DOCSLIB.ORG

Distribution and Population Dynamics of the Kerry Slug, Geomalacus Maculosus (Arionidae)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Distribution and Population Dynamics of the Kerry Slug, Geomalacus Maculosus (Arionidae) Distribution and population dynamics of the Kerry Slug, Geomalacus maculosus (Arionidae) Irish Wildlife Manual No. 54 Distribution and population dynamics of the Kerry Slug, Geomalacus maculosus (Arionidae) Rory Mc Donnell & Mike Gormally Applied Ecology Unit, Centre for Environmental Science, School of Natural Sciences, NUI Galway, Ireland. Citation: Mc Donnell, R.J. and Gormally, M.J. (2011). Distribution and population dynamics of the Kerry Slug, Geomalacus maculosus (Arionidae). Irish Wildlife Manual s, No. 54. National Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, Dublin, Ireland. Cover photo: Geomalacus maculosus © Rory Mc Donnell The NPWS Project Officer for this report was: Dr Brian Nelson; [email protected] Irish Wildlife Manuals Series Editor: F. Marnell & N. Kingston © National Parks and Wildlife Service 2011 ISSN 1393 – 6670 Distribution and population dynamics of Geomalacus maculosus ____________________________________________________ CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...............................................................................................................................2 1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................3 Background information on Geomalacus maculosus .......................................................................3 Research Objectives.............................................................................................................................6 2. SURVEY FOR GEOMALACUS MACULOSUS ..................................................................................................7 Rationale................................................................................................................................................7 Materials and methods ........................................................................................................................7 Results and discussion.........................................................................................................................8 3. IDENTIFICATION OF A LIVE TRAPPING METHOD FOR GEOMALACUS MACULOSUS ................................13 Rationale..............................................................................................................................................13 Study sites...........................................................................................................................................13 Methods and materials ......................................................................................................................14 Glengarriff Nature Reserve.................................................................................................................14 Cashelkeelty Lowland Blanket Bog......................................................................................................17 Results and discussion.......................................................................................................................19 4. DEVELOPMENT OF A MONITORING STRATEGY FOR GEOMALACUS MACULOSUS ...................................24 Rationale..............................................................................................................................................24 Study sites...........................................................................................................................................24 Materials and methods ......................................................................................................................24 Experimental design...........................................................................................................................24 Power analysis ...................................................................................................................................25 Results and discussion.......................................................................................................................25 Baseline monitoring data....................................................................................................................25 Power analysis ...................................................................................................................................27 5. MOBILITY , SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION AND COMMUNITY STRUCTURE .....................................................32 Rationale..............................................................................................................................................32 Study sites...........................................................................................................................................32 Materials and methods ......................................................................................................................32 Slug tagging ......................................................................................................................................32 Experimental design...........................................................................................................................35 Results and discussion.......................................................................................................................37 Uragh Wood.......................................................................................................................................37 Leahill blanket bog..............................................................................................................................46 6. THREATS TO GEOMALACUS MACULOSUS ...............................................................................................50 Distribution and population dynamics of Geomalacus maculosus ____________________________________________________ Rationale............................................................................................................................................. 50 A. Impact of uncontrolled burning.................................................................................................. 50 Study sites......................................................................................................................................... 50 Methods and materials....................................................................................................................... 