VBVictoria A. Bennett

Victoria A. Bennett

*This is an algorithmically generated author record based on publicly available information.

Current Organizations / Institutes

The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article


Victoria A. Bennett has a total of 5 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:

  • Adrian D. Manning

    Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Acton, ACT 2601, Australia

    4 shared publications
  • David B. Lindenmayer

    Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia

    4 shared publications
  • Erik D. Doerr

    Ecosystem Sciences, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia

    4 shared publications
  • Veronica A. J. Doerr

    Ecosystem Sciences, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia

    4 shared publications
  • Hwan-Jin Yoon

    Statistical Consulting Unit, School of Mathematical Sciences, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia

    3 shared publications

Latest Publications

  • Open Access

    Habitat Selection and Behaviour of a Reintroduced Passerine: Linking Experimental Restoration, Behaviour and Habitat Ecology

    by Victoria A. Bennett, Veronica A. J. Doerr, Erik D. Doerr, Adrian D. Manning, David B. Lindenmayer, Hwan-Jin Yoon

    Habitat restoration can play an important role in recovering functioning ecosystems and improving biodiversity. Restoration may be particularly important in improving habitat prior to species reintroductions. We reintroduced seven brown treecreeper (Climacteris picumnus) social groups into two nature reserves in the Australian Capital Territory in south-eastern Australia. This study provided a unique opportunity to understand the interactions between restoration ecology, behavioural ecology and habitat ecology. We examined how experimental restoration treatments (addition of coarse woody debris, variations in ground vegetation cover and nest box installation) influenced the behaviour and microhabitat use of radio-tracked individuals to evaluate the success of restoration treatments. The addition of coarse woody debris benefited the brown treecreeper through increasing the probability of foraging on a log or on the ground. This demonstrated the value of using behaviour as a bio-indicator for restoration success. Based on previous research, we predicted that variations in levels of ground vegetation cover would influence behaviour and substrate use, particularly that brown treecreepers would choose sites with sparse ground cover because this allows better access to food and better vigilance for predators. However, there was little effect of this treatment, which was likely influenced by the limited overall use of the ground layer. There was also little effect of nest boxes on behaviour or substrate use. These results somewhat confound our understanding of the species based on research from extant populations. Our results also have a significant impact regarding using existing knowledge on a species to inform how it will respond to reintroduction and habitat restoration. This study also places great emphasis on the value of applying an experimental framework to ecological restoration, particularly when reintroductions produce unexpected outcomes.


  • Causes of reintroduction failure of the brown treecreeper: Implications for ecosystem restoration

    by Victoria A. Bennett, Veronica A. J. Doerr, Erik D. Doerr, Adrian D. Manning, David B. Lindenmayer, Hwan-Jin Yoon


  • The anatomy of a failed reintroduction: a case study with the Brown Treecreeper

    by Victoria A. Bennett, Veronica A. J. Doerr, Erik D. Doerr, Adrian D. Manning, David B. Lindenmayer

    Reintroductions are often used to re-establish a self-sustaining population of a species as a conservation method. Despite their prevalence, few reintroductions have followed recent international r...


  • Open Access

    Habitat Selection and Post-Release Movement of Reintroduced Brown Treecreeper Individuals in Restored Temperate Woodland

    by Victoria A. Bennett, Veronica A. J. Doerr, Erik D. Doerr, Adrian D. Manning, David B. Lindenmayer, Hwan-Jin Yoon

    It is essential to choose suitable habitat when reintroducing a species into its former range. Habitat quality may influence an individual’s dispersal decisions and also ultimately where they choose to settle. We examined whether variation in habitat quality (quantified by the level of ground vegetation cover and the installation of nest boxes) influenced the movement, habitat choice and survival of a reintroduced bird species. We experimentally reintroduced seven social groups (43 individuals) of the brown treecreeper (Climacteris picumnus) into two nature reserves in south-eastern Australia. We radio-tracked 18 brown treecreepers from release in November 2009 until February 2010. We observed extensive movements by individuals irrespective of the release environment or an individual’s gender. This indicated that individuals were capable of dispersing and actively selecting optimum habitat. This may alleviate pressure on wildlife planners to accurately select the most optimum release sites, so long as the species’ requirements are met. There was significant variation in movement between social groups, suggesting that social factors may be a more important influence on movement than habitat characteristics. We found a significant effect of ground vegetation cover on the likelihood of settlement by social groups, with high rates of settlement and survival in dry forests, rather than woodland (where the species typically resides), which has implications for the success of woodland restoration. However, overall the effects of variation in habitat quality were not as strong as we had expected, and resulted in some unpredicted effects such as low survival and settlement in woodland areas with medium levels of ground vegetation cover. The extensive movement by individuals and unforeseen effects of habitat characteristics make it difficult to predict the outcome of reintroductions, the movement behaviour and habitat selection of reintroduced individuals, particularly when based on current knowledge of a species’ ecology.