DOCSLIB.ORG

Round-Leaved Chaff Flower (Achyranthes Splendens Var

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Round-Leaved Chaff Flower (Achyranthes Splendens Var Round-Leaved Chaff Flower (Achyranthes splendens var. rotundata) Habitat Conservation Plan Kenai Industrial Park Project Prepared for: Hawai‘i Department of Land and Natural Resources Applicant: CIRI Land Development Company 2525 C Street, Suite 500 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Initial draft prepared by: AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 23049 Ualena Street, Suite 1100 Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96819 Revisions and final document produced by: SWCA Environmental Consultants, Honolulu Office Bishop Square: ASB Tower 1001 Bishop Street, Suite 2800 Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96813 October 2013 ROUND-LEAVED CHAFF FLOWER (ACHYRANTHES SPLENDENS VAR. ROTUNDATA) HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN KENAI INDUSTRIAL PARK PROJECT Prepared for: Hawaiʻi Department of Land and Natural Resources Applicant: CIRI Land Development Company 2525 C Street, Suite 500 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Draft Prepared by: AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 3049 Ualena Street, Suite 1100 Honolulu, Hawaiʻi 96819 Revisions and Final Document Produced by: SWCA Environmental Consultants Honolulu Office Bishop Square: ASB Tower 1001 Bishop Street, Suite 2800 Honolulu, Hawaiʻi 96813 October 2013 Round-Leaved Chaff Flower HCP; Kenai Industrial Park CONTENTS 1. Introduction and Project Overview .................................................................................................. 1 1.1. Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.2. Applicant ....................................................................................................................................... 3 1.3. Regulatory Context ....................................................................................................................... 3 1.3.1. HRS Chapter 195D ............................................................................................................... 3 1.4. Project Description ........................................................................................................................ 5 1.4.1. Project Location and Description .......................................................................................... 5 1.4.2. Covered Activities................................................................................................................. 5 1.4.3. Purpose and Need for the Project .......................................................................................... 9 1.5. List of Preparers ............................................................................................................................ 9 2. Description of Habitat Conservation Plan ...................................................................................... 10 2.1. Purpose of This HCP .................................................................................................................. 10 2.2. Scope and Term .......................................................................................................................... 10 3. Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................................... 11 3.1. Location, Vicinity, and Climate .................................................................................................. 11 3.2. Topography and Geology............................................................................................................ 11 3.3. Soils............................................................................................................................................. 12 3.4. Hydrology, Drainage and Water Resources ................................................................................ 12 3.4.1. Surface Water ...................................................................................................................... 12 3.4.2. Flooding .............................................................................................................................. 12 3.4.3. Groundwater ....................................................................................................................... 12 3.5. Land Use Designations ............................................................................................................... 13 3.6. Vegetation ................................................................................................................................... 13 3.6.1. Listed Plant Species ............................................................................................................ 13 3.7. Fauna ........................................................................................................................................... 18 3.7.1. Surveys Conducted ............................................................................................................. 18 3.7.2. Non-Listed Species ............................................................................................................. 18 3.7.3. Listed Species ..................................................................................................................... 18 4. Biological Goals and Objectives ...................................................................................................... 19 5. Potential Impacts .............................................................................................................................. 20 5.1. Estimating Project-Related Impacts ............................................................................................ 20 5.2. Cumulative Impacts to Listed Species ........................................................................................ 20 6. Mitigation Measures ......................................................................................................................... 21 6.1. Selection of Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................... 21 6.2. Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................................... 21 6.2.1. Proposed Mitigation Site Description ................................................................................. 23 6.2.2. Mitigation Design ............................................................................................................... 26 6.3. Maintenance ................................................................................................................................ 