nena masthead
SENA Home Staff & Editors For Readers For Authors

An Overlooked Hotspot? Rapid Biodiversity Assessment Reveals a Region of Exceptional Herpetofaunal Richness in the Southeastern United States
Sean P. Graham, David A. Steen, Kerry T. Nelson, Andrew M. Durso, and John C. Maerz

Southeastern Naturalist, Volume 9, Issue 1 (2010): 19–34

Full-text pdf (Accessible only to subscribers.To subscribe click here.)


Access Journal Content

Open access browsing of table of contents and abstract pages. Full text pdfs available for download for subscribers.

Issue-in-Progress: Vol. 22 (2) ... early view

Current Issue: Vol. 21 (4)
SENA 21(3)

All Regular Issues


Special Issues






JSTOR logoClarivate logoWeb of science logoBioOne logo EbscoHOST logoProQuest logo

2010 SOUTHEASTERN NATURALIST 9(1):19–34 An Overlooked Hotspot? Rapid Biodiversity Assessment Reveals a Region of Exceptional Herpetofaunal Richness in the Southeastern United States Sean P. Graham1,*, David A. Steen1, Kerry T. Nelson2, Andrew M. Durso3, and John C. Maerz2 Abstract - We conducted a competitive bioblitz survey in four Georgia counties to raise awareness of a unique and species rich herpetofauna in the Pine Mountain/ Fall Line Sandhills Region of Georgia, and compared documented species of these counties to other herpetofaunas of the southeast that have known high richness and/ or were subject to thorough collection efforts. Our results demonstrate the efficacy of bioblitzes for documenting large numbers of species in a limited amount of time (62 amphibian and reptile species in only seven days, including 36 new county records and documentation of three protected species). Compared to areas of similar size, this area is among the most species-rich herpetofaunas in North America north of Mexico, with only three areas having higher documented richness. However, all areas we compared our site to have experienced much higher collection effort and contain much larger tracts of protected land. Thus, our data suggest the Pine Mountain/ Fall Line Sandhills region is among the most important regions for amphibian and reptile conservation in North America. Introduction Biodiversity hotspots—areas undergoing extensive habitat loss characterized by high species richness, diversity, and/or endemism— have garnered great attention from ecologists, land managers, and conservationists as interesting areas for research and practical targets for conservation (Myers et al. 2000). A range of factors influence patterns of species richness within a given area, including local environmental variables (Qian et al. 2007), historical climate (Araú jo et al. 2008), latitude (Pianka 1966), topography and/or habitat heterogeneity (Kerr and Packer 1997), and productivity (Rodrí guez et al. 2005). The first step in identifying and understanding hotspots is to accurately measure species distributions and richness. Not surprisingly, attention to hotspots is biased toward easily sampled taxa (e.g., plants; Myers 1988, 1990). Unfortunately, biodiversity hotspots do not always show great congruence among taxa, so characterizations of one set of organisms may not apply to other taxa (e.g., Daniels 1992, Grenyer et al. 2006). This lack of congruence presents a unique challenge in identifying biodiversity hotspots for cryptic taxa that are difficult to detect. 1Auburn University Department of Biological Sciences, 331 Funchess Hall, Auburn University, AL 36849. 2Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602. 3Odum School of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602. *Corresponding author - 20 Southeastern Naturalist Vol. 9, No. 1 Amphibians and reptiles (hereafter, “herpetofauna”) are examples of taxa that can be difficult to systematically inventory (Heyer et al. 1994) and therefore may have regional hotspots that remain undocumented. Identification of herpetofaunal hotspots may require opportunistic or targeted inventories and long-term accumulation of records. For example, it took 45 years of incidental and opportunistic encounters to identify areas within the Savannah River Site (SRS) that contain as many as 90 reptile and amphibian species, and the SRS is arguably one of the most intensively studied areas for herpetofauna in the world (Gibbons et al. 1997). Even still, one amphibian species escaped detection for over 50 years until only recently being discovered on the site (Luhring 2008). The southeastern United States is the center of herpetofaunal biodiversity in North America (north of Mexico), containing approximately half of its known species of amphibians and reptiles (Conant and Collins 1998, Gibbons and Buhlmann 2001, Tuberville et al. 2005). Therefore, the location of the most species rich herpetofaunal assemblage in North America presumably occurs in the southeastern United States, and it has been suggested that the Florida Panhandle has the most amphibian and reptile species for its size compared to any other region in North America (Blaustein 2008). However, due to the inherent difficulties involved in sampling these animals (Heyer et al. 1994), it is possible that other areas with equal or higher