CSIRO Publishing Books Journals About Us Shopping Cart You are here: Journals > Wildlife Research   
Wildlife Research
  Ecology, Management and Conservation in Natural and Modified Habitats
 
Search
 
 
  Advanced Search
   

Journal Home
About the Journal
Editorial Board
Contacts
Content
Online Early
Current Issue
Just Accepted
All Issues
Special Issues
Sample Issue
For Authors
General Information
Notice to Authors
Submit Article
Open Access
For Referees
General Information
Review Article
Annual Referee Index
For Subscribers
Subscription Prices
Customer Service
Print Publication Dates

 Early Alert
Subscribe to our email Early Alert or RSS feeds for the latest journal papers.

 Connect with us
facebook   youtube

 CSIRO Wildlife Research
All volumes of CSIRO Wildlife Research are online and available to subscribers of Wildlife Research.

 

Article << Previous     |     Next >>   Contents Vol 32(8)

A comparison of survey methods for arboreal possums in jarrah forest, Western Australia

A. F. Wayne A C D, A. Cowling B, C. G. Ward C, J. F. Rooney C, C. V. Vellios C, D. B. Lindenmayer A, C. F. Donnelly B

A Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia.
B Statistical Consulting Unit, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia.
C Science Division, Department of Conservation and Land Management, Locked Bag 2, Manjimup, WA 6258, Australia.
D Corresponding author: Email: adrianw@calm.wa.gov.au
 
PDF (180 KB) $25
 Export Citation
 Print
  


Abstract

Comparative trials of different survey methods were conducted in the southern jarrah (Eucalyptus marginata) forest to determine the most efficient means of detecting koomal (common brushtail possum, Trichosurus vulpecula hypoleucus) and ngwayir (western ringtail possum, Pseudocheirus occidentalis). In particular, we examined different trapping and spotlighting methods and compared these with scat surveys. Six different trapping methods (derived by combining three bait types and two trap positions) were compared at six sites. Significantly fewer koomal were caught on ‘universal’ bait (i.e. peanut butter, rolled oats and sardines) than on flour-based baits using rose oil or Eucalyptus oil as lures. Significantly more individuals of both possum species were caught in arboreal traps than in ground traps (P < 0.001 in both cases). Recapture rates of koomal were high, whereas ngwayir were rarely retrapped. There were no detection differences between six different spotlighting methods (derived by combining three spotlight intensities with two filter colours) for koomal. Significantly more ngwayir were detected using 50-W or 100-W lights than 20-W lights (P = 0.01). There were no significant differences in the detection rates for ngwayir using red or white light. There were, however, significant observer differences in the number of possums of both species detected (koomal, P = 0.025; ngwayir, P = 0.004). Spotlighting detected, on average, only 4.9% of the koomal ‘known to be alive’ by trapping. However, spotlighting with a 50-W or 100-W spotlight detected more ngwayir than did trapping. Koomal abundance measures derived from scat surveys were not related to trapping or spotlight abundance estimates. For ngwayir, however, scat counts were strongly related to spotlight counts and there were no significant observer differences for the former. We conclude that koomal are more effectively surveyed using arboreal trapping with rose or Eucalyptus lures. Ngwayir are best surveyed using scat surveys or 50-W spotlights.

   
Subscriber Login
Username:
Password:  

    


 
Top  Email this page
 
Legal & Privacy | Contact Us | Help

CSIRO

© CSIRO 1996-2012