DOCSLIB.ORG

Nymphaea Mexicana Zuccarini (Nymphaeaceae) in South Africa

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nymphaea Mexicana Zuccarini (Nymphaeaceae) in South Africa INITIATING BIOLOGICAL CONTROL FOR NYMPHAEA MEXICANA ZUCCARINI (NYMPHAEACEAE) IN SOUTH AFRICA A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Masters in Entomology at Rhodes University By MEGAN REID December 2019 RU-AREC ERAS ethics approval number: 2019-0371-304 Table of contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... 1 Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................... 3 List of figures ............................................................................................................................... 5 List of tables ................................................................................................................................. 9 Chapter 1: General introduction ............................................................................................. 11 1.1 INVASIVE ALIEN PLANTS ......................................................................................... 11 1.2 MANAGEMENT OF INVASIVE ALIEN PLANTS ..................................................... 13 Mechanical control ................................................................................................................ 14 Chemical control.................................................................................................................... 15 Biological and integrated control .......................................................................................... 15 1.3 HISTORY OF AQUATIC INVASIONS IN SOUTH AFRICA ..................................... 19 1.4 NYMPHAEA MEXICANA................................................................................................ 21 Distribution in South Africa .................................................................................................. 24 Hybrids .................................................................................................................................. 25 Impact .................................................................................................................................... 26 Current control ....................................................................................................................... 26 Potential impact ..................................................................................................................... 28 1.5 THESIS OUTLINES AND AIMS .................................................................................. 28 Chapter 2: Matching invasive Nymphaea mexicana to native range populations ....... 30 2.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 30 2.2 MATERIALS AND METHODS .................................................................................... 33 Sampling ................................................................................................................................ 33 DNA extraction...................................................................................................................... 34 ISSR PCR protocol and analysis ........................................................................................... 34 i Electropherograms ................................................................................................................. 39 ISSR scoring parameters ....................................................................................................... 39 Analysis of full dataset .......................................................................................................... 39 STRUCTURE analysis .......................................................................................................... 41 2.3 RESULTS ........................................................................................................................ 42 Preliminary tests .................................................................................................................... 42 ISSR data ............................................................................................................................... 43 STRUCTURE analysis .......................................................................................................... 48 2.4 DISCUSSION .................................................................................................................. 49 Chapter 3: Surveys for potential biological control agents for Nymphaea mexicana, with notes on field host specificity* .................................................................................................... 56 3.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 56 3.2 MATERIALS AND METHODS .................................................................................... 61 MaxEnt modelling and surveys ............................................................................................. 61 Host specificity pilot study .................................................................................................... 65 3.3 RESULTS ........................................................................................................................ 65 MaxEnt modelling ................................................................................................................. 65 Surveys .................................................................................................................................. 66 Host specificity pilot studies.................................................................................................. 78 Prioritisation .......................................................................................................................... 79 3.4 DISCUSSION .................................................................................................................. 80 Chapter 4: General discussion ................................................................................................ 86 4.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 86 4.2 MATCHING INVASIVE NYMPHAEA MEXICANA TO ITS NATIVE RANGE ......... 87 4.3 SURVEYS FOR POTENTIAL BIOLOGICAL CONTROL AGENTS ......................... 88 4.4 PREDICTING EFFICACY OF BIOLOGICAL CONTROL AGENTS ......................... 91 4.5 BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF HYBRIDS .................................................................... 95 ii 4.6 IMPORTANCE OF ANTHROPOGENIC INFLUENCE ON INVASIONS.................. 99 4.7 LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................... 100 4.8 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................. 102 References ................................................................................................................................. 