DOCSLIB.ORG

DIGFOR Extension Final Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
DIGFOR Extension Final Report General Enquiries on the form should be made to: Defra, Procurements and Commercial Function (Evidence Procurement Team) E-mail: [email protected] Evidence Project Final Report Note In line with the Freedom of Information Project identification Act 2000, Defra aims to place the results of its completed research projects in the public domain wherever possible. 1. Defra Project code BD1451 The Evidence Project Final Report is designed to capture the information on 2. Project title the results and outputs of Defra-funded Diversification of grassland through the manipulation of research in a format that is easily plant-soil interactions publishable through the Defra website An Evidence Project Final Report must be completed for all projects. 3. Contractor Lancaster Environment Centre This form is in Word format and the organisation(s) boxes may be expanded, as appropriate. Lancaster University Lancaster LA1 4YQ ACCESS TO INFORMATION The information collected on this form will be stored electronically and may be sent to any part of Defra, or to individual 54. Total Defra project costs £ researchers or organisations outside (agreed fixed price) Defra for the purposes of reviewing the st project. Defra may also disclose the 5. Project: start date ................ 1 April 2009 information to any outside organisation acting as an agent authorised by Defra to st process final research reports on its end date ................. 31 march 2013 behalf. Defra intends to publish this form on its website, unless there are strong reasons not to, which fully comply with exemptions under the Environmental Information Regulations or the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Defra may be required to release information, including personal data and commercial information, on request under the Environmental Information Regulations or the Freedom of Information Act 2000. However, Defra will not permit any unwarranted breach of confidentiality or act in contravention of its obligations under the Data Protection Act 1998. Defra or its appointed agents may use the name, address or other details on your form to contact you in connection with occasional customer research aimed at improving the processes through which Defra works with its contractors. EVID4 Evidence Project Final Report (Rev. 06/11) Page 1 of 11 6. It is Defra’s intention to publish this form. Please confirm your agreement to do so. ................................................................................... YES NO (a) When preparing Evidence Project Final Reports contractors should bear in mind that Defra intends that they be made public. They should be written in a clear and concise manner and represent a full account of the research project which someone not closely associated with the project can follow. Defra recognises that in a small minority of cases there may be information, such as intellectual property or commercially confidential data, used in or generated by the research project, which should not be disclosed. In these cases, such information should be detailed in a separate annex (not to be published) so that the Evidence Project Final Report can be placed in the public domain. Where it is impossible to complete the Final Report without including references to any sensitive or confidential data, the information should be included and section (b) completed. NB: only in exceptional circumstances will Defra expect contractors to give a "No" answer. In all cases, reasons for withholding information must be fully in line with exemptions under the Environmental Information Regulations or the Freedom of Information Act 2000. (b) If you have answered NO, please explain why the Final report should not be released into public domain Executive Summary 7. The executive summary must not exceed 2 sides in total of A4 and should be understandable to the intelligent non-scientist. It should cover the main objectives, methods and findings of the research, together with any other significant events and options for new work. Here we report on the findings of a two-year extension to objective 2 of BD1451, a cross-site mesocosm study set up to test how plants modify soil microbial communities and ultimately botanical diversity under different environmental conditions. This study tested the hypothesis that certain plant species facilitate changes in the soil microbial community which feedback to encourage colonization of late successional species and hence promote grassland diversity restoration. To achieve this, a series of mesocosm experiments were established across a range of climatic and soil conditions in 2004, including variations in soil fertility, at three sites in the north-east, south-east and south-west of England. Results from the first four years of this study were reported in the Final Report of BD1451. At this time (2008), we found that the introduction of facilitator species into species-poor swards had promoted fungal growth in soil, and we expected that this would lead to enhanced colonization of late successional species in coming years. However, at the time of reporting, insufficient time had elapsed for the late successional species to become established across treatments and sites. As result, a two-year extension of this study was funded to examine longer-term responses to the experimental treatments; we report on the findings of this extension here. In 2011, we found that the presence of facilitator species significantly reduced the fungal to bacterial PLFA across all sites and soils, indicating that these plants had promoted the growth of bacteria more than fungi. This finding was opposite to what was found in 2008, when the facilitators significantly increased the biomass of fungi relative to bacteria, as initially predicted. This switch in the response of the microbial community to facilitator species was associated with changes in soil conditions, although these effects were site specific. Facilitator species had no effect on any of the measured soil nutrients at Reading, and, in general, the addition of Rhinanthus to swards had no effect on