Sand Hills Success

Having explored the Pine Ridge of northwestern Nebraska and the Black Hills of South Dakota, it was time to turn my attention to the vast central Nebraska Sand Hills. My original plan was to leave the Pine Ridge area early in the morning and arrive at the western edge of the Sand Hills during late morning. This would provide plenty of time during the rest of the day to explore several western Sand Hills localities before traveling east the following day to look at some eastern Sand Hills sites. It is, however, the nature of these trips that plans change – sometimes on a whim – and such was the case Thursday morning. As I approached the left turn onto Hwy 385 that would take me down to Alliance, I made a impulsive decision to take another shot at finding the elusive Cicindela lengi (blowout tiger beetle). Recall that I battled rain and cool temps in my first attempt, and although I came away with several larvae of what I hope turn out to be this species (assuming I am successful in rearing them to adulthood), they also could represent one of the more common species. I questioned the wisdom of this move during the entire 40 minutes it took to drive to the spot – completely in the opposite direction of where I had planned to go that morning, but something in my gut told me to do it anyway. If I succeeded, the lost time and resulting need to adjust my plans would be worth it. I won’t delay the suspense – it was one of the best decisions I’ve made on this trip. I found two adults, and had I not known to expect this species at the site, I might have easily mistaken them for the much more common C. formosa (big sand tiger beetle). The two species resemble each other greatly in color and markings, but the subtle differences are unmistakeable once you’ve seen them in the field. I didn’t dare risk attempting a field photo – they were just too active, but I do have one of the specimens alive and will take photos of it later in confinement. Success would not end there – shortly after finding the first C. lengi, I saw an individual of the very uncommon C. nebraskana – another new locality for the species! Matt Brust will be very pleased to add yet another data point for the distribution of this species in Nebraska. Finally, as if to add an exclamation point on the success of this diversion, I found another specimen of Megacyllene comanchei (provisional ID – see previous post) – another locality for this new state record. As with the other five specimens seen on this trip, it too was found crawling on the barren ground rather than on goldenrod flowers as is typical of most other species of Megacyllene. Quite a successful detour it turned out to be.

Success has its price, and the time spent on this diversion meant that something would have to give. By the time I got back to Chadron it was already past noon, which meant I would not make it to the Sand Hills until mid-afternoon. My primary target for the Sand Hills was the gorgeous C. limbata (sandy tiger beetle), which lives on barren sand dunes and blowouts. My delayed arrival left only a few hours to explore these habitats – with no sign of C. limbata, but I did find a few more C. fulgida along the margin of a small alkaline lake that Matt had told me about. Rather than move on to the eastern Sand Hills the following day as originally planned, I decided to stay on the western side for another day – my last full day of collecting. It was another good move – with a full day to explore, I found several sites in the morning with C. fulgida, and in the afternoon I finally found the coveted C. limbata. I only saw one adult out and about, but that was enough to convince me to spend some time there. As I’ve noted before, sand-inhabiting tigers start digging by midday, so I started looking for suspected burrows and digging after them. Most of what I dug up at first were the common C. formosa (big sand tiger beetle), but after a bit I was able to discriminate between the burrows of that species and those of C. limbata. After a couple hours of work, I had a grand total of seven vivid white/iridescent green individuals to show for my effort! Again, I didn’t even attempt a field photograph – they were very active once dug up, so one individual is being kept alive for photographs later in confinement. This day would also end with a nice exclamation point – another C. lengi! My lesson in field discrimination of this species versus C. formosa payed off, as I instantly recognized it for what it was.

I’ve now made it to the eastern edge of the Sand Hills, where tomorrow morning I’ll be looking for a red population of C. limbata before finishing off the trip with (hopefully) finding C. denverensis (green claybank tiger beetle) in the clay soils just to the south of where the Sand Hills end. If successful, I will have succeeded in finding a total of twelve tiger beetle species on the trip (38% of the known Nebraska/South Dakota combined fauna). The extra time spent in the Pine Ridge area means I will have to skip the last two localities in northwest Missouri, but the success I had in Nebraska does much to ease the disappointment. With a 10-hour drive confronting me after I finish my collecting tomorrow, I suspect this will be the last of my trip updates. I’ll provide a wrap up and some more photos after I return home, but in the meantime enjoy this video of C. formosa digging in for a midday siesta.

Rattled in the Black Hills

My first day in the Black Hills of South Dakota was spent at McNenny State Fish Hatchery near Spearfish – on the north side of the Black Hills. I went to this place on the advice of my esteemed colleagues in Nebraska, who suggested that I might be able to find several interesting tiger beetle species there: the closely related trio of beauties C. denverensis (green claybank tiger beetle), C. limbalis (common claybank tiger beetle), and C. splendida (splendid tiger beetle) in the red clay eroded banks; C. fulgida (crimson saltflat tiger beetle) and C. tranquebarica kirbyi (oblique-lined tiger beetle) around the lakes; and – again, if I’m lucky – intergrades between the prairie and boreal long-lipped tiger beetles (C. longilabris x nebraskana) along a trail through the shortgrass prairie east of the hatchery. For the first time since Saturday, I awoke to baby blue skies which filled me with an optimism and anticipation that made the 3-hour drive from Chadron, Nebraska to Spearfish, South Dakota seem interminable.

What my esteemed colleagues failed to include on that list of species I might encounter was Crotalus viridis – the prairie rattlesnake! Now folks, I’ve seen a number of rattlesnakes before – mostly in Texas – but I’ve never heard this sound in real life, much less heard it coming from a rattlesnake poised to strike. I encountered this fellow in the eroded red clay slopes above the lake, and even though I wasn’t too terribly close it gave me quite a start (my bravery in taking this photo is vastly exaggerated by the twin miracles of telephoto and cropping!). I walked a little more cautiously afterwards but gradually let my guard down over time. About an hour later, I was startled again by another rattler – I had come within 2 feet of it before it started rattling. I nearly jumped out of my skin, and once I got my heart stuffed back down my throat I noticed several dark juveniles coiled up with her. They slunk away, and I tiptoed back to the car having had my fill of the red clay slopes for the time being.

