Melomys Burtoni) (Rodentia: Muridae) in Far North Queensland Sugarcane Crops
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The biology of the grassland Melomys (Melomys burtoni) (Rodentia: Muridae) in far north Queensland sugarcane crops Brendan C Dyer (B.App.Sci) 2007 A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Applied Science (SC80) at the Queensland University of Technology ABSTRACT Melomys burtoni and M. cervinipes naturally occur in habitats adjacent to sugarcane crops in north Queensland, have been trapped within sugarcane crops, and are potentially damaging to sugarcane crops. However, little is known about their biology and pest status in sugarcane crops and this information is needed by the industry for the development of a sustainable pest management programme for these rodents. Field studies were undertaken between Tully and Innisfail in far north Queensland, to determine the extent to which either or both Melomys species inhabit sugarcane crops and to examine the biology of Melomys within the crop. Field diagnostic approaches were developed which, when blind tested using molecular techniques, proved 100% accurate in-field discrimination of the two Melomys species. Based on field trapping, M. cervinipes proved to be rare in sugarcane and should not be regarded as a pest by the industry. In contrast, M. burtoni were recorded in significant numbers within cane, were found to feed on cane and, in crop stage 5 (canopy closure to harvest) were responsible for damage to ~5% of stalks. Melomys burtoni were found to colonise sugarcane at the later stages of crop development than the other major sugarcane rodent, Rattus sordidus. The highest proportion of M. burtoni reproduction and juvenile recruitment also occurs in the later stages of crop development. The late colonisation of the crop by M. burtoni means that the Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategy already in place for R. sordidus is not directly transferable to M. burtoni. If an effective IPM strategy is to be developed, further research is required to examine the population i dynamics and dispersal of M. burtoni populations between the crop and the adjacent habitats within the sugarcane production system of far north Queensland. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT . i TABLE OF CONTENTS . iii LIST OF FIGURES . v LIST OF TABLES . vii SOURCES STATEMENT . ix ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . x Chapter 1 Introduction . 1 1.1 The Australian sugarcane industry . 1 1.2 Rodent pests as limiters of production . 2 1.3 Rodents as pests of Queensland sugarcane (Saccharum hybrid) . 4 1.4 Rodent pest species in Queensland sugarcane . 6 1.5 Investigations of rodent pest species in Queensland sugarcane . 8 1.6 Current management of rodents in Queensland Sugarcane . 11 1.7 The Melomys species issue . 14 1.8 Conclusion . 16 1.9 Objectives . 17 Chapter 2 Materials and Methodology . 20 1.1 Study sites . 20 1.2 Surveys and experimental work . 20 1.3 (a) Capture and release study . 24 1.4 (b) Snap trapping study . 25 1.5 (c) Weed biomass study . 26 1.6 (d) Damage stalks study . 27 1.7 Crop stages . 30 Chapter 3 Diagnostics . 31 1.1 Introduction . 31 1.2 Materials and methodology . 35 1.2.1 Morphological characteristics . 35 1.2.2 DNA examination . 36 1.3 Results . 37 1.3.1 Morphological characteristics . 37 iii 1.3.2 DNA examination . 39 1.4 Discussion . 40 Chapter 4 Species in Sugarcane . 42 1.1 Introduction . 42 1.2 Methodology . 43 1.3 Results . 44 1.3.1 Total captures . 44 1.3.2 Captures within crop stage . 45 1.3.3 Other captures . 45 1.4 Discussion . 46 Chapter 5 Diet and Damage . 49 1.1 Introduction . 49 1.2 Methodology . 52 1.3 Results . 53 1.3.1 Number of individuals sampled . 53 1.3.2 Diet . 53 1.3.3 Sugarcane damage . 56 1.3.4 Weed levels, sugarcane damage and rodent numbers . 57 1.4 Discussion . 59 Chapter 6 Population Dynamics . 62 1.1 Introduction . 62 1.2 Methodology . 65 1.3 Results . 66 1.3.1 Overall abundance . 66 1.3.2 Breeding . 67 1.3.3 Average litter size . 67 1.3.4 Sex ratio . 68 1.3.5 Juvenile recruitment . 68 1.4 Discussion . 69 Chapter 7 Discussion . 73 7.1 Thesis summary . 73 7.2 Management implications . 75 REFERENCES . 82 iv LIST OF FIGURES Chapter 1 Figure 1.1: A spherical Melomys burtoni nest of dry cane leaves, built in the middle of a sugarcane stool approximately one meter off the ground. 9 Chapter 2 Figure 2.1: Typical sugarcane site adjacent grassland, separated by headland. 22 Figure 2.2: Typical sugarcane site adjacent closed forest, separated by headland. 22 Figure 2.3: Melomys burtoni climbing through the canopy of a fully developed sugarcane crop. 28 Figure 2.4: Damage caused by Melomys burtoni, at a greater than 50cm on sugarcane stalk. 29 Figure 2.5: Damage on sugarcane caused by Rattus sordidus at ground level. 29 Chapter 3 Figure 3.1: Melomys burtoni. 32 Figure 3.2: Melomys cervinipes. 