DOCSLIB.ORG

Introduction and Description of the Wetland Ecosystem

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

THE WETLANDS OF DANE COUNTY, WISCONSIN Prepared by Barbara L. Bedford Elizabeth H. Zimmerman James H. Zimmerman for the Dane County Regional Planning Commission in cooperation with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources The preparation of this document was financially aided through a federal grant from the Department of Housing and Urban Develop- ment through the Urban Planning Assistance Program authorized by Section 701 of the Housing Act of 1954, as amended; and by funds from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources through the Outdoor Recreation Aids Progr'm (ORAP) and other Department of Natural Resources funds. COMMISSION Richard Pire, Chairman Merton Walter, Vice Chairman Fred Raemisch, Secretary Sanford Anderson, Treasurer Robert Ballweg Walter Bauman Carl Jensen William Lunney Marilyn Slautterback Mary Louise Symon Ole Week STAFF Charles Montemayor, Executive Director Thomas Brant, Deputy Director C. M. Tabaka, Director of Land Use Planning Thomas Favour, Director of Transportation Planning William Lane, Director of Environmental Resources Planning Thomas Smiley, Director of Community Services Louise Smoczynski, Administrative Assistant Shirley Ruhland, Clerk Steno IV James Steffenhagen, Graphics Chief WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES CONTRIBUTING STAFF Clifford L. Brynildson David A. Gjestson Ruth L. Hine Earl Loyster Allan J. Rusch Harry Stroebe, Jr. Donald R. Thompson Charles Wahtola Scientific Areas Preservation Council PREFACE The present survey of Dane County wetlands was undertaken with several goals in mind. Existing wetland surveys, although useful in a general sense, do not provide the information and detail needed to carry out modern wetland protection policies. A shift is being made in many states, including Wisconsin, toward inventorying with black and white, color, and various types of infrared photography from airplanes and satellites. However, this type of survey, useful as it is fox locating and delineating wetlands, requires backup studies on the ground to aid in the interpretation of vegetative cover and to add in- formation of other types. Water quality, rare plant communities, and wildlife use fall into the category of valuable additional information. This study will hopefully aid in inventory and interpretation by indicating what information is readily obtain- able in the field. In this survey, our emphasis has not been on identifying and delineating wetland areas in the manner of a general inventory. Instead, it has been on the wetland, surrounding upland, and watershed relationships as a unit, as is necessary for management planning. Each wetland was considered for its unique qualities. Hopefully, this approach will he found useful by the State of Wisconsin in conjunction with its planned photographic de- lineation of wetlands. We hope that the results of the present survey will be used by all in Dane County who have responsibility or concern with the future of its wetlands. This report has been aimed at planners, policymakers, landowners, students of the wetland ecosystem, conservationists, and the interested public. It was felt necessary to give enough background material in the intro- duction so that those not familiar with wetland ecology could understand the descriptions and management suggestions. Although our sources of technical information were many, we were unable to cover all which might have proved to be of importance. We take full responsibility for all errors and omissions, and hope that readers will not hesitate to call them to our attention. F'inally, the Dane County wetland survey was a pilot study on techniques of making such inventories in the future. We have learned a great deal concerning how such a survey could have been organized and carried out more efficiently, as well as some improvements in technique that could be made in the future. It is our hope that others undertaking wetland surveys, in Wisconsin and elsewhere, will benefit from studying the re- sults of this one. If any valuable wetlands anywhere axe pro- tected as a result of this work, we will feel our effort has been many times repayed. iii We are grateful to the many people without whose assistance this survey would have been difficult if not impossible to carry out. Foremost among these are the present and former commissioners and the staff members of the Dane County Regional Planning Corn- mission, who showed great patience and cooperation, and whose technical assistance made it possible for this report to appear in print. Information, assistance, and advice came from many people. Both knowledge and inspiration were gained from contact with them. Much of the field work was done with the assistance and companionship of Paul Putzer, Don Samuelsen, and Robert Werner. Their contributions were basic to the completion of the work. Clifford E. Germain, William Tans, and Robert H. Read of the Wisconsin Scientific Areas Preservation council provided information and field assistance. More importantly, they other- wise reinforced our efforts by their example, dedication, and