Understanding the mechanism behind invasion of African lovegrass

African lovegrass (Eragrostis curvula) is a C4 perennial grass, native to southern Africa, that was accidentally introduced into Australia in the late 1900s as a contaminant of pasture seed. Its utility for pasture improvement and soil conservation was explored because of its recognised ability to grow in areas of low rainfall and on nutrient-poor sandy loams. Several different agronomic types have now been intentionally introduced across Australia. African lovegrass is now found in all Australian states and territories. It is a declared weed in 33 council areas of New South Wales, a declared pest plant in the ACT and Tasmania and a Regionally Prohibited Weed in 5 out of 11 regions in Victoria. Victoria has also placed it in the very serious threat category (Carr et al. 1992). In Queensland, it has yet to be declared except under local law in the Eidsvold shire (Leigh and Walton, in press).

Impacts of periodic tillage on soil C stocks : a synthesis

Long-term loss of soil C stocks under conventional tillage and accrual of soil C following adoption of no-tillage have been well documented. No-tillage use is spreading, but it is common to occasionally till within a no-till regime or to regularly alternate between till and no-till practices within a rotation of different crops. Short-term studies indicate that substantial amounts of C can be lost from the soil immediately following a tillage event, but there are few field studies that have investigated the impact of infrequent tillage on soil C stocks. How much of the C sequestered under no-tillage is likely to be lost if the soil is tilled? What are the longer-term impacts of continued infrequent no-tillage? If producers are to be compensated for sequestering C in soil following adoption of conservation tillage practices, the impacts of infrequent tillage need to be quantified. A few studies have examined the short-term impacts of tillage on soil C and several have investigated the impacts of adoption of continuous no-tillage. We present: (1) results from a modeling study carried out to address these questions more broadly than the published literature allows, (2) a review of the literature examining the short-term impacts of tillage on soil C, (3) a review of published studies on the physical impacts of tillage and (4) a synthesis of these components to assess how infrequent tillage impacts soil C stocks and how changes in tillage frequency could impact soil C stocks and C sequestration. Results indicate that soil C declines significantly following even one tillage event (1-11 % of soil C lost). Longer-term losses increase as frequency of tillage increases. Model analyses indicate that cultivating and ripping are less disruptive than moldboard plowing, and soil C for those treatments average just 6% less than continuous NT compared to 27% less for CT. Most (80%) of the soil C gains of NT can be realized with NT coupled with biannual cultivating or ripping. (C) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Soil carbon sequestration rates and associated economic costs for farming systems of south-eastern Australia

Soil organic carbon (C) sequestration rates based on the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) methodology were combined with local economic data to simulate the economic potential for C sequestration in response to conservation tillage in the six agro-ecological zones within the Southern Region of the Australian grains industry. The net C sequestration rate over 20 years for the Southern Region (which includes discounting for associated greenhouse gases) is estimated to be 3.6 or 6.3 Mg C/ha after converting to either minimum or no-tillage practices, respectively, with no-till practices estimated to return 75% more carbon on average than minimum tillage. The highest net gains in C per ha are realised when converting from conventional to no-tillage practices in the high-activity clay soils of the High Rainfall and Wimmera agro-ecological zones. On the basis of total area available for change, the Slopes agro-ecological zone offers the highest net returns, potentially sequestering an additional 7.1 Mt C under no-tillage scenario over 20 years. The economic analysis was summarised as C supply curves for each of the 6 zones expressing the total additional C accumulated over 20 years for a price per t C sequestered ranging from zero to AU$200. For a price of $50/Mg C, a total of 427 000 Mg C would be sequestered over 20 years across the Southern Region, <5% of the simulated C sequestration potential of 9.1 Mt for the region. The Wimmera and Mid-North offer the largest gains in C under minimum tillage over 20 years of all zones for all C prices. For the no-tillage scenario, for a price of $50/Mg C, 1.74 Mt C would be sequestered over 20 years across the Southern Region, <10% of the simulated C sequestration potential of 18.6 Mt for the region over 20 years. The Slopes agro-ecological zone offers the best return in C over 20 years under no-tillage for all C prices. The Mallee offers the least return for both minimum and no-tillage scenarios. At a price of $200/Mg C, the transition from conventional tillage to minimum or no-tillage practices will only realise 19% and 33%, respectively, of the total biogeochemical sequestration potential of crop and pasture systems of the Southern Region over a 20-year period.

Endangerment and Likeability of Wildlife Species: How Important are they for Payments Proposed for Conservation?

This paper examines empirically the relative influence of the degree of endangerment of wildlife species and their stated likeability on individuals' allocation of funds for their conservation. To do this, it utilises data obtained from the IUCN Red List, and likeability and fund allocation data obtained from two serial surveys of a sample of the Australian public who were requested to assess 24 Australian wildlife species from three animal classes: mammals, birds and reptiles. Between the first and second survey, respondents were provided with extra information about the focal species. This information resulted in the dominance of endangerment as the major influence on the allocation of funding of respondents for the conservation of the focal wildlife species. Our results throw doubts on the proposition in the literature that the likeability of species is the dominant influence on willingness to pay for conservation of wildlife species. Furthermore, because the public's allocation of fund for conserving wildlife species seems to be more sensitive to information about the conservation status of species than to factors influencing their likeability, greater attention to providing accurate information about the former than the latter seems justified. Keywords: Conservation of wildlife species; Contingent valuation; Endangerment of species; Likeability of species; Willingness to pay

Raman spectroscopy of some complex arsenate minerals—implications for soil remediation

The application of spectroscopy to the study of contaminants in soils is important. Among the many contaminants is arsenic, which is highly labile and may leach to non-contaminated areas. Minerals of arsenate may form depending upon the availability of specific cations for example calcium and iron. Such minerals include carminite, pharmacosiderite and talmessite. Each of these arsenate minerals can be identified by its characteristic Raman spectrum enabling identification.

Common And Endangered Species: How Does Society Allocate Support For Their Conservation

Examines how society allocates support for species’ conservation when numbers involved are large and resources are limited. Rational behaviour suggests that species in urgent need of conservation will receive more support than those species that are common. However, we demonstrate that in the absence of balanced knowledge common species will receive support more than they would otherwise receive despite society placing high existence values on all species. Twenty four species, both common and endangered and some with a restricted distribution, are examined. We demonstrate that balanced information is vital in order to direct more support for species that are endangered than those that are not. Implications for conservation stemming from the findings are discussed.