DOCSLIB.ORG

Plant Press Cross-Border Community Nursery Newsletter Volume 1—Issue 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Plant Press Cross-border Community nursery newsletter Volume 1—Issue 1 Jan– Feb 2014 Newsletter debut Welcome to the first edition of the Plant Press Newsletter produced by Nature Glenelg Trusts Cross-Border Community Nursery. The purpose of the Newsletter is to keep growers, seed collectors, revegetators and interested community members up to date with activities and events being run either by the Nursery or in partnership with other organizations. It will also provide current and relevant information about the germination and propagation of native plants discovered by plant scientist and professional and amateur plant growers in our region. Where relevant , knowledge and experience from further afield will be included. Nursery sowed seeds for success in 2013 Volunteers Welcome The Cross-Border Community Nursery invites interested Before arriving in Mount Gambier to take up the position of the Cross- community members join our Friends of the Cross-Border Border Nursery Co-coordinator in late February 2013, I was aware that Nursery Group. there wasn’t much in the way of a nursery to coordinate. Friends Group members will Nonetheless, when I arrived, I headed be involved in all aspects of straight down to Vansittart Park to check propagation, nursery care and out my new work place. After a few laps the development of our com- around the Park I decided that the few munity herbarium. trays of plants placed on top of an old farm We’d love to hear from anyone gate, adjacent to what looked like a derelict Volunteer Samantha Baker who is interested in being in- & Internee, Yvonne Riley volved. Nursery opening hours and roofless old toilet block must actually working in the nursery be the ‘Nursery’. are 10-12 Wed & Sat. Nursery during construction in April 2013 Nearly twelve months later, and after many hours working with builders, NGT staff and Forums & Workshops well received volunteers, I am delighted to say, we have In 2013 The Cross-Border Community Nursery worked with State now dispensed with the farm gate and ac- environment agencies and community groups , on both sides of tually have a small but very well equipped the Border, to deliver seven seed collecting and propagating nursery, which includes a spanking new forums and workshops. greenhouse. 2014 is shaping up to be another busy year. Since our official opening in June 2013 we Following on from the success of our Sowing the Seeds of Suc- have propagated around 40 species, in- cess Forum in Hamilton in September 2013, the Coorong Dis- trict Local Action Plan cluding many threatened species from Nursery in early January 2014 (LAP) Committee and South Australia and Victoria. the Lakes Hub Com- munity Nursery Net- work are hosting an- other Seed Forum in Threatened species in the Nursery Tailem Bend in 2014. Athropodium milleflorum This Forum will fea- ture Linda Broadhurst, tissue culture special- ist Andrea Kodym, Vulnerable in South Australia CSIRO seed geneticist Linda Broadhurst, and geneticist Adam giving a presentation at the Hamilton Seed Miller. Forum. Photo: Lachlan Farrington Illustrated by Samantha Baker Plant Press Volume 1—Issue 1 Cross-border Community nursery newsletter Researchers ramp up Gahnia radula production It is now recognized that sedges fruit had the outward appearance Here at the NGT Nursery we are like Gahnia and Lepidosperma play of being well formed and healthy hopeful of recovering filled fruit for an important role in the ecology no filled fruit was found ( Kodym & tissue culture from G.radula popula- of many ecosystems. Delpratt ,2010 ). tions that we bagged on both sides of the SA/Vic border in December However, the inclusion of many A Study of Lepidosperma concavum 2013. species of these genera in revege- ( Kodym et al 2010 ) revealed that tation programs has proven difficult filled fruits are shed soon after References due to the inherent low viability of maturation, while unfilled fruits Kodym, A. Delpratt J. ( 2010 ) System- the seed and because they can be remained on the inflorescence. This Researchers Andrea Kodym and atic investigation of fruit viability in study also revealed that the timing John Delpratt, examining growth very slow to propagate vegetative- Thatch Saw-sedge ( Gahnia radula, of Gahnia radula plants propagated ly. of collection was critical to securing Cyperaceae ). Ecological Management by tissue culture. good quality seed. Bagging the inflo- While this fact is well known to & Restoration, Vol. 11, No 1. rescences of Lepidosperma & Gahn- many propagators, what is not so ia species has turned out to be Kodym, A; Turner S. and Delpratt J. well known is that there is often a important for recovering filled fruit , ( 2010 ) In Situ seed development and complete failure of the seed to in vitro regeneration of three difficult– especially for G.radula. Happily, after develop an endosperm in many of to-propagate Lepidosperma species several years of research Dr Kodym these