good will. Of his storehouse of accumulated knowledge and experience, Earl Loyster of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources gave freely. Other members of the staff of the Department, most notably Donald R. Thompson and David Gjestson, were likewise generous in supplying information on state-owned wetlands. Dr. Lutz Bayer assisted in the identification of certain aquatic invertebrates. Dr. Frank A. Iwen, Dr. William G. Reeder, and Richard Vogt provided information on invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles, and small mammals and supervised field shpling'of . selected Dane County wetlands. Jeffrey Burns conducted bird surveys of selected wetland areas. Some of the last minute field checking was done by Michael John Jaeger, who also shared with us his knowledge of ephemeral ponds in north central Dane County. For calling particular wetland areas to our attention and contributing to us their own personal knowledge of them, we are grateful to Dr. Calvin B. DeWitt, Rosemary Fleming, Robert Friedman, Scott Huston, Harriet Irwin, Lu Severson, Maarit Threlfall, and Jonathan Wilde. Jerome Seljan, Carl Guell, and Molly Fifield were kind enough to make several trips into the field to assist with photographic work. Dr. ~anielE. Willard reviewed portions of the manuscript and clarified certain ideas by refusing to accept a general statement. Dr. Gerhard B. Lee was most helpful in reviewing the section on wetland soils and making numerous suggestions. The Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service of the U.S.D.A. kindly lent us their aerial photographs, which we realized too late we should have purchased, and waited patiently for their return. We hope any inconvenience caused to the public will be repayed by the publication of wetland maps for their use. PART I INTRODUCTION In order to live a full and healthy life, man needs a healthy environment, Man has evolved dependent on his physical and bio- logical world; it has shaped him both physically and psychologically. Wetlands are a basic part of this natural heritage. All life arose in the water. Shallow seas, lakes, streams, and wetlands played a vital part in evolution. Our vertebrate an- cestors came onto dry land from habitats not unlike our present wetlands. We are still biologically tied to the water, as are the life forms around us. We live in a time of greater and faster change in the environ- ment than has ever occurred before during the existence of man. Even the glaciers did not affect so many habitats so fast, nor did they have the worldwide scope of human impact. By our numbers and sophisticated activities, we have become a geological force. According to whim, we can reroute rivers, cause deserts to bloom, render forests into desert, even redesign the topography altogether. Most of our activities have been undertaken without regard to biological results. Wetlands have suffered their share of devas- tation, through flooding, drainage, filling, and many subtler means. Until recently, little attention has been paid to their value. At this point in time, there is a new awareness of the con- sequences of our activities. This comes none too soon, as our growing population and technology are causing ever more rapid and irreversible destruction of natural resources. Decisions are now being made which will affect land use for decades or centuries to come. Our success in sustaining and restoring the natural environ- ment depends on planning, and planning depends on knowledge. A new emphasis is, therefore, being made on gathering knowledge, from detailed analysis of single species to vegetation studies from satellites. The results of these studies will be used in two ways: to make an inventory of existing natural areas and problem areas; and to understand better the physical and bio- logical processes in the environment. Both types of knowledge are essential to planning. VALUES OF WETLANDS Wetlands contribute to a healthy environment in several ways. They affect the quantity and quality of water. They act to retain water during dry periods and hold it back during floods, thus keeping the water table high and relatively stable. Aquatic plants use nutrients in the water, storing it as peat after they die. Silt settles as water flow is slowed by the stems of emergent plants. Removal of wetlands causes faster runoff of dirtier water. Because they collect and hold water and other materials, their condition can be used to indicate problems on the surrounding upland. Biological benefits include feeding, breeding, and drinking areas needed by all animals, and stopping places and refuge for waterfowl (for thorough discussions of waterfowl use of Wisconsin wetlands, see Jahn and Hunt,,1964, and March et al, 1973). The presence of water is also atcractive to many upland birds and animals, During the winter, wetlands with springs provide needed open water. Due to glacial action and shapes of water- courses, wetlands often occur in groups or corridors. This arrangement is an additional attraction to wildlife, since a wetland complex provides a larger region to move about in.
Recommended publications
  • Birds of the Nova Scotia— New Brunswick Border Region by George F

