Gleanings From The Journals: Who Was Our First Conservation Officer?

As the following article indicates there is much to be learnt from the old journals so much so that from time to time there will be a series of posts titled Gleanings from the Journals.

This first of the series was taken from Volume 36 No 10, November 2012 Journal of the Native Orchid of South Australia.

WHO WAS OUR FIRST CONSERVATION OFFICER?

Recently I’ve been looking over the old NOSSA Journals. I like (my husband says addictive!) reading history and even more reading original source material, so it’s not surprising that I’ve enjoyed this activity. There are some lovely gems in them. I like to read about the people, which brings me to the title of this article – Who was our first Conservation Officer?

Well if you ask Thelma Bridle, she’ll say that it was Karen Possingham but when I read in the April 1984 edition, I see that Margaret Fuller is said to be “the initiator of the Conservation Group” back in 1982. Margaret had a long involvement with the Bird Care and Conservation Group. She headed the NOSSA group who collaborated with the Education Department to produce Pic-a-Pac, an orchid teaching package for the schools.

Yet was Margaret the first? For I then read of two foundational members. Roy Hargreaves who is described as a “keen conservationist, ambassador and liaison person with numerous groups including SGAP, OCSA, Parks and Wildlife, the Adelaide Botanic Gardens, Black Hill Flora Research Centre, … an initiator of the R. S. Rogers Orchid House.” The other is Ron Robjohns who “drafted the Society’s Constitution and By-laws and formulated the Society’s Conservation Policy.” But ….. there is a third contender amongst the founding members – Peter Hornsby, the Society’s first editor and an organiser of field trips. Peter was always putting articles in the Journals relating to conservation. A keen conservationist and current member, he resigned his role as editor in 1981 to “concentrate on his study of the behaviour of the Yellow-footed Rock Wallaby in the North Flinders Ranges.” And yet we could continue for there were other foundational members who took a keen interest in conservation.

So who was our first Conservation Officer? Well, Thelma is right. It was Karen Possingham. She was the first one to have the title Conservation Officer when she was appointed to the role in March 1992 – fifteen years after the founding of the Society, and remained in that role until May 1997 when she became a councillor with the Burnside City Council. Karen formalised many activities, organizing bi-monthly meetings, Conservation Booths at the various NOSSA shows, lobbying, weeding, etc

Below is her report of their first meeting.

CONSERVATION GROUP PRIORITIES SET                                       K. Possingham

The first meeting of the 1992 NOSSA Orchid Conservation Sub-Committee was held on Wednesday 15th April. The following priorities were set at the meeting:

1) Lobby politicians; resolution to write letters to the Minister of the Environment, to National Parks and Wildlife, Department of Environmental Planning, Woods and Forests and Leaders of the Opposition Parties, and request a meeting in July to discuss Orchid Conservation strategy.

Liaise with other Conservation groups such as the Conservation Council; join at first as an Association Member and find out about South Australia’s conservation concerns and needs.

3) Monitor Hills Zone development; – liaise with Mt. Lofty Ranges Conservation Association.

4) Prioritise high risk sites that are not managed properly and in danger of clearance, habitat degradation etc.

5) In short term adopt a Reserve such as Belair National Park in order to monitor known Orchid populations, raise Society profile and provide assistance in weeding and other such requirements. This will provide conservation experience for members. There is easy access to Belair from Adelaide and the park and conservation activities should appeal to younger members as well as older members: we’ll be doing something concrete!

6) Possibility to apply for funding from Endangered Species Program, World Wildlife Fund and Save the Bush, to work on endangered orchids.

7) Education: area at Warrawong to be fenced off from animals for native orchids to be established and protected.

Meetings are to be held bi-monthly: Next meeting will be held on Wednesday, 10th June at 8

P.M. Anyone is welcome. Enquiries Karen Possingham, Conservation Officer, ph 364 0671.

