Introduction

The positioning of the North American continent on the globe makes it susceptible to a uniquely diverse variety of atmospheric conditions, creating an equally diverse variety of ecosystems. As such, North America can be divided into 15 broad Level I ecoregions, 50 more detailed Level II ecoregions, and still 182 more specific Level III ecoregions (EPA, 2016). Each ecoregion may play host to a number of species of herpetofauna, some of which may be more particular to their regions than others. In North America, the two main Level I ecoregions of the Midwestern United States are the Great Plains and Eastern Temperate Forests; of those two, Illinois has been entirely placed in the Eastern Temperate Forests Level I ecoregion (EPA, 2016). Illinois is a large centrally-located state, measuring 385 miles from north to south and 215 miles from east to west (Barten, 2013). At Level III, it is split into two more ecoregions: the Central Corn Belt Plains and Interior River Valleys and Hills (EPA, 2016). A study by Smith (1961)  divided the two main ecosystems into seven defined herpetological sub-areas: grand prairie, outlier prairie, sand prairie, northeastern mesic forest, western division, southern division, and river borders. 

Unfortunately, much of the original habitats found in Illinois have been domesticated, destroyed by man. The Chicago Herpetological Society reports that within the last century nearly all of the indigenous prairie was turned into agricultural land (Barten, 2013). Rapidly increasing populations and urbanization continue to mar remaining natural habitats. Nevertheless, a robust range of reptile and amphibian species are distributed throughout the state, having evolved to live efficiently in almost complete hiding. Of particular interest are the sand prairie subareas - well-defined areas located along the eastern borders of the Mississippi and Illinois Rivers, and the northeastern mesic forest sub-areas - found in just the northeastern most corner of the state lining Lake Michigan (Barten, 2013). Among the quickly developing society in this part of the state lay a few pockets of land that have yet to be charted, such as the well-preserved Melody Site in northeastern Illinois. 

Reptiles and amphibians are native to every continent on Earth excluding Antarctica. However, due, to their ectothermic nature and reliance on their external environments for body temperature regulation, most species are reported to be found between the latitudes of 40°N and 40°S (Barten, 2013). The Melody Site is very near the 40°N border, making it an ideal field to observe herpetofauna that may be more adapted to the lower end of temperatures.

Material and Methods

This survey was done at the Melody site in Lake Forest, IL 60045. This private site included an almost pristine ecosystem, adjacent to Middlefork Savanna Forest Preserve, Figure 1.1 Map of Colburn's Melody site. Quadrants highlighted in red are the survey sites specified for this group.including a wide variety of natural habitats to survey. The site included habitats such as savanna, wet savanna, wet prairies, mesic prairies, aquatic, and shoreline. The wide variety of habitats should have allowed for a wide variety of herpetofauna. Surveys started September 10, 2018 and lasted until October 15, 2018. Each survey was conducted by the group on Monday around afternoon and checked throughout the week by Rob Carmichael. 

There were multiple parts to this survey, including three different types of traps and meandering surveys. A drift fence was placed in Quadrant 23 along a mesic prairie and savanna edge, hoping to cut off herpetofauna making their way to or from the pond. The fence was made of mesh material and six wooden stakes. The six stakes were placed 4 ft apart, creating a fence 24 ft long. The fence was dug into the ground to keep small herpetofauna from going under instead of around. Pitfall traps, made of coffee cans placed flush with the ground, were placed at both ends of the drift fence and one in the middle on the west side. Making the trap flush with the ground was important for catching herpetofauna. The purpose of the pitfall traps was to catch herpetofauna that got stopped by the drift fence. Each can was filled with a small amount of water, a wet sponge, and some vegetation to ensure the safety of the animals, allowing them access to water and shade. The pitfall traps were numbered (1, 2, and 3) for our records. Along the east side of the fence, a funnel trap was placed (a funnel leading into a mesh bag). Inside the bag was a wet sponge, and vegetation was used to cover it. This trap was intended mostly for snakes, which could easily go through the funnel into the bag but could not get back out.

Although not a part of the personal survey, other surveying groups  also set out traps; these include aquatic traps and coverboards. Aquatic traps included turtle traps and minnow traps, placed in the water. The traps were mesh netting or metal traps, each baited with a can of sardines. The sardines baited aquatic animals into the traps where it was easy for them to enter but hard to escape. Cover boards were also placed out various places on the site. Coverboards consisted of large pieces of wood that provided snakes a good place for shade and hiding. This allowed them to rest in a nice and shaded area. Although useful, they may take up to a few weeks or months to be fully utilized by enough snakes to  yield results. All three traps were checked every day that they were out, either by the groups or Rob Carmichael, to ensure the safety of the animals caught. Data sheets were also created and used to record the findings.

A meandering survey was done by each of the groups by picking a section of the land and slowly walking through it, searching for herpetofauna. The group walked as a transect through the area, looking for any sign of wildlife. Materials brought along were nets, snake bags, snake hooks, identification cards, and data recording sheets. The group made sure to be as quiet as possible to avoid scaring off any potential animals and walked slowly, stopping every few steps to survey the area around. If a reptile or amphibian was spotted, an attempt would be made to catch the animal. If successful in catching, data including age, weight, length, and gender would be included. If not successful, an identification would be made using visual characteristics and identification cards. GPS coordinates were taken of each animal sighted and each was released in the same spot. Along with coordinates, other data recorded included time, weather, humidity, behavior, and habitat.

Results

Table 1.1
Record of species found in either the pitfall trap or funnel trap. Species were collected and recorded before released. Missing information was data not taken. TL stands for total length and SVL stands for snout-vent length.

Using the drift fence method with pitfall and funnel traps, seven different animals were caught, including five different species (Table 1.1). The first week, two Chelydra serpentina (Common Snapping Turtle) were caught in Pitfall Trap #1. The two were juveniles, not even a week old. One of them had a tooth for breaking out of the egg still visible. Also found this week was the shed skin of Thamnophis sirtalis (Common Garter Snake), found in Pitfall Trap #2, and Faxonius virilus (Northern Crayfish) was found in an unspecified pitfall trap by Rob Carmichael. In the second week, Ambystoma tigrinum (Tiger Salamander) was found in Pitfall Trap #3. The salamander was a very large 140 grams and an adult male with a very golden underbelly. On the third week, Anaxyrus americanus (American Toad) was found in Pitfall Trap #3 and was a juvenile, no more than a year old. 

We would like to thank the site provider, Robin Colburn, for allowing us to conduct this survey on her land, as well as Dr. Sean Menke, from Lake Forest College, and Professor Rob Carmichael, from the Wildlife Discovery Center, for helping us set up traps at the site and assisting in catching, trapping, and identifying species.