104 iii Abstract Nymphaea mexicana Zuccarini (Nymphaeaceae) is an aquatic plant originating from south-eastern USA that is becoming increasingly invasive in South Africa as other invasive aquatic plants are being managed successfully through biological control. Mechanical and chemical control of aquatic weeds is expensive, damaging to the environment, and only effective in the short term, so biological control is more desirable as a management strategy for N. mexicana. The biological control of invasive alien plants requires that agents are host specific so that non-target risks are mitigated. For success to be achieved, it is important to ensure that the genetic structure of invasive populations is clarified so that agents can be collected from populations in the native range that match genetically to populations in the invasive range. This is especially important in cases where the morphology of invasive alien plants does not reflect genetic differences between populations. A previous study of the genetic structure of the invasive populations of N. mexicana in South Africa suggests the presence of hybrid forms of the plant in South Africa, with only one of these populations matching with samples from the native range. However, the study only used samples from two sites in the native range using amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs), so it was necessary to conduct further genetic analyses using samples from more sites in the native range. Hence, the first aim of this study was to develop a better understanding of the genetic structure of N. mexicana populations in the native and invaded range. Genetic samples were collected from sites in the native range during field surveys for potential biological control agents, and inter-simple sequence repeats (ISSRs) were used to compare the genetic structure of invasive and native populations of N. mexicana in South Africa. The results from these analyses suggest that seven of the 14 investigated invasive populations of N. mexicana in South Africa are genetically similar to populations in the native range, while the remaining seven populations are likely to be hybrid forms of the plant. This knowledge will be useful to target populations for biological control and highlights the need for further genetic analyses to determine the parentage of these hybrids so that biological control efforts are more likely to be successful. The initiation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fauna Lepidopterologica Volgo-Uralensis" 150 Years Later: Changes and Additions
    ©Ges. zur Förderung d. Erforschung von Insektenwanderungen e.V. München, download unter www.zobodat.at Atalanta (August 2000) 31 (1/2):327-367< Würzburg, ISSN 0171-0079 "Fauna lepidopterologica Volgo-Uralensis" 150 years later: changes and additions. Part 5. Noctuidae (Insecto, Lepidoptera) by Vasily V. A n ik in , Sergey A. Sachkov , Va d im V. Z o lo t u h in & A n drey V. Sv ir id o v received 24.II.2000 Summary: 630 species of the Noctuidae are listed for the modern Volgo-Ural fauna. 2 species [Mesapamea hedeni Graeser and Amphidrina amurensis Staudinger ) are noted from Europe for the first time and one more— Nycteola siculana Fuchs —from Russia. 3 species ( Catocala optata Godart , Helicoverpa obsoleta Fabricius , Pseudohadena minuta Pungeler ) are deleted from the list. Supposedly they were either erroneously determinated or incorrect noted from the region under consideration since Eversmann 's work. 289 species are recorded from the re­ gion in addition to Eversmann 's list. This paper is the fifth in a series of publications1 dealing with the composition of the pres­ ent-day fauna of noctuid-moths in the Middle Volga and the south-western Cisurals. This re­ gion comprises the administrative divisions of the Astrakhan, Volgograd, Saratov, Samara, Uljanovsk, Orenburg, Uralsk and Atyraus (= Gurjev) Districts, together with Tataria and Bash­ kiria. As was accepted in the first part of this series, only material reliably labelled, and cover­ ing the last 20 years was used for this study. The main collections are those of the authors: V. A n i k i n (Saratov and Volgograd Districts), S.
    [Show full text]
  • 27April12acquatic Plants
    International Plant Protection Convention Protecting the world’s plant resources from pests 01 2012 ENG Aquatic plants their uses and risks Implementation Review and Support System Support and Review Implementation A review of the global status of aquatic plants Aquatic plants their uses and risks A review of the global status of aquatic plants Ryan M. Wersal, Ph.D. & John D. Madsen, Ph.D. i The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of speciic companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned.All rights reserved. FAO encourages reproduction and dissemination of material in this information product. Non-commercial uses will be authorized free of charge, upon request. Reproduction for resale or other commercial purposes, including educational purposes, may incur fees. Applications for permission to reproduce or disseminate FAO copyright materials, and all queries concerning rights and licences, should be addressed by e-mail to [email protected] or to the Chief, Publishing Policy and Support Branch, Ofice of Knowledge Exchange,
    [Show full text]
  • SUNY Cortland School of Arts and Sciences Annual Report 2018-19
    SUNY Cortland School of Arts and Sciences Annual Report 2018-19 September 3, 2019 R. Bruce Mattingly, Dean Vincent DeTuri, Associate Dean Mary McGuire, Assistant Dean Meghan VanDeuson, Secretary II, Dean’s Office Michele Lella, Secretary I, Associate Dean’s Office i Table of Contents I. Introduction 2 II. Assessment and Student Learning Outcomes 2 III. Enrollment Trends and Budget Analysis 3 IV. Highlights and Major Accomplishments 4 A. Personnel Changes 4 B. Sabbatical Leaves and Other Leaves of Absence 5 C. Faculty Awards and Honors 6 D. Faculty Promotions effective Fall 2019 9 E. Alumni Awards and Honors 9 F. Department Highlights in Teaching, Research and Creative Activity 10 G. Faculty Service Activities 20 H. Associate Dean’s Report 21 Appendices 1. Academic Standing Data Tables 2. Faculty Publications and Creative Activities 3. Faculty Presentations 4. External Grants 5. Faculty Service Activities i I. Introduction We are pleased to present the 2018-19 Annual Report for the School of Arts and Sciences. This year, we were pleased to add a new member to our team, as Vincent DeTuri joined us as the new Associate Dean. Faculty across all eighteen departments continued their excellent work in all areas of responsibility. Christa Carsten, Mathematics, won the Non-Tenure Track Excellence in Teaching Award, and Scott Moranda, History, was the recipient of the Rozanne Brooks Dedicated Teaching Award. Tiantian Zheng, Sociology/Anthropology, was promoted to the rank of Distinguished Professor, and Donna West, Modern Languages, received the Chancellor’s Award for Excellence in Scholarship and Creative Activities. Kathleen Lawrence, Communication and Media Studies, won the Chancellor’s Award for Excellence in Faculty Service, and Jenn McNamara, Art and Art History, received the campus award for Outstanding Achievement in Service.
