DOCSLIB.ORG

Srel.Edu This Report Is Provided for Information Only and Is Not to Be Considered Formally Published Literature

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Srel.Edu This Report Is Provided for Information Only and Is Not to Be Considered Formally Published Literature SAVANNAH RIVER ECOLOGY LABORATORY ANNUAL TECHNICAL PROGRESS REPORT OF ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH Draft submitted 29 June 2005 Final submitted 19 July 2005 Supported under Cooperative Agreement DE-FC09-96SR18546 between The University of Georgia and the U.S. Department of Energy for The University of Georgia fiscal year ending June 30, 2005 Paul M. Bertsch, Director Prepared by Laura Janecek Savannah River Ecology Laboratory Drawer E Aiken, SC 29802 PH (803) 725-2472 FAX 725-3309 E-mail: [email protected] www.uga.edu/srel/ This report is provided for information only and is not to be considered formally published literature. We request that no citations be made of information contained herein without the express consent of the investigator. Savannah River Ecology Laboratory FY2005 Annual Technical Progress Report Table of Contents SREL FY2005 Overview .............................................................................................................................................. 1 Special Accomplishments of SREL Personnel ............................................................................................................. 5 An Overview of Research Themes............................................................................................................................... 7 Characterization ......................................................................................................................................................... 8 Question 1: What are the roles of microorganisms in biogeochemical processes? ......................................... 8 Question 2: How do coupled biological and geochemical processes interact? .............................................. 10 Question 3: What processes control chemical speciation?............................................................................. 12 Question 4: How are bioavailability, bioconcentration, and biomagnification related?............................. 20 Question 5: What types of statistical models best describe contaminant distributions? ............................. 22 Question 6: Can sentinel species be used as surrogates to determine environmental health? .................... 24 Question 7: What techniques permit studies of bacterial community structure and function?.................. 26 Question 8: How do seasonal variations influence contaminant speciation?.............................................. 27 Question 9: How can amphibian conservation plans protect against rare events? ...................................... 28 Ecological Risks and Effects ..................................................................................................................................... 30 Question 1: How does contaminant speciation influence bioavailability? .................................................. 30 Question 2: How do contaminant effects integrate over different levels of biological organization? ......... 31 Question 3: How do variation in contamination, remediation practices, and ecology alter risk?.............. 34 Question 4: What are the potential interactions from exposures to mixed contaminants? ........................ 37 Question 5: What are the risks from low-dose, chronic exposures to radiation? ......................................... 37 Question 6: What are the most cost-effective biomarkers for impacts to biota? .......................................... 37 Question 7: What are the mechanisms of trophic and maternal transfer of contaminants? ....................... 38 Question 8: What are the risks associated with indirect selection for antibiotic resistance? ...................... 39 Question 9: What statistical techniques provide the most power when estimating dose or exposure? ....... 41 Remediation and Restoration ................................................................................................................................... 42 Question 1: How can solute transport be incorporated in models of contaminant migration? .................. 42 Question 2: What are the hydrogeochemical processes that determine contaminant migration? ............... 42 Question 3: What hydrogeochemical factors control permeable reactive barrier function? ........................ 43 Question 4: What are the mechanisms by which amendments immobilize contaminants? ........................ 44 Question 5: Can plant genes involved in remediation of groundwater contaminants be identified? ......... 46 Question 6: How do microbes affect metal speciation transformations? ..................................................... 46 Question 7: What traits of native plants determine their use in remediation and restoration?.................. 47 Question 8: Can natural processes be directed or accelerated for restoration?............................................ 48 i Savannah River Ecology Laboratory FY2005 Annual Technical Progress Report Research Support Programs .................................................................................................................................... 51 Environmental Health and Safety Program .................................................................................................... 52 Distance Learning Program ............................................................................................................................ 52 Quality Assurance Program............................................................................................................................. 