2001 Final Report Summaries
Discover Life in America ATBI Grant Program

This report presents the original nomenclature (synonymies), known distributions, and summary of known plant associations for the leaf beetle species occurring or possibly occurring within the Great Smoky Mountains National Park (GSMNP). As used here, the term leaf beetle includes the families Megalopodidae, Orsodacnidae and Chrysomelidae (sensu Reid, 1995), the latter including the seed beetles, Bruchinae. However, the chrysomelid subfamily Bruchinae is omitted from the present report. The bruchines, commonly referred to as seed beetles, have traditionally been treated as a family separate from the Chrysomelidae, and a monograph on the North American members of this group is in preparation by John Kingsolver. The Megalopodinae are not presently recorded from North Carolina or Tennessee , and only one species of the Orsodacnidae is known from the area.

The three sections presented under each species, i. e., the synonymy, the distribution statement, and the plant association summary, have been extracted from two of our on-going and nearly completed projects covering these subjects for the leaf beetle fauna of American north of Mexico: 1) A Catalog of the Leaf Beetles of America north of Mexico (Riley, et al.), and 2) Host Plants of Leaf Beetle Species Occurring in the United States and Canada (Clark, et al.).

The initial leaf beetle list for GSMNP was compiled from distribution data captured as part of these two studies. We included species on the GSMNP list if they were recorded from either or both North Carolina and Tennessee . A double asterisk (**) preceding a beetle’s name in this report denotes species from these states that we feel are unlikely to be found in GSMNP. In addition to those species hose placement on the list as based on literature records, we added a few additional species based on specimens found in the Insect Collection of GSMNP or that we captured during our 2001 field collecting at the park. A current GSMNP summary list is given as Appendix 1 (Concise Checklist of the Leaf Beetles of Great Smoky Mountains National Park).

Synonymies:

Synonymies presented in this report are current except in a few cases of dubious subspecies where data are combined under the valid species name. These cases are clearly marked with bracketed comments. Each species-group name is cited in its original combination and original status (species, subspecies, var. ab., etc.) followed by its author, date of publication and page number. Original capitalization, diacritical marks and compound names are given in their correct forms (corrected according to The Code, Articles 27, 28, and 32.5.2). If the date of publication is different from the printed "cover date" of the work, then both dates are given with the actual date of publication shown in parenthesis following the cover date. The cited page number is the page where the name's "main entry" is found unless, in rare cases, a publication spanned a range years where the first occurrence of the name is cited if that use fulfills the requirements needed to make the name available.

Distributions:

Distributional data included in this report are presented by listing the Canadian provinces/territories and states of the United States , including the District of Columbia , from which each species has been recorded. Canadian provinces/territories are presented first, followed by states of the United States , and, if a species occurs outside of Canada and the United States , then mention of these extralimital regions is given last. Distribution records were taken largely from the primary systematics literature as well as from faunal treatments and previous catalogs or checklists. Additional distribution records were obtained from select literature on economically important species or from published works on biology. State and provincial/territorial abbreviations that are shown in lower case and enclosed in brackets represent records from the examined literature we feel are highly suspect or doubtful, or are known to be in error.

Leaf beetle species that were introduced to North America , either intentionally or unintentionally, are so denoted at the beginning of their respective distribution statements. The phrase "Introduced to N. Amer." is used to denote cases where a species has been deliberately introduced. The phrase "Immigrant to N. Amer." is used to denote cases of known or suspected unintentional, man-assisted, introductions.

Plant Associations:

The plant association statements presented in this report include references to plant associations from throughout a beetle species’ range. Thus, many of the cited plant species may not be found in GSMNP. None-the-less, the inclusion of these data is vital to our understanding of potential hosts in the park, as many beetle species feed on closely related plants. These beetle/plant relationships are sometimes evident across species within beetle genera. These data, therefore, may contribute significantly towards confirming the presence of additional leaf beetle species in GSMNP and in documenting new plant associations.

The review of North American literature for plant association records has been extensive, far exceeding that done for any preceding treatise on leaf beetle host plants. In general, practically any mention of plant associations has been cited in this report. This includes even casual mention of previously published observations. One major exception involves theses and dissertations. In instances where these have been formally published subsequently, little changed from their original form, only the formal publication is usually cited, without mention of the thesis or dissertation. Additionally, nearly countless publications involve investigations of well-documented pest species on their normal hosts. Many such articles were examined, and a large number of them are cited in the following treatment. However, many others are not cited. Sometimes, beetles are reported as being in fields of agricultural crops. Unless there is mention of the insect actually occurring on the crop plant, such records are generally not cited.

Both common plant names and scientific plant names are used in literature dealing with leaf beetle biology. In instances where both appear for a particular beetle/plant association, only the scientific name is reported in the present report. In instances where only the common name appears in the literature, it is given and is followed by the presumed scientific name enclosed in brackets. Similarly, if an antiquated scientific name appears in the literature (without the modern name appearing also among the references examined), the old name is given, followed by the updated name in brackets. However, in instances where a plant species has merely been transferred from one genus to another, without changing the species name, the updated plant name is given, without indication of the previous genus. In some instances, one publication reports plants identified only to the generic level, and another publication reports the actual species. Although literature dealing with these generically identified plants is referenced in the following pages, the generic names are not listed separately from the species names. For example, “Alnus sp.” is generally not listed if “Alnus incana (L.) Moench” has also been recorded as the host for a particular beetle species.

Abstract:

The Great Smoky Mountains Institute received a DLIA mini-grant in 2001 to hire two high school students (seniors or recently graduated) to work on a number of ATBI projects and learn about field research and biological diversity in the process. Erin Henegar and Meredith Jagger, both graduating seniors from Maryville High School , Maryville , Tennessee , were hired to fill these positions. They worked three to four days per week for a total of approximately 300 hours each. The principle projects they worked on were studies of hymenoptera pollinators (Apoidea), coleoptera, lepidoptera, odonata, land snails, and analysis of lepidoptera data. They collected over 500 specimens, which have been passed on to taxonomists for determination and wrote articles about their experience for the ATBI Quarterly and the Walker Valley Reflections (newsletter of the Great Smoky Mountains Institute).

Introduction:

The Great Smoky Mountains Institute is a private, not-for-profit, residential environmental education center partnered with Great Smoky Mountains National Park . It is headquartered inside the park boundary along the Middle Prong of the Little River at a place called Tremont. Its educational programs are designed to “nurture an appreciation of Great Smoky Mountains National Park , celebrate diversity, and foster stewardship” (mission statement). In 1999, the park and the Institute initiated a science/education integration program, developing opportunities for middle and high school students to learn about scientific research by collecting actual data of use to park managers and scientists. Hundreds of students visiting the Institute with the classes or for summer programs have been involved in the study of land snails, ferns, lepidoptera, birds, and salamanders. Sixty students from five neighboring counties have volunteered on multiple days for these and other research projects, gaining a more in-depth understanding of the science involved.