soil microbial communities or nutrient levels, aside from increasing soil potassium concentrations at the Newcastle site. In sum, these findings suggest that, in the longer term, the addition of facilitator species has shifted the microbial community to one that is more dominated by bacteria, and at certain sites, this has increased the concentrations of some nutrients in soil, albeit in an inconsistent way. Facilitator species increased overall plant species richness at North Wyke, in both alluvial and EVID4 Evidence Project Final Report (Rev. 06/11) Page 2 of 11 clay soils, but not at Newcastle. This response, however, was mostly attributed to the presence of the facilitator species themselves; despite increasing overall plant species richness at North Wyke, the addition of facilitator plants suppressed the Shannon diversity and evenness of the plant community. The addition of facilitator species also strongly suppressed the biomass and species richness of the late successional species at Newcastle and North Wyke. This response was presumably a consequence of increased competitive dominance of the facilitator species, which suppressed the growth of late successional species. Contrary to expectations, the addition of Rhinanthus had no impact on overall plant species richness or diversity across sites and soil treatments, and didn’t affect the colonization of late successional species. Across all sites, one of the strongest determinants of plant species diversity and evenness was soil type, both being greater in clay than alluvial soil at Newcastle and North Wyke. Likewise, the biomass and richness of late successional species was affected by soil type, but the effect was in the opposite direction: biomass and richness of late successional species were both greater in alluvial than clay soils, which was most likely due to more intense competition in clay soil. In conclusion, our findings provide little support for the idea that direct facilitator species promote the restoration of species diversity in mesotrophic grassland, at least in the short term. We did not find consistent effects of Rhinanthus on soil microbial communities or plant diversity, in that effects were highly site specific reflecting its variable establishment. However, as shown in other studies, the establishment and persistence of Rhinanthus varies with soil conditions and disturbance, and as a result its effect on vegetation diversity, varies across sites. Therefore, our results do not challenge the general value of Rhinanthus as a tool for diversity restoration; rather, they support the view that its role varies across sites. While drawing conclusions from our study, we should caution that they are derived from mesocosms that do not always reflect what happens in the field. Nevertheless, they reveal some of the mechanisms involved in the way that plants modify soils, and in our case, raise questions over the value of direct facilitator species for promoting grassland diversification, at least in the short timescale of our study. Project Report to Defra 8. As a guide this report should be no longer than 20 sides of A4. This report is to provide Defra with details of the outputs of the research project for internal purposes; to meet the terms of the contract; and to allow Defra to publish details of the outputs to meet Environmental Information Regulation or Freedom of Information EVID4 Evidence Project Final Report (Rev. 06/11) Page 3 of 11 obligations. This short report to Defra does not preclude contractors from also seeking to publish a full, formal scientific report/paper in an appropriate scientific or other journal/publication. Indeed, Defra actively encourages such publications as part of the contract terms. The report to Defra should include: the objectives as set out in the contract; the extent to which the objectives set out in the contract have been met; details of methods used and the results obtained, including statistical analysis (if appropriate); a discussion of the results and their reliability; the main implications of the findings; possible future work; and any action resulting from the research (e.g.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Reptiles in Sub-Boreal Forests of Eastern Europe
    ©Österreichische Gesellschaft für Herpetologie e.V., Wien, Austria, download unter www.biologiezentrum.at HERPETOZOA 17(1/2): 65-74 65 Wien, 30. Juni 2004 Reptiles in sub-boreal forests of Eastern Europe: patterns of forest type preferences and habitat use in Anguisfragilis, Zootoca vivipara and Natrix matrix (Squamata: Sauria: Anguidae, Lacertidae; Serpentes: Colubridae) Kriechtiere im subborealen Wald Osteuropas: Präferierte Waldtypen und Habitatnutzung bei Anguisfragilis, Zootoca vivipara und Natrix natrix (Squamata: Sauria: Anguidae, Lacertidae; Serpentes: Colubridae) ANDRIS CEIRÄNS KURZFASSUNG In zwei Nationalparks in Lettland (im Nationalpark von Kernen 1994-1997 und im Nationalpark von Gauja 1998-2000) wurden Daten über Waldlebensräume von Reptilien gesammelt. Die Klassifikation der Waldlebensräume erfolgte auf Grundlage der Typologie lettischer Wälder, die auf Standorteigenschaften basiert. Berechnet wurden für jeden Waldtyp die Abweichungen von den erwarteten Werten der Reptiliennachweise sowie die Nischenbreite und -Überlappung der Reptilienlebensräume. Drei Kriechtierarten - Anguis fragilis LINNAEUS, 1758, Zootoca vivipara (JACQUIN, 1787) und Natrix natrix (LINNAEUS, 1758) - kamen in den Waldlebensräume regelmäßig vor. Anguis fragilis wurde ausschließlich in trockenen und entwässerten Wäldern beobachtet, Z. vivi- para und N. natrix besiedelten die unterschiedlichsten Waldtypen. Für die genannten Arten werden die Präferenzen gegenüber bestimmten Waldtypen und das Ausmaß der Überlappung ihrer Lebensräume diskutiert. ABSTRACT Material on the forest habitats of reptiles was collected in two National Parks of Latvia: Kemeri National Park (1994-1997), and Gauja National Park (1998-2000). Habitats were classified according to the Latvian forest typology that focuses on site quality of the stand. Deviations from the expected proportions of reptile records for each forest type, niche breadth and overlap of the reptile habitats were determined.