    [Show full text]
  • Bilimsel Araştırma Projesi (8.011Mb)
    1 T.C. GAZİOSMANPAŞA ÜNİVERSİTESİ Bilimsel Araştırma Projeleri Komisyonu Sonuç Raporu Proje No: 2008/26 Projenin Başlığı AMASYA, SİVAS VE TOKAT İLLERİNİN KELKİT HAVZASINDAKİ FARKLI BÖCEK TAKIMLARINDA BULUNAN TACHINIDAE (DIPTERA) TÜRLERİ ÜZERİNDE ÇALIŞMALAR Proje Yöneticisi Prof.Dr. Kenan KARA Bitki Koruma Anabilim Dalı Araştırmacı Turgut ATAY Bitki Koruma Anabilim Dalı (Kasım / 2011) 2 T.C. GAZİOSMANPAŞA ÜNİVERSİTESİ Bilimsel Araştırma Projeleri Komisyonu Sonuç Raporu Proje No: 2008/26 Projenin Başlığı AMASYA, SİVAS VE TOKAT İLLERİNİN KELKİT HAVZASINDAKİ FARKLI BÖCEK TAKIMLARINDA BULUNAN TACHINIDAE (DIPTERA) TÜRLERİ ÜZERİNDE ÇALIŞMALAR Proje Yöneticisi Prof.Dr. Kenan KARA Bitki Koruma Anabilim Dalı Araştırmacı Turgut ATAY Bitki Koruma Anabilim Dalı (Kasım / 2011) ÖZET* 3 AMASYA, SİVAS VE TOKAT İLLERİNİN KELKİT HAVZASINDAKİ FARKLI BÖCEK TAKIMLARINDA BULUNAN TACHINIDAE (DIPTERA) TÜRLERİ ÜZERİNDE ÇALIŞMALAR Yapılan bu çalışma ile Amasya, Sivas ve Tokat illerinin Kelkit havzasına ait kısımlarında bulunan ve farklı böcek takımlarında parazitoit olarak yaşayan Tachinidae (Diptera) türleri, bunların tanımları ve yayılışlarının ortaya konulması amaçlanmıştır. Bunun için farklı böcek takımlarına ait türler laboratuvarda kültüre alınarak parazitoit olarak yaşayan Tachinidae türleri elde edilmiştir. Kültüre alınan Lepidoptera takımına ait türler içerisinden, Euproctis chrysorrhoea (L.), Lymantria dispar (L.), Malacosoma neustrium (L.), Smyra dentinosa Freyer, Thaumetopoea solitaria Freyer, Thaumetopoea sp. ve Vanessa sp.,'den parazitoit elde edilmiş,
    [Show full text]
  • When Misconceptions Impede Best Practices: Evidence Supports Biological Control of Invasive Phragmites
    Biol Invasions https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-019-02166-8 (0123456789().,-volV)( 0123456789().,-volV) PERSPECTIVES AND PARADIGMS When misconceptions impede best practices: evidence supports biological control of invasive Phragmites Bernd Blossey . Stacy B. Endriss . Richard Casagrande . Patrick Ha¨fliger . Hariet Hinz . Andrea Da´valos . Carrie Brown-Lima . Lisa Tewksbury . Robert S. Bourchier Received: 9 July 2019 / Accepted: 26 November 2019 Ó The Author(s) 2019 Abstract Development of a biological control pro- the risks invasive Phragmites represent to North gram for invasive Phagmites australis australis in American habitats. But to protect those habitats and North America required 20 years of careful research, the species, including P. australis americanus,we and consideration of management alternatives. A come to a different decision regarding biological recent paper by Kiviat et al. (Biol Invasions control. Current management techniques have not 21:2529–2541, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530- been able to reverse the invasiveness of P. australis 019-02014-9) articulates opposition to this biocontrol australis, threats to native rare and endangered species program and questions the ethics and thoroughness of continue, and large-scale herbicide campaigns are not the researchers. Here we address inaccuracies and only costly, but also represent threats to non-target misleading statements presented in Kiviat et al. species. We see implementation of biocontrol as the (2019), followed by a brief overview of why biological best hope for managing one of the most problematic control targeting Phragmites in North America can be invasive plants in North America. After extensive implemented safely with little risk to native species.
