School of Agriculture, Food and Ecosystem Sciences - Research Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 18
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Animal mortality during fire
    Jolly, CJ ; Dickman, CR ; Doherty, TS ; Eeden, LM ; Geary, WL ; Legge, SM ; Woinarski, JCZ ; Nimmo, DG (WILEY, 2022-03)
    Earth's rapidly warming climate is propelling us towards an increasingly fire-prone future. Currently, knowledge of the extent and characteristics of animal mortality rates during fire remains rudimentary, hindering our ability to predict how animal populations may be impacted in the future. To address this knowledge gap, we conducted a global systematic review of the direct effects of fire on animal mortality rates, based on studies that unequivocally determined the fate of animals during fire. From 31 studies spanning 1984-2020, we extracted data on the direct impacts of fire on the mortality of 31 species from 23 families. From these studies, there were 43 instances where direct effects were measured by reporting animal survival from pre- to post-fire. Most studies were conducted in North America (52%) and Oceania (42%), focused largely on mammals (53%) and reptiles (30%), and reported mostly on animal survival in planned (82%) and/or low severity (70%) fires. We found no studies from Asia, Europe or South America. Although there were insufficient data to conduct a formal meta-analysis, we tested the effect of fire type, fire severity, fire regime, animal body mass, ecological attributes and class on survival. Only fire severity affected animal mortality, with a higher proportion of animals being killed by high than low severity fires. Recent catastrophic fires across the globe have drawn attention to the plight of animals exposed to wildfire. Yet, our systematic review suggests that a relatively low proportion of animals (mean predicted mortality [95% CI] = 3% [1%-9%]) are killed during fire. However, our review also underscores how little we currently know about the direct effects of fire on animal mortality, and highlights the critical need to understand the effects of high severity fire on animal populations.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Distinctive diets of eutherian predators in Australia.
    Fleming, PA ; Stobo-Wilson, AM ; Crawford, HM ; Dawson, SJ ; Dickman, CR ; Doherty, TS ; Fleming, PJS ; Newsome, TM ; Palmer, R ; Thompson, JA ; Woinarski, JCZ (The Royal Society, 2022-10)
    Introduction of the domestic cat and red fox has devastated Australian native fauna. We synthesized Australian diet analyses to identify traits of prey species in cat, fox and dingo diets, which prey were more frequent or distinctive to the diet of each predator, and quantified dietary overlap. Nearly half (45%) of all Australian terrestrial mammal, bird and reptile species occurred in the diets of one or more predators. Cat and dingo diets overlapped least (0.64 ± 0.27, n = 24 location/time points) and cat diet changed little over 55 years of study. Cats were more likely to have eaten birds, reptiles and small mammals than foxes or dingoes. Dingo diet remained constant over 53 years and constituted the largest mammal, bird and reptile prey species, including more macropods/potoroids, wombats, monotremes and bandicoots/bilbies than cats or foxes. Fox diet had greater overlap with both cats (0.79 ± 0.20, n = 37) and dingoes (0.73 ± 0.21, n = 42), fewer distinctive items (plant material, possums/gliders) and significant spatial and temporal heterogeneity over 69 years, suggesting the opportunity for prey switching (especially of mammal prey) to mitigate competition. Our study reinforced concerns about mesopredator impacts upon scarce/threatened species and the need to control foxes and cats for fauna conservation. However, extensive dietary overlap and opportunism, as well as low incidence of mesopredators in dingo diets, precluded resolution of the debate about possible dingo suppression of foxes and cats.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Mitochondrial phylogeny within the Yellow Chat (Epthianura crocea) does not support subspecific designation of endangered Alligator Rivers population
