RECOVERY PLAN FOR ENDANGERED KARST INVERTEBRATES

IN TRAVIS AND WILLIAMSON COUNTIES, TEXAS

 


 

The following document has been slightly modified (primarily by the omission of figures and tables).
The original (large) PDF file can be found here.

 

Texas Endangered Invertebrate Species

 

Return to Texas Entomology

 


 

RECOVERY PLAN

FOR

ENDANGERED KARST INVERTEBRATES

IN TRAVIS AND WILLIAMSON COUNTIES, TEXAS

 

Prepared by:

 

Lisa O’Donnell

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

611 E. 6th Street, Room 407

Austin, Texas 78701

 

William R. Elliott, Ph.D.

12102 Grimsley Drive

Austin, Texas 78750

 

and

 

Ruth A. Stanford

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

611 E. 6th Street, Room 407

Austin, Texas 78701

 

Edited by:

 

Alisa Shull

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

611 E. 6th Street, Room 407

Austin, Texas 78701

 

For:

 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Region 2


 

LITERATURE CITATIONS

 

Literature citations for this document should read as follows:

 

U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Recovery Plan for

Endangered Karst Invertebrates in Travis and Williamson

Counties, Texas. Albuquerque, New Mexico. 154 pp.

 

Additional copies may be purchased from:

 

Fish and Wildlife Reference Service

5430 Grosvenor Lane, Suite 110

Bethesda, Maryland 20814

 

(301) 492-6403

or

1-800-582-3421

 

The fee for the plan varies depending on the number of

pages of the plan.

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

 

The study of caves and karst in Texas is a continuing

process. Much of the information presented in this plan

was derived from research in progress. Besides William R.

Elliott, who prepared the initial draft of this plan,

contributors include James R. Reddell, George Veni, Mike

Warton, and Bill Russell. James Reddell and George Veni

provided significant comments to William Elliott in the

early development stages of this plan.

 


EXECUTIVE SUMARY OF THE RECOVERY PLAN OR ENDANGERED

KARST INVERTEBRATES IN TRAVIS AND WILLIAMSON COUNTIES, TEXAS

 

Current Species’ Status: All seven species (Texella reddelli, Texella reyesi, Tartarocreagris texana, Neoleptoneta myopica, Rhadine persephone, Texamaurops reddelli, and Batrisodes texanus) are endangered. They spend their entire lives underground and are endemic to karst formations (caves, sinkholes, and other subterranean voids) in Travis and Williamson counties, Texas. Five of these listed invertebrate species occur in only four to seven caves, while Rhadine persephone and Texella reyesi occupy wider ranges. The total number of individuals is unknown, as are many aspects of their biology. Most localities are imminently threatened by land development, pollution, vandalism, and/or red imported fire ants (Solenopsis invicta).

 

Habitat Requirements and Limiting Factors: All tend to occur

in the dark zone of caves, but occasionally in deep twilight.

All prefer relative humidities near 100%, but some may be less

sensitive to drying than others. Presumably all are predators

upon small or immature arthropods, or, as in the case of the

ground beetle, possibly cave cricket eggs.

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Disclaimer

Literature Citations

Acknowledgments

Executive Summary

Table of Contents

 

I. Introduction and Background

 

     A. Taxonomic and Legal Classification, and Description

     B. Distribution

     C. Habitat, Ecosystem, and Ecology

     D. Reasons for Listing and Current Threats

     E. Conservation Measures

     F. Recovery Strategy

 

II. Recovery

 

     A. Objective and Criteria

     B. Recovery Outline

     C. Narrative Outline for Recovery Actions

     D. References Cited

 

III. Implementation Schedule

 

IV. Appendices

 

     A. Glossary

     B. List of Commenters

     C. Summary of Comments and USFWS Response

 

Tables

 

Table 1 – 3

 

Figures

 

Figure 1 - 11

 

 


I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

 

[Appendix A contains a glossary of terms used in this

recovery plan. Terms defined in the glossary are indicated

by BOLD face type in the text.]

 

     This recovery plan covers seven species of karst

invertebrates and their ecosystems. The seven species are:

 

Texella reddelli (Bee Creek Cave harvestman),

Texella reyesi (Bone Cave harvestman),

Tartarocreagris texana (Tooth Cave pseudoscorpion),

Neoleptoneta myopica (Tooth Cave spider),

Rhadine persephone (Tooth Cave ground beetle),

Texamaurops reddelli (Kretschmarr Cave mold beetle), and

Batrisodes texanus (Coffin Cave mold beetle).

 

Five species (Texella reddelli, Tartarocreagris texana,

Neoleptoneta myopica, Rhadine persephone, and Texamaurops

reddelli) were listed as endangered on September 16, 1988

(53 FR 36029). A refinement of the taxonomy has expanded

this group into seven distinct species (58 FR 43818)

Because Texella reyesi and Batrisodes texanus were

considered to be populations of Texella reddelli and

Texamaurops reddelli, respectively, at the time of listing,

they are also considered to be listed as endangered under

the Endangered Species Act (58.FR 43818).

 

     Of the seven listed species, three are insects (one

ground beetle and two mold beetles) and four are arachnids

(one pseudoscorpion, one spider, and two harvestmen) . All

are troglobites, which spend their entire lives underground

and have small or absent eyes, elongated appendages, and

other adaptations to the subterranean environment.

Although troglobites must complete their life cycles

underground, they are dependent on moisture and nutrient

inputs from the surface. Troglobites typically inhabit the

dark zone of the cave where temperature and humidity are

relatively constant. Most are usually found under rocks.

All seven species appear to be predators and are found in

relatively small numbers. Each species may have a

different preferred microhabitat and may depend on certain

prey species for survival. Troglobites tend to be rare

and limited in distribution and are of special interest to

evolutionary biologists, ecologists, biogeographers, and

educators. Their limited distributions combined with low

reproductive rates, ecological specialization, and other

factors, make troglobites especially vulnerable to habitat

destruction, fire ant infestations, pollution, and other

factors.

 


A. Taxonomic and Legal Classification, and Description

 

Note on Common Names and Arthropod Systematics

 

     Few invertebrates have common names. Common names are

often used for convenience sake and may become standardized

for well-known or commonly studied species. The common

names for the karst invertebrates included in this recovery

plan are given in this section (A) However, because there

are no official common names for these invertebrates,

because taxonomy is most clearly understood in terms of

scientific names, and because most biologists working with

these species refer to them by scientific name, we use

scientific names throughout this plan.

 

     Scientific names are sometimes changed by scientists

according to the International Code of Zoological

Nomenclature. As taxonomists study certain groups, they

publish descriptions of new or previously unrecognized

species or assign known species to different groups. For

example, the spider Leptoneta myopica was reassigned to the

New World genus Neoleptoneta (Brignoli 1977), and Batrisodes texanus was described from specimens previously assigned to Texamaurops reddelli (Chandler 1992). It is widely recognized that most invertebrate species have yet to be described and catalogued (May 1992). In the future some of the invertebrate species discussed in this plan may be redescribed to include several distinct species, especially as DNA studies are increasingly used to determine the genetic and evolutionary relationship of different populations.

 

     All of the listed species are members of the Phylum

Arthropoda. With some arthropods, it is important to

obtain mature male specimens for study. In many cases, as

in the mold beetles and harvestmen, species are identified

based on the structure of the male genitalia. These

structures are highly species-specific and believed to be

under genetic control. Often a first collection from a

cave contains only immature and female specimens. Other

species, such as the ground beetles, pseudoscorpions, and

several species of spiders (including Neoleptoneta

myopica), can be differentiated based on male or female

structures (such as the ovipositor), as long as an adult

specimen is obtained.

 


SPECIES 1 Scientific name: Neoleptoneta myopica

(Gertsch), formerly Leptoneta myopica Gertsch

 

Common Name: Tooth Cave spider

 

Taxonomic Classification: Class Arachnida

(arachnids), Order Araneae (spiders), Infraorder

Araneomorphae (true spiders), Family Leptonetidae.

Spiders and other arachnids are not insects. Unlike

insects, arachnids possess four pairs of legs,

pedipalps, and chelicerae, and lack antennae. Insects

have three pairs of legs, mandibles, and antennae.

Leptonetids are minute spiders with six eyes, commonly

found in caves and similar habitats. Some leptonetid

spiders in Europe and the United States are completely

eyeless, but members of this family typically have

small eyes.

 

Original Description: Gertsch (1974)

 

Type Specimen: Male holotype, Tooth Cave, Travis

County, Texas, March 30, 1965. Collected by James R.

Reddell. Female specimen described but not designated

as paratype. Type specimens are deposited in the

American Museum of Natural History.

 

Other Taxonomic Literature: Brignoli (1972) erected

the genus Neoleptoneta for all New World leptonetid

spiders and reserved the genus Leptoneta for other

regions. In 1977, Brignoli formally removed Leptoneta

myopica to Neoleptoneta. The validity of Neoleptoneta

was further supported by Platnick (1986). This

recovery plan follows these two authorities in using

the name Neoleptoneta.

 

Selected characteristics: A small, whitish, longlegged

troglobitic spider with six obsolescent eyes.

Eyes medium sized, without dark pigment; front eye row

moderately recurved; eyes subcontiguous and subequal

in size; posterior eyes subcontiguous, set back from

anterior lateral eyes. First leg in both sexes 6.1

times as long as carapace. Body length 1.6 mm,

carapace 0.7 mm long and 0.5 mm wide, abdomen 0.9 mm

long and 0.5 mm wide. Tibia of male palpus with thin

retrolateral process set with curved spine.

 

Intraspecific Variation: Not known.

 

Distinctiveness: Neoleptoneta myopica is related to

several other troglobites in the Balcones Fault Zone

of Texas: N. anopica (eyeless) from Cobb Caverns,

Williamson County; N. coeca from two caves in Comal

County; N. concinna from a cave and a mine in Travis

County; N. devia from one cave in Travis County; and

N. microps from one cave in Bexar County.

Geographically, the Neoleptoneta species closest to N.

myopica is N. devia from McDonald Cave (Schulze Cave),

only 2.5 km from Stovepipe Cave and 4 km from Tooth

Cave, the type locality. Neoleptoneta devia is dull

yellow with a whitish abdomen and the eyes enclose a

dusky field, whereas N. myopica is whitish and has

very reduced eyes that are not set in a dusky field.

Neoleptoneta devia and N. concinna, the other two

species in Travis County, have much shorter legs.

Gertsch (1974) did not discuss evolutionary

relationships among the six Texas species of Leptoneta

that he described.

 

Listed: Endangered; September 16, 1988; 53 FR 36029.

 

Recovery Priority: 2C. According to the 13. 5. Fish

and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) criteria (48 FR 51985)

this indicates a species with a high degree of

threats, high potential for recovery, and in conflict

with construction or development projects or other

forms of economic activity.

 

SPECIES 2 Scientific name: Tartarocreagris texana

(Muchmore), formerly Microcreagris texana Muchmore.

 

Common Name: Tooth Cave pseudoscorpion

 

Taxonomic Classification: Class Arachnida (arachnids), Order Pseudoscorpiones (pseudoscorpions), Family Neobisiidae. Pseudoscorpions are quite distinct from scorpions in lacking a postabdomen (tail), stinger, and book lungs. Most pseudoscorpions are no more than a few mm long.

 

Original Description: Muchmore (1969).

 

Type Specimen: Female holotype, Tooth Cave, Travis

County, Texas, May 16, 1965. Collected by James R.

Reddell. Deposited in American Museum of Natural

History. Male known from Amber Cave (Muchmore 1992).

 

Other Taxonomic Literature: Muchmore (1992)

reassigned Microcreagris texana to Tartarocreagris, a

genus described by Curcic (1984), based on the female

holotype of M. infernalis from Inner Space Cavern,

Williamson County. After Muchmore examined recently

collected males of both species, it became clear that

M. texana also belonged in Tartarocreagris. Curcic

(1989) had previously reassigned N. texana to

Australinocreagris Curcic (1984), which is based on M.

grahami from California, but Muchmore (1992) found

that classification to be incorrect based on internal

male genitalia. Muchmore (1992) described a new

species of Tartarocreagris, T. comanche, from New

Comanche Trail Cave 1.8 km southwest of Tooth Cave,

and reassigned N. reddelli, from McDonald Cave, Travis

County, to Tartarocreagris. In Muchmore (1992) , all

four Texas Microcreagris species were reassigned to

Tartarocreagris. The genus Microcreagris is no longer

believed to occur in the New World. The four species

of Tartarocreagris are extremely limited in distribution. Three of the species occur within 4.9 km of each other in the vicinity of the RM 2222 and RM 620 intersection on the central Jollyville Plateau in Travis County, Texas. T. infernalis occurs in Inner Space Cavern and a few caves, all locations no more than 1.4 km apart in Williamson County, Texas.

 

Selected Characteristics: A large (female body length

4.1 mm), eyeless pseudoscorpion with attenuated

appendages. Carapace, chelicerae, and palps golden

brown, body and legs light tan. Carapace about 1/3

longer than broad. No eyes or eyespots present.

Chelicera about 2/3 as long as carapace, 1.95 times as

long as broad. Palps relatively long and slender;

femur 1.5 and chela 2.55 times as long as carapace.

 

Intraspecific Variation: Male very similar to female

in most respects — male body length 3.96 mm.

 

Distinctiveness: Tartarocreagris texana can be

distinguished from its closest relatives only by

microscopic inspection. Tartarocreagris comanche from

New Comanche Trail Cave has four poorly developed eyes

and relatively robust appendages, whereas the others

are eyeless and more slender. Among the species of

Tartarocreagris there are many minor differences in

tergal chaetotaxy and in the proportions of the palps.

Confirmation of the species may require dissection and

study of the female spermathecae or the male internal

genitalia.

 

Listed: Endangered; September 16, 1988; 53 FR 36029.

 

Recovery Priority: 2C

 


SPECIES 3 Scientific name: Texella reddelli

Goodnight and Goodnight

 

Common Name: Bee Creek Cave harvestman

 

Taxonomic Classification: Class Arachnida (arachnids), Order Opiliones (opilionids, or harvestmen) , Suborder Laniatores, Family Phalangodidae. Harvestmen are anatomically and

evolutionarily quite distinct from spiders (Order Araneae) and are not properly referred to as “spiders”. Phalangodid harvestmen are predaceous. Other North American genera are Banksula in California (to which Texella is most closely related), Sitalcina, Calicina, and Phalangodes. Many harvestmen are cavernicoles (soil dwellers). Texella is the most widespread genus with 21 species from Texas, New Mexico, California, and Oregon. Several species groups, subgroups, and infragroups are recognized.

