Sorting out Biodiversity Chapter 2 • Sorting out Biodiversity 45 Early Classification Methods

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Sorting out Biodiversity Chapter 2 • Sorting out Biodiversity 45 Early Classification Methods <<BIG IDEAS>> Diversity Our Earth is teeming with life. Approximately 1.8 million known types of organisms (living things) on the Earth have been described and Sorting out named. scientists estimate 10–30 million other kinds of living things that haven’t even been discovered yet. scientists use classifi cation 2 to organise this diversity of life forms (biodiversity) in a logical fashion. biodiversity classifi cation is an example of a system that scientists have created, and continue to create, to help us better understand the world. 2.1 2.2 How do scientists Why do scientists classify? organise life? Until the 1960s, any group of scientists could land on 1 Name three resolutions or rules that scientists In 2010, six new Antarctic organisms were discovered. the Antarctic continent to do research. Often, the groups might have to agree to before they can do Although these organisms look like plants, they are research at the Antarctic. would be researching the same organism but call it by classifi ed as animals. The ‘sea whips’ or ‘sea fans’ different names. Each would publish their results in 2 Find out which countries signed the Antarctic are similar to the corals found in the warm tropical Treaty. their own language. The scientists needed an organised waters of other oceans, which is why the scientists ➔ Fig 2.3 The orca is one of our closest living relatives. system to help them share the results of their efforts. 3 Do you think the Antarctic Treaty protects only were surprised to fi nd them in the icy waters of the These days, all visitors to the Antarctic work under a living things? Explain your answer. Antarctic. Like the coral reefs, these tiny animal common treaty, working together to conserve every type polyps form colonies surrounded by hard scales that 2.3 Where do I fi t in? of plant and animal on this very special continent. ➔ Fig 2.1 A naming system for living things helps scientists to share their research. stand upright, gradually fl attening and branching out like a fan. A colony can grow to a metre high and a metre across, but only a few centimetres thick. They may be brightly coloured, often red, purple or yellow. The orca or Orcunus orca is one of our closest living relatives in the Antarctic. Orcas are highly 1 Tauroprimnoa austasensis was named because the social animals, often travelling in large families, researcher thought it looked like a bull. can you fi nd each family with their own range of sounds and a hint in the name? hunting techniques. Although Orcas have large 2 Name two characteristics that might make you think teeth (up to 4 centimetres long) they do not chew these organisms are plants instead of animals. their food. Instead, they tend to swallow it whole. 3 If you had to divide your class into two groups, what Orcas are very protective of their young, nursing characteristic would you use to decide on the groups? them with milk from their mammary glands. As Try to fi nd four different characteristics. soon as the young are old enough, the adults teach them to hunt fi sh, seals and seabirds in the freezing ➔ Fig 2.2 These plant- like organisms are ice-capped waters of the Antarctic. See Figure 2.2 actually animals. at left. 1 With a partner, brainstorm the characteristics you think of when you hear the word ‘animal’. 2 Which, if any, of the characteristics you brainstormed SAMPLE would you use to describe yourself? 3 Which of the orca’s characteristics could you use to describe yourself? In what ways is the orca different to you? 44 CHAPTER 2 • SORTING OUT BIODIVERSITY CHAPTER 2 • SORTING OUT BIODIVERSITY 45 Early classification methods Early humans first classified plants by learning which Why do scientists classify? plants were edible and which were poisonous. A new plant or animal discovered by humans was (and still is) 2.1 tested and put into a group. Some plants were found Every year, scientists are discovering plants and animals that have never been seen to help sick people and others were poisonous. Some before. What if you were to find a neworganism at your school? How would you animals could produce foods (e.g. milk and eggs). Each know that no one else had discovered it before you? Could you describe it so that generation of scientists worked to improve how these people on the other side of the world understood what it looked like and how it groups were classified. behaved? How would you know if it was alive? The Greek philosopher Aristotle (384–322 BCE) is considered by many to be the grandfather of classification. He found that each small township near his home had its own list of favourite plants and