With this grant we were able to hire two students to provide them with a more intensive research experience while they assisted existing research, piloted new projects, and helped to analyze the data from some of these projects for park resource managers and eventual publication. Research projects included the existing moth, beetle, and avian parasite inventories, as well as inventories of dragonflies and land snails, and piloting studies of reptile distribution and bees. All research projects have been developed with the input of TWIG leaders and/or other active members of TWIGs who continue to be involved in the projects. The incumbents were also available for assisting park and visiting ATBI researchers.

This grant furthers Themes 1, 2, and 5 of the DLIA Science plan. Conducting inventory work on a number of taxa of interest in the park specifically addresses Objective 1-8 of Theme 1 by introducing taxonomic research to students early in their exploration of career choices. This grant relates to Theme 2 in that all projects are under the guidance of TWIG leaders/members. Theme 5 is especially addressed with students being involved in the ATBI research.

All points from the original proposal have been completed. The study consisted of two parts: 1) sorting to adult and juvenile, the spiders collected in Malaise traps over a two year period, and identifying the adults and 2) entering the data generated into Biota, a relational database published by Sinauer and Associates.

Spiders collected by ATBI personnel, from twenty-two malaise traps, representing eleven habitat types and up to two years of collecting, were sorted to morphospecies and by age class (adult or juvenile). The adults collected were identified to species, with some juveniles of particular species identified as well. Dr. Fred Coyle, of Western Carolina University , confirmed all species identifications.

There were 443 adult spiders (or easily identifiable juveniles) in the total of 5482 spider specimens. These represent 19 families, 62 genera, and 88 species. Three of the species (belonging to the Linyphiidae subfamily Erigoninae) appear to be undescribed in the scientific literature. In addition, there were five species that are new records for the park.

The data generated has been entered into the relational database Biota, published by Sinauer and Associates. This is the database currently used by Dr. Coyle for his inventory of spiders. All the data generated, as well as the spider samples, will be hand delivered to Dr. Coyle for inclusion in the main spider species catalog being generated.

A copy of the data generated was forwarded to research associate I. Stocks at the University of Tennessee/Knoxville for inclusion in the database created by Dr. Johnson of OSU.

Dr. Coyle provided much-needed vials and ethanol for this project; no other “in-kind” contributions were obtained for this project.

The goal of this work is twofold, first, to design and construct a database for Lepidoptera specimen records from the Great Smoky Mountains National Park ATBI, and second to construct a database to be used for the writing of web pages for the butterfly species of the park. These web pages will be automatically generated from the database as users call up the species in which they are interested. The web pages will also be linked to the specimen database so that the most current information on collections, localities and distributions will be available to users.

Design of both databases was done using FileMaker Pro 5.0 for the Macintosh and is now complete. The specimen database consists of a set of linked databases designed so that the person inputting data enters the least amount of redundant information. These linked databases consist of an authority file containing all North American species of Lepidoptera (and synonyms) references by number, a database of collecting localities in Great Smoky Mountains National Park , and the database of actual specimen information. Whenever the user enters specimen information taxonomy and locality information is entered automatically from the linked databases. Taxonomic information entered includes family, subfamily, genus, species, and author. This information is linked using a unique number for each specific epithet. Locality information entered includes state, county, latitude, longitude (both in decimal degrees), and altitude (m). This information is linked using a written locality description (often place names or mileage from a particular place). After the user enters the linking fields the associate fields are filled. The user must then enter fields including date, collector(s), sex, collection method, type of specimen, identifier, collection, and rearing notes. During actual data entry, many of these fields are not entered for each specimen because generally several specimens collected by the same individual at the same locality are entered consecutively, and the previous record can simply be copied with minor changes. Currently the specimen database has more than 5000 records entered. The first goal of data entry was to capture historical records from the GSMNP collection. This process is nearly complete, with only 3 drawers of specimens remaining to be entered (to be completed in May). In addition, all of the Scholtens collections from the park are entered, all pyralids from a funded project of John Brown and Don Davis are entered, and I have gathered data on all specimens collected by Bo Sullivan at Ravensford to be entered. Gathering information from recent collections by other lepidopterists will continue and a large number of records will be entered at the bioblitz this summer. All records that were entered through December of 2001 have already been sent to Dr. Norm Johnson and he will receive regular updates of the database.

The species database has been completed for butterflies. This database consists of general information and text specific to a particular butterfly species. It includes fields such as overall range, expected range in the Smokies, known host plants, written adult description, flight phenology, references, adult image, and larval image. Image fields are not currently filled, but text fields are complete. This database covers XXX species of butterflies known to occur or suspected to occur in the Park.

Up to this point, Twigs that have completed web pages have written them individually, but this is not feasible for most insect groups, including Lepidoptera. We estimate that there are 2500-3000 species of Lepidoptera in the park and we are unlikely to have the person-power to individually write web pages for each species and keep them updated. By filling the database for each species and the specimen database, these web pages can be automatically generated using a template page that indicates where the different fields are located on the page. This template page is yet to be designed, but initial information for its design has been gathered from park personnel and I will be coordinating with Dr. Norm Johnson about the details of this operation.

For this work, the major in kind contribution has been researcher time. A very rough estimate of my time necessary to complete the work over the last year is about 30 working days. Additionally, much work was done previously constructing the linked databases that made data entry possible.

This work was presented at the DLIA annual meeting in Nov.-Dec. 2001 and will be included in a presentation at the Annual Meeting of the Lepidopterists’ Society this June (immediately after the 2002 bioblitz).

Any information regarding the design or content of the databases is available from Brian Scholtens at the College of Charleston .

We were funded last year to conduct algal studies in aerial habitats in the major geological substrata of the park. Our project plans were to spend a full week in the spring collecting samples from damp and wet rocks throughout the park. A second trip was planned for July. Although beyond the scope of the present study, we promised to make permanent diatom slides from all samples so that they could be analyzed in future studies.

We promised the following deliverables. First, we indicated we would complete and publish a checklist of algae reported from the park in the journal Castanea. Second, we indicated we would help build the algal website posted by DLIA. Third, we indicated we would publish the summer’s study in the journal Algological Studies. Fourth, we promised to attend the DLIA meeting to be held in late November 2001. Finally, this final report was promised.

