Rummerys Hill Wildlife & Landcare Booklet
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Synthesizing Ecosystem Implications of Mistletoe Infection
Environmental Research Letters LETTER • OPEN ACCESS Related content - Networks on Networks: Water transport in Mistletoe, friend and foe: synthesizing ecosystem plants A G Hunt and S Manzoni implications of mistletoe infection - Networks on Networks: Edaphic constraints: the role of the soil in vegetation growth To cite this article: Anne Griebel et al 2017 Environ. Res. Lett. 12 115012 A G Hunt and S Manzoni - Impact of mountain pine beetle induced mortality on forest carbon and water fluxes David E Reed, Brent E Ewers and Elise Pendall View the article online for updates and enhancements. This content was downloaded from IP address 137.154.212.215 on 17/12/2017 at 21:57 Environ. Res. Lett. 12 (2017) 115012 https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa8fff LETTER Mistletoe, friend and foe: synthesizing ecosystem OPEN ACCESS implications of mistletoe infection RECEIVED 28 June 2017 Anne Griebel1,3 ,DavidWatson2 and Elise Pendall1 REVISED 1 Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, Australia 12 September 2017 2 Institute for Land, Water and Society, Charles Sturt University, PO box 789, Albury, NSW, Australia ACCEPTED FOR PUBLICATION 3 Author to whom any correspondence should be addressed. 29 September 2017 PUBLISHED E-mail: [email protected] 16 November 2017 Keywords: mistletoe, climate change, biodiversity, parasitic plants, tree mortality, forest disturbance Original content from this work may be used Abstract under the terms of the Creative Commons Biotic disturbances are affecting a wide range of tree species in all climates, and their occurrence is Attribution 3.0 licence. contributing to increasing rates of tree mortality globally. -
Factors Influencing Sub-Adult Mortality of Eastern Grey Kangaroos in the ACT
FACTORS INFLUENCING SUB- ADULT MORTALITY EVENTS IN EASTERN GREY KANGAROOS (MACROPUS GIGANTEUS) IN THE ACT FEBRUARY 2018 Tim Portas and Melissa Snape Conservation Research Technical Report © Australian Capital Territory, Canberra 2018 This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced without the written permission from: Director-General, Environment, Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate, GPO Box 158 Canberra ACT 2601. ISBN 978-1-921117-49-7 Published by the Environment, Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate, ACT Government Visit the EPSDD Website Disclaimer The views and opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views, opinions or policy of funding bodies or participating member agencies or organisations. This publication should be cited as: Portas TJ and Snape MA (2018). Factors influencing sub-adult mortality events in Eastern Grey Kangaroos (Macropus giganetus) in the ACT. Environment, Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate, ACT Government, Canberra. Accessibility The ACT Government is committed to making its information, services, events and venues as accessible as possible. If you have difficulty reading a standard printed document and would like to receive this publication in an alternative format, such as large print, please phone Access Canberra on 13 22 81 or email the Environment, Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate at [email protected]. If English is not your first language and you require a translating and interpreting service, please phone 13 14 50. If you are deaf, or have a speech or hearing impairment, and need the teletypewriter service, please phone 13 36 77 and ask for Access Canberra on 13 22 81. -
Honey and Pollen Flora Suitable for Planting in SE
Honey & pollen flora suitable for planting in south-eastern NSW Agnote DAI-115 Second edition, Revised April 2002 Doug Somerville District Livestock Officer (Apiculture) Goulburn Trees and shrubs are planted for a number of species that have a flowering time different from reasons — as windbreaks, for shade or shelter, and that of the crops. for aesthetic reasons. By carefully selecting the • Avoid selecting winter flowering species for the species you may also produce an environment Tablelands. The temperature is often too low for attractive to native birds and bees. bees to work these sources efficiently. If they It is doubtful whether enough flowering shrubs do, health problems in the bee colony may and trees can be planted on a farm or recreational result. activity area to be a major benefit to commercial • When planting near drains, sewers and beekeeping. But there is good reason to believe buildings, consider whether the plantings may they can benefit small static apiaries. A cause damage in the future. commercial stocking rate for beehives is about one • Select salt tolerant species in areas where this hive per 4–12 ha. This figure varies with the honey is, or may be, a problem. and pollen yielding capacity of the flora. • Windbreaks should be planted three to four Consider these points before selecting species plants wide. Consider an extra one or two rows on the basis of honey and pollen yielding capacity: chosen for honey and pollen production, and to • Multiple plantings of a range of species are increase the aesthetic appeal of the plantings. more desirable than two or three plants of many species. -
