title: The characterisation and role of mighty during myogenesis

authors: Davies, Todd John

subjects: myogenesis

abstract: Myogenesis, or skeletal muscle formation, begins during embryogenesis and involves the proliferation of myoblasts followed by their exit from the cell-cycle to differentiate and form myotubes. This formation of skeletal muscle is a complex process involving many genes and various signalling pathways. Mighty is a novel myogenic gene discovered at AgResearch by the Functional Muscle Genomics (FMG) group in a genetic screen performed on the muscle of myostatin null and wild-type mice. It was found that heavily muscled mice, lacking myostatin, had increased expression of the mighty gene. This gene was found to be conserved, with cognates found in mammals, amphibians, teleosts, and arthropods. Mighty was found to be expressed in a variety of tissues, but only skeletal muscle showed increased mighty mRNA expression in myostatin null mice, indicating the specific regulation of mighty by myostatin in skeletal muscle (Marshall, 2005).

The aim of this study was to characterise the mighty protein and examine its role in myogenesis to elucidate mighty's function. To undertake this study, antibodies specific for the full-length mighty protein and antibodies specific for a peptide region of mighty were characterised. Results using these antibodies, showed endogenous mighty, from myoblasts, to be a low-abundant, nuclear protein which shows a mobility of ~52 kDa in SDS gels, different to that of recombinant mighty protein. The mobility difference of endogenous mighty compared to recombinant mighty appears to be due to phosphorylation and may involve other post-translational modifications. In agreement, the determined isoelectric point (~5.7) of endogenous mighty also appears to be the result of phosphorylation. Interestingly, 52 kDa mighty was not detected in muscle extracts, but a ~30 kDa protein was specifically detected, indicating multiple forms, and subsequent roles, for mighty protein. Mass spectrometry (MS) was also performed for further characterisation of the mighty protein and possible post-translational modifications. Although hits were achieved with both recombinant mighty proteins, endogenous mighty MS analysis was not accomplished due to its low-abundance.

The function of the mighty protein in myoblasts was investigated during proliferation and differentiation. The results indicate that proliferating myoblasts have low levels of mighty in G0 and increased levels in G1/S during the cell cycle. This differential expression of mighty may involve cell cycle exit at the G1/S phase. Differentiation results showed mighty to be upregulated before MyoD during differentiation, placing mighty very early in the differentiation hierarchy. This agrees with previous results by Marshall (2005) which showed mighty to upregulate MyoD through IGF-II expression. Enhanced differentiation was also seen in double muscle bovine myoblasts concomitantly with increased mighty expression.

In conclusion, mighty appears to be a post-translationally modified protein that plays an early role in myogenic differentiation. This role in differentiation appears to be upstream of MyoD through the upregulation of IGF-II and may be linked to cell cycle exit in the G1 phase of the cell cycle.

text: The characterisation and role of mighty during myogenesis Myogenesis, or skeletal muscle formation, begins during embryogenesis and involves the proliferation of myoblasts followed by their exit from the cell-cycle to differentiate and form myotubes. This formation of skeletal muscle is a complex process involving many genes and various signalling pathways. Mighty is a novel myogenic gene discovered at AgResearch by the Functional Muscle Genomics (FMG) group in a genetic screen performed on the muscle of myostatin null and wild-type mice. It was found that heavily muscled mice, lacking myostatin, had increased expression of the mighty gene. This gene was found to be conserved, with cognates found in mammals, amphibians, teleosts, and arthropods. Mighty was found to be expressed in a variety of tissues, but only skeletal muscle showed increased mighty mRNA expression in myostatin null mice, indicating the specific regulation of mighty by myostatin in skeletal muscle (Marshall, 2005).

The aim of this study was to characterise the mighty protein and examine its role in myogenesis to elucidate mighty's function. To undertake this study, antibodies specific for the full-length mighty protein and antibodies specific for a peptide region of mighty were characterised. Results using these antibodies, showed endogenous mighty, from myoblasts, to be a low-abundant, nuclear protein which shows a mobility of ~52 kDa in SDS gels, different to that of recombinant mighty protein. The mobility difference of endogenous mighty compared to recombinant mighty appears to be due to phosphorylation and may involve other post-translational modifications. In agreement, the determined isoelectric point (~5.7) of endogenous mighty also appears to be the result of phosphorylation. Interestingly, 52 kDa mighty was not detected in muscle extracts, but a ~30 kDa protein was specifically detected, indicating multiple forms, and subsequent roles, for mighty protein. Mass spectrometry (MS) was also performed for further characterisation of the mighty protein and possible post-translational modifications. Although hits were achieved with both recombinant mighty proteins, endogenous mighty MS analysis was not accomplished due to its low-abundance.

The function of the mighty protein in myoblasts was investigated during proliferation and differentiation. The results indicate that proliferating myoblasts have low levels of mighty in G0 and increased levels in G1/S during the cell cycle. This differential expression of mighty may involve cell cycle exit at the G1/S phase. Differentiation results showed mighty to be upregulated before MyoD during differentiation, placing mighty very early in the differentiation hierarchy. This agrees with previous results by Marshall (2005) which showed mighty to upregulate MyoD through IGF-II expression. Enhanced differentiation was also seen in double muscle bovine myoblasts concomitantly with increased mighty expression.

In conclusion, mighty appears to be a post-translationally modified protein that plays an early role in myogenic differentiation. This role in differentiation appears to be upstream of MyoD through the upregulation of IGF-II and may be linked to cell cycle exit in the G1 phase of the cell cycle.

year: 2006

title: The interaction of buoyant river plumes with vegetation and consequences for sediment transport and deposition in coastal regions

authors: Vundavilli, Venkata Satya Sai Ram Hemanth

subjects: Buoyant river plumes

abstract: Mangrove forests are one of the most prominent vegetated coastal habits in tropical and subtropical areas. These wetland ecosystems typically inhabit estuaries and tidally influenced river banks. The presence of trees helps to protect coastal regions through the dissipation of tidal currents and wave energy, forming an essential barrier against coastal erosion. River plumes are the primary mechanism of sediment delivery to these vegetated coastlines. As the buoyant freshwater merges with saline ocean waters, horizontal advection of the freshwater establishes the shape of the river plume and influences the distribution of sediments along the coast. In this thesis, I investigate the principal dynamics associated with the interaction of buoyant river plumes with vegetation. In particular, we investigate the interplay between mangrove vegetation, hydrodynamics, and sediment dynamics, specifically: (1) the principal drivers of sediment deposition within a mangrove-lined river delta, (2) the influence of river forcing and winds on the sediment transport, and (3) sediment dynamics of two adjacent and interacting coastal river plumes.  

Understanding the hydro-morphodynamics of a river plume in a mangrove environment:
We developed a 3-D idealized Delft3D morphological model to explore the effects of vegetation on the river plumes and associated sediment transport patterns. Using an idealized model based on the Firth of Thames (FoT) mangrove forest located on the North Island of Aotearoa-New Zealand, we observed that, while sediment deposition occurred in the forest and tidal flats region of the model domain, the fringe region (between the vegetation and mudflat) experienced erosion. Compared to the eastern side, sediment deposition in the western side of the model domain was more prominent owing to the influence of Coriolis (Southern hemisphere). By examining the momentum balances on the surface and bottom layers in different regions of the river plume, we found that the principal balance between the bottom shear stress (enhanced by the presence of vegetation) and baroclinic pressure gradient largely controlled the sediment deposition in the riverine sections of the domain. Additionally, we found that vertical advection and diffusion during flood tide enhanced erosion in the fringe region of the mangrove forest. The advection of suspended sediment into the forest was controlled by factors including longer duration of high water slack at the forest fringe region, pressure gradients, and inertial acceleration. In the near-field region (close to the river mouth) of the river plume, during ebb tide, the barotropic and baroclinic pressure gradients coupled with Coriolis accelerations deliver sediments into the forest and mudflat regions. In the mid-field regions of the river plume, the magnitude of changes in the bed elevation was smaller due to larger Coriolis acceleration which arrested the spreading of the river plume. Furthermore, the far-field region (away from the river mouth) of the river plume experienced erosion due to more substantial tidal influence. Conversely, in the shallow forested regions, reduced movement of sediment in the offshore direction leads to an overall flood dominance.

Linking sediment transport within river plumes to varying river flows and winds:
Subsequent modeling experiments were carried out to investigate how the forcing factors of riverine discharge and wind velocities influence sediment transport within an idealized moderate-sized freshwater river plume. We assessed total sediment transport along with the relative contributions of riverine and bed-sourced sediment into a mangrove forest. Instantaneous and tidally averaged sediment fluxes were evaluated to investigate the critical linkages between the riverine flows, tidal influence, and winds in the presence of vegetation. In the near-field region of the river plume, riverine and bed-sourced sediment were dominant and found to be directed into the forest, indicative of an accretionary environment. In the mid- and far-field regions of the river plume, bed-sourced sediment was found to be the dominant contributor to total sediment transport and was directed out of the forest, indicative of sediment erosion. While the mass loads (directed into the mangrove forest) increased with an increase in riverine discharge, mass loads were relatively similar for large flow events. The river sediment delivered into the mangrove-forested regions was found to push into and through the forest front for large river discharges. The presence of 5 m/s wind velocities could alter the sediment deposition patterns in the mid- and far-field regions of the river plume. Despite the significant river momentum, strong winds (10 m/s) were also able to alter the sediment transport in the near-field region of the river plume. Moreover, results showed that in the far-field region of the river plume, strong winds combined with the effects of riverine discharge, Coriolis, and bed-shear stress affected the overall mass movement of sediment. In the case of easterly winds, a combination of tidal effects and wind stress controlled the sediment deposition into the forest. In the case of westerly winds, as the plume was pushed away from the forest, tidal effects controlled the total sediment transport. 


Understanding the effects of coalescing buoyant river plumes on sediment transport:
We investigated how the interaction between plumes from two mangrove-lined rivers in close proximity affected coastal sediment transport patterns. In particular, I examined the links between the river plume coalescence and the trapping of sediment by mangroves, using an idealized 3-dimensional numerical. Sediment fluxes and relative contributions of riverine- and bed-sourced sediments were quantified along the western, central (located between the rivers), and eastern mangrove forests. The two river plumes coalesced into a single river plume that flowed along the edge of the central mangrove forest. As the river plumes were deflected to the left by Coriolis (Southern hemisphere), the total sediment fluxes were largest for the central and the western forest, with only modest sediment deposition along the eastern mangrove forest. Also, modeled transport fluxes along the central mangrove forest were the largest close to the rivers, consistent with the satellite imagery of the FoT field site. Flow variations through either river resulted in changes to the sediment transport patterns into the mangrove forests. In particular, an increase in flow discharge through the western river resulted in reduced contributions of the eastern river towards the total sediment transport fluxes. Conversely, an increase in flow discharge through the eastern river inhibited the contribution of western river-associated sediment towards the total sediment transport flux through the central, eastern, and western mangrove forests. Furthermore, this study revealed that 5 m/s wind velocities altered the expansion, coalescence, and overall sediment transport fluxes of the river plumes. The total sediment fluxes through the central and western mangrove forests were greatest for easterly winds. However, the total transport into the eastern mangrove forest was largest for the southerly winds, as the bulge of the eastern river plume was pushed into mangrove forests.

These modeling experiments help elucidate the interaction of river plumes with mangrove vegetation. The work presented in this thesis highlights the complex non-linear interactions of hydro-morphodynamics, sediment transport, the effects of river flows and winds within mangrove environments, and the fate of riverine sediments in the bay of the Firth of Thames. Finally, the results presented here provide insights into the sediment trapping capabilities of mangroves under variable conditions and thus may help to predict their ability to function as a coastal defense mechanism under future sea-level rise and sediment supply scenarios.

text: The interaction of buoyant river plumes with vegetation and consequences for sediment transport and deposition in coastal regions Mangrove forests are one of the most prominent vegetated coastal habits in tropical and subtropical areas. These wetland ecosystems typically inhabit estuaries and tidally influenced river banks. The presence of trees helps to protect coastal regions through the dissipation of tidal currents and wave energy, forming an essential barrier against coastal erosion. River plumes are the primary mechanism of sediment delivery to these vegetated coastlines. As the buoyant freshwater merges with saline ocean waters, horizontal advection of the freshwater establishes the shape of the river plume and influences the distribution of sediments along the coast. In this thesis, I investigate the principal dynamics associated with the interaction of buoyant river plumes with vegetation. In particular, we investigate the interplay between mangrove vegetation, hydrodynamics, and sediment dynamics, specifically: (1) the principal drivers of sediment deposition within a mangrove-lined river delta, (2) the influence of river forcing and winds on the sediment transport, and (3) sediment dynamics of two adjacent and interacting coastal river plumes.  

Understanding the hydro-morphodynamics of a river plume in a mangrove environment:
We developed a 3-D idealized Delft3D morphological model to explore the effects of vegetation on the river plumes and associated sediment transport patterns. Using an idealized model based on the Firth of Thames (FoT) mangrove forest located on the North Island of Aotearoa-New Zealand, we observed that, while sediment deposition occurred in the forest and tidal flats region of the model domain, the fringe region (between the vegetation and mudflat) experienced erosion. Compared to the eastern side, sediment deposition in the western side of the model domain was more prominent owing to the influence of Coriolis (Southern hemisphere). By examining the momentum balances on the surface and bottom layers in different regions of the river plume, we found that the principal balance between the bottom shear stress (enhanced by the presence of vegetation) and baroclinic pressure gradient largely controlled the sediment deposition in the riverine sections of the domain. Additionally, we found that vertical advection and diffusion during flood tide enhanced erosion in the fringe region of the mangrove forest. The advection of suspended sediment into the forest was controlled by factors including longer duration of high water slack at the forest fringe region, pressure gradients, and inertial acceleration. In the near-field region (close to the river mouth) of the river plume, during ebb tide, the barotropic and baroclinic pressure gradients coupled with Coriolis accelerations deliver sediments into the forest and mudflat regions. In the mid-field regions of the river plume, the magnitude of changes in the bed elevation was smaller due to larger Coriolis acceleration which arrested the spreading of the river plume. Furthermore, the far-field region (away from the river mouth) of the river plume experienced erosion due to more substantial tidal influence. Conversely, in the shallow forested regions, reduced movement of sediment in the offshore direction leads to an overall flood dominance.

Linking sediment transport within river plumes to varying river flows and winds:
Subsequent modeling experiments were carried out to investigate how the forcing factors of riverine discharge and wind velocities influence sediment transport within an idealized moderate-sized freshwater river plume. We assessed total sediment transport along with the relative contributions of riverine and bed-sourced sediment into a mangrove forest. Instantaneous and tidally averaged sediment fluxes were evaluated to investigate the critical linkages between the riverine flows, tidal influence, and winds in the presence of vegetation. In the near-field region of the river plume, riverine and bed-sourced sediment were dominant and found to be directed into the forest, indicative of an accretionary environment. In the mid- and far-field regions of the river plume, bed-sourced sediment was found to be the dominant contributor to total sediment transport and was directed out of the forest, indicative of sediment erosion. While the mass loads (directed into the mangrove forest) increased with an increase in riverine discharge, mass loads were relatively similar for large flow events. The river sediment delivered into the mangrove-forested regions was found to push into and through the forest front for large river discharges. The presence of 5 m/s wind velocities could alter the sediment deposition patterns in the mid- and far-field regions of the river plume. Despite the significant river momentum, strong winds (10 m/s) were also able to alter the sediment transport in the near-field region of the river plume. Moreover, results showed that in the far-field region of the river plume, strong winds combined with the effects of riverine discharge, Coriolis, and bed-shear stress affected the overall mass movement of sediment. In the case of easterly winds, a combination of tidal effects and wind stress controlled the sediment deposition into the forest. In the case of westerly winds, as the plume was pushed away from the forest, tidal effects controlled the total sediment transport. 


Understanding the effects of coalescing buoyant river plumes on sediment transport:
We investigated how the interaction between plumes from two mangrove-lined rivers in close proximity affected coastal sediment transport patterns. In particular, I examined the links between the river plume coalescence and the trapping of sediment by mangroves, using an idealized 3-dimensional numerical. Sediment fluxes and relative contributions of riverine- and bed-sourced sediments were quantified along the western, central (located between the rivers), and eastern mangrove forests. The two river plumes coalesced into a single river plume that flowed along the edge of the central mangrove forest. As the river plumes were deflected to the left by Coriolis (Southern hemisphere), the total sediment fluxes were largest for the central and the western forest, with only modest sediment deposition along the eastern mangrove forest. Also, modeled transport fluxes along the central mangrove forest were the largest close to the rivers, consistent with the satellite imagery of the FoT field site. Flow variations through either river resulted in changes to the sediment transport patterns into the mangrove forests. In particular, an increase in flow discharge through the western river resulted in reduced contributions of the eastern river towards the total sediment transport fluxes. Conversely, an increase in flow discharge through the eastern river inhibited the contribution of western river-associated sediment towards the total sediment transport flux through the central, eastern, and western mangrove forests. Furthermore, this study revealed that 5 m/s wind velocities altered the expansion, coalescence, and overall sediment transport fluxes of the river plumes. The total sediment fluxes through the central and western mangrove forests were greatest for easterly winds. However, the total transport into the eastern mangrove forest was largest for the southerly winds, as the bulge of the eastern river plume was pushed into mangrove forests.

These modeling experiments help elucidate the interaction of river plumes with mangrove vegetation. The work presented in this thesis highlights the complex non-linear interactions of hydro-morphodynamics, sediment transport, the effects of river flows and winds within mangrove environments, and the fate of riverine sediments in the bay of the Firth of Thames. Finally, the results presented here provide insights into the sediment trapping capabilities of mangroves under variable conditions and thus may help to predict their ability to function as a coastal defense mechanism under future sea-level rise and sediment supply scenarios.

year: 2023

title: Ko ia tonu te rangatira o tana mauri: Ko te Mauritau hei tohu o te puāwaitanga o Te Aho Matua i te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Hoani Waititi Marae

authors: Angeli-Gordon, Joni Māramatanga

abstract: Ko te mauri te wāhanga wairua o te tangata e whakahihiri i te tinana me te tūhonohono nei i te wairua ki te kikokiko. Ko te mauri te wāhanga ora o te tangata, ā, i te roanga atu o te oranga o te tangata ka rerekē te tau o te mauri nā ngā awenga o tōna ao. Ko te Mauritau te wā e ita pai ana te wairua ki te kikokiko. Kua whai ngātahitanga ērā mea e rua. Kei tōna ito, ki te Mauritau te tangata, e wātea ana ia, kāhore ōna taumaha, ka mutu e tuwhera ana ia ki tōna ao. Ko tā Te Aho Matua, ka whakatō te mauri ki te tangata i te whakatōnga o te kākano ki te kōpū. Ko te Mauritau tētahi āhuatanga kāhore anō kia tino rangahau, ā, he iti noa ngā wā te kite atu ki te puna mātātuhi, heoi anō, ka rangona whānuitia ki Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Hoani Waititi Marae. Ko tā tēnei kaupapa rangahau, ko te Mauritau tētahi o ngā puāwaitanga matua o Te Aho Matua, ā, kua taupuhipuhi nei ki ngā whakaaro o rātou i whai wāhi nei ki tēnei kaupapa rangahau. Ko te manako nui o tēnei kaupapa rangahau ko te whakawhānui i te mōhioranga mō ngā hua o ngā Kura Kaupapa Māori mā te ruku hōhonu ki te Mauritau i te whānau o Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Hoani Waititi Marae.  

Kua whā tekau tau neke atu kua hipa mai i te orokotīmatanga o ngā Kura Kaupapa Māori, otirā, te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Hoani Waititi Marae. Ko te tino take o ngā Kura Kaupapa Māori ko te whakarauora reo me te whakarauora tikanga, heoi anō, he tini me te mano ngā angitutanga, ngā painga kua puta mai i ēnei kura tua atu i ēnei whāinga e rua. Ko Te Aho Matua te tūāpapa ā-mātāpono mō ngā Kura Kaupapa Māori e whakawhārikihia ngā uaratanga matua kia whakatutuki i ngā wawata nui, i ngā ōhākī nui ā kui mā, a koro mā mō te orangatonutanga o te reo Māori me ngā tikanga Māori. Ko tā tēnei kaupapa rangahau, ko te Mauritau tētahi āhuatanga i puāwai i ngā kura Aho Matua, ā, ka kitea rawatia tēnei puāwaitanga ki Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Hoani Waititi. 

