DOCSLIB.ORG

CULTURAL INDICATORS for KAURI NGAHERE | Tui Shortland, Repo Consultancy Ltd Table of Contents Kupu Whakataki

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CULTURAL INDICATORS for KAURI NGAHERE | Tui Shortland, Repo Consultancy Ltd Table of Contents Kupu Whakataki 6/30/2011 KIA TOITU HE KAURI CULTURAL INDICATORS FOR KAURI NGAHERE | Tui Shortland, Repo Consultancy Ltd Table of Contents Kupu Whakataki ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 1 Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 2 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 3 Background ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 4 What are Cultural Indicators .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 10 5 Methodology .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 11 5.1 Literature Review ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 11 5.2 Kaumatua Interviews ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 12 5.3 Peer Review............................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 12 5.4 Kauri Dieback Tangata Whenua Roopu Workshop ................................................................................................................................................................ 12 6 Overarching Values ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 13 6.1 Whakapapa ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 13 6.2 Ngahere .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 14 7 Species Specific Cultural Indicators ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 16 7.1 Minor vegetation ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 18 7.1.1 Kahakaha / Kowharawhara / Mauri / Kokaha ................................................................................................................................................................ 18 7.1.2 Piripiri ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 18 7.1.3 Akatea / Aka / Tokai ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 18 7.1.4 Kohia .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 19 7.1.5 Rata ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 19 7.1.6 Mingimingi ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 20 7.1.7 Hangehange ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 21 7.1.8 Maire .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 21 7.1.9 Neinei /emiemi .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 22 Cultural Indicators for Kauri Ngahere, Repo Consultancy Ltd Page 2 7.2 Trees ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 22 7.2.1 Hinau / pokaka ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 23 7.2.2 Horoeka .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 23 7.2.3 Kahikatea ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 24 7.2.4 Karamu / karamuramu / kakarangu ............................................................................................................................................................................... 24 7.2.5 Kauri ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 25 7.2.6 Kiekie .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 26 7.2.7 Kohekohe ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 27 7.2.8 Kotukutuku ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 27 7.2.9 Mahoe / hinahina / inihina ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 28 7.2.10 Mairehau ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 28 7.2.11 Mamaku ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 29 7.2.11 Manono / kanono / papauma / raurekau ...................................................................................................................................................................... 30 7.2.12 Matai .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 30 7.2.13 Matipo ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 31 7.2.14 Ponga.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 31 7.2.15
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 4 Reproductive Biology of Cerambycids
    4 Reproductive Biology of Cerambycids Lawrence M. Hanks University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Urbana, Illinois Qiao Wang Massey University Palmerston North, New Zealand CONTENTS 4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 133 4.2 Phenology of Adults ..................................................................................................................... 134 4.3 Diet of Adults ............................................................................................................................... 138 4.4 Location of Host Plants and Mates .............................................................................................. 138 4.5 Recognition of Mates ................................................................................................................... 140 4.6 Copulation .................................................................................................................................... 141 4.7 Larval Host Plants, Oviposition Behavior, and Larval Development .......................................... 142 4.8 Mating Strategy ............................................................................................................................ 144 4.9 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 148 Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Divergence in Gut Bacterial Community Among Life Stages of the Rainbow Stag Beetle Phalacrognathus Muelleri (Coleoptera: Lucanidae)
    insects Article Divergence in Gut Bacterial Community Among Life Stages of the Rainbow Stag Beetle Phalacrognathus muelleri (Coleoptera: Lucanidae) 1,2, 1,2, 1,2, Miaomiao Wang y, Xingjia Xiang y and Xia Wan * 1 School of Resources and Environmental Engineering, Anhui University, Hefei 230601, China; [email protected] (M.W.); [email protected] (X.X.) 2 Anhui Province Key Laboratory of Wetland Ecosystem Protection and Restoration, Hefei 230601, China * Correspondence: [email protected] These authors contributed equally to this article. y Received: 19 September 2020; Accepted: 17 October 2020; Published: 21 October 2020 Simple Summary: Phalacrognathus muelleri is naturally distributed in Queensland (Australia) and New Guinea, and this species can be successfully bred under artificial conditions. In this study, we compared gut bacterial community structure among different life stages. There were dramatic shifts in gut bacterial community structure between larvae and adults, which was probably shaped by their diet. The significant differences between early instar and final instars larvae suggested that certain life stages are associated with a defined gut bacterial community. Our results contribute to a better understanding of the potential role of gut microbiota in a host’s growth and development, and the data will benefit stag beetle conservation in artificial feeding conditions. Abstract: Although stag beetles are popular saprophytic insects, there are few studies about their gut bacterial community. This study focused on the gut bacterial community structure of the rainbow stag beetle (i.e., Phalacrognathus muelleri) in its larvae (three instars) and adult stages, using high throughput sequencing (Illumina Miseq). Our aim was to compare the gut bacterial community structure among different life stages.
