Effects of fire on vegetation and arthropods in a coastal heath, south-east Queensland

2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathew Manwaring ◽  
Martyn Eliott ◽  
Philip Barton ◽  
Haylee Weaver
Keyword(s):  
1978 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 203 ◽  
Author(s):  
RD Moral ◽  
RJ Willis ◽  
DH Ashton

Eucalyptus baxteri produces a zone of suppression beneath its canopy when growing in coastal heath. Dominant species including Casuarina pusilla and Leptospermum myrsinoides are suppressed, but species such as L. juniperinum and Xanthorrhoea australis are not. Investigations of shoot water potential, soil nutrient levels and shading failed to suggest suppression by competition. E. nitida produces a slightly deeper shade but fails to produce a similar pattern of differential suppression. Chemical inhibition (allelopathy) of Casuarina pusilla, Eucalyptus viminalis and Triticum aestivum by E. baxteri was shown to exist under laboratory conditions. Foliar leachates of E, baxteri are inhibitory in bioassays and contain gentisic and ellagic acids. Litter leachates are also inhibitory in bioassays and contain gentisic, gallic, sinapic, caffeic and ellagic acids. Both leachates also contain several unknown phenolic aglycones, numerous glycosides, and terpenoids. Topsoil extracts are also inhibitory and contain resins and, possibly, terpenoids. The suppression zone is associated with the allelopathic ability of E. baxteri, and is maintained either through the direct transfer of foliar leachates to leaves of suppressed species, through root absorption of foliar and litter leachates, or as a consequence of mycorrhizal inhibition by such leachates.


2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 523-538 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liv S. Nilsen ◽  
Asbjørn Moen
Keyword(s):  

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (6) ◽  
pp. 604-612 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathew S. Crowther ◽  
Geetha Ortac ◽  
Simen Pedersen ◽  
Clare McArthur
Keyword(s):  

2013 ◽  
Vol 22 (7) ◽  
pp. 947 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrin Lowe ◽  
J. Guy Castley ◽  
Jean-Marc Hero

Fire has varying effects on species ecology. Knowledge of amphibian responses to fire is particularly limited, with variable responses reported amongst studies. Variability is attributed to differences in fire regimes, sampling methodologies, historical exposure to fire and species traits. Acid frogs, a group of amphibians restricted to acidic coastal heath wetlands of eastern Australia, occupy a discrete ecological niche that is exposed to regular and intense fires. Visual encounter surveys conducted monthly over 2 years revealed different short- and long-term responses to fire in three threatened acid frog species (Litoria olongburensis, Litoria freycineti and Crinia tinnula). Fires altered the thermal properties of habitats by increasing substrate temperature and widening daily temperature ranges. Acid frog populations did not suffer adversely from moderate intensity fires as suitable refuges, including standing water, were available. All species were present shortly after fire with subsequent successful reproduction occurring once wetlands were sufficiently inundated. Time since fire was a strong predictor of landscape scale differences in average relative abundance of acid frogs, yet the relationships varied among species. This highlights the importance of assessing community-wide responses to fire at the landscape scale. The dynamic and adaptive responses observed within acid frog populations demonstrate substantial resilience to fire processes in these fire prone environments.


2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 703-712 ◽  
Author(s):  
José Luiz Alves Silva ◽  
Alexandre Fadigas Souza ◽  
Louis Stephen Santiago

1985 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 271 ◽  
Author(s):  
DC Paton ◽  
V Turner

In coastal heath, 12 km north of Sydney, Banksia ericifolia set fruit after cross-pollination but not after controlled self-pollination. Animals removed nectar and pollen from inflorescences during the day but not overnight. Introduced honeybees (Apis mellifera) and native birds (Meliphagidae, Zosteropidae) visited flowers frequently during the day, carried pollen on their body surfaces and were likely to transfer pollen between plants. Native bees, nocturnal moths and ants also visited flowers but were too infrequent, did not move between plants or foraged inappropriately to be important pollinators. No mammals were seen visiting flowers and the small mammals we caught carried no pollen. Exclusion experiments confirmed that pollination occurred during the day and not at night, but the experiments were insufficient to determine the relative importance of honeybees versus birds as pollinators. Only about 3% of the flowers of Banksia ericifolia developed follicles under natural conditions. Follicle production in this species was limited by resources and not by pollinators, since multiple cross- pollinations of flowers did not increase follicle production above the natural rate.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document