 

Original Description: Goodnight and Goodnight (1967)

Type Specimen: Male holotype, Bee Creek Cave (= “Pine

Creek Cave”), Travis County, Texas, October 2, 1963.

Collected by James Reddell and David McKenzie.

Deposited in the American Museum of Natural History.

Redescription by Thick and Briggs (1992) is based on

holotype, female paratopotype, and 14 other specimens

deposited in the American Museum of Natural History,

Texas Memorial Museum, California Academy of Sciences,

Darrell Thick collection, and Marie Goodnight collection.

 

Other Taxonomic Literature: Goodnight and Goodnight

(1942), Ubick and Briggs (1992). The genus Texella

was erected by Goodnight and Goodnight (1942) on the

basis of one troglomorphic individual, described as

Texella mulaiki, from Hays County, Texas. This specimen probably was from Ezell’s Cave. Thick and Briggs (1992) revised the genus and recognized 15 species in the mulaiki species group of Central Texas.

 

Selected Characteristics: Body length 1.90-2.18 mm,

scute length 1.21-1.66 mm, leg II length 4.92-7.59 mm,

leg II/scute length 3.81-5.20 mm (N = 16). Color

orange. Body of medium rugosity. Eye mound broadly

conical, eyes well developed. Male (holotype) —

Postopercular process length 0.44; penis: ventral

plate prong with two dorsal, 10 lateral, and three

ventral setae; apical spine curved, apically pointed;

glans: basal knob slender; middle lobe present;

parastylar lobes claw-like; stylus spatulate, basal

fold present. Female (paratopotype) — Ovipositor

cuticle intricately folded; one pair of apical teeth

present.

 

Intraspecific Variation: Juveniles are white to

yellowish-white (as in most Texella); adults are

orange. The tarsal count (number of tarsomeres) and

the leg-to-body-length ratio (leg II/scute length) may

vary from the south to north part of the species’

range, with the least troglomorphic (cave-adapted)

population being in Cave Y (south of the Colorado

River) and the most troglomorphic in Jester Estates

Cave (north of the Colorado River). The origin of

this species is not easily explainable in that it is

distributed on both sides of the Colorado River, which

is a major barrier to other terrestrial troglobites.

Troglomorphy in this genus is marked by increased

leg/body ratio, greater number of tarsomeres,

depigmentation, reduction of protuberances, and loss

of retinas followed by loss of corneas.

 

Distinctiveness: Goodnight and Goodnight (1942)

described Texella mulaiki from Hays County (probably

Ezell’s Cave), but in 1967 reported it from Cotterell

Cave in Travis County as well as Man-With-A-Spear Cave

and Beck’s Tin Can Cave (Beck Sewer Cave) in Williamson County. In 1967 they also described T. reddelli, but the genitalia were not studied and the only differences from T. mulaiki noted were the shorter legs, the differently-shaped spine on the genital operculum, and a few minor characteristics. The authors also reported T. reddelli from Bee Creek Cave, Tooth Cave, and Weldon Cave, Travis County; and Bone Cave, Williamson County. Lacking detailed data

and material, they did not note that the distribution

patterns of the two species were incongruously mixed.

Apparently the identifications were based more on leg

length than other characters. Thick and Briggs (1992)

examined more specimens from more caves and epigean

sites and in their revision distinguished T. reddelli

from T. reyesi (below). They described 18 new species

and transferred one species from Sitalcina to Texella.

Sixteen of the 21 Texella species are cavernicoles and

five are troglobites. Fifteen of the species occur

along the Balcones Escarpment in Central Texas.

 

     T. reddelli can be distinguished in the field

from its closest relative, T. reyesi by its shorter

legs, its well developed eyes (versus extremely small

or no eyes in T. reyesi), and its color, which is more

orange. The species is not “without eyes” as noted by

Goodnight and Goodnight but has “eye mound broadly

conical, eyes well developed” (Thick and Briggs 1992).

Such details can be seen with the naked eye or a hand

lens in the field. However, confirmation of the species must be made microscopically by a qualified systematist on a preserved, adult specimen.

 

     In their redescription of the Texella species,

Thick and Briggs (1992) state that Texella reddelli

and Texella reyesi “are clearly very closely related

and, using the standards of genitalia distinctness

applied to other Texella species, may even be considered conspecific.” However, given that the two groups can be distinguished, and are considered separate in the taxonomic description, the USFWS follows Thick and Briggs and considers the two species separately.

 

Listed: Endangered; September 16, 1988; 53 FR 36029.

 

Recovery Priority: 2C

 


SPECIES 4 Scientific name: Texella reyesi Thick and

Briggs

 

Common Name: Bone Cave harvestman

 

Taxonomic Classification: Class Arachnida (arachnids)

Order Opiliones (opilionids, or harvestmen), Suborder

Laniatores, Family Phalangodidae.

 

Original Description: Ubick and Briggs (1992). This

paper describes 18 new species of Texella, with a

total of 21 species in three species groups in Texas,

New Mexico, California, and Oregon. The highest

species diversity (15 species) is along the Balcones

Escarpment in Central Texas.

 

Type Specimen: Male holotype, Bone Cave, Williamson

County, Texas, 4 June 1989. Collected by William

Elliott, James Reddell, and Marcelino Reyes. Male

paratype, Tooth Cave, and female paratopotype, Bone

Cave. All specimens are deposited at the California

Academy of Sciences.

 

Other Taxonomic Literature: Goodnight and Goodnight

(1942, 1967). The genus Texella was erected by

Goodnight and Goodnight (1942). In 1967 they

described Texella reddelli, which at that time

included some populations of Texella reyesi.

Selected Characteristics: A long-legged, blind, pale

orange harvestman. Body length 1.41-2.67 mm, scute

length 1.26-1.69 mm, leg II length 6.10-11.79 mm, leg

II/scute length 4.30-8.68 mm (N = 85). Body finely

rugose. Few small tubercles on eye mound; eye mound

broadly conical, retina absent, cornea variable (well

developed, reduced, or absent). Penis with ventral

plate prong round apically; two dorsal, 17 lateral,

and four ventral setae; apical spine bent, apically

pointed, length 0.05 mm. Glans with basal knob

narrowly conical; middle lobe long; parastylar lobes

claw-shaped. Stylus long, curved, ventrally carinate,

apically spatulate; basal fold well developed.

 

Intraspecific Variation: Juveniles are white to

yellowish-white. Adults are pale orange. Elliott

(unpublished data) has observed an adult with a pale

green abdomen in Man-With-A-Spear Cave, Williamson

County, and an adult with a yellowish abdomen in

Temples of Thor Cave, Williamson County. These colorations may have been due to eggs in the ovaries. This species is extremely polymorphic, most notably in troglomorphic characters, which increase toward the northern populations. Northern populations tend to be more troglomorphic; that is, longer-legged and smoother, with reduced or absent corneas.

 

Distinctiveness: Texella reyesi can be distinguished

from its closest relative T. reddelli by its longer

legs, its lack of retinas (versus well developed eyes

in Texella reddelli), and its color, which is pale

orange. Such differences can be seen with the naked

eye or a hand lens in the field. However, confirmation of the species must be made microscopically by a qualified systematist on a preserved adult.

 

Listed: Because Texella reyesi was considered to be

Texella reddelli before Ubick and Briggs’

redescription (1992) and five localities (Tooth,

McDonald, Weldon, Bone, and Root caves) of T. reyesi

were included with T. reddelli at the time T. reddelli

was listed as endangered on September 16, 1988 (53 FR

36029), T. reyesi is considered to be listed as

endangered under the Endangered Species Act. The

USFWS has reviewed the taxonomic change (Ubick and

Briggs 1992) and other available information on this

species and determined it should remain listed as

endangered (58 FR 43818)

 

Recovery Priority: 2C

 


SPECIES 5 Scientific name: Rhadine persephone Barr

 

Common Name: Tooth Cave ground beetle

 

Taxonomic Classification: Class Insecta (insects),

Order Coleoptera (beetles), Suborder Adephaga, Family

Carabidae (ground beetles), Tribe Agonini (agonines).

Many troglobitic ground beetles have evolved in Texas

and other parts of the world. The genus Rhadine

contains more than 60 eyed and eyeless species in the

Great Plains westward to California and south to

Oaxaca, Mexico. Eleven species are troglobites found

mostly in caves of the Balcones Escarpment of Texas

and are members of the subterranea species group, a

monophyletic assemblage. The subterranea group is

closely related to the perlevis group, which contains

eyed, troglophilic members found in caves of the

Edwards Plateau. The subterranea species group

contains a “robust”, or heavy-bodied, subgroup, which

is generally found south of the Colorado River, but

which includes R. persephone north of the river. A

“slender” subgroup, including R. subterranea, is

widely distributed on both sides of the river. At

least three different species pairs coexist in some

caves, consisting of a robust species and a slender

species in each case. In most situations the robust

species is more abundant. These data suggest that the

ranges of the various species may overlap broadly, but

that minimal niche overlap occurs between robust and

slender species, which allows the two species to

coexist in some caves.

 

Original Description: Barr (1974a)

 

Type Specimen: Holotype male, Tooth Cave, Travis

County, Texas, May 16, 1965. Collected by R.W.

Mitchell, T.C. Barr, Jr., and W.M. Andrews.

Deposited in American Museum of Natural History.

 

Selected Characteristics: A moderately robust and

convex beetle, more so than other species of the

subterranea group. Reddish-brown, head and pronotum

shining. Head half as wide as long, neck about 0.57-

0.59 of greatest head width. Eye rudiment larger than

in other species of subterranea group. Pronotum about

0.7 as wide as long, widest in apical three-eighths,

slightly wider than head. Antenna about 0.85 total

body length, attaining apical third of elytra when

laid back. Aedeagus very large for subterranea group,

1.24-1.31 mm long, elongate, feebly arcuate, basal

bulb slender and set off by slight constriction, keel

prominent, apex attenuate and slightly produced;

internal sac with proximal patch of numerous scales.

Body length 8.0 mm, head 2.17 mm long by 1.08 mm wide,

pronotum 1.80 mm long by 1.18 mm wide, elytra 4.46 mm

long by 2.29 mm wide, antenna 6.8 mm long. Fifty

paratypes and four specimens from Kretschmarr Cave

with length 7.2-8.7 mm, mean 7.8.

 

Intraspecific Variation: Not known.

 

Distinctiveness: Rhadine persephone is distinguished

from R. subterranea by its more robust build and its

shorter and wider pronotum (the most distinguishing

characteristic) . The two species are about the same

length. Tenerals (young adult beetles that have

recently emerged) of all Rhadine species are pale

yellow but soon darken to reddish brown. Other species that can be confused with R. Persephone include R. austinica (southern Travis County), R. noctivaga (northern Williamson County) and R. russelli (Post Oak Ridge area of Burnet, Travis, and Williamson counties). All three of these species are in the “slender” subgroup. Other related species occur in

other parts of Central Texas. Identification of Rhadine species must be confirmed by microscopic examination of preserved specimens by a qualified systematist.

 

Listed: Endangered; September 16, 1988; 53 FR 36029.

 

Recovery Priority: 2C

 


SPECIES 6 Scientific name: Texamaurops reddelli

Barr and Steeves

 

Common Name: Kretschmarr Cave mold beetle

 

Taxonomic Classification: Class Insecta (insects)

Order Coleoptera (beetles), Suborder Polyphaga, Family

Pselaphidae (mold beetles), Tribe Batrisini.

Pselaphids, or short-winged mold beetles, are a group

of small beetles found under stones and logs, in

rotting wood, moss, ant and termite nests, and caves.

The European and North American cave faunas include

many species. The genus Texamaurops was erected for

one species, T. reddelli, from Kretschmarr Cave,

Travis County, by Barr and Steeves in 1963.

Texamaurops remains a monotypic genus found only in a

few Texas caves.

 

Original Description: Barr and Steeves (1963)

 

Type Specimen: Female holotype, Kretschmarr Cave,

Travis County, Texas, March 2, 1963. Collected by

James R. Reddell and David McKenzie. Deposited in the

Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago. Found under

a rock in the second room of the cave, about 10 m from

the entrance.

 

Other Taxonomic Literature: The first pselaphid

described from a Texas cave was Batrisodes

schneiderensis Park (1960), based on a single female

from Schneider Ranch Cave in Kendall County. Barr

(1974b) classified a male pselaphid from Inner Space

Cavern as Texamaurops reddelli, but the specimen is

now recognized by Chandler (1992) as Batrisodes

texanus (below).

 

Selected Characteristics: A small, long-legged beetle

with short elytra leaving five abdominal tergites

exposed; metathoracic wings absent. Body length 2.72-

3.08 mm. Color reddish-brown, shiny; pubescent hairs

pale, moderately abundant and partially laid back;

general body surface sparsely and weakly dotted with

small pits. Ventral surface of head heavily

pubescent. Eyes absent, but represented by small

knobs with six vestigial eye facets. Antennae 11-

segmented, simple.

 

Intraspecific Variation: Chandler (1992) noted that

the holotype female from Kretschmarr Cave and the male

from Stovepipe Cave differ from all other specimens in

having only two basal foveae (pits) on each elytron,

whereas the others have three equal foveae. All

others features appear to be similar.

 

Distinctiveness: Texamaurops reddelli can only be

distinguished from other pselaphid beetles by a

qualified systematist upon microscopic study. The

species is “superficially similar to Batrisodes

texanus by the greatly elongated antennae and legs, as

well as body size” (Chandler 1992), but can be

definitively separated from Batrisodes texanus by its

ocular knobs and its lack of the pencil of setae on

the metatibia. Chandler (1992) stated that “based on

the form of the aedeagus and antennal characters

Texamaurops is probably best considered a lineage

derived from Batrisodes that has lost the metatibial

pencil of setae.” In life Texamaurops reddelli is a

tiny, long-legged form that can be confused with other

species such as Tachys ferrugineus, which is an eyed,

short-legged, shiny, fast-moving carabid beetle with

full-length elytra; and Batrisodes uncicornis, an eyed

species occurring in many caves in Central Texas.

Other pselaphids, both blind and eyed, occur in caves

outside the range of this species (Chandler 1992).

