Celastrina neglectamajor - Opler and Krizek, 1984
Appalachian Azure
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Celastrina neglectamajor Opler and Krizek, 1984 (TSN 777898)
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.113273
Element Code: IILEPG0030
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Invertebrates - Insects - Butterflies and Moths - Butterflies and Skippers
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Mandibulata Insecta Lepidoptera Lycaenidae Celastrina
Genus Size: C - Small genus (6-20 species)
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: Opler, P. A., and A. D. Warren. 2002. Butterflies of North America. 2. Scientific Names List for Butterfly Species of North America, north of Mexico. C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity, Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. 79 pp.
Concept Reference Code: B02OPL01EHUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Celastrina neglectamajor
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G4
Global Status Last Reviewed: 18Aug2009
Global Status Last Changed: 01Sep1998
Rounded Global Status: G4 - Apparently Secure
Reasons: Moderate range, fragmented in some portions, but probably not the core portions. Threats are known, but their severity is uncertain. Not currently in trouble but should be monitored.
Nation: United States
National Status: N4 (01Sep1998)

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
United States Arkansas (SNR), Connecticut (S1), Georgia (SU), Indiana (S1S2), Kentucky (S3), Maryland (S3S4), Missouri (SNR), New Jersey (SNR), New York (S1S3), North Carolina (S3S4), Ohio (S1?), Pennsylvania (S3S4), South Carolina (SNR), Tennessee (S4), Virginia (S4), West Virginia (S3)

Other Statuses

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent: 200,000-2,500,000 square km (about 80,000-1,000,000 square miles)
Range Extent Comments: Extreme southeastern New York and closely adjacent Connecticut through parts of New Jersey and southern Pennsylvania south in the mountains and some extent Piedmont to northern Georgia and into southern Ohio. Also disjunctly the Ozark region

Overall Threat Impact: High
Overall Threat Impact Comments: This butterfly is less threatened than most forest understory Lepidoptera in the Northeast, Middle Atlantic states, and parts of the mountains that have excessively abundant deer because deer tend to avoid the larval foodplant. However, any incident of herbivory of flower buds, flowers or young fruit would be direct predation of any larvae present, and deer probably will eat these if better food is scarce. The foodplant is harvested legally and illegally for alleged medicinal value. Habitat fragmentation is an issue in northern parts of the range and on the Piedmont generally. Btk use against gypsy moth larvae should have no direct impact because application is normally before any larvae are present. It is not know to what extent, if any, invasive plants actually threaten this species, however its habitats are generally more or less rich soil forests which are vulnerable to most of these weeds.

Short-term Trend: Unknown

Long-term Trend: Decline of 30-70%

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (200,000-2,500,000 square km (about 80,000-1,000,000 square miles)) Extreme southeastern New York and closely adjacent Connecticut through parts of New Jersey and southern Pennsylvania south in the mountains and some extent Piedmont to northern Georgia and into southern Ohio. Also disjunctly the Ozark region

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces

Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
Color legend for Distribution Map
Endemism: endemic to a single nation

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States AR, CT, GA, IN, KY, MD, MO, NC, NJ, NY, OH, PA, SC, TN, VA, WV

Range Map
No map available.


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
CT Fairfield (09001)
IN Ripley (18137)
NJ Morris (34027)*
NY Putnam (36079)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
01 Saugatuck (01100006)+
02 Hudson-Wappinger (02020008)+, Lower Hudson (02030101)+, Hackensack-Passaic (02030103)+*
05 Middle Ohio-Laughery (05090203)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Habitat Type: Terrestrial
Non-Migrant: N
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: N
Palustrine Habitat(s): Riparian
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Forest - Hardwood, Forest - Mixed
Habitat Comments: Rich woods with the foodplant CIMICIFUGA RACEMOSA.
Adult Food Habits: Nectarivore
Food Comments: Caterpillar Hosts: Bugbane (Cimicifuga racemosa). Adult Food: Flower nectar (Lotts and Naberhaus 2017).
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Celastrina Species (Azures)

Use Class: Not applicable
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: A location, generally a woodland or forest, where the species occurs, or has occurred, where there is potential for persistence or continued recurrence. Minimally a suitable habitat with the larval foodplant where the species has been verified by specimens or photographs. In some situations sight records will suffice but these are not recommended except for summer records for C. NEGLECTA and should be used only with the approval of an expert highly familiar with the local fauna. Not all specimens and certainly not all photographs are presently reliably identifiable for some taxa in some places, so in some cases a series may be needed.
Mapping Guidance: Occurrence boundaries will normally closely match the limits of the foodplants except in summer for C. NEGLECTA. This is especially helpful for taxa like C. NIGRA, NEGLECTAMAJOR and HUMULUS that feed on understory plants that are somewhat to highly localized. With taxa feeding on co-dominant subcanopy or shrub layer plants like flowering dogwood, holly, highbush blueberries, viburnums etc. boundaries may be very hard to define and thus arbitrary. Consult habitat and foodplant comments fields for species-specific information on what constitutes suitable habitat when mapping occurrences for individual species.
Multiple colonies within a single patch of forest should nearly always be treated as a metapopulation.

