The 2004 Survey of the Dragonflies and Damselflies

of Jackson Lane Preserve

(Caroline County, Maryland)

Richard Orr

5215 Durham Rd East

Columbia, MD 21044

(410) 730-7290

odonata457@comcast.net

November 6, 2004

1

ABSTRACT:

The objective of the survey was to determine the species of dragonflies and damselflies

(odonates) of TNC’s Jackson Lane preserve. Jackson Lane contains a variety of recently

restored open wetland cells, plugged ditches, a small creek, and intact forest and semi-

open depressional temporary seasonal pools (Delmarva bays).

Fifty-eight (58) species of odonates were found at Jackson Lane (JL) in 2004. Those

species that inhabit the Delmarva bays, but not the restoration cells, are either bog species

which require a sphagnum (acidic) substrate, or species which prefer deep shade or

species that require long-term, temporary-pool environments. The odonate species that

best represent intact depressional seasonal ponds at JL and are not yet present at the

restoration cells are Gomphaeschna furcillata, Libellula axilena, Lestes congener and

Sympetrum ambiguum (cover photo). These species are predicted to spread to the

restoration cells when habitat conditions allow and thus can be used as indicators for

progress for the restoration project.

The record-level high rainfall proceeding the survey season in 2003, coupled with

another wet spring and summer during the 2004 survey enhanced the survival ability of

permanent water species over temporary water species at JL. This is not likely what

would happen during normal or dry years. An attempt to estimate the species

compositions for dry, wet and average years for each of the major wetland type at

Jackson Lane based on the 2004 data is provided. However, since these estimates are

based only upon data from a single atypical year, additional annual survey data would be

needed to fine tune or confirm these findings.

INTRODUCTION:

The Nature Conservancy’s Jackson Lane Preserve, including the Wetland Restoration

site, is located in northern Caroline County, Maryland, northeast of the city of Goldsboro.

The initial restoration construction to return the farmland back to forested seasonally-

flooded depressional wetlands and uplands occurred in 2003. The study described here

was commissioned by the Nature Conservancy for the 2004 field season to determine the

potential for using dragonflies and damselflies (odonates) as indicator species to monitor

the ecological success of the restoration project.

Related to the better-known Carolina bays to the south, Delmarva bays are of regional

conservation importance because they provide habitat for a host of state and globally rare

plant species, as well as several state rare amphibians. When the farmland was created it

was cleared of timber and drained. TNC restoration efforts are therefore focused on

artificially returning the land to a seasonal depressional wetland and upland environment

by promoting the re-growth of trees on the site and using earthen ditch plugs to restrict

drainage from the low sections of the property.

The restoration wetlands (cells) range in size and depth. How long they hold water is

dependent on their location, size, depth and hydrology. There is a great degree of

variability among the cells in their degree and speed of drying. At high water levels the

2

cells often merge with one another and the larger cells often dry out as patches creating

separate pools and/or have parts that dry out faster than others. The various restoration

wetland sites are in constant change throughout the year. In the most general sense there

are long-lived pools (deep cells) like Cell #2 and #17, and short-lived pools (shallow

cells) like most of the other named cells.

Pasture Pond (Cell #1) is treated separately in this report from the other mitigation cells

because it is so unique. Pasture Pond is different from the other restoration wetlands in

that it was never converted to farmland and is dominated by trees. Pasture Pond is

believed to have been an intact Delmarva Bay until the late 1970’s (personal

communication, Doug Samson, TNC). Pasture Pond has since been used as pasture and

the open canopy at its center has closed due to the encroachment of sweet gum and red

maple trees.

Jackson lane Restoration Site – (USFWS Photograph)

A series of relatively intact Delmarva bays occur in 300 acres of a forested natural area

adjacent to the restoration site to the north. The two most prominent natural ponds,

Jackson Lane Large (JLL) and Jackson Lane Small (JLS) are different from one another

in that the much smaller JLS is deeply shaded with shrub islands at the center while the

much larger JLL is more open and dominated by Walter’s Sedge. These intact

depressional wetlands serve as examples of what the restoration cells may eventually

resemble. For the purpose of this report, I use the term Delmarva bay in a general sense

3

to cover all of the intact depressional wetlands on the forested portion of the preserve

north of the restoration site.

Along the western edge of the restoration site runs East Broadway Branch, a small

permanent drainage ditch that currently provides a small creek environment. In addition,

the restoration site is, for the most part, bound on the north, east, and south by ditches.

These ditches were plugged to limit drainage from the restoration site. Except for a few

of the ditches exhibiting limited flow at high water levels, the water in the ditches is non-

moving and currently provides a swamp-like environment.

Off site an extensive marsh exists where the Choptank River and Cow Marsh Creek

merges a mile or so east of the property just over the Delaware state line (personal

communication, Hal White, University of Delaware). This adjacent marsh and river

environment provides a healthy influx into Jackson Lane of adult dragonflies of species

that both, do and do not, complete their lifecycles at Jackson Lane.

Odonates are of keystone importance in the Mid-Atlantic region, being the major first-

trophic-level insect predators for most aquatic environments. Information on their

presence and function at Jackson Lane is important if an ecosystem approach to

management and restoration is to be implemented. Dragonflies and damselflies provide a

source of biological information that can be used for the conservation planning and

management of freshwater aquatic ecosystems, because different species are

characteristic of different aquatic habitats. Having a sound baseline survey can provide a

clear indicator of the current health of the various wetland habitats and provide an

excellent tool for monitoring or determining future changes within Jackson Lane’s

aquatic environments. Therefore, it makes good sense to determine which species are

present in both natural and restored wetlands at Jackson Lane and determine which

species can be used to monitor the progression of the mitigation wetlands towards an

ecosystem structure and function similar to an intact natural Delmarva bay system.

The 2004 dragonfly and damselfly survey starts the process of documenting the

occurrence of which species occur in the natural Delmarva bays, restoration wetlands,

Pasture Pond and other aquatic habitats in or near the preserve which contribute to the

overall odonate fauna of Jackson Lane.

METHODS:

Eighteen field days were spent at Jackson Lane in 2004 for the odonate survey. Field

trips took place on April 9, 17, 22, 25 and 30, May 7, 12 and 20, June 1, 10 and 22, July

2, 9 and 21, August 4, September 1 and 27, and October 10.

Specific locations were targeted during the study to provide a continuous record. These

locations were picked either because of their identified unique characteristics or because

they provided a reasonable surrogate for other similar wetlands at Jackson Lane. These

included Jackson Lane Large (JLL), Jackson Lane Small (JLS), Pasture Pond (Cell #1),

Cell #2, Cell #3, Cell #21, Cell #23, East Broadway Branch and a section of ditch south

4

of Cell #3. In addition, all the wetlands at the site were visited at least a couple of times

during the course of the year.

