86,
105
Covert, cliflty, 123
Cow-parsnip, 119
Cow-wheat, American, 120
Cowbird, brown-headed, 50, 54, 56
COYLE, SHAWN, 165, 166, 167
Coyote-thistle, blue-flower, 119
Craba cuneifolia, 119
Crabapple, southern, 120
Cracking pearlymussel, 130
Crambidae, 105, 106
QEIGICIO CIGISIO |G GElelol@ Glelel@
Crater, queen, 123
Crawe’s sedge, 118
Crawfish frog, northern, 127
Crayfish, 124, 125
bottlebrush, 124
Cajun dwarf, 124
Crittenden, 124
dwarf, 124
Louisville, 124
Cream wild indigo, 117
Creek heelsplitter, 124
Creekshell
Kentucky, 124
mountain, 124
Creeper, brown, 127
Creeping St. John’s-wort, 119
Creole pearly-eye, 87
Crescent
pearl, 87
tawny, 87, 125
Cress
glade, 120
lake, 117
necklace glade, 120
Cricotopus trifascia, 22
Crinkled hair 119
Crittenden crayfish, 124
Cross-leaf milkwort, 121
Crossline skipper, 86
Crow
American, 53, 54
fish, 127
Crow-wheat, American, 120
Crucigenia tetrapedia, 36, 37
Crustacea, 22
Crustaceans, 124-125
Cryocopus pileatus, 53
Cryptobranchus allaganiensis alle-
ganiensis, 126
Cryptotis parva, 164
Crystal darter, 130
Crystallaria asprella, 130
CSUHAI, EVA, 171
Cub Run Cave beetle, 125
Cuckoo, yellow-billed, 53
Cumberland bean, 124
Cumberland elktoe, 124
Cumberland leafshell, 130
Cumberland papershell, 124
Cumberland rosemary, 118
Cumberland sandwort, 120
Cumberlandia monodonta, 124
Cumberlandian combshell, 124
Cupped vertigo, 124
Curtis’ goldenrod, 122
Cut turf, 167-168
volatile emissions from, 167-168
Cutleaf meadow-parsnip, 123
Cutleaf water-milfoil, 121
Cyanocitta cristata, 53, 54
Cyllopsis gemma, 87
Cymophyllus fraserianus, 118
Cynodon dactylon, 167
Cyperus plukenetii, 118
Cyperus, Plukenet’s, 118
Cypress darter, 126
Cypress minnow, 126
Cypress-swamp sedge, 118
Cyprinella camura, 125
C. venusta, 125
Cypripedium candidum, 118
C. kentuckiense, 118
C. parviflorum, 119
C. reginae, 119
Cyprogenia stegaria, 124
Dace
blackside, 126
longnose, 126
Dainty sulphur, 87
Dalea purpurea, 119
Danaus gilippus, 87
D. plexippus, 87
Dandelion, 167
western dwarf, 120
DARIA, D., 170
Dark-eyed junco, 50, 53, 55, 127
Darter
ashy, 70, 126
banded, 70
bloodfin, 70
bluebreast, 70
brighteye, 126
channel, 70
crystal, 130
cypress, 126
duskytail, 67-76, 126
emerald, 70
firebelly, 126
goldstripe, 126
greenside, 70
gulf, 126
johnny, 126
least, 130
longhead, 126
olive, 126
rainbow, 70
relict, 126
scaly sand, 130
Shawnee, 126
smallscale, 126
speckled, 70
spotted, 126
swamp, 126
tippecanoe, 70
westerm sand, 125
Darters, 60
DAVIS, MARIA L., 167
Decapoda, 22
Delaware skipper, 86
Delicate vertigo, 124
Delphinium carolinianum, 119
Delta arrowhead, 122
Dendroica caerulescens, 53, 54
D. cerulea, 50, 53
D. coronata, 53
D. fusca, 50, 53, 127
D. pensylvanica, 53, 54
Index to Volume 61
D. tigrina, 53
D. virens, 53
Dero nivea, 20
DERTING, TERRY L., 171
Deschampsia cespitosa ssp. glauca,
119
D. flexuosa, 119
Desmidium aptogonum, 44
D. grevillii, 44
D. swartzii, 44, 45
Dewberry, Wharton's, 122
Diamesa sp., 22
Diana fritillary, 87
Diasemiodes nigralis, 106
Dichanthelium boreale, 119
Dicranodontium asperulum, 117
Dicranota sp., 22
Dictyosphaerium pulchellum, 36, 37
Didiplis diandra, 119
Digenea, 99-104
Digenetic trematode, 60-63
Digital model
analysis of, 169
of mammalian basilar membrane,
169
DILLARD, GARY E., 34
Dion skipper, 86
Diplectrona, 10, 13, 15
D. modesta, 21
Diplocladius sp., 22
Diploperla robusta, 20
Diptera, 21, 155
Disporum maculatum, 119
Dixa sp., 22
Dixidae, 22
Docidium baculum, 36, 39
D. undulatum, 36, 39
Dodecatheon frenchii, 119
Dogface, southern, 87
olichonyx oryzivorus, 127
Dollar sunfish, 126
Domed ancylid, 123
Double-crested cormorant, 128
Double-ringed pennant, 125
Dove, mourning, 53
Downy arrowwood, 123
Downy goldenrod, 122
Dragon-head, slender, 130
Dreamy duskywing, 86
Dromedary pearlymussel, 130
Dromus dromas, 130
Drooping blue 121
Dropseed
northern, 122
rough, 122
Drosera brevifolia, 119
D. intermedia, 119
Dryobius sexnotatus, 125
Dryopidae, 21
Dryopteris carthusiana, 119
D. ludoviciana, 119
Duke's skipper, 86, 125
Dun skipper, 86
Dusky azure, 87
179
Duskytail darter, 67-76, 126
Duskywing
columbine, 86
dreamy, 86
funereal, 86
Horace’s, 86
Juvenal’s, 86
mottled, 86
sleepy, 86
wild indigo, 86
zarucco, 86
Dusted skipper, 86
Dwarf burhead, 119
Dwarf crayfish, 124
Cajun, 124
Dwarf dandelion, westem. 120
Dwarf sundew, 119
Eagle, bald, 127
Eallophrys irus, 125
Earleaf false foxglove, 117
Early 87, 125
Earthworms, 1—5
Eastern blue-star, 117
Eastern coachwhip, 130
Eastern comma, 87
Eastern eulophus, 121
Eastern hellbender, 126
Eastern mock bishop’s-weed, 121
Eastern phoebe, 53
Eastern pine elfin, 87
Eastern puma, 130
Eastern ribbon snake, 127
Eastern silvery aster, 117
Eastern slender glass lizard, 127
Eastern small-footed myotis, 128
Eastern spotted skunk, 128
Eastern tailed blue, 87
Eastern turkeybeard, 123
Echinodorus berteroi, 119
KE. parvulus, 119
Kclipidrilus sp., 20
Ectopistes migratorius, 130
Ectopria, 15
E. nervosa, 21
Edward’, 87
Fel-grass, 123
Eggert’s sunflower, 119
Eggleston's violet, 123
Egret
cattle, 127
great, 127
Egretta carulea, 127
EISENHOUR, DAVID 67
Hiseniella, 3
Elanoides forficatus forficatus, 130
Elaphe guttata guttata, 127
Elaphria cornutinis, 107
E. festivoides, 107
Eleocharis olivacea, 119
Elfin
brown, 87
eastern pine, 87
frosted, 87
180 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Henry's, 87
Elimia ebenum, 60-63
E. semicarinata, 60, 61
Elk, 130
Elktoe, 124
Cumberland, 124
Elm, September, 123
Elmidae, 21
Elodea nuttallii, 119
Elusive clubtail, 125
Elymus species, 88-98
E. elymoides, 88
E. glabriflorus, 88, 89, 92
E. glaucus, 88, 92, 93
ssp. glaucus, 96
ssp. jepsonii, 93, 96
ssp. mackenzii comb nov., 88-98
ssp. virescens, 93
var. minor, 88
. macgregorii sp. nov., SS—98
. mackenzii, 93
. stebbinsii, 92
. svensonii, 119
. trachycaulus, 93, 95
. villosus, 92
. virginicus, 88, 89, 92
var. glabriflorus, 92
var. intermedius, 89, 92
var. jejunus, 88, 89, 92
var. minor, 92
Emerald darter, 70
Emperor
hackberry, 87
tawny, 87
Empididae, 22
Empidonax minimus, 127
E. virescens, 53
Enchanter'’s-nightshade, small, 115
Endopiza yaracana, 106
Enodia anthedon, 87
E. creola, 87
E. portlandia missarkae, 87
Entodon brevisetus, 117
Epargyreus clarus, 86
Epeorus, 10, 15
E. prob. namatus, 20
Ephemera guttulata, 20
E. simulans, 20
Ephemerella, 10, 15
E. inconstans, 125
E. prob. auravilii, 20
Ephemerellid mayfly, 125
Ephemerellidae, 20
Ephemeridae, 20
Ephemeroptera, 20
Epioblasma arcaeformis, 130
. biemarginata, 130
. brevidens, 124
. capsaeformis, 124
. flexuosa, 130
. florentina florentina, 130
. florentina walkeri, 130
. lewisii, 130
. obliquata obliquata, 124
AAmMAA ee
AAAAAAe eS
eomecomcsmecsmicoMcs mesic]
E
E
Eremosphaera viridis, 34, 35
E
E
E
E
E
E
Eryngium intergrifolium, 119
E
E
AAAAA Ae
E
E
E
E
. obliquata perobliqua, 130
. personata, 130
. propinqua, 130
. Sampsonii, 130
. stewardsonii, 130
. torulosa rangiana, 124
. torulosa torulosa, 130
. triquetra, 124
piphytic sedge, 118
pling’s hedge-nettle, 122
rimystax insignis, 126
rimystax x-punctatus, 130
rimyzon sucetta, 126
riophorum virginicum, 119
ristalis, 155
rora laetus, 87, 125
rynnis baptisiae, 86
rynnis brizo, 86
. funeralis, 86
. horatius, 86
. icelus, 86
. juvenalis, 86
. lucilius, 86
. martialis, 86
. zarucco, 86
rythronium rostratum, 119
sox lucius, 75
. niger, 126
theostoma spp., 60
E. baileyi, 70
. blennioides, 70
. caeruleum, 70
. camurum, 70
. chienense, 126
. cinereum, 70, 126
. flabellare, 67, 68
. fusiforme, 126
. lynceum, 126
maculatum, 126
. microlepidum, 126
. microperca, 130
nigrum susanae, 126
. parvipinne, 126
. percnurum, 67—76, 126
. proeliare, 126
. pyrrhogaster, 126
sanguifluum, 70
. stigmaeum, 70
. swaini, 126
. tecumsehi, 126
. tippecanoe, 70
. virgatum, 60, 61
. zonale, 70