 

Listed: Endangered; September 16, 1988; 53 FR 36029.

 

Recovery Priority: lC. Indicates a monotypic genus

with a high degree of threats, high potential for

recovery, and in conflict with construction or

development projects or other forms of economic

activity (48 FR 51985)

 


SPECIES 7 Scientific name: Batrisodes texanus

Chandler

 

Common Name: Coffin Cave mold beetle

 

Taxonomic Classification: Class Insecta (insects),

Order Coleoptera (beetles), Suborder Polyphaga, Family

Pselaphidae (mold beetles), Tribe Batrisini. Mold

beetles are generally minute (about 2 or 3 mm long)

rounded beetles with short elytra (wing covers), which

expose the posterior half of the abdomen.

Original Description: Chandler (1992)

 

Type Specimen: Male holotype from Inner Space Cavern,

Williamson County, Texas, May 23, 1965. Collected by

William H. Russell. Deposited in Field Museum of

Natural History, Chicago. Female paratypes from Inner

Space Cavern and Off Campus Cave, Williamson County

(deposited in Donald S. Chandler collection) and

Coffin Cave, Williamson County (deposited in Texas

Memorial Museum). The Coffin Cave paratype was the

first collected on November 3, 1963, by James Reddell.

 

Other Taxonomic Literature: Barr (1974b) classified

a male pselaphid from Inner Space Cavern as

Texamaurops reddelli, but the specimen is now

recognized by Chandler (1992) as Batrisodes texanus.

 

Selected Characteristics: A small, long-legged beetle

with short elytra leaving five abdominal tergites

exposed; metathoracic wings absent. Body length 2.60-

2.88 mm. Male with vague groove across the head

anterior to antennal bases. Sides of head smoothly

curved and flat with a few granules present where eyes

should be.

 

Intraspecific Variation: In females, the transverse

impression anterior to the antennal bases is absent,

and the tenth antennal segment is barely wider and

longer than the ninth. In males the tenth is twice as

wide as the ninth. No geographical variation has been

noted.

 

Distinctiveness: Batrisodes texanus can only be

distinguished from other pselaphid beetles by a

qualified systematist upon microscopic study. The

species can be definitively separated from Texamaurops

reddelli by its lack of ocular knobs and the presence

of a pencil of setae on the metatibia. In life the

beetle is a tiny, long-legged form that can be

confused with other species such as Tachys

ferrugineus, which is an eyed, short-legged, shiny,

fast-moving carabid beetle with full-length elytra;

and Batrisodes uncicornis, an eyed species occurring

in many caves in Central Texas. Other pselaphids,

both blind and eyed, occur in caves outside the range

of this species (Chandler 1992)

 

Listed: Because Batrisodes texanus was considered to

be Texamaurops reddelli before Chandler’s

redescription (1992) and one locality (Coffin Cave) of

B. texanus was included with Texamaurops reddelli at

the time Texamaurops reddelli was listed as endangered

on September 16, 1988, (53 FR 36029), B. texanus is

considered to be listed as endangered under the

Endangered Species Act. The USFWS has reviewed the

species description (Chandler 1992) and other

available information on this species and determined

it should remain listed as endangered (58 FR 43818).

 

Recovery Priority: 2C

 


B. Distribution

 

Population estimates: No population estimates are

currently available for any of the species due to their

secretive habits, rarity, and inaccessibility. Generally,

no more than one or two individuals of each species are

seen on a visit to a cave and often none are observed, even

in caves where they are considered relatively abundant.

Some of the species, such as the pseudoscorpion and mold

beetles, are so secretive that finding an individual is a

rare event (Elliott, pers. observation) . Current mark-

recapture methods are of little use with such small

populations.

 

Historic range: Since karst surveys and biospeleological

studies in the Austin area were not initiated until the

early 1960’s, there is no information on the species’

ranges prior to that time. Further, the status of some of

the caves from which listed species have been collected is

unknown. Some of these caves may have been filled or

destroyed due to land development. For example, attempts to

relocate Coffin Cave, which contains Batrisodes texanus,

have been unsuccessful (James Reddell, Texas Memorial

Museum, pers. communication)

 

Current range: The level of interest and effort in

conducting karst and biospeleological surveys greatly

increased with the listing of the invertebrate species in

1988. Regional studies were funded by the USFWS, the Texas

Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD), the Texas Department

of Transportation, the Texas Nature Conservancy (TNC), and

the City of Georgetown (Elliott and Reddell 1989, Reddell

1989, Reddell 1991, Reddell and Elliott 1991, Veni &

Associates 1988a,b). Additional surveys have been done by

developers, financial institutions, and private landowners.

These studies have assisted in clarifying the range and

taxonomy of each species. Although additional localities

for each species may still be discovered with continuing

survey efforts, the species’ ranges are now fairly well-

defined, particularly for those species that are restricted

to the Jollyville Plateau (Neoleptoneta myopica,

Tartarocreagris texana, and Texamaurops reddelli)

 

     Some specimens collected from certain localities have

been tentatively identified as listed species (Tables 1 and

2). Positive identification of these specimens is

contingent upon identification by a qualified systematist

and/or additional collections including well-preserved,

intact adult specimens. The information in these tables

will be revised and updated as positive identifications are

made.

 

     Figure 1 shows all the caves in Travis and Williamson

counties currently known to contain one or more of the

listed species or from which tentative identifications have

been made. Figure 2 shows the seven karst fauna regions

(corresponding to the karst fauna areas in Figure 19 of

Veni & Associates 1992) that support one or more of the

listed species. The South Travis County region is included

in the figure even though it is not currently known to have

listed species. It is included in the event that future

surveys locate any listed species in this region. To date,

no listed species have been found in the caves that have

been surveyed in the South Travis County region. However,

local biospeleologists believe that portions of the South

Travis County karst fauna region warrant further

investigation to determine whether there are karst features

inhabited by listed species, particularly along the south

side of Barton Creek. The species most likely to occur in

this region is Texella reddelli, which occurs in the adjacent Rollingwood karst fauna region. Since this

species’ current distribution occurs on both sides of the

Colorado River, it may also occur on both sides of Barton

Creek, which separates the Rollingwood and South Travis

County karst fauna regions.

 

     Two karst fauna regions from Veni’s 1992 report, the

McNeil and Round Rock regions, have been combined for the

purposes of this plan (hereafter referred to as the

McNeil/Round Rock karst fauna region), since they contain

virtually the same species and present no significant

geologic barriers to troglobitic migration between them

(Veni, in litt., 1993).

 

The distribution of each species is as follows:

 

SPECIES 1 - Neoleptoneta myopica: Known to occur

in two caves and tentatively identified from two

additional caves within a 4.5 km stretch in the

Jollyville Plateau karst fauna region, Travis

County, Texas (Table 1, Figure 3).

 

SPECIES 2 - Tartarocreagris texana: Known to

occur in two caves and tentatively identified

from two additional caves within a 1.3 km radius

in the Jollyville Plateau karst fauna region,

Travis County, Texas (Table 1, Figure 4).

 

SPECIES 3 - Texella reddelli: Occurs in three

caves (one positive, two tentative

identifications) in the Jollyville Plateau karst

fauna region and four caves (one positive, three

tentative identifications) in the Rollingwood

karst fauna region, Travis County, Texas (Table

1, Figure 5). Previously reported from Tooth,

McDonald, Weldon, and Root caves, Travis County

(53 FR 36029), but these populations have been

redescribed as Texella reyesi (Ubick and Briggs

1992) (58 FR 43818). Kretschmarr Double Pit,

Jest John Cave, and Jester Estates Cave are north

of the Colorado River on the Jollyville Plateau.

The other four caves are located in the

Rollingwood karst fauna region, south of the

Colorado River. The Cave Y and Bandit Cave

collections do not include the male specimens

necessary to confirm the occurrence of this

species. However, the females are similar to the

females collected from Bee Creek Cave and Jester

Estates Cave. Isolation of this species in caves

on opposite sides of the Colorado River and in

different blocks of limestone may be an

indication that the populations are genetically

distinct.

 

SPECIES 4 - Texella reyesi: Occurs in 69 caves

(60 confirmed, 9 tentative identifications) from

northern Travis to northern Williamson County, a

distance of 40 km (Tables 1 and 2, Figure 6).

This species occurs in six karst fauna regions

(Jollyville, Central Austin, Cedar Park,

McNeil/Round Rock, Georgetown, and North

Williamson County). When Goodnight and Goodnight

(1967) described Texella reddelli they included

four populations, three of which are now

recognized as Texella reyesi (Tooth Cave and

Weldon Cave, Travis County; and Bone Cave,

Williamson County). The Goodnight and Goodnight

(1992) redescription of Texella mulaiki included

four populations, three of which are now

recognized as Texella reyesi (Cotterell Cave,

Travis County; Man-With-A-Spear Cave and Beck’s

Tin Can Cave (= Beck Sewer Cave), Williamson

County (58 FR 43818))

 

SPECIES 5 - Rhadine persephone: Occurs in ten

caves (8 positive, 2 tentative identifications)

in the Jollyville Plateau karst fauna region

(Travis County) and 17 localities (16 positive,

1 tentative identifications) in the Cedar Park

karst fauna region (Travis and Williamson

counties) (Tables 1 and 2, Figure 7), with a

total distance of about 14 km between the

northern and southernmost locations. Sympatric

in at least four caves with a slender species, R.

subterranea.

 

SPECIES 6 - Texamaurops reddelli: Known to occur

in four caves within a 2 km radius in the

Jollyville Plateau karst fauna region, Travis

County, Texas (Table 1, Figure 8). Previously

reported from Coffin Cave, Williamson County (53

FR 36029), but the Coffin Cave population has

been redescribed as Batrisodes texanus (Chandler

1992) (58 FR 43818)

 

SPECIES 7 - Batrisodes texanus: Occurs in two

caves in the North Williamson County karst fauna

region (both positive identifications) and three

caves (two positive, one tentative

identification) in the Georgetown karst fauna

region, Williamson County, Texas (Table 2, Figure

9) . All localities occur within a 17 km stretch.

 

     Of the seven listed species, Rhadine persephone and

Texella reyesi are the only two known from more than seven

sites. Rhadine persephone appears to be restricted to

sites within the Cedar Park and Jollyville Plateau karst

fauna regions (Figure 7). Texella reyesi has both the

greatest number of sites and the widest distribution,

occurring in six karst fauna regions (Figure 6). Texella

reddelli is the only species that occurs both north and

south of the Colorado River.

 

     Except for Batrisodes texanus, which occurs only in

Williamson County, all or portions of the listed species’

ranges include the Jollyville Plateau karst fauna region in

Travis County. Three of the species’ ranges (Neoleptoneta

myopica, Tartarocreagris texana, and Texamaurops reddelli)

occur entirely within this region. One cave cluster,

located in the vicinity of the RM 2222 and RM 620

intersection in a proposed residential subdivision, harbors

six of the listed species. This cluster supports one of

the most diverse, terrestrial, cave-adapted faunas in the

southwestern United States. Only the large, integrated

cave systems, such as Mammoth Cave in Kentucky, contain

more diverse faunas. Tooth Cave occurs in this cave

cluster and contains five of the listed species. Stovepipe

Cave, located to the northeast, also contains five of the

listed species.

 

     Many of the reconnaissance studies conducted since

1988 have resulted in the discovery of new localities for

the listed species as well as new endemic species. Because

current methods of locating karst features are time

intensive and require on-site inspections, many areas

within each karst fauna region have not yet been surveyed.

As surveying efforts continue, new localities may be

discovered in all karst fauna regions. To date, karst

fauna regions that have received the least amount of study

are the South Travis County and northwest portion of the

North Williamson County karst fauna regions. The

northwestern part of Cedar Park also warrants additional

study. A large knowledge gap also exists between Round

Rock and Georgetown, where a large quarry exists and access

to the property is limited. The Texas Speleological

Society (TSS), a private, non-profit research group,

recorded numerous caves in that area in 1963, but none have

been investigated recently. Many of those caves may still

exist.

 

     In addition to continuing surveys for new endangered

species localities, more intensive biospeleological studies

of currently known karst features may also provide

additional information on species distributions. More than

700 karst features have been located in Travis and

Williamson counties (Elliott, pers. communication), of

which about 100 are known or believed (through tentative

identification of collected specimens) to contain

endangered species (tables 1 and 2). Biospeleological

surveys of many of the remaining karst features are either

nonexistent, outdated (e.g. recent surveys have not been

conducted), incomplete, or cursory. Detailed faunal

surveys of those features that have not been adequately

studied but which could support one or more of the listed

species may lead to the discovery of additional endangered

species localities. Although these surveys may increase

the total number of known locations for the karst

invertebrates, most new locations will occur within the

currently defined range of each species. The overall range

of each species is not expected to increase significantly

beyond what is defined in this plan.

 

C. Habitat, Ecosystem, and Ecology

 

     Little is known about the life history, ecology, and

habitat requirements of the listed species and other karst

fauna in central Texas. Although interest in biospeleology

in Texas has increased in recent years, the research

emphasis has been on taxonomy, biogeography, and a few

behavioral studies (Barr 1974a,b; Barr and Steeves 1963;

Bull and Mitchell 1972; Christiansen and Culver 1969;

Elliott and Mitchell 1973; Elliott 1976, 1978a,b; Gertsch

1974; Goodnight and Goodnight 1967; Holsinger 1967; Maguire

1960; Mitchell 1968a,b,c, 1970; Mitchell and Reddell 1971;

Muchmore 1969; Reddell 1965, 1966, 1967, 1970a-c), and more

recently on geologic and hydrologic processes of karst

(Veni & Associates 1988a,b, 1992). Elliott (1991a-f,

1992b-e) has begun a long-term, baseline ecology study of

three caves as part of the LakeLine Mall Habitat

Conservation Plan (see discussion in Section E).

 

Origin of Karst Features: “Karst” is a type of terrain

that is formed by the slow dissolution of calcium carbonate

from limestone bedrock by mildly acidic groundwater. This

process creates numerous subterranean voids (caves,

sinkholes, fractures, interconnections, etc.) so that the

bedrock somewhat resembles a honeycomb. The formation of

these features depends largely on the solubility of the

bedrock and the rate and direction of groundwater movement.

Water enters the subsurface through cracks, crevices, and

other openings, dissolving away soluble beds of rock as it

moves through the ground, until it discharges downhill at

a spring outlet.

