Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · 5230248

Checklist of vertebrates of the United States, the U.S. territories, and Canada

Abstract

On 30 January 1980 the Policy Group of the 1978 Interagency Agreement on Classifications and Inventory established a work group on fish and wildlife species names. The participating agencies were the Fish and Wildlife Service, Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, Geological Survey, and Soil Conservation Service. The Fish and Wildlife Service was assigned the role of establishing and leading this work group in developing a national list of standard vertebrate species names that is up-to-date and accurate. The Association of Systematic Collections was contracted to develop the reference list. This publication is a revision of portions of the list (amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals), including updating to the end of 1985. The geographic areas encompassed by this list are: the United States, including Alaska and Hawaii; the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Navassa Island; the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (the Caroline Islands, Palau Islands, Marshall Islands, and northern Mariana Islands); and the U.S. Territories of American Samoa, Baker Island, Guam, Howland Island, Jarvis Island, the Johnston Islands, Kingman Reef, the Midway Islands, and Wake Islands. Canadian species that do not also occur in the United States have been included. This list includes the names of all Recent species known to occur, or to have occurred, in the geographic areas indicated above. No distinction is made between resident and migratory species or between those that occur regularly and those of casual or accidentally occurrence. The occurrence of all species listed is documented by specimen or photographic evidence. Zoo, aquarium, game park, and hunting preserve populations are not listed, nor are unestablished escapes from such populations. Species that are extinct are marked with a 1 . Species whose only occurrence in an area is the result of introduction by man are marked with a 2 . Species introduced into one area but native to another covered by this checklist do not have a superscript, nor do species for which the documentation of introduction is equivocal. Species listed as Endangered or Threatened (as of January 1987) throughout their ranges are marked with a 3 , whereas species with only selected subspecies or populations so listed are marked with a 4 . Refer to the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR) for further details on the Endangered Species Act of 1973 and its requirements. The list includes the scientific names and English names of taxa from order to species. At the level of genus and above, more than one English name may be given; this is to indicate content, not alternative names. English (common or vernacular) names for species vary from region to region and from author to author. The name "gopher", for example, has been applied to kinds of animals as diverse as pocket gophers, ground squirrels, and turtles. Most species have names in other languages as well as English names, and some species lack generally accepted English names. A single English name is given for each species in this list to promote uniformity and to permit more precise communication among users. Accurate communication about species can be assured only by using the scientific names, including their authors and date. We provide an "exploded" illustration (Fig. 1) of a typical portion of the list and identify the elements of each citation.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Richard C. Banks, Roy W. McDiarmid, Alfred L. Gardner. 1987. Checklist of vertebrates of the United States, the U.S. territories, and Canada. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/5230248

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Satellite telemetry: A new tool for wildlife research and management

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game have cooperated since 1984 to develop and evaluate satellite telemetry as a means of overcoming the high costs and logistical problems of conventional VHF (very high frequency) radiotelemetry systems. Detailed locational and behavioral data on caribou ( Rangifer tarandus ), polar bears ( Ursus maritimus ), and other large mammals in Alaska have been obtained using the Argos Data Collection and Location System (DCLS). The Argos system, a cooperative project of the Centre National d'Études Spatiales of France, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, is designed to acquire environmental data on a routine basis from anywhere on earth. Transmitters weighing 1.6-2.0 kg and functioning approximately 12-18 months operated on a frequency of 401.650 MHz. Signals from the transmitters were received by Argos DCLS instruments aboard two Tiros-N weather satellites in sun-synchronous, nearpolar orbits. Data from the satellites were received at tracking stations, transferred to processing centers in Maryland and France, and made available to users via computer tape, printouts, or telephone links. During 1985 and 1986, more than 25,000 locations and an additional 28,000 sets of sensor data (transmitter temperature and short-term and long-term indices of animal activity) were acquired for caribou and polar bears. Locations were calculated from the Doppler shift in the transmitted signal as the satellite approached and then moved away from the transmitter. The mean locational error for transmitters at known locations (n - 1,265) was 829 m; 90% of the calculated locations were within 1,700 m of the true location. Caribou transmitters provided a mean of 3.1 (+5.0. SD) locations per day during 6h of daily operation, and polar bear transmitters provided 1.7 (+6.9SD) locations during 12h of operation every third day. During the first 6 months of operation, the UHF (ultra-high frequency) signal failed on three of 32 caribou transmitters and 10 of 36 polar bear transmitters. A geographic information system (GIS) incorporating other databases (e.g., land cover, elevation, slope, aspect, hydrology, ice distribution) was used to analyze and display detailed locational and behavioral data collected via satellite. Examples of GIS applications to research projects using satellite telemetry and examples of detailed movement patterns of caribou and polar bears are presented. This report includes documentation for computer software packages for processing Argos data and presents developments, as of March 1987, in transmitter design, data retrieval using a local user terminal, computer software, and sensor development and calibration.

