Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Mammal Study”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

637 records · Page 36Linked to original sources
USGS2001

Green fluorescent protein is lighting up fungal biology

Prasher ( 42 ) cloned a cDNA for the green fluorescent protein (GFP) gene from the jellyfish Aequorea victoria in 1992. Shortly thereafter, to the amazement of many investigators, this gene or derivatives thereof were successfully expressed and conferred fluorescence to bacteria and Caenorhabditis elegans cells in culture ( 10 , 31 ), followed by yeast ( 24 , 39 ), mammals ( 40 ), Drosophila ( 66 ), Dictyostelium ( 23 , 30 ), plants ( 28 , 49 ), and filamentous fungi ( 54 ). The tremendous success of GFP as a reporter can be attributed to unique qualities of this 238-amino-acid, 27-kDa protein which absorbs light at maxima of 395 and 475 nm and emits light at a maximum of 508 nm. The fluorescence of GFP requires only UV or blue light and oxygen, and therefore, unlike the case with other reporters (β-glucuronidase, β-galacturonidase, chloramphenicol acetyltransferase, and firefly luciferase) that rely on cofactors or substrates for activity, in vivo observation of gfp expression is possible with individual cells, with cell populations, or in whole organisms interacting with symbionts or environments in real time. Complications caused by destructive sampling, cell permeablization for substrates, or leakage of products do not occur. Furthermore, the GFP protein is extremely stable in vivo and has been fused to the C or N terminus of many cellular and extracellular proteins without a loss of activity, thereby permitting the tagging of proteins for gene regulation analysis, protein localization, or specific organelle labeling. The mature protein resists many proteases and is stable up to 65°C and at pH 5 to 11, in 1% sodium dodecyl sulfate or 6 M guanidinium chloride (reviewed in references 17 and 67 ), and in tissue fixed with formaldehyde, methanol, or glutaraldehyde. However, GFP loses fluorescence in methanol-acetic acid (3:1) and can be masked by autofluorescent aldehyde groups in tissue fixed with glutaraldehyde. Fluorescence is optimal at pH 7.2 to 8.0 ( 67 ). Limitations on GFP as a reporter for some applications are its low turnover rate, 2-h lag time for autoactivation of its chromophore, improper folding at high temperatures (37°C), which results in nonfluorescent and insoluble forms of the protein, and requirement for oxygen, which is not present in equal concentrations in all subcellular locations or cell types (reviewed in references 17 and 67 ). These characteristics of GFP, however, have not posed a problem for many applications, and mutant forms of GFP that have an ability to fold properly at high temperatures, increased solubility and fluorescence, reduced photobleaching ( 16 , 17 , 51 ), and reduced half-lives ( 1 ) have been developed. Coupled with fluorescence-activated cell sorting, confocal microscopy or quantitative image analysis techniques, GFP technology can be used to isolate transformed cells or specific cell types from populations of cells ( 14 ), to quantify gene expression of individual cells within whole organisms ( 8 ), or to assess the dispersal and biomass of organisms in complex environments, such as in animal or plant hosts ( 38 , 59 ), in biofilms ( 55 ), in fermentors ( 41 ), on leaf surfaces ( 53 , 61 ), or in soils ( 2 ). The vast majority of studies utilizing GFP expression in fungi have been with yeast (reviewed in reference 13 ). Ustilago maydis was the first filamentous fungus for which successful expression of gfp was reported ( 54 ), followed closely by Aspergillus nidulans ( 22 , 57 ) and Aureobasidium pullulans ( 61 ). Presently, gfp expression has been reported for 16 species comprising 12 genera of filamentous fungi, including Colletotrichum ( 21 , 44 ), Mycosphaerella ( 52 ), Magnaporthe ( 32 , 35 ), Cochliobolus ( 38 ), Trichoderma ( 2 , 70 ), Podospora ( 5 ), Sclerotinia ( 63 ), Schizophyllum ( 37 ), Aspergillus ( 20 , 47 , 50 ) and Phytophthora ( 7 , 62 ). In this review we draw on published reports, with the goal of providing an overview of GFP technology as it applies to the biology of filamentous fungi. These reports are not exhaustive of potential applications of GFP technology, as examples of genomic approaches to utilizing GFP in bacterial and yeast systems attest ( 4 , 46 , 60 , 65 ). Expression of gfp in filamentous fungi requires a gfp variant that is efficiently translated in fungi, a transformation system, and a fungal promoter that satisfies the requirements of a given experimental objective. Transformation of fungi has recently been reviewed by Gold et al. ( 26 ). Robinson and Sharon ( 44 ) suggest that GFP can actually be used to optimize transformation protocols. In addition to reporting the construction of a new fungal transformation vector that expresses SGFP under the control of the ToxA gene promoter from Pyrenophora tritici-repentis ( 12 ) and demonstrating its use in plant pathogens belonging to eight different genera of filamentous fungi ( Fusarium, Botrytis, Pyrenophora, Alternaria, Cochliobolus, Sclerotinia, Colletotrichum , and Verticillium ), in this review we also enumerate and describe a comprehensive list of vectors for expressing GFP in fungi.