Karen remained involved with the Conservation Group until the family moved to Queensland in 2000 where her husband Hugh took a chair in the departments of Mathematics and Biological Sciences at the University of Queensland. Prior to leaving Adelaide, Hugh had been President of the Nature Conservation Council, Professor of Environmental Science and Management at Adelaide University and instrumental in initiating biodiversity planning in South Australia. Hugh has made various trips back to Adelaide will be back here on 27th November to talk about Citizen Science prior to the Uni SA and ABC 891 Great Koala Count the next day.

I have wandered a bit from Karen as NOSSA’s first Conservation Officer but from what I can see in reading the Journals Hugh and Karen worked together in conservation and though no longer in South Australia are still actively involved in conservation. The objectives of that first meeting Karen left with NOSSA and continues to this day, albeit with changes to adapt to current issues and thinking.

Protect Our Orchids – Stay on the Path

This week there was a workshop South Lofty Block Orchid Recovery Project with representatives from Adelaide and Mt Lofty Ranges Natural Resource Management, SA Water, Forestry SA, Park Rangers, Threatened Plant Action Group and NOSSA. Many issues were discussed. One issue briefly discussed was the development of unofficial bike and walking tracks in parks and the negative impact that this would have on rare and endangered orchids.

This issue is not unique to Australia, the American Orchid Society whose mantra is Education, Conservation and Research published in their journal Orchid February 2008 a summary article titled Watch Your Step: Possible Consequences of Walking off the Trail.  The authors are Maryilyn H.S. Light and Michael Mcconaill and the original paper can be found in the Lankesteriana 7:294 – 298  Click on the titles to read the articles.

The researchers studied the effects of visiting a site once a day and standing in the same spot for 10 minutes ie the effects of trampling. Their research suggested that there are possible longer term consequences as they found that the effects of compaction was still observable 18 months later. This does not seem like much but it was sufficient for them to offer some advice such as

  • stay on the tracks,
  • don’t walk on the side as even walking on the side of the track can result in unintended damage as the track is widened,
  • when one person walks off the track others are likely to follow
  • think carefully of the consequences before walking off the track
  • where possible step on rocks, not soil

The research was carried out in Canada and though there are differences between the two countries, there are so many similarities it is worth our while to take note of their advice.

Possibly there is scope for research here in South Australia but in the meantime their summary sentence says it all – Until we know what is happening beneath our feet, we should really watch our step

Stay on the Path
Fortunately our orchids like the edges of paths and so the are easy to spot.  But at the same time, trampling on the edge of the paths means that the orchids can be destroyed and so be lost forever.

Related Article

Orchid Etiquette – Tread Carefully

From the Journals: A Tale of Two Cities – London & Burnside

The following article written by Robert and Rosalie Lawrence is from the Volume 37 No 9 October 2013 Journal of the Native Orchid Society of South Australia

Orchids and the concrete jungle that makes up a city don’t seem together, particularly the terrestrial orchids. Yet in the heart of one of the world’s most well known capital cities such an orchid was found. On the 19th July 2013, the Telegraph reported that botanists from the Natural History Museum had found in the middle of London a white helleborine orchid (Cephalanthera damasonium) which had not been seen in that region since 1900. It was found in the Queen’s backyard, Buckingham Palace. Despite the building, demolishing, rebuilding, bombing and rebuilding that has been going on for the last 400 years, here is an orchid which has survived to surprise the botanist. (For details see Long Lost orchid found in Buckingham Palace Garden)

It is always heartening to hear good news about orchids but here in Adelaide we have our own encouraging story. Settlement in Adelaide is not as long as in London by a long shot but in our own short time we have managed to clear and cover some very good land with concrete and bitumen. The result has been that much of our native flora has been lost with many of our orchid species being the first to disappear.

In recent years effort has been made to bring back the bush with revegetation projects. This work has not tended to involve the orchids, the work of Heather Whiting and her team of volunteers at Vale Park being an exception. Consequently, any orchids found on such sites tend to be the more robust species principally Pterostylis pedunculata, Microtis sp. and in some cases Linguella sp.

Finding anything else will always be special; but that is what has happened at site where a Shell petrol station stood for decades on the corner of Portrush and Greenhill Roads. After the demolition of the service station the site was an area of bare clay for about a decade. Then in 2003, work began on restoring native vegetation incorporating a mini wetland in an area of 2,000 square metres that was given the name Linden “Bush Garden”. Indigenous flora was sourced from the local region and the site has been kept meticulously weed-free by dedicated workers.

