Controlling Fire Tree (Myrica Faya) in Hawaii
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Caterpillars Moths Butterflies Woodies
NATIVE Caterpillars Moths and utter flies Band host NATIVE Hackberry Emperor oodies PHOTO : Megan McCarty W Double-toothed Prominent Honey locust Moth caterpillar Hackberry Emperor larva PHOTO : Douglas Tallamy Big Poplar Sphinx Number of species of Caterpillars n a study published in 2009, Dr. Oaks (Quercus) 557 Beeches (Fagus) 127 Honey-locusts (Gleditsia) 46 Magnolias (Magnolia) 21 Double-toothed Prominent ( Nerice IDouglas W. Tallamy, Ph.D, chair of the Cherries (Prunus) 456 Serviceberry (Amelanchier) 124 New Jersey Tea (Ceanothus) 45 Buttonbush (Cephalanthus) 19 bidentata ) larvae feed exclusively on elms Department of Entomology and Wildlife Willows (Salix) 455 Larches or Tamaracks (Larix) 121 Sycamores (Platanus) 45 Redbuds (Cercis) 19 (Ulmus), and can be found June through Ecology at the University of Delaware Birches (Betula) 411 Dogwoods (Cornus) 118 Huckleberry (Gaylussacia) 44 Green-briar (Smilax) 19 October. Their body shape mimics the specifically addressed the usefulness of Poplars (Populus) 367 Firs (Abies) 117 Hackberry (Celtis) 43 Wisterias (Wisteria) 19 toothed shape of American elm, making native woodies as host plants for our Crabapples (Malus) 308 Bayberries (Myrica) 108 Junipers (Juniperus) 42 Redbay (native) (Persea) 18 them hard to spot. The adult moth is native caterpillars (and obviously Maples (Acer) 297 Viburnums (Viburnum) 104 Elders (Sambucus) 42 Bearberry (Arctostaphylos) 17 small with a wingspan of 3-4 cm. therefore moths and butterflies). Blueberries (Vaccinium) 294 Currants (Ribes) 99 Ninebark (Physocarpus) 41 Bald cypresses (Taxodium) 16 We present here a partial list, and the Alders (Alnus) 255 Hop Hornbeam (Ostrya) 94 Lilacs (Syringa) 40 Leatherleaf (Chamaedaphne) 15 Honey locust caterpillar feeds on honey number of Lepidopteran species that rely Hickories (Carya) 235 Hemlocks (Tsuga) 92 Hollies (Ilex) 39 Poison Ivy (Toxicodendron) 15 locust, and Kentucky coffee trees. -
Invasive Trees of Georgia Pub10-14
Pub. No. 39 October 2016 Invasive Trees of Georgia by Dr. Kim D. Coder, Professor of Tree Biology & Health Care Warnell School of Forestry & Natural Resources, University of Georgia Georgia has many species of trees. Some are native trees and some have been introduced from outside the state, nation, or continent. Most of Georgia’s trees are well- behaved and easily develop into sustainable shade and street trees. A few tree species have an extrodinary ability to upsurp resources and take over sites from other plants. These trees are called invasive because they effectively invade sites, many times eliminat- ing other species of plants. There are a few tree species native to Georgia which are considered invasive in other parts of the country. These native invasives, may be well-behaved in Georgia, but reproduce and take over sites elsewhere, and so have gained an invasive status from at least one other invasive species list. Table 1. There are hundreds of trees which have been introduced to Georgia landscapes. Some of these exotic / naturalized trees are considered invasive. The selected list of Georgia invasive trees listed here are notorious for growing rampantly and being difficult to eradicate. Table 2. Table 1: Native trees considered invasive in other parts of the country. scientific name common name scientific name common name Acacia farnesiana sweet acacia Myrica cerifera Southern bayberry Acer negundo boxelder Pinus taeda loblolly pine Acer rubrum red maple Populus deltoides Eastern cottonwood Fraxinus americana white ash Prunus serotina black cherry Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Robinia pseudoacacia black locust Gleditsia triacanthos honeylocust Toxicodendron vernix poison sumac Juniperus virginiana eastern redcedar The University of Georgia is committed to principles of equal opportunity and affirmative action. -
In China: Phylogeny, Host Range, and Pathogenicity
