DOCSLIB.ORG

Teralba Quarry Extensions Part 5: Fauna Assessment Report No

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Teralba Quarry Extensions Part 5: Fauna Assessment Report No Metromix Pty Ltd ABN: 39 002 886 839 Teralb a Quarry Extensions Fauna Assessment Prepared by Kendall & Kendall Ecological Services November 2011 Specialist Consultant Studies Compendium Volume 1, Part 5 This page has intentionally been left blank Metromix Pty Ltd ABN: 39 002 886 839 Fauna Assessment Prepared for: R.W. Corkery & Co. Pty Limited 1st Floor, 12 Dangar Road PO Box 239 BROOKLYN NSW 2083 Tel: (02) 9985 8511 Fax: (02) 9985 8208 Email: [email protected] On behalf of: Metromix Pty Ltd Level 4, 107 Phillip Street PARRAMATTA NSW 2150 Tel: (02) 9849 7400 Fax: (02) 9635 4816 Email: [email protected] Prepared by: Kendall & Kendall Ecological Services PO Box 196 WEST KEMPSEY NSW 2440 Tel: (02) 6566 029- Fax: (02) 6566 9280 Email: [email protected] November 2011 Kendall & Kendall Ecological Services METROMIX PTY LTD SPECIALIST CONSULTANT STUDIES Teralba Quarry Extensions Part 5: Fauna Assessment Report No. 559/13 This Copyright is included for the protection of this document COPYRIGHT © Kendall & Kendall Ecological Services, 2011 and © Metromix Pty Ltd, 2011 All intellectual property and copyright reserved. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright Act, 1968, no part of this report may be reproduced, transmitted, stored in a retrieval system or adapted in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without written permission. Enquiries should be addressed to Kendall & Kendall Ecological Services. 5 - 2 Kendall & Kendall Ecological Services SPECIALIST CONSULTANT STUDIES METROMIX PTY LTD Part 5: Fauna Assessment Teralba Quarry Extensions Report No. 559/13 CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................... 5-7 1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................... 5-9 1.1 BACKGROUND, LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND OBJECTIVES ...................................................................... 5-9 1.2 PROJECT SITE, STUDY AREA AND SUBJECT SITE ............................................................................... 5-10 2. PROJECT OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................... 5-13 2.1 PROJECT LOCALITY ................................................................................................................................. 5-13 2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................................................... 5-13 2.2.1 Existing Southern Extraction Area ................................................................................................... 5-13 2.2.2 Existing Mid Pit Extraction Area ....................................................................................................... 5-14 2.2.3 Proposed Southern Extension ......................................................................................................... 5-14 2.2.4 Proposed Northern Extension .......................................................................................................... 5-14 2.2.5 Non-Project related Commercial Operations ................................................................................... 5-14 3. METHODOLOGY........................................................................................................................................ 5-15 3.1 IDENTIFICATION OF TARGET SPECIES LIST ......................................................................................... 5-15 3.2 FAUNA SURVEYS ...................................................................................................................................... 5-18 3.2.1 Survey Period .................................................................................................................................. 5-18 3.2.2 Survey Personnel ............................................................................................................................ 5-18 3.2.3 Survey Techniques and Survey Effort ............................................................................................. 5-18 3.2.4 Weather Conditions Prior to and During the Field Survey................................................................ 5-30 3.3 DECCW INFORMATION SEARCHES ........................................................................................................ 5-30 3.3.1 DECCW Wildlife Atlas Search ......................................................................................................... 5-30 3.3.2 DECCW Threatened Species Website Search ................................................................................ 5-30 3.4 EPBC ACT PROTECTED MATTERS SEARCH ......................................................................................... 5-30 4. RESULTS ................................................................................................................................................... 5-31 4.1 TARGET SPECIES ..................................................................................................................................... 5-31 4.1.1 DECCW Wildlife Atlas Data Search ................................................................................................. 5-31 4.1.2 Other Studies Conducted in the Locality of the Study Area ............................................................. 