uastrum abruptum, 40, 43
. affine, 40, 43
. ansatum, 40, 43
. binale, 40, 43
. denticulatum, 40, 43
. didelta, 40, 43
. elegans, 40, 43
. evolutum, 40, 43
. insulare, 40, 43
E. verrucosum, 40, 43
Euchloe olympia, 87
Eufala skipper, 86
Eukiefferiella spp., 22
Eulophus, eastern, 121
Eumeces anthracinus anthracinus,
127
E. anthracinus pluvialis, 127
E. inexpectatus, 127
Eupatorium maculatum, 119
E. rugosum, 167
E. semiserratum, 119
E. steelei, 119
Euphorbia mercurialina, 119
Euphydryas phaeton, 87
Euphyes dion, 86
E. dukesi, 86, 125
E. vestris, 86
Euptoieta claudia, 87
Eurema lisa, 87
E. nicippe, 87
European skipper, 86
Eurycea guttolineata, 126
Eurylophella funeralis, 20
Eurytides marcellus, 87
EVEN, DEBORAH, 168
Evening bat, 128
Evening primrose, 121
yellow, 118
stemless, 121
Everes comyntas, 87
Extirpated biota of Kentucky, 115-
132
Fagus grandifolia, 11
Falcate Orange Tip, 87
Falco peregrinus, 127
Falcon, peregrine, 127
False foxglove
earleaf, 117
pale, 117
spreading, 117
ten-lobe, 117
False gromwell
hairy, 121
soft, 121
western, 121
False hellebore, 120
small-flowered, 120
False mallow, hispid, 120
False solomon-seal, starry, 120
Fameflower
limestone, 122
roundleaf, 123
Fanshell, 124
Fanwort, Carolina, 118
Farancia abacura reinwardtii, 127
Fat pocketbook, 124
Fecal coliform species, 168
from Lee’s Branch, 168
identification of, 168
Fée’s lip fern, 118
Feniseca tarquinius, 87
Fem
Alabama lip, 118
Fée’s lip, 118
southern maidenhair, 117
southem shield wood, 119
spinulose wood, 119
FERRELL, SHELLY, 169
Fescue, 56
Festuca arundinacea, 56
F. elatior, 27
Fetterbush, 120
Few-flowered scurf-pea, 121
Fiddleleaf
one-flower, 119
ovate, 119
Fiery skipper, 86
Filmy angelica, 117
Fimbristylis, hairy, 119
Fimbristylis purberula, 119
Finely-nerved sedge, 118
Fir, Fraser, 52
Firebelly darter, 126
Fish crow, 127
Fishes, 125-126, 130
Five-lined skink, southeastern, 127
Flame chub, 130
Flathead chub, 126
Floater, green, 124
Fluted kidneyshell, 124
Fly-poison, 117
Flycatcher, least, 127
Forcipomyia sp., 21
Forestiera ligustrina, 119
Forkshell, 130
Fox grape, northern, 123
Foxglove
earleaf false, 117
pale false, 117
spreading false, 117
ten-lobe false, 117
Fraser fir, 52
Fraser's loosestrife, 120
Fraser's sedge, 118
Fraxinus americana, 54
French's shooting-star, 119
FRENCH, AUSTIN, 170
Freshwater mussels, 124, 130
Freshwater prawns, 165, 166
copepods as live food for, 165—
166
effect of water temperature on
survival, 167
transport density on survival, 165
Fringed nut-rush, 122
Fringeless orchid, white, 121
Fritillary
Aphrodite, 87
Diana, 87
great-spangled, 87
gulf, 87
meadow, 87
regal, 87, 125
silver-bordered, 87
variegated, 87
FRITZ, D., 170
Index to Volume 61
Frog’s-bit, American, 120
Frog
northern crawfish, 127
northern leopard, 127
Frosted elfin, 87, 125
FROSTMAN, POLLY, 171
Frostweed
Canada, 119
plains, 119
Fulica americana, 127
Fumitory, climbing, 117
Fumonelix wetherbyi, 123
Fundulus chrysotus, 126
F. dispar, 126
Funereal duskywing, 86
Fusconaia subrotunda subrotunda,
124
GABaAc rhol subunit genes, 168
in the mouse, 168
GABaAc rho2 subunit genes, 168
in the mouse, 168
Gallinula chloropus, 127
Gallus domesticus, 171
Gammarus bousfieldi, 124
Gar, alligator, 125
Garman’s cave beetle, 125
Gastropods, 123-124
' Gattinger’s lobelia, 120
Gaywings, 121
Gelechiidae, 105
Gemmed satyr, 87
Genistein, 170-171
effect on Cathepsin B, 170-171
effect on Cathepsin L, 170-171
effect on cysteine proteases, 170-
171
Gentian
prairie, 119
showy, 119
yellow, 119
Gentiana decora, 119
G. flavida, 119
G. puberulenta, 119
Geometrid moth, 125
Geometridae, 105, 107
Geothlypis trichas, 53
Gian hyssop, purple, 117
Giant swallowtail, 87
GIBSON, LORAN D., 105
Gillmeria pallidactyla, 107
Glade cress, 120
necklace, 120
Glandularia canadensis, 119
Glass lizard, eastern slender, 127
Glassy grapeskin, 124
Glassywing, little, 86
Glaucopsyche lygdamus, 87
Glechoma hederacea, 167
Gleditsia aquatica, 119
Globe beaked-rush, 121
Gloeocystis planctonica, 34, 35
Glossosoma sp., 21
Glossosomatidae, 21
181
Glyceria acutiflora, 119
Glyph
Maryland, 123
sculpted, 123
Glyphyalinia raderi, 123
G. rhoadsi, 123
Gnaphalium helleri var. micraden-
ium, 119
Goatweed leafwing, 87
Goera sp., 21
Goeridae, 21
Goerita, 15
G. betteni, 21
Gold-banded skipper, 86
Golden topminnow, 126
Golden-aster, broad-leaf, 119
Golden-crowned kinglet, 55
Golden-saxifrage, American, 118
Golden-star, 119
Golden-winged warbler, 50, 53, 55,
128
Goldenclub, 121
Goldenrod
Buckley's, 122
Curtis’, 122
downy, 122
Rand’s, 122
Roan Mountain, 122
Short’s, 122
southern bog, 122
squarrose, 122
white-haired, 122
Goldfinch, American, 56
Goldstripe darter, 126
Golenkinia radiata, 36, 37
Gomphidae, 21
Gonatozygon brebissonii, 36, 39
Gorgone checkerspot, 87
GOTTESMAN, STEPHEN T., 170
Gracillariidae, 105
Grama, side-oats, 118
Grape honeysuckle, 120
Grape
northem fox, 123
sand, 123
Grapefern
blunt-lobe, 117
matricary, 117
Grapeskin, glassy, 124
Grass
bearded skeleton, 119
blue-joint reed, 118
branched three-awn, 117
crinkled hair, 119
drooping blue, 121
hair, 120
June, 120
northern witch, 119
pale manna, 123
Porter's reed, 118
purple sand, 123
reed bent, 118
reed canary, 23, 26, 27
sharp-scaled manna, 119
182 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
shortleaf skeleton, 119
tufted hair, 119
Grass-leaf arrowhead, 122
Grass-of-parnassus
kidney-leaf, 121
largeleaf, 121
Grass-pink, 118
Grassleaf mud-plantain, 119
Gratiola pilosa, 119
G. viscidula, 119
Gravel chub, 130
Gray comma, 87, 125
Gray hairstreak, 87
Gray myotis, 128
Gray treefrog, 127
Gray wolf, 130
Great blue heron, 127
Great egret, 127
Great Plains ladies’-tresses, 122
Great purple, 87
Great-spangled fritillary, 87
Greater Adams Cave beetle, 125
Greater bladderwort, 123
Greater prairie-chicken, 130
Greater redhorse, 130
Grebe, pied-billed, 128
Green comma, 87, 125
Green floater, 124
Green orchis, long-bract, 118
Green treefrog, 127
Green water snake, Mississippi, 127
Green-and-gold, 118
Greenside darter, 70
GRISBY, EBONY J., 166
Grizzled skipper, 86
Appalachian, 125
Gromwell
hairy false, 121
soft false, 121
western false, 121
Groovebur, tall hairy, 117
Grosbeak, rose-breasted, 50, 53, 55,
56, 128
Ground juniper, 120
Gulf darter, 126
Gulf fritillary, 87
Gymnopogon ambiguus, 119
G. brevifolius, 119
Hackberry emperor, 87
Hair 120
Hair
crinkled, 119
tufted, 119
Haircap moss, 117
Hairstreak
Acadian, 87
banded, 87
coral, 87
early, 87, 125
Edward's, 87
gray, 87
great purple, 87
hickory, 87
juniper, 87
northern, 87, 125
red-banded, 87
striped, 87
white-m, 87
Hairy false gromwell, 121
Hairy fimbristylis, 119
Hairy groovebur, tall, 117
Hairy hawkweed, 119
Hairy ludwigia, 120
Hairy rock-cress, 117
Hairy skullcap, 122
Hairy snout-bean, 121
HAISCH, KARL E., JR., 170
Halesia tetraptera, 119
Haliaeetus leucocephalus, 127
Halictidae, 155
Halictus, 155
Hall’s bulrush, 122
Haploperla sp., 20
Haplotaxida, 20
Harelip sucker, 130
Harrier, northern, 127
Harvest mouse, 163, 164
Harvester, 87
Hawk, sharp-shinned, 127
Hawkweed, hairy, 119
Hayhurst’s scallopwing, 86
Health Sciences, 169-170
Heartleaf plantain, 121
Heartleaf
southern, 119
variable-leaved, 119
Heath aster, white, 117
HEDEEN, STANLEY E., 6
Hedeoma hispidum, 119
Hedge-hyssop
shaggy, 119
Short’s, 119
Hedge-nettle, Epling’s, 122
Heelsplitter, creek, 124
Helianthemum bicknellii, 119
H. canadense, 119
Helianthus eggertii, 119
H. silphioides, 119
Helichus fastigiatus, 21
Helicodiscus notius specus, 123
H. puntatellus, 123
Hellbender, eastern, 126
Hellebore
false, 120
small-flowered false, 120
Helma’s net-spinning caddisfly, 125
Helmitheros vermivorus, 53
Helvibotys pseudohelvialis, 105
Hemerodromia sp., 22
Hemistena lata, 130
Hemitremia flammea, 130
Hempseed meal, 166.