Persoonia 45, 2020: 101–131 ISSN (Online) 1878-9080 www.ingentaconnect.com/content/nhn/pimj RESEARCH ARTICLE https://doi.org/10.3767/persoonia.2020.45.04 Cryphonectriaceae on Myrtales in China: phylogeny, host range, and pathogenicity W. Wang1,2, G.Q. Li1, Q.L. Liu1, S.F. Chen1,2 Key words Abstract Plantation-grown Eucalyptus (Myrtaceae) and other trees residing in the Myrtales have been widely planted in southern China. These fungal pathogens include species of Cryphonectriaceae that are well-known to cause stem Eucalyptus and branch canker disease on Myrtales trees. During recent disease surveys in southern China, sporocarps with fungal pathogen typical characteristics of Cryphonectriaceae were observed on the surfaces of cankers on the stems and branches host jump of Myrtales trees. In this study, a total of 164 Cryphonectriaceae isolates were identified based on comparisons of Myrtaceae DNA sequences of the partial conserved nuclear large subunit (LSU) ribosomal DNA, internal transcribed spacer new taxa (ITS) regions including the 5.8S gene of the ribosomal DNA operon, two regions of the β-tubulin (tub2/tub1) gene, plantation forestry and the translation elongation factor 1-alpha (tef1) gene region, as well as their morphological characteristics. The results showed that eight species reside in four genera of Cryphonectriaceae occurring on the genera Eucalyptus, Melastoma (Melastomataceae), Psidium (Myrtaceae), Syzygium (Myrtaceae), and Terminalia (Combretaceae) in Myrtales. These fungal species include Chrysoporthe deuterocubensis, Celoporthe syzygii, Cel. eucalypti, Cel. guang dongensis, Cel. cerciana, a new genus and two new species, as well as one new species of Aurifilum. These new taxa are hereby described as Parvosmorbus gen. -
Field Instructions for The
FIELD INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE INVENTORY OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS 2013 Hawaii Edition Forest Inventory and Analysis Program Pacific Northwest Research Station USDA Forest Service THIS MANUAL IS BASED ON: FOREST INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS NATIONAL CORE FIELD GUIDE FIELD DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES FOR PHASE 2 PLOTS VERSION 5.1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 PURPOSES OF THIS MANUAL ................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 ORGANIZATION OF THIS MANUAL .......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2.1 UNITS OF MEASURE ................................................................................................................................................................. 2 1.2.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................................................................ 2 1.2.3 PLOT SETUP .............................................................................................................................................................................. 3 1.2.4 PLOT INTEGRITY ...................................................................................................................................................................... -
100 of the World's Worst Invasive Alien Species
100 OF THE WORLD’S WORST INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES A SELECTION FROM THE GLOBAL INVASIVE SPECIES DATABASE Published by Contribution to the Global Invasive Species Programme (GISP) In Association with SPECIES SURVIVAL COMMISSION Citation Lowe S., Browne M., Boudjelas S., De Poorter M. (2000) 100 of the World’s Worst Invasive Alien Species A selection from the Global Invasive Species Database. Published by The Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG) a specialist group of the Species Survival Commission (SSC) of the World Conservation Union (IUCN), 12pp. First published as special lift-out in Aliens 12, December 2000. Updated and reprinted version: November 2004. Electronic version available at: www.issg.org/booklet.pdf For information, or copies of the booklet in English, French or Spanish, please contact: ISSG Office: School of Geogra- phy and Environmental Sciences (SGES) University of Auckland (Tamaki Campus) Private Bag 92019 Auckland, New Zealand Phone: #64 9 3737 599 x85210 Fax: #64 9 3737 042 E-mail: [email protected] Development of the 100 of the World’s Worst Invasive Alien Spe- cies list has been made possible by Cover image: Brown tree snake the support of the Fondation (Boiga irregularis). d’Entreprise TOTAL (1998 - 2000). Photo: Gordon Rodda Printed in New Zealand by: Hollands Printing Ltd Contact: Otto van Gulik Email: [email protected] 2 Biological Invasion What happens when a species is in- The list of “100 of the World’s precedented rate. A number of the troduced into an ecosystem where Worst Invasive Alien Species” in invasive alien species featured in it doesn’t occur naturally? Are eco- this booklet illustrates the incred- this booklet are contributing to systems flexible and able to cope ible variety of species that have the these losses. -
