No. 9 November 2000
So, You Have Never Looked Closely at a Moss or Liverwort?
By Tessa Carrick
If you would enjoy peering through a hand lens at the teeth along the edge of the leaves of a minute moss or working out the structure of a tiny leafy liverwort, then come along and join the informal WWT bryophyte group. Many mosses and leafy liverworts are extremely beautiful when looked at closely. And, there’s nothing like being able mutter incantations of their names – Thuidium tamariscinum, Fissidens taxifolius, Frullania diliata or Plagiochilaporelloides. Everyone is welcome.
The group sprang up out of the one-day introductory mosses and liverworts course last spring. None of the group is really expert – indeed, most are complete beginners but some are a bit more knowledgeable and have more time to follow things up than others.
What do we do? We’ve visited Chaddesley Woods and Hartlebury Common and have plans for a New Year trip to the Malvern area. We’ve also arranged an indoor day so that we can work together identifying species. There’s a serious side to our work, because bryophytes are very much under-recorded in Worcestershire. Even records of common species are useful and slowly we hope to build up our confidence so we can identify more unusual species.
Our outings so far have involved looking intensively at bryophytes for the morning, a picnic lunchand then a general walk around the site for those who want to stay.
Several people have also joined in activities of the Border Bryologists organised by Mark Lawley from Ludlow and have attended bryophyte Field Studies Council courses. With Mark and his fellow Border Bryologists we’ve visited Hanley Dingle and Hunthouse Wood. We hope that we’ll slowly build up expertise as a group and will help each other through those despondent feelings that we’re not making any progress.
In March, there will be another introductory day which is nearly fully booked.
If you are interested in getting to know a new group of organisms, come along and join us. Youmight soon find yourself one of Worcestershire’s main moss and liverwort specialists!
Enquiries to: Tessa Carrick, E-mail tessa.carrick@care4free.net
Bryophytes from Hunthouse Wood 5th November 2000
Liverworts
Conocephalum conicum
Frullania dilatata
Leiocolea turbinata
Lophocolea bidentata
Lophocolea heterophylla
Metzgeria fruticulosa
Metzgeria furcata
Metzgeria termperata
Pellia endiviifolia
Pellia epiphylla
Plagiochila asplenoides
Plagiochila porelloides
Mosses
Amblystegium serpens
Atrichum undulatum
Brachythecium rutabulum
Bryum capillare
Bryum subelegans
Calliergonella cuspidata
Ceratodon purpureus
Cyrriphyllum piliferum
Cratoneuron filicinum
Dicranella heteromalla
Dicranoweisia cirrata
Dicranum scoparium
Eurhynchium hians
Eurhynchium praelongum
Fissidens bryoides
Fissidens taxifolius
Hypnum andoi
Hypnum cupressiforme
Isothecium myosuroides
Mnium hornum
Orthotrichum affine
Plagiomnium undulatum
Plagiothecium succulentum
Pohlia nutans
Pseudotaxiphyllum elegans
Rhizomnium punctatum
Rhynchostegium riparoides
Rhytidiadelphus squarrosus
Scleropodium purum
Tetraphis pellucida
Thamnobryum alopecurum
Thuidium tamariscinum
Zygodon conoideus
A New Mammals Atlas for Worcestershire?
By Harry Green
A few months ago Shaun Micklewright contacted me to say that he would be keen to play a leading role in undertaking work leading to a Mammal Atlas for Worcestershire. Great! Following on from that I hope we can start work in 2001 – more details in the April 2001 issue of Worcestershire Record. Meanwhile, here follows a little background information.
Recorders may remember that I showed overheads of Worcestershire mammal distribution at the Annual meeting of the Worcs BRC in March 1999 which had been prepared in 1982 from work done by BRC volunteers and staff (employed under the government’s job creation scheme of the time). The maps had been laboriously prepared by hand and had fortunately been hoarded by John Meiklejohn after the WBRC had lost funding and support. Illustrations for a publication had also been prepared. Four of the maps were printed in Worcestershire Record No 6 April 1999 with my response to an article by Digby Wood who had reached the unhappy conclusion after the March meeting that the tetrad mammal maps were of little use. In some respects he was correct, in others less so, as I stated in the article. The maps showed so few dots for some common species (especially mice) that the maps were almost meaningless in tetrad context though useful in the national hectad context. Conversely, moles had been recorded in virtually every tetrad in the county giving a truer picture of their distribution.
I have long been unhappy that so much effort was expended in 1982 without published results. Hopefully we can build on these efforts. I think that because of the long gap since the 1982 maps were prepared, that a simple up-date is useless – many things have changed. For example, deer (especially muntjac) have increased, and moles have probably declined. Hares are now scarce but badgers more abundant. Polecats and otters have returned.. Mink may be declining. Water voles have nearly vanished. Bats are in a bad way. Therefore it makes sense to start again but refer back to the earlier maps and information in the eventual publication. Johnny Birks has suggested we compile a ten-year atlas 1996 to 2005. This means we can make use of information on recent changes and have five years of intensive surveying ahead of us.
We should be very interested to hear your comments and ideas on this project including offers of help!
| BTO Surveys
By Harry Green, BTO Regional Representative for Worcestershire |
 |
Breeding Waders of Wet Meadows Survey – 2001
This is a repeat of the survey carried out in 1982. The aim is to assess changes in breeding wader numbers on wet grassland in the last 19 years, thereby indicating changes in the quality of this important habitat. The primary objective is to survey the same sites as in 1982. In addition to also survey any new wet grasslands have appeared since then. Most of the Worcestershire sites are on the Avon and Severn flood plains, with a few in the Teme valley and near Kidderminster.
Surveyors will be provided with a map showing the boundaries of the site and it is important to cover all of that area to produce a result comparable with 1982. The survey method is to visit the area on three occasions between mid-April and the end of June, with the visits about two weeks apart. Ideal dates are first between 14-30 April, second between 1-21 May, and third between 22nd May and 24th June. Each part of the area is to be visited and waders seen marked on the map using the codes given in the survey instructions. Although the prime targets are waders, surveyors are asked to count ducks and note and yellow wagtails or meadow pipits.
Full instructions and recording forms are provided.
If you would like to take part in this survey please contact me as soon as possible. I need to tell BTO what areas I can cover/not cover by end of February.
The BTO/JNCC Winter Farmland Bird Survey is now in its second of three winters and we have improved coverage with 18 of possible 58 1×1 km squares now being surveyed. These squares are mainly those randomly selected originally for the Breeding Bird Survey or Wintering skylark survey. This is a field by field survey and if anyone would like to participate next winter please let me know.
Breeding Bird Survey
Once again I thought we would hit the jackpot with all of our 51 1×1 km squares surveyed. We nearly did so with only one square not surveyed, although in two other squares only there was only one visit instead of two, due to bad weather. This important survey now provides the basic on-going monitoring system for many bird species. The methodology has been described in previous numbers of the Worcestershire Record. If you would like to take part please let me know.
Peregrine Survey 2001
This is very similar in organisation to the 1991 survey and is organised by BTO Scotland and mainly carried out by specialist raptor groups. We have very few breeding peregrines in Worcestershire but if any reader wishes to pass on any information to me it will of course be treated in confidence.
 |
Hawfinches
I have received a request for information on this elusive species via the RSPB.. There is concern that it is declining but there is little information available and hawfinches are not covered by any of the monitoring schemes. I know they did, perhaps still do, occur in small numbers, especially in west Worcestershire. If anyone can provide any information about past and present places where they occur I should be pleased to hear from you. |
Garden Birdwatch
Nationally about 15,000 people now undertake this survey – I think about 400 in Worcestershire. This vast sample is providing fascinating information on the variation in bird numbers and species in gardens through the year, and is becoming another useful monitoring system.
An offshoot, the Garden BirdWatch Breeding Birds Survey 2000, is also providing interesting new data with, for the first time, estimates of the numbers of birds breeding in gardens throughout the country. First estimates suggest that 17 millions pairs of birds breed in gardens! So some previous national estimates of numbers in the whole country are probably too low! There are far more birds in towns, suburbs and villages, of a small ranges of species, than in the farmed countryside!
If you would like to take part in this survey contact Garden BirdWatch, British Trust for Ornithology, The Nunnery, Thetford. Norfolk, IP24 2PU. Tel 01842 750050. Or look at the BTO web site: http://www.bto.org. Or contact me.
Recording Day Grimley Brick Pit (North) – 29th July 2000
Compiled By Harry Green
About 12 recorders attended. The most striking organisms of the day were flies – true Diptera. Mick Blythe was in his element and collected several month’s microscope work within a couple of hours. Thus, most of this report is of his work. Mosquitos were abundant and one of our recorders had to retire , bitten, and go home to apply antidotes. Recovery satisfactory!
Grimley Brick Pit North is adjacent to the River Severn and floods is winter. It consists mainly of willow woodland and scrub of different ages and densitys with a lot of fallen trees in places. On the landward side there are shallow muddy pools. The current and historical plant list is long with many interesting species, some of which may have disappeared with willow shading and, in places, extensive invasion by Himalayan Balsam which during our visit formed a ‘forest’ about 3 metres tall!
Main groups recorded were invertebrates, and bryophytes. J Meiklejohn kept a list of plants he noticed but this is incomplete.
DIPTERA – M Blythe
SO 842613 The River Bank Path. An overgrown path along the river bank fringed with rank stinging nettles and patches of tall Himalayan Balsam. Several stretches shaded by tall trees. Followed by the deeply shaded woodland beyond with an understorey of stunted Himalayan Balsam less than 2 m. tall.
Cylindrotomidae
Cylindrotoma distinctissima (Meigen, 1818)
5/8/00. My specimens 1014 (male), 1015 (female). Identified from Coe (1950).
Diadocidiidae
Diadocidia ferruginosa (Meigen, 1830)
5/8/00. My specimen 1012 (male, spirit specimen). Identified from Hutson et al (1980)
Keroplatidae
Macrocera centralis Meigen, 1818
12/8/00. My specimens 943 (male). 17/8/00. 940 (female). Deep shade of trees amongst Himalayan Balsam understorey. Identified from Hutson et al (1980).
Macrocera stigmoides Edwards, 1925
17/8/00. My specimen 941 (female). Identified from Hutson et al (1980).
Anisopodidae
Sylvicola cinctus (Fabricius, 1787)
17/8/00. My specimens 861, 863 (male), 862 (female). Identified from Freeman (1950).
Culicidae
It was difficult to overlook the mosquitoes at Grimley!
Aedes annulipes (Meigen, 1830) [A local but widespread species- adults need mammalian blood – we now know that for a fact!].
29/7/00. My specimen 789. 5/8/00. My specimens 783-787, 791-792 Many, many others examined! All female and very bloodthirsty. The overwhelming majority of the adult mosquitoes on the site at this time appeared to be of this species. According to Snow it can be difficult to distinguish in the female from Aedes cantans. However the key characters in the fresh specimens seemed clear enough. Unfortunately no males were found. Identified from Snow (1990).
Aedes geniculatus (Olivier, 1791)
29/7/00. My specimens 790 (female). 17/8/00. 864 (male). Deep shade of trees near the river bank. Identified from Snow (1990).
Aedes rusticus (Rossi, 1790)
29/7/00. My specimen 788 (female). Shade near the river bank. Identified from Snow (1990).
Anopheles claviger (Meigen, 1804)
5/8/00. My specimens 793 (male), 796 (female). Deep shade under trees. Identified from Snow (1990).
Anopheles plumbeus Stephens, 1828
5/8/00. My specimen 797 (female). Deep shade under trees. Identified from Snow (1990). A tree-hole breeding species.
Culex pipiens Linnaeus, 1758
5/8/00. My specimens 794, 795 (male). Deep shade under trees. Identified from Snow (1990).
Culiseta annulata (Schrank, 1776)
24/8/00. My specimens 935, 936 (male), 939 (female). Identified from Snow (1990).
Chironomidae
Chironomus plumosus (Linnaeus, 1758)
24/8/00. My specimen 944 (male). Identified from Pinder (1978).
Other Chironomidae numerous of course, but I haven’t got back into them yet.
Rhagionidae
Chrysopilus asiliformis (Preyssler, 1791).
5/8/00. My specimen 747 (female). Identified from Oldroyd (1969). In Oldroyd this species is C. aureus (Meigen, 1804).
Rhagio lineola Fabricius, 1794.
5/8/00. My specimen 748 (female). Found lying dead on a leaf. Identified from Oldroyd (1969).
Stratiomyidae
Beris geniculata Haliday, 1830.
29/7/00. My specimen 735 (female). Identified from Oldroyd (1969).
Asilidae
IDENTIFICATION TO BE CONFIRMED. I think I shall have to wait for British Soldierflies and their Allies for final confirmation. Oldroyd is particularly dubious on Asilidae. However I have ordered Verrall from the library.
Dioctria linearis (Fabricius, 1787)
5/8/00. My specimens 744, 745, 746 (female). Identified from Oldroyd (1969).
Hybotidae
Bicellaria vana Collin, 1926.
12/8/00. My specimen 806 (male). Identified from Collin (1961).
Hybos culiciformis (Fabricius, 1775) 12/8/00. My specimen 805 (male). Identified from Collin (1961).
Hybos femoratus (Müller, 1776) 5/8/00. My specimen 773 (male). 24/8/00. 933 (female) Deep shade of trees. Identified from Collin (1961) and Chvála (1983).
Ocydromia glabricula (Fallén, 1816)
5/8/00. My specimen 749 (male), 772, 774 (female). Several others taken. Identified from Collin (1961) and Chvála (1983).
Platypalpus annulipes (Meigen, 1822)
5/8/00. My specimen 802 (female). Deep shade of trees. Identified from Collin (1961).
Platypalpus candicans (Fallén, 1815)
17/8/00. My specimen 852 (female). Identified from Chvála (1983).
Platypalpus maculipes (Meigen, 1822)
12/8/00. My specimen 807 (female). Identified from Collin (1961).
Empididae
Empis (Kritempis) livida Linnaeus, 1758.
5/8/00. My specimen 750 (female). Identified from Collin (1961). Nettles beside the riverside path. Numerous.
Hemerodromia baetica Collin, 1927
17/8/00. My specimen 856 (female). Identified from Collin (1961).
Hilara albiventris von Roser, 1840
5/8/00. My specimens 831 (female), 832 (male). Identified from Chvála (1997) and Collin (1961). Collin records this species only from Herefordshire, especially the Monnow Valley, and Chvála describes it in connection with the European records as “uncommon everywhere”. However it was abundant at this site along the river path.
Hilara rejecta Collin, 1927
17/8/00. My specimens 858 (male), 859 (female). Identified from Collin (1961).
Rhamphomyia (Holoclera) sciarina (Fallén, 1816)
17/8/00. My specimen 857 (male). Identified from Collin (1961).
Dolichopodidae
Argyra leucocephala (Meigen, 1824)
17/8/00. My specimen 902 (male). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca, 1978.
Campsicnemus curvipes (Fallén, 1823)
29/7/00. Male specimen (not retained). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1978). Very numerous.
Campsicnemus scambus (Fallén, 1823)
5/8/00. My specimen 765 (male). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1978). Numerous.
Dolichopus festivus Haliday, 1832
5/8/00. My specimens 768, 770, 771 (male), 781 (female). 12/8/00. My specimen 816 (male). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1978). The most numerous Dolichopus species at this time..
Dolichopus griseipennis Stannius, 1831
17/8/00. My specimens 888, 889 (male). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1978).
Dolichopus latilimbatus Macquart, 1827
17/8/00. My specimen 890 (male). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1978). The name is erroneously latelimbatus in d’Assis Fonseca.
Dolichopus ungulatus (Linnaeus, 1758)
5/8/00. My specimen 769 (male). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1978).
Poecilobothrus nobilitatus (Linnaeus, 1767)
29/7/00. Abundant throughout the site. No specimens captured as identification was obvious.
Rhaphium appendiculatum Zetterstedt, 1849.
5/8/00. My specimen 761 (male). 12/8/00. Damaged male not retained. Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1978). This species is commoner than R. caliginosum on the site.
Rhaphium caliginosum Meigen, 1824
5/8/00. My specimen 778 (male). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1978).
Sciapus platypterus (Fabricius, 1805)
29/7/00. My specimen 739 (female). 5/8/00. My specimens 762, 763 (female). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1978).
Sybistroma obscurellum (Fallén, 1823).
29/7/00. My specimen 737 (female). 5/8/00. My specimen 764 (female). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1978).
NOTE: This species is Hypophyllus obscurellus in d’Assis Fonseca. My previous record from the Wyre Forest, August 1999, under that name needs correction (if indeed I sent it!).
Syntormon denticulatum (Zetterstedt, 1843)
12/8/00. My specimens 814, 815 (female). 24/8/00 930 (male), 931 (female). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1978). This species is commoner than S. pallipes on the site.
Syntormon pallipes (Fabricius, 1794)
24/8/00. My specimen 929 (male). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1978)
Teuchophorus calcaratus (Macquart, 1827)
29/7/00. My specimens 732, 733 (male). 5/8/00. My specimens 776 (male), 777 (female presumed to be of this species by association with the males.) Collected around low vegetation beside the riverside path. Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1978). Scarce and local.
Lonchopteridae
Lonchoptera lutea Panzer, 1809
29/7/00. Numerous, varying from light to very dark in colour. Several males and females (not retained) identified from Smith (1969). Other Lonchoptera species looked for but not found.
Syrphidae
Baccha sp.
12/8/00. My specimens 818 (female). 24/8/00. 919 (male). According to Stubbs (1983) there are two species of Baccha which are morphologically inseparable in the female but dubiously separable in the male. He suggests that all Baccha are reported as “Baccha sp.” On the other hand Chandler in the current check list (Chandler, 1998) goes for the one-species theory and gives it the priority name Baccha elongata (Fabricius, 1775). My male appears to be the true elongata from Stubbs’ key, for what that is worth.
Chalcosyrphus (Xylotina) nemorum (Fabricius, 1805)
5/8/00. My specimen 756 (male). Identified from Stubbs (1983). Uncommon.
Cheilosia pagana (Meigen, 1822)
5/8/00. My specimen 755 (female). 12/8/00. 817 (male). Identified from Stubbs (1983).