50 Results and discussion....................................................................................................................... 50 B. Impact of Rhododendron ponticum .............................................................................................. 52 Study sites......................................................................................................................................... 52 Materials and methods....................................................................................................................... 52 Results and discussion....................................................................................................................... 53 C. Impact of commercial afforestation ............................................................................................ 54 Study sites......................................................................................................................................... 54 Materials and methods....................................................................................................................... 54 Results and discussion....................................................................................................................... 55 7. POPULATION SIZE AND DENSITY ESTIMATES FOR GEOMALACUS MACULOSUS USING MARK -CAPTURE - RECAPTURE .............................................................................................................................................. 57 Rationale............................................................................................................................................. 57 Woodland ........................................................................................................................................... 57 Study sites......................................................................................................................................... 57 Materials and methods....................................................................................................................... 58 Results and discussion....................................................................................................................... 58 Blanket bog ........................................................................................................................................ 62 Study sites......................................................................................................................................... 62 Materials and methods....................................................................................................................... 62 Results and discussion....................................................................................................................... 63 MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • San Gabriel Chestnut ESA Petition
    BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR PETITION TO THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE TO PROTECT THE SAN GABRIEL CHESTNUT SNAIL UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT © James Bailey CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY Notice of Petition Ryan Zinke, Secretary U.S. Department of the Interior 1849 C Street NW Washington, D.C. 20240 [email protected] Greg Sheehan, Acting Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1849 C Street NW Washington, D.C. 20240 [email protected] Paul Souza, Director Region 8 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Pacific Southwest Region 2800 Cottage Way Sacramento, CA 95825 [email protected] Petitioner The Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 1.3 million members and supporters dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places. http://www.biologicaldiversity.org Failure to grant the requested petition will adversely affect the aesthetic, recreational, commercial, research, and scientific interests of the petitioning organization’s members and the people of the United States. Morally, aesthetically, recreationally, and commercially, the public shows increasing concern for wild ecosystems and for biodiversity in general. 1 November 13, 2017 Dear Mr. Zinke: Pursuant to Section 4(b) of the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. §1533(b), Section 553(3) of the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. § 553(e), and 50 C.F.R. §424.14(a), the Center for Biological Diversity and Tierra Curry hereby formally petition the Secretary of the Interior, through the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (“FWS”, “the Service”) to list the San Gabriel chestnut snail (Glyptostoma gabrielense) as a threatened or endangered species under the Endangered Species Act and to designate critical habitat concurrently with listing.
    [Show full text]
  • The Slugs of Bulgaria (Arionidae, Milacidae, Agriolimacidae
    POLSKA AKADEMIA NAUK INSTYTUT ZOOLOGII ANNALES ZOOLOGICI Tom 37 Warszawa, 20 X 1983 Nr 3 A n d rzej W ik t o r The slugs of Bulgaria (A rionidae , M ilacidae, Limacidae, Agriolimacidae — G astropoda , Stylommatophora) [With 118 text-figures and 31 maps] Abstract. All previously known Bulgarian slugs from the Arionidae, Milacidae, Limacidae and Agriolimacidae families have been discussed in this paper. It is based on many years of individual field research, examination of all accessible private and museum collections as well as on critical analysis of the published data. The taxa from families to species are sup­ plied with synonymy, descriptions of external morphology, anatomy, bionomics, distribution and all records from Bulgaria. It also includes the original key to all species. The illustrative material comprises 118 drawings, including 116 made by the author, and maps of localities on UTM grid. The occurrence of 37 slug species was ascertained, including 1 species (Tandonia pirinia- na) which is quite new for scientists. The occurrence of other 4 species known from publications could not bo established. Basing on the variety of slug fauna two zoogeographical limits were indicated. One separating the Stara Pianina Mountains from south-western massifs (Pirin, Rila, Rodopi, Vitosha. Mountains), the other running across the range of Stara Pianina in the^area of Shipka pass. INTRODUCTION Like other Balkan countries, Bulgaria is an area of Palearctic especially interesting in respect to malacofauna. So far little investigation has been carried out on molluscs of that country and very few papers on slugs (mostly contributions) were published. The papers by B a b o r (1898) and J u r in ić (1906) are the oldest ones.