We spent a week in the field both in May and in July. These trips were described in the ATBI Quarterly Autumn newsletter 2001 (Vol 2, No. 4). During the May trip we collected 80 different samples in nine different geological formations. These formations included: Anakeesta, Thunderhead Sandstone, Basement Complex, Pigeon Siltstone, Longarm Quartzite, Roaring Fork Sandstone, Metcalf Phylite, Rich Butt Sandstone, and Cades Sandstone. The July trip we collected 62 more samples, adding the following formations to our collection set: Great Smoky Group, Wilhite Formation, and Elkmont Sandstone. The samples represented a broad range of pH values: 3.8-7.4. These samples represented an enormous diversity of algal habitats.

Following the field and microscope work of the summer, we continued to examine these samples through March 2002. We only had time to work up 18 of the 140+ samples. These 18, represented 2 samples from each of the first 9 bedrock types sampled in May, and were chosen so that pH was as different as possible within bedrock types. These samples were examined fresh, in formalin-preserved state, and in enrichment cultures made from each sample. We have a number of the species in unialgal state after they were isolated from the enrichment cultures. This work is the subject of the master’s thesis by Shannon Gomez, which was completed and approved April 17 th. We are sending a copy of this thesis under separate cover ( Gomez 2002).

We finished the checklist of the algae just recently. This turned out to be more involved than originally thought. We prepared a checklist that reflects current taxonomy, including a number of new taxonomic combinations in the diatoms (many species have changed genus lately, and some transfers had not yet been made). The checklist came out very nice, and not only lists the algae reported thus far in the literature, but gives all of the species found in unpublished reports, the algal foray, and in Shannon’s thesis. It reports the source of the report, and the locale from which each species has been reported. A copy of this paper ( Johansen et al. in review), which has been submitted to the international peer-reviewed journal Algological Studies, is also being sent under separate cover.

Based on the two studies above, we can say the following about the present state of algal species records. A thorough search of the literature, including several unpublished studies conducted over the past 25 years, was combined with current studies of the algae of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park to produce a comprehensive list of the algae observed in the park to date. Since the ATBI began, we have found 173 new species records, of which 75 are cyanobacteria, 77 are chlorophytes, 1 is a rhodophyte, 10 are tribophytes, 1 is a chrysophyte, 2 are synurophytes, 3 are eustigmatophytes, and 4 are dinoflagellates. This brings the total algae observed to 585 taxa from over 62 sites within the park. These taxa included: 108 cyanobacteria, 97 chlorophytes, 12 tribophytes, 1 chrysophyte, 2 synurophytes, 3 eustigmatophytes, 355 diatoms, 4 dinoflagellates, and 3 rhodophytes. Despite this high number of taxa, it appears likely that we have found only a small percentage of the taxa present in the park. During the study funded just last summer, we found 65 taxa not identifiable to species, which suggests that many taxa new to science may be present in this unique preserve. We will be working on describing some of these new taxa in the coming year. We feel we cannot publish Shannon Gomez’s thesis until some of these taxa have been studied sufficiently to describe as new species in the publication.

Twelve new taxonomic combinations and names were proposed in the checklist for the following diatom taxa: Achnanthidium alpestris ( Lowe & Kociolek) Lowe & Kociolek comb. nov. , Luticola stigma ( Patrick) Johansen comb. nov. , Luticola naviculoides Johansen nom. nov. , Luticola terminata ( Hustedt) Johansen comb. nov. , Luticola terminata var. rostrata ( Krasske) Johansen comb. nov. , Placoneis anglica ( Ralfs in Pritchard) Lowe comb. nov. , Placoneis lata ( M. Peragallo in Tempère & Peragallo) Lowe comb. nov. , Placoneisneglecta ( Krasske) Lowe comb. nov. , Planothidium apiculatum ( Patrick) Lowe comb. nov. , Planothidium fossilum ( Tempère & Peragallo) Lowe comb. nov. , Sellaphora wummensis Johansen nom. nov. , and Sellaphora rostrata ( Hustedt) Johansen comb. nov.

We have prepared diatom slides of all samples and currently have splits housed in the diatom collections at both John Carroll University and Bowling Green State University . Rex Lowe and I have just begun work on these samples. Many of the diatoms have very fine structure, and require study under the SEM. It appears that we have new species of aerophilic diatoms, and we hope to work further on these diatoms this summer.

We have sent an overview page for the algae section of the DLIA website to John Pickering. We intend to provide images of algae in all of the major phyla soon. The text we provided has not yet been posted to the website, but we expect it will be soon. It was provided to Dr. Pickering only in early April. I have sent the species list to both Becky Nichols and to Norman Johnson. We attended the DLIA meeting in November, and I gave an update of our results at that time.

Thus, we have made progress on all five of the deliverables we promised. We intend to continue to contribute to the website, and will publish Gomez’s thesis once we are ready to name some of the new species. We will be working on the diatoms in our spare time this summer, while Shannon and I will be working on the sequencing of the 16S rRNA gene of the new cyanobacterial taxa as well as the life histories of the green algae so that selected species can be described. We have been able to leverage some supplies money from John Carroll University for this project. I paid for travel to the DLIA meeting in November 2001 out of funds I had set aside in another account.

References:

Gomez, S. (2002): Epilithic aerial algae of Great Smoky Mountains National Park . - Master’s Thesis, John Carroll University , University Heights , Ohio . 78 pp.

Johansen, J.R; Lowe, R.; Gomez, S.R.; Kociolek, J.P. & Makosky, S.A. (In review): New algal species records for the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, U.S.A., with an annotated checklist of all reported algal species for the park. - Algological Studies.

I. Promised Products

 In my proposal I indicated that the following products would be completed during the 2001-2002 grant cycle.

1. Develop a sampling program for an inventory of the tardigrades in the GSMNP.
2. Develop standard laboratory protocols for preparing tardigrade specimens.
3. Develop and coordinate a team of researchers and students to carry out the inventory.
4. Initiate the inventory and begin a microscope slide catalog of tardigrades.
5. Collect meiofaunal organisms other than tardigrades for other researchers.
6. Develop a web-based key to the genera of tardigrades.

II. Completed Products

 We successfully completed promised products 1-5, and considerable progress was made toward 6. The actual inventory has raised the total number of tardigrade species known for the park from 3 to 33, and two groups of specimens are candidates for further study to determine if they are new to science.

