DOCSLIB.ORG

Report of Ecological Surveys Between Sakaleshpura and Gundya Region

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Report of Ecological Surveys Between Sakaleshpura and Gundya Region Report of Ecological Surveys between Sakaleshpura and Gundya region PREPARED FOR CTII/JICA GUBBI LABS LLP TABLE OF CONTENTS PREAMBLE ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 The Issue ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 2 Ecological Assessments ........................................................................................................................................................................ 2 Amphibians ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Floristics ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Fishes ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Birds ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Objectives ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Study Area and Methods ...................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Study Area ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 5 Methods .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 6 Amphibians ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Flora .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Fishes .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 8 Birds .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Results .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Amphibians ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Richness ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 8 Ecological Status ......................................................................................................................................................................... 10 Locality specific amphibian richness ................................................................................................................................. 10 Species profile .............................................................................................................................................................................. 11 Conservation Index .................................................................................................................................................................... 14 Floristics .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 20 Unique features of sampling points ................................................................................................................................... 20 Significant findings .................................................................................................................................................................... 20 Fishes .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 26 Habitat ecology of key fish species ..................................................................................................................................... 29 i Birds ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 36 observations at Sampling Points ......................................................................................................................................... 38 Discussions .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 42 Amphibians ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 42 Flora ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 42 Fishes .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 43 Birds ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 45 Mitigation Measures ........................................................................................................................................................................... 46 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................................................................. 49 References ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 49 Annexure A: Maps ................................................................................................................................................................................ 52 Annexure B: Images and micro-habitats characteristics of sampling points ............................................................ 58 Annexure C: Photographs from the field ................................................................................................................................... 63 Annexure D: Plates of Amphibian species observed during the field survey. ........................................................... 67 Annexure E: Sampling pointwise list of species with their presence and Absence data. ..................................... 70 Annexure F: Glimpses of floral diversity of Shiradi and Gundya forest range .......................................................... 78 Annexure G: Site description and features based on Fish Sampling ............................................................................. 82 Annexure H: Fish species .................................................................................................................................................................. 89 Annexure I: Birds Sighted and Nest Holes ................................................................................................................................ 99 ii PREAMBLE Gubbi Labs is a private research collective having its expertise in mapping besides studying cities and ecology. The Labs works on a host of domains ranging from sustainable ecosystems to livable settlements. The Labs is powered by a collective with interdisciplinary expertise and focus on research, development and consultancy. The Labs has an extreme focus for taking theory to practice and vice-versa with expertise in geospatial science and technologies, field ecology, urban and regional
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Final Project Completion Report
    CEPF SMALL GRANT FINAL PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT Organization Legal Name: Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS) Status of freshwater fishes in the Sahyadri-Konkan Corridor: Project Title: diversity, distribution and conservation assessments in Raigad. Date of Report: 08-05-2015 Mr. Unmesh Gajanan Katwate Report Author and Contact Dr. Rupesh Raut Information CEPF Region: Western Ghats & Sri Lanka Hotspot (Sahyadri-Konkan Corridor) CEPF Strategic Direction 2: Improve the conservation of globally threatened species through systematic conservation planning and action. Grant Amount: $ 18,366.36 Project Dates: 1st July 2013 to 31st January 2015 Implementation Partners for this Project (please explain the level of involvement for each partner): Dr. Neelesh Dahanukar Indian Institute of Science, Education and Research (IISER) Involvement in field study, species identification, publication of project results in peer reviewed scientific journals and setting conservation priorities for the fishes of Raigad District. Systematics and genetic study of freshwater fishes collected during project period. Dr. Rajeev Raghavan Department of Fisheries Resource Management Kerala University of Fisheries and Ocean Studies (KUFOS), Kochi, India Conservation Research Group (CRG), St. Albert’s College, Kochi, Kerala, India Involvement in fish study, species identification, and publication of project results in peer reviewed journals. Contribution in systematic study of fishes of Raigad District and implementing regional conservation plans. Dr. Mandar Paingankar Department of Zoology, University of Pune Involvement in field surveys, fishing expeditions, species identification and publication of project results in scientific journals. Contribution in molecular study of fishes of the Raigad District. Dr. Sanjay Molur Zoo Outreach Organization (ZOO) Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641 035, India Involvement in developing strategic conservation plans for fishes in northern Western Ghats through IUCN Red List assessment of fishes.