    Birds of the Nova Scotia— New Brunswick Border Region by George F

    Birds of the Nova Scotia— New Brunswick border region by George F. Boyer Occasional Paper Number 8 Second edition Canadian Wildlife Service Environment Canada Environnement Canada Wildlife Service Service de la Faune Birds of the Nova Scotia - New Brunswick border region by George F. Boyer With addendum by A. J. Erskine and A. D. Smith Canadian Wildlife Service Occasional Paper Number 8 Second edition Issued under the authority of the Honourable Jack Davis, PC, MP Minister of the Environment John S. Tener, Director Canadian Wildlife Service 5 Information Canada, Ottawa, 1972 Catalogue No. CW69-1/8 First edition 1966 Design: Gottschalk-)-Ash Ltd. 4 George Boyer banding a barn swallow in June 1952. The author George Boyer was born in Woodstock, New Brunswick, on August 24, 1916. He graduated in Forestry from the University of New Brunswick in 1938 and served with the Canadian Army from 1939 to 1945. He joined the Canadian Wildlife Service in 1947, and worked out of the Sackville office until 1956. During that time he obtained an M.S. in zoology from the University of Illinois. He car­ ried on private research from April 1956 until July 1957, when he rejoined CWS. He worked out of Maple, Ontario, until his death, while on a field trip near Aultsville. While at Sackville, Mr. Boyer worked chiefly on waterfowl of the Nova Scotia-New Brunswick border region, with special emphasis on Pintails and Black Ducks. He also studied merganser- salmon interrelationships on the Miramichi River system, Woodcock, and the effects on bird popu­ lations of spruce budworm control spraying in the Upsalquitch area.
  • Effects of Age on Hummock Succession in Bogs

    Effects of Age on Hummock Succession in Bogs

    Effects of age on hummock succession in bogs By Joel Vallier Abstract Ecological succession is the change in communities over time. We chose to study the successional stages of hummocks in a bog using age. We hypothesized that hummock plant richness should increase then decrease with age because of successional flora species mixing. We also hypothesized that hummock density, and hummock size will increase with age. Our study site was a bog at Mud Lake located in Cheboygan County, Michigan. We set up two 100 meter transects, divided them into zones based on age then recorded hummock surface area and hummock density. Plant richness was also recorded. There was a significant difference in plant richness with hummock age but only when surface area was used a covariant. Surface area was not significantly different among different aged zones. Hummock density did not have any correlation with age. Places were successional flora species mixed provided more plant richness and also showed trends of higher surface area. The tree line altered our results in the youngest zones because it had late successional species mixed with early successional species. This gave one of our youngest zones the highest plant richness. This shows that trends exist between hummock size, and plant richness but the surrounding morphology has a large impact. Introduction Succession within an ecological community is the change in species composition over time. This can change the biodiversity of the environment by altering conditions making it more adaptable by other species (Katz, 1926). This can be seen in the classic hydrosere succession model, where infilling of a shallow lake by sediments produces a sequential trend of vegetation communities staring with marsh shrub and moss species and ending with climax forests composed mostly of woody species (Klinger, 1996).
  • Chapter 5: Vegetation of Sphagnum-Dominated Peatlands

