Birds’ nests have evolved into many shapes and sizes, but they all function to provide a secure substrate for eggs and hatchlings, camouflage and defence from predators, as well as protect the eggs, hatchlings and incubating parent from harsh climatic conditions. My doctoral studies focused on understanding the factors influencing the structure and insulation of avian nests and hence the manner in which a nest may influence the energetic cost of incubation.
FACTORS INFLUENCING NEST SIZE AND SHAPE
Comparing the size and shape of nests of 36 Australian passerine species against parent mass reveals that nest surface area increases in direct proportion to the size of the parent. Nest diameter and height increase with parent mass but as nests become larger in line with increases in parent mass, the nest cup also becomes shallower and the opening becomes wider than expected, which allows for the space that the chicks will occupy.
Nest mass increases with parent mass at a rate that matches that of a supporting structure, suggesting that structural considerations of nest construction are of primary importance to nest design. The requirement for structural support is also evident for nest thickness, which increases more than proportionally expected as parent size increases. Structurally adequate nests become thicker than expected for their size in larger birds.
Of interest is how the size or number of eggs in a clutch relates to the size of a nest. The clutch surface area and the internal surface area of the nest increase simultaneously; and the clutch volume and volume of the nest cup are also associated. Since nest design for the majority of birds in the study is in part influenced by the male and egg shape is controlled by muscles in the pelvis of the female, it is likely that one does not control the other. However, nest and egg size/shape are influenced by body size and ancestry. Therefore, it is likely that the nest and clutch are in fact independent, yet matched secondarily due to the shared influence of body mass and genetic ancestry.
FACTORS INFLUENCING NEST INSULATION
As we know, the nest surface area increases in proportion to bird size, however nests become much thicker than expected as bird size increases. The thick walls provide structural support for the parent and clutch, with the consequence that structurally adequate nests achieve greater insulation than expected, as they increase in size. Nests are often viewed as objects that are designed to prevent heat loss from the clutch and incubating parent; however the requirement for adequate structural support is the primary selective influence on nest construction, not the requirement for insulation.
By assessing the insulation of Spiny-cheeked Honeyeater (Acanthagenys rufogularis) and Yellow-throated Miner (Manorina flavigula) nests under varying wind conditions, I found that wind enters the nest material and dissipates heat, resulting in a decrease in thermal insulation with greater wind speeds. The consequence of increased wind currents around and through the nests would be a near-doubling in heat production required by the parent when incubating.
While ambient temperature does not influence the structure of nests in my study, it does influence the insulation of nests and the thermal efficiency of the material. However, temperature and precipitation (henceforth referred to as climate) act in combination, indicating that the response of Australian passerines to one variable depends upon the level of the other.
In sites with low temperatures, nest insulation may be important to maintain an appropriate microclimate for offspring and therefore birds construct nests with good insulation, irrespective of the rainfall at the site. For nests constructed in warm climates but at the two extremes of rainfall, there is a pronounced decrease in insulation for nests built in areas with high rainfall, compared to areas with low rainfall.
The effect of climate extends to the thermal efficiency of the nest materials, indicating that not only the ambient temperature, but also the precipitation of the breeding site, influences material selection during the nest construction phase. Birds breeding in warm and wet climates construct their nests with materials that have a poor thermal efficiency compared to those in dry climates. The warm temperatures may cause a relaxation in the need for insulation, and poorly insulating materials (such as sticks and grasses, rather than fur and wool) are possibly less absorptive and able to dry out faster following a rain event, to restore the insulating function of the nest.
To determine the effect of water (from rain, dew or absorption from the nest substrate) on the heat loss from the nest, I measured Tawny-crowned Honeyeater (Gliciphila melanops) nests under varying water content levels (from dry to saturated). Water penetrating the nesting material increases conductance of G. melanops nests by up to two and a half times the rate seen in a dry nest – a consequence of the decreased thermal efficiency of materials in a wet nest. As a result, additional energy is required by the incubating parent to keep clutches warm when nests become wet. Individuals should be capable of obtaining additional floral resources to deal with an energy deficit in cold and wet conditions. However, if floral resources are poor and an individual is unable to meet such energy demands, it may abandon the nest altogether.
My studies highlight the importance of nest design and construction for the thermal properties of nests – small variations in nest design can have significant impacts on the insulation value of a nest, which will in turn influence the energetic cost of incubation. The effect of rain and wind on nest insulation, and the consequence of this for the energetics of the incubating parent, reinforces the view that appropriate nest site selection that provides additional shelter is crucial for avian reproductive success.
