sign in sign up
<<
Home , Central netted dragon, Ctenophorus, Ctenophorus isolepis, Ctenophorus pictus, Ctenotus ariadnae, Ctenotus regius

Marqualpie Land System Biological Survey

REPTILES D. Armstrong1

Summary of Records Available Prior to 2008 As the first two of these surveys occurred during the Prior to the major systematic survey effort of the development stages of the Biological Survey of SA Marqualpie Land System carried out by a combined program the site sampling and trapping effort which Department of Environment and Natural Resources was later adopted as a standard was not then in place. (DENR) and Scientific Expedition Group (SEG) team Records were collected using either differing trap in 2008 records were available for the area from numbers, trap nights or over multiple visits to the sites. the DENR Biological Databases of South As such, the results from these sites cannot be directly (BDBSA). These records had been collected during compared with the 2008 sites. Although the three three earlier surveys of sections of the north-eastern Stony Survey sites were sampled using the quarter of SA, all of which had some sample sites current DENR standard sampling methods (Owens within the boundaries of the Marqualpie Land System 2000), they are included in this separate discussion of (MLS). all earlier records due to their minimal number of both sites and records and different timing to the majority These surveys were:- sampling effort of 2008. • BS3 – Cooper Creek Environmental Association Survey (1983): 8 sites. Due to the extreme An additional 24 records were provided from the SA variability in sampling effort this is simply the Museum specimen collection, and one from the DENR number of locations for which reptile records were general Opportunistic Sightings records. These available. combined sources produced a total of 512 reptile • BS41 – Della and Marqualpie Land Systems’ records providing evidence of the presence of 38 Fauna Monitoring Program (1989-92): 10 sites. reptile within the survey area (Table 36). • BS69 – Stony Deserts Survey (1994-97): 3 sites. The location of all sites sampled on these and the 2008 Marqualpie Land System Biological Survey are shown in Figure 103.

Table 36. Sources of reptile records for the Marqualpie Land System.

Cooper Della and Stony 2008 2008 General SA Source Creek Marqualpie Deserts Survey Survey Total OP Museum (Sites) (Sites) (Sites) (OP) (Sites) Records 29* 436 22 1 24 49 485 1,046 Species 18 26 7 1 12 11 35 42 Note: * = includes one opportunistic sighting record.

Marqualpie Land System Biological Survey Between 19th and 27th September 2008 32 sites were sampled using the standard survey effort recommended by the Biological Survey of (Owens 2000). Reptile records were obtained at all 32 sites. The 485 records at these sites represent 35 of the total of 42 reptile species known for the survey area. A list of all reptile species recorded at sites on this survey is provided in Appendix 15.

Another 49 records were collected opportunistically during the survey, but the 11 species they represented Figure 102. Eastern (Ctenotus were also caught at one or more of the survey sites. regius) was recorded at more sites on this survey All 17 Eremiascincus fasciolatus (Narrow-banded than any other reptile species (Photo: A. Robinson).

1 Science Resource Centre, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, GPO Box 1047, Adelaide SA 5001.

81 Marqualpie Land System Biological Survey

Figure 103. Location of survey sites where have been sampled in the Marqualpie Land System.

Sandswimmer) recorded opportunistically were found The six species recorded at more than 10 sites in trenches dug to monitor Marsupial Mole activity, as accounted for almost half (49.7%) of all reptile records were three other individual species records. Therefore at survey sites (Table 37). These were: four - 20 of 49 (41%) opportunistic records were the result of Ctenotus regius (Eastern Desert Ctenotus), these trenches. Eremiascincus fasciolatus (Narrow-banded Sandswimmer), Ctenotus leae (Centralian Coppertail) The average number of site records per reptile species and Ctenotus taeniatus (Eyrean Ctenotus); one dragon was 13.9. By far the most frequently recorded species - nuchalis (); and was Ctenotus regius (Eastern Desert Ctenotus), which one - Nephrurus levis (Smooth Knob-tailed accounted for 67 (or 13.8%) of all 485 site records and Gecko). was present at 25 (or 78%) of the 32 sites (Table 37).

Table 37. Most frequently recorded reptile species at survey sites during the 2008 Survey.

Species Name Common Name No. of Sites No. of Records Ctenotus regius Eastern Desert Ctenotus 25 78% 67 13.8% Ctenophorus nuchalis Central Netted Dragon 17 53% 39 8.0% Eremiascincus fasciolatus Narrow-banded Sandswimmer 12 38% 63 13.0% Ctenotus leae Centralian Coppertail 11 34% 30 6.2% Ctenotus taeniatus Eyrean Ctenotus 11 34% 27 5.6% Nephrurus levis Smooth Knob-tailed Gecko 11 34% 15 3.1% Total 241 49.7%

82 Marqualpie Land System Biological Survey At the other end of the scale there were six species were BLO00101 in Eucalyptus coolabah (Coolibah) with only one or two records. These least frequently Low Woodland in a flood-out area on clay soil, recorded species were: two skinks - Ctenotus ariadnae KEN00601 in Eucalyptus coolabah (Coolibah) Low (Pin-striped Ctenotus) and venustus Open Woodland swamp on loamy clay soil and (Saltbush ); two legless - KES00101 in holocarpa (Pop Saltbush) Pygopus nigriceps (Black-headed Scaly-foot) and Herbland on a floodplain on clay loam soil. Lialis burtonis (Burton’s Legless Lizard); one dragon - tetraporophora (Eyrean Earless Dragon); and one goanna - Varanus eremius (Desert Pygmy Goanna).

