說明
From 2002 to 2007 biologists and volunteer butterfly enthusiasts spent thousands of hours in the field in an effort to record the status and distribution of Vermont butterflies, the first systematic statewide butterfly atlas to be undertaken. Despite their lofty status among the insects, butterflies were largely a mystery in Vermont. There was no atlas of their distribution, no scientific assessment of the threats they faced, and no conservation concept for butterfly species on a statewide scale. With this in mind, we initiated a six-year study to document the distribution and abundance of butterflies in Vermont.
資料紀錄
此資源sampling event的資料已發佈為達爾文核心集檔案（DwC-A），其以一或多組資料表構成分享生物多樣性資料的標準格式。 核心資料表包含 9,654 筆紀錄。
亦存在 1 筆延伸集的資料表。延伸集中的紀錄補充核心集中紀錄的額外資訊。 每個延伸集資料表中資料筆數顯示如下。
此 IPT 存放資料以提供資料儲存庫服務。資料與資源的詮釋資料可由「下載」單元下載。「版本」表格列出此資源的其它公開版本，以便利追蹤其隨時間的變更。
版本
以下的表格只顯示可公開存取資源的已發布版本。
如何引用
研究者應依照以下指示引用此資源。:
McFarland K, Pfeiffer B (2022): Vermont Butterfly Atlas 1.0 (2002-2007). v1.1. Vermont Center for Ecostudies. Dataset/Samplingevent. https://ipt.vtatlasoflife.org/resource?r=vtbutterflyatlas1&v=1.1
權利
研究者應尊重以下權利聲明。:
此資料的發布者及權利單位為 Vermont Center for Ecostudies。 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY 4.0) License.
GBIF 註冊
此資源已向GBIF註冊，並指定以下之GBIF UUID: 0901cecf-55f1-447e-8537-1f7b63a865a0。 Vermont Center for Ecostudies 發佈此資源，並經由U.S. Geological Survey同意向GBIF註冊成為資料發佈者。
關鍵字
Samplingevent
聯絡資訊
- 元數據提供者 ●
- 出處 ●
- 連絡人
http://orcid.org/https://orcid.org/ 0000-0001-7809-5503
- 出處
地理涵蓋範圍
State of Vermont, United States
| 界定座標範圍 | 緯度南界 經度西界 [42.634, -73.542], 緯度北界 經度東界 [45.105, -71.367] |
|---|
分類群涵蓋範圍
Butterflies
| Order | Lepidoptera (Butterflies) |
|---|
時間涵蓋範圍
| 起始日期 / 結束日期 | 2002-03-01 / 2007-11-30 |
|---|
計畫資料
https://val.vtecostudies.org/
| 計畫名稱 | Vermont Atlas of Life |
|---|---|
| 辨識碼 | VAL |
| 經費來源 | https://val.vtecostudies.org/ |
| 研究區域描述 | State of Vermont |
| 研究設計描述 | https://val.vtecostudies.org/ |
參與計畫的人員:
取樣方法
The Vermont Butterfly Atlas (VBA) was a six-year (2002-2007) census to document the relative abundance and distribution of butterflies across Vermont. VBA was closely modeled after the Massachusetts Butterfly Atlas (1986-1990), Connecticut Butterfly Atlas Project (1995-1999) and Breeding Bird Atlas of Vermont (Laughlin and Kibbe 1985). Data collection protocols generally followed those of other biological atlases. Because this was the first insect atlas ever conducted in Vermont, we planned for one trial year (2002), followed by five additional field seasons (2003-2007). Field biologists were hired in some years to augment survey coverage in areas lacking adequate volunteer coverage, including blocks in the Northeastern Highlands, Franklin County, and Windham County, as well as special habitats such as wetlands. VBA accepted butterfly records from anywhere in Vermont, but to ensure thorough coverage, we surveyed butterflies evenly and systematically across the state. We adopted a grid-based sampling scheme from the Atlas of Breeding Birds of Vermont (Laughlin and Kibbe 1985). This system relied on the 184 U.S. Geological Survey 1:24,000, 7½-minute quadrangle topographic maps (7.5 minutes = 1/8 of 1 degree of latitude or longitude) that cover Vermont. Quadrangles were divided into 6 blocks with each block covering about 25 km2. Because it would have been impossible to adequately survey all 1,177 blocks in Vermont, we randomly selected one priority survey block from each quadrangle for a total of 184 priority survey blocks scattered across the state. All data from both priority and non-priority blocks were accepted by VBA. Priority blocks constituted the minimum set of blocks requiring full surveys in order to obtain a valid sample of butterflies for the entire state. Butterflies were recorded as either voucher specimens (collection or photograph) or sight records (net-release, binoculars, visual-no aid). In the field each collected specimen was assigned a uniquely numbered voucher card and placed in a glassine envelope. Printed photographs were also handled in this manner after development. Digital photograph files were assigned a voucher card number and electronically transferred to VBA. An attempt was made to secure one voucher of each species in each priority block. Data collection fell under two categories: site surveys (timed counts) and casual observations (incidental records). Site survey forms were completed when a field worker visited a location specifically to conduct a timed survey and count of all butterflies observed, as well as to record habitat types in which they were found. Casual sightings did not require measures of time or counts of individuals seen, but simply noted that a given species was present at a particular location on a certain date. Field workers were asked to visit potential butterfly habitats in their adopted priority blocks at least once per month during the growing season (May-Sept). Many breeding bird atlases adopt minimum time and total species requirements; these define when a block was adequately surveyed (Smith 1982). Because we had no prior data to examine for VBS, we collected data for two field seasons before setting our standards. We ranked the detectability of each species on the checklist and calculated the minimum total number of species likely to be found in each block with a reasonable amount of fieldwork. The minimum standard was set at 30 species per block, with a preferred target of 40 species or more.
| 研究範圍 | State of Vermont |
|---|---|
| 品質控管 | A data processing and retention protocol was outlined prior to the first field season. All data sheets were initially examined for completeness, matching codes and records, and other simple quality assurance and control (QA/QC) procedures. Site survey forms, casual observation forms and voucher card data were entered into the database and filed. Project staff and experienced volunteers completed most voucher determinations. For difficult species and specimens (e.g., Celastrina, Papilio glaucus and P. canadensis, Phyciodes, and Erynnis), experts were consulted for final identification. Because visual records yielded no physical material for determination, they were simply examined for potential errors in field identification by searching for any possible out of season dates, or odd locations and habitats. Any obvious mistakes resulted in deletions of records from the database or assignment to the genus level only. Vouchers with photographs that were not acceptable for determination were changed to visual records if the observer indicated a field identification. |
方法步驟描述:
- Final QA/QC was conducted after all data were entered. Although detailed priority block maps provided guidance to observers, most errors detected resulted from georeferencing mistakes made by observers, such as incorrect latitude and longitude or incorrect block names. Because we wanted records to be spatially referenced to a point and not just the block if possible, these corrections were very time consuming. Ambiguous records were only spatially referenced at the block level or higher (town, county or even state in rare cases). Exact reference points for each record will allow for more detailed analysis and modeling of species in the future.
引用文獻
- McFarland, K.P. and S. Zahendra. 2010. The Vermont Butterfly Survey, 2002 – 2007: A Final Report to the Natural Heritage Information Project of the Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife. 298 pp. dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.827269.v1 dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.827269.v1