5-33 4.1.3 Other Studies Conducted on the Study Area ................................................................................... 5-33 4.2 MIGRATORY SPECIES .............................................................................................................................. 5-34 4.2.1 Migratory Species Recorded within the Study Area during the Kendall Surveys ............................. 5-34 4.2.2 Migratory Species Recorded within the 10km of the Study Area on the DECCW Wildlife Atlas (7/3/2011) ........................................................................................................................................ 5-34 4.3 FAUNA HABITAT WITHIN THE STUDY AREA .......................................................................................... 5-35 4.3.1 Vegetation Communities of the Study Area ..................................................................................... 5-35 4.3.2 Specific Fauna Habitat Attributes ..................................................................................................... 5-37 4.3.3 Disturbance to Habitat ..................................................................................................................... 5-43 4.4 KOALAS ...................................................................................................................................................... 5-44 4.4.1 SEPP 44 Koala Habitat Assessment ............................................................................................... 5-44 4.4.2 Recovery Plan for the Koala ............................................................................................................ 5-46 4.4.3 Priorities Action Statement for the Koala ......................................................................................... 5-46 Kendall & Kendall Ecological Services 5 - 3 METROMIX PTY LTD SPECIALIST CONSULTANT STUDIES Teralba Quarry Extensions Part 5: Fauna Assessment Report No. 559/13 CONTENTS Page 4.5 FAUNA SPECIES RECORDED ON THE STUDY AREA ........................................................................... 5-46 4.5.1 Overview .......................................................................................................................................... 5-46 4.5.2 Species Listed under the Threatened Species Provisions of the EPBC Act Recorded during the Field Survey ..................................................................................................................................... 5-47 4.5.3 TSC Act Threatened Species Recorded During the Field Survey.................................................... 5-47 4.5.4 Introduced Vertebrate Species Recorded within the Study Area During the Field Survey ............... 5-48 5. DISCUSSION .............................................................................................................................................. 5-50 5.1 THREATENED SPECIES RECORDED WITHIN THE STUDY AREA DURING THE FIELD SURVEYS .... 5-50 5.1.1 Little Lorikeet ................................................................................................................................... 5-50 5.1.2 Barking Owl ..................................................................................................................................... 5-51 5.1.3 Hooded Robin .................................................................................................................................. 5-52 5.1.4 Grey-headed Flying-fox ................................................................................................................... 5-53 5.1.5 Eastern Freetail-bat ......................................................................................................................... 5-54 5.1.6 Little Bentwing-bat ..........................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Anyone for Slugs? - Densey Clyne
    Anyone for Slugs? - Densey Clyne No, thank you very much, you will be thinking. Slimy pests with no redeeming features at all - away with them! Well yes, some of them, but others deserve a closer look. If I had not become so thoroughly captivated by six-legged and eight-legged arthropods so early in my life I believe it would have been the slugs and snails that took my fancy. There is something so elegant about a snail gliding along, rather like a ship on a calm sea, and the courtship and mating habits of slugs can be spectacular. But one particular kind of slug has always intrigued me. Over the summer months one of the smooth-barked gumtrees in my Wauchope garden acquires an artistic pattern of meandering squiggles. One rainy night I went out after dark and there was the artist, moving very slowly high up on a branch - my old friend first met in Sydney, the Red Triangle slug, Triboniophorus graeffei. It was my first sighting of the slug in my new garden though I had recognised its squiggles on the gumtree. This year I’ve been excited to find them for the first time on my crepe Triboniophorus graeffei on gumtree myrtle trees, planted 5 years ago. I first got to know these slugs years ago in an overgrown Sydney suburban garden where giant bluegums grew on rich soil and it rained a lot. The slugs had taken a liking to a mature crepe myrtle tree, adding an extra touch to its beautifully patterned trunk. As well as being much bigger - up to 140mm - these slugs were different from any other slugs I knew.