Eucalypt Discovery Walk
Eucalypt Discovery Walk This self-guided walk through the Botanic Gardens features 21 eucalypts, each of which has an interpretive sign. Additional information is provided here. A round trip, starting with #1 Eucalyptus cunninghamii in the North Car Park and returning past #21 Eucalyptus viminalis to the Visitor Information Centre, will take about an hour and covers a range of terrain (e.g. stairs, lawn, uneven surfaces). There are about 850 eucalypt species, almost all occurring naturally only in Australia. Indeed, eucalypts are a defining feature of the Australian landscape. They are an important component of Australian vegetation and provide a habitat for many native animals. Some species have a wide geographic distribution, others are extremely restricted in their natural habitat and may need conservation. There is great diversity of size, form, leaf and bark type among eucalypts. Eucalypts have many commercial uses. An important source of wood products in Australia, they are also the world’s most widely-planted hardwoods. Large areas are being grown in Brazil, South Africa, India, China and elsewhere mainly for pulp and paper production. Species featured in this walk have been selected to illustrate the diversity and many uses of eucalypts. Acknowledgements This walk has been supported by the Bjarne K. Dahl Trust (www.dahltrust.org.au) a philanthropic fund. Dahl was a Norwegian forester who developed a great affinity with the Australian Bush and left his entire estate to establish a fund which focuses solely on eucalypts. Funds have also been provided by the Public Fund of the Friends of the Australian National Botanic Gardens (www.friendsanbg.org.au). -
José Guadalupe García-Franco
CURRICULUM VITAE JOSÉ GUADALUPE GARCÍA-FRANCO 20/08/2015 Curriculun Vitae García-Franco Contenido 1. DATOS PERSONALES ..................................................................................................................... 5 2. DATOS LABORALES ....................................................................................................................... 5 3. FORMACIÓN PROFESIONAL ............................................................................................................ 5 3.1. Licenciatura: .......................................................................................................................... 5 3.2. Maestría: ................................................................................................................................ 5 3.3. Doctorado: ............................................................................................................................. 5 4. PERTENENCIA AL SISTEMA NACIONAL DE INVESTIGADORES ......................................................... 5 5. DOMINIO DE IDIOMAS EXTRANJEROS ............................................................................................ 5 6. BECAS OBTENIDAS PARA SU FORMACIÓN PROFESIONAL ............................................................... 5 7. EXPERIENCIA LABORAL ................................................................................................................ 6 8. ASISTENCIA A CURSOS Y TALLERES DE CAPACITACIÓN .............................................................. 6 9. -
Pdf (686.71 K)
ISSN 2537_ 0715 IJSRSD (2021): Volume 4, Issue 1, June 2021 International Journal of Scientific Received: April 2021, Accepted: June 2021 Research and Sustainable Development Essential Oils as Green Insecticides: GC/MS Analysis and Toxicological Studies on Cotton Mealybugs Phenacoccus solenopsis (Tinsley) (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) Saad, L.H.E.1; Negm, S.El.2; Saleh, A.A.2 and Abd El-Mageed, A.E.M.1 1 Plant Protection Research Institute, Agricultural Research Center, Dokki, Giza, Egypt. 2 Pesticides Department, Faculty of Agriculture. Mansoura University, Egypt. ABSTRACT This study was conducted to evaluate the toxic effect of three essential oils extracted from Rosemary Salvia rosmarinus (Lamiales: Lamiaceae), Lemongrass Cymbopogon citratus ( Poales: Poaceae), and Camphor Eucalyptus melliodora (Myrtales: Myrtaceae) leaves compared to Diver® 97% E.C. under laboratory conditions on 3rd instar nymph of Cotton Mealybug (CMB) Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae). The chemical composition of the extracted essential oils was clarified. Results showed that the most remarkable toxic essential oils to the 3rd instar nymph of P. solenopsis after three days of treatment were S. rosmarinus followed by C. citratus. The LC50 values were 3102.591 and 3323.293 ppm, respectively; while, the LC50 values after seven days for C. citratus followed by S. rosmarinus were 680.073 and 740.591 ppm, respectively. Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry was used to analyze the essential oils and identify the most active ingredients. Results revealed that the most abundant constituents of E. melliodora were found to be (z)-tagetenone (20.56%) and p-cymene (16.62%). The S. rosmarinus essential oil mainly consisted of 1,8-cineol (18.37%), bornyl acetate (13.02%), and norbornan-2-one (12.53%), while the major constituent of C. -
World Heritage Values and to Identify New Values
