Somatochlora hineana
Williamson, 1931
Hine's Emerald
G2ImperiledGlobal Rank
Least concernIUCN
Very high - highThreat Impact
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, https://www.usa.gov/government-works
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.115545
Element CodeIIODO32110
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryInvertebrate Animal
IUCNLeast concern
Endemicoccurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumArthropoda
ClassInsecta
OrderOdonata
FamilyCorduliidae
GenusSomatochlora
Other Common Names
Cordulie de Hine (FR) Hine's emerald (EN) Hine's Emerald Dragonfly (EN)
Concept Reference
Paulson, D.R. and S.W. Dunkle. 1999. A checklist of North American Odonata. Slater Museum of Natural History, University of Puget Sound Occasional Paper, 56: 86 pp. Available: http://www.ups.edu/x7015.xml.
Taxonomic Comments
Note similarities in appearance and shared habitat with Somatochlora tenebrosa (Walker and Smentowsky, 2003). Genetic analysis of haplotype distribution in related Somatochlora species (Somatochlora tenebrosa, Somatochlora linearis, Somatochlora ensignera, Somatochlora hineana) revealed greater genetic diversity in the unglaciated portion of the species' range, and lower diversity in the northern glaciated portion (Purdue et al., 1999). Genetic analysis of varying populations is underway via non-lethal tissue sampling (Monroe et al., 2010).
Conservation Status
Rank MethodExpertise without calculation
Review Date2016-08-02
Change Date1998-02-19
Edition Date2011-09-01
Edition AuthorsCordeiro, J. (2011), Schweitzer, D.F.
Threat ImpactVery high - high
Range Extent1000-20,000 square km (about 400-8000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences21 - 80
Rank Reasons
Less than 50 estimated occurrences are known (some are not viable and several can be lumped into metapopulations); most of which are small and disjunct. The species is extirpated in Ohio, Alabama, and Indiana; some other extant occurrences are threatened with habitat destruction or degradation. Potential viability is poor or unclear for a substantial number of occurrences although populations are somewhat stable following federal listing and designation of critical habitat.
Range Extent Comments
This is primarily a species of the Great Lakes region that was originally only known from Ohio and Indiana (Bick, 1983), but additional investigations also found locations in Illinois, Wisconsin (Vogt and Cashatt, 1990; 1991; 1994), Michigan and Missouri (USFWS, 2001). In the summer of 1997 it was found on the Upper Peninsula of Michigan in Mackinac County and in 2007 it was found at a wetland complex in southern Ontario (Ontario CDC has details). A single adult male has been reliably reported from Alabama. Also, recently recorded from Missouri (Walker and Smentowsky, 2003) which suggests there may be more populations in the southern part of potential range. It is apparently extirpated from Indiana and Ohio (USFWS, 1995; 2001).
Occurrences Comments
Probably > 50 occurrences globally (Vogt, pers. comm. 1998). Currently known from 42 locations (not all viable): 9 in Illinois (Will, Cook, DuPage Cos.; most not viable), 20 in Wisconsin (Door, Kewaunee, Ozaukee Cos.), 10 in Michigan (Mackinac, Presque Isle, Alpena Cos.), and at least 3 sites in Missouri (Reynolds, Iron Cos.) (USFWS, 2001). It has been searched for intensively in Illinois and Wisconsin. In addition, there are four historic occurrences in Ohio, one in Indiana, and one in Alabama (USFWS, 2001). The first Canadian occurrence was documented in 2007 in Simcoe County, Ontario (Colin Jones, ON CDC, pers. comm., July 2007).