species richness exist. The Fall Line along the Gulf and Atlantic Coasts of the United States has particularly high species richness due to the intermingling of species typical of the Coastal Plain and those restricted to other physiographic provinces (e.g., Piedmont, Ridge and Valley, etc.; Mount 1975). In particular, one section of the Georgia Fall Line appears to have notable species richness (see Griffith et al. 2001, Wharton 1978). In this zone (the Pine Mountain Ecoregion and nearby Fall Line Sandhills), certain northern/montane-associated species (e.g., Rana sylvatica LeConte [Wood Frog], Gyrinophilus porphyriticus Green [Spring Salamander]) reach the southernmost termini of their ranges (Conant and Collins 1998, Jensen et al. 2008), while Coastal Plain-associated species (e.g., Rana capito LeConte [Gopher Frog], Crotalus adamanteus Palisot de Beauvois [Eastern Diamondback Rattlesnake], and Notophthalmus perstriatus Bishop [Striped Newt]) occur in some of their inland-most populations (Jensen et al. 2008). Surprisingly, this area has not been subject to intensive study, although its significance relative to vertebrates has been briefl y noted (e.g., Wharton 1978), and a botanical study has been conducted, documenting similar patterns of biogeographic intermingling of plant species (Jones 1974). This paper presents the findings of a bioblitz to raise awareness of this potentially important area of reptile and amphibian biodiversity. Bioblitz competitions are events in which teams of biologists compete to document and voucher the most species in a particular area (Graham et al. 2007a; Graham et al., in press). Our goals were to: 1) document new county records to 2010 S.P. Graham, D.A. Steen, K.T. Nelson, A.M. Durso, and J.C. Maerz 21 supplement the list of known species and demonstrate the incompleteness of sampling for this region, 2) document the presence or persistence of rare and protected species, and 3) compare the species list for this region to wellstudied herpetofaunas in the southeast known for their high diversity. Methods Study area The core area of our survey included the four Georgia counties of Talbot, Taylor, Marion, and Schley, although participants were encouraged to locate new records in adjacent counties as well. Many terrestrial and aquatic environments are found in this region; for complete descriptions of these plant and animal communities, consult Wharton (1978). The Fall Line—the physiographic boundary between the Piedmont and Coastal Plain—transects southern Talbot and northern Taylor counties (Fig. 1). Areas north of this boundary contain heavy, clay soils derived from crystalline metamorphic rocks, whereas deep sands of the Coastal Plain are found south of it (Griffith et. al. 2001, Wharton 1978). Southern portions of the Pine Mountain ridges terminate in Talbot County (Fig. 1), and are composed of ancient (e.g., >1 billion years old) “basement” (e.g., continental shield) metamorphic rocks (Steltenpohl et al. 2008). These ridges are topped with xeric mountain Longleaf Pine-Blackjack Oak forests, and their north-facing slopes contain mesic hardwood forests. Streams of this area often have high gradients and contain larger, cobble substrates than those found elsewhere in the Piedmont (Griffith et al. 2001). Typical oak-hickory assemblages are found in the Piedmont hills surrounding these ridges. The Fall Line Sandhills in this area once contained excellent tracts of xeric Longleaf Pine-Turkey Oak forests which are now heavily fragmented, with much of the original Pinus palustris Mill (Longleaf Pine) removed (Wharton 1978). Within these sand ridges are black-water creeks and a few remaining isolated wetlands. Whitewater Creek, a unique, clear, black-water creek, is one of the sole locations in Georgia for Chamaecyparis thyoides L. (Atlantic White Cedar) and many other plants (Patrick et al. 1995). The Flint River is the largest stream fl owing through this area and contains numerous shoals, riffl es, and gorges in its Piedmont section. Its fl oodplain widens extensively after entering the Coastal Plain to form Magnolia Swamp (Fig. 1). Most of the remaining tracts of natural forests and wetlands are in private ownership (including Magnolia Swamp), and are surrounded by agriculture, old fields, pine plantations, and rural development. Bioblitz competition Twenty-five individuals in two teams participated in the survey. However, daily effort ranged widely. The two teams competed to find undocumented species throughout the region, seeking suitable habitat (with landowner’s permission on private tracts), conducting visual encounter surveys, and thoroughly turning cover objects searching for herpetofauna. Limited trapping 22 Southeastern Naturalist Vol. 9, No. 1 (using hoop and minnow traps) was conducted in ponds and creeks. Our survey was divided into spring (21–23 March 2008) and fall (8–10 October 2008 and 26 Oct 2008) portions, a strategy previously demonstrated to maximize results by accommodating diverse reptile and amphibian activity seasons (Graham et al., in press; Todd et al. 2007). New records were vouchered as Figure 1. Map of area surveyed for amphibians and reptiles over seven total days in March and October 2008. Insert: four county center of our survey area, with key physiographic features indicated. 