in diets for fish, 166
Henry's elfin, 87
Henslow’s sparrow, 127
HENSON, G., 170
Heptageniid mayfly, 125
Heptageniidae, 20
Heracleum lanatum, 119
Hermeuptychia sosybius, 87
HERNER-THOGMARTIN, JEN-
NIFER H., 163
Heron
great blue, 127
little blue, 127
Herzogiella turfacea, 117
Hesperia leonardus, 86
H. metea, 86
H. sassacus, 86
Heteranthera dubia, 119
H. limosa, 119
Heterotheca subaxillaris var. latifol-
ia, 119
Hexastylis contracta, 119
H. heterophylla, 119
Hexatoma sp., 22
Hickory, 87
water, 118
Hidden cave beetle, 125
Hieracium longipilum, 119
Hispid false mallow, 120
Hoary azalea, 121
Hoary edge, 86
Hoary mock orange, 121
Hoary-pea, spiked, 123
Hobomok skipper, 86
HOLDEN, T., 170
Homoeosoma deceptorium, 107
Honeysuckle
grape, 120
wild, 120
Hooded merganser, 127
Hooded warbler, 54-56
Horace’s duskywing, 86
Homsnail
rugged, 123
shortspire, 123
Hornyhead chub, 126
Horse-balm, whorled, 118
House mouse, 164
body organs, 171
effect of food restriction, 171
male, 171
reproductive development, 171
Houstonia serpyllifolia, 119
HUGO, E., 170
Hummingbird, ruby-throated, 53
HUBST, B., 170
Hyalotheca dissiliens, 44
H. mucosa, 44
Hybognathus hayi, 126
H. placitus, 126
Hybopsis amnis, 126
Hybrid striped bass, 166
Hydrobaenus sp., 22
Hydrocotyle americana, 119
Hydrogen gas in shell galaxies, 170
Hydrolea ovata, 119
H. uniflora, 119
Hydrophyllum virginianum, 119
Hydropsyche betteni, 21
Hydropsychidae, 21
Hyla avivoca, 126
H. cinerea, 127
H. gratiosa, 127
H. versicolor, 127
Hylephila phyleus, 86
Hylocichla mustelina, 53
H. mustelina, 56
Hymenoptera, 155
Hypericum adpressum, 119
H. crux-andreae, 119
H. nudiflorum, 120
H. pseudomaculatum, 120
Hyssop, purple giant, 117
Icebox cave beetle, 125
Ichthyomyzon castaneus, 126
I. fossor, 126
I. gagei, 126
I. greeleyi, 126
Icteria virens, 53
Icterus spurius, 53
Ictinia mississippiensis, 127
Ictiobus niger, 126
Illinois pondweed, 121
Immyria nigrovittella, 106
Indian paintbrush, scarlet, 118
Indian skipper, 86
Indian wild rice, 123
Indiana myotis, 128
Indigo bunting, 56
Indigo
blue wild, 117
cream wild, 117
yellow wild, 117
Inland silverside, 126
Insecta, 20, 105-107
Insects, 125, 130
air breathing, control of, 166-167
Iris fulva, 120
I. pseudacorus, 27
I. versicolor, 23, 26, 27
Iris
blue water, 23, 26, 27
copper, 120
yellow water, 27
Ironoquia punctatissima, 21
Ironweed, New York, 123
Isoetes butleri, 120
I. melanopoda, 120
Isoperla holochlora, 20
Isopod, Clifton cave, 124
Isopoda, 22
Ivory-billed woodpecker, 130
Ixobrychus exilis, 127
JAMES, MICHAEL A., 133
Jay, blue, 54
Joan’s swallowtail, 87
Joe-pye-weed
spotted, 119
Steele’s, 119
Johnny darter, 126
Jointed rush, 120
Index to Volume 61
JONES, BRITTNEY, 1
JONES, SNAKE C., 165, 166
JUETT, BEVERLY W., 168
Juglans cinerea, 120
Junco hyemalis, 50
J. hyemalis, 53, 127
Junco, dark-eyed, 50, 53, 55, 127
Juncus articulatus, 120
J. elliottii, 120
J. filipendulus, 120
June, 120
Juniper, 87
ground, 120
Juniperus communis var. depressa,
120
Junonia coenia, 87
Juvenal’s duskywing, 86
KALISZ, PAUL J., 1
Kentucky creekshell, 124
Kentucky lady’s-slipper, 118
Kentucky red-backed vole, 128
KENTUCKY STATE NATURE
PRESERVES COMMISSION,
115
Kentucky vertebrate species, 171
Kidney-leaf grass-of-parnassus, 121
Kidney-leaf twayblade, 120
Kidneyshell, fluted, 124
King rail, 128
Kingfisher, belted, 69
Kinglet, golden-crowned, 55
Kingsnake, scarlet, 127
Kirchneriella lunaris, 34, 35
K. obesa, 34, 35
Kirtland’s snake, 127
Kite
Mississippi, 127
swallow-tailed, 130
\Koeleria macrantha, 120
KOGER, MATTHEW E., 169
Kricogonia lyside, 87
Krigia occidentalis, 120
KUMAR, K. S., 169
Lace-winged Roadside Skipper, 86
LACKI, MICHAEL J., 50
Ladies’-tresses
Great Plains, 122
shining, 122
sweetscent, 122
yellow nodding, 122
Lady’s-slipper
Kentucky, 118
showy, 119
small white, 118
small yellow, 119
Lady ;
American, 87
painted, 87
Laetilia fiskeella, 107
LAINE, SEPPO, 170
Lake chubsucker, 126
Lake cress, 117
183
Lake sturgeon, 125
Lampetra appendix, 126
Lamprey
chestnut, 126
mountain brook, 126
northern brook, 126
southern brook, 126
Lampropeltis triangulum elapsoides,
247/
Lampsilis abrupta, 124
L. ovata, 124
Large bur-reed, 122
Large orange sulphur, 87
Large sedge, 118
Large spotted St. John’s-wort, 120
Largeleaf grass-of-parnassus, 121
Lark sparrow, 127
Larkspur, Carolina, 119
Lasmigona compressa, 124
L. subviridis, 124
Lathyrus palustris, 120
L. venosus, 120
LAU, JOANN M.., 168
Layside sulphur, 87
Lead, effects of on rats, 108-114
Leafcup, Tennessee, 121
Leafshell, 130
Cumberland, 130
Leafwing, goatweed, 87
Least bittern, 127
Least darter, 130
Least flycatcher, 127
Least madtom, 126
Least shrew, 164
Least skipper, 86
Least tern, 128
Least trillium, 123
Ozark, 123
Least weasel, 128
Leather-flower, blue jasmine, 118
Leavenworthia exigua var. laciniata,
120
L. torulosa, 120
Leiophyllum buxifolium, 120
Lemming, southern bog, 163, 164
Lenthus sp., 21
Leonard's skipper, 86
Leopard frog, northern, 127
Lepidoptera, 105-107
Lepidostoma sp., 21
Lepidostomatidae, 21
Lepomis macrochirus, 75
L. macrochirus, 100
L. marginatus, 126
L. miniatus, 126
Lepotes marina, 87
Leptochloa fascicularis, 167
Leptodea leptodon, 130
Leptophlebiid mayfly, 125
Leptophlebiidae, 20
Leptoxis praerosa, 123
Lerema accius, 56
Lerodea eufala, 86
Lescur’s bladderpod, 120
184 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Lespedeza capitata, 120
L. stuvei, 120
Lesquerella globosa, 120
L. lescurii, 120
Lesquereux’s bladderpod, 120
Lesser Adams cave beetle, 125
Lettuce-leaf saxifrage, 122
Leucania calidior, 107
Leucothoe recurva, 120
Leucrocuta, 15
L. prob. thetis, 20
Leuctra, 10, 13, 15
L. sp., 20
Leuctridae, 20
Lexingtonia dolabelloides, 124
Liatris cylindracea, 120
Libythaena carinenta bachmanii, 87
Lichens, 117
Lilium philadelphicum, 120
L. superbum, 120
Lilliput
purple, 124
Texas, 124
Lily
calla, 27
Turk’s cap, 120
wood, 120
Lily-of-the-valley
American, 118
wild, 120
Limenitis archippus, 87
L. arthemis arthemis, 87
L. arthemis astyanax, 87
Limestone cave beetle, 125
Limnephilid caddisfly, 125
Limnephilidae, 21
Limnobium spongia, 120
Limnophila sp., 22
Limnophyes sp., 22
Limstone fameflower, 122
Lip fen
Alabama, 118
Fée’s, 118
Liparis loeselii, 120
Liriodendron tulipifera, 11, 54
Listera australis, 120
L. smallii, 120
Lithasia armigera, 123
L. geniculata, 123
L. salebrosa, 123
L. verrucosa, 123
Litobrancha recurvata, 125
Little blue heron, 127
Little glassywing, 86
Little spectaclecase, 124
Little wood satyr, 87
Little yellow, 87
Littlewing pearlymussel, 124
Lizard, eastern slender glass, 127
Lobelia appendiculata var. gattin-
geri, 120
L. flabellaris, 27
L. nuttallii, 120
Lobelia
Gattinger’s, 120
Nuttall’s, 120
Locust
black, 54, 56
water, 119
Loesel’s twayblade, 120
Logperch, 70
blotchside, 130
Lolium perenne, 167, 168
Long-bract green orchis, 118
Long-eared owl, 127
Long-styled rush, 120
Long-tailed shrew, 128
Long-tailed skipper, 86
Longhead darter, 126
Longhorn beetle, sixbanded, 125
Longleaf stitchwort, 122
Longnose dace, 126
Longsolid, 124
Lonicera dioica var. orientalis, 120
L. reticulata, 120
Loosestrife
Fraser's, 120
trailing, 120
Lophodytes cucullatus, 127
Lordithon niger, 125
Lordithon rove beetle, black, 125
Lota lota, 126
Louisiana broomrape, 121
Louisville cave beetle, 125
Louisville crayfish, 124
Lousewort, swamp, 121
Low rough aster, 117
Low-tech teaching methods, 170
open mindedness to, 170
Lucy Braun’s white snakeroot, 117
Ludwigia hirtella, 120
Ludwigia, hairy, 120
Lumbricidae, 1-5
Lumbriculidae, 20