The field survey was oriented towards adult and castskin identification. However,

limited larval sampling took place and a few larval samples were examined from other

pond sample studies (See Appendix 2). All identified individual odonates encountered

during the 2004 field work were recorded by date and location, along with any relevant

observed behavior (e.g. oviposition, mating and territoriality).

The majority of identifications were by direct observation, or by netting and release.

However, difficult or questionable identifications were taken to the lab for further

examination. Voucher specimens were taken whenever possible. The voucher species

have been labeled and prepared and will be deposited in the National Insect Collection

located at the Smithsonian Natural History Museum.

RESULTS:

A total of fifty-eight species of dragonflies and damselflies were found at Jackson Lane,

twenty-two (38%) of which were new records for Caroline County.

Table 1 provides a complete list of the dragonflies and damselflies species found in 2004

at Jackson Lane. Those species marked with (+) represents a new species record for

Caroline County. Voucher specimens were taken for those species marked with an

asterisk and if marked with (1) photographs were obtained.

TABLE 1: ODONATE SPECIES LIST

Damselflies (18 species): Calopteryx maculata – Ebony Jewelwing (*) Lestes australis – Northern Spreadwing (*)(+)

Lestes congener – Spotted Spreadwing (*)(+)(1) Lestes forcipatus – Sweatflag Spreadwing (*)(+)

Lestes inaequalis – Elegant Spreadwing (*)(+) Lestes rectangularis – Slender Spreadwing (*)

Lestes vigilax – Swamp Spreadwing (*) Argia fumipennis violacea – Violet Dancer (*)

Enallagma aspersum – Azure Bluet (*)(+) Enallagma basidens – Double-striped Bluet (*)(+)

Enallagma civile -- Familiar Bluet (*) Enallagma divagans -- Turquoise Bluet (*)

Enallagama signatum – Orange Bluet (*) Enallagma traviatum -- Slender Bluet (*)(+)

Ischnura hastata – Citrine Forktail (*) Ischnura posita -- Fragile Forktail (*)

Ischnura ramburii – Rambur’s Forktail (+) Ischnura verticalis -- Eastern Forktail (*)

Dragonflies (40 species): Dromogomphus spinosus – Black Shouldered Spinyleg (*)(+) Gomphus exilis – Lancet Clubtail (*)

Gomphus lividus -- Ashy Clubtail (*)(1) Hagenius brevistylus – Dragonhunter

Aeshna umbrosa – Shadow Darner Anax junius -- Common Green Darner (*)

Anax longipes – Comet Darner (*)(+) Basiaeschna janata -- Springtime Darner (*)

Epiaeschna heros – Swamp Darner (+)(*) Gomphaeschna antilope – Taper-tailed Darner (*)(+)

Gomphaeschna furcillata -- Harlequin Darner(*)(+) Nasiaeschna pentacantha – Cyrano Darner (+)

Cordulegaster maculata -- Twin-spotted Spiketail (*)(+) Didymops transversa – Stream Cruiser(*)

Macromia illinoiensis georgina – Georgia River Cruiser (*)(1) Epicordulia princeps – Prince Baskettail (+)

Somatochlora linearis – Mocha Emerald (*)(+) Somatochlora tenebrosa – Clamp-tipped Emerald

Tetragoneuria cynosura -- Common Baskettail (*) Celithemis elisa – Calico Pennant (*)(+)

Celithemis verna – Double-ringed Pennant (*)(+) Erythemis simplicicollis – Eastern Pondhawk (*)

Libellula axilena – Bar-winged Skimmer (+)(*) Libellula cyanea – Spangled Skimmer (*)

Libellula deplanata -- Corporal Skimmer (*)(1) Libellula incesta – Slaty Skimmer (*)

Libellula luctuosa – Widow Skimmer Libellula lydia -- Common Whitetail Skimmer (*)(1)

Libellula pulchella – Twelve-spotted Skimmer (*) Libellula semifasciata – Painted Skimmer (*)

Libellula vibrans – Great Blue Skimmer (*) Pachydiplax longipennis – Blue Dasher (*)(1)

5

Pantala flavescens – Wandering Glider Pantala hymenaea – Spot-winged Glider

Perithemis tenera – Eastern Amberwing (1)(*) Sympetrum ambiguum – Blue-faced Meadowhawk (1)(*)(+)

Sympetrum vicinum – Autumn Meadowhawk (*) Sympetrum rubicundulum – Ruby Meadowhawk (*)(+)

Tramea carolina – Carolina Saddlebag (*) Tramea lacerata – Black Saddlebag (*)

Table 2 provides a common name, a scientific name, state heritage rank, larval habitat,

and larval activity for each odonate species found at Jackson Lane in 2004. The Larval

Activity column classifications were barrowed from the third edition of Aquatic Insects of

North America (edited by Merritt & Cummins); table 12a pages 206-211.

TABLE 2

Common Name Genus Species State Rank MD Larval Habitat (JL) Larval Activity

Ebony Jewelwing Calopteryx maculata Stream C

Northern Spreadwing Lestes australis Ponds, Bogs C

Spotted Spreadwing Lestes congener S3 Pools C

Sweetflag Spreadwing Lestes forcipatus S3 Ponds C Elegant Spreadwing Lestes inaequalis Swamps, Ponds C

Slender Spreadwing Lestes rectangularis Pools, Swamps, Ponds C

Swamp Spreadwing Lestes vigilax Swamps, Bogs C Violet Dancer Argia fumipennis Ponds, Swamps C, S

Azure Bluet Enallagma aspersum S3S4 Ponds, Marshes C

Double-striped Bluet Enallagma basidens Ponds, Marshes C Familiar Bluet Enallagma civile Ponds, Marshes, Pools C

Turquoise Bluet Enallagma divagans S3S4 Stream C

Orange Bluet Enallagma signatum Ponds C Slender Bluet Enallagma traviatum S3 Ponds C

Citrine Forktail Ischnura hastata Ponds, Pools C

Fragile Forktail Ischnura posita Ponds, Swamps, Pools C Rambur's Forktail Ischnura ramburii Ponds C

Eastern Forktail Ischnura verticalis Ponds C

Black-shouldered Spinyleg Dromogomphus spinosus SAO - from river B

Lancet Clubtail Gomphus exilis Stream, Ponds B

Ashy Clubtail Gomphus lividus Stream B

Dragonhunter Hagenius brevistylus SAO - from river S Shadow Darner Aeshna umbrosa Stream C