Threat Impact Comments
Extant occurrences are threatened by the following activities: petroleum refineries and other heavy industry, a proposed highway project, quarrying, urban non-point water pollution, and ATV use in Illinois; agricultural non-point water pollution (surface and groundwater) and recreational development in Wisconsin. Most significant threats are habitat/alteration/destruction plus fragmentation from development of commercial and residential areas, quarrying, creating landfills, constructing pipelines, and filling of wetlands. Habitats are often closely associated with surface dolomite deposits which are often quarried. Changes in surface or subsurface hydrology has the potential to reduce suitable breeding habitat. Contamination from landfills (including leaching) and chemical fertilizer and pesticide application is a past and potential future threat. Secondary threats include off-road and highway vehicle mortality and associated mortality from roadway development as well as predation (probably minimal) (USFWS, 2001). The known breeding sites in Illinois occur along the Des Plaines River floodplain, which has been fragmented by industrial and urban development (Cashatt, 1991). In Wisconsin, land development for agriculture, light industry, and tourism are principal threats (Vogt and Cashatt, 1990). Off-road vehicle use and possible logging, creation of water impoundments, real estate development, road development and maintenance, pipeline construction, and changes in hydrology are potential threats in Michigan (Steffens, 1997).
Ecology & Habitat
Description
It is a fairly large metallic brown dragonfly with 2 yellow stripes on each side of the thorax, and in life, bright green eyes. (Needham and Westfall, 1955; Williamson, 1931). Adults have wings that are clear and may have an amber hue towards the base of the hind wings. After emerging as an adult, the eyes are initially brown and turn emerald green within 1 to 3 days. Toward the end of the adult life span, the wings may turn from clear to a slightly opaque, smoky color (USFWS, 2001).
Diagnostic Characteristics
Distinctive shapes of terminal appendages and ovipositors separate adults from other species. The species is distinguished from all other Somatochlora by its dark metallic green thorax with two distinct, creamy-yellow lateral lines, and distinctly shaped male terminal appendage. The wings are clear and may have an amber hue towards the base of the hind wings. Other species of Somatochlora that occur in the same range that may be confused include Somatochlora linearis, Somatochora tenebrosa, Somatochlora ensigera, Somatochlora elongata, and Somatochlora williamsoni; but they are all distinguished by the shape of terminal appendages and ovipositors (USFWS, 2001). Male cerci unique, bent downward at a right angle near the tip, the female ovipositor is a pointed trough extending at a 45 degree angle from the abdomen, and the female cerci are longer than abdominal segments 9+10. Note similarities in appearance and shared habitat with Somatochlora tenebrosa (Walker and Smentowsky, 2003).
No one larval character has been found to easily and reliably differentiate larvae from Somatochlora linearis, Somatochlora tenebrosa, Somatochlora ensigera, Somatochlora elongata, and Somatochlora williamsoni. Most Somatochlora hineana larvae have a small middorsal hook on segment three, but Somatochlora minor does as well. The earliest instars of S. hineana larvae have fewer dorsal hooks than later instars (Zercher, 2001). Other characters include head width, metatibial length, palpal crenulation setae, and total length; and are discussed in detail in Crashatt and Vogt (2001).
No one larval character has been found to easily and reliably differentiate larvae from Somatochlora linearis, Somatochlora tenebrosa, Somatochlora ensigera, Somatochlora elongata, and Somatochlora williamsoni. Most Somatochlora hineana larvae have a small middorsal hook on segment three, but Somatochlora minor does as well. The earliest instars of S. hineana larvae have fewer dorsal hooks than later instars (Zercher, 2001). Other characters include head width, metatibial length, palpal crenulation setae, and total length; and are discussed in detail in Crashatt and Vogt (2001).
Habitat
In Illinois and Wisconsin, adults of this species occurs in shallow, calcareous seepage marshes; or marshy margins of small, sluggish, calcareous streams overlaying dolomite bedrock (Vogt and Cashatt, 1994). The seepage marshes are often dominated by Typha spp. and can be broadly defined as fen or fen-like communities. Larval microhabitat in Wisconsin is in shallow seepage along the edges of sluggish streamlets that meander through dense cattail seepage marsh (exuviae usually attached to Typha angustifolia) (Vogt and Cashatt, 1994). The larvae also are able to use the wet burrows of the crayfish Cambarus diogenes during dry periods. The species lives in wetlands dominated by grass or grass-like plants that are groundwater fed and shallow. Soil types range from organic muck to mineral soils like marl. A nearby forest edge is also important (USFWS, 2001). Larval habitat may be important in determining distribution.