Applied and Environmental Microbiology↗
USGS2021

Historic population estimates for bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in Aragua, Venezuela indicate monitoring need

This study reports historic capture-mark-recapture survival and abundance estimates of common bottlenose dolphins ( Tursiops truncatus ) based on photo-identification surveys of coastal Venezuela (along the Aragua coast between Turiamo Bay and Puerto Colombia). We used the most recent data available: dolphins identified by unique dorsal fin marks during wet and dry season surveys conducted from 2004 to 2008. Dolphin encounter histories were analyzed in the Closed Capture Robust Design framework, with the top model including random movement, constant survival, and capture-recapture probabilities that varied by secondary periods. Survival of marked adults was estimated at 0.99 (95% CI = 0.97 to 1.00). Population estimates for all adults (marked and unmarked) averaged 31 animals (SD = 13.8), and for all dolphins (all adults and calves), 41 animals (SD = 17.2). Coastal bottlenose dolphins face numerous threats, including ship strikes, oil spills, conflict with recreational and industrial fisheries, other negative human interactions, biotoxins, chemicals, noise, freshwater discharge, and coastal development. Further, small populations are, in general, at increased risk due to reduced resiliency and recovery potential when exposed to such threats and to expected environmental and demographic stochasticity. These historic estimates of abundance and survival are critical for establishing a reference state and indicate a need for ongoing monitoring of the small dolphin population while the Aragua coast is still, as of yet, relatively little impacted by humans. Should coastal development increase (as is the global trend) and/or environmental catastrophes (e.g., harmful algal blooms, hurricanes, and oil spills) occur, these historic estimates will be essential for assessing impacts and guiding management and conservation interventions. Our results show year-round dolphin presence and highlight the Venezuelan coastal–oceanic landscape as an area of both future research and conservation importance.

Aragua↗
USGS2002

Sea otter studies in Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve

Following translocations to the outer coast of Southeast Alaska in 1965, sea otters have been expanding their range and increasing in abundance. We began conducting surveys for sea otters in Cross Sound, Icy Strait, and Glacier Bay, Alaska in 1994, following initial reports (in 1993) of their presence in Glacier Bay. Since 1995, the number of sea otters in Glacier Bay proper has increased from around 5 to more than 1500. Between 1993 and 1997 sea otters were apparently only occasional visitors to Glacier Bay, but in 1998 long-term residence was established as indicated by the presence of adult females and their dependent pups. Sea otter distribution is limited to the Lower Bay, south of Sandy Cove, and is not continuous within that area. Concentrations occur in the vicinity of Sita Reef and Boulder Island and between Pt. Carolus and Rush Pt. on the west side of the Bay (Figure 1). We describe the diet of sea otters during 2001 in Glacier Bay based on visual observations of prey during 456 successful forage dives. In Glacier Bay, diet consisted of 62% clam, 15% mussel, 9% crab, 7% unidentified, 4& urchins, and 4% other. Most prey recovered by sea otters are commercially, socially, or ecologically important species. Species of clam include Saxidomus gigantea, Protothaca staminea, and Mya truncata. Urchins are primarily Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis and the mussel is Modiolus modiolus. Crabs include species of three genera: Cancer, Chinoecetes, and Telmessus. Although we characterize diet at broad geographic scales, we found diet to vary between sites separated by as little as several hundred meters. Dietary variation among and within sites can reflect differences in prey availability and individual specialization. We estimated species composition, density, biomass, and sizes of subtidal clams, urchins, and mussels at 9 sites in lower Glacier Bay. All sites were selected based on the presence of abundant clam siphons. Sites were not selected to allow inference to any area larger than the sampling area (approx 400 m^2). Sites were selected to achieve a broad geographic sample of dense subtidal clam beds within Glacier Bay prior to occupation and foraging by sea otters. There was no direct evidence of otter foraging at any of our clam sampling sites. We sampled 11,568 bivalves representing 14 speces of clam and 2 species of mussel. We sampled 4,981 urchins, all Strongylocentrotus droeobachiensis. Only four species of clam (littleneck clams, Protothaca staminea; butter clams, Saxidomus gigantea; soft-shell claims, Mya truncata; and Macoma sp.) accounted for 91.6% of all clams sampled. Mean total clam density (#/0.25 m^2) across the 9 sites was 62.3. Densities (and se ) of P. staminea averaged 22.6 (1.6) and ranged from 0 to 97. Densities of S. gigantea averaged 14.4 (1.0) and ranged from 0 to 63. Densities of Macoma sp. averaged 14.5 (1.2) and ranged from 0 to 78. Densities of S. droebachiensis averaged 27.3 (1.7) and ranged from 0 to 109. Mean S. droebachiensis sizes ranged from 16 to 30 mm by site. Mean P. staminea sizes ranged from 30 to 53 mm, mean S. gigantea sizes ranged from 51 to 85 mm, and mean Macoma sp. sizes ranged from 14 to 19 mm. Although not the most abundant clam, S. gigantea contributed the greatest proportion to total clam biomass (63%), followed by P. staminea (24%). Sea otters are now well established in limited areas of the lower portions of Glacier Bay. It is likely that distribution and numbers of sea otters will continue to increase in Glacier Bay in the near future. Glacier Bay supports large and diverse populations of clams that are largely unexploited by sea otters presently. It is predictable that the density and sizes of clam populations will decline in response to otter predation. This will result in fewer opportunities for human harvest, but will also trigger ecosystem level changes, as prey for other predators, such as octopus, sea stars, fishes, birds and mammals are modified. Sea ott