Cheilosia vulpina (Meigen, 1822)
24/8/00. My specimen 1007 (female). Identified from Stubbs (1983).
Chrysogaster solstitialis (Fallén, 1817)
5/8/00. My specimens 753, 754 (male). Identified from Stubbs (1983).
Episyrphus balteatus (De Geer, 1776)
29/7/00 and 5/8/00. Specimens not captured as the species is unmistakeable.
Eristalis pertinax (Scopoli, 1763).
5/8/00. My specimen 751 (male). Several others seen. Identified from Stubbs (1983). Feeding on Heracleum flowers.
Eupeodes luniger (Meigen, 1822)
24/8/00. My specimen 918 (male). Identified from Stubbs (1983).
Helophilus pendulus (Linnaeus, 1758)
5/8/00. My specimen 757 (female). Others seen but not caught. Identified from Stubbs (1983).
Melanostoma scalare (Fabricius, 1794)
5/8/00. My specimen 800 (female). Many others seen. Identified from Stubbs (1983).
Neoascia podagrica (Fabricius, 1775)
12/8/00. My specimen 819 (female). Identified from Stubbs (1983) and Plant (1999).
Platycheirus albimanus (Fabricius, 1781)
5/8/00. My specimen 752 (female). Identified from Stubbs (1996).
Rhingia campestris Meigen, 1822
5/8/00. My specimen 760 (male). Several others seen. Identified from Stubbs (1983).
Syrphus ribesii (Linnaeus, 1758)
24/8/00. My specimen 917 (male). Identified from Stubbs (1983).
Xylota segnis (Linnaeus, 1758)
5/8/00. My specimens 758, 759 (female). Identified from Stubbs (1983). Numerous, sunning themselves on leaves.
Pipunculidae
Cephalops (Cephalops) aeneus Fallén, 1810
17/8/00. My specimen 989 (male). Identified from Coe (1966) and Von der Dunk (1997).
Cephalops (Semicephalops) semifumosus (Kowarz, 1887)
24/8/00. My specimens 988 (female), 1016 (male). Identified from Coe (1966) and Von der Dunk (1997). IDENTIFICATION TO BE CONFIRMED.
Chalarus pughi Coe, 1966.
17/8/00. My specimen 990 (female). Identified from Coe (1966) and Von der Dunk (1997).
Pipunculus campestris Latreille, 1802.
24/8/00. My specimen 1019 (male). Identified from Coe (1966) and Von der Dunk (1997).
Ulidiidae
Homalocephala albitarsis Zetterstedt, 1838
5/8/00. My specimen 799 (female). Identified from Clements (1990). This is the species which used to be called H. bipunctata (Loew, 1854). Confusingly the species which used to be called H. albitarsis is now H. biumbrata (Wahlberg, 1838).
Tephritidae
Philophylla caesio (Harris, 1780)
5/8/00. My specimen 798 (female). Identified from White (1988). This species is Myoleja caesio in White.
Lauxaniidae
Calliopum aeneum (Fallén, 1820)
17/8/00. My specimen 880 (female). Identified from Collin (1948).
Lyciella decipiens (Loew, 1847)
12/8/00. My specimen 808 (male). 17/8/00. 882 (male) Identified from Collin (1948).
Lyciella rorida (Fallén, 1820)
5/8/00. My specimens 811 (female). Deep tree shade. 12/8/00. 809 (female). Identified from Collin (1948)
Minettia longipennis (Fabricius, 1794)
17/8/00. My specimen 881 (female). Identified from Collin (1948)
Tricholauxania praeusta (Fallén, 1820)
5/8/00. My specimen 810 (female). Deep shade of trees. Identified from Collin (1948).
Dryomyzidae
Neuroctena anilis (Fallén, 1820)
5/8/00. My specimen 779 (male). Deep shade of trees. Identified from Steyskal (1957). Previously listed as Dryomyza anilis.
Sciomyzidae
Tetanocera ferruginea Fallén, 1820
24/8/00. My specimen 934 (female). Identified from Rozkosný (1984).
Tetanocera hyalipennis von Roser, 1840
17/8/00. My specimen 878 (male). Identified from Rozkosný (1984).
Sepsidae
Sepsis fulgens Meigen, 1826.
17/8/00. My specimen 886 (male). Identified from Pont (1979).
Sepsis orthocnemis Frey, 1908.
17/8/00. My specimen 1020 (male). Identified from Pont (1979).
Themira leachi (Meigen, 1826)
17/8/00. My specimen 1022 (female). Identified from Pont (1979).
Agromyzidae
Agromyza mobilis Meigen, 1830
5/8/00. My specimen 1004 (male). Identified from Spencer (1972 and 1976).
Chromatomyia milii (Kaltenbach, 1864)
24/8/00. My specimens 1002, 1003 (male). Identified from Spencer (1972 and 1976). This species is Phytomyza milii in Spencer.
Liriomyza flaveola (Fallén, 1823)
17/8/00. My specimens 1000, 1001 (female). Identified from Spencer (1972 and 1976).
Opomyzidae
Opomyza florum (Fabricius, 1794)
29/7/00 Numerous. No specimens retained. Identification checked in Drake (1993).
Opomyza germinationis (Linnaeus, 1758)
29/7/00. Male specimen (not retained). Identified from Drake (1993).
Asteiidae
Asteia amoena Meigen, 1830
12/8/00. My specimen 851 (male). Identified from Chandler (1978).
Chloropidae
Tricimba (Tricimba) lineella (Fallén, 1820)
12/8/00. My specimen 850 (female). Identified from Collin (1946).
Chlorops species were numerous but I have no literature for identifying them.
Heleomyzidae
Suillia variegata (Loew, 1862)
5/8/00. My specimens 782 (female). 17/8/00. 905 (female). Deep shade beneath trees. Identified from Withers (1987).
Sphaeroceridae
Leptocera (Leptocera) fontinalis (Fallén, 1826)
29/7/00. My specimens 842 (female). 5/8/00. 845, 846 (female) Deep shade beneath trees. Identified from Pitkin (1988) and Rohácek (1982). Numerous. Opacifons coxata (Stenhammar, 1855)
29/7/00. My specimen 843 (female). 17/8/00 865 (male) Deep shade beneath trees. Identified from Pitkin (1988). Numerous.
Campichoetidae
Campichoeta punctum (Meigen, 1830)
17/8/00. My specimen 879 (female). Identified from Chandler (1986).
Drosophilidae
Drosophila (Drosophila) phalerata Meigen, 1830.
5/8/00. My specimen 839 (male). 12/8/00. 820 (female). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1965) and Shorrocks (1972). A fungus-feeding woodland species. Drosophila (Lordiphosa) andalusiaca Strobl, 1906
27/8/00. My specimens 897, 898, 899 (female). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1965).
Drosophila (Lordiphosa) fenestrarum Fallén, 1823
29/7/00. My specimen 833 (female). 5/8/00. 801, 841 (female). 12/8/00. 821 (male). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1965) with help from Shorrocks (1972).
Scaptomyza (Scaptomyza) flava (Fallén, 1823)
5/8/00. My specimen 840 (female). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1965).
Scaptomyza (Parascaptomyza) pallida (Zetterstedt, 1847)
29/7/00. No specimens retained. Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1965).
Ephydridae
Ditrichophora calceata (Meigen, 1830)
17/8/00. My specimens 874, 875, 876. 24/8/00. specimen 1006 (female). Identified from Collin (1943). Confirmed from Martin Drake’s MS keys. Numerous. Ditrichophora palliditarsis(Becker, 1896)
17/8/00. My specimens 872, 1021, 1023. Identified from Collin (1943) and Martin Drake’s MS keys.
Gymnoclasiopa plumosa (Fallén, 1823)
17/8/00. My specimens 873, 877 (female), 901 (male). Identified from Collin (1943). Numerous.
Parydra coarctata (Fallén, 1813)
24/8/00. My specimen 1005 (male). Identified from MS keys from Martin Drake.
Hydrellia and Notiphila species were present but none were collected.
Scathophagidae
Norellisoma spinimanum (Fallén, 1819)
5/8/00. My specimen 743 (male). 12/8/00. 894 (male). Identified from Collin (1958). I have spelt the name as in Collin and in the current check list (Chandler, 1998), but Nelson and Sifner (2000) who have recently reviewed the genus spell the name N. spinimana and I can’t help thinking they are right.
Scathophaga stercoraria (Linnaeus, 1758)
17/8/00. Two females captured but not retained. Identified from Collin (1958).
Muscidae
Eudasyphora cyanella (Meigen, 1826)
24/8/00. My specimen 920 (female). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1968).
Graphomya maculata (Scopoli, 1763)
24/8/00. My specimen 921 (male). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1968).
Morellia simplex (Loew, 1857)
24/8/00. My specimen 922 (female). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1968).
Muscina levida (Harris, 1780)
24/8/00. My specimen 923 (male). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1968). This species is M. assimilis (Fallén, 1823) in d’Assis Fonseca..
Polietes lardarius (Fabricius, 1781)
24/8/00. My specimen 928 (male). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1968).
Calliphoridae
Calliphora vomitoria (Linnaeus, 1758)
17/8/00. My specimen 887 (male). Basking on leaves. Identified from Erzinçlioglu (1996) and Rognes (1991). Two other specimens identified but not retained.
Lucilia ampullacea Villeneuve, 1922
24/8/00. My specimen 927 (male). Identified from Rognes (1991). Uncommon species according to van Emden.
Lucilia caesar (Linnaeus, 1758)
24/8/00. My specimens 924 (female), 925, 926 (male). Identified from Rognes (1991). Common basking on leaves.
Pollenia species identified by David Green:
Pollenia angustigena (male) Pollenia pediculata (female) Pollenia labialis (female
Sarcophagidae
Sarcophaga dissimilis Meigan (male) det. David Green
Tachinidae
Epicampocera succinata (Meigen, 1824)
24/8/00. My specimen 956 (female). Identified from Belshaw (1993).
Tachina fera (Linnaeus, 1761)
24/8/00. My specimen 916 (female). Heracleum flower on the edge of the wood. Identified from Belshaw (1993). Previously Echinomya fera.
Siphona species also present but not identified.
SO 841 613 Grimley Brick Pits.
Batches 90, 100. The First Mud Pool. A consolidated pool bottom of firm, wet mud coated with Lemna. Very sparsely vegetated but with tall, rank, surrounding vegetation. Extensively sheltered by tall trees but with good light penetration.
Syrphidae
Episyrphus balteatus (De Geer, 1776)
12/8/00. Identified by inspection.
Sphaeroceridae
Leptocera (Leptocera) fontinalis (Fallén, 1826)
5/8/00. Several males and females (not retained) identified from Pitkin (1988). Collected by sweeping just above the mud.
Drosophilidae
Drosophila (Lordiphosa) fenestrarum Fallén, 1823
5/8/00. My specimen 823 (male). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1965).
Batch 93. The Himalayan Forest. An extensive forest of Himalayan Balsam, growing far higher than head height. Wet but not boggy underfoot with a considerable amount of dead, sodden timber. Flies were pooted directly from the leaves.
Bibionidae
Dilophus febrilis (Linnaeus, 1758)
29/7/00. My specimen 742 (female). Identified from Freeman and Lane (1985).
Lonchopteridae
Lonchoptera lutea Panzer, 1809
29/7/00. One female collected (not retained). Identified from Smith (1969).
Sphaeroceridae
Leptocera (Leptocera) fontinalis (Fallén, 1826)
29/7/00. Female specimen not retained. Identified from Pitkin, 1988.
Drosophilidae
Drosophila (Lordiphosa) fenestrarum Fallén, 1823
29/7/00. My specimen 826 (male). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1965).
Drosophila (Lordiphosa) andalusiaca Strobl, 1906
29/7/00. My specimens 827, 828, 829 (female). 830 (male) is tentatively identified by association with the females. Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1965) and Shorrocks (1972). A rare species according to Shorrocks but this may be because it is not attracted to Drosophila traps.
SO 840 614 Grimley Brick Pits.
Batch 91. The Mint Clearing. A further consolidated pool bed, thick with growing mint, much trodden down by the rest of the party. Heavily sheltered by trees but with sunlight reaching through to the ground.
Ceratopogonidae
A species of Atrichopogon was present. These are very difficult to identify.
Dolichopodidae
Argyra leucocephala (Meigen, 1824)
29/7/00. My specimen 736 (female). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1978).
Campsicnemus curvipes (Fallén, 1823)
12/8/00. Abundant at this location. No specimens retained as identification was obvious.
Campsicnemus scambus (Fallén, 1823)
12/8/00. My specimen 813 (male). Abundant at this location. Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1978).
Poecilobothrus nobilitatus (Linnaeus, 1767)
29/7/00. Numerous. No specimens retained as identification was obvious.
Syrphidae
Episyrphus balteatus (De Geer, 1776)
29/7/00. Numerous. No specimens caught as identification was obvious.
Syrphus torvus Osten Sacken, 1875
29/7/00. My specimen 734 (male). Identified from Stubbs (1993).
Sciomyzidae
Sepedon spinipes (Scopoli, 1763)
29/7/00. My specimen 730 (female). Identified from Rozkosný (1984).
Tetanocera ferruginea Fallén, 1820.
29/7/00. My specimen 731 (female). Identified from Rozkosný (1984).
Sepsidae
Sepsis punctum (Fabricius, 1794)
29/7/00. My specimen 910 (male). Identified from Pont (1979).
Themira annulipes (Meigen, 1826)
29/7/00. My specimen 909 (female). Identified from Pont (1979).
Chloropidae
Elachiptera cornuta (Fallén, 1820)
29/7/00. My specimen 907 (female). Identified from Collin (1945).
Elachiptera tuberculifera (Corti, 1909)
29/7/00. My specimen 908 (male). Identified from Collin (1945).
Sphaeroceridae
Opacifons coxata (Stenhammar, 1855)
29/7/00. Male not retained. Identified from Pitkin (1988).
Drosophilidae
Drosophila (Lordiphosa) fenestrarum Fallén, 1823
12/8/00. My specimen 825 (male). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1965).
Scaptomyza (Scaptomyza) flava (Fallén, 1823)
12/8/00. My specimen 824 (female). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1965).
Ephydridae
Coenia curvicauda (Meigen, 1830)
29/7/00. My specimen 906 (female). Identified from Martin Drake’s MS keys..
ORDER PSOCOPTERA
Ectopsocus briggsi McLachan, 1899.
29/7/00. Numerous. Female identified from New (1974).
SO 839 615 Grimley Brick Pits..
Batch 92. The Sedge. An extensive stand of tall Sedge. Sheltered but little shaded by surrounding trees.
Chironomidae
Psectrotanypus varius (Fabricius, 1787)
29/7/00. My specimen 1010 (male; spirit storage). Identified from Pinder (1978).
Dolichopodidae
Campsicnemus curvipes (Fallén, 1823)
29/7/00 Male and female (not retained). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1978).
Dolichopus griseipennis Stannius, 1831
29/7/00 My specimen 740 (female). Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1978).
Lonchopteridae
Lonchoptera lutea Panzer, 1809
29/7/00 Female specimen (not retained). Identified from Smith (1969). Abundant in the sedge.
Sciomyzidae
Sepedon spinipes (Scopoli, 1763)
29/7/00 My specimen 729 (male). Identified from Rozkosný (1984).
Tetanocera ferruginea Fallén, 1820.
29/7/00 My specimen 728 (female). Identified from Rozkosný (1984).
Sepsidae
Sepsis punctum (Fabricius, 1794)
29/7/00. Two male specimens not retained. Identified from Pont (1979).
Opomyzidae
Opomyza florum (Fabricius, 1794)
29/7/00 Present in vast numbers throughout the area but particularly in the sedge at this location. (Note: This species first appeared in large numbers in Feckenham Wylde Moor the previous week.) No specimens retained. Identification checked in Drake (1993).
Chloropidae
Elachiptera cornuta (Fallén, 1820)
29/7/00. My specimen 1024. Identified from Collin, 1945.
Sphaeroceridae
Opacifrons coxata (Stenhammar, 1855)
29/7/00. My specimens 834, 835, 837 (female), 836, 838 (male). Identified from Pitkin (1988). Abundant.
Drosophilidae
Scaptomyza (Parascaptomyza) pallida (Zetterstedt, 1847)
29/7/00. Female not retained. Identified from d’Assis Fonseca (1978).
Ephydridae
Coenia curvicauda (Meigen, 1830)
29/7/00. My specimen 913 (female). Identified from Martin Drake’s MS keys..
ORDER PSOCOPTERA
Peripsocus subfasciatus (Rambur, 1842)
29/7/00. A small colony from the deeply furrowed bark of a tree. Two specimens examined, both female. Identified from New (1974).
Additions received 15 Nov 2000
SO 842 613 Riverside path. Grimley Brick Pits.
Limoniidae
Ilisia maculata (Meigen, 1804)
17/8/00. My specimen 1170 (male). Identified from Coe (1950).
Pipunculidae
Cephalops semifumosus (Kowarz, 1887)
17/8/00. My specimen 1047 (male). The riverside path, Grimley Brick Pits. Identity confirmed (at last!) from Ackland (1993).
Agromyzidae
Phytoliriomyza melampyga (Loew, 1869)
29/7/00. My specimen 1025 (male). The Balsam Forest, Grimley Brick Pits. Identified from Spencer (1976). I am not skilled with agromyzids and am doing a follow-up investigation of them this winter. But in view of the urgency…
Ephydridae
Now that I have keys to Ephydridae I am sorry I didn’t collect lots of them.
Coenia palustris (Meigen, 1830)
29/7/00. My specimen 911 (male). The black sedge area. Identified from Martin Drake’s MS keys.
Parydra coarctata (Fallén, 1813)
24/8/00. My specimen 1005. The riverside path, Grimley Brick Pits. Identified from Martin Drake’s MS keys and Becker (1926).
