Ligustrum Spp
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016
Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Revised February 24, 2017 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org C ur Alleghany rit Ashe Northampton Gates C uc Surry am k Stokes P d Rockingham Caswell Person Vance Warren a e P s n Hertford e qu Chowan r Granville q ot ui a Mountains Watauga Halifax m nk an Wilkes Yadkin s Mitchell Avery Forsyth Orange Guilford Franklin Bertie Alamance Durham Nash Yancey Alexander Madison Caldwell Davie Edgecombe Washington Tyrrell Iredell Martin Dare Burke Davidson Wake McDowell Randolph Chatham Wilson Buncombe Catawba Rowan Beaufort Haywood Pitt Swain Hyde Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Johnston Graham Henderson Jackson Cabarrus Montgomery Harnett Cleveland Wayne Polk Gaston Stanly Cherokee Macon Transylvania Lenoir Mecklenburg Moore Clay Pamlico Hoke Union d Cumberland Jones Anson on Sampson hm Duplin ic Craven Piedmont R nd tla Onslow Carteret co S Robeson Bladen Pender Sandhills Columbus New Hanover Tidewater Coastal Plain Brunswick THE COUNTIES AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NORTH CAROLINA Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org This list is dynamic and is revised frequently as new data become available. New species are added to the list, and others are dropped from the list as appropriate. -
(Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae : Cetoniinae : Tribe, Trichiini)1 Brandon Jones and Andrea Lucky2
EENY-704 Delta Flower Beetle Trigonopeltastes delta (Forster 1771) (Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae : Cetoniinae : Tribe, Trichiini)1 Brandon Jones and Andrea Lucky2 Introduction The delta flower beetle, Trigonopeltastes delta (Forster), is a member of the scarab beetle family Scarabaeidae, in the subfamily Cetoniinae. This subfamily is commonly known as flower or fruit chafers because their diet consists mostly of decomposing fruits or pollen (Cave and Ratcliffe 2008). Trigonopeltastes delta belongs to the tribe Trichiini, which contains mostly flower-frequenting species. Although this species is commonly encountered where it occurs, many details of its life cycle and its potential economic importance remain poorly studied. Like many other cetoniines, the delta flower beetle has bright colors and distinctive patterns that distinguish it from other similar species (Figure 1). The delta flower beetle is one of two species in Florida, but while Trigonopeltastes delta is a familiar sight, Trigono- Figure 1. Adult Trigonopeltastes delta (Forster) (dorsal view). peltastes floridana is extremely rare (Woodruff 1960). While Credits: Mike Quinn, TexasEnto.net they are superficially similar, these species are distinguished by distinctive yellow markings on the pronotum. Trigono- Etymology and Synonymy peltastes delta bears a triangular mark whereas Trigono- The name Trigonopeltastes delta is Greek in origin and peltastes floridana has a U- or V-shaped mark. describes the pronotal markings of the species. Trigon translates to triangle, pelt translates to a shield, and delta originates from the letter Δ, or delta. The Greek symbol for delta is a triangle, which resembles the beetle’s pronotal marking, and accounts for its common name. 1. This document is EENY-704, one of a series of the Department of Entomology and Nematology, UF/IFAS Extension. -
Approved Plant List 10/04/12
FLORIDA The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago, the second best time to plant a tree is today. City of Sunrise Approved Plant List 10/04/12 Appendix A 10/4/12 APPROVED PLANT LIST FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES SG xx Slow Growing “xx” = minimum height in Small Mature tree height of less than 20 feet at time of planting feet OH Trees adjacent to overhead power lines Medium Mature tree height of between 21 – 40 feet U Trees within Utility Easements Large Mature tree height greater than 41 N Not acceptable for use as a replacement feet * Native Florida Species Varies Mature tree height depends on variety Mature