Common Green Darner Anax junius Ponds, Pools C

Comet Darner Anax longipes S3 Ponds, Pools C Springtime Darner Basiaeschna janata SAO - from river C

Swamp Darner Epiaeschna heros Swamps C, S

Taper-tailed Darner Gomphaeschna antilope S2 Bogs C Harlequin Darner Gomphaeschna furcillata S3 Swamps C

Cyrano Darner Nasiaeschna pentacantha S3 Ponds, Swamps C

Twin-spotted Spiketail Cordulegaster maculata Stream B, S Stream Cruiser Didymops transversa Stream S

Georgia River Cruiser Marcromia illinoiensis SAO - from river S Prince Baskettail Epicordulia princeps SAO C, S

Mocha Emerald Somatochlora linearis S3S4 Stream S

Clamp-tipped Emerald Somatochlora tenebrosa S3S4 Stream S Common Baskettail Tetragoneuria cynosura Ponds, Swamps C, S

Calico Pennant Celithemis elisa Ponds C

Double-ringed Pennant Celithemis verna Ponds C

Eastern Pondhawk Erythemis simplicicollis Ponds, Swamps, Pools S

Bar-winged Skimmer Libellula axilena S3 Pools, Swamps S

White-spangled Skimmer Libellula cyanea Ponds S Blue Corporal Libellula deplanata Ponds S

Slaty Skimmer Libellula incesta Ponds S

Widow Skimmer Libellula luctuosa Ponds S Common Whitetail Libellula lydia Ponds, Pools, Swamps S

Twelve-spotted Skimmer Libellula pulchella Pools S

Painted Skimmer Libellula semifasciata Ponds, Pools S Great Blue Skimmer Libellula vibrans Ponds, Swamps S

Blue Dasher Pachydiplax longipennis Ponds, Pools, Swamps S

Wandering Glider Pantala flavescens Pools, Ponds S

6

Spot-winged Glider Pantala hymenaea Pools, Ponds S

Eastern Amberwing Perithemis tenera Ponds, Pools S

Blue-faced Meadowhawk Sympetrum ambiguum S3S4 Pools S

Ruby Meadowhawk Sympetrum rubicundulum Pools S Autumn Meadowhawk Sympetrum vicinum Ponds, Bogs S, C

Carolina Saddlebags Tramea carolina Pools, Ponds S

Black Saddlebags Tramea lacerata Pools, Ponds S

KEY: S1 = State Endangered Pools = temporary B = Burrower

S2 = State Threatened Ponds = permanent (including ditches) S = Sprawler S3 = State watch list SAO = Stray Adults only C - Climber

Bogs = acidic ponds only

Swamps = Deep shaded Ponds

Table 3 provides the minimum number of adults of each species recorded by field date at

Jackson Lane in 2004.

TABLE 3: MINIMUM NUMBER OF ADULTS RECORDED Common Name 9-

Apr 17-Apr

22-Apr

25-Apr

30-Apr

7-May

12-May

20-May

1-Jun 10-Jun

22-Jun

2-Jul 9-Jul 21-Jul

4-Aug

1-Sep

26-Sep

10-Oct

SUM

Ebony Jewelwing 31 4 60 30 30 12 6 173

Northern Spreadwing 3 1 4 Spotted Spreadwing 170 300 470

Sweetflag Spreadwing 1 1

Elegant Spreadwing 1 1 Slender Spreadwing 152 1 2 1 156

Swamp Spreadwing 1 1 Violet Dancer 3 2 1 6

Azure Bluet 8 3 1 12 2 5 4 8 5 2 50

Double-striped Bluet 1 4 1 6 Familiar Bluet 33 1000 100 300 80 60 1000 3000 60 20 200 8 1 150 6012

Turquoise Bluet 2 2

Orange Bluet 1 1 2

Slender Bluet 4 4

Citrine Forktail 6 4 100 19 12 8 8 18 100 15 1 1 292

Fragile Forktail 8 3002 3000 200 5000 5000 500 1000 100 150 140 1200 100 60 300 60 19820 Rambur's Forktail 1 1

Eastern Forktail 7 40 8 20 1 1 15 2 3 97

Black-shouldered Spinyleg 1 3 1 5 Lancet Clubtail 1 5 1 7

Ashy Clubtail 9 15 40 45 15 1 125

Dragonhunter 1 1 Shadow Darner 1 1

Common Green Darner 7 12 12 1 20 29 9 81 20 28 15 20 8 9 8 20 350 4 653

Comet Darner 2 2 4 Springtime Darner 2 35 1 16 1 1 56

Swamp Darner 20 61 51 8 12 18 20 1 191

Taper-tailed Darner 1 1 Harlequin Darner 4 54 105 1 1 165

Cyrano Darner 1 1 2

Twin-spotted Spiketail 1 1 5 1 1 1 10 Stream Cruiser 4 2 1 7

Georgia River Cruiser 5 1 11 6 1 24

Prince Baskettail 1 1 Mocha Emerald 8 2 2 12

Clamp-tipped Emerald 1 2 2 2 1 8

Common Baskettail 33 1 38 59 17 9 1 2 160 Calico Pennant 7 30 40 30 30 6 6 4 1 154

Double-ringed Pennant 0

Eastern Pondhawk 4 10 40 50 30 18 15 15 15 25 4 226 Bar-winged Skimmer 1 81 30 30 15 60 30 2 249

White-spangled Skimmer 9 13 60 100 50 25 8 3 3 271

Blue Corporal 1 2 15 20 6 4 6 54 Slaty Skimmer 1 4 30 25 25 30 80 40 5 240

Widow Skimmer 1 4 9 15 9 3 41

7

Common Whitetail 1 5 30 250 100 300 200 60 600 300 60 80 50 8 1 2045

Twelve-spotted Skimmer 12 30 20 100 60 60 30 15 6 11 1 345

Painted Skimmer 15 4 120 30 30 25 30 80 9 60 18 5 426

Great Blue Skimmer 4 20 35 43 16 12 3 20 30 183 Blue Dasher 3 1 300 1000 500 3000 3000 1000 500 300 28 9632

Wandering Glider 2 2 2 8 3 17

Spot-winged Glider 1 3 1 1 20 8 1 35 Eastern Amberwing 15 29 19 40 6 6 15 130

Blue-faced Meadowhawk 200 150 350

Ruby Meadowhawk 1 1 2 Autumn Meadowhawk 16 3 2 4 3 1 250 279

Carolina Saddlebags 3 8 31 8 30 150 20 25 16 20 2 6 319

Black Saddlebags 1 1 30 30 20 25 6 8 8 129

Totals 15 3023 3127 228 5517 6601 1036 2222 1813 1619 5265 7953 1462 950 1043 199 723 862 43658

Table 4 lists by wetland type where larval development likely took place during

2003/2004. This information was determined by the presence of mature larvae, cast

skins, newly emerged adults and/or inferred from reproductive behavior of adults. Those

marked with a question mark indicate sites where the habitat was such that a few

individuals of that species also likely completed their life cycle, but direct field data was

absent. In addition, a few larval identifications were incorporated into Table 4 from other

invertebrate studies. A complete list of these specimens is provided in Appendix 2. For

the purposes of this table and this report, the data on Pasture Pond does not include the

southern extension of Cell #1 which has the characteristics of a shallow cell.

