Sunshine Diuris Diuris Fragrantissima

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Sunshine Diuris Diuris Fragrantissima Action Statement Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 No. 50 (revised in 2004) Sunshine Diuris Diuris fragrantissima Preamble The species is most similar to the Wedge This Action Statement is heavily based on the Diuris Diuris dendrobioides Fitzg., a threatened draft Recovery Plan under the Environment orchid from grasslands in inland western New Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act South Wales and northern Victoria. The 1999 prepared for this species by the Wedge Diuris was included in D. Department of Sustainability and Environment fragrantissima by Walsh and Entwistle (1994), for the Commonwealth Department of although most other authors including Jones Environment and Heritage. (1988), Clements (1989), Gullan et al. (1990), Backhouse and Jeanes (1995) and Bishop Description (1996) have retained D. dendrobioides as a Sunshine Diuris has two to three slender, separate species. channelled, grass-like green leaves, up to 18 cm long. A slender green stem to 20 cm tall, bears Distribution and abundance one to nine (average four) strongly scented Sunshine Diuris was once so common in the flowers, coloured white with variable purplish native grasslands north-west of Melbourne hues and streaks, while the lateral sepals are around the time of European occupation, that green. The dorsal sepal is triangular and erect, it was often referred to as ‘Snow-in-the- while the lateral sepals are long and slender (to Paddocks’ (Richards 2002). Since then the about 60 mm), inrolled, drooping and parallel species has suffered a catastrophic decline in (giving rise to the name doubletail). The ovate range and abundance. Its decline has been petals project obliquely upwards. The labellum attributed to widespread habitat destruction is strongly bilobed, the lateral lobes curved and degradation. Current major threats upward, and the fan-shaped mid-lobe projects include weed invasion, predation from forward. Flowers open sequentially up the stem, introduced herbivores, lack of fire and ill- the lowest flower often having collapsed before timed fire. the top flower buds have opened. Sunshine Diuris is now known from only two The Sunshine Diuris was originally called the populations in the wild, at Tottenham and White Diuris, Diuris alba R. Br., a species now Laverton North, although the latter is the known to be confined to the central coast of result of reintroduction. There are believed to New South Wales (Bishop 1996). It was later be fewer than 5 plants in the wild. There are known as the white form of the Purple Diuris 800-1000 plants in cultivation, principally at (Diuris punctata var. albo-violacea Rupp ex the Melbourne Zoo but also at the Royal Dockr.) until it was recognised and described as Botanic Gardens and with private growers a separate species, D. fragrantissima D.L. Jones et M.A. Clem. (cited in Clements 1989). The Tottenham site is owned by Victorian Rail Very little is known of the biology or ecology of Track (Victrack), a Victorian Government Business Sunshine Diuris. It grows in a complex Enterprise. The reintroduction site at Laverton relationship with a mycorrhizal fungus Tulasnella North Grassland Reserve is managed by Parks calospora Boudier (Warcup 1971), that initiates Victoria under the Victorian Crown Land (Reserves) seed germination, and assimilates nutrients for the Act 1978 (Parks Victoria 2000). The site is orchid. The degree of dependence upon the reserved under the IUCN category IV for the fungus, particularly of mature plants, is not purpose of nature conservation (International known. Some individuals of Sunshine Diuris have Union for the Conservation of Nature 1994; Parks survived for over nine years in the wild (Cropper Victoria 2000). 1993) and over 20 years in cultivation (D. Tonkinson, La Trobe University and C. Knight, Habitat Melbourne Zoo, unpubl. data). Sunshine Diuris appears to have been confined to Sunshine Diuris is pollinated by a small native bee the grassland plains immediately to the west of (Tonkinson 1985), the purplish colour of the Melbourne, particularly between Werribee and flowers mimicking the colour of native lilies that Sydenham (Cropper 1993; Jones 1988; Parsons often grow with Diuris species. The bee may also 1981). It grew in native grasslands dominated by be attracted by the strong fragrance of the orchid. Kangaroo Grass Themeda triandra, on heavy basalt Cropper (1993) reported very low natural rates of soils, often with embedded basalt boulders. The pollination, with a maximum of only 7% of flowers sole remaining natural population occurs in a producing seed pods, which is possibly a function small (one hectare) grassland remnant located of the rarity of the orchid and hence few along a railway reserve west of Melbourne. T. opportunities for pollinators to find flowers and triandra dominates this site with Austrodanthonia effect pollination. species, Dianella longifolia, Dianella revoluta, Hot summer fires are likely to enhance flowering in Tricoryne elatior, Pimelea humilis and Dichanthium the following flowering season. Fires may species (the latter may be a non-endemic native indirectly promote seed germination and seedling plant transported to the site). establishment by altering soil nutrient levels and The sole remaining natural population at by reducing competition from associated grasses. Tottenham is found in Western (Basalt) Plains This effect may act directly upon the orchid, or Grassland on shallow clay with exposed basalt indirectly through the fungal symbiont. Most boulders. This site, as well as the reintroduction recruitment has been observed one to two years site at Laverton North Grassland Reserve should be after a summer fire. considered as part of the critical habitat for the species, although there remains some doubt as to Conservation status whether they still fulfil the ecological requirements for the species. There is some suggestion that National conservation status Sunshine Diuris may have had a wider distribution Sunshine Diuris has been listed as Endangered and ecological range than at present (Richards under the Commonwealth Environment Protection 2002). This could indicate that Sunshine Diuris and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. may be able to tolerate a wider ecological niche than that which it currently occupies. Using the IUCN Red List categories and criteria (2001), Sunshine Diuris is Critically Endangered Life history and ecology and is close to extinction in the wild. An application has been made to revise the status of Sunshine Diuris is a terrestrial deciduous herb, the species from Endangered to Critically emerging annually from a lobed, subterranean Endangered sensu IUCN (2001). tuber. The leaves emerge in late autumn, following the onset of seasonal rains. Flowering commences in late October, through November and is Victorian conservation status completed by early December. Sunshine Diuris has been listed as threatened under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988. By mid-summer the leaf has shrivelled, and if pollination has occurred, the seed capsule is Sunshine Diuris is considered Endangered in ripening. Seed set occurs about six weeks after. Victoria according to “Advisory List of Rare or The species survives the late summer and early Threatened Vascular Plants in Victoria – 2004” autumn as a dormant tuber. Reproduction is (DSE 2004). almost entirely from seed, with rare vegetative reproduction apparently possible (Cropper 1993). The irregularly shaped, lobed tuber is replaced annually. 2 Decline and threats by the introduced House Mouse Mus musculus, was Sites where Sunshine Diuris occurred have now believed responsible for a mortality of perhaps 70% been destroyed, with the exception of the of plants during the mid-1980s (Cropper 1993). Tottenham Rail reserve and the translocation site Trampling, particularly by visiting naturalists, has at Laverton North Grassland Reserve. Prior to its been a major problem in the past, with up to 15% near extinction in the wild, botanists had been of plants broken or damaged in some years concerned with the plight of Sunshine Diuris for (Cropper 1993). Human interference with the almost 80 years. In 1934, Nicholls (Willis 1951) reserve is also cause for concern. Three days after wrote that 'the species was at one time exceedingly the flowering plant was found in 1997, the plentiful, but is now becoming scarce'. Willis grassland reserve was deliberately burnt by an (1951) believed that 'Victoria's most beautiful arsonist. Ironically, this event may have been the orchid' was in dire peril of extinction. stimulus for three plants flowering in 1998. By 1970, only five D. fragrantissima populations However, while fires occurring in late summer are remained, and by 1980 the species was restricted beneficial to the species, too frequent or ill timed to the single remaining site at Tottenham rail fire may be a threat, causing damage to plants, reserve, where about 100 plants survived. This increasing seedling mortality and destroying population continued to decline through the immature seedpods. It is highly likely that, with so 1980s, with 67 flowering plants recorded in 1982, few plants, ecological processes such as natural 11 in 1989, and only one in 1992. No flowering pollination have also been substantially disrupted. plants were seen in recent years, until a single flowering plant was found at the site in October Existing conservation measures 1997. A short time later an arsonist set fire to the The plight of Sunshine Diuris has received reserve, and three flowering plants were recorded
Recommended publications
  • Native Orchid Society South Australia
    Journal of the Native Orchid Society of South Australia Inc PRINT POST APPROVED VOLUME 25 NO. 11 PP 54366200018 DECEMBER 2001 NATIVE ORCHID SOCIETY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA POST OFFICE BOX 565 UNLEY SOUTH AUSTRALIA 5061 The Native Orchid Society of South Australia promotes the conservation of orchids through the preservation of natural habitat and through cultivation. Except with the documented official representation from the Management Committee no person is authorised to represent the society on any matter. All native orchids are protected plants in the wild. Their collection without written Government permit is illegal. PRESIDENT: SECRETARY: Bill Dear Cathy Houston Telephone: 82962111 Telephone: 8356 7356 VICE-PRESIDENT David Pettifor Tel. 014095457 COMMITTEE David Hirst Thelma Bridle Bob Bates Malcolm Guy EDITOR: TREASURER Gerry Carne Iris Freeman 118 Hewitt Avenue Toorak Gardens SA 5061 Telephone/Fax 8332 7730 E-mail [email protected] LIFE MEMBERS Mr R. Hargreaves Mr G. Carne Mr L. Nesbitt Mr R. Bates Mr R. Robjohns Mr R Shooter Mr D. Wells Registrar of Judges: Reg Shooter Trading Table: Judy Penney Field Trips & Conservation: Thelma Bridle Tel. 83844174 Tuber Bank Coordinator: Malcolm Guy Tel. 82767350 New Members Coordinator David Pettifor Tel. 0416 095 095 PATRON: Mr T.R.N. Lothian The Native Orchid Society of South Australia Inc. while taking all due care, take no responsibility for the loss, destruction or damage to any plants whether at shows, meetings or exhibits. Views or opinions expressed by authors of articles within this Journal do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Management. We condones the reprint of any articles if acknowledgement is given.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Orchid Society of South Australia
    NATIVE ORCHID SOCIETY of SOUTH AUSTRALIA NATIVE ORCHID SOCIETY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA JOURNAL Volume 6, No. 10, November, 1982 Registered by Australia Post Publication No. SBH 1344. Price 40c PATRON: Mr T.R.N. Lothian PRESIDENT: Mr J.T. Simmons SECRETARY: Mr E.R. Hargreaves 4 Gothic Avenue 1 Halmon Avenue STONYFELL S.A. 5066 EVERARD PARK SA 5035 Telephone 32 5070 Telephone 293 2471 297 3724 VICE-PRESIDENT: Mr G.J. Nieuwenhoven COMMITTFE: Mr R. Shooter Mr P. Barnes TREASURER: Mr R.T. Robjohns Mrs A. Howe Mr R. Markwick EDITOR: Mr G.J. Nieuwenhoven NEXT MEETING WHEN: Tuesday, 23rd November, 1982 at 8.00 p.m. WHERE St. Matthews Hail, Bridge Street, Kensington. SUBJECT: This is our final meeting for 1982 and will take the form of a Social Evening. We will be showing a few slides to start the evening. Each member is requested to bring a plate. Tea, coffee, etc. will be provided. Plant Display and Commentary as usual, and Christmas raffle. NEW MEMBERS Mr. L. Field Mr. R.N. Pederson Mr. D. Unsworth Mrs. P.A. Biddiss Would all members please return any outstanding library books at the next meeting. FIELD TRIP -- CHANGE OF DATE AND VENUE The Field Trip to Peters Creek scheduled for 27th November, 1982, and announced in the last Journal has been cancelled. The extended dry season has not been conducive to flowering of the rarer moisture- loving Microtis spp., which were to be the objective of the trip. 92 FIELD TRIP - CHANGE OF DATE AND VENUE (Continued) Instead, an alternative trip has been arranged for Saturday afternoon, 4th December, 1982, meeting in Mount Compass at 2.00 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Identifying Conservation Priorities and Assessing Impacts and Trade‐Offs of Potential Future Development in the Lower Hunter Valley in New South Wales
    Identifying conservation priorities and assessing impacts and trade-offs of potential future development in the Lower Hunter Valley in New South Wales A report by the NERP Environmental Decisions Hub Heini Kujala, Amy L. Whitehead and Brendan A. Wintle The University of Melbourne The Environmental Decisions Hub is supported through funding from the Australian Government’s National Environmental Research Program www.environment.gov.au/nerp and involves researchers from the University of Western Australia (UWA), The University of Melbourne (UM), RMIT University (RMIT), The Australian National University (ANU), The University of Queensland (UQ) and CSIRO . Identifying conservation priorities and assessing impacts and trade‐offs of potential future development in the Lower Hunter Valley in New South Wales. ISBN: 978‐07340‐5140‐0 (PDF) Hub Research Theme: 4.4 Regional Sustainability Plans (Hunter) Enquiries to: [email protected] © The University of Melbourne This work is copyright. It may be produced in whole or in part for study or training purposes subject to the inclusion of an acknowledgement of the source. It is not intended for commercial sale or use. Reproduction for other purposes other than those listed above requires the written permission from the authors. For permission to reproduce any part of this document, please approach the authors. Please cite the report as follows: Kujala H, Whitehead AL & Wintle BA (2015) Identifying conservation priorities and assessing impacts and trade‐offs of potential future development in the Lower Hunter Valley in New South Wales. The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria. Pp. 100 Purpose of the Report This report describes the framework and tools used to identify areas of high conservation priority in the Lower Hunter, and to assess the individual and cumulative impacts of potential future development scenarios.
    [Show full text]
  • Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 Protected Flora List November 2019
    Department of Environment, Land, Water & Planning Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 Protected Flora List November 2019 What is Protected Flora? Protected flora are native plants or communities of native plants that have legal protection under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988. The Protected Flora List includes plants from three sources: plant taxa (species, subspecies or varieties) listed as threatened under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 plant taxa belonging to communities listed as threatened under the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 plant taxa which are not threatened but require protection for other reasons. For example, some species which are attractive or highly sought after, such as orchids and grass trees, are protected so that the removal of these species from the wild can be controlled. For all listed species protection includes living (eg flowers, seeds, shoots and roots) and non-living (eg bark, leaves and other litter) plant material. Do I need a permit or licence? The handling of protected flora is regulated by the Department of Environment, Land, Water & Planning (DELWP) to ensure that any harvesting or loss is ecologically sustainable. You must obtain a ‘Protected Flora Licence’ or Permit from one of the Regional Offices of DELWP if you want to collect protected native plants or if you are planning to do works or other activities on public land which might kill, injure or disturb protected native plants. In most cases, you do not require a Licence or Permit for works or activities on private land, although you may require a planning permit from your local council.
    [Show full text]
  • Orchid Seed Coat Morphometrics. Molvray and Kores. 1995
    American Journal of Botany 82(11): 1443-1454. 1995 . CHARACTER ANALYSIS OF THE SEED COAT IN SPIRANTHOIDEAE AND ORCHIDOIDEAE, WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE DIURIDEAE (ORCHIDACEAE)I MIA MOLVRAy2 AND PAUL J. KORES Department of Biological Sciences, Loyola University, New Orleans, Louisiana 70118 Previous work on seed types within Orchidaceae has demonstrated that characters associated with the seed coat may have considerable phylogenetic utility. Application of the se characters has been complicated in practice by the absence of quan­ titative descriptors and in some instances by their apparent lack of congruity with the taxa under con sideration. Using quantitative descriptors of size and shape, we have demonstrated that some of the existing seed classes do not represent well delimited, discrete entities, and we have proposed new seed classes to meet these criteria. In the spiranthoid-orchidoid complex, the characters yielding the most clearly delimited shape classes are cell number and variability and degree and stochasticity of medial cell elongation. Of lesser, but still appreciable, significance are the pre sence of varying types and degrees of intercellular gaps, and some, but not all, features of cell walls. Four seed classes are evident on the basis of these characters in Spiranthoideae and Orchidoideae. These seed types are briefly described, and their distribution among the taxa examined for this study is reported. It is hoped that these more strictly delimited seed classes will faci litate phylogenetic analysis in the family. Phylogenetic relationships within the Orchidaceae delimitation of the seed coat characters within the two have been discussed extensively in a series of recent pub­ putatively most primitive subfamilies of monandrous or­ lications by Garay (1960, 1972), Dressler (1981, 1986, chids and evaluates the util ity of these characters for the 1990a, b, c, 1993), Rasmussen (1982, 1986), Burns-Bal­ purpose of phylogenetic inference, extends this avenue of ogh and Funk (1986), and Chase et aI.
    [Show full text]
  • Redalyc.ARE OUR ORCHIDS SAFE DOWN UNDER?
    Lankesteriana International Journal on Orchidology ISSN: 1409-3871 [email protected] Universidad de Costa Rica Costa Rica BACKHOUSE, GARY N. ARE OUR ORCHIDS SAFE DOWN UNDER? A NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF THREATENED ORCHIDS IN AUSTRALIA Lankesteriana International Journal on Orchidology, vol. 7, núm. 1-2, marzo, 2007, pp. 28- 43 Universidad de Costa Rica Cartago, Costa Rica Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=44339813005 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative LANKESTERIANA 7(1-2): 28-43. 2007. ARE OUR ORCHIDS SAFE DOWN UNDER? A NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF THREATENED ORCHIDS IN AUSTRALIA GARY N. BACKHOUSE Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Division, Department of Sustainability and Environment 8 Nicholson Street, East Melbourne, Victoria 3002 Australia [email protected] KEY WORDS:threatened orchids Australia conservation status Introduction Many orchid species are included in this list. This paper examines the listing process for threatened Australia has about 1700 species of orchids, com- orchids in Australia, compares regional and national prising about 1300 named species in about 190 gen- lists of threatened orchids, and provides recommen- era, plus at least 400 undescribed species (Jones dations for improving the process of listing regionally 2006, pers. comm.). About 1400 species (82%) are and nationally threatened orchids. geophytes, almost all deciduous, seasonal species, while 300 species (18%) are evergreen epiphytes Methods and/or lithophytes. At least 95% of this orchid flora is endemic to Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • Act Native Woodland Conservation Strategy and Action Plans
    ACT NATIVE WOODLAND CONSERVATION STRATEGY AND ACTION PLANS PART A 1 Produced by the Environment, Planning and Sustainable Development © Australian Capital Territory, Canberra 2019 This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without written permission from: Director-General, Environment, Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate, ACT Government, GPO Box 158, Canberra ACT 2601. Telephone: 02 6207 1923 Website: www.planning.act.gov.au Acknowledgment to Country We wish to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land we are meeting on, the Ngunnawal people. We wish to acknowledge and respect their continuing culture and the contribution they make to the life of this city and this region. Accessibility The ACT Government is committed to making its information, services, events and venues as accessible as possible. If you have difficulty reading a standard printed document and would like to receive this publication in an alternative format, such as large print, please phone Access Canberra on 13 22 81 or email the Environment, Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate at [email protected] If English is not your first language and you require a translating and interpreting service, please phone 13 14 50. If you are deaf, or have a speech or hearing impairment, and need the teletypewriter service, please phone 13 36 77 and ask for Access Canberra on 13 22 81. For speak and listen users, please phone 1300 555 727 and ask for Canberra Connect on 13 22 81. For more information on these services visit http://www.relayservice.com.au PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CONTENTS VISION ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • ACT, Australian Capital 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity Summary: Port Phillip and Westernport, 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.
    [Show full text]
  • White Box Yellow Box Blakely's Red Gum Grassy Woodland And
    NSW Threatened Species Scientific Committee Conservation Assessment of White Box – Yellow Box – Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland Mark Tozer and Christopher Simpson 22/06/2020 NSW Threatened Species Scientific Committee Name: White Box – Yellow Box – Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland Short Name: Box – Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Grassland Distribution: Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland and Australian Capital Territory Bioregions: NSW North Coast, New England Tableland, Nandewar, Brigalow Belt South, Sydney Basin, South Eastern Highlands, NSW South Western Slopes Bioregions, South East Queensland and Victorian Midlands Bioregions Current EPBC Act Status: Critically Endangered Current NSW BC Act Status: Endangered Proposed listing on NSW BC Act and EPBC Act: Critically Endangered Summary of Conservation Assessment White Box – Yellow Box – Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland was found to be eligible for listing as Critically Endangered under Criteria A3 and D3. The main reasons for this Ecological Community being eligible are that it has undergone a very large historical reduction in geographic distribution (since approximately 1750) and has experienced disruption of biotic processes of relative severity >90% over more than 90% of its distribution since 1750. Description White Box – Yellow Box – Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland comprises an aggregation of Grassy Woodlands (sensu Keith 2004) occurring on the tablelands and western slopes of the Great Diving Range from the Darling Downs in southern Queensland south to central Victoria. In NSW, the community corresponds broadly with Keith’s (2004) Western Slopes Grassy Woodlands, Southern Tableland Grassy Woodlands and New England Grassy Woodlands classes.
    [Show full text]
  • Australian Orchidaceae: Genera and Species (12/1/2004)
    AUSTRALIAN ORCHID NAME INDEX (21/1/2008) by Mark A. Clements Centre for Plant Biodiversity Research/Australian National Herbarium GPO Box 1600 Canberra ACT 2601 Australia Corresponding author: [email protected] INTRODUCTION The Australian Orchid Name Index (AONI) provides the currently accepted scientific names, together with their synonyms, of all Australian orchids including those in external territories. The appropriate scientific name for each orchid taxon is based on data published in the scientific or historical literature, and/or from study of the relevant type specimens or illustrations and study of taxa as herbarium specimens, in the field or in the living state. Structure of the index: Genera and species are listed alphabetically. Accepted names for taxa are in bold, followed by the author(s), place and date of publication, details of the type(s), including where it is held and assessment of its status. The institution(s) where type specimen(s) are housed are recorded using the international codes for Herbaria (Appendix 1) as listed in Holmgren et al’s Index Herbariorum (1981) continuously updated, see [http://sciweb.nybg.org/science2/IndexHerbariorum.asp]. Citation of authors follows Brummit & Powell (1992) Authors of Plant Names; for book abbreviations, the standard is Taxonomic Literature, 2nd edn. (Stafleu & Cowan 1976-88; supplements, 1992-2000); and periodicals are abbreviated according to B-P- H/S (Bridson, 1992) [http://www.ipni.org/index.html]. Synonyms are provided with relevant information on place of publication and details of the type(s). They are indented and listed in chronological order under the accepted taxon name. Synonyms are also cross-referenced under genus.
    [Show full text]
  • Catchments and Local Government Areas
    Threatened Species Section Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment Threatened plants within the Local Government Area: Circular Head Tas LGA Species Common name Endemic TSP Act EPBC Act LGA % Count Count Acacia ulicifolia juniper wattle r 307 4 1.3 Agrostis australiensis southern bent r 11 1 9.1 Agrostis diemenica flatleaf southern bent end r 11 1 9.1 Amphibromus neesii southern swampgrass r 30 4 13.3 Asperula subsimplex water woodruff r 47 2 4.3 Austrocynoglossum latifolium forest houndstongue r 63 1 1.6 Banksia serrata saw banksia r 122 40 32.8 Barbarea australis riverbed wintercress end e CR 127 1 0.8 Baumea gunnii slender twigsedge r 77 1 1.3 Bunodophoron notatum e 7 1 14.3 Caladenia campbellii thickstem fairy fingers end e CR 23 5 21.7 Caladenia congesta blacktongue finger-orchid e 40 3 7.5 Caladenia dienema windswept spider-orchid end e EN 165 163 98.8 Caladenia lindleyana lindleys spider-orchid end e CR 12 3 25.0 Caladenia pallida rosy spider-orchid end e CR 12 4 33.3 Caladenia patersonii patersons spider-orchid v 109 50 45.9 Caladenia pusilla tiny fingers r 117 68 58.1 Calystegia soldanella sea bindweed r 42 2 4.8 Carex gunniana mountain sedge r 50 5 10.0 Comesperma defoliatum leafless milkwort r 34 2 5.9 Corunastylis brachystachya shortspike midge-orchid end e EN 36 34 94.4 Corunastylis nuda tiny midge-orchid r 78 1 1.3 Cotula vulgaris var. australasica slender buttons r 75 3 4.0 Craspedia preminghana preminghana billybuttons end e EN 11 11 100.0 Crassula moschata musky stonecrop mi & tas r 16 6 37.5 Cullen
    [Show full text]