 

     Many of the karst features occupied by the listed

species were formed at or below the water table, and thus

were once filled with water. As the groundwater table

lowered through canyon downcutting and regional uplift,

these features dried out and are now air-filled. These

features are referred to as “dry” because they tend to

have small catchment areas, take very little runoff, and

contain little or no perennially flowing water. In some

cases, cave and sinkhole entrances were formed as the

groundwater table lowered, resulting in ceiling collapse of

some cavities.

 

     Some karst features may act as recharge structures to

underground stream systems. For example, Buttercup Creek

in the Cedar Park karst fauna region in Williamson County,

overlies an important karst network composed of several

caves such as Buttercup River Cave, Ilex Cave, Boulevard

Cave, Whitewater Cave, and a large number of small

sinkholes and caves that may contribute to an underground

stream (Russell 1993). Testudo Tube is a more distant

infeeder to the system. Available information indicates

that the stream exits either at a spring in Bull Creek to

the south, which contributes to Austin’s water supply, or

feeds into the northern pool of the Edwards Aquifer.

 

Evolution of Troglobites: Troglobites have been referred

to as “relicts” of surface soil and leaf-litter faunas. A

widely accepted explanation for the evolution of

troglobites is that, during the course of climatic changes

in the Pleistocene epoch (two million to ten thousand years

ago), certain creatures retreated into the more stable cave

environments, while their respective surface relatives

either emigrated or became extinct (Barr 1968, Mitchell and

Reddell 1971, Elliott and Reddell 1989). The troglobitic

species survived and adapted to the cave environment and

colonized the caves and other subterranean voids. Through

faulting and canyon downcutting, the karst terrain along

the Balcones Fault Zone became increasingly dissected,

particularly around the Jollyville Plateau, creating

“islands” of karst and barriers to dispersal. This led to

increasing isolation of troglobitic populations from each

other with subsequent speciation. Some groups speciate

very readily, while others appear to speciate more slowly.

Some species are more mobile than others and can achieve

larger ranges. The restricted distribution of troglobitic

species makes many of them highly susceptible to extinction

(Elliott and Reddell 1989).

 

Habitat Requirements - Moisture and Temperature:

Troglobites require high humidities (nearly l00%), and many

are very susceptible to drying. Generally, areas within

caves that have low humidities are almost entirely devoid

of cave fauna (Elliott and Reddell 1989, Barr 1968). Caves

that are encased with an inner shell of calcite, which can

cut off water and nutrient infiltration, are also nearly

biologically sterile (Elliott, pers. observation).

 

     Water enters the karst ecosystem though groundwater

and surface drainage. Well-developed pathways, such as

cave openings, fractures, and solutionally enlarged bedding

planes, rapidly transport water through karst with little

or no purification. Caves are susceptible to pollution

from contaminated water entering the ground because karst

has little capacity for self-purification. The route that

has the greatest potential to carry water-borne

contaminants into the karst ecosystem is through the

surface and subsurface drainage basin that supplies water

to the ecosystem. Certain activities within this

hydrologically sensitive area, such as application of

pesticides and fertilizers, leakage from sewer lines, and

urban runoff, could contaminate the karst ecosystem. The

potential for contaminants to travel through karst systems

may be increased in some areas relative to others due to

local geologic features.

 

     Most troglobites require stable temperatures. Cold,

dry air entering a cave causes the fauna to retreat to more

humid, warmer recesses (Reddell and Elliott 1991). During

these times, some troglobites may be found in small ceiling

pockets where the conditions are presumably warmer and

damper, rather than on the floor where they are normally

found (Elliott, pers. observation). During hot, dry periods, cave fauna may retreat into the cave soil or interstitial spaces where environmental conditions are more stable (Howarth 1983).

 

Habitat Requirements - Importance of Surface Communities:

Due to the paucity of light and limited capability for

photosynthesis, karst ecosystems are almost entirely

dependent upon surface plant and animal communities for

nutrient and energy input. Karst ecosystems receive

nutrients from the surface in the form of leaf litter and

other organic debris that have washed or fallen into the

caves, from tree and other vascular plant roots, or through

the feces, eggs, or dead bodies of troglophiles and

trogoxenes (for example, cave crickets, raccoons).

 

     Certain animal species, such as cave crickets, daddy

longlegs, and raccoons appear to use most caves, provided

there is sufficient area on the surface with habitat to

support these species and the cave entrance is not blocked.

A study to determine the foraging range and spatial/temporal distributions of cave crickets and daddy longlegs is currently underway as part of the LakeLine Mall Habitat Conservation Plan (see discussion in Section E). Recent research indicates cave crickets may forage more than 50 meters from cave entrances (W.R. Elliott, pers. comm., 1993).

 

     Cave crickets (Ceuthophilus spp.) are an especially

important component of the cave ecosystem, because many

invertebrates are known to feed on their eggs, feces,

nymphs, and dead body parts. Cave crickets typically roost

and lay eggs in caves during the day, then emerge at night

to feed. They are general predators and scavengers, but

the exact food preferences of Ceuthophilus species in Texas

are still unclear. Daddy longlegs harvestmen (Leiobunum

townsendii), which are abundant in many caves, may

similarly introduce nutrients into the cave ecosystem.

Raccoons are also ecologically important in many cave

communities because their feces provide a rich medium for

the growth of fungi and, subsequently, localized population

blooms of several species of collembolans. Collembolans

are tiny, hopping insects that reproduce rapidly on rich

food sources and may become prey for some predatory

troglobites.

 

     Caves with large bat colonies usually harbor a

community dominated by guano-feeders and related species.

Some of the small caves of Travis and Williamson counties

once harbored small bat colonies, usually cave bats (Myotis

velifer). This species often abandons caves because of

human disturbance or other factors (Elliott, in press).

However, most of the caves inhabited by the listed species

were not significant bat roosts in the past. The exceptions

to this rule follow: 1) Tooth Cave apparently harbored a

small bat colony at one time, but has not contained bats

for many years (Reddell, pers. communication); 2) Steam

Cave at Georgetown for many years has continued to harbor

some Myotis velifer individuals, according to numerous

cavers’ reports; 3) On Campus Cave at Georgetown,

apparently a major bat cave at one time, was sealed during

land development, then reopened in 1992 (Mike Warton,

geologist, pers. communication); 4) Beck Bat, Beck Horse,

and Beck Ranch caves have had bat colonies at different

times (Elliott, pers. observation). These data suggest

that although the karst ecosystems containing the listed

species may not depend on bats for nutrient input, some of

the listed species can tolerate conditions around small bat

colonies and may benefit from the increased nutrients.

 

     Surface plant communities around karst features

supporting the listed species range from pasture land to

mature oak-juniper woodland. In general, exotic plants and

animals (particularly fire ants) are believed to be

detrimental and may result in competition with or predation

upon native species and a decreased overall species

diversity.

 

     In addition to providing nutrients to the karst

ecosystem, the surface plant community also serves to

buffer the karst ecosystem against changes in the

temperature and moisture regimes, pollutants entering from

the surface (Biological Advisory Team 1990, Veni &

Associates 1988a), and other factors such as sedimentation

from soil erosion. Protecting native vegetation may also

help control certain exotics (such as fire ants) that may

compete with and/or prey upon the listed species and other

karst fauna. Fire ants are particularly detrimental to

karst ecosystems, although the full extent of their impact

has not yet been determined. Soil disturbance,

introduction of nursery plants and sod containing fire

ants, garbage (potential food source), and electrical

equipment are some of the factors contributing to fire ant

infestations.

 

Habitat Requirements - Use of Interstitial Spaces: The

extent to which the species use small humanly inaccessible

voids, referred to as “interstitial spaces” (such as

fractures, fissures, cracks, etc.), between or around caves

is not fully known. Use of interstitial spaces by

troglobites has been observed in Japan, Hawaii, and Europe

(Howarth 1983). At the LakeLine Mall site in Williamson

County (see Section B), six boreholes (referred to as

“coreholes” in certain documents) were drilled to determine

the presence of interstitial fauna. The two caves on the

site, LakeLine Cave and Underline Cave, both contain listed

species (Rhadine persephone and Texella reyesi). Four to

five Rhadine persephone beetles and one Rhadine subterranea

beetle were found in one of the four boreholes that

encountered a void (Well Trap #6, Table 2). This void was

located about 600 feet northwest of LakeLine Cave in

Williamson County. No troglobites were found in the other

five boreholes (Horizon Environmental Services, Inc.

1991a)

 

     Howarth (1983) refers to these interstitial

communities as “crack fauna” and asserts that “caves are

not isolated but connect with other subterranean habitats

to constitute a single functioning system”. He argues that

troglobites primarily live in interstitial spaces, where

environmental conditions are more stable, but will venture

into larger voids and caves when conditions are suitable.

Some troglobites have a lower metabolic rate and are able

to use energy more efficiently than their surface

relatives, and many have exhibited the ability to withstand

long periods without consuming food. Thus, a steady food

supply for these species may not be as limiting a factor as

the need for high moisture levels and stable temperatures.

This may explain the seasonal distribution of the cave

fauna and the apparent paucity of troglobites during

periods of dryness or temperature extremes (Howarth 1983)

 

     Troglobites occupying interstitial spaces may receive

nutrients through root systems of surface vegetation and

through many small holes and fissures in karst areas where

raccoons, cave crickets, and other surface fauna can enter

the subsurface. Groundwater flow and surface infiltration

are also vehicles for transporting nutrients through

interstitial spaces. Certain strata in the Edwards

Limestone are more prone to developing karstic solutional

openings and thus may be more penetrable by nutrients than

other strata. The extent of nutrient infiltration into the

interstitium appears to be site-specific and is largely

dependent on the nature of the limestone strata and the

juxtaposition of subterranean voids. Thus, some strata may

receive nutrient input over a large area, while others may

receive input only through caves and sinkholes.

 

     The distance that the listed species or other karst

fauna retreat from cave openings is unknown but is probably

dependent upon the presence of contiguous voids large

enough for the fauna to occupy, proximity to nutrient

supplies, and the ecological requirements of the species.

For example, if the “epikarst” (the surface of the karst)

is extremely honeycombed, as in the LakeLine Mall area,

then troglobites may be found where there are continuous

passages or open bedding planes. Furthermore, more mobile

species, such as Rhadine persephone, may range farther from

cave openings, while more sedentary species, such as

Neoleptoneta myopica, may be physically restricted to

nutrient-rich areas.

 

Habitat Requirements - Management Considerations: The

karst features inhabited by these species and the

ecosystems on which they depend have evolved slowly over

millions of years and cannot be recreated once they have

been destroyed. Protection of these ecosystems will

require maintaining moist, humid conditions and stable

temperatures in the air-filled voids; maintaining an

adequate nutrient supply; preventing contamination of the

water entering the ecosystem; preventing or controlling

invasion of exotic species, such as fire ants; and other

actions as deemed necessary. Additional research may help

to develop or refine conservation and management practices

necessary to achieve these goals.

 

     In determining appropriate management techniques of

surface communities, the ecological requirements of other

species, such as the federally listed endangered black-

capped vireo (Vireo atricapillus) and golden-cheeked

warbler (Dendroica chrysoparia), whose ranges overlap with

those of the listed invertebrates, will also need to be

considered. Recovery plans for these species have been

prepared (USFWS 1991, 1992)

 

Ecology: Most of the endangered karst invertebrates are

believed to be predators of microarthropods, such as

collembolans. Many troglobites also feed on well-

decomposed organic matter. Others, such as the ground

beetle, may consume cave cricket eggs or dead cave cricket

parts. The limited data available suggest that most

troglobites are food generalists (Barr 1968), although this

does not preclude the development of food specialization in

some species. Since several predator species coexist in

most caves, one can expect some degree of prey

specialization in these species.

 

     Elliott and Reddell (1989) note that “there is no

direct information on the life cycle of any of these

species. Many surface relatives have a distinct seasonal

life cycle, but collections throughout the year indicate

that all of these species have lost this seasonality...”

 

The following list summarizes currently available on each

species’ biology.

 

Species 1 - Neoleptoneta myopica: This species preys on

microarthropods and has been described as a “sedentary

aerial spider that hangs from a small tangle or sheet web

on long, thin legs” (Gertsch 1974). Mitchell and Reddell

(1971) observed that “in Texas caves, generally, the

spiders are the most important animals filling the ‘small

predator’ niches.” Since a cave can contain several

different species of spiders, such as members of the genera

Neoleptoneta, Cicurina, Nesticus, and Eidmannella, slightly

different small predator niches apparently have developed

in those communities. For example, in Tooth Cave, Travis

County, there are 11 co-existing, troglobitic, small

predators (6 spiders, a harvestman, 2 pseudoscorpions, and

2 Rhadine beetles) (Elliott and Reddell 1989).

 

Species 2 - Tartarocreagris texana: Tartarocreagris texana

is usually found under rocks. Finding individuals of this

species is so rare that little else is known of its habits

(Elliott and Reddell 1989). All known pseudoscorpions are

predators of microarthropods.

 

Species 3 - Texella reddelli: This species is usually

found under rocks in darkness or in dim twilight. All

phalangodids have large, raptorial pedipalps designed to

seize and hold prey. Elliott (1978b) observed that

Banksula melones and Banksula grahami, members of the same

family from California, fed upon cave psocids

(psocopterans) and collembolans placed in small containers,

but preferred the collembolans, which were smaller.

Texella and other small harvestmen tend to walk rather

slowly and deliberately, unlike spiders, which tend to move

faster. See further remarks on Texella reyesi.

 

Species 4 - Texella reyesi: This species is especially

sensitive to drying and requires very moist, humid

conditions (Elliott 1991a-f and unpublished data). Most

individuals are found under large rocks, but are

occasionally seen walking on moist floors. In Temples of

Thor Cave, individuals are typically found about 30m from

the entrance in total darkness, where humidity is high;

they seldom occur farther in the cave where there is less

water and food. In the hottest part of the summer when

many of the small caves warm up and become drier,

individuals may retreat into the interstitium or may be

found only in the coolest, dampest spots in the caves.

This species feeds on microarthropods. One individual in

LakeLine Cave was observed feeding on fungi growing on a

dead raccoon.

 

Species 5 - Rhadine persephone: Rhadine persephone is the

largest, most visible, and most active of the species and

is sometimes visible in strong light from a distance of 5

to 10 m. Rhadine persephone is usually found under rocks,

although some individuals have been observed walking on

damp rocks and silt. The beetle runs rapidly and patrols

the floor area in search of prey, as does R. subterranea,

a closely related and sympatric species.