By Claire Treilibs
Without fur, feathers, or large-adorable eyes, reptiles generally draw the short straw when it comes to popular appeal of our native critters. Some (mammal-centric) commentators might argue that reptiles lack charisma, but these scaly creatures have their own je ne sais quoi.
A lesser-known central Australian resident is the endangered Slater’s skink (Liopholis slateri). With an air of nonchalance, these sly skinks laze outside their burrow entrances, peering through narrowed eyes, basking. Then – wham! At lightning speed, they pounce upon their prey – any ants or termites that might be wandering by.
I got to know a population of Slater’s skink over four years of a PhD study. I could tell who was whom from the spots and scale patterns on their faces. Once I found a way of recognising individuals by photograph, I could track them over time. Take ‘Spotty’ for instance. If I recorded where Spotty was when I snapped the photo, then I could track Spotty’s whereabouts; which burrows she uses, and for how long. I found that these skinks were surprisingly mobile within the population compared with the more sedentary habits of many of their close relatives.
Slater’s skinks are extraordinary in that they are specialist floodplain users. In fact, they only occur in the floodplains of the east and west MacDonnell Ranges. The entire global population occurs within 150 km of Alice Springs in 11 (mostly isolated) populations. Buffel grass, fire, climate change, and in some populations, cattle, are causing dramatic changes to their floodplain habitats and risking the future of this endangered skink.
Last month, indigenous ranger groups and other land managers got together to share information, discuss current monitoring and management of the skink, and how to help look after it in future. You can read more about the two-day Slater’s skink forum on the ABC post and the TNRM post.
~ Claire Treilibs
By Candice Appleby
As you may all recall earlier this year Land for Wildlife announced that we would be coordinating the rejuvenation of the National Trust NT Significant Trees Register. Overall, LFW are appointed to coordinate the maintenance of the register for the entire Northern Territory, however initially we have decided to focus our energy locally and revitalise the Central Australia Register.
A lot has changed in the region in the past 28 years since the inception of the register in 1989. Several listings have been removed from the register, as they have made way for town development or simply suffered the fate of nature (like fire, hail, old age and white ants). Likewise numerous listings were added in the 90’s when Greening Australia NT was managing the register.
Over the last few months we have made it a priority to get all this information into the digital age by GPS plotting each listing and getting all the information into an interactive database. After numerous site visits, sorting through old documents and culling expired listings, Land for Wildlife is excited to announce the Significant Trees Register (Central Australia Region) has now gone live!
Head to the project page at the Land for Wildlife website to read more about the register, see a list of the trees on the central Australian register, download PDF fact sheets about the trees and even take a ‘virtual’ tour of the register via an interactive Google Map.
Stay tuned for more updates to the register – next on the list to update is the Katherine- Daly Rivers Region. This is a region rich in Banyans, Boabs and historical blazes! Currently the Significant Tree Project is unfunded. Land for Wildlife is actively seeking funding to assist with the groundwork costs associated with reassessing trees and getting this information recorded on the database. Land for Wildlife would like to extend a great appreciation to our host Bill Low of Low Ecological Services for his ongoing support.
~ Candice Appleby
The Domestic Cat Monitoring and Awareness in Alice Springs program is wrapping up for another round and the cats are exhausted from all their hard work recording where they go and what they see. The tracker data has been through the wringer! Maps have been produced showing where the cats go and what their hotspots are. We will be running the timing of movements and distances through the calculator to get some statistics prepared. The final step in the process will be to collate the information and present this to the cat owners so they can see the results.
An additional monitoring round will take place in Tennant Creek in a couple of weeks if all goes to plan, with the intention of broadening the range of our community engagement. Several Tennant Creek residents with pet cats have offered to take part in the monitoring, with their data sneaking into the mix in the final couple of weeks of the funding round.
As a little taster of the data to come, this is the measured home-range of Possum, a young Tabby that spends a significant amount of time outside. Possum spends much of its time outside near the house (red hotspot) but the tracking data shows that Possum also spends a good proportion of his time near the main road, roaming in the riverbed and also in nearby bushland (90% of GPS fixes are within the green shaded zone). Not only does Possum roam on the large property, but he also visits neighbouring properties. Possum’s video surveillance and tracking data will be presented to his owner in the coming weeks as the project is wrapped up for another year.
