DOCSLIB.ORG

Comparative Diversity of Arthropods on Bt Maize and Non-Bt Maize in Two Different Cropping Systems in South Africa Author(S): J

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Comparative Diversity of Arthropods on Bt Maize and Non-Bt Maize in Two Different Cropping Systems in South Africa Author(S): J Comparative Diversity of Arthropods on Bt Maize and Non-Bt Maize in two Different Cropping Systems in South Africa Author(s): J. Truter , H. Van Hamburg and J. Van Den Berg Source: Environmental Entomology, 43(1):197-208. 2014. Published By: Entomological Society of America URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1603/EN12177 BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use. Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. TRANSGENIC PLANTS AND INSECTS Comparative Diversity of Arthropods on Bt Maize and Non-Bt Maize in two Different Cropping Systems in South Africa 1,2 1 1,3 J. TRUTER, H. VAN HAMBURG, AND J. VAN DEN BERG Environ. Entomol. 43(1): 197Ð208 (2014); DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1603/EN12177 ABSTRACT The biodiversity of an agroecosystem is not only important for its intrinsic value but also because it inßuences ecological functions that are vital for crop production in sustainable agricultural systems and the surrounding environment. A concern about genetically modiÞed (GM) crops is the potential negative impact that such crops could have on diversity and abundance of nontarget organisms, and subsequently on ecosystem functions. Therefore, it is essential to assess the potential environmental risk of the release of a GM crop and to study its effect on species assemblages within that ecosystem. Assessment of the impact of Bt maize on the environment is hampered by the lack of basic checklists of species present in maize agroecosystems. The aims of the study were to compile a checklist of arthropods that occur on maize in South Africa and to compare the diversity and abundance of arthropods and functional groups on Bt maize and non-Bt maize. Collections of arthropods were carried out during two growing seasons on Bt maize and non-Bt maize plants at two localities. Three maize Þelds were sampled per locality during each season. Twenty plants, each of Bt maize and non-Bt maize, were randomly selected from the Þelds at each site. The arthropods collected during this study were classiÞed to morphospecies level and grouped into the following functional groups: detritivores, herbivores, predators, and parasitoids. Based on feeding strategy, herbivores and predators were further divided into sucking herbivores or predators (piercingÐsucking mouthparts) and chewing herbivores or predators (chewing mouthparts). A total of 8,771 arthropod individuals, comprising 288 morphospecies and presenting 20 orders, were collected. Results from this short-term study indicated that abundance and diversity of arthropods in maize and the different functional guilds were not signiÞcantly affected by Bt maize, either in terms of diversity or abundance. KEY WORDS arthropod, biodiversity, diversity index, GM maize, South Africa One concern about growing genetically modiÞed ticidal properties, it is necessary to determine the (GM) crops is the potential negative impact that such arthropod species occurring in maize ecosystems. This crops could have on diversity and abundance of non- information will be useful in the evaluation of the target organisms (Eckert et al. 2006). The biodiversity possible impact of Bt maize on nontarget organisms at of an agroecosystem is not only important for its in- different trophic levels. Assessment of the impact of Bt trinsic value but also because it may inßuence eco- maize on the environment is hampered by the lack of system functions that are vital for sustainable crop basic knowledge regarding arthropod diversity in production and for the surrounding environment maize ecosystems. There is also a need to identify (Hilbeck et al. 2006). Species assemblages in agroeco- indicator or representative organisms and develop systems fulÞll a variety of ecosystem functions that simple methods that combine suitability for ecological may be negatively impacted if changes occur in these risk assessment under Þeld conditions and cost efÞ- assemblages (Dutton et al. 2003). For example, guild ciency of assessments (Eckert et al. 2006). rearrangement due to the elimination of a target pest Several studies related to the potential impact of Bt and the subsequent changes in guild structure can lead crops on nontarget organisms have examined the in- to the development of secondary pests. Therefore, it teraction of one or more species under laboratory is essential to assess the potential environmental risk conditions (Sims 1995; Hilbeck et al. 1998a,b; Dutton that the release of a GM crop may hold and to study et al. 2002, 2003, 2004; Meissle and Romeis 2009; Li and its effect on species assemblages within that ecosystem Romeis 2010). Some results indicated no signiÞcant (Van Wyk et al. 2007). To identify possible secondary effects on nontarget organisms, whereas others