 

     While feeding behavior has not been observed in R.

persephone, Mitchell (1968a, b) observed R. subterranea

feeding on cave cricket eggs and dead cave cricket parts in

Beck’s Ranch Cave, Williamson County. James Reddell (pers.

communication, in Mitchell 1968b) reported one observation

of a R. subterranea beetle carrying a collembolan. Rhadine

subterranea appears to be restricted to areas of deep,

uncompacted silt, where it digs holes to remove and feed on

eggs deposited into the silt by cave crickets. Mitchell

also found R. subterranea larvae in the silt, but he felt

the food supply was the limiting factor in the beetle’s

distribution. Rhadine subterranea is not believed to feed

on organic material, fungi, raccoon feces, cricket

droppings, or live cave cricket nymphs, as are some other

invertebrates. Fungi may harbor parasites that result in

beetle mortality. Predation on cave cricket eggs has

apparently evolved in at least four different genera of

troglobitic carabid beetles in North America (Howarth

1983).

 

     In Tooth Cave, where numerous specimens were collected

in 1965, R. persephone are more abundant than R.

subterranea. The high population levels of R. subterranea

in the Round Rock and Georgetown areas contrast sharply

with its rarity at the southern margin of its range (for

example, Tooth Cave), where population density and perhaps

further range extension may be checked by interspecific

competition. Competition due to broad niche overlap

between R. persephone and R. subterranea may limit the

latter in Tooth and Kretschmarr caves (Barr 1974a)

 

     On one occasion Elliott (1992b) observed Rhadine

persephone in LakeLine Cave to be more active at night.

This may indicate a residual nocturnal behavior, similar to

that seen in fully-eyed species of Rhadine beetles observed

in caves on the Edwards Plateau (Elliott, pers.

observations)

 

Species 6 - Texamaurops reddelli: Texamaurops reddelli is

found in total darkness under and among rocks and buried in

silt (Barr and Steeves 1963, Reddell 1966). All members of

the family are believed to be predators. Both Texamaurops

reddelli and Batrisodes texanus (below) have well-developed

mouth parts and are also believed to be predators (Donald

S. Chandler, Dept. of Entomology, University of New

Hampshire, in litt., 1993). Pselaphids are found in soil,

moldy wood, moss, under stones and logs, in caves, or in

termite nests. The term “mold beetle” refers to an old

definition of “mold” as rotting plant material.

 

Species 7 - Batrisodes texanus: Batrisodes texanus is

found in total darkness under rocks. In Off Campus Cave,

it was found on the underside of a rock lightly buried in

silty clay in total darkness (Chandler 1992). In Inner

Space Cavern in August 1968, Elliott (unpublished data)

collected a female as it ran from under a moldy match box

in the Mud Room. It is believed to be a predator (see

Texamaurops reddelli, above).

 


D. Reasons for Listing and Current Threats

 

     One of the main threats to the listed species is loss

of habitat due to urban development activities (53 FR

36029). The species occur in an area that is undergoing

continued urban expansion at a rapid rate and few caves are

adequately protected. Most of the species’ localities

occur adjacent to or near developed areas (residential

subdivisions, schools, golf courses, roads, commercial and

industrial facilities, etc.) or in areas that are proposed

for development. Unless proper protective measures can be

devised, urban development may lead to the filling in or

collapse of caves, alteration of drainage patterns,

alteration of surface plant and animal communities, as well

as increased contamination and human visitation.

 

     One cave cluster in the Jollyville Plateau karst fauna

region occurs in an area that presently supports some

residential and industrial development and where additional

development has been proposed. Another cave to the north

of this cave cluster occurs in an area that is undergoing

expansion of a residential community. These two areas

support six of the listed species and include the entire

ranges of Tartarocreagris texana and Texamaurops reddelli.

 

Filling in and Collapsing of Caves: Some caves have been

filled, collapsed, or otherwise altered during road

construction and building site preparation (53 FR 36029).

Various construction and development activities over caves

or sinkholes may also result in the collapse of cave

ceilings. There are limited data available on the number

of caves that have been filled to date. Elliott and

Reddell (1989) estimate that at least 10% of the caves in

Travis County are destroyed every 10 years. This trend

will only accelerate with increasing urban expansion. To

date, two caves containing Texella reyesi are known to have

been filled (Fossil and Sore-ped caves). Sore-ped Cave was

filled in 1991 by the owner but was reopened after

negotiations with the USFWS. Fossil Cave was filled around

1980 and has not been reopened. Underline Cave and Well

Trap #6 will be destroyed as part of the LakeLine Mall

Section 10 (a) (1) (B) permit (see discussion in Section E)

Other caves (such as Coffin Cave which contains Batrisodes

texanus) may already have been filled due to recent

development. Attempts to relocate Coffin Cave have been

unsuccessful (53 FR 36029)

 

     Ranching activities may also lead to the filling of

cave entrances. The earliest published reference to local

ranchers routinely filling cave entrances was by Vinther

and Jackson (1948), who stated that entrances were closed

in Williamson County “to eliminate hiding places for

‘varmints’— predatory animals.” Ranchers sometimes fill

entrances or cover cave entrances by placing “cedar”

(juniper) limbs across entrances to prevent cattle and

goats from falling in (Elliott, pers. observations).

 

Alteration of Drainage Patterns: Because karst ecosystems

depend on air-filled voids with some water infiltration,

diverting water away from a cave could lead to drying and

subsequent mortality of karst fauna, while increasing water

infiltration could lead to flooding and loss of air-breathing species. Altering the quantity of water inflow

could also result in changes in the nutrient regime.

 

     Development activities that result in the alteration

of natural drainage patterns include altering the

topography, increasing impervious cover, installing water

collecting devices, spray-irrigation systems, and other

activities. Opening too many or too large entrances into

a cave system during cave exploration may also result in

drying. The extent to which these activities are impacting

the listed species’ localities needs to be determined.

 

Alteration of Surface Plant and Animal Communities: Land

development and other human activities (such as

agriculture) can lead to the loss of surface plant and

animal communities on which karst ecosystems depend for

nutrient supplies. With urbanization, native vegetation

may be removed and replaced with impervious cover, nursery

plants, and/or exotic plants. Subsequent changes in the

animal community include the introduction of exotics, such

as fire ants; loss or reduction of certain animals due to

habitat loss, competition, predation, or other factors; and

overall declines in species diversity. Many of these

plants and animals (for example, cave crickets and daddy

longlegs) may be critical to the nutrient regime of the

karst ecosystem, and loss of these species could lead to

nutrient reduction or depletion within the karst ecosystem.

Removal of the native surface vegetation may lead to

increases in temperature fluctuations, changes in the

moisture regime, increased potential for contamination, and

increases in sedimentation in the caves from soil erosion

on the surface.

 

     The impacts that altering surface plant and animal

communities have on karst ecosystems are not fully

understood and warrant further research. Important

contributors to the karst ecosystem’s nutrient regime need

to be identified, as well as the surface area and other

ecological requirements necessary to sustain these nutrient

sources. Some of this information will be gathered as part

of the LakeLine Mall Habitat Conservation Plan’s studies

(see discussion in Section E)

 

Contamination: Because karst is highly susceptible to

groundwater contamination, urbanization (including

industrial, residential, road, and commercial development)

may result in the contamination of karst ecosystems. Types

of contaminants associated with urbanization may include

chemical, sewage, and oil pollution. These pollutants are

derived from urban runoff; broadcasting, spraying, and

fogging pesticides and fertilizers; hazardous materials

spills; pipeline and storage tank leaks; power transformer

and industrial accidents; leakage from septic systems,

landfills, and sewer lines; and other sources.

 

     Primary routes of contaminant entry into karst

ecosystems include the surface and subsurface drainage

basin of a karst ecosystem; air (for air-borne

contaminants); and dumping of household garbage,

construction debris, motor oil, alkaline batteries (which

contain mercury), pesticides and other materials directly

into cave entrances. Many caves are currently subject to

disposal of refuse, urban runoff, and contamination from

pesticides and fertilizers. Several chemical facilities

are located along RM 2222 in the Jollyville Plateau karst

fauna region near caves known to support six of the listed

species. A cave containing Texella reyesi is directly

under an oil pipeline. Provisions for protecting karst

ecosystems from contamination need to be developed.

 

Human Visitation, Vandalism, and Dumping: Urban

development near cave entrances is likely to increase human

visitation to these caves. Possible impacts from human

entry into a cave include habitat disturbance or loss due

to soil compaction or changes in atmospheric conditions,

abandonment of the cave by bats or other trogloxenes, and

direct mortality (e.g., from stepping on karst fauna).

These impacts may be reduced or avoided, depending on the

caving skills and caution of the person(s) entering the

cave. Vandalism may also result in the destruction or

deterioration of the karst ecosystem. Dumping of toxic

trash (such as alkaline batteries) can lead to

contamination of the karst ecosystem. Disposal of

household and other wastes may also attract fire ants.

 

     Cave gates and fences are often installed to deter

unauthorized human visitation and dumping; however, these

devices may inadvertently alter the air flow, moisture, and

nutrient regimes of the karst ecosystem. Installation of

a cave gate may also destroy the aesthetics of the cave

opening. Furthermore, the soil disturbance generated

during the installation of cave gates and fences may

encourage fire ant infestations in these areas.

Nonetheless, carefully constructed and monitored cave gates

and fences are appropriate in some situations and should be

considered as an option at heavily visited or vandalized

caves. Caves gates are further discussed in Tasks 4.3 and

7.3.

 

Fire ants: Fire ant activity in central Texas appears to

have increased dramatically since 1989 (Elliott 1992a).

The fire ant is an aggressive predator, and current

evidence shows that it has a devastating and long-lasting

impact on native ant populations and other arthropod

communities (Vinson and Sorenson 1986; Porter and Savignano

1990). Fire ants have been observed building nests both

within and near cave entrances as well as foraging in

caves, especially during the summer.

 

     The relative accessibility of the shallow caves

inhabited by the listed invertebrates makes them especially

vulnerable to invasion by fire ants and other exotic

species. Fire ants can enter karst ecosystems through the

cave entrance or through small holes from the surface and

attack karst fauna in areas that humans cannot observe.

Fire ants have been found in more than 50 percent of the

caves that contain listed karst invertebrates and have been

observed attacking and preying on several troglobitic

species, as well as scorpions, cave crickets, and other

karst dwellers (James Reddell, Texas Memorial Museum, in

litt., 1993). Karst fauna that are most vulnerable to fire

ant predation are the slower-moving adults, nymphs, and

eggs. (Reddell, pers. communication). Even in the unlikely

event that fire ants do not prey directly upon the listed

invertebrates, their presence in and around karst areas

could have a drastic detrimental effect on the karst

ecosystem through loss of both surface and subsurface

species that are critical links in the food chain.

 

     Fire ant colonies occur in two forms: single-queen and

multiple-queen colonies. Multiple-queen fire ant colonies

occur in very dense concentrations (about 750-5000 mounds

per acre) and successfully dominate areas previously

occupied by the less dense (100-200 mounds/acre) single-

queen form (Porter et al. 1991). The multiple-queen form

is three times more abundant in Texas than in other parts

of its range and recent surveys indicate it is spreading.

This form invaded the Austin area sometime in the early

1980’s (Porter et al. 1991).

 

     Fire ant studies conducted by Porter et al. (1988) in

Austin indicate that fire ants invade areas in two phases.

In the first phase, fire ant queens invade an area through

long-distance dispersal of winged queens or are introduced

through imported products such as nursery stock or soil

containing small fire ant colonies. Their invasion is

aided by “any disturbance that clears a site of heavy

vegetation and disrupts the native ant community.” Several

native ants are known to attack and kill founding fire ant

queens. These native ants are especially important in

eliminating founding fire ant queens and their colonies

from non-infested areas. Once the fire ant becomes

established, they enter the second phase during which the

native ant communities are gradually eliminated and show

little resurgence as the fire ant slowly expands and

increases in number. This phase takes many years to

complete (Porter et al. 1988) . These factors should be

considered when determining short and long-term methods of

fire ant control.

 

Mining, quarrying, or blasting above/in caves: There are

several limestone quarries in the Austin area that may

contain suitable habitat for one or more of the listed

species. Vinther and Jackson (1948) reported three caves

south of Georgetown where a quarry is now located. Reddell

and Finch (1963) reported two other caves in this area that

were destroyed in 1960 and 1963 by quarry activities and at

least 22 other caves and sinks on ranches that are now part

of or adjacent to that quarry. Both Batrisodes texanus and

Texella reyesi occur in caves to the north of this quarry.

Other quarry properties in the area may still contain

caves.

 


E. Conservation Measures

 

     This section summarizes the regional karst and

biospeleological surveys, research, and other conservation

measures that have been conducted to date.

 

Regional karst and biospeleological surveys: Since the

listing of the endangered species, numerous surveys have

been conducted to better define the distribution and

taxonomy of karst fauna in Travis and Williamson counties.

Many of the studies are proprietary reconnaissance studies

conducted by environmental consultants, geologists,

engineers, cavers, and biospeleologists to locate caves and

sinkholes on properties proposed for development. These

studies have been funded primarily by private landowners,

financial institutions, school districts, and governmental

agencies and have resulted in the discovery of new

endangered species localities.

 

     In early 1989, the Texas Department of Transportation

(formerly known as the Texas Department of Highways and

Public Transportation) sponsored a karst feature survey and

biospeleological study of karst features along the

right-of-way of the proposed Austin Outer Parkway (State

Highway 45) from Comanche Trail to U.S. 183 (Reddell 1989).

That same year, Elliott and Reddell (1989) completed a

major study of several caves in Travis and Williamson

counties to further define the status and range of the

listed species. Elliott and Reddell’s surveys were funded

by TPWD and TNC in preparation for a regional endangered

species conservation effort involving local and state

government and several conservation organizations. The

report also discussed cave ecology, scientific and economic

values of cave faunas, destruction rates of Central Texas

caves, and threats to cave fauna. Acquisition, scientific,

and management recommendations were also given, including

long-term ecological studies, stewardship programs,

cooperative agreements, and greenbelts. Through an

Endangered Species Act Section 6 cooperative agreement with

TPWD, USFWS funded continued karst and biospeleological

studies by Reddell and his associates (1991). These

studies helped further clarify the range of the listed

species and determine areas that warranted additional

study.