He Rangahau Kaupapa Māori tēnei, ā, i tārai i ngā tikanga me ngā tukanga o te kaupapa rangahau nei kia Māori te karawhiu. Ko Te Aho Matua me ōna uaratanga e tū hei pou whakawhirinaki i te Kaupapa Rangahau Māori. E rua ngā tukanga i whāia e te tuhikura nei, arā, ko te iāna me te puawānanga. Ko te iāna tētahi kupu mino nō Te Tai Tokerau mō te kōrero ōpaki, ā, kua iāna tahi ki ngā pakeke tokowhitu nō te whānau o Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Hoani Waititi Marae. Ko te puawānanga he wānanga ki ngā ākonga tokowhitu o te reanga tuakana o te wharekura kia āta wherawhera i ngā āhuatanga o te Mauritau ki a rātou. I te whakaraupapatia ngā kōrero i puta mai i ngā iāna me te puawānanga mā ngā uaratanga o Te Aho Matua.

text: Ko ia tonu te rangatira o tana mauri: Ko te Mauritau hei tohu o te puāwaitanga o Te Aho Matua i te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Hoani Waititi Marae Ko te mauri te wāhanga wairua o te tangata e whakahihiri i te tinana me te tūhonohono nei i te wairua ki te kikokiko. Ko te mauri te wāhanga ora o te tangata, ā, i te roanga atu o te oranga o te tangata ka rerekē te tau o te mauri nā ngā awenga o tōna ao. Ko te Mauritau te wā e ita pai ana te wairua ki te kikokiko. Kua whai ngātahitanga ērā mea e rua. Kei tōna ito, ki te Mauritau te tangata, e wātea ana ia, kāhore ōna taumaha, ka mutu e tuwhera ana ia ki tōna ao. Ko tā Te Aho Matua, ka whakatō te mauri ki te tangata i te whakatōnga o te kākano ki te kōpū. Ko te Mauritau tētahi āhuatanga kāhore anō kia tino rangahau, ā, he iti noa ngā wā te kite atu ki te puna mātātuhi, heoi anō, ka rangona whānuitia ki Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Hoani Waititi Marae. Ko tā tēnei kaupapa rangahau, ko te Mauritau tētahi o ngā puāwaitanga matua o Te Aho Matua, ā, kua taupuhipuhi nei ki ngā whakaaro o rātou i whai wāhi nei ki tēnei kaupapa rangahau. Ko te manako nui o tēnei kaupapa rangahau ko te whakawhānui i te mōhioranga mō ngā hua o ngā Kura Kaupapa Māori mā te ruku hōhonu ki te Mauritau i te whānau o Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Hoani Waititi Marae.  

Kua whā tekau tau neke atu kua hipa mai i te orokotīmatanga o ngā Kura Kaupapa Māori, otirā, te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Hoani Waititi Marae. Ko te tino take o ngā Kura Kaupapa Māori ko te whakarauora reo me te whakarauora tikanga, heoi anō, he tini me te mano ngā angitutanga, ngā painga kua puta mai i ēnei kura tua atu i ēnei whāinga e rua. Ko Te Aho Matua te tūāpapa ā-mātāpono mō ngā Kura Kaupapa Māori e whakawhārikihia ngā uaratanga matua kia whakatutuki i ngā wawata nui, i ngā ōhākī nui ā kui mā, a koro mā mō te orangatonutanga o te reo Māori me ngā tikanga Māori. Ko tā tēnei kaupapa rangahau, ko te Mauritau tētahi āhuatanga i puāwai i ngā kura Aho Matua, ā, ka kitea rawatia tēnei puāwaitanga ki Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Hoani Waititi. 

He Rangahau Kaupapa Māori tēnei, ā, i tārai i ngā tikanga me ngā tukanga o te kaupapa rangahau nei kia Māori te karawhiu. Ko Te Aho Matua me ōna uaratanga e tū hei pou whakawhirinaki i te Kaupapa Rangahau Māori. E rua ngā tukanga i whāia e te tuhikura nei, arā, ko te iāna me te puawānanga. Ko te iāna tētahi kupu mino nō Te Tai Tokerau mō te kōrero ōpaki, ā, kua iāna tahi ki ngā pakeke tokowhitu nō te whānau o Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Hoani Waititi Marae. Ko te puawānanga he wānanga ki ngā ākonga tokowhitu o te reanga tuakana o te wharekura kia āta wherawhera i ngā āhuatanga o te Mauritau ki a rātou. I te whakaraupapatia ngā kōrero i puta mai i ngā iāna me te puawānanga mā ngā uaratanga o Te Aho Matua.

year: 2023