|Scientific Name:||Gomphus consanguis|
|Species Authority:||Selys, 1879|
Gomphurus consanguis (Selys, 1879)
|Taxonomic Notes:||Transferred from the genus Gomphurus to Gomphus as the former is now a subgenus.|
|Red List Category & Criteria:||Endangered C2a(i) ver 3.1|
|Reviewer/s:||Donnelly, N., Suhling, F. & Clausnitzer, V. (Odontata Red List Authority)|
This species is known from only about 15 populations and most populations are apparently quite small (less than 50 adults). Of the known populations, one is in Georgia, two in Alabama, one in North Carolina, two to three in Tennessee, and nine to ten in Virginia (Roble 1997). Recent surveys in Virginia (Stevenson and Roble 1995; Roble 1996, 1997) suggest that this species is considerably more common than previously (e.g., Carle in Terwilliger 1991, Morse et al. in Benz and Collins 1997) believed. There are probably several dozen more populations to be discovered elsewhere within the current known range. The current rank may be changed if future surveys confirm suspicion that this species has been vastly undersampled. The small streams that it inhabits are not typically surveyed by odonatologists. Probably there are no more than 50 extant populations. Probably declining due to habitat loss and degradation (spring-fed habitats are subject to developmental usage and pollution), but it may be stable. It is apparently tolerant of some organic pollution. The estimated extent of occurrence is less than 5,000 km².
|Range Description:||Endemic to five states in the United States. The species is known from 10 counties in these states.|
Native:United States (Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia)
|Range Map:||Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.|
|Population:||Current population size is unknown, but with probably no more than 50 extant populations with less than 50 adults in each of these, the population size is likely to be fewer than 2,500. The population is likely to be declining due to habitat loss and degradation, but may possibly be stable: more data are required to be able to confirm.|
|Habitat and Ecology:||Small, second order streams, partly wooded (Tennessen et al. 1995), and spring-fed moderately flowing forest streams especially where they drain small ponds (Dunkle 2000).|
|Major Threat(s):||Part of one Tennessee stream is used as a fish hatchery; some streams are subject to agricultural pollution. Spring-fed habitats are subject to developmental usage and pollution.|
Baillie, J. and Groombridge, B. 1996. 1996 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. International Union for Conservation of Nature, Gland, Switzerland.
Benz, G.W. and Collins, D.E. (eds). 1997. Aquatic Fauna in Peril: the Southeastern Perspective. Southeast Aquatic Research Institute Special Publication 1. Lenz Design & Communications, Decatur, Georgia
Bick, G.H. 1983. Odonata at risk in conterminous United States and Canada. Odonatologica 12(3): 209–226.
Dunkle, S. 2000. Dragonflies through binoculars. Oxford Univ. Press, N.Y.
Garrison, R.W. 1995. The taxonomic status of twenty-five (25) taxa of Odonata of the Continental United States. Submitted to the National Biological Survey: 1-38.
Groombridge, B. (ed.). 1994. 1994 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.
IUCN. 1990. IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.
IUCN. 2007. 2007 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. (Accessed: 12th September 2007).
Louton, J.A. 1982. Lotic dragonfly (anisoptera: odonata) nymphs of the southeastern United States: identification, distribution and historical biogeography. Unpub. Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. of TN, Knoxville.
Needham, J.G. and Westfall, M.J., Jr. 1954. A Manual of the Dragonflies of North America (Anisoptera). University of California Press, Berkeley, California
Paulson, D.R. and Dunkle, S.W. 1996. Common names of North American Dragonflies and Damselflies, adopted by The Dragonfly Society of the Americas. Argia. 8(2):appendix.
Paulson, D.R. and Dunkle, S.W. 1999. A Checklist of North American Odonata. Slater Museum of Natural History University of Puget Sound Occasional Paper Number 56.
Roble, S.M. 1996. Status survey for the Cherokee Clubtail (Stenogomphurus consanguis) in Virginia. Natural Heritage Technical Report 96-27. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. Unpublished report to Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. 8 pp. plus appendix
Roble, S.M. 1997. Status survey for the Cherokee Clubtail (Stenogomphurus consanguis) in Virginia, 1997.
Stevenson, D.J. and Roble, S.M. 1995. Status survey for the Cherokee Clubtail (Gomphus consanguis) in Virginia. Natural Heritage Technical Report 95-18. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond. Unpublished report to Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 7 pp. plus appendix.
Tennessen, K. 1994. Checklist of Odonata in Tennessee. Personal letter to D. Withers, TN Heritage Program, 15 May 1994.
Tennessen, K., Harper, J. and Krotzer, R. 1995. The distribution of Odonata in Alabama. Bull. Amer. Odonatol. 3(3): 49–74.
Terwilliger, K. 1991. Virginia's Endangered Species: Proceedings of a Symposium held at Va. Tech. April 1989. The McDonald and Woodward Publishing Company, Blacksburg
Westfall, M.J. and Trogdon, R.P. 1962. The true Gomphus consanguis Selys. Florida Ent. 45(1): 29-41.
|Citation:||Abbott, J.C. 2007. Gomphus consanguis. In: IUCN 2013. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2013.2. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 16 April 2014.|
|Feedback:||If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown on this page, please fill in the feedback form so that we can correct or extend the information provided|