Interested in having your cat tracked but you haven’t taken part in the monitoring yet? Land for Wildlife will look at continuing the monitoring process for members of the Land for Wildlife and Garden for Wildlife programs to engage with cat owners about responsible management of their free-roaming felines.
This project is supported by Territory Natural Resource Management, through funding from the Australian Government’s National Landcare Programme.
Feral cats have contributed to the disappearance of many ground dwelling birds and mammals in the arid zone and continue to threaten the success of recovery programs for endangered species. It’s therefore a service to the native animals of the region to trap any feral cats you find roaming your property. Land for Wildlife loan out cat traps to members and can provide you with the information and advice needed to get you on your way to become a successful trapper.
Are you already trapping cats? Land for Wildlife would like to hear from you. We are in the process of gathering information on trapping success by Land for Wildlife members on their property. This information will be used to help the Alice Springs Town Council’s Environment Advisory Committee to assess the effectiveness of various trapping programs in the region.
We can determine trapping success by taking the ratio of the number of cats trapped to the number of trapping nights (successful and unsuccessful). If you are trapping feral cats on your property and are able to provide us with this information, we would appreciate it! Email us at firstname.lastname@example.org with the two figures plus the suburb you are trapping in and we can collate the data from our members.
The production of a scent by a flower is well-understood by many as a method of attracting birds, bats, butterflies, beetles, ants and various other invertebrates to the flower. The smell produced by a flower acts as an attractant, which is generally combined with a reward of nectar, and has the primary function of assisting the plant with reproduction via pollination.
For some plants, the floral scent can be a delight, with each flower producing a distinctive scent that is attractive to a certain faunal assemblage. For other flowers, the scent can be less appealing to the human nose, but attracts the correct pollinator none-the-less. Flowers that smell like carrion have evolved to attract flies and beetles that would normally lay their eggs in rotting meat and faeces. They are often tempted to the carrion flowers by the smell and their visitation to the flower inadvertently pollinates it, before they depart for a more suitable place to lay their eggs.
But what about the strong scent emitted by leaves, bark and other plant tissues when no flowers are present? The roots of many Acacia have a strong foetid smell when being handled, which is produced by nitrifying root bacteria nodules, indicating that they are active and performing their task. But often, the scent in plant leaves is produced by complex chemicals. The complex chemicals that give plants their odour are often the by-products or waste components of plant metabolism, or photosynthesis. These secondary metabolites are known as volatile organic compounds. They are known as volatile, because they evaporate quickly from the liquid state and enter the air as gas, which causes the sudden detection of a scent. The largest groups of volatile organic compounds are the terpenoids (compounds with an isoprenoid structure) and green leaf volatiles. For other plants the odours are a result of other secondary metabolites called flavonoids and phenols, which are composed of hydroxyl groups attached to an aromatic ring.
Green leaf volatiles are best known as the smell that is produced by freshly mown grass, generally resulting from 6-carbon aldehydes and alcohols. When grass is damaged (e.g. cut by a lawnmower) it triggers enzymes to start breaking down fats and phospholipids, leading to the formation of linolenic and linoleic acids that are oxidised and broken down by another enzyme. The process splits the molecule into fragments that lead to the cut grass smell.
Terpenoids are responsible for contributing to many scents produced by plants. The smell of Native Pine (Callitris glaucophylla) comes from pinene. The smell of native lemongrass (Cymbopogon ambiguus) is a result of limonene and α-terpineol (both commonly found in citrus), as well as eugenol and elemicin (found in nutmeg and clove). Species of Eucalyptus contain a terpenoid called cineole, which gives the leaves their characteristic fresh scent. Cineole can also be found in other local native plants such as Striped Mintbush (Prostanthera striatiflora). Sticky Bluerod (Stemodia viscosa) contains terpenoids such as caryophyllene (pepper-like scent in rosemary), fenchol (found in basil) and limonene.
Some other strongly scented natives are Apple Bush (Pterocaulon sphacelatum), Gidgee (Acacia cambagei), and Curry Wattle (Acacia spondylophylla).