2010 S.P. Graham, D.A. Steen, K.T. Nelson, A.M. Durso, and J.C. Maerz 23 digital photographs or specimens, verified by experts (see Appendix 1), and deposited in the Auburn University Herpetological Collections (AUM). Comparison to other southeastern US herpetofaunas with high species richness We compiled lists of herpetofaunas in the Southeast from published reports combined with museum records. We chose areas of known high species richness based on overlapping ranges in published range maps (Mount 1975; Conant and Collins, 1998; Jensen et al., 2008), our own experience with this region, and suggestions in Gibbons et al. (1997) and Blaustein (2008). We focused on regions with 80 to >100 potential species based upon overlapping ranges (Conant and Collins 1998), then chose localities within these zones that have been well-studied and have published species lists (e.g, Apalachicola National Forest [Means 1976], Savannah River Site [Gibbons et al. 1997], Ichauway [Smith et al. 2006]). Our method resulted in 12 locations of high species richness, varying area, and variable collection effort, to which we compared our area of interest. It is likely that these represent some of the most species rich herpetofaunas (of similar size) in North America (Blaustein 2008). These areas ranged from small national forests (Tuskegee National Forest, Macon County, AL; 45 km2 ) to large counties (Mobile and Baldwin County, AL; 9508 km2). We chose these areas since they are high in amphibian and reptile species richness and also fairly well studied (e.g., they have a long history of sampling due to repeated visits by university biologists), and thus they have been sufficiently sampled. Since our goal was not to provide an exhaustive analysis of species richness patterns in the Southeast, we argue this is an appropriate approach and a heuristic exercise to put our focal region in perspective. For each region, lists included only native species that can be unequivocally assigned to a species using morphology alone, and lists included members of species complexes separable by molecular characters alone only once (e.g., the Plethodon glutinosus Green [Slimy Salamander] complex). This was a conservative approach that likely underestimated the species pool for our own area by at least three species (i.e., the ranges of three members of the P. glutinosus complex overlap in our study area [Jensen et al. 2008], as well as the Elaphe allegheniensis Holbrook [Eastern Ratsnake]/Elaphe spiloides Duméril, Bibron, and Duméril [Grey Ratsnake] contact zone [Burbrink et al. 2000]). We did not include undescribed species known or rumored to occur in an area. We included all species reported within the past 100 years as still present in each area. Species richness is likely related to both study area size and collection effort. To determine if species richness was associated with the area of each location, we used linear regression, and calculated the per-area species richness of each location. We then took residuals from this analysis to rank locations above and below the mean richness of our sample of sites. Since collection effort varied between localities, we determined a qualitative estimate of effort for each area prior to this study, with no 24 Southeastern Naturalist Vol. 9, No. 1 surveys and/or collection efforts from university herpetologists considered to be a “low” collection effort, one herpetofaunal survey and/or collection effort from university herpetologists considered to be a “moderate” collection effort, and localities with long-term collection data from university herpetologists and/or numerous surveys considered to be “high” collection efforts. Similarly, we qualitatively estimated the amount of protection for each locality, with national forests, parks, and wildlife refuges considered “highly” protected, military reservations and other federal properties (e.g., Department of Energy) considered “moderately” protected, and areas with mostly private lands (e.g., counties) with “low” protection. We used SPSS for statistical analyses, with α set at 0.05. Results and Discussion In seven days (disjunct between spring and fall periods), we documented 62 total species of amphibians and reptiles, including 36 new county records (for 5 counties; Appendix 1), surpassing totals achieved during previous bioblitz competitions conducted in other areas (Graham et al. 2007a; Graham et al., in press). Twenty-three of the new records we report were from our core area (the rest from adjacent counties; see Appendix 1), with 54 species documented from Talbot, Taylor, Schley, and Marion counties. By comparison, it took several decades to document 60 reptile and amphibian species in most areas on the Savannah River Site (SRS), and we documented approximately 2/3 the total number of species known from the SRS (Gibbons et al. 1997) in seven days using limited trapping techniques. However, it is important to mention that a more concerted effort using a single drift fence