species. ( Cyperaceae ). Australian Journal of has now worked out how to grow Botany 58,1 In one study carried out by Dr G.radula reliably from tissue culture. Andrea Kodym & John Delpratt at This knowledge has recently been For further information contact: passed on to a commercial tissue the University of Melbourne [email protected] NGT wetland project officer, (Kodym & Delpratt , 2010), 2,694 culture laboratory for mass produc- Dan Anderson, demonstrated Gahnia radula fruits from 175 inflo- tion . At the moment, only one *Papers referred to here are avail- admirable dexterity with stockings rescences were collected from five population (from Drouin) is in able for loan from the NGT Library while bagging these Gahnia seed heads. different locations. Although this production. Seed viability—a cautionary tale Seed Fill-Making By David Carr the cut The term ‘seed fill’ describes what In 2008 The Border Rivers Gwydir the seed mix for one site. Sow- proportion of a seed has intact em- CMA and Greening Australia ing this mix would have resulted bryo and endosperm. conducted trials of large scale in a bare site that would need For many species this can be deter- direct seeding using agricultural reseeding. The cause of the low mined by cutting the seeds in half seeders in the Moree district of viability is likely to be collecting with a scalpel and examining them NSW. immature seed, collecting poor with a hand lens or under a dissect- quality seed from small isolated Seed for the trials was obtained ing microscope. The endosperm populations and/or from poor by tender from 8 different seed tissue in viable seeds is usually firm storage practice. suppliers including both profes- and white. sional and amateur collectors. As Interestingly, both professional part of the trial process, all seed and amateur collectors provided batches were tested for viability seedlots that had serious viability using a tetrazolium test. problems. The results were alarming. Of the This article first appeared in 2008 in Greening Australia’s Thinking Bush This photo shows some tetrazoli- 30 seedlots obtained, 4 had zero series in an edition called There’s more um stained seeds. viability and a further 8 had less than 50% viability. If these had to seed than local provenance. Tetrazolium (TZ) is regarded as a quick test of seed viability. Seeds been sown in the paddock, one It has been reprinted here with the are considered viable if they stain permission of David Carr third of the effort of seeding Cut test of Leptospermum myrsinoides red when treated with TZ. How- would have been wasted with ever, accurate interpretation of the References indicating 95% viability. TZ test results depends on a good little or no germination resulting. Photo provided by the South Australian knowledge of seed structure and Carr, D. ( 2008 ), There’s more to One seedlot of river red gum Seed Conservation Center seed germination. seed than local provenance. (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) had Thinking Bush Series, Greening http://saseedbank.com.au/splash.html Photo: Wikipedia encyclopaedia zero viability and made up most of Australia. Available online here Plant Press Volume 1—Issue 1 Cross-border Community nursery newsletter Page 3 Taraxacum cygnorum – Coast Dandelion – Not your average threatened species By David Pitts, Department of Environment & Primary Industries, Heywood. Taking up the position of Threatened Flora Project Officer in October 2008 for Victoria’s south west came with some trepidation, particularly when it came to familiarising myself with the suite of threatened species encom- passed within the project. Sure, there was a great range of data for many of the species such as the Mellblom’s Spider-orchid, Gorae Leek-orchid and Wrinkled Cassinia, but there was one species that was all but unknown apart from some 1980s information from the Lower Glenelg National Park, near Nelson. I had to ask myself – why? Was it because, as the literature suggest- ed, it’s a species very difficult to distinguish from your average garden weed? Or perhaps it was not considered attractive enough to really capture ones attention. Whatever the reason I decided that the Coast Dandelion was a species that deserved more attention so I took it upon myself to find out more – and exactly that I did. But before I get into the specifics I should mention a bit more about the Coast Dandelion (Taraxacum cygnorum) which is listed as plant itself. The Coast Dandelion, Taraxacum cygnorum to some, is a small endangered in Victoria perennial herb that belongs to the daisy family. First collected in the 1840s partment and Environment & Primary Industries, Parks Victo- from Western Australia’s Swan District, as the name cygnorum implies, the ria, the Melbourne Herbarium, the Glenelg Hopkins Catchment Coast Dandelion was subsequently collected from the Bass Strait Isles of Management Authority and the federal governments Caring Flinders, King and Seal shortly after this time.
Recommended publications
  • A Biological Survey of the Southern Mount Lofty Ranges

