In addition, proponents and land managers should refer to the Recovery Plan (where available) or the Conservation Advice (where available) for recovery, mitigation and conservation information.
|EPBC Act Listing Status||Listed as Vulnerable|
|Listing and Conservation Advices||
Commonwealth Listing Advice on Tetratheca juncea (Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC), 2005be) [Listing Advice].
Commonwealth Conservation Advice on Tetratheca juncea (Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC), 2008yk) [Conservation Advice].
|Recovery Plan Decision||
Recovery Plan not required, included on the Not Commenced List (1/11/2009).
|Adopted/Made Recovery Plans|
|Policy Statements and Guidelines||
Referral guidelines for the black-eyed susan, Tetratheca juncea (Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (DSEWPaC), 2011h) [Admin Guideline].
Federal Register of
Declaration under s178, s181, and s183 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 - List of threatened species, List of threatened ecological communities and List of threatening processes (Commonwealth of Australia, 2000) [Legislative Instrument].
Documents and Websites
|State Listing Status||
|Scientific name||Tetratheca juncea |
|Reference||A Specimen of the Botany of New Holland (1 Oct. 1793) 5, t. 2.|
This is an indicative distribution map of the present distribution of the species based on best available knowledge. See map caveat for more information.
Scientific name: Tetratheca juncea
Common Name: Black-eyed Susan
The taxonomy of this species is currently under review with a strong argument for considering Tetratheca as a member of the family Elaeocarpaceae (Crayn et al. 2006).
Black-eyed Susan is a low shrub that grows in clumps of single or multiple stems arising from a single rootstock. Stems are up to 1 m long, hairless with minute tubercles, and with two or three narrow wings that give them an angular appearance (Benson & McDougall 2001; NSW DECC 2005s; Harden 1992). The distinctly angular, winged structure distinguishes Black-eyed Susan from other members of the Tetratheca genus (Thompson 1976). Juvenile plants have alternate narrow lanceolate (lance-shaped) leaves (Norton 1994). Mature plants are usually leafless but if leaves are present they are alternate, hairless, usually reduced to narrow triangular scales up to 3 mm long, or otherwise narrow-elliptic to 20 mm long and approximately 5 mm wide with flat or recurved margins (Harden 1992).
Plants of Black-eyed Susan are usually sprawling and can be difficult to detect amongst other vegetation when not flowering (NSW DECC 2005s; Payne 2001). An individual plant can grow into a clump of as many as 200500 individual stems of genets (plants growing from seed) and ramets (plants growing from asexual rhizomal spread) (Bartier et al. 2001) which can bear several hundred flowers (Payne 2001). Gross and colleagues (2003) report that clumps appear to be long-lived, with the inside of the clump becoming senescent while the outside of the clump remains vigorous. Plant clumps tend to be low growing and straggly amongst low dense vegetation but in taller heath the plants can reach 1.5 m in height and there is a tendency for them to scramble (climb) (Payne 2001).
Black-eyed Susan has hanging pink flowers with the dark centre giving rise to the common name (Gross et al. 2003). Flowering occurs between July and December (Benson & McDougall 2001; Harden 1992) with the peak flowering period occurring between the start of September to the end of October (Driscoll 2009). The flowers face downwards and usually have four petals which range from white to pink to dark purple in colour (NSW DECC 2005s; Payne 2001; Thompson 1976) and have pink sepals ranging from 11.5 mm long (Harden 1992). However Driscoll (2003) also recorded flowers having five, six and seven petals proportionately arranged. The flowers occur singly or in pairs along the stem suspended on a peduncle approximately 510 mm in length (Harden 1992). Flowers are bisexual, odourless and nectarless (Gross et al. 2003).
Gross and colleagues (2003) described the floral morphology in detail and noted that flowers have eight anthers recurved around the pistil (carpel). Anthers are poricidal and contain a deep-red tapetal fluid at the base that is slightly oily. Pollen is contained within the tapetal fluid (Driscoll 2003). The style projects from the corona of anthers and elongates with age. The stigma is minute (less than 0.2 mm wide). Pollen is 80% viable at first but by 14 days is inviable. Only a few pollen grains are passively shed from the anthers (sometimes landing on the stigma), otherwise pollen has to be actively removed from the anthers (Gross et al. 2003).
Fruit and seed morphology
The Tetratheca fruit is a non fleshy capsule which opens spontaneously at maturity to release brown, shiny seeds that have a large chalazal appendage on the outside of the seed (Belairs et al. 2006). The fruit capsule is obovate and 68 mm in length, with seeds approximately 4 mm long (Benson & McDougall 2001; Harden 1993). Seeds are produced in late spring and mature from November to February. However, seeds have very low viability (Bellairs et al. 2006) and the longevity of the soil seed bank is short (Bartier et al. 2001; Bellairs et al. 2006) indicating that Black-eyed Susan is dependant on annual seed set for seedling recruitment.
Black-eyed Susan is endemic to NSW and was historically distributed from Port Jackson and Botany Bay in Sydney, north to Bulahdelah and Lake Macquarie on the central coast of NSW (Harden 1992; Benson & McDougall 2001; Driscoll 2003). Payne (2001) suggests that there was a localised disjunct in populations of the Sydney area with those found between Wyong, Lake Macquarie and Bulahdelah. Payne (2001) also believes the Bulahdelah population to be disjunct.
Black-eyed Susan is now regarded as extinct in the Sydney area (Harden 1992; Payne 2001; Driscoll 2003; Gross et al. 2003). The last recorded collection in the Sydney area occurred in 1913 at Bexley (Payne 2001). The species has now contracted to a range of approximately 110125 km north-south from Wyong north to Bulahdelah, and inland 50 km east-west to the edge of the Sugarloaf Range (NSW NPWS 2000e; Payne 2001; Driscoll 2003; Gross et al. 2003).
It is currently found in the local government areas of Wyong, Lake Macquarie, Newcastle, Port Stephens, Great Lakes and Cessnock (NSW DECC 2005s; Payne 2001), with North Wyong and Lake Macquarie appearing to be the strongholds of the species (Payne 2001). The distribution of Black-eyed Susan is not known to overlap with any threatened ecological communities listed under either the EPBC Act or the TSC Act.
The current extent of occurrence is estimated to be between 1594 and 1861 km² (TSSC 2005be). These estimates appear to cover all subpopulations located during detailed surveys by Payne (2001). No specific information is available on past changes in the extent of occurrence. No information is available to estimate or indicate future changes in the extent of occurrence.
The current area of occupancy is estimated at 46 km². These figures are based on the number of 1 km² grid squares in which the species is thought to occur. The estimate is considered to be of low reliability, as recent ground-truthing at all populations has not occurred. No specific information is available on past changes in the area of occupancy. No information is available to estimate or indicate future changes in the area of occupancy.
Black-eyed Susan is grown in the Australian National Botanic Gardens, Canberra; the Botanic Gardens of Adelaide; Mt Annan Botanic Gardens near Sydney (CHABG 1992), the Royal Botanic Gardens, Sydney (Meredith & Richardson 1986) and Newcastle Botanic Gardens (Bellairs et al. 2006). Green Point Nature Reserve is a site where plants of the species have been translocated, but with little success (NSW NPWS 2000d).
Detailed surveys conducted prior to 2005 revealed approximately 239250 locations of Black-eyed Susan, with distribution considered to be severely fragmented (TSSC 2005be). As of early 2010, the Atlas of NSW Wildlife has over 2000 records for Black-eyed Susan with a much less fragmented distribution.