I did manage some success on the slopes before the rattlers drove me away – not with the claybank and splendid tigers that I had hoped to find, which were largely missing in action save for two individuals of C. limbalis that I spotted amongst the annoyingly similar appearing and ridiculously numerous C. purpurea audubonii (clay path tiger beetle). Success instead came in the form of this cerambycid beetle – Megacyllene comanchei. Recently described from Texas, nothing more was published about this species until I recorded a northern range extension into south-central Kansas (MacRae & Rice 2007). Its occurrence in the Black Hills is not only a new state record for South Dakota but also represents an incredible 700-mile northern range extension – on top of the previous one! Actually, Matt and I each found one individual a few days ago in Sioux County, Nebraska (also a new state record) – I had thought of this species at the time but decided I must be wrong and that I should wait until I got back before making an identification. But the capture of these three additional individuals even further north renewed my suspicions, and consultion of my databases shows good agreement with this species – note the white rather than yellow antemedian elytral band and medial portion of the postmedian elytral band, along with the medial and lateral coelescence of the apical and subapical bands, which distinguish this species from the closely related M. angulifera. The records from this trip show that M. comanchei is much more widely distributed than previously thought. Curiously, all five of the individuals I’ve seen (so far!) were crawling on the ground – an unusual habit for Megacyllene, which are normally found on flowers of goldenrod. The type series was associated with plants in the genus Heterotheca, which I did note growing in the area.

After escaping the snake slopes, I began surveying the lake margins to look for potential tiger beetle habitat. I was especially interested in C. fulgida – Matt and I had seen a single individual along a dry salt creek in Sioux County. The lakeshore around the upper lake was completely surrounded by thick vegetation – no tiger beetles there, but when I arrived at the lower lake I found some small areas of open ground along one side. They didn’t look very extensive, and my initial search of the area showed no activity. Closer inspection, however, showed the presence of larval burrows, and when I grabbed my fishing gear (the nearest grass stem) I promptly managed to extract a couple of larvae. Okay, so there are tiger beetles here, but which one I don’t know – probably C. tranquebarica kirbyi, which we had seen rather commonly at the same dry salt creek in Sioux County. Although the sun would not set for another two hours, it was quite cool already. I wondered if maybe the adults had already started digging in for the night and began looking for evidence of adult burrows. I looked carefully along the edge of the grassline when I saw movement – it was the back end of an adult C. fulgida kicking dirt out as it excavated its burrow. Success! I dug it out, took a few photos (one shown here) and started looking for similar appearing burrows. I not only found several more C. fulgida in their burrows, but also several C. tranquebarica kirbyi. The larvae I collected may or may not represent one of these species – there are other species associated with alkaline habitats that active at other times during the season. I collected a few more larvae, filled a container with soil from the spot – cutting out a section of salt-encrusted surface to place on top, placed all of the collected larvae in it, and watched them immediately start digging new burrows with their shovel-like heads. More babies to take care of!

With tiger beetle success under my belt and the sun setting fast, I decided the day was done and packed up the car. As I was closing the hatch, I happened to look over and saw something of great interest – milkweed! I had, in fact, been looking for milkweed all day long in the hopes – faint, I thought – of encountering the newly described Tetraopes heutheri (Skillman 2007). Mirror Lakes, at the McNenny Fish Hatchery, is the type locality of this species, and although the type series was collected in August I held out hope that the adults might persist until September. These hopes faded quickly, however, as I located milkweed plant after milkweed plant on the shortgrass prairie above the eroded clay slopes – all completely senesced, with nary a sign of any milkweed beetles. The plant I’d just spotted – only a small sprout – was green, and on it were two milkweed beetles! I excitedly took some pictures, then started looking carefully about and found several more on additional small sprouts in the area. Apparently, the sprouts represented regrowth from late-season mowing of the roadside, as several full-sized, completely senescent plants were found in the adjacent unmowed area. My excitement at having “found” T. heutheri (because of their small size and occurrence at the type locality) was short lived – closer examination of the specimens after returning home showed them to be very small individuals of the more common Great Plains species T. femoratus. I did have some doubts when I found the beetles, since the milkweed species on which I found them is not the same species with which T. heutheri was associated (Asclepias verticillata, a small species with narrow, linear leaves).

Day 2 in the Black Hills was spent at nearby Boundary Gulch, just across the border in the northeast corner of Wyoming. This was another attempt to find the C. longilabris x nebraskana intergrades that eluded me at McNenney, and although I failed to find them at this location also, I did find five other species of tiger beetles, including several beautifully marked C. limbalis to go along with the two I found the previous day. After that it was some spurious collecting here and there – including larvae from two spots in the southern Black Hills – as I traveled back to Chadron, Nebraska for the night. On tap for tomorrow – Nebraska’s famed Sand Hills! The beautiful sandy tiger beetle (C. limbata) – vivid white and iridescent green to red – hopefully will be found among the super abundant festive (C. scutellaris) and big sand (C. formosa) tigers, and I’ll get another shot at seeing the C. lengi (blowout tiger beetle) that I missed a few days ago.

Goin’ fishin’

For the past two days I’ve been in Sioux County, Nebraska – just east of Wyoming and just south of South Dakota. As I traveled up through the western panhandle to arrive at this spot, I was pleasantly surprised by the varied terrain – not at all the monotonously flat landscape that I expected. The landscape in this so-called Pine Ridge area is even more surprising – an impressive escarpment drops 1,400′ from the high shortgrass prairie down to an eery badlands below. The escarpment itself is forested with Ponderosa pine and is studded with numerous impressive buttes. The photos shown here were taken in Sowbelly Canyon – typical of the landscape along the escarpment – and in the badlands below Monroe Canyon a little further west.

