C. A. Adams, L. K. Van der Weyde, K. Tuft, G. R. Finlayson, K. E. Moseby
{"title":"Using bioindicators to inform effective predator management for threatened species protection","authors":"C. A. Adams, L. K. Van der Weyde, K. Tuft, G. R. Finlayson, K. E. Moseby","doi":"10.1111/aec.13556","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In Australia, most threatened species translocations conducted into areas where feral predators are present fail to establish viable, self-sustaining populations despite intensive predator control. These translocations are occurring amidst a lack of understanding regarding the conditions required for native species to survive, including predator densities. This study investigated whether population trends of in situ common species could be used as bioindicators to determine the effectiveness of predator management for threatened species protection. We compared changes in capture rates of four small mammals and four reptile species inside and outside a predator-proof reserve for 11 years after cat and fox removal to identify which species responded to cat and fox eradication at various time scales. We only used sites inside the reserve where threatened species had not yet been reintroduced to isolate the effects of cat and fox removal. The effectiveness of these bioindicators was then tested at an unfenced reserve where predators were controlled using baiting, trapping, and shooting. There was a significant increase in the abundance of native rodents (spinifex hopping mouse and Bolam's mouse) inside the fenced reserve compared to outside, however, these differences were not detected in the unfenced reserve possibly due to inadequate predator control or insufficient time for in situ species to recover with sustained predator control. Captures of the introduced house mouse were higher at sites inside the fenced reserve in some years, but the difference was not consistent. Native dunnarts and all four reptile species did not respond consistently over the 11-year time frame at either reserve. Native rodent abundance was the best indicator of effective feral predator control and may provide a useful bioindicator for threatened species management, such as reintroductions.</p>","PeriodicalId":8663,"journal":{"name":"Austral Ecology","volume":"49 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/aec.13556","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Austral Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aec.13556","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In Australia, most threatened species translocations conducted into areas where feral predators are present fail to establish viable, self-sustaining populations despite intensive predator control. These translocations are occurring amidst a lack of understanding regarding the conditions required for native species to survive, including predator densities. This study investigated whether population trends of in situ common species could be used as bioindicators to determine the effectiveness of predator management for threatened species protection. We compared changes in capture rates of four small mammals and four reptile species inside and outside a predator-proof reserve for 11 years after cat and fox removal to identify which species responded to cat and fox eradication at various time scales. We only used sites inside the reserve where threatened species had not yet been reintroduced to isolate the effects of cat and fox removal. The effectiveness of these bioindicators was then tested at an unfenced reserve where predators were controlled using baiting, trapping, and shooting. There was a significant increase in the abundance of native rodents (spinifex hopping mouse and Bolam's mouse) inside the fenced reserve compared to outside, however, these differences were not detected in the unfenced reserve possibly due to inadequate predator control or insufficient time for in situ species to recover with sustained predator control. Captures of the introduced house mouse were higher at sites inside the fenced reserve in some years, but the difference was not consistent. Native dunnarts and all four reptile species did not respond consistently over the 11-year time frame at either reserve. Native rodent abundance was the best indicator of effective feral predator control and may provide a useful bioindicator for threatened species management, such as reintroductions.
期刊介绍:
Austral Ecology is the premier journal for basic and applied ecology in the Southern Hemisphere. As the official Journal of The Ecological Society of Australia (ESA), Austral Ecology addresses the commonality between ecosystems in Australia and many parts of southern Africa, South America, New Zealand and Oceania. For example many species in the unique biotas of these regions share common Gondwana ancestors. ESA''s aim is to publish innovative research to encourage the sharing of information and experiences that enrich the understanding of the ecology of the Southern Hemisphere.
Austral Ecology involves an editorial board with representatives from Australia, South Africa, New Zealand, Brazil and Argentina. These representatives provide expert opinions, access to qualified reviewers and act as a focus for attracting a wide range of contributions from countries across the region.
Austral Ecology publishes original papers describing experimental, observational or theoretical studies on terrestrial, marine or freshwater systems, which are considered without taxonomic bias. Special thematic issues are published regularly, including symposia on the ecology of estuaries and soft sediment habitats, freshwater systems and coral reef fish.