References
 |
Belshaw R. (1993) Tachinid Flies. Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects 10 (4a(i)); R. ent. Soc. Lond. |
|
Chandler, P. J. (1978) A revision of the British Asteiidae (Diptera) including two additions to the British list. Proceedings and Transactions of the British Entomological and Natural History Society 11: 23-34. |
|
Chandler P. J. (1986). The British species of Diastata Meigen and Campichoeta Macquart (Diptera: Drosophiloidea). Proceedings and Transactions of the British entomological and natural history Society 19: 9-16. |
|
Chandler P. (ed) (1998) Checklists of Insects of the British Isles (New Series) Part 1: Diptera. Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects 12, R. ent. Soc. Lond. |
|
Chvála, M. (1975). The Tachydromiinae (Dipt: Empididae) of Fennoscandia and Denmark. Fauna Entomologica Scandinavica 3. |
|
Chvála, M. (1997). A revision of the European species of the Hilara flavipes – group (Diptera, Empididae), with new synonymies and description of a new species. Studia Dipterologica 4(2): 463-472. |
|
Clements, D. K. 1990. Provisional keys to the Otitidae and Platystomatidae of the British Isles. Dipterist’s Digest 6: 32-41. |
|
Coe R.L. (1950) Family Tipulidae. In Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects 9: (1). R. ent. Soc. Lond. |
|
Collin J.E. (1946). The British Genera and Species of Oscinellinae. Trans. R. ent. Soc. Lond. 97: 117-48. |
|
Collin J. E. (1948). A Short Synopsis of the British Sapromyzidae (Diptera). Trans. R. ent. Soc. Lond. 99: 225-42. |
|
Collin J.E. (1958). A Short Synopsis of the British Scatophagidae (Diptera). Trans. Soc. Brit. Ent. 13: 37-56. |
|
Colyer C. N. and Hammond C. O. (1968) Flies of the British Isles. Second Edition. Warne & Co. |
|
D’Assis Fonseca E. C. M. (1965). A Short Key to the British Drosophilidae (Diptera) including a new species of Amiota. Trans. Soc. Brit. Ent. 16 (X): 233-244. |
|
D’Assis Fonseca E. C. M. (1968). Diptera Cyclorrhapha Calyptrata Section (b) Muscidae. Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects 10(4b). R. ent. Soc. Lond. |
|
D’Assis Fonseca E. C. M. (1978). Diptera: Orthorrhapha: Brachycera: Dolichopodidae. Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects 9(5). R. ent. Soc. Lond. |
|
Drake C. M. (1993). A Review of the British Opomyzidae (Diptera). Br. J. Ent. Nat. Hist. 6: 159-176. |
|
Erzinçlioglu Z. (1996). Blowflies. Naturalists Handbooks 23, Richmond Publishing. |
|
Freeman, P. (1950) Family Anisopodidae (Rhyphidae) in Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects 9: (1). R. ent. Soc. Lond. |
|
Freeman P. and Lane R. P. (1985). Bibionid and Scatopsid Flies. Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects 9 (7). R. ent. Soc. Lond. |
|
Hutson A. M., Ackland D. M. and Kidd L. N. (1980) Mycetophilidae (Bolitophilinae, Ditomyiinae, |
|
Diadocidiinae, Keroplatinae, Sciophilinae and Manotinae) Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects 9 (3). R. ent. Soc. Lond. |
|
Ismay J. W. (1999). The British and Irish Genera of Chloropinae (Dipt: Chloropidae). Entomologist’s mon. Mag. 135 (1): 1-37. |
|
Nelson J. M. and Sifner F. (2000). A redescription of Norellisoma flavicorne (Meigen, 1826) (Dipt, Scathophagidae) with an account of its biology and notes on other members of the genus. Entomologist’s monthly Magazine 136: 31-35. |
|
New, T. R. (1974) Psocoptera. Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects 1 (7). |
|
Oldroyd H. (1969). Diptera Brachycera. Section (a) Tabanoidea and Asiloidea. Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects 9 (4). R. ent. Soc. Lond. |
|
Pinder L.C.V. (1978) A Key to the Adult Males of British Chironomidae. Freshwater Biological Association. |
|
Plant, C. W. (1997). A Key to the Adults of British Lacewings and their Allies. AIDGAP, Field Studies Council. |
|
Plant, C. W. (1999). A test key to European Neascia species. Hoverfly Newsletter 27, p.4 in Bulletin of the Dipterists Forum 47, Feb 1999. |
|
Rognes K. (1991). Blowflies (Diptera, Calliphoridae) of Fennoscandia and Denmark. Fauna Entomologica Scandinavica 24. |
|
Rohácek J. (1982). Revision of the subgenus Leptocera (s.s.) of Europe (Diptera, Sphaeroceridae). Entomologische Abhandlungen Staatlichen Museum für Tierkunde in Dresden 46: 1-44. |
|
Rozkosný, R. (1984) The Sciomyzidae (Diptera) of Fennoscandia and Denmark. Fauna Entomologica Scandinavica 14. |
|
Shorrocks, B. (1972). Invertebrate Types: Drosophila. Ginn & Co., London. |
|
Smith K. G. V. (1969). Diptera Lonchopteridae. Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects 10 (2). R. ent. Soc. Lond. |
|
Snow K. R. (1990). Mosquitoes. Naturalists Handbooks 14, Richmond Publishing |
|
Spencer K. A. (1972) Diptera: Agromyzidae. Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects 10 (5g): R. ent. Soc. Lond. |
|
Spencer, K. A. (1976). The Agromyzidae (Diptera) of Fennoscandia and Denmark. Fauna Entomologica Scandinavica 5. 2 vols. |
|
Steyskal, G. C. (1957). A revision of the family Dryomyzidae (Diptera, Acalyptratae). Papers from the Michigan Academy of Sciences, Arts and Letters 42: 55-68. |
|
Stubbs A.E. (1983). British Hoverflies; an Illustrated Identification Guide. British Entomological and Natural History Society. |
|
Stubbs A.E. (1996). British Hoverflies; Second Supplement. British Entomological and Natural History Society. |
|
Van Emden F. I. (1954). Diptera Cyclorrhapha Calyptrata (i) Section (a) Tachinidae and Calliphoridae. Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects 10 (4a). R. Ent. Soc. Lond. |
|
Von der Dunk, K. (1997). Key to Central European species of Pipunculidae (Diptera). Studia Dipterologica 4(2): 289-335. |
|
White I. M. (1988). Tephritid Flies. Diptera: Tephritidae. Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects 10 (5a). R. ent. Soc. Lond. |
Other Diptera identified by other recorders
Chirosia betuleti Gall on fern Dryopteris felix-mas. (J Meiklejohn)
Stratiomys potamida large soldier fly (GHGreen/GHTrevis)
COLEOPTERA
J Meiklejohn
Agonum assimile
Agonum obscurum
Agonum versutum
Anobium punctatum
Anotylus rugosus
Bembidion dentellum
Calvia 14-guttata
Cercyon sp.
Coccinella 7-punctata
Elaphrus cupreus
Helophorus brevipalpis
Leiopus nebulosus
Loricera pilicornis
Oulema melanopa
Philonthus nigrita
Phyllotreta vittula
Prasocuris junci
Pterostichus cupreus
Pterostichus madidus
Tachinus signatus
HEMIPTERA
Anthocoris nemorum
Coranus subapterus
Corixa affinis
Corixa punctata
Gerris lacustris
Hydrometra stagnorum
Notonecta glauca
Stroggylocephalus agrestis
ODONATA
Enallagma cyathigerum
ORTHOPTERA
Meconema thalassinum
ACARI
Eriophyes laevis inangulis (gall on alder)
CHILOPODA
Lithobius forficatus
ISOPODA
Oniscus asellus
Philoscia muscorum
Porcellio scaber
MOLLUSCA
Derocerus reticulatum
Discus rotundatus
Physa fontinalis
Succinea putris
Trichia hispidus
Trichia striolata
OPILIONES
Dicranopalpus ramosus
Leiobunum rotundum
Oligolophus tridens
HYMENOPTERA
Aculeata
G H Trevis
Bumble bees: Bombus leucorum, B. pascuorum and B. lapidarius
Honey bee: Apis mellifera
Wasps: Two nests seen were common wasp – Vespula vulgaris
SPIDERS
John Partridge
Achaearana lunata *
Bathyphantes gracilis
Clubiona phragmitis *
Erigone atra
Gnathonarium dentatum
Gongylidium rufipes
Lepthyphantes zimmermanni
Nuctunea umbratica
Oedothorax fuscus
Pirata piraticus *
Porhomma pygmaeum
Tetragnatha montana
The * species are new hectad records
In addition two OPILIONES
Oligolophus tridens
Dicranopalpus ramosus
Records from Kevin McGee
LEPIDOPTERA
Butterflies.
SMALL SKIPPER. Thymelicus
sylvestris. 2 along riverside approach path. ESSEX SKIPPER. Thymelicus lineola. 1 possibly photographed along approach path, it will need confirmation or otherwise by ANBSimpson upon return of slide. SADLY NOT. Definitely a Small Skipper.
LARGE WHITE. Pieris brassicae. 2 along approach path.
SMALL WHITE. Pieris rapae. 2 along approach path.
GREEN-VEINED WHITE. Pieris napi. 20+ along path and inside woodland.
PURPLE HAIRSTREAK. Quercusia quercus. 1 up in a riverside oak in the woodland.
SMALL TORTOISESHELL. Aglais urticae. 3 along approach path.
PEACOCK. Inachis io. 10+ at Hemp Agrimony along approach path.
COMMA. Polygonia c-album. 2 at Hemp Agrimony along approach path.
SPECKLED WOOD. Pararge aegeria. 2 at riverside path inside woodland.
GATEKEEPER. Pyronia tithonus. 40+ along approach path.
MEADOW BROWN. Maniola jurtina. 10+ along approach path.
RINGLET. Aphantopus hyperantus. 1 along approach path.
LEPIDOPTERA
Macro Moths.
THE VAPOURER. Orgyia antiqua. 1 male at riverside path inside woodland.
THE VAPOURER. Orgyia antiqua. 1 larva, (fully grown), on Purple Loosestrife inside woodland.
COMMON CARPET. Epirrhoe alternata alternata. 1 photographed along approach path.
LEPIDOPTERA
Pyralidae.
MOTHER OF PEARL. Pleuroptya ruralis. 1 at riverside path inside woodland.
ODONATA.
BANDED DEMOISELLE. Agrion splendens. 20+ at riverside path inside woodland.
EMERALD DAMSELFLY. Lestes sponsa. 2 males amongst sedges inside the woodland.
WHITE-LEGGED DAMSELFLY. Platycnemis pennipes. 2, (male, female), at riverside path inside woodland.
BLUE-TAILED DAMSELFLY. Ischnura elegans. 2 along approach path.
BROWN HAWKER. Aeshna grandis. 1 at riverside in woodland.
COMMON DARTER. Sympetrum striolatum. 3 (imm) along approach path.
COLEOPTERA.
Rhagonycha fulva. (Cantharidae, common). 100+ throughout study area.
Leiopus nebulosus. (Cerambycidae, local). 1 photographed on sedges inside woodland. Specimen with J.Meiklejohn.
Calvia quattuordecimguttata. (Coccinellidae, common). 1 on Flag Iris inside woodland.
Loricera pilicornis. (Carabidae, common). 2 under Alder log inside woodland.
Agonum albipes. (Carabidae, common). 2 under bark of Alder log inside woodland.
Cantharis nigra. (Cantharidae, common). 1 photographed inside woodland. Confirmed by P.F.Whitehead.
Phyllodecta vulgatissima. (Chrysomelidae, local). 1 of about 20 photographed on Willow at riverside. Confirmed by P.F.Whitehead.
HEMIPTERA
Heteroptera.
Dolichonabis limbatus. 1 at riverside path inside woodland.
Deraeocoris ruber. 10+ throughout study area.
Phytocoris ulmi. 1 photographed on Comfrey at riverside. Confirmed by P.F.Whitehead.
Plagiognathus arbustorum. 1 photographed on Comfrey at riverside. Confirmed by P.F.Whitehead.
Calocoris norvegicus. 1 photographed on Comfrey at riverside. Confirmed by P.F.Whitehead.
HEMIPTERA
Homoptera.
Cicadella viridis. 1 at riverside path inside woodland.
ORTHOPTERA
DARK BUSH-CRICKET. Pholidoptera griseoaptera. 1 male at riverside path inside woodland.
HYMENOPTERA
Symphyta.
Xiphydria camelus. 1 photographed on Alder branch inside woodland.
Larva photographed on Flag Iris inside woodland. Could be possible to determine species, (eventually)!
BIRDS
Heron, green woodpecker, great-spotted woodpecker, buzzard, nuthatch, blackcap, chiffchaff.
AMPHIBIAN
SMOOTH NEWT. 1 young individual was under bark of Alder log inside woodland.
FLOWERING PLANTS & FERNS
J Meiklejohn
Aegopodium podagraria
Alnus glutinosa
Angelica sylvestris
Anthriscus sylvestris
Brachypodium sylvaticum
Campanula trachelium
Carduus crispus
Carex acutiformis
Carex riparia
Circaea lutetiana
Crataegus monogyna
Dactylis glomeratus
Elymus caninus
Elytrigia repens
Galium aparine
Galium mollugo
Geranium pratense
Geum urbanum
Glechoma hederacea
Hedera helix
Heracleum sphondylium
Impatiens glandulifera
Iris pseudacorus
Lapsana conununis
Ligustrum vulgare
Lycopus europaeus
Lysimachia vulgaris
Lythrum salicaria
Mentha aquatica
Myosotis scorpioides
Phyllitis scolopendrium
Plantago major
Poa nemoralis
Polygonum cuspidatum
Quercus robur
Ranunculus repens
Rubus sp.
Salix cinerea
Salix fragilis
Salix purpurea
Salix viminalis
Sambucus nigra
Senecio palustris
Silene x hampeana
Solanum dulcamara
Stachys sylvatica
Urtica dioica
Veronica montana
LICHENS
J Meiklejohn
Cladonia coniocraea
Evernia prunastri
Hypogymnia physodes
Lepraria incana
Parmelia sulcata
Usnea subfloridana
BRYOPHYTES
Mosses
Mark Lawley
Amblystegium riparium
Amblystegium serpens
Amblystegium tenax
Barbilophozia cyli
Brachythecium rutabulum
Bryum bicolor
Bryum capillare
Ceratodon purpureus
Dicranella varia
Dicranoweisia cirrata
Didymodon (formerly Barbula) nicholsonii
Eurhynchium praelongum
Eurhynchium swarzii
Fissidens bryoides
Fissidens crassipes
Fissidens taxifolius
Hennediella stanfordensis
Homalia trichomanoides
Hypnum cupressiforme
Hypnum mammillatum
Leskea polycarpa
Mnium hornum
Orthotrichum affine
Orthtrichum diaphanum
Plagiomnium undulatum
Plagiothecium denticulatum
Plagiothecium succulentum
Pohlia carnea
Rhizomnium punctatum
Tortula latifolia
Tortula muralis
Zygodon viridissimus
BRYOPHYTES
Liverworts.
Mark Lawley
Conocephalum conicum
Lophocolea bidentata
Lunularia cruciata
Metzgeria furcata
Metzgeria temperata
Elm Galls
By Harry Green
Our Elm Tour provided plenty of records of the common elm leaf gall Aceria ulmicola (Nalepa) (=Aculus =Eriophyes ulmi = campestricola). The causer is a mite and it appears to be restricted to English Elm Ulmus procera – the common elm with small rough leaves. We also had two new county records. Tetraneura ulmi, the Fig Gall which is a biggish pouch on the upper blade of the leaf caused by an aphid – one specimen found on the Huntingdon Elm Ulmus x vegeta var outside the pub at Barnards Green, Malvern. Also Eriosoma ulmi, a leaf roll gall caused by waxy aphids, on Small-leaved Elm Ulmus minor planted near the Mitre Oak, Crossway Green by the side of the A449.
| The galls were identified using the test version of Keys to galls – Identification of galls on plants and fungi in Britain by Redfern, M, Shirley, P and Bloxham M. This will eventually be published by the Field Studies Council in the AIDGAP series, and it will revolutionise gall recording. Thanks to John Meiklejohn for confirming my identifications. |  |
| WBRC Home | Worcs Record Listing by Issue | Worcs Record Listing by Subject |
Long-Tailed Blue Lampides boeticus (Linnaeus) in Pershore
By Harry Green
When Chris Thompson phoned from Pershore on 7th August 2000 to say he had a Long-tailed Blue in his kitchen I was a little sceptical. “It has tails” he said, “and blue, its a female”. A hairstreak, I queried. He disagreed. politely! .Book in hand, I went to see it, and it was! As it happened Chris was unable to contact the West Midlands Butterfly Conservation top brass at the time, but he did contact Worcestershire Wildlife Trust who told me, a lesser expert, so I was fortunate to see the butterfly. Chris also took photographs but unfortunately when the transparancies returned they were very sharp but a strange colour – emulsion failure according to Kodak. Nevertheless the butterfly is clearly identifiable from the photo.
The Long-tailed Blue is a well-known European migrant which breeds throughout the year, apparently without diapause, round the Mediterranean (the caterpillar feeds on legumes, usually brooms and other large-podded species, especially Bladder Senna Colutea arborescens) and often migrates north, but it rarely reaches Britain. Whether the Pershore individual was a true immigrant, or had been bred in captivity and released by someone (unlikely), or had hitched a lift on a lorry-load of plants, we shall never know. The larvae are, apparently, regularly found on imported legumes (Emmett & Heath 1989)
To date (December 2000) I have not heard of any other British records in 2000 but I think its quite in order for Worcestershire to have the one and only record!. Unlike immigrant Clouded Yellows Colias croceus, which are easily seen and recognized, and were abundant in 2000, Long-tailed Blues are inconspicuous fast-flying little butterflies and may well be missed.
Jack Green (1982) in his book on Worcestershire Butterflies mentions Long-tailed Blue merely to note that it has never occurred in the county. The national distribution map in Emmett & Heath (1989) covering the years 1859-1988 indicate one Worcestershire Record; 2-4 in Warwickshire; and none in Hereford, Gloucester, or Oxford shires. Most records are from south coast counties. Thomas & Lewington 1991 state that only about 120 have been recorded in Britain since 1859, including 38 in 1945, a extraordinary year for immigrant butterflies, and six in the 1980s. The species is almost certainly often overlooked because it is small, fast-flying and, in the distance, mistaken for a Common Blue Polyommatus icarus. So look at your Blues in 2001! Warmer summers might enable it to breed in the wild for a few months. Warmer winters might enable caterpillars to survive. Two possible food plants are Narrow-leaved Everlasting Pea Lathyrus sylvestris, a long-standing resident of Tiddesley Wood, near Pershore, and Broad-leaved Everlasting Pea Lathyrus latifolius, a garden escape is well-established in many places! Garden Sweet Peas and evergreen Broom are perhaps more likely,but on the whole year-round survival in Britain will probably require a lot more global warming!
