DOCSLIB.ORG

Sucul Ortamlarda Doğal Gderm Yöntemler Le

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sucul Ortamlarda Doğal Gderm Yöntemler Le YILDIZ TEKN İK ÜN İVERS İTES İ FEN B İLİMLER İ ENST İTÜSÜ SUCUL ORTAMLARDA DO ĞAL G İDER İM YÖNTEMLER İ İLE METALLERDEK İ DE ĞİŞİ KL İĞİ N ARA ŞTIRILMASI Biyolog Zehra ŞAPÇI ZENG İN FBE Çevre Mühendisli ği Anabilim Dalı Çevre Mühendisli ği Programında Hazırlanan DOKTORA TEZ İ Tez Savunma Tarihi : 17 Eylül 2008 Tez Danı şmanı : Prof. Dr. E. Beyza ÜSTÜN (YTÜ) Jüri Üyeleri : Prof. Dr. Ay şen ERD İNÇLER (BÜ) : Prof. Dr. BAHAR İNCE (BÜ) : Prof. Dr. M. Talha GÖNÜLLÜ (YTÜ) : Yrd. Doç. Dr. Süleyman ŞAKAR (YTÜ) i İSTANBUL, 2008 İÇİNDEK İLER Sayfa KISALTMA L İSTES İ........................................................................................................... vi ŞEK İL L İSTES İ................................................................................................................... vii ÇİZELGE L İSTES İ ............................................................................................................ xiii İLİŞ Kİ L İSTES İ .................................................................................................................. xv ÖZET ................................................................................................................................. xvi ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... xvii 1. GİRİŞ .................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Çalı şmanın Amacı ................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Çalı şmanın Kapsamı............................................................................................. 2 2. KAYNAK ÖZETLER İ ........................................................................................ 4 2.1 İz Elementler ........................................................................................................ 4 2.1.1 Metalik İz Elementler (A ğır Metaller)................................................................... 5 2.1.1.1 Ara ştırmada İncelenen Metalik İz Elementler ....................................................... 6 2.1.1.1.1 Demir (Fe)............................................................................................................ 6 2.1.1.1.2 Bakır (Cu) ............................................................................................................ 8 2.1.1.1.3 Çinko (Zn).......................................................................................................... 10 2.1.1.1.4 Mangan (Mn) ..................................................................................................... 12 2.1.1.1.5 Krom (Cr)........................................................................................................... 13 2.1.1.1.6 Nikel (Ni)........................................................................................................... 14 2.1.1.2 Ara ştırmada İncelenen Metal Olmayan İz Elementler ......................................... 16 2.1.1.2.1 Magnezyum (Mg)............................................................................................... 16 2.1.1.2.2 Kalsiyum (Ca) .................................................................................................... 17 2.1.2 Metalik İz Elementlerin Sa ğlı ğa Etkileri ............................................................. 18 2.2 Bitki ile Giderim (Fitoremediasyon) ................................................................... 22 2.2.1 Temel Bitki Fizyolojisi ....................................................................................... 23 2.2.2 Fitoremediasyon mekanizmaları ......................................................................... 26 2.2.2.1 Fitostabilizasyon (Phytostabilization) ................................................................. 28 2.2.2.2 Fitoakümülasyon (Phytoaccumulation veya Phytoextraction) ............................. 29 2.2.2.3 Fitodegredasyon (Phytodegradation)................................................................... 31 2.2.2.4 Fitovolatilizasyon (Phytovolatilisation)............................................................... 33 2.2.2.5 Rizodegredasyon (Rhizodegradation) ................................................................. 34 2.2.2.6 Evapotranspirasyon ............................................................................................ 35 2.2.3 Fitoremediasyon Tekni ğinin Di ğer Arıtma Yöntemleri ile Kıyaslanması ............ 35 2.3 Küçükçekmece Gölü ve Havzası......................................................................... 37 2.3.1 Genel Bilgi ......................................................................................................... 37 2.3.2 Nüfus Geli şimi ................................................................................................... 42 2.3.3 Fiziki Yapı.......................................................................................................... 43 2.3.3.1 Topo ğrafik ve Morfolojik Yapı........................................................................... 43 2.3.3.2 İklim Şartları ...................................................................................................... 44 2.3.3.3 Su ve Sediment Kalitesi...................................................................................... 47 ii 3. MATERYAL VE METOT ................................................................................ 49 3.1 Deneysel Çalı şmada Kullanılacak Bitkilerin Seçimi ve Deneye Hazırlanması..... 49 3.1.1 Seçilen Bitkilerin Özellikleri............................................................................... 50 3.1.1.1 Echinodorus amazonicus .................................................................................... 50 3.1.1.2 Crinum thaianum ................................................................................................ 51 3.1.1.3 Anubia congensis ................................................................................................ 52 3.1.1.4 Cryptocoryne undulata ....................................................................................... 53 3.1.1.5 Myriophyllum verticillatum Linnaeus ................................................................. 54 3.1.2 Bitkilerin Laboratuar Ortamında Adaptasyonu.................................................... 55 3.2 Denemeler için Sediment Numunelerinin Do ğal Ortamdan Alınması ve Deneye Hazırlanması ...................................................................................................... 56 3.2.1 Sediment Numunelerinin Alınması ..................................................................... 56 3.2.2 Sediment Numunelerinin Element Özelliklerinin Belirlenmesi ........................... 57 3.3 Sentetik Besleme Suyunun Hazırlanması............................................................ 60 3.4 Deney Düzene ğinin Hazırlanması....................................................................... 62 3.4.1 Reaktörlerin Hazırlanması .................................................................................. 62 3.4.2 Işık Düzene ğinin Hazırlanması ........................................................................... 65 3.4.3 Bitkilerin Uzunluk Ölçümü ve Reaktöre Yerle ştirilmesi ..................................... 65 3.5 Numunelerin Alımı ve Analizi............................................................................ 65 3.5.1 Numunelerin Alımı............................................................................................. 65 3.5.1.1 Su, Sediment Arası Bo şluk suyu ve Sediment Numunelerinin Alımı................... 66 3.5.1.2 Bitki Örneklerinin Alımı ve Hazırlanması........................................................... 66 3.5.2 Analiz Yöntemi.................................................................................................. 66 3.5.2.1 Su, Sediment Arası Bo şluk Suyu ve Sediment Numunelerinin Analizi................ 66 3.5.2.2 Bitki Numunelerinin Analizi............................................................................... 68 4. DENEY SONUÇLARI VE DE ĞERLEND İRME ............................................. 70 4.1 Echinodorus amazonicus ile Yapılan Deneme .................................................... 74 4.1.1 Reaktör Suyundaki Kimyasal Değişiklikler......................................................... 74 4.1.2 Reaktörde Su, Sediment Arası Boşluk Suyu ve Sediment Yapıda Metal Değişimleri......................................................................................................... 77 4.1.3 Deneme Sürecinde Bitkinin Metal Miktarlarındaki Değişimler........................... 89 4.1.3.1 Bitki Tarafından Alınan Elementler .................................................................... 90 4.1.3.2 Denemeler Sırasında Bitkide Olu şan Yeni Yapraklardaki Elementler ................. 94 4.1.3.3 Reaktörde Kontrol Dı şı Üreyen Bitkideki Elementler ......................................... 94 4.1.4 Deneme Sürecinde Bitkinin Fiziksel Değişiklikleri............................................. 95 4.2 Crinum thaianum ile Yapılan Deneme................................................................ 98 4.2.1 Reaktör Suyundaki Kimyasal Değişiklikler......................................................... 98 4.2.2 Reaktörde Su, Sediment Arası Bo şluk Suyu ve Sediment Yapıda Metal Değişimleri....................................................................................................... 101 4.2.3 Deneme Sürecinde Bitkinin Metal Miktarlarındaki
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Notes on Cryptocoryne
    Notes on Cryptocoryne BY T. Petch, B.A., B.Sc. WITH FOUR PLATES The genus Cryptocoryne (Araceae) was established by Fischer for the reception of two Indian species, Cryptocoryne spiralis and Crypto- coryne ciliata, which had been described under Ambrosinia by Roxburgh. Additional species were described by Roxburgh, Schott, and other botanists, while in Beccari, Malesia, Engler described eleven new species from Borneo and gave a conspectus of twenty-four known species. In Flora British India, Hooker enumerated sixteen species, and in Flora of Ceylon, five species. The total number of species is now over thirty, confined to the Eastern Tropics. For our knowledge of the structure of the flower we are indebted almost entirely to Griffith, who recorded the results of his examination of fresh specimens of Cryptocoryne ciliata in Trans. Linn. Soc., XX, pp. 263-276. The spadix is small, and it is not easy to determine the details of its structure from dried specimens. Consequently, very little has been added to Griffith's account, and a detailed examination of the living flower is still lacking in the case of the majority of the alleged species. In Ceylon, Cryptocoryne has been considered very rare. Crypto- coryne Thwaitesii Schott, hitherto the best-known species, occurs in the wet low-country in the south-west of the Island. C. Nevillii Trimen was described from a single collection made by Nevill in the Eastern Province. C. Beckettii Thwaites was collected in 1865 in Matale East, and there are two subsequent collections assigned to this species in Herb., Peradeniya. The record of C.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • History and Current Status of Systematic Research with Araceae
    HISTORY AND CURRENT STATUS OF SYSTEMATIC RESEARCH WITH ARACEAE Thomas B. Croat Missouri Botanical Garden P. O. Box 299 St. Louis, MO 63166 U.S.A. Note: This paper, originally published in Aroideana Vol. 21, pp. 26–145 in 1998, is periodically updated onto the IAS web page with current additions. Any mistakes, proposed changes, or new publications that deal with the systematics of Araceae should be brought to my attention. Mail to me at the address listed above, or e-mail me at [email protected]. Last revised November 2004 INTRODUCTION The history of systematic work with Araceae has been previously covered by Nicolson (1987b), and was the subject of a chapter in the Genera of Araceae by Mayo, Bogner & Boyce (1997) and in Curtis's Botanical Magazine new series (Mayo et al., 1995). In addition to covering many of the principal players in the field of aroid research, Nicolson's paper dealt with the evolution of family concepts and gave a comparison of the then current modern systems of classification. The papers by Mayo, Bogner and Boyce were more comprehensive in scope than that of Nicolson, but still did not cover in great detail many of the participants in Araceae research. In contrast, this paper will cover all systematic and floristic work that deals with Araceae, which is known to me. It will not, in general, deal with agronomic papers on Araceae such as the rich literature on taro and its cultivation, nor will it deal with smaller papers of a technical nature or those dealing with pollination biology.
    [Show full text]
  • NOTES Suction Dredge Removal of an Invasive Macrophyte from a Spring-Fed River in Central Texas, USA
    J. Aquat. Plant Manage. 46: 184-185 NOTES Suction Dredge Removal of an Invasive Macrophyte From a Spring-fed River in Central Texas, USA MARA L. ALEXANDER1, R. D. DOYLE2 AND P. POWER3 INTRODUCTION mented Beckett’s water trumpet covering 1951 m2 in the low- er 2.9 km of the upper SMR. The majority of colonies In 1996, Beckett’s water trumpet (Cryptocoryne beckettii) was mapped in 2005 was found at shallow depths (between 30 found growing in the upper San Marcos River (SMR), locat- and 120 cm) and in areas of rapidly flowing water (Michael ed in Hays County, Texas, USA (Rosen 2000). The SMR is Robertson, BIO-WEST, Inc., pers. comm.). This preference spring-fed and is home to numerous endangered and threat- for shallow, rapidly flowing areas of the river makes Beckett’s ened species, including Texas wild rice (Zizania texana), Tex- water trumpet a potentially serious threat to the endangered as blind salamander (Eurycea rathbuni), San Marcos Texas wild rice in the SMR (Power 1996, Poole and Bowles salamander (Eurycea nana), fountain darter (Etheostoma fonti- 1999). While the introduction of any aggressive, non-native cola), Comal Springs riffle beetle (Heterelmis comalensis) and species is a concern, Beckett’s water trumpet provides an ex- the San Marcos gambusia (Gambusia georgei) now thought to tra threat because it grows in the same habitat conditions as be extinct. Any changes to these species’ habitats may prove the endangered Texas wild rice and has invaded a portion of detrimental to their existence. Texas wild rice’s critical habitat. Fortunately, the growth of Beckett’s water trumpet is in the Araceae family native to the exotic species was downstream of Texas wild rice current Sri Lanka (Jacobsen 1977).
    [Show full text]
  • Induction of Direct Shoot Organogenesis from Shoot Tip Explants of an Ornamental Aquatic Plant, Cryptocoryne Wendtii
    http://wjst.wu.ac.th Applied Sciences Induction of Direct Shoot Organogenesis from Shoot Tip Explants of an Ornamental Aquatic Plant, Cryptocoryne wendtii Sutha KLAOCHEED1,*, Wanna JEHSU2, Wanwilai CHOOJUN2, Kanchit THAMMASIRI3, Somporn PRASERTSONGSKUN4 and Suphat RITTIRAT5 1Department of Technology and Industries, Faculty of Science and Technology, Prince of Songkla University, Pattani Campus, Pattani 94000, Thailand 2Program in Biology, Faculty of Science and Technology, Nakhon Si Thammarat Rajabhat University, Nakhon Si Thammarat 80280, Thailand 3Department of Plant Science, Faculty of Science, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10400, Thailand 4Department of Science, Faculty of Science and Technology, Prince of Songkla University, Pattani Campus, Pattani 94000, Thailand 5Faculty of Science and Technology, Nakhon Si Thammarat Rajabhat University, Nakhon Si Thammarat 80280, Thailand (*Corresponding author’s e-mail: [email protected]) Received: 26 March 2017, Revised: 13 February 2018, Accepted: 26 March 2018 Abstract Cryptocoryne wendtii is an important amphibious species with a wide range of foliage colors. Although it has a high market demand, the natural propagation of its aquatic species is limited due to the limited production on the number of plants with a long cultivation period, disease, and the requirement for a large space for propagation. Thus, we studied the effects of the plant growth regulators and their concentrations on the induction of direct shoot organogenesis from shoot tip explants of Cryptocoryne wendtii. The shoot tips were sterilized on its surface using 8 % Clorox® (5.25 % sodium hypochlorite, NaOCl) for 15 min followed by rinsing them three times with sterile distilled water. They were again sterilized on the surface for another 4 % Clorox® (5.25 % sodium hypochlorite, NaOCl) for 5 min.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxonomy and Conservation Status of Pteridophyte Flora of Sri Lanka R.H.G
    Taxonomy and Conservation Status of Pteridophyte Flora of Sri Lanka R.H.G. Ranil and D.K.N.G. Pushpakumara University of Peradeniya Introduction The recorded history of exploration of pteridophytes in Sri Lanka dates back to 1672-1675 when Poul Hermann had collected a few fern specimens which were first described by Linneus (1747) in Flora Zeylanica. The majority of Sri Lankan pteridophytes have been collected in the 19th century during the British period and some of them have been published as catalogues and checklists. However, only Beddome (1863-1883) and Sledge (1950-1954) had conducted systematic studies and contributed significantly to today’s knowledge on taxonomy and diversity of Sri Lankan pteridophytes (Beddome, 1883; Sledge, 1982). Thereafter, Manton (1953) and Manton and Sledge (1954) reported chromosome numbers and some taxonomic issues of selected Sri Lankan Pteridophytes. Recently, Shaffer-Fehre (2006) has edited the volume 15 of the revised handbook to the flora of Ceylon on pteridophyta (Fern and FernAllies). The local involvement of pteridological studies began with Abeywickrama (1956; 1964; 1978), Abeywickrama and Dassanayake (1956); and Abeywickrama and De Fonseka, (1975) with the preparations of checklists of pteridophytes and description of some fern families. Dassanayake (1964), Jayasekara (1996), Jayasekara et al., (1996), Dhanasekera (undated), Fenando (2002), Herat and Rathnayake (2004) and Ranil et al., (2004; 2005; 2006) have also contributed to the present knowledge on Pteridophytes in Sri Lanka. However, only recently, Ranil and co workers initiated a detailed study on biology, ecology and variation of tree ferns (Cyatheaceae) in Kanneliya and Sinharaja MAB reserves combining field and laboratory studies and also taxonomic studies on island-wide Sri Lankan fern flora.
    [Show full text]
  • Invasive Aquatic Plants and the Aquarium and Ornamental Pond Industries Shakira Stephanie Elaine Azan
    Ryerson University Digital Commons @ Ryerson Theses and dissertations 1-1-2011 Invasive aquatic plants and the aquarium and ornamental pond industries Shakira Stephanie Elaine Azan Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.ryerson.ca/dissertations Part of the Plant Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Azan, Shakira Stephanie Elaine, "Invasive aquatic plants and the aquarium and ornamental pond industries" (2011). Theses and dissertations. Paper 818. This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ Ryerson. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Ryerson. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INVASIVE AQUATIC PLANTS AND THE AQUARIUM AND ORNAMENTAL POND INDUSTRIES by Shakira Stephanie Elaine Azan Master of Philosophy, University of the West Indies, Mona Campus, Jamaica, 2002 Bachelor of Science (Hons.), University of the West Indies, Mona Campus, Jamaica, 1997 A thesis presented to Ryerson University in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Applied Science in the Program of Environmental Applied Science and Management Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 2011 ©Shakira Azan 2011 AUTHOR’S DECLARATION I hereby declare that I am the sole author of this thesis. I authorize Ryerson University to lend this thesis to other institutions or individuals for the purpose of scholarly research. ........................................................................................ I further authorize
    [Show full text]
  • Enhancement of a Three-Kilometer Segment of the San Marcos River and Eradication of the Invasive Aquatic Plant Cryptocoryne Beckettii
    Section 6 Revised Final Report 4/7/2006 Grant Title: Enhancement of a three-kilometer segment of the San Marcos River and eradication of the invasive aquatic plant Cryptocoryne beckettii TPWD Abbreviated Title Plant Removal SM River (E45) Grant #: E-45 Project #: WER01 Contract #: 129861 Principle Investigator: Dr. Robert Doyle Baylor University Director, Center for Reservoir and Aquatic Systems Research One Bear Place, Box 97388 Waco, TX 76798 254-710-2911 [email protected] Research and Project Collaborator Ms. Paula Power & Dr. Tom Brandt San Marcos National Fish Hatchery and Technology Center San Marcos, TX. Reporting Period: November 1 2003- 31 August 2005 Section 6 Final Report- Revised. R. Doyle- Grant E-45 (4/7/2006) I. ABSTRACT Efforts have continued on the lower San Marcos River to eradicate the invasive exotic aquatic plant Cryptocoryne beckettii and to re-establish desirable native plants to provide habitat and cover for fish and invertebrate species. During the 2002-2003 dredging operations were initiated under other funding to remove C. beckettii from San Marcos River. Prior to the initiation of the Section 6 project, approximately 132 m2 of the exotic species was removed by human-operated dredging efforts. The Section 6 Project provided funds for continuing the dredge removal operations during the fall of 2003 and spring –summer 2004. During the Section 6 project period, approximately 515 additional m2 of C. beckettii were removed from the section of the San Marcos River downriver of the “powerline” and in the vicinity of the San Marcos Waste Water Treatment Plant. This effort was accomplished by use of a suction dredge operated for 62 days by paid field assistants.
    [Show full text]
  • Cryptocoryne Beckettii
    Cryptocoryne beckettii Authors: Mandy Tu, Global Invasive Species Team, The Nature Conservancy Contents [hide] 1 Identifiers 2 Stewardship summary o 2.1 Impacts 3 Natural history o 3.1 Description o 3.2 Reproduction o 3.3 Range 4 Management/Monitoring 5 Information sources o 5.1 Bibliography . 5.1.1 Source document Identifiers Latin Names: Cryptocoryne beckettii Thwaites ex Trimen Common Names: watertrumpet The genus name Cryptocoryne is derived from the Latin crypto, meaning hidden, and the Greek koryne, meaning club. The common name (watertrumpet) refers to the shape of its inflorescence, which is typical of the arum family. There are currently no accepted synonyms for C. beckettii. Stewardship summary Cryptocoryne beckettii has been recently observed invading the San Marcos River in Texas, and there are (unconfirmed) reports of it in Florida. (Cryptocoryne wendtii is established in the wild in Florida, where it is not native (Atlas of Florida vascular plants, 2000).) Cryptocoryne beckettii is thought to have escaped from cultivation via the dumping of aquariums. Its potential range as an invader in North America is uncertain, but it may easily expand throughout the Gulf coastal plain, Florida, and the southern Atlantic coastal plain. Native to southeastern Asia, C. beckettii is an attractive herb in the arum family (Araceae), and which has been one of the most popular aquarium plants for more than 60 years (Bastmeijer, 2001; Tropica Aquarium Plants, 2001). Since the confident identification of members in this rely on floral characters, the plants in Texas (which were not flowering) should not be considered absolutely certain (Bastmeijer, 2001).
    [Show full text]
  • EIAA HAP Classifications and Banned Plants
    EIAA HAP Classifications and Banned Plants This list contains an alphabetic listing by Genus and species. Follow across to determine the classification for vegetative reproduction. The list also contains the information on which species are banned from the HAP, due to listing on the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). There are also notes indicated which show on the last page of the listing which will help explain status and identification. Following the vegetative classifications are the point value information for flowering and sexual reproduction. Classification points are as follows: Class A = 5, B = 10, C = 15, D = 20. Class E and F are awarded according to the schedule under the classification explanations following the species list. Scientific Name (Binomial) Common Name Class Notes Aldrovanda vesiculosa D Alternanthera reineckii C Note 2 Alternanthera sessilis BANNED Alternanthera sp. (other) C Note 2 Alisma plantago Water Plantain A Ambulia sp. B Anubias barteri v nana Anubias Nana C Note 4 Anubias barteri v nana 'petite' Anubias Nana Petite C Note 4 Anubias sp. (other) C Note 2 & 4 Aponogeton boivianus D Note 3 Aponogeton capuronii D Note 3 Aponogeton crispus C Note 3 Aponogeton x hybridus C Note 3 Aponogeton longiplumulosus D Note 3 Aponogeton madagascarlensis Madagascar Lace D Note 3 Aponogeton rigidifolius C Note 3 Aponogeton ulvaceus C Note 3 Aponogeton undulatus C Note 3 Aponogeton sp. (other) C Notes 2 & 3 Azolla sp. A Bacopa sp. B Cabomba caroliniana B Cabomba sp. (other) B Note 2 Calla palustris Water Arum A Cardamine sp. B Caulerpa mexicana B Ceratophyllum demersum Hornwort A Ceratophyllum sp.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding the Impacts of Invasive Non-Native Species on Protected Sites
    Improvement Programme for England’s Natura 2000 Sites (IPENS) – Planning for the Future IPENS 046 Understanding the impacts of invasive non-native species on protected sites Report covers all Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Special Protection Area (SPA) within England First published 01 January 2014 www.gov.uk/government/publications/improvement-programme-for-englands-natura-2000-sites-ipens This project is part of the IPENS programme (LIFE11NAT/UK/000384IPENS) which is financially supported by LIFE, a financial instrument of the European Community. Foreword The Improvement Programme for England’s Natura 2000 sites (IPENS), supported by European Union LIFE+ funding, is a new strategic approach to managing England’s Natura 2000 sites. It is enabling Natural England, the Environment Agency, and other key partners to plan what, how, where and when they will target their efforts on Natura 2000 sites and areas surrounding them. As part of the programme we identified gaps in our knowledge and have commissioned a range of projects to help us fill these gaps. The project findings are being used to help develop our Theme Plans and Site Improvement Plans. This report is one of the project studies we commissioned. Invasive non-native species (INNS) are considered the second biggest threat to global biodiversity - following habitat loss - causing impacts through consumption, resource competition, introduction of diseases, interbreeding and disturbance. They can have economic, agricultural and health impacts, with an estimated cost to the English economy of at least £1.3 billion per year. They also present a significant risk to the favourable condition of England’s protected sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Cryptocoryne
    L.andbouwhoogeschool Aid. PLANTENSYSTEMATIEK en GEOGRAFIE .frorr: The orlo ~ ~ , 1g~6 . WJ.GEN1NGEN - Necledllad H. C. D. de Wit ,Jh. / Mainly on Cryptocoryne As a result of efforts to grow Cryptocoryne spp. though in Cr. lutea the leaves seem, generally, at the National Agricultural College at Wage­ somewhat wider. They are never marked by pur­ ningen, Holland, with the purpose of obtaining ply striations indicating transverse veinlets. The flowering specimens, Mr Legro and I made some margin of fully developed submerged leaves is observations which will be published more fully later in the year in the dutch periodical ,.Het Aquarium", but may be briefly referred to here at present. In the second half of the winter 1955 /56, the following species flowered: Cr. beckettii Thw. ex Trim., Cr. lutea Alston, Cr. nevillii Trim., and Cr. willisii Engl. ex Baum. / It was now possible to compare Cr. lutea closely to Cr. beckettii. This was needed as Al­ ston, on publishing his Cr. lutea as a new spe­ cies, suggested that it might prove to be identical with Cr. beckettii. It was, moreover, quite inte­ resting to have Cr. lutea in flower, as it was, we believe, the first time that a specimen flowered in Europe. Cr. beckettii, a Ceylonese species, flo­ wers easily, if cultivated for that purpose, in the right way. Cr. beckettii - if fully developed submerged - shows leaves with widely undulating recurved margins; the blade always is, more or less, olive green above, and the lower surface is usually purplish or brownish. If cultivated on moist soil, emerse, the leaves are shorter and wider, darker green, though they often retain some scattered purple striations a long the transverse connecting veinlets on the upper surface, as is usually also seen on submerged leaves.
    [Show full text]