TABLE 4 – PRESENCE OF LARVAL DEVELOPMENT BY LOCATION

Genus Species JL-Large JL-Small Pasture Pd Deep Cells Shallow Cells Ditches Creek

Calopteryx maculata NO NO NO NO NO NO YES

Lestes australis ? ? ? YES ? ? NO

Lestes congener YES YES ? NO NO NO NO

Lestes forcipatus YES ? ? ? ? ? NO

Lestes inaequalis ? ? ? YES ? ? NO

Lestes rectangularis YES YES YES YES YES YES NO

Lestes vigilax ? ? ? NO NO ? NO

Argia fumipennis NO NO NO YES ? ? YES

Enallagma aspersum NO NO NO YES YES NO NO

Enallagma basidens ? ? ? YES YES NO NO

Enallagma civile YES YES YES YES YES ? NO

Enallagma divagans NO NO NO NO NO NO YES

Enallagma signatum ? ? ? YES ? ? NO

Enallagma traviatum NO NO NO YES YES NO NO

Ischnura hastata YES YES YES YES YES NO NO

Ischnura posita YES YES YES YES YES YES NO

Ischnura ramburii NO NO NO ? ? NO NO

Ischnura verticalis YES YES YES YES YES NO NO

Dromogomphus spinosus NO NO NO NO NO NO ?

Gomphus exilis ? ? ? NO NO ? YES

Gomphus lividus NO NO NO NO NO NO YES

Hagenius brevistylus NO NO NO NO NO NO ?

Aeshna umbrosa NO NO NO ? NO ? ?

Anax junius YES YES YES YES YES YES NO

8

Anax longipes ? ? ? YES ? NO NO

Basiaeschna janata NO NO NO NO NO NO ?

Epiaeschna heros YES YES YES NO NO YES NO

Gomphaeschna antilope ? ? ? NO NO ? NO

Gomphaeschna furcillata YES YES ? NO NO YES NO

Nasiaeschna pentacantha ? YES ? ? NO ? NO

Cordulegaster maculata NO NO NO NO NO NO YES

Didymops transversa NO NO NO NO NO NO YES

Marcromia illinoiensis NO NO NO NO NO NO ?

Epicordulia princeps NO NO NO ? NO NO NO

Somatochlora linearis NO NO NO NO NO NO YES

Somatochlora tenebrosa NO NO NO NO NO NO YES

Tetragoneuria cynosura YES YES YES YES YES YES NO

Celithemis elisa ? NO NO YES YES NO NO

Celithemis verna YES ? ? ? ? NO NO

Erythemis simplicicollis YES YES YES YES YES YES NO

Libellula axilena YES YES YES NO NO YES NO

Libellula cyanea YES YES YES YES YES NO NO

Libellula deplanata ? NO NO YES YES NO NO

Libellula incesta YES YES YES YES YES NO NO

Libellula luctuosa NO NO YES YES YES NO NO

Libellula lydia YES YES YES YES YES YES NO

Libellula pulchella YES YES YES YES YES NO NO

Libellula semifasciata YES YES YES YES YES ? NO

Libellula vibrans YES YES YES YES YES YES NO

Pachydiplax longipennis YES YES YES YES YES YES NO

Pantala flavescens ? ? ? YES ? NO NO

Pantala hymenaea YES YES YES YES YES NO NO

Perithemis tenera NO NO NO YES ? NO NO

Sympetrum ambiguum YES YES ? NO NO NO NO

Sympetrum rubicundulum ? YES ? ? ? NO NO

Sympetrum vicinum NO NO NO YES YES NO NO

Tramea carolina YES YES YES YES YES NO NO

Tramea lacerata ? YES ? YES ? NO NO

In Table 4, Delmarva bays are represented by JLL and JLS. Both slowly lost water

during the season, losing all surface water by September 26th. However, the spongy

substrate under both depressional wetlands remained damp throughout 2004.

JLS – April 9 JLS – September 26th

9

JLL - April 9 JLL – September 26

The overall density of individual odonates was significantly higher at JLS than at JLL in

2004 even though the general species makeup was about the same. The reason for this is

not known. On July 9, the number of Pachydiplax longipennis castskins at JLS were

estimated (counting castskins at a couple “average” locations and extrapolating to the

entire logical area around the pond) in excess of 80,000. Considering that Pachydiplax

longipennis is a permanent water species, which can only resist minimal drying of its

larval source, these numbers were unexpected.

There were a handful of dragonfly and damselfly species currently associated with the

adjacent Delmarva bays that were not found at the restoration ponds. These potential

indicator species have larval requirements that the restoration cells currently do not yet

have. They are 1) deep shade (favoring species such as Tetragoneuria cynosura,

Libellula vibrans, Epiaeschna heros, Libellula axilena), 2) annually occurring temporary

pool environment (favoring species such as Lestes congener, Sympetrum ambiguum) or

3) a sphagnum-like bog substrate (favoring species such as Gomphaeschna furcillata).

Large numbers of adult Gomphaeschna furcillata, Libellula axilena, Sympetrum

ambiguum and Lestes congener were found at JLL and JLS and standout as the most

distinctive four species of the Delmarva bays at the preserve. The other species

mentioned in the previous paragraph were either in smaller numbers or their adults often

wandered into the open wetland sites even though they did not use them for larval

development.

Jackson Lane Large has the highest concentration of individuals of Libellula axilena that

I have ever encountered -- anywhere. On June 10th, I spent a couple hours at JLL

mapping the range of adult L. axilena in an attempt to determine their preferred habitat.

It turned out that they occurred in the highest concentrations in a broad ring around the

inside of the bay at the tree line where Walter's sedge was present. Outside of the tree

line (in the shade), but still well within JLL smaller numbers of Libellula vibrans

dominated; while in the center (open to sunlight) a mix of dragonflies in limited numbers

were present with Libellula semifasciata, Libellula incesta, and Pachydiplax longipennis

being the most conspicuous. Libellula axilena appeared concentrated at the interface of

10

the forest and the open area of the bay. There is nothing in the existing scientific

literature that would explain why this should take place. I still do not know if the larvae

are also so restricted or if it was just an adult preference. If it does hold for the larvae it

would be proof of a distinct division of habitat within JLL by these dragonflies. These

loose, but still distinctive, concentric rings of adult dragonfly species at JLL is interesting

and deserves additional study.