Ecology
Larval individuals can occur in small clusters within their habitat and remain independent. Larval individuals may overwinter in crayfish burrows. Individuals are well adapted to survive drought conditions (USFWS, 2001).
Reproduction
Females most likely lay more than 500 eggs during their lives. After an egg is hatched, larvae spend 2 to 4 years in small streamlets, foraging and molting as they grow. Larvae begin to emerge as adults possibly as early as late May in Illinois and late June in Wisconsin and continue to emerge throughout the summer. Known flight season lasts up to early October in Illinois and to late August in Wisconsin. Fully adult dragonflies can live at least 14 days and may live 4 to 6 weeks (Soluk et al., 1996: Mierzwa et al., 1995). Copulating pairs have been observed from early June to late August in Illinois and from late July in Wisconsin. Females oviposit by repeatedly dipping their abdomens up to 200 times in shallow water from June to late August in Illinois and early to late July in Wisconsin; usually in seepage marshes, seepage sedge meadows, sedge hummocks, muck along sluggish water, and in small muck-bottomed pools (see Vogt and Cashatt, 1994; Soluk et al., 1996; USFWS, 2001).
Palustrine Habitats
HERBACEOUS WETLANDBog/fen
Other Nations (2)
CanadaN1
| Province | Rank | Native |
|---|---|---|
| Ontario | S1 | Yes |
United StatesN2
| Province | Rank | Native |
|---|---|---|
| Wisconsin | S1 | Yes |
| Ohio | SX | Yes |
| Indiana | SX | Yes |
| Illinois | S1 | Yes |
| Michigan | S1 | Yes |
| Alabama | SH | Yes |
| Missouri | S2 | Yes |
Threat Assessments
| Threat | Scope | Severity | Timing |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 - Residential & commercial development | Large - restricted | Serious - moderate | High (continuing) |
| 1.1 - Housing & urban areas | Large - restricted | Serious - moderate | High (continuing) |
| 1.2 - Commercial & industrial areas | Large - restricted | Serious - moderate | High (continuing) |
| 3 - Energy production & mining | Restricted (11-30%) | Extreme - moderate | High (continuing) |
| 3.2 - Mining & quarrying | Restricted (11-30%) | Extreme - moderate | High (continuing) |
| 4 - Transportation & service corridors | Restricted (11-30%) | Serious - slight | High - moderate |
| 4.1 - Roads & railroads | Restricted (11-30%) | Serious - slight | High - moderate |
| 4.2 - Utility & service lines | Restricted (11-30%) | Serious - slight | High - moderate |
| 6 - Human intrusions & disturbance | Small (1-10%) | Slight or 1-10% pop. decline | High - moderate |
| 6.1 - Recreational activities | Small (1-10%) | Slight or 1-10% pop. decline | High - moderate |
| 7 - Natural system modifications | Large - restricted | Serious or 31-70% pop. decline | High (continuing) |
| 7.2 - Dams & water management/use | Large - restricted | Serious or 31-70% pop. decline | High (continuing) |
| 9 - Pollution | Large - restricted | Serious - moderate | High (continuing) |
| 9.1 - Domestic & urban waste water | Large - restricted | Serious - moderate | High (continuing) |
| 9.2 - Industrial & military effluents | Large - restricted | Serious - moderate | High (continuing) |
| 9.3 - Agricultural & forestry effluents | Large - restricted | Serious - moderate | High (continuing) |
Roadless Areas (3)
Michigan (2)
| Area | Forest | Acres |
|---|---|---|
| Government Island | Hiawatha National Forest | 225 |
| Round Island | Hiawatha National Forest | 2 |
Missouri (1)
| Area | Forest | Acres |
|---|---|---|
| Anderson Mountain Rare II Study Area | Mark Twain National Forest | 2,741 |
References (36)
- Bick, G.H. 1983. Odonata at risk in conterminous United States and Canada. Odonatologica 12(3):209-226.
- Cashatt, E.D. 1991. A vulnerable species: The Ohio emerald dragonfly. The Living Museum 53(2):29-30.