Between June 1991 and November 2007, approximately 30 surveys were conducted in the area between Wyong and Bulahdelah. Most surveys have been undertaken because of proposed development projects.
In June 1991, Payne (1993) conducted field investigations of populations of Black-eyed Susan in the Munmorah area. A corridor about 5 km long between Munmorah and the Wallarah Colliery was examined as well as 12 km² surrounding this area, including Munmorah State Recreation Area and sites at Point Wolstoncroft. Both populations and isolated plants were recorded. A population was designated if there was more than 20 plant clumps along a ridge with a length of 100 m (Payne 1993). Fourteen populations were identified.
In September 1992, 323 plant clumps were recorded at seven sites in Munmorah State Recreation Area (Payne 1993).
A survey was undertaken between August 1997 and 30 December 1999 (during the flowering seaon) for Lake Macquarie Council (Payne 2001b). In 1998 another search was made to the north and east of Lake Macquarie, and within NSW NPWS managed lands. A further survey was completed between September and December 1999 in the Karuah to Bulahdelah area and west of the lakes. The surveys located 162 subpopulations in the Lake Macquarie Local Government Area (Payne 2001b).
Between 2001 and 2005 vegetation mapping and surveys were undertaken for the Branxton Freeway Link. Vegetation clearing figures that were presented in the EIS (Connell Wagner 1995 in Acacia EP 2007) and the Representations Report (RTA 2001 in Acacia EP 2007) were based on vegetation polygons delineated from aerial photography and limited ground-truthing.
In 2005 Biosis Research updated the Lower Hunter and Central Coast Regional Environmental Management Strategy (LHCCREMS) mapping to incorporate the results of targeted flora surveys and selected ground-truthing, as well as threatened species that have been gazetted since approval in 2001. Three subpopulations of Black-eyed Susan were found, of 2, 33 and 123 clumps on the site, although development would only affect the two subpopulations of 2 and 33 clumps (Acacia EP 2007).
A survey on the Moonee Colliery Site, in the Wyong Local Government Area, was undertaken in March 2003 by Wildthing. Black-eyed Susan was found on the perimeter of the site (Ecobiological 2007).
Wildthing undertook a flora survey in the Gwandalan site from March 2003 until August 2003. Black-eyed Susan was found in forested areas of the site (Ecobiological 2007).
A survey in the Crangan Bay Site was carried out by Wildthing in November 2003. Over 30 ha of heavily populated Black-eyed Susan was present at the site (Ecobiological 2007).
In July 2005, and on 26 July 2005, HLA undertook a survey on 56 ha of land located north of the existing Eraring Power Station ash dam. The study area included land owned by Eraring Energy and land to be purchased. There were 684 clumps of Black-eyed Susan observed within the study area (HLA 2006).
A survey of the proposed gas turbine facility, gas connection pipeline and inlet facility at Munmorah in the Wyong Local Government Area was undertaken in 2005. A targeted survey was undertaken on 30 and 31 August 2005 to coincide with the flowering period of Black-eyed Susan. A second targeted survey was undertaken on 12 and 13 December to coincide with a later flowering time of Black-eyed Susan. No Black-eyed Susan plants were found on either occasion (Parsons Brinkerhoff 2005).
Between October 2002 and February 2006, the Wyong Employment Zone was surveyed by Forest Fauna Surveys. Black-eyed Susan plants were located in each planning precinct: three populations in Precinct 14 in areas not zoned for development; five populations in the central part; and ten populations near the F3 Freeway. There were a further five populations in Precincts 11 and 13, and eight populations, each supporting single plants, or a few plant clumps, in Warnervale Business Park (Forest Fauna Surveys 2007).
Between July 2005 and February 2006 Ecobiological Pty Ltd undertook a targeted search in the Proposed Moonee Colliery Site development area. Black-eyed Susan was found on the site mostly to the west in undisturbed bushland outside the development area (Ecobiological 2007).
Additional Black-eyed Susan was identified in the Moonee Colliery Site north of Montefiore Street (Ecobiological 2007) in a survey in 2006.
Between 2001 and 2006 Conacher Travers undertook surveys within the Wallarah Peninsula. Approximately 7022 indivdual Black-eyed Susan plants were identified in development precincts within the peninsula and Wallarah National Park areas. A further 1939 occur in "potential" habitat in the Wallarah Peninsula area (Conacher Travers 2006).
In 2006, 28 Black-eyed Susan plants were recorded by Ecovision Consulting (2006) in the Cessnock LGA between Cessnock and Kurri Kurri, on land rezoned for development.
A survey by HSO in 2007 confirmed the extent of the main population of Black-eyed Susan, within the Narrabeen Snappy Gum Forest in the north-west of the site, to be 178 plants (HSO 2007e).
In September 2007 flora surveys were carried out across the Catherine Hill Bay site (HSO 2007a). A total of 8042 Black-eyed Susan plants were located during the targeted surveys within the site. Of these over 7057 (88%) will be retained within the conservation lands to the south and west of the development. Another large population of 985 Black-eyed Susan individuals was located within the site of the future development estate (HSO 2007a).
Targeted Black-eyed Susan surveys within Catherine Hill Bay land owned by Coal and Allied Operations were undertaken from 1216 November 2007 by HSO. The majority of land was located between the coast at Catherine Hill Bay and the shores of Lake Macquarie at Crangan Bay, with a smaller portion of land located at Kanangara Drive, Gwandalan. While subpopulations of Black-eyed Susan were identified during previous investigations (EcoBiological 2007) the population size was not assessed. The subpopulations identified in 2006 were targeted for detailed survey. Around 583 Black-eyed Susan plants were located during the targeted surveys within the site. Approximately 369 clumps were to be removed as part of the development proposal. Suitable habitat within the remainder of the development lands was searched. The identification of the extent of the species occurrence within the offset lands was performed by random meander techniques and no parallel transects or individual counts were undertaken, but the numbers were expected to be large (HSO 2007d).
Targeted and significant flora surveys were carried out in 2007 by HSO in the proposed Gwandalan site situated within land owned by Coal and Allied Operations, on the Gwandalan peninsula. A total of 10 095 Black-eyed Susan plants were located. Of these, 3498 plants were located within the development site while 6591 plants were planned to be retained within the conservation lands to the south and west of the development estate (HSO 2007b).
In November 2007 a survey was conducted by HSO within the Nords Wharf site. Some 6798 Black-eyed Susan plants were located during the targeted surveys. Of these, 5933 (88%) were to be retained within the conservation lands to the south and north of the development estate. The remaining 865 (12%) individuals were to be removed as part of the proposal (HSO 2007f).
The total population size of Black-eyed Susan is difficult to estimate accurately due to the species' habit of clumping. Plant clumps are commonly counted during survey work and used as a surrogate for individual plants. The total population size of Black-eyed Susan has previously been estimated to be between 9881 and 11 893 plant clumps (approximately 10 000 individuals) (Hogbin 2002b, cited in TSSC 2005be).
In recent years, however, there have been a significant number of targeted surveys for Black-eyed Susan, primarily associated with environmental assessments for land development. Unfortunately, much of this work is unpublished company confidential data and not readily available. However, a review of available data and estimates made by Driscoll (2009) reveals that the population estimate made by Hogbin (2002b, cited in TSSC 2005be) may grossly underestimate the total population of Black-eyed Susan.