    Chapter 5: Vegetation of Sphagnum-Dominated Peatlands

    CHAPTER 5: VEGETATION OF SPHAGNUM-DOMINATED PEATLANDS As discussed in the previous chapters, peatland ecosystems have unique chemical, physical, and biological properties that have given rise to equally unique plant communities. As indicated in Chapter 1, extensive literature exists on the classification, description, and ecology of peatland ecosystems in Europe, the northeastern United States, Canada, and the Rocky Mountains. In addition to the references cited in Chapter 1, there is some other relatively recent literature on peatlands (Verhoeven 1992; Heinselman 1963, 1970; Chadde et al., 1998). Except for efforts on the classification and ecology of peatlands in British Columbia by the National Wetlands Working Group (1988), the Burns Bog Ecosystem Review (Hebda et al. 2000), and the preliminary classification of native, low elevation, freshwater vegetation in western Washington (Kunze 1994), scant information exists on peatlands within the more temperate lowland or maritime climates of the Pacific Northwest (Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia). 5.1 Introduction There are a number of classification schemes and many different peatland types, but most use vegetation in addition to hydrology, chemistry and topological characteristics to differentiate among peatlands. The subject of this report are acidic peatlands that support acidophilic (acid-loving) and xerophytic vegetation, such as Sphagnum mosses and ericaceous shrubs. Ecosystems in Washington state appear to represent a mosaic of vegetation communities at various stages of succession and are herein referred to collectively as Sphagnum-dominated peatlands. Although there has been some recognition of the unique ecological and societal values of peatlands in Washington, a statewide classification scheme has not been formally adopted or widely recognized in the scientific community.
  • New Records of the Diatoms (Bacillariophyceae) from the Coastal Lagoons in Korea

    New Records of the Diatoms (Bacillariophyceae) from the Coastal Lagoons in Korea

    Journal of Marine Science and Engineering Article New Records of the Diatoms (Bacillariophyceae) from the Coastal Lagoons in Korea Daeryul Kwon 1 , Mirye Park 1 , Chang Soo Lee 1, Chaehong Park 2 and Sang Deuk Lee 3,* 1 Protist Research Team, Microbial Research Department, Nakdonggang National Institute of Biological Resources (NNIBR), 137, Donam 2-gil, Sangju-si 37182, Korea; [email protected] (D.K.); [email protected] (M.P.); [email protected] (C.S.L.) 2 Human and Eco-Care Center, Konkuk University, Seoul 05029, Korea; [email protected] 3 Bioresources Collection & Research Team, Bioresources Collection & Bioinformation Department, Nakdonggang National Institute of Biological Resources (NNIBR), 137, Donam 2-gil, Sangju-si 37182, Korea * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +82-54-530-0898; Fax: +82-54-530-0899 Abstract: Lagoons are natural bodies of water that are isolated from the sea due to the develop- ment of a sand bar or spit. Each lagoon has distinct ecological characteristics, and these sites also serve as popular tourist attractions because they are common habitats for migratory birds and are characterized by beautiful natural scenery. Lagoons also have distinct ecological characteristics from those of their associated estuaries, and there are active research efforts to classify, qualify, and quantify the high biodiversity of lagoons. The lagoons in Korea are primarily distributed in the East Sea, and are represented by Hwajinpo, Yeongrangho, and Gyeongpoho. Here, we report the discovery of 11 unrecorded diatom species (Diploneis didyma, Mastogloia elliptica, Cosmioneis citriformis, Haslea crucigera, Pinnularia bertrandii, Pinnularia nodosa var. percapitata, Gyrosigma sinense, Gomphonema guaraniarum, Gomphonema italicum, Navicula freesei, Trybionella littoralis var.
  • The Mangal of Sinai: Limits of an Ecosystem

    The Mangal of Sinai: Limits of an Ecosystem

    Helgoi~nder wiss. Meeresunters. 30, 295-314 (1977) The mangal of Sinai: Limits of an ecosystem F. D. PoR 1, I. DOR 2 & A. AMIR 2 1 Department of Zoology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Jerusalem, Israel, and 2 Oceanography Program, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Jerusalem, Israel ABSTRACT: The northernmost mangrove forests of the Red Sea are described. Temperature and salinity conditions were found to be extreme, obviously reducing the diversity of the ecosystem and presumably setting the geographical limits of its distribution. The Sinai mangal grows on hard fossil coral bottom, without any influence of estuarine sedimentation. Primary production of the open Red Sea waters is extremely low, therefore, the rich biomass of the Sinai mangal is built up by an autarkic nutrient recycling system. Several biotic zones within the Sinai mangal are described following an inshore-offshore transect. Vertical zonation of algae and animals on the aerial roots of Avicennia is discussed. The Sinai mangal, "Shura" by its local name, is proposed as an ideal model for the study of trophic relations within the mangrove biome. INTRODUCTION The mangrove forests or "mangal" (MacNae, 1968) are a typical life community of the tropical shores. Although equal in importance to coral reefs, as far as fre- quency is concerned, mangrove forests have been little studied as integral ecosystems. Much has been written about the phytosociology of the mangrove trees, but studies including also algal and animal associates are rare (Walsh, 1974). The Sinai mangrove was first mentioned by Ascherson (1887) and the mangroves of the Egyptian African coast by Kassas & Zahran (i967).
  • Glossary of Landscape and Vegetation Ecology for Alaska