1. Sampling Program

Terrestrial tardigrades are being collected from moss, lichen, and soil samples. These samples are being taken from within the 20 ATBI plots. Lichen and moss samples are taken from beech or buckeye trees when these are present. Beech and buckeyes were selected as the focal tree species because they are known to harbor many mosses and lichens, a significant literature exists for tardigrades in beech forests, and they have a broad elevational distribution. When these two tree species are not available, moss and lichens are taken from dominant tree species, rocks, or shrubs. Four trees of each species are sampled within each plot, and mosses and lichens are taken from both ground level and breast height on each tree. Thus, up to 32 samples of mosses and lichens are taken within a given plot. Four soil samples are also taken from each plot, with an attempt to collect from a variety of types of soil/leaf-litter.

Harold Keller’s group from Central Missouri State University has been collecting bark samples from large canopy trees throughout the park. Their collections include samples from ground level to the tops of the trees. They have sent a number of slides to Diane Nelson for identification and these specimens are included in this report.

Aquatic samples are being taken from streams throughout the park. At any collection site, four sediment and four periphyton samples are taken. We are attempting to collect from at least 6 watersheds throughout the park.

If time allows we would also like to do some sampling of specialized habitats such as seeps and cave periphyton.

2. Lab Protocols

Lab protocols have been modified from Diane Nelson (pers. comm.) and Sandra McInnes (pers. comm.).

Terrestrial samples are stored in paper bags until isolation, preservation, and microscope slide preparation. If the samples are to be stored for longer than 6 months they are placed in an ultra-cold freezer (-70 oC). Aquatic samples are preserved with boiling ETOH within 12 hours of the time of collection. Procedures for isolating specimens include washing samples through sieves, then centrifuging the runoff on a colloidal liquid to separate specimens from sediment and debris. Permanent mount microscope slides containing one specimen per slide are prepared. When possible 50 slides are made from each sample using a randomization process for collecting individual tardigrades. Slides are being archived at East Tennessee State University . When the project is complete a reference collection with slides of each species will be sent to the GSMNP.

See “Tardigrade Lab Protocols” at the end of this report for details.

3. Research Team

Warren Wilson College
faculty: Paul Bartels (field collection, lab processing, project coordination, data analysis)
lab tech: Ahmad Kusujiarti (lab processing)
undergraduate student assistants: Indika Somaratne & Sharon Fabrega (senior theses), invertebrate zoology class student field trip, ecology class student field trip, environmental science camp middle school student field trip

East Tennessee State University
faculty: Diane Nelson (taxonomy)
lab tech: Gilbert Voss (lab processing)

University of the South
faculty: Karen McGlothlin (taxonomy and lab processing)

Columbia State Community College
faculty: Karen Kendall-Fite (taxonomy)

Central Missouri State University
faculty: Harold Keller (field collection and lab processing)
undergraduate student assistant: Buck Counts (field collection and lab processing)

University of North Alabama
faculty: Paul Davison (microscope slides from CMSU moss samples)

4. Inventory Results

Prior to our work only one published paper reported tardigrades from the GSMNP (Riggin, Jr. 1964). This included an unspecified number of samples taken on one day, containing three species.

To date, WWC has collected 152 terrestrial samples from 8 ATBI plots, and 68 aquatic samples from 6 streams. 46 of the terrestrial samples and 32 of the aquatic samples have been fully processed yielding 1181 individually mounted specimens. Of these, 927 have been identified. Additionally, the Central Missouri State group has made extensive collections, yielding a total of 142 identified specimens (106 from Paul Davison and 36 from Buck Counts).

The species list from the 1069 identified specimens for the park is attached. The list now includes 33 species. Two groups of specimens warrant further investigation to determine if they are new species.

The 927 specimen database for the WWC collection has been completed and sent to Norman Johnson at OSU.

5. Non-Tardigrade Specimens

Large numbers of bdelloid rotifers occur in our preserved samples. These are being archived at Warren Wilson College , and they are available to be shared with researchers investigating this phylum. Nematodes also occur in our samples, but since they are not preserved in formalin, they are probably not useful (Ernie Bernard pers. comm.)

6. Web-Based Key to Genera

Diane Nelson has just published a key to the genera of non-marine tardigrades (Nelson & McInnes 2002). This is now the definitive key for our use. It is not pictorial, however. Susie Balser of Illinois Wesleyan University has produced an on-line key to tardigrade genera (http://sun.iwu.edu/~tardisdp/ keypage1.html). This is not a comprehensive key to the genera, but it is web-based with good graphic support. Dr. Balser will probably allow the DLIA website to link to her site. The next step would be to combine these two sources into one visually supported, complete and updated key.

This is a preliminary report on a study funded by Discover Life in America . The objective of the study was to compare the species composition, species richness, and phenology of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (mayflies, stoneflies, and caddisflies) at multiple sites within the Abrams Creek drainage of western Great Smoky Mountains National Park . The study began in the summer of 2001.

Nine sites were routinely sampled in the Abrams Creek drainage between May 25 and 22 July 2001 . These locations were spread throughout the drainage and over an elevational gradient of 454 m. The highest location was Anthony Creek , while the lowest, near the northwestern corner of GRSM, was on Abrams Creek at Abrams Creek Campground.

In last year's proposal I stated that we would provide the following products or initiate the following activities during this reporting period:
1. Establish a taxonomic working group (TWIG) for the order Coleoptera (beetles) to contribute to the All Taxon Biodiversity Inventory (ATBI) at GSMNP.
2. Establish a sorting center for beetles at the Louisiana State Arthropod Museum (LSAM) in support of objective 1.
3. Develop a research project involving students and staff at the LSAM to fill gaps in survey beetle faunas of obscure habitats in GSMNP that may not be covered by the park's "in-house" collecting protocols. The main ecological focus of this research is forest litter.
4. Develop a website to disseminate information about the beetle TWIG.
5. Initiate a checklist of beetle species documented from GSMNP to be posted on the website and updated periodically.

Products and Activities Delivered
(numbers correspond to list above)

1. We have established a network of approximately 25 beetle specialists to support beetle survey and identification efforts for the park. This was accomplished by contacting researchers already involved in the ATBI, and by soliciting involvement of new researchers through formal presentations and informal discussions at the Entomological Society of America national meeting in San Diego , CA .

Two important sources of information that have perhaps not received the attention they deserve fall within this category. For many years specimens from the Park have been accumulating in museums and/or have been recorded as “material examined” entries in published revisions and other taxonomic literature. As these sources have become available to us we have made an effort to scan them for specimens or references to specimens that originated in GSMNP. These records have been added to the checklist, and references they are derived from have been added to the bibliography as they came to our attention. Graduate student Andrew Cline recorded GSMNP specimen records while on a research visit to the Canadian Museum of Nature and we are aware of additional holdings of GSMNP specimens in the Cornell University collection and elsewhere.

2. Space and procedures have been established at the LSAM to sort beetles. We have devoted most of our 400 square foot sorting and alcohol storage laboratory to this project. Early in 2002 we hired a Master's Degree candidate to perform most of the family sorting in preparation for distribution to the cooperating specialists described above. All specimens collected during the June 2001 "Beetle Blitz" have been mounted, labeled, and are in the process of being identified. We have identified the following priority taxa from the in-house collections for immediate sorting and distribution to cooperators: Lampyridae (fireflies); Staphylinidae (selected subfamilies) (rove beetles); Scarabaeidae (scarab beetles); Chrysomelidae (leaf beetles); and Curculionidae (weevils).

3. Three expeditions were made by LSAM staff and students to collect forest litter samples and conduct general surveys of beetles at GSMNP. During June 2001 we participated in the "Beetle Blitz" as a means of jumpstarting the beetle TWIG and to initiate contact with other ATBI researchers and volunteers. A second field trip was conducted in late July-early August by graduate student A. Tishechkin. A third trip was conducted during October by four LSAM researchers. Approximately 25 Berlese (forest litter) samples, five flight intercept trap samples, and numerous fungus, bark, and rotten wood samples yielded approximately 2500 beetle specimens that have been mounted, labeled, and databased.

Significant research findings include the discovery of at least two new species of flightless leaf litter chrysomelid beetles currently being described by beetle twig cooperators. In addition, the following rare and poorly known southern Appalachian and/or GSMNP endemic beetles were collected: Cainosternum imbricatum Notman (Leiodidae); P. copelandi Park (Staphylinidae); Tohlezkus inexpectus Vit (Eucinetidae). Each of these species are known from fewer than five specimens and these records represent only the second or third time they have been reported. The record of C. imbricatum is new from the Park. Discoveries made during museum studies associated with this research include an undescribed genus of staphylinid known only from historical records from the Park and the discovery of a "false paratype" in the GSMNP of a staphylinid beetle. This specimen is labeled as one of Orlando Park 's manuscript names, but the description and name were never published. Therefore it represents an undescribed species for the GSMNP.

4. Webpages devoted to the GSMNP Beetle Twig may be viewed on the LSAM's website: www.agctr.lsu.edu/Inst/Research/Departments/arthropodmuseum//smokybeetles.htm.

An introduction page containing objectives and a mission statement is linked to pages containing a list of cooperators, a bibliography, research briefs, and the beetle checklist. The pages are tastefully decorated by illustrations and photographs of beetles from GSMNP.

5. The checklist presented on the website was compiled using two existing lists, the list of species in the Park collection, and a list compiled from survey work by Ciegler and Merritt. These two lists were integrated and duplications and mistakes were excised. The result was a list of approximately 750 beetle species documented from GSMNP. This list was expanded as additional records became available or were discovered during searches of taxonomic literature as described previously, and by the end of this reporting period, the number of beetles documented from the Park was approximately 1100.

The manner in which the abbreviated information is organized in the checklist will allow interested persons to keep track of new records for GSMNP as they accumulate. By scanning the columns labeled “Source Collections” and “Published Records” the original documentation of the species’ occurrence in the Park can be traced. For convenience new collection records for each year of the study will be entered under a different column. An Excel spreadsheet of the current version of the checklist will be sent to Janice Pelton at GSMNP at the same time this report is submitted.

Summary of Presentations, Publications, and Educational Activities

Presentations
1. Carlton , C. E. Progress Report on the Coleoptera Twig. Discover Life in America Annual Meeting, Gatlinburg TN , Nov. 2001.
2. Moseley, V. L., and C. E. Carlton. Status of the Coleoptera Twig for the GSMNP ATBI. Entomological Society of America National Meeting, San Diego CA , Dec. 2001.
Publications
1. Carlton , C. E. Mining beetle diversity in the Smokies. Discover Life in America ATBI Newsletter, Fall 2001, reprinted in Southeastern Biology 49: 27-28.
Educational Activities
1. Participation/informal instruction of students and volunteers during that 2001 Beetle Blitz.
2. Taxonomic training for three graduate students and two undergraduate students in LSAM laboratory. The project has benefited from a two semester special problems course, ENTM 8900, Advanced Coleopterology. This course has served a dual purpose in training students in identification of beetles, and advancing the primary directive of the beetle twig to enhance knowledge of beetles in GSMNP.
3. Informal presentation to Glenn Este high school students during March 2002 fieldwork.

In-kind Support Estimates

Commitment of Principal Investigator (Assoc. Professor) to project
10% salary + fringe --$7700
Commitment of Curator/Research Associate to project
5% salary + fringe --$2000
Unrecovered indirect cost
43% of MTDC --$2100
Total --$11,800

Additional undocumented support was provided by the LSU Agricultural Center through the use of facilities and equipment, including vehicles, microscopes, computers, and specimen storage.

Information Management

Specimens derived from research activities conducted by LSAM staff and students are processed in-house and data capture at the specimen level is accomplished using Biota software (R. Colwell, Sinauer Assoc.). Relevant fields for all GSMNP specimens can be selected and exported to flatfile and Excel formats and sent to Norman Johnson's central databasing laboratory at Ohio State anytime. At the suggestion of data management specialist Luciana Musetti, we are delaying submission of the first year specimen database pending the incorporation of additional taxonomic information. We anticipate a much higher return of taxonomic information during the second year of the project. Transfer of all the data including this coming year’s taxonomic data will minimize the need for retroactive data updates at Ohio State . All specimens derived from our research carry unique specimen codes consisting of our four letter acronym, LSAM, and a seven digit numerical code. Thus, subsequent information, such as updated taxonomic information, can be precisely matched using the unique specimen codes, but this adds an additional upstream step in the data consolidation process.

Specimens sorted from the structured GSMNP sampling protocols that have been forwarded to taxonomic specialists in alcohol were accompanied by explicit instructions that specimen data capture is required. Individual specialists have the option of accomplishing the data capture themselves or returning properly mounted and labeled specimens to us for incorporation into our own databasing system for submission during the next reporting period.