    [Show full text]
  • Barbed Wire Vine
    Insects, beetles, bugs and slugs of Mt Gravatt Conservation Reserve Compiled by: Michael Fox www.megoutlook.org/flora-fauna/ © 2015-17 Creative Commons – free use with attribution to Mt Gravatt Environment Group Ants Dolichoderinae Iridomyrmex sp. Small Meat Ant Attendant “Kropotkin” ants with caterpillar of Imperial Hairstreak butterfly. Ants provide protection in return for sugary fluids secreted by the caterpillar. Note the strong jaws. These ants don’t sting but can give a powerful bite. Kropotkin is a reference to Russian biologist Peter Kropotkin who proposed a concept of evolution based on “mutual aid” helping species from ants to higher mammals survive. 22-Aug-17 Insects Beetles and Bugs - ver 5.4 Page 1 of 51 Mt Gravatt Environment Group – www.megoutlook.wordpress.com Insects, beetles, bugs and slugs of Mt Gravatt Conservation Reserve Formicinae Opisthopsis rufithorax Black-headed Strobe Ant 22-Aug-17 Insects Beetles and Bugs - ver 5.4 Page 2 of 51 Mt Gravatt Environment Group – www.megoutlook.wordpress.com Insects, beetles, bugs and slugs of Mt Gravatt Conservation Reserve Formicinae Camponotus consobrinus Banded Sugar Ant Size 10mm Eggs in rotting log Formicinae Camponotus nigriceps Black-headed Sugar Ant 22-Aug-17 Insects Beetles and Bugs - ver 5.4 Page 3 of 51 Mt Gravatt Environment Group – www.megoutlook.wordpress.com Insects, beetles, bugs and slugs of Mt Gravatt Conservation Reserve 22-Aug-17 Insects Beetles and Bugs - ver 5.4 Page 4 of 51 Mt Gravatt Environment Group – www.megoutlook.wordpress.com Insects, beetles, bugs and slugs of Mt Gravatt Conservation Reserve Formicinae Polyrhachis ammon Golden-tailed Spiny Ant Large spines at rear of thorax Nest 22-Aug-17 Insects Beetles and Bugs - ver 5.4 Page 5 of 51 Mt Gravatt Environment Group – www.megoutlook.wordpress.com Insects, beetles, bugs and slugs of Mt Gravatt Conservation Reserve Formicinae Polyrhachis australis Rattle Ant Black Weaver Ant or Dome-backed Spiny Ant Feeding on sugar secretions produced by Redgum Lerp Psyllid.
    [Show full text]
  • Insects, Beetles, Bugs and Slugs of Mt Gravatt Conservation Reserve
    Insects, beetles, bugs and slugs of Mt Gravatt Conservation Reserve Compiled by: Michael Fox www.megoutlook.org/flora-fauna/ © 2015-20 Creative Commons – free use with attribution to Mt Gravatt Environment Group Ants Dolichoderinae Iridomyrmex sp. Small Meat Ant Attendant “Kropotkin” ants with caterpillar of Imperial Hairstreak butterfly. Ants provide protection in return for sugary fluids secreted by the caterpillar. Note the strong jaws. These ants don’t sting but can give a powerful bite. Kropotkin is a reference to Russian biologist Peter Kropotkin who proposed a concept of evolution based on “mutual aid” helping species from ants to higher mammals survive. 4-Nov-20 Insects Beetles and Bugs - ver 5.9.docx Page 1 of 59 Mt Gravatt Environment Group – www.megoutlook.wordpress.com Insects, beetles, bugs and slugs of Mt Gravatt Conservation Reserve Formicinae Opisthopsis rufithorax Black-headed Strobe Ant Formicinae Camponotus consobrinus Banded Sugar Ant Size 10mm Eggs in rotting log 4-Nov-20 Insects Beetles and Bugs - ver 5.9.docx Page 2 of 59 Mt Gravatt Environment Group – www.megoutlook.wordpress.com Insects, beetles, bugs and slugs of Mt Gravatt Conservation Reserve Formicinae Camponotus nigriceps Black-headed Sugar Ant 4-Nov-20 Insects Beetles and Bugs - ver 5.9.docx Page 3 of 59 Mt Gravatt Environment Group – www.megoutlook.wordpress.com Insects, beetles, bugs and slugs of Mt Gravatt Conservation Reserve Formicinae Polyrhachis ammon Golden-tailed Spiny Ant Large spines at rear of thorax Nest 4-Nov-20 Insects Beetles and Bugs - ver 5.9.docx Page 4 of 59 Mt Gravatt Environment Group – www.megoutlook.wordpress.com Insects, beetles, bugs and slugs of Mt Gravatt Conservation Reserve Formicinae Polyrhachis australis Rattle Ant Black Weaver Ant or Dome-backed Spiny Ant Feeding on sugar secretions produced by Redgum Lerp Psyllid.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife (General) Regulations 2010