Lumbricus, 3
Luperina trigona, 107
Lycaena hyllus, 87
Lycaena phlaeas americana, 87
Lycopodiella appressa, 120
L. inundata, 120
Lycopodium clavatum, 120
Lygropia tripunctata, 106
Lype diversa, 21
Lysimachia fraseri, 120
L. radicans, 120
L. terrestris, 120
Lytrosis permagnaria, 125
Macrhybopsis gelida, 126
M. meeki, 126
Macrobrachium ohione, 124
M. rosenbergii, 165-167
Macroclemys temminckii, 127
10-22
Madtom
brown, 126
least, 126
Macroinvertebrate communities,
northern, 126
slender, 126
Magnolia acuminata, 54
Maianthemum canadense, 120
M. stellatum, 120
Maindenhair fern, southern, 117
Malirekus hastatus, 20
Mallow, hispid false, 120
MALPHRUS, BENJAMIN K., 133
Malus angustifolia, 120
Malvastrum hispidum, 120
Mammals, 128, 130
Mammoth Cave shrimp, 124
Mandarin, nodding, 119
Manna grass
pale, 123
sharp-scaled, 119
Manophylax butleri, 125
Maple
red, 54, 56
sugar, 54
Mapleleaf, winged, 130
Marble, Olympia, 87
Marigold, marsh, 130
Marine blue, 87
MARKER, GLENDA, 168
MARKEY, M., 170
Marsh marigold, 130
Marsh-pink, slender, 122
Marshallia grandiflora, 120
Maryland glyph, 123
Masked shrew, 128
Masticophis flagellum flagellum, 130
Matelea carolinensis, 120
Mathematics, 170
Matricary grapefern, 117
Matted feather moss, 117
Mayfly
burrowing, 125
ephemerellid, 125
heptageniid, 125
leptophlebiid, 125
robust pentagenian burrowing,
130
McCALL, MAUREEN, 168
McDONOUGH, E., 170
Meadow fritillary, 87
Meadow vole, 164
Meadow-parsnip, cutleaf, 123
Meadowsweet, narrow-leaved, 122
Megaceryle alcyon, 71
Megalitter, 171
an Appalachian deformity, 171
Megisto cymela, 87
Melampyrum lineare var. latifolium,
120
M. lineare var. pectinatum, 120
Melanostoma, 155
Melanthera nivea, 120
Melanthium parviflorum, 120
M. virginicum, 120
M. woodii, 120
Meleagris gallopavo, 53
Melithreptus, 155
Menidia beryllina, 126
Mercury spurge, 119
Merganser, hooded, 127
Meropleon cosmion, 107
Mesomphix rugeli, 123
Metalmark
northem, 87
swamp, 87, 125
Mice, radioprotective drug combi-
nation in, 167—170
Michaux’s bluets, 119
Michaux’s saxifrage, 122
Micrasterias americana, 40, 43
M. apiculata, 43, 44
M. denticulata, 43, 44
M. laticeps, 43, 44
M. pinnatifida, 43, 44
M. truncata, 44
Micropsectra sp., 22,
Microspora pachyderma, 36, 38
Microsporales, 36
Microtendipes pedellus gp., 22
M. rydalensis gp., 22
Microtus ochrogaster, 163, 164
M. pennsylvanicus, 164
M. pinetorum, 162, 164
Midland smooth softshell, 127
Milbert’s tortoise shell, 87
Milkwort
eross-leaf, 121
Nuttall’s, 121
racemed, 121
Mimulus floribundus, 96
Minnow
cypress, 126
plains, 126
stargazing, 126
Minuartia cumberlandensis, 120
M. glabra, 120
Mirabilis albida, 120
Mississippi green water snake, 127
Mississippi kite, 127
Missouri arrow-wood, 123
Missouri rock-cress, 117
Mniotiilta vara, 53, 56
MOBLEY, JOEL, 169
Mock bishop’s-weed, 121
eastern, 121
Nuttall’s, 121
Mock orange, 121
hoary, 121
Molanna, 15, 18
M. blenda, 21
Molannidae, 21
Molothrus ater, 50, 54
Monarch, 87
Monarda punctata, 120
Monkshood, blue, 117
Monotropsis odorata, 120
Montain birds, long-term conserva-
tion, 50-59
Moorhen, common, 127
MOORMAN, KENNETH M., 169
Morehead radio telescope, 133-145
Index to Volume 61
first observations, 133-145
MORGAN, ANN M., 166Morone
chrysops X M. saxatilis, 166
Morus rubra, 54
MORZILLO, ANITA T., 164
Mosses, 117
Moth
geometrid, 125
rattlesnake-master borer, 125
Moths, Kentucky, 105-107
Mottled duskywing, 86
Mougeotia boodlei, 36, 38
M. sphaerocarpa, 36, 38
Mountain brook lamprey, 126
Mountain creekshell, 124
Mountain maple, 117
Mountain woodsia, 123
Mountain-lover, Canby’s, 121
Mountain-mint
blunt, 121
white leaved, 121
Mourning cloak, 87
Mourning dove, 53
Mouse
cotton, 128
harvest, 163, 164
house, 164, 171
Moxostoma lacerum, 130
M. poecilurum, 126
M. valenciennesi, 130
Mucket, pink, 124
Mud snake, western, 127
Mud-plantain
blue, 119
grassleaf, 119
Muddy rocksnail, 123
Mudminnow, central, 126
Muhlenbergia bushii, 120
M. cuspidata, 120
M. glabriflora, 120
Muhly
Bush's, 120
plains, 120
MURPHY, D. SHANNON, 133
Mus musculus, 164, 171
Muscidae, 155
Mussel
oyster, 124
salamander, 124
Mussels, freshwater, 124, 130
Mustela nivalis, 128
Mycteria americana, 116
Myotis austroriparius, 128
M. grisescens, 128
M. leibii, 128
M. sodalis, 128
Myotis b
eastern small-footed, 128
gray, 128
Indiana, 128
southeastern, 128
Myriophyllum heterophyllum, 121
M. pinnatum, 121
185
N-arginine dibasic convertase, 17]
stability of acidic domain of, 171
Naiad, thread-like, 121
aididae, 20
ajas gracillima, 121
annyberry, 30-33
Narrow-leaved bluecurls, 123
Narrow-leaved meadowsweet, 122
Nastra ilherminier, 86
Nathalis iole, 87
Neargyractis slossonalis, 106
Neckera pennata, 117
ecklace glade cress, 120
emophila aphylla, 121
emouridae, 20
eohelix dentifera, 123
eophylax, 15
eophylax sp., 21
ephopterix crassifasciella, 107
. vesustella, 106
ephrocytium obesum, 34, 44
erodia cyclopion. 127
. erythrogaster neglecta, 127
. fasciata confluens, 127
Nest density, artificial, 46-49
effect on Canada Goose, 46-49
Nestronia umbellula, 121
Net-spinning caddisfly, Helma’s, 125
Netrium digitus, 36, 39
Nettle-leaf noseburn, 123
N
N
PG PE
y
AZAAAAAAAZAZAAZ!
Jettle-leaf sage, 122
New available names, moths, 105—
107
New York ironweed, 123
NEWCOMB, ANGELA L.., 169
Nicrophorus americanus, 125
Night-heron
black-crowned, 127
yellow-crowned, 127
Nigronia, 14
N. fasciatus, 21
Nilotanypus sp., 22
Nitrobacter, 27
Nitrosomonas, 27
Nocomis biguttatus, 126
Noctuidae, 105, 107
Nodding ladies’-tresses, yellow, 122
Nodding mandarin, 119
Nodding rattlesnake-root, 121
Northern bog club-moss, 120
Northem broken-dash, 86
Northern brook lamprey, 126
Norther cardinal, 53, 56
Northem cavefish, 125
Northern cloudywing, 86
Northern coal skink, 127
Northern crawfish frog, 127
Northern dropseed, 122
N
N
N
N
N
Northern fox grape, 123
Northern hairstreak, 87, 125
Northern harrier, 127
Northern leopard frog, 127
Northern madtom, 126
Northern metalmark, 87
186 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Northern pearly-eye, 87
Northern pike, 75
Northern pine snake, 127
Northern riffleshell, 124
Northern shoveler, 127
Northern starflower, 123
Northern starhead topminnow, 126
Northern white-cedar, 123
Northern witch, 119
Noseburn, nettle-leaf, 123
NOTES, 163-164
Notropis sp., 126
N. albizonatus, 126
N. hudsonius, 126
N. maculatus, 126
Noturus exilis, 126
N. hildebrandi, 126
N. phaeus, 126
N. stigmosus, 126
Nut-rush, fringed, 122
Nuthatch, red-breasted, 55, 128
Nuttall’s lobelia, 120
Nuttall’s milkwort, 121
Nuttall’s mock bishop’s-weed, 121
Nyctanassa violacea, 127
Nycticeius humeralis, 128
Nycticorax nycticorax, 127
Nyctiphylax sp., 21
Nymphalis antiopa, 87
Nymphalis vaualbum j-album, 87
Nyssa sylvatica, 54
Obovaria retusa, 124
Ocola skipper, 86
Odonata, 21
Oecophoridae, 105
Oedogoniales, 36
Oedogonium boscii, 36, 38
O. capilliforme, 36, 38
O. cardiacum, 36, 38
O. grande, 36, 38
Oenothera linifolia, 121
O. oakesiana, 121
O. perennis, 121
O. triloba, 121
Ohio shrimp, 124
Oidaematophorus eupatorii, 107
Old Well Cave beetle, 125
Oldenlandia uniflora, 121
Olethreutes tiliana, 106
Oligia mactata, 107
Oligochaeta, 1-5, 20
Olivaceous sedge, 119
Olive darter, 126
Olympia marble, 87
Oncophorus raui, 117
One-flower fiddleleaf, 119
Onosmodium molle ssp. hispidissi-
mum, 12]
O. molle ssp. molle, 121
O. molle ssp. occidentale, 121
Onychonema laeve, 44
Onyx rocksnail, 123
Oocystis parva, 34, 35
O. solitaria, 34, 35
Ophiogomphus aspersus, 125
O. howei, 125
Ophisaurus attenuatus longicaudus,
127.