    [Show full text]
  • 2014 Hydrilla Integrated Management
    Reviewed January 2017 Publishing Information The University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (UF/IFAS) is an Equal Opportunity Institution. UF/IFAS is committed to diversity of people, thought and opinion, to inclusiveness and to equal opportunity. The use of trade names in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing specific information. UF/IFAS does not guarantee or warranty the products named, and references to them in this publication do not signify our approval to the exclusion of other products of suitable composition. All chemicals should be used in accordance with directions on the manufacturer’s label. Use pesticides and herbicides safely. Read and follow directions on the manufacturer’s label. For questions about using pesticides, please contact your local county Extension office. Visit http://solutionsforyourlife.ufl.edu/map to find an office near you. Copyright 2014, The University of Florida Editors Jennifer L. Gillett-Kaufman (UF/IFAS) Verena-Ulrike Lietze (UF/IFAS) Emma N.I. Weeks (UF/IFAS) Contributing Authors Julie Baniszewski (UF/IFAS) Ted D. Center (USDA/ARS, retired) Byron R. Coon (Argosy University) James P. Cuda (UF/IFAS) Amy L. Giannotti (City of Winter Park) Judy L. Gillmore (UF/IFAS) Michael J. Grodowitz (U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center) Dale H. Habeck, deceased (UF/IFAS) Nathan E. Harms (U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center) Jeffrey E. Hill (UF/IFAS) Verena-Ulrike Lietze (UF/IFAS) Jennifer Russell (UF/IFAS) Emma N.I. Weeks (UF/IFAS) Marissa L. Williams (City of Maitland) External Reviewers Nancy L. Dunn (Florida LAKEWATCH volunteer) Stephen D.
    [Show full text]
  • Nymphaea Mexicana1
    Fact Sheet FPS-433 October, 1999 Nymphaea mexicana1 Edward F. Gilman2 Introduction Mexican Waterlily is a hardy, native plant that floats its round foliage and produces a fragrant, multipetaled, white flower just above the water (Fig. 1). It was abundant throughout Florida until the introduction of Water Hyacinth which has crowded out the Waterlilies. Control measures that reduce the Water Hyacinth population should help waterlilies grow back and become more prominent. Each leaf of the Waterlily lasts about 6 weeks before turning yellow. This is normal and should not be cause for concern. Flower showiness is legendary and each flower lasts several days, but flowers close in late afternoon and at night. Fragrant Waterlily grows in standing water about 18 inches deep and spreads by means of rhizomes. It can be prevented from spreading by planting it in a container without drainage holes and submerging the container into the water garden. This helps prevent the plant from invading the entire water garden. Although Waterlilies require full sun for best flowering, this one will produce some flowers with only 4 hours of direct sun. General Information Figure 1. Mexican Waterlily. Scientific name: Nymphaea mexicana Pronunciation: nim-FEE-uh meck-sick-KAY-nuh Planting month for zone 10 and 11: year round Common name(s): Mexican Waterlily, Yellow Waterlily Origin: native to Florida Uses: cut flowers; attracts butterflies Family: Nymphaeaceae Plant type: aquatic plant Availablity: somewhat available, may have to go out of the region to find the plant USDA hardiness zones: 3 through 11 (Fig. 2) Planting month for zone 7: year round Planting month for zone 8: year round Description Planting month for zone 9: year round 1.This document is Fact Sheet FPS-433, one of a series of the Environmental Horticulture Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida.