Driscoll (2009) divides the entire geographic distribution of Black-eyed Susan into three metapopulations:
- southern, and presumed extinct, in the Sydney area
- central coast, from Wyong to Beresfield
- northern, from Karuah to Bulahdelah.
Most populations occur in the Wyong and Lake Macquarie Local Government Areas with isolated but widespread populations at Cessnock, Maitland, Newcastle, Port Stephens and the Great Lakes Local Government Areas (Payne 2001b; TSSC 2005be). The major area in the Lake Macquarie region is on the coastal ridges between Munmorah and Swansea, Belmont and Charlestown (Payne 2001b).
Known populations of Black-eyed Susan:
|Locality||Land tenure||No. of Plant Clumps|
|Karuah||Nature Reserve||Approx 100|
|Lake Macquarie Foreshore Reserve||State Recreation Area||29|
|Lake Macquarie||Lake Macquarie LGA||123|
|Munmorah (Birdie Creek South)||State Recreation Area||296323|
|Wallaroo||Nature Reserve/State Forest||Approx 1000|
|Green Point||Recreation Reserve||>1000|
|Wallarah||National Park||9900 (4 subpopulations)|
|Jilliby||State Recreation Area|
|Wallarah Peninsula||Lake Macquarie LGA||Approx 15 000|
|Wyong||Wyong LGA||162 subpopulations|
|Port Stephens||Port Stephens LGA|
|Great Lakes||Great Lakes LGA|
|Red Head||Lake Macquarie LGA||>1000|
|Kurri Kurri Interchange||Cessnock LGA||158|
|Gwandalan Site||Wyong LGA||10 095|
|Kanangra Drive, Gwandalan||Wyong LGA||178|
|Nords Wharf||Private land||6605|
|Jewells Swamp||Lake Macquarie LGA||Extinct?|
|Pindimar||Port Stephens LGA|
|Belmont||Lake Macquarie LGA|
|Charlestown||Lake Macquarie LGA|
|Catherine Hill Bay||Wyong LGA||8013|
|Summerland Point||Wyong LGA||Significant|
|Hillsborough||Lake Macquarie LGA|
|Cardiff South||Lake Macquarie LGA|
|Mount Hutton||Lake Macquarie LGA|
|Whitebridge||Lake Macquarie LGA|
|Morisset||Lake Macquarie LGA|
|Cooranbong||Lake Macquarie LGA||Large|
|West Wallsend||Lake Macquarie LGA|
|Killingworth||Lake Macquarie LGA||Large|
|Rankin Park||Cessnock LGA|
|Highfields||Lake Macquarie LGA|
|Barnsley||Lake Macquarie LGA|
|Cardiff Heights||Lake Macquarie LGA|
|Nelson Bay||Port Stephens LGA|
|Lake Haven||Wyong LGA|
|Vales Point||Wyong LGA||Extinct|
|Newstan Colliery||Wyong LGA||Extinct|
|Five Dock (1884)||Concord LGA||Extinct|
|Cooks River (1892, 1905)||Marrickville LGA||Extinct|
|Carlton (1893)||Kogarah LGA||Extinct|
|Tempe (1891, 1893)||Marrickville LGA||Extinct|
|Kogarah (1893)||Kogarah LGA||Extinct|
|Bexley (1913)||Rockdale LGA||Extinct|
|Undercliff (1889)||Marrickville LGA||Extinct|
|Port Jackson (1802-5)||LGA (Sydney)||Extinct|
|Hurstville (1885)||Hurstville LGA||Extinct|
|Helensburgh (1893)||Wollongong LGA||Extinct|
|Canterbury (1892)||Canterbury LGA||Extinct|
|Tempe-Arncliffe (1886)||Marrickville LGA||Extinct|
(After Benson & McDougall 2001; Conacher Travers 2007 in HSO 2007f; Driscoll 2003; Ecovision Consulting 2006; Forest Fauna Surveys 2007; HSO 2007a, 2007b, 2007d, 2007e; Murray & Bell 2001; NSW NPWS 2000d; Payne 1993, 2001b; TSSC 2005be; Wyong Shire Council n.d.).
The age of Black-eyed Susan is difficult to determine (NSW NPWS 2000d). An individual plant is clonal and can grow into a clump of many stems of genets and ramets (Bartier et al. 2001). Clumps seem to be long lived with the inside of the clumps dying while the outside of the clumps remain alive and healthy (Gross et al. 2003).
In 2000, 45 populations of Black-eyed Susan were located in state conservation areas comprising 1600 plant clumps (TSSC 2005be). These are Awabakal Nature Reserve, Glenrock State Recreation Area, Lake Macquarie Recreation Area, Jilliby State Recreation Area and Munmorah State Recreation Area. Others are reserved in Wallarah National Park, Wallaroo Nature Reserve, Karuah Nature Reserve and Green Point Recreation Reserve (TSSC 2005be).
Black-eyed Susan is found in sandy, occasionally moist heath and in dry sclerophyll vegetation communities endemic to coastal NSW (Harden 1992). Benson and McDougall (2001) further detail Black-eyed Susan to prefer ridges in areas from 0200 m in altitude with an annual rainfall of 10001200 mm and restricted to open forest of Angophora costata, Eucalyptus haemastoma, E. globoidea, Corymbia gummifera, and E. capitellata. The preferred substrates are: sandy skeletal soil on sandstone, sandy-loam soils, low nutrients; and clayey soil from conglomerates, pH neutral.
Payne (2001) reported Black-eyed Susan preferred ridge and upper crest sites with a moist aspect in open forest with a dense understorey. More specifically a preference for: south-western and south-eastern aspects; shallow slopes of less than 5°; woodland forest with a canopy cover ranging between 1150%; heathland and closed heathland of between 51100% cover; and occurring in low nutrient forest of Angophora costata, E. capitellata and E. gummifera (MU 30) (vegetation community classification follows NSW NPWS 2000) or E. haemastoma, E. capitellata and E. gummifera (MU 31).
Habitat suitability modelling conducted by Driscoll (2009), however, showed aspect, slope and elevation had little influence on preferred habitat. The predominant factors were rainfall and soil; the species occurs predominantly in erosional soil landscapes in areas where annual rainfall exceeds 1000 mm. Driscoll (2009) further showed that the greatest overlap between modelled suitable habitat for Black-eyed Susan and various canopy species occurred with species associated with Coastal Plains Smoothbarked Apple Woodland and Coastal Plains Scribbly Gum Woodland.
Driscoll (2003) summarised the vegetation communities in which over 400 records of Black-eyed Susan occurred within the Lower Hunter and Central Coast region. Black-eyed Susan showed a distinct preference for the Coastal plains smoothbarked apple woodland (MU 30) vegetation community. The species also appeared to favour several underlying geologies including Quaternary sands, Triassic sandstones, Triassic shales, Permian coal measures and Carboniferous volcanics (Driscoll 2003).
