What lies beneath? The pattern and abundance of the subterranean tuber bank of the invasive liana cat's claw creeper, Macfadyena unguis-cati (Bignoniaceae)

Cat’s claw creeper, Macfadyena unguis-cati (L.) Gentry (Bignoniaceae) is a major environmental weed of riparian areas, rainforest communities and remnant natural vegetation in coastal Queensland and New South Wales, Australia. In densely infested areas, it smothers standing vegetation, including large trees, and causes canopy collapse. Quantitative data on the ecology of this invasive vine are generally lacking. The present study examines the underground tuber traits of M. unguis-cati and explores their links with aboveground parameters at five infested sites spanning both riparian and inland vegetation. Tubers were abundant in terms of density (~1000 per m2), although small in size and low in level of interconnectivity. M. unguis-cati also exhibits multiple stems per plant. Of all traits screened, the link between stand (stem density) and tuber density was the most significant and yielded a promising bivariate relationship for the purposes of estimation, prediction and management of what lies beneath the soil surface of a given M. unguis-cati infestation site. The study also suggests that new recruitment is primarily from seeds, not from vegetative propagation as previously thought. The results highlight the need for future biological-control efforts to focus on introducing specialist seed- and pod-feeding insects to reduce seed-output.

Scat contents of the spotted-tailed quoll Dasyurus maculatus in the New England gorges, north-eastern New South Wales

In 1313 scats of the spotted-tailed quoll Dasyurus maculatus, collected over 5 years from the gorge country of north-eastern New South Wales, the most frequent and abundant items were derived from mammals and a restricted set of insect orders. These quolls also ate river-associated items: waterbirds, eels, crayfish, aquatic molluscs and even frogs. Macropods contributed most of the mammal items, with possums, gliders and rodents also being common. Some food, particularly from macropods and lagomorphs, had been scavenged (as shown by fly larvae). The most frequent invertebrates were three orders of generally large insects Coleoptera, Hemiptera and Orthoptera, which were most frequent in summer and almost absent in winter scats. Monthly mean numbers of rodent and small dasyurid items per scat were inversely related to these large insects in scats. The numbers of reptile items were inversely related to the numbers of mammal (especially arboreal and small terrestrial mammal) items per scat, thus types of items interacted in their occurrences in monthly scat samples. Frequencies of most vertebrate items showed no seasonal, but much year-to-year, variation. This quoll population ate four main types of items, each requiring different skills to obtain: they hunted arboreal marsupials (possibly up trees), terrestrial small mammals and reptiles (on the ground), and seasonally available large insects (on trees or the ground), and scavenged carcases, mostly of large mammals but also birds and fishes (wherever they could find them).

Local dispersion and damage of Corymbia citriodora subsp. variegata (Myrtaceae) regrowth by eriophyid mites (Acari: Eriophyoidea).

Eriophyid mites (Acari: Eriophyoidea: Eriophyidae: Rhombacus sp. and Acalox ptychocarpi Keifer) are recently-emerged pests of commercial eucalypt plantations in subtropical Australia. They cause severe blistering, necrosis and leaf loss to Corymbia citriodora subsp. variegata (F. Muell.) K.D. Hill & L.A.S. Johnson, one of the region's most important hardwood plantation species. In this study we examine the progression, incidence and severity of these damage symptoms. We also measure within-branch colonisation by mites to identify dispersive stages, and estimate the relative abundance of the two co-occurring species. Rhombacus sp., an undescribed species, was numerically dominant, accounting for over 90% of all adult mites. Adults were the dispersive stage, moving mostly within branches, but 12% of recruitment onto new leaves occurred on previously uninfested branches. Damage incidence and severity were correlated, while older leaves had more damage than younger leaves. "Patch-type" damage was less frequent but was associated with higher mite numbers and damage scores than "spot-type" damage, while leaf discoloration symptoms related mostly to leaf age.

Weeds of Australian rangelands

Despite recognition that non-native plant species represent a substantial risk to natural systems, there is currently no compilation of weeds that impact on the biodiversity of the rangelands within Australia. Using published and expert knowledge, this paper presents a list of 622 non-native naturalised species known to occur within the rangelands. Of these, 160 species (26%) are considered a current threat to rangeland biodiversity. Most of these plant species have been deliberately introduced for forage or other commercial use (e.g. nursery trade). Among growth forms, shrubs and perennial grasses comprise over 50% of species that pose the greatest risk to rangeland biodiversity. We identify regions within the rangelands containing both high biodiversity values and a high proportion of weeds and recommend these areas as priorities for weed management. Finally, we examine the resources available for weed detection and identification since detecting weeds in the early stages of invasion is the most cost effective method of reducing further impact.

The distribution and spread of citrus canker in Emerald, Australia

Citrus canker is a disease of citrus and closely related species, caused by the bacterium Xanthomonas citri subsp. citri. This disease, previously exotic to Australia, was detected on a single farm [infested premise-1, (IP1). IP is the terminology used in official biosecurity protocols to describe a locality at which an exotic plant pest has been confirmed or is presumed to exist. IP are numbered sequentially as they are detected] in Emerald, Queensland in July 2004. During the following 10 months the disease was subsequently detected on two other farms (IP2 and IP3) within the same area and studies indicated the disease first occurred on IP1 and spread to IP2 and IP3. The oldest, naturally infected plant tissue observed on any of these farms indicated the disease was present on IP1 for several months before detection and established on IP2 and IP3 during the second quarter (i.e. autumn) 2004. Transect studies on some IP1 blocks showed disease incidences ranged between 52 and 100% (trees infected). This contrasted to very low disease incidence, less than 4% of trees within a block, on IP2 and IP3. The mechanisms proposed for disease spread within blocks include weather-assisted dispersal of the bacterium (e.g. wind-driven rain) and movement of contaminated farm equipment, in particular by pivot irrigator towers via mechanical damage in combination with abundant water. Spread between blocks on IP2 was attributed to movement of contaminated farm equipment and/or people. Epidemiology results suggest: (i) successive surveillance rounds increase the likelihood of disease detection; (ii) surveillance sensitivity is affected by tree size; and (iii) individual destruction zones (for the purpose of eradication) could be determined using disease incidence and severity data rather than a predefined set area.

Landscape structure influences tree density patterns in fragmented woodlands in semi-arid eastern Australia.

Landscape and local-scale influences are important drivers of plant community structure. However, their relative contribution and the degree to which they interact remain unclear. We quantified the extent to which landscape structure, within-patch habitat and their confounding effects determine post-clearing tree densities and composition in agricultural landscapes in eastern subtropical Australia. Landscape structure (incorporating habitat fragmentation and loss) and within-patch (site) features were quantified for 60 remnant patches of Eucalyptus populnea (Myrtaceae) woodland. Tree density and species for three ecological maturity classes (regeneration, early maturity, late maturity) and local site features were assessed in one 100 × 10 m plot per patch. All but one landscape characteristic was determined within a 1.3-km radius of plots; Euclidean nearest neighbour distance was measured inside a 5-km radius. Variation in tree density and composition for each maturity class was partitioned into independent landscape, independent site and joint effects of landscape and site features using redundancy analysis. Independent site effects explained more variation in regeneration density and composition than pure landscape effects; significant predictors were the proportion of early and late maturity trees at a site, rainfall and the associated interaction. Conversely, landscape structure explained greater variation in early and late maturity tree density and composition than site predictors. Area of remnant native vegetation within a landscape and patch characteristics (area, shape, edge contrast) were significant predictors of early maturity tree density. However, 31% of the explained variation in early mature tree differences represented confounding influences of landscape and local variables. We suggest that within-patch characteristics are important in influencing semi-arid woodland tree regeneration. However, independent and confounding effects of landscape structure resulting from previous vegetation clearing may have exerted a greater historical influence on older cohorts and should be accounted for when examining woodland dynamics across a broader range of environments.

Simulating the evolution of glyphosate resistance in grains farming in northern Australia.

Background and Aims: The evolution of resistance to herbicides is a substantial problem in contemporary agriculture. Solutions to this problem generally consist of the use of practices to control the resistant population once it evolves, and/or to institute preventative measures before populations become resistant. Herbicide resistance evolves in populations over years or decades, so predicting the effectiveness of preventative strategies in particular relies on computational modelling approaches. While models of herbicide resistance already exist, none deals with the complex regional variability in the northern Australian sub-tropical grains farming region. For this reason, a new computer model was developed. Methods: The model consists of an age- and stage-structured population model of weeds, with an existing crop model used to simulate plant growth and competition, and extensions to the crop model added to simulate seed bank ecology and population genetics factors. Using awnless barnyard grass (Echinochloa colona) as a test case, the model was used to investigate the likely rate of evolution under conditions expected to produce high selection pressure. Key Results: Simulating continuous summer fallows with glyphosate used as the only means of weed control resulted in predicted resistant weed populations after approx. 15 years. Validation of the model against the paddock history for the first real-world glyphosate-resistant awnless barnyard grass population shows that the model predicted resistance evolution to within a few years of the real situation. Conclusions: This validation work shows that empirical validation of herbicide resistance models is problematic. However, the model simulates the complexities of sub-tropical grains farming in Australia well, and can be used to investigate, generate and improve glyphosate resistance prevention strategies.

Pest-damage relationships for Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on vegetative soybean.