    [Show full text]
  • Western Ghats & Sri Lanka Biodiversity Hotspot
    Ecosystem Profile WESTERN GHATS & SRI LANKA BIODIVERSITY HOTSPOT WESTERN GHATS REGION FINAL VERSION MAY 2007 Prepared by: Kamal S. Bawa, Arundhati Das and Jagdish Krishnaswamy (Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology & the Environment - ATREE) K. Ullas Karanth, N. Samba Kumar and Madhu Rao (Wildlife Conservation Society) in collaboration with: Praveen Bhargav, Wildlife First K.N. Ganeshaiah, University of Agricultural Sciences Srinivas V., Foundation for Ecological Research, Advocacy and Learning incorporating contributions from: Narayani Barve, ATREE Sham Davande, ATREE Balanchandra Hegde, Sahyadri Wildlife and Forest Conservation Trust N.M. Ishwar, Wildlife Institute of India Zafar-ul Islam, Indian Bird Conservation Network Niren Jain, Kudremukh Wildlife Foundation Jayant Kulkarni, Envirosearch S. Lele, Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies in Environment & Development M.D. Madhusudan, Nature Conservation Foundation Nandita Mahadev, University of Agricultural Sciences Kiran M.C., ATREE Prachi Mehta, Envirosearch Divya Mudappa, Nature Conservation Foundation Seema Purshothaman, ATREE Roopali Raghavan, ATREE T. R. Shankar Raman, Nature Conservation Foundation Sharmishta Sarkar, ATREE Mohammed Irfan Ullah, ATREE and with the technical support of: Conservation International-Center for Applied Biodiversity Science Assisted by the following experts and contributors: Rauf Ali Gladwin Joseph Uma Shaanker Rene Borges R. Kannan B. Siddharthan Jake Brunner Ajith Kumar C.S. Silori ii Milind Bunyan M.S.R. Murthy Mewa Singh Ravi Chellam Venkat Narayana H. Sudarshan B.A. Daniel T.S. Nayar R. Sukumar Ranjit Daniels Rohan Pethiyagoda R. Vasudeva Soubadra Devy Narendra Prasad K. Vasudevan P. Dharma Rajan M.K. Prasad Muthu Velautham P.S. Easa Asad Rahmani Arun Venkatraman Madhav Gadgil S.N. Rai Siddharth Yadav T. Ganesh Pratim Roy Santosh George P.S.
    [Show full text]
  • A CONCISE REPORT on BIODIVERSITY LOSS DUE to 2018 FLOOD in KERALA (Impact Assessment Conducted by Kerala State Biodiversity Board)
    1 A CONCISE REPORT ON BIODIVERSITY LOSS DUE TO 2018 FLOOD IN KERALA (Impact assessment conducted by Kerala State Biodiversity Board) Editors Dr. S.C. Joshi IFS (Rtd.), Dr. V. Balakrishnan, Dr. N. Preetha Editorial Board Dr. K. Satheeshkumar Sri. K.V. Govindan Dr. K.T. Chandramohanan Dr. T.S. Swapna Sri. A.K. Dharni IFS © Kerala State Biodiversity Board 2020 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, tramsmitted in any form or by any means graphics, electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the prior writted permission of the publisher. Published By Member Secretary Kerala State Biodiversity Board ISBN: 978-81-934231-3-4 Design and Layout Dr. Baijulal B A CONCISE REPORT ON BIODIVERSITY LOSS DUE TO 2018 FLOOD IN KERALA (Impact assessment conducted by Kerala State Biodiversity Board) EdItorS Dr. S.C. Joshi IFS (Rtd.) Dr. V. Balakrishnan Dr. N. Preetha Kerala State Biodiversity Board No.30 (3)/Press/CMO/2020. 06th January, 2020. MESSAGE The Kerala State Biodiversity Board in association with the Biodiversity Management Committees - which exist in all Panchayats, Municipalities and Corporations in the State - had conducted a rapid Impact Assessment of floods and landslides on the State’s biodiversity, following the natural disaster of 2018. This assessment has laid the foundation for a recovery and ecosystem based rejuvenation process at the local level. Subsequently, as a follow up, Universities and R&D institutions have conducted 28 studies on areas requiring attention, with an emphasis on riverine rejuvenation. I am happy to note that a compilation of the key outcomes are being published.