Distribution of reports of Black-eyed Susan across vegetation map units in the Lower Hunter and Central Coast regions (Driscoll 2003).
|Vegetation Community Description||Vegetation Community Map Unit
(classification follows NPWS (2000))
|Coastal Plains Smoothbarked Apple Woodland||MU 30||62|
|Coastal Plains Scribbly Gum Woodland||MU 31||14|
|Coastal Foothills Spotted Gum-Ironbark Forest||MU 15||10|
|Alluvial Tall Moist Forest||MU 5||2|
|Lower Hunter Spotted Gum-Ironbark Forest||MU 17||1|
|Wyong Paperbark Swamp Forest||MU 43||1|
|Coastal Sheltered Apple-Peppermint Forest||MU 11||1|
|Coastal Sand Wallum Woodland-Heath||MU 34||1|
|Swamp Mahogany-Paperbark Forest||MU 37||1|
|Riparian Melaleuca Swamp Woodland||MU 42||1|
|Coastal Clay Heath||MU 48||1|
|Coastal Wet Sand Cyperoid Heath||MU 44||<1|
|Coastal Wet Gully Forest||MU 1||0.5|
|Coastal Sand Apple-Blackbutt Forest||MU 33||0.5|
|Hunter Valley Moist Forest||MU 12||< 0.5|
Research conducted by Bartier and colleagues (2001) found that Black-eyed Susan forms arbuscular mycorrhizal associations (fungi/root association) and typically grows in low nutrient soils of moderate to strong acidity. Therefore, the appropriate mycorrhizal fungi may be needed in the soil for long term survival. Bellairs and colleagues (2006) further note that the poor growth and survival of seedlings grown in glasshouses, suggests mychorriza may be needed for their survival.
There is a lack of ecological knowledge of Black-eyed Susan (Bellairs et al. 2006). As a consequence of clonality, at any location a group of plants will be comprised of genets (plants originating from seed germination) and ramets (plants arising vegetatively from a particular genet) (Driscoll 2009). No genetic studies have been conducted on Black-eyed Susan to determine the proportion of genets and ramets in a local group of plants.
Individual plants are difficult to identify given the plant is clonal and will resprout from rootstock (NSW NPWS 2000d). The plant usually spreads by underground stems which can be up to 50 cm long with plant clumps covering around 0.5 m² (NSW NPWS 2000d). Mature plants can have as many as 200500 stems (Bartier et al. 2001 in Gross et al. 2003). Individual clumps (>100) have now been monitored for over 10 years and it is apparent that the plant is very slow growing. The oldest reliable record of a location where a Black-eyed Susan population is still present in 2009 is from 1940, 69 years ago (NSW Wildlife Atlas 2009 in Driscoll 2009). Local populations/patches of the plant could be a hundred or more years old (Driscoll 2009). Evidence from historical urban development and rural land clearing indicates that the species continues to exist despite large losses from a local population (Driscoll 2009).
Driscoll (2009) concludes that a generation could be in the order of 2050 years and that in any local population the establishment of a new plant from seed which was the product of fertilisation by pollen from a different local population need only occur every 100 years or so to maintain healthy genetic variability, thus avoiding the onset of inbreeding depression.
Reproduction in Black-eyed Susan is through asexual rhizomal spread and sexual pollination, seed development and germination (Driscoll 2003; Payne 2001). Black-eyed Susan is rhizomatous and propagates asexually from rootstock to form plant clumps of up to 0.5 m². Regeneration and spread is aided by hot, fast and medium intensity fires which result in seed germination. Slow cool fires completely burn out the rootstock and kill the plant (Norton 1994).
Bartier and colleagues (2001) and Gross and colleagues (2003) found the preferred breeding system of Black-eyed Susan to be outcross pollination requiring a pollinator for high seed yield. They determined that the floral structure of Black-eyed Susan (poricidal anthers with pollen located within tapetal fluid) requires special class of native bees capable of buzz pollination. The gradual dehydration of tapetal fluid assists with a timed release of pollen to buzz pollinating bees.
The flowers of Black-eyed Susan produce no nectar that could attract pollinators, and it appears pollen is the sole reward available (Driscoll 2003), and so bees pollinating Black-eyed Susan collect nectar and pollen from a number of other plant species. Driscoll (2009) confirmed six species of native bees, Exoneura sp., Lasioglossum convexum, L. erythrurum, L. gilesi, L. hemichalceum and L. carbonarium collected pollen from the flowers and noted five potential pollinator species. Driscoll (2003) found that the strong flowering period from September to January coincided with the presence of pollinators and fruiting only occurred in coincidence with flower pollination by the bees. He further notes that flowering, seed set and seed release was a concurrent process while ever the bees were active. The sexual reproductive process in Black-eyed Susan appears to be pollinator limited, and this was considered as possibly explaining what was believed to be very low seed set within populations (Driscoll 2003). However Driscoll (2009) has since demonstrated that seed set levels in Black-eyed Susan fall within the normal range for a plant with bisexual flowers.
The short-lived seed bank and very low seed viability after soil storage indicates that Black-eyed Susan is dependant on annual seed set for seedling recruitment (Bellairs et al. 2006). Studies by Bartier and colleagues (2001) and Bellairs and colleagues (2006) found that seeds germinated after exposure to smoke or scarification of the seed coat (such as from heat acting on the seed coat during fire), suggesting that fire will increase the likelihood of germination. Furthermore, Bellairs and colleagues (2006) notes fire may stimulate seed germination in the months following dispersal but limited germination is likely unless a fire occurs soon after seed release.
Bartier and colleagues (2001) also found Black-eyed Susan able to self-pollinate, although the automatic self-production of seed was uncommon. The potential for self pollination and subsequent seed set was considered to be low because of the minute stigma surface and downward presentation of the flowers limiting the opportunities for air-borne pollen to land on the stigma surface (Driscoll 2003).
The chalazal appendage of Black-eyed Susan seeds have a high lipid content attracting ants, which disperse and bury the seeds (Bellairs et al. 2006; Boesewinkel 1999). The combination of the seed chalazal appendage, ant dispersion, and smoke stimulated germination is an indication of a fire adapted species (Bellairs et al. 2006).
Macropods may also act as dispersal agents. There is evidence of Black-eyed Susan clumps being heavily grazed by macropods and seeds could pass through the gut and be dispersed over large distances (Driscoll 2009).
Black-eyed Susan is readily distinguished from other Tetratheca species by its distinct, angular winged stem (Thompson 1976) and reduced leaves. Only T. thymifolia is known to grow in association with this species (NSW NPWS 2000d). It is an erect straggling shrub, with leaves that are usually in whorls of 35, and the flowers are rarely paired (Harden 1992).
Plants of Black-eyed Susan are usually sprawling and can be difficult to detect amongst other vegetation when not flowering (Murray & Bell 2001).
The following recommendations to conducting surveys for Black-eyed Susan were developed in consultation with species experts during the Black-eyed Susan significant impact guidelines policy statement expert workshop held in November 2009.
The peak flowering period of Black-eyed Susan occurs between the start of September to the end of October (Driscoll 2009). Surveys should therefore be conducted within the period of the 1st of September to the 31st of October. Any survey conducted outside of this period should be supported by evidence that flowering at the affected area was at its peak at the time of the survey.
Determination of peak flowering
Prior to conducting detailed surveys, preliminary field visits are required to determine whether flowering has begun at a particular affected area. Preliminary investigations should compare the number of flowers to the number of buds. A minimum of 75% of buds should be in flower before conducting surveys at a proposed affected area.
To determine the level of flowering, 30 plant clumps should be inspected. The selected plant clumps should be a minimum of 10 m apart. If the population is sufficiently small, so that the 30 plant clumps and/or the separation distance requirements cannot be met, then a sample should be taken from each clump. A single stem should be selected on each clump and the number of buds and flowers should be counted.