Annual Report↗
USGS2003

Sea otter studies in Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve: annual report 2002

Since 1995, the number of sea otters in Glacier Bay proper has increased from around 5 to more than 1200. Sea otter distribution is mostly limited to the Lower Bay, south of Sandy Cove, and is not continuous within that area. Concentrations occur in the vicinity of Sita Reef and Boulder Island and between Pt. Carolus and Rush Pt. on the west side of the Bay, although there have been occasional sightings north of Sandy Cove (Figure 1). Large portions of the Bay remain unoccupied by sea otters, but recolonization is occurring rapidly. Most prey recovered by sea otters in Glacier Bay are ecologically, commercially, or socially important species. In 2002 sea otter diet consisted of 35% clam, 26% mussel, 3% crab, 3.0% snail, 2% starfish, 11% urchins, 2% other, and 20% unidentified. Dominant clam species include the butter clam, Saxidomus gigantea , the Greenland cockle, Serripes groenlandicus , and the littleneck clam, Protothaca staminea . Urchins are primarily green urchins, Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis , and the mussel is Modiolus modiolus . Crabs observed in 2002 include the Dungeness, Cancer magister , the kelp crab Pugettia gracilis , and the helmet crab, Telmessus cherigonus . Although we characterize diet at broad geographic scales, we have previously found diet to vary between sites separated by as little as several hundred meters. Dietary variation among and within sites can reflect differences in prey availability as well as individual specialization. We estimated species composition, density, biomass, and sizes of subtidal clams, urchins, and mussels at 13 sites in Glacier Bay and 5 sites in nearby Port Althorp, where sea otters have been present for at least 20 years. All sites were selected based on the presence of abundant clam siphons and the absence of sea otters (Glacier Bay) or abundant shell litter and the presence of sea otters (Port Althorp). Glacier Bay sites were selected to achieve a broad geographic sample of dense subtidal clam beds within Glacier Bay prior to occupation and foraging by sea otters. Port Althorp sites were chosen to achieve a representative sample of subtidal clam beds already under prolonged foraging pressure by sea otters. There was no direct evidence of otter foraging at any of our Glacier Bay sampling sites. In Glacier Bay, we sampled 15,338 bivalves (average of 1,180/site) representing 14 species of clam, 2 species of mussel, and a single scallop and we sampled 6,917 urchins (average of 513/site). In Port Althorp, we sampled 1,034 bivalves (average of 207/site) representing 14 species of clam. We found only 5 urchins, all S. droebachiensis . Mean densities and biomass of all subtidal clams were significantly greater in Glacier Bay (59.2 and 99/0.25m 2 compared to Port Althorp (10.3 and 5.8/0.25m 2 (p<0.002 for both). Our contrasts of subtidal clam populations between Glacier Bay and Port Althorp suggest that clam densities will likely decline by about a factor of six and that clam biomass estimates will decline by more than a factor of ten. Numerically dominant species of clams, P. staminea , S. gigantea , Macoma sp. and Mya sp. were all significantly greater in density and biomass in Glacier Bay, while C. nutalli density was low but significantly higher in Port Althorp. Subtidal clam species diversity was significantly greater in Port Althorp compared to Glacier Bay, although this may simply reflect habitat differences. Sea urchin densities were high in Glacier Bay, while in Port Althorp urchins were virtually absent. Sea otters are now well established in limited areas of the lower portions of Glacier Bay. It is likely that distribution and numbers of sea otters will continue to increase in Glacier Bay in the near future. Glacier Bay supports large and diverse populations of clams that are largely unexploited by sea otters at present. It is predictable that the density and sizes of clam populations will decline in response to otter predation. This will result in fewer opportunities for human harvest, but will also trigger ecosystem level changes, as prey for other predators, such as octopus, sea stars, fishes, birds and mammals are modified. Sea otters will also modify benthic habitats through excavation of sediments required to extract burrowing infauna such as clams. Effects of sediment disturbance by foraging sea otters are not understood. Glacier Bay also supports large populations of other preferred sea otter prey, such as king ( Paralithodes sp. ), tanner ( Chionoecetes sp. ) and dungeness ( Cancer magister ) crabs and green sea urchins ( S. droebachiensis ). As the colonization of Park waters by sea otters continues, it is also likely that dramatic changes will occur in the species composition, abundance, and size class distribution of many components of the nearshore marine ecosystem. Many of the changes will occur as a direct result of predation by sea otters. Others will result from indirect or cascading effects of sea otter foraging, such as increased kelp production and modified prey availability for other nearshore predators. Without recognizing and quantifying the extent of change initiated by the colonization of Glacier Bay by sea otters, management of nearshore resources will be severely constrained for many decades.