animals, described and ordered for its own purposes. He decided ➔ Fig 2.5 The mature pine tree looks very different from its sapling. that this information should be shared and he set about <<DISCOVERING IDEAS>> finding a logical way to collect it. He sent his students out to gather local samples and stories. Over 500 types He suggested that each scientist needed to observe of plant and animal were collected and arranged in order an organism over the whole of its lifespan. Augustus of importance, according to where they lived and the Who am I? Quirinus Rivinus (1652–1723) and Joseph Pitton de shapes of their bodies. Aristotle ordered them from what Choose a partner to work with. Describe an animal to your partner—make sure you don’t use the animal’s Tournefort (1656–1708) both suggested using a hierarchy he thought was least important (rocks) to the most name. Your partner should try to draw the animal you describe. How accurate are they? of names. This meant starting with large general groups important (wild animals, men, kings, fallen angels, (like plants and animals) and then making each group Now draw an animal while your partner tries to guess what it is. How quickly did they guess your animal? angels and God). He divided animals into those with smaller and smaller depending on its characteristics. 1 How effective are word descriptions and drawings for communicating specific information about new blood (cats and dogs) and those that he thought had no Each organism had a long Latin name that described species? blood (insects, worms and shelled animals). the characteristics of each level of the hierarchy. For 2 What are the problems you can identify? For many years, other scientists used Aristotle’s example, a human would be described as an animal that 3 How might some of these problems have been overcome in more recent times? classification system. Nearly 2000 years later, early breathes air, lives on land, has two legs and two arms, explorers travelling to new lands found more new and can give birth (if female) to live young that drink milk different species—too many to fit into Aristotle’s 500 from their mother, has body hair, stands upright, uses The history of classification classification groups. They also questioned some of the tools and can speak. All this would have been written groupings—were rocks alive in Latin and the classification Early scientists didn’t have the technologies to make and should angels and God used by all educated people or send exact images of their discoveries. Most of their be included in this system? in the 17th century. Over the next hundred communication was written as papers or letters, sent Carolus Linnaeus (1707–1778) years a number of scientists around the world to other scientists. Many scientists tried these classification developed new ways of communicated in Latin, the ancient language from systems but found their describing and grouping which many European languages have come. They descriptions to be too long. organisms. Each scientist had to make illustrations and written descriptions of He decided a simpler system would publish their ideas the plants and animals that they saw and not all of was needed. He changed the in letters or books for other them were great artists. Often, without knowing it, descriptions to single words scientists to see. two scientists described the same organism that was and reduced the number of at different stages of its life. Imagine finding a tadpole Andrea Caesalpino (1519– classification groups to seven. and a frog for the first time—how would you know they 1603) suggested classifying Linnaeus’s system is still were the same animal? To devise a useful classification plants into groups according used today. It is occasionally system, scientists had to find a way to communicate that to their trunks and fruits. modified as new organisms would make misunderstandings less likely. They needed John Ray (1627–1705) pointed to agree on common words SAMPLEthey could use to describe are discovered and as we learn out that some plants looked more about the organisms we certain characteristics, common languages for scientific very different when they already know. papers and common processes for finding, describing were saplings than when ➔ Fig 2.4 Early scientists used illustrations to help them communicate. and communicating their work. they were large trees. ➔ Fig 2.6 Carolus Linnaeus. 46 C HAPTER 2 • SORTING OUT BIODIVERSITY UNIT 2.1 • WHY DO SCIENTISTS CLASSIFY? 47 PRACTIVITY 2.1 The fi rst person to discover microscopic organisms was a Dutch scientist named Antonie The great Guzzlemobile van Leeuwenhoek (pronounced debate ‘LAY-ven-hock’), in the late 17th century. His fi rst discoveries gave him quite a shock. One day, van Leeuwenhoek noticed that his local water supply looked greenish and had begun to smell.