Enough about pines and buttes – my business here is tiger beetles. I met up yesterday with tiger beetle aficionado Matt Brust, who recently took a position here at Chadron State College after finishing his Ph.D. in Lincoln. I’ve been corresponding with Matt for a bit now, and when I told him of my interest in doing a tiger beetle trip through western Nebraska, he was more than willing to show me around and hopefully help me find some of the more unusual species I was looking for. Of course, tops on the priority list was Cicindela nebraskana (prairie long-lipped tiger beetle). This beetle isn’t common anywhere within its range and just sneaks into the northwest corner of Nebraska, where the type locality is located. Until recently, the species was known from very few specimens in Nebraska. Matt did some intensive sampling a few years ago and located a few limited populations in the vicinity of the type locality. Yesterday, he took me to two of these localities, and we succeeded in finding one individual at the first and several at the second. It was at the type locality where I succeeded in getting this field photo. While admittedly harshly-sunlit, it is as far as I know the only field photograph of the species – all others that I’ve seen have been taken in terraria. I’ll fix it up a bit with Photoshop and re-post once I get back home. This species looks similar to the black morph of Cicindela purpurea audubonii, which co-occurs with C. nebraskana in Nebraska, but it lacks the bright white labrum and elytral markings of the former. Also, as I would learn during these past two days, it can be instantly recognized in the field by its shinier appearance and “stubbier” legs. A few days before my arrival, Matt succeeded in finding the species in the next county to the east, an eastern range extension of about 60 miles, and today I located the species at another new locality between the two. It is gratifying to have played a small role in increasing our knowledge about this unusual species.

My success with C. nebraskana has come despite uncooperative weather. A series of frontal systems has moved through the area since my arrival, resulting in several rain events and lots of cool, cloudy weather. Tiger beetles are sun-loving insects, and when it gets too cold or wet the adults dig in and don’t come out until the sun shines through or temps warm enough to trigger them to dig out. Matt had taken me to another locality – a sand embankment – where we might find the beautiful Cicindela lengi (blowout tiger beetle), but it rained prior to our arrival and we saw no activity. I tried finding adult burrows to dig them out, but the rain had obliterated any trace of the diggings, making their burrows impossible to find. We did, however, note an abundance of larval burrows. I went back to the spot today hoping to see some activity, but thick clouds and cool temps made that unlikely. This is when I decided to “go fishing.” Tiger beetle larval burrows are easily recognized by their perfect circular shape and clean “beveling” around the entrance (1st photo). Burrows of 3rd instars (the last larval instar in tiger beetles) are distinctly larger than those of 2nd instars (2nd photo), while those of 1st instars are smaller still (not shown). Larvae sit at the burrow entrance and ambush any suitable prey that comes too close. During cool, cloudy weather, however, they drop to the bottom of their burrow – up to a foot or more deep. A technique useful for extracting inactive larvae from their burrows is called fishing and involves inserting a thin grass stem down to the bottom of the burrow in an attempt to coax the larva into “taking the bait” and biting the end of the grass stem (3rd photo). The grass stem is then pulled up rapidly – much like setting the hook when fishing – in an attempt to pull the larva out of its burrow before it has a chance to let go of the stem. It can take a few tries, but with practice one can more often than not succeed at removing the grotesquely odd, yet beautiful larva (4th photo). Note the huge, heavily sclerotized head with upward facing jaws. The hump in the middle of the back is armed with forward-curved spines that helps the larva avoid being pulled out of the burrow by struggling prey (but they’re not so effective against obsessive cicindelophiles!). As I managed to “fish” larvae I placed them in a plastic container with their native soil. In the 5th photo, four larvae have already begun digging new burrows, and one more 3rd instar (L) along with a 2nd instar (R) has just been placed in the container. I’ll bring this container back with me and continue to feed the larvae live insects in the hopes of rearing them to adulthood. I cannot say with certainty that the larvae I collected represent C. lengi – other species that could potentially occur at this site include C. scutellaris (festive tiger beetle) and C. limbata (sandy tiger beetle). However, the locality is known for the abundant occurrence there of C. lengi, so I’m hopeful that that is what I’ve collected – we’ll know in a few weeks. In the meantime, I’ll have additional opportunities to look for this species, along with C. limbata, as I pass through the Sand Hills region later this week.

Tomorrow morning I head to the Black Hills in South Dakota, where I hope to find not only Cicindela longilabris laurentii (Boreal long-lipped tiger beetle) in the high pine forests, but also intergrades between this species and the closely related C. nebraskana in the more open habitats of the middle latitudes. Look for an update in a couple days or so.

Digging tiger beetles

After driving almost 600 miles on Friday, I was ready for some tiger beetle action. A quick 2-hour drive this morning got me to the first set of localities in extreme southwestern Nebraska and just across the border into Colorado (“B” thru “D” in the previously posted map). Compared to the other localities I have lined up for the trip, these were the most vague – based on published records from more than a century ago with no recent ‘ground intelligence.’ I wasn’t too concerned about having success at these spots, I just wanted a potentially interesting area to explore after a day of driving before completing my voyage to the first real target areas up in the northwestern corner of Nebraska. I could’ve taken a more direct line along I-80 and explored areas along that route, but I’ll be exploring that route on my return trip.

My first stop at Benkelman was a bust – I was looking for some sand blows in the hopes of finding Cicindela limbata, but a half hour of so of driving around the area turned up nothing. I stopped at some exposed clay to see if I might encounter C. denverensis but only saw a couple of the ubiquitous C. punctulata. Haigler – a half hour to the west – was more productive. I found a spot with access down along the Republican River (at only 2 yards in width, it is beyond me how this qualifies as a “river”) and found several typical sand associated species – C. scutellaris (pictured) and C. formosa, both nominotypical forms which look very different from the populations we have in Missouri, and several C. tranquebarica individuals that show the bold markings characteristic of the northern Great Plains subspecies kirbyi (the first time I’ve seen this subspecies). My 104 year-old literature reference suggested C. fulgida occurred around salt marshes in the area, but no such habitats were found – probably degraded long ago, or even worse obliterated in the interest of “improving” the land for agriculture. Another half hour drive got me to Wray, just across the border in Colorado, where C. limbata again had been recorded from sand hills above the Republican Trickle. These sand hills were easily located, but the completely barren blows that the species requires, again, were not found – probably allowed/encouraged to grow over. As it was now the heat of the day (a very pleasant low 80’s), the common sand species C. formosa and C. scutellaris were now digging in to avoid the heat.

