title: Garden Place: Who Belongs Here? Individuals' Attitude Towards Hamilton's Homeless Population

authors: Barrow, Shevon Fern Crystal

subjects: homelessness

abstract: Like many other countries, it was during the 1980s that homelessness emerged as a social problem in New Zealand. It first became a prominent issue in cities like Auckland, Wellington, and Christchurch. However, in later years surveys and census readings indicated that the homeless population increased in many other cities throughout New Zealand - including Hamilton. As years passed, the number of homeless individuals increased in Hamilton, along with their tendency to congregate within the Central Business District - specifically in the popular town square known as Garden Place. Subsequently news articles emerged highlighting the congregation of the homeless in Garden Place. Media portrayals labelled these homeless men and women as a ‘problem’ for businesses and city users’ alike. As a result many expressed a need for a solution to the homeless who congregate within Garden Place. Garden Place was thus chosen as the prime area of study within this research. In addition, although conscious of the potential emergence of the contestation of this public space, and irrespective of media portrayals, this study was developed to further examine the expressed (through interviews) and observed attitudes that individuals have towards Hamilton’s homeless in Garden Place, and to gain an understanding of why individuals held such views. It is proposed that an important barrier to resolving or dealing with the issue of homelessness is our attitudes towards homeless individuals. These perceptions and attitudes are important because they determine the way we think about social problems and the solutions we offer to solve them. To gain an understanding, and tap into the emotional and textual aspects of responses on how individuals perceived this particular issue, the qualitative approach was chosen for this research. Participant observation of Garden Place, and semi-structured interviews with approximately twenty willing pedestrians and four business managers within Garden Place were also conducted. As a result, findings showed that participant responses conveyed more negative attitudes towards the congregation of the homeless in Garden Place, as compared to positive attitudes. Such attitudes were based on the construction of homeless people as non-deserving of the right to this public space because they either do not ‘fit’ into the normal activities for which this space is intended or they do not live up to the imagined depictions of such spaces. In addition, solutions offered suggested that the homeless be ‘moved along’, out of Garden Place, which favoured what to do about the homeless rather than what to do for them. Therefore this research also aims to offer additional approaches to addressing this issue of homelessness within Garden Place, which can be implemented and achieved with a more positive stance on the issue.

text: Garden Place: Who Belongs Here? Individuals' Attitude Towards Hamilton's Homeless Population Like many other countries, it was during the 1980s that homelessness emerged as a social problem in New Zealand. It first became a prominent issue in cities like Auckland, Wellington, and Christchurch. However, in later years surveys and census readings indicated that the homeless population increased in many other cities throughout New Zealand - including Hamilton. As years passed, the number of homeless individuals increased in Hamilton, along with their tendency to congregate within the Central Business District - specifically in the popular town square known as Garden Place. Subsequently news articles emerged highlighting the congregation of the homeless in Garden Place. Media portrayals labelled these homeless men and women as a ‘problem’ for businesses and city users’ alike. As a result many expressed a need for a solution to the homeless who congregate within Garden Place. Garden Place was thus chosen as the prime area of study within this research. In addition, although conscious of the potential emergence of the contestation of this public space, and irrespective of media portrayals, this study was developed to further examine the expressed (through interviews) and observed attitudes that individuals have towards Hamilton’s homeless in Garden Place, and to gain an understanding of why individuals held such views. It is proposed that an important barrier to resolving or dealing with the issue of homelessness is our attitudes towards homeless individuals. These perceptions and attitudes are important because they determine the way we think about social problems and the solutions we offer to solve them. To gain an understanding, and tap into the emotional and textual aspects of responses on how individuals perceived this particular issue, the qualitative approach was chosen for this research. Participant observation of Garden Place, and semi-structured interviews with approximately twenty willing pedestrians and four business managers within Garden Place were also conducted. As a result, findings showed that participant responses conveyed more negative attitudes towards the congregation of the homeless in Garden Place, as compared to positive attitudes. Such attitudes were based on the construction of homeless people as non-deserving of the right to this public space because they either do not ‘fit’ into the normal activities for which this space is intended or they do not live up to the imagined depictions of such spaces. In addition, solutions offered suggested that the homeless be ‘moved along’, out of Garden Place, which favoured what to do about the homeless rather than what to do for them. Therefore this research also aims to offer additional approaches to addressing this issue of homelessness within Garden Place, which can be implemented and achieved with a more positive stance on the issue.

year: 2015

title: Studies on carbon and DNA preservation in allophanic soils and paleosols on Holocene tephras in New Zealand

authors: Huang, Yu-Tuan

abstract: The recovery of ancient DNA (aDNA) and palaeoenvironmental DNA (PalEnDNA) from soils and sediments has enabled detailed paleontological and ecological records to be obtained. Because of the superior ability of allophanic soils and Andisols to adsorb considerable soil organic matter (SOM), and to slow the rate of carbon turnover in such soils, I hypothesised that environmental DNA can be preserved in allophanic soils and Andisols together with SOM, and that such DNA may be able to help reveal past environments. I characterised the preserved SOM in stratigraphic successions of buried paleosols on Holocene tephras of known age in northern New Zealand and attempted to extract and analyse the DNA to search for possible PalEnDNA.

