Time to adjust: changes in the diet of a reintroduced marsupial after release

Bannister, Hannah; Croxford, Adam E.; Brandle, Robert; Paton, David C.; Moseby, Katherine E.

doi:10.1017/s0030605319000991

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Grazing effects of brush‐tailed possums on other plants (especially shrubs) within the exclosure are also highly likely given the broad diet of this species (Evans 1992; Bannister et al . 2020). The pronounced treatment impact on mistletoes at Yookamurra in this study suggests potential consequences for ecosystems, given the importance of mistletoes as a key food resource for other fauna (Watson 2002).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consequences of the reintroduction of regionally extinct mammals for vegetation composition and structure at two established reintroduction sites in semi‐arid Australia

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Australia has lost a substantial proportion of its small to medium‐sized mammals since European colonisation. Given the passage of time since local extinctions – decades to more than a century for much of the continent – the consequences of these changes for vegetation are poorly known. In this study, we take advantage of two well‐established mammal reintroduction projects in southern inland Australia to examine the ecological consequences for vegetation of re‐established mammal populations. The study is based on replicated surveys inside and outside fenced reintroduction sites, with treatments characterised by varying presence, absence and composition of reintroduced mammals, feral predators and feral herbivores. We found a suite of differences in vegetation between reintroduction sites and matched controls, with generally lower richness inside reintroduction sites (with one exception). Other compositional differences varied by location, with some functional groups – herbaceous chenopods, shrubby chenopods, introduced geophytes and low shrubs – and a few individual chenopod species – being less frequent inside the reintroduction site at one location. At the same site, mistletoes and orchids were less abundant inside than outside the reintroduction site. Structural differences included a higher percentage of bare ground inside, and a higher ground layer for one inside treatment versus outside. Although the absence of baseline data and replicated temporal data limits inference as to causal factors, many of the results are consistent with data from other reintroduction sites. Some results, especially those for geophytes, mistletoes and some chenopods, may indicate long‐term consequences for those taxa. Whilst predator‐fencing substantially contributes to prevention of extinction of highly threatened mammals, some environmental trade‐offs are inevitable. Nonetheless, given the aims of reintroductions include re‐constructing natural ecosystem processes, the resulting changes to vegetation require ongoing investigation and further monitoring.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consequences of the reintroduction of regionally extinct mammals for vegetation composition and structure at two established reintroduction sites in semi‐arid Australia

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, transitioning from live traps to camera traps offers a cost‐effective way for monitoring programs to meet their long‐term objectives. However, it is important to consider that monitoring programs are often required to achieve multiple objectives in addition to detecting changes in occupancy (Likens & Lindenmayer, 2018), such as the collection of genetic (Schwartz et al, 2007; Chan 2020), morphological (Dunlop & Morris, 2018), dietary (Bannister et al, 2020), mutations (Dunlop et al, 2019), and breeding information (Robinson et al, 2020), which may not be possible through the exclusive use of camera traps. In such cases it may be important for managers to take a broader approach when assessing the applicably of cameras traps to their monitoring design, and potentially consider the use of multiple monitoring techniques in combination.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

First you get the money, then you get the power: Comparing the cost and power of monitoring programs to detect changes in occupancy of a threatened marsupial predator

Moore

Dunlop

Geyle

et al. 2023

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecological monitoring is crucial for tracking changes in the status of species over time. However, ensuring that monitoring programs possess adequate statistical power—capacity to detect changes in populations with a high level of confidence—remains a challenge for many wildlife managers globally. While new monitoring technologies potentially offer cost effective solutions to this problem, transitioning to these methods requires careful calibration with existing techniques, such that differences in power and cost can be measured and assessed accurately. Here, we compare new (camera traps) and conventional (live trapping) survey methods in terms of cost and statistical power in tracking occupancy declines in an endangered marsupial predator, the northern quoll (Dasyurus hallucatus). We show that camera trap monitoring designs can detect northern quoll occupancy declines of 30%, 50%, and 80% at reduced cost when compared to live trap designs, without compromising statistical power. Overall, we find support for the cost‐effectiveness of camera traps for species monitoring and its potential to replace existing live trap sampling of species when measuring changes in occupancy. Additionally, we offer a robust framework to compare new monitoring techniques against pre‐existing methods on the basis of statistical power.

show abstract

“…Alternatively, knowledge of animal behavior could help design effective solutions that could be implemented after the release, such as making modifications to the release site, release protocols, or the post-release conditions (Bell, 2016;Efrat et al, 2020;Resende et al, 2021). Detailed monitoring of released individuals might indicate the need for further adjustments to the release site or to the release protocol, since acclimatization to the new environment can take anywhere between several weeks to well over a year (Poirier and Festa-Bianchet, 2018;Bannister et al, 2020).…”

Section: Editorial On the Research Topic Animal Behavior After Transl...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Editorial: Animal Behavior After Translocation Into Novel Environments

Berger‐Tal

Saltz

Moseby

et al. 2022

Front. Conserv. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Time to adjust: changes in the diet of a reintroduced marsupial after release

Cited by 7 publications

References 47 publications

Consequences of the reintroduction of regionally extinct mammals for vegetation composition and structure at two established reintroduction sites in semi‐arid Australia

Consequences of the reintroduction of regionally extinct mammals for vegetation composition and structure at two established reintroduction sites in semi‐arid Australia

First you get the money, then you get the power: Comparing the cost and power of monitoring programs to detect changes in occupancy of a threatened marsupial predator

Editorial: Animal Behavior After Translocation Into Novel Environments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About