Although it is well known that adult tiger beetles dig burrows to spend the night, I haven’t really seen much in the literature that talks about their daytime burrowing habits, how to recognize the burrows, and how to dig them out (okay, so now my double entendre of a title makes sense, cuz you see I really ‘dig’ tiger beetles… and I’m digging them from their burrows… oh well, it seemed funny when I thought of it). Many other insects also burrow in the sand, and some of them – especially those of the many ‘digger’ wasps and ground nesting bees – can look very similar to (and sometimes outnumber) those of tiger beetles. In my experience, adult tiger tiger beetle burrows have a more ‘flattened’ aspect to them (1st photo), while those of wasps and bees are more rounded. Fresh burrows from both groups will have moist diggings thrown to one side (in old burrows – often uninhabited – the diggings will be dry), but those of tiger beetles appear more ‘fanned’ while those of hymenopterans are more ‘piled.’ I use a knife to excavate the sand away from the entrance in thin vertical slices (2nd photo), slightly undercutting the burrow to prevent sand from falling into it (and making it impossible to follow). Wasp and bee burrows look more round during excavation and often make a hard turn downward, while those of tiger beetles continue looking very flattened and usually stay rather shallow. If somebody is home, they will be encountered without too much digging – these photos show a C. scutellaris adult peaking out head first and a C. formosa who was still in the act of excavating (done by kicking the sand backwards while backing towards the entrance). I stumbled onto this technique last year during my first encounter with C. limbata – had I not done so I probably would’ve walked away with only a single specimen.

Tomorrow, I hope to have encountered C. nebraskana and C. lengi. Cicindela decemnotata is a long shot, but hope springs eternal…

A hunting we will go!

Maps have been prepared. Relevant emails from my esteemed colleagues to the northwest have been read and re-read. Summary sheets on the distribution, biology, and biogeography of the many different species I hope to encounter are in hand. Google Earth images of each locality I plan to visit – annotated with potential species occurrences and pinpointing precise locations of their likely habitats – have been assembled into a Powerpoint presentation, and detailed driving directions from Point “A” to Point “B”… all the way to Point “X” (home!) have been determined. All of this has been printed out and organized into a 3-ring binder. Why the extraordinary attention to detail? Because…

It’s time for the annual fall tiger beetle trip!

View Larger Map

The annual fall tiger beetle trip started several years ago when I, along with my friend and colleague Chris, began studying Missouri’s tiger beetle fauna. At first it was a diversion – buprestids and cerambycids are pretty well played out by fall, but tiger beetles across much of the U.S. exhibit a unique spring/fall fauna that is quite distinct from the summer fauna. Chris and I would go to different parts of Missouri, documenting the species encountered to fill in distributional data gaps. It was on these trips that I discovered how much I truly love early fall collecting – the cool air, the crisp smells, the long sharp shadows, and a landscape of foliage ever so lightly tinged with shades of red and yellow while grasses morph into fields of gold. In recent years, I’ve begun adventuring beyond Missouri’s borders on these fall trips, allured by the diversity of species found in the Great Plains – species alien to Missouri in an equally alien landscape. First, it was Barber County, Kansas, with its red gypsum hills inhabited by the aptly named Cicindela pulchra (beautiful tiger beetle) – deep wine-red and iridescent purple flashing across the barren red clay. Then last year I got my first taste of the Sand Hills of Nebraska at their farthest eastern extent. I watched in amazement as Cicindela limbata (sandy tiger beetle) – vivid white and metallic green – danced across the surface of sand blows, undaunted by scouring 30 mph winds. It was on that trip that I decided a long weekend wasn’t cutting it – I needed to take a whole week and get myself into the heart of the Great Plains. The annual fall tiger beetle weekend has just become the annual fall tiger beetle week.

As the map above indicates, I’ve got a rather ambitious itinerary of locations that I’d like to visit – 22 in all. I leave tomorrow, and if I have planned properly (and have a little luck) I might be able to visit all of them in the 9 days I have set aside for the trip. My “trip bible” will be my constant companion, along with my already worn copy of the newly issued Tiger Beetles of South Dakota & Nebraska (Spomer et al. 2008), as I explore deep into the Sand Hills and experience for the first time ever the Black Hills of South Dakota. I’ll even sneak over into Colorado and Wyoming for a spot or two. Unfortunately, my faithful colleague isn’t able to join me. I tried to seduce him with visions of Cicindela limbata and C. lengi (blowout tiger beetle) in the numerous sand blows, C. fulgida (crimson saltflat tiger beetle) around countless alkaline lakes, C. longilabris (Boreal long-lipped tiger beetle) in the high pine forests, and C. nebraskana (prairie long-lipped tiger beetle) and (if we’re really really lucky) C. decemnotata (Badlands tiger beetle) just sneaking into the shortgrass prairies of the extreme northwestern corner of Nebraska. I reminded him of my (wanting) photographic skills and the images we would have to settle for if his talent and equipment didn’t accompany me. I almost had him, but in the end he muttered some lame excuse about his 15-month old baby and wife needing him (just kidding, Chris!).

The map above should be fully interactive, so give it a click and follow me along on this adventure. If you happen to be at any of the spots marked by a balloon and see a khaki-clad fellow – insect net in one hand, camera in the other – how’s about joining me for a bit of tiger beetle hunting.

“All the better to see you with, my dear!”

Click me!