While Sticky Hopbush (Dodonaea viscosa) has a distinctive scent and flower capsules that are visually similar to Hops (Humulus lupulus), used in the production of beer, they are not botanically related. Hopbush (D. viscosa) gets its name, as is was used to make beer by early European Australians, yet there are no taxonomic links to Hops (H. lupulus). Sticky Hopbush produces a scent from a combination of flavonoids such as isorhamnetin, hyperoside and a citrus flavonoid rutin, whereas Hops produces its scent from myrcene, beta-pinene and alpha-humulene (a sesquiterpene). Their scent is, however, somewhat similar despite the difference composition. On a side note, Hops and Marijuana (Cannabis sativa) have similar organoleptic properties (taste and smell), as they have similar aromatic compounds, owing to their taxonomic relatedness.
Volatile organic compound emissions are affected by factors that include temperature (determines rates of volatilization) and sunlight (determines rates of biosynthesis). Emission occurs almost exclusively from the leaves, the stomata in particular. Hence, the Gidgee around town will smell to varying degrees, depending on the weather. There is a stand of Gidgee near Billygoat Hill in Alice Springs, which commonly will stink out the region on a rainy, misty and high humidity morning during a period of weather depressions.
The production of volatile organic compounds can require extra energy by plants and therefore can come at a cost. So why bother? Strong odours emitted by plants may also be a way of deterring browsing herbivores or insects. Volatile terpenoids released by plants when under attack from herbivorous insects allows predatory insects (or insect parasitoids) to locate prey secondarily through infected hosts (E.g. Pine trees). Volatile organic compounds may even be produced to help kill off other plants in the vicinity, in order to thrive themselves (E.g. Eucalyptus sp.). Some plants give off scent when crushed that induces defence mechanisms in neighbouring plants or promote production of new cells at the site of the wound to repair the damage. Some compounds even act as antibiotics to prevent infection at the site of the crush.
So if you start smelling something strange on the wind following a change in weather, you may be able to sniff it out to a plant upwind!
By Marg Friedel
Back In March, Marg gave a talk to the Alice Springs Field Naturalists Club, which she called “Where did they come from and how did they get here? Examining the evidence for some familiar weeds of arid central Australia”. As part of her rummaging in the records of Australia’s Virtual Herbarium (AVH), and lots of follow-up reading and discussion, she found evidence for camel harness being the source of a surprising number of invasive plant species.
Not so surprising was the evidence for Buffel Grass (Cenchrus ciliaris), which was first recorded in AVH south of Wyndham in 1897, near the Ord River. Camels were in use, supplying the goldfields at Hall’s Creek, and the cameleers commonly rested at waterholes and creeks. From the 1880s, camels were sourced from India to modern Afghanistan and were brought into Western Australia via Fremantle predominantly, as well as Geraldton, Port Hedland and Albany. They serviced the pastoral industry and mines both inland and along the WA coast. Joe Moore, storekeeper at Port Headland, persuaded school children to collect the seeds from buffel grass growing around the town from about 1910, and distributed it to stations in the district.
Buffel grass also came with camels via Port Augusta from the 1860s, and camel trains and Ghan towns were a feature of much of inland South Australia, Northern Territory and New South Wales, as well as WA. The first herbarium record for NT is Woodforde Well in 1931, but we know from Walter Smith that cameleers were deliberately spreading buffel grass well before that.
Fountain Grass (Cenchrus setaceus) first appears in AVH in 1903 at Eurelia, near Orroroo, South Australia. Cloncurry Buffel (Cenchrus pennisetiformis), supposedly introduced by General Birdwood after WWI, appears in 1915 in the Geraldton-Greenough area. Birdwood Grass (Cenchrus setigera), appears at Roebourne in 1932, in keeping with its introduction by General Birdwood. Hence it’s likely that three of the Cenchrus species, including buffel grass, came with camels initially, and that subsequently there were deliberate introductions.
Rosy Dock (Acetosa vesicaria) was first collected by naturalist Richard Helms in Perth in 1892, after he left the Lindsay expedition in the Murchison district. Rosy dock is native to north Africa, southwestern Asia and the Indian sub-continent, so it’s a likely accidental inclusion in camel harness arriving in Fremantle.
Kapok Bush (Aerva javanica) was found in 1937 on the de Grey River and Roy Hill Station in 1938, according to AVH. The Ord River Regeneration Project was undertaken from the 1960s, using seed sourced from existing populations on Anna Plains station in the Pilbara and Fitzroy Crossing in the West Kimberley. These populations were understood at the time to have come from camel harness, and kapok bush was known to be used historically by Arabian people for cushion and saddle padding.