 

     From 1990 to 1991, the City of Georgetown sponsored an

extensive study of 21 caves and 19 other karst features in

Georgetown’s extraterritorial jurisdiction (Reddell and

Elliott 1991). As a result of the study, Temples of Thor

and Red Crevice caves were discovered and later sold to

Melvin Simon & Associates, Inc. to become part of the

LakeLine Mall Habitat Conservation Plan. Known cave

locations from the Texas Speleological Society files were

mapped onto the City of Georgetown’s geographic information

system.

 

     Through an Endangered Species Act Section 6

cooperative agreement with TPWD, the USFWS funded a study

(Veni & Associates 1992) of geologic controls on cave

development and the distribution of karst fauna in the

vicinity of Travis and Williamson counties. This study

significantly improved the ability to predict where

endangered species’ localities might occur in Travis and

Williamson counties. Veni divided Travis, Williamson,

Hays, and Burnet counties into 11 areas (referred to as

“karst fauna regions” in this recovery plan) based on

geologic continuity, hydrology, and the distribution of 38

rare troglobites. By correlating distribution data for the

38 troglobites to the 11 karst fauna regions, Veni observed

that the Jollyville Plateau, Central Austin, and Post Oak

Ridge regions have more endemic species than McNeil, Round

Rock, and Cedar Park. For the purposes of this plan, the

McNeil and Round Rock karst fauna regions have been

combined, and areas where listed species do not occur have

been omitted from Figure 2, with the exception of South

Travis County (see discussion in Part I.B).

 

     Veni and Associates (1992) mapped four zones in Travis

and Williamson Counties indicating areas with different

likelihoods of having extensive cave development and listed

species. The boundaries are matched to known outcrops of

cavernous limestone garnered from numerous geologic maps

and studies and to hydrologic boundaries extrapolated from

the elevations of cave passages compared to surface water

divides. Zone 1 includes areas in the Edwards Group

limestones that are known to contain listed species. Zone

2 comprises areas that may contain listed species or other

endemic fauna. Zone 3 probably does not contain listed

species or their habitat, and Zone 4 consists of

noncavernous rock and thus does not contain caves or other

karst features. Together, Zones 1 and 2 comprise about

55,000 acres in Travis County and about 100,000 acres in

Williamson County (Figure 10).

 

Fire ant control study: In 1991, USFWS funded, through a

Section 6 cooperative agreement with TPWD, a fire ant

control study in and around 12 caves containing listed

species in Travis and Williamson counties (Elliott 1992a).

Three types of treatments were used including hot (nearly

boiling) water, and the chemicals Amdro® and Logic®.

Additional research is needed to determine the

effectiveness of the treatments against fire ants and

effects on the listed species.

 

     Both Logic® and Amdro® are harmful to arthropods. Use

of Amdro or Logic may result in the mortality of the

endangered species through consumption of the chemical(s)

or contaminated prey which have ingested the bait. Adverse

impacts to the species may be avoided through strict

control of chemical applications. For example, applying

chemical baits away from the cave entrance and outside of

areas used by cave crickets may prevent introduction of the

active ingredients into the food chain. By applying

chemicals in the morning under dry, warm conditions, the

ants may consume most or all of the chemicals before cave

crickets exit the cave at sundown to forage.

 

     Despite effective initial treatments, some areas may

be rapidly re-infested with fire ants from surrounding

areas, as happened at Kretschmarr Cave, and could require

more than one treatment each year. The level and type of

fire ant control necessary for each area will likely be

site-specific, depending on adjacent land use and severity

of the fire ant infestation.

 

LakeLine Mall Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP): On February

13, 1992, the USFWS issued a Section 10(a) (1) (B) permit

under the Endangered Species Act to Melvin Simon and

Associates, Inc., to allow the “taking” of some Rhadine

persephone and Texella reyesi individuals as a result of

the proposed LakeLine Mall development. The Endangered

Species Act authorizes the USFWS to permit the taking of

federally listed species if such taking is “incidental to,

and not the purpose of, the carrying out of an otherwise

lawful activity” (16 U.S.C. Section 1539). Two caves

(LakeLine and Underline) and one bore-hole (Well Trap #6)

were found to contain listed species. Underline Cave

contains T. reyesi, and Well Trap #6 contains R.

persephone, while LakeLine Cave contains both species.

Both Underline Cave and Well Trap #6 will be destroyed

during mall construction. The initial two to three-acre

fenced preserve around LakeLine Cave will be reduced to

less than 0.5 acre about two years after completion of the

mall, which may result in loss or degradation of the cave

ecosystem.

 

     As part of mitigation for the taking as outlined in

their Habitat Conservation Plan, Melvin Simon and

Associates, Inc., acquired a total of 232 acres of preserve

land in three separate areas known to support four caves

containing Rhadine persephone (Rolling Rock and Testudo

Tube caves) and Texella reyesi (Red Crevice and Temples of

Thor caves). Three of the caves occur in Williamson

County. Rolling Rock Cave is in Travis County. Texas

Parks and Wildlife Department is the management authority

for the LakeLine HCP.

 

     Other mitigation measures in the LakeLine HCP include

a 10-year monitoring program of certain environmental

conditions (such as temperature, humidity, air movements,

and rainfall) and karst fauna (including species,

abundance, activity and location within the cave) for

LakeLine Cave. This program will include monitoring for 5

years before and 5 years after mall completion, as well as

during construction. The purpose is to determine the

impacts of mall development on the cave ecosystem and the

listed species. Commensurate five-year studies of

environmental conditions and karst fauna will be done in

Testudo Tube and Temples of Thor Caves to serve as control

sites to the LakeLine Cave study. Studies will include

food preferences, foraging range, and distribution of cave

crickets and daddy longlegs harvestmen at the above three

caves and fire ant control at all five sites. A karst

ecosystem exhibit for public education will be displayed

within the LakeLine Mall development project (Horizon

Environmental Services, Inc., 1991b).

 

     Elliott (1991a-f, 1992c-e) initiated the LakeLine Cave

studies in May 1991 and began investigations of Testudo

Tube and Temples of Thor caves in May 1992. Monthly

ecological monitoring visits to these caves provide

information on temperature, humidity, air movements,

nutrient inputs, fire ants, and the distribution of

numerous species in the cave, but may not provide much data

on life histories and other aspects of the listed species’

biology. The cave cricket/daddy longlegs study is

providing data on the foraging behavior and

spatial/temporal distributions of these species, which feed

above ground at night. The cave cricket study will help

determine the surface area around the caves needed to

sustain these species. A major goal of this research is to

determine whether the karst invertebrate community in

LakeLine Cave is significantly affected by development of

the shopping mall and to assist in making preserve

recommendations for other caves.

 

     In addition to the mitigation outlined above and prior

to the development of the HCP, Melvin Simon and

Associates, Inc. funded research designed to help determine

the extent to which karst fauna occur in the interstitial

spaces at the LakeLine Mall site. Six bore-holes were

drilled into the bedrock near a cluster of surface karst

features. Five-foot sections of 4-inch PVC pipe were

installed in each borehole. To prevent surface material

from entering the boreholes, approximately 2 feet of pipe

protruded above the surface, and the edges around each pipe

were sealed with rocks and dirt. Each pipe was then sealed

to prevent moisture loss.

 

     Pitfall traps containing a variety of baits, including

moldy blue cheese, banana, peanut butter, and yeast were

placed inside each borehole to attract karst fauna. This

method was successful in trapping Rhadine persephone in one

borehole. No troglobites were found in the other five.

The baits do not attract many species, particularly more

sedentary predatory species such as Neoleptoneta myopica

and the Texella species. Baits may attract fire ants, as

may the surface disturbance generated during the drilling

process.

 

Regional Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP): The City of

Austin is proceeding with development of a regional HCP,

although specific preserve boundaries for the karst

features have not been determined at this time. Individual

applications for 10(a) (1) (b) permits and associated HCP’s

should contribute to achieving recovery plan goals,

particularly in setting aside cave preserves.

 

Security measures: To control access to caves where

unauthorized human visitation and vandalism present a

serious threat to the karst ecosystems and possible injury

to humans, cave gates have been installed at some cave

entrances. Caves where gates have been installed to date

include Tooth, Gallifer, Kretschmarr, Kretschmarr

Salamander, LakeLine, and Sore-ped caves. Most of these

cave gates consist of a locked door fashioned from an open

steel grid to prevent unauthorized entry. Cave gates

should be designed to permit normal air flow, water

infiltration, and nutrient input. Since some cave gates

have been known to filter out important nutrient sources,

particularly larger animals such as raccoons, they should

be closely monitored and rectified should such problems

occur.

 

     One alternative to gating that may pose less

interference with the nutrient regime and other

environmental factors (such as air and water movement) is

the installation of a high fence around a cave preserve.

Chain-link fences have been installed around Kretschmarr

Cave and LakeLine Cave. Since both cave gates and fences

are subject to vandalism, they may require frequent

surveillance. The effectiveness of gating and fencing and

their effects on the karst ecosystems should be closely

monitored. Other alternatives to protecting caves from

human visitation and vandalism, such as public education

and routine site patrols, should also be explored.

 

Other conservation measures: In late 1988, the USFWS, in

conjunction with two groups of developers, sponsored a

hydrogeologic study of a cave cluster located to the

northwest of the RM 2222 and RM 620 intersection to aid in

determining measures to protect this cluster, which

supports six of the listed species. The project, conducted

by Veni & Associates (1988a), provided guidelines for

protecting the caves based largely on hydrogeologic

factors, but did not involve biological investigations.

The study was used by a group of experts assembled by USFWS

to prepare guidelines for the protection of the cave

cluster. The group’s guidelines were used in discussions

between USFWS and the developers about protecting the caves

and cave fauna.

 

     Local caving organizations have been instrumental in

locating and monitoring karst features and maintaining a

database of their findings. Several of these organizations

have published reports of their findings and made

conservation and management recommendations that are useful

to the USFWS. Other contributions made by local cavers

include the removal of trash from cave openings and the

detection of contaminant spills.

 

     The entrances to Tooth Cave and Kretschmarr Cave have

been under the stewardship of the Texas System of Natural

Laboratories (TSNL) on behalf of the owners since about

1970. This resulted in the discovery of several more caves

containing troglobites. A small area (about 0.6 acres)

around Tooth Cave and a total of about six acres

encompassing Kretschmarr Cave, Kretschmarr Double Pit,

Gallifer Cave, Root Cave, and other sinkholes on the

Jollyville Plateau were deeded by the owner to the TSNL in

1990. However, the preserves around these caves are not

sufficient to counter nutrient depletion and prevent

pollution should the surrounding areas be developed. The

entire area is now infested with fire ants. Furthermore,

some of these caves are under temporary deed to TSNL and

may be sold at the owners’ discretion.

 


F. Recovery Strategy

 

     This recovery plan is designed to outline steps for

long-term protection of the listed invertebrate species,

including restoration and enhancement of the habitat where

necessary. The recovery criteria state that each species

will be considered for downlisting from endangered to

threatened when three karst fauna areas (if at least three

exist) within each karst fauna region in each species’

range are protected in perpetuity (see Section II.A for a

more detailed delineation of the criteria).

 

The “karst fauna regions” depicted in Figure 2 of this

plan are adapted from the karst fauna areas delineated in

Veni & Associates’ 1992 report (see discussion in Section

I.B) . These regions are delineated based on geologic

continuity, hydrology, and the distribution of 38 rare

troglobitic species. Each karst fauna region can be

further subdivided into karst fauna areas. For the

purposes of this plan, a “karst fauna area” is an area

known to support one or more locations of a listed species

and is distinct in that it acts as a system that is

separated from other karst fauna areas by geologic and

hydrologic features and/or processes that create barriers

to the movement of water, contaminants, and troglobitic

fauna. Karst fauna areas should be far enough apart so

that if a catastrophic event (for example, contamination of

the water supply, flooding, disease) were to destroy one of

the areas and/or the species in it, that event would not

likely destroy any other area occupied by that species.

 

     As troglobitic populations become increasingly

isolated due to hydrogeologic processes, subsequent

speciation among the isolated populations may occur. The

recovery criteria are designed to allow these natural

evolutionary processes to continue for each species. The

recovery criteria aim at protecting populations and

preserving genetic diversity across each species’ range.

 

     Full implementation of the recovery criteria should

protect against catastrophic loss of the listed species.

Because karst ecosystems can never be recreated once they

are destroyed, an adequate number of karst fauna areas per

karst fauna region should be protected in perpetuity to

ensure the continued survival and conservation of each

species. Ideally, at least three karst fauna areas per

karst fauna region should be protected to provide a margin

of safety against extinction if one or more protected areas

are lost due to an unanticipated catastrophic event. This

is particularly important for karst species since their

habitat can not be recreated. If a given species only

occurs in two karst fauna areas, that species would still

be considered for downlisting provided both areas were

adequately protected. Species whose entire range consists

of only one karst fauna area (should one area be destroyed)

will not be considered for downlisting. If a species

occupies several karst fauna regions (such as Texella

reyesi), but one or more of those karst fauna regions

contains less than three karst fauna areas, then all karst

fauna areas within that region must be protected in order

to meet the recovery objective.

 

     The first step in recovering these species is to

identify the karst fauna areas targeted for recovery.

According to the recovery criteria, all localities

inhabited by four of the listed species (Neoleptoneta

myopica, Tartarocreagris texana, Texamaurops reddelli, and

Batrisodes texanus) should be provided long-term protection

prior to consideration for downlisting. Three of the

listed species, Texella reddelli, Texella reyesi, and

Rhadine persephone, occupy karst fauna regions that contain

more than three karst fauna areas. Table 3 identifies the

karst fauna regions in which each species occurs, the

approximate number of karst fauna areas inhabited by each

species, and the number of karst fauna areas that should be

protected, based on the recovery criteria for downlisting

and current knowledge of the species’ distributions

(figures 3-9). Continuing surveys for caves and karst

invertebrates may result in an increase in the number of

karst fauna areas occupied by some species.

 

     In selecting karst fauna areas to be targeted for

recovery, priority should be given to those areas that

exhibit high species diversity and contain other rare or

listed species. This ecosystem-based approach to choosing

karst fauna areas for preservation should consider both the

listed species and other endemic species and may prevent

the need for listing additional species in the future.