    [Show full text]
  • An Assessment of the Use of Conifer Plantations by the Kerry Slug Geomalacus Maculosus with Reference to the Potential Impacts of Forestry Operations
    An assessment of the use of conifer plantations by the Kerry Slug Geomalacus maculosus with reference to the potential impacts of forestry operations Irish Wildlife Manuals No. 64 An assessment of the use of conifer plantations by the Kerry Slug (Geomalacus maculosus) with reference to the potential impacts of forestry operations Inga Reich, Kim O’Meara, Rory Mc Donnell and Mike Gormally Applied Ecology Unit, Centre for Environmental Science, School of Natural Sciences, NUI Galway, Ireland. Citation: Reich, I., O’Meara, K., Mc Donnell, R.J. and Gormally, M.J. (2012) An assessment of the use of conifer plantations by the Kerry Slug ( Geomalacus maculosus) with reference to the impact of forestry operations. Irish Wildlife Manual s, No. 64. National Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, Ireland. Keywords: Kerry Slug, Geomalacus maculosus , Mollusca, Arionidae, protected species, conifer plantation, forestry operations, Connemara Cover photo: Kerry slug © Timothy Collins The NPWS Project Officer for this report was: Dr Brian Nelson; [email protected] Irish Wildlife Manuals Series Editors: F. Marnell & N. Kingston © National Parks and Wildlife Service 2012 ISSN 1393 – 6670 Use of conifer plantations by the Kerry Slug ( Geomalacus maculosus) Contents Contents ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Executive Summary......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • On the Distribution and Food Preferences of Arion Subfuscus (Draparnaud, 1805)
    Vol. 16(2): 61–67 ON THE DISTRIBUTION AND FOOD PREFERENCES OF ARION SUBFUSCUS (DRAPARNAUD, 1805) JAN KOZ£OWSKI Institute of Plant Protection, National Research Institute, W³adys³awa Wêgorka 20, 60-318 Poznañ, Poland (e-mail: [email protected]) ABSTRACT: In recent years Arion subfuscus (Drap.) is increasingly often observed in agricultural crops. Its abun- dance and effect on winter oilseed rape crops were studied. Its abundance was found to be much lower than that of Deroceras reticulatum (O. F. Müll.). Preferences of A. subfuscus to oilseed rape and 19 other herbaceous plants were determined based on multiple choice tests in the laboratory. Indices of acceptance (A.I.), palat- ability (P.I.) and consumption (C.I.) were calculated for the studied plant species; accepted and not accepted plant species were identified. A. subfuscus was found to prefer seedlings of Brassica napus, while Chelidonium maius, Euphorbia helioscopia and Plantago lanceolata were not accepted. KEY WORDS: Arion subfuscus, abundance, oilseed rape seedlings, herbaceous plants, acceptance of plants INTRODUCTION Pulmonate slugs are seroius pests of plants culti- common (RIEDEL 1988, WIKTOR 2004). It lives in low- vated in Poland and in other parts of western and cen- land and montane forests, shrubs, on meadows, tral Europe (GLEN et al. 1993, MESCH 1996, FRANK montane glades and sometimes even in peat bogs. Re- 1998, MOENS &GLEN 2002, PORT &ESTER 2002, cently it has been observed to occur synanthropically KOZ£OWSKI 2003). The most important pest species in such habitats as ruins, parks, cemeteries, gardens include Deroceras reticulatum (O. F. Müller, 1774), and and margins of cultivated fields.
    [Show full text]
  • Fauna of New Zealand Ko Te Aitanga Pepeke O Aotearoa
    aua o ew eaa Ko te Aiaga eeke o Aoeaoa IEEAE SYSEMAICS AISOY GOU EESEAIES O ACAE ESEAC ema acae eseac ico Agicuue & Sciece Cee P O o 9 ico ew eaa K Cosy a M-C aiièe acae eseac Mou Ae eseac Cee iae ag 917 Aucka ew eaa EESEAIE O UIESIIES M Emeso eame o Eomoogy & Aima Ecoogy PO o ico Uiesiy ew eaa EESEAIE O MUSEUMS M ama aua Eiome eame Museum o ew eaa e aa ogaewa O o 7 Weigo ew eaa EESEAIE O OESEAS ISIUIOS awece CSIO iisio o Eomoogy GO o 17 Caea Ciy AC 1 Ausaia SEIES EIO AUA O EW EAA M C ua (ecease ue 199 acae eseac Mou Ae eseac Cee iae ag 917 Aucka ew eaa Fauna of New Zealand Ko te Aitanga Pepeke o Aotearoa Number / Nama 38 Naturalised terrestrial Stylommatophora (Mousca Gasooa Gay M ake acae eseac iae ag 317 amio ew eaa 4 Maaaki Whenua Ρ Ε S S ico Caeuy ew eaa 1999 Coyig © acae eseac ew eaa 1999 o a o is wok coee y coyig may e eouce o coie i ay om o y ay meas (gaic eecoic o mecaica icuig oocoyig ecoig aig iomaio eiea sysems o oewise wiou e wie emissio o e uise Caaoguig i uicaio AKE G Μ (Gay Micae 195— auase eesia Syommaooa (Mousca Gasooa / G Μ ake — ico Caeuy Maaaki Weua ess 1999 (aua o ew eaa ISS 111-533 ; o 3 IS -7-93-5 I ie 11 Seies UC 593(931 eae o uIicaio y e seies eio (a comee y eo Cosy usig comue-ase e ocessig ayou scaig a iig a acae eseac M Ae eseac Cee iae ag 917 Aucka ew eaa Māoi summay e y aco uaau Cosuas Weigo uise y Maaaki Weua ess acae eseac O o ico Caeuy Wesie //wwwmwessco/ ie y G i Weigo o coe eoceas eicuaum (ue a eigo oaa (owe (IIusao G M ake oucio o e coou Iaes was ue y e ew eaIa oey oa ue oeies eseac
