Associations of Behaviour and Physiology on Body Mass Gain in the Woylie (Bettongia Penicillata Ogilbyi) Post- Translocation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Does my bum look big in this exclosure? Associations of behaviour and physiology on body mass gain in the woylie (Bettongia penicillata ogilbyi) post- translocation. by Kimberley Dale Page Bachelor of Science in Conservation and Wildlife Biology (Honours) A thesis submitted to Murdoch University to fulfil the requirements for the degree of Conservation and Wildlife Biology Perth, Western Australia, 2018 1 Author’s Declaration I declare that this thesis is my own account of my research and contains as its main content work which has not previously been submitted for a degree at any tertiary education institution. Kimberley Dale Page Abstract An individual’s temperament can affect its fitness and survival by influencing behaviours associated with predator avoidance, interactions with conspecifics, refuge selection and foraging. Furthermore, temperament can determine an individual’s response to novel stimuli and environmental challenges, such as those experienced through translocation. Increasing our understanding of the effect of temperament on fitness post-translocation is thus necessary for improving translocation outcomes. This study focused on the woylie (Bettongia penicillata ogilbyi) and, specifically, investigated the influence of individuals’ temperament – determined through measures of behaviour and physiology – on change in body mass post-translocation. Forty woylies were translocated from two predator-free exclosures to a larger exclosure at Mt Gibson Wildlife Sanctuary, near Wubin, Western Australia. Behavioural and physiological measures were recorded during trapping, processing, holding and release, and again ~5 months post-release. In the absence of predation, 100% survivorship of translocated individuals, and extremely high fecundity, body mass was used as a proxy for survival rate. On initial capture (‘pre- translocation’), males had significantly higher faecal corticosterone levels than did females; however, at post-release recapture (‘post-translocation’), there was no significant difference. There was no significant difference in body mass between males and females pre-translocation; however, post- translocation, females had gained significantly more body mass than had males. Combined analyses of behavioural and physiological variables showed that the strongest predictors of body mass gain were sex, heart rate lability and a measure of escape behaviour when released (a convoluted escape path). 2 Most behavioural measures were not consistent or repeatable and hence, individual temperament could not be determined. However, it is also possible that the translocation was not sufficiently challenging for individuals to be able to test differences in temperament. Future research could involve similar trials on animals that are released into unfenced settings. More robust behavioural measures that can be easily incorporated into the translocation process without increasing stress or affecting welfare of individuals should also be trialled. On average, all woylies recaptured had increased in body mass, suggesting that, in the absence of predation, the selected candidates were able to cope with the stress of translocation, and also possessed the behavioural plasticity to successfully find resources and adapt to a novel environment. Acknowledgements I would like to begin by thanking my academic supervisors, Associate Professor Trish Fleming, Dr Peter Adams, and Dr Bill Bateman. Thank you for your guidance over the last two years, I appreciate everything you have taught me. Bill, for your kind words of encouragement – just a few go a long way – so thank you. Trish, I thank you for your patience with me at times when I struggled to understand, particularly whilst working through my data analyses. You presented me with ideas for my study that allowed me to create an honours project that was everything that I had hoped for; interesting, diverse, rewarding, and challenging. Peter, thank you for always having a smile on your face and acknowledging your weaknesses, it allowed me to see that we’re all students, we never stop learning and we’re never going to know it all, but that’s ok. All of you challenged me in different ways which made me strive to do my best. To my external academic supervisor, Dr Laura Ruykys, your passion and dedication to your work is inspiring. It has been a privilege to have worked alongside you. You have taught me so much academically and operationally. Whenever I needed questions answered, guidance or clarity I could always count on you. Completing this honours project has been the most challenging thing I have ever done and knowing I had your support whenever I needed it made it that bit easier. Accompanying our 3 precious little woylies on their flight to Mt Gibson is something I will never forget, so thank you for that opportunity. Associate Professor David Miller – when you’re faced with the daunting task of processing 64 faecal samples using a really expensive ELISA kit and you’ve only got one shot to get it right, you’re the guy everyone wants in their corner. Thank you for spending the time to break it all down into basic steps so I didn’t run away screaming, and giving up your time to help me get my second plate finished. You’re a great teacher and I was so grateful to have had your help. To the AWC staff; Nicola, Bryony, Chantelle, Mike, and Noel, I can’t thank you enough for your ideas, words of encouragement and hard work assisting me to collect my data. I am lucky to have had guidance from such a knowledgeable and dedicated group of people. Thank you for the 4 am quizzes, jokes, laughs and engaging conversation. To the fabulous AWC interns; Bradley, Kaarissa, Edward, Carlie, and Georgia. The legends who assisted me with everything from recording data, collecting samples, finding me extra phone chargers and driving me and the woylies to the airport each day. Couldn’t have done it without you. Thank you! Finally, thank you to all the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions staff; Julia Wayne, Ian Wilson, Tracey Robbins, Peter Baymess, Luke Millar, Colin Ward, Michelle Ivory, Brad Barton, and Maddison Read. Julia, thank you for your guidance during the initial stages of planning for the translocation at Perup. I am thankful to have worked with you and your staff and have admiration for your ability to coordinate simultaneous translocations with a large team of people and on a tight schedule. Everyone’s efforts in collecting data at 4 am in freezing conditions every morning was so much appreciated. Your assistance was invaluable; thank you. 4 Table of contents Author’s Declaration ............................................................................................................................. 2 Abstract .................................................................................................................................................. 2 Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................ 3 Table of contents .................................................................................................................................... 5 List of Figures ........................................................................................................................................ 6 List of Tables .......................................................................................................................................... 7 Chapter 1 – General Introduction ....................................................................................................... 8 1.1 Individual temperament traits in animals and their effects on fitness ........................................... 8 1.2 Assessing temperament and physiology in the context of translocation ..................................... 10 1.2.1 Methodological approaches and measures for assessing temperament and physiology .. 11 1.2.2 Radio-collaring ................................................................................................................. 14 1.2.3 Concluding remarks.......................................................................................................... 15 1.3 Context of the project .................................................................................................................. 15 Chapter 2 – General Methods ............................................................................................................ 17 2.1 Study species - The woylie .......................................................................................................... 17 2.1.1 Biology of the woylie ....................................................................................................... 17 2.1.2 Distribution, conservation status and causes of decline ................................................... 18 2.2 Study sites ................................................................................................................................... 20 2.2.1 Source population 1 – Karakamia Sanctuary ................................................................... 20 2.2.2 Source population 2 – Perup Sanctuary ............................................................................ 21 2.2.3 Destination – Mt Gibson Wildlife Sanctuary ................................................................... 21 2.3 Translocations ............................................................................................................................