If anyone can provide more information on Long-tailed Blues in Britain in the last ten years, that would be helpful.
References
|
EMMETT A Maitland & HEATH J Eds 1989. The moths and butterflies of Great Britain and Ireland. Volume 7, part 1. The butterflies. |
|
GREEN, Jack 1982 A practical guide to the butterflies of Worcestershire. Worcestershire Wildlife Trust |
|
THOMAS J & LEWINGTON R 1991. The Butterflies of Britain & Ireland. Dorling Kindersley |
What do Buzzards Eat?
By Harry Green
Following my request for information in Worcestershire Record No 6 I have still only received a few reports of buzzards eating – they do seem to be secretive about it! As mentioned earlier, in view of the great increase in numbers it would be interesting to know about their food resource. If nothing else we are hearing some fascinating observations. I would still like to receive reports – address and email at beginning of this newsletter.
Ann & Tony Seymour write:
Re your article on Buzzards. On 9th June we saw a buzzard flying over the garden dangling a large frog from its feet. Then, on 20th June, a pair flying over the area, again with a frog in the feet of one of them, and they were still doing the same, rolling and diving and carrying the frog, over an hour later. Whether it was the same frog, I don’t know. They have lots of problems being ‘mobbed’ round here by crows, gulls, etc. We seem to have a number of youngsters in the area at present (August), using the trees in the garden and field. Also noted that when the ducklings have been (perhaps only a week old) on the lawn feeding and the buzzards call and fly over the ducklings all disappear into the hedges as if by magic!! If this implies they know they can be on the menu I don’t know. They also do it when the sparrow hawk is about, but he doesn’t give much notice!! Also a friend who is a reliable source of information has seen a buzzard on the ground feeding on a road accident hedgehog.
Also a ‘Mike’ sent me an email, but I am not sure who he is or where he made the following observation!
| Hello Harry, Hope you are well, I had a sighting I thought you might be interested in. A Buzzard flew off before I saw it, and I then found the remains of a mostly eaten Moorhen, presumably the two were connected.Wendy Johnson told mePheasants seen hiding from buzzard………..buzzard seen carrying pheasant into wood!Lastly, Martin Skirrow noted:27th April 2000. Buzzard observed with what looked like a fresh rabbit carcase in field about half mile east of the Eastnor monument. After picking at it for a few moments it took it off into the woods on Midsummer Hill. Grid ref SO758377. |
Mistletoe Bugs
By Harry Green & John Meiklejohn.
A short communication caught my eye (HG) – The specialist Hemiptera associated with mistletoe, Hollier & Briggs 1999. JWM had never seen them and there were apparently no records in the Worcs BRC. There is a lot of mistletoe on apple trees in my garden in Little Comberton, so in early spring 2000 I held a net under a large clump and gave it a good shaking. The result was a net full of psyllids! I repeated the search in late summer – more psyllids, some small bugs (all about 3 mm long) and a small long horn beetle about 6 mm long.
From the spring catch David Green identified the mistletoe-specific psyllid Psylla visci. From the late summer catch he and JWM identified more of the same (and other psyllids, probably off the apple tree), and JWM named Orthops viscicola, a specialist mistletoe-sucking capsid plant bug, and Anthocoris visci a specialist carnivore which attacks Psylla visci. So the whole bug-ecology of mistletoe was present in my garden, and it seems to be only the second set of records for Worcestershire. The first set was reported from Kemerton in the afore-mentioned communication from Hollier & Briggs 1999.
Interestingly, Price 1987 made a special search for mistletoe in Warwickshire, where it is much less common than in Worcestershire, (he found 541 mistletoe plants on a total of 152 host trees!) and at the same time he looked for the specialist bugs. He found Orthops viscicola and Psylla visci but not Anthocoris visci. He mentions that the latter occurred in Hereford & Worcester but we do not know of that Worcester record.
Recorder 3.3 tells us that Anthocoris visci is classified as a notable B species, confined to mistletoe, limited in distribution by its host plant, and probably under-recorded because of its inaccessibility. Orthops visci, the plant sucking bug, is a southern species restricted to mistletoe, and not often recorded, though is probably no more restricted in distribution than its host plant. Psylla visci is a jumping plant louse patterned red, brown and white, which feeds on mistletoe, and is confined to southern England. (see also Dolling 1991).
David Green confirmed HG’s identification of the longhorn beetle as Pogonocherus hispidus, which is widespread but local in distribution. The larvae feed under the bark of dead twigs of many broad-leaved tree species, commonly holly, apple, pear and ivy: the long list given by Bense 1995 includes Viscum (Mistletoe), but the beetle we caught may not have emerged from mistletoe as many of the other species occur nearby, including ivy, apple, pear, and holly.
We shall be looking for two more mistletoe specialists in 2001. Price 1987 found three blister mines in Warwickshire mistletoe leaves, caused by the larvae of a tortrix moth Celypha woodiana, which is apparently restricted to old apple orchards in west England, where it feeds on mistletoe. It is classified as RDB 2 (vulnerable) and we don’t know if it occurs in Worcestershire.
To name the second specialist we want to find it is easiest to quote a press release as it appeared in the Worcester Evening News 3rd October 2000:
Consumer GPS Comes of Age
By Martyn Hodgson
One of the most popular new gadgets being used by Biological Recorders in the last couple of years are hand-held GPS receivers. GPS, or Global Positioning System, receivers allow the user to locate their position anywhere on the earth’s surface to remarkably high accuracy. Two recent changes, (one gradual, one sudden) have improved the accuracy of GPS receivers greatly. For less than £100 you should now be able to pin-point your position to within about 20m almost anywhere on earth, using equipment the size of a mobile telephone.
The basics of how GPS works
What follows is very simplistic. A fuller explanation (still simplified, but quite understandable) can be found at Trimble Navigation’s web site.
In the 1970’s the American Department of Defence launched 24 satellites into geostationary orbit. From anywhere on earth, if you had good enough eyesight, you could see at least 5 of these satellites (assuming there aren’t buildings or mountains etc. in the way). From Britain there seem to be about 7 or 8 ‘visible’. These satellites transmit radio signals which the GPS receiver picks up. The GPS receiver uses these radio signals to triangulate its location, based on its distance from the satellites. This is requires incredibly accurate timing (an error of less 40 billionths of a second) as the distances are calculated from the ‘time lag’ between the signals. To make all this possible, there are a number of factors that must be taken into account. The most important being that each satellite must know its exact location. This is managed by 5 ground stations which monitor the satellites and tell them what adjustments need to be made to their signals to compensate for ‘drift’. At the users end, the GPS receiver has to allow for delays in the radio signals as they pass through the earth’s atmosphere. In order for all this to work, a GPS receiver needs to be able to receive transmissions from at least 4 satellites. As mentioned earlier, ignoring the effects of buildings, mountains etc., at the location with the poorest coverage on earth you can still see 5 satellites. So, in theory, where ever you are you should be able to get your location, with no loss of accuracy.
Recent changes that have improved GPS
Over the last two or three years, small ‘consumer’ GPS receivers have really taken off. They are being put into cars, telephones, computers, and dedicated hand held GPS units. This has largely been made possible by improvements in the computing power available in lower (electrical) power computer processors. However, there has been a big drawback. It is called the ‘Selective Availability Program’. Because GPS covers the world, and anyone can use it, the American Government decided that a fuzziness (signal degredation) would be deliberately added to the transmissions. This limited its accuracy for conventional receivers to 100m or so. In the mean time, electronics engineers have been busily working out ways of getting around the Selective Availability Program. The commonest method is called Differential GPS. If you are interested in DGPS then see the details on Trimble Navigation’s web site. The big news this year though, is that from 1st May 2000, the Selective Availability Program was switched off permanently. This won’t make DGPS redundant as it still offers higher accuracy (an error of about 1.5m), but for Biological Recorders, standard GPS is now even better. For details regarding the decision to switch off Selective Availablity, see the Interagency GPS Executive Board web site.
Accuracy of standard GPS today and its limitations.
A standard GPS receiver will cost you less than £100. It should be about the size of mobile telephone (but it won’t fry your brain – I hope). With the Selective Availability Program switched off, and a clear sky all around you, you should be able to get a horizontal accuracy of at least 13m, and a vertical accuracy of 16m (these numbers are based on figures given at www.trimble.com/gps/howgps/moreinfo/aa_m3s.htm). However, there are a number of other factors that can seriously mess up your readings. A GPS receiver needs a clear line of sight to the satellites it is using. Heavy cloud and rain certainly slows down the time taken to get a reading, but it will get there after a minute or so. With my receiver I have managed to get a position in 20 seconds at sea on a sunny day, compared with 70 seconds in low cloud on a rain swept hillside. A similar effect is caused by heavy tree cover. More importantly still, steep valley sides, cliffs, buildings, or anything that blocks your view of parts of the sky can stop your GPS receiver from making a reading at all. Remember, you need to be able to see at least 4 satellites, and there are currently only 24 covering the earth. The number of satellites is due to increase in the next year or two, but even so, if you can only see a small amount of the sky you’re probably in trouble.
Other standard features
Even with hand held GPS receivers, there are a number of other software features that generally come as standard. These include a speedometer (quite fun when you are a car passenger), compass and route plotting. This last feature allows you to either preload points and then the GPS receiver guides you to between them, or to simply mark points as you reach them. You can then use these points to retrace your route.
Conclusions
In spite of their limitations in enclosed surroundings, hand held GPS receivers are potentially very useful for biological recorders. There is no excuse now for inaccurate, or missing, map references (all of the consumer versions I’ve seen will give readings in OSGB format). You don’t even need a map! Actually I suspect that we’ll start to notice slight errors and discrepancies in UK maps. You’ll certainly start to see errors in maps abroad. Ordnance Survey admit themselves that if you scale one set of maps to another, they don’t always match! I wouldn’t dare recommend any model of GPS as they change so regularly, but a browse through the internet, or Maplin catalogue, should give you a good pointer to what is available. However, as a starting point, I think that the two manufacturers whose products are most widely available in the UK are Garmin and Magellan.
Futher information
The following web sites may be of interest:
|
Garmin International – www.garmin.com |
|
Magellan Systems – www.magellandis.com |
|
Maplin Ltd – www.maplin.co.uk |
|
Trimble Navigation – www.trimble.com |
|
Interagency GPS Executive Board – www.igeb.gov |
Use of Bird Feeder by Dormice
By John Hodson
At Worcestershire Wildlife Trust headquarters we often get unusual phone calls, so when in late summer this year we received a call from a lady reporting dormice visiting peanut feeders put out for birds in her garden we were, to say the least, a little sceptical. Yellow-necked mice we all cried, (I said “rats”! Ed). This was a mistake.
Just before Christmas we received a letter from the same lady and with it came a collection of photographs. Suffice to say, they were of dormice, and one particular shot had two animals on the same feeder.
| Our correspondent lives in Malvern Wells on the western side of Holywell Road and her garden backs onto the woodland that covers the lower slopes. An overgrown mixed hedgerow connects her garden with the woodland and so provides an arboreal route to her bird feeders. The animals were first noticed in early June this year and were seen on most nights until some time in August. They often appeared as early as 18.00hrs and remained until darkness fell.
In a nearby laurel bush, she found what appeared to be a dormouse nest: it was small, circular and contained pieces of honeysuckle bark. It is therefore possible the animals had set up territory within the garden to be close to a reliable food source. In most years mid-summer can be a lean time for dormice as most flowering has ended and fruiting has yet to begin. This, coupled with evidence that in some areas this year hazelnut production was particularly poor, may have prompted this behaviour. For anyone lucky enough to have a garden adjoining woodland, either directly or via an overgrown hedgerow this would appear to be a useful method for both helping dormice survive and for increasing our small number of recent Dormouse records. If anyone has dormouse records for Worcestershire (new or old) I should be very pleased to hear from you – please phone the Trust office 01905 754919 It is worth pointing out that we have no recent records east of the River Severn. Our correspondent wishes to remain anonymous. |
 |
Bombus ruderatus (Fabricius), the Large Garden Bumble Bee At Windmill Hill
By T D Knight
A melanic male bumble bee was found at the north end of Windmill Hill Reserve, near North Littleton, on 12th July 1999. Initial inspection suggested it might be Bombus ruderatus and so the specimen was sent to the National Recorder (Dr O Prys-Jones) for positive identification. After being examined by experts it is now agreed that “it meets all the criteria for B. ruderatus“. The specimen has been retained by him for future reference.
[The following notes explain why the record is important – Ed. This species has been recorded occasionally in Worcestershire in the past (Fraser et al 1998) and, although there has been little recent recording, all bumblebees have declined, often from abundance 50 years ago to virtual extinction. Fletcher & Martineau (1901) in the Victoria County History record ruderatus as Bombus hortorum var harrisellus from Wyre Forest and MoseleyRecorder 3.3 states this species to be national status Notable B and is listed in the national BAP list 2 with a Species Action Programme, and notes “A bumblebee with a southern distribution in Britain with most recent records south of the Severn-Wash line. Few, scattered localities north to Northumberland”.
Falk (1991) states: “A very local and declined species with most modern records confined to southern England ……… Various authorities writing between 1900 and 1930 considered it to be very common …….. The species appears to require large expanses of unimproved-flower-rich habitat using traditional management (grazing, cutting) and without the use of fertilisers and agricultural chemicals”.
Benton (2000) states that this is now one of the rarest of British bumblebees and speculates that significant populations may survive is flower-rich oases based on suburban gardens!].
References
|
BALL SG 1994 Recorder 3.3. JNCC |
|
**BENTON, T 2000 The Bumblebees of Essex. available from Lopinga Books, Tye Green House, Wimbish, Saffron Walden, Essex, CB10 2XE. web site www.lopinga.co.uk, email enquiries@lopinga.co.uk |
|
FALK S 1991. A review of the scarce and threatened bees, wasps and ants of Great Britain. Nature Conservancy Council. |
|
FLETCHER JE & MARTINEAU JH 1902 Hymenoptera. in The Victoria History of the County of Worcester. Volume 1. |
|
FRASER A, GREEN H, LAKE S, AND NEALE W. 1998 The endangered wildlife of Worcestershire. The County Red Data Book. Worcestershire Biodiversity Partnership. |
**This new book is a very useful for anyone interested in bumblebees and especially if you would like to learn to identify and record species. Its usefulness extends far beyond Essex. With this book you could easily make a start on recording our rapidly disappear bumblebees – and we badly need records. And you can start in your garden. Gardens may well be the one of the very few flowery resources still available to bumblebees. If you need more, the Naturalists’ Handbook No 6 Bumblebees by Oliver Prys-Jones and Sarah A Corbet is also very useful.
We need to know about Worcestershire’s bumblebees and where there are good places for them – what about the Malvern Hills and Castlemorton Common? These could be nationally important. Perhaps you could find out? Ed.
Clouded Yellow, Colias croceus f. ‘helice’ at Mill Meadow
by Kevin McGee
 |
It’s been a good summer for the Clouded Yellow butterfly in Drakes Broughton. I first saw one at the Mill Meadow reserve on 19.8.00. This was the normal variety, Colias croceus, and, true to form, it belted round at great speed refusing to land and have its portrait taken, though I did manage a couple of photos of the butterfly nectaring at Devil’s-bit Scabious.
On 3.9.00, there were two at Mill Meadow, a normal one and the very pale form of female which is almost white: Further normal specimens were present as singles at the meadow on 10.9.00 and in our garden in Drakes Broughton from 10.9.00 to 16.9.00, feeding at Michaelmas Daisy. I would be interested to know if any other specimens of the pale variety have been recorded this year in Worcestershire? |
Conopidae; (Diptera), At Mill Meadow, Drakes Broughton, 2000
By Kevin McGee
I first became aware of this fascinating and quite bizarre family of flies after photographing a specimen of Myopa buccata, (Conopidae), on Spurge flowers at Wyre Forest, (Shropshire), on 27.5.00. I had no idea of what it was at the time, so I tubed the Fly and asked Mike Bloxham to take a look, who later confirmed the identification
Since then I have found one or two species of Conopid flies at Mill Meadow, Drakes Broughton. Most have been painfully difficult to photograph but the following were captured on film with sufficient clarity to determine their identification; with grateful thanks to P.F.Whitehead.
Sicus ferrugineus. (Conopidae). One photographed on 15.7.00.
Physocephala rufipes. (Conopidae). One photographed on 31.7.00.
Conops quadrifasciata. (Conopidae). One photographed on 10.9.00.
Grass Snakes in Drakes Broughton
By Kevin McGee.
I am pleased to report the presence of the Grass Snake, Natrix natrix, at Drakes Broughton orchard. On 3.6.00. I found a small one of about 10 inches in length sun bathing at the path-side. Much larger individuals were disturbed at Mill Meadow, Drakes Broughton, on 2.7.00. (about 2 feet in length), and on 10.9.00. (about 4 feet in length, quite the largest I’ve ever seen).