size information based on Betrock’s Florida Landscape Plants Published 2001 GROUP “A” TREES Common Name Botanical Name Uses Mature Tree Size Avocado Persea Americana L Bahama Strongbark Bourreria orata * U, SG 6 S Bald Cypress Taxodium distichum * L Black Olive Shady Bucida buceras ‘Shady Lady’ L Lady Black Olive Bucida buceras L Brazil Beautyleaf Calophyllum brasiliense L Blolly Guapira discolor* M Bridalveil Tree Caesalpinia granadillo M Bulnesia Bulnesia arboria M Cinnecord Acacia choriophylla * U, SG 6 S Group ‘A’ Plant List for Single Family Homes Common Name Botanical Name Uses Mature Tree Size Citrus: Lemon, Citrus spp. OH S (except orange, Lime ect. Grapefruit) Citrus: Grapefruit Citrus paradisi M Trees Copperpod Peltophorum pterocarpum L Fiddlewood Citharexylum fruticosum * U, SG 8 S Floss Silk Tree Chorisia speciosa L Golden – Shower Cassia fistula L Green Buttonwood Conocarpus erectus * L Gumbo Limbo Bursera simaruba * L -
Low and Medium Water Use Plant List
Low and Medium Water Use Plant List LOW WATER USE PLANT LIST Plant Type Common Name Scientific Name Trees Shoestring Acacia Acacia stenophylla Sweet Acacia Acacia smallii Desert Museum Palo Verde Cercidium sp. Thornless Mesquite Prosopis chilensis African Sumac Rhus lancea Large Shrubs Green Cassia Cassia nemophila Desert Honeysuckle Anisacanthus quadrifidus Texas Mountain Laurel Sophora secundiflora Medium Shrubs Texas Ranger Leucophyllum langmaniae Goldman’s Senna Senna polyantha Red Salvia Salvia greggii Small Shrubs Green Carpet Natal Plum Carissa macrocarpa Purple Spreading Lantana Lantana montevidensis Acacia Acacia redolens Golden mound lantana Lantana montevidensis Dwarf Rosemary Rosmarinus officinalis Accent Shrubs Century plant Agave Americana Bougainvillea Bougainvillea sp. Red Bird of Paradise Caesalpinia pulcherrima Golden Barrel Echinocactus grusonii Red Yucca Hesperaloe parviflora Regal Mist Muhlenbergia capillaries Firecracker Penstemon Penstemon eatonii Yucca Yucca pendula Desert spoon (Grey) Dasylirion wheeleri MEDIUM WATER USE PLANT LIST Plant Type Common Name Scientific Name Trees California Fan Palm California Fan Palm California Pepper California Pepper Large Shrubs Shiny Xylosma Xylosma congestum Wax Leaf Privet Ligustrum japonicum Medium Shrubs Mexican Sage Mexican Sage Dwarf Mock Orange Dwarf Mock Orange India Hawthorne India Hawthorne Small Shrubs Weeping Bottlebrush Calistemon viminalis Mexican Bush Sage Salvia leucantha Vines Lavender Trumpet Vine Clytostoma callistegioides Queen’s Wreath Antigonon leptopus . -
Pruning Trees and Shrubs-2
Pruning Trees and Shrubs Ursula Schuch University of Arizona School of Plant Sciences 1 Publications on Pruning Pruning Deciduous Shade Trees http://extension.arizona.edu/sites/extension.arizona.edu/files/pubs/az1139.pdf Pruning Citrus http://extension.arizona.edu/sites/extension.arizona.edu/files/pubs/az1455.pdf Pruning Shrubs in the Low and Mid Elevation Deserts in Arizona http://extension.arizona.edu/sites/extension.arizona.edu/files/pubs/az1499.pdf 2 1 Pruning is the intentional removal of parts of a plant for a purpose. 3 Pruning Equipment Sterilizing tools Virus, vascular fungus, bacteria Avoid oozing cankers 70% Isopropyl alcohol Listerine, Lysol, Pine-Sol 4 2 Why Do We Prune Plants? To remove damaged/broken branches To remove rubbing, crossing, inwardly growing branches For visibility & safety considerations To train young plants Control plant size Rejuvenation of plants Increase flowering, fruiting and vigor 5 Dead branches Sign blocked Broken branch Rubbing/crossing branches 6 3 Co-dominant leader 7 Remove suckers, root stock suckers, and adventitious buds growing on the stem 8 4 Pruning Basics • Never remove more than 25‐30% of the canopy in any given year • If the plant requires frequent pruning, then it may not be the best suited plant for that situation • Usually best done in the early life of the plant • Shearing of shrubs is labor intensive, generally unnecessary, requires regular repeat shearing 9 Pruning Basics Heading versus Thinning Cut anywhere Leaves STUBS Cut back to next lateral branch NO STUBS 10 5 Where to cut? Opposite buds Above a bud when possible. Prevents unsightly stubs that die back. -
