Comparing the use of pitfall drift fences and cover boards for sampling the threatened sand skink (Neoseps reynoldsi)

Herpetological Review

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 149-151

  Sutton, Phillip E ^a   Mushinsky, Henry R ^a,b   McCoy, Earl D ^a,b  

^a Department of Biology ^*  (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

NEOSEPS REYNOLDSI;

EID: 0032733618     PISSN: 0018084X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. ABRAHAMSON, W. G., AND D. C. HARTNETT. 1990. Pine flatwoods and dry prairies. In R. L. Myers and J. J. Ewel (eds.), Ecosystems of Florida, pp. 103-149. University of Central Florida Press, Orlando.
2. ANDREWS, R. M. 1994. Activity and thermal biology of the sand-swimming skink Neoseps reynoldsi: diel and seasonal patterns. Copeia 1994:91-99.
3. CAMPBELL, H. W., AND S. P. CHRISTMAN. 1982a. The herpetological components of Florida sandhill and sand pine scrub associations. In N. J. Scott, Jr. (ed.), Herpetological Communities, pp. 163-171. Wildlife Research Report 13, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.
4. _, AND _. 1982b. Field techniques for herpetofaunal community analysis. In N. J. Scott, Jr. (ed.), Herpetological Communities, pp. 193-200. Wildlife Research Report 13, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.
5. CHRISTMAN, S. P. 1992. Threatened sand skink, Neoseps reynoldsi Stejneger. In P E. Moler (ed.), Rare and Endangered Biota of Florida, pp. 135-140. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.
6. COOPER, B. W. 1953. Notes on the life history of the lizard, Neoseps reynoldsi Stejneger. Quart. J. Florida Acad. Sci. 16:235-238.
7. FELLERS, G. M., AND C. A. DROST. 1994. Sampling with artificial cover. In W. R. Heyer et al. (eds.), Measuring and Monitoring Biological Diversity: Standard Methods for Amphibians, pp. 146-150. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.
8. GIBBONS, J. W., AND R. D. SEMLITSCH. 1981. Terrestrial drift fences with pitfall traps: an effective technique for sampling of animal populations. Brimleyana 7:1-16.
9. GRANT, B. W., A. D. TUCKER, J. E. LOVICH, A. M. MILLS, P. M. DIXON, AND J. W. GIBBONS. 1992. The use of coverboards in estimating patterns of rep-tile and amphibian biodiversity. In D. R. McCullough and R. H. Barret (eds.), Wildlife 2001 : Populations, pp. 379-403. Elsevier, New York.
10. MCCOY, E. D., AND H. R. MUSHINSKY. 1994. Effects of fragmentation on the richness of vertebrates in the Florida scrub habitat. Ecology 75:446-457.
11. _, P. E. SUTTON, AND H. R. MUSHINSKY. 1999. The role of guesswork in conserving the threatened sand skink. Conserv. Biol. 13:190-194.
12. MUSHINSKY, H. R., AND E. D. MCCOY. 1995. Vertebrate species composition of selected scrub islands on the Lake Wales Ridge of central Florida. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Nongame Wildlife Program, Tallahassee.
13. MYERS, C. W., AND S. R. TELFORD. 1965. Food of Neoseps, the Florida sand skink. Quart. J. Florida Acad. Sci. 28:190-194.
14. MYERS, R. L. 1990. Scrub and high pine. In R. L. Myers and J. J. Ewel (eds.), Ecosystems of Florida, pp. 150-193. University of Central Florida Press, Orlando.
15. TELFORD, S. R. 1959. A study of the sand skink, Neoseps reynoldsi Stejneger. Copeia 1959:110-119.
16. U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. 1993. Recovery plan for the sand skink and blue-tailed mole skink. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia.