DOCSLIB.ORG

The Longleaf Pine Ecosystem Ecology, Silviculture, and Restoration the Longleaf Pine Ecosystem Shibu Jose Eric J

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Longleaf Pine Ecosystem Ecology, Silviculture, and Restoration the Longleaf Pine Ecosystem Shibu Jose Eric J Jokela Jose The Longleaf Pine Ecosystem Ecology, Silviculture, and Restoration The Longleaf Pine Ecosystem Shibu Jose Eric J. Jokela Deborah L. Miller Editors S PRINGER S ERIES ON E NVIRONMENTAL M ANAGEMENT BRUCE N. ANDERSON ROBERT W. H OWARTH LAWRENCE R. WALKER Series Editors Springer Series on Environmental Management Volumes published since 1989 The Professional Practice of Environmental Marine Debris: Sources, Impacts, and Solutions Management (1989) (1997) R.S. Dorney and L. Dorney (eds.) J.M. Coe and D.B. Rogers (eds.) Chemicals in the Aquatic Environment: Advanced Environmental Problem Solving: Psychosocial Hazard Assessment (1989) Barriers to Adaptive Change (1999) L. Landner (ed.) A. Miller Inorganic Contaminants of Surface Water: Research and Monitoring Priorities (1991) Rural Planning from an Environmental Systems J.W. Moore Perspective (1999) F.B. Golley and J. Bellot (eds.) Chernobyl: A Policy Response Study (1991) B. Segerstahl˚ (ed.) Wildlife Study Design (2001) Long-Term Consequences of Disasters: The M.L. Morrison, W.M. Block, M.D. Strickland, and Reconstruction of Friuli, Italy, in its International W.L. Kendall Context, 1976–1988 (1991) R. Geipel Selenium Assessment in Aquatic Ecosystems: A Guide for Hazard Evaluation and Water Quality Food Web Management: A Case Study of Lake Criteria (2002) Mendota (1992) A.D. Lemly J.F. Kitchell (ed.) Restoration and Recovery of an Industrial Region: Quantifying Environmental Impact Assessments Progress in Restoring the Smelter-Damaged Using Fuzzy Logic (2005) Landscape near Sudbury, Canada (1995) R.B. Shepard J.M. Gunn (ed.) Changing Land Use Patterns in the Coastal Zone: Limnological and Engineering Analysis of a Managing Environmental Quality in Rapidly Polluted Urban Lake: Prelude to Environmental Developing Regions (2006) Management of Onondaga Lake, New York (1996) G.S. Kleppel, M.R. DeVoe, and M.V. Rawson (eds.) S.W. Effler (ed.) Assessment and Management of Plant Invasions The Longleaf Pine Ecosystem: Ecology, (1997) Silviculture, and Restoration (2006) J.O. Luken and J.W. Thieret (eds.) S. Jose, E.J. Jokela, and D.L. Miller (eds.) Shibu Jose Eric J. Jokela Deborah L. Miller (Editors) The Longleaf Pine Ecosystem Ecology, Silviculture, and Restoration With 92 Illustrations Shibu Jose Eric J. Jokela Deborah L. Miller School of Forest Resources and School of Forest Resources and Department of Wildlife Ecology Conservation Conservation and Conservation University of Florida University of Florida University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611 Gainesville, FL 32611 Milton, FL 32583 USA USA USA sjose@ufl.edu ejokela@ufl.edu dlmi@ufl.edu Series Editors: Bruce N. Anderson Robert W. Howarth Lawrence R. Walker Planreal Australasia Program in Biogeochemistry and Department of Biological Keilor, Victoria 3036 Environmental Change Sciences Australia Cornell University University of Nevada [email protected] Corson Hall Las Vegas, NV 89154 Ithaca, NY 14853 [email protected] [email protected] Library of Congress Control Number: 2005936717 ISBN-10: 0-387-29655-7 ISBN-13: 978-0387-29655-5 eISBN: 0-387-30687-0 Printed on acid-free paper. C 2006 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC All rights reserved. This work may not be translated or copied in whole or in part without the written permission of the publisher (Springer Science+Business Media, Inc., 233 Spring Street, New York, NY 10013, USA), except for brief excerpts in connection with reviews or scholarly analysis. Use in connection with any form of information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed is forbidden. The use in this publication of trade names, trademarks, service marks, and similar terms, even if they are not identified as such, is not to be taken as an expression of opinion as to whether or not they are subject to proprietary rights. Printed in the United States of America. (TB/EB) 987654321 springer.com Contributors Janaki R.R. Alavalapati, School of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611 John Blake, Savannah River Site, USDA Forest Service, New Ellenton, South Carolina 29809 William D. Boyer, Southern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Auburn, Alabama 36849 Dale G. Brockway, Southern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Auburn, Alabama 36849 J. Bachant Brown, The Nature Conservancy, Jay Florida Office, The Gulf Coastal Plain Ecosys- tem Partnership of Jay, Florida 32565 Douglas R. Carter, School of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611 Vernon Compton, The Nature Conservancy, Jay Florida Office, The Gulf Coastal Plain Ecosys- tem Partnership of Jay, Florida 32565 Ralph Costa, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Clemson Field Office, Department of Forestry and Natural Resources, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina 29634 Roy S. DeLotelle, DeLotelle and Guthrie, Inc., 1220 SW 96th Street, Gainesville, Florida 32607 Cecil Frost, Adjunct Faculty, Curriculum in Ecology, University of North Carolina, 119 Pot Luck Farm Road, Rougemont, North Carolina 27572. Dean Gjerstad, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama 36849 J.C.G. Goelz, USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Pineville, Louisiana 71360 v vi Contributors James M. Guldin, Arkansas Forestry Sciences Laboratory, Southern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Monticello, Arkansas 71656 Timothy B. Harrington, USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Olympia, Washington 98512 Larry D. Harris, Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611 M. Hicks, The Nature Conservancy, Jay Florida Office, The Gulf Coastal Plain Ecosystem Part- nership Jay, Florida 32565 Thomas S. Hoctor, Department of Landscape Architecture, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611 Alan W. Hodges, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611 Don Imm, Savannah River Site, USDA Forest Service, New Ellenton, South Carolina 29809 Steven B. Jack, Joseph W. Jones Ecological Research Center, Newton, Georgia 39870 Rhett Johnson, Solon Dixon Forestry Education Center, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sci- ences, Auburn University, Andalusia, Alabama 36420 Eric J. Jokela, School of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611 Shibu Jose, School of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611 John S. Kush, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama 36849 Peter E. Linehan, The Pennsylvania State University, Mont Alto Campus, Mont Alto, Pennsylvania 17237 Jagannadha R. Matta, School of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611 D. Bruce Means, Coastal Plains Institute and Land Conservancy, Tallahassee, Florida 32303 Deborah L. Miller, Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, University of Florida, Milton, Florida 32583 Robert J. Mitchell, Joseph W. Jones Ecological Research Center, Newton, Georgia 39870 W. Keith Moser, USDA, Forest Service, North Central Research Station, Forest Inventory and Analysis, St. Paul, Minnesota 55108 Contributors vii W. Leon Neel, Joseph W. Jones Ecological Research Center, Newton, Georgia 39870 Reed F. Noss, Department of Biology, University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida 32816 Kenneth W. Outcalt, Southern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Athens, Georgia 30602 Robert K. Peet, Department of Biology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-3280 P. Penniman, The Nature Conservancy, Jay Florida Office, The Gulf Coastal Plain Ecosystem Partnership of Jay, Florida 32565 Andrea M. Silletti, USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Clemson, South Carolina 29634 G. Andrew Stainback, School of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611 Joan L. Walker, USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Clemson, South Carolina 29634 K. A. Whitney, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611 Richard A. Williams, School of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida, Milton, Florida 32572. Preface The history and development of the longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) ecosystem in the south- eastern United States has intrigued natural resource professionals, researchers, and the general public for many decades. Prior to European settlement, longleaf pine forests were one of the most extensive ecosystems in North America. Most recent estimates suggest that only about 2.2% of the original area remains today, making it one of the most threatened ecosystems in North America. The reduction in land area of the longleaf pine ecosystem has been attributed to a number of factors, including: (i) extensive harvesting in the early 1900s that significantly reduced growing stock levels; (ii) an inadequate understanding of the biophysical factors influencing regeneration dynamics such as seeding habits and fire management; (iii) general intolerance of longleaf pine to shade and understory competition; and (iv) conversion of longleaf pine sites to other commercially important species such as loblolly (P. taeda L.) and slash pine (P. elliottii Engelm.) Over the last decade, considerable interest has grown in conserving and restoring the lon- gleaf pine ecosystem. For example, it provides habitat for a wide variety of wildlife species in- cluding
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Annual Report of the Commissioner of Conservation
    )925" Public Document ^g^No. 73 Wbt Commontoealtf) of jWastfacfmtfette ANNUAL REPORT OF THE Commissioner of Conservation AND State Forester FOR THE Year ending November 30, 1925 Department of Conservation Publication of this Document approved by the Commission on Administration and Finance 1,500. 2-'26. Order 4299. C — CONTENTS PAGE Conservation of Forests . • • 3 Conservation of Domestic Animals 4 Conservation of Wild Life 4 State Forests 5 Standish Monument Reservation 6 White Pine Blister Rust 6 Lectures and Conventions 6 Exhibits .• 7 Extension Forestry 7 Recommendations, Forestry 7 Recommendations, Fisheries and Game 8 Recommendations, Animal Industry 9 Division of Forestry, Report 10 Organization 10 State Plantations 10 Forest Survey 11 Examinations 11 Nurseries 11 State Forests 12 Report of State Fire Warden 14 Report of Moth Superintendent 18 Federal Gypsy Moth Work in Massachusetts 19 Appendix: Financial Statements 21 OUTLINE OF REPORT This report is divided for convenience and economy into four parts: Part I. The organization and general work of the Department of Conservation. Part II. The work of the Division of Forestry. Part III. The work of the Division of Fisheries and Game. Part IV. The work of the Division of Animal Industry. Parts I and II are printed in one volume as Public Document No. 73. Part III is printed in a separate volume as Public Document No. 25. Part IV is printed in a separate volume as Public Document No. 98. Wbt Commontoealtfj of JHa**acfm*etta Part I ANNUAL REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CONSERVATION of forestry, the divi- The Department of Conservation composed of the division of animal industry, is engaged m promot- ion of fisheries and game and the division assuring to the citizens of Massachusetts ig activities that are absolutely essential in possible of attainment The various he fullest measure of health and prosperity year are reported m the fullness of detail ,ctivities of these divisions during the past document.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Adaptive Evolutionary Convergence of Carnivorous Plant Taxa Through Functional Genomics
    Evaluating the adaptive evolutionary convergence of carnivorous plant taxa through functional genomics Gregory L. Wheeler and Bryan C. Carstens Department of Evolution, Ecology, & Organismal Biology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States of America ABSTRACT Carnivorous plants are striking examples of evolutionary convergence, displaying complex and often highly similar adaptations despite lack of shared ancestry. Using available carnivorous plant genomes along with non-carnivorous reference taxa, this study examines the convergence of functional overrepresentation of genes previously implicated in plant carnivory. Gene Ontology (GO) coding was used to quantitatively score functional representation in these taxa, in terms of proportion of carnivory- associated functions relative to all functional sequence. Statistical analysis revealed that, in carnivorous plants as a group, only two of the 24 functions tested showed a signal of substantial overrepresentation. However, when the four carnivorous taxa were analyzed individually, 11 functions were found to be significant in at least one taxon. Though carnivorous plants collectively may show overrepresentation in functions from the predicted set, the specific functions that are overrepresented vary substantially from taxon to taxon. While it is possible that some functions serve a similar practical purpose such that one taxon does not need to utilize both to achieve the same result, it appears that there are multiple approaches for the evolution of carnivorous function in plant genomes. Our approach could be applied to tests of functional convergence in other systems provided on the availability of genomes and annotation data for a group. Submitted 27 October 2017 Accepted 13 January 2018 Subjects Bioinformatics, Evolutionary Studies, Genomics, Plant Science Published 31 January 2018 Keywords Carnivorous plants, Gene Ontology, Functional genomics, Convergent evolution Corresponding author Gregory L.
