Phylogeny and taxonomy of the Ophiostoma piceae complex and the Dutch elm disease fungi

The Ophiostoma piceae complex forms a monophyletic group of insect-dispersed pyrenomycetes with synnemata (Pesotum) and micronematous (Sporothrix) synanamorphs. Other species of Ophios-toma outside of the O. piceae complex that form syn-nemata lack the Sporothrix state. The nine recognized species within the 0. piceae complex are delimited by synnema morphology, growth rate at 32 C, mating reactions and sequences of the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region of the rDNA operon. Phyloge-netic analysis of the ITS region suggests two major clades in the complex, one that causes bluestain in primarily coniferous hosts and the other on primarily hardwood hosts. In the coniferous group are O. pi-ceae, O. canum, O. floccosum and the recently de-scribed O. setosum (anamorph Pesotum cupulatum sp. nov.). In the hardwood group are O. querci, O. caton-ianum, and the Dutch elm disease fungi: O. ulmi, O. novo-ulmi and O. himal-ulmi. Restriction fragment length polymorphisms of the ITS region are shown to be a convenient diagnostic tool for delimiting these species

Review of best management practices for aquatic vegetation control in stormwater ponds, wetlands, and lakes

Auckland Council (AC) is responsible for the development and operation of a stormwater network across the region to avert risks to citizens and the environment. Within this stormwater network, aquatic vegetation (including plants, unicellular and filamentous algae) can have both a positive and negative role in stormwater management and water quality treatment. The situations where management is needed to control aquatic vegetation are not always clear, and an inability to identify effective, feasible and economical control options may constrain management initiatives. AC (Infrastructure and Technical Services, Stormwater) commissioned this technical report to provide information for decision- making on aquatic vegetation management with in stormwater systems that are likely to experience vegetation-related issues. Information was collated from a comprehensive literature review, augmented by knowledge held by the authors. This review identified a wide range of management practices that could be potentially employed. It also demonstrated complexities and uncertainties relating to these options that makes the identification of a best management practice difficult. Hence, the focus of this report was to enable users to screen for potential options, and use reference material provided on each option to confirm the best practice to employ for each situation. The report identifies factors to define whether there is an aquatic vegetation problem (Section 3.0), and emphasises the need for agreed management goals for control (e.g. reduction, mitigation, containment, eradication). Resources to screen which management option(s) to employ are provided (Section 4.0), relating to the target aquatic vegetation, likely applicability of options to the system being managed, indicative cost, and ease of implementation. Initial screening allows users to shortlist potential control options for further reference (Section 5.0). Thirty-five control options are described (Section 5.0) in sufficient detail to consider applicability to individual sites and species. These options are grouped under categories of biological, chemical or physical control. Biological control options involve the use of organisms to predate, infect or control vegetation growth (e.g. classical biological control) or manipulate conditions to control algal growth (e.g. pest fish removal, microbial products). Chemical control options involve the use of pesticides and chemicals (e.g. glyphosate, diquat), or the use of flocculants and nutrient inactivation products that are used to reduce nutrient loading, thereby decreasing algal growth. Physical control options involve removing vegetation or algal biomass (e.g. mechanical or manual harvesting), or setting up barriers to their growth (e.g. shading, bottom lining, sediment capping). Preventative management options are usually the most cost effective, and these are also briefly described (Section 6.0). For example, the use of hygiene or quarantine protocols can reduce weed introductions or spread. Catchment- based practices to reduce sediment and nutrient sources to stormwater are likely to assist in the avoidance of algal and possibly aquatic plant problems. Nutrient removal may be a co-benefit where harvesting of submerged weed biomass is undertaken in stormwater systems. It should also be considered that removal of substantial amounts of submerged vegetation may result in a sudden and difficult-to-reverse s witch to a turbid, phytoplankton dominated state. Another possible solution is the conversion of systems that experience aquatic vegetation issues, to systems that are less likely to experience issues. The focus of this report is on systems that receive significant stormwater inputs, i.e. constructed bodies, including ponds, amenity lakes, wetlands, and highly-modified receiving bodies. However, some information will have application to other natural water bodies

World distribution, diversity and endemism of aquatic macrophytes

To test the hitherto generally-accepted hypothesis that most aquatic macrophytes have broad world distributions, we investigated the global distribution, diversity and endemism patterns of 3457 macrophyte species that occur in permanent, temporary or ephemeral inland freshwater and brackish waterbodies worldwide. At a resolution of 10 × 10° latitude x longitude, most macrophyte species were found to have narrow global distributions: 78% have ranges (measured using an approach broadly following the IUCN-defined concept “extent of occurrence”) that individually occupy <10% of the world area present within the six global ecozones which primarily provide habitat for macrophytes. We found evidence of non-linear relationships between latitude and macrophyte α- and γ-diversity, with diversity highest in sub-tropical to low tropical latitudes, declining slightly towards the Equator, and also declining strongly towards higher latitudes. Landscape aridity and, to a lesser extent, altitude and land area present per gridcell also influence macrophyte diversity and species assemblage worldwide. The Neotropics and Orient have the richest ecozone species-pools for macrophytes, depending on γ-diversity metric used. The region around Brasilia/Goiás (Brazil: gridcell 10–20 °S; 40–50 °W) is the richest global hotspot for macrophyte α-diversity (total species α-diversity, ST: 625 species/gridcell, 350 of them Neotropical endemics). In contrast, the Sahara/Arabian Deserts, and some Arctic areas, have the lowest macrophyte α-diversity (ST <20 species/gridcell). At ecozone scale, macrophyte species endemism is pronounced, though with a>5-fold difference between the most species-rich (Neotropics) and species-poor (Palaearctic) ecozones. Our findings strongly support the assertion that small-ranged species constitute most of Earth’s species diversity