- Cashatt, E.D. and T.E. Vogt. 1996. Population and habitat monitoring of Hine's emerald dragonfly (Somatochlora hineana Williamson) in northeastern Illinois in 1995. Report to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Illinois State Museum: Springfield, Illinois. 77 pp.
- Cashatt, E.D. and T.E. Vogt. 2001. Description of the larva of <i>Somatochlora hineana</i> with a key to the larvae of the North American species of <i>Somatochlora </i>(Odonata: Corduliidae). International Journal of Odonatology 4(2):93-105.
- Cashatt, E.D., B.G. Sims, and J.R. Wiker. 1991. Survey for the Hine's emerald dragonfly along the FAP-340 corridor near the Des Plaines River at the Will/Cook County border. Unpublished report, Illinois State Museum, Springfield, Illinois. 11 pp.
- Curry, J.R. 2001. Dragonflies of Indiana. Everbest Printing, Ltd.: China. xiv + 303 pp.
- Foster, S.E. and D.A. Soluk. 2004. Evaluating exuvia collection as a management tool for the federally endangered Hine's emerald dragonfly, <i>Somatochlora hineana</i> Williamson (Odonata: Cordulidae). Biological Conservation 118:15-20.
- Foster, S.E. and D.A. Soluk. 2006. Protecting more than the wetland: the importance of biased sex ratios and habitat segregation for conservation of the Hine's emerald dragonfly, <i>Somatochlora hineana</i> Williamson. Biological Conservation 127:158-166.
- Glotzhober, R.C. and D. McShaffrey (eds.). 2002. The dragonflies and damselflies of Ohio. Ohio Biological Survey Bulletin, New Series 14(2):1-364.
- Mead, K. 2003. Dragonflies of the North Woods. Kollath-Stensaas Publishing, Duluth, Minnesota. 203 pp.
- Mierzwa, K.S. (eds.). 1995. The Hine's emerald dragonfly in Illinois: An assessment of population dynamics and habitat use. TAMS Consultants: Chicago, Illinois. 105 pp.
- Monroe, E., C. Lynch, D. Soluk, and H. Britten. 2010. Nonlethal tissue sampling techniques and microsatellite markers used for first report of genetic diversity in two populations of the endangered <i>Somatochlora hineana</i> (Odonata: Corduliidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 103(6):1012-1017
- Needham, J.G. and M.J. Westfall, Jr. 1954. A Manual of the Dragonflies of North America (Anisoptera). University of California Press, Berkeley, California. 615 pp.
- Needham, J.G., M.J. Westfall, Jr., and M.L. May. 2000. Dragonflies of North America. Revised edition. Scientific Publishers: Gainesville, Florida. 939 pp.
- O'Brien, M. 2001. Hine's emerald dragonfly Somatochlora hineana Williamson. Michigan Odonata Survey Technical Report 3: 3 pp.
- Paulson, D.R. and S.W. Dunkle. 1999. A checklist of North American Odonata. Slater Museum of Natural History, University of Puget Sound Occasional Paper, 56: 86 pp. Available: http://www.ups.edu/x7015.xml.
- Paulson, D.R., and S.W. Dunkle. 2009. A checklist of North American Odonata including English name, etymology, type locality, and distribution. Originally published as Occasional Paper No. 56, Slater Museum of Natural History, University of Puget Sound, June 1999; completely revised March 2009. Online. Available: http://www.odonatacentral.org/docs/NA_Odonata_Checklist_2009.pdf.
- Paulson, D.R., and S.W. Dunkle. 2016. A checklist of North American Odonata including English name, etymology, type locality, and distribution. Originally published as Occasional Paper No. 56, Slater Museum of Natural History, University of Puget Sound, June 1999; completely revised March 2009; updated February 2011, February 2012, and October 2016. Online. Available: http://www.odonatacentral.org/docs/NA_Odonata_Checklist.pdf
- Paulson, D.R., and S.W. Dunkle. 2021. A checklist of North American Odonata including English name, etymology, type locality, and distribution. 2021 Edition. Originally published as Occasional Paper No. 56, Slater Museum of Natural History, University of Puget Sound, June 1999. 98 pp.