    [Show full text]
  • The Framework Species Approach to Forest Restoration: Using Functional Traits As Predictors of Species Performance
    - 1 - The Framework Species Approach to forest restoration: using functional traits as predictors of species performance. Thesis submitted in accordance with the requirements of the University of Liverpool for the degree of Doctor in Philosophy by Hannah Betts July 2013 - 2 - - 3 - Abstract Due to forest degradation and loss, the use of ecological restoration techniques has become of particular interest in recent years. One such method is the Framework Species Approach (FSA), which was developed in Queensland, Australia. The Framework Species Approach involves a single planting (approximately 30 species) of both early and late successional species. Species planted must survive in the harsh conditions of an open site as well as fulfilling the functions of; (a) fast growth of a broad dense canopy to shade out weeds and reduce the chance of forest fire, (b) early production of flowers or fleshy fruits to attract seed dispersers and kick start animal-mediated seed distribution to the degraded site. The Framework Species Approach has recently been used as part of a restoration project in Doi Suthep-Pui National Park in northern Thailand by the Forest Restoration Research Unit (FORRU) of Chiang Mai University. FORRU have undertaken a number of trials on species performance in the nursery and the field to select appropriate species. However, this has been time-consuming and labour- intensive. It has been suggested that the need for such trials may be reduced by the pre-selection of species using their functional traits as predictors of future performance. Here, seed, leaf and wood functional traits were analysed against predictions from ecological models such as the CSR Triangle and the pioneer concept to assess the extent to which such models described the ecological strategies exhibited by woody species in the seasonally-dry tropical forests of northern Thailand.
    [Show full text]
  • Riparian Flora of Thamiraparani River in Kanyakumari District, Tamilnadu, India J
    International Journal of Scientific Research and Modern Education (IJSRME) Impact Factor: 6.225, ISSN (Online): 2455 – 5630 (www.rdmodernresearch.com) Volume 2, Issue 1, 2017 RIPARIAN FLORA OF THAMIRAPARANI RIVER IN KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT, TAMILNADU, INDIA J. S. Angel Felix*, Z. Miller Paul*, S. Jeeva** & S. Sukumaran* * Department of Botany and Research Centre, Nesamony Memorial Christian College, Marthandam, Kanyakumari District, Tamilnadu, India. ** Scott Christian College (Autonomous), Research Centre in Botany, Nagercoil, Tamilnadu Cite This Article: J. S. Angel Felix, Z. Miller Paul, S. Jeeva & S. Sukumaran, “Riparian Flora of Thamiraparani River in Kanyakumari District, Tamilnadu, India”, International Journal of Scientific Research and Modern Education, Volume 2, Issue 1, Page Number 72-90, 2017. Copy Right: © IJSRME, 2017 (All Rights Reserved). This is an Open Access Article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Abstract: Riparian flora is an expressed survey to analyze marginal vegetation of river zones. The present study was conducted in Thamiraparani river of Kanyakumari District, Tamil Nadu, India. Result of the current study showed a total of, 720 species of angiosperms belonging to 449 genera under 126 families of these 76.5% were dicots and 23.5% of monocots were recorded.Habitually 30.4% herbs , 26.7% trees, 15.7% shrubs, 6.9% climbing shrubs, 5.2% perennial herbs, 3.3% annual herbs, 2 % twining herbs, 1.7% twining shrubs, 1.6% aquatic herbs, 1.3% climbing herbs, 0.6% rhizomatous herbs, 0.7% marshy herbs, 0.7% tunerous herbs, 0.6% lianas, 0.4% tuberous climbing herbs, 0.4% stragglinbg shrubs, 0.3% climbers, 0.3% climbing palms, 0.3% prostrate herbs, climbing shrub, creeping herb, epiphytic herb, parasitic shrub and parasitic twining herb were 0.1% .