re- pests and nontarget effects of GM crops with insec- ported negative effects. While most Þeld studies assessing impacts of Bt 1 Unit of of Environmental Sciences and Management, North-West crops have focused on limited numbers of species University, Private Bag X6001, Potchefstroom 2520, South Africa. (Wilson et al. 1992, Hardee and Bryan 1997, Wold et 2 DuPont-Pioneer, Outspan Building, 1006 Lenchen Ave, Centu- rion 0046, South-Africa. al. 2001, Liu et al. 2003, Schoenly et al. 2003, Wolfen- 3 Corresponding author, e-mail: [email protected]. barger et al. 2008), it is important to also study effects 0046-225X/14/0197Ð0208$04.00/0 ᭧ 2014 Entomological Society of America 198 ENVIRONMENTAL ENTOMOLOGY Vol. 43, no. 1 on arthropod communities. The few studies previously during this study was from the event MON810 ex- conducted on arthropod community diversity were on pressing Cry1Ab protein for control of the stem bor- Bt rice in China (Li et al. 2007), Bt cotton in the United ers, Busseola fusca (Fuller) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) States (Torres and Ruberson 2007), and Bt maize in and Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) (Lepidoptera: Cram- Spain (De la Poza et al. 2005). These three studies bidae), and its near-isogenic non-Bt counterpart. Pest concluded that Bt crops did not have adverse effects pressure (target and nontarget) is usually very high in on arthropod diversity at the Þeld level. the Vaalharts area, where Bt maize has been planted The aims of this study were to describe the biodi- since 1998. In the Tshiombo area, pest pressure is versity of arthropods on maize by compiling a check- usually much lower than in the Vaalharts area, and list of species that occur on maize in South Africa and resource-poor farmers had not been introduced to GM to compare the diversity and abundance of arthropods crops before this study. and the functional groups on Bt maize and non-Bt Three maize Þelds were sampled for each of the two maize. localities once during each season (12 Þelds in total per site). Sampling was not done on the same Þeld over two seasons because of crop rotation practices Materials and Methods followed at both sites. Twenty plants, each of Bt maize Collections of arthropods were carried out during and non-Bt maize (from the refuge area of the Þeld), the 2008Ð2009 and 2009Ð2010 growing seasons in Bt were randomly selected from the Þelds at each site maize and non-Bt maize Þelds at two localities, i.e., (480 plants in total). Each plant was bagged, and all Vaalharts in the Northern Cape province (S24Њ 48Ј 693, arthropods were removed later and placed in 70% E27Њ 38Ј 330) and Tshiombo in the Limpopo province ethanol in 40-ml bottles. Each plant was carefully (22Њ 48Ј05Љ S, 30Њ 27Ј07Љ E), South Africa. Sampling was inspected for any arthropods by removing leaves, leaf done only once on each Þeld, 2Ð3 wk after anthesis, sheaths, and husk leaves and ears. All arthropods were and took place during April and November (in both collected and kept such that abundance and diversity 2008 and 2009) at Vaalharts and Tshiombo, respec- could be calculated on a per-plant basis. tively. During this study the focus was on collecting Arthropods were classiÞed to morphospecies level plant-dwelling arthropods that occur on plants only and grouped into functional groups to provide infor- during the reproductive stage of plant growth. Other mation on the potential exposure of species to Bt toxin studies have shown that arthropod diversity during produced by Bt maize. Where possible, morphospe- this plant growth stage, particularly on plant ears, cies were further identiÞed to family and species level. capture different trophic levels, and thus could be a Morphospecies can be deÞned as a group of individ- good method to sample a comprehensive arthropod uals that are considered to belong to the same species community (Eckert et al. 2006). Dively (2005) also on the basis of morphology alone (Lawrence 2011). showed that arthropod biodiversity on maize during Data Analysis. The Shannon diversity index (H1), the period after anthesis is very high compared with which describes diversity (species richness and even- the rest of the growing period. ness), and the Margalef richness index (d), which Study Areas. Tshiombo. This area is a low-input describes species richness, were used to analyze data. small-farming area where crop production is done on The Shannon diversity and Margalef richness indices small Þelds (1Ð2 ha) on which the main crop, maize, were calculated using Primer 5 (Version 5.2.9, is often rotated with groundnut, brassicas, or sweet PRIMER-E Ltd., Plymouth, United Kingdom; Clarke potato.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Checklist of the Non -Acarine Arachnids