Alaska↗
USGS2017

Variation in abundance of Pacific Blue Mussel (Mytilus trossulus) in the Northern Gulf of Alaska, 2006–2015

Mussels are conspicuous and ecologically important components of nearshore marine communities around the globe. Pacific blue mussels (Mytilus trossulus) are common residents of intertidal habitats in protected waters of the North Pacific, serving as a conduit of primary production to a wide range of nearshore consumers including predatory invertebrates, sea ducks, shorebirds, sea otter s , humans, and other terrestrial mammals. We monitored seven metrics of intertidal Pacific blue mussel abundance at five sites in each of three regions across the northern Gulf of Alaska: Katmai National Park and Preserve (Katmai) (2006–2015), Kenai Fjords National Park (Kenai Fjords) (2008–2015) and western Prince William Sound (WPWS) (2007–2015). Metrics included estimates of: % cover at two tide heights in randomly selected rocky intertidal habitat; and in selected mussel beds estimates of: the density of large mussels (≥ 20 mm); density of all mussels > 2 mm estimated from cores extracted from those mussel beds; bed size; and total abundance of large and all mussels, i.e. the product of density and bed size. We evaluated whether these measures of mussel abundance differed among sites or regions, whether mussel abundance varied over time, and whether temporal patterns in abundance were site specific, or synchronous at regional or Gulf-wide spatial scales. We found that, for all metrics, mussel abundance varied on a site-by-site basis. After accounting for site differences, we found similar temporal patterns in several measures of abundance (both % cover metrics, large mussel density, large mussel abundance, and mussel abundance estimated from cores), in which abundance was initially high, declined significantly over several years, and subsequently recovered. Averaged across all sites, we documented declines of 84% in large mussel abundance through 2013 with recovery to 41% of initial abundance by 2015. These findings suggest that factors operating across the northern Gulf of Alaska were affecting mussel survival and subsequently abundance. In contrast, density of primarily small mussels obtained from cores (as an index of recruitment), varied markedly by site, but did not show meaningful temporal trends. We interpret this to indicate that settlement was driven by site-specific features rather than Gulf wide factors. By extension, we hypothesize that temporal changes in mussel abundance observed was not a result of temporal variation in larval supply leading to variation in recruitment, but rather suggestive of mortality as a primary demographic factor driving mussel abundance. Our results highlight the need to better understand underlying mechanisms of change in mussels, as well as implications of that change to nearshore consumers.

