Assessing longwall support-roof interaction from shield leg pressure data

A concept has been developed where characteristic load cycles of longwall shields can describe most of the interaction between a longwall support and the roof. A characteristic load cycle is the change in support pressure with time from setting the support against the roof to the next release and movement of the support. The concept has been validated through the back-analysis of more than 500 000 individual load cycles in five longwall panels at four mines and seven geotechnical domains. The validation process depended upon the development of new software capable of both handling the large quantity of data emanating from a modern longwall and accurately delineating load cycles. Existing software was found not to be capable of delineating load cycles to a sufficient accuracy. Load-cycle analysis can now be used quantitatively to assess the adequacy of support capacity and the appropriateness of set pressure for the conditions under which a longwall is being operated. When linked to a description of geotechnical conditions, this has allowed the development of a database for support selection for greenfield sites. For existing sites, the load-cycle characteristic concept allows for a diagnosis of strata-support problem areas, enabling changes to be made to set pressure and mining strategies to manage better, or avoid, strata control problems. With further development of the software, there is the prospect of developing a system that is able to respond to changes in strata-support interaction in real time.

A new crocodilian from the Lower Cretaceous Crato Formation of north-eastern Brazil

A new mesosuchian crocoddian from the Nova Olinda Member of the Crato Formation (Lower Cretaceous, Aptian) of north-eastern Brazil is described. Susisuchus anatoceps gen. et sp. nov. is the first crocodillan to be reported from this formation. It is represented by an incomplete, partially articulated skeleton: the skull and mandible, partial postcranial axial skeleton, forelimbs and portions of the osteodermal skeleton. Preservation of soft tissues includes the skin surrounding both forelimbs and the digits of the right hand. The state of preservation of the specimen suggests that it was incorporated into the basin as a desiccated carcass. Susisuchus anatoceps is one of the oldest crocodilians with a eusuchian-type dorsal shield, comprising a tetraserial paravertebral shield and, either side of this, two sagittal rows of accessory osteoderms. It also possesses amphicoelous thoracic, lumbar and caudal vertebrae. This combination of postcranial features have never before been seen in a crocodilian and warrant the erection of a new family within Mesosuchia: Susisuchidae. Taxonomically, S. anatoceps is similar to a number of Lower Cretaceous mesosuchians previously considered to have given rise to eusuchians, most notably the Glen Rose crocodilian and a new, but as yet undescribed crocodillan from the Lower Cretaceous Winton Formation of western Queensland, Australia. Preliminary preparation of the Winton crocodilian indicates that it may belong to Susisuchidae, supporting the hypotheses of interchange between the vertebrate faunas of South America and Australia during the Lower Cretaceous.

Survey-gap analysis in expeditionary research: where do we go from here?

Research expeditions into remote areas to collect biological specimens provide vital information for understanding biodiversity. However, major expeditions to little-known areas are expensive and time consuming, time is short, and well-trained people are difficult to find. In addition, processing the collections and obtaining accurate identifications takes time and money. In order to get the maximum return for the investment, we need to determine the location of the collecting expeditions carefully. In this study we used environmental variables and information on existing collecting localities to help determine the sites of future expeditions. Results from other studies were used to aid in the selection of the environmental variables, including variables relating to temperature, rainfall, lithology and distance between sites. A survey gap analysis tool based on 'ED complementarity' was employed to select the sites that would most likely contribute the most new taxa. The tool does not evaluate how well collected a previously visited site survey site might be; however, collecting effort was estimated based on species accumulation curves. We used the number of collections and/or number of species at each collecting site to eliminate those we deemed poorly collected. Plants, birds, and insects from Guyana were examined using the survey gap analysis tool, and sites for future collecting expeditions were determined. The south-east section of Guyana had virtually no collecting information available. It has been inaccessible for many years for political reasons and as a result, eight of the first ten sites selected were in that area. In order to evaluate the remainder of the country, and because there are no immediate plans by the Government of Guyana to open that area to exploration, that section of the country was not included in the remainder of the study. The range of the ED complementarity values dropped sharply after the first ten sites were selected. For plants, the group for which we had the most records, areas selected included several localities in the Pakaraima Mountains, the border with the south-east, and one site in the north-west. For birds, a moderately collected group, the strongest need was in the north-west followed by the east. Insects had the smallest data set and the largest range of ED complementarity values; the results gave strong emphasis to the southern parts of the country, but most of the locations appeared to be equidistant from one another, most likely because of insufficient data. Results demonstrate that the use of a survey gap analysis tool designed to solve a locational problem using continuous environmental data can help maximize our resources for gathering new information on biodiversity. (c) 2005 The Linnean Society of London.