    [Show full text]
  • Carnivorous Plant Responses to Resource Availability
    Carnivorous plant responses to resource availability: environmental interactions, morphology and biochemistry Christopher R. Hatcher A doctoral thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of requirements for the award of Doctor of Philosophy of Loughborough University November 2019 © by Christopher R. Hatcher (2019) Abstract Understanding how organisms respond to resources available in the environment is a fundamental goal of ecology. Resource availability controls ecological processes at all levels of organisation, from molecular characteristics of individuals to community and biosphere. Climate change and other anthropogenically driven factors are altering environmental resource availability, and likely affects ecology at all levels of organisation. It is critical, therefore, to understand the ecological impact of environmental variation at a range of spatial and temporal scales. Consequently, I bring physiological, ecological, biochemical and evolutionary research together to determine how plants respond to resource availability. In this thesis I have measured the effects of resource availability on phenotypic plasticity, intraspecific trait variation and metabolic responses of carnivorous sundew plants. Carnivorous plants are interesting model systems for a range of evolutionary and ecological questions because of their specific adaptations to attaining nutrients. They can, therefore, provide interesting perspectives on existing questions, in this case trait-environment interactions, plant strategies and plant responses to predicted future environmental scenarios. In a manipulative experiment, I measured the phenotypic plasticity of naturally shaded Drosera rotundifolia in response to disturbance mediated changes in light availability over successive growing seasons. Following selective disturbance, D. rotundifolia became more carnivorous by increasing the number of trichomes and trichome density. These plants derived more N from prey and flowered earlier.
    [Show full text]
  • Insectivorous Plants”, He Showed That They Had Adaptations to Capture and Digest Animals
    the Strange, the Ugly, and the Bizarre . carnivores, parasites, and mycotrophs . Plant Oddities - Carnivores, Parasites & Mycotrophs Of all the plants, the most bizarre, the least understood, but yet the most interesting are those plants that have unusual modes of nutrient uptake. Carnivore: Nepenthes Plant Oddities - Carnivores, Parasites & Mycotrophs Of all the plants, the most bizarre, the least understood, but yet the most interesting are those plants that have unusual modes of nutrient uptake. Parasite: Rafflesia Plant Oddities - Carnivores, Parasites & Mycotrophs Of all the plants, the most bizarre, the least understood, but yet the most interesting are those plants that have unusual modes of nutrient uptake. Things to focus on for this topic! 1. What are these three types of plants 2. How do they live - selection 3. Systematic distribution in general 4. Systematic challenges or issues 5. Evolutionary pathways - how did they get to what they are Mycotroph: Monotropa Plant Oddities - The Problems Three factors for systematic confusion and controversy 1. the specialized roles often involve reductions or elaborations in both vegetative and floral features — DNA also is reduced or has extremely high rates of change for example – the parasitic Rafflesia Plant Oddities - The Problems Three factors for systematic confusion and controversy 2. their connections to other plants or fungi, or trapping of animals, make these odd plants prone to horizontal gene transfer for example – the parasitic Mitrastema [work by former UW student Tom Kleist]
    [Show full text]
  • 2010 Online Catalog
    Meadowview Biological Research Station 2010 Catalog $5.00 S. „Craig Rudman‟ pg. 25 Utricularia radiata pg. 37 S. „Caroline‟ pg. 25 Meadowview Biological Research Station 8390 Fredericksburg Tnpk. Woodford, VA 22580 (804) 633-4336 [email protected] www.pitcherplant.org A non-profit 501(c)(3) organization As an incentive to become a Meadowview sponsor, we are offering a 50% dis- count on our plants when you become a sponsor with an annual donation of $25.00 or more. This entitles you to excellent prices on our plants while at the same time supporting our conservation and restoration efforts. Our focus is on the pitcher plant genus Sarracenia but we also offer a number of interesting associate and novelty tropical plants for sale at Meadowview Biological Research Station. All plants are