    [Show full text]
  • Patrones De Distribución De La Flora Vascular Acuática Estricta En El
    Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad 79: 435- 448, 2008 Patrones de distribución de la fl ora vascular acuática estricta en el estado de Tamaulipas, México Distributional patterns of the strictly aquatic vascular fl ora in the state of Tamaulipas, Mexico Arturo Mora-Olivo1*, José Luis Villaseñor2, Isolda Luna-Vega3 y Juan J. Morrone4 1Instituto de Ecología y Alimentos, Universidad Autónoma de Tamaulipas, 13 Blvd. Adolfo López Mateos 928, Ciudad Victoria 87040, Tamaulipas, México. 2Departamento de Botánica, Instituto de Biología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. Apartado postal 70-367, 04510 México, D. F., México. 3Departamento de Biología Evolutiva, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México , Apartado postal 70-399, 04510 México, D.F., México. 4Museo de Zoología “Alfonso L. Herrera”, Departamento de Biología Evolutiva, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Apartado postal 70-399, 04510 México, D. F., México. *Correspondencia: [email protected] Resumen. Se analizaron los patrones de riqueza y distribución de las plantas vasculares acuáticas estrictas en el estado de Tamaulipas, México. Se registraron 93 especies, 62 de las cuales son típicas de ambientes lénticos. La subcuenca Río Tamesí fue la que registró el mayor número de especies (68, 73.1%). No se registraron especies endémicas del estado, aunque existen 2 especies restringidas al territorio mexicano (Lobelia purpusii y Oserya coulteriana). Se consideran como raras 29 especies (31.2%) por presentarse en una sola subcuenca y sólo 2 especies están distribuidas ampliamente en la mayoría de éstas (Bacopa monnieri y Echinodorus berteroi). Un análisis de parsimonia de endemismos (PAE) de las subcuencas hidrológicas del estado con base en la presencia compartida de especies reveló que las plantas acuáticas estrictas presentan un patrón de distribución anidado.
    [Show full text]
  • The Noctuidae (Lepidoptera) of the Daghestan Republic (Russia)
    The Noctuidae (Lepidoptera) of the Daghestan Republic (Russia) Poltavsky Alexander Nikolaevitch & Ilyina Elena Vjatcheslavovna Abstract. In this paper the complete list of Noctuidae currently known from Daghestan, the largest republic in the North Caucasus, is given. The list comprises 343 species and includes original data of the authors, records from the two main national collections in Russia, and some data from a few publications. Noctuidae were recorded from 37 localities in Daghestan, situated in the five natural zones of the country. The time interval of the faunistic studies spreads through the main part of the 20th Century: from 1926 to 2000. Samenvatting. De Noctuidae (Lepidoptera) van de Republiek Daghestan (Rusland) Dit artikel bevat de volledige lijst van de 343 soorten Noctuidae die tot op heden bekend zijn uit Daghestan, de grootste republiek in de Noord-Kaukasus. De lijst werd samengesteld met persoonlijke waarnemingen van de auteurs, gegevens uit de twee belangrijkste verzamelingen in Rusland en enkele gepubliceerde gegevens. Noctuidae werden op 37 plaatsen verzameld in Daghestan, gelegen in de 5 natuurlijke gebieden van het land. De waarnemingen stammen uit een grote tijdspanne in de 20ste eeuw: van 1926 tot 2000. Résumé. Les Noctuidés (Lepidoptera) de la République du Daghestan (Russie) Cet article contient la liste complète des 343 espèces de Noctuidae qui sont connues du Daghestan, la république la plus grande du Nord-Caucase. La liste a été compilée avec les observations personnelles des auteurs, les données des deux plus grandes collections de Russie et quelques citations dans la littérature. Des Noctuidae furent capturés dans 37 localités différentes, situées dans les 5 zones naturelles du pays.