Georgia Native Trees Considered Invasive in Other Parts of the Country. Scientific Name Common Name Scientific Name Common Name
Invasive Trees of Georgia Dr. Kim D. Coder, Professor of Tree Biology & Health Care, Warnell School, UGA Georgia has many species of trees. Some are native trees and some have been introduced from outside the state, nation, or continent. Most of Georgia’s trees are well-behaved and easily develop into sustainable shade and street trees. A few tree species have an extrodinary ability to upsurp resources and take over sites from other plants. These trees are called invasive because they effectively invade sites, many times eliminating other species of plants. There are a few tree species native to Georgia which are considered invasive in other parts of the country. These native invasives, may be well-behaved in Georgia, but reproduce and take over sites elsewhere, and so have gained an invasive status from at least one other invasive species list. Table 1. There are hundreds of trees which have been introduced to Georgia landscapes. Some of these exotic / naturalized trees are considered invasive. The selected list of Georgia invasive trees listed here are notorious for growing rampantly and being diffi- cult to eradicate. Table 2. They should not be planted. Table 1: Georgia native trees considered invasive in other parts of the country. scientific name common name scientific name common name Acacia farnesiana sweet acacia Myrica cerifera Southern bayberry Acer negundo boxelder Pinus taeda loblolly pine Acer rubrum red maple Populus deltoides Eastern Fraxinus americana white ash cottonwood Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Prunus serotina black cherry Gleditsia triacanthos honeylocust Robinia pseudoacacia black locust Juniperus virginiana eastern Toxicodendron vernix poison sumac redcedar Table 2: Introduced (exotic) tree / shrub species found in Georgia listed at a regional / national level as being ecologically invasive. -
Antimicrobial Properties of Traditional Brewing Herbs
ANTIMICROBIAL PROPERTIES OF TRADITIONAL BREWING HERBS - Ledum palustre, Myrica gale & Humulus lupulus Gordon Virgo Project work in Ethnobiology 15 hp, 2010 Evolutionary Biology Centre (EBC) Supervisor: Hugo J. de Boer ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my supervisor Hugo de Boer for encouragement and his excellent input to this project. Thanks to Stallhagen Brewery and Marcus Lindborg for providing material and literature. Also, I would like to thank Stefan Roos at SLU and Marianne Svarvare for guidance and technique. ABSTRACT In this study, three different brewing herbs that have been used through the history are evaluated as inhibitors of common beer spoilage organisms. The three species are Ledum palustre (Marsh Tea), Myrica gale (Bog Myrtle) and Humulus lupulus (Hops). Experimental batches of 10 L were made with all the three herbs and one without any additives. For each herb, two batches were made with different concentration, one batch with 3g/L and the other with 6g/L. All batches were treated the same and fermentation pattern for all of them were similar. Inoculations of four common beer spoilage organisms were practiced in order to examine microbial resistance of the different beers. Antibacterial activity was analyzed by membrane filtration and by measure the optical density during the incubation time. Both Humulus lupulus and Myrica gale showed clear resistance to the three gram-positive bacteria. 1 INTRODUCTION Throughout history, several different plant species have been used as beer additives for flavour and above all as preservatives. Particularly two species, Myrica gale and Humulus lupulus were widely used as beer additives in Europe (Behre 1999). -
Invasive Alien Species in Protected Areas
INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES AND PROTECTED AREAS A SCOPING REPORT Produced for the World Bank as a contribution to the Global Invasive Species Programme (GISP) March 2007 PART I SCOPING THE SCALE AND NATURE OF INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES THREATS TO PROTECTED AREAS, IMPEDIMENTS TO IAS MANAGEMENT AND MEANS TO ADDRESS THOSE IMPEDIMENTS. Produced by Maj De Poorter (Invasive Species Specialist Group of the Species Survival Commission of IUCN - The World Conservation Union) with additional material by Syama Pagad (Invasive Species Specialist Group of the Species Survival Commission of IUCN - The World Conservation Union) and Mohammed Irfan Ullah (Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment, Bangalore, India, [email protected]) Disclaimer: the designation of geographical entities in this report does not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IUCN, ISSG, GISP (or its Partners) or the World Bank, concerning the legal status of any country, territory or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delineation of its frontiers or boundaries. 1 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...........................................................................................4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................................................................................6 GLOSSARY ..................................................................................................................9 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................12 1.1 Invasive alien -
Seed Dispersal and Propagation of Three Myrica Species
Of Birds and Bayberries : Alfred j. Fordham Seed Dispersal and Propagation of Three Myrica Species The genus Myrica comprises about 50 tral United States and from Europe to north- species (often ill-defined) distributed east Asia. throughout the temperate and subtropical All three of these species have nitrogen- areas of both hemispheres. The Arnold Ar- fixing root nodules, which enable them to boretum collection includes three species: thrive m areas where many other plants M. pensylvanica, M. cerifera, andM. gale. could not survive. They are dioecious - Myrica pensylvanica Lois., the common having staminate (male) and pistillate (fe- bayberry or candleberry, occurs naturally male) flowers on different plants - like hol- from Newfoundland to western New York lies and ashes. and Maryland, chiefly in poor soil. It is suck- The fruits of Myrica pensylvanica and M. ering in habit and tends to form shrubby cerifera are small (2.5-3 mm and 3.5~.5 mm clumps, which at maturity can range from 2 in diameter respectively) globose nuts with to 8 feet in height. Frequently it is found on waxlike coatings. It is this waxlike material roadside cuts, railroad banks, gravel pits, and that provides the fragrance in bayberry- other locations where topsoil has been re- scented candles and soap. It becomes bluish moved completely. In Boston its shiny green gray as it dries, making the thickly clustered leaves remain on the branches until No- fruits conspicuous in the landscape. The vember. They are fragrant when crushed, a fruits ripen in late September and are eaten characteristic of all Myrica species. -
Exotic Species and Temporal Variation in Hawaiian Floral Visitation Networks
Exotic Species and Temporal Variation in Hawaiian Floral Visitation Networks By Jennifer Lynn Imamura A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Environmental Science, Policy, and Management in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor George Roderick, Chair Professor Claire Kremen Professor Bruce Baldwin Spring 2019 Abstract Exotic Species and Temporal Variation in Hawaiian Floral Visitation Networks by Jennifer Lynn Imamura Doctor of Philosophy in Environmental Science, Policy, and Management University of California, Berkeley Professor George Roderick, Chair Many studies have documented the negative impact of invasive species on populations, communities, and ecosystems, although most have focused solely on antagonistic rather than mutualistic interactions. For mutualistic interactions, such as pollination, a key to understanding their impacts is how invasive species interact with native species and alter interaction networks. Chapter 1 explores the impacts of invasive species on islands, particularly in regard to plants, pollinators, and how these exotic species attach to existing pollination interaction networks. Island pollination networks differ from mainland counterparts in several important characteristics, including fewer species, more connectance, and increased vulnerability to both invasion and extinction. A progression of invasion has been previously proposed, through which supergeneralist native species -