The data should be presented in a table as follows:
|Clump||No. Flowers||No. Buds||No. Seed Capsules||% Flowers*|
The average of % Flowers for the 30 plant clumps sampled should be a minimum of 75%.
If no Black-eyed Susan plants are found on the affected area during preliminary field visits, then an adjacent site or a nearby reference population (as determined from the Atlas of NSW Wildlife Records) can be checked to determine the onset of the peak flowering period.
Survey of affected areas < 30 ha
Affected areas of less than 30 ha should be thoroughly surveyed using the following procedure:
- Determine the peak flowering period for the affected area following Determination of peak flowering recommendations
- Undertake a single detailed survey during the period 1st of September to the 31st October
- Set up belt transects approximately 45 m apart to cover the entire affected area
- Count plant clumps in accordance with the method outlined in Payne and colleagues (2002). That is, a single plant entity is defined as a clump of stems separated from the next nearest clump by a minimum of 30 cm
- Record tracks of transects covered using GPS
- Record the location of plant clumps using GPS: A single GPS point can be used to record the location of several clumps where they occur inside the error margin for that point; Flag counted clumps to avoid missing clumps or double-counting clumps.
- Calculate plant clump density for the affected area as plant clumps per hectare of suitable habitat
- Determine the area of occupancy polygons for the affected area.
Surveys conducted along transects generally allow for the visual identification of Black-eyed Susan plant clumps within 22.5 m either side of the transect line (Driscoll 2009a). Therefore, belt transects spaced 45 m apart should adequately cover the affected area.
Survey of affected areas > 30 ha
In order to achieve an acceptable outcome without an excessive level of field work, affected areas of greater than 30 ha will require an initial survey, to determine the distribution of Black-eyed Susan, followed by a detailed targeted survey.
The initial survey should be conducted using the following procedure:
- Determine the peak flowering period for the affected area following Determination of peak flowering recommendations
- Undertake a survey during the period 1st of September to the 31st October
- Set up belt transects, maximum of 50 m apart, to cover a minimum of 10% of the entire affected area (assume that each transect will enable an approximate survey width of 5 m)
- Count plant clumps in accordance with the method outlined in Payne and colleagues (2002). That is, a single plant entity is defined as a clump of stems separated from the next nearest clump by a minimum of 30 cm
- Record tracks of transects covered using GPS
- Record the location of plant clumps using GPS: A single GPS point can be used to record the location of several clumps where they occur inside the error margin for that point; Flag counted clumps to avoid missing or double-counting clumps
- Determine the distribution of Black-eyed Susan within the affected area by drawing a polygon/boundary around the plant clumps recorded.
Once the initial survey has determined the distribution of Black-eyed Susan within the affected area, a detailed survey should be conducted using the following procedure:
- Set up belt transects approximately 45 m apart to cover the distributed area of Black-eyed Susan within the affected area
- Count and record plant clumps in accordance with the method referenced above
- Calculate plant clump density for the affected area as plant clumps per hectare of suitable habitat
- Determine the area of occupancy polygons for the affected area.
To keep the level of field work to that necessary to achieve an acceptable outcome, Driscoll (2009a) performed GIS simulations of transects across real population data contained in Driscoll (2009) in order to estimate the minimum transect spacing required. The simulation process was to set 10 m wide search transects centred 20, 50 and 100 m apart with a random start point, the occupancy polygon was determined for the clumps detected, and a 50 m buffer added to that polygon. Twenty metre transects resulted in near to 100% detection rate, 50 m transects >95% detection rate and 100 m transects >90% detection rate. The undetected clumps were all outliers; all of the main sub-populations would be found even with the 100 m transect spacing. The total number of clumps used in the simulation was 3460 across 9 different sites. Therefore, transects 50 m apart were selected as the precautionary choice.
Counting methodology (Payne et al. 2002)
Given the multi-stem and clumping growth form of Black-eyed Susan, counting of clumps, rather than individual stems has been adopted (Payne et al. 2002). The definition of what is a clump has proven problematic, but a standard clump count methodology has been developed. Payne and colleagues (2002) propose:
- That a distance of 30 cm be adopted to delineate between adjacent clumps.
- Any distance greater than 30 cm would mean that the clumps would be considered to be separate and counted as separate "plant clumps".
- Clumps which appear to be separate plants clumps (stems converging to a single rootstock) but which are within a distance of 30 cm of other adjacent clumps should be counted as a single plant clump.
The main threats to Black-eyed Susan are habitat loss, fragmentation and degradation; inappropriate fire regimes; weed invasion; poor recruitment; and dieback (Driscoll 2003; Gross et al. 2003; NSW DECC 2005s; NSW NPWS 2000d, 2000e; Payne 2001; TSSC 2005be).
Habitat loss, fragmentation and degradation
The primary threat to Black-eyed Susan is habitat clearing for urban development (Gross et al. 2003) particularly as the species' strongholds of Wyong and Lake Macquarie are experiencing strong urbanisation growth rates (Payne 2001). Additionally, Black-eyed Susan subpopulations are under threat from underground and open-cut coal mining operations (Bartier et al. 2001; Gross et al. 2003), and timber harvesting activities (Payne 2001).
Habitat clearing not only results in the destruction of individual Black-eyed Susan plants, but in the continued fragmentation of remaining subpopulations and associated loss of connectivity (NSW NPWS 2000d). Fragmentation has potentially adverse consequences for both pollen and seed dispersal (Driscoll 2009) and is likely to lead to the loss of genetic variation, increased divergence and reduced abundance and effectiveness of pollinators (NSW NPWS 2000e; Payne 2001). It is thought that the actual number of mature individuals is low and current populations may predominantly be made up of established clonal colonies with little genetic variation in, and between, populations (Driscoll 2003; Hogbin 2002, cited in TSSC 2005be).
Habitat degradation can result from too frequent fire or inappropriate fire regimes, weed invasion and stormwater run-off (NSW DECC 2005s). Additionally, the habitat of small populations with large edge to area ratios can be degraded by changes in urban or agricultural run-off and rubbish dumping, especially in populations close to residential developments (NSW NPWS 2000d; TSSC 2005be) which may result in impacts such as altered hydrological regimes, nutrient load, soil permeability and loss, and pollution. Local recreational activities may have an impact on Black-eyed Susan, as it appears to be sensitive to soil disturbance and vegetation clearance (Payne 2001).
Although fire is an integral part of the Black-eyed Susan life cycle, breaking seed dormancy and promoting germination, inappropriate fire regimes threaten its long term survival. Slow cool and high intensity fires kill Black-eyed Susan by completely burning out the rootstock. High frequency of such fires, apart from eliminating Black-eyed Susan plants, subsequently allows the infiltration and establishment of weeds against which Black-eyed Susan is unable to compete for resources (Norton 1994; NSW NPWS 2000d; NSW NPWS 2000e).
Weeds compete with Black-eyed Susan for resources such as light and water and may smother plant clumps. This has been found to be occurring in the Wyong area (Wyong Shire Council 2003, cited in TSSC 2005be). Inappropriate fire regimes promote weed invasion, which Black-eyed Susan cannot compete with when they become dominant (Payne 2001). Additionally, the destruction of overstorey species (through fire or clearing) increases light penetration which promotes weed growth, as well as changing growing conditions for Black-eyed Susan which tends to prefer shaded areas (NSW NPWS 2000d; Payne 2001). Weed invasion near urban development can also result in localised extinctions (NSW NPWS 2000d).