27 6.4. Schedule for Implementation ...................................................................................................... 28 6.5. Consistency with Approved Recovery Plans .............................................................................. 28 6.6. Measures of Success ................................................................................................................... 29 i Round-Leaved Chaff Flower HCP; Kenai Industrial Park 6.7. Contingency measures ................................................................................................................ 30 7. Implementation ................................................................................................................................. 31 7.1. HCP Administration .................................................................................................................... 31 7.2. Monitoring and Reporting ........................................................................................................... 31 7.2.1. Monitoring .......................................................................................................................... 31 7.2.2. Reporting ............................................................................................................................. 35 7.3. Adaptive Management ................................................................................................................ 36 7.4. Funding ....................................................................................................................................... 36 7.5. Changes in Conditions or Circumstances ................................................................................... 36 7.6. Permit Duration ........................................................................................................................... 36 7.7. Revisions and Amendments ........................................................................................................ 37 7.7.1. Minor Amendments ............................................................................................................ 37 7.7.2. Major Amendments............................................................................................................. 37 7.8. Permit Transfer ........................................................................................................................... 38 8. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 39 9. Literature Cited ................................................................................................................................ 40 ii Round-Leaved Chaff Flower HCP; Kenai Industrial Park FIGURES Figure 1.1. Project location. ........................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Identification of Cereal Remains from Archaeological Sites 2Nd Edition 2006
    Identification of cereal remains from archaeological sites 2nd edition 2006 Spikelet fork of the “new glume wheat” (Jones et al. 2000) Stefanie JACOMET and collaborators Archaeobotany Lab IPAS, Basel University English translation partly by James Greig CEREALS: CEREALIA Fam. Poaceae /Gramineae (Grasses) Systematics and Taxonomy All cereal species belong botanically (taxonomically) to the large family of the Gramineae (Poaceae). This is one of the largest Angiosperm families with >10 000 different species. In the following the systematics for some of the most imporant taxa is shown: class: Monocotyledoneae order: Poales familiy: Poaceae (= Gramineae) (Süssgräser) subfamily: Pooideae Tribus: Triticeae Subtribus: Triticinae genera: Triticum (Weizen, wheat); Aegilops ; Hordeum (Gerste; barley); Elymus; Hordelymus; Agropyron; Secale (Roggen, rye) Note : Avena and the millets belong to other Tribus. The identification of prehistoric cereal remains assumes understanding of different subject areas in botany. These are mainly morphology and anatomy, but also phylogeny and evolution (and today, also genetics). Since most of the cereal species are treated as domesticated plants, many different forms such as subspecies, varieties, and forms appear inside the genus and species (see table below). In domesticates the taxonomical category of variety is also called “sort” (lat. cultivar, abbreviated: cv.). This refers to a variety which evolved through breeding. Cultivar is the lowest taxonomic rank in the domesticated plants. Occasionally, cultivars are also called races: e.g. landraces evolved through genetic isolation, under local environmental conditions whereas „high-breed-races“ were breed by strong selection of humans. Anyhow: The morphological delimitation of cultivars is difficult, sometimes even impossible. It needs great experience and very detailed morphological knowledge.
    [Show full text]
  • International Journal of Universal Pharmacy and Bio
    1| P a g e International Standard Serial Number (ISSN): 2319-8141 International Journal of Universal Pharmacy and Bio Sciences 5(3): May-June 2016 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UNIVERSAL PHARMACY AND BIO SCIENCES IMPACT FACTOR 2.966*** ICV 6.16*** Pharmaceutical Sciences RESEARCH ARTICLE …………!!! FREE RADICAL SCAVENGING ACTIVITY AND PHYTOCHEMICAL INVESTIGATION OF ACHYRANTHES SPLENDENS SEEDS Gill N.S*, AroraRashmi, KausharAnmol, KaurManpreet Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Rayat Institute of Pharmacy, Railmajra, SBS Nagar, Pb. 144533. KEYWORDS: ABSTRACT Achyranthes splendens, Achyranthes splendens is commonly called a Puthakanda and it is Antioxidant activity, also known as Ewa Hinahina also called Round chaff flower, is a Hydrogen peroxide. species of flowering plant in the pigweed family, Amaranthaceae For Correspondence: that is native to United state Hawaiian’. It is natural habitats are dry Gill N.S.* Address: forest, low shrublands, and shandy shores. It is threatened by Department of habitat loss. The present study was designed to investigate the Pharmaceutical Antioxidant property of A. splendens seeds. The dried coarse Chemistry, Rayat powder of A.splendens was exhaustively extracted with Methanol Institute of Pharmacy, and the resulting crude extracted was assayed for Antioxidant Railmajra, SBS Nagar, activity. The extract showed strong Antioxidant property which Pb. 144533. suggests the use of plant for therapeutic purpose, supporting tradition claims. Full Text Available On www.ijupbs.com P a g e | 2 International Standard Serial Number (ISSN): 2319-8141 INTRODUCTION: Achyranthes splendens is also called a Round chaff leaves and in Hindi it’s called a Puthakanda belonging to Family Amarantheceae. It is found in Africa, Uganda, Kenya and Asia.