    Wildlife (General) Regulations 2010 I, the Governor in and over the State of Tasmania and its Dependencies in the Commonwealth of Australia, acting with the advice of the Executive Council, make the following regulations under the Nature Conservation Act 2002. 22 November 2010 PETER G. UNDERWOOD Governor By His Excellency's Command, D. J. O'BYRNE Minister for Environment, Parks and Heritage PART 1 - Preliminary 1. Short title These regulations may be cited as the Wildlife (General) Regulations 2010. 2. Commencement These regulations take effect on 1 January 2011. 3. Interpretation (1) In these regulations, unless the contrary intention appears – Act means the Nature Conservation Act 2002; adult male deer means a male deer with branching antlers; antlerless deer means a deer that is – (a) without antlers; and (b) partly protected wildlife; approved means approved by the Secretary; Bass Strait islands means the islands in Bass Strait that are within the jurisdiction of the State; brow tine means the tine closest to a deer's brow; buy includes acquire for any consideration; cage includes any pen, aviary, enclosure or structure in which, or by means of which, wildlife is confined; certified forest practices plan means a certified forest practices plan within the meaning of the Forest Practices Act 1985; device, in relation to a seal deterrent permit, means a device that – (a) is designed to, or has the capability to, deter seals from entering or remaining in a particular area of water; and (b) involves the use of explosives, the discharge
    [Show full text]
  • Hemiptera, Heteroptera, Scutelleridae)
    LUCIANA WEILER Morfologia do sistema eferente odorífero metatorácico e filogenia de Pachycorinae (Hemiptera, Heteroptera, Scutelleridae) Tese apresentada ao Programa de Pós-Graduação em Biologia Animal, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, como requisito parcial à obtenção do título de Doutor em Biologia Animal. Área De Concentração: Biologia Comparada Orientadora: Dra. Jocelia Grazia Coorientadora: Dra. Aline Barcellos UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL PORTO ALEGRE 2016 Morfologia do sistema eferente odorífero metatorácico e filogenia de Pachycorinae (Hemiptera, Heteroptera, Scutelleridae) LUCIANA WEILER Aprovada em ______ de _____________________ de ______. Dr. José Antônio Marin Fernandes Dr. Luciano de Azevedo Moura Dr. Márcio Borges Martins Everything could have been anything else and it would have had just as much meaning. Tennessee Williams AGRADECIMENTOS À professora Jocelia, por todo o tempo que foi orientadora, conselheira e amiga. Por toda a experiência partilhada, por todos os ensinamentos e, principalmente, pela confiança em mim e no meu trabalho durante todos estes anos. Por me provar, sempre com tanta serenidade, que tudo tem jeito na vida. À minha coorientadora Aline Barcellos, por ter me aceitado no seu projeto e por todas as informações e conhecimentos acerca dos escutelerídeos compartilhados comigo. Aos curadores das coleções entomológicas, por terem me emprestado o material para o desenvolvimentos desse estudo; especialmente Joe Eger. À secretária do PPG-BioAnimal, minha parceira, Ana Paula, por toda a ajuda, auxílio, paciência e por ter solucionado tantos problemas meus durante todos esses anos. Pelas trocas de ideias, pela simplicidade e transparência. Valeu, queridona! Ao meu pai e minha mãe. Por toda compreensão e ajuda..
    [Show full text]
  • Pittwater Nature Issue 5 April 2021
    1 Pittwater Nature Issue 5 April 2021 News and stories from Bushcarers, Wildlife carers, Community and home gardens Trad biocontrol in Ingleside Chase Reserve: Success! Trad biocontrol smut takes off. You’ll have read about our October 2020 smut releases in PNHA Newsletter 86. We’re excited to announce that Trad next to where we planted some infected stems along the track to the Irra- wong waterfall is looking yellow and sick. The spores of the smut, a type of fungus, have started spreading and in- fecting healthy Trad. We were advised to wait for up to a year for results, so to see Trad dying after only six months is wonderful. We receive boxes of infected stems from the CSIRO in Canberra. In February this year we planted stems amongst dense Trad along Narrabeen Creek at Warriewood. This April we planted in the Avalon reserves Toongari, Palmgrove Park and Plateau Park and in Crescent Reserve Newport. A few stems were also planted in the Avalon Community Garden. McCarrs Creek Reserve had been planted in October, but in April we planted more in other areas there. Click here: https://blog.csiro.au/smut-to-the-rescue/ to read about the CSIRO’s Wandering Trad biocontrol pro- gram. Left: Smut spores form on the lower surface of the leaf. Centre: Yellow dying cells from upper surface. Right: Infected area. Leaves will die, the plant will collapse, native vegetation can get light. Bush regenerators and gardeners, rejoice! Children: Ask us a question and we will try to answer. Here’s a trick question to ask someone: How many flowers are there in one daisy? Have you only given me one flower? Answer: I’ve actually given you a bunch of flowers because each daisy has lots of flowers (in the centre).
    [Show full text]
  • Land Snails of the Eungella Plateau and Environs, Clarke Range, Mid-Eastern Queensland
    LAND SNAILS OF THE EUNGELLA PLATEAU AND ENVIRONS, CLARKE RANGE, MID-EASTERN QUEENSLAND STANISIC, J.1 & WINDOW, E.2 This study documents the land snails recovered on the Eungella Biodiversity Survey. Thirty-three species belonging to 10 families are documented, representing the first attempt at analysing the altitudinal stratification of the Eungella land snail fauna. Three species were newly recorded and subsequently described from the survey, these being Eungellaropa crediton Holcroft 2018, Burwellia staceythomsonae Holcroft & Stanisic 2018, and Pereduropa burwelli Holcroft & Stanisic 2018. Fastosarion comerfordae Stanisic 2018 was also described from the survey material, having previ- ously been confused with the Mt Dryander Fastosarion superba (Cox, 1871). Species are discussed in relation to their current taxonomy, their local and more widespread distributions, and their habitat and microhabitat preferences. Shortcomings of the land snail survey are also briefly discussed. A bio- geographic overview of the Eungella rainforest land snails is presented. Keywords: elevational gradient, land snails, taxonomy, distributions 1 Biodiversity Program, Queensland Museum, PO Box 3300, South Brisbane, Queensland, Australia 2 School of Environmental & Natural Sciences, Griffith University, Nathan, Queensland, Australia INTRODUCTION given the predilec tion of land snails for humid The Eungella Biodiversity Survey (EBS) of 2014– wet forests along the length of the continent’s eastern 2015 (Ashton et al., this volume) was the first con- seaboard, the Eungella region appears to offer a num- certed effort at surveying and documenting the land ber of prime habitats for a robust community of land snails of the Eungella plateau and environs. Previous snails. land snail collecting in the area by the Queensland Museum (QM) comprised only short-term visits METHODS that formed part of more wide-ranging expeditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Identification and Functional Characterization of the First