33 Figure 3.3: Mean (+SE) weight of the different age classes of Melomys burtoni and Melomys cervinipes. 37 Figure 3.4: Mean (+SE) tail length of the different age classes of Melomys burtoni and Melomys cervinipes. 37 Figure 3.5: Neighbour-Joining Tree of 16S rRNA sequence data showing two divergent clades corresponding to the field identified Melomys burtoni and Melomys cervinipes. 39 Chapter 4 Figure 4.1: Mean capture rates of Melomys burtoni, Melomys cervinipes and Rattus sordidus. 46 v Chapter 5 Figure 5.1: Mean ± SE of stomach content type in Melomys burtoni in crop stage 4. 55 Figure 5.2: Mean ± SE of stomach content type in Melomys burtoni in crop stage 5. 55 Figure 5.3: Relationship between quantity of in-crop weed biomass and level of Melomys burtoni sugarcane damage. 57 Figure 5.4: Relationship between the quantity of in-crop weed biomass available and Melomys burtoni population numbers. 58 Figure 5.5: Relationship between sugarcane damage levels attributed to Melomys burtoni and M. burtoni population size. 58 vi LIST OF TABLES Chapter 1 Table 1.1: Rodents listed by McDougall (1944b) occurring in sugarcane and current nomenclature. 7 Chapter 2 Table 2.1: Information on sampling sites within the sugarcane production area of far north Queensland. 21 Table 2.2: Crop stage (0-5*) at each monthly sampling event for the eight sites sampled in this study. 23 Table 2.3: Scale used for cover (%) and height of non-cane vegetation in field vegetation surveys. 27 Table 2.4: Approximate canopy cover % and age at different crop stages. 30 Chapter 3 Table 3.1: External diagnostic characteristics of adult Melomys burtoni and Melomys cervinipes. 33 Table 3.2: Weight and tail length ranges for Melomys burtoni and Melomys cervinipes of all age classes. 38 Chapter 4 Table 4.1: Proportion of species captured over crop stage. 44 Chapter 5 Table 5.1: Number and proportion of Melomys burtoni dissected and assessed for stomach content in each sugarcane crop stage. 53 Table 5.2: Mean ± SE of proportion of cane and seed in Melomys burtoni according to age class. 56 vii Chapter 6 Table 6.1: Initial captures of Melomys burtoni where individual capture, sex, morphological characteristics and reproductive condition were recorded. 66 Table 6.2: The proportion and number of pregnant and non-pregnant female Melomys burtoni across all sugarcane crop stages. 67 Table 6.3: Number of pregnant Melomys burtoni and mean (±SE) litter size across all sugarcane crop stages. 68 Table 6.4: Proportion and number of mature male and female Melomys burtoni across all sugarcane crop stages. 68 Table 6.5: Proportion and number of juvenile and mature Melomys burtoni across all sugarcane crop stages. 69 viii STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY The work presented in this thesis has not been previously submitted for a degree, either in whole or part, at any other higher education institution. To the best of my knowledge and belief, this thesis contains no material published or written by another person except where due reference is made. All photographs and figures within this thesis are by the author except where acknowledged as otherwise. Signed: Date: ix ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank the Sugar Research and Development Corporation (SRDC) for realising the potential of this project and providing the funding which made this study possible. Thankyou also to BSES Limited, my employer, for the support and encouragement received throughout the project, in particular, access to staff and field resources. Thanks to Peter Allsopp (BSES) for suggestions and editorial comment, and Steve Garrad (ex BSES Extension Officer) for help with grower introductions and site selection in the Silkwood district. A special thankyou goes to Deborah Martin (BSES Librarian) for her generous assistance in sourcing referenced material. I especially wish to thank the cane-growers and their families that agreed to be involved in this project and for granting access to their properties. In agreeing to the condition of not baiting their cane crops, a true assessment of the rodent population within sugarcane crops was able to be defined. The ever-willing and proficient field assistance, dedication, mateship and sense of humour of Andrew Brodie and Andrew Schalks under all and sometimes adverse field conditions are most gratefully acknowledged. My QUT supervisors, Dr Anthony (Tony) Clarke and Dr Susan Fuller, offered their expertise, support and ideas throughout the duration of this project. In particular, I thank them for their patience. A thankyou also goes to Litticia Bryant for laboratory support with the DNA extraction, PCR amplification and sequencing of tissue samples. x Finally, and most importantly, a very special thankyou is extended to the late Dr John C Wilson for his expertise, encouragement, fairness and friendship received throughout the development of this study.