    Original Research A CHECKLIST OF THE NON -A C A RINE A R A CHNIDS (CHELICER A T A : AR A CHNID A ) OF THE DE HOOP NA TURE RESERVE , WESTERN CA PE PROVINCE , SOUTH AFRIC A Authors: ABSTRACT Charles R. Haddad1 As part of the South African National Survey of Arachnida (SANSA) in conserved areas, arachnids Ansie S. Dippenaar- were collected in the De Hoop Nature Reserve in the Western Cape Province, South Africa. The Schoeman2 survey was carried out between 1999 and 2007, and consisted of five intensive surveys between Affiliations: two and 12 days in duration. Arachnids were sampled in five broad habitat types, namely fynbos, 1Department of Zoology & wetlands, i.e. De Hoop Vlei, Eucalyptus plantations at Potberg and Cupido’s Kraal, coastal dunes Entomology University of near Koppie Alleen and the intertidal zone at Koppie Alleen. A total of 274 species representing the Free State, five orders, 65 families and 191 determined genera were collected, of which spiders (Araneae) South Africa were the dominant taxon (252 spp., 174 genera, 53 families). The most species rich families collected were the Salticidae (32 spp.), Thomisidae (26 spp.), Gnaphosidae (21 spp.), Araneidae (18 2 Biosystematics: spp.), Theridiidae (16 spp.) and Corinnidae (15 spp.). Notes are provided on the most commonly Arachnology collected arachnids in each habitat. ARC - Plant Protection Research Institute Conservation implications: This study provides valuable baseline data on arachnids conserved South Africa in De Hoop Nature Reserve, which can be used for future assessments of habitat transformation, 2Department of Zoology & alien invasive species and climate change on arachnid biodiversity.
    [Show full text]
  • Biosecurity Plan for the Vegetable Industry
    Biosecurity Plan for the Vegetable Industry A shared responsibility between government and industry Version 3.0 May 2018 Plant Health AUSTRALIA Location: Level 1 1 Phipps Close DEAKIN ACT 2600 Phone: +61 2 6215 7700 Fax: +61 2 6260 4321 E-mail: [email protected] Visit our web site: www.planthealthaustralia.com.au An electronic copy of this plan is available through the email address listed above. © Plant Health Australia Limited 2018 Copyright in this publication is owned by Plant Health Australia Limited, except when content has been provided by other contributors, in which case copyright may be owned by another person. With the exception of any material protected by a trade mark, this publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivs 3.0 Australia licence. Any use of this publication, other than as authorised under this licence or copyright law, is prohibited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/ - This details the relevant licence conditions, including the full legal code. This licence allows for redistribution, commercial and non-commercial, as long as it is passed along unchanged and in whole, with credit to Plant Health Australia (as below). In referencing this document, the preferred citation is: Plant Health Australia Ltd (2018) Biosecurity Plan for the Vegetable Industry (Version 3.0 – 2018) Plant Health Australia, Canberra, ACT. This project has been funded by Hort Innovation, using the vegetable research and development levy and contributions from the Australian Government. Hort Innovation is the grower-owned, not for profit research and development corporation for Australian horticulture Disclaimer: The material contained in this publication is produced for general information only.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report 1
    Sand pit for Biodiversity at Cep II quarry Researcher: Klára Řehounková Research group: Petr Bogusch, David Boukal, Milan Boukal, Lukáš Čížek, František Grycz, Petr Hesoun, Kamila Lencová, Anna Lepšová, Jan Máca, Pavel Marhoul, Klára Řehounková, Jiří Řehounek, Lenka Schmidtmayerová, Robert Tropek Březen – září 2012 Abstract We compared the effect of restoration status (technical reclamation, spontaneous succession, disturbed succession) on the communities of vascular plants and assemblages of arthropods in CEP II sand pit (T řebo ňsko region, SW part of the Czech Republic) to evaluate their biodiversity and conservation potential. We also studied the experimental restoration of psammophytic grasslands to compare the impact of two near-natural restoration methods (spontaneous and assisted succession) to establishment of target species. The sand pit comprises stages of 2 to 30 years since site abandonment with moisture gradient from wet to dry habitats. In all studied groups, i.e. vascular pants and arthropods, open spontaneously revegetated sites continuously disturbed by intensive recreation activities hosted the largest proportion of target and endangered species which occurred less in the more closed spontaneously revegetated sites and which were nearly absent in technically reclaimed sites. Out results provide clear evidence that the mosaics of spontaneously established forests habitats and open sand habitats are the most valuable stands from the conservation point of view. It has been documented that no expensive technical reclamations are needed to restore post-mining sites which can serve as secondary habitats for many endangered and declining species. The experimental restoration of rare and endangered plant communities seems to be efficient and promising method for a future large-scale restoration projects in abandoned sand pits.
