The curtius rearrangement of acyl azides revisited - formation of cyanate (R-O-CN)

The Curtius rearrangement is a synthesis of isocyanates (R-N=C=O) by thermal or photochemical rearrangement of acyl acides and/or acylnitrenes. The photochemical rearrangement of benzoyl azide is now shown for the first time to produce a small amount of phenyl cyanate (Ph-O-CN) together with phenyl isocyanate.

Do harvest refuges buffer kangaroos against evolutionary responses to selective harvesting?

There is a wealth of literature documenting a directional change of body size in heavily harvested populations. Most of this work concentrates on aquatic systems, but terrestrial populations are equally at risk. This paper explores the capacity of harvest refuges to counteract potential effects of size-selective harvesting on the allele frequency,of populations. We constructed a stochastic, individual-based model parameterized with data on red kangaroos. Because we do not know which part of individual growth would change in the course of natural selection, we explored the effects of two alternative models of individual growth in which alleles affect either the growth rate or the maximum size. The model results show that size-selective harvesting can result in significantly smaller kangaroos for a given age when the entire population is subject to harvesting. In contrast, in scenarios that include dispersal from harvest refuges, the initial allele frequency remains virtually unchanged.

Population monitoring for kangaroo management

In wildlife management, the program of monitoring will depend on the management objective. If the objective is damage mitigation, then ideally it is damage that should be monitored. Alternatively, population size (N) can be used as a surrogate for damage, but the relationship between N and damage obviously needs to be known. If the management objective is a sustainable harvest, then the system of monitoring will depend on the harvesting strategy. In general, the harvest strategy in all states has been to offer a quota that is a constant proportion of population size. This strategy has a number of advantages over alternative strategies, including a low risk of over- or underharvest in a stochastic environment, simplicity, robustness to bias in population estimates and allowing harvest policy to be proactive rather than reactive. However, the strategy requires an estimate of absolute population size that needs to be made regularly for a fluctuating population. Trends in population size and in various harvest statistics, while of interest, are secondary. This explains the large research effort in further developing accurate estimation methods for kangaroo populations. Direct monitoring on a large scale is costly. Aerial surveys are conducted annually at best, and precision of population estimates declines with the area over which estimates are made. Management at a fine scale (temporal or spatial) therefore requires other monitoring tools. Indirect monitoring through harvest statistics and habitat models, that include rainfall or a greenness index from satellite imagery, may prove useful.

Of sheep and rain: large-scale population dynamics of the red kangaroo

1. We analysed time-series data from populations of red kangaroos (Macropus rufus, Desmarest) inhabiting four areas in the pastoral zone of South Australia. We formulated a set of a priori models to disentangle the relative effects of the covariates: rainfall, harvesting, intraspecific competition, and domestic herbivores, on kangaroo population-growth rate. 2. The statistical framework allowed for spatial variation in the growth-rate parameters, response to covariates, and environmental variability, as well as spatially correlated error terms due to shared environment. 3. The most parsimonious model included all covariates but no area-specific parameter values, suggesting that kangaroo densities respond in the same way to the covariates across the areas. 4. The temporal dynamics were spatially correlated, even after taking into account the potentially synchronizing effect of rainfall, harvesting and domestic herbivores. 5. Counter-intuitively, we found a positive rather than negative effect of domestic herbivore density on the population-growth rate of kangaroos. We hypothesize that this effect is caused by sheep and cattle acting as a surrogate for resource availability beyond rainfall. 6. Even though our system is well studied, we must conclude that approximating resources by surrogates such as rainfall is more difficult than previously thought. This is an important message for studies of consumer-resource systems and highlights the need to be explicit about population processes when analysing population patterns.

Should managed populations be monitored every year?

We often need to estimate the size of wild populations to determine the appropriate management action, for example, to set a harvest quota. Monitoring is usually planned under the assumption that it must be carried out at fixed intervals in time, typically annually, before the harvest quota is set. However, monitoring can be very expensive, and we should weigh the cost of monitoring against the improvement that it makes in decision making. A less costly alternative to monitoring annually is to predict the population size using a population model and information from previous surveys. In this paper, the problem of monitoring frequency is posed within a decision-theory framework. We discover that a monitoring regime that varies according to the state of the system call outperform fixed-interval monitoring This idea is illustrated using data for a red kangaroo (Macropits rufus) population in South Australia. Whether or not one should monitor in a given year is dependent on the estimated population density in the previous year, the uncertainty in that population estimate, and past rainfall. We discover that monitoring is-important when a model-based prediction of population density is very uncertain. This may occur if monitoring has not taken place for several years, or if rainfall has been above average. Monitoring is also important when prior information suggests that the population is near a critical threshold in population abundance. However, monitoring is less important when the optimal management action would not be altered by new information.