Originally 60 local species were planted with several other species arriving by themselves. Among the latter group are five species of orchids. These include a Microtis species and Pterostylis pedunculata, but the other three are more surprizing – Arachnorchis tentaculata, a small blue-flowered Thelymitra species and a Caladenia (syn Petalochilus) species. How they came to be there is a mystery. The long term viability of them will depend upon the continued maintenance of this unique site.

The City of Burnside should be congratulated both for its foresight and initiative as well as its ongoing support of this project.

Orchid 1 Arachnorchis tentaculata
Natural regeneration at Linden Gardens includes three plants of Arachnorchis tentaculata (King spider Orchid) that are understood to have flowered for the first time this year (2013). The buildings of the council chambers can be seen in the background.

 

Understanding the Conservation Status of South Australia Orchids

Endangered, Threatened or Rare?

Sometimes a particular species of orchid is said to be rare or endangered, for instance Thelymitra circumsepta* is listed as endangered in South Australia but has no listing federally whilst the endemic Prasophyllym murfetii* is listed as Critically Endangered federally but only Endangered in South Australia.

Prasophyllum murfettii (Denzel's Leek Orchid)
Prasophyllum murfettii (Denzel’s Leek Orchid)

What do these listings mean and why are they different for the same species?

What are the Conservation Categories?

Conservation listing by governments gives species a legal status, which can then be used to determine the type of consideration to be given to individual species in decision-making processes for species conservation.

In South Australia, the two main legislations affecting native orchids are the state National Parks and Wildlife Act 1972 (NPW) and the national Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPB). There is also the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List which is used for international treaties. Each has their own set of categories resulting in terms with slightly different meanings.

The IUCN classification is quite detailed but in summary the conservation status used are

  • Extinct – not seen for fifty years or despite intensive searching not seen at a previously known site
  • Extinct in the Wild – no natural populations exist; only surviving in cultivation
  • Critically Endangered – known only from a single non-viable population
  • Endangered – in danger of extinction unless the factors causing decline are arrested
  • Vulnerable – likely to become endangered if the only large populations is wiped out for whatever reason
  • Near Threatened – close to qualifying or likely to qualify for a threatened category in the near future
  • Least Concern
  • Data Deficient
  • Not Evaluated

The Australian Federal government, under Section 179 of the EPBC Act, has six categories

  • Extinct – no reasonable doubt that the species has died out
  • Extinct in the Wild – no natural population existing, surviving in cultivation
  • Critically Endangered – faces an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild in the immediate future
  • Endangered – faces a very high risk of extinction in the wild in the near future
  • Vulnerable – faces a high risk of extinction in the wild in the medium term future
  • Conservation Dependent – if the cessation of a specific conservation program ceased the species could become vulnerable, endangered or critically endangered

South Australia uses three categories based on the categories from the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria.

  • Endangered (Schedule 7) – includes Critically Endangered Extinct in the Wild and Extinct
  • Vulnerable (Schedule 8)
  • Rare (Schedule 9) – this is a South Australian term not recognised elsewhere but the criteria are consistent with the IUCN Near Threatened category and refers to uncommon species that are naturally limited in location or are in decline. Hence it is possible for a species to be common interstate but threatened in South Australia, for example Anzybas unguiculatus* is rated rare.
07 sm JP Anzybas unguiculatus 2
Anzybas unguiculatus (Little Pelican or Cherry Helmet Orchids)

Another term that is frequently used is Threatened. For the IUCN Threatened encompasses the three categories of Critically Endangered, Endangered and Vulnerable. It means that a species rated as threatened with extinction under these three categories may have different degrees of threat – note the adjectives in the IUCN definitions above. This serves as a guideline for its usage in South Australia. It should also be noted that Threatened and Rare are not interchangeable but a species rated Rare may be threatened by outside influences.