    [Show full text]
  • Kea (Nestor Notabilis) Care Manual
    Kea (Nestor notabilis) CARE MANUAL CREATED BY THE AZA Kea Species Survival Plan® Program IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE AZA Parrot Taxon Advisory Group Kea (Nestor notabilis) Care Manual Kea (Nestor notabilis) Care Manual Published by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums in collaboration with the AZA Animal Welfare Committee Formal Citation: AZA Kea Species Survival Plan (Nestor notabilis). (2020). Kea Care Manual. Silver Spring, MD: Association of Zoos and Aquariums. Original Completion Date: July 1, 2019 Kea (Nestor notabilis) Care Manual Coordinator: Kimberly Klosterman, Cincinnati Zoo & Botanical Garden, Senior Avian Keeper, Kea SSP Vice Coordinator Authors and Significant Contributors: Krista Adlehart CRM, Woodland Park Zoo, Animal Management Registrar Amanda Ardente NVM, PhD, Walt Disney World, University of Florida, Nutrition Fellow Jackie Bray, MA Zoology CPBT-KA, Raptor Incorporated, Associate Director Cassandre Crawford MM, Northwest Local School District, Orchestra Director, Kea SSP Volunteer Thea Etchells, Denver Zoo, Bird Keeper Linda Henry, Board Member of Zoological Lighting Institute, SeaWorld San Diego Phillip Horvey, Sedgwick County Zoo, Senior Zookeeper, Masked Lapwing SSP Coordinator and Studbook Keeper Cari Inserra, San Diego Zoo, Lead Animal Trainer Kimberly Klosterman, Cincinnati Zoo & Botanical Garden, Senior Avian Keeper, Kea Care Manual Coordinator, Vice Coordinator Kea SSP Program Jessica Meehan, Denver Zoo, Bird Keeper, Kea SSP Coordinator and Studbook Keeper Jennifer Nollman DVM, Cincinnati Zoo & Botanical Garden, Associate Veterinarian Catherine Vine, Philadelphia Zoo, Avian Keeper Reviewers: Raoul Schwing PhD, Head of Kea Lab & Infrastructure Project Manager, Messerli Research Institute, University of Vienna, AU Tamsin Orr-Walker, BAAT, Co-founder, Trustee & Chair of Kea Conservation Trust, South Island Community Engagement Coordinator, NZ Nigel Simpson, EAZA Kea EEP Coordinator, Head of Operations, Wild Place Project, Bristol Zoological Society, UK Dr.rer.nat Gyula K.
    [Show full text]
  • Standardization of Methyl Bromide Use for New Zealand Log Exports Armstrong JW, Brash D, Hall A, Waddell BC November 2011
    Standardization of Methyl Bromide use for New Zealand Log Exports Armstrong JW, Brash D, Hall A, Waddell BC November 2011 A report prepared for Stakeholders in Methyl Bromide Reduction Inc. (STIMBR) Armstrong JW Quarantine Scientific Limited Brash D, Hall A Plant & Food Research, Palmerston North Waddell BC Plant & Food Research, Auckland SPTS No. 6242 DISCLAIMER Unless agreed otherwise, The New Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research Limited does not give any prediction, warranty or assurance in relation to the accuracy of or fitness for any particular use or application of, any information or scientific or other result contained in this report. Neither Plant & Food Research nor any of its employees shall be liable for any cost (including legal costs), claim, liability, loss, damage, injury or the like, which may be suffered or incurred as a direct or indirect result of the reliance by any person on any information contained in this report. COPYRIGHT © COPYRIGHT (2011) The New Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research Ltd, Private Bag 92169, Victoria Street West, Auckland 1142, New Zealand. All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted, reported, or copied in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical or otherwise without written permission of the copyright owner. Information contained in this publication is confidential and is not to be disclosed in any form to any party without the prior approval in writing of the Chief Executive Officer, The New Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research Ltd, Private Bag 92169, Victoria Street West, Auckland 1142, New Zealand.