documented 59 species at the SRS in just months (Todd et al. 2007). A recent survey of species richness patterns in southeastern national parks documented a maximum park species richness of 64, with 25 new county records after two years of detailed surveys using a variety of standard methods (Tuberville et al. 2005). Our results illustrate the value and utility of bioblitz competitions for generating baseline species lists in general, as well as the extraordinary richness of the herpetofauna in this area. Combined with previously documented species for these counties (Jensen et al. 2008), our results indicate 104 documented amphibians and reptiles for this region. The comparison among localities in the Southeast demonstrated a positive correlation between locality size and species richness (R2 = 0.349, F = 5.351, P = 0.043), with our area exhibiting richness comparable to sites noted for their herpetofaunal abundance and/or collection effort (Fig. 2, Table 1). Our area had the fourth highest residual richness of our sample of localities (Table 1). However, this can be considered one of the first surveys of this area, and thus collection effort has presumably been much lower for this area than any of the other sites we compared it to (Table 1). To compensate for this lack of collection effort, we analyzed predicted species richness for our area based on range maps in Jensen et al. (2008). Including these species would raise our 2010 S.P. Graham, D.A. Steen, K.T. Nelson, A.M. Durso, and J.C. Maerz 25 pool to 111 species and result in the highest residual richness of our sample (Fig. 2). It is likely that at least nine more species await documentation from this region, such as the widespread Bufo americanus Holbrook (American Toad), Plethodon serratus Grobman (Southern Redback Salamander), and Regina septemvittata Say (Queen Snake), as well as the more secretive Farancia erytrogramma Palisot de Beauvois (Rainbow Snake), Ophisaurus attenuatus Cope (Slender Glass Lizard), and others. If these are documented in our area, the Pine Mountain/Fall Line Sandhills region may possibly deserve status as the most species-rich herpetofauna in North America. A brief consideration of other herpetofaunas in the United States demonstrates the high species richness of this region. For example, the 3242-km2 Big Bend National Park, which boasts more documented birds, bats, and cacti (National Park Service 2009) than any other national park, has 67 documented amphibians and reptiles (56 of which are reptiles; National Park Service 2009). The 370-km2 Saguaro National Park has only 54 species (National Park Service 2009). Although the southwestern United States is known for its reptile (especially lizard) diversity (Ricketts et al. 1999), the Pine Mountain/Fall Line Sandhills region, with 60 species, still outranks the reptile total for both of these southwestern national parks. Figure 2. Relationship between amphibian and reptile species richness and size of study area for regions with documented high species richness/and or extensive collection effort in the southeastern United States. 26 Southeastern Naturalist Vol. 9, No. 1 Great Smoky Mountains National Park is heralded for its amphibian diversity with 44 documented species (Dodd 2004, Tilley and Huheey 2001), yet our focal area has the same number of documented amphibians. In sum, one could combine the reptile species richness of Big Bend National Park and the amphibian species richness of Great Smoky Mountain National Park, and the herpetofauna species list would still be surpassed by our study area. The herpetofaunal species richness observed at our study area and elsewhere in the southeastern United States approaches the richness documented for the tropics (Zug 1993:286–287). Unfortunately, construction of a species-accumulation curve was not practical due to daily fl uctuations in sampling effort (Gotelli and Colwell 2001), and therefore we cannot estimate how many total species may be present. However, the number of new records we documented confirms that sampling has been incomplete in this region, and that increased sampling would likely result in documentation of additional species in the study area. Recent discoveries of range extensions for Rana sylvatica (Graham et al. 2007b), and cryptic species such as Micrurus fulvius L. (Coral Snake) (Klaus and Jensen 2009) in Talbot County are illustrative examples. While this paper was under review, one of us (S.P. Graham) discovered a Desmognathus aeneus Brown and Bishop (Seepage Salamander) on Rockhouse Mountain in Talbot County (Graham 2009). This is yet another species with montane affinities discovered in the Pine Mountain ecoregion. This species was not included in our analysis. Table 1. Species richness patterns in selected southeastern sites with high species richness. Sites are represented in ascending order of residual richness. NF = National Forest, NWR = National Wildlife Refuge, and AFB = Air Force Base. SR = species richness, RR = residual richness, and CE = collection effort, AP = area preserved. H = high collection effort/preservation, M = moderate collection effort/preservation, L = low collection effort/preservation. Area Site (km2) SR Species/area RR CE AP Source Apalachicola NF, FL 2286 106 0.04636920 1.21 M H Means 1976 St. Marks NWR, FL 280 99 0.35357143 0.81 H H USFWS 1998b Savannah River Site, SC 803 99 0.12328767 0.66 H M Gibbons et al. 1997 Taylor, Talbot, Schley, 3379 104 0.03077834 0.63 L L This study, and Marion counties, GA Jensen et al. 2008 Eglin AFB, FL 1875 100 0.05333333 0.49 M M Printiss and Hipes 1999; HerpNET Conecuh NF, AL 340 96 0.28235294 0.37 H H Guyer et al. 2007, Graham 2008, AUM records Fort Stewart, GA 1100 97 0.08818182 0.30 H M Stevenson 1999 Okefenokee NWR, GA 1627 98 0.06023356 0.28 H H USFWS 1998a Mobile and Baldwin 9508 110 0.01156920 -0.67 M L Mount 1975; Counties, AL Palmer 1987; Carey 1984, 1985 Tuskegee NF, AL 45 86 1.91111111 -0.97 H H AUM records Ichauway, GA 117 84 0.71794872 -1.28 H H Smith et al. 2006 Great Smoky Mountains 2108 81 0.03842505 -2.26 H H Tilley and Huheey National Park, TN and NC 2001 2010 S.P. Graham, D.A. Steen, K.T. Nelson, A.M. Durso, and J.C. Maerz 27 In addition to increasing the documented species pool for counties in this region, we documented the persistence of three rare/protected species. Gopherus polyphemus Daudin (Gopher Tortoise) were observed at two sites, a Macrochelys temminckii Gray (Alligator Snapping Turtle) was trapped in a farm pond, and Gopher Frog egg masses were located at a historic locality not resurveyed for this species since 1975 (based on Auburn University Museum records). Two historical and topographical factors appear to be responsible for the high species richness in the region. First, the Apalachicola drainage is a known biogeographic corridor and refugium that has facilitated historical migrations during recent glacial advances and retreats (Blaustein 2008). The Apalachicola Ravines region of the Florida Panhandle is a recognized global hotspot with many endemics thought to have relict distributions (e.g., the critically endangered, Torreya taxifolia Arn [Florida Torreya]; Blaustein 2008). The Pine Mountain/Fall Line Sandhills area is also bisected by Apalachicola drainages, and shares some of the same endemics with the ravines further south (e.g., Silene polypetala Walter [Eastern Fringed Catchfl y]). Therefore, this region probably harbored fl ora and fauna (including herpetofauna) from higher latitudes during climatic fl uctuations, and they likely migrated through the Apalachicola corridor. In addition, the Pine Mountain Ridges trend east–west rather than north–south as most Appalachian ranges do—similar topography has been suggested to have increased diversity and endemism in Asian forests relative to North American ones during the Pleistocene (Qian and Ricklefs 1999). Second, the nearness of the Pine Mountain ecoregion to a rich and almost complete Coastal Plain fauna results in the proximity of species usually found much farther apart. Thus, this region represents an ecotone at the ecoregion scale. Almost all southeastern habitat types (with the exception of caves, high elevation cove/boreal forests, and coastal/marine ecosystems) are available. The southernmost breeding population of Wood Frogs (Graham et al. 2007b) occurs less than 30 km from a population of Gopher Frogs and Striped Newts (Jensen 2000; Jensen and Klaus 2004), both Coastal Plain endemics. We documented Spring Salamanders and Siren lacertina L. (Greater Siren) during the same survey in nearly adjacent counties (≈80 km apart). Future considerations of hotspots—regardless of taxon of interest—should scrutinize border areas between distinctive ecoregions. Additional studies are needed to determine if other taxa exhibit similarly high richness in this region. Areas such as Apalachicola National Forest, Great Smoky Mountains National Park, and the Savannah River Site are known for their high diversity, and their protection as public lands has maintained historical levels of richness. Unfortunately, our focal region (especially in areas below the Fall Line) has not enjoyed this advantage. Although this region has high local herpetofaunal species richness, little of this area is protected as public land, and habitat in the Fall Line Sandhills is generally degraded for much 28 Southeastern Naturalist Vol. 9, No. 1 wildlife. Most of the area is heavily fragmented and under intensive agriculture or silviculture (see Wharton 1978:183). The region may still be suitable for the acquisition and restoration of large areas as conservation easements. Fortunately, a nearby military base (Fort Benning) utilizes conservation management, parts of the Pine Mountain Ridges are protected as state lands (FDR State Park in Harris and Meriwether Counties, Big Lazar Creek WMA in Talbot County, and Sprewell Bluff State Park in Upson County), and the recent designation of Fall Line Sandhills Natural Area by the Georgia Department of Natural Resources (which protects an isolated wetland used by rare Coastal Plain amphibians) is progress toward this goal. The number of endemic species in the area and the extent of habitat loss may be insignificant on a large scale, not qualifying this region as a global hotspot (Myers et