    [Show full text]
  • Gastropoda: Stylommatophora)1 John L
    EENY-494 Terrestrial Slugs of Florida (Gastropoda: Stylommatophora)1 John L. Capinera2 Introduction Florida has only a few terrestrial slug species that are native (indigenous), but some non-native (nonindigenous) species have successfully established here. Many interceptions of slugs are made by quarantine inspectors (Robinson 1999), including species not yet found in the United States or restricted to areas of North America other than Florida. In addition to the many potential invasive slugs originating in temperate climates such as Europe, the traditional source of invasive molluscs for the US, Florida is also quite susceptible to invasion by slugs from warmer climates. Indeed, most of the invaders that have established here are warm-weather or tropical species. Following is a discus- sion of the situation in Florida, including problems with Figure 1. Lateral view of slug showing the breathing pore (pneumostome) open. When closed, the pore can be difficult to locate. slug identification and taxonomy, as well as the behavior, Note that there are two pairs of tentacles, with the larger, upper pair ecology, and management of slugs. bearing visual organs. Credits: Lyle J. Buss, UF/IFAS Biology as nocturnal activity and dwelling mostly in sheltered Slugs are snails without a visible shell (some have an environments. Slugs also reduce water loss by opening their internal shell and a few have a greatly reduced external breathing pore (pneumostome) only periodically instead of shell). The slug life-form (with a reduced or invisible shell) having it open continuously. Slugs produce mucus (slime), has evolved a number of times in different snail families, which allows them to adhere to the substrate and provides but this shell-free body form has imparted similar behavior some protection against abrasion, but some mucus also and physiology in all species of slugs.
    [Show full text]
  • Kerry Slug Geomalacus Maculosus
    Threat Response Plan Kerry Slug Geomalacus maculosus MAY 2010 Contents Summary 4 1. Introduction 5 2. Range 6 2.1 Overview 6 2.2 Geographical restriction and geology 7 3. Habitat 7 4. Population 10 4.1 Published abundance estimates 10 4.2 Methodology 10 5. Scientific Monitoring 12 5.1 Previous monitoring 12 5.2 Monitoring targets 13 5.3 Future Action 15 6. Protection 16 6.1 Special Areas of Conservation and National Parks 16 6.2 Catchment Management Plans 17 6.3 Regulation 23 - Strict Protection 18 6.4 Regulation 25 – Derogations 19 7. Enforcement 21 8. Threat and pressures 21 Introduction 21 Threat 1 Afforestation and Forestry Management 23 Background 23 Current Action - Within SACs 26 Indicative Forestry Statement 26 Appropriate assessment 27 Notifiable Actions Process 27 Practical management 27 Current Action – Outside SACs 28 Control of forestry practice 28 Approval process 29 Native Woodland Scheme 29 High Conservation Value Forests 30 Future Action 30 Threat 2 Invasion of woodland habitat by Rhododendron 31 Background 31 Current Action - Within SACs 32 2 Eradication programme 32 Current Action – Outside SACs 32 Native Woodland Scheme 32 Coillte work 33 Future Action 33 Threat 3 Agricultural reclamation 34 Background 34 Current Action - Within SACs 34 Appropriate assessment 34 Notifiable Actions Process 34 Agri-environment Schemes 35 Current Action – Outside SACs 35 Cross compliance 35 REPS 35 Agri-Environment Options Scheme (AEOS) 36 Commonage Framework Plans 37 Future Action 37 Threat 4 Infrastructure development 38 Background 38 Current Action - Within SACs 38 Appropriate assessment 38 Current Action – Outside SACs 39 NRA procedures 39 Planning process 39 Future Action 39 9.
