There’s no accounting for taste: bait attractants and infrared digital cameras for detecting small to medium ground-dwelling mammals
David J. Paull A D , Andrew W. Claridge A B and Simon C. Barry CA School of Physical, Environmental and Mathematical Sciences, University College, University of New South Wales, Australian Defence Force Academy, Northcott Drive, Canberra, ACT 2600, Australia.
B Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water, Parks and Wildlife Group, Planning and Assessment Team, Southern Ranges Branch, PO Box 733, Queanbeyan, NSW 2620, Australia.
C CSIRO Mathematical and Information Sciences, GPO Box 664, ACT 2601, Australia.
D Corresponding author. Email: dpaull@adfa.edu.au
Wildlife Research 38(3) 188-195 https://doi.org/10.1071/WR10203
Submitted: 9 November 2010 Accepted: 8 March 2011 Published: 13 July 2011
Abstract
Context: Reliable information about the occurrence and distribution of threatened forest-dwelling mammals is critical for developing effective conservation plans. To optimise limited resources, advances need to be made to the toolkit available for detecting rare and cryptic fauna.
Aims: We trialled three bait attractants (peanut butter with oats, live mealworms and black truffle oil) in combination with infrared digital cameras to determine whether detection rates of forest-dwelling native mammals in south-eastern Australia were influenced by: (1) bait type; (2) previous visits by conspecifics; (3) previous visits by Rattus; and (4) duration of bait deployment.
Methods: Bait attractants were set at 40 camera stations in combination with odourless controls. Over two fortnight-long deployments, 1327 images were captured of 22 mammal and bird species. From these data, detailed statistical analyses were conducted of six mammal genera.
Key results: Peanut butter with oats was found to be a significantly better attractant than empty bait holders for Antechinus, Isoodon, Perameles and Rattus, but not for Potorous or Pseudocheirus. Truffle oil and mealworms were also significantly better attractants than the control for Rattus but not the other five genera. When Antechinus, Isoodon, Potorous or Rattus were detected at a bait station there was a significant likelihood they had been detected there during the previous 24 h. This was not the case for Perameles or Pseudocheirus. A prior visit by Rattus to a station had no significant influence on the detection probabilities of Antechinus, Isoodon, Perameles, Potorous and Pseudocheirus during the subsequent 24 h. Detection probabilities for Isoodon and Rattus declined significantly during the fortnight-long deployments but trends for the other genera were not significant.
Conclusions: Peanut butter with oats is an excellent general purpose bait for detecting small to medium-sized mammals. However, scope exists for using other baits to target species. For example, truffle oil baits may reduce by-catch of non-target Rattus in labour intensive cage trapping of bandicoots. Regardless of bait type, longer deployments are necessary to detect Perameles, Potorous or Pseudocheirus than Antechinus, Isoodon or Rattus.
Implications: Targeted detection of predominantly ground-dwelling mammals may be improved by better understanding the attraction of species to baits and required bait deployment times.
Additional keywords: bait attractants, bandicoots, infrared digital cameras, potoroos.
References
Bachmann, P., Bramwell, R. N., Fraser, S. J., Gilmore, D. A., Johnston, D. H., Lawson, K. F., MacInnes, C. D., Matejka, F. O., Miles, H. E., Pedde, M. A., and Voigt, D. R. (1990). Wild carnivore acceptance of baits for delivery of liquid rabies vaccine. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 26, 486–501.| 1:STN:280:DyaK3M%2Fms1ektw%3D%3D&md5=c94bd59be85271fddcc29670ca2a8c9bCAS | 2250325PubMed |
Bennett, A. F., and Baxter, B. J. (1989). Diet of the long-nosed potoroo, Potorous tridactylus (Marsupialia : Potoroidae), in south-western Victoria. Wildlife Research 16, 263–271.
| Diet of the long-nosed potoroo, Potorous tridactylus (Marsupialia : Potoroidae), in south-western Victoria.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Campbell, T. A., and Long, D. B. (2008). Mammalian visitation to candidate feral swine attractants. The Journal of Wildlife Management 72, 305–309.
| Mammalian visitation to candidate feral swine attractants.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Catling, P. C., Burt, R. J., and Kooyman, R. (1997). A comparison of techniques used in a survey of ground-dwelling mammals in forests in north-eastern New South Wales. Wildlife Research 24, 417–432.
| A comparison of techniques used in a survey of ground-dwelling mammals in forests in north-eastern New South Wales.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Claridge, A. W., and Barry, S. C. (2000). Factors influencing the distribution of medium-sized ground-dwelling mammals in southeastern mainland Australia. Austral Ecology 25, 676–688.
| Factors influencing the distribution of medium-sized ground-dwelling mammals in southeastern mainland Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Claridge, A. W., and May, T. W. (1994). Mycophagy among Australian mammals. Australian Journal of Ecology 19, 251–275.
| Mycophagy among Australian mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Claridge, A. W., Tanton, M. T., and Cunningham, R. B. (1993). Hypogeal fungi in the diet of the long-nosed potoroo (Potorous tridactylus) in mixed-species and regrowth eucalypt forest stands in south-eastern Australia. Wildlife Research 20, 321–337.
| Hypogeal fungi in the diet of the long-nosed potoroo (Potorous tridactylus) in mixed-species and regrowth eucalypt forest stands in south-eastern Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Claridge, A. W., Cork, S. J., and Trappe, J. M. (2000). Diversity and habitat relationships of hypogeous fungi. I. Study design, sampling techniques and general survey results. Diversity and Conservation 9, 151–173.
| Diversity and habitat relationships of hypogeous fungi. I. Study design, sampling techniques and general survey results.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Claridge, A. W., Mifsud, G., Dawson, J., and Saxon, M. J. (2004). Use of infrared digital cameras to investigate the behaviour of cryptic species. Wildlife Research 31, 645–650.
| Use of infrared digital cameras to investigate the behaviour of cryptic species.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Claridge, A. W., Seebeck, J. H., and Rose, R. W. (2007). ‘Bettongs, Potoroos and the Musky Rat-Kangaroo.’ (CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne.)
Claridge, A. W., Paull, D. J., and Barry, S. C. (2010). Detection of medium-sized ground-dwelling mammals using infrared digital cameras: an alternative way forward? Australian Mammalogy 32, 165–171.
| Detection of medium-sized ground-dwelling mammals using infrared digital cameras: an alternative way forward?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cunningham, R. B., Lindenmayer, D. B., MacGregor, C., Barry, S., and Welsh, A. (2005). Effects of trap position, trap history, microhabitat and season on capture probabilities of small mammals in a wet eucalypt forest. Wildlife Research 32, 657–671.
| Effects of trap position, trap history, microhabitat and season on capture probabilities of small mammals in a wet eucalypt forest.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
De Bondi, N., White, J. G., Stevens, M., and Cooke, R. (2010). A comparison of the effectiveness of camera trapping and live trapping for sampling small-mammal communities. Wildlife Research 37, 456–465.
| A comparison of the effectiveness of camera trapping and live trapping for sampling small-mammal communities.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Dexter, N., and Murray, A. (2009). The impact of fox control on the relative abundance of forest mammals in East Gippsland, Victoria. Wildlife Research 36, 252–261.
Fleming, P. J. S., and Korn, T. J. (1989). Predation of livestock by wild dogs in eastern Australia. Australian Rangelands Journal 11, 61–66.
| Predation of livestock by wild dogs in eastern Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Garden, J. G., McAlpine, C. A., Possingham, H. P., and Jones, D. N. (2007a). Using multiple survey methods to detect terrestrial reptiles and mammals: what are the most successful and cost-efficient combinations? Wildlife Research 34, 218–227.
| Using multiple survey methods to detect terrestrial reptiles and mammals: what are the most successful and cost-efficient combinations?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Garden, J. G., McAlpine, C. A., Possingham, H. P., and Jones, D. N. (2007b). Habitat structure is more important than vegetation composition for local-level management of native terrestrial reptile and small mammal species living in urban remnants: a case study from Brisbane, Australia. Austral Ecology 32, 669–685.
| Habitat structure is more important than vegetation composition for local-level management of native terrestrial reptile and small mammal species living in urban remnants: a case study from Brisbane, Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Glen, A. S., and Dickman, C. R. (2005). Complex interactions among mammalian carnivores in Australia, and their implications for management. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 80, 387–401.
| Complex interactions among mammalian carnivores in Australia, and their implications for management.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 16094805PubMed |
Gompper, M. E., Kays, R. W., Ray, J. C., Lapoint, S. D., Bogan, D. A., and Cryan, J. R. (2006). A comparison of non-invasive techniques to survey carnivore communities in northeastern North America. Wildlife Society Bulletin 34, 1142–1151.
| A comparison of non-invasive techniques to survey carnivore communities in northeastern North America.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Jacob, J., Ylonen, H., Perry, J. A., and Singleton, G. R. (2002). Who eats first? Uptake of pellet bait by target and non-target species. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation 49, 121–124.
| Who eats first? Uptake of pellet bait by target and non-target species.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Koerth, B. H., and Kroll, J. C. (2000). Bait type and timing for deer counts using cameras triggered by infrared monitors. Wildlife Society Bulletin 28, 630–635.
