Erik D. Doerr

The complete mitochondrial genome (mitogenome) of the tjaku□a, Liopholis kintorei was obtained using next-generation sequencing, making it the first recorded mitogenome of the genus Liopholis and the Tiliquini . The mitogenome is 16,844bp in length with a base composition of A (31.7%), T (24.4%), G (14.6%), and C (29.3%) and a G + C content of 43.9%. The genome contains 13 protein-coding genes, 22 transfer RNA genes, two ribosomal RNA genes (12S and 16S), and three non-coding fragments, consisting of the putative control region and two mitochondrially encoded heavy strand origin of replication region (OriH). The gene order is identical to that of typical skink mitogenomes. This genomic resource will provide valuable information for genetic studies of this genus and contribute to the growing collection of mitogenomes within the family Scincidae.

Systematic reviews provide a rigorous, repeatable and quantitative method for assessing and synthesizing all available empirical evidence to evaluate a specific research, management, or policy question. They are particularly well suited for evaluating the effectiveness of environmental management actions, and thus for underpinning evidence‐based adaptive natural resource management. However, their current utility may be limited in countries like Australia, where both the amount of research relative to land area and of well‐monitored, active land management for environmental purposes are relatively low. Based on our experience conducting two of the first ecological systematic reviews in Australia, we have developed a number of recommendations for conducting systematic reviews in situations where resources and/or primary research data are limited. We discuss potential modification or augmentation of most aspects of the systematic review process including selection of a review team, question formulation, search strategy, data analysis, and the communication of results, as well as the inherent tradeoffs between systematic thoroughness and available resources that are involved in these changes. We hope that our recommendations will encourage more ecologists to undertake systematic reviews even if primary research and resources to conduct the review appear to be limited, as even a modified systematic review can provide more defensible evidence‐based guidelines for management of natural resources.

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.

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...

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.

The persistence of native species in fragmented landscapes is dependent on dispersal or foraging movements between habitat patches, which may be limited. Although corridors have been heralded as solutions, their effectiveness depends on species’ movement behaviour, which has rarely been studied. We previously analysed dispersal movements of Brown Treecreepers (Climacteris picumnus), concluding that scattered trees may provide greater connectivity than corridors, and the length of corridors and size of any gaps within may be more important than corridor width. However, conclusions from a single species may not be representative. Here, we analyse dispersal movements of two sedentary birds—Eastern Yellow Robins (Eopsaltria australis) and White-throated Treecreepers (Cormobates leucophaeus)—and foraging movements of two semi-nomadic birds—Fuscous Honeyeaters (Lichenostomus fuscus) and White-plumed Honeyeaters (L. penicillatus). Despite differences in their ecologies and purpose of movements, we found the movement strategies of these species at the local landscape scale were similar. The types of connectivity used and gap distances crossed were similar to those for Brown Treecreepers, strengthening our understanding of how to provide connectivity. We suggest that decision rules for movement have been shaped over evolutionary time by variability in the landscape, so movement behaviour may be less species-specific than previously assumed.

Summary: 1. Hodgson et al. [Journal of Applied Ecology46 (2009) 964] argue that connectivity is complex and uncertain, that it can be improved incidentally by increasing habitat extent, and that connectivity conservation is unlikely to be effective under climate change.2. We believe that they have overlooked recent research on dispersal behaviour and structural connectivity, which has improved our understanding of functional connectivity and revealed that it will not necessarily increase with habitat extent.3. New modelling techniques including least‐cost path models incorporate this more detailed understanding of connectivity into conservation planning, facilitating the true aim of connectivity conservation – to ensure appropriate interactions between habitat extent, quality and connectivity.4. Synthesis and applications. Advances in behavioural research and modelling techniques allow us to manage structural connectivity with as much certainty as we manage extent and quality of habitat. Successful landscape conservation to address both current threats and future climate change must manage these three elements in concert.