The response of vegetative soybean (Glycine max) to Helicoverpa armigera feeding was studied in irrigated field cages over three years in eastern Australia to determine the relationship between larval density and yield loss, and to develop economic injury levels. Rather than using artificial defoliation techniques, plants were infested with either eggs or larvae of H. armigera, and larvae allowed to feed until death or pupation. Larvae were counted and sized regularly and infestation intensity was calculated in Helicoverpa injury equivalent (HIE) units, where 1 HIE was the consumption of one larva from the start of the infestation period to pupation. In the two experiments where yield loss occurred, the upper threshold for zero yield loss was 7.51 ± 0.21 HIEs and 6.43 ± 1.08 HIEs respectively. In the third experiment, infestation intensity was lower and no loss of seed yield was detected up to 7.0 HIEs. The rate of yield loss/HIE beyond the zero yield loss threshold varied between Experiments 1 and 2 (-9.44 ± 0.80 g and -23.17 ± 3.18 g, respectively). H. armigera infestation also affected plant height and various yield components (including pod and seed numbers and seeds/pod) but did not affect seed size in any experiment. Leaf area loss of plants averaged 841 and 1025 cm2/larva in the two experiments compared to 214 and 302 cm2/larva for cohort larvae feeding on detached leaves at the same time, making clear that artificial defoliation techniques are unsuitable for determining H. armigera economic injury levels on vegetative soybean. Analysis of canopy leaf area and pod profiles indicated that leaf and pod loss occurred from the top of the plant downwards. However, there was an increase in pod numbers closer to the ground at higher pest densities as the plant attempted to compensate for damage. Defoliation at the damage threshold was 18.6 and 28.0% in Experiments 1 and 2, indicating that yield loss from H. armigera feeding occurred at much lower levels of defoliation than previously indicated by artificial defoliation studies. Based on these results, the economic injury level for H. armigera on vegetative soybean is approximately 7.3 HIEs/row-metre in 91 cm rows or 8.0 HIEs/m2.

Domestication for Conservation of an Endangered Species: The Case of the Wollemi Pine

A small population of tall slender conifers was discovered in 1994 in a deep rainforest canyon of the Wollemi National Park, New SouthWales, Australia. The living trees closely resembled fossils that were more than 65 million years old, and this ‘living fossil’ was recognised as a third extant genus in the Araucariaceae (Araucaria, Agathis and now Wollemia). The species was named the Wollemi pine (W. nobilis). Extensive searches uncovered very few populations, with the total number of adult trees being less than 100. Ex situ collections were quickly established in Sydney as part of the Wollemi Pine Recovery Plan. The majority of the ex situ population was later transferred to our custom-built facility in Queensland for commercial multiplication. Domestication has relied very heavily on the species’ amenability to vegetative propagation because seed collection from the natural populations is dangerous, expensive, and undesirable for conservation reasons. Early propagation success was poor, with only about 25% of cuttings producing roots. However, small increases in propagation success have a very large impact on a domestication program because plant production can be modelled on an exponential curve where each rooted cutting develops into a mother plant that, in turn, provides more rooted cuttings. An extensive research program elevated rooting percentages to greater than 80% and also provided in vitro methods for plant multiplication. These successes have enabled international release of the Wollemi pine as a new and attractive species for ornamental horticulture.

Sustainable native forest management. Case studies in managing private native forest in southeast Queensland.

The introduction describes productive forest in Queensland and summaries the principles of native forest management that achieve optimum productivity. Case study 1 deals with thinning an even-aged regrowth forest. It shows how thinning the stand actively manages the future composition and structure to improve productivity in the best stems and increase the commercial value of the next harvest. Case study 2 describes restoring productivity in a high-graded spotted gum - ironbark forest. It shows that defective and non-saleable trees should be removed so they do not repress the future stand; and that regeneration should be thinned, retaining the best trees in adequate growing space. Case study 3 discusses on-farm value adding for hardwood forests. It shows how long-term viability and maximum productivity and returns depend on the best management practices and knowing how to obtain the best returns from a range of forest products. Case study 4 examines integrated harvesting in a eucalypt forest. It shows how integrating the harvest enables the full range of timber products are harvested and sold for their maximum value while reducing the amount of waste.

Avocado Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.deedi.qld.gov.au (Select: Queensland Industries - Agriculture link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 2001. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed reprint information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 2001. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of avocadoes. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Research note: poplar box (Eucalyptus populnea) growth rates in thinned and intact woodlands in central Queensland

A 19-year data set, which highlights the rapid growth rate in basal area of trees in thinned plots compared with unthinned controls, is presented. These results support the contention that, following tree thinning, basal area of retained trees will increase more rapidly than that of trees on unthinned areas. Indications are that pre-thinning levels in tree basal area will again be reached before the cost of treatment can be recouped by increased pasture and livestock production.

Papaw Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website http://www.deedi.qld.gov.au/ (Select: Queenslands Industries - Agriculture Link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 2000. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 2000. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of papaw. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Mango Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.deedi.qld.gov.au (Select: Queensland Industries - Agriculture link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 1999. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 1999. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of mangoes. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Citrus Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.daf.qld.gov.au This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 1997. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 1997. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of citrus. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.