Pasture Pond overall odonate species composition and number of individuals is closer to

the ditch environment that any other wetland type at JL. However, there are slight

differences as shown in Table 4 (e.g. small numbers of L. axilena). This species, which

is common in JLL/JLS, indicates that Pasture Pond does have something in common with

the Delmarva bays. However, two other dragonfly species common at JLL/JLS,

Sympetrum ambiguum and Lestes congener could not be found despite a direct effort to

do so. The dominant conspicuous species at Pasture Pond was Libellula vibrans and

Pachydiplax longipennis in 2004. These are both permanent to semi-permanent water

generalists which do not do well in temporary pools. Pasture Pond was dry by the end of

September, with only the central ditch substrate likely remaining moist enough to allow

the development of these two species. Following is a photograph of Pasture Pond taken

just before the ditch went dry.

PASTURE POND -- CENTRAL DITCH – September 1

11

Restoration cells were of two types, those that went dry in 2004 (shallow cells) and those

that did not (deep cells). Cells #2 and #17 retained significant surface water, while Cell

#3 was reduced to a very shallow pool. All the other cells went dry.

Cell #2 -- September 26 Cell #17 -- September 26

What was unexpected is that all the wetland cells produced high numbers of permanent

water species with annual life-cycles (see Table 4) during spring and early summer of

2004. It was a common and perplexing sight to find significant numbers of castskins of

permanent-water, annual, dragonfly species hanging on vegetation above completely dry

ponds with hard-baked bottoms. These dry cells in their present condition could not

possibly sustain these species through a complete 2005 larval development as they

obviously did for 2004. It was equally perplexing having reduced numbers of individual

temporary pool dragonflies at the dry cells in 2004, despite the shallow cells’ temporary

nature. The shallow and deep cells were being utilized by some temporary pool species

(e.g. Anax junius, Libellula pulchella, Pantala hymenaea, Pantala flavescens, Tramea

lacerata, and Tramea carolina) but their numbers were far less than expected. This

apparent contradiction of permanent-water dragonfly castskins found above scorched dry

cells indicated that the dynamics of the shallow cells is more complex than implied by

classifying them as simply temporary pools.

Cell #23 stood out from the other cells in having a different damselfly composition

(species and numbers) during the spring and early summer. Enallagma traviatum was

found at this location but not elsewhere at Jackson Lane. On June 1, the unexpected

combination of sexually mature adults of Enallagma traviatum, Enallagma civile,

Enallagma basidens, and Enallagma aspersum ovipositing at Cell #23, resulted in my

naming Cell #23 Enallagma pond. The pond was dominated by Eleocharis sedges but

this is also the case with other cells. The reason for Cell #23 having such a unique set of

damselflies is not known, but does reflect that something about this cell is unique.

12

Cell #23 Enallagma Pond--July 2

A single male Gomphaeschna antilope (Taper-tailed Darner) was collected on May 20th

from a low bush near Ditch Plug #14 [N39o 03.152’ W 075.741’]. This species is of

interest because it is listed as threatened (S2 rank) in Maryland. Little is known about

this species except that it inserts its eggs in wood above the water line in swamps and

bogs. This was the only odonate species confirmed at JL that is listed as rare, threatened,

or endangered in Maryland.

An unusual male dragonfly belonging to the genus Tetragoneuria was collected between

JLL and JLS [N39o 03.416’ W 075o 45.266’] on April 22nd. The extensive marking of

the wings (see photograph on next page) suggested, using standard keys, that it was

Tetragoneuria semiaquea; a species which is listed in Maryland as SH. Historically a

single Maryland record exists from one specimen collected in the early part of the last

century from Baltimore County. However, after comparing the specimen with other T.

semiaquea from New Jersey the measurements taken of the abdominal segments did not

match the New Jersey specimens. The separation of species within Tetragoneuria are

best done using a series of specimens. This is because the genus is currently undergoing

a rapid radiation of species and many of the species are very closely related, with

overlapping morphological characteristics. Only one specimen was found at JL which

exhibited the dark wing markings. However, a closely related species, with smaller dark

wing markings, Tetragoneuria cynosura was common on the property at the time the

specimen in question was taken.

The specimen was sent to Michael May at Rutgers University who is arguably the

foremost authority on the genus Tetragoneuria. His response back was “I did the

13

measurements on the specimen you gave me to look at. Unfortunately, the abdominal

proportions fall fairly well into the cynosura range. Also, the hind wing pattern doesn’t

have the hyaline area around the midbasal space that is typical of New Jersey

semiaquea. The dark area is unusually large for a cynosura from this region, but similar

markings are fairly common in the deep south and in new England. So, although I

wouldn’t absolutely write off semiaquea, my best guess is that it’s just an unusually

small, dark cynosura.” Based on Dr. May’s response I recorded it as Tetragoneuria

cynosure, but the possibility that it is hybrid should not be ruled out – indicating that a

small population of T. semiaquea might be present at the preserve.

Another unexpected species that might occur at JL is based on a single sighting of a large

dull-colored dragonfly on May 20th that landed vertically on a tree trunk [N 39o 03.381’

W 075o 45.160’] near JLL. The lighting was shaded when it was observed with 7x42

binoculars. The initial impression was that it was a Tachopteryx thoreyi. Upon

attempting to approach the dragonfly it flew and I was not able to find it again either on

that day or on return visits. Tachopteryx thoreyi is listed as S2 (rare) in Maryland and

this would be the first ever found on the Delmarva Peninsula. Its larvae require

permanent seeps in deciduous forests. The behavior of landing vertically on tree trunks is

one of the characteristics of this species -- but on occasions other darners such as

Epiaeschna heros and Gomphaeschna furcillata, which occur at JL, will occasionally do

this also. I still believe that it might have been T. thoreyi but since I never had another

sighting, and that the lighting conditions were such that it’s apparent gray body color

14

might have been more wishful thinking than reality, I have not included it on the

dragonfly list for Jackson Lane.

Appendix 1 lists the 41 species of butterflies, 4 species of Tiger Beetles, 17 species of

amphibians and reptiles, 82 species of birds and a few other plants/animals that were

identified and field notes taken during the 2004 season.

DISCUSSION:

In 2004, the restoration depressions (cells) had a surprising degree of biodiversity of both

aquatic plants and animals which was unexpected for a one-year old wetland mitigation

project. Aquatic plants such as Marsh Purslane and Eleocharis were so widespread in the

newly formed depressions that high recruitment was taking place, or a residual seed bank

was present, or remnant populations were still present from the original wetlands.