FLORISTIC VALUES OF THE TASMANIAN WILDERNESS WORLD HERITAGE AREA J. Balmer, J. Whinam, J. Kelman, J.B. Kirkpatrick & E. Lazarus Nature Conservation Branch Report October 2004 This report was prepared under the direction of the Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment (World Heritage Area Vegetation Program). Commonwealth Government funds were contributed to the project through the World Heritage Area program. The views and opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment or those of the Department of the Environment and Heritage. ISSN 1441–0680 Copyright 2003 Crown in right of State of Tasmania Apart from fair dealing for the purposes of private study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part may be reproduced by any means without permission from the Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment. Published by Nature Conservation Branch Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment GPO Box 44 Hobart Tasmania, 7001 Front Cover Photograph: Alpine bolster heath (1050 metres) at Mt Anne. Stunted Nothofagus cunninghamii is shrouded in mist with Richea pandanifolia scattered throughout and Astelia alpina in the foreground. Photograph taken by Grant Dixon Back Cover Photograph: Nothofagus gunnii leaf with fossil imprint in deposits dating from 35-40 million years ago: Photograph taken by Greg Jordan Cite as: Balmer J., Whinam J., Kelman J., Kirkpatrick J.B. & Lazarus E. (2004) A review of the floristic values of the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area. Nature Conservation Report 2004/3. Department of Primary Industries Water and Environment, Tasmania, Australia T ABLE OF C ONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................................................................................................1 1. -
The Vegetation Communities Native Grassland
Edition 2 From Forest to Fjaeldmark The Vegetation Communities Native grassland Themeda australis Edition 2 From Forest to Fjaeldmark (revised - October 2017) 1 Native grassland Community (Code) Page Coastal grass and herbfield (GHC) 5 Highland Poa grassland (GPH) 7 Lowland grassland complex (GCL) 9 Lowland grassy sedgeland (GSL) 11 Lowland Poa labillardierei grassland (GPL) 12 Lowland Themeda triandra grassland (GTL) 14 Rockplate grassland (GRP) 16 General description align the key and the description of Lowland grassland complex ( ) with respect to the Native grasslands are defined as areas of native GCL required cover of native grass species. In 2017 vegetation dominated by native grasses with few or further minor revisions were made to improve no emergent woody species. Different types of information for general management issues, and to native grassland can be found in a variety of habitats, improve the description of Coastal grass and including coastal fore-dunes, dry slopes and valley herbfield (GHC) and its differentiation from Lowland bottoms, rock plates and subalpine flats. The lowland Poa labillardierei grassland (GPL). This is reflected in temperate grassland types have been recognised as the key to this Section. some of the most threatened vegetation communities in Australia. General management issues Some areas of native grassland are human-induced Most lowland native grassland in Tasmania has been and exist as a result of heavy burning, tree clearing cleared for agriculture since European settlement or dieback of the tree layer in grassy woodlands. (Barker 1999, Gilfedder 1990, Kirkpatrick et al. 1988, There are seven grassland communities recognised Kirkpatrick 1991, Williams et al. 2007). -
List of Plants
Indigenous Plant Nursery Plant Species List The following plant list contains some of the local native plants that may be available from the Edendale Indigenous Plant Nursery. Availability can vary so please contact the nursery for specific and seasonal availability of plants. Contact details: [email protected] Phone (03) 9433 3703 30 Gastons Road, Eltham VIC 3091 Open 7 days per week, 9.30am to 4.30pm Trees Species Common Name Size (height x width) Acacia dealbata Silver Wattle 6 – 30m x 5 – 10m Acacia implexa Lightwood 5 – 15m x 4 – 7m Acacia pycnantha Golden Wattle 3 – 10m x 2 – 5m Acacia mearnsii Black Wattle 8 – 25m x 6 – 10m Acacia melanoxylon Blackwood 5 – 30m x 4 – 15m Allocasuarina littoralis Black Sheoke 4 – 8m x 2 – 5m Allocasuarina verticillata Drooping Sheoke 4 – 11m x 3 – 6m Banksia marginata Silver Banksia 1 – 10m x 1 – 5m Callitris rhomboidea Oyster Bay Pine 9 – 15 m high Eucalyptus blakelyi Blakely’s Red Gum 15 – 24m x 10 – 15m Eucalyptus camaldulensis River Red Gum 15 – 50m x 15 – 35m Eucalyptus goniocalyx Long-leaved Box 8 – 20m x 6 – 15m Eucalyptus leucoxylon Yellow Gum 10 – 20m x 6 – 20m Eucalyptus macrorhyncha Red Stringybark 10 – 35m x 10 – 20m Eucalyptus melliodora Yellow Box 10 – 30m x 8 – 25m Eucalyptus ovata Swamp Gum 8 – 30m x 8 – 20m Eucalyptus pauciflora Snow Gum 8 – 12m x 6 – 10m Eucalyptus polyanthemos Red Box 7 – 25m x 5 – 15m Eucalyptus radiata Narrow-leaved Peppermint 10 – 30m x 6 – 20m Eucalyptus rubida Candlebark Gum 10 – 25m x 10 – 20m Eucalyptus tricarpa Red Ironbark 10 – 30m x -
Arthur-Pieman Conservation Area Vehicle Tracks Assessment: Geoconservation, Flora and Fauna Values and Impacts
Arthur-Pieman Conservation Area Vehicle Tracks Assessment: Geoconservation, Flora and Fauna Values and Impacts A Report commissioned by the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service June 2007 Department of Primary Industries and Water ARTHUR-PIEMAN CONSERVATION AREA Vehicle Tracks Assessment: Geoconservation, Flora and Fauna Values and Impacts A Report commissioned by the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service June 2007 Resource Management & Conservation Division Department of Primary Industries and Water Hobart, Tasmania APCA Vehicle Track Assessment: Geoconservation, Flora and Fauna Values and Impacts i __________________________________________________________________________________________ IMPORTANT NOTE This report was commissioned by the Parks and Wildlife Service to assist a process to determine appropriate management of vehicular tracks in Arthur-Pieman Conservation Area. The recommendations in the report are based on an assessment of natural values (geoconservation, flora and fauna) only. They do not take account of cultural values, which are the subject of a separate assessment, and other factors. Decisions concerning management of the vehicle tracks are the responsibility of the Parks and Wildlife Service. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Resource Management and Conservation Division of the Department of Primary Industries and Water prepared this report with input from Michael Comfort, Rolan Eberhard, Richard Schahinger, Chris Sharples and Shaun Thurstans. Comments were received from the following RMC staff: Michael Askey- Doran, Jason Bradbury, Sally Bryant, Stephen Harris, Ian Houshold, Michael Pemberton and Greg Pinkard. Staff from the Parks and Wildlife Service at Arthur River provided assistance in the field and generously shared their collective knowledge. Air photos used in this study were orthorectified by Matt Dell and John Corbett. The Arthur-Pieman Vehicle Tracks Assessment Project was funded by the Natural Heritage Trust through Cradle Coast NRM. -
Lowland Grassy Woodland in the South East Corner Bioregion
Lowland Grassy Woodland in the South East Corner Bioregion Introduction These guidelines provide background information to assist landholders to identify remnants of Lowland Grassy Woodland in the South East Corner Bioregion (known here as Lowland Grassy Woodland). For more detailed information refer to the NSW Scientific Committee’s Final Determination at www.threatenedspecies.environment.nsw.gov.au/tsprofile/profile.aspx?id=20070 What is an endangered ecological community? An ecological community is a unique and naturally occurring assemblage of plants and animals. The presence of an ecological community can be determined by factors such as soil type, position in the landscape, climate and water availability, all of which influence species composition. An endangered ecological community (EEC) is an ecological community listed under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 as being at risk of extinction unless threats affecting these areas are managed and reduced. What is Lowland Grassy Woodland? Lowland Grassy Woodland is an open forest or woodland often with a layer of scattered small trees, an open shrub layer and a mostly continuous grassy ground layer. Some examples may reach a height of 40 m, but many regrowth stands may only be 10 m tall. It is associated with rainshadow areas of the south coast and hinterland of New South Wales which receive less rainfall than the more elevated surrounding areas. It typically occurs in undulating terrain up to 500 m elevation on granitic substrates (e.g. adamellites, granites, granodiorites, gabbros, etc.) but may also occur on locally steep sites and on acid volcanic, alluvial and fine-grained sedimentary substrates. -
Grey Box (Eucalyptus Microcarpa) Grassy Woodlands and Derived Native Grasslands of South-Eastern Australia
Grey Box (Eucalyptus microcarpa) Grassy Woodlands and Derived Native Grasslands of South-Eastern Australia: A guide to the identification, assessment and management of a nationally threatened ecological community Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 Glossary the Glossary at the back of this publication. © Commonwealth of Australia 2012 This work is copyright. You may download, display, print and reproduce this material in unaltered form only (retaining this notice) for your personal, non-commercialised use within your organisation. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, all other rights are reserved. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to: Public Affairs - Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, GPO Box 787 Canberra ACT 2610 Australia or email [email protected] Disclaimer The contents of this document have been compiled using a range of source materials and is valid as at June 2012. The Australian Government is not liable for any loss or damage that may be occasioned directly or indirectly through the use of or reliance on the contents of the document. CONTENTS WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS GUIDE? 1 NATIONALLY THREATENED ECOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES 2 What is a nationally threatened ecological community? 2 Why does the Australian Government list threatened ecological communities? 2 Why list the Grey Box (Eucalyptus microcarpa) Grassy Woodlands and Derived Native Grasslands of South-Eastern Australia as