    [Show full text]
  • Black Chaff of Wheat Stephen N
    ® ® University of Nebraska–Lincoln Extension, Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources Know how. Know now. G1672 (Revised December 2012) Black Chaff of Wheat Stephen N. Wegulo, Extension Plant Pathologist widely distributed bacterial disease of small grains and can Cause, symptoms, disease cycle, and management cause yield losses of up to 40 percent. of black chaff of wheat. Cause and Symptoms Black chaff is a bacterial disease of wheat common in Black chaff is caused by the bacterium Xanthomonas irrigated fields or in areas with abundant rainfall during the campestris pathovar (pv.) undulosa. The disease derives its growing season. It is also known as bacterial stripe or bacte- name from the darkened glumes of infected plants (Figure rial leaf streak. The disease also occurs on barley, oats, rye, 1A). This symptom is similar to that caused by genetic triticale, and many grasses. It is the most important and most melanism (darkening of tissue) and glume blotch incited by Stagonospora nodorum. Black chaff can be distinguished from other diseases by the appearance of cream to yellow bacterial ooze in the form of slime or viscous droplets produced on infected plant parts during wet or humid weather. This ooze appears light colored and scale-like when dry. Bands of necrotic and healthy tissue on awns (“barber’s pole” appearance) are indicative of black chaff. A dark brown to purple discoloration may appear on the stem below the head and above the flag leaf (Figure 1B). On leaves, symptoms start as small water-soaked spots or streaks that turn brown after a few days.
    [Show full text]
  • THE NATIVE COASTAL PLANTS of OIAHU, HAWAIII Raymond S. Tabata Sea Grant Marine Advisory Program University of Hawaii at Manoa Ho
    321 THE NATIVE COASTAL PLANTS OF OIAHU, HAWAIII Raymond S. Tabata Sea Grant Marine Advisory program University of Hawaii at Manoa Honolulu, Hawaii 96822 INTRODUCTION The most vulnerable elements in the coastline vegetation are the endemic strand elements, which are narrow in range ..•and the endemic elements of the native dry forests, which may have extended to the coast in the leeward areas.... (Richmond & Mueller­ Dombois 1972). The demise of the Hawaiian endemic flora has been a concern for many decades. Degener (1932 et seq.), Egler (1947), and Richmond and Mueller-Dombois (1972) h~ve documented the gradual loss of native plants on O'ahu due to the impacts of agriculture, development, and introduced plants. In recent years, with in­ creased interest in Hawaiiana, the native Hawaiian environment, and coastal zone management, there has been increasing concern for native coastal plants. This is shown by several, recent pUblications written for general audiences on this subject: Arrigoni (1977, 1978), Merlin (1977), and Tabata (1979). Also, a 20-minute slide/tape program "Ni Mea Uiu Ma Kahakai a Hawaili" was produced by Kimura and Nagata (1979). For O'ahu,particular1y, there is now new information on the status of native coastal plants: Richmond and Mue1ler-Dombois (1972) on O'ahu coastline ecosystems; Fosberg and Herbst (1975) on rare and endangered plants; Herbst (1976), ErS Corp. (1977), and Miura and Sato (1978) on the Barber's Point Deep-Draft Harbor site; Stemmermann (1977) on Hawaiian sandalwoods (Santalum spp.); Degener and Degener (1978) on the lohai (Sesbania spp.); Elliott and Hall (1978) on the Kahuku area; Char and Balakrishnan (1979) on the 'Ewa ·Plains flora; Gardner (1979) on nehe (LiEochaeta spp.); and Kimura and Nagata (19frO) on endangered coastal envi­ ronments.