Black-eyed Susan seeds may only be viable for a matter of months once buried in the soil and seed germination is poor unless stimulated by an appropriate fire regime. The very low seed set reported in Black-eyed Susan populations is a likely indicator of a pollinator-limited reproductive system (Driscoll 2003). However, data in Driscoll (2009) shows that seed set rates fall within the expected range.
Black-eyed Susan is particularly vulnerable to further disruption of pollination services because pollination events are infrequent and plants need to co-flower with nectar producing species (Gross et al. 2003). Bees which collect pollen from nectarless flowers generally collect pollen and nectar from a number of plant genera across several families (Bernhardt 1987, cited in Driscoll 2003). Therefore Black-eyed Susan habitat needs to contain a diversity of plant species to allow foraging bees to collect their nectar from other species growing with Black-eyed Susan (Gross et al. 2003). Habitat degradation through various human activities has resulted in a simplification of the floristic composition and vegetation structure that has led to a decline in pollinator numbers (Driscoll 2003; Gross et al. 2003; Payne 2001). Additionally, unsuitable floral assemblage, lack of nesting locations, loss of populations through inappropriate fire regimes and competition for nectar resources with introduced honey bees may make sites for native bees unsuitable (Gross et al. 2003).
The combination of pollinator limitation and further fragmentation of disjunct populations suggests little genetic variation will occur within and between disjunct populations. Fragmentation restricts the movement of pollinators between habitat patches and native bee capacity to cross gaps appears to relate to the quality of the vegetation within the gap (Driscoll 2009).
The plant pathogen Phytophthora cinnamoni has been declared a key threatening process in NSW with Black-eyed Susan listed as a species that may be adversely affected by direct infestation or habitat degradation (TSSC 2005be).
Due to the lack of understanding of the factors critical to the persistence of Black-eyed Susan, recovery and management actions should focus on habitats and not just the species. Management plans will need to cater for all ecological requirements, species and habitat (Bartier et al. 2001). Driscoll (2009a, pers. comm.) further notes that in the absence of genetic data, including pollen transfer distances, conservation of habitat containing black-eyed susan should be directed at maximising fragment size and connectivity at a macro scale and preserving habitat and vegetation type heterogeneity at a micro scale.
Key management actions are summarised below.
Habitat Loss, fragmentation and disturbance
- Protect and actively manage large populations and those at the limit of the species range through conservation covenanting and the preparation and implementation of site specific vegetation management plans (NSW DECC 2005s, 2005t; TSSC 2008yk)
- Monitor known populations to identify key threats (NSW DECC 2005t; TSSC 2008yk)
- Identify populations of high conservation priority (TSSC 2008yk)
- Improve vegetative connectivity within and between populations through revegetation and regeneration programs (NSW DECC 2005s, 2005t)
- Monitor the progress of recovery, including the effectiveness of management actions and the need to adapt them if necessary (TSSC 2008yk)
- Ensure stormwater infrastructure and associated development involving substrate or vegetation disturbance do not adversely impact on Black-eyed Susan and manage any associated hydrological change, such as increased runoff (NSW DECC 2005s, 2005t; TSSC 2008yk)
- Minimise factors that promote habitat degradation such as large edge-area ratios (NSW NPWS 2000d).
- Undertake weed control activities at priority sites on private and public land (NSW DECC 2005s, 2005t; TSSC 2008yk)
- Ensure chemicals or other mechanisms used to eradicate weeds do not have a significant adverse impact on Black-eyed Susan (TSSC 2008yk).
- Develop and implement a suitable fire management strategy for Black-eyed Susan (NSW DECC 2005s; TSSC 2008yk): No more than one quick, low intensity fire event in an eight year period (Driscoll 2009a); and avoid slow or high intensity fire events (Driscoll 2009a)
- Provide maps of known occurrences to local and state Rural Fire Services and seek inclusion of mitigation measures in bush fire risk management plans, risk register and/or operation maps (TSSC 2008yk).
Diseases, fungi and parasites
Implement suitable hygiene protocols to protect known sites from further outbreaks of dieback caused by Phytophthora cinnamomi (DEWHA 2009w) (TSSC 2008yk).
Raise awareness of Black-eyed Susan within the local community, particularly with state conservation area users (TSSC 2008yk).
Enable recovery of additional sites and/or populations
- Undertake appropriate seed collection and storage (TSSC 2008yk)
- Investigate options for linking, enhancing or establishing additional populations (TSSC 2008yk)
- Implement national translocation protocols (Vallee et al. 2004, cited in TSSC 2008yk) if establishing additional populations is considered necessary and feasible (TSSC 2008yk).
- More precisely assess population size, distribution, ecological requirements and the relative impacts of threatening processes (TSSC 2008yk)
- Investigate population dynamics and genetic diversity within and between populations (NSW DECC 2005t; TSSC 2008yk) across the distributional range to determine paternity, pollen transfer distances, specialised genotypes, what constitutes a discreet population, and the impacts of fragmentation (Driscoll 2009)
- Investigate the role of fire on sustainability of populations (Bellairs et al. 2006, Driscoll 2009), optimal fire intervals and intensity (Payne 2001; TSSC 2008yk)
- Undertake additional research on the reproductive biology, including the poor recruitment (NSW DECC 2005t; TSSC 2008yk) and seed dispersal vectors (Driscoll 2009)
- Investigate the cause of the rapid loss in viability of seeds in the soil seed bank (Bellairs et al. 2006; Driscoll 2009)
- Investigate the ecology of pollinators and factors affecting site suitability for their occupation (Driscoll 2003; Gross et al. 2003)
- Undertake a review of the extent and distribution of Black-eyed Susan as well as the type of land tenures on which it occurs (NSW DECC 2005t; TSSC 2008yk)
- Further investigate propagation and translocation (NSW NPWS 2000d; Payne 2001)
- Investigate the symbiotic relationship with mycorrhiza (Bellairs et al. 2006; Payne 2001).
Limited information is available on the translocation potential or success of Black-eyed Susan. The NSW NPWS (2000d) notes that a translocation attempt at Green Point Nature Reserve failed and that translocations are not recommended as a management strategy or mitigation. Benson and McDougall (2001) note that Black-eyed Susan is mycorrhiza dependant, making it difficult to translocate. Furthermore, Bartier and colleagues (2001) commented that due to the lack of understanding of the factors critical to the persistence of Black-eyed Susan, translocations are not recommended.
Driscoll and Bell (2009, cited in Driscoll 2009) translocated 100 plant clumps by hand shovel to a site in the immediate vicinity of the donor site, effectively within the same population. After five years, the average survival was 27%.
Translocation should be regarded as experimental and is not recommended.
Propagation from cuttings
Black-eyed Susan plants have previously been propagated from root and tip cuttings (NSW NPWS 2000d; Payne 2001). However, plants propagated from cuttings should not be used in rehabilitation projects until the reasons for poor seed set are known. The reintroduction of genets from one subpopulation to another may reduce the fitness and stability of existing populations (Payne 2001).
Propagation from seed
While Black-eyed Susan plants have been successfully propagated from seed using various experimental treatments (Bartier et al. 2001; Bellairs et al. 2006), further research is required into the reproduction biology, seed viability and the appropriate fire regime required to stimulate germination.