    [Show full text]
  • Heliophanus Apiatus Simon, 1868, New to Portugal
    Revista Ibérica de Aracnología, nº 21 (31/12/2012): 144. NOTA CIENTÍFICA Grupo Ibérico de Aracnología (S.E.A.). ISSN: 1576 - 9518. http://www.sea-entomologia.org/ Heliophanus apiatus Simon, 1868, new to Portugal Mark Alderweireldt1 & Carine De Boever2 1 University Gent, Terrestrial Ecology Unit. K.L. Ledeganckstraat 35, B-9000 Gent Belgium ‒ [email protected] 2 Begoniastraat 5, B-9090 Melle Belgium The spider fauna of Portugal has received renewed attention during BACELAR, A. 1933. Aracnídios Portugûeses. IV. Continuaçao do inventário the last two decades (Alderweireldt & Bosmans, 2001; Bosmans, dos Aracnídios. Bull. Soc. Portug. Sci. Nat., 11(28): 295-302. 1993; Cardoso, 2010; Ferrández, 1985, 1990; Telfer et al., 2003). BACELAR, A. 1935. Aracnídios Portugûeses. V. Bull. Soc. Portug. Sci. Nat., And this after a long stand-still since the well-known pioneer contri- 12(7): 33-39. BACELAR, A. 1936. Aracnídios Portugûeses.III. Continuaçao do inventário butions of Bacelar (1927a, 1927b, 1928, 1933, 1935, 1936, 1940) dos Aracnídios. Bull. Soc. Portug. Sci. Nat., 12(24): 179-183. and Machado (1937, 1941, 1949). BACELAR, A. 1940. Aracnídios Portugûeses.VI. Continuaçao do inventário The latest checklist of Iberian spiders lists 1335 species of dos Aracnídios. Bull. Soc. Portug. Sci. Nat., 13: 99-110. which 236 are Iberian endemics (Cardoso & Morano, 2010). The BOSMANS, R. 1993. Revision of the genus Zodarion Walckenaer, 1833 in the Portuguese checklist contains 768 species. In comparison to the high Iberian Peninsula and the Balearic Islands (Araneae, Zodariidae). Eos, variation in habitats in Portugal, this number is certainly still an 69: 115-142. underestimation of the reality.
    [Show full text]
  • Ant-Like Flower Beetles (Coleoptera: Anthicidae) of the Uk, Ireland and Channel Isles
    BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 23: 2010 99 ANT-LIKE FLOWER BEETLES (COLEOPTERA: ANTHICIDAE) OF THE UK, IRELAND AND CHANNEL ISLES DMITRY TELNOV Stopinu novads, Darza iela 10, LV-2130, Dzidrinas, Latvia; E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT The Anthicidae or ant-like flower beetles of the UK, Ireland and Channel Isles are reviewed. A species list, identification key, short diagnoses and illustrations of all taxa are given. Brief information on known ecological preferences of species is given. Key words: identification, distribution, key, United Kingdom, Ireland, fauna, ecology. INTRODUCTION Anthicidae are a cosmopolitan family of small to medium-sized, fast-moving beetles of the superfamily Tenebrionoidea. Anthicidae are represented in the World fauna by approximately 100 genera, and about 3500 species (Chandler, 2010). Only a few species are known from the fossil record. The last revision of the British Anthicidae was published by F. D. Buck (1954) in the well-known series Handbooks for the Identification of British Insects. Since then, there have been numerous nomenclatural changes within Anthicidae, and some additional species (introduced) have been recorded from the UK, making Buck’s key out of date. During 2004 and 2005 a total of 3356 specimens of Anthicidae from the UK and Ireland were examined by the author, mainly from the collections of The Natural History Museum (London), Oxford University Museum of Natural History and National Museum of Ireland. Additional data for more than 2100 specimens were received from other British museums and private collections between 2005 and 2007. A new key and short diagnoses for the genera are presented, as well as data on habitats and general distribution of species.