Alaska↗
USGS2001

Conservation status and recovery strategies for endemic Hawaiian birds

Populations of endemic Hawaiian birds declined catastrophically following the colonization of the islands by Polynesians and later cultures. Extinction is still occurring, and recovery programs are urgently needed to prevent the disappearance of many other species. Programs to recover the endemic avifauna incorporate a variety of conceptual and practical approaches that are constrained by biological, financial, social, and legal factors. Avian recovery is difficult to implement in Hawai‘i because a variety of challenging biological factors limit bird populations. Hawaiian birds are threatened by alien predatory mammals, introduced mosquitoes that transmit diseases, alien invertebrate parasites and predators that reduce invertebrate food resources, and alien animals and plants that destroy and alter habitats. Life in the remote Hawaiian Archipelago has imposed other biological constraints to avian recovery, including limited geographical distributions and small population sizes. Recovery of the endemic avifauna is also challenging because resources are insufficient to mitigate the many complex, interacting factors that limit populations. Decisions must be made for allocating limited resources to species teetering on the brink of extinction and those in decline. If funds are spent primarily on saving the rarest species, more abundant species will decline and become more difficult to recover. However, critically rare species will disappear if efforts are directed mainly towards restoring species that are declining but not in immediate danger of becoming extinct. Determining priorities is difficult also because management is needed both to supplement bird populations and to restore habitats of many species. Rare species cannot respond quickly to management efforts intended only to improve habitat and reduce limiting factors. Recovery is slow, if it occurs at all, because years or decades are generally required for habitat rehabilitation and because small populations of birds initially increase slowly even when habitat conditions are favorable. Consequently, even as habitat conditions begin to improve, small populations may disappear unless they are supplemented directly. Hawaiian bird conservation is also affected by social and legal factors, including hunting alien game species, commercial land use practices, and lawsuits and policies concerning endangered species and critical habitat. Influenced by this mixture of conflicting and competing issues, Hawaiian bird recovery programs range from management of single species and some components of their habitats to limited forms of community or ecosystem management. Although the effectiveness of most programs is difficult to evaluate because of monitoring limitations, several programs exemplify species and community management. Programs primarily intended to recover single species include Hawaiian Goose or Nene ( Branta sandvicensis ), Hawaiian Crow or ‘Alala ( Corvus hawaiiensis ), and Palila ( Loxioides bailleui ). Programs attempting to manage entire communities of forest birds include Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge and Hawai‘i Volcanoes National Park on Hawai‘i, and Waikamoi Preserve, Hanawi Natural Area Reserve, and Haleakala National Park on Maui.