    Leppitt, R ; Rose, A ; Houston, WA ; Kyne, PM ; Banks, SC ; Woinarski, JCZ ; Garnett, ST (WILEY, 2022-07)
    The delineation of subspecies is important in the evaluation and protection of biodiversity. Subspecies delineation is hampered by inconsistently applied criteria and a lack of agreement and shifting standards on how a subspecies should be defined. The Australian endemic Yellow Chat (Epthianura crocea) is split into three subspecies (E. c. crocea, E. c. tunneyi, and E. c. macgregori) based on minor plumage differences and geographical isolation. Both E. c. tunneyi (Endangered) and E. c. macgregori (Critically Endangered) are recognized under Australian legislation as threatened and are the subject of significant conservation effort. We used mitochondrial DNA to evaluate the phylogeny of the Yellow Chat and determine how much genetic variation is present in each of the three subspecies. We found no significant difference in the cytochrome b sequences (833 base pairs) of E. c. crocea and E. c. tunneyi, but approximately 0.70% or 5.83 bp difference between E. c macgregori and both E. c. crocea and E. c. tunneyi. This analysis supports the delineation of E. c. macgregori as a valid subspecies but does not support separation of E. c. crocea from E. c. tunneyi. We also found very low levels of genetic variation within the Yellow Chat, suggesting it may be vulnerable to environmental change. Our results cast doubt upon the geographic isolation of E. c. crocea from E. c. tunneyi, but more advanced genetic sequencing and a robust comparison of plumage are needed to fully resolve taxonomy.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Expert range maps of global mammal distributions harmonised to three taxonomic authorities
    Marsh, CJ ; Sica, YV ; Burgin, CJ ; Dorman, WA ; Anderson, RC ; del Toro Mijares, I ; Vigneron, JG ; Barve, V ; Dombrowik, VL ; Duong, M ; Guralnick, R ; Hart, JA ; Maypole, JK ; McCall, K ; Ranipeta, A ; Schuerkmann, A ; Torselli, MA ; Lacher, T ; Mittermeier, RA ; Rylands, AB ; Sechrest, W ; Wilson, DE ; Abba, AM ; Aguirre, LF ; Arroyo-Cabrales, J ; Astua, D ; Baker, AM ; Braulik, G ; Braun, JK ; Brito, J ; Busher, PE ; Burneo, SF ; Camacho, MA ; Cavallini, P ; de Almeida Chiquito, E ; Cook, JA ; Cserkesz, T ; Csorba, G ; Cuellar Soto, E ; da Cunha Tavares, V ; Davenport, TRB ; Demere, T ; Denys, C ; Dickman, CR ; Eldridge, MDB ; Fernandez-Duque, E ; Francis, CM ; Frankham, G ; Franklin, WL ; Freitas, T ; Friend, JA ; Gadsby, EL ; Garbino, GST ; Gaubert, P ; Giannini, N ; Giarla, T ; Gilchrist, JS ; Gongora, J ; Goodman, SM ; Gursky-Doyen, S ; Hacklander, K ; Hafner, MS ; Hawkins, M ; Helgen, KM ; Heritage, S ; Hinckley, A ; Hintsche, S ; Holden, M ; Holekamp, KE ; Honeycutt, RL ; Huffman, BA ; Humle, T ; Hutterer, R ; Ibanez Ulargui, C ; Jackson, SM ; Janecka, J ; Janecka, M ; Jenkins, P ; Juskaitis, R ; Juste, J ; Kays, R ; Kilpatrick, CW ; Kingston, T ; Koprowski, JL ; Krystufek, B ; Lavery, T ; Lee, TE ; Leite, YLR ; Novaes, RLM ; Lim, BK ; Lissovsky, A ; Lopez-Antonanzas, R ; Lopez-Baucells, A ; MacLeod, CD ; Maisels, FG ; Mares, MA ; Marsh, H ; Mattioli, S ; Meijaard, E ; Monadjem, A ; Morton, FB ; Musser, G ; Nadler, T ; Norris, RW ; Ojeda, A ; Ordonez-Garza, N ; Pardinas, UFJ ; Patterson, BD ; Pavan, A ; Pennay, M ; Pereira, C ; Prado, J ; Queiroz, HL ; Richardson, M ; Riley, EP ; Rossiter, SJ ; Rubenstein, DI ; Ruelas, D ; Salazar-Bravo, J ; Schai-Braun, S ; Schank, CJ ; Schwitzer, C ; Sheeran, LK ; Shekelle, M ; Shenbrot, G ; Soisook, P ; Solari, S ; Southgate, R ; Superina, M ; Taber, AB ; Talebi, M ; Taylor, P ; Vu Dinh, T ; Ting, N ; Tirira, DG ; Tsang, S ; Turvey, ST ; Valdez, R ; Van Cakenberghe, V ; Veron, G ; Wallis, J ; Wells, R ; Whittaker, D ; Williamson, EA ; Wittemyer, G ; Woinarski, J ; Zinner, D ; Upham, NS ; Jetz, W (WILEY, 2022-05)