Recommended publications
  • Reptiles and Amphibians of Otago
    Society for Research on Amphibians and Reptiles in New Zealand (SRARNZ) presents Reptiles and Amphibians of Otago Otago is a large (31,251 km2) and lightly populated region of the southern South Island of Aotearoa New Zealand, stretching from the eastern coastline west to the Southern Alps. The earliest humans, of East Polynesian origin, arrived about 700 years ago. The largest settlement today is the coastal city of Dunedin (pop. >127,000), which grew from a Scottish influx in the 1800s. The Otago Regional Council administers the region, and tribal authority (mana whenua) rests with the iwi of Ngāi Tahu. Climates in the Otago region (roughly 45°– leiopelmatid frogs survive elsewhere in 47°S) range from changeable, cool- New Zealand. Two species of introduced temperate conditions near the coast to frogs are present, but there are no the near-continental climates (baking hot crocodilians, salamanders, terrestrial summers, freezing winters) of the interior. snakes or turtles. Marine turtles (mainly The region provides varied habitats for leatherback turtles, Dermochelys coriacea) herp species, including sand-dunes, visit the coastal waters of Otago but do grasslands, shrublands, wetlands, forests, not nest here. rock structures and scree slopes, some occupied to at least 1900 m above sea level. Today’s herpetofauna is dominated by lizards (solely geckos and skinks), including about 10 described species. A further 12 or more undescribed taxa are recognised Otago by tag names for conservation purposes, and we follow that approach here. All lizards in Otago are viviparous and long- lived, and remain vulnerable to ongoing habitat loss and predation by introduced mammals.
    [Show full text]
  • BESS) Detailed Ecology Assessment Tilt Renewables Reference: 509891 Revision: 2 2021-02-22
    Latrobe Valley Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) Detailed Ecology assessment Tilt Renewables Reference: 509891 Revision: 2 2021-02-22 Document control record Document prepared by: Aurecon Australasia Pty Ltd ABN 54 005 139 873 Aurecon Centre Level 8, 850 Collins Street Docklands, Melbourne VIC 3008 PO Box 23061 Docklands VIC 8012 Australia T +61 3 9975 3000 F +61 3 9975 3444 E [email protected] W aurecongroup.com A person using Aurecon documents or data accepts the risk of: a) Using the documents or data in electronic form without requesting and checking them for accuracy against the original hard copy version. b) Using the documents or data for any purpose not agreed to in writing by Aurecon. Document control Report title Detailed Ecology assessment Document code Project number 509891 File path Client Tilt Renewables Client contact Client reference Rev Date Revision Author Reviewer Verifier Approver details/status (if required) 0 2021-01-14 First Draft Justin Sullivan Brett Taylor Brett Taylor Greta Thraves 1 2021-02-04 Revised report to Justin Sullivan Greta Thraves respond to client comments 2 2021-02-22 Revised report to Justin Sullivan Greta Thraves respond to client comments Current revision 2 Approval Author signature Approver signature Name Justin Sullivan Name Greta Thraves Title Senior Consultant Title Manager, Planning and (Ecologist) Environment Project number 509891 File Latrobe Valley BESS – Detailed Ecology Assessment, 2021-02-22 Revision 2 ii Executive summary Aurecon was commissioned by Tilt Renewables (the Proponent) to undertake an ecological assessment to inform the design and planning approvals for a proposed Latrobe Valley Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) at Morwell in eastern Victoria (the Project).