    [Show full text]
  • Wheat Cleaning Basics
    Goal in Wheat Cleaning • Remove Non-Wheat Material – Metal – Foreign Material (Debris) – Stones – Grains other than wheat (soybean, corn, sorghum,… etc. – Weed Seeds • Remove Wheat not-fit for Milling – Shrunken & Broken – Diseased & Damaged Non-Wheat Material Wheat not-fit for Milling Shrunken/Shriveled Diseased- Scab Insect Damaged Black Tip (color defect) Ergot Heat Damaged Physical Properties of Common Impurities • Impurities are separated from wheat based physical differences which aid their removal. • Magnetic properties • Flow in air properties • Size and shape • Density • Friability (easily broken by impact) • Surface characteristics (color and texture) Wheat Cleaning System Cleaning System Design Principle 1. Eliminate impurities that pose a significant health and safety risk first. – Ferrous Metal (grain dust explosion hazard). – Grain Dust (explosion risk, health/safety risk). 2. Eliminate impurities which impact downstream machine efficiency. – Light chaff and dust (bulky, poor flow characteristics, decreases screening efficiency). Generic Cleaning Flow Principle Magnetic Separation Dust/chaff removal Size- coarse tolerance Larger/Smaller Size- fine tolerance Density Length Width Shape Friction/Abrasion Impact Friability Color/ Surface Characteristics Pre-Cleaning for Wheat Storage Benefits of Pre-Cleaning • Decrease infestation risk. • Improve sanitation and dust control. • Decrease microbial growth. • Improves flow of grain through the bin. • Increases storage life of grain. Generic Cleaning Flow Principle Grain Dust Explosion Risk. Magnetic Separation Explosion risk, sanitation, health and safety risk. Dust/chaff Removal Greatly improves equipment efficiency. Least similar to wheat based on size. Easy to remove. Larger/Smaller than wheat Reduces bulk. Lighter than wheat. Stones and mud removal. Density High and low density separation. Magnetic Separator • Tramp Iron or Tramp metal is metal brought in with grain at recieveing.
    [Show full text]
  • *Wagner Et Al. --Intro
    NUMBER 60, 58 pages 15 September 1999 BISHOP MUSEUM OCCASIONAL PAPERS HAWAIIAN VASCULAR PLANTS AT RISK: 1999 WARREN L. WAGNER, MARIE M. BRUEGMANN, DERRAL M. HERBST, AND JOEL Q.C. LAU BISHOP MUSEUM PRESS HONOLULU Printed on recycled paper Cover illustration: Lobelia gloria-montis Rock, an endemic lobeliad from Maui. [From Wagner et al., 1990, Manual of flowering plants of Hawai‘i, pl. 57.] A SPECIAL PUBLICATION OF THE RECORDS OF THE HAWAII BIOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR 1998 Research publications of Bishop Museum are issued irregularly in the RESEARCH following active series: • Bishop Museum Occasional Papers. A series of short papers PUBLICATIONS OF describing original research in the natural and cultural sciences. Publications containing larger, monographic works are issued in BISHOP MUSEUM four areas: • Bishop Museum Bulletins in Anthropology • Bishop Museum Bulletins in Botany • Bishop Museum Bulletins in Entomology • Bishop Museum Bulletins in Zoology Numbering by volume of Occasional Papers ceased with volume 31. Each Occasional Paper now has its own individual number starting with Number 32. Each paper is separately paginated. The Museum also publishes Bishop Museum Technical Reports, a series containing information relative to scholarly research and collections activities. Issue is authorized by the Museum’s Scientific Publications Committee, but manuscripts do not necessarily receive peer review and are not intended as formal publications. Institutions and individuals may subscribe to any of the above or pur- chase separate publications from Bishop Museum Press, 1525 Bernice Street, Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96817-0916, USA. Phone: (808) 848-4135; fax: (808) 841-8968; email: [email protected]. Institutional libraries interested in exchanging publications should write to: Library Exchange Program, Bishop Museum Library, 1525 Bernice Street, Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96817-0916, USA; fax: (808) 848-4133; email: [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • ELP and ESP Station Handout Grist Mill
    ELP and ESP Station Handout Grist Mill INTRODUCTION The goal of this handout is to prepare you to lead the Grist Mill station during your Environmental Living Program or Environmental Studies Program. At the Grist Mill station, your students will experience firsthand what it was like to grind wheat into flour using a hand- powered grist mill. This station will allow you and your students to explore the history, science, language, and math related to agriculture. HISTORY The Fort’s primary crop was wheat and there were a number of fields near the Fort, so the grist mill had an important place at Sutter’s Fort. The mill was likely in operation both day and night, and prior to the establishment of the Fort, the nearest grist mill was about 65 miles away in Sonoma. It was not until 1846, when a grist mill was opened, near present day Sloughhouse, that there was another local source for flour. The mill and agriculture were central to John Sutter’s business plan for the Fort. He hoped create a thriving agricultural business. However, to be successful in agriculture, Sutter needed countless laborers. The large majority of those laborers were local California Indians. Early visitors to the Fort, such as the French diplomat and dignitary Comte de Mofras, wrote glowingly about the limitless potential for agriculture at New Helvetia. The rich soil and the flat grasslands were an agricultural paradise to the trained eye. However, potential does not always translate into production; Sutter and the large California Indian workforce had many obstacles to overcome.