Recovery Plan for Pimelea Spicata Pimelea Spicata Recovery Plan
© Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW), 2005 This work is copyright, however material presented in this plan may be copied for personal use or published for educational purposes, providing that any extracts are fully acknowledged. Apart from this and any other use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced without prior written permission from the Department of Environment and Conservation. The NPWS is part of the Department of Environment and Conservation Department of Environment and Conservation 43 Bridge Street (PO Box 1967) Hurstville NSW 2220 www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au Requests for information or comments regarding the recovery program for Pimelea spicata should be directed to: The Director General, Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW) C/- Coordinator Pimelea spicata recovery program Biodiversity Conservation Section, Metropolitan Branch Environment Protection and Regulation Division Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW) PO Box 1967 Hurstville NSW 2220 Ph: (02) 9585 6678 Fax: (02) 9585 6442 Cover photograph: Pimelea spicata in flower growing amongst grasses at Mt Warrigal in the Illawarra Photographer: Martin Bremner This Plan should be cited as following: Department of Environment and Conservation (2005) Pimelea spicata R. Br. Recovery Plan. Department of Environment and Conservation (NSW), Hurstville NSW. ISBN: 1 74137 333 6 DEC 2006/181 Approved Recovery Plan for Pimelea spicata Pimelea spicata Recovery Plan Executive summary This document constitutes the formal Commonwealth and New South Wales State Recovery Plan for the small shrub Pimelea spicata (Thymelaeaceae), and as such considers the conservation requirements of the species across its known range. It identifies the future actions to be taken to ensure the long-term viability of P. -
POTENTIAL of a NATIVE LACE BUG (LEPTOYPHA MUTICA) for BIOLOGICAL CONTROL of CHINESE PRIVET (LIGUSTRUM SINENSE) by JESSICA A
POTENTIAL OF A NATIVE LACE BUG (LEPTOYPHA MUTICA) FOR BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF CHINESE PRIVET (LIGUSTRUM SINENSE) By JESSICA A. KALINA (Under the Direction of S. Kristine Braman and James L. Hanula) Abstract This work was done to better understand the lace bug Leptoypha mutica Say (Hemiptera: Tingidae) and its potential for biological control of Chinese privet, Ligustrum sinense Lour (Oleaceae). L. mutica host utilization of Chinese privet was confirmed in a no choice test. In choice tests with plant species Chinese privet, swamp privet (Foresteria acuminata Michx), and green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica Marsh) L. mutica preferred green ash. The duration of development of L. mutica on Chinese privet from egg to adult ranged from 24.4 to 57.1 days at o o o o the temperatures: 20 C, 24 C, 28 C, and 32 C. Estimated threshold temperatures (To) and calculated thermal unit requirements (K) for development of egg, nymphal, and complete development were 11.0oC, 9.9oC, 10.5oC and 211.9, 326.8, 527.4 degree-days (DD). The only suspected specific Leptoypha spp. natural enemy found was a mymarid wasp, but was not concluded to be limiting factor for L. hospita’s success. INDEX WORDS: Chinese privet, Ligustrum sinense, Leptoypha mutica, biological control, invasive, biology, host study, no choice study, choice study, natural enemy complex. _________________________________________________________ POTENTIAL OF NATIVE LACE BUG (LEPTOYPHA MUTICA) FOR BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF CHINESE PRIVET (LIGUSTRUM SINENSE) By JESSICA A. KALINA B.S., The University of Georgia, 2012 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF SCIENCE GRIFFIN, GEORGIA 2013 ©2013 Jessica A. -
Developmental Biology of Leptoypha Mutica (Hemiptera: Tingidae) on Chinese Privet (Lamiales: Oleaceae) Author(S): J
Developmental Biology of Leptoypha mutica (Hemiptera: Tingidae) on Chinese Privet (Lamiales: Oleaceae) Author(s): J. Kalina, S.K. Braman, and J.L. Hanula Source: Journal of Entomological Science, 52(2):154-160. Published By: Georgia Entomological Society https://doi.org/10.18474/JES16-28.1 URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.18474/JES16-28.1 BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use. Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. Developmental Biology of Leptoypha mutica (Hemiptera: Tingidae) on Chinese Privet (Lamiales: Oleaceae)1 J. Kalina2, S.K. Braman3, and J.L. Hanula4 University of Georgia, Department of Entomology, 413 Biological Sciences Building, Athens, Georgia 30602 USA J. Entomol. Sci. 52(2): 154–160 (April 2017) Abstract The native lace bug, Leptoypha mutica Say (Hemiptera: Tingidae), has demonstrated potential as an insect biological control agent of invasive Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense Lour). -
Texas Big Tree Registry a List of the Largest Trees in Texas Sponsored by Texas a & M Forest Service
Texas Big Tree Registry A list of the largest trees in Texas Sponsored by Texas A & M Forest Service Native and Naturalized Species of Texas: 320 ( D indicates species naturalized to Texas) Common Name (also known as) Latin Name Remarks Cir. Threshold acacia, Berlandier (guajillo) Senegalia berlandieri Considered a shrub by B. Simpson 18'' or 1.5 ' acacia, blackbrush Vachellia rigidula Considered a shrub by Simpson 12'' or 1.0 ' acacia, Gregg (catclaw acacia, Gregg catclaw) Senegalia greggii var. greggii Was named A. greggii 55'' or 4.6 ' acacia, Roemer (roundflower catclaw) Senegalia roemeriana 18'' or 1.5 ' acacia, sweet (huisache) Vachellia farnesiana 100'' or 8.3 ' acacia, twisted (huisachillo) Vachellia bravoensis Was named 'A. tortuosa' 9'' or 0.8 ' acacia, Wright (Wright catclaw) Senegalia greggii var. wrightii Was named 'A. wrightii' 70'' or 5.8 ' D ailanthus (tree-of-heaven) Ailanthus altissima 120'' or 10.0 ' alder, hazel Alnus serrulata 18'' or 1.5 ' allthorn (crown-of-thorns) Koeberlinia spinosa Considered a shrub by Simpson 18'' or 1.5 ' anacahuita (anacahuite, Mexican olive) Cordia boissieri 60'' or 5.0 ' anacua (anaqua, knockaway) Ehretia anacua 120'' or 10.0 ' ash, Carolina Fraxinus caroliniana 90'' or 7.5 ' ash, Chihuahuan Fraxinus papillosa 12'' or 1.0 ' ash, fragrant Fraxinus cuspidata 18'' or 1.5 ' ash, green Fraxinus pennsylvanica 120'' or 10.0 ' ash, Gregg (littleleaf ash) Fraxinus greggii 12'' or 1.0 ' ash, Mexican (Berlandier ash) Fraxinus berlandieriana Was named 'F. berlandierana' 120'' or 10.0 ' ash, Texas Fraxinus texensis 60'' or 5.0 ' ash, velvet (Arizona ash) Fraxinus velutina 120'' or 10.0 ' ash, white Fraxinus americana 100'' or 8.3 ' aspen, quaking Populus tremuloides 25'' or 2.1 ' baccharis, eastern (groundseltree) Baccharis halimifolia Considered a shrub by Simpson 12'' or 1.0 ' baldcypress (bald cypress) Taxodium distichum Was named 'T. -
Oaks of the Wild West Inventory Page 1 Nursery Stock Feb, 2016
Oaks of the Wild West Inventory Nursery Stock Legend: AZ = Arizona Nursery TX = Texas Nursery Feb, 2016 *Some species are also available in tube sizes Pine Trees Scientific Name 1G 3/5G 10G 15 G Aleppo Pine Pinus halapensis AZ Afghan Pine Pinus elderica AZ Apache Pine Pinus engelmannii AZ Chinese Pine Pinus tabulaeformis AZ Chihuahua Pine Pinus leiophylla Cluster Pine Pinus pinaster AZ Elderica Pine Pinus elderica AZ AZ Italian Stone Pine Pinus pinea AZ Japanese Black Pine Pinus thunbergii Long Leaf Pine Pinus palustris Mexican Pinyon Pine Pinus cembroides AZ Colorado Pinyon Pine Pinus Edulis AZ Ponderosa Pine Pinus ponderosa AZ Scotch Pine Pinus sylvestre AZ Single Leaf Pine Pinus monophylla AZ Texas Pine Pinus remota AZ, TX Common Trees Scientific Name 1G 3/5G 10G 15 G Arizona Sycamore Platanus wrightii ** Ash, Arizona Fraxinus velutina AZ AZ Black Walnut, Arizona Juglans major AZ AZ Black Walnut, Texas Juglans microcarpa TX Black Walnut juglans nigra AZ, TX Big Tooth Maple Acer grandidentatum AZ Carolina Buckthorn Rhamnus caroliniana TX Chitalpa Chitalpa tashkentensis AZ Crabapple, Blanco Malus ioensis var. texana Cypress, Bald Taxodium distichum AZ Desert Willow Chillopsis linearis AZ AZ Elm, Cedar Ulmus crassifolia TX TX Ginko Ginkgo biloba TX Hackberry, Canyon Celtis reticulata AZ AZ AZ Hackberry, Common Celtis occidentalis TX Maple (Sugar) Acer saccharum AZ AZ Mexican Maple Acer skutchii AZ Mexican Sycamore Platanus mexicana ** Mimosa, fragrant Mimosa borealis Page 1 Oaks of the Wild West Inventory Pistache (Red Push) Pistacia -
