Survey guidelines for Australia’s threatened non-flying mammals

Greater stick-nest rat, wopilkara

Leporillus conditor

States and territories: South Australia (reintroduced to Western Australia).

Regions: South Australia: East and West Franklin Islands and reintroduced to Reevesby, St. Peter Islands, Venus Bay and Roxby Downs (Breed & Ford 2007).

Western Australia: reintroduced to Salutation Island and Heirisson Prong (Robinson 2008a).

Habitat: Limestone country with dense, low shrub cover.

Habit: Ground-dwelling.

Avg. body weight: 350 g (Robinson 2008a).

Activity pattern: Mostly nocturnal.

Diet: Exclusively herbivorous, feeding on the leaves and fruit of mostly succulent plants (Robinson 2008a).

Breeding: Breeds throughout the year, but mostly March and April, when between one and three young are born (Robinson 2008a).

Description

The greater stick-nest rat is approximately the size of a small rabbit, has a compact body, large eyes and blunt nose. They are one of two Leporillus species known for their curious habit of building large, communal nests from twigs and branches. The other species, the lesser stick-nest rat, Leporillus apicalis, is considered extinct (Robinson 2008b). The large nest can be up to 1.5 metres in diameter and 1 metre high, and may house up to 20 animals. The nests are persistent (some up to 2000 years old), and may be found over the species’ former range where they have been used to establish previous fauna and flora records (for example, Pearson et al. 2001). The greater stick-nest rat had a former range across much of arid and semi-arid southern Australia, until the introduction of feral predators and the expansion of arid zone grazing led to the decline of the species’ range in the mid-nineteenth century (Copley 1999).

Both species of stick-nest rat became extinct on mainland Australia in the 1930s. In 1920, a small population of the greater stick-nest rat was found on the Franklin Islands off the South Australian coast (Jones 1922). This population remains extant today with an estimated population of 1000 to 1500 individuals (Robinson 2008a). It has been the source of animals bred in captivity and released to a number of other islands (Reevesby and St. Peter in South Australia and Salutation in Western Australia) and mainland sites (Heirisson Prong, Western Australia and Venus Bay, South Australia). The reintroduced island populations have expanded in size, while the mainland populations have had mixed success, mostly due to inadequate control of introduced predators (Copley 1999).

Survey methods

On the basis of previous studies, the following survey techniques are recommended to detect the presence of the species in areas up to 5 hectares in size:

• 
  daytime searches for potentially suitable habitat resources (description of the survey technique and recommended effort is provided in Section 3.1)
  
• 
  daytime searches for signs such as stick-nests, tracks or scats (description of the survey technique and recommended effort is provided in Section 3.2)
  
• 
  collection of predator scats, owl casts or remains in predatory bird/mammal nests/dens (description of the survey technique and recommended effort is provided in Section 3.2)
  
• 
  Elliott A/B trapping surveys conducted according to the technique description and recommended effort provided in Section 3.3.9, using a mixture of peanut butter and rolled oats as bait
  
• 
  camera traps at any unconfirmed locations such as overhangs (see Section 3.3.6)
  
• 
  possibly spotlight surveys conducted according to the technique description and recommended effort provided in Section 3.3.3
  
• 
  consultation with local people, including leaseholders, station hands, park rangers and field workers and investigating potential Indigenous knowledge of this species’ presence in an area.
  

Care must be taken when handling these animals as the skin on their tail strips off easily if held by the tail.

Similar species in range

There are no similar species within the range of the greater stick-nest rat. The lesser stick-nest rat, although considered extinct, can be distinguished by its more slender build and bicoloured tail that is marked by a white tip. If possible, tissue samples (tail tip or ear punch) should be taken, provided that the appropriate permission and licensing has been granted by the relevant government organisations, and lodged with the South Australian Museum which maintains an extensive tissue collection of this species.

References

Barclay, S. (2003). UNSW. Personal communication regarding the Greater Stick-nest Rat.