Whatever the cause, it is an indication that the wetland restoration project has an

excellent chance of succeeding.

Not all of the species of odonates found at JL utilize lentic environments and were

therefore completing their larval development away from JL; presumably either in the

Choptank River or East Broadway Branch. These lotic dependent species are Calopteryx

maculata, Argia fumipennis violacea, Enallagma divagans, Dromogomphus spinosus,

Gomphus lividus, Hagenius brevistylus, Basiaeschna janata, Cordulegaster maculata,

Didymops transvera, Macromia illinoiensis georgina, Somatochlora tenebrosa, and

Somatochlora linearis. The spring flying dragonflies Gomphus lividus, Basiaeschna

janata and Didymops transvera were present in high enough numbers to become

significant predators at JL and are therefore an important component of the ecology of the

preserve. These species were often seen flying along roads and along the forest edges at

JL.

A few dragonfly species at Jackson Lane do not over-winter in Maryland, but do utilize

Jackson Lane wetlands for larval development. These migratory species arrive from the

south in the spring or early summer, lay eggs, and emerge as adults by late summer or fall

to leave the area and fly south. These include Anax junius (in part), Pantala flavescens,

Pantala hymenaea, Tramea carolina and Tramea lacerata. Although absent during

much of the year, they still contribute to the overall ecology of Jackson Lane, especially

the temporary pool habitats they have evolved to utilize.

In 2004, large numbers of adults could be found at the intact Delmarva bays consisting of

Gomphaeschna furcillata in the spring, Libellula axilena in the summer and Sympetrum

ambiguum and Lestes congener in the fall. The restoration cells did not have these

species. As the restoration cells start to take on the characteristics of the Delmarva bays

these species will likely start to utilize these wetland cells. Success of the restoration

cells should be measured against all three of these species and not just one of them (e.g.

Pasture Pond has a small population of Libellula axilena but appears not to harbor the

other two species). It should also be noted that low population levels of one or more of

these species at a restoration cell may represent important progress, but should not be

15

interpreted as a successful conversion to a Delmarva bay unless high population levels of

all three species are reached.

Interpreting the 2004 data in the context of the basic biological information on the

various species, one can make reasonable assumptions about how the overall odonate

species composition would change at the various wetland sites at Jackson Lane under

different long-term levels of water availability. Table 5 shows the species expected for

the Delmarva bays, deeper restoration ponds and shallow restoration ponds during a

hypothetical dry, wet and average year. In Table 5 note that the wet years show the

greatest amount of odonate species similarity between the wetland types, while during

dry years the greatest differences. The reason for this is two fold. First, JL has a high

recruitment level of adult odonates from nearby adjacent wetlands (intense immigration)

so re-colonization of ponds by permanent water species is fast. Larval development of

these immigrants will continue as long as pond conditions remain, but fail if they dry out

too soon. Second, temporary pool species survive better when they do not need to

compete with permanent water species. During dry years the relatively fast differential

drying of the wetland cells and ponds set the environmental limit as to which odonate

larvae will survive, thus providing greater differences in odonate production between

cells. This strong survival pressure is something that is absent during wet years when

surface water is plentiful and long lasting, thus producing a homogenization of species

across the wetland cells. Although Table 5 is structured to represent annual levels of

water availability, longer periods of sustained wetness or dryness would likely further

exaggerate these effects.

TABLE 5: Odonate Larval Emergence (ability to complete life cycle)

By Pond/Cell during a hypothetical dry year (e.g. 2002), a hypothetical

wet year (e.g. 2003) and an average year (slightly drier than 2004)

TABLE 5.1: DELMARVA BAYS ( e.g. Jackson Lane Large, Jackson Lane Small) (Usually no standing water by end of summer in most years but surface/subsurface

sphagnum substrate remains moist expect during the driest years. During wet years surface

water present year round – deeply shade at the edges but open in center)

SPECIES Dry

Year

Average

Year

Wet Year Abundance

at Best

Lestes australis No No Yes Rare

Lestes congener Yes Yes Yes Common

Lestes forcipatus Yes Yes Yes Uncommon

Lestes inaequalis No No Yes Rare

Lestes rectangularis Yes Yes Yes Common

Enallagma basidens Unknown Yes Yes Rare

Enallagma civile Unknown Yes Yes Uncommon

Enallagma signatum No Yes Yes Rare

Ischnura hastata Unknown Unknown Yes Rare

Ischnura posita Unknown Yes Yes Abundant

Ischnura verticalis Unknown Yes Yes Uncommon

Gomphus exilis No Unknown Yes Rare

Anax junius Yes Yes Yes Common

Anax longipes No No Yes Rare

16

Epiaeschna heros No Yes Yes Common

Gomphaeschna antilope Unknown Unknown Yes Rare

Gomphaeschna furcillata Unknown Yes Yes Common

Nasiaeschna pentacantha No No Yes Rare

Tetragoneuria cynosura No Unknown Yes Rare

Celithemis verna No Unknown Yes Rare

Erythemis simplicicollis Yes Yes Yes Uncommon

Libellula axilena Yes Yes Yes Common

Libellula cyanea Unknown Yes Yes Rare

Libellula incesta Unknown Yes Yes Common

Libellula lydia Unknown Yes Yes Uncommon

Libellula pulchella Yes Yes Yes Uncommon

Libellula semifasciata Yes Yes Yes Common

Libellula vibrans Yes Yes Yes Common

Pachydiplax longipennis Unknown Unknown Yes Uncommon

Pantala flavescens Yes Yes Yes Rare

Pantala hymenaea Yes Yes Yes Rare

Sympetrum ambiguum Yes Yes Yes Common

Sympetrum rubicundulum Yes Yes Yes Rare

Sympetrum vicinum No No Yes Rare

Tramea carolina Yes Yes Yes Rare

Tramea lacerata Yes Yes Yes Rare

TABLE 5.2: DEEP CELLS (e.g. Cell 2 and Cell 17/DP17) (Likely to retain some surface water except in driest of years – little shade)