    [Show full text]
  • ARAZPA Amphibian Action Plan
    Appendix 1 to Murray, K., Skerratt, L., Marantelli, G., Berger, L., Hunter, D., Mahony, M. and Hines, H. 2011. Guidelines for minimising disease risks associated with captive breeding, raising and restocking programs for Australian frogs. A report for the Australian Government Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities. ARAZPA Amphibian Action Plan Compiled by: Graeme Gillespie, Director Wildlife Conservation and Science, Zoos Victoria; Russel Traher, Amphibian TAG Convenor, Curator Healesville Sanctuary Chris Banks, Wildlife Conservation and Science, Zoos Victoria. February 2007 1 1. Background Amphibian species across the world have declined at an alarming rate in recent decades. According to the IUCN at least 122 species have gone extinct since 1980 and nearly one third of the world’s near 6,000 amphibian species are classified as threatened with extinction, placing the entire class at the core of the current biodiversity crisis (IUCN, 2006). Australasia too has experienced significant declines; several Australian species are considered extinct and nearly 25% of the remainder are threatened with extinction, while all four species native to New Zealand are threatened. Conventional causes of biodiversity loss, habitat destruction and invasive species, are playing a major role in these declines. However, emergent disease and climate change are strongly implicated in many declines and extinctions. These factors are now acting globally, rapidly and, most disturbingly, in protected and near pristine areas. Whilst habitat conservation and mitigation of threats in situ are essential, for many taxa the requirement for some sort of ex situ intervention is mounting. In response to this crisis there have been a series of meetings organised by the IUCN (World Conservation Union), WAZA (World Association of Zoos & Aquariums) and CBSG (Conservation Breeding Specialist Group, of the IUCN Species Survival Commission) around the world to discuss how the zoo community can and should respond.
    [Show full text]
  • Predation by Introduced Cats Felis Catus on Australian Frogs: Compilation of Species Records and Estimation of Numbers Killed
    Predation by introduced cats Felis catus on Australian frogs: compilation of species records and estimation of numbers killed J. C. Z. WoinarskiA,M, S. M. LeggeB,C, L. A. WoolleyA,L, R. PalmerD, C. R. DickmanE, J. AugusteynF, T. S. DohertyG, G. EdwardsH, H. GeyleA, H. McGregorI, J. RileyJ, J. TurpinK and B. P. MurphyA ANESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub, Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, NT 0909, Australia. BNESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub, Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Research, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Qld 4072, Australia. CFenner School of the Environment and Society, Linnaeus Way, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2602, Australia. DWestern Australian Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, Bentley, WA 6983, Australia. ENESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub, Desert Ecology Research Group, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia. FQueensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Red Hill, Qld 4701, Australia. GCentre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life and Environmental Sciences (Burwood campus), Deakin University, Geelong, Vic. 3216, Australia. HNorthern Territory Department of Land Resource Management, PO Box 1120, Alice Springs, NT 0871, Australia. INESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub, School of Biological Sciences, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tas. 7001, Australia. JSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, 24 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol BS8 1TQ, United Kingdom. KDepartment of Terrestrial Zoology, Western Australian Museum, 49 Kew Street, Welshpool, WA 6106, Australia. LPresent address: WWF-Australia, 3 Broome Lotteries House, Cable Beach Road, Broome, WA 6276, Australia. MCorresponding author. Email: [email protected] Table S1. Data sources used in compilation of cat predation on frogs.