There is another level of conservation which is the regional status. This level does not have any legal standing but it is helpful in managing the species. The IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria are used to assign a regional conservation status. This is helpful in managing species at this level.

Why does a species have different Conservation Categories?

Looking through Part Two of South Australia’s Native Orchids 2011, it is not uncommon to find a species with two different conservation statuses. It is not surprising when they have the same status eg Arachnorchis behrii* is rated Endangered both state and nationally but why are the others different? Some of this is due to the different number of categories – six federally but only three at the state level so Diplodium bryophilum* is nationally Critically Endangered but only Endangered in South Australia as there is no critically Endangered category. Others have a state status but no national status, for example the endemic Diuris brevifolia* is rated Endangered. Curiously there are no endemic species with the combination of a national status but no state status, although there are five non-endemic species found in South Australia that do have this combination.

Diuris brevifolia (Late Donkey Orchid)
Diuris brevifolia (Late Donkey Orchid)

This comes about because there are two different bodies determining the statuses through two very different processes.

Nationally under the EPBC Act any individual can nominate a species which is assessed by the Threatened Species Scientific Committee, put out for public comment, changes adjusted as necessary and then the recommendations are passed onto the Minister who approves or rejects the nomination.

In South Australia, DEWNR (Department Environment Water and Natural Resources) initiates the process by asking the experts, compiling data, holding workshops with the experts. A report is written for the National Parks and Wildlife Council outlining the changes under the NPW Threatened Species Schedules. Once the changes are approved, it is sent to the Minister for approval before being released for public comment. After any necessary adjustments the report is then sent to the South Australian Parliamentary Cabinet for final approval.

Both processes check the species under consideration against the IUCN criteria.

How many South Australian orchids are under threat?

On 22nd July 2014, Doug Bickerton presented a talk at the Native Orchid Society on the conservation status of South Australian orchids. The comparison between the State and Federal listings was as follows:

Number of Orchids with a Conservation Status under the NPW Act (State)

  • 77 species Endangered
  • 33 species Vulnerable
  • 32 species Rare

A total of 142 species or 49% of all South Australian orchids are recognised to be under threat.

Number of Orchids with a Conservation Status under the EPBC Act (Federal)

  • 4 Critically Endangered
  • 22 Endangered
  • 19 Vulnerable

A total of 45 species for the State have a Federal government legal conservation status.

The fact that one authority recognises a species and the other authority does not doesn’t mitigate against the seriousness of the threat to that species. The fact that a species does not have a conservation status from either authority does not mean that it is not under threat. It could still be in danger of extinction.

Cryptostylis subulata (Moose Orchid)
Cryptostylis subulata (Moose Orchid) State Conservation Status: Vulnerable National Conservation Status: not listed

Currently in South Australian there is a State-wide assessment underway and the results will be published in 2016.

This article was inspired and is based upon notes taken from a talk given by Doug Bickerton in 2014 at the Native Orchid Society of South Australia. I would like to thank Thelma Bridle, Conservation Officer, Native Orchid Society of South Australia, for her help.

*Based on information found in South Australia’s Native Orchids 2011

References:

South Australia’s Native Orchids Bates 2011

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species#categories accessed 13th November 2015

http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/managing-natural-resources/Plants_Animals/Threatened_species_ecological_communities/Conservation_status_of_threatened_species/State accessed 13th November 2015

IUCN RED LIST CATEGORIES AND CRITERIA Version 3.1 Second edition Prepared by the IUCN Species Survival Commission As approved by the 51st meeting of the IUCN Council Gland, Switzerland 9 February 2000

 

Orchids come in ‘under par’ at Grange Golf course

With the development of cities here in Australia, many of our orchids were lost as habitat was cleared and the newly arrived settlers built houses and reconstructed the gardens they knew from the Old World; but the odd pocket of native bushland has survived.  Cemeteries and golf courses have often been the only refuge for remnant bushland.  One such refuge has been The Pinery, Grange Golf Club, the only known location of Oligochaetochilus arenicola (syn. Pterostylis arenicola) on the Adelaide Plains.  In the National Parks and Wildlife Act, this orchid is scheduled as vulnerable. The Golf Club left this site intact and has been supportive of the conservation efforts of the Threatened Plant Action Group who in turn have received assistance from the Native Orchid Society of SA and the Natural Resources Adelaide and Mt Lofty Ranges.