Separation Barriers: There are no actual data, but the forest and woodland species seem unusually reluctant to fly more than about 15 meters into open habitats. So there may be cases where croplands, paved areas etc. should be treated as barriers and not merely unsuitable. Two lane roads are definitely not barriers if forest occurs on both sides.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 2 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 10 km
Alternate Separation Procedure: Within continuous forest use the suitable habitat distance unless there are gaps with no foodplant of at least half the suitable habitat distance.
Separation Justification: No real data are known. However on warm sunny days the spring woodland taxa such as LADON, LUCIA, IDELLA are easily observed flying widely throughout any available habitat as long as their common foodplants are present at all in the subcanopy or shrub layer. Under cooler conditions they concentrate in protected sunny areas and can give the false impression of small localized occurrences or that they stay along paths. In places like southern New Jersey and some parts of the Appalachians these azures are so ubiquitous in the woods that EOs are virtually undefinable. One can easily directly observe that occurrences cover several square kilometers if the foodplants do. As far as known the species such as NEGLECTAMAJOR and NIGRA that feed on more localized forest understory plants stay within a kilometer and usually much less of them. The woodland and forest species almost never move even 100 meters into open fields or residential areas, although they do move across powerlines and roads with woods on both sides. For example Schweitzer has never seen C. IDELLA or C. LADON LUCIA in his yard in 13 years despite presence of the foodplant for both within less than a kme and some of the best occurrences globally of the former within about five kilometers. Probably larger distances are appropriate for C. NEGLECTA which readily enters and breeds in towns and will cross larger fields, but for now no separate Specs are suggested for that very common species. Instead be more liberal in applying suitable habitat distance with this species. It is less clear what Specs should be for species 2 (cherry gall azure) but it seems to occur along forest edges and more widely in open woodlands such as barrens or outcrops. For now use the generic Specs
Inferred Minimum Extent of Habitat Use (when actual extent is unknown): 1 km
Inferred Minimum Extent Justification: Some occurrences of C. NEGLECTA, LADON LADON, C. LADON LUCIA, and in New Jersey also IDELLA, can easily be observed to extend over several kilometers in at least one direction. At least in Schweitzer's experience, occurrences under 50-100 hectares are unusual but occurrences of 200-500 hectares are rather routine for these four taxa. However some arbitrary limit is needed in places where the habitat and foodplant are contiguous for large distances. This figure is recommended with large habitats until additional sampling establishes the correct (generally larger) extent. With smaller habitats (up to 400 hectares) assume full occupancy.
Date: 25Jul2001
Author: Schweitzer, D. F.
Population/Occurrence Viability
Help
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank) Not yet assessed
Help
Authors/Contributors
Help
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Edition Date: 18Aug2009
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Schweitzer, D.F.
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 15May2001

Zoological data developed by NatureServe and its network of natural heritage programs (see Local Programs) and other contributors and cooperators (see Sources).

References
Help
  • Allen, T.J., J.P. Brock, and J. Glassberg. 2005. Caterpillars in the field and garden. Oxford University Press, New York. 232 pp.

  • Belth, Jeffrey E. 2013. Butterflies of Indiana A Field Guide. Indiana University Press.Bloomington, IN.

  • Brock, J. P., and K. Kaufman. 2003. Butterflies of North America. Kaufman Focus Field Guides, Houghton Mifflin Company, New York, NY 284 pp.

  • COVELL, C.V., JR. 1999. THE BUTTERFLIES AND MOTHS (LEPIDOPTERA) OF KENTUCKY: AN ANNOTATED CHECKLIST. KENTUCKY STATE NATURE PRESERVES COMMISSION SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL SERIES 6:1-220.

  • Glassberg, J. 1993. Butterflies through binoculars: A field guide to butterflies in the Boston-New York-Washington region. Oxford University Press: New York. 160 pp.

  • Glassberg, J. 1999. Butterflies Through Binoculars: The East. Oxford University Press, New York, New York. 400 pp.

  • Gochfeld, M. and J. Burger. 1997. Butterflies of New Jersey. Rutgers University Press: Rutgers, New Jersey. 327 pp.

  • Iftner, D. C., J. A. Shuey, and J. V. Calhoun. 1992. Butterflies and Skippers of Ohio. Ohio Biological Survey Bulletin. New Series, Vol. 9, no. 1, xii + 212 pp., 40 color plates.

  • Iftner, David C. and Wright, David M., 1996. Atlas of New Jersey Butterflies. Privately published by authors.

  • Lotts, K., and T. Naberhaus, coordinators. 2017. Butterflies and Moths of North America. Available online: http://www.butterfliesandmoths.org/ (Version December 2018).

  • Natural Resources Commission. 2014. Roster of Indiana Animals, Insects, and Plants That Are Extirpated, Endangered, Threatened or Rare. Information Bulletin #2 (Sixth Amendment. 20pp.

