Archivos de diario de mayo 2020

04 de mayo de 2020

CNC Superheroes!

I'm so proud of everyone that contributed to the CNC this year, even if it was only 10 observations! I learn so much every year: quantity vs. quality tricks, where to go to see a wider variety of organisms, photography techniques, ways to differentiate similar species, talking with experts (academic and hobbyist,) and places I want to visit that have some things I've never seen before. More than that, though, I find new-to-me species (50 this year!) and join in being a part of something really big for nature.

After the physical 4 day challenge is over, we turn to the mental 6-day challenge of trying to ID things. It's tough to put yourself out there and risk being wrong, and even more so when you are making IDs for other people's observations.

This year I didn't ID as much as I wanted to, but I have to give a HUGE SHOUT OUT to a couple of folks that really outdid themselves!
@connlindajo made 9,822 IDs for observations all over Texas. That's incredible!
@kalamurphyking made 8,483 IDs for the DFW area. WOW!
@kathrynwells333 made 7, 260 IDs for the DFW area. Awesome job!
You guys deserve to be recognized just as much as those who took photos.
There were 845 people that contributed IDs in the DFW area! There are many more people that IDs thousands of observations, and you can see them all here:

I also want to thank those folks that helped new users by putting in broad IDs (plant, insect, etc) and commented on how they can improve their chances of getting an ID. I hope a bunch of folks will stick around after the CNC and see how great this community is!

I hope your CNC experience was great, especially in light of the COVID19 restrictions, and I look forward to having extra BioBlitzes the rest of the year to make up for it! Right?!

iNaturally yours,
Kimberlie 😄

Publicado el mayo 4, 2020 04:42 TARDE por kimberlietx kimberlietx | 6 comentarios | Deja un comentario

07 de mayo de 2020

1,000+ species documented in my suburban yard

Woohoo! I finally reached 1,000 species (wild, no cultivars counted) in my .25 acre suburban yard. Well, a lot of that is house, but I count those inside creatures, too! It took me 3.5 years, which I don't think is much at all! Mothing... that's definitely the biggest boost.

Publicado el mayo 7, 2020 02:48 MAÑANA por kimberlietx kimberlietx | 5 comentarios | Deja un comentario

20 de mayo de 2020

Project update - Changes coming your way!

Hello Thora Hart Naturalists! There are some changes to this project you need to be aware of...

When this project was originally created several years ago, iNaturalist required users to add each observation into the project manually. Unfortunately, if a naturalist was not aware of the project, his/her observations were not included. Over time, the iNat Project Features evolved into "Collection" style which automatically adds your observations into a project like this, based on location. Now we can include all observations made within park boundaries, regardless of whether a user joins as a project member or not.

Without going into technical details, converting the project from "Traditional" to "Collection" was causing some hiccups. To simplify the process, this project has been designated as a "Legacy Project", meaning it remains functional but is not supported by the automated collection process. A new "Thora Hart Park" Project is now available to automatically add all observations within park boundaries. Again, you do not need to do anything to have your observations included. All previous observations have been migrated to the new project already.

A bonus to this change is that your observation counts just jumped up, because we all had observations left out of the old project by accident. For example, @sambiology had 86 observations before, but now he has 322! We previously had 1,392 total observations by 11 people. The new collection feature identified 1,903 observations by 16 people, with a few more smaller tweaks needed to include another 100 or so observations still slipping through the cracks.


If you have questions, feel free to send me a message! If you think your counts are still incorrect, please let me know so I can research it! If you haven' been to Thora Hart lately, GO NOW! 😃

Happy iNatting!


Publicado el mayo 20, 2020 05:30 MAÑANA por kimberlietx kimberlietx | 11 comentarios | Deja un comentario

29 de mayo de 2020

Clustered midrib gall on Post Oak

I have been wondering (for four long years) about the ID of a particular gall which has come to be known as the Clustered Midrib Gall. After some amazing collaboration between @megachile, @mileszhang, and myself we have finally solved the mystery!

There is quite a history to this gall, so this post is to record the abbreviated details for future reference.

The gall was first described by itself (without the larva or adult fly) from a Post Oak in 1862 by Osten Sacken. (Osten Sacken, 1862)

In 1887 Ashmead described a new wingless fly and erroneously thought the gall is the one Osten Sacken had described. He published that as Acraspis vaccinii (which later becomes Zopheroteras vaccinii), using Osten Sacken's description of the gall. (Ashmead, 1887)

In 1913 Beutenmuller described a new winged fly without the gall as Andricus lustrans. (Beutenmuller, 1913)

In 1918 Beutenmuller described a new winged fly and gall, which he named Andricus impositus, and even commented that he first thought it was Z. vaccinii but the fly did not match even though the gall did. (Beutenmueller, 1918)

In 1927, Weld figured out that the winged A. impositus fly is the same as the winged A. lustrans fly and described Callirhytis lustrans, the winged fly and the correct gall. In addition, he commented on 1) Ashmead's error, 2) the A. lustrans and A. impositus flies being the same species, as well as 3) Kinsey's Andricus dimorphus var. verifactor fly. (Weld, 1927)

Today, the current accepted name is Callirhytis vaccinii (Ashmead). (Krombein, 1979)

Zopheroterus vaccinii is the accepted name for the unrelated wingless fly and the correct gall it came from.

Weld points out that he found the same looking gall on Quercus breviloba in Austin and Boerne, Tex. Kinsey also reports the galls on Q. breviloba in Leander and Austin, Tex.

Weld's 1927 description of the Callirhytis lustrans gall is the most recent and accurate, and is transcribed here:

Callirhytis lustrans (BEUTENMUELLER)

Andricus lustrans BEUTENMUELLER, Trans. Amer. Ent. Soc. vol. 39, 1913. p. 244.
Andricus impositus BEUTENMUELLER, Ent. News, vol. 29, 1918, p. 329.
Andricus dimorphus verifactor KINSEY, Indiana Univ. Studies 53, 1922, p. 15.
Acraspis vaccinii (gall only), ASHMEAD, Trans. Amer. Ent. Soc., vol. 14, 1887, p. 136.

Lustrans was described from two adults captured at Austin, Texas, gall and host unknown. One of these specimens was given in 1921 to the writer, who recognized its close relation to impositus. Lustrans is described as without a median groove, but this specimen in certain positions shows a faint median line, while the groove in some of the many available parataypes of impositus is fully as faintly defined. The writer is unable to separate paratypes of verifactor from lustrans. The gall of this species was first described by Osten Sacken in 1862, but Ashmead was evidently in error in thinking he had reared it in 1887, associating the wingless fly he reared with the wrong gall. These galls occur as midrib clusters on under side of leaves of Quercus stellata in the fall, dropping when mature. When fresh the individual galls are shaped like huckleberry flowers, somewhat cylindrical with the end distinctly truncate and depressed, but during the winter on the ground they become globular except for a short pedicel, and the depressed end becomes a flattened circular scar at apex with a slightly raised rim, and the greenish or reddish color changes to brown.

Beutenmueller sent the writer galls from New York City which contained pupae on November 1 and adults on November 25 (age of galls unknown). The writer collected galls at Poplar Bluff and Ironton, Mo.; Wharton, Trinity, Arlington, and Boerne, Tex.; Hugo, Okla. At Hugo they were just starting to develop on July 25. Galls collected in October, 1917, at Trinity, Tex., gave two adults May 18, 1919. In galls collected at Ironton in fall of 1917 pupae were found in October, 1918, and in March, 1919, flies emerging before May 12, 1919. S. A. Rohwer collected galls at Ironton in October, 1918, and reared adults April 9-16, 1919, and a few more were found dead in cage May 12, 1920 (Hopkins U. S. No. 10777j).

A precisely similar gall on the shin oak, Q. breviloba, was seen at Austin and Boerne, Tex., and may prove to be that of this species.

Illustration (Beutenmuller, 1909)


Ashmead, William H., "On the Cynipidous Galls of Florida, with Descriptions of New Species and Synopses of the Described Species of North America" (1887)

Beutenmuller, William, "The Species of Biorhiza, Philonix and Allied Genera, and Their Galls" (1909)

Beutenmuller, William, "Descriptions of New Cynipidae" (1913)

Beutenmuller, William, "Notes on Cynipidae, with Descriptions of a New Species (Hym.)" (1918)

Kinsey, Alfred C., "Studies of Some New and Described Cynipidae (Hymenoptera)" (1922)

Krombein, Karl V., "Catalog of Hymenoptera in America North of Mexico" (1979)

Osten Sacken, Baron R., "Additions and Corrections to the paper entitled: 'On the Cynipidae of the North American Oaks and their Galls'” (1862)

Weld, Lewis H., "Field Notes on Gall-inhabiting Cynipid Wasps with Descriptions of New Species" (1927)

Publicado el mayo 29, 2020 05:57 MAÑANA por kimberlietx kimberlietx | 2 comentarios | Deja un comentario