Typical of the rufus hood this Oligochaetochilus arenicola shows the sencesing leaves, pendent petals and hairs on the labellum. Photographer: H Lawrence
Typical of the rufushoods, this Oligochaetochilus arenicola shows the sencesing leaves, pendent petals and hairs on the labellum.
Photographer: H Lawrence

Below is a media release from the Natural Resources, Adelaide and Mt Lofty Ranges

Orchids come in ‘under par’ at Grange Golf course

News release
30 September 2015

A tiny remnant population of rare orchids which survives in a patch of bush on Grange Golf Course has increased 50% since last year, according to a new survey.

The survey conducted this month found 1200 individuals of the Sandhill Greenhood Orchid (Pterostyllis arenicola), a nationally threatened species which is considered critically endangered in the Adelaide and Mt Lofty Ranges region.

When surveys began 20 years ago, only about 100 plants survived at this site. But the latest survey has revealed the population is steadily increasing

The orchid comeback is thanks to decades of care by four groups involved with the annual survey: the Threatened Plant Action Group, the Native Orchid Society of SA, Natural Resources Adelaide and Mt Lofty Ranges, and with support from the Grange Golf Club.

The tiny fragment of native pine bushland in the middle of Grange Golf Course is one of the only known locations of this species within the entire Adelaide and Mt Lofty Ranges region, with other small populations known from near Wellington and Tailem Bend.

The orchid grows 10cm-25 cm high and produces hood-shaped flowers that are green and brown or red-brown with white markings. Most species of orchid flower for only a short period and for the Sandhill Greenhood, it will flower only for the next few weeks.

Grange Golf Course just happens to provide ideal conditions for the plant: red sandy soils and an over-story of native cypress pine trees.

Dedicated project partners have tackled the main threat to orchids – suffocation by Perennial Veldt Grass and Soursob weeds – through years of patient hand weeding.

The orchid comeback is a great success story of collaboration across the community to save one of our state’s tiny floral gems.

As a demonstration of nature’s interdependence, conserving the Sandhill Greenhood also means conserving a particular mycorrhizal fungus that must be in the soil for Sandhill Greenhood seeds to germinate. In addition, the flowers must be pollinated by a particular type of insect, the fungus gnat. The gnat is attracted by the orchid’s pheromones and tries to mate with the flower, only to find itself loaded up with a packet of pollen which it then transfers to the next flower as it continues its romantic adventures.

While the survey results are good news, the Sandhill Greenhood population is still precariously small, and it is hoped that as the population grows, so do the options to secure the species into the future.

South Australia has over 260 species of orchids, including 50 species of greenhood.

For a free colourful field guide to local orchids, go to http://www.naturalresources.sa.gov.au/adelaidemtloftyranges/home and search for ‘orchid’.

2015 June Winning Photograph

06 sm PM Arachnorchis argocallaOf the five entries this month, four featured winter orchids. Lorraine Badger entered a Diplodium robustum, whilst Claire Chesson, Robert and Rosalie Lawrence all entered Urochilus sangineus. Though not the winning photographs it was interesting to see the differences between the U. sangineus with one being no taller than the small Acianthus pusillus next to it and another being taller than the rapier sedge.

But the winning photograph was the spring flowering Arachnorchis argocalla (White Beauty Spider Orchid) by Pauline Meyers. This is amongst our most threatened orchids and is dealt with in depth in the Recovery Plan For Twelve Threatened Orchids in the Lofty Block Region of South Australia 2010. This fungi dependent endemic orchid is rated Endangered both at State and National level.

Found in the Southern and Northern Lofty regions, it range has been severely reduced by possibly 80%. Since 1918 no plant has been found south of Adelaide.

Flowering from September to October, it is often found in grassy woodlands often growing on gentle southerly-facing hill slopes. The soil is a clay loam with a high humus content.

This beautiful orchid has one to two non-perfumed white flowers with thickened but not clubbed drooping lateral sepals and petals. The strongly recurved broad labellum is usually white, sometimes crimson, fringed with short teeth.

This is one of our larger spider orchids reaching a height of 60cms. The size of the plant flower and leaf help to distinguish it from other similar appearing orchids such as A. brumalis and albino flowers of A. behrii.

Like many of the spider orchids it takes 2 – 5 years to reach maturity and then has a potential reproductive life of 10 years. With an average pollination rate of less than 10%, the potential to increase the population is low and any threat to survival of the individual plants needs to taken seriously.

Some threats are obvious such as weed invasion including the garden escapees such as Topped lavender (Lavandula stoechas spp. stoechas) and action is being taken to curb the spread of weeds through targeted weeding programs.

Another threat is habitat loss. This has been the result of land clearing but sites are being protected either through conservation legislation or Heritage Agreements. Habitat loss can also occur indirectly and that is through Phytophthora being introduced into the sites. Although the direct effect of Phytophtora on the orchid is unknown, it is known that it can affect the plants that grow in association with this orchid. This threat can be reduced by all of us implementing good hygiene practices.

These were some of the threats noted in the Recovery Plan. This plan was not just defensive, ie attempt to halt and minimalize the damage; but it was also proactive with measures outlined to increase the population. These included seed and fungi collection eventually resulting in germination and cultivation with a view to re-introduction.

It is good to see that there is a plan and active steps are being taken to bring this orchid back from threat of extinction.

June 2015 other entrants
Photographers from L to R: Claire Chesson, Rosalie Lawrence, Lorraine Badger, Robert Lawrence

References

Websites accessed 1 July 2015

White Beauty Spider Orchid (Caladenia argocalla) Recovery Plan
http://www.environment.gov.au/archive/biodiversity/threatened/publications/recovery/c-argocalla/index.html
Caladenia argocalla – White-beauty spider-orchid, biodiversity species Profile and Threats Database
http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=54991
Recovery Plan For twelve threatened Orchids in the Lofty Block Region of South Australia
http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/e362cfd2-a37b-443a-b007-db3a2b7b64dd/files/lofty-block-orchids-recovery-plan.pdf

Bates R J, South Australia’s Native Orchids 2011 DVD

An Examination of Two Rufoushoods

This week’s post is taking a brief look at a paper by Noushka Reiter, Mark Clements and Kate Vlcek which appeared in Muelleria, Volume 31: 69 – 76, 2013.

Titled “An examination of Pterostylis xerophila (Orchidaceae) and the confirmation of P. lingua as a new species in Victoria” this paper seeks to ascertain whether the records collected are correctly identified, that there are differences between them both in morphology and associated vegetation.

Both P. xerophila and P. lingua are found in South Australia where they are known, respectively, by the synonyms Oligochaetochilus xerophilus and O. linguus. In fact the type specimen for O. xerophilus is from South Australia.

In the introduction, the authors give a detailed description of Oligochaetochilus otherwise known as the ‘rufa group’ which differs from Pterostylis, in the strict sense, in several features. Some of the main features of this group are:

  • Basal rosette of overlapping stemless leaves
  • Leaves senesced, withered and died, by flowering
  • Erect multi-flowered
  • Flowers
    • Lateral sepals
      • hang down
      • basal half joined
      • tips become long and threadlike
    • Labellum
      • is very mobile
      • has obvious long white hairs and often short hairs as well
Typical of the rufus hood this Oligochaetochilus arenicola shows the sencesing leaves, pendent petals and hairs on the labellum. Photographer: H Lawrence
Typical of the rufus hood, this Oligochaetochilus arenicola shows the sencesing leaves, pendent petals and hairs on the labellum.
Photographer: H Lawrence

Later in the articles, the differences between the two species are discussed. There is much of interest concerning the two species but one outcome of the research was to establish that P. lingua (O. linguus) had been incorrectly identified in the records and by correcting the names of the specimens the authors were able to confirm that it did occur in Victoria.

To find the answer to the authors other questions, read the paper

And for those that need a glossary of the terminology used, click here

For images of P. xerophila (O. xerophilus) click here

For images of P. lingua (O. linguus) click here

2015 February Winning Photograph

02 CC Thelymitra glaucophylla sm

The number of photographs may have been few but the quality was present. The clear winner was Claire Chesson’s Thelymitra glaucophylla (Glaucous Leaf Sun Orchid). Flowering from October to December, this endemic grassy woodland species of the ranges was only published in 2013 by Jeff Jeanes in the Mulleria 31:3 – 30 (2013) but it had been recognized much earlier by Bob Bates and has appeared with this name in his electronic Orchids of South Australia since 2005. It belongs to the T. nuda complex, of which there are 15 species, six of them having only been published in 2013. This complex is characterised by having large scented blue multiple flowers that open freely.

Not seen in this picture is the leaf and though the leaf is highly variable – 10-50cm long, 8-20mm wide, erect and short, long and flaccid, Jeanes mentions that T. glaucophylla “can be identified with a high degree of confidence from the mature leaves alone” (Page 4 Vol 31, 2013 Mulleria). The main features of the leaf are grey-green glaucous ie white bloom and is often senescent (withered) at anthesis (full flowered). Of the T. nuda complex, T. megcalyptra is the most similar but its leaf is never glaucous and has a red base, as well as an earlier flowering time and habitat of plains and rock outcrops.

For more details on the other orchids in the T. nuda group see the post titled Those Blue Orchids Again … posted 30th January 2015 with the link to Jeanes article in the Muelleria

NOSSA and the Lofty Block Threatened Orchid Recovery Project

In the NOSSA Constitution (2007) the aims of NOSSA “are to promote and engage in activities for the promotion and furtherance of :
  1. the culture, propagation, conservation, knowledge and scientific study of the native orchids of southern Australia and the Australasian region;
  2. the preservation of orchids as a species and their preservation within their native habitat.”

The article following is about one of the ongoing conservation activities with which NOSSA members were and are currently involved.  Quoted verbatim from SA Veg on the Edge, Vol 7, No. 1, 2007

Recovery Plan for 12 Threatened Orchids in the Lofty Block Region released
Since 1998, the Lofty Block Threatened Orchid Recovery Project (LBTORP) has been implementing recovery actions for threatened orchids in the Lofty Block region of SA. In late 2006, a draft recovery plan was completed for the following twelve species:
  • Caladenia argocalla (White Beauty Spider-orchid) – ENDANGERED (EPBC Act)
  • C. behrii (Pink-lipped Spider-orchid) – ENDANGERED (EPBC Act)
  • C. gladiolata (Bayonet Spider-orchid) – ENDANGERED (EPBC Act)
  • C. sp. ‘Brentwood’ (Ghost Spider-orchid) – Nominated as CRITICALLY ENDANGERED (EPBC Act)
  • C. macroclavia (Large-club Spider-orchid) – ENDANGERED (EPBC Act)
  • C. rigida (White Spider-orchid) – EPBC Act – ENDANGERED (EPBC Act)
  • C. woolcockiorum (Woolcock’s Spider-orchid) – VULNERABLE (EPBC Act)
  • C. xantholeuca (Flinders Ranges Spider-orchid) – ENDANGERED (EPBC Act)
  • Pterostylis bryophila (Hindmarsh Valley Greenhood) – CRITICALLY ENDANGERED (EPBC Act)
  • P. cucullata (Leafy Greenhood) – VULNERABLE (EPBC Act)
  • P. despectans (Lowly Greenhood) – ENDANGERED  (EPBC Act)
  • P. sp. ‘Halbury’ (Halbury Greenhood) – ENDANGERED (EPBC Act)
The recovery plan describes each of these twelve species in detail including their morphology, distribution, population size, habitat, and ecology.  Importantly, it also outlines the threats to each species and prescribes recovery objectives, targets, and actions for the next five years.
  • Determine population size and trends
  • Determine current extent of occurrence and number of sub-populations
  • Mitigate threats to sub-populations.
Recovery actions will be implemented for each of the twelve species in accordance with the recovery plan over the next five years by the LBTORP.  Community involvement is recognised as a key factor in the successful delivery of on-ground recovery actions.
Fact sheets and a webpage that provide up to date information on the program were recently completed … Joe Quarmby, Lofty Block Threatened Orchid Recovery Project Officer , SA DEH
(NB Joe Quramby now is the Threatened Flora Ecologist Natural Resources, Adelaide & Mount Lofty Ranges Partnerships and Stewardship and DEH is now Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, 2014)

The article may be seven years old but it is a good overview of some of the conservation work that NOSSA members have done with Joe Quarmby.