- Perkins, P. D. 1983. North American insect status review. Contract 14-16-0009-79-052. Final report to Office of Endangered Species, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior. 354 pp.
- Pintor, L.M. and D.A. Soluk. 2006. Evaluating the non-consumptive, positive effects of a predator in the persistence of an endangered species. Biological Conservation 130: 584-591.
- Price, H.F. 1958. Additional notes on the dragonflies of northwestern Ohio. Ohio Journal of Science 58(1):50-62.
- Purdue, J.R., E.D. Cashatt, and T.E. Vogt. 1996. Variability of the mitochondrial DNA in populations of the Hine's emerald dragonfly, <i>Somatochlora hineana</i>. Report to Material Service Corporation, Illinois State Museum, Champaign, Illinois. 24 pp.
- Soluk, D.A., B.J. Swisher, and D.S. Zercher. 1996. The ecology of Hine's emerald dragonfly (Somatochlora hineana): Monitoring populations and determining patterns of habitat use in the Des Plaines River valley. Activity and summary report of preliminary results (January-August 1996). Illinois Natural History Survey: Champaign, Illinois. 35 pp.
- Soluk, D.A, H. Britten, K. Kissane, C.D. Satyshur, J. Holmes, E. Blas and C. Lynch. 2007. Evaluation of the potential impacts of the I355 extension on the ecology, behavior,population genetics and distribution of the endangered Hine's emerald dragonfly (Somatochlora hineana) in the Des Plaines River Valley. Report of Activities 2006. Submitted to: Illinois State Toll Highway Authority, January 2007. Online. Available: www.fws.gov/filedownloads/ftp_HED/New%20HED%20Lit%20for%20HCP/Soluk%20et%20al%202010_Evltn_impacts_I355_extension.pdf..
- Steffens, W.P. 1997. 1997 Hine's emerald (<i>Somatochlora hineana</i> Williamson) surveys in Michigan's upper peninsula. Report to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 17 pp.
- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1995. Determination of endangered status for the Hine's Emerald Dragonfly (<i>Somatochlora hineana</i>). Final Rule. Federal Register 60(17):5267-5272.
- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2001. Hine's emerald dragonfly (<i>Somatochlora hineana</i>) recovery plan. USFWS Great Lakes-Big Rivers Region: Fort Snelling, Minnesota. 120 pp.
- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2010. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final revised Critical Habitat for Hine's emerald dragonfly (<i>Somatochlora hineana</i>); Final rule. Federal Register 75(78):21393-21453.
- Vogt, T.E. 2002. Survey site identification for potential Hine's emerald dragonfly (<i>Somatochlora hineana</i>) localities in New York and West Virginia: final report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Barrington, IL.
- Vogt, T.E. and E.D. Cashatt. 1990. The Wisconsin 1990 Status Survey for the Ohio Emerald Dragonfly (<i>Somatochlora hineana </i>Williamson). Report prepared for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Illinois State Museum: Springfield, Illinois. 14 pp.
- Vogt, T.E. and E.D. Cashatt. 1991. The Wisconsin 1991 status survey for the Hine's emerald dragonfly <i>Somatochlora hineana </i>Williamson). Report submitted to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).
- Vogt, T.E. and E.D. Cashatt. 1994. Distribution, habitat and field biology of <i>Somatochlora hineana </i>(Odonata: Corduliidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 87(5):599-603.
- Walker, J. and J. Smentowsky. 2003. <i>Tachopteryx thoreyi </i>(Hagen), <i>Somatochlora tenebrosa</i> (Say) and <i>S. hineana</i> Williamson- observations from Missouri. Argia 15(1):6-11.
- Wells, S.M., R.M. Pyle, and N.M. Collins. 1983. The IUCN Invertebrate Red Data Book. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. 632 pp.
- Williamson, E.B. 1931. A new North American <i>Somatochlora</i> (Odonata-Cordulinae). Occasional Papers of the Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan 225:1-8.