Introduction . The current status of research focusing on the distribution of aquatic Oligochaeta (Annelida, Clitellata) in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, North Carolina and Tennessee , USA , [the Park] is summarized in this report. This study, being conducted by Mark J. Wetzel and M.A. Peggy Morgan [Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Tampa], is part of the All Taxa Biodiversity Inventory (ATBI) project being underwritten by Discover Life in America, Inc. (DLIA), a not-for-profit foundation based in Knoxville, Tennessee. Research conducted during 2001 is a continuation of research begun in 1999, supported by small grants previously received from DLIA in 1999 and 2000. Requested information for inclusion in this report was received via E-mail communications from Tammy Morton ( Clemson University ) and Dr. John Morse (Co-Chair, Science Committee, DLIA; Clemson University ) on 10 April 2002 . As requested, this report has been kept short. A more extensive accounting of this research project, including site locality information, field and lab methodologies, assisting personnel, status of samples and specimens, a list of taxa identified from collections taken during 1999-2001, site-specific associations, pertinent literature associated with this research project, and the aquatic Annelida known or thought likely to occur in the Park (and the southeastern U.S.) is available via a website I established in September 1999. The URL for that website is:

< http://www.inhs.uiuc.edu:80/~mjwetzel/AqAnnel.GSMNP.html >

Background. To date, forty-nine stream sites, 12 springs and seeps, one pond, and Gum Swamp, all located within the Park, have been surveyed for aquatic Oligochaeta (and other macroinvertebrates); over 1,000 oligochaete specimens have been mounted and identified, representing three families, eight genera, and 13 species -- all represent new Park records, and one -- Rhyacodrilus subterraneus (Tubificidae) -- represents a new state record for North Carolina. Representatives of two other families of aquatic oligochaetes (Enchytraeidae and Lumbriculidae), as yet unidentified, also have been collected during this study, as well as representatives of two other annelid groups Aeolosomatida (suction-feeding worms) and the Branchiobdellida (crayfish worms). Those few leeches that have been collected to date have been forwarded to Dr. Bill Moser (USNM-Smithsonian Institution), who is collaborating with Dr. Donald J. Klemm (US EPA) in a study of leeches occurring within the Park.

Presentations, publications, other media conveying research findings and progress.

Reports . Three reports previously prepared and submitted to DLIA summarized progress on funded research in 1999 and 2000.

1. Wetzel, M.J. 1999. Aquatic Oligochaeta (Annelida, Clitellata) of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park , North Carolina and Tennessee . Progress Report. 9 pp. + appendices. 1 December. [submitted to Discover Life In America, Inc. - All Taxa Biodiversity Inventory Program, 1314 Cherokee Orchard Road , Gatlinburg , TN 37738 ].

2. Wetzel, M.J. 2000. Aquatic Oligochaeta (Annelida, Clitellata) of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park , North Carolina and Tennessee . Illinois Natural History Survey Center for Biodiversity Technical Report 2000(28). 21 pp. + appendices. 19 December. [progress report to Discover Life In America, Inc. - All Taxa Biodiversity Inventory Program, 1314 Cherokee Orchard Rd , Gatlinburg , TN 37738 ].

3. Wetzel, M.J. 2001. Aquatic Oligochaeta (Annelida, Clitellata) of Ravensford Wetland Area, Great Smoky Mountains National Park , North Carolina . 12 pp. + Appendix. 24 September. [Submitted to the National Park Service, Great Smoky Mountains National Park , Cherokee Orchard Road , Gatlinburg , TN.

Oral Presentations. To date, I have prepared three oral presentations summarizing this research:

1. “ Aquatic Oligochaeta (Annelida, Clitellata) of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, North Carolina and Tennessee.” presented by M.J. Wetzel at the Annual Meeting of Discover Life In America, Inc. [a not-for-profit foundation underwriting the All Taxa Biodiversity Inventory of the Park]; meeting convened at the Glenstone Lodge, Gatlinburg, TN, 19-21 December 2000.

2. “Aquatic Oligochaeta (Annelida, Clitellata) of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park , North Carolina and Tennessee .” presented by M.J. Wetzel at the Annual meeting of the All Taxa Biodiversity Inventory Program underwritten by Discover Life In America, Inc., Glenstone Lodge, Gatlinburg , TN , 29 November 2001 . [presentation co-authored with M.A. Morgan].

3. “Aquatic Oligochaeta (Annelida, Clitellata) of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, North Carolina and Tennessee.” presented by M.J. Wetzel at the Annual meeting of the Florida Association of Benthologists, convened at the Florida Marine Research Institute, Cedar Key, FL, 6 December 2001. [presentation co-authored with M.A. Morgan].

Print Media . To date, one paper summarizing this research has been published:

Wetzel, M.J., and P. Morgan. " Worms : Segments, Hairs, Maybe Gills -- Oh My!" ATBI Quarterly 3(1): 6-7 [the Winter 2002 issue] [Summarizes the current status and findings of continuing surveys for aquatic annelids by Wetzel and Morgan in the Park. This article is also available in PDF, at:

http://www.discoverlife.org/pa/pu/ATBI_Quarterly/atbi_quarterly_winter_2002.pdf

Websites. As stated above, a more extensive accounting of this research project is available via a website I established in September 1999.. The URL for that website is:

http://www.inhs.uiuc.edu:80/~mjwetzel/AqAnnel.GSMNP.html and is linked from the website of Discover Life In America, Inc., at: http://www.discoverlife.org/

Transfer of Project Data to DLIA Database. Contact has been made with Dr. Norm Johnson at Ohio State University , who is managing the databases for all information associated with the ATBI project. Data associated with my research has been entered into my field journal and annelid specimen databases (FileMaker Pro 5) at the Illinois Natural History Survey in Champaign . I will be working with Norm Johnson in the near future to transfer appropriate information to the DLIA database. Most of this information is also available via my website (see above).

In-Kind Contributions. A letter summarizing In-Kind contributions during 2001 that are directly associated with this research was forwarded to Dr. John Morse in February 2001. These In-Kind contributions totaled approximately $17,900.

Current / Future Status of this Research Project.

On 15 April 2002, I was informed that I had again been successful in the proposal process, receiving a mini-grant of $4,988.00 to continue this research during 2002; In-Kind contributions from my institution, and from other institutions and private donors to support this research during 2002 are estimated at over $23,500.00 (itemized in letter to Dr. John Morse, dated 27 February 2002). Some of these newly-awarded funds and In-Kind contributions have already supported continuing field research this year: surveys for oligochaetes, other aquatic invertebrates, and terrestrial arthropods (for other ATBI researchers) were conducted at 11 stream sites, three spring/seep sites, pools in Gregory Cave, and three terrestrial sites (Malaise traps) during a collecting trip to the Park on 19-27 April 2002. Additional surveys in the Park are scheduled for late September 2002. The training of undergraduate and graduate students in general invertebrate taxonomy is integral to this project.

We proposed to survey the biting flies (11 families) and their symbionts in the Park, using various trapping techniques, to describe new species, to furnish records to the central ATBI database, to develop a small guide to the Parks biting flies, and to deposit specimens in various museums, including the Park museum.