SPECIES Dry

Year

Average

Year

Wet Year Abundance

At Best

Lestes australis No Yes Yes Rare

Lestes forcipatus Yes Yes Yes Rare

Lestes rectangularis Yes Yes Yes Abundant

Enallagma aspersum Unknown Yes Yes Uncommon

Enallagma basidens Unknown Yes Yes Rare

Enallagma civile Yes Yes Yes Abundant

Enallagma signatum No Yes Yes Rare

Enallagma traviatum No Yes Yes Rare

Ischnura hastate Unknown Yes Yes Common

Ischnura posita Unknown Yes Yes Abundant

Ischnura verticalis Unknown Yes Yes Common

Anax junius Yes Yes Yes Common

Anax longipes No Yes Yes Rare

Tetragoneuria cynosura No Yes Yes Rare

Celithemis elisa No Yes Yes Uncommon

Erythemis simplicicollis No Yes Yes Uncommon

Libellula cyanea No Yes Yes Common

Libellula deplanata No Yes Yes Common

Libellula incesta No Yes Yes Common

Libellula luctuosa No Yes Yes Uncommon

Libellula lydia No Yes Yes Abundant

Libellula pulchella Yes Yes Yes Common

Libellula semifasciata Unknown Yes Yes Common

Libellula vibrans No No Yes Uncommon

Pachydiplax longipennis No Yes Yes Abundant

17

Pantala flavescens Yes Yes Yes Uncommon

Pantala hymenaea Yes Yes Yes Uncommon

Perithemis tenera No Yes Yes Uncommon

Sympetrum vicinum No Yes Yes Abundant

Tramea carolina Yes Yes Yes Common

Tramea lacerata Yes Yes Yes Uncommon

TABLE 5.3: SHALLOW CELLS (e.g. Cell 21, Cell 23) (Completely dry by mid-summer in most years but retains some water all year

during wet years – little shade)

SPECIES Dry

Year

Average

Year

Wet Year Abundance

At Best

Lestes australis No No Yes Rare

Lestes forcipatus Unknown Yes Yes Rare

Lestes rectangularis Unknown Yes Yes Abundant

Enallagma aspersum No No Yes Uncommon

Enallagma basidens Unknown Yes Yes Rare

Enallagma civile Unknown Yes Yes Abundant

Enallagma signatum No No Yes Rare

Enallagma traviatum No No Yes Rare

Ischnura hastate No No Yes Common

Ischnura posita No No Yes Abundant

Ischnura verticalis No No Yes Common

Anax junius Unknown Yes Yes Common

Anax longipes No Unknown Yes Rare

Tetragoneuria cynosura No No Yes Rare

Celithemis elisa No No Yes Uncommon

Erythemis simplicicollis No No Yes Common

Libellula cyanea No No Yes Common

Libellula deplanata No No Yes Common

Libellula incesta No No Yes Common

Libellula luctuosa No No Yes Uncommon

Libellula lydia No No Yes Abundant

Libellula pulchella Unknown Yes Yes Common

Libellula semifasciata No No Yes Common

Libellula vibrans No No Yes Uncommon

Pachydiplax longipennis No No Yes Abundant

Pantala flavescens Unknown Yes Yes Uncommon

Pantala hymenaea Unknown Yes Yes Uncommon

Perithemis tenera No No Yes Uncommon

Sympetrum vicinum No No Yes Uncommon

Tramea carolina Unknown Yes Yes Common

Tramea lacerata Unknown Yes Yes Uncommon

One of the main objectives of this study was to be able to differentiate species

composition and numbers when comparing the restoration ponds and the original bays.

This year’s field data unfortunately gives, at best, a skewed view and would be

misleading if used as a baseline by itself. There were high emergence numbers of

permanent water species found universally across both the restoration cells and the

Delmarva bays during the spring and early summer; while temporary pond odonates were

found in relatively few numbers. In other words, there was a homogenizing of species

18

across all of the wetlands at JL in 2004. Considering the variety of wetlands at JL, this

homogenization of odonate species would not be expected in normal or dry years. In a

more typical year the restoration cells would likely experience strong oscillations of

populations with frequent local extinctions; with a predominance of temporary water

odonate species and a limited number of those permanent water odonates whose larvae

can tolerate some degree of drying by utilizing the moist substrate left at the bottom of

the pools.

It is likely that the extremely dry year (2002) followed by an extremely wet year (2003)

reset and homogenized all of the wetlands at JL at least for the dragonflies and

damselflies. 2002 was a record setting year for lack of rain, and it is likely that few

permanent-water species survived anywhere at JL. If this is correct, then in 2003 a

predominance of temporary pool species emerged from the wetlands at JL, but due to the

extensive rains that year the site also became very receptive to the annual high emigration

of permanent pond species from adjacent wetlands. These permanent species established

due to the high levels of rainfall. Their larvae strongly selected against the temporary

pool species that they co-existed with.

Therefore, during the 2004 survey all across the different types of wetlands at JL there

were high emergences of permanent pond species and low emergences of temporary pool

species. In 2004, JLL, JLS and the majority of the restoration ponds went dry, but not

until later than usual due to a wet spring and summer. Dry restoration pools with little

substrate to hold moisture will not allow most permanent pond species to survive to

maturity. At JLL and JLS, where moist substrate is present a greater number of

permanent pond odonates will survive; but overall will still suffer from high mortality

rates. Because 2004 was a drier year (at least by the end of the season) than 2003, it is

expected that in 2005 there will be a higher number of temporary pool odonates and

fewer permanent pond odonates in the wetlands than there were during the 2004 season.

This balance of temporary pool species and permanent pond species is in constant flux

and will always be different for each year. But can be summed up as – during a series of

dry years, temporary pool species will dominate Jackson Lane wetlands; during a series

of wet years, permanent pond species will dominate, and for all other years, an unstable

balance will be reached, which will differ for each pool or pond. It is also likely that

other aquatic invertebrates and possibly aquatic vertebrates follow this trend. Caution

should therefore be taken in data consisting only of a single wet, or dry or average year,

since the total makeup of Jackson Lane’s aquatic biota is defined by this ecological

balancing act.

This discussion was based on one atypical year’s worth of data and observations. The

conclusions presented in this paper are likely sound, but need to be confirmed with

additional field seasons. Most important would be to survey Jackson Lane during and

following a dry year, or at least, a more typical year.