    [Show full text]
  • Archaeobotanical and Isotopic Evidence of Early Bronze Age
    Archaeobotanical and isotopic evidence of Early Bronze Age farming activities and diet in the mountainous environment of the South Caucasus: a pilot study of Chobareti site (Samtskhe–Javakheti region) Erwan Messager, Estelle Herrscher, Lucie Martin, Eliso Kvavadze, Inga Martkoplishvili, Claire Delhon, Kakha Kakhiani, Giorgi Bedianashvili, Antonio Sagona, Liana Bitadze, et al. To cite this version: Erwan Messager, Estelle Herrscher, Lucie Martin, Eliso Kvavadze, Inga Martkoplishvili, et al.. Ar- chaeobotanical and isotopic evidence of Early Bronze Age farming activities and diet in the moun- tainous environment of the South Caucasus: a pilot study of Chobareti site (Samtskhe–Javakheti region). Journal of Archaeological Science, Elsevier, 2015, 53, pp.214-226. 10.1016/j.jas.2014.10.014. hal-01814002 HAL Id: hal-01814002 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01814002 Submitted on 12 Jun 2018 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Accepted Manuscript Archaeobotanical and isotopic evidence of Early Bronze Age farming activities and diet in the
    [Show full text]
  • Admixing Chaff with Straw Increased the Residues
    energies Article Admixing Chaff with Straw Increased the Residues Collected without Compromising Machinery Efficiencies Alessandro Suardi 1 , Sergio Saia 1,* , Walter Stefanoni 1 , Carina Gunnarsson 2, Martin Sundberg 2 and Luigi Pari 1 1 Council for Agricultural Research and Economics (CREA)—Research Centre for Engineering and Agro-Food Processing (CREA-IT), Via della Pascolare, 16 - 00015 Monterotondo Scalo (Rome) Italy; [email protected] (A.S.); [email protected] (W.S.); [email protected] (L.P.) 2 Research Institutes of Sweden (RISE), Ultunaallén 4, 756 51 Uppsala, Sweden; [email protected] (C.G.); [email protected] (M.S.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 18 February 2020; Accepted: 2 April 2020; Published: 7 April 2020 Abstract: The collection of residues from staple crop may contribute to meet EU regulations in renewable energy production without harming soil quality. At a global scale, chaff may have great potential to be used as a bioenergy source. However, chaff is not usually collected, and its loss can consist of up to one-fifth of the residual biomass harvestable. In the present work, a spreader able to manage the chaff (either spreading [SPR] on the soil aside to the straw swath or admixed [ADM] with the straw) at varying threshing conditions (with either 1 or 2 threshing rotors [1R and 2R, respectively] in the combine, which affects the mean length of the straw pieces). The fractions of the biomass available in field (grain, chaff, straw, and stubble) were measured, along with the performances of both grain harvesting and baling operations.