Myrica Cerifera Southern Waxmyrtle1 Edward F
Fact Sheet ST-410 October 1994 Myrica cerifera Southern Waxmyrtle1 Edward F. Gilman and Dennis G. Watson2 INTRODUCTION Multiple, twisted trunks with smooth, light grey bark, aromatic, olive green leaves, and clusters of grey-blue, waxy berries on female plants which are attractive to wildlife are just some of the reasons Southern Waxmyrtle is such a popular landscape plant (Fig. 1). Most specimens form a multi-stemmed, open, rounded canopy of weak trunks and branches. This rapidly-growing, small, evergreen native tree is capable of reaching a height of 25 feet with an equal spread but is usually seen in the 10 to 20-foot range. Sometimes used as a large shrubbery screen, Southern Waxmyrtle is ideal for use as a small tree, the lower limbs removed to reveal its picturesque form. One, or several clustered together, provide pleasing dappled shade for terraces or patios. Figure 1. Middle-aged Southern Waxmyrtle. GENERAL INFORMATION standard; small parking lot islands (< 100 square feet Scientific name: Myrica cerifera in size); narrow tree lawns (3-4 feet wide); specimen; Pronunciation: MEER-ih-kuh ser-IF-er-uh sidewalk cutout (tree pit); residential street tree; no Common name(s): Southern Waxmyrtle, Southern proven urban tolerance Bayberry Availability: generally available in many areas within Family: Myricaceae its hardiness range USDA hardiness zones: 7B through 11 (Fig. 2) Origin: native to North America DESCRIPTION Uses: Bonsai; container or above-ground planter; hedge; large parking lot islands (> 200 square feet in Height: 15 to 25 feet size); wide tree lawns (>6 feet wide); medium-sized Spread: 20 to 25 feet parking lot islands (100-200 square feet in size); Crown uniformity: irregular outline or silhouette medium-sized tree lawns (4-6 feet wide); Crown shape: round; vase shape recommended for buffer strips around parking lots or Crown density: moderate for median strip plantings in the highway; near a deck Growth rate: fast or patio; reclamation plant; screen; trainable as a 1. -
Effects of Distance from Invasive Lythrum Salicaria On
EFFECTS OF DISTANCE FROM INVASIVE LYTHRUM SALICARIA ON POLLINATOR VISITATION RATE AND REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS IN NATIVE LYTHRUM ALATUM A Thesis Presented to The Graduate Faculty of The University of Akron In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science Anthony Steven Kinyo August, 2005 EFFECTS OF DISTANCE FROM INVASIVE LYTHRUM SALICARIA ON POLLINATOR VISITATION RATE AND REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS IN NATIVE LYTHRUM ALATUM Anthony Kinyo Thesis Approved: Accepted: ______________________________ _____________________________ Advisor Department Chair Dr. Randall J. Mitchell ______________________________ ______________________________ Committee Member Dean of the College Dr. Stephen C. Weeks Dr. Charles B. Monroe ______________________________ ______________________________ Committee Member Dean of the Graduate School Dr. Peter H. Niewiarowski Dr. George R. Newkome ______________________________ Date ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Numerous people have helped me during this project and I could not have completed the research without all of their generous support. I would like to begin by thanking Dr. Randy Mitchell for his constant enthusiasm and positive encouragement throughout the research process. Thanks Randy, you have helped me to become a better scientist and researcher and I appreciate all that you have done for me. I would also like to thank my committee members Dr. Steve Weeks and Dr. Peter Niewiarowski, who provided feedback and assistance throughout the research process. Next, I would like to the Cuyahoga Valley National Park, Summit County Metroparks, and Ottawa National Wildlife Refuge for allowing me to pursue my research on their land. The University of Akron Biology Department provided financial assistance. Robert Jean, Donald Webb, Martin Hauser, and John Ascher deserve thanks for helping me to identify the numerous pollinators collected during the experiment.