We identified 103 species of biting flies and 41 species of their symbionts from the Great Smoky Mountains National Park . More than half of these species represent Park records. Five species of flies and five species of symbionts are new to science. The number of species of biting flies now known from the Park represents about 21% of exactly 500 species of flies that we have databased as coordinators of the Diptera TWIG. One of the first records of a pathogenic bacterium in black flies was documented and a publication is now in press. All records were entered into our Diptera database, and all records of endosymbionts and biting flies were also provided to Norm Johnsons central ATBI database at the end of 2001. Identified specimens have been deposited in the Parks museum and in various museums throughout the world. Many specimens from other groups of invertebrates that were collected during this project were submitted to other TWIGs. Work on the guide to biting flies continues.

Estimate of in-kind contributions: Approximately $1,400 from discretionary funds of PHA, plus $500 to WKR for a W. C. Nettles Grant from Clemson University , which paid for molecular identification. Total: $1,900.

Publications:

Reeves, W. 2001. The hidden diversity inside biting flies. ATBI Quarterly 2 (4): 8.

Reeves, W. K. & D. Nayduch. 2002. Pathogenic Bacillus from a larva of the Simulium tuberosum species complex (Diptera: Simuliidae). Journal of Invertebrate Pathology (In press).

Schmidt-Rhaesa, A., B. Hanelt, W. Reeves. In preparation. Redescription and compilation of Nearctic freshwater Nematomorpha (Gordiida). Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington . In preparation.

Reeves, W. K. 2001. Great Smoky Mountains Ravens Ford Collection Site Final Report. Great Smoky Mountains National Park Technical Report. http//www.npslandexchange.com/docs/arthropods.pdf

Presentations

Reeves, W. K. & P. H. Adler. 2001. Biting flies and their symbionts. 5 th Annual Meeting of the All Taxa Biodiversity Inventory. Great Smokey Mountains National Park , Gatlinburg , TN.

Reeves, W. K. 2001. Diptera of the Great Smoky Mountains and the status of the Diptera taxonomic working group. 5 th Joint Meeting of the Georgia Entomological Society and the South Carolina Entomological Society. Gainesville , GA.

Reeves, W. K. 2001. Symbionts of Biting Flies in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park . 72 nd Rocky Mountain Conference of Entomologists. Woodland Park , CO .

Reeves, W. K. 2001. Arthropod Symbionts: the big picture. 33 rd Annual Southern Arthropod Conference on Arthropod Biology. Cullowhee , NC .

Reeves, W. K. 2001. Diptera Taxonomic Working Group, Research Report. 5 th Annual Great Smoky Mountains All Taxa Biodiversity Inventory Annual Conference. Gatlinburg , TN.

Reeves, W. K. 2002. Simuliid symbiotes in the Smoky Mountains . Southern Extension and Research Activities Information Exchange Group. Lake Placid , FL.

Reeves, W. K. 2002. A new pathogenic Bacillus from a Simulium species. 7 th Annual Graduate Student Research Forum. Clemson , SC

The following results are taken from one of our posters provided to Discover Life in America . The list of publications that already have appeared in newsletters, journals, and as abstract proceedings have all of the project personnel and students involved in this project. I try to provide copies to Keith Langdon and Jeanie Hilten.

Tree Climbing Activities: A total of 240 trees representing 35 different tree species were climbed during two three-week periods in June, July and August of calendar years 2000 and 2001.

Myxomycetes: Total number of species (107) recorded from the tree canopy. Total number of new records for the GSMNP from the tree canopy (51) represents 48 per cent. Total number of species (30) only known from living trees and vines (28 per cent) . Total number of species known from tree canopy and ground sites (77) representing 72 per cent. A new species of Diachea was restricted to heights above 6.1 to 21.3 meters. This is the first upper tree canopy species documented for the Myxomycetes. Apparently the Myxomycetes are the only group of cryptogams with obligate tree canopy species.

Macrofungi: Five basidiomycete species were collected from the tree canopy with no new records for the GSMNP. All of these species are commonly found on ground sites.

Bryophytes: Mosses: Twenty-two moss species were collected from the tree canopy with no new records for the GSMNP. Liverworts: Sixteen liverwort species were collected from the tree canopy with no new records for the GSMNP. All of the moss and liverwort species are commonly found on ground sites.

Lichens: Fieldwork during the summer of calendar year 2000 produced 2,750 lichen samples taken from the tree canopy of 141 trees which yielded 193 species of lichens and of these 78 are new lichen records for the GSMNP. All lichen species recorded from the tree canopy also occur on ground sites.

Vascular Epiphytes: Polypodium appalachianum is a fern species typically found growing on rocks, other ground sites, and occasionally as an epiphyte at the trunk base of living trees. Its discovery as a tree canopy epiphyte in a champion-sized Liriodendron tulipifera tree at 35.1 meters and at at 39.7 meters on a horizontal branch was documented for the first time.

Tardigrades: An undergraduate student has been assigned this project. This is a joint venture with Diane Nelson, Paul Bartels and Paul Davison. This is the list of species we have identified to date and a number of slides were sent to Diane Nelson. Macrobiotus tonolii, Macrobiotus hufelandi group, Pseudechiniscus suillus, Milnesium tardigradum, and Minibiotus intermedius.

Web Site Development: Discover Life In America web site address for "Tree Canopy Biodiversity in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park " http://www.discoverlife.org/nh/tx/Fungi/ click on Tree Canopy Biodiversity Project. This site located under the Fungal Twig has pictures of the climbers, of the ground crew and representative species of organisms from the tree canopy. Central Missouri State University Department of Biology web site address http://www.cmsu.edu/biology for Tree Canopy Biodiversity (Myxomycetes macrofungi, mosses, liverworts, and lichens) in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park .

In-kind Contributions: The principal investigator, Harold W. Keller, spent two three-week periods in the park. A normal day was from about 7:30 AM in the morning until 11:00 PM at night, sometimes later. This represents 42 days, including travel time from Warrensburg , Missouri to Cades Cove in the GSMNP. This is about a 13-hour drive. I would estimate the number of hours at 12 hours per day X 42=504 hours. This project has a number of volunteers. Mike Ferro spent many hours preparing our web page. James Murray served as our research project photographer. He made two trips to the GSMNP at his own expense. Dan Dourson identified specimens of Philomycus. Harley Barnhart provided the photograph for the banana slug feeding on Boletus edulis. Keith Langdon from the GSMNP and Jeanie Hilten from Discover Life in America provided assistance with equipment, housing and logistics. The multidisciplinary research team included: Drs. Alex Ciegler, lichenologist, Paul Davison, bryologist (mosses and liverworts), Professor Uno Eliasson, Göteborg University, Sweden, Myxomycetes and vascular plants, Professor Thomas Gaither, Myxomycetes and macrofungi, Ken Nelson, volunteer ecologist, Drs. Jay Raveill, expert on the flora of the GSMNP, David Smith, bryologist, Ted Stampfer, volunteer moist chamber culture specialist. All of these professionals were part of the multidisciplinary ground crew. Lisa Schmidt, University Media Services at CMSU, assisted with poster preparation. All of these people donated their time to this project.

In the Summer of 2001 (23-28 July) and Spring of 2002 (21-26 April), William Moser, Donald Klemm and Bruce Daniels visited the Great Smoky Mountains National Park (GSMNP) to collect leeches. Nineteen wetland and running water localities throughout and adjacent to the GSMNP were sampled in the Summer of 2001 and twelve localities were sampled in the Spring of 2002. Leeches were hand-collected underneath submerged rocks, branches, logs and vegetation, by dip-net and from host specimens. The latitude and longitude of the collecting sites were recorded with a Garmin GPS 12 receiver and entered into a TOPO CD-ROM of the Southern Appalachian region. Nine species [Desserobdella picta, Helobdella fusca, Helobdella stagnalis, Helobdella triserialis, Oligobdella biannulata, Placobdella multilineata, Placobdella ornata, Placobdella papillifera, Erpobdella punctata (and Erpobdellid unidentified specimen and Eropbdellid cocoons)] were found. All nine species are new to the GSMNP. Specimens of Desserobdella picta, Helobdella fusca, Oligobdella biannulata and Placobdella papillifera represent new state records for Tennessee .

In the course of this study, we have also collected Glossiphoniid life history data, especially, on the rather rare salamander leech, Oligobdella biannulata. There has been only four published records of O. biannulata (less than 20 adult specimens of the species have been collected) and very little was known about its life history. We have collected additional specimens of O. biannulata and documented hosts and host infestation, distribution, brooding/breeding and ecological data.

Products

The main product of this study, a digital key of the Leeches of the Southern Appalachian States ( North Carolina , Northern Georgia , South Carolina and Tennessee ), is approximately half-way completed. Species information pages have been written for all of the Glossiphoniidae (19 species) and over half of the Hirudinidae (2 of 3 species). A 7 page (82 term) glossary of leech anatomical terms used in the key has also been written and digital images of approximately 10 species have been captured. We are working on species information pages for the Piscicolidae (5 species), Haemopidae (4 species) and Erpobdellidae (4 species), and capturing digital images for the remaining species on the check-list.

Another product from this study will be journal manuscripts from Oligobdella biannulata anatomy, life history and distribution studies. We are currently working on two journal manuscripts on the biology of O. biannulata.

December 2001 ATBI/DLIA meeting - Leeches (Euhirudinea) of the Southern Appalachians , especially the Great Smoky Mountains National Park .

April 2002 Association of Southeastern Biologists - Anatomy, Life History and Distribution of the Leech Oligobdella biannulata ( Moore , 1900) (Euhirudinea: Glossiphoniidae).

Popular articles:

Moser, W. and Klemm, D. 2001. Leeches of Great Smoky Mountains National Park . ATBI Quarterly. 2(4): 9.

Data

We are still processing and curating the leeches that have been collected in this study. By the end of Summer 2002, we will send the electronic collection data to Park staff and DLIA database staff. We plan to deposit specimens that are collected through this research in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park Museum and the Smithsonian Institution -National Museum of Natural History.

Costs: $360 for 20,000 pins.
Travel to Annual meeting (May 10) approx $200
Stipend to undergrad to mount and label Sphecids and braconids, and to sort and ship specimens to collaborators. $3350
Remaining money: $1,900
Money committed.
1)Travel to Orlando Fl. to sort braconids in exchange for mounting and labeling and generic sorting of 2,800 apoids by Stuart Fullerton. app $500.
2) Money for Maurius Wausbauer for identifying Pompilidae

Mounted and labeled specimens shipped to the following collaborators:
700 Alysiinae to Bob Wharton, Texas A&M
130 Mutillidae to James Pitts, U. of Arkansas (all identified to species and returned)

75 agathidinae (Braconidae) sorted to species.
100 misc. other braconid taxa identified to species.
2,000 other braconids mounted and labeled and in my collection (awaiting identification)
2,800 Apoidea (bees) mounted and labeled by Stuart Fullerton, soon to be sorted to genus and sent to Terry Griswald.
Assembeled a large team of Hymenopterists most of whom have recently received hundreds of specimens for identification

List of collaborators:
Chao-Dong ZHU sea@panda.ioz.ac.cn Chalcidoidea: Eulophidae Encyrtidae.
David P. Cowan cowan@wmich.edu Vespidae s.l.
David R. Smith dsmith@sel.barc.usda.gov Symphyta
Don Manley dmanley@CLEMSON.EDU Mutilidae
Gregory A. Evans evansg@doacs.state.fl.us Chalcidoidea
Ian Stocks istocks@earthlink.net Tiphiidae, Pompilidae
James M. Carpenter carpente@amnh.org Vespidae
Jim Wiley wileyj@doacs.state.fl.us Sphecidae, some Apoidea
John Heraty sjohn.heraty@ucr.edu Eucharididae
John MacDonald john_macdonald@entm.purdue.edu Vespidae
Kathy Schick kaschick@uclink.berkeley.edu Cynipoidea,
and sorting of microfraction
Marius Wasbauer mwasb@harborside.com Pompilidae
MASSIMO OLMI olmi@unitus.it Dryinidae, embolemids and bethylids
Matt MacGown MattM@Entomology.msstate.edu Platygastroidea (?)
Mike Sharkey msharkey@ca.uky.edu Braconidae
Parker Gambino parker_gambino@greenwich.k12.ct.us Aculeata
Phillip Russell Pjruss73@aol.com Apoidea
Steven L. Heydon slheydon@ucdavis.edu Pteromalidae
Stuart M Fullerton stuartf@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu Apoidea
Bob Wharton rawbaw@@tamu.edu Alysiinae
Robert Zuparko: Aphidiinae (Braconidae)

1. We were awarded $1632 to provide a species list of certain brachycerous Diptera from the park. The taxa we focused on are associated with aquatic and moist woodland habitat. We proposed to make use of pan traps, malaise traps, and sweep netting to accomplish this during summer 2001. We proposed delivering a spreadsheet with our collecting data. One specimen of each species is promised to the NPS.