    [Show full text]
  • ROLE of COLOR and ODOR on the ATTRACTION of INSECT VISITORS to SPRING BLOOMING TRILLIUM a Thesis Presented to the Faculty Of
    ROLE OF COLOR AND ODOR ON THE ATTRACTION OF INSECT VISITORS TO SPRING BLOOMING TRILLIUM A thesis presented to the faculty of the Graduate School of Western Carolina University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Biology. By Natasha Marie Shipman Director: Dr. Laura DeWald Professor of Biology Biology Department Committee Members: Dr. Beverly Collins, Biology Dr. Amy Boyd, Biology Summer 2011 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study was supported by grants from the Southern Appalachian Botanical Society Earl Core Graduate Student Research Award and North Carolina Native Plant Society Tom and Bruce Shinn Grant. I thank Jay Kranyik, director of the Botanical Gardens at Asheville for allowing me to use this location as my study site. Many Thanks to Warren Wilson College undergraduate students Manday Monroe, Alison LaRocca and Laura Miess for their constant help with field work; Shaun Moore for his support and help with development of experimental flowers and field work; Dr. Paul Bartels for his support and expertise in PRIMER-E; Dr. David Alsop (Professor, retired, Department of Biology, Queens College, The City University of New York) for his expertise and ability to help identify insects collected; my adviser Dr. Laura DeWald for her continued encouragement, advise and support; the rest of my committee Dr. Amy Boyd and Dr. Beverly Collins for advise and support. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Tables……………………………………………………………………. iv List of Figures…………………………………………………………………… v Abstract………………………………………………………………………….. vi Chapter 1: Introduction………………………………………………………..... 1 Chapter 2: Literature Review…………………………………………………... 3 Floral Cues and Insect Response…………………………………….. 3 Plant-Pollinator Interactions: Specializations - Generalizations Continuum……………................ 10 Trillium…………………………………………………………………… 14 Chapter 3: Manuscript………………………………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • Addenda to the Insect Fauna of Al-Baha Province, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia with Zoogeographical Notes Magdi S
    JOURNAL OF NATURAL HISTORY, 2016 VOL. 50, NOS. 19–20, 1209–1236 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00222933.2015.1103913 Addenda to the insect fauna of Al-Baha Province, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia with zoogeographical notes Magdi S. El-Hawagrya,c, Mostafa R. Sharafb, Hathal M. Al Dhaferb, Hassan H. Fadlb and Abdulrahman S. Aldawoodb aEntomology Department, Faculty of Science, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt; bPlant Protection Department, College of Food and Agriculture Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; cSurvey and Classification of Agricultural and Medical Insects in Al-Baha Province, Al-Baha University, Al-Baha, Saudi Arabia ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY The first list of insects (Arthropoda: Hexapoda) of Al-Baha Received 1 April 2015 Province, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) was published in 2013 Accepted 30 September 2015 and contained a total of 582 species. In the present study, 142 Online 9 December 2015 species belonging to 51 families and representing seven orders KEYWORDS are added to the fauna of Al-Baha Province, bringing the total Palaearctic; Afrotropical; number of species now recorded from the province to 724. The Eremic; insect species; reported species are assigned to recognized regional zoogeogra- Arabian Peninsula; Tihama; phical regions. Seventeen of the species are recorded for the first Al-Sarah; Al-Sarawat time for KSA, namely: Platypleura arabica Myers [Cicadidae, Mountains Hemiptera]; Cletomorpha sp.; Gonocerus juniperi Herrich-Schäffer [Coreidae, Hemiptera]; Coranus lateritius (Stål); Rhynocoris bipus- tulatus (Fieber) [Reduviidae, Hemiptera]; Cantacader iranicus Lis; Dictyla poecilla Drake & Hill [Tingidae, Hemiptera]; Mantispa scab- ricollis McLachlan [Mantispidae, Neuroptera]; Cerocoma schreberi Fabricius [Meloidae, Coleoptera]; Platypus parallelus (Fabricius) [Curculionidae, Coleoptera]; Zodion cinereum (Fabricius) [Conopidae, Diptera]; Ulidia ?ruficeps Becker [Ulidiidae, Diptera]; Atherigona reversura Villeneuve [Muscidae, Diptera]; Aplomya metallica (Wiedemann); Cylindromyia sp.