53 Research Data Archives ................................................................................................................................... 53 SREL Undergraduate and Graduate Education Program................................................................................ 53 Environmental Outreach Program.................................................................................................................. 56 DOE Research Set-Aside Areas ......................................................................................................................... 58 Externally Funded Grants ......................................................................................................................................... 62 Publications ............................................................................................................................................................. 69 SREL Organizational Chart ....................................................................................................................................... 75 ii Savannah River Ecology Laboratory FY2005 Annual Technical Progress Report Savannah River Ecology Laboratory FY2005 Overview The Savannah River Ecology Laboratory (SREL) is a humans also protect other organisms in the research unit of The University of Georgia (UGA) and has environment, as is currently assumed. They been conducting ecological research on the Savannah River emphasized there is a need to understand how Site (SRS) near Aiken, South Carolina for almost 54 years. radiation effects are integrated across different levels The overall mission of the Laboratory is to acquire and of biological organization, but to gain such communicate knowledge of ecological processes and understanding better collaboration is needed between principles. SREL conducts fundamental and applied the traditionally separate disciplines of radiation ecological research, as well as education and outreach biology and radiation ecology. programs, under a Cooperative Agreement with the U.S. Dr. Paul Bertsch and colleagues received a $239,000 Department of Energy (DOE). grant from the Department of Energy Office of Science EMSP program to study the link between chemical The Laboratory’s research mission during the 2005 fiscal speciation and bioavailability of uranium and nickel year was fulfilled with the publication of 102 journal articles in contaminated sediments. This study, to be conducted and book chapters by faculty, technical staff, students, and in the Tims Branch/Steed Pond system of the Savannah visiting scientists. Two books were also published with SREL River Site, will provide valuable information on the personnel as authors. An additional 43 journal articles have scientific basis for natural attenuation of similarly been submitted or are in press. Other noteworthy events contaminated areas. took place as faculty members, staff, and graduate students SREL researchers received a $500,000 grant from the received awards. These are described in the section titled National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Special Accomplishments of SREL Personnel on page 5. (NOAA) to study the role of metal contamination in the proliferation of antibiotic resistance in coastal Notable scientific accomplishments during the past year water-borne pathogens. The three-year award builds included work in the areas of environmental remediation, upon novel field and laboratory research done at the radiation ecology, and environmental microbiology. SRS by Drs. J Vaun McArthur and Ramunas SREL researchers, in collaboration with others from Stepanauskas that suggested microbes resistant to Clark Atlanta University, WSRC, and the U.S. Forest metal contamination may also be resistant to Service-Savannah River, developed and implemented antibiotics. an automated vadose zone monitoring system to measure soil moisture and soil matric potential, and During the past year several faculty had accomplishments to collect lysimeter samples.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Guideline 410 Prohibited Plant List
    VENTURA COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU 165 DURLEY AVENUE CAMARILLO, CA 93010 www.vcfd.org Office: 805-389-9738 Fax: 805-388-4356 GUIDELINE 410 PROHIBITED PLANT LIST This list was first published by the VCFD in 2014. It has been updated as of April 2019. It is intended to provide a list of plants and trees that are not allowed within a new required defensible space (DS) or fuel modification zone (FMZ). It is highly recommended that these plants and trees be thinned and or removed from existing DS and FMZs. In certain instances, the Fire Department may require the thinning and or removal. This list was prepared by Hunt Research Corporation and Dudek & Associates, and reviewed by Scott Franklin Consulting Co, VCFD has added some plants and has removed plants only listed due to freezing hazard. Please see notes after the list of plants. For questions regarding this list, please contact the Fire Hazard reduction Program (FHRP) Unit at 085-389-9759 or [email protected] Prohibited plant list:Botanical Name Common Name Comment* Trees Abies species Fir F Acacia species (numerous) Acacia F, I Agonis juniperina Juniper Myrtle F Araucaria species (A. heterophylla, A. Araucaria (Norfolk Island Pine, Monkey F araucana, A. bidwillii) Puzzle Tree, Bunya Bunya) Callistemon species (C. citrinus, C. rosea, C. Bottlebrush (Lemon, Rose, Weeping) F viminalis) Calocedrus decurrens Incense Cedar F Casuarina cunninghamiana River She-Oak F Cedrus species (C. atlantica, C. deodara) Cedar (Atlas, Deodar) F Chamaecyparis species (numerous) False Cypress F Cinnamomum camphora Camphor F Cryptomeria japonica Japanese Cryptomeria F Cupressocyparis leylandii Leyland Cypress F Cupressus species (C.
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Ord Natural Reserve Plant List
    UCSC Fort Ord Natural Reserve Plants Below is the most recently updated plant list for UCSC Fort Ord Natural Reserve. * non-native taxon ? presence in question Listed Species Information: CNPS Listed - as designated by the California Rare Plant Ranks (formerly known as CNPS Lists). More information at http://www.cnps.org/cnps/rareplants/ranking.php Cal IPC Listed - an inventory that categorizes exotic and invasive plants as High, Moderate, or Limited, reflecting the level of each species' negative ecological impact in California. More information at http://www.cal-ipc.org More information about Federal and State threatened and endangered species listings can be found at https://www.fws.gov/endangered/ (US) and http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/ t_e_spp/ (CA). FAMILY NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME LISTED Ferns AZOLLACEAE - Mosquito Fern American water fern, mosquito fern, Family Azolla filiculoides ? Mosquito fern, Pacific mosquitofern DENNSTAEDTIACEAE - Bracken Hairy brackenfern, Western bracken Family Pteridium aquilinum var. pubescens fern DRYOPTERIDACEAE - Shield or California wood fern, Coastal wood wood fern family Dryopteris arguta fern, Shield fern Common horsetail rush, Common horsetail, field horsetail, Field EQUISETACEAE - Horsetail Family Equisetum arvense horsetail Equisetum telmateia ssp. braunii Giant horse tail, Giant horsetail Pentagramma triangularis ssp. PTERIDACEAE - Brake Family triangularis Gold back fern Gymnosperms CUPRESSACEAE - Cypress Family Hesperocyparis macrocarpa Monterey cypress CNPS - 1B.2, Cal IPC
    [Show full text]
  • Heterotheca Grandiflora
    Invasive KISC Feasibility Combined Kauai Status HPWRA Impacts Status Score Score Score Heterotheca EARLY HIGH RISK Naturalized grandiflora DETECTION (14) 6.5 7.5 14 (telegraph weed) Initial Prioritization Assessment Report completed: December 2017 Report updated as of: N/A Current Recommendation for KISC: Pending Ranking and Committee approval Knowledge Gaps and Contingencies: 1) Delimiting surveys near the known location are necessary to ensure it hasn’t spread beyond its known distribution 2) Discussions with the landowner about seed mix and control around agricultural areas and watercourses are needed. 3) The control crew likely needs to be trained to identify this weed. Background Heterotheca grandiflora (Asteraceae) or “telegraph weed” is a large herb sometimes growing over 1m tall that has been accidentally introduced by way of its sticky seeds throughout Hawaii, mainland USA and Australia (Wagner et al. 1999, HPWRA 2015). H. grandiflora has not been considered for control by KISC; the purpose of this prioritization assessment report is to evaluate whether KISC should attempt eradication (i.e. accept “Target” status) or joint control with partnering agencies (i.e. accept as “Partnership” species status). This will be informed by scoring and comparing H. grandiflora to other “Early Detection” species known to Kauai (See Table 5 in KISC Plant Early Detection Report for status terminology). Detection and Distribution Statewide, H. grandiflora is considered naturalized on all of the main Hawaiian islands (Wagner et al. 1999, Imada 2012). However, only one herbarium voucher collected in 1971 (Hobdy 261, BISH) designates its presence on Kauai. An apparently small population near Mana was detected during the 2014 Statewide Noxious Invasive Pest Program (SNIPP) Surveys, and again during 2015-2017 Surveys (Figure C24- 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Choosing a Restoration Plant Palette and Collecting Native Plant Materials1
    Chaparral Restoration Workshop, June 17-20, 2013 Arcadia, CA Guidelines for Choosing a Restoration Plant Palette and Collecting Native Plant Materials1 Katie VinZant2 Abstract One of the first tasks in restoration planning is determining the appropriate native plant species and associated quantities. Species with the greatest prevalence at the restoration site, collectability, heat, sunlight and disturbance tolerance, germination and reproduction rate, large growth habit, soil retention qualities, nitrogen fixation, wildlife habitat value, and weed competitiveness were the main traits considered and desired. After this analysis is completed, a listing of on average twenty different species is generated, along with seeding or planting rates per acre for each species. Once this palette of species is developed, the locations from which the native plant material will be harvested and guidelines for those collections should be determined. Keywords: chaparral restoration, Angeles National Forest, seed collection, native plant palette Introduction Wildland vegetation restoration, especially arid land restoration, requires multi-year planning to ensure that the correct native species are obtained and effectively utilized. One of the first, and probably most important, steps in beginning restoration planning is to determine the native plant species that will make up the planting palette. The palette is a suite of species that are the most appropriate plants to utilize for revegetation purposes. This intention of this paper is to provide guidance on methods for 1) selecting a successful plant palette; 2) determining the amount of seed or container plants needed for a site; and 3) sustainably harvesting wildland seed and cuttings. A “lessons learned” section also highlights challenges that can arise and techniques for moving forward.
    [Show full text]
  • Florida Golden Aster Chrysopsis (=Heterotheca) Floridana Small
    Florida Golden Aster Chrysopsis (=Heterotheca) floridana Small he Florida golden aster is a perennial herb in the Federal Status: Endangered (May 16, 1986) aster family with a distribution limited to a few Critical Habitat: None Designated Tcounties in west-central Florida. The Florida golden Florida Status: Endangered aster occurs in sand pine and oak scrub or in disturbed areas at the edges of scrub. Recovery Plan Status: Contribution (May 1999) This account represents South Floridas contribution to Geographic Coverage: South Florida the existing recovery plan for the Florida golden aster (FWS 1988). Figure 1. County distribution of the Florida golden aster. Description Chrysopsis floridana is a perennial herb with stems that are woody toward the base and non-woody above. The plants have basal rosettes (clusters of leaves at ground level) with leaves 4 to 10 cm long, 1.5 to 2.0 cm wide; the leaves of the rosette are densely short-wooly pubescent. The stem leaves are nearly the same size from the top to the bottom of the stem; they are obovate-elliptic, slightly clasping the stem, entire, and densely short-wooly pubescent. The flower heads are grouped into a more or less flat-topped cluster of 1 to 25 heads at the top of the stem. Each head is slightly over 2.5 cm in diameter. Both the central disc and the rays are golden yellow. C. floridana is distinguished from other members of its genus by its perennial habit, the woodiness of its stems, the wooliness and the shape of the stem and the leaves, and the way the flower heads are arranged in a flat-topped cluster (Semple 1981, Wunderlin et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Summer Fun and Games at the Wellness Center
    Thursday,ee August 4, 2005 Volume 15 I Number 16r Area teachers learn to be health recruiters Summer fun and games by Ellen Gladden Jones Augusta-area teachers and school counselors learned how to guide their at the Wellness Center students to health care careers July 19- 20 as part of the Foothills Area Health by Ellen Gladden Jones Education Center TEACH Academy held at the Medical College of Georgia. The Wellness Center staff has expanded in Teachers Exploring and Advocating hopes that more of the MCG community will get in Careers in Health is a statewide the game of personal fitness. program that pairs health care Program Coordinator Summer Talley joined the providers and educators with middle center July 1 as part of the center's goal to expand and high school counselors and programming, said Dale Hartenburg, Wellness teachers. Up to 30 teachers attend the Center director. Duties for the new position will three-day academies, held at include leading children's activities and working sponsoring medical centers, such as with the Student Government Association MCG Medical Center. Attendees learn intramural sports program. about regional, statewide and national "The continued growth and development of the health care provider shortages, Wellness Center has brought us to a point where we educational requirements for health can offer new opportunities to the MCG students professions and advising students in and employees," said, Mr. Hartenburg. health care career options. Teachers A new program Ms. Talley will coordinate for also shadow health professionals to children of members and non-members is Kids' learn health-related career skills.
    [Show full text]
  • An Invitation to Monitor Georgia's Coastal Wetlands
    An Invitation to Monitor Georgia’s Coastal Wetlands www.shellfish.uga.edu By Mary Sweeney-Reeves, Dr. Alan Power, & Ellie Covington First Printing 2003, Second Printing 2006, Copyright University of Georgia “This book was prepared by Mary Sweeney-Reeves, Dr. Alan Power, and Ellie Covington under an award from the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of OCRM and NOAA.” 2 Acknowledgements Funding for the development of the Coastal Georgia Adopt-A-Wetland Program was provided by a NOAA Coastal Incentive Grant, awarded under the Georgia Department of Natural Resources Coastal Zone Management Program (UGA Grant # 27 31 RE 337130). The Coastal Georgia Adopt-A-Wetland Program owes much of its success to the support, experience, and contributions of the following individuals: Dr. Randal Walker, Marie Scoggins, Dodie Thompson, Edith Schmidt, John Crawford, Dr. Mare Timmons, Marcy Mitchell, Pete Schlein, Sue Finkle, Jenny Makosky, Natasha Wampler, Molly Russell, Rebecca Green, and Jeanette Henderson (University of Georgia Marine Extension Service); Courtney Power (Chatham County Savannah Metropolitan Planning Commission); Dr. Joe Richardson (Savannah State University); Dr. Chandra Franklin (Savannah State University); Dr. Dionne Hoskins (NOAA); Dr. Charles Belin (Armstrong Atlantic University); Dr. Merryl Alber (University of Georgia); (Dr. Mac Rawson (Georgia Sea Grant College Program); Harold Harbert, Kim Morris-Zarneke, and Michele Droszcz (Georgia Adopt-A-Stream); Dorset Hurley and Aimee Gaddis (Sapelo Island National Estuarine Research Reserve); Dr. Charra Sweeney-Reeves (All About Pets); Captain Judy Helmey (Miss Judy Charters); Jan Mackinnon and Jill Huntington (Georgia Department of Natural Resources).
    [Show full text]
  • Richmond County Comprehensive Plan
    AUGUSTA – RICHMOND COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN As Adopted by the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission Willie Wright, Chairman David M. Darby, Chairman, Comprehensive Plan Committee George A. Patty, Executive Director December 1, 2003 As Adopted by the Augusta Commission Bob Young, Mayor Willie Mays, III, Mayor Pro Tempore February 17, 2004 THE AUGUSTA-RICHMOND COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Table of Contents INTRODUCTION-----------------------------------------------------------------------------CHAPTER 1 Preface ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1-1 Public Participation ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1-1 The Planning Process ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1-2 Step 1: Inventory and Assessment--------------------------------------------------------------1-2 Step 2: Statement of Needs & Goals ----------------------------------------------------------.1-2 Step 3: Implementation Strategy ---------------------------------------------------------------1-2 Plan Elements ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1-3 Population ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1-3 Housing ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1-3 Economic Development --------------------------------------------------------------------------1-3
    [Show full text]
  • USGS DDS-43, Status of Rare and Endemic Plants
    JAMES R. SHEVOCK U.S. Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region San Francisco, California 24 Status of Rare and Endemic Plants ABSTRACT The Sierra Nevada represents nearly 20% of the California land base INTRODUCTION yet contains over 50% of the state’s flora. Approximately 405 vascu- For more than 100 years, the flora of the Sierra Nevada has lar plant taxa are endemic to the Sierra Nevada. Of this total, 218 fascinated botanists even beyond the borders of the United taxa are considered rare by conservation organizations and/or state States. Visions of Yosemite, giant sequoias, and extensive and federal agencies. In addition, 168 other rare taxa have at least mixed conifer forests have added to an awareness of this one occurrence in the Sierra Nevada. Five monotypic genera are magnificent mountain range. The Sierra Nevada, part of the endemic to the Sierra Nevada (Bolandra, Carpenteria, Orochaenactis, California Floristic Province, is characterized by high rates of Phalacoseris, and Sequoiadendron). Information on rarity and ende- plant endemism (Stebbins and Major 1965; Raven and Axelrod mism for lichens and bryophytes for the Sierra Nevada is very specu- 1978; Messick 1995). For most of this century, plant collecting lative and fragmentary due to limited fieldwork and the small number and floristic research remained the pursuits of professional of available collections. Two mosses are endemic to the Sierra Ne- botanists with ties to major scientific and educational centers vada. Parameters obtained for each rare and/or endemic taxon in- (Shevock and Taylor 1987). Floristic studies have as one of clude habitat type and distributions by county, river basin, and their primary goals documentation of all the taxa (species, topographic quadrangle.
    [Show full text]
  • Pityopsis Oligantha (Chapman Ex Torrey & Gray) Small
    Common Name: FEW-FLOWERED GOLDEN-ASTER Scientific Name: Pityopsis oligantha (Chapman ex Torrey & Gray) Small Other Commonly Used Names: coastal plain golden-aster, few-headed grass-leaved golden-aster Previously Used Scientific Names: Chrysopsis oligantha Chapman ex Torrey & Gray, Heterotheca oligantha (Chapman ex Torrey & Gray) V.L. Harms Family: Asteraceae/Compositae (aster) Rarity Ranks: G3/S1S2 State Legal Status: Special Concern Federal Legal Status: none Federal Wetland Status: FAC Description: Perennial herb with erect stems 8 - 20 inches (20 - 50 cm) tall, the lower stem covered with silky, silvery hairs; the upper stem with dark, knob-tipped, glandular hairs. Lower leaves 3 - 12 inches (8 - 30 cm) long and up to ½ inch (3 - 14 mm) wide, grass-like, silky-hairy. Stem leaves fewer than 7, much reduced in size and scattered along the stem. Flower heads about 1½ inches (4 cm) wide, 1 - 6 per plant, on long stalks. Each flower head composed of 11 - 16 yellow, strap-shaped ray flowers and 25 - 40 yellow disk flowers in a central disk; the base of the head is surrounded by several series of green bracts forming a cup (involucre) around the base, ½ inch (9 - 11 mm) high, covered with knob-tipped, glandular hairs. Fruits less than ¼ inch (4 - 5 mm) long, dry, seed-like, ribbed, and hairy. Similar Species: Grass-leaved golden-aster (Pityopsis graminifolia) is abundant in dry habitats throughout Georgia. It has more than 7 stem leaves per plant and more than 6 flower heads per stem. The upper stem has few or no glandular hairs, and the lower leaves are usually wider than ¾ inch (2 cm).
    [Show full text]
  • Pollinator Plant Recommendations for New Mexico
    TECHNICAL NOTES U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO Revised March, 2015 PLANT MATERIALS TECHNICAL NOTE NO. 71 (Final Revision) Pollinator Plant Recommendations for New Mexico David R. Dreesen, Agronomist/Horticulturist Los Lunas Plant Materials Center Tessa R. Grasswitz, Assistant Professor, Urban/Small Farms IPM Specialist New Mexico State University In recent years, the phenomenon known as Colony Collapse Disorder and the resultant declines in domesticated honey bee populations (both in the U.S. and elsewhere) have prompted increasing concern over the long-term sustainability of crop pollination services. In many cases, however, it has been shown that native (wild) bee species can provide pollination services equal, or superior to, those of hive bees (Garibaldi et al., 2013), provided that their habitat requirements (such as nesting sites and alternative forage sources) are met. Consequently, there has been considerable interest in creating habitat that will help conserve both native wild bees and domesticated honeybees. Until recently, however, there have been no state-specific guidelines for those wishing to install pollinator plantings appropriate to New Mexico conditions. To address this need, staff from the Los Lunas Plant Materials Center and the NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Los Lunas conducted field trials from 2010-2015 to develop the current recommendations for plants that will sustain bees (and other beneficial insects) throughout the growing season. During the project, a total of 380 plant species were tested, including 260 herbaceous perennials (215 native and 45 introduced), 85 annuals and biennials (60 natives and 25 introduced), and 35 native shrubs. Additional details of the pollinator project, including the trial sites, are given in Dreesen and Grasswitz (2013).
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Floristic Studies of Georgian Sandhill Ecosystems Reveals a Dynamic Composition of Endemics and Generalists James M
    Georgia Southern University Digital Commons@Georgia Southern University Honors Program Theses 2017 Comparative Floristic Studies of Georgian Sandhill Ecosystems Reveals a Dynamic Composition of Endemics and Generalists James M. Long Honors College John Schenk Georgia Southern University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/honors-theses Part of the Biology Commons, and the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons Recommended Citation Long, James M. and Schenk, John, "Comparative Floristic Studies of Georgian Sandhill Ecosystems Reveals a Dynamic Composition of Endemics and Generalists" (2017). University Honors Program Theses. 247. https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/honors-theses/247 This thesis (open access) is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons@Georgia Southern. It has been accepted for inclusion in University Honors Program Theses by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Georgia Southern. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Comparative Floristic Studies of Georgian Sandhill Ecosystems Reveals a Dynamic Composition of Endemics and Generalists By James M. Long Under the mentorship of Dr. John Schenk ABSTRACT Sandhill habitats are characterized by sandy, xeric soils that contain a unique assemblage of plants and animals. Similar to the broader long-leaf pine (Pinus palustris) and wire grass (Aristida stricta) ecosystem that sandhills are a subset of, agriculture, development, and habitat modifications have caused sandhill ecosystems to become degraded, putting many species at risk of extinction. Previous studies have focused on diversity within individual sandhills, leaving us with an incomplete understanding of how these communities form, what species are endemic, whether endemics are widespread across sandhills, and how species have adapted to these communities.
    [Show full text]