    [Show full text]
  • Monograph of the Cyprinid Fis~Hes of the Genus Garra Hamilton (173)
    MONOGRAPH OF THE CYPRINID FIS~HES OF THE GENUS GARRA HAMILTON By A. G. K. MENON, Zoologist, ,Zoological Surt1ey of India, Oalcutta. (With 1 Table, 29 Text-figs. and 6 Plates) CONTENTS Page I-Introduction 175 II-Purpose and general results 176 III-Methods and approaches 176 (a) The definition of Measurements 176 (b) The analysis of Intergradation 178 (c) The recognition of subspecies. 179 (d) Procedures in the paper 180 (e) Evaluation of systematic characters 181 (I) Abbreviations of names of Institutions 181 IV-Historical sketch 182 V-Definition of the genus 187 VI-Systematic section 188 (a) The variabilis group 188 (i) The variabilis Complex 188 1. G. variabilis 188 2. G. rossica 189 (b) The tibanica group 191 (i) The tibanica Complex 191 3. G. tibanica. 191 4. G. quadrimaculata 192 5. G. ignestii 195 6. G. ornata 196 7. G. trewavasi 198 8. G. makiensis 198 9. G. dembeensis 199 10. G. ethelwynnae 202 (ii) The rufa complex 203 11. G. rufa rufa 203 12. G. rufa obtusa 205 13. O. barteimiae 206 (iii) The lamta complex 208 14. G. lamta 208 15. G. mullya 212 16. G. 'ceylonensis ceylonensis 216 17. G. c. phillipsi 216 18. G. annandalei 217 (173) 174 page (iv) The lissorkynckus complex 219 19. G. lissorkynchus 219 20. G. rupecula 220 ~ (v) The taeniata complex 221 21. G. taeniata. 221 22" G. borneensis 224 (vi) The yunnanensis complex 224 23. G. yunnanensis 225 24. G. gracilis 229 25. G. naganensis 226 26. G. kempii 227 27. G. mcOlellandi 228 28. G.
    [Show full text]
  • E:\Jega\Archives\Index\M.65\2005
    REVIEW ZOOS' PRINT JOURNAL 20(4): 1847-1849 AN OVERVIEW OF THE HILL TROUTS (BARILIUS SPP.) OF THE INDIAN REGION P.M. Raagam and K. Rema Devi Zoological Survey of India, Southern Regional Station, #130, Santhome High Road, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600028, India ABSTRACT range of distribution in India and are also found in Bangladesh, An attempt is made to account the taxonomic and biological Pakistan, Nepal and Srilanka. Four species are endemic to the information available on the bariline fishes of India. The Western Ghats, viz., B. evezardi, B. bakeri, B. canarensis and nominal list includes 21 species in the Indian region. Their distributional status and diagnostic features are detailed. B. gatensis; the first is restricted to Maharashtra, the latter three to central and southern Western Ghats. Of these three KEYWORDS species, B. gatensis has a wider distribution being found in the Barilius spp., cyprinidae, distribution, fish, hill trouts, India Western Ghats of southern Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Kerala, while B. bakeri is found in several west flowing rivers of Kerala The bariline cyprinid fishes have a trout-like appearance and only. Biju et al. (2000) reported its occurrence in 19 out of the inhabit medium to fast torrential mountain streams, earning them 39 west flowing rivers of Kerala surveyed by them. Recently the name “hill-trouts”. They are affected by the swiftness of the species has also been reported from an east flowing river in current but are capable of progressing against it. On the rush Karnataka (Rema Devi et al., in press). The species B. of water they seek shelter under rocks and stones at the bottom canarensis has a very limited range of distribution being found or hide under crevices along the edges of the streams (Yazdani, in Canara (Karnataka) only.
    [Show full text]
  • FAMILY Balitoridae Swainson, 1839
    FAMILY Balitoridae Swainson, 1839 - hillstream and river loaches [=Balitorinae, Homalopterini, Sinohomalopterini, Homalopteroidini] GENUS Balitora Gray, 1830 - stone loaches [=Sinohomaloptera] Species Balitora annamitica Kottelat, 1988 - annamitica stone loach Species Balitora brucei Gray, 1830 - Gray's stone loach [=anisura, maculata] Species Balitora burmanica Hora, 1932 - Burmese stone loach [=melanosoma] Species Balitora chipkali Kumar et al., 2016 - Kali stone loach Species Balitora eddsi Conway & Mayden, 2010 - Gerwa River stone loach Species Balitora elongata Chen & Li, in Li & Chen, 1985 - elongate stone loach Species Balitora haithanhi Nguyen, 2005 - Gam River stone loach Species Balitora jalpalli Raghavan et al., 2013 - Silent Valley stone loach Species Balitora kwangsiensis (Fang, 1930) - Kwangsi stone loach [=heteroura, hoffmanni, nigrocorpa, songamensis] Species