Journal of the Department of Agriculture, Western Australia.

Vol. 2, no. 1 omitted in numbering.

Journal of agriculture, South Australia.

Title from cover.

The Journal of the Ministry of Agriculture.

Title from cover.

... annual report of the State Board of Agriculture, made to the General Assembly at its ... session, ... /

Description based upon Twentieth annual ..., 1905.

Journal of agriculture, South Australia.

Title from cover.

The Journal of the Ministry of Agriculture

Title Varies: Vol.1-25, Journal of the Board of Agriculture; V.26-45, Journal of the Ministry of Agriculture; V.46-74, Agriculture; Journal of the Ministry of Agriculture

Modifying the yield factor based on more efficient use of fertilizer — The environmental impacts of intensive and extensive agricultural practices

The aim of this article is to draw attention to calculations on the environmental effects of agriculture and to the definition of marginal agricultural yield. When calculating the environmental impacts of agricultural activities, the real environmental load generated by agriculture is not revealed properly through ecological footprint indicators, as the type of agricultural farming (thus the nature of the pollution it creates) is not incorporated in the calculation. It is commonly known that extensive farming uses relatively small amounts of labor and capital. It produces a lower yield per unit of land and thus requires more land than intensive farming practices to produce similar yields, so it has a larger crop and grazing footprint. However, intensive farms, to achieve higher yields, apply fertilizers, insecticides, herbicides, etc., and cultivation and harvesting are often mechanized. In this study, the focus is on highlighting the differences in the environmental impacts of extensive and intensive farming practices through a statistical analysis of the factors determining agricultural yield. A marginal function is constructed for the relation between chemical fertilizer use and yield per unit fertilizer input. Furthermore, a proposal is presented for how calculation of the yield factor could possibly be improved. The yield factor used in the calculation of biocapacity is not the marginal yield for a given area, but is calculated from the real and actual yields, and this way biocapacity and the ecological footprint for cropland are equivalent. Calculations for cropland biocapacity do not show the area needed for sustainable production, but rather the actual land area used for agricultural production. The proposal the authors present is a modification of the yield factor and also the changed biocapacity is calculated. The results of statistical analyses reveal the need for a clarification of the methodology for calculating marginal yield, which could clearly contribute to assessing the real environmental impacts of agriculture.

Modifying the yield factor based on more efficient use of fertilizer — The environmental impacts of intensive and extensive agricultural practices

The aim of this article is to draw attention to calculations on the environmental effects of agriculture and to the definition of marginal agricultural yield. When calculating the environmental impacts of agricultural activities, the real environmental load generated by agriculture is not revealed properly through ecological footprint indicators, as the type of agricultural farming (thus the nature of the pollution it creates) is not incorporated in the calculation. It is commonly known that extensive farming uses relatively small amounts of labor and capital. It produces a lower yield per unit of land and thus requires more land than intensive farming practices to produce similar yields, so it has a larger crop and grazing footprint. However, intensive farms, to achieve higher yields, apply fertilizers, insecticides, herbicides, etc., and cultivation and harvesting are often mechanized. In this study, the focus is on highlighting the differences in the environmental impacts of extensive and intensive farming practices through a statistical analysis of the factors determining agricultural yield. A marginal function is constructed for the relation between chemical fertilizer use and yield per unit fertilizer input. Furthermore, a proposal is presented for how calculation of the yield factor could possibly be improved. The yield factor used in the calculation of biocapacity is not the marginal yield for a given area, but is calculated from the real and actual yields, and this way biocapacity and the ecological footprint for cropland are equivalent. Calculations for cropland biocapacity do not show the area needed for sustainable production, but rather the actual land area used for agricultural production. The proposal the authors present is a modification of the yield factor and also the changed biocapacity is calculated. The results of statistical analyses reveal the need for a clarification of the methodology for calculating marginal yield, which could clearly contribute to assessing the real environmental impacts of agriculture.

In vitro efficacy of selected medicinal plants from Cholistan desert, Pakistan, against gastrointestinal helminths of sheep and goats

Gastrointestinal helminths are a major constraint to small ruminants in extensive husbandry systems of tropical regions. Yet, unavailability, high prices, side effects, and development of parasite resistance often limit the use of synthetic anthelmintics. Traditional medicinal plants might be an effective low-cost alternative. Therefore the in vitro anthelmintic activity of leaf extracts of the ligneous plants Capparis decidua, Salsola foetida, Suaeda fruticosa, Haloxylon salicornicum, and Haloxylon recurvum from Cholistan, Pakistan, was investigated against adult worms of Haemonchus contortus, Trichuris ovis, and Paramphistomum cervi. Various concentrations (from 7.8 to 500 mg dry matter ml^(−1)) of three extracts (aqueous, methanol, and aqueous-methanol) of each plant were tested at different time intervals for their anthelmintic activity via adult motility assay. Plant species (p<=0.01), extract type (p<=0.001), parasite species (p<=0.001), extract concentration (p<=0.001), time of exposure (p<=0.001) and their interactions (p<=0.001) affected the number of immobile or dead helminths. The 50% lethal concentration (LC_(50)) values indicated that the methanol and aqueous-methanol extracts of C. decidua, H. recurvum, and H. salicornicum as well as the methanol extract of S. fruticosa have the potential to be developed into plant-based remedies against the studied helminths. Further studies are needed to investigate the in vivo anthelmintic activity of these extracts, in order to develop effective, cheap and locally available anthelmintics for pastoralists in Cholistan and neighbouring desert regions.

Stock assessment of whaler and hammerhead sharks (Carcharhinidae and Sphyrnidae) in Queensland

This stock assessment provides detailed results for the most common sharks encountered by Queensland commercial fishers. These sharks come from the whaler (Carcharhinidae) and hammerhead (Sphyrnidae) families and comprise sharpnose sharks (Rhizoprionodon taylori and R. oligolinx), the milk shark (R. acutus), the creek whaler (Carcharhinus fitzroyensis), the hardnose shark (C. macloti), the spot-tail shark (C. sorrah), the Australian blacktip shark (C. tilstoni), the common blacktip shark (C. limbatus), the spinner shark (C. brevipinna), bull and pigeye sharks (C. leucas and C. amboinensis), the winghead shark (Eusphyra blochii), the scalloped hammerhead (Sphyrna lewini) and the great hammerhead (S. mokarran). Reef sharks were excluded because fishery observer data indicated that they were largely spatially segregated from sharks caught in the inshore net fisheries. The three common species of reef sharks in Queensland, which are all whaler sharks, are the grey reef shark Carcharhinus amblyrhynchos, the blacktip reef shark C. melanopterus and the whitetip reef shark Triaenodon obesus.

Double trouble: French colonialism in Morocco and the early history of the Pasteur institutes of Tangier and Casablanca (1895-1932)

Morocco was the last North African country in which a Pasteur institute was created, nearly two decades later than in Tunisia and Algeria. In fact, two institutes were opened, the first in Tangier in 1913 and the second in Casablanca in 1932. This duplication, far from being a measure of success, was the material expression of the troubles Pastorians had experienced in getting a solid foothold in the country since the late 19th century. These problems partly derived from the pre-existence of a modest Spanish-Moroccan bacteriological tradition, developed since the late 1880s within the framework of the Sanitary Council and Hygiene Commission of Tangier, and partly from the uncoordinated nature of the initiatives launched from Paris and Algiers. Although a Pasteur Institute was finally established, with Paul Remlinger as director, the failure of France to impose its colonial rule over the whole country, symbolized by the establishment of an international regime in Tangier, resulted in the creation of a second centre in Casablanca. While elucidating many hitherto unclear facts about the entangled origins of both institutes, the author points to the solidity of the previously independent Moroccan state as a major factor behind the troubled translation of Pastorianism to Morocco. Systematically dismissed or downplayed by colonial and postcolonial historiography, this solidity disrupted the French takeover of the country and therefore Pastorian expectations.