    [Show full text]
  • Registration Districts of Ireland
    REGISTRATION DISTRICTS OF IRELAND An Alphabetical List of the Registration Districts of Ireland with Details of Counties, Sub­Districts and Adjacent Districts Michael J. Thompson [email protected] © M. J. Thompson 2009, 2012 This document and its contents are made available for non‐commercial use only. Any other use is prohibited except by explicit permission of the author. The author holds no rights to the two maps (see their captions for copyright information). Every effort has been made to ensure the information herein is correct, but no liability is accepted for errors or omissions. The author would be grateful to be informed of any errors and corrections. 2 Contents 1. Introduction … … … … … … … Page 3 a. Chapman code for the counties of Ireland b. Maps of Ireland showing Counties and Registration Districts 2. Alphabetical listing of Registration Districts … … … Page 6 giving also sub‐districts contained therein, and adjacent Registration Districts 3. Registration Districts listed by County … … … Page 17 4. Alphabetical listing of Sub‐Districts … … … … Page 20 Appendix. Registration District boundary changes between 1841 and 1911 … Page 30 First published in 2009 Reprinted with minor revisions in 2012 3 1. Introduction Civil registration of births, marriages and deaths commenced in Ireland in 1864, though registration of marriages of non‐Roman Catholics was introduced earlier in 1845. The Births, marriages and deaths were registered by geographical areas known as Registration Districts (also known as Superintendent Registrar’s Districts). The boundaries of the registration districts followed the boundaries of the Poor Law Unions created earlier under the 1838 Poor Law Act for the administration of relief to the poor.
    [Show full text]
  • Towards the Unravelling of the Slug A. Ater–A. Rufus Complex (Gastropoda Arionidae): New Genetic Approaches
    Web Ecol., 18, 115–119, 2018 https://doi.org/10.5194/we-18-115-2018 © Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Towards the unravelling of the slug A. ater–A. rufus complex (Gastropoda Arionidae): new genetic approaches María L. Peláez1, Antonio G. Valdecasas1, Daniel Martinez2, and Jose L. Horreo1 1National Museum of Natural Sciences (MNC-CSIC), Department of Biodiversity and Evolutionary Biology, C/José Gutiérrez Abascal 2, 28006 Madrid, Spain 2Environmental management services SIGMA SL, C/ Cimadevilla no. 15, Esc. A 2 A, 33003 Oviedo, Spain Correspondence: Jose L. Horreo ([email protected]) Received: 6 April 2018 – Revised: 26 June 2018 – Accepted: 3 July 2018 – Published: 11 July 2018 Abstract. The genus Arion includes several slug species, some of which are considered to be a pest to both cul- tivated and wild flora. Within this genus, the Arion ater complex comprises two different morphological forms: Arion rufus and A. ater, but there is no consensus about their species status. Their phylogenetic relationships have been recently solved, both of them belonging to different phylogenetic clades, but their species status is still unclear (as different clades are not always different species). For this reason, the aim of this study was to precisely identify these species status by employing the up-to-date multi-rate Poisson tree processes (mPTP) methodology as well as the classic methodology of genetic distances, both of which have three different mi- tochondrial genes. Results confirmed that both A. ater and A. rufus are independent evolutionary clades, and the high genetic distances between them (K2P distances ranged between 9.1 and 16.4 %, depending on genes) together with mPTP analyses, supported the idea that the clades correspond to different species.
    [Show full text]
  • Magnum Mantleslug Magnipelta Mycophaga
    Magnum Mantleslug Magnipelta mycophaga Gastropoda — Stylommatophora — Arionidae CONSERVATION STATUS / CLASSIFICATION Rangewide: Imperiled/Vulnerable (G2G3) Statewide: Possibly extinct (SH) ESA: No status USFS: Region 1: No status; Region 4: No status BLM: No status IDFG: Not classified BASIS FOR INCLUSION Lack of essential imformation pertaining to status in Idaho. TAXONOMY No subspecies is recognized. DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE This slug occurs in widely scattered localities in western Montana, northern Idaho, northeastern Washington, and south-central British Columbia. Within Idaho, colonies were historically located in the Bitterroot Mountains and the Clearwater National Forest in Idaho County. The species has not been located in Idaho during recent years, and the current status of populations is not known (Frest 1999). POPULATION TREND Current population trend is not known. HABITAT AND ECOLOGY The magnum mantleslug inhabits mesic forests having a diverse plant understory and a duff layer. Dominant trees include subalpine fir, white-bark pine, and Engelmann spruce (Frest 1999). ISSUES This species is thought to be intolerant of habitat alteration and is found only at undisturbed sites (Frest 1999). Because no Idaho populations are known to be extant, specific threats are not known. Logging and grazing are prevalent activities throughout the known range and are potential threats (Frest 1999). RECOMMENDED ACTIONS As there is little known about this species, research that addresses population numbers, range, habitat status, conservation measures, and trends is needed. Magnum Mantleslug Magnipelta mycophaga Ecological Section Point Locations 0 20 40 80 Kilometers 2 August 2005 Point data are from Idaho Conservation Data Center, Idaho Department of Fish and Game. 0 20 40 80 Miles.