Balitora lancangjiangensis (Zheng, 1980) - Lancangjiang stone loach Species Balitora laticauda Bhoite et al., 2012 - Krishna stone loach Species Balitora longibarbata (Chen, in Zheng et al., 1982) - Yiliang Xian stone loach Species Balitora ludongensis Liu & Chen, in Liu et al., 2012 - Qilong River stone loach Species Balitora meridionalis Kottelat, 1988 - Chan River stone loach Species Balitora mysorensis Hora, 1941 - slender stone loach Species Balitora nantingensis Chen et al., 2005 - Nanting River stone loach Species Balitora nujiangensis Zhang & Zheng, in Zheng & Zhang, 1983 - Nu-Jiang stone loach Species Balitora tchangi Zheng, in Zheng et al., 1982 - Tchang
    [Show full text]
  • Check List of Wild Angiosperms of Bhagwan Mahavir (Molem
    Check List 9(2): 186–207, 2013 © 2013 Check List and Authors Chec List ISSN 1809-127X (available at www.checklist.org.br) Journal of species lists and distribution Check List of Wild Angiosperms of Bhagwan Mahavir PECIES S OF Mandar Nilkanth Datar 1* and P. Lakshminarasimhan 2 ISTS L (Molem) National Park, Goa, India *1 CorrespondingAgharkar Research author Institute, E-mail: G. [email protected] G. Agarkar Road, Pune - 411 004. Maharashtra, India. 2 Central National Herbarium, Botanical Survey of India, P. O. Botanic Garden, Howrah - 711 103. West Bengal, India. Abstract: Bhagwan Mahavir (Molem) National Park, the only National park in Goa, was evaluated for it’s diversity of Angiosperms. A total number of 721 wild species belonging to 119 families were documented from this protected area of which 126 are endemics. A checklist of these species is provided here. Introduction in the National Park are Laterite and Deccan trap Basalt Protected areas are most important in many ways for (Naik, 1995). Soil in most places of the National Park area conservation of biodiversity. Worldwide there are 102,102 is laterite of high and low level type formed by natural Protected Areas covering 18.8 million km2 metamorphosis and degradation of undulation rocks. network of 660 Protected Areas including 99 National Minerals like bauxite, iron and manganese are obtained Parks, 514 Wildlife Sanctuaries, 43 Conservation. India Reserves has a from these soils. The general climate of the area is tropical and 4 Community Reserves covering a total of 158,373 km2 with high percentage of humidity throughout the year.
    [Show full text]
  • DIVERSITY in ANGIOSPERM FLORA of SIJU WILDLIFE SANCTUARY, SOUTH GARO HILLS DISTRICT of MEGHALAYA, INDIA *Dilip Kr
    Indian Journal of Plant Sciences ISSN: 2319–3824(Online) An Open Access, Online International Journal Available at http://www.cibtech.org/jps.htm 2014 Vol. 3 (3) July-September, pp.87-101/Roy et al. Research Article DIVERSITY IN ANGIOSPERM FLORA OF SIJU WILDLIFE SANCTUARY, SOUTH GARO HILLS DISTRICT OF MEGHALAYA, INDIA *Dilip Kr. Roy1, Anupam Das Talukdar2, M. Dutta Choudhury2 and Bipin Kr. Sinha3 1Botanical Survey of India, Eastern Regional Centre, Shillong-793003, India 2Department of Life Science and Bioinformatics, Assam University, Silchar-788011, India 3Industrial Section, Indian Museum, Botanical Survey of India, Kolkata-700016, India *Author for Correspondence ABSTRACT Diversity of vascular plants was studied in the Siju Wildlife Sanctuary of Meghalaya, in Northeast India. A total of 257 species of angiosperms comprising 213 genera and 83 families were recorded from 5.20 sq. kms area, between 90-200m altitudes. Of these, Dicotyledons comprise of 67 families, 158 genera and 189 species and monocotyledons comprise of 16 families, 55 genera and 68 species. 12 species of rare occurrence in the state of Meghalaya including 9 species listed under CITES were reported from the sanctuary along with some primitive taxa. Keywords: Angiosperm Diversit, Siju Wildlife Sanctuary, Meghalaya INTRODUCTION The North-Eastern region of India, south of the Brahmaputra River, is part of the globally recognized Indo-Burma biodiversity hotspot and host to a remarkable biodiversity that includes a high proportion of endemic, rare and endangered species (http://www.conservation.org/where/priority_areas/hotspots/asia- pacific/Indo-Burma/Pages/default.aspx). The region is a unique transitional zone between the Indian, Indo-Malayan and Indo-Chinese bio-geographical zones as well as the confluence of the Himalayan region with peninsular India (Rao, 1994).