Lindenmayer, D. B., Incoll, R. D., Cunningham, R. B., Pope, M. L., Donnelly, C. F., MacGregor, C. I., Tribolet, C., and Triggs, B. E. (1999). Comparison of hairtube types for the detection of mammals. Wildlife Research 26, 745–753.
| Comparison of hairtube types for the detection of mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Menkhorst, P., and Knight, F. (2004). ‘A Field Guide to the Mammals of Australia.’ (Oxford University Press: Melbourne.)
Millington, S., Leach, D. N., Wyllie, S. G., and Claridge, A. W. (1998). Aroma profile of the Australian truffle-like fungus Mesophelia glauca. American Chemical Society (ACS) Symposium Series 705, 331–342.
| 1:CAS:528:DyaK1cXlsFOnsLk%3D&md5=887edd065dae86ccb6105d38d149b32bCAS |
Mills, D. J., Harris, R., Claridge, A. W., and Barry, S. C. (2002). Efficacy of hair-sampling techniques for the detection of critical-weight-range terrestrial mammals. I. A comparison between hair-tubes, hair-funnels and indirect signs. Wildlife Research 29, 379–387.
| Efficacy of hair-sampling techniques for the detection of critical-weight-range terrestrial mammals. I. A comparison between hair-tubes, hair-funnels and indirect signs.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Morgan, D. R. (1982). Field acceptance of non-toxic and toxic baits by populations of the brushtail possum (Trichosurus vulpecula Kerr). New Zealand Journal of Ecology 5, 36–43.
Nicolas, V., and Colyn, M. (2006). Relative efficacy of three types of small mammal traps in an African rainforest. Belgian Journal of Zoology 136, 107–111.
Patric, E. F. (1970). Bait preference of small mammals. Journal of Mammalogy 51, 179–182.
| Bait preference of small mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Paull, D. J. (1995). The distribution of the southern brown bandicoot Isoodon obesulus obesulus in South Australia. Wildlife Research 22, 585–600.
| The distribution of the southern brown bandicoot Isoodon obesulus obesulus in South Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ripple, W. J., and Beschta, R. L. (2007). Restoring Yellowstone’s aspen with wolves. Biological Conservation 138, 514–519.
| Restoring Yellowstone’s aspen with wolves.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Roughton, R. D. (1982). A synthetic alternative to fermented egg as a canid attractant. The Journal of Wildlife Management 46, 230–234.
| A synthetic alternative to fermented egg as a canid attractant.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DyaL38XkvVOjsL4%3D&md5=a2d885ff49aff31a324b57786c8f21deCAS |
Saunders, G., and Harris, S. (2000). Evaluation of attractants and bait preferences of captive red foxes (Vulpes vulpes). Wildlife Research 27, 237–243.
| Evaluation of attractants and bait preferences of captive red foxes (Vulpes vulpes).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Scotts, D. J., and Craig, S. A. (1988). Improved hair-sampling tube for the detection of rare mammals. Australian Wildlife Research 15, 469–472.
| Improved hair-sampling tube for the detection of rare mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Umetsu, F., Naxara, L., and Pardini, R. (2006). Evaluating the efficacy of pitfall traps for sampling small mammals in the Neoptropics. Journal of Mammalogy 87, 757–765.
| Evaluating the efficacy of pitfall traps for sampling small mammals in the Neoptropics.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Van Polanen Petel, A. M., Marks, C. A., and Morgan, D. G. (2001). Bait palatability influences the caching behaviour of the red fox (Vulpes vulpes). Wildlife Research 28, 395–401.
| Bait palatability influences the caching behaviour of the red fox (Vulpes vulpes).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Venables, W. N., and Ripley, B. D. (2002). ‘Modern Applied Statistics with S.’ (Springer: New York, NY.)
Yasuda, M. (2004). Monitoring diversity and abundance of mammals with camera traps: a case study on Mount Tsukuba, central Japan. Mammal Study 29, 37–46.
| Monitoring diversity and abundance of mammals with camera traps: a case study on Mount Tsukuba, central Japan.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