Black-eyed Susan seeds lose viability rapidly once in the soil and therefore Bellairs and colleagues (2006) suggest that, rather than collecting seed from the soil seed bank, it would be more effective to collect and store seeds under optimal conditions (seeds retained viability for six months in cold storage) and then hand sow when conditions are optimal. Seeds would then need to be treated to stimulate germination soon after sowing to overcome their short longevity in the soil. Bellairs and colleagues (2006) also suggest that seedlings could be established in a nursery, however, the dependence on mycorrhiza for survival needs to be understood.
The following documents may inform protection and management of Black-eyed Susan:
The following table lists known and perceived threats to this species. Threats are based on the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) threat classification version 1.1.
|Threat Class||Threatening Species||References|
|Invasive and Other Problematic Species and Genes:Invasive Non-Native/Alien Species:Competition and/or habitat degradation by weeds||Commonwealth Conservation Advice on Tetratheca juncea (Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC), 2008yk) [Conservation Advice].|
|Invasive and Other Problematic Species and Genes:Invasive Non-Native/Alien Species:Grazing, tramping, competition and/or habitat degradation||Sus scrofa (Pig)||The threat posed by pest animals to biodiversity in New South Wales (Coutts-Smith, A.J., P.S. Mahon, M. Letnic & P.O. Downey, 2007) [Management Plan].|
|Invasive and Other Problematic Species and Genes:Invasive Non-Native/Alien Species:Vegetation and habitat loss caused by dieback||Phytophthora cinnamomi||Commonwealth Conservation Advice on Tetratheca juncea (Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC), 2008yk) [Conservation Advice].|
|Natural System Modifications:Fire and Fire Suppression:Inappropriate and/or changed fire regimes (frequency, timing, intensity)||Commonwealth Conservation Advice on Tetratheca juncea (Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC), 2008yk) [Conservation Advice].|
|Pollution:Household Sewage and Urban Waste Water:Changes to water quality and quantity due to urban/agricultural runoff and stormwater|
|Residential and Commercial Development:Housing and Urban Areas:Habitat loss, modification and fragmentation due to urban development|
|Species Stresses:Indirect Species Effects:Poor recruitment (regeneration) and declining population numbers|
Acacia Environmental Planning Pty Ltd (Acacia EP) (2007). F3 Freeway to Branxton link. Modification to the Approved Project Environmental Assessment. [Online]. NSW: Roads and Traffic Authority. Available from: http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/constructionmaintenance/downloads/hunter/f3_branxton/f3_branxton_mod-ea_01_0307.pdf. [Accessed: 01-May-2008].
Bartier, F., C.L. Gross, D. Mulligan, S. Bellairs, & D. Bowen (2001). Understanding the biology and ecology of a vulnerable plant species - a case study with Tetratheca juncea occurring over coal leases. ACARP Project C8012. St Lucia, Queensland: University of Queensland.
Bell, M. (2009). Personal Communication.
Bellairs, S.M., F.V. Bartier, A.J. Gravina & K. Baker (2006). Seed biology implications for the maintenance and establishment of Tetratheca juncea (Tremandraceae), a vulnerable Australian species. Australian Journal of Botany. 54(1):35-41.
Benson, D. & L. McDougall (2001). Ecology of Sydney plant species: Part 8 Dicotyledon families Rutaceae to Zygophyllaceae. Cunninghamia. 7(2):241-462. [Online]. Sydney: Royal Botanic Gardens. Available from: http://www.rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/58556/Cun7Ben241.pdf. [Accessed: 25-Sep-2008].
Boesewinkel, F.D. (1999). Ovules and seeds of Tremandraceae. Australian Journal of Botany. 47:769-781.
Conacher Travers Environmental Consultants (Conacher Travers) (2006). Ecological Site Report Coastal and Northern Sectors, Wallarah Peninsula.
Council of Heads of Australian Botanic Gardens (CHABG) (1992). Census of plants in botanic gardens. [Online]. Available from: http://www.anbg.gov.au/chabg/census/census.html.
Crayn, D.M., M. Rosetto & D.J. Maynard (2006). Molecular Phylogeny and Dating Reveals an Oligomiocene Radiation of Dry-adapted Shrubs (former Tremandraceae) from Rainforest Tree Progenitors (Elaeocarpaceae) in Australia. American Journal of Botany. 93(9):1328¿1342.
Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) (2009w). Threat abatement plan for disease in natural ecosystems caused by Phytophthora cinnamomi. [Online]. Canberra; ACT: Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/publications/tap/phytophthora.html.
Driscoll, C. (2003). Pollination ecology of Tetratheca juncea (Tremandraceae): finding the pollinators. Cunninghamia. 8(1):133-140.
Driscoll, C. (2009). A review of the ecology and biology of Tetratheca juncea Sm. (Elaeocarpaceae). Draft report to Lake Macquarie City Council.
Driscoll, C. (2009a). Personal Communication.
Ecobiological Pty Ltd (2007). Environmental Assessment Report Catherine Hill Bay/Gwandalan Concept Plan. [Online]. Available from: http://www.chbgconceptplan.com.au/chbgconceptplan/documents/03-DescriptionofProposal.pdf. [Accessed: 29-May-2008].
Ecovision Consulting (2006). Ecological Impact Assessment, Proposed Recovery of Carbonaceous Materials and Site Rehabilitation of former coal mines at Neath, Aberdare East and Richmond Main East. [Online]. Environmental Assessment Report, Chitter and Tailings Reclamation Project. Available from: http://www.hunterenviro.com.au/www/323/1001127/displayarticle/1001238.html.
Forest Fauna Surveys Pty Ltd (2007). Threatened Species Impact Assessment Wyong Employment Zone. [Online]. Available from: http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/assessingdev/pdf/sss/wez_floraandfauna_report_pt5.pdf. [Accessed: 21-May-2008].
Gross, C.L., F.V. Bartier & D.R. Mulligan (2003). Floral Structure, Breeding System and Fruit-set in the Threatened Sub-shrub Tetratheca juncea Smith (Tremandraceae). Annals of Botany. 92(6):771-777.
Harden, G.J. (Ed.) (1992). Flora of New South Wales Volume 3. Kensington, NSW: University of NSW Press.
Harper Somers O'Sullivan Pty Ltd (HSO) (2007a). Ecological Assessment Report For Southern Lands at Gwandalan. [Online]. Coal & Allied Operations. Available from: http://www.coalandallied.com.au/documents/Appendix_F_CHB_ecological_assessment_report_(part_one).pdf. [Accessed: 24-Apr-2008].
Harper Somers O'Sullivan Pty Ltd (HSO) (2007b). Ecological Assessment For Southern Lands at Catherine Hill Bay. [Online]. Coal & Allied Operations. Available from: http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/asp/pdf/06_0330_rosecorp_chb_ppr_appendixc_ecoassessreport_pt1.pdf. [Accessed: 19-May-2008].
Harper Somers O'Sullivan Pty Ltd (HSO) (2007d). Ecological Assessment For Southern Lake Macquarie Lands. [Online]. Coal & Allied Operations. Available from: http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/asp/pdf/06_0330_rosecorp_chb_ppr_appendixc_ecoassessreport_pt1.pdf. [Accessed: 20-May-2008].
Harper Somers O'Sullivan Pty Ltd (HSO) (2007e). Updated EPBC Addendum Report For Proposed Subdivision Lot 3 DP 588206 Kanangra Drive Gwandalan. [Online]. Coal & Allied Operations. Available from: http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/asp/pdf/06_0330_rosecorp_chb_ppr_appendixe_epbc_addendumreport.pdf. [Accessed: 20-May-2008].
