Keystone effects of an alien top-predator stem extinctions of native mammals

Alien predators can have catastrophic effects on ecosystems and are thought to be much more harmful to biodiversity than their native counterparts. However, trophic cascade theory and the mesopredator release hypothesis predict that the removal of top predators will result in the reorganization of trophic webs and loss of biodiversity. Using field data collected throughout arid Australia, we provide evidence that removal of an alien top-predator, the dingo, has cascading effects through lower trophic levels. Dingo removal was linked to increased activity of herbivores and an invasive mesopredator, the red fox (Vulpes vulpes), and to the loss of grass cover and native species of small mammals. Using species distribution data, we predict that reintroducing or maintaining dingo populations would produce a net benefit for the conservation of threatened native mammals across greater than 2.42 × 10⁶ km² of Australia. Our study provides evidence that an alien top predator can assume a keystone role and be beneficial for biodiversity conservation, and also that mammalian carnivores more generally can generate strong trophic cascades in terrestrial ecosystems.     

Are dingoes a trophic regulator in arid Australia? A comparison of mammal communities on either side of the dingo fence

The direct and indirect interactions that large mammalian carnivores have with other species can have far‐reaching effects on ecosystems. In recent years there has been growing interest in the role that Australia's largest terrestrial predator, the dingo, may have in structuring ecosystems. In this study we investigate the effect of dingo exclusion on mammal communities, by comparing mammal assemblages where dingoes were present and absent. The study was replicated at three locations spanning 300 km in the Strzelecki Desert. We hypothesized that larger species of mammal subject to direct interactions with dingoes should increase in abundance in the absence of dingoes while smaller species subject to predation by mesopredators should decrease in abundance because of increased mesopredator impact. There were stark differences in mammal assemblages on either side of the dingo fence and the effect of dingoes appeared to scale with body size. Kangaroos and red foxes were more abundant in the absence of dingoes while Rabbits and the Dusky Hopping‐mouse Notomys fuscus were less abundant where dingoes were absent, suggesting that they may benefit from lower red fox numbers in the presence of dingoes. Feral cats and dunnarts (Sminthopsis spp.) did not respond to dingo exclusion. Our study provides evidence that dingoes do structure mammal communities in arid Australia; however, dingo exclusion is also associated with a suite of land use factors, including sheep grazing and kangaroo harvesting that may also be expected to influence kangaroo and red fox populations. Maintaining or restoring populations of dingoes may be useful strategies to mitigate the impacts of mesopredators and overgrazing by herbivores.     

Do dingoes suppress the activity of feral cats in northern Australia?

Large predators can have profound impacts on community composition. Not only do they directly affect prey abundance, they also indirectly affect prey abundance through their direct effects on smaller predators. In Australia, dingoes fill the role of a large predator and, in southern Australia, have clear impacts on introduced foxes. Their effect on introduced cats, however, is less clear. Here we present data from multiple sites across northern Australia (where foxes are absent), which reveal a negative correlation between cat and dingo activity. This relationship could arise because cats avoid areas where dingoes are active, or because cats are less abundant in areas with high dingo densities, or a combination of both. At a subset of our study sites, we experimentally reduced dingo (but not cat) abundance by poison baiting. This resulted in a 55% drop in dingo activity within 4 weeks of baiting, but without a compensatory increase in cat activity. This suggests the negative correlation between cat and dingo activity is not a simple consequence of cats reactively avoiding areas with higher dingo traffic, but rather, that there are fewer cats in areas where dingoes are more active. This study is a rare demonstration of the potential for dingoes to affect the behaviour and potentially the population size of feral cats, and therefore reduce the impact of feral cats on vulnerable native prey species.     

Does a top predator suppress the abundance of an invasive mesopredator at a continental scale?

Aim We examined evidence for the mesopredator release hypothesis at a subcontinental scale by investigating the relationship between indices of abundance of the dingo Canis lupus dingo (top‐order predator) and the invasive red fox Vulpes vulpes (mesopredator) in three large regions across mainland Australia. The red fox is known to be one of the major threats to the persistence of small and medium‐sized native vertebrates across the continent. Location Australia. Methods Indices of abundance were calculated from three independently collected datasets derived from bounty returns and field surveys. Data were analysed using univariate parametric, semi‐parametric and nonparametric techniques. Results Predator abundance indices did not conform to a normal distribution and the relationships between dingo and fox abundance indices were not well described by linear functions. Semi‐parametric and nonparametric techniques revealed consistently negative associations between indices of dingo and fox abundance. Main conclusions The results provide evidence that mesopredator suppression by a top predator can be exerted at very large geographical scales and suggest that relationships between the abundances of top predators and mesopredators are not linear. Our results have broad implications for the management of canid predators. First, they suggest that dingoes function ecologically to reduce the activity or abundance of red foxes and thus are likely to dampen the predatory impacts of foxes. More generally, they provide support for the notion that the mesopredator‐suppressive effects of top predators could be incorporated into broad‐scale biodiversity conservation programmes in many parts of the world by actively maintaining populations of top predators or restoring them in areas where they are now rare. Determining the population densities at which the interactions of top predators become ecologically effective will be a critical goal for conservation managers who aim to maintain or restore ecosystems using the ecological interactions of top predators.     

Ecologically functional landscapes and the role of dingoes as trophic regulators in south‐eastern Australia and other habitats

Large carnivores can play a pivotal role in maintaining healthy, balanced ecosystems. By suppressing the abundances and hence impacts of herbivores and smaller predators, top predators can indirectly benefit the species consumed by herbivores and smaller predators. Restoring and maintaining the ecosystem services that large carnivores provide has been identified as a critical step required to sustain biodiversity and maintain functional, resilient ecosystems. Recent research has shown that Australia's largest terrestrial predator, the Dingo (Canis lupus dingo), has strong effects on ecosystems in arid Australia and that these effects are beneficial for the conservation of small mammals and vegetation. Similarly, there is evidence from south‐eastern Australia that dingoes suppress the abundance of macropods and red Fox (Vulpes vulpes). It is likely that dingoes in south‐eastern Australia also generate strong indirect effects on the prey of foxes and macropods, as has been observed in the more arid parts of the continent. These direct and indirect effects of dingoes have the potential to be harnessed as passive tools to assist biodiversity conservation through the maintenance of ecologically functional dingo populations. However, research is required to better understand dingoes' indirect effects on ecosystems and the development of dingo management strategies that allow for both the preservation of dingoes and protection of livestock.     

Top-predator control-induced trophic cascades: an alternative hypothesis to the conclusion of Colman et al.

Colman et al. (2014 Proc. R. Soc. B 281, 20133094. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2013.3094)) recently argued that observed positive relationships between dingoes and small mammals were a result of top-down processes whereby lethal dingo control reduced dingoes and increased mesopredators and herbivores, which then suppressed small mammals. Here, I show that the prerequisite negative effects of dingo control on dingoes were not shown, and that the same positive relationships observed may simply represent well-known bottom-up processes whereby more generalist predators are found in places with more of their preferred prey. Identification of top-predator control-induced trophic cascades first requires demonstration of some actual effect of control on predators, typically possible only through manipulative experiments with the ability to identify cause and effect.     

Do wild dogs exclude foxes? Evidence for competition from dietary and spatial overlaps

Abstract The management of wild canids (wild dogs/dingoes and foxes) presents a conservation dilemma for land managers across Australia. These canids are predators of wildlife and domestic stock but dingoes are considered native and anecdotal reports suggest that they may suppress foxes such that dingo/dog conservation may have a net benefit to wildlife. This study examines dietary and spatial interactions between wild dogs and foxes in the Greater Blue Mountains region of NSW to address the possibility of suppression through competitive exclusion by dogs on foxes. Predator diets were compared using faecal analysis as well as an analysis of 19 dietary studies from similar forest habitats in eastern Australia. Spatial relationships were examined using data from an extensive canid control programme. Diets of wild dogs and foxes showed a high degree of overlap in species taken, indicating potential for competition. But there was also evidence of resource partitioning with the size and arboreality of mammalian prey differing between the two predators. Wild dogs and foxes responded to different landscape‐scale variation in the physical environment, but there was no clear evidence of large‐scale differences in their distribution. At the fine scale there was a negative association between these predators that indicated possible temporal avoidance or localized habitat shifts. Therefore, there is evidence for dietary competition and fine‐scale exclusion, but no support for landscape‐scale exclusion of foxes by wild dogs in the Blue Mountains.     

Mesopredators constrain a top predator: competitive release of ravens after culling crows

Although predator control programmes rarely consider complex competitive interactions among predators, it is becoming clear that removal of larger ‘superior’ competitors often releases the ‘inferior’ ones and can precipitate trophic cascades. In contrast, our study indicates that culling hooded crows Corvus cornix appears to release a larger competitor, the common raven Corvus corax. Ravens ranged more widely, and the predation of artificial nests was significantly faster (although total predation was similar), after the removal of crows. Our study provides evidence of a novel reversal of competitive release where a larger species was freed from constraints imposed on its distribution and behaviour by a smaller species, and emphasizes the importance of considering community and ecosystem effects of predator manipulations when undertaken for conservation or game management.     

Are we getting the full picture? Animal responses to camera traps and implications for predator studies

Camera trapping is widely used in ecological studies. It is often considered nonintrusive simply because animals are not captured or handled. However, the emission of light and sound from camera traps can be intrusive. We evaluated the daytime and nighttime behavioral responses of four mammalian predators to camera traps in road‐based, passive (no bait) surveys, in order to determine how this might affect ecological investigations. Wild dogs, European red foxes, feral cats, and spotted‐tailed quolls all exhibited behaviors indicating they noticed camera traps. Their recognition of camera traps was more likely when animals were approaching the device than if they were walking away from it. Some individuals of each species retreated from camera traps and some moved toward them, with negative behaviors slightly more common during the daytime. There was no consistent response to camera traps within species; both attraction and repulsion were observed. Camera trapping is clearly an intrusive sampling method for some individuals of some species. This may limit the utility of conclusions about animal behavior obtained from camera trapping. Similarly, it is possible that behavioral responses to camera traps could affect detection probabilities, introducing as yet unmeasured biases into camera trapping abundance surveys. These effects demand consideration when utilizing camera traps in ecological research and will ideally prompt further work to quantify associated biases in detection probabilities.     

Does lethal control of top‐predators release mesopredators? A re‐evaluation of three Australian case studies

Top‐predators can sometimes be important for structuring fauna assemblages in terrestrial ecosystems. Through a complex trophic cascade, the lethal control of top‐predators has been predicted to elicit positive population responses from mesopredators that may in turn increase predation pressure on prey species of concern. In support of this hypothesis, many relevant research papers, opinion pieces and literature reviews identify three particular case studies as supporting evidence for top‐predator control‐induced release of mesopredators in Australia. However, many fundamental details essential for supporting this hypothesis are missing from these case studies, which were each designed to investigate alternative aims. Here, we re‐evaluate the strength of evidence for top‐predator control‐induced mesopredator release from these three studies after comprehensive analyses of associated unpublished correlative and experimental data. Circumstantial evidence alluded to mesopredator releases of either the European Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes) or feral Cat (Felis catus) coinciding with Dingo (Canis lupus dingo) control in each case. Importantly, however, substantial limitations in predator population sampling techniques and/or experimental designs preclude strong assertions about the effect of lethal control on mesopredator populations from these studies. In all cases, multiple confounding factors and plausible alternative explanations for observed changes in predator populations exist. In accord with several critical reviews and a growing body of demonstrated experimental evidence on the subject, we conclude that there is an absence of reliable evidence for top‐predator control‐induced mesopredator release from these three case studies. Well‐designed and executed studies are critical for investigating potential top‐predator control‐induced mesopredator release.