    [Show full text]
  • February 2018 Issue
    THE FROG AND TADPOLE STUDY GROUP NSW Inc. Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/FATSNSW/ Email: [email protected] PO Box 296 Rockdale NSW 2216 NEWSLETTER No. 153 FEBRUARY 2018 Frogwatch Helpline 0419 249 728 Website: www.fats.org.au ABN: 34 282 154 794 Photo by Cassie Thompson You are invited to our FATS meeting. Everyone is welcome. Arrive from 6.30 pm for a 7pm start. Friday 2 February 2018 FATS meet at the Education Centre, Bicentennial Pk, Sydney Olympic Park Easy walk from Concord West railway station and straight down Victoria Ave. By car: Enter from Australia Ave at the Bicentennial Park main entrance, turn off to the right and drive through the park. It is a one way road. Or enter from Bennelong Rd / Parkway. It is a short stretch of two way road. Park in P10f car park, the last car park before the Bennelong Rd. exit gate. Litoria dayi Australian Lace-lid, Lace-eyed Tree frog CONTENTS PAGE FATS meeting Friday 2 February 2018 Last meeting main speakers: Marion Anstis South African 2 6.30 pm Lost frogs desperately seeking forever homes: Several cheery photographic journey Green Tree Frogs Litoria caerulea and one lonely Litoria October: Jenny O’Meara SOPA peroni Perons Tree Frog. Priority to new pet frog owners. and Arthur White Maud Island, Please bring your membership card and cash $50 donation. The oldest frog? Sorry we don’t have EFTPOS. Your current NSW NPWS Australian Museum frog app 3 amphibian licence must be sighted on the night. Rescued ’s frogs can never be released.
    [Show full text]
  • Rare Or Threatened Flora & Fauna Surveying of the Proposed Kalbar Fingerboards Mineral Sands Project Site
    Rare or Threatened Flora & Fauna Surveying of the proposed Kalbar Fingerboards Mineral Sands Project site SITE ADDRESS: Fingerboards Mineral Sands Project, Glenaladale, Victoria REPORT DATE: 2 November 2020 TREETEC REFERENCE: glen1120bj PREPARED FOR: Submitter 813 PREPARED BY: Bradley Jenner Botanist (03) 8644 8005 [email protected] glen1120bj www.treetec.net.au 1 of 17 Contents Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................. 3 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 3 1.1 Purpose .......................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Background .................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Scope ............................................................................................................................. 3 1.4 Survey methods ............................................................................................................. 3 1.5 Limitations ..................................................................................................................... 4 2 Results ........................................................................................................................ 4 2.1 Rare or threatened flora and fauna survey results ......................................................
    [Show full text]
  • National Recovery Plan for the Southern Bell Frog Litoria Raniformis
    DRAFT for public comment January 2010 National Recovery Plan for the Southern Bell Frog Litoria raniformis Nick Clemann and Graeme R. Gillespie Prepared by Nick Clemann (Department of Sustainability and Environment, Victoria) and Graeme R. Gillespie (Zoos Victoria). Published by the Victorian Government Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) Melbourne, month 2010. © State of Victoria Department of Sustainability and Environment 2010 This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968. Authorised by the Victorian Government, 8 Nicholson Street, East Melbourne. ISBN 1 74152 464 4 This is a Recovery Plan prepared under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, with the assistance of funding provided by the Australian Government Natural Heritage Trust. This Recovery Plan has been developed with the involvement and cooperation of a range of stakeholders, but individual stakeholders have not necessarily committed to undertaking specific actions. The attainment of objectives and the provision of funds may be subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved. Proposed actions may be subject to modification over the life of the plan due to changes in knowledge. Disclaimer This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence that may arise from you relying on any information in this publication. An electronic version of this document is available on the Commonwealth Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts website www.environment.gov.au For more information contact the DSE Customer Service Centre 136 186 Citation: Clemann, N.
    [Show full text]
  • Cardinia Road Employment Precinct, Conservation Management Plan for Growling Grass Frog Litoria Raniformis
    FINAL REPORT: Cardinia Road Employment Precinct, Conservation Management Plan for Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis PREPARED FOR Cardinia Shire Council 16TH SEPTEMBER 2010 Ecology Partners Pty Ltd HEAD OFFICE: 420 Victoria Street Brunswick VIC 3056 MELBOURNE: PO Box 298 Brunswick VIC 3056 GEELONG: PO Box 8048 Newtown VIC 3220 Acknowledgments We thank the following people for their contribution in the project: • Hilary Rutledge, John Holland and Janene Vurlow (Cardinia Shire Council) for information relating to the staging of the proposed development. • Deborah Riley, Sara Johnston, David Carew and Nino Polon from Melbourne Water for comments on the draft report. • Clare White and Karen Lester (Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE)) for comments on the draft report. • Melinda Wealands and Alissa Baker (SMEC Urban Pty Ltd) for landscape information (e.g. wetland design). • Jessica Cutting and Kristy Plant (MacroPlan Australia Pty Ltd) and Jason Black (Insight Planning Pty. Ltd.) for project and site information. • DSE for access to the data on the Flora Information System and Atlas of Victorian Wildlife. Cover photo: View of an existing farm dam within the Precinct (background), Growling Grass Frog Litoria raniformis (upper right and middle left insets) (Dan Weller, Ecology Partners Pty Ltd). The following Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd. employees either undertook the field assessments and/or contributed to the preparation of the final report: Dan Weller, Aaron Organ and Amanda Feetham Copyright © Ecology Partners Pty. Ltd. This document is subject to copyright and may only be used for the purposes for which it was commissioned. The use or copying of this document in whole or part without the permission of Ecology Partners Pty Ltd is an infringement of copyright.
    [Show full text]
  • Growling Grass Frog Habitat Design Standards 1 Melbourne Strategic Assessment Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning
    Growling Grass Frog Habitat Design Standards Melbourne Strategic Assessment Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning Cover image: Growling Grass Frog on a mat of Fennel Pondweed (Stuckenia pectinata). Photo by Geoff Heard, University of Melbourne © The State of Victoria Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning 2017 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence. You are free to re-use the work under that licence, on the condition that you credit the State of Victoria as author. The licence does not apply to any images, photographs or branding, including the Victorian Coat of Arms, the Victorian Government logo and the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) logo. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ISBN 978-1-76047-324-2 (pdf/online) Disclaimer This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence which may arise from you relying on any information in this publication. Accessibility If you would like to receive this publication in an alternative format, please telephone the DELWP Customer Service Centre on 136186, email [email protected], or via the National Relay Service on 133 677 www.relayservice.com.au. This document is also available on the internet at www.delwp.vic.gov.au.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Genetics of the Growling Grass Frog, Litoria Raniformis, in Urbanising Landscapes by Claire C
    CONSERVATION GENETICS OF THE GROWLING GRASS FROG, LITORIA RANIFORMIS, IN URBANISING LANDSCAPES CLAIRE CATHERINE KEELY Bachelor of Science (Hons) Submitted in total fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY AUGUST 2016 School of BioSciences The University of Melbourne ORCID ID: 0000-0002-7243-4639 Conservation genetics of the Growling Grass Frog, Litoria raniformis, in urbanising landscapes By Claire C. Keely ! 2016 Supervisors: Kirsten Parris, Geoff Heard, Jane Melville and Andrew Hamer Title Page: Litoria raniformis juvenile, photo by C. C. Keely For Dan and Max Abstract The proportion of the world’s human population living in cities and towns (urban areas) grew rapidly over the 20th century. Indeed, the global urban population grew by an order of magnitude during this period, from 220 million to 2.8 billion. By 2030, the global urban population is expected to swell to almost 5 billion. Urbanisation is a key threatening process for amphibians, with the global amphibian assessment listing greater than one-third of the world’s known amphibian species as currently threatened by urbanisation. As is the case for biodiversity more generally, habitat loss and fragmentation represent pervasive impacts of urbanisation for amphibians. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) recognises genetic diversity as one of three forms of biodiversity requiring conservation. However, surprisingly few studies have focused on the genetic consequences of urbanisation for amphibians. With the global rate of urbanisation set to steadily increase, and its recognition as a key threatening process to amphibians, the application of genetic techniques will be an important component of conservation planning for these animals.