Mill Meadow, Drakes Broughton, 2000. Coleoptera of Note
By Kevin McGee
Arranged in chronological order.
| Orsodacne cerasi. | (Chrysomelidae, local) | One photographed on Pear foliage on 23.4.00. Another was photographed on Hogweed flowers at nearby Drakes Broughton orchard on 5.6.00. |
| Pediacus dermestoides. | (Cucujidae, local). | One photographed under bark of an Oak log on 23.4.00. |
| Megatoma undata. | (Dermestidae, Notable B). | One photographed on the gate-post at the reserve entrance on 23.4.00. & 30.4.00. |
| Chrysolina staphylaea. | (Chrysomelidae, local) . | One on nettles along Chevington Lane near the reserve entrance on 23.4.00. |
| Dorcus parallelipipedus. | (Lucanidae, local). | Three under an Oak log on 28.5.00. One very large male was photographed. |
| Judolia cerambyciformis. | (Cerambycidae, local) | One photographed at Hogweed flowers on 4.6.00. The second year running I’ve recorded this Longhorn here, it’s usually more associated with the north & west of the county. |
| Psylliodes dulcamarae. | (Chrysomelidae, local). | One of about 20 was tubed from Bittersweet on 4.6.00. Identification confirmed by P.F.Whitehead. |
| Hemicrepidius hirtus. | (Elateridae, local). | One photographed on grasses on 17.6.00. |
| Cryptarcha strigata. | (Nitidulae, Notable B). | One photographed at the sap-run of a pollarded Oak on17.6.00. |
| Serica brunnea. | (Scarabaeidae, local). | A dead one was collected from a Marsh Thistle on 2.7.00. Identification confirmed by P.F.Whitehead. |
| Agapanthia villosoviridescens. | (Cerambycidae, local). | Two were photographed on 2.7.00. One was in the classic text-book situation on a Marsh Thistle stem. Probably the first site-record according to P.F.Whitehead. |
| Gnorimus nobilis
(Scarabaeidae, RDB2). The ‘Noble Chafer’ one photographed at Angelica flowers on 15.7.00. Almost certainly the first site-record. This highlights the importance of the region outlying the west of Pershore as a stronghold for this nationally rare beetle. |
 |
|
| Anthrenus fuscus. | (Dermestidae, local). | One tubed from Angelica flowers on 27.7.00. Identification confirmed by P.F.Whitehead. |
| Rhynchites salicis. | (Attelabidae, local). | One of about six was tubed from Willow foliage on 1.8.00. Identification confirmed by P.F.Whitehead. |
| Phloiotrya vaudoueri. | (Melandryidae, Notable B). | One photographed on an Oak log on 19.8.00. Very possibly the first site-record. |
| Cychrus caraboides. | (Carabidae, local). | One under an Oak log on 10.9.00. |
| Metoecus paradoxus. | (Rhipiphoridae, local). | One photographed on an Oak trunk on 10.9.00. Very possibly the first site-record. |
Thanks to Paul Whitehead for confirming identifications.
A New Gall on Alder
by John Meiklejohn
Gall causing organisms have a habit of suddenly making their presence on the rural scene – the Oak Marble gall in the 1830’s and the Oak Knopper gall in the 1970’s for examples. Are we about to see another such outbreak?
Look for a peculiar tongue-like growth emerging from the female catkins, or ‘cones’, of Alder trees – green when immature but turning red to purple when older. This is the gall caused by the ascomycete fungus Taphrina amentorum.
First seen in Norfolk in 1998, it haas been reported from several counties since. I found numerous galls in Ledbury in 1999 and a single specimen, the first record for Worcestershire, in Larches Wood, near Bayton, on 5th September 2000.
Do send me details of any Worcestershire sightings!
A New Gall on Alder
By John W Meiklejohn
Gall causing organisms have a habit of suddenly making their presence known on the rural scene – the Oak Marble gall in the 1830’s and the Oak Knopper gall in the 1970’s for examples. Are we about to see another such outbreak?
Look for a peculiar tongue-like growth emerging from the female catkins, or ‘cones’, of Alder trees – green when immature but turning red to purple when older. This is the gall caused by the ascomycete fungus Taphrina amentorum.
First seen in Norfolk in 1998, it has been reported from several counties since. I found numerous galls in Ledbury in 1999 and a single specimen, the first record for Worcestershire, in Larches Wood, near Bayton, on 5th September 2000.
Do send me details of any Worcestershire sightings!
Hymenopteran Cells
By John W Meiklejohn & Harry Green
Dolichovespula
There has been a national wasp survey this year so we have been peering at wasp faces down a microscope to identify the species (if you want to try wasp identification see excellent key by George Else 1994). Practically every wasp we looked at was Common wasp Vespula vulgaris and we have heard reports of many nests in holes in the ground. Interestingly Geoff Trevis found a wasps’ nest suspended in a bush and after it was inactive he sent it off to national expert, Dr Mike Archer, who confirmed that it was of the Median of French Wasp Dolichovespula media. This European species was first recorded in Britain in 1980 with the first nest in 1985, both in Sussex. Since then it has considerably extended its range with a few records in Worcestershire (JM). This species has a bad reputation because its big, supposedly French, and, allegedly, a vigorous attacker of humans! This is probably because it suspends its nest in bushes which people inadvertently cut, shake or bash, so naturally the wasps try to see-off a possible predator! In the early stages their paper nests have a typical tapering bottle-neck -shaped entrance.
Coincidentally I was trimming a small laburnum tree in our garden in September and noticed to my astonishment (we walk under the tree every day!) a wasp’s nest suspended from a branch about 10 ft up. The nest appeared to have failed as it was inactive , and there were many unused cells – perhaps the queen had died. It was about 14 cms diam and 17 cm high, and from its shape I hoped it was D. media. I sent photos to Tom Ings (organiser of the wasp survey) who wrote:
“I think you are right that it is a nest of D media, it looks like the few I have seen. The early stages are much easier to identify as they have a long narrow opening rather like a bottle neck which disappears as the nest develops. As far as I can tell from the photos the nest had not reached maturity and produced new queens or males as there appears to be only small cells and three combs. I can only assume that the queen died before the nest was fully developed as there are no larvae etc, then the workers must have carried on without the queen until all had emerged”.
In the hope of confirmation Geoff Trevis sent the photos to hymenopterist Dr Michael Archer who confirmed that the nest was of a species of Dolichovespula, and told us to measure the width of the largest cells across the flats of the hexagon: D media would measure 8 mm, other species 6-6.5mm. I had retained the nest and the largest cells measured 6.1 mm!. However, as the nest had not reached maturity, perhaps larger cells had not been produced. On comparison with descriptions and pictures in Spradbury (1973) I concluded that the nest was probably of Norwegian Wasp D. norwegica, or possibly Tree Wasp D sylvestris but might just maybe D media!
Braconid
I (GHG) visited the South Birmingham Group of Worcestershire Wildlife Trust on 13th October 2000 to give a talk.. In the break Malcolm Beach showed me a small branch of Lawson’s Cypress x leylandii “Castle Welland” with several small masses of tiny chambers about 1 cm diameter stuck to the twigs. He had found them in a garden at Hawkesley, near Kings Heath, grid ref about SP049773, in early October. Apart from a guess that they might be made by a hymenopteran I did not know what they were so I took some home and showed them to JWM. He did’nt know what they were either so he sent one to Michael Chinery (of insect Field Guide fame), who replied as follows:
“You are quite right about it being a clump of hymenopteran cocoons or pupation chambers. It belongs to some kind of braconid. I can’t say which species, but Gauld & Bolton (1988) mention Diolcogaster as one of the genera that produce honeycomb-like stacks of cocoons. The parasites may well have come from a small looper caterpillar – they often spin up under the arched body of the victim and this gives the cluster its neat shape. There is a very nice photograph of such a cluster in Step’s Bees, Wasps, Ants and Allied Insects – one of the old Wayside and Woodland series.
The only looper that I know of that feeds on Lawson’s cypress is the Cypress Pug Eupithecia phoeniceata. This relative newcomer to Britain is spreading northwards with the increasing use of cypress hedges, although I don’t know that it eats the abominable leylandii. The caterpillars feed in the autunm and winter, so this fits quite well if you have only recently found the cocoons”.
Skinner 1998 states that the first British specimen of Cypress Pug was found in Cornwall in 1959 and has since spread through the southern counties and has been recorded as far north as Rugby, Warwickshire. The larvae will apparently eat Cupressocyparis x leylandii in captivity! We had not yet checked current status in Worcestershire and West Midlands.
Braconidae are small, active, inconspicuous insects, and the great majority are parasitoids on other insects. They are abundant worldwide and there are about 1045 species in 138 genera in Britain (Gauld & Bolton 1996).
 |
 |
| Mass of Braconid cocoons (possibly genus Diolcogaster) on Lawson’s Cypress. Actual size of mass 10 x 8 mm and 3 mm thick. Problably formed inside the curve of a looper moth caterpillar – likely species Cypress Pug Eupitheicia phoeniceata according to Michael Chinery (in lit).
Part of wasp’s nest, probably Dolichovespula norwegica, possibly sylvestris from top of laburnum tree 3 m above ground. Cell width across the flats of the largest cells is 6.1 mm. |
|
 |
 |
Acknowledgements
Many thanks to Geoff Trevis, Michael Archer Tom Ings and Michael Chinery for helping us with our enquiries. Also to Malcolm Beach for the Braconid cell cluster.
References
|
ELSE, G 1994 Identification – Social wasps. British Wildlife Vol 5, 304-311. |
|
GAULD I. & BOLTON, B. first impression 1988, reprinted 1996. The Hymenoptera. The Natural History Museum, London and OUP. |
|
SKINNER, B. 1998 (2nd ed) Colour identification guide to the moths of the British Isles. Viking. |
|
SPRADBURY, JP. 1973. Wasps. Sidgwick & Jackson. |
|
STEP. E. 1946 Bees, wasps, ants and allied insects of the British Isles. Frederick Warne |
Adopt a Square (or a Plot or a Pool)
By John Partridge
Regular readers will know that we are continually urging you to send in records, but we still do not receive many. If it were not for the few regular contributors, who can be counted on the fingers of one hand, there would be almost nothing.
There are many areas of the county for which records of anything are scarce. We point out one near you, and give you a print-out of what has been recorded there, and when, so that you would know what was ‘new’.
Alternatively, would you like to look at a piece of ‘waste’ ground near you? The trend in Reserve Acquisition is to bigger areas, but we still know little of the value of those bits of waste ground, particularly for invertebrates. If you can identify a ladybird, a beetle, butterflies, snails, or a spider, or some of the less common plants, or anything then why not give it a try? All you need to do is to be sure that whatever you identify is correctly done. Many common things that are easy to recognise are not recorded, and, who knows, they may be rare in the future. Great interest can come from studying a particular patch, and the records would be useful to us all.
| Have Legs – Will Travel
By John Partridge |
 |
Have a look around this autumn for this long-distance traveller – Dicranopalpus ramosus – a harvestman. You can find it in trees with a sweep-net, but for the odinary observer, you are far more likely to notice it in its characteristic pose, as seen in the illustration, with its long legs pushed out sideways, sunbathing (if we ever see any) on a shed, a wall or a tree-trunk.
Just seeing it like this is probably enough for identification, but to make sure, just look at those front palps which branch into two sections -no other British harvestman has palps like this. The colour is beige-brown, probably with some sort of line visible across the abdomen.
This harvestman was first described from Morocco in 1909, then found in Portugal (1948), Spain (1965), France (1969) and Britain in 1957, in Bournemouth. Since then it has continued its travels,with quite a few observations in Worcestershire (5 in 1988, 6 in 1999 and 5 so far this year), and with 1999 records in Lancashire and Yorkshire.
It is probably all through the county by now, but it would be nice to have a few more records to show the distribution. You can pass these to the WBRC through anybody who visits Smite, or via e-mail to records@wbrc.org.uk.
Please include your name, a method of contacting you if necessary, a date seen, a place, and preferably a 6-figure grid reference. (If you saw it in your garden we can probably sort out a grid reference from your post-code)
Birds in Worcestershire – May to October 2000
By Gavin Peplow
This year will be well remembered as being poor weatherwise with only a few hot and dry spells through the summer before a very wet late autumn. In the birding world, no two years are the same and this year has again thrown up a good number of surprises, particularly towards the end of the period.
Early May produced an exceptionally varied wader passage with it being possible to find 16 species of wader in a day in the south of the County. The highlights included a Temminck’s Stint and Bar-tailed Godwit at Bredon’s Hardwick, Curlew Sandpiper, Turnstone and Grey Plover at Kinsham Pit and Spotted Redshank at the Gwen Finch Reserve at Nafford. Further Temminck’s Stints followed a few days later at Ryall Pit and at Upton Warren whilst this last site also attracted a couple of Marsh Harriers and a typically elusive Golden Oriole mid-month. Black Tern passage was concentrated during the first ten days with the largest party being of 24 at Kinsham Pit. Five Little Gulls also passed through at this time. The month concluded with a superb breeding plumaged Slavonian Grebe at Westwood.
June, often rather a quiet month ornithologically, provided some notable highlights this year. These included a Spoonbill heading north over Wilden and a White Stork which drifted over the motorway at Bredon’s Hardwick; though what was believed to be this bird was later found to be carrying a plastic ring and therefore considered to be of suspect origin! The overall highlight however, arrived at the end of the month in the form of a sub-adult Purple Heron at Upton Warren – the second record for the Reserve and for the County. Thankfully for those that missed it at Upton, it was refound at Oakley the following day and though rather elusive, it was enjoyed by a good number of people who patiently viewed the reedbed waiting for it to show. Other species recorded included the only Quail of the summer – heard one evening at Larford, Red Kites over Nafford, Redditch and near Droitwich, two Sanderling at Grimley and nine Black-tailed Godwits at Upton Warren.
Numbers of this last species peaked at 17 at Upton early in July whilst two Little Terns visited Bittell on single dates during the first and third weeks of the month. An Osprey lingered in the Grimley area for over a week, regularly visiting the Woodlands Fishery at Hadley where it was able to find a more than adequate supply of its preferred food!
Despite the mixed weather it was encouraging to see Common Terns successfully rearing young again at Upton Warren whilst a pair of Oystercatchers there produced three chicks. Elsewhere a pair of Shelduck bred at Bredon’s Hardwick for the first time (only the second ever County breeding record for this species) and Pochard were also successful at the same site.
 |
| Oystercatcher |
Wader passage gathered momentum at the end of the month with Knot and Curlew Sandpiper at Grimley and Little Stint and Turnstone at Upton Warren. A Little Egret also visited Kinsham and a Black-necked Grebe was found at Bittell at this time.
Rough weather at the beginning of August resulted in nine Shags dropping into Bittell one afternoon and a little later in the month the same site was visited by a Little Egret. Probably the same bird also appeared briefly at Upton Warren and one or more frequented the Kinsham – Bredon’s Hardwick area. A Marsh Harrier was seen at this last site and one or two more were reported from Upton Warren whilst further Ospreys were seen over this last locality and at Lower Moor.
Parties of four Crossbills were seen at Kinsham and over Upton Warren whilst a count of 62 Corn Buntings at Wyre Piddle was notable. Towards the end of the month rough weather grounded 15 Curlew Sandpipers at Bittell and as the rain eased they quickly headed south, being seen flying through Upton Warren en route ! A Wryneck was a good find for a visiting birder in Broadway and as usual it was observed actively searching lawns for ants.
September began with a flourish when a juvenile White-winged Black Tern was seen briefly over the Gwen Finch Reserve before relocating to Bredon’s Hardwick for a few hours. This was only the fourth record for the County. A further two Wrynecks were found, one near Droitwich and another which spent a week at Charlton. A trickle of waders included a further Little Stint and a Spotted Redshank at Upton Warren and a Knot at the Gwen Finch Reserve, whilst two Common Scoter at Lower Moor were the first of the year.
As the month drew to an end, eyes were cast skywards as news filtered through of a large influx of Honey Buzzards arriving on the East Coast. This was the result of an easterly airflow and a blocking depression sitting across central Europe, thus forcing young Scandinavian birds to head to the west rather than in their normal southerly direction. This eventually lead to an all time record influx of the species into Britain. Those birders able to spend time in the field were not disappointed; at least four birds were seen before the end of the month with one being tracked from the Lenches to Bredon Hill and then watched as it was joined by two other birds, all three then soaring over Westmancote for at least half an hour before continuing on their way! Partially as a result of this extra observation of the skies, Marsh Harriers were seen at Holt and moving south over the Lenches and Ospreys were seen at Bittell and over Abberton, whilst several Peregrines, Hobbys and numerous Common Buzzards were also recorded. Elsewhere one or two Ring Ouzels were found on the Malverns and a Black Redstart remained on the side of North Hill for a couple of weeks.
 |
| Honey Buzzard |
October began with another Honey Buzzard over the Lenches followed by a bird that roosted overnight near Timberhonger and was then seen heading south-east the following morning. A couple of days later, following rain and low cloud a Great Skua was a completely unexpected find, located sitting in the middle of a ploughed field again just near Timberhonger, though it departed quickly once the mist started to lift. As the adrenalin continued to flow, a juvenile Red-backed Shrike was discovered near Throckmorton and within an hour of being found, fortunate birders watching this bird were again distracted as yet another juvenile Honey Buzzard drifted over heading south!
This purple patch continued with a Grey Phalarope visiting Westwood for a couple of days mid month whilst a Black Tern lingering at Upton Warren was decidedly late for the species. A Scaup also moved between these two sites at this time. Just as most people thought an amazing autumn’s birding was returning to ‘normality’, the biggest avian surprise of the year and indeed of quite a few years, arrived at Westwood in the form of a female Surf Scoter ! What this almost exclusively coastal North American sea duck was doing in the heart of Worcestershire at this time remains a mystery but serves to illustrate what a fascinating and totally unpredictable hobby birdwatching can be !
Ensuring that the month didn’t end in a whimper, a Pectoral Sandpiper spent two days at Grimley whilst several Rock Pipits were found. A Water Pipit was seen briefly at Kinsham, there were several more Ring Ouzels on Malvern and Bredon Hill and a Black Redstart lingered on the top of the latter. Finally, demonstrating as Buzzards before them, that they are still increasing significantly in numbers, a count of 22 Ravens was made around North Hill at the end of the month.