Plants in aquatic ecosystems: current trends and future directions

Aquatic plants fulfil a wide range of ecological roles, and make a substantial contribution to the structure, function and service provision of aquatic ecosystems. Given their well-documented importance in aquatic ecosystems, research into aquatic plants continues to blossom. The 14th International Symposium on Aquatic Plants, held in Edinburgh in September 2015, brought together 120 delegates from 28 countries and six continents. This special issue of Hydrobiologia includes a select number of papers on aspects of aquatic plants, covering a wide range of species, systems and issues. In this paper we present an overview of current trends and future directions in aquatic plant research in the early 21st century. Our understanding of aquatic plant biology, the range of scientific issues being addressed and the range of techniques available to researchers have all arguably never been greater; however, substantial challenges exist to the conservation and management of both aquatic plants and the ecosystems in which they are found. The range of countries and continents represented by conference delegates and authors of papers in the special issue illustrate the global relevance of aquatic plant research in the early 21st century but also the many challenges that this burgeoning scientific discipline must address

The restoration of native aquatic plants

I am very pleased to be here today because I have the privilege of speaking about a good news story, that being the restoration of native aquatic plants instead of weeds. I will start by looking at what native aquatic plants look like, touch on species and communities, and talk about their benefits. You have heard some of this already from Max and Tracey, but we are now going to look at actions for restoration and then move on to outcome examples

Spraying as a solution

When invasive aquatic weeds establish in a lake, they usually result in detrimental effects on native biodiversity, amenity and utility values. Once a weed species or weed issue has been recognised control options are often sought to protect amenity and utility functions of aquatic systems. There is also a growing desire to control invasive plants to support the restoration of lakes, improving biodiversity and habitat values. The tools or methods that can be utilised for the control of invasive aquatic plants can be broadly described by the following categories; habitat manipulation; biological, chemical, mechanical and manual, and integrated weed control. The selection of which tool to use is primarily determined by the target weed, characteristics of the lake or waterbody and the management goals or desired outcome. Herbicides can be used to provide effective, selective and targeted weed control. This paper describes the products available, how they work and the environmental benefits that can be achieved with their use

Hygraula nitens, the only native aquatic caterpillar in New Zealand, prefers feeding on an alien submerged plant

International audienceHygraula nitens is a New Zealand native moth with aquatic larvae that feed on submerged aquatic plants. The larvae have been mainly observed using native Potamogeton and Myriophyllum species as a food source, although some studies reported larvae feeding on the alien macrophytes Hydrilla verticillata, Lagarosiphon major and Ceratophyllum demersum. Experimental mesocosm studies showed larvae had a major effect on H. verticillata, C. demersum, L. major, Elodea canadensis and Egeria densa. In both no choice and choice experiments H. nitens larvae showed a clear preference for and the highest consumption of C. demersum, while the native macrophyte Myriophyllum triphyllum ranked fourth out of five alien and two native plant species, indicating a preference of the larvae for alien macrophytes. Additional choice experiments using C. demersum, sampled from different waters in NZ, illustrated that there was a clear difference in H. nitens preference for plants based on their source. However although C. demersum had the lowest leaf dry matter content (LDMC) compared with the other macrophytes, neither the LDMC nor leaf carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus or total phenolic contents alone could explain the preferences of H. nitens, and we conclude that food choice is based on a combination of these and/or additional factors

On the move: New insights on the ecology and management of native and alien macrophytes

Globally, freshwater ecosystems are under threat. The main threats come from catchment land-use changes, altered water regimes, eutrophication, invasive species, climate change and combinations of these factors. We need scientific research to respond to these challenges by providing solutions to halt the deterioration and improve the condition of our valuable freshwaters. This requires a good understanding of aquatic ecosystems, and the nature and scale of changes occurring. Macrophytes play a fundamental role in aquatic systems. They are sensitive indicators of ecosystem health, as they are affected by run-off from agricultural, industrial or urban areas. On the other hand, alien macrophytes are increasingly invading aquatic systems all over the world. Improving our knowledge on the ecology and management of both native and alien plants is indispensable to address threats to freshwaters in order to protect and restore aquatic habitats. The International Aquatic Plants Group (IAPG) brings together scientists and practitioners based at universities, research and environmental organisations around the world. The main themes of the 15th symposium 2018 in New Zealand were biodiversity and conservation, management, invasive species, and ecosystem response and restoration. This Virtual Special Issue provides a comprehensive review from the symposium, addressing the ecology of native macrophytes, including those of conservation concern, and highly invasive alien macrophytes, and the implications of management interventions. In this editorial paper, we highlight insights and paradigms on the ecology and management of native and alien macrophytes gathered during the meeting