Breed, B. and Ford, F. 2007. Native Mice and Rats. CSIRO Publishing, Victoria.
Copley, P. 1999. Natural histories of Australia’s stick-nest rats, genus Leporillus (Rodentia: Muridae). Wildlife Research 26: 513-539.
Jones, F.W. 1922. The flora and fauna of the Nuyts Archipelago and the Investigator Group. No. 2. The Monodelphian Mammals. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Australia 46: 181-194.
Pearson, S.G., Baynes, B. and Triggs, B.E. 2001. The record of fauna, and accumulating agents of hair and bone, found in middens of stick-nest rats (Genus Leporillus) (Rodentia: Muridae). Wildlife Research 28: 435-444.
Robinson, A.C. 2008a. Greater Stick Nest Rat Leporillus conditor. In ‘The Mammals of Australia’ (Eds. S. Van Dyck and R. Strahan) pp. 387-388. (Reed New Holland: Sydney).
Robinson, A.C. 2008b. Lesser Stick Nest Rat Leporillus apicalis. In ‘The Mammals of Australia’ (Eds. S. Van Dyck and R. Strahan) pp. 385-386. (Reed New Holland: Sydney).

Hastings River mouse

Pseudomys oralis

States and territories: NSW and Queensland.

Regions: Patchy distribution along the Great Dividing Range, from Barrington Tops NSW to Warwick Queensland (Townley 2008).

Habitat: Open woodlands ranging in altitude from 300 to 1250 m with grass, sedge and mat-rush Lomandra sp. dominated understorey (NSW NPWS 2003). Other habitat characteristics include a dense ground-cover, suitable shelter sites and an increased time since burning (> 10 years) (NSW NPWS 2003). The species utilises not only the sedge and mat-rush habitats on creek lines, but also ridge and mid-slope habitats with a dense ground cover and high species diversity (Meek et al. 2006; Townley 2008). They appear to be able to inhabit old-growth forests with no historical logging (Townley 2000) and areas that are subject to burn cycles of less than 5–8 years (Meek et al. 2003).

Habit: Ground-dwelling.

Avg. body weight: 85 g (females), 95 g (males) (Townley 2008).

Activity pattern: Nocturnal.

Diet: Herbivore: a large component of this species’ diet comprises native legumes, especially Glycine spp., and seeds and leaves of Carex sp., Juncus spp. and Poa spp., especially new growth (Fox et al. 1994; Townley 2008). Additional dietary items include moss, hypogeal fungi and insects.

Breeding: Breeding has been recorded between August and March, with two to three young being raised. Between one and three litters may be born over a season (Townley 2008). Nest sites appear to vary depending on location. Sites include rock piles, crevices, tree butt hollows (Townley 2000) and fallen logs (Meek et al. 2006). The same nest site can be used by successive generations over several years (Townley 2008).

Description

The Hastings River mouse is one of the rarest extant Pseudomys species, with only about 620 captured since 1969 (NSW NPWS 2003). A thorough review of the ecology and conservation management strategy for the Hastings River mouse is provided in the recovery plan for the species (NSW NPWS 2003). Genetic studies indicate that there is little gene flow between populations (Jerry et al. 1998) suggesting that the distribution across its range is not continuous.

This species typically occurs in low densities, with frequently less than one individual per hectare (Townley 2008). As a result it can easily escape detection in fauna surveys where the trapping effort is comparatively low. Consequently, targeted trapping surveys are required in habitat that involves high trapping effort and is therefore labour intensive (see the reference to guidelines in the section below).

Survey methods

Surveys for the Hastings River mouse must conform to the survey guidelines provided in the species’ recovery plan (NSW DECC 2005).