    A Biological Survey of the Southern Mount Lofty Ranges

    Southern Mount Lofty Ranges Biological Survey APPENDIX I DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATIONS OCCURRING IN SURVEY REGION BOUNDARY. Part 1. Environmental associations in study area occurring within FLEURIEU IBRA sub-region Environmental Total % of Description Association Area vegetation (ha) remaining 3.2.1 Mt. Rapid 12,763 3.9 Hills and ridges on interbedded shale and arkose, locally overlain by tillite. Relict fans form broad flat surfaces near Cape Jervis where some coastal cliffs occur. Open parkland with sown pasture is used for livestock grazing. The scenery of the coastline is dominated by tall cliffs that vary in form and steepness, the amount of rock outcrop and vegetative cover. 3.2.2 Deep Creek 12,984 30.2 A long dissected ridge of phyllite and greywacke with cliffs, or beaches and dunes along the coastline. The cover is predominantly open parkland over sown pasture with widespread remnants of woodland and forest. Inland views tend to be middle-ground panoramic, featuring grassy ridge crests and valley floors with bracken and reed or remnant forest vegetation. 3.2.3 Fleurieu 30,389 15.6 An undulating to hilly dissected tableland on lateritized sandstone. There is a mixed cover of open parkland, forest plantation and woodland. 3.2.4 Inman 37,130 4.4 A series of low dissected ridges and spurs on tillite and arkose, with dunes and beaches or Valley cliffs along the coast. The cover is open parkland over sown pastures and cereal crops. 3.2.5 Bob Tiers 15,761 21.3 Ridges on schist and gneiss with dissected slopes and remnantsof laterite-capped tableland.
  • Jervis Bay Territory Page 1 of 50 21-Jan-11 Species List for NRM Region (Blank), Jervis Bay Territory

    Jervis Bay Territory Page 1 of 50 21-Jan-11 Species List for NRM Region (Blank), Jervis Bay Territory

    Biodiversity Summary for NRM Regions Species List What is the summary for and where does it come from? This list has been produced by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPC) for the Natural Resource Management Spatial Information System. The list was produced using the AustralianAustralian Natural Natural Heritage Heritage Assessment Assessment Tool Tool (ANHAT), which analyses data from a range of plant and animal surveys and collections from across Australia to automatically generate a report for each NRM region. Data sources (Appendix 2) include national and state herbaria, museums, state governments, CSIRO, Birds Australia and a range of surveys conducted by or for DEWHA. For each family of plant and animal covered by ANHAT (Appendix 1), this document gives the number of species in the country and how many of them are found in the region. It also identifies species listed as Vulnerable, Critically Endangered, Endangered or Conservation Dependent under the EPBC Act. A biodiversity summary for this region is also available. For more information please see: www.environment.gov.au/heritage/anhat/index.html Limitations • ANHAT currently contains information on the distribution of over 30,000 Australian taxa. This includes all mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs and fish, 137 families of vascular plants (over 15,000 species) and a range of invertebrate groups. Groups notnot yet yet covered covered in inANHAT ANHAT are notnot included included in in the the list. list. • The data used come from authoritative sources, but they are not perfect. All species names have been confirmed as valid species names, but it is not possible to confirm all species locations.
  • Introduction Methods Results

    Introduction Methods Results

    Papers and Proceedings Royal Society ofTasmania, Volume 1999 103 THE CHARACTERISTICS AND MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS OF THE VEGETATION AND FLORA OF THE HUNTINGFIELD AREA, SOUTHERN TASMANIA by J.B. Kirkpatrick (with two tables, four text-figures and one appendix) KIRKPATRICK, J.B., 1999 (31:x): The characteristics and management problems of the vegetation and flora of the Huntingfield area, southern Tasmania. Pap. Proc. R. Soc. Tasm. 133(1): 103-113. ISSN 0080-4703. School of Geography and Environmental Studies, University ofTasmania, GPO Box 252-78, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia 7001. The Huntingfield area has a varied vegetation, including substantial areas ofEucalyptus amygdalina heathy woodland, heath, buttongrass moorland and E. amygdalina shrubbyforest, with smaller areas ofwetland, grassland and E. ovata shrubbyforest. Six floristic communities are described for the area. Two hundred and one native vascular plant taxa, 26 moss species and ten liverworts are known from the area, which is particularly rich in orchids, two ofwhich are rare in Tasmania. Four other plant species are known to be rare and/or unreserved inTasmania. Sixty-four exotic plantspecies have been observed in the area, most ofwhich do not threaten the native biodiversity. However, a group offire-adapted shrubs are potentially serious invaders. Management problems in the area include the maintenance ofopen areas, weed invasion, pathogen invasion, introduced animals, fire, mechanised recreation, drainage from houses and roads, rubbish dumping and the gathering offirewood, sand and plants. Key Words: flora, forest, heath, Huntingfield, management, Tasmania, vegetation, wetland, woodland. INTRODUCTION species with the most cover in the shrub stratum (dominant species) was noted. If another species had more than half The Huntingfield Estate, approximately 400 ha of forest, the cover ofthe dominant one it was noted as a codominant.
  • Labiatae) in South-Eastern Australia

    Labiatae) in South-Eastern Australia

    319 Contributions to the systematics of Prostanthera (Labiatae) in south-eastern Australia Barry J. Conn Abstract Conn, B.J. (Royal Botanic Gardens, Mrs Macquaries Road, Sydney NSW 2000, Australia) 1997. Contributions to the systematics of Prostanthera (Labiatae) in south-eastern Australia. Telopea 7(4): 319–332. Prostanthera cuneata is regarded as endemic to mainland Australia, with the type material based on cultivated material grown in Formosa garden, Tasmania. The new species Prostanthera galbraithiae B.J.Conn is here formally described. A morphological re-evaluation of Prostanthera melissifolia concludes that this species is endemic to Victoria. Prostanthera melissifolia sensu Conn, from the Northern Tablelands of New South Wales, is P. caerulea R.Br., and Prostanthera sp. aff. melissifolia sensu Beauglehole, from East Gippsland (Victoria), probably is P. incisa R.Br. (s. lat.). A full description, habitat notes, distribution map and illustration of each of the first three species are provided. Introduction This paper presents the conclusions of revisionary studies into the genus Prostanthera section Prostanthera, arising particularly from work towards the preparation of an account of the genus for the forthcoming Flora of Victoria, volume 4. Terminology follows Conn (1984), except inflorescence terminology as modified by Conn (1995). Distribution information for Victoria follows Conn (1993). 1. Distribution of Prostanthera cuneata Benth. Previously, Prostanthera cuneata has been regarded as occurring in New South Wales, Tasmania and Victoria. Although the type specimen of this species (Gunn 725, 7 Dec. 1842) is stated to have been collected from the ‘South Esk’ River, south of Launceston in Tasmania, Buchanan (1988, 1990) states that Gunn actually collected from ‘Formosa’ garden, on the estate of W.E.
  • Native Plants of Sydney Harbour National Park: Historical Records and Species Lists, and Their Value for Conservation Monitoring

    Native Plants of Sydney Harbour National Park: Historical Records and Species Lists, and Their Value for Conservation Monitoring

    Native plants of Sydney Harbour National Park: historical records and species lists, and their value for conservation monitoring Doug Benson National Herbarium of New South Wales, Royal Botanic Gardens, Mrs Macquaries Rd, Sydney 2000 AUSTRALIA [email protected] Abstract: Sydney Harbour National Park (lat 33° 53’S; long 151° 13’E), protects significant vegetation on the harbour foreshores close to Sydney City CBD; its floristic abundance and landscape beauty has been acknowledged since the writings of the First Fleet in 1788. Surprisingly, although historical plant collections were made as early as1802, and localised surveys have listed species for parts of the Park since the 1960s, a detailed survey of the flora of whole Park is still needed. This paper provides the first definitive list of the c.400 native flora species for Sydney Harbour National Park (total area 390 ha) showing occurrence on the seven terrestrial sub-regions or precincts (North Head, South Head, Dobroyd Head, Middle Head, Chowder Head, Bradleys Head and Nielsen Park). The list is based on historical species lists, records from the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (formerly Dept of Environment, Climate Change and Water) Atlas, National Herbarium of New South Wales specimen details, and some additional fieldwork. 131 species have only been recorded from a single precinct site and many are not substantiated with a recent herbarium specimen (though there are historical specimens from the general area for many). Species reported in the sources but for which no current or historic specimen exists are listed separately as being of questionable/non-local status.
  • Recovery of Victorian Rare Or Threatened Plant Species After the 2009 Bushfires

    Recovery of Victorian Rare Or Threatened Plant Species After the 2009 Bushfires

    Recovery of Victorian rare or threatened plant species after the 2009 bushfires Black Saturday Victoria 2009 – Natural values fire recovery program Arn Tolsma, Geoff Sutter, Fiona Coates Recovery of Victorian rare or threatened plant species after the 2009 bushfires Arn Tolsma, Geoff Sutter and Fiona Coates Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research Department of Sustainability and Environment PO Box 137, Heidelberg VIC 3084 This project is No. 9 of the program ‘Rebuilding Together’ funded by the Victorian and Commonwealth governments’ Statewide Bushfire Recovery Plan, launched October 2009. Published by the Victorian Government Department of Sustainability and Environment Melbourne, February 2012 © The State of Victoria Department of Sustainability and Environment 2012 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. Print managed by Finsbury Green Printed on recycled paper ISBN 978-1-74287-436-4 (print) ISBN 978-1-74287-437-1 (online) For more information contact the DSE Customer Service Centre 136 186. 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 accessible format, such as large print or audio, please telephone 136 186, 1800 122 969 (TTY), or email customer.
  • Reinstatement and Revision of the Genus Chaetospora (Cyperaceae: Schoeneae)

    Reinstatement and Revision of the Genus Chaetospora (Cyperaceae: Schoeneae)

    Volume 23: 95–112 ELOPEA Publication date: 2 July 2020 T dx.doi.org/10.7751/telopea14345 Journal of Plant Systematics plantnet.rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au/Telopea • escholarship.usyd.edu.au/journals/index.php/TEL • ISSN 0312-9764 (Print) • ISSN 2200-4025 (Online) Reinstatement and revision of the genus Chaetospora (Cyperaceae: Schoeneae) Russell L. Barrett1,3, Karen L. Wilson1 and Jeremy J. Bruhl2 1National Herbarium of New South Wales, Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust, Sydney, Mrs Macquaries Road, Sydney, New South Wales 2000, Australia 2Botany, School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, New South Wales 2351, Australia 3Author for Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract Three species are recognised within the reinstated and recircumscribed genus Chaetospora R.Br. Chaetospora is lectotypified on C. curvifolia R.Br. A new combination, Chaetospora subbulbosa (Benth.) K.L.Wilson & R.L.Barrett, is made for Schoenus subbulbosus Benth. Lectotypes are selected for Chaetospora aurata Nees, Chaetospora curvifolia R.Br., Chaetospora turbinata R.Br., Elynanthus capitatus Nees, Schoenus subbulbosus Benth., Schoenus subg. Pseudomesomelaena Kük. and Schoenus sect. Sphaerocephali Benth. Two species are endemic to south-western Australia, while the third is endemic to south-eastern Australia. Full descriptions, illustrations and a key to species are provided. All species have anatomy indicative of C3 photosynthesis. Introduction Chaetospora R.Br. is here reinstated as a segregate from Schoenus L., with a novel circumscription. Schoenus is a nearly globally-distributed genus exhibiting a significant range of morphological variation (Rye et al. 1987; Sharpe 1989; Wilson 1993, 1994a,b; Bruhl 1995; Goetghebeur 1998; Wheeler and Graham 2002; Wilson et al.
  • Biodiversity Summary: Wimmera, Victoria