RESEARCH REPORTS Fruit Had Fallen
Australian Weeds Vol. 2(4) Winter 1983 127 generally successful; less than 2"70 of shoots sampled eitheT carTied a ny Howers or showed ev id ence that ripe RESEARCH REPORTS fruit had fallen. Even in this minority of shoots, losses did not exceed 20"70, so eTTOTS due to fruit loss or incomplete fruit se t were negligible compaTed with the very hi gh natural variation among shoots. The numbeT of immatuTe fTuit formed was treated as fTuit production. FaT each shoot the following data were collected: diameteT of the stem at 20 em from the ground; two diameteTs of the canopy outline, at right-angles Fruit production by two species of privet, to one a notheT, from which the aTea of Ligustrum sinense Lour. and L. lucidum W.T.Ait., the canopy was calculated as an elli pse in Sydney wi th the two measured diameters; the height of the canopy at its highest point; an estimate of the percentage M. Westoby, J. Dalby and L. Adams-Acton projective foliage coveT (Specht, 1970) School of Biological Sciences, Macquarie Un iversity. North Ryde, due to other plants aT shoots, of any New South Wales 2113 species, over the shoot in question; an estimate of the numbers of fruit carried on the stem. This could not be made by complete census since the numbeTs Summary which Buchanan (1978) showed was fTequently exceeded 10' per shoot. readily eaten by biTds and dispersed up Fruit production by Chinese privet The estimate was made in the field by I (Ligustrum sinense) and large· leaved to km. -
Illustrated Flora of East Texas Illustrated Flora of East Texas
ILLUSTRATED FLORA OF EAST TEXAS ILLUSTRATED FLORA OF EAST TEXAS IS PUBLISHED WITH THE SUPPORT OF: MAJOR BENEFACTORS: DAVID GIBSON AND WILL CRENSHAW DISCOVERY FUND U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION (NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, USDA FOREST SERVICE) TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT SCOTT AND STUART GENTLING BENEFACTORS: NEW DOROTHEA L. LEONHARDT FOUNDATION (ANDREA C. HARKINS) TEMPLE-INLAND FOUNDATION SUMMERLEE FOUNDATION AMON G. CARTER FOUNDATION ROBERT J. O’KENNON PEG & BEN KEITH DORA & GORDON SYLVESTER DAVID & SUE NIVENS NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY OF TEXAS DAVID & MARGARET BAMBERGER GORDON MAY & KAREN WILLIAMSON JACOB & TERESE HERSHEY FOUNDATION INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT: AUSTIN COLLEGE BOTANICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF TEXAS SID RICHARDSON CAREER DEVELOPMENT FUND OF AUSTIN COLLEGE II OTHER CONTRIBUTORS: ALLDREDGE, LINDA & JACK HOLLEMAN, W.B. PETRUS, ELAINE J. BATTERBAE, SUSAN ROBERTS HOLT, JEAN & DUNCAN PRITCHETT, MARY H. BECK, NELL HUBER, MARY MAUD PRICE, DIANE BECKELMAN, SARA HUDSON, JIM & YONIE PRUESS, WARREN W. BENDER, LYNNE HULTMARK, GORDON & SARAH ROACH, ELIZABETH M. & ALLEN BIBB, NATHAN & BETTIE HUSTON, MELIA ROEBUCK, RICK & VICKI BOSWORTH, TONY JACOBS, BONNIE & LOUIS ROGNLIE, GLORIA & ERIC BOTTONE, LAURA BURKS JAMES, ROI & DEANNA ROUSH, LUCY BROWN, LARRY E. JEFFORDS, RUSSELL M. ROWE, BRIAN BRUSER, III, MR. & MRS. HENRY JOHN, SUE & PHIL ROZELL, JIMMY BURT, HELEN W. JONES, MARY LOU SANDLIN, MIKE CAMPBELL, KATHERINE & CHARLES KAHLE, GAIL SANDLIN, MR. & MRS. WILLIAM CARR, WILLIAM R. KARGES, JOANN SATTERWHITE, BEN CLARY, KAREN KEITH, ELIZABETH & ERIC SCHOENFELD, CARL COCHRAN, JOYCE LANEY, ELEANOR W. SCHULTZE, BETTY DAHLBERG, WALTER G. LAUGHLIN, DR. JAMES E. SCHULZE, PETER & HELEN DALLAS CHAPTER-NPSOT LECHE, BEVERLY SENNHAUSER, KELLY S. DAMEWOOD, LOGAN & ELEANOR LEWIS, PATRICIA SERLING, STEVEN DAMUTH, STEVEN LIGGIO, JOE SHANNON, LEILA HOUSEMAN DAVIS, ELLEN D.