Harper Somers O'Sullivan Pty Ltd (HSO) (2007f). Ecological Assessment Report Southern Lands Nords Wharf. [Online]. Coal & Allied Operations. Available from: http://www.coalandallied.com.au/documents/Appendix_F_Nords_Wharf_ecological_assessment_report_pages_45_to_51.pdf.
HLA Envirosciences Pty Ltd (HLA) (2006). Flora and Fauna Impact Assessment. Upgrade to Existing Ash Dam Appendix E Eraring Power Station. [Online]. Available from: http://www.eraring-energy.com.au/Uploads/Documents/Appendix%20E%20[4.6Mb]_20080817024551.pdf. [Accessed: 27-May-2007].
Meredith, L.D. & M.M, Richardson (1986). Rare or threatened Australian plant species in cultivation in Australia. Canberra, ACT: Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service.
Murray, M. & S. Bell (2001). Lake Macquarie City Council Flora and Fauna Survey Guidelines. [Online]. Eastcoast Flora Survey. Available from: http://www.lakemac.com.au/downloads/I_FloraFaunaSurveyGuidelines.pdf.
Norton, A.E. (1994). Field observations into Tetratheca juncea. Fire regeneration and its attribution within Lake Macquarie. Unpublished report, prepared for BHP Pty Ltd.
NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change (NSW DECC) (2005s). Black-eyed Susan Profile. [Online]. Hurstville, NSW: Threatened Species Unit. Available from: http://threatenedspecies.environment.nsw.gov.au/tsprofile/profile.aspx?id=10799. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2008].
NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change (NSW DECC) (2005t). Black-eyed Susan - Priority Actions. [Online]. Available from: http://www.threatenedspecies.environment.nsw.gov.au/tsprofile/pas_profile.aspx?id=10799&print=yes. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2008].
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NSW NPWS) (2000d). Threatened Species Information-Tetratheca juncea. [Online]. Hurstville, NSW:Threatened Species Unit. Available from: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/nature/TSprofileTetrathecaJuncea.pdf. [Accessed: 14-Apr-2008].
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NSW NPWS) (2000e). Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines Tetratheca juncea. [Online]. Hurstville, NSW: Threatened Species Unit. Available from: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/nature/TjunceaEia0500.pdf. [Accessed: 29-May-2008].
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NSW NPWS) (2003b). Fire Management Plan Munmorah State Conservation Area Incorporating Bird Island Nature Reserve. [Online]. Gosford, NSW: NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service. Available from: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/parks/fmpFinalMunmorahAndBirdIsland.pdf. [Accessed: 28-Apr-2008].
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NSW NPWS) (2003c). Wallerah National Park Interim Management Guidelines Parts 6-9. [Online]. Available from: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/parks/WallarahNPInterimMgmtGuidelinesCh06-14.pdf. [Accessed: 20-May-2008].
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NSW NPWS) (2003d). Glenrock Lagoon Cultural Landscape Conservation Management and Cultural Tourism Plan. [Online]. NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service. Available from: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/parks/cmctpGlenrock.pdf. [Accessed: 20-May-2008].
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NSW NPWS) (2004b). Draft Fire Management Strategy Glenrock State Conservation Area and Awabakal Nature Reserve. [Online]. NSW Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC). Available from: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/parks/FMPDraftGlenrockSCAAwabakalNR.pdf. [Accessed: 26-May-2008].
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NSW NPWS) (2005d). Lake Macquarie State Conservation Area, Pulbah Island Nature Reserve and Moon Island Nature Reserve Plan of Management. [Online]. NSW Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC). Available from: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/parks/PoMLakeMacquarieSCAPulbahIslandNRMoonIslandNR.pdf. [Accessed: 26-May-2008].
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NSW NPWS) (2005e). Hunter Region Wallaroo Nature Reserve Fire Management Strategy. [Online]. NSW Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC). Available from: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/parks/WallarooNRFMS.pdf. [Accessed: 23-May-2008].
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NSW NPWS) (2005f). Karuah Nature Reserve and Karuah State Conservation Area Fire management Strategy. [Online]. NSW Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC). Available from: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/parks/KaruahNRFMS.pdf. [Accessed: 26-May-2008].
NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NSW NPWS) (2006j). Jilliby State Conservation Area (North) Draft Fire Management Strategy. [Online]. NSW Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC). Available from: http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/parks/JillibyFmsAug06Map1.pdf. [Accessed: 28-May-2008].
Parsons Brinckerhoff (2005). Technical Paper 1, Flora and Fauna Assessment of Munmorah Gas Turbine Facility. [Online]. Sydney, NSW: Delta Electricity. Available from: http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/asp/pdf/mun_vol2_technical_paper_1_flora_fauna.pdf. [Accessed: 21-May-2008].
Payne, R J (1993). Prediction of the habitat for Tetratheca juncea in the Munmorah area, near Wyong, NSW. Cunninghamia. 3(1):147-154.
Payne, R. (2001). Final-Lake Macquarie Tetratheca juncea Conservation Management Plan. Robert Payne Ecological Surveys & Management.
Payne, R., D. Stevenson & R. Wellington (2002). A standardised method for counting Black-eyed Susan populations. Technical Note.
Payne, R.J. (2001b). Addendum to the final November 2000 Tetratheca juncea conservation management plan. Umina Beach, NSW: Lake Macquarie Council & Robert Payne Ecological Surveys and Management.
Sinclair Knight Merz (SKM) (2001). Ecological Assessment of the Appropriate Widths of Vegetated Buffers to Drainage Lines in Urban Lake Macquarie. Draft report to Lake Macquarie City Council.
Thompson, J. (1976). A Revision of the genus Tetratheca (Tremandraceae). Telopea. 1(3):139-215.
Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2005be). Commonwealth Listing Advice on Tetratheca juncea. [Online]. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/tetratheca-juncea.html.
Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) (2008yk). Commonwealth Conservation Advice on Tetratheca juncea. [Online]. Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species/pubs/21407-conservation-advice.pdf.
Wyong Shire Council (n.d.). Appendix 8, Natural Resource Officer, Environmental Studies, Rosecorp Exhibition (Gwandalan and Catherine Hill Bay). [Online]. NSW: Wyong Shire Council. Available from: http://www.wyongsc.nsw.gov.au/development/PDFs/Submission_Gwandalan_and_Catho_environmental_studies.pdf. [Accessed: 20-May-2008].
This database is designed to provide statutory, biological and ecological information on species and ecological communities, migratory species, marine species, and species and species products subject to international trade and commercial use protected under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act). It has been compiled from a range of sources including listing advice, recovery plans, published literature and individual experts. While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure the accuracy of the information, no guarantee is given, nor responsibility taken, by the Commonwealth for its accuracy, currency or completeness. The Commonwealth does not accept any responsibility for any loss or damage that may be occasioned directly or indirectly through the use of, or reliance on, the information contained in this database. The information contained in this database does not necessarily represent the views of the Commonwealth. This database is not intended to be a complete source of information on the matters it deals with. Individuals and organisations should consider all the available information, including that available from other sources, in deciding whether there is a need to make a referral or apply for a permit or exemption under the EPBC Act.
Citation: Department of the Environment (2014). Tetratheca juncea in Species Profile and Threats Database, Department of the Environment, Canberra. Available from: http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed Thu, 13 Mar 2014 02:13:31 +1100.