Rare Actinobacteria Nocardiopsis lucentensis VLK-104 Isolated from Mangrove Ecosystem of Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh

Author(s):  
Krishna Naragani
2003 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 344-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Rönnbäck ◽  
M. Troell ◽  
T. Zetterström ◽  
D.E. Babu

There are many environmental and socio-economic concerns about the shrimp aquaculture industry. This study, based on interviews, direct observations and literature reviews, shows that the Indian hatchery industry is heavily dependent upon the continuous support of natural resources and ecosystem services generated by marine, freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems. The mangrove ecosystem support area (‘ecological footprint’) needed to supply the hatcheries with Penaeus monodon shrimp broodstock, and the aquaculture grow-out ponds with postlarvae, exemplify the dependence on external ecosystems. Each hectare of mangrove in the Godavari River delta generated an annual fisheries catch of 0.8–1.5 P. monodon spawners (gravid females), valued at US$ 92–184. The entire Godavari mangrove delta had a partial gross economic value of US$ 3.0–6.0 million per year for the provision of shrimp spawners alone. The average hatchery, producing 75 million postlarvae annually, had an ecological footprint of 534 ha mangrove for the life-support input of shrimp spawners. The ecological footprint of intensive shrimp ponds was up to 11 times the pond area for postlarval input alone. The shrimp ponds in the State of Andhra Pradesh needed 35 000–138 000 ha of mangroves to satisfy the spawner requirement to hatcheries, and this implied a need to appropriate mangroves in other regions. Hatcheries were prepared to pay up to US$ 2000 for a single shrimp spawner, which also illustrated that the mangrove support areas regionally available were too small. Other concerns about the industry are the net loss of employment if hatcheries replace wild postlarvae collection, the extensive use of groundwater creating direct resource-use conflicts, by-catch problems in broodstock fisheries, and pollution by effluents. The risk of hatcheries introducing, amplifying and propagating disease affecting both cultured organisms and wild biota is another concern that can, and should, be addressed.


2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 8777 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.J. Solomon Raju ◽  
Rajendra Kumar

Clerodendrum inerme (L.) Gaertn. (Lamiaceae) is bisexual, self-compatible and has a vector-dependent mixed breeding system.  They are dichogamous and herkogamous; the day 1 flowers are staminate while the day 2 and 3 flowers are pistillate.  The plant blooms in the evening, possesses a white long corolla with a hairy interior to exclude other insects and strong fragrance are adaptations for pollination by the hawk-moth Macroglossum gyrans.  The 2nd and 3rd day flowers are nectar-rich and attract hawk-moths during the dawn and dusk hours.  The plant is also visited by bees and butterflies.  The bees Xylocopa and Anthophora are primary nectar robbers which collect nectar without effecting pollination.  In C. inerme, three forms of flowers can be distinguished based on the position of sex organs.  The first form is characterized by elongated stamens and a style which occur in close proximity to each other just after anthesis facilitating contact between the stamens and stigma.  The second form is characterized by the scattered position of stamens and style.  In the third form, the stamens are fully extended while the style is curved away from them, either to the left or to the right; subsequently the stamens curl inward and the style elongates. Interestingly, the three flower forms can be found within a cyme also.  These forms of flowers with strong protandry prevent autonomous selfing but not geitonogamy.  The fruit is a capsule and breaks open to disperse nutlets.  Birds such as Acridotheres tristis, Corvus splendens, Corvus macrorhynchos and Turdoides caudatus disperse nutlets during the early winter season. Seeds germinate in June and seedlings grow gradually to produce new plants. 


2011 ◽  
Vol 3 (8) ◽  
pp. 23-27
Author(s):  
G. Swarna latha G. Swarna latha ◽  
◽  
Dr. Amara Srinivasulu ◽  
G. Suneetha G. Suneetha
Keyword(s):  
Oil Palm ◽  

2011 ◽  
Vol 1 (9) ◽  
pp. 133-134
Author(s):  
Anuradha Averineni ◽  
Keyword(s):  

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (8) ◽  
pp. 33-34
Author(s):  
Dr. Nivedita Deshmukh ◽  
◽  
Menka Mishra
Keyword(s):  

2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 250-251
Author(s):  
M Venkatalakshmamma M Venkatalakshmamma ◽  
◽  
N Munirathnamma N Munirathnamma
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document