    Glossary of Landscape and Vegetation Ecology for Alaska

    U. S. Department of the Interior BLM-Alaska Technical Report to Bureau of Land Management BLM/AK/TR-84/1 O December' 1984 reprinted October.·2001 Alaska State Office 222 West 7th Avenue, #13 Anchorage, Alaska 99513 Glossary of Landscape and Vegetation Ecology for Alaska Herman W. Gabriel and Stephen S. Talbot The Authors HERMAN w. GABRIEL is an ecologist with the USDI Bureau of Land Management, Alaska State Office in Anchorage, Alaskao He holds a B.S. degree from Virginia Polytechnic Institute and a Ph.D from the University of Montanao From 1956 to 1961 he was a forest inventory specialist with the USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Regiono In 1966-67 he served as an inventory expert with UN-FAO in Ecuador. Dra Gabriel moved to Alaska in 1971 where his interest in the description and classification of vegetation has continued. STEPHEN Sa TALBOT was, when work began on this glossary, an ecologist with the USDI Bureau of Land Management, Alaska State Office. He holds a B.A. degree from Bates College, an M.Ao from the University of Massachusetts, and a Ph.D from the University of Alberta. His experience with northern vegetation includes three years as a research scientist with the Canadian Forestry Service in the Northwest Territories before moving to Alaska in 1978 as a botanist with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. or. Talbot is now a general biologist with the USDI Fish and Wildlife Service, Refuge Division, Anchorage, where he is conducting baseline studies of the vegetation of national wildlife refuges. ' . Glossary of Landscape and Vegetation Ecology for Alaska Herman W.
  • Wetland Information for Southern Alaska: Wetland Environmental Indicators, Bibliography, and Wetland Communities

    Wetland Information for Southern Alaska: Wetland Environmental Indicators, Bibliography, and Wetland Communities

    WETLAND INFORMATION FOR SOUTHERN ALASKA: WETLAND ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS, BIBLIOGRAPHY, AND WETLAND COMMUNITIES By Keith Boggs, Susan Klein, Gerald Tande, Julie Michaelson and Julia Lenz ALASKA NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM Environment and Natural Resources Institute University of Alaska Anchorage 707 A Street, Anchorage, Alaska 99501 for the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Alaska Operations Office 222 W 7th Ave. Anchorage, Alaska November 1998 1 ABSTRACT The purpose of this project was to provide State and Federal land managers and environmental regulators information that could be applied to evaluating wetland degradation. The development of ‘hydrogeomorphic functional profiles’ and other wetland evaluation methods depend on understanding the response of wetlands to human disturbance. To address this need, this project provides descriptions of the response of wetlands to human disturbance, a list of wetland community types, and a bibliography of wetland literature for southeast-, southcentral- and southwest-Alaska. The wetland communities provide the baseline information needed for describing non-degraded wetland systems for Alaska. Wetland community classifications are developed by land management and regulatory agencies concerned with wetland issues. They are based on ground sampling of vegetation, soils, landform, and other wetland characteristics. Approximately 563 communities were listed during the literature review. Our findings show that there is substantial vegetation-based information available for describing non- degraded wetlands. A complete bibliography of wetland literature within southern Alaska was developed by searching on various library and government computer databases and contacting individuals working in the field. The search topics included rapid ecological assessment, disturbance, pollution, community types, ecosystem studies, biodiversity, hydrology, soils and vegetation. The results were entered into a database that is maintained by The Nature Conservancy and State Heritage Programs.
  • The Vegetation of the Coastal Region of Suriname. Results of the Scientific Expedition to Suriname 1948—49 Botanical Series No

    The Vegetation of the Coastal Region of Suriname. Results of the Scientific Expedition to Suriname 1948—49 Botanical Series No

    The vegetation of the Coastal Region of Suriname. Results of the scientific expedition to Suriname 1948—49 botanical series No. 1 by J.C. Lindeman (Utrecht) CONTENTS GENERAL PART CHAPTER I. Introduction. 1 ....... Literature 2 Methods 5 ......... Terminology 7 ......... Vernacular 9 names ........ Value of vernacular names 12 The soil. 14 .......... The climate 18 CHAPTER II. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS 21 General remarks 21 Difficulties with herbaceous vegetation; illumination effects. 22 results 25 Interpretation ........ and 25 Mangrove swamps ....... Savannas 26 ......... Forests 27 SPECIAL PART CHAPTER III. DESCRIPTION OF THE LANDSCAPE IN THE INVESTIGATED AREAS 28 I. Wia- Transect from Moengo tapoe to the ‘Wiawiabank’ or wia flat 28 The saline coastal belt 29 . articulatus and Machaerium Typha-Cyperus swamp lunatum scrub 31 ........ Third to sixth with Cereus wood ridge , . 31 . Leersia hexandra and 32 swamps Erythrina glauca groves . Second series of ridges and 33 Cyperus giganteus swamps . The old ridges beyond km 9.5 34 II The 35 swaying swamps ....... The oldest and the savannas 37 ridges ..... II. Coronie 38 of the road 38 Brackish North . area . and fresh-water South of the road 39 Ridge complex swamp Third and fourth line 40 Totness 40 III. Nickerie 41 belt and brackish North of the Nickerie Mangrove swamps River 41 Fresh-water area South of the Nickerie River 44 ... IV. Tibiti 45 CHAPTER IV. MANGROVE AND STRAND 46 . ... I. belts the lower the rivers 46 Mangrove along part of . along rivers outside Suriname 48 Mangrove . and other 49 Epiphytes accompanying species ... II. Coastal 50 mangrove ........ Regressing coast 50 Accrescent 50 coast . Accompanying species ....... 53 Mixed forest 54 mangrove ......
  • Resilience Thinking Applied to the Mangroves of Indonesia

    Resilience Thinking Applied to the Mangroves of Indonesia

    Resilience Thinking Applied to The Mangroves of Indonesia A Look at the General Resilience of Indonesia’s Mangrove Forests, as Socio-Ecological Systems with Reference to Potential Thresholds. Resilience Thinking Applied to The Mangroves of Indonesia A Look at the General Resilience of Indonesia’s Mangroves as Socio-Ecological Systems with Reference to Potential Thresholds. The designation of geographical entities in this book, and the presentation of the material, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IUCN concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authori- ties, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. This report was produced with the financial support of the Organismo Autónomo Parques Nacionales (OAPN) of the Min- istry of Environment of Spain, under the project “Rehabilitating Coastal Ecosystems in a Post Tsunami Context: Consolida- tion Phase’’. The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of OAPN, Ministry of Environment or IUCN. Rights: © 2007 International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources & Mangrove Action Project Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holder. Citation: Brown, Benjamn (2007). “Resilience Thinking Applied to the Mangroves of Indonesia.” IUCN & Mangrove Action Project; Yogyakarta, INDONESIA Photography: front cover: Ben Brown - Simeulue Island - Aceh; back cover: Ben Brown, Jaring Halus, North Sumatera all other photos by Ben Brown, with exception of pp.
  • Caba Biodiversity Pack Lakes