  • O'Donnell, J.E., L.F. Gall., and D.L. Wagner, eds. 2007. The Connecticut Butterfly Atlas. State Geological and Natural History Survey of Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection, Hartford. 376 pp.

  • Opler, P. A., and A. D. Warren. 2002. Butterflies of North America. 2. Scientific Names List for Butterfly Species of North America, north of Mexico. C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity, Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. 79 pp.

  • Pelham, J. P. 2008. A catalogue of the butterflies of the United States and Canada with a complete bibliography of the descriptive and systematic literature. The Journal of Research on the Lepidoptera. Volume 40. 658 pp. Revised 14 February, 2012.

  • Shapiro, A.M. 1974. Butterflies and Skippers of New York State. Search 4:1-60.

  • Shapiro, A.M. 1974. Butterflies and skippers of New York State. Search 4:1-60.

  • Shuey, John. 1995. Indiana S-Ranks for Butterflies. Memorandum to Cloyce Hedge. 10 pp.

Use Guidelines & Citation

Use Guidelines and Citation

The Small Print: Trademark, Copyright, Citation Guidelines, Restrictions on Use, and Information Disclaimer.

Note: All species and ecological community data presented in NatureServe Explorer at http://explorer.natureserve.org were updated to be current with NatureServe's central databases as of March 2019.
Note: This report was printed on

Trademark Notice: "NatureServe", NatureServe Explorer, The NatureServe logo, and all other names of NatureServe programs referenced herein are trademarks of NatureServe. Any other product or company names mentioned herein are the trademarks of their respective owners.

Copyright Notice: Copyright © 2019 NatureServe, 2511 Richmond (Jefferson Davis) Highway, Suite 930, Arlington, VA 22202, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Each document delivered from this server or web site may contain other proprietary notices and copyright information relating to that document. The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference the web site.

Citation for data on website including State Distribution, Watershed, and Reptile Range maps:
NatureServe. 2019. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. (Accessed:

Citation for Bird Range Maps of North America:
Ridgely, R.S., T.F. Allnutt, T. Brooks, D.K. McNicol, D.W. Mehlman, B.E. Young, and J.R. Zook. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Birds of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Bird Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Robert Ridgely, James Zook, The Nature Conservancy - Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International - CABS, World Wildlife Fund - US, and Environment Canada - WILDSPACE."

Citation for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
Patterson, B.D., G. Ceballos, W. Sechrest, M.F. Tognelli, T. Brooks, L. Luna, P. Ortega, I. Salazar, and B.E. Young. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Mammals of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Bruce Patterson, Wes Sechrest, Marcelo Tognelli, Gerardo Ceballos, The Nature Conservancy-Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International-CABS, World Wildlife Fund-US, and Environment Canada-WILDSPACE."

Citation for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe. 2004. Global Amphibian Assessment. IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe, Washington, DC and Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
"Data developed as part of the Global Amphibian Assessment and provided by IUCN-World Conservation Union, Conservation International and NatureServe."

NOTE: Full metadata for the Bird Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/birdDistributionmapsmetadatav1.pdf.

Full metadata for the Mammal Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/mammalsDistributionmetadatav1.pdf.

Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute documents delivered from this server is hereby granted under the following conditions:
  1. The above copyright notice must appear in all copies;
  2. Any use of the documents available from this server must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes;
  3. Some data may be downloaded to files and altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above;
  4. No graphics available from this server can be used, copied or distributed separate from the accompanying text. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring by implication, estoppel, or otherwise any license or right under any trademark of NatureServe. No trademark owned by NatureServe may be used in advertising or promotion pertaining to the distribution of documents delivered from this server without specific advance permission from NatureServe. Except as expressly provided above, nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring any license or right under any NatureServe copyright.
Information Warranty Disclaimer: All documents and related graphics provided by this server and any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server are provided "as is" without warranty as to the currentness, completeness, or accuracy of any specific data. NatureServe hereby disclaims all warranties and conditions with regard to any documents provided by this server or any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, including but not limited to all implied warranties and conditions of merchantibility, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement. NatureServe makes no representations about the suitability of the information delivered from this server or any other documents that are referenced to or linked to this server. In no event shall NatureServe be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, consequential damages, or for damages of any kind arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information contained in any documents provided by this server or in any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, under any theory of liability used. NatureServe may update or make changes to the documents provided by this server at any time without notice; however, NatureServe makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. Since the data in the central databases are continually being updated, it is advisable to refresh data retrieved at least once a year after its receipt. The data provided is for planning, assessment, and informational purposes. Site specific projects or activities should be reviewed for potential environmental impacts with appropriate regulatory agencies. If ground-disturbing activities are proposed on a site, the appropriate state natural heritage program(s) or conservation data center can be contacted for a site-specific review of the project area (see Visit Local Programs).

Feedback Request: NatureServe encourages users to let us know of any errors or significant omissions that you find in the data through (see Contact Us). Your comments will be very valuable in improving the overall quality of our databases for the benefit of all users.