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Identifcation and functional characterization of the frst molluscan neuromedin U receptor in the slug, Deroceras reticulatum Seung‑Joon Ahn1,2, Rory J. Mc Donnell3, Jacob A. Corcoran1,4, Ruth C. Martin5 & Man‑Yeon Choi1* Neuromedin U (NmU) is a neuropeptide regulating diverse physiological processes. The insect homologs of vertebrate NmU are categorized as PRXamide family peptides due to their conserved C‑terminal end. However, NmU homologs have been elusive in Mollusca, the second largest phylum in the animal kingdom. Here we report the frst molluscan NmU/PRXamide receptor from the slug, Deroceras reticulatum. Two splicing variants of the receptor gene were functionally expressed and tested for binding with ten endogenous peptides from the slug and some insect PRXamide and vertebrate NmU peptides. Three heptapeptides (QPPLPRYa, QPPVPRYa and AVPRPRIa) triggered signifcant activation of the receptors, suggesting that they are true ligands for the NmU/PRXamide receptor in the slug. Synthetic peptides with structural modifcations at diferent amino acid positions provided important insights on the core moiety of the active peptides. One receptor variant always exhibited higher binding activity than the other variant. The NmU‑encoding genes were highly expressed in the slug brain, while the receptor gene was expressed at lower levels in general with relatively higher expression levels in both the brain and foot. Injection of the bioactive peptides into slugs triggered defensive behavior such as copious mucus secretion and a range of other anomalous behaviors including immobilization, suggesting their role in important physiological functions. Neuromedin U (NmU) is a neuropeptide, identifed initially from the porcine spinal cord1.
    [Show full text]
  • European Birds and Aposematic Heteroptera: Review of Comparative Experiments
    Bulletin of Insectology 61 (1): 163-165, 2008 ISSN 1721-8861 European birds and aposematic Heteroptera: review of comparative experiments 1 1,2 1 1,3 1 Alice EXNEROVÁ , Kateřina SVÁDOVÁ , Petra FOUSOVÁ , Eva FUČÍKOVÁ , Dana JEŽOVÁ , Aneta 1 1 1 NIEDERLOVÁ , Michala KOPEČKOVÁ , Pavel ŠTYS 1Department of Zoology, Charles University, Praha, Czech Republic 2Department of biology, University of Hradec Králové, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic 3Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO-KNAW), Heteren, The Netherlands Abstract The efficiency of defensive mechanisms in 11 European aposematic species of Heteroptera against various passerine predators was analysed. Bird species differed in their reactions to aposematic preys: small insectivorous birds generally avoided aposematic bugs, but granivorous birds as well as large insectivorous birds frequently attacked them. The ability to overcome heteropteran chemical defences appears to be connected with the larger body size of birds and with their food-storing behaviour. From the bird’s point of view, various red-and-black aposematic species of Heteroptera form a mimetic complex. However, antipredatory defence properties of individual species differ substantially in their efficiency against bird predators, and the nature of the mimetic complex is rather quasi-Batesian than Müllerian. Key words: antipredatory defences, warning signals, Heteroptera Pentatomomorpha, Passeriformes. Introduction Materials and methods Aposematism is a type of antipredatory strategy, when Heteroptera the prey signals its own unprofitability by a signal under- We tested the reactions of birds to adults of the fol- standable to predators (Ruxton et al., 2004). There is con- lowing species: Pyrrhocoris apterus (L.), its white, yel- siderable evidence that prey defences as well as warning low, and orange mutants, and brown-painted individu- signals may be multimodal, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Adhesive Defence Mucus Secretions in the Red Triangle Slug (Triboniophorus Graeffei) Can Incapacitate Adult Frogs
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/544775; this version posted February 11, 2019. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY 4.0 International license. Adhesive defence mucus secretions in the red triangle slug (Triboniophorus graeffei) can incapacitate adult frogs John Gould1*, Jose W. Valdez2*, Rose Upton1 1School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, 2308 NSW, Australia 2 Department of Bioscience - Biodiversity and Conservation, Aarhus University, 8410 Rønde, Denmark *John Gould and Jose W. Valdez should be considered joint first author. Correspondence: John Gould, Conservation Biology Research Group, School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, University Drive, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia email: [email protected] Jose Valdez, Biodiversity and Conservation, Department of Bioscience, Grenåvej 14, Rønde 8410, Denmark email: [email protected] Abstract Gastropods are known to secrete mucus for a variety of purposes, including locomotion, reproduction, adhesion to surfaces, and lubrication. A less commonly known function of mucus secretion in this group involves its use as a defence against predation. Among the terrestrial slugs, mucus that serves this particular purpose has been studied for only a handful of species under laboratory conditions, where it is thought to be produced for self-fouling or to make individuals difficult to consume. However, the mechanisms of how these defensive secretions operate and their effectiveness in deterring predation in the natural world have not be described in much detail.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 1 Vernacular Names