Cicindela formosa (the big sand tiger beetle) is a not uncommon species that occurs across much of North America east of the Rocky Mountains in deep, dry, open sand habitats. It is absent in Appalachia and much of the Interior Highlands, understandable given the rarity of deep sand habitats on these elevated landforms; however, its absence across much of the southeastern coastal plain as well as south and west Texas, despite the widespread presence of apparently suitable habitat, is not easily explained. In Missouri, dry sand habitats are rather limited, occurring primarily along the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers, a few of the larger Ozark rivers, and along Crowley’s Ridge and the Blodgett Terrace in the Mississippi River Alluvial Plain. The individual in these photos was seen last weekend at Sand Prairie Conservation Area (on the Blodgett Terrace), where I also recorded it earlier this year. Despite its relative commoness, I always get a little excited whenever I find this species – it’s a big, chunky thing with bold markings and sufficient habitat specificity to keep it from being too pedestrian (unlike Cicindela repanda and C. punctulata, which usually evoke only a groan – okay, maybe western forms of the latter, with their gorgeous suffusion of green and blue excite me a little bit). Cicindela formosa populations to the west are even more brilliantly colored and localized – it’s a handsome species, indeed! Adults are powerful fliers that terminate their long escape flights with a comical tumble or two across the sand before ending up on their feet. Normally a difficult species to get close to, cool temps and overcast skies on this morning resulted in a cooperative subject and excellent lighting for this series of photos.

Missouri populations are assignable to the eastern subspecies generosa – mostly, that is. There is a population known from the Ozarks, along the beautifully pristine Current River, that exhibits tendencies towards the bright coppery-red dorsal and metallic purple ventral coloration of the nominate subspecies found further west. I’ve also located another population in the northeastern Ozarks on “sand” flats – not true sand, but expansive dumpings of pulverized limestone tailings from former lead mining operations – that shows a similar intergrading with nominotypical characters. The occurrence of these populations near typical generosa populations and disjunct from nominotypical populations several hundred kilometers to the west, coupled with the existence of a broad intergrade zone between the two forms along both sides of the Missouri River through Nebraska, Iowa, and the Dakotas, raises interesting questions about the validity of a subspecific distinction for generosa. Additional subspecies have been described from eastern Texas and adjacent areas of Arkansas and Louisiana (pigmentosignata), southeastern New Mexico (rutilovirens), and southwestern Saskatchewan (gibsoni). Each of these populations is at the edge of the nominate subspecies’ range of distribution and exhibits consistent differentiation in multiple characters – primarily color and maculation – from nominotypical populations. As a result, the case for according subspecific status to these populations is more convincing despite the occurrence of intergrades along narrow zones of contact with nominotypical populations. A truly allopatric population center occurs in northwestern Colorado and southeastern Utah – separated from nominotypical populations to the east by a distance of 230 km. The Colorado population strongly resembles and has thus been assigned to subspecies gibsoni. However, it is hard to imagine a mechanism by which the Colorado and Saskatchewan populations – with over 1,000 km separating them – derived from a common ancestry. A more likely scenario is independent adaptation to similar conditions in their respective habitats. Differences in coloration of the larval head capsule between these two populations lend support to this idea, which if true should qualify the two populations for consideration as distinct subspecies despite the similarity in their appearance. Interestingly, the Utah population resembles nominotypical forms further east, although intergrades with the adjacent Colorado population do occur along a narrow zone of contact.

The subspecies concept has been hotly debated for many decades now. E. O. Wilson and W. L. Brown (1953), in their seminal paper, The subspecies concept and its taxonomic application, questioned the validity of many subspecies on the basis that they failed to exhibit concordance across multiple characters and argued that subspecies that interbreed were not “real taxa” because the flow of genes and characters between them prevented divergence. This restrictive concept essentially limited subspecies to populations that showed significant divergence from their relatives but relied upon external mechanisms (i.e., allopatry) rather than internal (i.e., genetic) for reproductive isolation. Many of North America’s described tiger beetle subspecies would not meet these criteria, since there often exist zones of contact where intergrades (a result of gene flow within hybrid zones) do occur. Ernst Mayr took a more pragmatic approach in Animal Species and Evolution (1963), defining subspecies as “an aggregate of local populations of a species inhabiting a geographic subdivision of the range of the species, and differing taxonomically from other populations of the species” – in other words, subspecies are taxonomic units and not evolutionary units. Viewing subspecies as strictly taxonomic units is more convenient, since the presence of hybrid zones does not invalidate a subspecies as long as it retains its taxonomic distinctiveness. I acknowledge that taxonomic subspecies units are useful – named subspecies provide a convenient shorthand for discussing geographical variation within species and stimulate interest in their study and characterization. Also, as emphasized by cicindelid experts D. L. Pearson et al. (2006), the application of formalized subspecies names for distinctive, local populations makes conservation policy decisions more palatable to policians and legislators, thus enhancing the potential for protection. However, I also agree with O’Neill (1982) that the subspecies concept must be connected to an evolutionary unit to be truly meaningful, and the recent application of molecular techniques is now providing a genetic basis for assessing subspecies validity. Interestingly, some such studies have shown near complete blockage of gene flow across hybrid zones, even when hybridization is frequent, providing genetic evidence of “real taxa” that nevertheless interbreed at their boundaries (Mallet 2007). It would be interesting to apply molecular techniques to populations of generosa, nominotypical formosa, and the Missouri intergrades to understand their degree of genetic divergence, the presence of which could convince me that their status as distinct subspecies should be maintained.

The hunt for Cicindela celeripes

One of the more enigmatic tiger beetle species in North America is Cicindela celeripes LeConte (swift tiger beetle). This small (6-8 mm), flightless species has been recorded from a restricted area of the eastern and southern Great Plains – from eastern Nebraska and westernmost Iowa south through Kansas to western Oklahoma and the Texas panhandle (Hoback and Riggins 2001, Pearson et al. 2006). Unfortunately, populations of this species appear to have suffered severe declines. It apparently is holding strong in the Flint Hills region of Kansas, but many of the records from outside of that area date back more than a century. Reportedly once common on the bluff prairies along the Missouri River, it has not been seen in Nebraska since 1915 and may have been extirpated from that state (Brust et al. 2005). The reasons for this decline undoubtedly involve loss of preferred habitat – upland prairies and grasslands with clay or loess soils and sparse or patchy vegetation. Areas supporting these native habitats have been drastically reduced since European settlement of the region, and suppression of fire – so vital to prairie ecosystems – has led to extensive woody encroachment on the few prairie relicts that do remain. Unlike many other tiger beetle species that have been able to adapt to these anthropogenic changes, this species apparently cannot survive in such altered habitats.

Chris Brown and I have been interested in this species ever since we began surveying the tiger beetles of Missouri. It has not yet been recorded from the state, but we have long suspected that it might occur in extreme northwest Missouri. It is here where the Loess Hill prairies along the Missouri River reach their southern terminus. (Incidentally, the Loess Hills are themselves a globally significant geological landform, possessing natural features rarely found elsewhere on earth. They will be the subject of a future post). We have searched several of what we consider to be the most promising potential sites for this species in Missouri, though without success. Nevertheless, we remain optimistic that the species might eventually be found in Missouri and has simply been overlooked due to the limited temporal occurrence, small size, rapid running capabilities, and tendency of adults to dart rapidly to the bases of grass clumps where they hide (Pearson et al. 2006). Furthermore, even though the species has not been seen recently in adjacent areas of Nebraska where it has been recorded in the past, it has been seen recently in a few Loess Hill prairie remnants just to the north in Iowa.

A few weeks ago, I was fortunate to receive specific locality information for one of the recently located Iowa populations. Armed with site descriptions, Google maps, photographs, and whatever book learnin’ I had gained about this species, my colleague and I made the long drive to southwestern Iowa in hopes of locating the population for ourselves, seeing adults in their native habitat, and using the learnings we would gain about their habitat preferences and field behavior to augment our efforts to eventually locate the species in northwestern Missouri. At mid-July, we were nearing the end of the adult activity period, but adults had been observed at the site the weekend prior, so we felt reasonably confident that adults might still be found. Additionally, fresh off of our recent success at locating the related Cicindela cursitans in Missouri (another small, flightless, fast-running species), we were hopeful that we now possessed the proper “search image” to recognize C. celeripes in the field should we have the good fortune to encounter it.

Walking into the area, I was impressed at the extensiveness of the prairie habitat – much larger than any of Missouri’s Loess Hill prairies. The presence of large, charred red-cedar cadavers on the lower slopes revealed active management for prairie restoration. We later learned from the area manager that the restoration area had been acquired from a neighboring landowner who had used the land for grazing and sold it when it became unproductive. I can only imagine the second thoughts that landowner must have had when subsequent burn regimes and woody growth removal prompted a return to the beautifully lush sea of prairie vegetation that now covered the hills. As we approached the area where we decided the beetles must have been seen, we started searching slowly and deliberately – looking carefully for any movement between the clumps of grass. It didn’t appear to be prime habitat for C. celeripes – the vegetation was just so thick, with only small openings among the plants. We continued to scour the area closely but saw nothing, and my optimism began to wane. Wrong spot? – I don’t think so. Bad search image? – hard to imagine, considering its similarity to C. cursitans. Too late? – could be.

After it became obvious we were searching the same gaps in the vegetation repeatedly, I started walking towards a small cut further down the hillside that I had noticed earlier (just visible in the previous photo). I had thought, “That’s tiger beetle land down there!” My optimism increased when I reached the cut, seeing the remains of an old, overgrown 2-track leading through the cut and on down the hillside. Vegetation was much sparser within and below the cut – it looked perfect. Chris had become distracted taking photographs of something, so I began searching. I’d been in the cut a few minutes when I thought I saw something flash across a bare patch out of the corner of my eye – was that it? It had to be. I carefully inspected around the base of every clump of vegetation at my feet but found nothing. It must have been wishful thinking – just another spider. I continued on down the cut, and within a few more minutes I saw the flash again – this time there was no doubt as to what it was, and I had a lock on it. I started slapping the ground frantically as the little guy darted erratically under, around, and over my hands. In the few seconds while this was happening, I was simultaneously exuberant at having succeeded in finding it, utterly astounded by its speed and evasiveness, and desperately afraid that it was getting away – swift tiger beetle, indeed! Persistence paid off, however, and eventually I had it firmly in my grasp.

We would see a total of seven individuals that day. Most of them were within or immediately below the cut, while another individual was seen much further down the 2-track. Mindful of the population declines this species has experienced, we decided to capture just three individuals (even though by this point in the season mating and oviposition would have been largely complete) in hopes that at least one would survive the trip back to the lab for photographs. Our primary goal – to see the species in its native habitat – had been accomplished. We now turned our attention to attempting in situ field photographs. This would prove to be too difficult a task – each beetle we located immediately ran for cover, and flushing it out only caused it to dart to another clump of vegetation. This scenario repeated with each beetle until eventually it simply vanished. We would have to settle for photographs of our captured specimens in a confined arena – a few of which are shown here. The beetles were photographed on a chunk of native loess taken from the site, and no chilling or other “calming” techniques were used. Spomer et al. (2008, Field Guide to the Tiger Beetles of Nebraska and South Dakota) state that C. celeripes is a delicate species that does not do well in captivity. It has never been reared, and the larva is unknown. Nevertheless, I placed the chunk of native loess in a plastic tupperware container and transplanted into one corner a small clump of bluegrass from my yard. The soil around the grass clump is kept moist, and every few days I have placed various small insects in the container. Of the three individuals that we brought back, two died within two days. The third individual (these photographs), however, has now survived for four weeks! Moreover, it is a female, and during the past two weeks six larval burrows have appeared in the soil (and another egg was seen on the soil surface just yesterday). Indeed, an egg can be seen in the upper right of the first photo. It remains to be seen whether I will be successful at rearing them to adulthood; however, I’m hopeful this can be accomplished using methods described for C. cursitans (Brust et al. 2005).

Do I still think C. celeripes occurs in Missouri? I don’t know – on one hand, the mixed grass Loess Hill prairie habitats in which the beetle lives in Iowa do extend south into Missouri, and the beetle could be inhabiting them but be easily overlooked for the reasons I’ve already mentioned. However, Missouri’s Loess Hill prairie relicts are small, both in number and in size, and highly disjunct. Such features increase the likelihood of localized extinctions and hamper recolonization through dispersal, especially in flightless species that must traverse unsuitable habitat. With its adult activity period winding down, renewed efforts to locate this species in Missouri will have to wait until next season. Hopefully, the knowledge we gained this season will help this become a reality. For now, the hunt continues…

(closing photo by C. Brown)

Sand Prairie Conservation Area

I have a love-hate affair with Missouri’s Southeast Lowlands (formally known as the Mississippi River Alluvial Basin, but simply called the “bootheel” by most folk in reference to the shape of its boundaries). Of the four main physiogeographic regions in the state, it is by far the most altered. Yes, the Ozark Highlands have been degraded by timber mismanagement, overgrazing, and fire suppression, yet many of its landscapes nevertheless remain relatively intact – just a few burn and chainsaw sessions away from resembling their presettlement condition. The northern Central Dissected Till Plains and western Osage Plains are more disturbed, their prairie landscapes having been largely converted to fields of corn, soybean, and wheat. Still, riparian corridors and prairie habitats ranging from narrow roadsides to sizeable relicts combine to provide at least a glimmer of the regions’ former floral and faunal diversity. The alterations these regions have experienced are significiant, yet they pale in comparison to the near-total, fence-row-to-fence-row conversion that has befallen the Southeast Lowlands. Its rich, deep soils of glacial loess, alluvial silt, and sandy loam originally supported vast cypress-tupelo swamps and wet bottomland forests – massively treed and dripping with biotic diversity. Exposed by relentless logging and an extensive system of drainage ditches and diversion canals, those same soils now support monotonous expanses of soybean, wheat, rice, and cotton. Giant plumes of dark smoke dot the unendingly flat landscape in late spring, as farmers burn wheat stubble in preparation for a double-crop of soybean (the need for which could be obviated by adopting more environmentally benign no-till drillers). Only a tiny fraction of the original swamp acres remain intact, preserved more by default due to their defiant undrainability than by human foresight, and wet bottomland forests now exist only as thin slivers hemmed in by levees along the Mississippi River to the east and the St. Francois River to the west. Solace is hard to find in these remaining tracts – hordes of mosquitoes and deer flies, desperate for blood to nourish their brood, descend upon anyone who dares to enter their realm, while impoverished locals leave behind waste of all manner in their daily quest for fish. The cultural history of the region parallels its natural history – nowhere in the state is the gap between wealth and poverty more evident, a testimony to its checkered history of race and labor relations.

Yet, despite its shortcomings, I am continually drawn to this region for my explorations. Driving down the southeastern escarpment of the Ozark Highlands into the Lowlands is like entering another world – a world of grits, fried catfish, and sweet tea, a world where it is odd not to wave to oncoming vehicles on gravel back roads, a world where character is judged by the subtleties of handshake, eye contact, and small talk. Again, its natural history follows suit, with many insects occurring here and nowhere else in Missouri – a distinctly Southern essence in an otherwise decidedly northern state. My recent discussion of Cicindela cursitans in the wet bottomland forests along the Mississippi River is just one example of the unique gems I have encountered in this region. Others include the rare and beautiful hibiscus jewel beetle (Agrilus concinnus), a sedge-mining jewel beetle (genus Taphrocerus) that is new to science (and, due to my sloth, still awaiting formal description), the striking Carolina tiger beetle (Tetracha carolina), and numerous other beetle species not previously recorded from the state. The small and scattered nature of the habitat remnants and often oppressive field conditions make insect study challenging here, but the opportunity for discovery makes this region irresistible.

Prior to this season, I had already visited most of the publicly-owned examples of swamp and forest found in the Southeast Lowlands. One natural community, however, that I had not yet seen happened to be one of Missouri’s rarest and most endangered – the sand prairie (I suppose you’ve surmised this by now from the photos). While conducting our recent survey for Cicindela cursitans, I took the opportunity to explore a recently acquired example called Sand Prairie Conservation Area. Geologically, sand prairies lie on our state’s youngest landscape, arising during the relatively recent Pleistocene glacial melts. Tremendous volumes of water from the melting glaciers scoured through loose sands and gravels deposited earlier during the Cretaceous and Tertiary periods by the present day Ohio River (the Mississippi River, much smaller at that time, actually drained northward into Hudson Bay!). After the last of these glacial melts formally ended the “ice age” (only 10,000 years ago), two long sandy ridges were all that remained of the original sand plain. Water drains quickly through the sandy soil of these ridges, which lie some 10 to 20 feet above the surrounding land, creating dry growing conditions favorable for prairie and savanna habitats where only drought-tolerant plants can survive. Dr. Walter Schroeder has conservatively estimated that 60 square miles of sand prairie were present in the Southeast Lowlands at the time of the original land surveys. Because settlement was already occurring at that time, a substantial amount of sand prairie had already likely been converted to agriculture, urban centers, and travel routes to staging areas for access across the swamps. Considering the conversion that might have already taken place, it is possible that as much as 150 to 175 square miles of sand prairie occupied the sand ridges. Sandy areas with higher organic soil content and supporting tallgrasses would have been the first to be converted, since this organic content would have also made them the most suitable for agriculture. Those with lower organic content created drier conditions more suitable for shortgrasses and were the next to be converted. Today, less than 2,000 acres of sand prairie remain – not even 1% of the original amount, and these relicts likely represent the sandiest (and driest) examples of the original sand prairie.

Walking onto the site, I was immediately greeted by an otherworldly expanse of sand dunes, blows, and swales. Ever the entomologist, and with tiger beetles in the fore from hunting C. cursitans, I immediately thought of two dry sand associated species that I have seen in the sand woodlands of nearby Crowley’s Ridge – Cicindela formosa (big sand tiger beetle) and Cicindela scutellaris (festive tiger beetle). These are both so-called “spring-fall” species – i.e., adults are active primarily during spring and fall, so I thought it might be a little late (my first visit was in late June) to see either one. It wasn’t long, however, before I scared up a C. formosa (pictured – but unfortunately facing the setting sun) on one of the dunes. I also encountered one individual of another dry sand associated species, Cicindela lepida (a white “summer” species aptly named ‘ghost tiger beetle’) but was not able to photograph it (I have to say this – I’m a patient man, but photographing tiger beetles is hard. Actually, stalking them until you can get close enough to photograph them is hard. Stalking them until you can get even closer to photograph them with a ‘point and shoot’ – hoping and praying they settle into a pose with the sun on their back because you can’t use the blindingly dinky little built-in flash – just about breaks every last fiber of patience I have within my soul!). Though the site represents a new county record for both species, this is not unexpected, since we have recorded each at multiple dry sand sites near big rivers throughout the state. The occurrence of C. scutellaris at this site, on the other hand, would be significant, and though I did not find it on these two summer visits, I will certainly return this fall to have another look. Cicindela scutellaris has been recorded from just three widely separated locations in the state. Individuals from the two northern Missouri sites are assignable to the more northerly and laterally maculate subspecies C. scutellaris lecontei, but those from the Crowley’s Ridge population (some 20 miles to the west) show an intergrade of characters between C. s. lecontei and the more southerly all-green and immmaculate subspecies C. scutellaris unicolor. I should mention that I believe the classic definition of subspecies (i.e., allopatric populations in which gene flow has been interrupted by geographic barriers) has been grossly misapplied in Cicindelidae taxonomy, with many “subspecies” actually representing nothing more than distinctive extremes of clinal variation. Nevertheless, I am anxious to see if C. scutellaris does occur at Sand Prairie, and if so does it exhibit even more of the “unicolor” influence than does the Crowley’s Ridge population?

I’ve mentioned previously my weakness as a botanist, a fact I found especially annoying as I explored this new area and found myself unfamiliar with much of the flora that I encountered. I’ve taken photographs and will, over time, attempt to identify them. Still, some plants are unmistakeable, such as this clasping milkweed (Asclepias amplexicaulis, also known as sand milkweed) – unfortunately well past bloom. Asclepias is a favorite plant genus of mine (I’ve made it a personal goal to locate all 16 of Missouri’s native Asclepias), so you can imagine my delight when I encountered numerous robust green milkweed (Asclepias viridiflora) plants in full bloom. As I approached one of these plants, I noticed the unmistakeable form and color of a milkweed beetle (genus Tetraopes). It didn’t have the look of the common milkweed beetle (Tetraopes tetrophthalmus), which is widespread and abundant throughout Missouri on common milkweed (Ascelpias syriaca), and as soon as I looked more closely, I recognized it to be the much less common Tetraopes quinquemaculatus. Additional individuals were found not only on A. viridiflora, but also on A. amplexicaulis. The latter is also a suspected host (the larvae are root borers in living plants) in other parts of the species’ range, but in Missouri I’ve found this species associated only with butterfly weed (Asclepias tuberosus). These observations suggest not only that A. viridiflora may also be utlized as a host, but that three species of milkweed are serving as such in this part of the state – unusual for a genus of beetles in which most species exhibit a preference for a single milkweed species in any given area. More questions to answer!

Amazingly, there were no publicly owned representatives of this community type in Missouri until just recently, when the Missouri Conservation Department acquired Sand Prairie CA through the efforts of the Southeastern Sand Ridge Conservation Opportunity Area, a consortium of private and public agencies dedicated to the conservation and restoration of sand prairies in the Mississippi River Alluvial Basin. Restoration efforts are now underway to promote species that historically occupied native sand prairies on the Sikeston Sand Ridge. Fire is one such management tool, although there seems to be some debate about the role of fire in the history of this natural community. Some have argued that the Southeast Lowland sand prairies are an anthropogenic landscape, created by Native Americans who regularly cleared and burned the land after arriving in the Mississippi River Alluvial Plain. Had it not been for such intervention, the sand ridges communities would have remained sand woodlands and forests, dominated by hickories and oaks. Several lines of evidence – convincingly summarized by Allison Vaughn in “The Origin of Sand Prairies” (June 2008 issue of Perennis, Newsletter of the S.E. Missouri Native Plant Society) – suggest a more natural origin. These include the presence of rare sand prairie endemics that do not occur in the sand woodlands of nearby Crowley’s Ridge and the fact that the remaining sand prairie relicts have not succeeded back to sand woodland despite 150 years of post-settlement fire suppression. Perhaps the truth lies somewhere in between, with the driest prairies remaining open regardless of fire, while those with somewhat higher organic content in their soils supported shifting mosaics of prairie, savanna, and woodland as fire events (whether natural or anthropogenic) flashed across different areas. Regardless of their history, the sand prairies of the Southeast Lowlands are truly unique communities that deserve protection. Restoration efforts are well underway at Sand Prairie CA, as evidenced by the charred grass clump next to eastern prickly pear (Opuntia humifusa) in the above photo. There is still more work to do, however, as illustrated by this attractively scenic, yet unfortunately exotic Persian silktree (Albizia julibrissin) still remaining on the parcel – emblematic of Man’s pervasive alterations in even the most unique of landscapes.

For further reading on the sand prairies of the Southeast Lowlands, I recommend the excellent article, “A Prairie in the Swamp”, by A. J. Hendershott and this blog entry by the ever-eloquent author of Ozark Highlands of Missouri. In the meantime, so as not to disappoint the botanists who may stumble upon this silly post, I leave you with a few photographs of some of the wildflowers I saw during my visits. I consider the plant in the first photograph to be camphorweed (Heterotheca sp., either camporum or subaxillaris), frequntly associated with sandy soils in southern Missouri (especially the Southeast Lowlands). My colleague James informs me the second plant is plains puccoon (Lithospermum caroliniense), another sandy soil associate found primarily in the Lowlands and distinguished from the much more common L. canescens by its robustness and rougher pubescence. Both of these species were common near the perimeter of the barren sand areas and nearby. The third plant appears to be spotted beebalm (Monarda punctata) (my thanks to michael for the ID). It was confined, as far as I could tell, to a small area in a swale (moister?) away from the barren sand. This plant, a clump-forming perennial that prefers prairies and open sandy soils, is apparently not common in Missouri, having been found primarily in a few eastern counties adjacent to the Mississippi River.