    [Show full text]
  • Insects 2006 (Includes Publications Since the Last List and Some That Were Not Included in the Last List)
    Insects 2006 (includes publications since the last list and some that were not included in the last list) Compiled by P. Hansen Arthur, B. J. & Hoy, R. R. (2006). The ability of the parasitoid fly Ormia ochracea to distinguish sounds in the vertical plane. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 120, 1546-1549. Bailey, W., MacLeay, C. & Gordon, T. (2006). Acoustic mimicry and disruptive alternative calling tactics in an Australian bushcricket (Caedicia: Phaneropterinae: Tettigoniidae: Orthoptera): does mating influence male calling tactic? Phys. Entomol., 31, 201-210. Barber, J. R. & Conner, W. E. (2006). Tiger moth responses to a simulated bat attack: timing and duty cycle. J. Exp. Biol., 209, 2637-2650. Bateman, P. W. & Fleming, P. A. (2006). Sex, intimidation and severed limbs: the effect of simulated predator attack and limb autotomy on calling and emergence behaviour in the field cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 59, 674-681. Bateman, P. W., Verburgt, L. & Ferguson, J. W. H. (2005). Exposure to male song increases rate of egg development in the cricket Gryllodes sigillatus. Afr. Zool., 40, 323-326. Bates, D. L. & Fenton, M. B. (1990). Aposematism or startle? Predators learn their reponses to the defences of prey. Can. J. Zool., 68, 49-52. Berg, A. & Greenfield, M. D. (2005). Sexual selection in insect choruses: Influences of call power and relative timing. J. Insect Behav., 18, 59-75. Bernal, X. E., Rand, A. S. & Ryan, M. J. (2006). Acoustic preferences and localization performance of blood-sucking flies (Corethrella Coquillett) to tungara frog calls. Behav. Ecol., 17, 709-715. Bertram, S. M. & Bowen, M.
    [Show full text]
  • Insects and Molluscs, According to the Procedures Outlined Below
    Bush Blitz – ACT Expedition 26 Nov – 6 Dec 2018 ACT Expedition Bush Blitz Hemiptera, Hymenoptera, Lepidoptera, Orthoptera, Terrestrial molluscs 26 Nov – 6 Dec 2018 Submitted: 5 April 2019 Debbie Jennings and Olivia Evangelista Nomenclature and taxonomy used in this report is consistent with: The Australian Faunal Directory (AFD) http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/abrs/online-resources/fauna/afd/home Page 1 of 43 Bush Blitz – ACT Expedition 26 Nov – 6 Dec 2018 Contents Contents .................................................................................................................................. 2 List of contributors ................................................................................................................... 3 Abstract ................................................................................................................................... 4 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 4 2. Methods .......................................................................................................................... 6 2.1 Site selection ............................................................................................................. 6 2.2 Survey techniques ..................................................................................................... 6 2.2.1 Methods used at standard survey sites ................................................................... 7 2.3 Identifying
    [Show full text]
  • 197 Section 9 Sunflower (Helianthus
    SECTION 9 SUNFLOWER (HELIANTHUS ANNUUS L.) 1. Taxonomy of the Genus Helianthus, Natural Habitat and Origins of the Cultivated Sunflower A. Taxonomy of the genus Helianthus The sunflower belongs to the genus Helianthus in the Composite family (Asterales order), which includes species with very diverse morphologies (herbs, shrubs, lianas, etc.). The genus Helianthus belongs to the Heliantheae tribe. This includes approximately 50 species originating in North and Central America. The basis for the botanical classification of the genus Helianthus was proposed by Heiser et al. (1969) and refined subsequently using new phenological, cladistic and biosystematic methods, (Robinson, 1979; Anashchenko, 1974, 1979; Schilling and Heiser, 1981) or molecular markers (Sossey-Alaoui et al., 1998). This approach splits Helianthus into four sections: Helianthus, Agrestes, Ciliares and Atrorubens. This classification is set out in Table 1.18. Section Helianthus This section comprises 12 species, including H. annuus, the cultivated sunflower. These species, which are diploid (2n = 34), are interfertile and annual in almost all cases. For the majority, the natural distribution is central and western North America. They are generally well adapted to dry or even arid areas and sandy soils. The widespread H. annuus L. species includes (Heiser et al., 1969) plants cultivated for seed or fodder referred to as H. annuus var. macrocarpus (D.C), or cultivated for ornament (H. annuus subsp. annuus), and uncultivated wild and weedy plants (H. annuus subsp. lenticularis, H. annuus subsp. Texanus, etc.). Leaves of these species are usually alternate, ovoid and with a long petiole. Flower heads, or capitula, consist of tubular and ligulate florets, which may be deep purple, red or yellow.
