丁香属（Syringa L.）的分类学修订

丁香属隶属于木犀科，分布于东南欧和东亚至喜马拉雅地区，我国是丁香属的现代分布中心。《中国植物志》（61卷，1992）记录了我国野生丁香种类16种;《Flora of China》（15卷，1996）记录了中国原产丁香种类16种，并认为全世界大约有20种。丁香属属下分类等级划分分歧较大，很多种的划分也存在争议。花叶丁香、四川丁香等种类是根据栽培植物描述的，没有指定模式标本，给分类处理带来了一定困难。另外，丁香属很多分类群的性状变异非常复杂，仅根据有限的标本很难做出合理的分类处理。本研究通过广泛查阅文献和标本，同时进行野外居群取样和性状观察，对各类群的性状在居群内和居群间的变异进行统计学分析，判断其分类价值，并运用多变量分析的方法，为各类群的合理划分提供依据。结合性状分析和地理分布等证据，做出分类处理。 作者查阅了国内外16个标本馆的近2000份标本，其中模式标本约70份。对我国12个省市的40余个居群进行了取样和观察，采集标本500余份，涉及了《中国植物志》61卷收录的除了藏南丁香以外的所有类群。通过对9个复合体的40余个性状在居群内和居群间的变异进行统计分析，发现叶片类型、叶柄长度、花序着生类型、花冠大小、花丝长度、花药颜色在不同类群间差异明显，可以用作划分种的依据;叶片形状、叶片毛被、花序轴毛被、花冠管形状等性状在有些复合体内的居群间呈现连续的变异，只能用作种下等级（亚种）的划分;叶片大小、花序轴形状、花药着生在花冠的位置、蒴果是否被皮孔等性状在不同复合体的居群间呈现间断或连续的变异，视不同情况可以用作种间或种下等级的划分依据，或作种内变异处理;而叶脉、花色、花萼齿裂、花冠裂片形状等性状在居群间差异不大，不适合用作分类依据。 在性状分析和多变量分析的基础上，本文将丁香属划分为2组2系12种13亚种，其中短花冠管组有1种3亚种;长花冠管组的顶生花序系有5种5亚种，侧生花序系有6种5亚种，并指定了各组和系的模式种;编制了属下各组、系、种和亚种划分的检索表，对12种13亚种进行了形态描述、标本引证，给出了地理分布图和生境，并提出了分类处理依据。文中对巧玲花、皱叶丁香、红丁香和云南丁香等复合体内的一些分类群进行了归并，做出4个新组合：S. pubescens ‘Meyer’、S. villosa subsp. wolfii、S. yunnanensis subsp. sweginzowii和S. yunnanensis subsp. tomentella，处理了11个新异名（S. fauriei H. Lév.、S. julianae C. K. Schneid.、S. meyeri var. spontanea M. C. Chang、S. pinetorum W. W. Sm.、S. wardii W. W. Sm.、S. oblata var. donaldii R. B. Clark et J. L. Fiala、S. afghanica C. K. Schneid.、S. protolaciniata P. S. Green et M. C. Chang、S. tibetica P. Y. Bai、S. reflexa C. K. Schneid. 、S. wilsonii C. K. Schneid.）。作者指定了3种4亚种(S. reticulata subsp. reticulata、 S. reticulata subsp. amurensis、S. pubescens subsp. microphylla、S. oblata subsp. dilatata的后选模式，并对其它10个名称指定了后选模式。文中还提出了分类处理原则，对我国丁 香属的分布及各地方植物志的记载进行了评述，并对丁香属的分布格局提出了作者的看法。 作者还对13个分类群的16号材料进行了染色体观察，发现除了毛丁香有染色体2n=48外，其它均为2n=46，其中朝阳丁香的染色体数目为首次报道。对小叶巧玲花不同异名（包括小叶蓝丁香、小叶巧玲花与小叶蓝丁香的杂交种）的材料进行染色体观察时，发现它们之间差异很小，进一步佐证了作者将其合并的合理性。另外野生的花叶丁香（华丁香）与栽培的花叶丁香在染色体数目上也无差异，支持了作者认为二者为同物异名的观点。

An ecological characterization of the Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary Region: oceanographic, biogeographic, and contaminants assessment

The mission of NOAA’s National Marine Sanctuary Program (NMSP) is to serve as the trustee for a system of marine protected areas, to conserve, protect, and enhance their biodiversity, ecological integrity, and cultural legacy while facilitating compatible uses. Since 1972, thirteen National Marine Sanctuaries, representing a wide variety of ocean environments, have been established, each with management goals tuned to their unique diversity. Extending from Cape Ann to Cape Cod across the mouth of Massachusetts Bay, Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary (NMS) encompasses 2,181 square kilometers of highly productive, diverse, and culturally unique Federal waters. As a result of its varied seafloor topography, oceanographic conditions, and high primary productivity, Stellwagen Bank NMS is utilized by diverse assemblages of seabirds, marine mammals, invertebrates, and fish species, as well as containing a number of maritime heritage resources. Furthermore, it is a region of cultural significance, highlighted by the recent discovery of several historic shipwrecks. Officially designated in 1992, Stellwagen Bank became the Nation’s twelfth National Marine Sanctuary in order to protect these and other unique biological, geological, oceanographic, and cultural features of the region. The Stellwagen Bank NMS is in the midst of its first management plan review since designation. The management plan review process, required by law, is designed to evaluate, enhance, and guide the development of future research efforts, education and outreach, and the management approaches used by Sanctuaries. Given the ecological and physical complexity of Stellwagen Bank NMS, burgeoning anthropogenic impacts to the region, and competing human and biological uses, the review process was challenged to assimilate and analyze the wealth of existing scientific knowledge in a framework which could enhance management decision-making. Unquestionably, the Gulf of Maine, Massachusetts Bay, and Stellwagen Bank-proper are extremely well studied systems, and in many regards, the scientific information available greatly exceeds that which is available for other Sanctuaries. However, the propensity of scientific information reinforces the need to utilize a comprehensive analytical approach to synthesize and explore linkages between disparate information on physical, biological, and chemical processes, while identifying topics needing further study. Given this requirement, a partnership was established between NOAA’s National Marine Sanctuary Program (NMSP) and the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS) so as to leverage existing NOAA technical expertise to assist the Sanctuary in developing additional ecological assessment products which would benefit the management plan review process.

A biogeographic assessment of the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary: a review of boundary expansion concepts for NOAA’s National Marine Sanctuary Program

The priority management goal of the National Marine Sanctuaries Program (NMSP) is to protect marine ecosystems and biodiversity. This goal requires an understanding of broad-scale ecological relationships and linkages between marine resources and physical oceanography to support an ecosystem management approach. The Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary (CINMS) is currently reviewing its management plan and investigating boundary expansion. A management plan study area (henceforth, Study Area) was described that extends from the current boundary north to the mainland, and extends north to Point Sal and south to Point Dume. Six additional boundary concepts were developed that vary in area and include the majority of the Study Area. The NMSP and CINMS partnered with NOAA’s National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science Biogeography Team to conduct a biogeographic assessment to characterize marine resources and oceanographic patterns within and adjacent to the sanctuary. This assessment includes a suite of quantitative spatial and statistical analyses that characterize biological and oceanographic patterns in the marine region from Point Sal to the U.S.-Mexico border. These data were analyzed using an index which evaluates an ecological “cost-benefit” within the proposed boundary concepts and the Study Area. The sanctuary resides in a dynamic setting where two oceanographic regimes meet. Cold northern waters mix with warm southern waters around the Channel Islands creating an area of transition that strongly influences the regions oceanography. In turn, these processes drive the biological distributions within the region. This assessment analyzes bathymetry, benthic substrate, bathymetric life-zones, sea surface temperature, primary production, currents, submerged aquatic vegetation, and kelp in the context of broad-scale patterns and relative to the proposed boundary concepts and the Study Area. Boundary cost-benefit results for these parameters were variable due to their dynamic nature; however, when analyzed in composite the Study Area and Boundary Concept 2 were considered the most favorable. Biological data were collected from numerous resource agencies and university scientists for this assessment. Fish and invertebrate trawl data were used to characterize community structure. Habitat suitability models were developed for 15 species of macroinvertebrates and 11 species of fish that have significant ecological, commercial, or recreational importance in the region and general patterns of ichthyoplankton distribution are described. Six surveys of ship and plane at-sea surveys were used to model marine bird diversity from Point Arena to the U.S.-Mexico border. Additional surveys were utilized to estimate density and colony counts for nine bird species. Critical habitat for western snowy plover and the location of California least tern breeding pairs were also analyzed. At-sea surveys were also used to describe the distribution of 14 species of cetaceans and five species of pinnipeds. Boundary concept cost-benefit indices revealed that Boundary Concept 2 and the Study Area were most favorable for the majority of the species-specific analyses. Boundary Concept 3 was most favorable for bird diversity across the region. Inadequate spatial resolution for fish and invertebrate community data and incompatible sampling effort information for bird and mammal data precluded boundary cost-benefit analysis.

Survey and impact assessment of derelict fish traps in St. Thomas and St. John, U.S. Virgin Islands

Since 2001, NOAA National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS), Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment’s (CCMA) Biogeography Branch (BB) has been working with federal and territorial partners to characterize, monitor, and assess the status of the marine environment across the U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI). At the request of the St. Thomas Fisherman’s Association (STFA) and NOAA Marine Debris Program, CCMA BB developed new partnerships and novel technologies to scientifically assess the threat from derelict fish traps (DFTs). Traps are the predominant gear used for finfish and lobster harvesting in St. Thomas and St. John. Natural phenomena (ground swells, hurricanes) and increasing competition for space by numerous user groups have generated concern about increasing trap loss and the possible ecological, as well as economic, ramifications. Prior to this study, there was a general lack of knowledge regarding derelict fish traps in the Caribbean. No spatially explicit information existed regarding fishing effort, abundance and distribution of derelict traps, the rate at which active traps become derelict, or areas that are prone to dereliction. Furthermore, there was only limited information regarding the impacts of derelict traps on natural resources including ghost fishing. This research identified two groups of fishing communities in the region: commercial fishing that is most active in deeper waters (30 m and greater) and an unknown number of unlicensed subsistence and or commercial fishers that fish closer to shore in shallower waters (30 m and less). In the commercial fishery there are an estimated 6,500 active traps (fish and lobster combined). Of those traps, nearly 8% (514) were reported lost during the 2008-2010 period. Causes of loss/dereliction include: movement of the traps or loss of trap markers due to entanglement of lines by passing vessels; theft; severe weather events (storms, large ground swells); intentional disposal by fishermen; traps becoming caught on various bottom structures (natural substrates, wrecks, etc.); and human error.