    AIM: Comprehensive, global information on species' occurrences is an essential biodiversity variable and central to a range of applications in ecology, evolution, biogeography and conservation. Expert range maps often represent a species' only available distributional information and play an increasing role in conservation assessments and macroecology. We provide global range maps for the native ranges of all extant mammal species harmonised to the taxonomy of the Mammal Diversity Database (MDD) mobilised from two sources, the Handbook of the Mammals of the World (HMW) and the Illustrated Checklist of the Mammals of the World (CMW). LOCATION: Global. TAXON: All extant mammal species. METHODS: Range maps were digitally interpreted, georeferenced, error-checked and subsequently taxonomically aligned between the HMW (6253 species), the CMW (6431 species) and the MDD taxonomies (6362 species). RESULTS: Range maps can be evaluated and visualised in an online map browser at Map of Life (mol.org) and accessed for individual or batch download for non-commercial use. MAIN CONCLUSION: Expert maps of species' global distributions are limited in their spatial detail and temporal specificity, but form a useful basis for broad-scale characterizations and model-based integration with other data. We provide georeferenced range maps for the native ranges of all extant mammal species as shapefiles, with species-level metadata and source information packaged together in geodatabase format. Across the three taxonomic sources our maps entail, there are 1784 taxonomic name differences compared to the maps currently available on the IUCN Red List website. The expert maps provided here are harmonised to the MDD taxonomic authority and linked to a community of online tools that will enable transparent future updates and version control.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Design considerations for rapid biodiversity reconnaissance surveys and long-term monitoring to assess the impact of wildfire
    Southwell, D ; Legge, S ; Woinarski, J ; Lindenmayer, D ; Lavery, T ; Wintle, B (WILEY, 2022-03)
    Abstract Aims Reconnaissance surveys followed by monitoring are needed to assess the impact and response of biodiversity to wildfire. However, post‐wildfire survey and monitoring design are challenging due to the infrequency and unpredictability of wildfire, an urgency to initiate surveys and uncertainty about how species respond. In this article, we discuss key design considerations and quantitative tools available to aid post‐wildfire survey design. Our motivation was to inform the design of rapid surveys for threatened species heavily impacted by the 2019–2020 fires in Australia. Location Global. Methods We discuss a set of best practice design considerations for post‐wildfire reconnaissance surveys across a range of survey objectives. We provide examples that illustrate key design considerations from post‐fire reconnaissance surveys and monitoring programmes from around the world. Results We highlight how the objective of post‐fire surveys drastically influences design decisions (e.g. survey location and timing). We discuss how the unpredictability of wildfire and uncertainty in the response of biodiversity complicate survey design decisions. Main conclusions Surveys should be conducted immediately following wildfire to assess the impact on biodiversity, to ground truth fire severity mapping and to provide a benchmark from which to assess recovery. Where possible, surveys should be conducted at burnt and unburnt sites in regions with historical data so that state variables of interest can be compared with baseline estimates (i.e. BACI design). This highlights the need to have long‐term monitoring programmes already in place and be prepared to modify their design when wildfires occur. There is opportunity to adopt tools from statistics (i.e. power analysis) and conservation planning (i.e. spatial prioritization) to improve survey design. We must anticipate wildfires rather than respond to them reactively as they will occur more frequently due to climate change.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Counting the bodies: Estimating the numbers and spatial variation of Australian reptiles, birds and mammals killed by two invasive mesopredators
    Stobo-Wilson, AM ; Murphy, BP ; Legge, SM ; Caceres-Escobar, H ; Chapple, DG ; Crawford, HM ; Dawson, SJ ; Dickman, CR ; Doherty, TS ; Fleming, PA ; Garnett, ST ; Gentle, M ; Newsome, TM ; Palmer, R ; Rees, MW ; Ritchie, EG ; Speed, J ; Stuart, J-M ; Suarez-Castro, AF ; Thompson, E ; Tulloch, A ; Turpin, JM ; Woinarski, JCZ ; Brito, J (WILEY, 2022-05)
    Abstract Aim Introduced predators negatively impact biodiversity globally, with insular fauna often most severely affected. Here, we assess spatial variation in the number of terrestrial vertebrates (excluding amphibians) killed by two mammalian mesopredators introduced to Australia, the red fox (Vulpes vulpes) and feral cat (Felis catus). We aim to identify prey groups that suffer especially high rates of predation, and regions where losses to foxes and/or cats are most substantial. Location Australia. Methods We draw information on the spatial variation in tallies of reptiles, birds and mammals killed by cats in Australia from published studies. We derive tallies for fox predation by (i) modelling continental‐scale spatial variation in fox density, (ii) modelling spatial variation in the frequency of occurrence of prey groups in fox diet, (iii) analysing the number of prey individuals within dietary samples and (iv) discounting animals taken as carrion. We derive point estimates of the numbers of individuals killed annually by foxes and by cats and map spatial variation in these tallies. Results Foxes kill more reptiles, birds and mammals (peaking at 1071 km−2 year−1) than cats (55 km−2 year−1) across most of the unmodified temperate and forested areas of mainland Australia, reflecting the generally higher density of foxes than cats in these environments. However, across most of the continent – mainly the arid central and tropical northern regions (and on most Australian islands) – cats kill more animals than foxes. We estimate that foxes and cats together kill 697 million reptiles annually in Australia, 510 million birds and 1435 million mammals. Main conclusions This continental‐scale analysis demonstrates that predation by two introduced species takes a substantial and ongoing toll on Australian reptiles, birds and mammals. Continuing population declines and potential extinctions of some of these species threatens to further compound Australia's poor contemporary conservation record.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Testing a global standard for quantifying species recovery and assessing conservation impact.
    Grace, MK ; Akçakaya, HR ; Bennett, EL ; Brooks, TM ; Heath, A ; Hedges, S ; Hilton-Taylor, C ; Hoffmann, M ; Hochkirch, A ; Jenkins, R ; Keith, DA ; Long, B ; Mallon, DP ; Meijaard, E ; Milner-Gulland, EJ ; Rodriguez, JP ; Stephenson, PJ ; Stuart, SN ; Young, RP ; Acebes, P ; Alfaro-Shigueto, J ; Alvarez-Clare, S ; Andriantsimanarilafy, RR ; Arbetman, M ; Azat, C ; Bacchetta, G ; Badola, R ; Barcelos, LMD ; Barreiros, JP ; Basak, S ; Berger, DJ ; Bhattacharyya, S ; Bino, G ; Borges, PAV ; Boughton, RK ; Brockmann, HJ ; Buckley, HL ; Burfield, IJ ; Burton, J ; Camacho-Badani, T ; Cano-Alonso, LS ; Carmichael, RH ; Carrero, C ; Carroll, JP ; Catsadorakis, G ; Chapple, DG ; Chapron, G ; Chowdhury, GW ; Claassens, L ; Cogoni, D ; Constantine, R ; Craig, CA ; Cunningham, AA ; Dahal, N ; Daltry, JC ; Das, GC ; Dasgupta, N ; Davey, A ; Davies, K ; Develey, P ; Elangovan, V ; Fairclough, D ; Febbraro, MD ; Fenu, G ; Fernandes, FM ; Fernandez, EP ; Finucci, B ; Földesi, R ; Foley, CM ; Ford, M ; Forstner, MRJ ; García, N ; Garcia-Sandoval, R ; Gardner, PC ; Garibay-Orijel, R ; Gatan-Balbas, M ; Gauto, I ; Ghazi, MGU ; Godfrey, SS ; Gollock, M ; González, BA ; Grant, TD ; Gray, T ; Gregory, AJ ; van Grunsven, RHA ; Gryzenhout, M ; Guernsey, NC ; Gupta, G ; Hagen, C ; Hagen, CA ; Hall, MB ; Hallerman, E ; Hare, K ; Hart, T ; Hartdegen, R ; Harvey-Brown, Y ; Hatfield, R ; Hawke, T ; Hermes, C ; Hitchmough, R ; Hoffmann, PM ; Howarth, C ; Hudson, MA ; Hussain, SA ; Huveneers, C ; Jacques, H ; Jorgensen, D ; Katdare, S ; Katsis, LKD ; Kaul, R ; Kaunda-Arara, B ; Keith-Diagne, L ; Kraus, DT ; de Lima, TM ; Lindeman, K ; Linsky, J ; Louis, E ; Loy, A ; Lughadha, EN ; Mangel, JC ; Marinari, PE ; Martin, GM ; Martinelli, G ; McGowan, PJK ; McInnes, A ; Teles Barbosa Mendes, E ; Millard, MJ ; Mirande, C ; Money, D ; Monks, JM ; Morales, CL ; Mumu, NN ; Negrao, R ; Nguyen, AH ; Niloy, MNH ; Norbury, GL ; Nordmeyer, C ; Norris, D ; O'Brien, M ; Oda, GA ; Orsenigo, S ; Outerbridge, ME ; Pasachnik, S ; Pérez-Jiménez, JC ; Pike, C ; Pilkington, F ; Plumb, G ; Portela, RDCQ ; Prohaska, A ; Quintana, MG ; Rakotondrasoa, EF ; Ranglack, DH ; Rankou, H ; Rawat, AP ; Reardon, JT ; Rheingantz, ML ; Richter, SC ; Rivers, MC ; Rogers, LR ; da Rosa, P ; Rose, P ; Royer, E ; Ryan, C ; de Mitcheson, YJS ; Salmon, L ; Salvador, CH ; Samways, MJ ; Sanjuan, T ; Souza Dos Santos, A ; Sasaki, H ; Schutz, E ; Scott, HA ; Scott, RM ; Serena, F ; Sharma, SP ; Shuey, JA ; Silva, CJP ; Simaika, JP ; Smith, DR ; Spaet, JLY ; Sultana, S ; Talukdar, BK ; Tatayah, V ; Thomas, P ; Tringali, A ; Trinh-Dinh, H ; Tuboi, C ; Usmani, AA ; Vasco-Palacios, AM ; Vié, J-C ; Virens, J ; Walker, A ; Wallace, B ; Waller, LJ ; Wang, H ; Wearn, OR ; van Weerd, M ; Weigmann, S ; Willcox, D ; Woinarski, J ; Yong, JWH ; Young, S (Wiley, 2021-12)
    Recognizing the imperative to evaluate species recovery and conservation impact, in 2012 the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) called for development of a "Green List of Species" (now the IUCN Green Status of Species). A draft Green Status framework for assessing species' progress toward recovery, published in 2018, proposed 2 separate but interlinked components: a standardized method (i.e., measurement against benchmarks of species' viability, functionality, and preimpact distribution) to determine current species recovery status (herein species recovery score) and application of that method to estimate past and potential future impacts of conservation based on 4 metrics (conservation legacy, conservation dependence, conservation gain, and recovery potential). We tested the framework with 181 species representing diverse taxa, life histories, biomes, and IUCN Red List categories (extinction risk). Based on the observed distribution of species' recovery scores, we propose the following species recovery categories: fully recovered, slightly depleted, moderately depleted, largely depleted, critically depleted, extinct in the wild, and indeterminate. Fifty-nine percent of tested species were considered largely or critically depleted. Although there was a negative relationship between extinction risk and species recovery score, variation was considerable. Some species in lower risk categories were assessed as farther from recovery than those at higher risk. This emphasizes that species recovery is conceptually different from extinction risk and reinforces the utility of the IUCN Green Status of Species to more fully understand species conservation status. Although extinction risk did not predict conservation legacy, conservation dependence, or conservation gain, it was positively correlated with recovery potential. Only 1.7% of tested species were categorized as zero across all 4 of these conservation impact metrics, indicating that conservation has, or will, play a role in improving or maintaining species status for the vast majority of these species. Based on our results, we devised an updated assessment framework that introduces the option of using a dynamic baseline to assess future impacts of conservation over the short term to avoid misleading results which were generated in a small number of cases, and redefines short term as 10 years to better align with conservation planning. These changes are reflected in the IUCN Green Status of Species Standard.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Reptiles as food: predation of Australian reptiles by introduced red foxes compounds and complements predation by cats