    [Show full text]
  • Woinarski J. C. Z., Legge S. M., Woolley L. A., Palmer R., Dickman C
    Woinarski J. C. Z., Legge S. M., Woolley L. A., Palmer R., Dickman C. R., Augusteyn J., Doherty T. S., Edwards G., Geyle H., McGregor H., Riley J., Turpin J., Murphy B.P. (2020) Predation by introduced cats Felis catus on Australian frogs: compilation of species records and estimation of numbers killed. Wildlife Research, Vol. 47, Iss. 8, Pp 580-588. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1071/WR19182 1 2 3 Predation by introduced cats Felis catus on Australian frogs: compilation of species’ 4 records and estimation of numbers killed. 5 6 7 J.C.Z. Woinarskia*, S.M. Leggeb, L.A. Woolleya,k, R. Palmerc, C.R. Dickmand, J. Augusteyne, T.S. Dohertyf, 8 G. Edwardsg, H. Geylea, H. McGregorh, J. Rileyi, J. Turpinj, and B.P. Murphya 9 10 a NESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub, Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, 11 Charles Darwin University, Darwin, NT 0909, Australia 12 b NESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub, Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Research, 13 University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia; AND Fenner School of the Environment and 14 Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2602, Australia 15 c Western Australian Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, Bentley, WA 6983, 16 Australia 17 d NESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub, Desert Ecology Research Group, School of Life and 18 Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia 19 e Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Red Hill, QLD 4701, Australia 20 f Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life and Environmental Sciences (Burwood campus), Deakin 21 University, Geelong, VIC 3216, Australia 22 g Northern Territory Department of Land Resource Management, PO Box 1120, Alice Springs, NT 0871, 23 Australia 24 h NESP Threatened Species Recovery Hub, School of Biological Sciences, University of Tasmania, 25 Hobart, TAS 7001, Australia i School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, 24 Tyndall Ave, Bristol BS8 1TQ, United Kingdom.
    [Show full text]
  • Esso Pipeline Replacement Project – Longford to Hastings: Flora and Fauna Survey and Impact Mitigation
    Esso Pipeline Replacement Project – Longford to Hastings: Flora and fauna survey and impact mitigation Prepared for WorleyParsons 19 February 2014 © Biosis September 2012 – Leading ecology and heritage consultants 1 Document information Biosis offices AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY Report to: WorleyParsons Canberra Prepared by: Matthew Dell, Katrina Sofo, Anthony Byrne, Floor 1, Unit 3, 38 Essington Street Ian Smales Mitchell ACT 2911 Biosis project no.: 16955/16956 Phone: (02) 6241 2333 File name: 16955 EAPL pipeline ff final 190214.docx Fax: (03) 9646 9242 Email: [email protected] Citation: Biosis 2013. Esso Pipeline Replacement Project –Longford to Hastings: Flora and fauna survey and impact mitigation. Report to Worley NEW SOUTH WALES Parsons. Authors: Dell, M., Sofo, K., Byrne A. & Smales I. Biosis Pty Ltd, Sydney Melbourne. Project 16955/16956. Unit 14 17-27 Power Avenue Alexandria NSW 2015 Document control Phone: (02) 9690 2777 Fax: (02) 9690 2577 Version Reviewer Date issued Email: [email protected] Draft V1 JY (int.), TJ, MH (ext.) 10/01/14 Wollongong 8 Tate Street Draft V2 MDD (int.), TJ (ext.) 31/01/14 Wollongong NSW 2500 Final version IS (int.) 20/02/14 Phone: (02) 4229 5222 Fax: (02) 4229 5500 Acknowledgements Email: [email protected] Biosis acknowledges the contribution of the following people and organisations in QUEENSLAND undertaking this study: Brisbane Suite 4 First Floor, 72 Wickham Street WorleyParsons: Tony Judd, Michelle Hendricks and Gary Fiddes. Fortitude Valley QLD 4006 CNC Project Management for property access liaison. Phone: (07) 3831 7400 Department of Sustainability & Environment for access to the Victorian Fax: (07) 3831 7411 Biodiversity Atlas.
    [Show full text]