Using synchrotron radiation-based carbon near-edge X-ray absorption fine structure (C NEXAFS) spectroscopy, I found the compositions and proportions of carbon functional groups of SOM in allophanic paleosols on precisely-dated Holocene tephras (c. 12,000 to 1718 calendar [cal] years BP) at four sites in northern New Zealand were similar and dominated by carboxylic functional groups, with subordinate amounts of quinonic, aromatic, and aliphatic groups. Differences in clay and allophane contents, stratigraphic position, age, parenttephra composition (andesitic versus rhyolitic), and mode of soil origin (retardant versus developmental upbuilding pedogenesis) seemed not to affect the structure of SOM over time. The similarity of the SOM in allophanic paleosols of different ages implied its preservation in allophanic soils over a long time, and the presence of quinonic carbon, normally very susceptible to degradation and transformation, shows that the allophanic soils have protected it very effectively. The quinonic carbon in buried horizons is thus indicative of the preservation of biological materials originating from bacteria and plants. The SOM originated through upbuilding pedogenesis: as soil genesis began in a newly-deposited tephra at the soil surface, allophane formed and it sequestered SOM from the modern (surface) organic cycle dominated by inputs from broadleaf-podocarp forest. Ongoing tephra deposition then caused the land surface to rise so that once-surface horizons were buried more deeply and hence became increasingly divorced from the modern organic cycle over time. The SOM adsorbed when the soil horizon was at the land surface was preserved in the buried soils because a fractal pore network of allophane aggregates and nanopores encapsulated and shielded the ‘old’ or relict SOM (including quinonic carbon) derived from past environments of the Holocene.

To provide fundamental knowledge about the interaction of allophane, DNA, and SOM in soils, I examined the adsorption capacity and adsorption mechanisms of salmon-sperm DNA on pure synthetic allophane and humic acidrich synthetic allophane. The pure synthetic allophane was able to adsorb up to 34 μg/mg of salmon-sperm DNA, but the humic acid-rich synthetic allophane adsorbed only 3.5 μg/mg of salmon-sperm DNA. Salmon-sperm DNA was adsorbed chemically through its phosphate group to the aluminol groups of synthetic allophane, and adsorbed chemically through humic acid covering the synthetic allophane spherules, and thus became bound indirectly to synthetic allophane. The chemical adsorption of salmon-sperm DNA on synthetic allophane led to the aggregation of allophane spherules to form nanoaggregates and microaggregates, and ~80% of total adsorbed DNA on allophane was held physically within the interstices (pores) between allophane spherules and nanoaggregates. The encapsulated DNA within the stable allophane-DNA aggregates may not be accessible to enzymes nor microbes, hence enabling DNA protection and preservation in allophanic soils. By implication, organic carbon is therefore likely to be sequestered and protected in allophanic soils (Andisols) in the same way as demonstrated here for DNA − that is, predominantly by encapsulation within a tortuous network of nanopores and submicropores amidst stable nanoaggregates and microaggregates, rather than by chemisorption alone.

A novel two-step method was developed to isolate DNA from allophane, based in part on experiments devised to extract salmon-sperm DNA from synthetic allophane. The two-step method for DNA extraction from allophanic soils is based on (1) chelating DNA and blocking adsorptive sites on allophane using EDTA and phosphate, respectively, and (2) dissolving allophane using acidified ammonium oxalate. The DNA yield from three allophanic paleosols on Holocene tephras was up to 44.5 μg/g soil (oven-dry basis). The extracted DNA was then successfully purified via gel electrophoresis followed by a gel purification kit, and the amplifiable and sequenced DNA extracted from a paleosol (which had been at the land surface for around 4000 years between c. 9423 and c. 5526 calendar years BP) on Rotoma tephra contained New Zealand endemic and exotic plants that differed from the European grasses growing currently on the land surface. The difference in vegetation indicates that the DNA extraction method I (with others) have developed is able to access environmental DNA originating from previous vegetation cover. The DNA extraction method could be used to facilitate the search for possible PalEnDNA in allophanic paleosols for reconstructing the past terrestrial environments as well as to investigate the biodiversity in allophanic soils and the origins of SOM.