The full 176 page report can be found here.

 

Arachnorchis behrii (Pink Lipped Spider Orchid)
Arachnorchis behrii (Pink Lipped Spider Orchid)

 

2014 September Winning Photograph

The winning picture was a single flower of Thelymitra epipactoides (Metallic Sun Orchid) taken by Rosalie Lawrence. This picture was cropped from a photograph taken on a mobile phone. Phones have come a long way since the days of Alexander Graham Bell!

Thelymitral epipactoides or Metallic Sun Orchid

T. epipactoides is a special orchid both in its beautiful colourings and that it is one of our rarest orchids. This endangered species has been well studied in an effort to prevent its demise with the result that there is an abundance of information about it. Recently, with the knowledge gained, Dr Nouska Reiter of the Australian Network for Plant Conservation (ANPC) and her team have managed to cultivate 3,000 plants with the plan to re-introduce them back into the bush in the Wimmera area.

Following are some interesting points from two good sources, which are the

  1. Biodiversity Information Resources Data page  (quotes in blue)
  2. Species Profile and Threats Database page  (quotes in brown)

 

Life Cycle

  • (2)……can remain dormant as a tuber in the soil for up to nine years ……….

(But once a plant has flowered)

  • (2)…….Plants can produce flowers from their second year of growth onwards for up to four consecutive years, but no more. Individual plants can remain dormant for up to two years then grow to produce flowers, but if dormant for four years or more, plants generally do not reappear. …..
  • (2)…… Detailed monitoring suggests that mature plants only live for about 10 years before dying (Cropper 1993). ……..
  • (2)……..flowers open when the relative humidity is lower than 52%, air temperature is above 15 °C, and there are clear skies ………….
  • (2)……..Flowers remain for up to four weeks but wither a week after pollination ……
  • (2)……. fungus is required to initiate successful seed germination (Calder et al. 1989) and seeds cannot survive more than two weeks without associating with the fungus ………

Plant Information

  • (1)…….Flower colour is highly variable, brown, copper, blue and green being the main colour groups which are determined by the proportion of red, blue and green epidermal cells, some of which are reflective giving a metallic appearance. …….
  • (2)….The leaf is loosely sheathing ………
  • (2)…Mature non-flowering plants have slightly narrower leaves to 51 cm long and not sheathing …
  • (1)………Flower colour is highly variable, brown, copper, blue and green being the main colour groups which are determined by the proportion of red, blue and green epidermal cells, some of which are reflective giving a metallic appearance. ………

Topography:

  • (2)…. is undulating plains, crests of hills, gentle slopes of low broad ridges and at the bottom of broad, shallow swales (Obst 2005). It grows in sandy soils over a clay subsoil, with these soils having a tendency to become waterlogged in winter and spring, and drying out in summer and autumn ……
  • (2)…..This species is a post-disturbance coloniser, utilising early successional stages after disturbance events such as human activities, fire, animal activities such as scratching of the soil, or associated vegetation disturbance. ……
  • (2)……..requires open sites for flowering and seedling recruitment (Calder et al. 1989). ………

Population Size

  • (1)……Population estimates vary from about 1050 plants in Australia (DEH 2006), to less than 3,000 plants (Coats et al 2002). More recent assessments suggest the population could be less than 1500 plants in the wild …….
  • (2)……In the Murray Darling Basin and South East Regions of South Australia there were ten populations of the Metallic Sun-orchid recorded in 2004 by Obst ……..

 

Reminder – November theme is Orchids and Insects (Spiders and other such critters are honorary insects)

%d bloggers like this: