Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
03 January 2020 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Leonie Bolleurs
Research read more
Dr Sandy Steenhuisen conducts research on invasive alien plants and the effect they have on the environment.

South Africa, and more specifically the Free State, is known as a drought-stricken area. Invasive alien plants are gulping up much-needed water resources, draining our land. 

Pollination ecologist, Dr Sandy-Lynn Steenhuisen, who is also expanding into invasive alien research, is conducting research on the reproductive ecology of exotic plant species in montane grasslands. As an affiliate of the Afromontane Research Unit (ARU) and Senior Lecturer in the Department of Plant Sciences at the University of the Free State (UFS), this research is conducted with her students and a host of collaborators from Rhodes University (Centre for Biological Control), Stellenbosch University (Centre for Invasion Biology), and the University of KwaZulu-Natal.  

She says substantial funding is being made available for research on invasive species due to the extent of the problem nationally and globally. Their research is being funded and conducted in collaboration with plant ecology experts, Dr Kim Canavan (Rhodes University), Dr Grant Martin (Rhodes University), Prof David Richardson (Stellenbosch University), and Prof Colleen Downs (University of KwaZulu-Natal), as well as UFS postgraduate students Anthony Mapaura and Lehlohonolo Donald Adams, and UFS postdoctoral fellow, Dr Nicholas Le Maitre. 

Besides working with a host of collaborators, the ARU was this year also invited to join the prestigious Mountain Invasion Research Network (MIREN), a global network of academics who are passionate about understanding the invasion of mountains by non-native species and its impact on local mountain ecologies.  

Black Wattle makes rivers run dry 

Alien plant species that often escape from planted gardens or plantations, thrive in disturbed, mismanaged and eroded areas. One of the biggest issues regarding alien plant invasion is that many people are not aware of the harmful effects it has on the environment, and that they continue to plant it or allow invaders to spread. 

A large percentage of trees in urban South Africa are invasive alien trees. They dry out the soil and displace our native plants. Coming from other countries and without their former enemies or competitors, they flourish. Our indigenous plants are not used to these plants and are easily displaced.  

An example of a very aggressive invasive alien plant in the region, and in South Africa as a whole, is Black Wattle. It uses excessive water, so bad that rivers run dry and riverbanks become eroded. It also chemically excludes many native plants from growing among them. 

Research content 1
Anthony Mapaura’s research focuses on Nassella, an invasive alien grass in the elevated areas of the Eastern Cape mountains.
This plant is extremely difficult to control and is the cause of a large number of  cattle dying. (Photo: Leonie Bolleurs)

This species is very hard to control. If you burn it or cut it off, it will grow back. In addition, it drops a great number of seeds into the soil, spreading without any difficulty.  

Another invader, Yellow Firethorn, which is being investigated by master’s student Adams, invades high-elevation grassland areas, reducing grazing potential and ultimately leading to unproductive farmland and choked rivers.  

“Our mountain grassland systems are not adapted to compete with the invasion of these alien trees. Since they are using excessive water resources, natural streams should return in many instances if they are removed,” says Dr Steenhuisen. 

Nassella displacing indigenous plants 

Mapaura focuses his doctoral study on an invasive grass genus, Nassella, originating from the Americas. Growing in the elevated areas of the Eastern Cape mountains, this species is the cause of a large number of cattle dying.  

The plant, which is not palatable and consists mostly of fibre, is eaten by cattle – especially during dry seasons when there is not much natural grazing available. It is difficult to digest, forming a ball in the stomach of the animals that ultimately results in death.  

“It is extremely difficult and costly to control, and natural grasses cannot compete with it. In Australia, many farmers have had to abandon their farms once these plants invaded, as the cost of control was higher than the value of the land. A similar situation could unfold in South Africa, and it’s a race to learn all we can about the ecology of this genus to inform policy and practice,” says Dr Steenhuisen. 

The solution, fighting for survival 

She said to effectively address these invasions, we need to understand everything about the reproductive ecology of the plants to develop specific biological or chemical control methods to target and destroy the plant at an appropriate life stage. We also need to know if the plants are using native animals (if not just wind and water) to pollinate their flowers and spread their seeds. “Organisations investigating the effectiveness of biological control agents and chemical products will be able to use our research data on the plants’ ecology to focus efforts on specific life stages,” she adds. 

Invasive alien plants also contribute to South Africa losing the genetic integrity of certain native plants with which they hybridise. For example, pure genetic lines of native white stinkwood trees are potentially mixing with exotics and hybrids, adding to a loss of diversity and genetic purity – a project being undertaken by postdoctoral fellow, Dr Le Maitre.  

Dr Steenhuisen urges South Africans to plant the genetically pure South African white stinkwood trees, especially since alien species and hybrids are often sold by garden centres as if they were the indigenous species.  