Allophanic soils are demonstrably able to protect environmental DNA from degradation for a long period of time, and such DNA is able to reveal past environments. However, the duration over which that environmental DNA can be preserved in allophanic soils needs to be resolved, and additional investigations of gene diversity in allophanic paleosols of different ages using high-throughput sequencing (HTS) are required to determine the taxonomic profiles recovered in paleosols and to rule out contamination of modern DNA.

text: Studies on carbon and DNA preservation in allophanic soils and paleosols on Holocene tephras in New Zealand The recovery of ancient DNA (aDNA) and palaeoenvironmental DNA (PalEnDNA) from soils and sediments has enabled detailed paleontological and ecological records to be obtained. Because of the superior ability of allophanic soils and Andisols to adsorb considerable soil organic matter (SOM), and to slow the rate of carbon turnover in such soils, I hypothesised that environmental DNA can be preserved in allophanic soils and Andisols together with SOM, and that such DNA may be able to help reveal past environments. I characterised the preserved SOM in stratigraphic successions of buried paleosols on Holocene tephras of known age in northern New Zealand and attempted to extract and analyse the DNA to search for possible PalEnDNA.

Using synchrotron radiation-based carbon near-edge X-ray absorption fine structure (C NEXAFS) spectroscopy, I found the compositions and proportions of carbon functional groups of SOM in allophanic paleosols on precisely-dated Holocene tephras (c. 12,000 to 1718 calendar [cal] years BP) at four sites in northern New Zealand were similar and dominated by carboxylic functional groups, with subordinate amounts of quinonic, aromatic, and aliphatic groups. Differences in clay and allophane contents, stratigraphic position, age, parenttephra composition (andesitic versus rhyolitic), and mode of soil origin (retardant versus developmental upbuilding pedogenesis) seemed not to affect the structure of SOM over time. The similarity of the SOM in allophanic paleosols of different ages implied its preservation in allophanic soils over a long time, and the presence of quinonic carbon, normally very susceptible to degradation and transformation, shows that the allophanic soils have protected it very effectively. The quinonic carbon in buried horizons is thus indicative of the preservation of biological materials originating from bacteria and plants. The SOM originated through upbuilding pedogenesis: as soil genesis began in a newly-deposited tephra at the soil surface, allophane formed and it sequestered SOM from the modern (surface) organic cycle dominated by inputs from broadleaf-podocarp forest. Ongoing tephra deposition then caused the land surface to rise so that once-surface horizons were buried more deeply and hence became increasingly divorced from the modern organic cycle over time. The SOM adsorbed when the soil horizon was at the land surface was preserved in the buried soils because a fractal pore network of allophane aggregates and nanopores encapsulated and shielded the ‘old’ or relict SOM (including quinonic carbon) derived from past environments of the Holocene.

To provide fundamental knowledge about the interaction of allophane, DNA, and SOM in soils, I examined the adsorption capacity and adsorption mechanisms of salmon-sperm DNA on pure synthetic allophane and humic acidrich synthetic allophane. The pure synthetic allophane was able to adsorb up to 34 μg/mg of salmon-sperm DNA, but the humic acid-rich synthetic allophane adsorbed only 3.5 μg/mg of salmon-sperm DNA. Salmon-sperm DNA was adsorbed chemically through its phosphate group to the aluminol groups of synthetic allophane, and adsorbed chemically through humic acid covering the synthetic allophane spherules, and thus became bound indirectly to synthetic allophane. The chemical adsorption of salmon-sperm DNA on synthetic allophane led to the aggregation of allophane spherules to form nanoaggregates and microaggregates, and ~80% of total adsorbed DNA on allophane was held physically within the interstices (pores) between allophane spherules and nanoaggregates. The encapsulated DNA within the stable allophane-DNA aggregates may not be accessible to enzymes nor microbes, hence enabling DNA protection and preservation in allophanic soils. By implication, organic carbon is therefore likely to be sequestered and protected in allophanic soils (Andisols) in the same way as demonstrated here for DNA − that is, predominantly by encapsulation within a tortuous network of nanopores and submicropores amidst stable nanoaggregates and microaggregates, rather than by chemisorption alone.

A novel two-step method was developed to isolate DNA from allophane, based in part on experiments devised to extract salmon-sperm DNA from synthetic allophane. The two-step method for DNA extraction from allophanic soils is based on (1) chelating DNA and blocking adsorptive sites on allophane using EDTA and phosphate, respectively, and (2) dissolving allophane using acidified ammonium oxalate. The DNA yield from three allophanic paleosols on Holocene tephras was up to 44.5 μg/g soil (oven-dry basis). The extracted DNA was then successfully purified via gel electrophoresis followed by a gel purification kit, and the amplifiable and sequenced DNA extracted from a paleosol (which had been at the land surface for around 4000 years between c. 9423 and c. 5526 calendar years BP) on Rotoma tephra contained New Zealand endemic and exotic plants that differed from the European grasses growing currently on the land surface. The difference in vegetation indicates that the DNA extraction method I (with others) have developed is able to access environmental DNA originating from previous vegetation cover. The DNA extraction method could be used to facilitate the search for possible PalEnDNA in allophanic paleosols for reconstructing the past terrestrial environments as well as to investigate the biodiversity in allophanic soils and the origins of SOM.

Allophanic soils are demonstrably able to protect environmental DNA from degradation for a long period of time, and such DNA is able to reveal past environments. However, the duration over which that environmental DNA can be preserved in allophanic soils needs to be resolved, and additional investigations of gene diversity in allophanic paleosols of different ages using high-throughput sequencing (HTS) are required to determine the taxonomic profiles recovered in paleosols and to rule out contamination of modern DNA.

year: 2016

title: Te Whānau Mārama

authors: Tuahine, Hōhepa

subjects: Whānau mārama

abstract: Ko te rā, ko te marama, ko te whetū, ko te auahitūroa, ko te kōtiritiri anō i tapaina e te Māori ko te Whānau Mārama.  Ko te whānau nei ka heke i a Tangotango rāua ko Wainui, he tamariki nā Ranginui rāua ko Papatūānuku, he atua. I whakaako motuhaketia ngā āhuatanga katoa o te Whānau Mārama ki te whare kōkōrangi.  Ko ana whakapapa, ko ana karakia, ko ana waiata, ko ana whakataukī maha.  Ko ngā kai mārō o taua whare wānanga e hoki ana ki te orokotīmatanga mai o Ranginui rāua ko Papatūānuku, heke iho mai ki te tangata me te ao tūroa e mōhiotia ana i tēnei rangi.  He tipua ngā tohunga o te whare kōkōrangi ki te whakamāori i ngā nekehanga me ngā āhuatanga rere kē o te Whānau Mārama nei.  Ka nui ngā tohutohu a te Whānau Mārama e tōnui ai te noho a te Māori ki te whenua.  Heoi anō, kei te āhua tonu o tā te whetū nekehanga i te rangi, kei te āhua tonu o tōna hikohiko mai, otirā kei te āhua tonu o tā te Whānau Mārama taunekeneke atu, taunekeneke mai ki a rātau anō.  Katoa ngā āhuatanga o te Whānau Mārama he mea hei ārahi i te Māori, me te aha, ko ngā mātauranga o te whare nei hei kāpehu ki te tohunga whakatere waka, hei tohu nō Tū ki te ope tauā, hei maramataka ki te ihu oneone, hei kai mārō ki te tauira, hei aha noa atu.  Ko tā tēnei tuhinga, he tūhura i ngā kōrero mō te Whānau Mārama me tana whare wānanga.  Ka titiro ki ngā kōrero kua whakamoanahia i roto i ngā tau maha me te whakamārama i te whakamahia o tēnei mātauranga e kui mā, e koro mā i te wā i a rātau.

text: Te Whānau Mārama Ko te rā, ko te marama, ko te whetū, ko te auahitūroa, ko te kōtiritiri anō i tapaina e te Māori ko te Whānau Mārama.  Ko te whānau nei ka heke i a Tangotango rāua ko Wainui, he tamariki nā Ranginui rāua ko Papatūānuku, he atua. I whakaako motuhaketia ngā āhuatanga katoa o te Whānau Mārama ki te whare kōkōrangi.  Ko ana whakapapa, ko ana karakia, ko ana waiata, ko ana whakataukī maha.  Ko ngā kai mārō o taua whare wānanga e hoki ana ki te orokotīmatanga mai o Ranginui rāua ko Papatūānuku, heke iho mai ki te tangata me te ao tūroa e mōhiotia ana i tēnei rangi.  He tipua ngā tohunga o te whare kōkōrangi ki te whakamāori i ngā nekehanga me ngā āhuatanga rere kē o te Whānau Mārama nei.  Ka nui ngā tohutohu a te Whānau Mārama e tōnui ai te noho a te Māori ki te whenua.  Heoi anō, kei te āhua tonu o tā te whetū nekehanga i te rangi, kei te āhua tonu o tōna hikohiko mai, otirā kei te āhua tonu o tā te Whānau Mārama taunekeneke atu, taunekeneke mai ki a rātau anō.  Katoa ngā āhuatanga o te Whānau Mārama he mea hei ārahi i te Māori, me te aha, ko ngā mātauranga o te whare nei hei kāpehu ki te tohunga whakatere waka, hei tohu nō Tū ki te ope tauā, hei maramataka ki te ihu oneone, hei kai mārō ki te tauira, hei aha noa atu.  Ko tā tēnei tuhinga, he tūhura i ngā kōrero mō te Whānau Mārama me tana whare wānanga.  Ka titiro ki ngā kōrero kua whakamoanahia i roto i ngā tau maha me te whakamārama i te whakamahia o tēnei mātauranga e kui mā, e koro mā i te wā i a rātau.

year: 2016