    [Show full text]
  • Ludwigia Grandiflora (Large-Flower Primrose-Willow) ERSS
    Large-flower Primrose-willow (Ludwigia grandiflora) Ecological Risk Screening Summary U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, May 2012 Revised, March 2018 Web Version, 2/1/2019 Photo: O. Pichard. Licensed under Creative Commons (CC-BY-SA-3.0). Available: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ludwigia_grandiflora_saint-mathurin-sur- loire_49_10082007_4.JPG. (March 2018). 1 Native Range and Status in the United States Native Range From CABI (2018): “L. grandiflora is native to the Americas, ranging from the Rio La Plata in Argentina north to the south/southeastern USA. In the USA, its range is primarily along the Atlantic coast and through the Gulf Coastal Plain (southeastern New York through Florida, westward to Texas) (McGregor et al., 1996).” From NatureServe Explorer (2018): “Global range includes two disjunct areas, one in southern Brazil, Bolivia, northeastern Argentina, Uruguay, and Paraguay (also locally in Guatemala), and the second (with relevance here) in the southeastern United States coastal plains of southern South Carolina, Georgia, northern Florida, and Louisiana, west to central Texas; and once in southwest Missouri (Zardini et al., 1991; Crow and Hellquist, 2000a).” “There is some uncertainty over the native range of Ludwigia grandiflora.” The USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (2018) website reports all occurrences in the contiguous United States are introductions. Status in the United States From NatureServe Explorer (2018): “This species has expanded rapidly in the past in the United States beyond its original early invasion into the Pacific Northwest and the American southeast. It is now found in more than 20 states with recent expansion continuing, though not as rapidly because a significant portion of its potential range has already been filled.
    [Show full text]
  • An Abstract of the Thesis Of
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Kathryn Wellons for the degree of Master of Science in Horticulture presented on June 7, 2018. Title: Ecophenology and Control of European Frogbit in a Hybrid Cattail Marsh of the St. Marys River, Michigan. Abstract approved: _____________________________________________________________________ Dennis Albert Great Lakes coastal wetland communities are threatened by the impacts of invasive plants on ecosystem function and biodiversity. What allows invasive plants to become dominant in invaded communities can be hard to define and context-dependent. Traits associated with invasion success in wetland systems – rapid vegetative growth, competitive superiority in resource acquisition, and tolerance for high nutrient levels – are shared by two co-occurring invasive plants, hybrid cattail (Typha × glauca) and European frogbit (Hydrocharis morsus- ranae). European frogbit is a free-floating weed causing substantial negative impacts to native ecosystems in the Great Lakes region. It is thought to be facilitated by the presence of emergent plants like hybrid cattail, but the nature of this relationship has not been empirically demonstrated or utilized in management strategies. The purpose of this thesis was to advance understanding of the phenology, ecology, and control of European frogbit within an invaded hybrid cattail marsh along the St. Marys River, a connecting channel between Lakes Huron and Superior. This marsh was a valuable site both for investigating the relationship between hybrid cattail and European frogbit and for assessing the role of deep water in the development and control of European frogbit. In an observational study, measures of the phenological development of European frogbit were accompanied by measures of environmental variables and estimates of plant community abundances to explore associations between European frogbit development and environmental conditions during a high-water period in the Great Lakes.
    [Show full text]
  • Desktop Biodiversity Report
    Desktop Biodiversity Report Land at Balcombe Parish ESD/14/747 Prepared for Katherine Daniel (Balcombe Parish Council) 13th February 2014 This report is not to be passed on to third parties without prior permission of the Sussex Biodiversity Record Centre. Please be aware that printing maps from this report requires an appropriate OS licence. Sussex Biodiversity Record Centre report regarding land at Balcombe Parish 13/02/2014 Prepared for Katherine Daniel Balcombe Parish Council ESD/14/74 The following information is included in this report: Maps Sussex Protected Species Register Sussex Bat Inventory Sussex Bird Inventory UK BAP Species Inventory Sussex Rare Species Inventory Sussex Invasive Alien Species Full Species List Environmental Survey Directory SNCI M12 - Sedgy & Scott's Gills; M22 - Balcombe Lake & associated woodlands; M35 - Balcombe Marsh; M39 - Balcombe Estate Rocks; M40 - Ardingly Reservior & Loder Valley Nature Reserve; M42 - Rowhill & Station Pastures. SSSI Worth Forest. Other Designations/Ownership Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty; Environmental Stewardship Agreement; Local Nature Reserve; National Trust Property. Habitats Ancient tree; Ancient woodland; Ghyll woodland; Lowland calcareous grassland; Lowland fen; Lowland heathland; Traditional orchard. Important information regarding this report It must not be assumed that this report contains the definitive species information for the site concerned. The species data held by the Sussex Biodiversity Record Centre (SxBRC) is collated from the biological recording community in Sussex. However, there are many areas of Sussex where the records held are limited, either spatially or taxonomically. A desktop biodiversity report from SxBRC will give the user a clear indication of what biological recording has taken place within the area of their enquiry.
    [Show full text]