al. 2000). However, on a more local scale, we suggest that its high species richness and diversity, coupled with heavy habitat modification and lack of protected land in the area, may qualify the Pine Mountain/ Fall Line Sandhills ecotone as one of the most important areas for herpetofaunal conservation within the United States and Canada. Acknowledgments Numerous individuals collected data associated with this project. We thank D.B. Means, D. Printiss, and D. Stevenson for their help supplying references and data for the herpetofaunas listed in Table 1. We thank C. Guyer, J. Jensen, C. Camp, and J. Godwin for their time verifying records. We thank the editorial board of the Southeastern Naturalist, Brian Todd, and an anonymous reviewer for their suggestions which considerably improved this document. S.P. Graham is supported by NIH grant # R01-A149724 to T. Unnasch under GA collection permit # 29-WTN-07-41 and 29- WBH-08-8. Literature Cited Araú jo, M., D. Nogú es-Bravo, J.A.F. Diniz-Filho, A.M. Haywood, P.J. Valdes, and C. Rahbek. 2008. Quaternary climate changes explain diversity among reptiles and amphibians. Ecography 31:8–15. Blaustein, R.J. 2008. Biodiversity hotspot: The Florida Panhandle. BioScience. 58:784–790. Burbrink, F.T., R. Lawson, and J.B. Slowinski. 2000. Mitochondrial DNA phylogeography of the polytypic North American Rat Snake (Elaphe obsoleta): A critique of the subspecies concept. Evolution 54:2107–2118. Carey, S.D. 1984. Amphiuma pholeter. Geographic distribution. Herpetological Review. 15:77. Carey, S.D. 1985. Amphiuma pholeter. Geographic distribution. Herpetological Review. 16:31. Conant, R., and J.T. Collins. 1998. Reptiles and Amphibians: Eastern/Central North America. Houghton Miffl in Co., Boston, MA. 616 pp. Daniels, R.J.R. 1992. Geographical distribution patterns in the Western Ghats, India. Journal of Biogeography 19:521–529. Dodd, C.K., Jr. 2004. The Amphibians of Great Smoky Mountains National Park. The University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, TN. 284 pp. 2010 S.P. Graham, D.A. Steen, K.T. Nelson, A.M. Durso, and J.C. Maerz 29 Gibbons, J.W., and K.A. Buhlmann. 2001. Reptiles and amphibians. Pp. 372–390, In J.G. Dickson, (Ed.). Wildlife of Southern Forests: Habitat and Management. Hanckock House Publishers, Blaine, WA. 552 pp. Gibbons, J.W., Burke, V.J., J.E. Lovich, R.D. Semlitch, T.D. Tuberville, J.R. Brodie, J.L. Greene, P.H. Niewiarowski, H.H. Whiteman, D.E. Scott, J.H.K. Pecnmann, C.R. Harrison, S.H. Bennett, J.R. Krenz, M.S. Mills, K.A. Buhlmann, J.R. Lee, R.A. Seigel, A.D. Tucker, T.M. Mills, T. Lamb, M.E. Dorcas, J.D. Congdon, M.H. Smith, D.H. Nelson, M. B. Dietsch, H.G. Hanlin, J.A. Ott, and D.J. Karapatakis. 1997. Perceptions of species abundance, distribution, and diversity: Lessons from four decades of sampling on a government-managed reserve. Environmental Management 21:259–268. Gotelli, N.J., and R.K. Colwell. 2001. Quantifying biodiversity: Procedures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of species richness. Ecology Letters 4:379–391. Graham, S.P. 2008. Amphiuma pholeter. Geographic distribution. Herpetological Review 39:231. Graham, S.P. 2009. Desmognathus aeneus (Seepage Salamander). Geographic distribution. Herpetological Review 40:232–233. Graham, S.P., V.M. Johnson, and E.K. Timpe. 2007a. A bioblitz competition to assess a distribution gap in Georgia herpetofaunal records. Herpetological Review 38:493–494. Graham, S.P., E.K. Timpe, and L.A. Giovanetto. 2007b. Significant new records for Georgia herpetofauna. Herpetological Review 38:494–495. Graham, S.P. V.M. Johnson, S.K. Hoss, D.A. Steen, D.J. McMoran, A.M. Durso, K.T. Nelson, S.C. Cox, E.C. Susko, J.W. Shapiro, and J.R. McMillan. In press. An additional bioblitz competition in northwest Georgia yields new county records. Herpetological Review. Grenyer, R., C.D., Jackson, S.F., Thomas, G.H., Davies, R.G., Davies, T.J., Jones, K.E., Olson, V.A., Ridgly, R.S., Rassmussen, P.C., Ding, T.S., Bennett, P.M., Blackburn, T.M., Gaston, K.J., Gittleman, J.L., and Owens, I.P. 2006. Global distribution and conservation of rare and threatened vertebrates. Nature 444:96–96. Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omernik, J.A. Comstock, S. Lawrence, G. Martin, A. Goddard, V.J. Hulcher, and T. Foster. 2001. Ecoregions of Georgia and Alabama (color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs). US Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia. (Map scale = 1:1,700,000). Guyer, C., M. Bailey, J. Holmes, J. Stiles, and S. Stiles. 2007. Herpetofaunal response to Longleaf Pine ecosystem restoration, Conecuh National Forest, Alabama. Unpublished report to the US Forest Service, Auburn, University, Auburn, AL. 92 pp. Heyer, W.R., M.A. Donnelly, R.W. McDiarmid, L.-A.C. Hayek, and M.S. Foster (Eds.). 1994. Measuring and Monitoring Biological Diversity: Standard Methods for Amphibians. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. 364 pp. Jensen, J.B. 2000. Rana capito (Gopher Frog) geographic distribution. Herpetological Review 31:110. Jensen, J.B., and N.A. Klaus. 