Dr Vincent Ralph Clark, Head of the Afromontane Research Unit at the UFS, has a vision to start a nursery for high-elevation indigenous plants. “A great number of nurseries do not supply pure indigenous trees, but hybrids,” says Dr Steenhuisen.  

 

News Archive

Bloemfontein's quality of tap water compares very favourably with bottled water
2009-08-04

The quality of the drinking water of five suburbs in Bloemfontein is at least as good as or better than bottled water. This is the result of a standard and chemical bacterial analysis done by the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Centre for Environmental Management in collaboration with the Institute for Groundwater Studies (IGS).

Five samples were taken from tap water sources in the suburbs of Universitas, Brandwag, Bain’s Vlei, Langenhoven Park and Bayswater and 15 samples were taken of different brands of still and unflavoured bottled water. The samples were analysed at the laboratory of the IGS, while the interpretation of the analysis was done by the Centre for Environmental Management.

“We wanted to evaluate the difference in quality for human consumption between tap water and that of the different brands of bottled water,” said Prof. Maitland Seaman, Head of the Centre for Environmental Management.

“With the exception of two samples produced by multinational companies at their plants in South Africa, the different brands of bottled water used for the study were produced by South African companies, including a local small-scale Bloemfontein producer,” said Prof. Seaman.

According to the labels, the sources of the water vary from pure spring water, to partial reverse osmosis (as an aid to standardise salt, i.e. mineral, content), to only reverse osmosis (to remove salts). (Reverse osmosis is a process in which water is forced under pressure through a pipe with minute pores through which water passes but no – or very low concentrations of – salts pass.)

According to Prof. Seaman, the analysis revealed some interesting findings, such as:

• It is generally accepted that drinking water should have an acceptable level of salt content, as the body needs salts. Most mineral contents were relatively higher in the tap water samples than the bottled water samples and were very much within the acceptable range of drinkable water quality. One of the bottled samples, however, had a very low mineral content, as the water was produced by reverse osmosis, as stated on the bottle. While reverse osmosis is used by various producers, most producers use it as an aid, not as a single method to remove nearly all the salts. Drinking only such water over a prolonged period may probably have a negative effect on the human physiology.

• The pH values of the tap water samples (8,12–8,40) were found to be slightly higher (slightly alkaline), like in all south-eastern Free State rivers (from where the water is sourced) than the pH of most of the bottled water samples, most of which are sourced and/or treated in other areas. Two brands of bottled water were found to have relatively low pH levels (both 4,5, i.e. acidic) as indicated on their bottles and as confirmed by the IGS analysis. The health implication of this range of pH is not significant.

• The analysis showed differences in the mineral content given on the labels of most of the water bottles compared to that found by IGS analysis. The possibility of seasonal fluctuation in content, depending on various factors, is expected and most of the bottling companies also indicate this on their labels. What was a rather interesting finding was that two pairs of bottled water brands claimed exactly the same mineral content but appeared under different brand names and were also priced differently. In each case, one of the pair was a well-known house brand, and the other obviously the original producer. In one of these paired cases, the house brand stated that the water was spring water, while the other (identical) “original” brand stated that it was spring water treated by reverse osmosis and oxygen-enriched.

• Nitrate (NO3) levels were uniformly low except in one bottled sample, suggesting a low (non-threatening) level of organic pollution in the source water. Otherwise, none of the water showed any sign of pollution.

• The bacterial analysis confirmed the absence of any traces of coliforms or E.coli in any of the samples, as was also indicated by the bottling companies. This is very reassuring. What is not known is how all these waters were sterilised, which could be anything from irradiation to chlorine or ozone treatment.

• The price of the different brands of bottled water, each containing 500 ml of still water, ranged between R3,99 and R8,99, with R5,03 being the average price. A comparison between the least expensive and the most expensive bottles of water indicated no significant difference in quality. In fact, discrepancies were observed in the most expensive bottle in that the amount of Calcium (Ca) claimed to be present in it was found to be significantly different from what the analysis indicated (29,6 mg/l versus 0,92 mg/l). The alkalinity (CaCO3 mg/l) indicated on the bottle was also found to differ considerably (83 mg/l versus 9,4 mg/l). The concentration of Total Dissolved Salts (TDS) was not given on the product.

“The preference for bottled water as compared to Bloemfontein’s tap water from a qualitative perspective as well as the price discrepancy is unjustifiable. The environmental footprint of bottled water is also large. Sourcing, treating, bottling, packaging and transporting, to mention but a few of the steps involved in the processing of bottled water, entail a huge carbon footprint, as well as a large water footprint, because it also requires water for treating and rinsing to process bottled water,” said Prof. Seaman.

Media Release
Lacea Loader
Deputy Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za  
3 August 2009

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept