DOCSLIB.ORG
Recommended publications
  • Invasive Plants in Southern Forests
    Invasive Plants in Southern Forests United States Department of Agriculture A Field Guide for the Identification of Invasive PlantsSLIGHTLY inREVISED NOVEMBERSouthern 2015 Forests United States Forest Service Department Southern Research Station James H. Miller, Erwin B. Chambliss, and Nancy J. Loewenstein of Agriculture General Technical Report SRS–­­119 Authors: James H. Miller, Emeritus Research Ecologist, and Erwin B. Chambliss, Research Technician, Forest Available without charge from the Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Southern Research Station, Auburn University, AL 36849; and Southern Research Station Nancy J. Loewenstein, Research Fellow and Alabama Cooperative Extension System Specialist for Also available online at Forest Invasive Plants, School of Forestry and Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University, AL 36849. www.srs.fs.usda.gov/pubs/35292 and invasive.org, or as a free download for iPhones and iPads at the AppStore Front Cover Upper left—Chinese lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata) infestation that developed from dormant seed in the soil seed bank after a forest thinning operation. Upper right—Kudzu (Pueraria montana) infestation within the urban-wildland interface. Lower left—Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) and dormant kudzu invading and replacing a pine- hardwood stand. Lower right—Cogongrass (Imperata cylindrica) infestation under mature slash pine (Pinus elliottii). Funding support for all printings provided by the Southern Research Station, Insect, Disease, and Invasive Plants Research Work Unit, and Forest Health Protection, Southern Region, Asheville, NC. First Printed April 2010 Slightly Revised February 2012 Revised August 2013 Reprinted January 2015 Slightly Revised November 2015 Southern Research Station 200 W.T. Weaver Blvd. Asheville, NC 28804 www.srs.fs.usda.gov i A Field Guide for the Identification of Invasive Plants in Southern Forests James H.
    [Show full text]
  • Crop Profile for Commercial Sod Production in Louisiana
    Crop Profile for Commercial Sod Production in Louisiana Prepared: November, 2004 General Production Information In 2003, 23 sod farms cultivated 3,855 acres of lawn turfgrasses. Sod acreage was reported down by 14.5% from the previous year. Gross farm sales were estimated at $13.7 million. About 60% of the sod acreage in Louisiana is centipedegrass. The remaining acreage is divided among St. Augustinegrass, bermudagrass and zoysiagrass, in that order. Cool-season grasses are not grown for sod in Louisiana. With new construction improving and Louisiana farms producing good quality sod, sod markets continue to hold a good price. Markets are expected to improve only as construction increases. Marketing is a limiting factor in the sod industry of Louisiana. Worker Activities Sod Production PLANTING ● Planting of turfgrass on sod farms is typically done either by seed or by vegetative means that would include sprigging, plugging, or sodding. Herbicides are often used at planting. ● Irrigation requirements are high during the early establishment phase on sod farms. Therefore, farm workers will be in the fields working with irrigation soon after planting of seed or vegetative means. ● Prolonged REIs could impact irrigation where there is a problem with the irrigation system. If no The Crop Profile/PMSP database, including this document, is supported by USDA NIFA. problems exist, the irrigation systems would work fine as they are highly automated. FERTILIZATION ● Turfgrasses on sod farms are routinely fertilized by workers. However, all fertilization is done by mechanical means, which includes tractors or trucks with high-flotation tires. ● Fertilization of turf on sod farms is almost always applied as a dry material which requires subsequent irrigation.
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Community Monitoring at Ocmulgee National Monument, 2011
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Vegetation Community Monitoring at Ocmulgee National Monument, 2011 Natural Resource Data Series NPS/SECN/NRDS—2014/702 ON THE COVER Duck potato (Sagittaria latifolia) at Ocmulgee National Monument. Photograph by: Sarah C. Heath, SECN Botanist. Vegetation Community Monitoring at Ocmulgee National Monument, 2011 Natural Resource Data Series NPS/SECN/NRDS—2014/702 Sarah Corbett Heath1 Michael W. Byrne2 1USDI National Park Service Southeast Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network Cumberland Island National Seashore 101 Wheeler Street Saint Marys, Georgia 31558 2USDI National Park Service Southeast Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network 135 Phoenix Road Athens, Georgia 30605 September 2014 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Data Series is intended for the timely release of basic data sets and data summaries. Care has been taken to assure accuracy of raw data values, but a thorough analysis and interpretation of the data has not been completed. Consequently, the initial analyses of data in this report are provisional and subject to change. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX B Biological Resources Vegetation Species Lists
    Feasibility Investigation Report Restoration of Hydrology along Mobile Bay Causeway December 2015 APPENDIX B Biological Resources Vegetation Species Lists Weston Solutions, Inc. Choccolatta Bay, June 2014 ORDER SALVINIALES SALVINIACEAE (FLOATING FERN FAMILY) Azolla caroliniana Willdenow —EASTERN MOSQUITO FERN, CAROLINA MOSQUITO FERN Salvinia minima Baker —WATER-SPANGLES, COMMON SALVINIA† ORDER ALISMATALES ARACEAE (ARUM FAMILY) Lemna obscura (Austin) Daubs —LITTLE DUCKWEED Spirodela polyrrhiza (Linnaeus) Schleiden —GREATER DUCKWEED ALISMATACEAE (MUD PLANTAIN FAMILY) Sagittaria lancifolia Linnaeus —BULLTONGUE ARROWHEAD HYDROCHARITACEAE (FROG’S-BIT FAMILY) Najas guadalupensis (Sprengel) Magnus —COMMON NAIAD, SOUTHERN NAIAD ORDER ASPARAGALES AMARYLLIDACEAE (AMARYLLIS FAMILY) Allium canadense Linnaeus var. canadense —WILD ONION ORDER COMMELINALES COMMELINACEAE (SPIDERWORT FAMILY) Commelina diffusa Burman f. —SPREADING DAYFLOWER, CLIMBING DAYFLOWER† PONTEDERIACEAE (PICKERELWEED FAMILY) Eichhornia crassipes (Martius) Solms —WATER HYACINTH† Pontederia cordata Linnaeus —PICKEREL WEED ORDER POALES TYPHACEAE (CATTAIL FAMILY) Typha domingensis Persoon —SOUTHERN CATTAIL JUNCACEAE (RUSH FAMILY) Juncus marginatus Rostkovius —GRASSLEAF RUSH † = non-native naturalized or invasive taxa Choccolatta Bay, June 2014 CYPERACEAE (SEDGE FAMILY) Cyperus esculentus Linnaeus —YELLOW NUTGRASS, CHUFA FLATSEDGE† Cyperus strigosus Linnaeus —STRAW-COLOR FLATSEDGE Schoenoplectus deltarum (Schuyler) Soják —DELTA BULRUSH Schoenoplectus tabernaemontani (C.C. Gmelin) Palla
    [Show full text]
  • US EPA, Pesticide Product Label, GEMINI GRANULAR,08/21/2020
    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, DC 20460 OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION August 21, 2020 Deena Newell Regulatory Analyst Everiss NA Inc. P.O. Box 3310 Dublin, OH 43016 Subject: Registration Review Label Mitigation for Isoxaben and Prodiamine Product Name: Gemini Granular EPA Registration Number: 58185-180 Application Dates: Feb 12, 2018; May 4, 2020 Decision Numbers: 557475; 565227 Dear Ms. Newell: The Agency, in accordance with the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended, has completed reviewing all of the information submitted with your application to support the Registration Review of the above referenced product in connection with Isoxaben and Prodiamine Interim Decisions, and has concluded that your submission is acceptable. The label referred to above, submitted in connection with registration under FIFRA, as amended, is acceptable. Should you wish to add/retain a reference to the company’s website on your label, then please be aware that the website becomes labeling under the Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act and is subject to review by the Agency. If the website is false or misleading, the product would be misbranded and unlawful to sell or distribute under FIFRA section 12(a)(1)(E). 40 CFR 156.10(a)(5) list examples of statements EPA may consider false or misleading. In addition, regardless of whether a website is referenced on your product’s label, claims made on the website may not substantially differ from those claims approved through the registration process. Therefore, should the Agency find or if it is brought to our attention that a website contains false or misleading statements or claims substantially differing from the EPA approved registration, the website will be referred to the EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance.
    [Show full text]
  • Durham Research Online
    Durham Research Online Deposited in DRO: 07 March 2016 Version of attached le: Accepted Version Peer-review status of attached le: Peer-reviewed Citation for published item: Welch, A.J. and Collins, K. and Ratan, A. and Drautz-Moses, D.I. and Schuster, S.C. and Lindqvist, C. (2016) 'The quest to resolve recent radiations : plastid phylogenomics of extinct and endangered Hawaiian endemic mints (Lamiaceae).', Molecular phylogenetics and evolution., 99 . pp. 16-33. Further information on publisher's website: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2016.02.024 Publisher's copyright statement: c 2016 This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Additional information: Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. Durham University Library, Stockton Road, Durham DH1 3LY, United Kingdom Tel : +44 (0)191 334 3042 | Fax : +44 (0)191 334 2971 https://dro.dur.ac.uk The quest to resolve recent radiations: Plastid phylogenomics of extinct and endangered Hawaiian endemic mints (Lamiaceae) Andreanna J.
    [Show full text]
  • Systemic Herbicides for Weed Control Phenoxy Herbicides, Dicamba, Picloram, Amitrole, and Glyphosate
    USDA Weed Control Compendium Systemic Herbicides for Weed Control Phenoxy herbicides, dicamba, picloram, amitrole, and glyphosate AD-BU-2281, December 1983 Published and distributed in cooperation with the Extension Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC. Authors: Dayton L. Klingman, Weed Science Laboratory, Agric. Research Service, U.S. Dept of Agriculture, Beltsville, MD 20705 R.W. Bovey, Agric. Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843 E.L. Knake, Agronomy Department, University of Illinois, Urbana, 61801 A.H. Lange, San Joaquin Valley Agricultural Research and Extension Center, University of California, Parlier, CA 93648 J.A. Meade, Soils and Crops Department, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08903 W.A. Skroach, Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27650 R.E. Stewart, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20013, D.L. Wyse, Department of Agronomy and Plant Genetics, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108 Susceptibility Chart Table 1 lists the effects of phenoxy and some other systemic herbicides when applied as sprays on the foliage of a number of common weeds. These comparisons are based on an application rate of: 1 pound acid equivalent per acre for 2,4-D, MCPA, mecoprop, dicamba, and picloram; 1.5 pounds per acre for glyphosate. The control ratings for the herbicides are interpreted as follows: E (Excellent) Over 95 percent of the weed population is killed by a single treatment. G (Good) One treatment per year maintains 85 to 94 percent suppression of top growth, or more than 95 percent of the weed population is killed by two or three treatments.
    [Show full text]
  • NCDOT Invasive Exotic Plants
    INVASIVE EXOTIC PLANTS OF NORTH CAROLINA Invasive Plants of North Carolina Cherri Smith N.C. Department of Transportation • 2008 Contents INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................5 CHAPTER 1: Threat to Habitat and Natural Areas . Trees........................................................................................................12 . Shrubs......................................................................................................20 . Herbaceous.Plants....................................................................................28 . Vines........................................................................................................44 . Aquatic.Plants..........................................................................................52 CHAPTER 2: Moderate Threat to Habitat and Natural Areas . Trees........................................................................................................60 . Shrubs......................................................................................................64 . Herbaceous.Plants....................................................................................78 . Vines........................................................................................................84 . Aquatic.Plants..........................................................................................96 CHAPTER 3: Watch List . Trees......................................................................................................104
    [Show full text]
  • Weed Control
    SNA RESEARCH CONFERENCE - VOL. 50 - 2005 Weed Control James Altland Section Editor and Moderator 431 SNA RESEARCH CONFERENCE - VOL. 50 - 2005 Preemergence Control of Winter Weeds in Overwintering Ornamental Crops Caren A. Judge, Joseph C. Neal and Robert E. Wooten Dept. of Horticultural Science, NC State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7609 Index Words: annual bluegrass, birdseye pearlwort, common chickweed, common groundsel, hairy bittercress, spiny sowthistle, and yellow woodsorrel Signifi cance to Industry: BroadStar, OH2, and Snapshot TG were compared for control of winter weeds in overwintering nursery crop production. BroadStar, OH2, and Snapshot TG controlled common chickweed, common groundsel, hairy bittercress, and spiny sowthistle. OH2 and Snapshot TG controlled yellow woodsorrel better than Broadstar, although control was greater than 86% with all treatments. Annual bluegrass and birdseye pearlwort were controlled with Snapshot TG; BroadStar and OH2 were less effective on these species. If annual bluegrass or birdseye pearlwort are expected in overwintering structures, Snapshot TG should be used before covering or a dinitroaniline herbicide may need to be included with BroadStar to improve the spectrum of weed control. Nature of Work: The container nursery industry relies upon broad-spectrum preemergence herbicides and supplemental hand weeding for weed management (1). In the southeastern United States, weed management in container nursery crop production is a year-round endeavor due to the relatively mild winters and overwintering protection of crops. Overwintering structures moderate the temperatures and provide conditions favorable for germination and establishment of winter annual weeds. Weed management options are limited in overwintering structures because no preemergence herbicides are labeled for application within covered structures (3).
    [Show full text]
  • Florida Betony (Stachys Floridana)
    Florida betony (Stachys floridana) For definitions of botanical terms, visit en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_botanical_terms. Florida betony often gets a bad rap because it spreads so prolifically, especially in moist turf lawns. But it is a wonderful native wildflower for attracting bees and butterflies, and is also almost entirely edible to humans. Its young leaves and stems can be cooked like greens or dried and made into a tea, and the seeds can be eaten raw. However, the star of this plant is its crunchy, radish-like tuber. Eat it raw or pickled, but be sure to harvest in spring when it is white and crisp. In summer heat, it turns tan in color and softens, losing its palatability. Photo by PaulineSingleton (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) Florida betony’s pinkish- to purplish- white flowers are tubular and two- lipped. Lower lips have pink to purple spots or stripes. Flowers emerge from leaf axils and grow on spikes in whorls of 3 to 6. Calyces are hairy and tubular. Sepals have pointed lobes and may have a pink or purple tinge. Leaves are oblong to cordate with crenate margins. They are oppositely arranged. Aboveground stems are square, erect and hairy. A network of underground stems produces white, segmented tubers that are usually 1–3 inches long. They resemble a rattlesnake’s rattle or a large grub. The fruit is a schizocarp that bears four nutlets. Florida botany is also known as Rattlesnakeweed, which describes its “rattle”-like tuber. The genus name Stachys is Greek for “ear of grain” and alludes to the flower spike, while the species epithet floridana references Florida where the plant was first identified.
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Pulaski National Monument, Georgia
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Program Center Natural Resource Condition Assessment (with addendum) Fort Pulaski National Monument, Georgia Natural Resource Report NPS/NRPC/WRD/NRR—2009/103 ON THE COVER Fort Pulaski and its surrounding vegetation. Photograph by: Scott D. Klopfer, Conservation Management Institute, Virginia Tech Natural Resource Condition Assessment (with addendum) Fort Pulaski National Monument, Georgia Natural Resource Report NPS/NRPC/WRD/NRR—2009/103 Jessica L. Dorr1, Scott D. Klopfer1, Ken M. Convery1, Rebecca M. Schneider1, Linsey C. Marr2, and John M. Galbraith3 1Conservation Management Institute Virginia Tech 1900 Kraft Drive, Suite 250 Blacksburg, VA 24061-0534 2Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Virginia Tech 3Department of Crop and Soil Environmental Science Virginia Tech An addendum (appended to this report) was added in July 2009 to address the 3.3.1 Air Quality section of the Fort Pulaski National Monument (NM) Natural Resource Condition Assessment. The original air quality condition assessment utilized EPA criteria designated for pollutants that are considered problematic for human health. While these metrics are significant, it is important to note that a difference exists between air quality measurements pertaining to the human dimension and those pertaining to the natural resource dimension. Because the original condition assessment focused on the human dimensions of air quality, this addendum was developed to include air quality measures and target values from the perspective of natural resource planning and management. We used methods developed by the National Park Service (NPS) Air Resources Division (ARD) to evaluate air quality conditions within national parks. May 2009 U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • An Ecological Characterization of Coastal Hammock Islands in South Carolina
    An Ecological Characterization of Coastal Hammock Islands in South Carolina Final Report To Ocean and Coastal Resources Management South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control Prepared by: Marine Resources Division South Carolina Department of Natural Resources Charleston, South Carolina 1 December 2004 Digitized by South Carolina State Library An Ecological Characterization of Coastal Hammock Islands in South Carolina by J. David Whitaker1, John W. McCord1, Philip P. Maier1, Albert L. Segars1, Megan L. Rekow2, Norm Shea3, Jason Ayers4, and Rocky Browder5 Marine Resources Division South Carolina Department of Natural Resources Charleston, South Carolina 1 December 2004 Final Report To Ocean and Coastal Resources Management South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control Project Number 475774 1 South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, Charleston, South Carolina 2 College of Charleston 3 Kiawah Island Community Association 4 US Fish and Wildlife Service 5 Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, SC Dept. of Health and Environ. Control Digitized by South Carolina State Library Hammock Island Final Report Acknowledgements South Carolina Department of Natural Resources Acknowledgements We thank John Miglarese and Chris Brooks for developing the initial concept of a joint study of the ecology of the hammock islands. We also thank Debra Hernandez and the office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management for providing the funding and other support for the study. Nancy Cofer-Shabico and the staff at the NOAA Coastal Services Center were very helpful in providing advice, maps, and associated data. We greatly appreciate the efforts of Mr. Patrick McMillan of Clemson University in assisting with field work, but more importantly, in identifying scores of plant specimens.
    [Show full text]