Perhaps more surprisingly Rubber Bush (Calotropis procera) is likely to have arrived with the camels that serviced the railhead at Mungana, in Queensland, for the nearby copper mines. A railway operated from Mareeba to Mungana from about 1900, and Mungana was the focus for camel teams for about six years. Rubber bush was first reported in AVH in 1935 at Mungana.
And of course the date palm (Phoenix dactylifera) was distributed by cameleers, all up giving us quite a substantial list of species likely to have arrived with cameleers and their camels.
Marg would like to hear from anyone with any additional information – whether in support or counter to her story.
~ Marg Friedel
Land for Wildlife launched the second edition of Reptiles and Frogs of Alice Springs by Nic Gambold and Deborah Metters at the Alice Springs Reptile Centre this month. The launch was attended by 20 keen Land for Wildlife and Garden for Wildlife members, who were treated to a presentation by Rex Neindorf on the biology and habits of legless lizards (Family PYGOPODIDAE).
Rex explained how members can identify the differences between some of the common legless lizards and small venomous snakes. He showed an example of an Excitable Delma or Excitable Snake Lizard (Delma tincta), which can often be confused with a baby brown snake. The two reptiles have a similar colour, both lay eggs and both slither along the ground. However, there are some clear differences, which were explained in detail and shown to those attending the event.
When the Excitable Delma was released onto the ground, the reason for its name became obvious. The legless lizard launched its body around on the ground with a huge amount of excitement. This was a great way to distinguish the difference between this particular legless lizard and snake. Rule 1: Snakes don’t jump. They do slither along the ground and they can launch their head and front third of their body, but they are not jumpers. Excitable Delmas are able to jump several centimetres off the ground, using their whole body.
Legless lizards have ears and some have eyelids and snakes do not have either. This is an easy way to tell the difference between the two types of reptiles, if you can get close enough without putting yourself or others in danger. Snakes can’t blink, instead they have a thin transparent scale that covers the eye, which are known as spectacles and are replaced when the snake sheds its skin. Snakes don’t have visible ear openings, but rather their inner ear is connected directly to the jawbone, which senses vibrations. Many legless lizards have small ear openings behind the jaw. Legless lizards may have lost their legs as large extensions over evolutionary time, however they do possess small residual nodules to the rear where the hind legs would have been. Keep an eye on the tongue of the reptile when it licks the air. Snakes have a very distinctly forked tongue, which is quite long and slim, whereas legless lizards have a fatter tongue that lacks a defined fork.
Legless lizards have the ability to drop their tail as a life-saving protection mechanism from predators, known as caudal autotomy. Many land owners are tricked this way when they are frightened, thinking they have found a snake and take to the individual with a shovel, only to find the animal does not die (quite the opposite for a snake, but we do not recommend testing this theory as we are pro-life for all reptiles!). Many legless lizards have a very small body and a large tail and hence are not killed when sliced in half. The tail will then regenerate given enough time and cause no discomfort to the individual. The regenerating tail has a slight colour difference in comparison to the rest of the body and so a shearing point can be found on some legless lizards that have undergone regeneration. Snakes do not regenerate a tail and therefore similar patternation can be found down the length of the body.
Some other distinguishing characteristics are less easy to identify in a hurry. For example, if you can get the reptile to roll over (good luck), you can check the ventral pattern of the scales. In venomous snakes, the ventral scales are wide, extending along the width of the belly and continue in such a way down the length of the body. In legless lizards, the scales on the underbelly are much like those on the rest of the body. Snakes are able to use their belly and side scales to move in an S-shape along the ground, whereas legless lizards can only use their sides. This means that if a legless lizard moves onto a completely smooth surface, it will lose its ability to move (important to note if you see one on the road – take care and drive around it if possible). If you happen to keep an eye on it long enough to find it feeding, legless lizards are not able to unlock their jaws to swallow large prey so they will generally go for smaller food items than snakes will.
Differences between venomous and non-venomous snakes include the size of the body scales (large in venomous snakes and small in non-venomous snakes), patterning of the body (non-intricate in venomous snakes and intricate in non-venomous snakes), tail movement (non-prehensile tail in venomous snakes, prehensile in non-venomous snakes) and loreal scales (no loreal scales in venomous snakes, loreal scales in non-venomous snakes).
Rex also explained about the snake catching service provided by the Alice Springs Reptile Centre. He noted that they have caught fewer snakes than usual this year since there has been a lot of rain so the snakes can’t be seen amongst the grass as easily, though the catch levels were still higher than we expected.
If you notice a venomous snake on your property, you can call the Alice Springs Reptile Centre call-out number on 0407 983 276. Keep an eye on the snake and they will attend to collect it as soon as possible. Snakes are then released at several sites around Alice Springs in the rural area, depending on the required habitat of the caught individual.
The Alice Springs Reptile Centre is selling snake bandages that have indicator boxes to determine the correct application of tension to prevent the venom spreading. If you are updating your first aid kit, you may wish to visit Rex and his team to discuss suitable bandage options.
Thanks go to Rex Neindorf for launching the Reptiles and Frogs of Alice Springs booklet and providing such an informative presentation!
The Reptiles and Frogs of Alice Springs booklet can be purchased from Land for Wildlife Central Australia for $15 at any of our upcoming stalls at local events. You can also grab copies from Arid Lands Environment Centre and Red Kangaroo Books.
For those that attended the Biodiversity Matters: Buffel Busters Tour of Alice Springs, you may be familiar with the booklet that we have been developing—A Selection of Grasses from Central Australia (yet to be formally titled). The information used was sourced from an excellent online resource called AusGrass2, in combination with 30 grass samples collected from Land for Wildlife member properties.
We have been able to seek permission from the Queensland Herbarium, who now manages the site, to use the information to develop a regional grass guide for central Australia. This will help our members to identify the invasive grasses and distinguish them from the local native grasses, as well as learn about the diversity of grasses in central Australia.
To help us along with producing a complete booklet, we are still seeking samples from the following native and exotic species (For the plant experts among you, let us know if you know where to find any of them):
|Grey-beard Grass, Long Grey-beard Grass||Amphipogon caricinus|
|Cane Grass Three-awn, Two-gland Three-awn||Aristida biglandulosa|
|Needle-leaved Three-awn||Aristida capillifolia|
|Bunched Kerosene Grass, Mulga Grass||Aristida contorta|
|Jericho Three-awn||Aristida jerichoensis var. subspinulifera|
|Feathertop Wiregrass||Aristida latifolia|
|Rock Three-awn||Aristida latzii|
|Flat-awned Three-awn||Aristida nitidula|
|Brush Three-awn, Brush Wiregrass||Aristida obscura|
|Weeping Mitchell Grass||Astrebla elymoides|
|Barley Mitchell Grass||Astrebla pectinata|
|Rough Speargrass||Austrostipa scabra subsp. scabra|
|Wild Oat||Avena fatua|
|Desert Bluegrass||Bothriochloa ewartiana|
|Birdwood Grass||Cenchrus setiger|
|Comb Chloris||Chloris pectinata|
|Feathertop Rhodes Grass, Furry Grass, Feather Finger-grass||Chloris virgata|
|Feathertop Rhodes Grass, Furry Grass, Feather Finger-grass||Chloris virgata|
|Golden Beard Grass, Ribbon Grass, Weeping Grass, Spear Grass||Chrysopogon fallax|
|Northern Barley Grass||Critesion murinum subsp. glaucum|
|Silkyheads, Lemon-scented Grass||Cymbopogon obtectus|
|Sheda Grass||Dichanthium annulatum|
|Dwarf Bluegrass||Dichanthium sericeum subsp. humilius|
|Silky Umbrella Grass, Spider Grass||Digitaria ammophila|
|Umbrella Grass, Finger Panic Grass||Digitaria coenicola|
|Comb Finger Grass||Digitaria ctenantha|
|Japanese Millet||Echinochloa esculenta|
|Conetop Nine-awn, Clelands Nine-awn||Enneapogon clelandii|
|Jointed Nine-awn, Limestone Oat-grass, Jointed Bottlewasher||Enneapogon cylindricus|
|Rock Nine-awn||Enneapogon oblongus|
|Curly Windmill Grass, Umbrella Grass, Spider grass||Enteropogon acicularis|
|Eragrostis A51007 Limestone|
|Swamp Canegrass||Eragrostis australasica|
|Neat Lovegrass, Clustered Lovegrass||Eragrostis basedowii|
|Fairy Grass, Cumings Lovegrass||Eragrostis cumingii|
|Mallee Lovegrass||Eragrostis dielsii|
|Clustered Lovegrass, Close-headed Lovegrass||Eragrostis elongata|
|Small-flowered Lovegrass||Eragrostis kennedyae|
|Purple Lovegrass||Eragrostis lacunaria|
|Drooping Lovegrass||Eragrostis leptocarpa|
|Weeping Lovegrass||Eragrostis parviflora|
|Small Lovegrass||Eragrostis pergracilis|
|Neverfail, Narrow-leaf Neverfail||Eragrostis setifolia|
|Knottybutt Neverfail||Eragrostis xerophila|
|Three-awn Wanderrie||Eriachne aristidea|
|Woollybutt Wanderrie||Eriachne helmsii|
|Pretty Wanderrie||Eriachne pulchella subsp. pulchella|
|Eight Day Grass, Common Fringe-rush||Fimbristylis dichotoma|
|Bunch Speargrass, Black Speargrass||Heteropogon contortus|
|Rough-stemmed Flinders Grass||Iseilema dolichotrichum|
|Bull Flinders Grass||Iseilema macratherum|
|Small Flinders Grass||Iseilema membranaceum|
|Red Flinders Grass||Iseilema vaginiflorum|
|Umbrella Canegrass||Leptochloa digitata|
|Small-flowered Beetle Grass||Leptochloa fusca subsp. fusca|
|Brown Beetle Grass||Leptochloa fusca subsp. muelleri|
|Beetle Grass||Leptochloa fusca subsp. uninervia|
|Natal Red Top, Red Natal Grass||Melinis repens|
|Winged Chloris||Oxychloris scariosa|
|Giant Panic||Panicum antidotale|
|Hairy Panic||Panicum effusum|
|Pepper Grass||Panicum laevinode|
|Bristle-brush Grass||Paractaenum refractum|
|Clements Paspalidium||Paspalidium clementii|
|Knottybutt Paspalidium, Slender Panic||Paspalidium constrictum|
|Warrego Summer Grass||Paspalidium jubiflorum|
|Bunch Paspalidium||Paspalidium rarum|
|Pennisetum pedicellatum subsp. unispiculum|
|Comet Grass||Perotis rara|
|Annual Beardgrass||Polypogon monspeliensis|
|Australian Dropseed||Sporobolus australasicus|
|Tall Oat Grass, Oat Kangaroo Grass, Native Oat Grass, Swamp Kangaroo Grass||Themeda avenacea|
|Window Mulga Grass, Mulga Mitchell Grass, Mulga Grass||Thyridolepis mitchelliana|
|Spurred Arrowgrass||Triglochin calcitrapum|
|Hard Spinifex, Lobed Spinifex||Triodia basedowii|
|Hard Spinifex, Lobed Spinifex||Triodia brizoides|
|Buck Spinifex, Bull Spinifex, Giant Grey Spinifex||Triodia longiceps|
|Five-minute Grass, Rye Beetle Grass||Tripogon loliiformis|
|Hairy Armgrass, Hairy Summer Grass, Green Summer Grass||Urochloa piligera|
|Large Armgrass, Large Summer Grass||Urochloa praetervisa|
|Sandhill Canegrass||Zygochloa paradoxa|
Land for Wildlife assisted Arid Lands Environment Centre to run a Biodiversity Matters: Buffel Busters Tour on the 18th of February 2017. You can read more about the event at our Blog:
Land for Wildlife were there to assist the Land for Wildlife properties to showcase the natural values of their properties, identifying plants for those on tour and we had a camera to capture the day. It was quite a windy day, according to the camera, so we have learnt that a microphone is sometimes a necessary tool (we must never stop learning!). Apologies for the windy moments towards the start, but it’s worth persisting. I’ve included some subtitles in places to help you out. It includes some presentations by the Buffel Busters on the day, photographs of the event and some of the wildlife spotted at the Buffel-free sites.
You can view the video below, and share it through the link: https://youtu.be/xzyi6D1OZFE
Still want to learn more about Buffel Grass? Head to our Resources web page for links to a range of handy fact sheets.
Thanks to the supporters: Arid Lands Environment Centre, Territory Natural Resource Management, Desert Knowledge Australia, Alice Springs Landcare Inc and Olive Pink Botanic Garden. Thanks to everyone that came along to the event and especially to all of the Buffel Busters that shared their experience, knowledge and wisdom (Peter Latz, Bruce Simmons, Debbie Page, Jude Prichard from Alice Springs Landcare Inc, and Doug McDougall from Olive Pink Botanic Garden).