Geology Reports⌕ Search

Geology topics

M.L. Niemiller

Publications and source records attributed to M.L. Niemiller.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Refining sampling protocols for cavefishes and cave crayfishes to account for environmental variation

Subterranean habitats support a diverse array of organisms and represent imperative habitats in many conservation strategies; however, subterranean habitats are one of the most difficult environments to study. Accounting for variable sampling detection is necessary to properly evaluate conservation options for rare species such as karst and other groundwater organisms. New sampling methods, such as environmental DNA, show promise to improve stygobiont detection; however, sources of sampling bias are poorly understood. Therefore, our objective was to determine factors affecting detection probability of both visual and environmental DNA (eDNA) surveys for cavefishes and cave crayfishes. We sampled 40 sites across the Ozark Highlands ecoregion in Arkansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma, USA using visual and eDNA surveys. We used occupancy modeling to estimate the detection probability of the two taxa using both survey methods under varying environmental conditions. Overall, eDNA sampling resulted in higher detection probability for cavefishes when compared to visual surveys, whereas visual surveys typically had higher detection probability for cave crayfishes. Greater water volume at the time of sampling was related to lower detection using visual surveys for both taxa, but there was no relationship between eDNA detection and water volume. Detection probability of both cavefishes and crayfishes was higher using visual surveys when sampling units were classified by coarse rather than fine substrate, whereas detection of cave crayfishes surveyed using eDNA was higher in coarse substrate environments. Detection of cavefishes and cave crayfishes was higher via eDNA sampling when water was flowing, but similar sampling conditions resulted in lower detection using visual surveys. Our results indicate detection should be considered when sampling stygobionts even if using traditional visual surveys. Environmental DNA is a useful tool; however, the limitations we identified indicate eDNA for these taxa currently are not adequate to replace traditional surveys in subterranean environments.

Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma↗

Herpetofauna of the cedar glades and associated habitats of the Inner Central Basin of middle Tennessee

The cedar glades and barrens of the Inner Central Basin (ICB) of middle Tennessee support a unique and diverse flora and fauna and represent some of the state's most valued natural areas. We conducted herpetofaunal inventories of the cedar glades, associated barrens, cedar-hardwood forest, and adjacent aquatic habitats of the Stones River drainage of Middle Tennessee, focusing our sampling effort primarily at seven state- or federally owned properties in Rutherford and Wilson counties. These properties included Stones River National Battlefield (SRNB), Flat Rock State Natural Area (FRSNA), Vesta Cedar Glade State Natural Area (VSNA), Fall Creek Recreation Area (FCRA) on J. Percy Priest Wildlife Management Area, Cedars of Lebanon State Forest (CLSF), Cedars of Lebanon State Forest Natural Area (CLSNA), and Cedars of Lebanon State Park (CLSP). We used a variety of inventory techniques in terrestrial, aquatic, and subterranean habitats to survey these properties periodically from 1989 to 2010. We documented 49 species (22 amphibian and 27 reptile) accounting for 75.4% of the 65 herpetofaunal species thought to occur in the ICB, including records for Cemophora coccinea, Aneides aeneus, Gyrinophilus palleucus, Ambystoma barbouri, and Pseudotriton montanus. We found differences in alpha and beta diversity between sites, with the CLSF complex containing a high of 41 herpetofaunal species and FRSNA containing a low of 23 species. Beta diversity comparisons indicated similarity in amphibian species composition between FRSNA and CLSF and between SRNB and CLSF (9 shared species), and in reptile species composition between VSNA and the CLSF complex (16 shared species). We compare the results of our inventory with two previous studies conducted in the area and discuss the relative abundance, conservation, and threats to the herpetofaunal community of these habitats.

Herpetological Conservation and Biology↗