Numerous rare species inhabit the same karst terrains in

Travis and Williamson counties. For example, Travis County

contains at least 32 rare karst species, 25 of which are

not federally-listed and some of which are undescribed

(Elliott 1992a). Many of those rare species were

taxonomically described in 1992 and some may become

candidates for the endangered species list, especially

those found in urbanizing areas. Therefore, judicious

selection of karst areas for preservation will aid in the

recovery of the listed species, help protect other

important elements of the karst ecosystem in Travis and

Williamson counties, and possibly prevent the need to list

other species in the future.

 

     Within each karst fauna region, karst fauna areas that

are targeted for recovery should be located as far apart as

possible, to protect against catastrophic loss and to

preserve genetic diversity within each species. Other

factors to consider when selecting karst fauna areas

include ability to ensure long-term protection, current

level of habitat disturbance, past and present land use,

presence of other rare or candidate species, ease of

protection (landowner cooperation), and, where applicable,

importance to the regional groundwater system.

 

     Where the listed species’ ranges overlap, particularly

on the Jollyville Plateau, more than one of the species may

occur in a given karst fauna area. For example, six of the

seven species occur in the Jollyville Plateau karst fauna

region, and three of the species’ entire ranges are in the

vicinity of the RM 2222/RM 620 intersection.

 

     Two areas within the Jollyville Plateau karst fauna

region that are already known to be very important to the

survival and recovery of several of the listed species

represent two distinct karst fauna areas and should be

targeted for protection. One of these areas, the Tooth

Cave karst fauna area, harbors six of the seven listed

species and one of the most diverse cave biotas in the

southwestern United States. The other area, the Stovepipe

Cave karst fauna area, contains five of the listed species.

Preservation of these two karst fauna areas would protect

100% of the range of two of the listed invertebrates

(Texamaurops reddelli and Tartarocreagris texana) and 67%

of the range of Neoleptoneta myopica. A suggested karst

fauna area for the Stovepipe Cave cluster is presented in

Figure 11.

 

     The second major step in recovery is to determine the

appropriate size and configuration of each of the karst

fauna areas targeted for recovery. To be considered

“protected”, a karst fauna area should contain a large

enough expanse of contiguous karst and surface area to

maintain the integrity of the karst ecosystem on which each

species depends. The size and configuration of each karst

fauna area should be adequate to maintain moist, humid

conditions, air flow, and stable temperatures in the air-

filled voids; maintain an adequate nutrient supply; prevent

contamination of surface and groundwater entering the

ecosystem; prevent or control the invasion of exotic

species, such as fire ants; and allow for movement of the

karst fauna and nutrients through the interstitium between

karst features.

 

     Several factors should be considered in determining

the size and configuration of karst fauna areas, including

the pattern and direction of groundwater movement,

direction and area of surface and subsurface drainage,

preservation of the surface community above and surrounding

the cave, and the presence of other caves or karst

features. In general, land bounded by the contour interval

at the cave floor is the area within which contaminants

moving over the surface or through the karst could move

toward the cave. Outside this contour, contaminants would

move away from the cave. A hydrogeologic investigation may

be useful in determining the surface and subsurface

drainage basin of the karst ecosystem, local recharge

areas, and direction of groundwater movement. This

information would be used to determine the area necessary

to protect the karst fauna area’s water supply. The amount

of surface area necessary to maintain the ecological

processes of the karst ecosystem should also be considered

and may be larger than the surface drainage area of the

cave. Other nearby karst features, which may affect the

moisture, air flow, temperature, and nutrient regimes and

allow movement of karst fauna through the interstitium,

should be included in each karst fauna area. Major sources

of nutrient input and areas necessary to sustain these

sources should be considered. Recent research as part of

the LakeLine Mall HCP may provide some information on the

importance of the surface area surrounding karst features

in providing nutrients to the cave ecosystem. Wherever

possible, karst fauna areas should connect to larger

undeveloped lands that are not slated for future

development, in order to ensure adequate nutrient flow into

the karst ecosystem and to help combat the fire ant threat.

 

     Setting aside large preserves may help to control fire

ants. Porter et al. (1991) state that control of fire ants

in large areas (>5 hectares) (12 acres) may be more

effective than in smaller areas since multiple queen fire

ant colonies reproduce primarily by “budding” (whereby

queens and workers branch off from the main colony and form

new sister colonies) . Budding is a relatively slow

process, and fire ants may not as quickly reinvade areas

where they have, been eliminated with this method. Native

ant communities may also require large, undisturbed areas

to help them combat the fire ant threat.

 

     Research in some areas, including the fire ant’s

native range, indicates that fire ants are associated with

open habitats disturbed as a result of human activity (such

as old fields, lawns, roadsides, ponds, and other open,

sunny habitats) but are absent or rare in late succession

or climax communities such as mature forest (Tschinkel

1986) . Although this association is not apparent in all

areas, especially in central Texas (Porter et al. 1988,

1991), maintaining native vegetation communities may help

sustain native ant populations and further deter fire ant

infestations. Chemical control methods have some

effectiveness in controlling fire ants, but the effect of

these agents on non-target species (including the listed

invertebrates) is unclear and, if used indiscriminately,

may also eliminate native ant populations. Ideally,

intensive fire ant control should be implemented along

disturbed areas on the periphery of large preserves. This

type of fire ant control, combined with safer but more

labor intensive methods (such as hot water applied mound-

by-mound) in the vicinity of cave entrances, should help

sustain the native ant fauna and reduce the need to

implement intensive control within the preserve.

 

     Due to the multiplicity of factors to consider when

determining the size and configuration of the karst fauna

areas, the design of each karst fauna area will be site-

specific. Although many factors (such as the species’

ecological requirements, distribution in the interstitium,

and the amount of surface area necessary to sustain

nutrient flow) are unknown, the amount of time and

financial expense to acquire this knowledge would preclude

achieving the recovery objective if karst fauna area

protection were delayed pending additional research in

these areas. To compensate for this lack of knowledge,

delineation of the karst fauna areas should be based on

protecting the integrity of the karst terrain supporting

the listed species and a conservative interpretation of the

available biological and hydrogeological information.

 

     Another step needed to accomplish recovery is to

provide long-term protection for the targeted karst fauna

areas. Methods could include land acquisition,

conservation easements, and cooperative agreements with

private landowners and public entities.

 

     Implementation of appropriate conservation and

management measures for each targeted karst fauna area is

also needed for recovery. This may include control of fire

ants and other threats; management of surface plant and

animal communities; maintaining surface and groundwater

quality and quantity; preventing vandalism, dumping, and

unauthorized human visitation; and other actions deemed

necessary. Additional studies will be necessary to monitor

the effects of each management program, refine management

techniques as appropriate, and determine any other steps

necessary to fully recover the species.

 

     Regardless of whether a listed species occurs in a

karst ecosystem that is in or outside of a karst fauna area

targeted for protection, the listed species are still

protected under the Endangered Species Act (Act) unless

authorization for incidental “take” has been obtained under

Section 7 or Section 10 of the Act.

 

II. RECOVERY

    

A.   OBJECTIVE AND CRITERIA <snip>

 

B.   RECOVERY OUTLINE <snip>

 

C.   NARRATIVE OUTLINE FOR RECOVERY ACTIONS <snip>

 

D.D. REFERENCES CITED

 

Barr, T.C., Jr. 1968. Cave ecology and the evolution of

     troglobites. Evolutionary Biol., 2: 35-102.

 

Barr, T.C., Jr. 1974a. Revision of Rhadine LeConte

     (Coleoptera, Carabidae). I. The subterranean group.

     Amer. Mus. Novitates, No. 2539. 30 pp.

 

Barr, T.C., Jr. 1974b. The eyeless beetles of the genus

     Arianops Brendel (Coleoptera, Pselaphidae) . Bull.

     Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 154: 1-52.

 

Barr, T.C., Jr. and H.R. Steeves, Jr. 1963. Texamaurops,

     a new genus of pselaphids from caves in Central Texas

     (Coleoptera: Pselaphidae). Coleopterists’ Bull., 17:

     117-120.

 

Biological Advisory Team (BAT) 1990. Comprehensive

     report of the Biological Advisory Team. Austin,

     Texas. 80 pp.

 

Brignoli, P.M. 1972. Some cavernicolous spiders from

     Mexico (Araneae). Accad. Naz. Lincei, Probl. Att.

     Sci. Cult., 171(1): 129-155.

 

Brignoli, P.M. 1977. Spiders from Mexico. III. A new

     leptonetid from Oaxaca (Araneae, Leptonetidae)

     Accad. Naz. Lincei, Probl. Att. Sci. Cult., 171(3):

     213-218.

 

Bull, E., and R.W. Mitchell. 1972. Temperature and

     relative humidity responses of two Texas cave adapted

     millipedes, Cambala speobia (Cambalida: Cambalidae)

     and Speodesmus bicornourus (Polydesmida:

     Vanhoeffeniidae). Southwestern Nat., 4: 365-393.

 

Chandler, D.S. 1992. The Pselaphidae of Texas caves

     (Coleoptera). Speleol. Monogr., 3. Texas Mem. Mus.,

     Univ. Texas at Austin.

 

Christiansen, K., and D. Culver. 1969. Geographical

     variation and evolution in Pseudosinella violenta

     (Folsum) . Evolution, 23(4): 602-621.

 

Curcic, B.P.M. 1984. A revision of some North American

     species of Microcreagris Balzan, 1982. (Arachnida:

     Pseudoscorpiones: Neobisiidae). Bull. British

     Arachnol. Soc. 6: 149-166.

 

Curcic, B.P.M. 1989. Further revision of some North

     American false scorpions originally assigned to

     Microcreagris Balzan (Pseudoscorpiones, Neobisiidae).

     J. Arachnol. 17: 351-362.

 

Elliott, W.R. 1976. Morphometrics and evolution of

     Speodesmus in Central Texas caves (Diplopoda,

     Polydesmida). Ph.D. dissertation, Texas Tech Univ.

     155 pp.

 

Elliott, W.R. 1978a. The cave fauna of Texas. Pp. 59-63

     in Fieseler, R.G., J. Jasek, and M. Jasek (eds.), An

     introduction to the caves of Texas. Natl. Speleol.

     Soc. Convention Guidebook, 19 pp.

 

Elliott, W.R. 1978b. The New Melones cave harvestman

     transplant. Report to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,

     Sacramento, California. 62 pp.

 

Elliott, W.R. 1991a. Preliminary ecological monitoring at

     LakeLine Cave, 9 May, 1991. Report to Melvin Simon &

     Associates, Indianapolis. 4 pp.

 

Elliott, W.R. 1991b. Ecological monitoring at LakeLine

     Cave, 21 June, 1991. Report to Melvin Simon &

     Associates, Indianapolis. 5 pp.

 

Elliott, W.R. 1991c. Ecological monitoring at LakeLine

     Cave, 6 August, 1991. Report to Melvin Simon & Associates, Indianapolis. 9 pp.

 

Elliott, W.R. 1991d. Ecological monitoring at LakeLine

     Cave, 24 September, 1991. Report to Melvin Simon &

     Associates, Indianapolis. 6 pp.

 

Elliott, W.R. 1991e. Ecological monitoring at LakeLine

     Cave and Testudo Tube, 24 September, 1991. Report to

     Melvin Simon & Associates, Indianapolis. 6 pp.

 

Elliott, W.R. 1991f. Ecological monitoring at LakeLine

     Cave, 30 October & 29 November, 1991. Report to

     Melvin Simon & Associates, Indianapolis. 7 pp.

 

Elliott, W.R. 1992a. Fire ants and endangered cave

     invertebrates: A control and ecological study. Draft

     report to Texas Parks and Wildlife Dept. 30 pp.

 

Elliott, W.R. 1992b. Ecological studies of three caves in

     Williamson County, Texas: June, 1992. Report to

     Melvin Simon & Associates, U.S. Fish and Wildlife

     Service, and Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. 2 pp.

 

Elliott, W.R. 1992c. Ecological studies of three caves in

     Williamson County, Texas: July, 1992. Report to

     Melvin Simon & Associates, U.S. Fish and Wildlife

     Service, and Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. 3 pp.

 

Elliott, W.R. 1992d. Ecological studies of three caves in

     Williamson County, Texas: August, 1992. Report to

     Melvin Simon & Associates, U.S. Fish and Wildlife

     Service, and Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. 5 pp.

 

Elliott, W.R. 1992e. Ecological studies of three caves in

     Williamson County, Texas: September, 1992. Report to

     Melvin Simon & Associates, U.S. Fish and Wildlife

     Service, and Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. 3 pp.

 

Elliott, W.R. In press. Cave fauna conservation in Texas.

     Proc. Natl. Cave Mgm. Symp., Bowling Green, Kentucky.

     Amer. Cave Consv. Assoc.

 

Elliott, W.R., and R.W. Mitchell. 1973. Temperature

     preference responses of some aquatic, cave-adapted

     crustaceans from Central Texas and Northeastern

     Mexico. Intl. J. Speleol., 5: 171-189.

 

Elliott, W.R., and J.R. Reddell. 1989. The status and

     range of five endangered arthropods from caves in the

     Austin, Texas, region. A report on a study supported

     by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and the

     Texas Nature Conservancy for the Austin Regional

     Habitat Conservation Plan. 100 pp.

 

Gertsch, W.J. 1974. The spider family Leptonetidae in

     North America. J. Arachnol., 1: 145-203.

 

Goodnight, C.J., and M.L. Goodnight. 1942. New

     Phalangodidae (Phalangida) from the United States.

     Amer. Mus. Novitates, 1188: 1-18.

 

Goodnight, C.J., and M.L. Goodnight. 1967. Opilionida

     from Texas caves (Opiliones, Phalangodidae). Amer.

     Mus. Novitates, No. 2301. 8 pp.

 

Holsinger, J.R. 1967. Systematics, speciation, and

     distribution of the subterranean amphipod genus

     Stygonectes (Gammaridae). Bull. U.S. Natl. Mus.,

     259. 176 pp.

 

Horizon Environmental Services, Inc. 1991a. Karst

     invertebrate survey of the LakeLine Mall site,

     Williamson County, Texas. Prepared for Melvin Simon

     & Associates, Inc.

 

Horizon Environmental Services, Inc. 1991b. Habitat

     Conservation Plan for LakeLine Mall, Williamson

     County, Texas. Submitted to the U.S. Fish and

     Wildlife Service.