from propagated material. If there are plants you are interested in but do not see in our catalog please ask us. We have limited quantities of many species which are not listed in this cata- log available to those involved in ecological restoration. We have propagated pitcher plant populations of varieties found from Virginia to Texas, which you may be interested in using for your restoration project, depending upon the geographic area. Please inquire as to location and availability of those plants. Feel free to visit our facility by appointment, where you may make your own selections from our stock. Unlike other companies, we ship only mature plants to ensure the highest quality plants and a satisfied customer. We suggest ordering in late winter before plants have started growth to get both the best plants we have avail- able and to ensure that plants have a full season of growth.
    [Show full text]
  • Principles of Silviculture Seeking More Benefits Than Ever Before from Their Rather Than Specifics of Application
    Silviculture — defined as the theory and practice of aged for multiple uses. In a woodland made up of two or controlling forest establishment, composition, and more stands, each one may be treated differently. This growth — is important to today’s landowners who are publication emphasizes the principles of silviculture seeking more benefits than ever before from their rather than specifics of application. The discussion woodlands. These benefits include water, wildlife, and should help the reader become more familiar with the recreation, as well as timber and other wood products. silvicultural terms used in forestry. Some additional Through the use of various silvicultural practices, these references are listed at the end of the unit. Other benefits can be increased and can make the woodland publications in this series cover certain silvicultural more useful. treatments that can be used to achieve specific Nature practices its own brand of silviculture, objectives. although such natural development of the forest may take hundreds or thousands of years. Nature, of course, THE ROLE OF CUTTING IN SILVICULTURE does not consult owners about preferences. Through The same tool that can be used to destroy a forest can silvicultural practices, a manager or owner can produce a also be used to build and improve one. In the past, this woodland that meets objectives and can do it faster than tool was the axe; today, it is usually the chainsaw. can Nature. In the forest ecosystem, literally every available space is occupied by some type of vegetation. The primary SILVICULTURE FOR IMPROVED BENEFITS way that the established forest can be altered or Silviculture involves developing a plan for influencing controlled is by killing trees and other plants.
    [Show full text]
  • Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- BIBLIOGRAPHY
    Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Ackerfield, J., and J. Wen. 2002. A morphometric analysis of Hedera L. (the ivy genus, Araliaceae) and its taxonomic implications. Adansonia 24: 197-212. Adams, P. 1961. Observations on the Sagittaria subulata complex. Rhodora 63: 247-265. Adams, R.M. II, and W.J. Dress. 1982. Nodding Lilium species of eastern North America (Liliaceae). Baileya 21: 165-188. Adams, R.P. 1986. Geographic variation in Juniperus silicicola and J. virginiana of the Southeastern United States: multivariant analyses of morphology and terpenoids. Taxon 35: 31-75. ------. 1995. Revisionary study of Caribbean species of Juniperus (Cupressaceae). Phytologia 78: 134-150. ------, and T. Demeke. 1993. Systematic relationships in Juniperus based on random amplified polymorphic DNAs (RAPDs). Taxon 42: 553-571. Adams, W.P. 1957. A revision of the genus Ascyrum (Hypericaceae). Rhodora 59: 73-95. ------. 1962. Studies in the Guttiferae. I. A synopsis of Hypericum section Myriandra. Contr. Gray Herbarium Harv. 182: 1-51. ------, and N.K.B. Robson. 1961. A re-evaluation of the generic status of Ascyrum and Crookea (Guttiferae). Rhodora 63: 10-16. Adams, W.P. 1973. Clusiaceae of the southeastern United States. J. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc. 89: 62-71. Adler, L. 1999. Polygonum perfoliatum (mile-a-minute weed). Chinquapin 7: 4. Aedo, C., J.J. Aldasoro, and C. Navarro. 1998. Taxonomic revision of Geranium sections Batrachioidea and Divaricata (Geraniaceae). Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 85: 594-630. Affolter, J.M. 1985. A monograph of the genus Lilaeopsis (Umbelliferae). Systematic Bot. Monographs 6. Ahles, H.E., and A.E.
    [Show full text]
  • Niche Partitioning in Sympatric Sarracenia Species at Splinter Hill Bog Preserve, Baldwin County, Alabama
    Technical Refereed Contribution Niche partitioning in sympatric Sarracenia species at Splinter Hill Bog Preserve, Baldwin County, Alabama Jacquelyn S. Howell • Department of Biology • University of South Alabama • Mobile • Alabama • USA Ashley B. Morris • Department of Biology • Middle Tennessee State University • Murfreesboro • Tennessee • USA • [email protected] Keywords: Ecology, Sarracenia, Splinter Hill Bog Preserve, Alabama. Abstract: With anthropogenic influences limiting and fractioning wetlands, it is imperative to understand niche partitioning in keystone species. Sarracenia (Sarraceniaceae), a genus of car- nivorous plants, are ecologically important species found in wetlands along the eastern coast of the United States. Species diversity of this genus is highest in the southeast, particularly along the Gulf Coast where they are found primarily in longleaf pine savannas. This study aims to identify underlying causes driving niche partitioning, specifically exploring water table elevation and soil type as potential sources. Splinter Hill Bog Preserve, located in northeastern Baldwin County, Alabama, served as the study site for this work. Findings indicated small, but significant cor- relations between soil type and species distribution, as well as between soil type and water table elevation. Introduction Niche partitioning has been informally documented in sympatric species of North American pitcher plants, Sarracenia (Sarraceniaceae), over the last several decades. Niche partitioning is the process by which natural selection acts upon organisms and allows closely related species to inhabit different environments or microenvironments. Although many reports allude to obvious habitat dif- ferences (shade, soil moisture, etc.) to explain distribution of species in sympatric Sarracenia popu- lations (McDaniel 1966; Gibson 1983; Schnell 2002; Mellichamp 2009), few empirical studies have evaluated the underlying factors driving niche partitioning among species.
    [Show full text]
  • Restoring Longleaf Pine Forest Ecosystems in the Southern U.S
    chapter thirty-two Restoring longleaf pine forest ecosystems in the southern U.S. Dale G. Brockway, Kenneth W. Outcalt, and Donald J. Tomczak US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Everett E. Johnson Auburn University Contents 32.1 Southern forest environment .......................................................................................... ..50 2 32.2 Longleaf pine ecology.. ..................................................................................................... .502 32.2.1 Longleaf pine ecosystems .................................................................................. ..50 2 32.2.2 Ecological significance ........................................................................................ ..50 . 32.3 History of longleaf pine ecosystems.. ............................................................................. .505 32.4 Social and political context ............................................................................................ ..50 6 32.5 Restoration perspectives.. ................................................................................................. .507 32.6 Restoration methods ........................................................................................................ ..50 7 32.6.1 Restoration framework ...................................................................................... ..50 7 32.6.2 Selecting techniques ............................................................................................. .508 32.6.3 Restoration prescriptions.
    [Show full text]
  • Transcriptome and Genome Size Analysis of the Venus Flytrap
    Downloaded from orbit.dtu.dk on: Oct 05, 2021 Transcriptome and genome size analysis of the venus flytrap Jensen, Michael Krogh; Vogt, Josef Korbinian; Bressendorff, Simon; Seguin-Orlando, Andaine; Petersen, Morten; Sicheritz-Pontén, Thomas; Mundy, John Published in: P L o S One Link to article, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0123887 Publication date: 2015 Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Link back to DTU Orbit Citation (APA): Jensen, M. K., Vogt, J. K., Bressendorff, S., Seguin-Orlando, A., Petersen, M., Sicheritz-Pontén, T., & Mundy, J. (2015). Transcriptome and genome size analysis of the venus flytrap. P L o S One, 10(4), [e0123887]. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123887 General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. RESEARCH ARTICLE Transcriptome and Genome Size Analysis of the Venus Flytrap Michael Krogh Jensen1☯‡, Josef Korbinian Vogt2☯‡, Simon Bressendorff1, Andaine Seguin-Orlando3, Morten Petersen1, Thomas Sicheritz-Pontén2*, John Mundy1* 1 Department of Biology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2 Center for Biological Sequence Analysis, Department of Systems Biology, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark, 3 National High-throughput DNA Sequencing Centre, Copenhagen, Denmark ☯ These authors contributed equally to this work.
    [Show full text]
  • Applying Reduced Impact Logging to Advance Sustainable Forest Management
    Applying Reduced Impact Logging to Advance Sustainable Forest Management Asia-Pacific Forestry Commission International Conference Proceedings 26 February to 1 March 2001 Kuching, Malaysia Edited by Thomas Enters Patrick B. Durst Grahame B. Applegate Peter C.S. Kho Gary Man Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific Bangkok, Thailand 2002 Table of Contents The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the permission of the copyright owner. Applications for such permission, with a statement of the purpose and extent of the reproduction, should be addressed to the Senior Forestry Officer, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, 39 Phra Atit Road, Bangkok, Thailand. Cover photos: Kuswata Kartawinata, Francis Ng, Reidar Persson and Thomas Enters For copies of the report, write to: Patrick B. Durst Senior Forestry Officer FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific 39 Phra Atit Road Bangkok 10200 Thailand Tel: (66-2) 697 4000 Fax: (66-2) 697 4445 Email: [email protected] © FAO 2002 ISBN 974-7946-23-8 Table of Contents Foreword Acknowledgments 1.
    [Show full text]
  • A Preliminary List of the Vascular Plants and Wildlife at the Village Of
    A Floristic Evaluation of the Natural Plant Communities and Grounds Occurring at The Key West Botanical Garden, Stock Island, Monroe County, Florida Steven W. Woodmansee [email protected] January 20, 2006 Submitted by The Institute for Regional Conservation 22601 S.W. 152 Avenue, Miami, Florida 33170 George D. Gann, Executive Director Submitted to CarolAnn Sharkey Key West Botanical Garden 5210 College Road Key West, Florida 33040 and Kate Marks Heritage Preservation 1012 14th Street, NW, Suite 1200 Washington DC 20005 Introduction The Key West Botanical Garden (KWBG) is located at 5210 College Road on Stock Island, Monroe County, Florida. It is a 7.5 acre conservation area, owned by the City of Key West. The KWBG requested that The Institute for Regional Conservation (IRC) conduct a floristic evaluation of its natural areas and grounds and to provide recommendations. Study Design On August 9-10, 2005 an inventory of all vascular plants was conducted at the KWBG. All areas of the KWBG were visited, including the newly acquired property to the south. Special attention was paid toward the remnant natural habitats. A preliminary plant list was established. Plant taxonomy generally follows Wunderlin (1998) and Bailey et al. (1976). Results Five distinct habitats were recorded for the KWBG. Two of which are human altered and are artificial being classified as developed upland and modified wetland. In addition, three natural habitats are found at the KWBG. They are coastal berm (here termed buttonwood hammock), rockland hammock, and tidal swamp habitats. Developed and Modified Habitats Garden and Developed Upland Areas The developed upland portions include the maintained garden areas as well as the cleared parking areas, building edges, and paths.
    [Show full text]