    [Show full text]
  • Agriculture: a Glossary of Terms, Programs, and Laws, 2005 Edition
    Agriculture: A Glossary of Terms, Programs, and Laws, 2005 Edition Updated June 16, 2005 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov 97-905 Agriculture: A Glossary of Terms, Programs, and Laws, 2005 Edition Summary The complexities of federal farm and food programs have generated a unique vocabulary. Common understanding of these terms (new and old) is important to those involved in policymaking in this area. For this reason, the House Agriculture Committee requested that CRS prepare a glossary of agriculture and related terms (e.g., food programs, conservation, forestry, environmental protection, etc.). Besides defining terms and phrases with specialized meanings for agriculture, the glossary also identifies acronyms, abbreviations, agencies, programs, and laws related to agriculture that are of particular interest to the staff and Members of Congress. CRS is releasing it for general congressional use with the permission of the Committee. The approximately 2,500 entries in this glossary were selected in large part on the basis of Committee instructions and the informed judgment of numerous CRS experts. Time and resource constraints influenced how much and what was included. Many of the glossary explanations have been drawn from other published sources, including previous CRS glossaries, those published by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and other federal agencies, and glossaries contained in the publications of various organizations, universities, and authors. In collecting these definitions, the compilers discovered that many terms have diverse specialized meanings in different professional settings. In this glossary, the definitions or explanations have been written to reflect their relevance to agriculture and recent changes in farm and food policies.
    [Show full text]
  • Lessons About Ancient Wheat from Studies of Kamut Brand Khorasan
    LESSONS ABOUT ANCIENT WHEAT FROM STUDIES OF KAMUT BRAND KHORASAN Robert M. Quinn, PhD Organic Farmer, Promoter & Researcher 333 Kamut Lane- Big Sandy, MT 59520 USA [email protected] Ancient Grain WorKshop – NPSAS Winter Conference Aberdeen, South Dakota – 24 January 2013 1. What are ancient wheat & modern wheat and how do they differ? 2. Why did modern wheat replace ancient wheat? 3. What is the maer with modern wheat? 4. What are our choices? 5. What we have learn from our research on Kamut brand ancient wheat Home base - Quinn Farm & Ranch: In Quinn family since 1920 – now 4000 acres (600 acres pasture) – dry land – 12-14 inches of rain – sandy loam – elevaon 3000 d. - frost free May 15 –Sep 15 – organic since 1986 – cash crops – winter wheat, Kamut brand Khorasan wheat, peas, feed and hull-less barley & high oleic safflower oil for food and fuel – soil building crops – peas, sweet clover, lencls & alfalfa – experimencng with dry land vegetables, a small orchard and using waste oil for fuel Let’s start with a few basic quescons – (answers: an organic wheat farmer’s point of view ) What is ancient wheat? A mixture of closely related wheat varieces from the wild combined to form a stable, diverse land race Why did it last so long and spread so far? Adapted through natural seleccon to create a stable populaon, high in nutricon, easy to store and transport - Know as the staff of life What is modern wheat? Geneccally different – in a substancal way Where does it come from? Man made crosses of exiscng varieces Why do we have Modern Wheat? cheap food policy – two goals for breeders 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Bacterial Leaf Streak and Black Chaff of Wheat
    Plant Disease PP1566 Management NDSU Extension Service Bacterial Leaf Streak and Black Chaff of Wheat Marcia McMullen, Extension Plant Pathologist, NDSU Department of Plant Pathology Tika Adhikari, Plant Pathologist, NDSU Department of Plant Pathology Causal Organism, Occurrence and Spread Symptoms and Comparison to Other Bacterial leaf streak (BLS) of wheat is caused by the Common Wheat Diseases in North Dakota bacterium Xanthomonas translucens pv. undulosa. Leaf symptoms: Early leaf infections of bacterial streak are Bacterial leaf streak has been observed frequently in characterized by translucent water-soaked streaks (Figure 1A). recent years in North Dakota and in the neighboring Initially, the causal bacterium may be visible as a shiny glaze or as states of Minnesota and South Dakota. During the 2008- clumps of dried bacteria on the leaf surface (Figure 1B and 1C). 09 growing seasons, surveys of wheat in fi ve locations in In contrast to symptoms caused by BLS, necrotic lesions of infec- North Dakota showed an average of 80 percent incidence tions by fungi in the Septoria species complex often have a gray- of BLS. Yield losses due to BLS and black chaff are ish, non-water-soaked appearance (Figure 2A), and the “pepper- variable, ranging from negligible to up to 40 percent, grain” sized spore-bearing structures of the Septoria species often depending on the stage of infection and severity. are visible in the center (Figure 2B). The causal bacterium is primarily seed-borne but may As the lesions of bacterial streak develop, these water-soaked survive in crop debris. The bacterium is spread by streaks become dry and turn brown or necrotic (Figure 3A).
    [Show full text]