 

Howarth, F.G. 1983. Ecology of cave arthropods. Ann.

     Rev. Entomol., 28: 365-389.

 

Maguire, B., Jr. 1960. Monodella texana n.sp., an

     extension of the crustacean order Thermosbaenacea to

     the Western Hemisphere. Crustaceana, 9: 149-154.

 

May, R.M. 1992. How many species inhabit the Earth? Sci.

     American, 267: 42-48.

 

Mitchell, R.W. 1968a. Distribution and dispersion of the

     troglobitic carabid beetle Rhadine subterranea. Intl.

     J. Speleol., 3: 271-288.

 

Mitchell, R.W. 1968b. Food and feeding habits of the

     troglobitic carabid beetle Rhadine subterranea. Intl.

     J. Speleol., 3: 249-270.

 

Mitchell, R.W. 1968c. Preference responses and tolerances

     of the troglobitic carabid beetle, Rhadine

     subterranea. Intl. J. Speleol., 3: 289-304.

 

Mitchell, R.W., and J.R. Reddell. 1971. The invertebrate

     fauna of Texas caves. Pages 35-40 in E.L. Lundelius,

     Jr., and B.H. Slaughter, (eds.) Natural History of

     Texas Caves. Gulf Natural History Publishing.

     Dallas, Texas.

 

Muchmore, W.B. 1969. New species and records of

     cavernicolous pseudoscorpions of the genus

     Microcreagris (Arachnida, Chelonethida, Neobisiidae,

     Ideobisiinae). Amer. Mus. Novitates, No. 2932. 21

     pp.

 

Muchmore, W.B. 1992. Cavernicolous pseudoscorpions from

     Texas and New Mexico (Arachnida: Pseudoscorpionida)

     Speleol. Monogr., 3. Texas Mem. Mus., Univ. Texas at

     Austin.

 

Park, O. 1960. Cavernicolous pselaphid beetles of the

     United States. Amer. Midl. Nat., 64(1): 66-104.

 

Platnick, N.I. 1986. On the tibial and patellar glands,

     relationships, and American genera of the spider

     family Leptonetidae (Arachnida, Araneae). Amer. Mus.

     Novit., 2855. 16 pp.

 

Porter, S.D., B. Van Eimeren, and L.E. Gilbert. 1988.

     Invasion of red imported fire ants (Hymenoptera:

     Formicidae): Microgeography of competitive

     replacement. Ann. Ent. Soc of America 81(6): 913-918.

 

Porter, S.D., A. Bhatkar, R. Mulder, S.B. Vinson, and D.J.

     Clair. 1991. Distribution and density of polygyne

     fire ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) in Texas. J.

     Econom. Entomol. (84)3: 866-874.

 

Porter, S.D. and D.A. Savignano. 1990. Invasion of

     polygyne fire ants decimates native ants and disrupts

     arthropod community. Ecology 71(6): 2095-2106.

 

Reddell, J.R. 1965. A checklist of the cave fauna of

     Texas. I. The invertebrata (exclusive of Insecta).

     Texas J. Sci., 17: 143-187.

 

Reddell, J.R. 1966. A checklist of the cave fauna of

     Texas. II. Insecta. Texas J. Sci., 18: 25-56.

 

Reddell, J.R. 1967. A checklist of the cave fauna of

     Texas. III. Vertebrata. Texas J. Sci., 19: 184-

     226.

 

Reddell, J.R. 1970a. A checklist of the cave fauna of

     Texas. IV. Additional records of Invertebrata

     (exclusive of Insecta). Texas J. Sci., 21: 389-415.

 

Reddell, J.R. 1970b. A checklist of the cave fauna of

     Texas. V. Additional records of Insecta. Texas J.

     Sci., 22: 47-65.

 

Reddell, J.R. 1970c. A checklist of the cave fauna of

     Texas. VI. Additional records of Vertebrata. Texas

     J. Sci., 21: 139-158.

 

Reddell, J.R. 1989. Austin Outer Parkway, State Highway

     45, Segments 3 and 4, Environmental Impact on Cave

     Fauna. Report prepared for Texas Department of

     Highways and Public Transportation.

    

Reddell, J.R. 1991. Further study of the status and range

     of endangered arthropods from caves in the Austin,

     Texas, region. Draft Section 6 report on a study for

     Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and U.S. Fish and

     Wildlife Service. iv + 178 pp.

 

Reddell, J.R., and W.R. Elliott. 1991. Distribution of

     endangered karst invertebrates in the Georgetown Area,

     Williamson County, Texas. A report on a study for the

     City of Georgetown. 64 pp.

 

Reddell, J.R., and R. Finch. 1963. The caves of

     Williamson County. Texas Speleol. Survey, 2(1): 1-61.

 

Ubick, D., and T.S. Briggs. 1992. The harvestman family

     Phalangodidae. 3. Revision of Texella Goodnight and

     Goodnight (Opiliones Laniatores). Speleol. Monogr.,

     3. Texas Mem. Mus., Univ. Texas at Austin.

 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1991. Black-capped Vireo

     (Vireo atricapillus) Recovery Plan. Austin, Texas.

     pp. vi + 74.

 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1992. Golden-cheeked

     Warbler (Dendroica chrysoparia) Recovery Plan.

     Albuquerque, New Mexico. 88 pp.

 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. Endangered and

     threatened wildlife and plants: Coffin Cave mold

     beetle (Batrisodes texanus) and the Bone Cave

     harvestman (Texella reyesi) determined to be

     endangered. FR 58 43818-43820.

 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1994. Endangered and

     threatened wildlife and plants; 90-day finding on a

     petition to delist seven Texas karst invertebrates.

 

Veni & Associates. 1988a. Hydrogeologic investigation of

     the Jollyville Plateau karst, Travis County, Texas.

     Report prepared for Parke Investors Ltd., 620

     Investors Ltd., and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

 

Veni & Associates. 1988b. Hydrogeologic and biologic

     investigation of McDonald Cave, Travis County, Texas.

     Report prepared for Murfee Engineering Co., Austin,

     Texas.

 

Veni & Associates. 1992. Geologic controls on cave

     development and the distribution of cave fauna in the

     Austin, Texas, region. Prepared for U.S. Fish and

     Wildlife Service. v + 77 pp.

 

Vinther, E.C., and A.T. Jackson. 1948. Williamson County.

     pp. 62-64 in The Caves off Texas. Natl. Speleol. Soc.,

     Bull. 10.

 

Vinson, S.B. and A.A. Sorensen. 1986. Imported fire ants:

     Life history and impact. Texas Department of

     Agriculture and Texas A&M University. 28pp.

 

III. RECOVERY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE <snip>

 


Appendix A. Glossary

 

Aedeagus - In male insects, the mating organ which is

everted from the posterior.

 

Apical -  At the tip of a structure (see proximal).

 

Apophysis - In arthropods, a chitinous ingrowth of the

exoskeleton for muscle insertion.

 

Attenuated Elongated, especially appendages, antennae,

etc.

 

Biospeleology The study of cave life and its relations to

the surface and subsurface environment.

 

Book lungs Primitive breathing organs found in lower

arachnids such as scorpions and some spiders.

 

Borehole - In this work, a vertical hole drilled in bedrock

for sampling karst fauna. Referred to as “corehole” in

certain documents.

 

Carabid - Ground beetle, including Rhadine Persephone.

 

Carapace The upper exoskeleton of the thorax of an

arachnid.

 

Carinate Having a carina, or keel, running lengthwise

along an appendage.

 

Cavernicole A species occurring only in caves, not

necessarily eyeless and depigmented.

 

Chelae The pincerlike claw of a scorpion’s or

pseudoscorpion’ s pedipalp.

 

Chelicerae The first pair of appendages in an arachnid in

front of the mouth, adapted for grasping and cutting up

food; usually claw-like.

 

Collembolans (springtails) - Minute insects that have a

forked structure on the abdomen that enables them to jump.

Usually common and abundant. Feed on plant material, fungi,

bacteria, arthropod feces, pollen, algae, and/or other food

sources.

 

Dark zone The permanently dark zone of the deep cave

environment where no light penetrates, as opposed to

twilight zone.

 

DNA (Deoxyribonucleic acid) - the substance that carries

the cell’s genetic code in the nucleus.

 

Elytra In beetles, the hardened front wings which serve

as covers to protect the delicate hind wings when the

insect is not flying.

 

Endemism, endemic Indigenous or native to a restricted

area.

 

Epigean Living on the surface, as opposed to living below

the surface (hypogean).

 

Eye mound In harvestmen, the conical projection on the

dorsum (upper side) of the body bearing the two eyes.

 

Facet An individual visual organ in the compound eye of

an insect.

 

Feebly arcuate - slightly arched.

 

Femur The third joint of an arachnid appendage.

 

Foveae - Small pits on the surface of the arthropod body.

 

Genital operculum - In harvestmen, a flap covering the

genital opening.

 

Holotype The primary type specimen selected as

representative of a species by a taxonomist who describes

the species. A holotype must be housed in a scientific

collection that is available for study by qualified

scientists.

 

Hydrogeology The study of water dynamics in relation to

geology, especially groundwater.

 

Infragroup - A collection of species within a subgroup (see

below) that share similar physical and/or genetic traits.

The smallest division in a hierarchical system of grouping

species based on degrees of relatedness.

 

Karst A terrain characterized by landforms and subsurface

features, such as sinkholes and caves, that are produced by

solution of bedrock (usually limestone or gypsum) . Karst

areas commonly have few surface streams; most water moves

through cavernous openings underground.

 

Metathoracic wings The hind wings of an insect.

 

Metatibial pencil of setae A small brush of setae (hairs)

found on the tibia of the third leg.

 

Microarthropod A tiny arthropod, such as a springtail,

mite, etc.

 

Monophyletic assemblage A group of species that has

descended from a common ancestor.

 

Niche - The role a species plays within its community or

ecosystem.

 

Obsolescent eyes Eyes that are nearly absent; only a

small remnant may remain.

 

Ocular knobs - Eye remnants (bumps) that would normally

bear a compound eye.

 

Ovipositor cuticle The surface of the female ovipositor

(an organ for laying eggs in the soil).

 

Palpal Pertaining to the pedipalps.

 

Parastylar - On either side of the stylus, part of the

harvestman’s penis.

 

Paratopotype — A type specimen selected by a taxonomist as

a representative example of a species and which comes from

the original type locality which he/she designates.

 

Paratype A secondary type specimen selected by a

taxonomist to represent a species being described; not

necessarily of the same sex as the holotype or from the

type locality.

 

Pedipalps The second pair of appendages in arachnids, the

bases of which provide a jaw-like function; the pedipalps

provide a grasping or pinching function for handling food.

 

Phalangodid - Daddy longlegs harvestman, including Texella

reddelli and Texella reyesi.

 

Polymorphic Exhibiting much physical variation among

individuals.

 

Postopercular process In some harvestmen, a projection

posterior to the genital operculum.

 

Pronotum In insects, the dorsal (upper) side of the

anterior (front) part of the thorax. In Rhadine beetles,

the pronotum is elongated like a neck.

 

Protuberance - A knob or prominence.

 

Proximal At the base of a structure (see apical)

 

Pselaphid - Short winged mold beetle, including Texamaurops

reddelli and Batrisodes texanus

 

Psocid - Small, soft-bodied insect, usually less than 6 mm

long.

 

Punctulate - Pitted.

 

Retrolateral On the backside of an appendage.

 

Robust - Relatively thick-bodied, compared to others in the

same group (opposite of slender, below)

 

Rugosity A rough or scaly quality to the exoskeleton.

 

Scute An exoskeletal plate on the dorsal (upper) side of

a harvestman’s body.

 

Setae - Hairs.

 

Slender - Relatively thin-bodied, compared to others in the

same group (opposite of robust, above)

 

Spatulate Flattened like a spatula.

 

Species group - A collection of species that share similar

physical and/or genetic traits. The highest division in a

hierarchical system of grouping species based on degrees of

relatedness.

 

Spermathecae Sacs used for the storage of sperm in female

pseudoscorpions and other invertebrates.

 

Stylus The long, thin part of a harvestman’s penis.

 

Subcontiguous Not quite touching.

 

Subgroup - A collection of species within a species group

(see above) that share similar physical and/or genetic

traits. An intermediate division in a hierarchical system

of grouping species based on degrees of relatedness.

 

Speleology— The scientific study and exploration of caves.

 

Sympatric Two species within the same genus occurring in

the same place.

 

Tarsomeres - The segments at the end of an arthropod leg.

 

Taxonomy The classification and nomenclature of living

things, also referred to as “systematics”. A taxonomist

publishes species descriptions and/or revisions in

scientific journals, based on studies of the anatomy,

biology, or genetics of a certain taxon (group).

 

Tergal chaetotaxy The pattern of setae (hair-like

structures) on the dorsal (upper) plates of an arthropod.

 

Tergite The dorsal (upper) plate of an arthropod’s

abdominal segment.

 

Tibia The fourth joint of an arthropod leg.

 

Transverse impression - A crease that runs from side to

side.

 

Trochanter - In arthropods, the second joint of the leg.

 

Troglobite An animal that completes its lifecycle and

spends its entire life in openings underground (such as

caves) usually with small or absent eyes, attenuated

appendages, and other adaptations to the subsurface

environment.

 

Troglomorphy, troglomorphism, troglomophic The physical

characteristics of a troglobite, typified by eyelessness,

attenuated appendages, depigmentation, delicate integument

or exoskeleton, and greater development of some sensory

organs.

 

Troglophile An animal that spends most of its life in

openings underground, but may also be found above ground;

not usually eyeless or depigmented.

 

Trogloxene A cave-dwelling animal that leaves the cave on

a regular basis to feed, such as bats and cave crickets.

 

Tubercle - A small, rounded nodule or mound.

 

Twilight zone The cave zone in which light from the

entrance is still visible.

 

Vestigial Having only a vestige, or a remnant, of a

structure left.

 

Appendix B. Individuals and Agencies Providing Comments on

the Draft Recovery Plan for Endangered Karst Invertebrates

in Travis and Williamson Counties, Texas. <snip>

 

Appendix C. Simmary of Comments Received on the Draft

Recovery Plan for Endangered Karst Invertebrates in Travis

and Williamson Counties, Texas. <snip>

  

 


27 Jan 2007  Mike Quinn  mike.quinn@tpwd.state.tx.us / Texas Entomology