    Appendix 1 Vernacular Names The vernacular names listed below have been collected from the literature. Few have phonetic spellings. Spelling is not helped by the difficulties of transcribing unwritten languages into European syllables and Roman script. Some languages have several names for the same species. Further complications arise from the various dialects and corruptions within a language, and use of names borrowed from other languages. Where the people are bilingual the person recording the name may fail to check which language it comes from. For example, in northern Sahel where Arabic is the lingua franca, the recorded names, supposedly Arabic, include a number from local languages. Sometimes the same name may be used for several species. For example, kiri is the Susu name for both Adansonia digitata and Drypetes afzelii. There is nothing unusual about such complications. For example, Grigson (1955) cites 52 English synonyms for the common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale) in the British Isles, and also mentions several examples of the same vernacular name applying to different species. Even Theophrastus in c. 300 BC complained that there were three plants called strykhnos, which were edible, soporific or hallucinogenic (Hort 1916). Languages and history are linked and it is hoped that understanding how lan- guages spread will lead to the discovery of the historical origins of some of the vernacular names for the baobab. The classification followed here is that of Gordon (2005) updated and edited by Blench (2005, personal communication). Alternative family names are shown in square brackets, dialects in parenthesis. Superscript Arabic numbers refer to references to the vernacular names; Roman numbers refer to further information in Section 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Jewel Bugs of Australia (Insecta, Heteroptera, Scutelleridae)1
    © Biologiezentrum Linz/Austria; download unter www.biologiezentrum.at Jewel Bugs of Australia (Insecta, Heteroptera, Scutelleridae)1 G. CASSIS & L. VANAGS Abstract: The Australian genera of the Scutelleridae are redescribed, with a species exemplar of the ma- le genitalia of each genus illustrated. Scanning electron micrographs are also provided for key non-ge- nitalic characters. The Australian jewel bug fauna comprises 13 genera and 25 species. Heissiphara is described as a new genus, for a single species, H. minuta nov.sp., from Western Australia. Calliscyta is restored as a valid genus, and removed from synonymy with Choerocoris. All the Australian species of Scutelleridae are described, and an identification key is given. Two new species of Choerocoris are des- cribed from eastern Australia: C. grossi nov.sp. and C. lattini nov.sp. Lampromicra aerea (DISTANT) is res- tored as a valid species, and removed from synonymy with L. senator (FABRICIUS). Calliphara nobilis (LIN- NAEUS) is recorded from Australia for the first time. Calliphara billardierii (FABRICIUS) and C. praslinia praslinia BREDDIN are removed from the Australian biota. The identity of Sphaerocoris subnotatus WAL- KER is unknown and is incertae sedis. A description is also given for the Neotropical species, Agonoso- ma trilineatum (FABRICIUS); a biological control agent recently introduced into Australia to control the pasture weed Bellyache Bush (Jatropha gossypifolia, Euphorbiaceae). Coleotichus borealis DISTANT and C. (Epicoleotichus) schultzei TAUEBER are synonymised with C. excellens (WALKER). Callidea erythrina WAL- KER is synonymized with Lampromicra senator. Lectotype designations are given for the following taxa: Coleotichus testaceus WALKER, Coleotichus excellens, Sphaerocoris circuliferus (WALKER), Callidea aureocinc- ta WALKER, Callidea collaris WALKER and Callidea curtula WALKER.
    [Show full text]