Similar species in range

The Hastings River mouse is sympatric with a number of other rodent species. It can be distinguished from these in the field using colouration, standard body measurements and external features, such as large protruding eyes, a rounded nose (‘Roman nose’), distinctly white feet and the bicoloured tail (Townley 2008). The black rat Rattus rattus and the swamp rat R. lutreolus both have dark feet, small eyes and a unicoloured tail (Tweedie and York, 1993), whereas the Hastings River mouse has a slender bicoloured tail (dark above, light below) (Townley 2008). The Hastings River mouse also has four nipples in the groin region, in contrast to the bush rat Rattus fuscipes that has more than eight nipples located over the chest region. In addition, the Hastings River mouse lacks the strongly ‘ringed’ tail of the bush rat (NSW DECC 2005). The species is also similar to the eastern chestnut mouse Pseudomys gracilicaudatus but is distinguished by having bicoloured skin and hair, rather than just bicoloured hair, as with the eastern chestnut mouse (Townley 2008). Voucher specimens of this species are not allowed to be taken (NSW DECC 2005).

References

Catling, P.C. and Burt, R.J. 1997. Ground-dwelling Mammals of Eucalypt Forests in North-eastern New South Wales: the species, their Abundance and Distribution. Wildlife Research 24: 1-19.
Dickman, C. R and McKenchnie, C.A. 1985. A survey of the mammals of Mount Royal and Barrington Tops, NSW. Australian Zoologist 21: 531-543.
Fox, B.J., Read, D.G., Jefferys, E. and Luo, J. 1994. Diet of the Hastings River Mouse Pseudomys oralis. Wildlife Research 21: 491-505.
Jerry, D.R., Dow, T.A., Elphinstone, M.S. and Baverstock, P.R. 1998. Historical and contemporary maternal population structuring in the endangered Hastings River Mouse (Pseudomys oralis). Conservation Biology 12: 1017-1022.
Meek, P.D., McCray, K. and Cann, B. 2003. New records of Hastings River Mouse, Pseudomys oralis, from State Forests of NSW pre-logging surveys. Australian Mammalogy 25: 101-105.
Meek, P.D., Radford, S.L. and Tolhurst, B.L. 2006. Summer-Autumn home range and habitat use of the Hastings River mouse Pseudomys oralis (Rodentia: Muridae). Australian Mammalogy 28: 39-50.
Meek, P.D. and Triggs, B. 1999. A record of Hastings River Mouse (Pseudomys oralis) in a fox (Vulpes vulpes) scat from NSW. Proceedings of the Linnean Society 121: 193-197.
NSW DECC 2005. Recovery Plan for the Hastings River Mouse (Pseudomys oralis), Department of Environment and Climate Change (NSW) (now NSW Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water), Hurstville.
NSW NPWS 2003. Interim Microhabitat Survey and Mapping Protocols of the Recovery Plan for the Hastings River Mouse (Pseudomys oralis). NPWS, Hurstville, Sydney.
Poole, M.A. 1994. The Hastings River Mouse, Pseudomys oralis, from Gambubal State Forest southeastern QLD. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 37: 280.
Pyke, G.H. and Read, D.G. 2002. The Hastings River Mouse, Pseudomys oralis: a biological review. Australian Mammalogy 24: 151-176.
Smith, A.P., Phillips, C. and Townley, S. 1996. Diet and habitat preference of the Hastings River Mouse Pseudomys oralis (Rodentia: Muridae). A report to the Hastings River Mouse Recovery Team, NSW NPWS, Coffs Harbour.
Townley, S. 2000. The ecology of the Hastings River Mouse Pseudomys oralis in North eastern NSW and Queensland. Ph.D. thesis, Southern Cross University, Lismore. In: Meek, P.D., Radford, S.L. and Tolhurst, B.L. 2006. Summer-Autumn home range and habitat use of the Hastings River mouse Pseudomys oralis (Rodentia: Muridae). Australian Mammalogy 28: 39-50.
Townley, S. 2008. Hastings River Mouse Pseudomys oralis. In ‘The Mammals of Australia’ (Eds. S. Van Dyck and R. Strahan) pp.646-648. (Reed New Holland: Sydney).
Tweedie T.D. and York, A. 1993. Survey guidelines for the Hastings River Mouse (Pseudomys oralis). Forestry Commission of NSW Technical Paper No 62.