    Stobo-Wilson, AM ; Murphy, BP ; Legge, SM ; Chapple, DG ; Crawford, HM ; Dawson, SJ ; Dickman, CR ; Doherty, TS ; Fleming, PA ; Gentle, M ; Newsome, TM ; Palmer, R ; Rees, MW ; Ritchie, EG ; Speed, J ; Stuart, J-M ; Thompson, E ; Turpin, J ; Woinarski, JCZ (CSIRO PUBLISHING, 2021)
    Context Invasive species are a major cause of biodiversity loss across much of the world, and a key threat to Australia’s diverse reptile fauna. There has been no previous comprehensive analysis of the potential impact of the introduced European red fox, Vulpes vulpes, on Australian reptiles. Aims We seek to provide an inventory of all Australian reptile species known to be consumed by the fox, and identify characteristics of squamate species associated with such predation. We also compare these tallies and characteristics with reptile species known to be consumed by the domestic cat, Felis catus, to examine whether predation by these two introduced species is compounded (i.e. affecting much the same set of species) or complementary (affecting different groups of species). Methods We collated records of Australian reptiles consumed by foxes in Australia, with most records deriving from fox dietary studies (tallying >35 000 samples). We modelled presence or absence of fox predation records against a set of biological and other traits, and population trends, for squamate species. Key results In total, 108 reptile species (~11% of Australia’s terrestrial reptile fauna) have been recorded as consumed by foxes, fewer than that reported for cats (263 species). Eighty-six species have been reported to be eaten by both predators. More Australian turtle species have been reported as consumed by foxes than by cats, including many that suffer high levels of predation on egg clutches. Twenty threatened reptile species have been reported as consumed by foxes, and 15 by cats. Squamate species consumed by foxes are more likely to be undergoing population decline than those not known to be consumed by foxes. The likelihood of predation by foxes increased with squamate species’ adult body mass, in contrast to the relationship for predation by cats, which peaked at ~217 g. Foxes, but not cats, were also less likely to consume venomous snakes. Conclusions The two introduced, and now widespread, predators have both compounding and complementary impacts on the Australian reptile fauna. Implications Enhanced and integrated management of the two introduced predators is likely to provide substantial conservation benefits to much of the Australian reptile fauna.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Red hot frogs: identifying the Australian frogs most at risk of extinction
    Geyle, HM ; Hoskin, CJ ; Bower, DS ; Catullo, R ; Clulow, S ; Driessen, M ; Daniels, K ; Garnett, ST ; Gilbert, D ; Heard, GW ; Hero, J-M ; Hines, HB ; Hoffmann, EP ; Hollis, G ; Hunter, DA ; Lemckert, F ; Mahony, M ; Marantelli, G ; McDonald, KR ; Mitchell, NJ ; Newell, D ; Roberts, JD ; Scheele, BC ; Scroggie, M ; Vanderduys, E ; Wassens, S ; West, M ; Woinarski, JCZ ; Gillespie, GR (CSIRO PUBLISHING, 2022)
    More than a third of the world’s amphibian species are listed as Threatened or Extinct, with a recent assessment identifying 45 Australian frogs (18.4% of the currently recognised species) as ‘Threatened’ based on IUCN criteria. We applied structured expert elicitation to 26 frogs assessed as Critically Endangered and Endangered to estimate their probability of extinction by 2040. We also investigated whether participant experience (measured as a self-assigned categorical score, i.e. ‘expert’ or ‘non-expert’) influenced the estimates. Collation and analysis of participant opinion indicated that eight species are at high risk (>50% chance) of becoming extinct by 2040, with the disease chytridiomycosis identified as the primary threat. A further five species are at moderate–high risk (30–50% chance), primarily due to climate change. Fourteen of the 26 frog species are endemic to Queensland, with many species restricted to small geographic ranges that are susceptible to stochastic events (e.g. a severe heatwave or a large bushfire). Experts were more likely to rate extinction probability higher for poorly known species (those with <10 experts), while non-experts were more likely to rate extinction probability higher for better-known species. However, scores converged following discussion, indicating that there was greater consensus in the estimates of extinction probability. Increased resourcing and management intervention are urgently needed to avert future extinctions of Australia’s frogs. Key priorities include developing and supporting captive management and establishing or extending in-situ population refuges to alleviate the impacts of disease and climate change.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Rapid assessment of the biodiversity impacts of the 2019-2020 Australian megafires to guide urgent management intervention and recovery and lessons for other regions
    Legge, S ; Woinarski, JCZ ; Scheele, BC ; Garnett, ST ; Lintermans, M ; Nimmo, DG ; Whiterod, NS ; Southwell, DM ; Ehmke, G ; Buchan, A ; Gray, J ; Metcalfe, DJ ; Page, M ; Rumpff, L ; van Leeuwen, S ; Williams, D ; Ahyong, ST ; Chapple, DG ; Cowan, M ; Hossain, MA ; Kennard, M ; Macdonald, S ; Moore, H ; Marsh, J ; McCormack, RB ; Michael, D ; Mitchell, N ; Newell, D ; Raadik, TA ; Tingley, R ; Boer, M (WILEY, 2022-03)
    Abstract Aim The incidence of major fires is increasing globally, creating extraordinary challenges for governments, managers and conservation scientists. In 2019–2020, Australia experienced precedent‐setting fires that burned over several months, affecting seven states and territories and causing massive biodiversity loss. Whilst the fires were still burning, the Australian Government convened a biodiversity Expert Panel to guide its bushfire response. A pressing need was to target emergency investment and management to reduce the chance of extinctions and maximise the chances of longer‐term recovery. We describe the approach taken to rapidly prioritise fire‐affected animal species. We use the experience to consider the organisational and data requirements for evidence‐based responses to future ecological disasters. Location Forested biomes of subtropical and temperate Australia, with lessons for other regions. Methods We developed assessment frameworks to screen fire‐affected species based on their pre‐fire conservation status, the proportion of their distribution overlapping with fires, and their behavioural/ecological traits relating to fire vulnerability. Using formal and informal networks of scientists, government and non‐government staff and managers, we collated expert input and data from multiple sources, undertook the analyses, and completed the assessments in 3 weeks for vertebrates and 8 weeks for invertebrates. Results The assessments prioritised 92 vertebrate and 213 invertebrate species for urgent management response; another 147 invertebrate species were placed on a watchlist requiring further information. Conclusions The priority species lists helped focus government and non‐government investment, management and research effort, and communication to the public. Using multiple expert networks allowed the assessments to be completed rapidly using the best information available. However, the assessments highlighted substantial gaps in data availability and access, deficiencies in statutory threatened species listings, and the need for capacity‐building across the conservation science and management sectors. We outline a flexible template for using evidence effectively in emergency responses for future ecological disasters.