Records compiled from reports received by Birdline Midlands. Please phone through details of all your interesting sightings to the 24-hour Hotline on 01905-754154 (free on application to regular callers). For all the latest information on birds currently within Worcestershire and the Midlands Region, call 09068-700247 (calls charged at 60p per minute).
| WBRC Home | Worcs Record Listing by Issue | Worcs Record Listing by Subject |
Wyre Forest Adder Census 1999 and Population Trends Through the 1990s
By Sylvia Sheldon
[Sylvia Sheldon has been undertaking an important study of adders in Wyre for many years. The following is extracted from her 1999 census report, with her permission. Ed]
| Year Total | Number of Sites Surveyed | Sites with adders | Mature Males | Mature females | Total | Average per site |
| 1990 | 56 | 50 | 185 | 55 | 240 | 4.8 |
| 1991 | 76 | 61 | 211 | 56 | 267 | 4.4 |
| 1992 | 78 | 55 | 159 | 33 | 192 | 3.5 |
| 1993 | 80 | 59 | 186 | 70 | 256 | 4.3 |
| 1994 | 76 | 50 | 153 | 29 | 182 | 3.6 |
| 1995 | 76 | 44 | 103 | 14 | 117 | 2.6 |
| 1996 | 80 | 41 | 112 | 32 | 144 | 3.5 |
| 1997 | 84 | 44 | 102 | 31 | 133 | 3 |
| 1998 | 85 | 42 | 103 | 34 | 137 | 3.3 |
| 1999 | 67 | 35 | 100 | 20 | 120 | 3.4 |
Table 1, Adder numbers
| Year | Sites with adders | Mature males | Mature females (Observed) | Mature females (Estimated) | Total (Observed) | Total (Estimated) |
| 1990 | 50 | 185 | 55 | 154 | 240 | 339 |
| 1991 | 61 | 211 | 56 | 144 | 267 | 355 |
| 1992 | 55 | 159 | 33 | 144 | 192 | 303 |
| 1993 | 59 | 186 | 70 | 189 | 256 | 345 |
| 1994 | 50 | 153 | 29 | 132 | 182 | 285 |
| 1995 | 44 | 103 | 14 | 113 | 117 | 216 |
| 1996 | 41 | 112 | 32 | 75 | 144 | 187 |
| 1997 | 44 | 102 | 31 | 77 | 133 | 179 |
| 1998 | 42 | 103 | 34 | 97 | 137 | 200 |
| 1999 | 35 | 100 | 20 | 85 | 120 | 185 |
Table la: Adder Numbers Including Estimates of Total
| Year | First Sighting | Air Temp. (°C) | Grass Temp. (°C) | First Slough |
| 1999 | 16 Feb | 8.0 | 9.0 | 16 Apr |
| 1998 | 11 Feb | 13.6 | 12.5 | 17 Apr |
| 1997 | 15 Feb | 8.6 | 11.0 | 08 Apr |
| 1996 | 16 Feb | 12.2 | 15.0 | 24 Apr |
| 1995 | 12 Feb | 11.4 | 11.0 | 10 -Apr |
| 1994 | 10 -Feb | 10.0 | 15.0 | 18 Apr |
| 1993 | 17 Feb | 10.7 | 12.5 | 16 Apr |
| 1992 | 23 Feb | 13.0 | 15.0 | 22 Apr |
| 1991 | 23 Feb | 14.0 | 17.0 | 19 Apr |
| 1990 | 5-Feb | 13.0 | 14.0 | 08 Apr |
Table 3: Dates of Emergence and Sloughing of Adders
Discussion
The 1999 Adder Census confirmed the decline in the adder population during the past decade. Table 1a shows the dramatic drop in numbers, both of adders themselves and the sites where are now present.
The relatively low numbers of female adders recorded in the census was discussed in the 1993 Report, when a study of ten females over a period of 11 seasons from 1983 onwards was completed. The data collected provided valuable information on the variable breeding cycle of each of these adders.
Previous observers had indicated that females in the UK bred in alternate years. This was proven by the results not to be the case in Wyre Forest. The females studied (three survived the full study period) all bred four times. They had “rest” periods to build up fat reserves of between one to four years. The data showed them breeding on average every three years.
In their non-breeding years the females tended to emerge from hibernation later than the breeding females, when the weather was generally warmer and more settled (and therefore more suitable for active hunting). They also tended to disperse from the hibernaculum areas very quickly, so that they were very difficult to observe. This knowledge explained the relatively low numbers of females observed during normal spring counts – the non-breeding females were generally not being seen. By adding the numbers of females from the previous two years to those observed for the current season, a more realistic estimate of the total can be obtained. This method has been used to prepare Table la and Graph 5.
Graph 5 Adder population trends
1993 was the last time that adder numbers were estimated to exceed 300 (345 estimated). In 1994 there were the first obvious signs of a decline, which continued through 1995 and 1996. The last three years show no signs of recovery towards former levels, This would, in any event, be a slow process given the limitation of the breeding frequency of the females.
Since 1993 there has also been a sharp decline in the number of sites where adders can be found, reaching an all-time low of 35 sites in l999 – since surveys began in 1985 80 used sites have been recorded. However, at no time have all 80 sites been found to be used in one season. A number of sites became unsuitable in the late nineteen-eighties and into the nineties, and new sites were also discovered.
Factors Contributing to the Decline
Housing and Industrial Developmeny
Sites particularly on the forest edge have been completely destroyed by heavy machinery involved in development work.
Forestry Practice
Such as felling, scarifying, and replanting can be destructive to both adders and habitat.
Road Improvement, Drainage and Water Pipeline Maintenance
Spoil deposited on active adder hibernacula has buried many adders alive. They cannot excavate their own holes and are therefore trapped underground.
Conservation Work for Other Species
Has in some cases destroyed adder hibernacula. More liaison is required before embarking upon such projects.
Intensive Pheasant Rearing
These are not a native species, and are known to prey upon adders, especially juveniles. Ins area where intensive pheasant rearing has commenced adders have disappeared.
Human Persicution
This is always evident. Every year adders are found battered to death. The formal protection offered by legislation, which makes it illegal to kill an adder, is of little value in practice.
Dog Walking
This is an additional problem, especially in the adder breeding season which coincides with the seasonal increase in human and dog numbers in the forest.
Accidental Death
Adders have been found to have fallen victim to cars, mountain bikes, and horses.
Availability of Food
This will influence the breeding cycle of females, who will take longer to regain body weight if food is scarce, and the winter survival of both sexes. In Wyre, adders have been observed to feed mainly on bank voles and field voles, but there is no information on variation in their numbers.
Disease
This oes not appear to be an issue, since there is no evidence of it in the existing population.
Climate
It is not known if a series of mild, wet winters has had an impact on adders in hibernation.
Natural Predation
There has been a significant increase in the buzzard population in recent years. Although these are not considered a major threat, they have been known to take adders.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Chris Bradley and Jeff Hubball for their census work, and all those who reported reptile sightings, and landowners on whose property the study has been undertaken.
Address for Communications
Ms Sylvia Sheldon, Knowles Mill, Dowles Brook, Wyre Forest, near Bewdley, Worcestershire, DY12 2LX.
Sylvia would be delighted to hear from anyone who would like to undertake census work in the future in new areas, or at sites which she could suggest to them.
Don Goddard
It was Friday lunchtime and Don was at Lower Smite. I was in a hurry and said “I’ll tell you about it on Monday”. On Sunday came the phone call telling me that Don had died of a heart attack while visiting his home town of Leicester. I never did get to tell him about the pond that I wanted him to check out…
A sudden passing always leaves a void but in Don’s case the void is all the larger because he was so involved in so many things. Having left the teaching profession, he was just beginning to enjoy the fruits of his decision to become a free-lance ecological consultant.
He was Chair of the newly-formed Herefordshire Amphibian and Reptile Team as well as being on the WRAG committee, he was involved in invertebrate surveys for Worcestershire Wildlife Consultancy and other clients, he was a pillar of the local community in his adopted home of Clifton on Teme; the list goes on but it cannot begin to touch the many facets of a full life. Three years in the Antarctic studying soil mites? Don did that. Leading a bible study group? Don did that. Teaching some really difficult pupils from a rough part of Kidderminster and achieving remarkably high academic standards? Yes, Don did that as well. There were so many facets to the man; whoever knew him will reveal yet another small part of the jigsaw.
Above all, his deep commitment to conservation was the driving force behind his change of career path. I have often told how the only time I ever heard him swear was at the removal of ivy from an old tree. Other memories are of staying in a less than luxurious hotel in London where, instead of moaning about the state of the room like the rest of us, Don listed the species of invertebrates to be found in his, commenting that he was disappointed not to discover cockroaches!
We are all aware of his uncanny ability to arrive at a site late and discover Nationally Notable Species within five minutes. In his sandals or his waders, with sweep net and beating tray or with his eye to a microscope he could look like the epitome of an eccentric Victorian naturalist. He was a good shot as well, part of a shooting syndicate near Martley, where he inevitably kept a list of invertebrates while filling the family freezer. I’m told he was a good cook too.
Don was adamant that biological recording was essential to the core of Conservation. He was dedicated to the idea of a comprehensive County BRC and while I am sure we all agree with the sentiment behind that, it strikes me that the best way to remember him is to “carry on recording”. Those who have worked alongside him will know just how much he will be missed: Those who were privileged to know him should feel honoured to have spent some time in his company. Don Goddard was truly a one-off and we may never see his like again.
Alan Shepherd
Readers of Worcestershire Record will have noticed a series of articles by Don Goddard on invertebrates, especially beetles, found at various sites. This information was collected either from surveys undertaken for the Worcestershire Wildlife Trust (sometimes via its Consultancy), or from his personal observations, including records from Worcs. BRC recording days. There are many outstanding reports in his articles; perhaps some of the most interesting appeared in the last Worcestershire Record No 8 April 2000 pages 28-30. To find the coastal water beetle Enochrus bicolour in Worcestershire is remarkable as Garth Foster mentions elsewhere in this Record. Don was very interested in aquatic invertebrates and contributed a many water beetle records to the national recording scheme, in which Worcestershire was and still is poorly represented. We understand that he hoped to produce a Worcestershire annotated atlas of water beetles in the future. I hope that one day before too many years pass we can do just that in his memory – it will not be easy.
It will not be easy because competent entomologists are so thin on the ground. We badly need more of them because in conservation circles invertebrates have generally been badly neglected and, it is now realised, many insects are under far greater threats of reduction or extinction than species in many other groups. We are desperately short of baseline information on invertebrates. Don was helping to train new entomologists through courses organised by Tessa Carrick for the Trust – some of us had already attended courses by him on ladybirds and mayflies, and were looking forward to bumble bees last summer. He was not of course the only tutor (inspirational John Meiklejohn is still here to help!) but we are very short of entomological teachers. The courses will continue, following on from his efforts, and, as Alan has written above, a good catch phrase to remember Don by is indeed “carry on recording”. Don believed that basic biological records were everyone’s property and should be available in a public domain. Biological Records Centres operate on this basis.
Don is badly missed. Our sympathy goes to his family and friends for their sad loss.
Harry Green
The Kiss Me Slow Beetle
A RARE beetle has been discovered living in Herefordshire. The mistletoe weevil, or Ixapion variegatum, has been found thriving in a National Trust orchard in Brockhampton, near Bromyard.
The small tan-coloured insect, which measures just three millimetres, has never been recorded before in Britain, but it is known to exist in other parts of Europe, especially France. “It has turned up in an area which remains a stronghold for mistletoe, which suggests the weevil is an overlooked native member of British fauna rather than a recent arrival,” said Les Rogers, manager of the Brockhampton estate. “Our discovery highlights the wildlife value of old orchards, especially in Herefordshire. This will reinforce our plans to enhance the survival of these precious habitats”.
The National Trust’s biological survey team, which monitors wildlife on Trust land, found the beetle while looking for other creatures known to live in the mistletoe.
“This is a really exciting find because it is the first time anyone from the Trust’s biological survey team has discovered a creature which has never before been recorded in Britain” said Andy Foster, who discovered the weevil.
He and fellow biologist professor Mike Morris now plan to write a scientific paper on the find.
If that’s not a challenge to Worcestershire’s biological recorders, we don’t know what is! In Herefordshire – Damn it! – and only just across the border. They must be here!
References
|
BENSE U 1995 Longhorn beetles. Illustrated key to the Cerambycidae and Vesperidae of Europe. Margraf Verlag. (bilingual in English and German). |
|
DOLLING, WR. 1991. The Hemiptera. Natural History Museum Publications, OUP. |
|
HOLLIER, J. & BRIGGS J 1999. The specialist Hemiptera associated with mistletoe. Br. J Ent. Nat. Hist. vol 12, 237-239. |
|
PRICE, JM. 1987 Viscum album (Mistletoe)in Warwickshire. Distribution and some insect associations. Proc. Birmingham Nat Hist Soc. vol. 25, 207-211. |
Hymenoptera 2000
By Geoff Trevis
This year has not been spectacularly successful in terms of adding to our knowledge of the county fauna but, with the help of Harry Green, some interesting records have been accumulated. I also have a number of specimens awaiting definite identification. Among these are a leaf cutter bee from Harry and a Nomada bee I collected at Briar Hill Coppice. The Nomada is particularly frustrating as, however many times I try, it always keys out to N.sexfasciata, a species which, according to George Else, is rare and confined to a few sites on the Devon coast!
However, apart from the common social wasps, bumble bees and ants, a few of the more interesting species have been:
Ancistrocerus nigricornis (Curtis)A potter/mason wasp (Eumenidae) |
| Location: | Collected by Harry Green at Little Comberton |
| Flight period: | April – September |
| Distribution and status: | Archer(1) records the species as wide spread though having shown a recent significant decline. |
| Additional notes: | Nests are usually located in tubes, usually in dead stems of Bramble or Elder. The adults feed on nectar from the flowers of Bramble, Golden Rod, Hogweed, Nightshades and Thistles. The larval cells are provisioned with a wide range of lepidopterous larvae, particularly tortricidae. |
| Identification: | Archer (1) ; Yeo and Corbet (2) |
Leptothorax nylanderi (Foerster)An ant (Formicidae) |
| Location: | Collected by Geoff Trevis at Upton Warren Educational Reserve |
| Flight period: | Alate forms are on the wing during August |
| Distribution and status: | Bolton et al.(3) note the species as local in the south from Devon to Shropshire. |
| Additional notes: | I have found little about the biology of the species except that it forms small colonies, probably with a single queen, under bark or in tree stumps. |
| Identification: | Bolton and Collingwood(3) ; Skinner and Allen(4) |
Evagetes crassicornis (Shuckard)A spider hunting wasp (Pompilidae) |
| Location: | Collected by Geoff Trevis at Droitwich Community Woodland |
| Flight period: | May to September |
| Distribution and status: | Day(5) records the species as frequent though rarely common throughout the British Isles. It is widely distributed, even having been taken on a window in the Entomology Department of the British Museum (Natural History). |
| Additional notes: | It is most often encountered in the sandy habitats where potential host species are plentiful. In Britain, it is cleptoparasitic on the Pompilid wasps Episyron rufipes and Arachnospila trivialis (Betts(6)). |
| Identification: | Day (5) |
Mellinus arvensis (Linn)A digger wasp (Sphecidae) |
| Location: | Collected by Geoff Trevis at Upton Warren Educational Reserve |
| Flight period: | May to September |
| Distribution and status: | Gauld and Bolton(7) describe the species of Sphecidae as being widely distributed though none being common and many rare. However, Edwards(8) says that Mellinus arvensis is, indeed, common and not regarded as threatened. |
| Additional notes: | Step(9) uses the English name “Field Digger Wasp” and describes the burrow as being a foot to twenty inches deep, in bare patches of sandy soil, with cells leading off at intervals from the main tunnel. Each cell is stocked with from 4 – 9 flies (diptera) before an egg is laid. Edwards(8) further notes that nests are frequently established in shady locations, an unusual habit for an aculeate. This accords with my own observation that all the specimens at Upton Warren were seen just within the entrances to rabbit borrows. |
| Identification: | Yeo and Corbett (2) |
Nomada marshamella (Kirby)A parasitic bee (Anthophoridae) |
| Location: | Collected by Harry Green at Little Comberton |
| Flight period: | April to September |
| Distribution and status: | I have found little information about this species except for a note in Step(9) that it is very common in the spring. This may have been true in 1932 but may not be the case now. |
| Additional notes: | This species is double brooded and is cleptoparasitic on various species of Andrena including A. scotica, A. trimmerana and A. bucephala. Having found the parasite it would be interesting to see if we can find the host. |
| Identification: | Else (10) |
Megachile willughbiella (Kirby)A leaf cutter bee (Megachilidae) |
| Location: | Collected by Harry Green at Little Comberton |
| Flight period: | June to August |
| Distribution and status: | Else(11) gives the details as a common and wisely distributed bee, the range extending from north east Scotland to the Channel Islands. Step(9) notes that it mines in old willows and the females can be seen around the trees from June to August. |
| Additional notes: | Else (11) states that the nests are built in various suitable niches, including burrows in dead wood and the soil; there is even a record of a bee nesting in a length of garden hose in a greenhouse. Leaf sections from Beech (Fagus sylvatica), rose and Tutsan (Hypericum androsaemum) have been reported in the building of cells. Whilst having little to say about the British species, Gauld and Bolton(7) record that “The Megachile includes some very large bees; Chalicodoma pluto from Indonesia is the world’s largest bee, and may attain a body length of 39mm! |
| Identification: | Else (11) |
References
- ARCHER M.E. The British Potter and Mason Wasps. A Handbook. Published – Vespid Studies, 2000.
- YEO P.F. & Corbet S.A. Naturalists Handbook No.3 – Solitary Wasps. Published – Cambridge University Press 1983.
- BOLTON B. & COLLINGWOOD C.A. Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects Vol. VI Part 3 ( c ) – Hymenoptera, Formicidae. Published – The Royal Entomological Society, 1975.
- SKINNER G.J. & ALLEN G.W. Naturalists Handbooks, No. 24, Ants. Published – The Richmond Publishing Co. Ltd., 1996.
- DAY M.C.. Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects Vol. 6, part 4; Spider Wasps, Hymenoptera, Pompilidae. Published – The Royal Entomological Society 1988.
- BETTS C. A Supplement to the Second Edition of the Hymenopterists Handbook. Published – The Amateur Entomologists Society 1986.
- GAULD I. AND BOLTON B.(eds.) The Hymenoptera. Published – Oxford University Press 1996. (First Impression; British Museum – Natural History, 1988).
- EDWARDS R. (ed.) Provisional Atlas of the Aculeate Hymenoptera of Britain and Ireland, Part 2. Published – Biological Records Centre, Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, 1998.
- STEP E. Bees, Wasps, Ants and Allied Insects of the British Isles (The Wayside and Woodland Series). Published – Frederick Warne and Co. Ltd., 1932.
- ELSE G.R. Draft Nomada Key, April 2000. Final draft in preparation.
- ELSE G.R. Leaf Cutter Bees. British Wildlife 10(6), 1999, 388 – 393.