Ophorornis formosus, 53
Orange sulphur, 87
Orange tip, falcate, 87
Orange, hoary mock, 121
Orange, mock, 121
Orange, sleepy, 87
Orange-barred sulphur, 87
Orangefood pimpleback, 124
Orbesilum stipulatum, 130
Orchard oriole, 53
Orchid
small purple-finged, 121
white fringeless, 121
yellow-crested, 121
Orchis, long-bract green, 118
Orconectes burri, 124
O. inermis, 124
O. jeffersoni, 124
O. lancifer, 124
O. palmeri, 124
O. pellucidus, 124
Oriole, orchard, 53
Ornate rocksnail, 123
Orobanche ludoviciana, 121
Oronectes australis, 124
O. bisectus, 124
Orontium aquaticum, 121
Orthocladius annectens, 22
Orthocyclops modestus, 165-166
Orthotrichum diaphanum, 117
Osprey, 128
Ostrocerca prob. truncata, 20
Oulimnious latiusculus, 21
Ovate catchfly, 122
Ovate fiddleleaf, 119
Ovenbird, 53
Owl
barn, 128
feeding habits, 163-164
Owl
long-eared, 127
short-eared, 127
Oxalis priceae, 121
Oxydendrum arboreum, 54
Oyster mussel, 124
Ozark least trillium, 123
Paintbrush, scarlet Indian, 118
Painted lady, 87
Painted trillium, 123
Painted turtle, southern, 127
Palaemonias ganteri, 124
Palamedes swallowtail, 87
PALAZZOLO, D. L., 169
Pale false foxglove, 117
Pale manna grass, 123
Pale umbrella-wort, 120
Palezone shiner, 126
Pallid shiner, 126
Pallid sturgeon, 126
PALOMBI, PEGGY SHADDUCK,
169
Palpomyia sp., 21
Pale corydalis, 118
Pandion haliaetus, 128
PANEMANGALORE, MYNA, 108
Panoquina ocola, 86
Papaipema eryngii, 125
Papershell, Cumberland, 124
Papilio cresphontes, 87
P. joanae, 87
P. palamedes, 87
P. polyxenes asterius, 87
P. troilus, 87
Papilo glaucus, 87
Parachaetocladius sp., 22
Paragnetina sp., 20
Parakeet, Carolina, 130
Paraleptophlebia, 10, 13, 15
P. prob. ontario, 20
Parametriocnemus, 15
P. lundbecki, 22
Parapediasia decorella, 106
Parnassia asarifolia, 121
P. grandifolia, 121
Paronychia argyrocoma, 121
Parrhasius m-album, 87
Parsley, prairie, 130
Parus bicolor, 53
Parus carolinensis, 53
Paspalum, bull, 121
Paspalum boscianum, 121
Passenger pigeon, 130
Passerculus sandwichensis, 128
Passerina cyanea, 53, 56
Pastinaca sativa, 159
Patera panselenus, 123
Pawpaw, 165, 166
controlled crosses, 165
Kentucky State University pro-
ject, 166
molecular markers, 165
Paxistima canbyi, 121
Peachleaf willow, 122
Peacock, white, 87
Pearl crescent, 87
Pearly-eye
Creole, 87
northern, 87
southern, 87
Pearlymussel
cracking, 130
dromedary, 130
littlewing, 124
slabside, 124
Peatmoss, 117
Peavine
smooth veiny, 120
vetchling, 120
Peck’s skipper, 86
Pediastrum boryanum, 36, 37
P. duplex, 36, 37
P. simplex, 36, 37
Pedicularis lanceolata, 121
Pegias fabula, 124
Peltoperla arcuata, 20
Peltoperlidae, 20
Penium margaritaceum, 36, 39
Pennant, double-ringed, 125
Pennyroyal, rough, 119
Pentagenia robusta, 130
Pentagenian burrowing mayfly, ro-
bust, 130
Pepper and salt skipper, 86
Percina burtoni, 130
P. caprodes, 70
P. copelandi, 70
P. macrocephala, 126
P. squamata, 126
Percopsis omiscomaycus, 126
Peregrine falcon, 127
Perideridia americana, 121
Perlidae, 20
Perlodidae, 20
Peromyscus gossypinus, 128
Pesticide residue, 165
in soil, 165
measurement, 165
mitigation, 165
runoff, 165
Phacelia ranunculacea, 121
Phaeophyscia leana, 117
Phalacrocorax auritus, 128
Phalaris arundinacea, 23, 26, 27
Phenacobius uranops, 126
Pheucticus ludovicianus, 50
P. ludovicianus, 53, 128
Philadelphus inodorus, 121
P. pubescens, 121
PHILLIPS, B., 170
Philopotamidae, 21
Philtraea monillata, 107
Phlox bifida ssp. bifida, 121
P. bifida ssp. stellaria, 121
Phlox
cleft, 121
starry cleft, 121
Phoebe, eastern, 53
Phoebis agarithe, 87
P. philea, 87
P. sennae, 87
Pholisora catullus, 86
Photoacoustic measurements, 169
in biological fluids, 169
in biological tissues, 169
Phoxinus cumberlandensis, 126
Phyciodes batesii, 87, 125
P. tharos, 87
Physics & Astronomy, 170
Physiology & Biochemistry, 170-172
Physostegia intermedia, 130
Picea rubens, 52
Pickerel weed, 23, 26, 27
Pickerel, chain, 126
Pickerel-weed, 121
Picoides borealis, 128
P. pubescens, 53
Index to Volume 61
P. villosus, 53
Pied-billed grebe, 128
Pieris rapae, 87
P. virginiensis, 87
Pigeon, passenger, 130
Pigmy rattlesnake, western, 127
Pigtoe
pyramid, 124
rough, 124
Pike, northern, 75
Pilaria sp., 22
Pilsbryna sp., 123
Pimpleback, orangefoot, 124
Pine Mountain tigersnail, 123
Pine snake, northern, 127
Pine, Virginia, 5D
Pines, 52
Pinesap, sweet, 120
Pink mucket, 124
Pink, ring, 124
Pinus virginiana, 52, 54, 55
Pipevine swallowtail, 86
Pipilo erythrophthalmus, 53, 54
Piranga olivacea, 53
Pisidium sp., 20
Pituophis melanoleucus melanoleu-
cus, 127
Plains frostweed, 119
Plains minnow, 126
Plains muhly, 120
Planariidae, 20
Planktosphaeria gelatinosa, 34, 35
Plant oils, effectiveness on air
breathing insects, 166-171
Plantago cordata, 121
P. lanceolata, 167, 168
Plantain, heartleaf, 121
Plants, 117, 130
Platanthera cristata, 121
‘Pp. integrilabia, 121
P. psycodes, 121
Platygobio gracilis, 126
Plecoptera, 20
Plethadon hoffmani, 8
P. wehrlei, 8
Plethobascus cicatricosus, 130
P. cooperianus, 124
P. cyphyus, 124
Plethodon cinereus, 6-9, 127
P. electromorphus, 6
P. richmondi, 6—9
P. shenandoah, 8
P. wehrlei, 127
Pleurobema clava, 124
P. oviforme, 124
P. plenum, 124
P. rubrum, 124
Pleurocera alveare, 123
P. curta, 123
Pleurocercidae, 60-63
Pleurotaenium constrictum, 39, 40
P. ehrenbergii, 39, 40
P. nodosum, 39, 40
Plukenet’s cyperus, 118
187
Poa saltuensis, 12]
Poaceae, 88
Poanes hobomok
P. viator, 86
P. yehl, 86
P. zabulon, 86
Pocketbook, 124
fat, 124
Podilymbus podiceps, 128
Podostemum ceratophyllum, 121
Pogonia, rose, 121
Pogonia ophioglossoides, 121
Poison sumac, 123
Polioptila caerulea, 53
Polites origenes, 86
P. peckius, 86
P. themistocles, 86
Polycentropodidae, 21
Polycentropus sp., 21
Polydamas swallowtail, 87
Polygala cruciata, 121
P. nuttallii, 121
P. paucifolia, 121
P. polygama, 121
Polygonia comma, 87
P. faunus, 125
P. faunus smythi, 87
P. intearrogationis, 87
P. progne, 87, 125
Polymnia laevigata, 121
Polypedilum aviceps gp., 22
P. convictum gp., 9)
P. fallax gp., 22
P. haltarare gp., 22
Polytaenia nuttalli, 130
Polytrichum pallidisetum, 117
P. piliferum, 117
P. strictum, 117
Pompeius verna, 86
POMPER, KIRK W., 165, 166
POND, GREGORY J., 10
Pondweed
Illinois, 121
spotted, 121
Pontederia cordata, 23, 26, 27, 121
Pontia protodice, 87
Pooecetes gramineus, 128
Poppy-mallow, clustered, 118
Porcupine sedge, 118
Porter's reed 118
Possum haw viburnum, 123
Potamilus capax, 124
Potamilus purpuratus, 124
Potamogeton illinoensis, 121
P. pulcher, 121
Potato-bean, Price’s, 117
Potentilla erecta, 155
Potthastia sp., 22
Poultry by-product meal, 166
in diets for fish, 166
Prairie gentian, 119
Prairie parsley, 130
Prairie redroot, 115
Prairie vole, 161, 164
188 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Prairie-chicken, greater, 130
Prairie-clover, purple, 119
Prawns, freshwater, 165, 166
copepods as live food for, 165—
166
effect of water temperature on
survival, 167
transport density on survival, 165
Pre-emphasis filter, auditory system
model, 169
Prenanthes alba, 121
P. aspera, 121
P. barbata, 121
P. crepidinea, 121
Pretty St. John’s-wort, 120
Price’s potato-bean, 117
Price’s yellow wood sorrel, 121
Prickly bog sedge, 118
Primrose
evening, 121
yellow evening, 118
Pristina aequisita, 20
Privet, upland, 119
Procambarus viaeviridis, 125
Prosimulium sp., 22
Prosopis, 155
Prostate cancer cell lines, 170-171
Proterometra albacauda, 103
P. autraini, 102
P. catenaria, 103
P. dickermani, 102
P. edneyi, 60-63, 103
P. macrostoma, 99-104
development in host, 99-104
distome emergence, 99-104
P. sagittaria, 103
P. septimae, 103
Prunus serotina, 54
Psephenidae, 21
Psephenus herricki, 21
Pseudanophthalmus audax, 125
P. calcareus, 125
P. catoryctos, 125
P. conditus, 125
P. desertus major, 125
P. frigidus, 125
P. globiceps, 125
P. horni abditus, 125
P. horni caecus, 125
P. horni horni, 125
P. hypolithos, 125
P. inexpectatus, 125
P. parvus, 125
P. pholeter, 125
P. pubescens intrepidus, 125
P. puteanus, 125
P. rogersae, 125
P. scholasticus, 125
P. simulans, 125.
P. tenebrosus, 125
P. troglodytes, 125
Pseudolimnophila sp., 22
Pseudoroegneria spicata, 92
Pseudostenophylax uniformis, 21
Psoralidium tenuiflorum, 121
Pterophoridae, 105, 107
Ptilimnium capillaceum, 121
P. costatum, 121
P. nuttallii, 121
Ptychobranchus subtentum, 124
Puma concolor couguar, 130
Puma, eastern, 130
Punctate coil, 123
Purple giant hyssop, 117
Purple lilliput, 124
Purple prairie-clover, 119
Purple sand grass, 123
Purple, red spotted, 87
Purple-fringed orchid, small, 121
Purple-oat, 122
Pussy willow, 122
Pycnanthemum albescens, 121
P. muticum, 121
Pycnopsyche gentilis, 21
Pycnopsyche prob. guttifer, 21
Pygmy snaketail, 125
Pyramid pigtoe, 124
Pyrausta signatalis, 106
Pyrgus centaurae, 86
P. communis, 86
P. wyandot, 125
Pyrola americana, 121
Quadrigula chodatii, 36, 37
Quadrula cylindrica cylindrica, 124
Q. fragosa, 130
Q. tuberosa, 130
Queen, 87 .
