Global ETD Search

1	Phylogenetic Analyses of subtribe Goodyerinae and Revision of <i>Goodyera</i> section <i>Goodyera</i> (Orchidaceae) from Indonesia, and Fungal Association of <i>Goodyera</i> section <i>Goodyera</i> Juswara, Lina S. 03 September 2010 (has links) No description available. Botany Orchidaceae Subtribe Goodyerinae Goodyera Phylogenetics Parsimony Maximum Likelihood Bayesian Analyses Phenetic Analyses Cluster Analyses Ordination Discriminant Function Analyses Fungal Association Rhizoctonia
2	Phylogenetic Analysis of Subtribe Alopecurinae (Poaceae) Boudko, Ekaterina 12 March 2014 (has links) Subtribe Alopecurinae (Poeae, Poaceae) sensu lato‘s seven genera share interesting morphological similarities (dense spicate panicles and one-flowered spikelets) that were widely thought to have a common origin. However, recent molecular evidence for three of the genera has suggested that the subtribe may be polyphyletic. To test this, five DNA regions were sequenced and analyzed using phylogenetic methods. Results confirm that Alopecurinae s.l. as presently treated is polyphyletic and should be dissolved. Additionally, the genus Cornucopiae may be just another Alopecurus. Limnas and Pseudophleum are not closely allied to Alopecurus or each other, and are even further from Phleum. Phleum is a distinct lineage that is not closely allied to any other included Alopecurinae genus. Evidence for revising infrageneric classifications of Alopecurus and Phleum is presented, as is evidence for separating A. magellanicus into two or more subspecies. Poaceae Alopecurinae Poinae Poeae Phleinae Pooideae Phylogenetics Phylogeny Polyphyly Molecular Botany Taxonomy Systematics Alopecurus Phleum Beckmannia Limnas Cornucopiae Rhizocephalus Pseudophleum Plant Grass DNA sequencing trnT-trnL-trnF rpoB-trnC matK ITS ETS Convergent Evolution Hybridization Morphology Evolution Genetics Flora Subtribe
3	Phylogenetic Analysis of Subtribe Alopecurinae (Poaceae) Boudko, Ekaterina January 2014 (has links) Subtribe Alopecurinae (Poeae, Poaceae) sensu lato‘s seven genera share interesting morphological similarities (dense spicate panicles and one-flowered spikelets) that were widely thought to have a common origin. However, recent molecular evidence for three of the genera has suggested that the subtribe may be polyphyletic. To test this, five DNA regions were sequenced and analyzed using phylogenetic methods. Results confirm that Alopecurinae s.l. as presently treated is polyphyletic and should be dissolved. Additionally, the genus Cornucopiae may be just another Alopecurus. Limnas and Pseudophleum are not closely allied to Alopecurus or each other, and are even further from Phleum. Phleum is a distinct lineage that is not closely allied to any other included Alopecurinae genus. Evidence for revising infrageneric classifications of Alopecurus and Phleum is presented, as is evidence for separating A. magellanicus into two or more subspecies. Poaceae Alopecurinae Poinae Poeae Phleinae Pooideae Phylogenetics Phylogeny Polyphyly Molecular Botany Taxonomy Systematics Alopecurus Phleum Beckmannia Limnas Cornucopiae Rhizocephalus Pseudophleum Plant Grass DNA sequencing trnT-trnL-trnF rpoB-trnC matK ITS ETS Convergent Evolution Hybridization Morphology Evolution Genetics Flora Subtribe
4	The confiscation of Pare Hauraki: The impact of Te Ao Pākehā on the Iwi of Pare Hauraki Māori; on the whenua of Pare Hauraki 1835-1997 and The Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004 / Te raupatutanga o Pare Hauraki Peters, Murray Hamaka January 2007 (has links) Kia mau ki te rangatiratanga o te Iwi o Hauraki Just as the whakataukī explains Hold fast to the power and authority of the Hauraki tribes the focus of this study is to examine and evaluate the impact of Te Ao Pākehā on Pare Hauraki lands and Tīkapa Moana under the mana of Pare Hauraki Māori and Pare Hauraki tikanga. The iwi of Pare Hauraki have land claims through the, (Wai 100) and the Hauraki Māori Trust Board, before the Waitangi Tribunal highlighting whenua issues and their impact on Pare Hauraki iwi. Also relevant is the foreshore and seabed issue which is documented leading on to the infamous Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004, (for Māori anyway), sparking widespread opposition by Māori throughout the country, and other supportive non-Māori groups because of the issue concerning Māori kaitiiakitanga and guardianship roles. This investigation will commence by outlining the histories of discovery and settlement of Pare Hauraki, the concept of mana-whenua/mana-moana as it applies to Pare Hauraki Māori and our tikanga, and then to subsequent issues leading to land alienation of the early 19th to late 20th cenutries and then to the foreshore issue of the early 21st Century. This research will include information showing that before 1840 to Te Tiriti o Waitangi and thereafter that Pākehā and various Crown agents, through legislation claimed the rights to the lands, waterways and oceanic areas under the kaitiakitanga of my tupuna of Pare Hauraki. Tupuna and other iwi members have expressed their disgust seeing the mana of their traditional lands, waterways, oceanic areas and kaitiaki roles slipping away from them through these activities. Therefore, this thesis is a response to those issues and the impact on (a), Māori as a people, and our tikanga Māori and (b), Pare Hauraki Māori as the kaitiaki/guardians of the Pare Hauraki rohe/territory in accordance with tikanga Māori, and the significance of the responsibilities which arise out of the Māori concepts of kaitiakitanga, manaakitanga and rangatiratanga. Maori Treaty of Waitangi Declaration of Independence Foreshore Seabed Water Human Rights United Nations Waitangi Tribunal Tupua Taniwha Deity Waka Tupuna Ancestor Moana Whakapapa Tikanga History Iwi Marutuahu Tainui Tribe Hapu Subtribe Land Alienation Confiscation Raupatu Crown Law Pakeha English Aotearoa New Zealand Captain Cook Taraia Tukukino Horeta Te Taniwha Tanumeha Te Moananui Tikapa Coromandel Tinorangatiratanga

1

Page generated in 0.0325 seconds