    [Show full text]
  • WORLD LIST of EDIBLE INSECTS 2015 (Yde Jongema) WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY PAGE 1
    WORLD LIST OF EDIBLE INSECTS 2015 (Yde Jongema) WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY PAGE 1 Genus Species Family Order Common names Faunar Distribution & References Remarks life Epeira syn nigra Vinson Nephilidae Araneae Afregion Madagascar (Decary, 1937) Nephilia inaurata stages (Walck.) Nephila inaurata (Walckenaer) Nephilidae Araneae Afr Madagascar (Decary, 1937) Epeira nigra Vinson syn Nephila madagscariensis Vinson Nephilidae Araneae Afr Madagascar (Decary, 1937) Araneae gen. Araneae Afr South Africa Gambia (Bodenheimer 1951) Bostrichidae gen. Bostrichidae Col Afr Congo (DeFoliart 2002) larva Chrysobothris fatalis Harold Buprestidae Col jewel beetle Afr Angola (DeFoliart 2002) larva Lampetis wellmani (Kerremans) Buprestidae Col jewel beetle Afr Angola (DeFoliart 2002) syn Psiloptera larva wellmani Lampetis sp. Buprestidae Col jewel beetle Afr Togo (Tchibozo 2015) as Psiloptera in Tchibozo but this is Neotropical Psiloptera syn wellmani Kerremans Buprestidae Col jewel beetle Afr Angola (DeFoliart 2002) Psiloptera is larva Neotropicalsee Lampetis wellmani (Kerremans) Steraspis amplipennis (Fahr.) Buprestidae Col jewel beetle Afr Angola (DeFoliart 2002) larva Sternocera castanea (Olivier) Buprestidae Col jewel beetle Afr Benin (Riggi et al 2013) Burkina Faso (Tchinbozo 2015) Sternocera feldspathica White Buprestidae Col jewel beetle Afr Angola (DeFoliart 2002) adult Sternocera funebris Boheman syn Buprestidae Col jewel beetle Afr Zimbabwe (Chavanduka, 1976; Gelfand, 1971) see S. orissa adult Sternocera interrupta (Olivier) Buprestidae Col jewel beetle Afr Benin (Riggi et al 2013) Cameroun (Seignobos et al., 1996) Burkina Faso (Tchimbozo 2015) Sternocera orissa Buquet Buprestidae Col jewel beetle Afr Botswana (Nonaka, 1996), South Africa (Bodenheimer, 1951; syn S. funebris adult Quin, 1959), Zimbabwe (Chavanduka, 1976; Gelfand, 1971; Dube et al 2013) Scarites sp. Carabidae Col ground beetle Afr Angola (Bergier, 1941), Madagascar (Decary, 1937) larva Acanthophorus confinis Laporte de Cast.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Edible Insects to Mitigate Challenges for Sustainability
    Open Agriculture 2021; 6: 24–36 Review Article Raquel P. F. Guiné*, Paula Correia, Catarina Coelho, Cristina A. Costa The role of edible insects to mitigate challenges for sustainability https://doi.org/10.1515/opag-2020-0206 the 1940’s last century, every 12–15 years an increase of received September 27, 2020; accepted December 3, 2020 1 billion people was observed. From 1950 to the present, Abstract: This review is focused on the utilization of there has been an increase of over 250%, from 2.6 billion insects as a new opportunity in food and feed products, to around 7 billion. According to the United Nations including their commercialization both in traditional and population projections, by year 2050 it is expected that new markets. It has been suggested that insects are con- the world population reaches approximately 10 billion ( ) siderably more sustainable when compared with other Population 2020 . ’ sources of animal protein, thus alleviating the pressure Although it might be debatable, according to O Neill ( ) - over the environment and the planet facing the necessity et al. 2018 , none of the countries in the world is pre - to feed the world population, constantly increasing. Many sently able to meet the critical needs for human well chefs have adhered to the trend of using insects in their being and at the same time coping with environmental ’ culinary preparations, bringing insects to the plan of top preservation standards. Today s food system is raising - gastronomy, highlighting their organoleptic qualities allied key problems not only to the environment and the sus to a recognized high nutritional value.
    [Show full text]
  • Insects As Mini-Livestock? a Study of New Zealand Attitudes Toward Insect Consumption
    Insects as mini-livestock? A study of New Zealand attitudes toward insect consumption Penny Payne and Alyssa Ryan June 2019 REPORT FOR AgResearch CLIENT REPORT NUMBER: RE450/2019/034 This report has been prepared for AgResearch, and is confidential to AgResearch Ltd. No part of this report may be copied, used, modified or disclosed by any means without their consent. Every effort has been made to ensure this Report is accurate. However scientific research and development can involve extrapolation and interpretation of uncertain data, and can produce uncertain results. Neither AgResearch Ltd nor any person involved in this Report shall be responsible for any error or omission in this Report or for any use of or reliance on this Report unless specifically agreed otherwise in writing. To the extent permitted by law, AgResearch Ltd excludes all liability in relation to this Report, whether under contract, tort (including negligence), equity, legislation or otherwise unless specifically agreed otherwise in writing. Report prepared for AgResearch June 2019 Attitudes toward insect consumption in New Zealand i Contents 1. Executive Summary ................................................................................................. 1 2. Background .............................................................................................................. 3 3. Methods ................................................................................................................... 4 3.1 Data collection .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Nurture – Nigel Brown Angela Middleton in 1977, I Was Struck by A
    Nurture – Nigel Brown Angela Middleton In 1977, I was struck by a painting, bought by the family art collectors, the likes of which I hadn’t seen before. Painted by Nigel Brown, it featured a single lemon on a rather ragged, tenacious tree, tended by a man clad in a black singlet. That item of clothing made him instantly recognizable as ‘one of us’, a man in his backyard, working in a factory, or on the land. It was the kind of thing that John Clarke wore on television at the time, along with his gumboots, as ‘Fred Dagg.’ That universal, vernacular (New Zealand) man was quite familiar to me. But why was he bent over that tree, showing so much concern? Words framed the image, enigmatic, poetic, bold. I was drawn to the lemon, the man, and the text, declaring the lemon a ray of hope, a ‘bright sun for us all’. Yes, I had looked at McCahon’s work and others featuring text as well as images, but this was something different. McCahon’s figurative painting was intimidating, for me. His religious iconography was scary, larger than me, too big to contemplate, too large to be part of my world, an unbeliever. But the Lemon Tree was close, accessible, domesticated, something familiar that I could understand. This had meaning. Nearly forty years later, I can still look at that same painting and ponder that single lemon, shining brightly on a tree, perhaps the hope and inspiration of the black–singleted bloke who gazes at it. No doubt he had nurtured that single fruit of the tree, willing its survival, tending its needs.
    [Show full text]
  • NICOTINAMIDE CONTENT of INSECTS* by G. B. Kittott and M
    NICOTINAMIDE CONTENT OF INSECTS* By G. B. KITTott and M. H. BRIGGst§ Surprisingly little is known of the vitamin content of insects and consequently, as part of an investigation of the function and metabolism of insect tissues, we have determined the nicotinamide content of a wide range of adult insects collected locally in the Wellington district. Nicotinamide was extracted by acid hydrolysis and concentrations determined by the LactobacillusLactobacillu8 arabino8U8arabinosU8 assay method (Snell and Wright 1941). Growth of the microorganism was measured by both optical density and acid production. TABLE 1 NICOTINAMIDE* CONTENT OF HEALTHY ADULT SPECIMENS OF WHOLE INSECTS Nicotin- Nicotin-Nicotin· amide amide Content Content Insect Insect (fLg/g(/Lg!g (fLg/g(/Lg!g fresh fresh wt.) wt.) Aedes aegypti (mosquito) 55 Hemideina thoracica (tree weta) 28 Apis mellifera (honey bee) 40 MelampsaltaM elampsalta rugiceps (cicada) 22 Argosarchus horridus (stick insect) 36 Orthodera ministralis (praying mantis) 17 Artystona rugiceps (beetle) 72 Oxycaenus sp. (ghost moth) 19 Bombus terrestris (bumble-bee) 71 Persectania compositor (army-worm Caedicia simplex (katydid) 49 moth 81 Cilibes otagoensis (compost beetle) 48 Prionoplus reticularis (huhu beetle) 60 Cutelia sedilotti (cockroach) 36 Uropetala caro'Veicarovei (dragon-fly) 130 * Results actually give nicotinamide ++nicotinic nicotinic acid content of the sample, but it is known that very little nicotinic acid occurs in animal tissues (Sebrell and Harris 1954). The results of these experiments are given in Table 1. For comparative purposes we have listed the results of other workers in Table 2. Table 3 indicates the nicotin­ amide contents of various tissues isolated from the insects. Nicotinamide is a constituent of the pyridine nucleotide coenzymes and the acid hydrolysis method employed in this investigation cleaves such coenzymescoenzymes resulting in the release of nicotinamide.
    [Show full text]
  • SHORT NOTE Artificial Light at Night Potentially Alters Feeding
    37 Notornis, 2016, Vol. 63: 37-39 0029-4470 © The Ornithological Society of New Zealand Inc. SHORT NOTE Artificial light at night potentially alters feeding behaviour of the native southern black-backed gull (Larus dominicanus) ANDREW R. PUGH* Scion, Forest Protection, 49 Sala Street, Rotorua, New Zealand STEPHEN M. PAWSON Scion, Forest Protection, Forestry Rd, Ilam, Christchurch, New Zealand Artificial light at night (ALAN) is increasingly & Bader 2014). The blue light part of the spectra is recognised as having ecological impacts. In fact, highly visible across a wide range of animal groups artificial light has been identified as one of the (Davies et al. 2013). most serious emerging threats to urban ecosystems Artificial light is known to cause behavioural (Stanley et al. 2015). Rich (2005) documents some changes in birds. There are periodic reports of mass of the first observations of the impact of artificial death of migrating birds from impact or exhaustion lights, beginning over 150 years ago. Since then, as a result of specific point source lights, the most light pollution has continued to grow in scale and famous example being the death of approximately in the number of known impacts on wildlife. It was 50,000 birds due to exhaustion over 2 nights at estimated that 18.7% of the world’s global land area an air force base in the United States (Johnston is now affected to some extent by ALAN (Cinzano 1955). However, additional, more subtle, effects et al. 2001), and is increasing by approximately 6% on birds include inducing activity earlier in the annually (Hölker et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Nzs-Backyard-Beasts-Blad.Pdf
    The first arthropods lived in the sea around 500 million years ago. Then, some arthropods evolved to live on land. Land-based arthropods like What are centipedes, millipedes and scorpions first appear in fossil records about 450 million years ago, so they existed long before dinosaurs roamed. This makes them some of the earliest life forms Arthropods? to adapt to life on land. Most of the bugs and critters you’ll find in your backyard – amongst the grass, under stones or creeping along branches – are part of a large family group called arthropods. Arthropods don’t have bones like us. Our bones join to form a skeleton that is inside our body. Instead, arthropods have lots of hollow tubes joined together to form a skeleton on the outside of their body, called an exoskeleton. Their bodies are made up of segments and they move with jointed limbs. Insects, centipedes and millipedes, slaters and spiders are all arthropods. Insects are the only arthropods that evolved an ability to fly. Fossils of Meganeura show an insect very like a modern dragonfly, but much larger. Our biggest dragonfly has a wingspan of 13 cm, Meganeura had a wingspan of 65 cm! Insects are the most successful type of arthropod. More than a million species of insect have been identified and they outnumber all the other creatures on the planet put together! Insects are the creatures you will find most often in your garden. 2 3 What is an Insect? There are three ways you can tell insects apart from other arthropods like spiders, centipedes or slaters.
    [Show full text]
  • Wild Foods 2.2
    WILD FOODS 2.2 WILD FOODS Nicola J. King1, Robin J. Lake1, Geoffrey N. Kerr2 1 Food Safety Programme, Institute of Environmental Science and Research (ESR) Limited, PO Box 29-181, Christchurch 8540, New Zealand 2 Faculty of Environment, Society, and Design, Lincoln University, New Zealand ABSTRACT: New Zealanders harvest a wide range of species from the wild for food: mammals, birds, insects, plants and fungi that live on the land, and fi sh, invertebrates and plants from fresh and salt water. This chapter describes the contribution of wild foods as a provisioning service by discussing, from available data, the range and quantities of wild foods harvested (commercially and non-commercially). Commercial harvesting, especially of marine fi sh, is of signifi cant economic value. Wild foods also provide a cultural service by fulfi lling spiritual, recreational, educational and cultural needs. Harvesting relies on access to wild food species, and we provide examples where managing and maintaining access to wild foods is challenging. The effects of legislation, commercial harvesting, conservation activities and land use on wild foods as an ecosystem service are discussed. We conclude by proposing that decision-making regarding wild foods should take an ecosystem service perspective, which means understanding the multiple values wild foods have to people. There are examples where this is happening, but this area is rich in opportunity. Key words: access, benefi ts, ecosystem service, fi sh, gather, harvest, hunt, quantity. INTRODUCTION named in this chapter by their common names, whether English Wild foods are both provisioning and cultural ecosystem or Māori, and provides their scientifi c names and some alterna- services.
    [Show full text]