    [Show full text]
  • Geomalacus Maculosus
    1 INFORMACIÓN COMPLEMENTARIA Geomalacus maculosus AUTORES BENJAMÍN J. GÓMEZ MOLINER Y MARÍA JOSÉ MADEIRA Esta ficha forma parte de la publicaciónBases ecológicas preliminares para la conservación de las especies de interés comunitario en España: invertebrados, promovida por la Dirección General de Calidad y Evaluación Ambiental y Medio Natural (Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente). Dirección técnica del proyecto Rafael Hidalgo Realización y producción Grupo Tragsa Coordinación general Roberto Matellanes Ferreras y Ramón Martínez Torres Coordinación técnica Juan Carlos Simón Zarzoso Coordinación del grupo de artrópodos Eduardo Galante Coordinación de los grupos de moluscos, cnidarios, equinodermos y anélidos José Templado Edición Eva María Lázaro Varas Maquetación Rafael Serrano Cordón Las opiniones que se expresan en esta obra son responsabilidad de los autores y no necesariamente de la Dirección General de Calidad y Evaluación Ambiental y Medio Natural (Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente). NIPO: 280-12-259-4 3 PRESENTACIÓNPRESENTACIÓN La coordinación general del grupo de moluscos ha sido encargada a la siguiente institución Sociedad Española de Malacología Coordinador: José Templado Autores: Benjamín J. Gómez Moliner y María José Madeira Fotografía de portada: Benjamín J. Gómez Moliner A efectos bibliográficos la obra completa debe citarse como sigue: VV.AA. 2012. Bases ecológicas preliminares para la conservación de las especies de interés comunitario en España: Invertebrados. Ministerio de Agricultura, Alimentación y Medio Ambiente. Madrid. A efectos bibliográficos esta ficha debe citarse como sigue: Gómez, B. J. y Madeira, M. J. 2012. Geomalacus maculosus. En: VV.AA., Bases ecológicas preliminares para la conservación de las especies de interés comunitario en España: Invertebrados.
    [Show full text]
  • Sacred Space. a Study of the Mass Rocks of the Diocese of Cork and Ross, County Cork
    Sacred Space. A Study of the Mass Rocks of the Diocese of Cork and Ross, County Cork. Bishop, H.J. PhD Irish Studies 2013 - 2 - Acknowledgements My thanks to the University of Liverpool and, in particular, the Institute of Irish Studies for their support for this thesis and the funding which made this research possible. In particular, I would like to extend my thanks to my Primary Supervisor, Professor Marianne Elliott, for her immeasurable support, encouragement and guidance and to Dr Karyn Morrissey, Department of Geography, in her role as Second Supervisor. Her guidance and suggestions with regards to the overall framework and structure of the thesis have been invaluable. Particular thanks also to Dr Patrick Nugent who was my original supervisor. He has remained a friend and mentor and I am eternally grateful to him for the continuing enthusiasm he has shown towards my research. I am grateful to the British Association for Irish Studies who awarded a research scholarship to assist with research expenses. In addition, I would like to thank my Programme Leader at Liverpool John Moores University, Alistair Beere, who provided both research and financial support to ensure the timely completion of my thesis. My special thanks to Rev. Dr Tom Deenihan, Diocesan Secretary, for providing an invaluable letter of introduction in support of my research and to the many staff in parishes across the diocese for their help. I am also indebted to the people of Cork for their help, hospitality and time, all of which was given so freely and willingly. Particular thanks to Joe Creedon of Inchigeelagh and local archaeologist Tony Miller.
    [Show full text]