Pore formation during dehydration of polycrystalline gypsum observed and quantified in a time-series synchrotron radiation based X-ray micro-tomography experiment

We conducted an in-situ X-ray micro-computed tomography heating experiment at the Advanced Photon Source (USA) to dehydrate an unconfined 2.3 mm diameter cylinder of Volterra Gypsum. We used a purpose-built X-ray transparent furnace to heat the sample to 388 K for a total of 310 min to acquire a three-dimensional time-series tomography dataset comprising nine time steps. The voxel size of 2.2 μm3 proved sufficient to pinpoint reaction initiation and the organization of drainage architecture in space and time. We observed that dehydration commences across a narrow front, which propagates from the margins to the centre of the sample in more than four hours. The advance of this front can be fitted with a square-root function, implying that the initiation of the reaction in the sample can be described as a diffusion process. Novel parallelized computer codes allow quantifying the geometry of the porosity and the drainage architecture from the very large tomographic datasets (20483 voxels) in unprecedented detail. We determined position, volume, shape and orientation of each resolvable pore and tracked these properties over the duration of the experiment. We found that the pore-size distribution follows a power law. Pores tend to be anisotropic but rarely crack-shaped and have a preferred orientation, likely controlled by a pre-existing fabric in the sample. With on-going dehydration, pores coalesce into a single interconnected pore cluster that is connected to the surface of the sample cylinder and provides an effective drainage pathway. Our observations can be summarized in a model in which gypsum is stabilized by thermal expansion stresses and locally increased pore fluid pressures until the dehydration front approaches to within about 100 μm. Then, the internal stresses are released and dehydration happens efficiently, resulting in new pore space. Pressure release, the production of pores and the advance of the front are coupled in a feedback loop.

Cost-effective suppression and eradication of invasive predators

Introduced predators can have pronounced effects on naïve prey species; thus, predator control is often essential for conservation of threatened native species. Complete eradication of the predator, although desirable, may be elusive in budget-limited situations, whereas predator suppression is more feasible and may still achieve conservation goals. We used a stochastic predator-prey model based on a Lotka-Volterra system to investigate the cost-effectiveness of predator control to achieve prey conservation. We compared five control strategies: immediate eradication, removal of a constant number of predators (fixed-number control), removal of a constant proportion of predators (fixed-rate control), removal of predators that exceed a predetermined threshold (upper-trigger harvest), and removal of predators whenever their population falls below a lower predetermined threshold (lower-trigger harvest). We looked at the performance of these strategies when managers could always remove the full number of predators targeted by each strategy, subject to budget availability. Under this assumption immediate eradication reduced the threat to the prey population the most. We then examined the effect of reduced management success in meeting removal targets, assuming removal is more difficult at low predator densities. In this case there was a pronounced reduction in performance of the immediate eradication, fixed-number, and lower-trigger strategies. Although immediate eradication still yielded the highest expected minimum prey population size, upper-trigger harvest yielded the lowest probability of prey extinction and the greatest return on investment (as measured by improvement in expected minimum population size per amount spent). Upper-trigger harvest was relatively successful because it operated when predator density was highest, which is when predator removal targets can be more easily met and the effect of predators on the prey is most damaging. This suggests that controlling predators only when they are most abundant is the "best" strategy when financial resources are limited and eradication is unlikely. © 2008 Society for Conservation Biology.