As a final note may I ask anybody who finds hymenoptera specimens, which they do not want, in their net to please send them to me. Even specimens which have dried out will be welcome as they can easily be relaxed. Also, the Bees, Wasps and Ants Recording Society is making a special effort to map the distribution of ants so again any records or specimens would be welcome.
Summary of Main Characteristics of Elms
By Will Watson
English Elm Ulmus procera Salisbury
|
Mature trees have a massive straight trunk persisting half way through the crown. | ||||||||
|
The bark is deeply cracked which in maturity form square plates | ||||||||
|
There are branches at all levels which twist and ascend at the top of a dense domed crown | ||||||||
|
Lower limbs become rapidly diffuse becoming short and slender | ||||||||
|
In sub-mature trees the majority of branches are ascending
|
||||||||
|
The leaves are nearly always attacked by the leaf-gall mite Eriophytes ulmicola | ||||||||
|
It suckers freely | ||||||||
|
Occasionally produces a mass of flowers clustered on small shoots which are purple caused by tufts of purple stamens | ||||||||
|
It rarely sets seed and fruit is usually sterile. |
Wych Elm Ulmus glabra Hudson
|
A broad spreading tree, the trunk usually forks into a Y shape. | ||||||||
|
Sub-mature trees have smooth (hence ‘glabra’) silvery-grey bark which latter become fissured. | ||||||||
|
The leaves are greater than 7cm in length:-
|
||||||||
|
It does not sucker freely, although it does coppice well (unlike English Elm U. procera). | ||||||||
|
Flowers are densely clustered close to shoots, dark purplish-red in early March | ||||||||
|
Wych Elm produces a mass of viable seed with relatively young trees reach fruiting maturity. Fruit is bright pale green with a broad obovate membrane which is slightly notched, they are prominent before the leaves form in late April and are contained in bunches |
Small-leaved Elm Ulmus minor Miller (syn. Smooth-leaved Elm Ulmus carpinifolia G. Sucklow)
|
Typically a tall tree with a narrow domed crown. | ||||||
|
Limbs in the upper crown are nearly all vertical, various size of branches ascend from the trunk | ||||||
|
unlike English Elm U. procera arch over to end in long pendulous branchlets with a narrow system of fine curled shoots. | ||||||
|
The bark has deep long, vertical fissures, young branches commonly have thick corky ridges. | ||||||
|
It has much smaller leaves than its counterparts being less than 7cm in length:-
|
||||||
|
It is rarely attacked by the elm leaf-gall mite. | ||||||
|
Where Small-leaved Elm U. minor is present it too is clonal i.e. produces suckers freely which are genetically identical to the parent plant. | ||||||
|
Flowers are red with white stigmas | ||||||
|
Fruit in elliptic membrane, cuneate (wedge shape) at base, seed near closed notch |
Hybrids Elms and intermediate types
Huntingdon Elm Ulmus x vegeta var. Vegeta (syn. Ulmus x hollandica)
|
A hybrid between Small-leaved Elm U. minor and Wych Elm U. glabra |
|
Tree with a regular tall domed crown with a straight clean bole. |
|
Bark is dark brown, sometimes grey, with an even network of broad flat ridges. |
|
It is non-suckering |
|
Its leaves are elliptic, long-acuminate, 10-13 x 8cm, doubly toothed with a petiole between 1-2cm, |
|
the upper surface is glossy, it has a very oblique base, one side is rounded curving to a first vein. |
|
Flowers are large, prominent and bright red |
|
Seed is obovate, notched, pale green, crimson in centre over seed. |
Lineage Elm Ulmus x hollandica var.?
|
Specifically a woodland elm. |
|
It has an intermediate leaf shape between Small-leaved Elm U. minor and Wych Elm U. glabra, unlike the more familiar hybrid Dutch Elm Ulmus x hollandica it is non-invasive and coppices well. |
Elms in Worcestershire
By Will Watson
(On 1st October JJ Day, AW Reid, GH Green and W Watson toured a large part of Worcestershire to visit some of the more unusual elms known to the Worcestershire Flora Project. The tour was initiated by Will Watson who prepared to following notes to help with identification. Afterwards we were probably more confused than ever! Elms are a complex and difficult group and await DNA fingerprinting. However, we collected a good few small branches with leaves and GHG now has a bulky plant press made of 3×2 ft sheets of ply with these pressed between masses of newspaper. Despite the problems of identification we should be pleased to hear of any big elm trees which have escaped elm disease and which we may not know of. Ed).
English Elm Ulmus procera Salisbury (syn. Ulmus campestris Miller)
There are three confirmed species of elm and several interspecific hybrid combinations that either native or naturalised in Worcestershire. English Elm Ulmus procera is by far the most widespread of the three species. In spite of the ravages of Dutch Elm Disease it is probably found within most 1 km2 in the county. It characteristic are that mature trees have a massive straight trunk persisting half way through the crown, the bark is deeply cracked which in maturity form square plates, there are branches at all levels which twist and ascend at the top of a dense domed crown, lower limbs become rapidly diffuse becoming short and slender, in sub-mature trees the majority of branches are ascending, the leaves are 5-9cm in length, ovate to circular with a short pointed apex, they are harshly roughened above and rough on the underside, when fully developed they are unusually curled or puckered (Mitchell, 1974). The leaves are nearly always attacked by the leaf-gall mite Eriophytes ulmicola (Rackham, 1980).
The reasons for its continued widespread distribution are that is native to our region and was widely planted right throughout the medieval period through to the 20th century, mainly in hedgerows (Rackham, 1994). Although all mature English Elm trees have succumbed to the disease it survives in hedgerows because of its ability to produce vegetative suckers. Indeed it has largely abandoned sex as a means of reproduction. Its success is further enhanced by the fact that it is invasive and over time out-competes neighbouring species – hence where English Elm U. procera is present we get dominant stretches of elm hedges and dominant stands of suckering elm in woodland (Peterkin, 1981), often with no other shrub species present. Rackham (1994) considers that its ability to sucker profusely may have developed over time in response to the disease which has struck in past centuries.
Wych Elm Ulmus glabra Hudson (syn. Ulmus montana Loudon.)
Wych Elm Ulmus glabra is a broad spreading tree, the trunk usually forks into a Y shape, sub-mature trees have smooth bark (hence ‘glabra’) which latter become fissured, the leaves are greater than 7cm in length, they are typically very rough on the upperside with more than 12 lateral veins covered in stiff white hairs, it has a hairy petiole greater than 3mm, the leaves commonly have a three point apex; although this is not a diagnostic character. It does not sucker freely, although it does coppice well (unlike English Elm U. procera). Wych Elm produces a mass of viable seed with relatively young trees reach fruiting maturity. Although it is vulnerable to Dutch Elm Disease senescence tends to occurs at a latter stage than English Elm U. procera. It is found in every 10km square in the county. Wych Elm U. glabra is more tolerant of shady conditions and well adapted to northern climes where it is a major native component species of lowland mixed broadleaved woodlands with Dog’s Mercury (NVC W8) and lowland mixed broadleaved woodlands with Bluebell (NVC W10) in northwest England (Rodwell, 1991). In Worcestershire it is an occasional component of such woods. It is often encountered in hedgerows, presumably because it was much planted.
Small-leaved Elm Ulmus minor Miller (syn. Smooth-leaved Elm Ulmus carpinifolia G. Sucklow. Ulmus nitens Moench)
Typically a tall tree with a narrow domed crown. Limbs in the upper crown are nearly all vertical, various size of branches ascend from the trunk, and unlike English Elm U. procera arch over to end in long pendulous branchlets with a narrow system of fine curled shoots. The bark has deep long, vertical fissures, commonly the branches have thick corky ridges. It has much smaller leaves than its counterparts being less than 7cm in length; although the leaf shape is extremely variable, they are most typically elliptic with the upper surface of the leaf being smooth and shiny green (Mitchell 1994). Where Small-leaved Elm U. minor is present it too is clonal i.e. produces suckers freely which are genetically identical to the parent plant. It is rarely attacked by the elm leaf-gall mite. There are several U. minor subspecies and varieties. The majority have glabrous leaves hence the synonym ‘Smooth-leaved Elm.’
The status of Small-leaved Elm U. minor within the county is so far undetermined. Its main centre of distribution is in the east of England. Small-leaved Elm U. minor is probably not native to Worcestershire with its presence being due to deliberate introduction, but this process is likely to have occurred over thousands of years.
A fine mature tree is present outside Dowles House, Bewdley (SO 775.765) and suckers are scattered along the railway embankment at Fernhill Heath (SO 868.589).
Plot’s Elm Ulmus plotii Druce (syn. Lock’s Elm Ulmus minor var. lockii Richens)
A tall tree with a very scanty crown. The top 5-6 metres are very thin and more on the one side of the tree than the other. It has relatively few short, almost horizontal branches from which slender, pendulous branchlets hang.
The unique characteristic of Plot’s Elm is its ability to produce proliferating short shoots. The terminal bus of most elms fall off, Plot’s Elm keeps on growing, in many cases producing on average up to eight leaves, opposed to say five in other species. The leaves are small, on average 8 x 4cm and obovate. They appear smooth on both sides but are minutely scabrous above and maybe hairy below but with white tufts beneath the axils. Leaves are typically deeply and doubly toothed, although newer leaves may have less pronounced serrations. There are 7-10 pairs of lateral veins. The petiole is 3-6mm (Stace, 1991).
The main centre of distribution is in the Trent valley around Newark on Trent. In Worcestershire it has yet to be confirmed. Any specimens of U. minor should be assessed to see if they have U. plotii features.
Elm hybrids and immediate types
Unfortunately for those people studying elms (know as pteleologists!) there are a bewildering number of elm types. Rackham (1980) cites elms as being the most difficult critical genus in the British flora, Richens (1983) recognises 27 different forms in Essex alone. Intermediates between Wych Elm U. glabra and English Elm U. procera are uncommon and thought to be evolutionary i.e. without fixed characteristics (Rackham, 1986). However, it is Small-leaved Elm U. minor which shows the greatest variation and it is this species which hybridises readily with other elms.
Hybrid elms with fixed characteristic are uncommon in Worcestershire because of the scarcity of Small-leaved Elm U. minor. In places where Small-leaved Elm U. minor and English Elm U. proceraare found growing in close proximity some suckers have characteristic common to both species. It is likely as, Rackham states, that such crosses are typically variable and can not be classified as true hybrids as they are probably still evolving.
Huntingdon Elm Ulmus x vegeta (Syn. Ulmus x hollandica var. Vegeta)It is described by Mitchell as an elm with a regular tall domed crown with a straight clean bole. Its leaves are elliptic, long-acuminate, 10-13 x 8cm, doubly toothed with a petiole between 1-2cm. The base of the leaf is asymmetrical and the short side curves into a first vein. It was a tree that was very widely planted in the British Isles (Stace, 1991), however, only a few trees currently now survive (Mitchell, 1994). A fine Huntingdon Elm Ulmus x vegeta (Syn. Ulmus x hollandica var. Vegeta) is present at Barnards Green on the Guarlford Road. A younger specimen, also planted, grows off the Tolladine Road in Worcester |
 |
Rough Narrow-leaved Elm Ulmus minor Ssp. minor. Biotype U. diversifolia
An intermediate type which occurs in several places in Worcestershire is the ‘Rough Narrow-leaved’ elm. Most appear to originate from trees planted alongside highways and maybe of continental origin. However, this biotype has been recorded from various parts of the Midlands and East Anglia by Dr. Ronald Melville who identified it as a distinct species (East Anglian Elm U. diversiflora). The leaves are more or less rough above and have a leathery texture with rather blunt regular serrations. The fine twigs branch at right angles (like Wych Elm). Suckers are common and the trunk is often divided. Ten percentage of its foliage is said to have symmetrical leaves. Many of our elms which have been planted along our highways and may originate from the continent appear to display many of the characteristics of this subspecies.
Lineage Elm (Rackham, 1980)
Lineage Elm is specifically a woodland elm (Rackham, 1980). It has an intermediate leaf shape between Small-leaved Elm U. minor and Wych Elm U. glabra, but unlike the more familiar hybrid Dutch Elm Ulmus x hollandica it is non-invasive and coppices well. It is believed to be a hybrid between these two species, but could be a species in its own right. Whilst its phenotypic features are reasonable well established its true parentage can probably only be determined as and when chromosomal analysis is undertaken. Lineage Elms are often found in homogenous stands and were probably deliberately planted in most situations. This tree is known to occur in Tiddesley Wood where it is locally common and may be scattered in other ancient woodland sites in Worcestershire.
Midland Elm Ulmus glabra x plotii = U. x elegantissima
It can be distinguished from Dutch Elms (U. minor x U. glabra) by its erect habit often with pendant branches. It has small leaves with blunt serrations. This hybrid was recorded by Melville across the Gladder Brook near Ribbesford Wood.
Wheatley or Jersey Elm Ulmus minor Ssp. Sarniensis (Stace) Ulmus sariensis (C.K. Schneid) Ulmus wheatleyi (Simon-Louis)
Conic crown, even and regular. Branches of all sizes from bole, densely ascending parallel at 45§ or more steeply, the angle decreasing towards the top where nearly vertical, progressively shorter towards the tree apex. Leaves are narrow elliptic to obovate, 7 x 4.5cm, shiny dark green, scarcely tufted in axils beneath. Bark has almost square plates as in U. procera, but still vertically fissured; large boles are fluted (Mitchell, 1974). Present as planted trees on southern verge to A44 at Norton juxta Kempsey close to Junction 7 on the M5.
Elm Trees and the Native Elm Programme
Elms grew taller than all other trees in the landscape with both English Elm U. procera and Small-leaved Elm U. minor regularly attaining heights of 120 feet (over 30 metres) or more. Elm wood is of medium weight and strength, but distorts easily and has to be seasoned carefully. Its timber was much valued in building construction and for use in furniture (Milner, 1992). Elm trees with circumferences of over 190cm are rare within the county. In 1996 a national survey was initiated by the Conservation Foundation with the aim of identifying elm trees which could be used for propagation of disease resistant native stock. Small-leaved Elm U. minor is less susceptible to the disease than English Elm U. procera. In certain parts of Essex and Suffolk elm trees with circumferences of more than 150cm are still commonplace. Likewise some Wych Elm U. glabra reach full maturity and appear not to contract the disease.
So how many elm trees remain in Worcestershire? The answer is we do not know because we have no recorded data. However, we know of the existence of several Wych Elms trees, other still await discovery. Recently the mature specimen of Small-leaved Elm U. minor was recorded in a hedge to the north of Bewdley.
If we can find and record where our Worcestershire elm trees are distributed we will be able to replace elm trees using seed or cuttings from Worcestershire stock.
Bibliography
|
ARMSTRONG. J, GIBBS. J, WEBBER. J, AND BRASIER. C. 1997. Elm Workshop Proceedings. Elm Newsletter No. 1. April 1997. The Conservation Foundation. |
|
MABEY. R., 1996. Flora Britannica. Sinclair-stevenson, London pp 58-62. |
|
MELVILLE, R. 1948. The British Elms. The New Naturalist: A Journal Of British Natural History. Collins |
|
MILNER. J.E. 1992. The Tree Book. (Channel Four Books) Collins & Brown, London pp 49-52. |
|
MITCHELL, A. Reprint 1994. Trees of Britain & Northern Europe. HarperCollinsPublishers, London pp 247-253. |
|
PETERKIN. G.F. Reprint 1994. Woodland Conservation and Management. Chapman & Hall, London. |
|
RACKHAM, O. 1980. Ancient Woodland: Its History, Vegetation and Uses in England. Edward Arnold, Norwich pp 255-281. Op. |
|
RACKHAM, O. 1986. The History of the Countryside. J.M. Dent and sons, London pp 232-247. |
|
RACKHAM, O. 1994. The Illustrated History of the Countryside. Orion Pubishing Group, London pp 88-92 |
|
RICHENS, R.H. 1983. Elms. Cambridge University press. |
|
RODWELL, J. S. (Ed) 1991. British Plant Communities, Volume 1: Woodland and Scrub. Cambridge University Press. |
|
ROSS-CRAIG, S. 1970 Drawings of British Plants. Part 27 Ulmaceae etc. Published by G. Bell and Sons Ltd. |
|
STACE. C.A. 1991. New Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge University Press pp 137-141. |
|
WILKINSON, G. 1978. Epitaph for the Elm. Hutchinson & Co. Ltd, London. Op. |
The Status and Distribution of Great Crested Newts Triturus cristatus in Worcestershire 2000
By Will Watson
Like most counties only casual records of great crested newts Triturus cristatus existed before 1986. However, these showed it to be widespread throughout the Worcestershire with records coming from Malvern in the west, Hopwood Dingle in the north and Corse Lawn in the south. In 1986 the National Amphibian Survey organised by Leicester Polytechnic was launched with funding from the Nature Conservancy Council. In 1987, Will Watson and Phil Williams conducted a blanket amphibian survey of the Warndon Parish in Worcester City; 410ha of biodiverse rural landscape scheduled for development. Forty five ponds were present and great crested newts were found in 12 of them in the first year. The ponds were studied over the 10 year period of the development recording great crested newts from 25 of the Warndon Ponds. The pond at Lyppard Grange, with 187 individual adult crested newts recorded in one evening, is still the best recorded site in Worcestershire.
Mainly from the mid 1990’s onwards I focused my attention on other parts of the county to find out if this high rate of occurrence was part of a pattern experienced elsewhere. Over a 14 year period of surveying (between 1987 and 2000 inclusive) I surveyed 387 ponds at least once for amphibians. Approximately half of the work conducted has been voluntary basis with the remainder of work being carried out from requests for amphibian data from a range a range of different organisations. Last year for example I was commissioned by the Environment Agency to survey 50 ponds in the county, I also undertook the survey of 28 ponds as Project Consultant for the County Council’s pond project Aqua Vitae 21.
A total of 335 of those ponds contained one or more species of amphibians, representing 86% of the total. An impressive 190 of those ponds surveyed contained Great Crested Newts. This is a 49% occurrence rate for this species. About 90% of the surveys carried out were targeted at all 5 common species and involved a minimum of 10 minute sampling either using netting or torching. Only about 10% of survey work carried out involved just egg searching and would be bias towards smooth and great crested newts.