    [Show full text]
  • Spider Biodiversity Patterns and Their Conservation in the Azorean
    Systematics and Biodiversity 6 (2): 249–282 Issued 6 June 2008 doi:10.1017/S1477200008002648 Printed in the United Kingdom C The Natural History Museum ∗ Paulo A.V. Borges1 & Joerg Wunderlich2 Spider biodiversity patterns and their 1Azorean Biodiversity Group, Departamento de Ciˆencias conservation in the Azorean archipelago, Agr´arias, CITA-A, Universidade dos Ac¸ores. Campus de Angra, with descriptions of new species Terra-Ch˜a; Angra do Hero´ısmo – 9700-851 – Terceira (Ac¸ores); Portugal. Email: [email protected] 2Oberer H¨auselbergweg 24, Abstract In this contribution, we report on patterns of spider species diversity of 69493 Hirschberg, Germany. the Azores, based on recently standardised sampling protocols in different hab- Email: joergwunderlich@ t-online.de itats of this geologically young and isolated volcanic archipelago. A total of 122 species is investigated, including eight new species, eight new records for the submitted December 2005 Azorean islands and 61 previously known species, with 131 new records for indi- accepted November 2006 vidual islands. Biodiversity patterns are investigated, namely patterns of range size distribution for endemics and non-endemics, habitat distribution patterns, island similarity in species composition and the estimation of species richness for the Azores. Newly described species are: Oonopidae – Orchestina furcillata Wunderlich; Linyphiidae: Linyphiinae – Porrhomma borgesi Wunderlich; Turinyphia cavernicola Wunderlich; Linyphiidae: Micronetinae – Agyneta depigmentata Wunderlich; Linyph- iidae:
    [Show full text]
  • Managing Weta Damage to Vines Through an Understanding of Their Food, Habitat Preferences, and the Policy Environment
    Lincoln University Digital Thesis Copyright Statement The digital copy of this thesis is protected by the Copyright Act 1994 (New Zealand). This thesis may be consulted by you, provided you comply with the provisions of the Act and the following conditions of use: you will use the copy only for the purposes of research or private study you will recognise the author's right to be identified as the author of the thesis and due acknowledgement will be made to the author where appropriate you will obtain the author's permission before publishing any material from the thesis. Managing weta damage to vines through an understanding of their food, habitat preferences, and the policy environment A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Applied Science at Lincoln University by Michael John Smith Lincoln University 2014 Abstract of a thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Applied Science. Abstract Managing weta damage to vines through an understanding of their food, habitat preferences, and the policy environment by Michael John Smith Insects cause major crop losses in New Zealand horticulture production, through either direct plant damage or by vectoring disease Pugh (2013). As a result, they are one of the greatest risks to NZ producing high quality horticulture crops (Gurnsey et al. 2005). The main method employed to reduce pest damage in NZ horticulture crops is the application of synthetic pesticides (Gurnsey et al. 2005). However, there are a number of negative consequences associated with pesticide use, including non–target animal death (Casida & Quistad 1998) and customer dissatisfaction.
    [Show full text]