    Caba Biodiversity Pack Lakes

    BIODIVERSITY PACK HABITAT GUIDE LAKES Lakes, broadly defined as standing waterbodies of over 2 hectares in surface area, exhibit great variety in terms of size, depth, productivity and characteristic species. They are typically classified across a gradient of productivity; from nutrient poor ‘oligotrophic’ lakes common across the uplands, to the naturally more nutrient rich ‘eutrophic’ lakes typical of the lowlands. Freshwater and terrestrial wetland habitats enhance our many freshwater habitats is excavation and reservoir construction. are formed by the flow and retention of intrinsically linked; with works to rivers and Man-made water bodies can have similar water in the landscape. Their nature is lakes able to benefit wetland habitats, and physical, chemical and biological properties determined by landform and hydrological vice versa. Delivery on a catchment scale to natural lakes, so their origin does not pathways, the characteristics of the water can take account of these synergies, and preclude them being of conservation value. supply, and climatological and biological can look to secure opportunities to achieve influences which generate a mosaic of biodiversity benefits across the full range of Those that are naturally functioning (in rivers, lakes, wet grasslands, reedbeds, habitats present within a catchment. terms of water chemistry and quality, and other habitats of various degrees of hydrological regime, wetness and types of hydrochemistry. morphology WFD AND and biological The UK Biodiversity Action Plan (published B2020 assemblages) in 1994), described the biological resources Man-made water provide the best and of the UK which were identified as SYNERGIES: bodies can have similar most sustainable being the most threatened and required VERY physical, chemical and expressions of conservation action – our priority species biological properties freshwater habitats and habitats.
  • ZOOLOGY Principles of Ecology Community

    ZOOLOGY Principles of Ecology Community

    Paper No. : 12 Principles of Ecology Module : 20 Community: Community characteristics, types of biodiversity, diversity index, abundance, species richness, vertical and horizontal stratification: Part IV Development Team Principal Investigator: Prof. Neeta Sehgal Head, Department of Zoology, University of Delhi Co-Principal Investigator: Prof. D.K. Singh Department of Zoology, University of Delhi Paper Coordinator: Prof. D.K. Singh Department of Zoology, University of Delhi Content Writer: Dr. Haren Ram Chiary and Dr. Kapinder Kirori Mal College, University of Delhi Content Reviewer: Prof. K.S. Rao Department of Botany, University of Delhi 1 Principles of Ecology ZOOLOGY Community: Community characteristics, types of biodiversity, diversity index, abundance, species richness, vertical and horizontal stratification: Part IV Description of Module Subject Name ZOOLOGY Paper Name Zool 12, Principles of Ecology Module Name/Title Community Module Id M20, Community characteristics, types of biodiversity, diversity index, abundance, species richness, vertical and horizontal stratification : Part-IV Keywords Succession, Primary succession, secondary succession, Sera, Climax community, Hydrosere, Lithosere, theories of climax community Contents 1. Learning Objective 2. Introduction 3. History of study of succession 4. Ecological succession and types: Primary and secondary succession 5. Stages of Primary and secondary succession 6. Process of succession in Hydrosere 7. Process of succession in Lithosere 8. Theories of climax community 9. Summary
  • Plant Geography- Ecology

    Plant Geography- Ecology

    QUESTION BANK SEMESTER IV CORE COURSE-8 Plant Geography, Ecology & Evolution (BOT-A-CC-4-8-TH) Plant Geography- Short answer type questions- (1 or 2 marks):- 1. Name two authors who classified India into different phytogeographical regions. 2. What is Mangrove vegetation? 3. What is meant by Physiological dry soil? 4. Define Endemism. 5. Who has proposed the Epibiotic Theory of endemism? 6. Who has proposed the age and area hypothesis on endemism? Short Note Type Questions: (5 Marks)- 1. Discuss the factors responsible for endemism. 2. Explain the Epibiotic Theory of endemism. 3. Describe the Age and Area hypothesis about endemism. 4. Discuss the dominant flora of Western Himalaya. Broad Answer Type Questions: (10 Marks)- 1. Describe the phytogeographical regions of India according to the D. Chatterjee (1960) with representation of a suitable map. 2. Discuss the range of plant species present in Western Himalaya. 3. Describe the dominant flora present in the Sundarbans. 4. Discuss the range of dominant flora of Eastern Himalayan region. 5. Write an elaborate note on endemism in Indian flora. 6. Describe the different factors responsible for endemism. Write a note on Age and Area hypothesis. Ecology- Answer following questions: (each carries 1 mark) 1) What do you mean by ecological niche? 2) Mention the competitive ecological niche. 3) What do you mean by realized niche? 4) What do you mean by fundamental niche? 5) Who coined the term ‘ecological niche’? 6) Who proposed fundamental and realized niche for the first time? 7) Define ecotone. 8) What do you mean by ‘Edge effect’? 9) Who are ‘edge species’? 10) What is ecocline? 11) Define microclimate.