Hawaii↗
USGS2019

Natural resource condition assessment: Channel Islands National Park

The Natural Resource Condition Assessment (NRCA) Program aims to provide documentation about the current conditions of important Park natural resources through a spatially explicit, multidisciplinary synthesis of existing scientific data and knowledge. Findings from the NRCA will help Channel Islands National Park (CINP) managers to develop near-term management priorities. The central objectives of this assessment were to evaluate the current conditions and trends of key Park resources, identify important knowledge gaps, and determine key stressors and threats. Because a recent report provided an assessment of marine resources (Engle 2006), which constitute 50% of the park, this NRCA focused on terrestrial resources. For this NRCA, CINP resource managers identified that the greatest Park need was to know whether or not vegetation (primarily woody vegetation) is recovering on the Channel Islands and how this may be influencing recovery of the native terrestrial vertebrates. To address this, the CINP NRCA team evaluated the condition of island vegetation and vertebrate communities using both: 1) already available, summarized information from reports, theses, and journal articles and 2) new analyses of recently available, existing data collected on the islands. Descriptions of specific methods used to analyze available data by the NRCA team are provided within the assessment sections in Chapter 4 of this report. The Team used the Vital Signs indicators as identified by Fancy et al. (2009) for monitoring the condition of Natural Resources in U.S. National Parks. Using this framework, the focal study resource components were the five CINP islands, because these are the bio-geophysical resources of greatest interest to the CINP. Each of the islands has its own unique history of human impacts, ecological conditions, restoration efforts, and natural resource monitoring. The Team evaluated island scrub recovery by assessing changes over time in two metrics: 1) vegetation community structure (species composition, cover, and spatial extent), and 2) vertebrate abundance, relative to the reference condition of each island. The reference conditions for this NRCA were the particular island’s ecological state prior to European settlement or ranching, which represent the ecological state to which the NPS desires the park return. For each metric, the Team determined the Reference Conditions/Values, Current Condition, Trend, and Recovery Potential (based on a review of the literature and from the NRCA team’s analysis of newly available data), Threats and Stressors, Data Gaps, Overall Condition. A qualitative statement of overall current condition was created for each metric, after all data and literature relevant to the measures (i.e., vegetation and vertebrates) of each resource component (i.e., island) were reviewed and evaluated. All information gathered for this NRCA is available and managed by CINP, so that the compilation of resources would be available not only for the assessment team, but will be provided for future Park reference. Chapter 1 of this NRCA provides a descriptive background of NRCAs. Chapter 2 provides Park-wide natural resource background information, while Chapter 3 describes the overall methodological approach used in this assessment. Chapter 4 provides a detailed assessment of each island’s condition, which is then summarized Park-wide and for each island in Chapter 5. Based on both vegetation recovery and vertebrate population abundances, our assessment found Santa Cruz Island (SCI), Santa Rosa Island (SRI), San Miguel Island (SMI), and Anacapa Island (AI) to be, overall, in moderate condition and slowly recovering following the removal of non-native herbivores. The condition of Santa Barbara Island (SBI) is poor and remains in a state that is not likely to improve without assisted recovery by the Park. All islands have exhibited some level of native vegetation recovery, with most of the observed natural recovery occurring on SCI, SRI, SMI, and AI; very little recovery has occurred at present on SBI. Vegetation recovery is uneven across each island and largely limited to mesic areas, such as north-facing slopes. Areas that will likely require some assisted recovery efforts are those that are: at risk of erosion, isolated, lacking native seed banks, and plagued with high competition of non-native grasses and other invasives. Some plant communities, such as exposed upland vegetation on SRI, also have lower natural recovery potential and will likely require assisted recovery. The overall condition of the Park’s terrestrial island vertebrate species generally appears to be good and improving, with high potential for further recovery to reach pre-ranching era reference conditions. This is particularly true for vertebrates on SCI, SRI, and SMI. Although there are limited data for AI, the data that are available suggest that vertebrates on that island are in good condition and improving as well. However, the condition of SBI vertebrates is only moderate, with natural recovery potential being low, with many landbird species’ populations currently declining, extinct, or not improving. An overarching theme across the Park’s terrestrial island vertebrate populations is that many of them are in good condition because the particular animals are habitat generalists, so their population dynamics are not strongly tied to habitat conditions. However, those landbirds associated with riparian vegetation are not showing signs of recovery across the Park islands, and riparian areas appear to be one of the habitats with limited natural recovery potential on the islands. Overwhelmingly, the most critical data gap that emerged from our analysis was the lack of current vegetation maps for most of the islands (AI, SCI, SRI, SMI). The lack of this information made it difficult to assess spatial changes in island vegetation over time, and to relate those changes to observed changes in vertebrate species abundances. Therefore, we were limited in our spatial assessment of vegetation recovery for AI, SCI, SRI, and SMI, and were only able to relate the current vegetation with island landbird analysis for SBI. Another common theme across islands was the lack of information on best techniques for shrub reintroduction and recovery, and the success of invasive species removal and re-vegetation efforts. Abundance, distribution, and habitat affinities of reptiles and amphibians are poorly known for AI, SCI, SRI, and SMI, making it difficult to assess their population condition and trends, and their potential responses to shrub recovery. Mammal and landbird populations are reasonably well-sampled across most of the islands, but data are lacking for most vertebrates from AI, especially West and Middle AI where no vertebrate sampling occurs. The population status, cause of declines, and recovery needs are lacking for several landbird species across multiple islands, including loggerhead shrikes ( Lanius ludovicianus ssp.) on SCI and SRI, and Santa Cruz Island rufous crowned sparrows ( Aimophila ruficeps obscura ) on AI. Additionally, island song sparrows ( Melospiza melodia graminea ) remain extirpated on SBI and data are needed for assessing their recovery potential on the island. The potentially major threats facing the islands’ flora and fauna today are: areas of continued erosion, potential new non-native introductions, and climate change. The Park islands have already experienced warming over the last several decades due to human-induced climate change, and are projected to experience continued warming. These increasing stresses imposed by climate change may slow and inhibit natural recovery potentials for island fauna, and especially flora.

California↗