2004. Notophthalmus perstriatus (Striped Newt) Geographic distribution. Herpetological Review 35:403. Jensen, J.B., C.D. Camp, W. Gibbons, and M.J. Elliot. 2008. Amphibians and Reptiles of Georgia. University of Georgia Press, Athens, GA. 600 pp. 30 Southeastern Naturalist Vol. 9, No. 1 Jones, S.B. 1974. The fl ora and phytogeography of the Pine Mountain region of Georgia. Castanea 39:113–149. Kerr, J.T., and L. Packer. 1997. Habitat heterogeneity as a determinant of mammal species richness in high-energy regions. Nature 385:252–254. Klaus, N.A., and J.B. Jensen. 2009. Micrurus fulvius (Harlequin Coralsnake). Geographic distribution. Herpetological Review 40:365. Luhring, T.M. 2008. “Problem species” of the Savannah River Site such as Brimley’s Chorus Frog, Pseudacris brimleyi, demonstrate the hidden biodiversity concept on an intensively studied government reserve. Southeastern Naturalist 7:371–373. Means, D.B. 1976. Survey of the status of amphibians and reptiles of the Apalachicola National Forest, Florida. Unpublished report to the US Forest Service, Tallahassee, FL. 60 pp. Mount, R.H. 1975. The Reptiles and Amphibians of Alabama. Auburn University Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, AL. 347 pp. Myers, N. 1988. Threatened biotas: “Hotspots” in tropical forests. Environmentalist 8:187–208. Myers, N. 1990. The biodiversity challenge: Expanded hotspots analysis. Environmentalist 10:243–256. Myers, N., R.A. Mittermeier, C.G. Mittermeier, G.A.B. da Fonseca, and J. Kent. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:853–858. National Park Service. 2009. Available online at Accessed 16 April 2009. Palmer, W.M. 1987. A new species of glass lizard (Anguidae: Ophisaurus) from the Southeastern United States. Herpetologica 43:415–423. Patrick, T.S., J.R. Allison, and G.A. Krakow. 1995. Protected plants of Georgia. Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Social Circle, GA. Pianka, E.R. 1966. Latitudinal gradients in species diversity: A review of concepts. American Naturalist 100:33–46. Printiss, D., and D. Hipes. 1999. Rare amphibian and reptile survey of Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. Unpublished Final Report to the Florida Natural Areas Inventory, Tallahassee, FL. 65 pp. Qian, H., and R.E. Ricklefs. 1999. A comparison of the taxonomic richness of vascular plants in China and the United States. American Naturalist. 154:160–181. Qian, H., X. Wang, S. Wang, and Y. Li. 2007. Environmental determinants of amphibian and reptile species richness in China. Ecography 30:471–482. Ricketts, T.H., E. Dinerstein, D.M. Olson, and C. Loucks. 1999. Who’s where in North America? Patterns of species richness and the utility of indicator taxa for conservation. BioScience 49: 69–380. Rodrí guez, M.Á ., J.A. Belmontes, and B.A. Hawkins. 2005. Energy, water, and large-scale patterns of reptile and amphibian species richness in Europe. Acta Oecologica 28:65–70. Smith, L.L., D.A. Steen, J.M. Stober, M.C. Freeman, S.W. Golladay, L.M. Conner, and J. Cochrane. 2006. The vertebrate fauna of Ichauway, Baker County, GA. Southeastern Naturalist 5:599–620. Steltenpohl, M.G., P.M. Mueller, A.J. Heatherington, T.B. Hanley, and J.L. Wooden. 2008. Gondwanan/peri-Gondwanan origin for the Uchee terrane, Alabama and Georgia: Carolina zone or Suwannee terrane (?) and its suture with Grenvillian basement of the Pine Mountain window. Geosphere 4:131–144. Stevenson, D.J. 1999. The herpetofauna of Fort Stewart, Georgia: Habitat occurrence, status of protected and rare species, and species diversity. Upublished report to the Fort Stewart Fish and Wildlife Branch, Fort Stewart, GA. 98 pp. 2010 S.P. Graham, D.A. Steen, K.T. Nelson, A.M. Durso, and J.C. Maerz 31 Tilley, S.G., and J.E. Huheey. 2001. Reptiles and Amphibians of the Smokies. Great Smoky Mountains Natural History Association, Gatlinburg, TN. 143 pp. Todd, B.D., C.T. Winne, J.D. Willson, and J. W. Gibbons. 2007. Getting the drift: Examining the effects of timing, trap type, and taxon on herpetofaunal drift fence surveys. American Midland Naturalist 158:292–305 Tuberville, T.D., J.D. Willson, M.E. Dorcas, and J.W. Gibbons. 2005. Herpetofaunal species richness of southeastern national parks. Southeastern Naturalist 4:537–569. US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1998a. Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge amphibians, fish, mammals, and reptiles list. Unpublished pamphlet. Folkston, GA. 16 pp. USFWS. 1998b. St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge reptile, amphibian, and mammal list. Unpublished pamphlet. St. Marks, FL. 8 pp. Wharton, C.H. 1978. The Natural Environments of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 114. 