This year have I attempted to focus on the areas where there is a high rate of occurrence for crested newts, usually coinciding with areas where there are clusters of ponds. By deliberately focusing on areas of known high occupancies one comes up with even more exceptional statistics. The survey of the National Trust estate at Hanbury Hall involved sampling 26 ponds (mostly, by egg search). Presence of great crested newts was found in 21 of these ponds within just 1.5km2. This was not a one off result for Worcestershire. Smaller surveys of pond clusters have revealed a similar rates of occupancy. These sites with high pond density supported by good terrestrial connectivity are by definition crested newt meta-populations.
The next and probably the most exciting phase of work will focus on carrying out evaluation on pond clusters where great crested newts are known to occur. This work will involve the recording of adult newts, during the breeding period using the most appropriate method according to the conditions. Sites which have been thoroughly surveyed on such a basis will be worthy of consideration for non-statutory wildlife site, SSSI or SAC designation.
Site designations alone will not protect ponds. Many of the ponds surveyed revealed that population sizes were low. In Warndon a fifth of ponds surveyed over the 10 year period revealed no signs of breeding at all. In a similar number of those ponds breeding only occurs wet seasons. This is believed to be typical for other parts of the county. What is also needed are financial incentives to manage ponds according to the best pond practices.
In terms of the biodiversity action plan establishing 20 new colonies within a county which on current evidence contains 2000 to 3000 great crested newt ponds is relatively insignificant objective and will not in itself lessen the rate of the extinction of local populations or the overall decline in population size. It is far more beneficial, in terms of species conservation, to encourage the natural expansion of the species in target areas and facilitate habitat management by restoring old ponds create new ponds and enhance existing amphibian corridors. Our next challenge is how to achieve such grand objectives under the local great crested newt species action plan.
What is required is strategic plan. Restoration work must carried out holistically to cater for also for macrophytes and macro-invertebrates. This process must work with the co-operation of landowners and where ever possible involve local communities. The Pond Warden Scheme operated in Cheshire and Lancashire is an excellent model to follow. But these schemes do not come cheap. Until we gear ourselves up to large scale restoration projects small -scale restoration maybe the most viable option in the short-term. We may achieve at least part of our objectives through Farm Plans tailor made for enhancing pond corridors as part of Countryside Stewardship agreements.
What has intrigued me for a long while is why some landscapes support large populations of great crested newts and others do not. We have known for a long while that there is strong correlation between pond density and great crested newt occurrence, but there is more to it than that. Worcestershire is not the mostly densely populated county for ponds. The county covers an area of 1735km2, there are approximately 5000 ponds covering less than 2ha in area within the county (derived by looking at recent Ordnance Survey maps). The average pond density in Worcestershire is 2.9 per 1km2. Both Cheshire and Suffolk have far more ponds. But Suffolk does not have anything like the same rate of occupancy by crested newts. However, part of Cheshire might equal rates of occupancy to Worcestershire. There is a common thread. The Cheshire plain is a clayland landscape predominated by Mercia Mudstone. The Severn Basin and Avon valley is also a clayland landscape. In Worcestershire as a whole Mercia Mudstone occupies about 40% of the county and Lower Lias clays about 20%. The greatest density of ponds are on the Mercia Mudstone. This substrate is contains bands of Tea-green Marl. Pond pH is usually to the basic side of neutral. Great crested newts are best suited to ponds which are slightly alkaline.
Worcestershire survey results
|
Worcestershire covers an area of 1735km2 |
|
There are approximately 5000 ponds covering less than 2ha in area within the county. (This figure was derived by looking at recent Ordnance Survey maps). |
|
Average pond density in Worcestershire is 2.9 per 1km2. |
|
387 ponds have been surveyed at least once for amphibians. |
|
Approximately 7.7% of the total number of ponds within the county have been surveyed for amphibians. |
|
190 of those ponds surveyed contained Great Crested Newts |
|
This is a 49% occurrence rate for this species. |
|
Based on these results there may be 2500 Great Crested Newt ponds in Worcestershire. |
|
This would work out to be 1.44 Crested Newt ponds per kilometre across the whole county. |
|
In 1916 there were 7653 ponds less than 2ha in size, comparing these results with today’s figures, we have lost at least 30% of our pond resource in the last 100 years. |
Table 1 Occurrence of amphibian species by ponds in Worcestershire between 1987 and 1999. Numbers of ponds surveyed 386
Species present:
| Great Crested Newt | 189 | 50% |
| Palmate Newt | 10 | 3% |
| Smooth Newt | 213 | 55% |
| Common Frog | 148 | 38% |
| Common Toad | 48 | 10% |
| Marsh Frog | 2 | 0.6% |
|
The vast majority of the amphibian work was carried out be Will Watson, (herpetologist and West Midlands Regional Representative for HGBI) between 1987 and 1999. Most of these records were gathered in the last 3 years and 40% of all records were gathered last year. Fifty ponds were surveyed as a result of a survey commissioned by the Environment Agency and 28 through the Aqua Vitae 21 pond restoration initiative. |
|
It is difficult to make direct comparison with surveys conducted in other counties. For a start very few counties have such a widespread series of records. However, this work indicates that there is an extremely high rate of occurrence for Great Crested Newts within Worcestershire (pers.com. Jim Foster: English Nature). It is possible to compare these results with a similar survey conducted in Cheshire by the Pond Life Project. |
Table 2 Percentage occurrence of amphibian species in ponds by District in Worcestershire between 1987 and 1999
| Species present | Wychavon | Malvern Hills | Worcester City | Redditch | Bromsgrove | WyeForest |
| Crested Newt | 62% | 52% | 33% | 46% | 28% | 44% |
| Palmate Newt | 0.9% | 8.3% | 6.4% | 11% | ||
| Smooth Newt | 60% | 62% | 53% | 80% | 26% | 33% |
| Common Frog | 30% | 46% | 54% | 69% | 50% | 22% |
| Common Toad | 12.5% | 36% | 5.8% | 38% | 6.4% | 22% |
| Marsh Frog | 0.9% | 1.4% | ||||
| Nos. of ponds surveyed | 159 | 72 | 89 | 27 | 34 | 9 |
|
There are several parts of the county which contain pond clusters where average pond density is over 6 per 1km2. This includes in the north-east of Bromsgrove District covering 8km2 and Bentley Pauncefoot in Bromsgrove. Other parts of county with similar pond density are Hanbury in Wychavon and Warndon Parish in Worcester City. The latter Parish contains 50 ponds within 4.1 km2. |
|
All high pond density is on the so called ‘clayland’ landscape of the Mercia Mudstone which occupies about 40% of the land area of Worcestershire. Elsewhere on the Mercia Mudstone ‘claylands’ average pond density is between 3 and 6 ponds per 1km2. This landscape is well represented in Wychavon District, Malvern Hills District, Worcester City and Redditch Borough. |
|
There is a good correlation between the rate of occurrence of Great Crested Newts and the distribution of ponds on the ‘clayland’ landscape. Over half of the ponds on the Mercia Mudstone were found to contain Great Crested Newts. In Warndon Parish for example 24 of the 50 ponds present were found to support Crested Newts. This figure would be much higher if one excludes the ephemeral ponds and permanent water-bodies containing fish. In Hanbury Parish, Wychavon District, 32 ponds have been surveyed and 26 of these have been found to contain Crested Newts. |
|
Lower Lias deposits, where clay frequently outcrops cover about 20% of the county. However, pond density is much lower, usually averaging between 2 and 3 ponds per 1km2. High rates of occurrence for Great Crested Newts were also found on this substrate with the species being found in approximately 50% of all ponds surveyed. |
Comparison with a survey in Cheshire
|
Cheshire covers an area of 2328km2 |
|
There are approximately 16000 ponds in Cheshire. (This figure was derived by studying Ordnance Survey maps, carrying out ground based field surveys and by looking at aerial photographs). |
|
Average pond density is 6.9 per 1km2 |
|
ponds were surveyed for amphibians. |
|
of those ponds contained Great Crested Newts. |
|
This is a 31% occurrence rate for this species. |
|
Based on these figures there may be 4960 Great Crested Newt sites in Cheshire.representing across the county an average occurrence of 2.13 Great crested Newt sites per 1km2. |
|
In the 1870’s it was estimated that were 80,000 ponds in Cheshire, comparing these results with current figures it is estimated that 61% of ponds have been lost since that date. |
|
This work was carried out by the Pond Life Project in 1995 |
The Status and Distribution of Great Crested Newts Triturus cristatus in Worcestershire 2000
By Will Watson
Like most counties only casual records of great crested newts Triturus cristatus existed before 1986. However, these showed it to be widespread throughout the Worcestershire with records coming from Malvern in the west, Hopwood Dingle in the north and Corse Lawn in the south. In 1986 the National Amphibian Survey organised by Leicester Polytechnic was launched with funding from the Nature Conservancy Council. In 1987, Will Watson and Phil Williams conducted a blanket amphibian survey of the Warndon Parish in Worcester City; 410ha of biodiverse rural landscape scheduled for development. Forty five ponds were present and great crested newts were found in 12 of them in the first year. The ponds were studied over the 10 year period of the development recording great crested newts from 25 of the Warndon Ponds. The pond at Lyppard Grange, with 187 individual adult crested newts recorded in one evening, is still the best recorded site in Worcestershire.
Mainly from the mid 1990’s onwards I focused my attention on other parts of the county to find out if this high rate of occurrence was part of a pattern experienced elsewhere. Over a 14 year period of surveying (between 1987 and 2000 inclusive) I surveyed 387 ponds at least once for amphibians. Approximately half of the work conducted has been voluntary basis with the remainder of work being carried out from requests for amphibian data from a range a range of different organisations. Last year for example I was commissioned by the Environment Agency to survey 50 ponds in the county, I also undertook the survey of 28 ponds as Project Consultant for the County Council’s pond project Aqua Vitae 21.
A total of 335 of those ponds contained one or more species of amphibians, representing 86% of the total. An impressive 190 of those ponds surveyed contained Great Crested Newts. This is a 49% occurrence rate for this species. About 90% of the surveys carried out were targeted at all 5 common species and involved a minimum of 10 minute sampling either using netting or torching. Only about 10% of survey work carried out involved just egg searching and would be bias towards smooth and great crested newts.
This year have I attempted to focus on the areas where there is a high rate of occurrence for crested newts, usually coinciding with areas where there are clusters of ponds. By deliberately focusing on areas of known high occupancies one comes up with even more exceptional statistics. The survey of the National Trust estate at Hanbury Hall involved sampling 26 ponds (mostly, by egg search). Presence of great crested newts was found in 21 of these ponds within just 1.5km2. This was not a one off result for Worcestershire. Smaller surveys of pond clusters have revealed a similar rates of occupancy. These sites with high pond density supported by good terrestrial connectivity are by definition crested newt meta-populations.
The next and probably the most exciting phase of work will focus on carrying out evaluation on pond clusters where great crested newts are known to occur. This work will involve the recording of adult newts, during the breeding period using the most appropriate method according to the conditions. Sites which have been thoroughly surveyed on such a basis will be worthy of consideration for non-statutory wildlife site, SSSI or SAC designation.
Site designations alone will not protect ponds. Many of the ponds surveyed revealed that population sizes were low. In Warndon a fifth of ponds surveyed over the 10 year period revealed no signs of breeding at all. In a similar number of those ponds breeding only occurs wet seasons. This is believed to be typical for other parts of the county. What is also needed are financial incentives to manage ponds according to the best pond practices.
In terms of the biodiversity action plan establishing 20 new colonies within a county which on current evidence contains 2000 to 3000 great crested newt ponds is relatively insignificant objective and will not in itself lessen the rate of the extinction of local populations or the overall decline in population size. It is far more beneficial, in terms of species conservation, to encourage the natural expansion of the species in target areas and facilitate habitat management by restoring old ponds create new ponds and enhance existing amphibian corridors. Our next challenge is how to achieve such grand objectives under the local great crested newt species action plan.
What is required is strategic plan. Restoration work must carried out holistically to cater for also for macrophytes and macro-invertebrates. This process must work with the co-operation of landowners and where ever possible involve local communities. The Pond Warden Scheme operated in Cheshire and Lancashire is an excellent model to follow. But these schemes do not come cheap. Until we gear ourselves up to large scale restoration projects small -scale restoration maybe the most viable option in the short-term. We may achieve at least part of our objectives through Farm Plans tailor made for enhancing pond corridors as part of Countryside Stewardship agreements.
What has intrigued me for a long while is why some landscapes support large populations of great crested newts and others do not. We have known for a long while that there is strong correlation between pond density and great crested newt occurrence, but there is more to it than that. Worcestershire is not the mostly densely populated county for ponds. The county covers an area of 1735km2, there are approximately 5000 ponds covering less than 2ha in area within the county (derived by looking at recent Ordnance Survey maps). The average pond density in Worcestershire is 2.9 per 1km2. Both Cheshire and Suffolk have far more ponds. But Suffolk does not have anything like the same rate of occupancy by crested newts. However, part of Cheshire might equal rates of occupancy to Worcestershire. There is a common thread. The Cheshire plain is a clayland landscape predominated by Mercia Mudstone. The Severn Basin and Avon valley is also a clayland landscape. In Worcestershire as a whole Mercia Mudstone occupies about 40% of the county and Lower Lias clays about 20%. The greatest density of ponds are on the Mercia Mudstone. This substrate is contains bands of Tea-green Marl. Pond pH is usually to the basic side of neutral. Great crested newts are best suited to ponds which are slightly alkaline.
Worcestershire survey results
|
Worcestershire covers an area of 1735km2 |
|
There are approximately 5000 ponds covering less than 2ha in area within the county. (This figure was derived by looking at recent Ordnance Survey maps). |
|
Average pond density in Worcestershire is 2.9 per 1km2. |
|
387 ponds have been surveyed at least once for amphibians. |
|
Approximately 7.7% of the total number of ponds within the county have been surveyed for amphibians. |
|
190 of those ponds surveyed contained Great Crested Newts |
|
This is a 49% occurrence rate for this species. |
|
Based on these results there may be 2500 Great Crested Newt ponds in Worcestershire. |
|
This would work out to be 1.44 Crested Newt ponds per kilometre across the whole county. |
|
In 1916 there were 7653 ponds less than 2ha in size, comparing these results with today’s figures, we have lost at least 30% of our pond resource in the last 100 years. |
Table 1 Occurrence of amphibian species by ponds in Worcestershire between 1987 and 1999. Numbers of ponds surveyed 386
| Species present: | ||
| Great Crested Newt | 189 | 50% |
| Palmate Newt | 10 | 3% |
| Smooth Newt | 213 | 55% |
| Common Frog | 148 | 38% |
| Common Toad | 48 | 10% |
| Marsh Frog | 2 | 0.6% |
|
The vast majority of the amphibian work was carried out be Will Watson, (herpetologist and West Midlands Regional Representative for HGBI) between 1987 and 1999. Most of these records were gathered in the last 3 years and 40% of all records were gathered last year. Fifty ponds were surveyed as a result of a survey commissioned by the Environment Agency and 28 through the Aqua Vitae 21 pond restoration initiative. |
|
It is difficult to make direct comparison with surveys conducted in other counties. For a start very few counties have such a widespread series of records. However, this work indicates that there is an extremely high rate of occurrence for Great Crested Newts within Worcestershire (pers.com. Jim Foster: English Nature). It is possible to compare these results with a similar survey conducted in Cheshire by the Pond Life Project. |
Table 2 Percentage occurrence of amphibian species in ponds by District in Worcestershire between 1987 and 1999
| Species present | Wychavon | Malvern Hills | Worcester City | Redditch | Bromsgrove | WyeForest |
| Crested Newt | 62% | 52% | 33% | 46% | 28% | 44% |
| Palmate Newt | 0.9% | 8.3% | 6.4% | 11% | ||
| Smooth Newt | 60% | 62% | 53% | 80% | 26% | 33% |
| Common Frog | 30% | 46% | 54% | 69% | 50% | 22% |
| Common Toad | 12.5% | 36% | 5.8% | 38% | 6.4% | 22% |
| Marsh Frog | 0.9% | 1.4% | ||||
| Nos. of ponds surveyed | 159 | 72 | 89 | 27 | 34 | 9 |
|
There are several parts of the county which contain pond clusters where average pond density is over 6 per 1km2. This includes in the north-east of Bromsgrove District covering 8km2 and Bentley Pauncefoot in Bromsgrove. Other parts of county with similar pond density are Hanbury in Wychavon and Warndon Parish in Worcester City. The latter Parish contains 50 ponds within 4.1 km2. |
|
All high pond density is on the so called ‘clayland’ landscape of the Mercia Mudstone which occupies about 40% of the land area of Worcestershire. Elsewhere on the Mercia Mudstone ‘claylands’ average pond density is between 3 and 6 ponds per 1km2. This landscape is well represented in Wychavon District, Malvern Hills District, Worcester City and Redditch Borough. |
|
There is a good correlation between the rate of occurrence of Great Crested Newts and the distribution of ponds on the ‘clayland’ landscape. Over half of the ponds on the Mercia Mudstone were found to contain Great Crested Newts. In Warndon Parish for example 24 of the 50 ponds present were found to support Crested Newts. This figure would be much higher if one excludes the ephemeral ponds and permanent water-bodies containing fish. In Hanbury Parish, Wychavon District, 32 ponds have been surveyed and 26 of these have been found to contain Crested Newts. |
|
Lower Lias deposits, where clay frequently outcrops cover about 20% of the county. However, pond density is much lower, usually averaging between 2 and 3 ponds per 1km2. High rates of occurrence for Great Crested Newts were also found on this substrate with the species being found in approximately 50% of all ponds surveyed. |
Comparison with a survey in Cheshire
|
Cheshire covers an area of 2328km2 |
|
There are approximately 16000 ponds in Cheshire. (This figure was derived by studying Ordnance Survey maps, carrying out ground based field surveys and by looking at aerial photographs). |
|
Average pond density is 6.9 per 1km2 |
|
This is a 31% occurrence rate for this species. |
|
Based on these figures there may be 4960 Great Crested Newt sites in Cheshire.representing across the county an average occurrence of 2.13 Great crested Newt sites per 1km2. |
|
In the 1870’s it was estimated that were 80,000 ponds in Cheshire, comparing these results with current figures it is estimated that 61% of ponds have been lost since that date. |
|
This work was carried out by the Pond Life Project in 1995. |