Queen crater, 123
Quercus alba, 11, 54
. coccinea, 1]
. falcata, 54
. macrocarpa, 89
. mandanensis, 89
. montana, 11
. muehlenbergii, 54, 89
. prinoides, 89
. prinus, 54
Q. rubra, 54
Question mark, 87
Quillwort
blackfoot, 120
Butler's, 120
OOOO OCC CPO
Rabbit-tobacco, small, 119
Rabbitsfoot, 124
Rabdotus dealbatus, 123
Rabdotus, whitewashed, 123
Racemed milkwort, 121
Radio telescope, Morehead, 133-
145
Radioprotective drug combination
in mice, 169-170
Rafinesque’s big-eared bat, 128
Rail, king, 128
Rainbow darter, 70
Rallus elegans, 128
Rana areolata circulosa, 127
Rana pipiens, 127
Rand's goldenrod, 122
Ranunculaceae, 64
Ranunculus ambigens, 121
Raptoheptagenia cruentata, 125
Rare biota of Kentucky, 115-132
Rats
adult, 108-114
aged, 108-114
body and tissue weights, 108-114
effects of cadmium on, 108-114
effects of lead on, 108-114
effects of zinc on, 108-114
weanling, 108-114
Rattlesnake, western pigmy, 127
Rattlesnake-master borer moth, 125
Rattlesnake-root
barbed, 121
nodding, 121
rough, 121
white, 121
Raven, common, 127
Rayed bean, 124
Red admiral, 87
Red buckeye, 117
Red elderberry, 122
Red maple, 54, 56
Red spotted purple, 87
Red spruce, 52
Red turtlehead, 118
Red wolf, 130
Red-backed vole, Kentucky, 128
Red-banded, 87
Red-breasted nuthatch, 55, 128
Red-cockaded woodpecker, 128
Red-eyed vireo, 54, 55
Red-winged blackbird, 164
Redback salamander, 127
Redhorse
blacktail, 126
greater, 130
Redroot, prairie, 118
Redspotted sunfish, 126
Redstart, American, 56
Reed bent grass, 118
Reed canary grass, 23, 26
Reed grass, blue-joint, 118
Porter's, 118
REED, EDDIE B., 166
REEDER, BRIAN C., 46
Regal fritillary, 87, 125
Regulus satrapa, 55
Reithrodontomys megalotis, 164
Reithrodontomys spp., 163
Relict darter, 126
Reniform sedge, 118
Reptiles, 127, 130
Rheotanytarsus sp., 22
Rhinichthys cataractae, 126
Rhodacme elatior, 123
Rhododendron canescens, 121
Rhyacionia aktita, 106
Rhyacophila carolina, 21
R. invaria gp., 21
R. torva, 21
R. vibox, 21
Rhyacophilidae, 21
Rhynchosia tomentosa, 121
Rhynchospora globularis, 121
R. macrostachya, 121
Rhyngia, 155
Ribbon snake
eastern, 127
western, 127
RICE, DAVID, 169
Rice
Indian wild, 123
southern wild, 123
Riffleshell
angled, 130
northern, 124
tan, 130
Tennessee, 130
Wabash, 130
Rigid sedge, 118
Ring pink, 124
Riparia riparia, 128
River bulrush, 122
Roan Mountain goldenrod, 122
Roan sedge, 118
Robinia pseudoacacia, 54
ROBINSON, DAVID L., 167, 168
Robust pentagenian burrowing may-
fly, 130 :
Rock skullcap, 122
Rock-cress
Braun's, 117
hairy, 117
Missouri, 117
Rockcastle aster, 117
Rockshell, rough, 130
Rocksnail
armored, 123
muddy, 123
onyx, 123
ornate, 123
varicose, 123
Roger's cave beetle, 125
Rosaceae, 146-162
Rose pogonia, 121
Rose turtlehead, 118
Rose verbena, 119
Rose-breasted grosbeak, 50, 53, 55,
56, 128
Rosemary, Cumberland, 118
ROSEN, RONALD, 62, 99
Rosinweed, Appalachian, 122
Rosinweed, tansy, 122
Rosy twistedstalk, 122
ROTH, LAUREN, 62
Rough aster, low, 117
Rough dropseed, 122
Rough pennyroyal, 119
Rough pigtoe, 124
Rough rattlesnake-root, 121
Rough rockshell, 130
Round combshell, 130
Round-head bush-clover, 120
Index to Volume 61
Round-headed cave beetle, 125
Roundleaf fameflower, 123
Rove beetle, black lordithon, 125
Royal catchfly, 122
Rubus canadensis, 122
R. whartoniae, 122
Ruby-throated hummingbird, 53
Rudbeckia subtomentosa, 122
Rufous-sided towhee, 54, 56
Rugged hornsnail, 123
Running buffalo clover, 123
Running-pine, 120
Rush
bog, 120
jointed, 120
long-styled, 120
Ruta graveolens, 159
Rye, Svenson’s wild, 119
Sabatia campanulata, 122
Sachem, 86
Sage, nettle-leaf, 122
Sagittaria graminea, 122
S. latifolia, 27
S. platyphylla, 122
S. rigida, 122
Salamander mussel, 124
redback, 127
three-lined, 126
Wehrle’s, 127
Salebriaria atratella, 106
S. tenebrosella, 106
Salix amygdaloides, 122
S. discolor, 122
S. nigra, 54
Salvia urticifolia, 122
Sambucus racemosa ssp. pubens,
122
_ Sand darter
scaly, 130
western, 125
Sand grape, 123
Sand grass, purple, 123
Sand-myrtle, 120
Sandpiper
spotted, 127
upland, 127
Sandwort
Appalachian, 120
Cumberland, 120
Sanguisorba canadensis, 122
Santhidium armatum, 40, 42
Sapsucker, yellow-bellied, 53
Sassafras, 56
Sassafras albidum, 54, 56
Satyr
Carolina, 87
gemmed, 87
little wood, 87
Satyrium acadicum, 87
S. calanus falacer, 87
S. caryaevorum, 87
S. edwardsii, 87
S. favonius ontario, 87, 125
189
S. liparops, 87
S. titus mopsus, 87
Satyrodes appalachia, 87
Savannah sparrow, 128
Sawfin shiner, 126
Saxifraga michauxii, 122
S. micranthidifolia, 122
S. pensylvanica, 122
Saxifrage
brook, 118
lettuce-leaf, 122
Michaux’s, 122
swamp, 122
Sayornis phoebe, 53
Scaleshell, 130
Scallopwing, Hayhurst’s, 86
Scaly sand darter, 130
Scaphirhynchus albus, 126
Scarlet indian paintbrush, 118
Scarlet kingsnake, 127
Scenedesmus bicaudatus, 36, 37
S. dimorphus, 36, 37
S. obtusus, 36, 37
S. quadricauda, 36, 37
Schisandra glabra, 122
Schizachne purpurascens, 122
Scholarly cave beetle, 125
Schroederia setigera, 34, 35
SCHUSTER, JESSICA, 62, 99
Schwalbea americana, 122
Science Education, 171
Scientists of Kentucky, 77-85
Scirpus expansus, 122
. fluviatilis, 122
. hallii, 122
. heterochaetus, 122
. microcarpus, 122
. validus, 23, 26, 27
. verecundus, 122
Scleria ciliata var. ciliata, 122
Scorpion-weed, blue, 121
Screwstem, yellow, 117
Scrophulariaceae, 96
Sculpted glyph, 123
Scurf-pea stipuled, 130
few-flowered, 121
Scutellaria arguta, 122
S. saxatilis, 122
Sedge wren, 127
Sedge
Appalachian, 118
bristly, 118
broadwing, 118
brown bog, 118
cedar, 118
Coastal Plain, 118
Crawe's, 115
cypress-swamp, 118
epiphytic, 118
finely-nerved, 118
Frasers, 118
large, 118
olivaceous, 119
ANNNNNMN
porcupine, 118
190 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
prickly bog, 118
reniform, 118
rigid, 118
roan, 118
stalkgrain, 118
straw, 118
summer, 118
Tarheel, 118
umbel-like, 118
weak stellate, 118
woolly, 118
Sedum telephioides, 122
SEED, T. M, 169
Seiurus aurocapillus, 53
Selenastrum gracile, 34, 35
Selenisa sueroides, 107
Semotilus atromaculatus, 11
September elm, 123
Sessile-fruit arrowhead, 122
Setophaga ruticilla, 53, 56
Shad, Alabama, 125
Shaggy cavesnail, 123
Shaggy hedge-hyssop, 119
Sharp-scaled manna grass, 119
Sharp-shinned hawk, 127
Shawnee darter, 126
Sheepnose, 124
Shell galaxies, hydrogen gas in, 170
SHIBER, JOHN G., 170
Shiner
blacktail, 125
bluntface, 125
palezone, 126
pallid, 126
sawfin, 126
spottail, 126
taillight, 126
Shining ladies’-tresses, 122
Shooting-star, French’s, 119
Short’s goldenrod, 122
Short'’s hedge-hyssop, 119
Short-eared owl, 127
Shortleaf skeleton 119
Shortspire hornsnail, 123
Shoveler, northern, 127
Showy gentian, 119
Showy lady’s-slipper, 119
Shrew, 163
least, 164
long-tailed, 128
masked, 128
Shrimp
Mammoth Cave, 124
Ohio, 124
Sicklefin chub, 126
Sida hermaphrodita, 122
Side-oats grama, 118
Silene ovata, 122
S. regia, 122
Silky aster, barrens, 117
Silphium sunflower, 119
Silphium laciniatum var. laciniatum,
122
S. laciniatum var. robinsonii, 122
S. pinnatifidum, 122
S. wasiotense, 122
Silver-bordered fritillary, 87
Silver-spotted skipper, 86
Silverbell, common, 119
Silvering, 121
Silvery aster, silvery, 117
Silvery blue, 87
Silvery checkerspot, 87
Simpsonaias ambigua, 124
Simuliidae, 22
Simulium sp., 22
Sistrurus miliarius streckeri, 127
Sitanion hystrix, 88, 89, 92
S. minus, 88
Sitta canadensis, 55, 128
S. carolinensis, 53
Sixbanded longhorn beetle, 125
Skeleton grass
bearded, 119
shortleaf, 119
Skink
northern coal, 127
southeastern five-lined, 127
southern coal, 127
Skipper
Appalachian grizzled, 125
Bell’s roadside, 86
broadwinged, 86
clouded, 86
cobweb, 86
common checkered, 86
common roadside, 86
crossline, 86
Delaware, 86
Dion, 86
Duke's, 86, 125
Dun, 86
dusted, 86
Eufala, 86
European, 86
fiery, 86
gold-banded, 86
grizzled, 86
hobomok, 86
Indian, 86
lace-winged roadside, 86
least, 86
Leonard’s, 86
long-tailed, 86
Ocala, 86
Peck’s, 86
pepper and salt, 86
silver-spotted, 86
swarthy, 86
tawny-edged, 86
Yehl, 86
Zabulon, 86
Skullcap
hairy, 122
rock, 122
Skunk, eastern spotted, 128
Slabside pearlymussel, 124
Sleepy duskywing, 86
Sleepy orange, 87
Slender blazingstar, 120
Slender bulrush, 122
Slender dragon-head, 130
Slender glass lizard, eastern, 127
Slender madtom, 126
Slender marsh-pink, 122
Small enchanter’s-nightshade, 118
Small lady’s-slipper, yellow, 119
Small purple-fringed orchid, 121
Small rabbit-tobacco, 119
Small sundrops, 121
Small white lady’s-slipper, 118
Small yellow lady’s-slipper, 119
Small-flower baby-blue-eyes, 121
Small-flowered false hellebore, 120