    Biodiversity Summary: Wimmera, Victoria

    Biodiversity Summary for NRM Regions Species List What is the summary for and where does it come from? This list has been produced by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (SEWPC) for the Natural Resource Management Spatial Information System. The list was produced using the AustralianAustralian Natural Natural Heritage Heritage Assessment Assessment Tool Tool (ANHAT), which analyses data from a range of plant and animal surveys and collections from across Australia to automatically generate a report for each NRM region. Data sources (Appendix 2) include national and state herbaria, museums, state governments, CSIRO, Birds Australia and a range of surveys conducted by or for DEWHA. For each family of plant and animal covered by ANHAT (Appendix 1), this document gives the number of species in the country and how many of them are found in the region. It also identifies species listed as Vulnerable, Critically Endangered, Endangered or Conservation Dependent under the EPBC Act. A biodiversity summary for this region is also available. For more information please see: www.environment.gov.au/heritage/anhat/index.html Limitations • ANHAT currently contains information on the distribution of over 30,000 Australian taxa. This includes all mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs and fish, 137 families of vascular plants (over 15,000 species) and a range of invertebrate groups. Groups notnot yet yet covered covered in inANHAT ANHAT are notnot included included in in the the list. list. • The data used come from authoritative sources, but they are not perfect. All species names have been confirmed as valid species names, but it is not possible to confirm all species locations.
  • A Flora Survey of the Proposed Beaconsfield

    A Flora Survey of the Proposed Beaconsfield

    A FLORASURVEY OF THE PROPOSED BEACONSFIELDREFUSE SITE Phil Barker March1992 TECHNICALREPORT 19921 1 QUEENVICTORIA MUSEUM AND ART GALLERY LAUNCESTON 1 Summaryand Recommendations Onehundred and nine species were recorded ftom 74 genera in 42 families. The vegetationwas found to be essentiallyhomogeneous shrubby Eucalyptus amygdalina woodlandand openforesl, except lor smallareas of lreelessheaths and verylocalized wet scrub.The shrubs are those species typical ol lownutrient sites, being essentially heaths. Degradationof the ecosysystemby evidentrepeated fires has probablyresulted in the increasedrepresentation o{sedges and bracken {ern throughout the area. Largeareas degraded by gravelremoval appear to be recoveringvery slowly,as may be exoectedon a lownutrient site. All oi the communitiesdescribed are considered to be wellreserved within the statessecure conservationreserves. Twospecies of conservalionsignificance were recorded. Brunoniaaustralis is recordedas unreservedand vulnerable (Kirkpatrick et a/. 1990),however, thespecies may be morewidespread than previously thought (F. Duncan, pers. comm.) Xanthorrhoeabracteata is recordedin Kirkpatrickel a/.(1990) as occurringin lessthan 20 10 X 10km mappinggrids, and as suchis consideredrare. The type specimen was recorded at Port Dalrympleand the speciesis found in heathsin northand easternTasmania, notably WaterhouseProtected Area. This areais not consideredas securetenure for conservation purposes.The speciesextends south to Hobartbut is of limitedabundance. Most quadrats containingthe speciesin
  • Thursday, 31 October 2002

    Thursday, 31 October 2002

    Attachment 2 Terrestrial and Freshwater Biodiversity Impact Assessment (Practical Ecology, 2020) TERRESTRIAL AND FRESHWATER BIODIVERSITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Golden Beach Gas Project October 2020 TERRESTRIAL AND FRESHWATER BIODIVERSITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Golden Beach Gas Project October 2020 Report by Liza James, Michelle Savona, Alice Ewing, Emma Wilkin, Karen McGregor, Noémie Seck and Marty White Mapping by Karen McGregor, Emma Loboda and Liza James Ecological Survey: Alice Ewing, Andrea Canzano, Katherine Smedley, Dr Andrew Hamer, Yasmin Kelsall, Gidja Walker, Liza James, Noémie Seck and Marty White PRACTICAL ECOLOGY Pty Ltd ACN: 082 911 377 ABN: 88 082 911 377 PO Box 228 Preston VIC 3072 (2B Stott Street Preston Vic 3072) P: 9484 1555F: 9484 9133 www.practicalecology.com.au Prepared for: AECOM PE project number: AEC 3002 Contact: Vic Buljubasic Version Date Author Reviewer: Version notes 1 23/04/2020 As above Lincoln Kern (Practical Ecology) Pre-draft internal review 1 05/05/2020 As above AECOM and GB Energy Draft 1 2 13/05/2020 As above AECOM and GB Energy Draft 2 3 20/05/2020 As above Golden Beach TRG Draft 3 4 09/07/2020 As above AECOM and GB Energy Final V1 5 16/07/2020 As above AECOM and GB Energy Final V2 6 15/08/2020 As above AECOM and GB Energy Final V3 7 29/08/2020 As above AECOM and GB Energy Final V4 8 22/09/2020 As above AECOM and GB Energy & Golden Beach TRG Final V5 9 08/10/2020 As above TBC Final V6 Acknowledgements: Guido Jakschik – Agri Business Manager, Gippsland Water for providing additional biodiversity data Gidja Walker – Botanist/ Assistance with field surveys © Copyright Unless otherwise agreed in writing, this report is the intellectual property of Practical Ecology Pty Ltd.
  • 'Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery's Expedition of Discovery I – the Flora

    'Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery's Expedition of Discovery I – the Flora

    Papers and Proceedings of the Royal Society of Tasmania, Volume 153, 2019 5 TASMANIAN MUSEUM AND ART GALLERY’S EXPEDITION OF DISCOVERY I – THE FLORA AND FAUNA OF WIND SONG, LITTLE SWANPORT, TASMANIA by Matthew Baker, Simon Grove, Miguel de Salas, Catherine Byrne, Lyn Cave, Kevin Bonham, Kirrily Moore and Gintaras Kantvilas (with 15 plates, two tables and an appendix) Baker, M.L., Grove, S., de Salas, M.F., Byrne, C., Cave, L., Bonham, K., Moore, K. & Kantvilas, G. 2019 (14:xii): Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery’s Expedition of Discovery I – The flora and fauna of Wind Song, Little Swanport, Tasmania. Papers and Proceedings of the Royal Society of Tasmania 153: 5–30. https://doi.org/10.26749/rstpp.153.5 ISSN 0080–4703. Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery, GPO Box 1164, Hobart, Tasmania 7001, Australia (MLB*, SG, MFS, CB, LC, KB, KM, GK). *Author for correspondence. Email: [email protected] A flora and fauna survey was conducted at the east coast Tasmanian property Wind Song in 2017 as part of the Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery’s ongoing research, collection-building and nature-discovery program. The survey recorded 885 taxa, primarily from the targeted groups of vascular plants, bryophytes, lichens, butterflies, moths, beetles, snails and slugs. Several of the taxa recorded, chiefly lichens and invertebrates, are new to science or new records for Tasmania. The survey provides a benchmark for further work and serves as an indicator of the biodiversity of a former farming property on Tasmania’s east coast. Key Words: species discovery, biodiversity, Tasmania, lichens, multidisciplinary survey.
  • Flowering Plants

    Flowering Plants

    Australian Plants Society NORTH SHORE GROUP Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden Monocotyledons John Ray, at the end of the 17th century realised that there were two radically different kinds of flowering plants, which he called Monocotyledons (one seed leaf) and Dicotyledons (two seed leaves). Modern botany has proved, maintained and amplified the discovery. It has added differences in leaf, flower and internal structure, though none by itself is as distinctive as the number of seed leaves. It’s important to note that a specific plant we regard as a Monocot or a Dicot may not exhibit all the characteristics to be mentioned. A good example of variation includes leaf venation. Summary of Main Differences between Monocots and Dicots: Characteristic Monocots Dicots Cotyledons (seed leaves) one two Roots fibrous tap with laterals Flower parts in 3s usually in 4s or 5s Leaf venation parallel usually netlike usually Stems: primary vascular bundles scattered in a ring Stems: true secondary growth absent present usually with vascular cambium ___ A contrast in the number of flower parts: Monocots: 3 or 6 (Patersonia sericea) Dicots: 4 or 5 (Crowea saligna) 1 Leaf Structure and Venation Sometimes included as a difference is that monocot leaves generally do not have a central vein or petiole (leaf stem) and often have a stem clasping leaf. The leaves of monocots are often basal, giving a tufted appearance to the plants. Most have parallel veins. They grow from the base and being eaten off or cut at the tops does not affect their further growth, hence it is possible to graze or mow them without permanent damage.