Resource Publication

Distribution and abundance of predators that affect duck production--prairie pothole region

During 1983-88, the relative abundance of 18 species and species-groups of mammalian and avian predators affecting duck production in the prairie pothole region was determined in 33 widely scattered study areas ranging in size from 23-26 km2. Accounts of each studied species and species-group include habitat and history, population structure and reported densities, and information on distribution and abundance from the present study. Index values of undetected, scarce, uncommon, common, or numerous were used to rate abundance of nearly all species in each study area. Principal survey methods were livetrapping of striped skunks (Mephitis mephitis) and Franklin's ground squirrels (Spermophilus franklinii), systematic searches for carnivore tracks in quarter sections (0.65 km2), daily records of sightings of individual predator species, and systematic searches for occupied nests of tree-nesting avian predators. Abundances of predators in individual areas were studied 1-3 years.The distribution and abundance of predator species throughout the prairie pothole region have undergone continual change since settlement of the region by Europeans in the late 1800's. Predator populations in areas we studied differed markedly from those of pristine times. The changes occurred from habitat alterations, human-inflicted mortality of predators, and interspecific relations among predator species. Indices from surveys of tracks revealed a decline in the abundance of red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and an albeit less consistent decline in the abundance of raccoons (Procyon lotor) with an increase in the abundance of coyotes (Canis latrans). Records of locations of occupied nests revealed great horned owls (Bubo virginianus) and red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis) tended to nest 0.5 km apart, and American crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos) tended to avoid nesting 0.5 km of nests of red-tailed hawks. Excluding large gulls, for which no measurements of abundance were obtained, the number of predator species averaged 12.2 (SD = 1.60) per study area; common or numerous predator species averaged 6.0 (SD = 1.54) per study area (minimal because the abundance of weasels [Mustela erminea; M. frenata] in all areas and of minks [Mustela vison] and raptors in some areas was not rated). Major changes in relative abundance of individual predator species studied >1 year were few. Predator species most restricted to the aspen parkland were the Franklin's ground squirrel, black-billed magpie (Pica pica), American crow (Corvus brachyrlus), and red-tailed hawk; species most restricted to the prairie were the badger (Taxidea taxus), Swainson's hawk (Buteo swainsoni), and ferruginous hawk (B. regalis). The coyote, black-billed magpie, and American crow were most numerous in Canada, whereas the red fox, raccoon, mink, ferruginous hawk, and great horned owl were most numerous in the United States. The number of common or numerous egg-eating predator species (excludes large gulls and weasels, which were not rated) averaged 4.6 (SD = 0.90) per study area. The average numbers of common or numerous egg-eating species per study area did not differ among provinces and states, but birds gradually replaced mammals from southeast to northwest across the region. Investigators are urged to assess composition of predator populations and relative abundance of predator species for evaluations of waterfowl recruitment.

Resource Publication

Selection of prey by walleyes in the Ohio waters of the central basin of Lake Erie, 1985-1987

Walleyes (Stizostedion vitreum vitreum) were collected at five locations in the central basin of Lake Erie in 1985-87. The contents of the fishes' stomachs were examined to identify the species of prey. The seasonal availability of potential prey was determined from sampling with trawl tows. Food electivity indexes for young-of-the-year (YOY) and older walleyes were calculated. Electivity indexes changed monthly in YOY walleyes that consumed mostly YOY gizzard shads (Dorosoma cepedianum) in July and fed moderately on gizzard shads, but more on smelts (Osmerus mordax), in August. In September and October YOY walleyes did not consume YOY white perch (Morone americana). During October, they continued to eat YOY gizzard shads moderately but consumed mostly emerald shiners (Notropis atherinoides). Older walleys were highly partial to YOY gizzard shads, emerald shiners, and smelts and consumed no YOY white perch. The numbers of YOY yellow perch (Perca flavescens) in stomachs were limited. Prey selection by walleyes in the central basin was species-specific irrespective of abundance of prey.

Resource Publication