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    OPEN ACCESS The Journal of Threatened Taxa fs dedfcated to bufldfng evfdence for conservafon globally by publfshfng peer-revfewed arfcles onlfne every month at a reasonably rapfd rate at www.threatenedtaxa.org . All arfcles publfshed fn JoTT are regfstered under Creafve Commons Atrfbufon 4.0 Internafonal Lfcense unless otherwfse menfoned. JoTT allows unrestrfcted use of arfcles fn any medfum, reproducfon, and dfstrfbufon by provfdfng adequate credft to the authors and the source of publfcafon. Journal of Threatened Taxa Bufldfng evfdence for conservafon globally www.threatenedtaxa.org ISSN 0974-7907 (Onlfne) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Prfnt) Short Communfcatfon Notes on the taxonomy and dfstrfbutfon of two endemfc and threatened dfpterocarp trees from the Western Ghats of Kerala, Indfa M.S. Sanfl, V.B. Sreekumar, K.A. Sreejfth, A.J. Robf & T.K. Nfrmesh 26 December 2017 | Vol. 9| No. 12 | Pp. 11033–11039 10.11609/jot. 3628 .9. 12.11033-11039 For Focus, Scope, Afms, Polfcfes and Gufdelfnes vfsft htp://threatenedtaxa.org/About_JoTT For Arfcle Submfssfon Gufdelfnes vfsft htp://threatenedtaxa.org/Submfssfon_Gufdelfnes For Polfcfes agafnst Scfenffc Mfsconduct vfsft htp://threatenedtaxa.org/JoTT_Polfcy_agafnst_Scfenffc_Mfsconduct For reprfnts contact <[email protected]> Publfsher/Host Partner Threatened Taxa Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 December 2017 | 9(12): 11033–11039 Notes on the taxonomy and distribution of two endemic and threatened dipterocarp trees from the Western Ghats of Kerala, India ISSN 0974-7907 (Online)
    [Show full text]
  • Dr. S. R. Yadav
    CURRICULUM VITAE NAME : SHRIRANG RAMCHANDRA YADAV DESIGNATION : Professor INSTITUTE : Department of Botany, Shivaji University, Kolhapur 416004(MS). PHONE : 91 (0231) 2609389, Mobile: 9421102350 FAX : 0091-0231-691533 / 0091-0231-692333 E. MAIL : [email protected] NATIONALITY : Indian DATE OF BIRTH : 1st June, 1954 EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS: Degree University Year Subject Class B.Sc. Shivaji University 1975 Botany I-class Hons. with Dist. M.Sc. University of 1977 Botany (Taxonomy of I-class Bombay Spermatophyta) D.H.Ed. University of 1978 Education methods Higher II-class Bombay Ph.D. University of 1983 “Ecological studies on ------ Bombay Indian Medicinal Plants” APPOINTMENTS HELD: Position Institute Duration Teacher in Biology Ruia College, Matunga 16/08/1977-15/06/1978 JRF (UGC) Ruia College, Matunga 16/06/1978-16/06/1980 SRF (UGC) Ruia College, Matunga 17/06/1980-17/06/1982 Lecturer J.S.M. College, Alibag 06/12/1982-13/11/1984 Lecturer Kelkar College, Mulund 14/11/1984-31/05/1985 Lecturer Shivaji University, Kolhapur 01/06/1985-05/12/1987 Sr. Lecturer Shivaji University, Kolhapur 05/12/1987-31/01/1993 Reader and Head Goa University, Goa 01/02/1993-01/02/1995 Sr. Lecturer Shivaji University, Kolhapur 01/02/1995-01/12/1995 Reader Shivaji University, Kolhapur 01/12/1995-05/12/1999 Professor Shivaji University, Kolhapur 06/12/1999-04/06/2002 Professor University of Delhi, Delhi 05/06/2002-31/05/2005 Professor Shivaji University, Kolhapur 01/06/2005-31/05/2014 Professor & Head Department of Botany, 01/06/2013- 31/05/2014 Shivaji University, Kolhapur Professor & Head Department of Botany, 01/08/ 2014 –31/05/ 2016 Shivaji University, Kolhapur UGC-BSR Faculty Department of Botany, Shivaji 01/06/2016-31/05/2019 Fellow University, Kolhapur.
    [Show full text]