A retrospective study of vase life determinants for cut Acacia holosericea foliage

Short and variable vase life of cut Acacia holosericea foliage stems limits its commercial potential. Retrospective evaluation of factors affecting the vase life of this cut foliage line was assessed using primary data collected from 30 individual experiments. These data had been collected by four different researchers over 17 months, from late Summer to mid Winter across two consecutive years. Vase life data of cut A. holosericea stems held in deionised water (DIW) was analysed for general vase life variation and to define the most influential factor affecting vase life of the cut stems. Meanwhile, vase life of cut stems exposed to various chemical and physical postharvest treatments was analysed using meta-analysis to evaluate their efficacy in prolonging vase life of the stems. The overall mean vase life (±standard deviation) of cut A. holosericea stems was 6.4 ± 1.2 days (n = 30 trials). Longer vase life of ≥7 days was obtained from cut stems harvested at vegetative and flowering stage, which was between Summer and Autumn. Cut stems harvested at fruiting stage, between Winter and Spring displayed shorter vase life of ≤5.5 days. Mixed model analysis indicated that vase life variation of the cut stems was mostly determined by season (P < 0.001). In averaged, postharvest treatments increased vase life 1.4-fold compared to stems in DIW, with 68.32% had a large positive treatment effect size (d). Among the treatments, nano silver (NS) and copper (Cu2+) were the most beneficial to vase life. Retrospective analysis was found to be beneficial for identifying conditions and targeting practices to maximise the vase life of cut A. holosericea and, potentially for other species.

Actionable climate knowledge: From analysis to synthesis

The traditional reductionist approach to science has a tendency to create 'islands of knowledge in a sea of ignorance', with a much stronger focus on analysis of scientific inputs rather than synthesis of socially relevant outcomes. This might be the principal reason why intended end users of climate information generally fail to embrace what the climate science community has to offer. The translation of climate information into real-life action requires 3 essential components: salience (the perceived relevance of the information), credibility (the perceived technical quality of the information) and legitimacy (the perceived objectivity of the process by which the information is shared). We explore each of these components using 3 case studies focused on dryland cropping in Australia, India and Brazil. In regards to 'salience' we discuss the challenge for climate science to be 'policy-relevant', using Australian drought policy as an example. In a village in southern India 'credibility' was gained through engagement between scientists and risk managers with the aim of building social capital, achieved only at high cost to science institutions. Finally, in Brazil we found that 'legitimacy' is a fragile, yet renewable resource that needs to be part of the package for successful climate applications; legitimacy can be easily eroded but is difficult to recover. We conclude that climate risk management requires holistic solutions derived from cross-disciplinary and participatory, user-oriented research. Approaches that combine climate, agroecological and socioeconomic models provide the scientific capabilities for establishment of 'borderless' institutions without disciplinary constraints. Such institutions could provide the necessary support and flexibility to deliver the social benefits of climate science across diverse contexts. Our case studies show that this type of solution is already being applied, and suggest that the climate science community attempt to address existing institutional constraints, which still impede climate risk management.