Small-flowered thoroughwort, 119
Small-footed myotis, eastern, 128
Small-fruit bulrush, 122
Smallscale darter, 126
SMITH, J., 171
Smooth blackberry, 122
Smooth softshell, midland, 127
Smooth veiny peavine, 120
Snail, 60-63, 121
Snake
broad-banded water, 127
copperbelly water, 127
corn, 127
eastern ribbon, 127
Kirtland’s, 127
Mississippi green water, 127
northern pine, 127
western mud, 127
western ribbon, 127
Snakeroot
Lucy Braun's white, 117
white, 167
Snaketail
brook, 125
pygmy, 125
Snapping turtle, alligator, 127
Snout-bean, hairy, 121
Snow melanthera, 120
Snow trillium, 123
Snowberry, 122
Snuffbox, 124
Soft false gromwell, 121
Soft-haired thermopsis, 123
Softshell, midland smooth, 127
Softstem bulrush, 23, 26, 27
Solidago albopilosa, 122
S. buckleyi, 122
. curtisii, 122
. gracillima, 122
. puberula, 122
. roanensis, 122
. shortii, 122
. simplex ssp. randii, 122
S. squarrosa, 122
Solomon-seal, starry false, 120
Sootywing, common, 86
Sorastrum americanum, 36, 37
Sorex spp., 163
NNNNANNM
S. cinereus, 128
S. dispar blitchi, 128
Sorrel, Price’s yellow wood, 121
Southeastern five-lined skink, 127
Southeastern myotis, 128
Southern bog club-moss, 120
Southern bog goldenrod, 122
Southern bog lemming, 163
Southern broken-dash, 86
Southern brook lamprey, 126
Southern cavefish, 126
Southern cloudywing, 86
Southern coal skink, 127
Southern crabapple, 120
Southern dogface, 87
Southern heartleaf, 119
Southern maidenhair fern, 117
Southern painted turtle, 127
Southern pearly-eye, 87
Southem shield wood fern, 119
Southern twayblade, 120
Southern wild rice, 123
Soyedina sp., 20
Sparganium eurycarpum, 120
Sparrow
Bachman’s, 127
Henslow’s, 127
lark, 127
Savannah, 128
vesper, 128
Spearwort, water-plantain, 121
Speckled darter, 70
Spectaclecase, 124
little, 124
Speedwell, American, 123
Speyeria aphrodite, 87
S. cybele, 87
S. diana, 87
S. idalia, 87, 125
Sphaeriidae, 20
Sphaerocystis schroeteri, 34, 35
Sphaerozosma aubertianum, 44
Sphagnum quinquefarium, 117
Sphenopholis pensylvanica, 122
Sphyrapicus varius, 53
Spicebush swallowtail, 87
Spiked hoary-pea, 123
Spilogale putorius, 128
Spinulose wood fern, 119
Spiraea alba var. alba, 122
S. virginiana, 122
Spiraea, Virginia, 122
Spiranthes lucida, 122
S. magnicamporum, 122
S. ochroleuca, 122
S. odorata, 122
Spirogyra communis, 36, 38
S. pratensis, 36, 38
S. varians, 36, 38
Spirotaenia condensata, 36, 39
Spondylosium moniliforme, 44
Spoon-leaved sundew, 119
Sporobolus clandestinus, 122
S. heterolepis, 122
Index to Volume 61
Spottail shiner, 126
Spotted beebalm, 120
Spotted coralroot, 118
Spotted darter, 126
Spotted joe-pye-weed, 119
Spotted pondweed, 121
Spotted sandpiper, 127
Spotted skunk, eastern, 128
Spreading false foxglove, 117
Spring azure, 87
Spruce, red, 52
Spurge, mercury, 119
Squarrose goldenrod, 122
SRINIVASAN, V., 169
St. John’s-wort
creeping, 119
large spotted, 120
pretty, 120
St. Peter’s-wort, 119
Stachys eplingii, 122
Stalkgrain sedge, 118
Staphylus hayhurstii, 86
Star tickseed, 118
Starflower, northern, 123
Stargazing minnow, 126
Starhead topminnow, northern, 126
Starry cleft phlox, 121
Starry false solomon-seal, 120
Starvine, bay, 122
State records, moths, 105-107
Staurastrum alternans, 40, 42
S. arctiscon, 40, 42
. botryophilum, 40, 42
. brasiliense, 40, 42
. chaetoceros, 40, 42
. crenulatum, 40, 42
. curvatum, 40, 42
. dickiei, 40, 42
. hexacerum, 40, 42
. leptocladum, 40, 42
. limneticum, 40, 42
S. setigerum, 40, 42
Steele’s joe-pye-weed, 119
Stellaria fontinalis, 122
S. longifolia, 122
Stellate sedge, weak, 118
Stemless evening-primrose, 121
Stenacron interpunctatum, 20
Stenelmis sp., 21
S. crenata, 21
Stenonema bednariki, 125
S. meririvulanum, 20
S. meririvulanum, 15
S. vicarium, 20
Stenoptilodes brevipennis, 107
Sterna antillarum, 128
Stevens Creek Cave beetle, 125
Stipuled scurf-pea, 130
Stitchwort
longleaf, 122
water, 122
Stonecrop, Allegheny, 122
Stonefly, 18
Stoneroller, central, 75
NANNNNANNAURHNMN
191
Straw sedge, 118
Streptopus roseus var. perspectus,
122
Striped bass hybrid, 166
Striped hairstreak, 87
Striped whitelip, 124
Strymon melinus, 87
Sturgeon chub, 126
Sturgeon
lake, 125
pallid, 126
Stygobromus vitreus, 125
Stylogomphus, 14
S. albistylus, 21
Stylurus notatus, 125
Sucker
blackfin, 126
hairlip, 130
Sugar maple, 54
Sugarspoon, 130
Sulphur
clouded, 87
cloudless, 87
dainty, 87
large orange, 87
Layside, 87
orange, 87
orange-barred, 87
Sumac, poison, 123
Summer sedge, 118
Sundew
dwarf, 119
spoon-leaved, 119
Sundrops
small, 121
thread-leaf, 121
Sunfish
dollar, 126
redspotted, 126
Sunflower
Eggert’s, 119
silphium, 119
Sunshine bass, 166
diets for, 166
Superficial coset curiosities, 170
Supplejack, 117
Surprising cave beetle, 125
Svenson’s wild rye, 119
Swallow
bank, 128
polydamas, 87
Swallow-tailed kite, 130
Swallowtail
black, 87
giant, 87
Joan's, 87
palamedes, 87
pipevine, 86
spicebush, 87
tiger, 87
zebra, 87
Swamp darter, 126
Swamp lousewort, 121
Swamp metalmark, 87
192 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
Swamp metalmark, 125
Swamp saxifrage, 122
Swamp wedgescale, 122
Swamp-candles, 120
Swarthy skipper, 86
Sweet birch, 54
Sweet coneflower, 122
Sweet flag, 23, 26, 27
Sweet pinesap, 120
Sweet-fern, 118
Sweetscent ladies’-tresses, 122
Sweetshrub, 118
Sweltsa, 15
S. sp., 20
Symphoricarpos albus, 122
Synaptomys cooperi, 163, 164
Synclita tinealis, 106
Synorthocladius sp., 22
Syritta, 155
Syrphidae, 155
Syrphus, 155
Taillight shiner, 126
Talinum calcaricum, 122
Tall beaked-rush, 121
Tall bush-clover, 120
Tall fescue, 27
Tall hairy groovebur, 117
Talnium teretifolium, 123
Tamoxifen, 170-171
effect on Cathepsin B, 170-171
effect on Cathepsin L, 170-171
effect on cysteine proteases, 170—
171
Tan riffleshell, 130
Tansy rosinweed, 122
Tanytarsus, 15
Tanytarsus sp., 22
Taraxacum officinale, 167, 168
inheritance of morphological
characteristics, 167
inheritance of physiological char-
acteristics, 167
Tarheel sedge, 118
Tatum Cave beetle, 125
Tawny cotton-grass, 119
Tawny crescent, 87, 125
Tawny emperor, 87
Tawny-edged skipper, 86
Taxus canadensis, 123
Teal, blue-winged, 127
Teilingia excavata, 44
Telescope, Morehead radio, 133-
145
Ten-lobe false foxglove, 117
Tennessee aster, 117
Tennessee clubshell, 124
Tennessee leafcup, 121
Tennessee riffleshell, 130
Tephrosia spicata, 123
Tern
black, 130
least, 128
Terrestrial vertebrate species, 171
richness of, 171
Tetgrasporales, 34
Tetmemorus brebissonii, 39, 40
Tetraedron minimum, 34, 35
T. regulare, 34, 35
Texas aster, 117
Texas lilliput, 124
Thalictrum clavatum, 62
T. mirabile, 62
chromosome number of, 62-63
Thamnophis proximus proximus,
W27/
T. sauritus sauritus, 127
Thaspium pinnatifidum, 123
Theliopsyche, 15, 18
T. sp., 21
Thermopsis mollis, 123
soft-haired, 123
Thienimanniella sp., 22
THIERET, JOHN W., 146
Thoburnia atripinnis, 126
THOGMARTIN, WAYNE E., 164
THOMPSON, J., 170
THOMPSON, KENNETH R., 166
Thoroughwort, small-flowered, 119
Thorybes bathyllus, 86
T. confusis, 86
T. pylades, 86
Thread-leaf sundrops, 121
Thread-like naiad, 121
Threadfoot, 121
Three-awn grass, branched, 117
Three-lined salamander, 126
Three-toed amphiuma, 126
Thrush, wood, 56
Thryomanes bewickii, 128
Thryothorus ludovicianus, 53, 56
Thuja occidentalis, 123
Thymelicus lineola, 86
Tickseed, star, 118
TIDWELL, JAMES H., 165, 166,
167
Tiger swallowtail, 87
Tigersnail, Pine Mountain, 123
Tilia spp., 54
Tillium nivale, 123
Tippecanoe darter, 70
Tipula sp., 22
Tipulidae, 22
Topminnow
golden, 126
northern starhead, 126
Torreyochloa pallida, 123
Tortoise shell, compton, 87
Milbert’s, 87
Tortricidae, 105, 106
Tortula, 117
Tortula norvegica, 117
Towhee, rufous-sided, 54, 56
Toxicodendron vernix, 123
Toxolasma lividus, 124
T. texasiensis, 124
Tragia urticifolia, 123
Trailing loosestrife, 120
Traverella lewisi, 125
Treatment, wastewater, 23-29
Treefrog
barking, 127
bird-voiced, 126
gray, 127
green, 127
Trematode, digenetic, 60-63
Trepocarpus, 123
Trepocarpus aethusae, 123
Trichoptera, 21
Trichostema setaceum, 123
Tricladia, 20
Trientalis borealis, 123
Trifolium reflexum, 123
T. repens, 167, 168
T. stoloniferum, 92, 123
Trillium pusillum var. ozarkanur
123
T. pusillum var. pusillum, 123
T. undulatum, 123
Trillium
least, 123
Ozark least, 123
painted, 123
snow, 123
Triplasis purpurea, 123
Troglodytes troglodytes, 55
Trout, American brook, 126
Trout-perch, 126
Tryphlichthys subterraneus, 126
Tsuga canadensis, 11]
TUAN, VO-DINH, 169
Tubercled blossom, 130
Tubificidae, 20
Tufted hair, 119
Turbellaira, 20
Turk’s cap lily, 120
Turkeybeard, eastern, 123
Turtle
alligator snapping, 127
southern painted, 127
Turtlehead
red, 118
rose, 118
Tvetenia bavarica gp., 22
Tvetinia discloripes gp., 22
Twayblade
kidney-leaf, 120
Loesel’s, 120
southern, 120
Twistedstalk, rosy, 122
Tympanuchus cupido, 130
Typha latifolia, 23-27
Tyto alba, 128, 163-164
Uenoidae, 21
Ulmus serotina, 123
Umbel-like sedge, 118
Umbra limi, 126
Umbrella-wort, pale, 120
Upland privet, 119
Upland sandpiper, 127
Urbanus proteus, 86
Ursus americanus, 128
Utricularia macrorhiza, 123
Vallisneria american, 123
VANARNUM, AARON, 165, 166,
167
Vanessa atalanta, 87
V. cardui, 87
V. virginiensis, 87
Variable-leaved heartleaf, 119
Varicose rocksnail, 123
Variegated fritillary, 87
Vascular plants, 117-123
Veery, 55
Veneroida, 20
Verbena, rose, 119
Vermivora bachmanii, 130
V. chrysoptera, 50, 53, 128
V. pinus, 55D
Vernonia noveboracensis, 123
Veronica americana, 123
Vertigo
cupped, 124
delicate, 124
Vertigo bollesiana, 124
V. clappi, 124
Vesper sparrow, 128
Vetchling peavine, 120
Viburnum lentago, 30—33
V. molle, 123
V. nudum, 123
V. prunifolium, 30-32
V. rafinesquianum var. rafinesquian-
um, 123
V. rufidulum, 30-32
Viburnum, possum haw, 123
Viceroy, 87
Villosa fabalis, 124
V. lienosa, 124
V. ortmanni, 124
V. trabalis, 124
V. vanuxemensis, 124
Viola septemloba var. egglestonii,
123
V. walteri, 123
Violet
Eggleston's, 123
Walter's, 123
Vireo bellii, 128
V. flavifrons, 53
V. griseus, 53
V. olivaceus, 53, 54
V. solitarius, 53, 54
Vireo
Bell’s, 128
blue-headed, 55
red-eyed, 54, 55
white-eyed, 53
Virginia big-eared bat, 128
Virginia bladetooth, 123
Virginia bunchflower, 120
Virginia pine, 55
Virginia spiraea, 122
Virginia waterleaf, 119
Index to Volume 61
Virginia-mallow, 122
Vitamin E, 170-171
effect on Cathepsin B, 170-171
effect on Cathepsin L, 170-171
effect on cysteine proteases, 170-
171
VITATOE, LEIGH ANNE, 167
Vitis labrusea, 123
V. rupestris, 123
Vitrinizonites latissimus, 124
Volatile emissions
biological effects of, 167-168
from cut turf, 167-168
Vole
Kentucky red-backed, 128
meadow, 164
prairie, 163, 164
woodland, 163, 164
Volvocales, 34
Wabash riffleshell, 130
WALCK, JEFFREY L., 63
Wallengrenia egeremet, 86
W. otho, 86
Walnut, white, 120
Walter's violet, 123
Warbler
Bachman’s, 130
black-and-white, 56
black-throated blue, 54
black-throated blue, 55
black-throated blue, 56
Blackburnian, 50, 53, 55, 127
blue-winged, 55
Canada, 50, 53, 55, 128
cerulean, 50, 53
chestnut-sided, 54-56
golden-winged, 50, 53, 55, 128
hooded, 54-56
yellow-rumped, 53
WARNER, RICHARD C., 23
Wartyback, white, 130
Wastewater treatment, 23-29
Water hickory, 118
Water locust, 119
Water snake
broad-banded, 127
copperbelly, 127
Mississippi green, 127
Water stitchwort, 122
Water-milfoil
broadleaf, 121
cutleaf, 121
Water-pennywort, American, 119
Water-plantain spearwort, 121
Water-purslane, 119
Waterleaf, Virginia, 119
Waterweed, 119
Weak stellate sedge, 118
Weasel, least, 128
Webbhelix multilineata, 124
WEBSTER, CARL D., 166
WECKMAN, TIMOTHY J., 30
Wedge-leaf whitlow, 119
193
Wedgescale, swamp, 122
Welhrle’s salamander, 127
WEIBEL, CHARLES, 1655, 166
WESSEL, MARK YV., 146
West Virginia white, 87
Western dwarf dandelion, 120
Wester false gromwell, 121
Western mud snake, 127
Western pigmy rattlesnake, 127
Western ribbon snake, 127
Wester sand darter, 125
Westland size, effect on Canada
Goose, 46—49
Wetlands, constructed, 23-29
Wharton’s dewberry, 122
White admiral, 87
White catspaw, 130
White fringeless orchid, 121
White heath aster, 117
White laldy’s slipper, small, 118
White peacock, 87
White rattlesnake-root, 121
White snakeroot, 167
White snakeroot, Lucy Braun’s, 117
White walnut, 120
White wartyback, 130
White
cabbage, 87
checkered, 87
West Virginia, 87
White-cedar, northern, 123
White-eyed vireo, 53
White-haired goldenrod, 122
White-leaved mountain-mint, 121
White-m, 87
Whitelip, big-tooth, 123
Whitelip, striped, 124
WHITEMAN, HOWARD, 171
Whitewashed rabdotus, 123
Whitlow- wedge-leaf, 119
Whorled aster, 119
Whorled horse-balm, 118
Wild honeysuckle, 120
Wild Indigo duskywing, 86
Wild indigo
blue, 117
cream, 117
yellow, 117
Wild lily-of-the-valley, 120
Wild rice
Indian, 123
southern, 123
Wild rye, Svenson’s, 119
Willow, 55
peachleaf, 122
pussy, 122
Wilsonia canadensis, 50, 53, 128
W. citrina, 53
Winged mapleleaf, 130
Winter wren, 55
Wintergreen, American, 121
Wire fern moss, 117
Witch northern, 119
Wolf
194 Journal of the Kentucky Academy of Science 61(2)
gray, 130
red, 130
Wood fern
southern shield, 119
spinulose, 119
Wood lily, 120
Wood sorrel, Price’s yellow, 121
Wood thrush, 56
Wood-nymph, common, 87
Woodland beak-rush, 122
Woodland vole, 163, 164
Woodpecker
ivory-billed, 130
red-cockaded, 128
Woodsia appalachiana, 123
Woodsia, mountain, 123
Woolly sedge, 118
Wormaldia prob. moesta, 21
Wren
Bewicks, 128
Carolina, 56
sedge, 127
winter, 55
WRIGHT, DONALD J., 105
Wrinkled button, 123
Xanthidium antilopaeum, 40, 42
Xerophyllum asphodeloides, 123
Xyris difformis, 123
Yandell, David Wendel, M. D., 77—
85
Yehl skipper, 86
Yellow blossom, 130
Yellow evening primrose, 118
Yellow gentian, 119
Yellow nodding ladies’-tresses, 122
Yellow screwstem, 117
Yellow water I., 27
Yellow wild indigo, 117
Yellow wood sorrel, Price’s, 121
Yellow, little, 87
Yellow-bellied sapsucker, 53
Yellow-billed cuckoo, 53
Yellow-breasted chat, 53
Yellow-crested orchid, 121
Yellow-crowned night-heron, 127
Yellow-eye, Carolina, 123
Yellow-poplar, 54, 56
Yellow-rumped warbler, 53
Yellowthroat, common, 53
Yew, Canadian, 123
Yugus, 18
Yugus sp., 20
Zabulon skipper, 86
Zantedeschia aethiopica, 27
Zarucco duskywing, 86
Zebra swallowtail, 87
Zenaida macroura, 53
Zenaida macroura, 53
Zinc, effects of on rats, 108-114
Zizania palustris var. interior, 123
Zizaniopsis miliacea, 123
Zoology & Entomology, 171
Zygnema decussatum, 36, 38
Zygnematales, 36
‘Wil iii
01304 3401
CONTENTS
ARTICLES
Conservation Status and Nesting Biology of the Endangered Duskytail
Darter, Etheostoma Percnurum, in the Big South Fork of the Cumberland
River, Kentucky. David J. Eisenhour and Brooks M. Burr ..................++ 67
Scientists of Kentucky
David Wendel Yandell, M. D. Nancy Disher Baird .................0.0seeseeee0s 77
A Field Checklist of Kentucky Butterflies. Charles V. Covell Jr. ............ 86
Notes on North American Elymus Species (Poaceae) with Paired Spikelets:
I. E. macgregorii sp. nov. and E. glaucus ssp. mackenzii comb. nov.
Julian -J..N. Campbell oso. 60.0.5 Seceecona note cha vavee aucnaNenk cnuaueadesssunern ea secu meee 88
Proterometra macrostoma (Digenea: Azygiidae): Distome Emergence
From the Cercarial Tail and Subsequent Development in the Definitive
Host. Ronald Rosen, Kelly Adams, Emilia Boiadgieva, and Jessica
SCRUSEER: | 2h si cisance dei ebm tans cab eehganemesae eoaces psbonewoneeetsetese aedemersadae aaa 99
New State Records and New Available Names for Species of Kentucky
Moths (Insecta: Lepidoptera). Charles V. Covell Jr., Loran D. Gibson,
and: Donald J. Wright: ..cic5c cece eee on tie loeb tebe na sla de eees cease ence aae 105
Comparative Effects of Zinc, Lead, and Cadmium on Body and Tissue
Weights of Weanling, Adult, and Aged Rats. F. N. Bebe and Myna
Panemangalore ooo. cose cs ises ahd cn oes eed edna eat sy oes ea ceeen nesta ena 108
Rare and Extirpated Biota of Kentucky. Kentucky State Nature Preserves
COMMISSION: 5 sic ccooboveccsesedaseyeadducwicasdceadan das bsakecduadeaetssucdeqsesees cea ebeeenaa meme 115
First Observations with the Morehead Radio Telescope, Morehead State
University, Morehead, Kentucky. Benjamin K. Malphrus, Michael S.
Combs, Michael A. James, D. Shannon Murphy, D. Kevin Brown, Jeff
Kruth;, and R: Douglas Kelly. °. .i.cc.06c sci Stes acatcat ences caueeduseauseeaseeaeme 133
Agrimonia (Rosaceae) in Kentucky with Notes on the Genus. Mark V.
Wessel and John- W. Thieret ioc. 5... eck. Sea ccowcnsndtecodcnesns es onaensnadat dauaponwabae 146
NOTE
Barn Owl (Tyto alba) Feeding Habits at Yellowbank Wildlife Management
Area, Breckinridge County, Kentucky. Anita T. Morzillo, Hetti A. Brown,
Wayne E. Thogmartin, and Jennifer H. Herner-Thogmartin ................ 163
Abstracts of Some Papers Presented at the 1999 Meeting of the Kentucky
Academy of Science | ...s. ce ceeds aeaae lan ah nde cnsce utile Ceuta eeaacee sn eeeeena nena 165
List of Reviewers for Volume 61 .0.............cccececscecececscececccecececececssccececsceses 173
Index'to' Volume G1 2352 eo aaa ens SAP AU eth Doc) 174
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11