19

APPENDIX 1:

2004 Non-Odonate records from Jackson Lane Preserve

Butterflies (41 species): Tiger Swallowtail Spicebush Swallowtail Black Swallowtail

Cabbage White Falcate Orangetip Clouded Sulphur

Orange Sulphur Sleepy Orange Cloudless Sulphur Henry’s Elfin (1) Brown Elfin Red-banded Hairstreak

Gray Hairstreak Eastern-tailed Blue Spring Azure

Summer Azure Common Buckeye Pearl Crescent Mourning Cloak Variegated Fritillary Red-spotted Purple

Viceroy Eastern Comma Question Mark

American Lady Painted Lady Red Admiral Little Wood Satyr Common Wood Nymph Appalachian Brown

Monarch Juvenile Duskywing Horace’s Duskywing

Wild Indigo Duskywing Common Checkered Skipper Common Sootywing Silver-spotted Skipper Least Skipper Sachem

Dun Skipper Zabulon Skipper

Tiger Beetles: Amphibians & Reptiles: Cicindela punctulata (*)(+) American Bullfrog

Cicindela repanda (*)(+) Fowler’s Toad

Cicindela sexglutta (*)(+) Gray Treefrog Cicindela tranquebarica (*)(+) Northern Spring Peeper

New Jersey Chorus Frog

Northern Green Frog Pickerel Frog

Wood Frog

Mammals: Southern Leopard Frog

Woodchuck Carpenter Frog

White-tailed Deer Red-bellied Turtle

Raccoon Eastern Box Turtle (1) Eastern Chipmunk Eastern Painted Turtle (1)

Opossum Eastern Mud Turtle (1)

Red Fox Eastern Gartersnake (1) Black Rat Snake

Queen Snake (+)(one sighting 9-July – need additional confirmation)

Other Animals of note: Amblyomma americanum – Lone Star Tick Dermacentor variabilis – American Dog Tick

Melanoplus differentialis – Differential Locust (1) Aedes vexans – Flood Water Mosquito Bittacomorpha sp. – Phantom Cranefly Callibaetis sp. -- Mayfly (*)

Actias luna -- Luna Moth Ecpantheria scribonia – Giant Leopard Moth Trypoxylon sp. Organ-pipe Muddauber (1) Argiope aurantia – Garden Orb weaver (1)

Microthena mitrata – White Micrathena (spider) Dolomedes triton – Six-spotted Fishing Spider (1)

Esox americanus – Grass Pickerel (1)

Plants Photographed: Vaccinium corymbosum (Swamp Blueberry) in bloom Viola lancelata (Lance-leaf Violet) in bloom Viola kitaibelliana (Field Pansey) in bloom Gratiola neglecta (Clammy Hedge-hyssop) in bloom

Carex striata (Walter’s Sedge) Phragmites australis

Spiraea sp. Microstegium vimineum -- Japanese Stilt Grass Ludwigia palustris – Marsh Purslane Rotala ramosior – Toothcup

Goodyera pubecens – Downy Rattlesnake Orchid

20

Birds seen with date of first sighting: Pied-billed Grebe 7-May Great Blue Heron 22-Apr Great Egret 22-Jun Little Blue Heron 21-Jul Green Heron 10-Jun Glossy Ibis 10-Jun

Black Vulture 22-Apr Turkey Vulture 22-Apr Canada Goose 7-May

Wood Duck 22-Apr American Black Duck 17-Apr Mallard 22-Apr Bald Eagle 25-Apr Northern Harrier 17-Apr Red-shouldered Hawk 22-Apr

Red-tailed Hawk 17-Apr American Kestrel 7-May Wild Turkey 30-Apr

Northern Bobwhite 22-June Sora 22-Apr Killdeer 22-Apr Greater Yellowlegs 9-Apr Least Sandpiper 7-May Wilson’s Snipe 22-Apr

Laughing Gull 17-Apr Mourning dove 22-Jun Yellow-billed Cuckoo 1-Jun

Eastern Screech-Owl 22-June Ruby-throated Hummingbird 2-Jul Downy Woodpecker 25-Apr Hairy Woodpecker 25-Apr Northern Flicker 22-Apr Pileated Woodpecker 22-Apr

Eastern Wood-Pewee 20-May-04 Acadian Flycatcher 30-Apr Great Crested Flycatcher 12-May

Eastern Kingbird 12-May White-eyed Vireo 22-Apr Red-eyed Vireo Blue Jay 22-Apr American Crow 22-Apr Fish Crow 17-Apr

Purple Martin 22-Apr Tree Swallow 22-Apr Barn Swallow 22-Apr

Carolina Chickadee 22-Apr Tufted Titmouse 17-Apr Marsh Wren 22-Apr Blue-gray Gnatcatcher 22-Apr Eastern Bluebird 30-Apr Wood Thrush 12-May

American Robin 22-Apr Gray Catbird 22-Apr Brown thrasher 22-Apr European Starling 22-Apr Cedar Waxwing 1-Jun Yellow Warbler 7-May

Yellow-rumped Warbler 22-Apr Black-throated Green Warbler 20-May American Redstart 22-Apr

Prothonotary Warbler 1-Jun Ovenbird 22-Apr Common Yellowthroat 20-May Hooded Warbler 7-May Scarlet Tanager 12-May Eastern Towhee 30-Apr

Chipping Sparrow 17-Apr Savannah Sparrow 22-Apr Grasshopper Sparrow 22-Apr

Song Sparrow 17-Apr Swamp Sparrow 17-Apr White-throated Sparrow 22-Apr Northern Cardinal 22-Apr Indigo Bunting 30-Apr Red-winged Blackbird 17-Apr

Common Grackle 12-May Brown-headed Cowbird 22-Jun Orchard Oriole 1-June

American Goldfinch 25-Apr Chuck-wills-widow 7-May Dark-eyed Junco 26-Sep Helmeted Guineafowl 26-Sep

Key: (+) = new for Caroline County (*) = specimen collected

(1) = photographed

21

APPENDIX 2: Larval Identification

form other Surveys:

Larval Specimens from Jackson Lane Large and Jackson Lane Small)

from Edward Schwartzman Vial 1: JLL pool, Plot 4, 22-May-2001

1 Anax junius

Vial 10: JLS pool, Plot 3, 25-May-2001, DMBO1-27

1 Lestes rectangularis

Vial 13: JLL pool, Plot 6, 22-May-2001

3 Lestes sp. (mid-instars) rectangularis or australis

Vial 15: JLS pool, Plot 4, 22-May-2001

1 Enallagma civile

Larval Specimens from Jackson Lane

from Michelle Alicia

Vial 1: PPD Stn. 10 25-May-2004

1 Early instar Libellulidae

Vial 2: JLL Stn 7 17-April-2004

1 Pachydiplax longipennis

1 Enallagma civile 1 Ischnura sp. possibly verticalis?

1 Libellula semifasciata

Vial 3: JLL Stn 10 May 2004

1 early instar Libellulidae

Vial 4: JLL Stn 7 May 2004

1 early instar Libellulidae – possibly Libellula semifasciata?

1 Ischnura posita

Vial 5: JLL Stn 1 May 2004

4 early instar Libellulidae – possibly Libellula semifasciata? 3 Lestes sp. probably rectangularis (posterior ends on all 3 missing)

Vial 6: JLL Stn 8 24-May-2004 4 Pachydiplax longipennis

1 Erythemis simplicicollis

1 Celithemis verna

Vial 7: JLL Stn 5 May 2004

1 Pachydiplax longipennis