Life in linear habitats: the movement ecology of an endangered mammal in a peri‐urban landscape

Abstract

Animal movement can be significantly altered in human‐dominated landscapes such as urban and peri‐urban areas, where habitat is often fragmented and/or linear. Knowledge regarding how wildlife respond to anthropogenic change is vital for informing conservation efforts in such landscapes, including the design of nature reserves and wildlife corridors. To better understand how threatened species persist and behave within human‐dominated landscapes, we examined the home range and space use of the nationally endangered southern brown bandicoot Isoodon obesulus obesulus in peri‐urban Melbourne, Australia’s second‐largest city. Specifically, we examined whether: (1) bandicoots were confined to linear strips of remnant vegetation or also made use of the broader highly modified landscape matrix; (2) the configuration of the linear vegetated strips affected home range shape; and (3) home range area differed between bandicoots living in linear strips and those in larger remnant habitat patches. We found that: (1) 71% of adult males and 33% of adult females used the matrix, but non‐dispersing juveniles were entirely confined to the linear strips; males also travelled greater distances into the matrix (away from the vegetated strips) than females; (2) bandicoots had longer home ranges in narrower strips and males had longer home ranges than females; and (3) home range area for both sexes was smaller in linear strips than has been recorded in other studies in larger remnant habitats. Our study highlights the importance of retaining narrow, fragmented and modified vegetation to accommodate threatened biodiversity within human‐dominated landscapes, but suggests the surrounding matrix may also offer important resources for adaptable species, such as bandicoots. Supporting off‐reserve conservation of biodiversity in novel ecosystems is increasingly pertinent in our rapidly urbanizing world.

Managing ecosystems in a sea of uncertainty: invasive species management and assisted colonizations

“…The range of alternative prey may mean that the high fecundity of bandicoots (Dufty 1995) is sufficient to prevent a population decline, provided adequate habitat refuge is available. Therefore, it is possible that bandicoot populations will be less successful within the more open agricultural landscapes of Phillip Island being restricted to remnant habitat in the presence of cats (Maclagan et al 2019). Targeted management may be required to facilitate the continued expansion of bandicoot populations should they be unable to colonize through the agricultural matrix.…”

Telemetry tails: a practical method for attaching animal-borne devices to small vertebrates in the field

“…Although our sample size was relatively small for long-nosed bandicoots compared with bilbies, and a slightly different method of tail-mount attachment was used, previous studies achieved a similar TTND for other Peramelidae spp (e.g. 3-35 days; Winnard et al 2013;Robinson et al 2018;Maclagan et al 2020). Bandicoots have a thinner, less robust tail (i.e.…”

“…It is important that candidate attachment materials and methods are tested for longevity, because more time before detachment will reduce the number of recaptures required for viable data, which is an important consideration for animal welfare. Attachments in previous studies using Fixomull ® (BSN Medical Pty Ltd, Australia) tape had a TTND of 3-22 days (Robinson et al 2018) or 7-33 days (Winnard et al 2013), and 14-35 days for a combination of Fixomull ® and Micropore™ tapes (Maclagan et al 2020). No glue was applied to the seam and edges of the tape.…”

“…With the success of the attachment technique, training was provided to other researchers involved in the reintroduction of the species at Arid Recovery (Moseby and O'Donnell 2003), and it has since been used and adapted for several studies of bilbies at Arid Recovery (Moseby et al 2012;Steindler et al 2018;Ross et al 2019a) and at Scotia Sanctuary (Finlayson et al 2008), and adapted for multiple studies on Peramelidae spp (e.g. Groenewegen et al 2017;Robinson et al 2018;Maclagan et al 2020).…”

Dietary variation of an endangered mycophagous mammal in novel and remnant habitats in a peri‐urban landscape

“…Bandicoots are suspected to make use of food intended for pets or other domestic animals (e.g. rabbits, cats, dogs, sheep, pigs, parrots and chickens) at the novel sites in our study (Maclagan et al 2020). Exploitation of anthropogenic food by opportunistic wildlife species is common in urbanised landscapes throughout the world (Oro et al 2013;Lowry et al 2013), including bandicoots (FitzGibbon & Jones 2006;Hillman & Thompson 2016).…”