    [Show full text]
  • Restoration of Species-Rich Nardus Grasslands Via Phosphorus-Mining
    Restoration of species-rich Nardus grasslands via phosphorus-mining Stephanie Schelfhout ir. Stephanie SCHELFHOUT Restoration of species-rich Nardus grasslands via phosphorus-mining Thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor (PhD) in Applied Biological Sciences: Forest and Nature Management February 2019 Dutch translation of the title: Herstel van soortenrijke heischrale graslanden via uitmijnen Illustration on the cover: Succisa pratensis – Blauwe knoop (front); Mowing management in a post-fertilization field in Vrieselhof, Ranst, Belgium (back) Citation of this thesis: Schelfhout S (2019) Restoration of species-rich Nardus grasslands via phosphorus-mining. Doctoral dissertation. Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium. ISBN-number: 978-946357174-6 Promotors: Prof. Dr. ir. Jan MERTENS ForNaLab, Dpt. of Environment, Fac. Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University Dr. ir. An DE SCHRIJVER, ForNaLab, Dpt. of Environment, Fac. Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University Fac. Science and Technology, University College Ghent Prof. Dr. ir. Kris VERHEYEN ForNaLab, Dpt. of Environment, Fac. Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University Prof. Dr. ir. Geert HAESAERT Dpt. of Plants and Crops, Fac. Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University Board of Prof. Dr. ir. Jo DEWULF (Chairman) examiners: EnVOC - STEN, Dpt. of Green Chemistry and Technology, Fac. Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University Prof. Dr. ir. Lander BAETEN ForNaLab, Dpt. of Environment, Fac. Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University Dr. ir. Frank NEVENS Dpt. of Plants and Crops, Fac. Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University Dr. Tobias CEULEMANS Unit Ecology, Evolution and Biodiversity conservation, Dpt. of Biology, University of Leuven Prof. Dr. Rob MARRS Dpt. of Earth, Ocean and Ecological Sciences, School of Environmental Sciences, University of Liverpool Dean: Prof. Dr. ir. Marc VAN MEIRVENNE Fac.
    [Show full text]
  • Working Today for Nature Tomorrow
    A review of the ecology, hydrology and nutrient dynamics of floodplain meadows in England No. 446 - English Nature Research Reports working today for nature tomorrow English Nature Research Reports Number 446 A review of the ecology, hydrology and nutrient dynamics of floodplain meadows in England David J.G. Gowing1, Jerry R.B. Tallowin2, Nancy B. Dise1, Joanne Goodyear2, Mike E. Dodd1 and Rebecca J Lodge1. 1Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes MK7 6AA 2Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research, North Wyke, Okehampton, Devon EX20 2SB You may reproduce as many additional copies of this report as you like, provided such copies stipulate that copyright remains with English Nature, Northminster House, Peterborough PE1 1UA ISSN 0967-876X © Copyright English Nature 2002 Contents Executive summary 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 13 1.1 Scope of the review..................................................................................................... 13 1.2 Review methodology................................................................................................... 13 1.3 Current distribution of Floodplain meadows in England............................................ 14 1.4 Perceived threats to the habitat.................................................................................... 15 2. Hydrology of floodplain meadows.............................................................................. 20 2.1 Introduction
    [Show full text]
  • Aquatic Ecosystem Delineation for WATER PIPELINE from THE
    Aquatic ecosystem delineation for WATER PIPELINE FROM THE MAGALIES PIPELINE TO MAROELOESFONTEIN MINE March 2018 Compiled by: Mr Bertus Fourie (M.Sc. Aquatic Health, Pr.Sci.Nat) Aquatic ecosystem Report: Maroeloes water pipeline March 2018 1 of 58 pages DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE I, Bertus Fourie, declare that - I am subcontracted as specialist consultant by Galago Environmental cc. for the aquatic ecosystem delineation. I will perform the work relating to the application in an objective manner, even if this results in views and findings that are not favourable to the applicant; I declare that there are no circumstances that may compromise my objectivity in performing such work; I have expertise in conducting the specialist report relevant to this application, including knowledge of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998), regulations and any guidelines that have relevance to the proposed activity; I will comply with the Act, regulations and all other applicable legislation; I will take into account, to the extent possible, the matters listed in Regulation 8; I have no, and will not engage in, conflicting interests in the undertaking of the activity; I undertake to disclose to the applicant and the competent authority all material information in my possession that reasonably has or may have the potential of influencing - any decision to be taken with respect to the application by the competent authority; and - the objectivity of any report, plan or document to be prepared by myself for submission to the competent authority; All the particulars furnished by me in this form are true and correct; and I realise that a false declaration is an offence in terms of Regulation 71 and is punishable in terms of section 24F of the Act.
    [Show full text]
  • International Ecological Classification Standard: Terrestrial Ecological Systems of the United States
    INTERNATIONAL ECOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION STANDARD: TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS OF THE UNITED STATES EVT Legend Entire U.S. February 2009 Reported from NS_Systems v1.11 Robb Lankston phone: 406-329-2131 email: [email protected] 800 E. Beckwith Ave. Missoula, MT 59801 Back to Contents 1 of 634 This subset of the Terrestrial Ecological Systems of The United States covers ecological systems attributed to the United States. This classification has been developed in consultation with many individuals and agencies and incorporates information from a variety of publications and other classifications. Copyright © 2008 NatureServe, 1101 Wilson Blvd, 15th floor Arlington, VA 22209, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. NatureServe. 2008. International Ecological Classification Standard: Terrestrial Ecological Systems of the United States. Natural Heritage Central Databases. NatureServe, Arlington, VA. Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute Systems.mdb data is hereby granted under the following conditions: The above copyright notice must appear in all documents and reports; Any use must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes; Some data may be altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above. All documents produced from this database should acknowledge the financial support of The Nature Conservancy in the initial development of this classification. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe. Except as expressly provided above, nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring any license or right under any NatureServe copyright. Information Warranty Disclaimer: All data are provided as is without warranty as to the currentness, completeness, or accuracy of any specific data.
    [Show full text]
  • Coordination of Physiological and Structural Traits in Amazon Forest Trees
    Biogeosciences, 9, 775–801, 2012 www.biogeosciences.net/9/775/2012/ Biogeosciences doi:10.5194/bg-9-775-2012 © Author(s) 2012. CC Attribution 3.0 License. Coordination of physiological and structural traits in Amazon forest trees S. Patino˜ 1,2,†, N. M. Fyllas2, T. R. Baker2, R. Paiva3, C. A. Quesada2-4, A. J. B. Santos3,4,†, M. Schwarz1, H. ter Steege5, O. L. Phillips2, and J. Lloyd2,6 1Max-Planck-Institut fur¨ Biogeochemie, Postfach 100164, 07701, Jena, Germany 2School of Geography, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT UK 3Institito Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazonia,ˆ Manaus, AM, Brazil 4Departamento de Ecologia, Universidade de Bras´ılia, DF, Brazil 5Dept. of Plant Ecology and Biodiversity, Utrecht University, The Netherlands 6School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, Qld 4871, Australia †deceased Correspondence to: J. Lloyd ([email protected]) Received: 5 May 2011 – Published in Biogeosciences Discuss.: 25 May 2011 Revised: 16 November 2011 – Accepted: 18 January 2012 – Published: 16 February 2012 Abstract. Many plant traits covary in a non-random man- appears to be synchronised with increases in foliar nutrient ner reflecting interdependencies associated with “ecological concentrations and reductions in foliar [C]. Leaf and leaflet strategy” dimensions. To understand how plants integrate area and 8LS were less responsive to the environment than their structural and physiological investments, data on leaf ρx. and leaflet size and the ratio of leaf area to sapwood area Thus, although genetically determined foliar traits such as (8LS) obtained for 1020 individual trees (encompassing 661 those associated with leaf construction costs coordinate in- species) located in 52 tropical forest plots across the Ama- dependently of structural characteristics such as maximum zon Basin were incorporated into an analysis utilising ex- height, others such as the classical “leaf economic spectrum” isting data on species maximum height (Hmax), seed size, covary with structural traits such as leaf size and 8LS.
    [Show full text]
  • Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment December 2003
    Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment December 2003 Ouachita Ecoregional Assessment Team Arkansas Field Office 601 North University Ave. Little Rock, AR 72205 Oklahoma Field Office 2727 East 21st Street Tulsa, OK 74114 Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment ii 12/2003 Table of Contents Ouachita Mountains Ecoregional Assessment............................................................................................................................i Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................................................iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..............................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................3 BACKGROUND ...........................................................................................................................4 Ecoregional Boundary Delineation.............................................................................................................................................4 Geology..........................................................................................................................................................................................5 Soils................................................................................................................................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • NADP Proceedings 2001
    In 2000, scientists, students, educators, and others interested in National Atmospheric Deposition Program (NADP) data viewed more than 84,000 maps and made nearly 17,000 on-line data retrievals from the NADP Internet site. These data are used to address important questions about the impact of the wet deposition of nutrients on eutrophication in coastal estuarine environments; the relationship between wet deposition, the health of unmanaged forests, and the depletion of base cations from forest soils; the impact of pollutant emissions changes on precipitation chemistry; and the rate at which precipitation delivers mercury to remote lakes and streams. NADP was organized in 1977 under the leadership of State Agricultural Experiment Stations (SAES) to address the problem of atmospheric deposition and its effects on agricultural crops, forests, rangelands, surface waters, and other natural and cultural resources. In 1978, sites in the NADP precipitation chemistry network first began collecting one- week, wet-only deposition samples analyzed by the Central Analytical Laboratory (CAL) at the Illinois State Water Survey. The network was established to provide data on amounts, temporal trends, and geographic distributions of the atmospheric deposition of acidic chemicals, nutrients, and base cations. NADP was initially organized as SAES North Central Regional Project NC-141, which all four SAES regions endorsed as Interregional Project IR-7 in 1982. A decade later, SAES reclassified IR-7 as National Research Support Project NRSP-3, which it remains. In October 1981, the federally supported National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP) was established to increase understanding of the causes and effects of acidic precipitation. This program sought to establish a long-term precipitation chemistry network of sampling sites distant from point source influences.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Assessment of Nitrogen Deposition Effects on Terrestrial Plant Diversity : a Synthesis R
    Marshall University Marshall Digital Scholar Biological Sciences Faculty Research Biological Sciences 1-2010 Global assessment of nitrogen deposition effects on terrestrial plant diversity : a synthesis R. Bobbink K. Hicks J. Galloway T. Spranger R. Alkemade See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: http://mds.marshall.edu/bio_sciences_faculty Part of the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, Forest Sciences Commons, and the Plant Biology Commons Recommended Citation Bobbink R, K Hicks, J Galloway, T Spranger, R Alkemade, M Ashmore, M Bustamante, S Cinderby, E Davidson, F Dentener, B Emmett, J-W Erisman, M Fenn, F Gilliam, A Nordin, L Pardo and W de Vries. 2010. Global assessment of nitrogen deposition effects on terrestrial plant diversity effects of terrestrial ecosystems: a synthesis. Ecological Applications 20:30-59. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Biological Sciences at Marshall Digital Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Biological Sciences Faculty Research by an authorized administrator of Marshall Digital Scholar. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Authors R. Bobbink, K. Hicks, J. Galloway, T. Spranger, R. Alkemade, M. Ashmore, M. Bustamante, S. Cinderby, E. Davidson, F. Dentener, B. Emmett, J. W. Erisman, M. Fenn, Frank S. Gilliam, A. Nordin, L. Pardo, and W. DeVries This article is available at Marshall Digital Scholar: http://mds.marshall.edu/bio_sciences_faculty/17 Ecological Applications INVITED FEATURE Vol. 20, No. 1 Ecological Applications, 20(1), 2010, pp. 30–59 Ó 2010 by the Ecological Society of America Global assessment of nitrogen deposition effects on terrestrial plant diversity: a synthesis 1,17 2 3 4 5 6 7 R.
    [Show full text]
  • A Global Comparison of Surface Soil Characteristics Across Five Cities: a Test of the Urban Ecosystem Convergence Hypothesis
    TECHNICAL ARTICLE A Global Comparison of Surface Soil Characteristics Across Five Cities: A Test of the Urban Ecosystem Convergence Hypothesis Richard V.Pouyat,1 Ian D. Yesilonis,2 Miklós Dombos,3 Katalin Szlavecz,4 Heikki Setälä,5 Sarel Cilliers,6 Erzsébet Hornung,7 D. Johan Kotze,5 and Stephanie Yarwood8 Key Words: Anthropogenic soils, experimental network, soil carbon, Abstract: As part of the Global Urban Soil Ecology and Education urban soils Network and to test the urban ecosystem convergence hypothesis,were- port on soil pH, organic carbon (OC), total nitrogen (TN), phosphorus (Soil Sci 2015;180: 136–145) (P), and potassium (K) measured in four soil habitat types (turfgrass, ruderal, remnant, and reference) in five metropolitan areas (Baltimore, Budapest, rban soils provide many of the same ecosystem functions as Helsinki, Lahti, Potchefstroom) across four biomes. We expected the urban U “natural” and agricultural soils, for example, decomposition soil characteristics to “converge” in comparison to the reference soils. and nutrient cycling, water purification and regulation, and habitat Moreover, we expected cities in biomes with more limiting climatic condi- for an enormous diversity of organisms (Giller, 1996; Pouyat tions, or where local factors strongly affect soil characteristics, would ex- et al., 2010). Nonetheless, the increasing burden of expanding hibit the greatest variance across soil types within and among cities. In urban areas, concomitant need for new infrastructure, and accom- addition, soil characteristics related to biogenic factors (OC, TN) would modation of greater human population densities is resulting in a vary the most because of differences in climate and human efforts to over- worldwide alteration of these functions (Sachs, 2015).
    [Show full text]
  • Read Book Habitat Pdf Free Download
    HABITAT PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Roy Simon | 96 pages | 01 Nov 2016 | Image Comics | 9781632158857 | English | Fullerton, United States Habitat PDF Book Take the quiz Citation Do you know the person or title these quotes desc For example, in Britain it has been estimated that various types of rotting wood are home to over species of invertebrate. The chief environmental factors affecting the distribution of living organisms are temperature, humidity, climate, soil and light intensity, and the presence or absence of all the requirements that the organism needs to sustain it. Bibcode : Natur. Loss of habitat is the single greatest threat to any species. In areas where it has become established, it has altered the local fire regimen to such an extant that native plants cannot survive the frequent fires, allowing it to become even more dominant. Whether from natural processes or the activities of man, landscapes and their associated habitats change over time. Biology Botanical terms Ecological terms Plant morphology terms. Dictionary Entries near habitat habitally habitancy habitant habitat habitat form habitat group habitation See More Nearby Entries. We're gonna stop you right there Literally How to use a word that literally drives some pe Retrieved 16 May Simply put, habitat destruction has reduced the majority of species everywhere on Earth to smaller ranges than they enjoyed historically. History at your fingertips. Another cause of disturbance is when an area may be overwhelmed by an invasive introduced species which is not kept under control by natural enemies in its new habitat. National Wildlife Federation. The laws may be designed to protect a particular species or group of species, or the legislation may prohibit such activities as the collecting of bird eggs, the hunting of animals or the removal of plants.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquatic Fauna Assessment for the Upgrade of the Bushkoppies Waste
    7 Adara Street Midstream Ridge 082 921 5445 [email protected] Aquatic fauna assessment for the upgrade of the Bushkoppies Waste Water Treatment Works July 2019 Compiled by: Mr Bertus Fourie (M.Sc. Aquatic Health, Pr. Sci. Nat) 1 of 54 pages TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................. 6 1.1. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................................ 6 1.2. SCOPE OF WORK ............................................................................................................................................. 7 2. ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS .................................................................................................. 7 3. SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................. 8 3.1. ACTIVITIES ON SITE .......................................................................................................................................... 8 3.2. REGIONAL DESCRIPTION AND VEGETATION.......................................................................................................... 8 3.2.1. Gm 9 Tsakane Clay Grassland ......................................................................................................... 8 3.3. ECOREGION DESCRIPTION..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]