227 pp. Zug, G.R. 1993. Herpetology. Academic Press. San Diego, CA. 527 pp. 32 Southeastern Naturalist Vol. 9, No. 1 Appendix 1. Amphibian and reptile species documented during a seven day survey in west-central Georgia in 2008, including new county records, locality data, and voucher information. AU = Auburn University, UGA = University of Georgia. T = team responsible. Species New record Locality Date Verified by T Museum number Amphibians Anura Bufo terrestris Bonnaterre Rana catesbeiana Shaw Rana sphenocephala Webster Co. 32.051804°N, 84.548490°W 8-Oct-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 135 R. clamitans Latreille R. heckscheri Wright R. capito LeConte Hyla cinerea Schneider Webster Co. 32.051804°N, 84.548490°W 8-Oct-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 134 Stewart Co. 32.141480°N, 84.753142°W 21-Mar-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 113 H. squirella Bosc H. gratiosa LeConte Webster Co. 32.107753°N, 84.492906°W 8-Oct-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 133 H. avivoca Viosca Stewart Co. 32.034373°N, 84.890252°W 22-Mar-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 120 Pseudacris crucifer Wied-Neuwied P. feriarum Baird P. ornata Holbrook Acris crepitans Baird A. gryllus LeConte Scaphiopus holbrookii Harlan Gastrophryne carolinensis Holbrook Webster Co. 32.051804°N, 84.548490°W 8-Oct-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 136 Caudata Eurycea cirrigera Green E. guttolineata Holbrook Talbot Co. 32.795118°N, 84.398492°W 10-Oct-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 125 E. chamberlaini Harrison & Guttman Stewart Co. 32.034373°N, 84.890252°W 21-Mar-08 C. Guyer AU AUM 37748 Marion Co. 32.526694°N, 84.569986°W 22-Mar-08 C. Guyer AU AUM 37751 Plethodon glutinosus Green P. websteri Highton Desmognathus apalachicolae Means & Karlin 2010 S.P. Graham, D.A. Steen, K.T. Nelson, A.M. Durso, and J.C. Maerz 33 Species New record Locality Date Verified by T Museum number D. conanti Rossman Pseudotriton ruber Latreille Gyrinophilus porphyriticus Green Talbot Co. 32.854411°N, 84.546829°W 26-Oct-08 C. Camp, J. Jensen AU AHAP-D 195-196 Ambystoma opacum Gravenhorst Schley Co. 32.308811°N, 84.293997°W 11-Oct-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 126 A. talpoideum Holbrook Stewart Co. 32.139461°N, 85.041513°W 22-Mar-08 J.C. Godwin AU AUM 37759 A. maculatum Shaw Talbot Co. 32.795118°N, 84.398492°W 23-Mar-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 117-118 Notophthalmus viridescens Rafinesque Webster Co. 32.051804°N, 84.548490°W 8-Oct-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 137 Siren lacertina Linnaeus Schley Co. 32.174857°N, 84.371463°W 23-Mar-08 C. Guyer AU AUM 37760 Reptiles Testudines Chelydra serpentina Linnaeus Talbot Co. 32.622125°N, 84.634668°W 23-Mar-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 116 Macrochelys temminckii Harlan Sternotherus minor Agassiz Schley Co. 32.174857°N, 84.371463°W 21-Mar-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 194 S. odoratus Latreille Kinosternon subrubrum Lacé pè de Trachemys scripta Schoepff Chrysemys picta Schneider Pseudemys concinna LeConte Deirochelys reticularia Latreille Gopherus polyphemus Daudin Terrapene carolina Schley Co. 32.215076°N, 84.371364°W 10-Oct-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 122-123 Lacertilia Anolis carolinensis Voigt Schley Co. 32.174857°N, 84.371463°W 21-Mar-08 C. Guyer AU/UGA AHAP-D 108 Talbot Co. 32.786769°N, 84.422183°W 23-Mar-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 200 Sceloporus undulatus Bosc & Daudin Schley Co. 32.174857°N, 84.371463°W 21-Mar-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 192 Eumeces fasciatus Linnaeus Stewart Co. 32.181526°N, 84.824247°W 21-Mar-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 110-112 E. laticeps Schneider Talbot Co. 32.799730°N, 84.400077°W 22-Mar-08 C. Guyer AU AUM 37761 Scincella lateralis Say Schley Co. 32.174857°N, 84.371463°W 21-Mar-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 115 Serpentes Elaphe obsoleta Holbrook Coluber constrictor Linneaus Talbot Co. 32.799730°N, 84.400077°W 23-Mar-08 C. Guyer AU/UGA AHAP-D 119 34 Southeastern Naturalist Vol. 9, No. 1 Species New record Locality Date Verified by T Museum number Masticophis fl agellum Shaw Schley Co. 32.206008°N, 84.317817°W 10-Oct-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 121 Opheodrys aestivus Linnaeus Talbot Co. 32.750672°N, 84.419732°W 10-Oct-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 124 Cemophora coccinea Blumenbach Tantilla coronata Baird & Girard Schley Co. 32.308811°N, 84.293997°W 21-Mar-08 C. Guyer AU AUM 37758 Nerodia sipedon Linnaeus Talbot Co. 32.782546°N, 84.405132°W 22-Mar-08 C. Guyer UGA AHAP-D 201-202 N. erythrogaster Forster Schley Co. 32.174857°N, 84.371463°W 10-Oct-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 127-128 Storeria dekayi Talbot Co. 32.782546°N, 84.405132°W 21-Mar-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D Virginia valeriae Baird & Girard Thamnophis sirtalis Linnaeus Webster Co 32.055479°N, 84.546561°W 8-Oct-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 138 Diadophis punctatus Linnaeus Stewart Co. 32.181526°N, 84.824247°W 21-Mar-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 109 Talbot Co. 32.799477°N, 84.502491°W 22-Mar-08 C. Guyer AHAP-D 114 Agkistrodon contortrix Linnaeus Stewart Co. 32.054132°N, 84.735728°W 8-Oct-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 139 A. piscivorus Lacé pè de Schley Co. 32.174857°N, 84.371463°W 21-Mar-08 C. Guyer AU AHAP-D 193 Crotalus horridus Linnaeus C. adamanteus Palisot de Beauvois