Figure 105. The Narrow-banded Sandswimmer (Eremiascincus fasciolatus) was one of the most frequently recorded reptile species on the 2008 survey, being found at most dune sites (Photo: A. Figure 104. The Saltbush Slender Bluetongue Robinson). (Cyclodomorphus venustus) was recorded at two sites in Coolibah Low Woodlands in floodouts near The average number of reptile records per site was the Cordillo Downs boundary (Photo: A. 15.2. Nine of the 32 sites had 20 or more reptile Robinson). records, whilst the highest was 38 records representing 11 species at MON00701 in Crotalaria eremaea ssp. The average number of reptile species recorded per eremaea (Downy Loose-flowered Rattle-pod), site was 7.1. There were 10 or more species recorded Zygochloa paradoxa (Sandhill Canegrass) Open at seven of the 32 sites (Figure 106). The highest Shrubland on a consolidated sand dune. However, 18 number of species recorded at a site was 15 at of these records were of two species, 11 KEN00801. This was in Atalaya hemiglauca Eremiascincus fasciolatus (Narrow-banded (Whitewood) Very Low Open Woodland on a low Sandswimmer) and seven Ctenotus leae (Centralian sand dune. The lowest number of species at a site was Coppertail). The lowest number of records at a site three at three run-on sites with heavy soils. These was three individual records of three separate species at KEN00601, described above.

6 5

4 3 2

Number ofSites 1 0 123456789101112131415 Number of Species

Figure 106. Reptile species diversity at sites for the 2008 survey.

83 Marqualpie Land System Biological Survey Species Summary Significance of pre 2008 Data The combination of all available reptile data provides a It is unusual for an area where a DENR systematic total of 1,046 records representing 42 species within survey is carried out to have so much pre-existing data, the Marqualpie Land System (Appendix 16). Amongst particularly in isolated arid areas. Of the total these species are members of all seven of the currently available records for the Marqualpie Land System recognised Australian lizard families and two of the survey area 512 of 1,046 (48.9%) come from sources six Australian families. other than the large scale DENR/SEG survey of 2008. This is largely the result of work carried out by a small The lizard families are: number of biologist contractors working for Santos. • (Dragons) six species Most of this earlier data was provided by their survey • Carphodactylidae (Knob-tailed ) one work repeated annually over four years from 1989-92, species which accounted for 436 of 512 (85%) pre-2008 • (Ground Geckos) seven species records. Although sampling effort at sites during this • Gekkonidae (Climbing Geckos) two species and other early surveys in the Marqualpie Land • (Legless Lizards) three species System differs from current standards, preventing its • Scincidae (Skinks) 17 species use in a comparable analysis with the 2008 survey, the quantity and variations in the data make it highly • Varanidae (Goannas) two species. valuable in presenting a more complete picture of the

biodiversity of the area. The snake families are:

• (Elapid ) - generally described as front-fanged venomous land snakes - three species Discussion of Combined Records When all records are combined, the average number of • Typhlopidae (Blind Snakes) one species. records per species is 24.9. The most frequently

recorded species is still Ctenotus regius (Eastern Note: It is probable that the number of species Desert Ctenotus), probably because it is not a recorded for the survey area will change pending a specialist, being found in a wide variety of vegetation current taxonomic review of a group of similar larger associations and on most soil types. Of the 42 reptile Ctenotus species (M. Hutchinson, pers comm, 2010). species, the five most frequently recorded (Table 38) These include two species recorded for the MLS, account for 41.2% of all records. However, there are Ctenotus brachyonyx (Brown Ctenotus) and Ctenotus still 13 species with five or fewer records from the saxatilis (Centralian Striped Skink). survey area. Appendix 16 provides a complete list of

all reptile species and their sources recorded in the Marqualpie Land System.

Table 38. The five most frequently recorded species when all records combined, and their proportion of the total records.

Species Name Common Name Total Records % of Total Records Ctenotus regius Eastern Desert Ctenotus 97 9.2% Military Dragon 94 9.0% Eremiascincus fasciolatus Narrow-banded Sandswimmer 94 9.0% conspicillatus Fat-tailed Gecko 75 7.1% labialis Eastern Two-toed Slider 71 6.8% Total 431 41.0%

This survey provided 534 records (485 at survey sites and 49 opportunistic sightings) representing 35 species, four of which had not previously been recorded. Amongst the 512 earlier records (representing 38 species), there were also seven species, which were not found during the 2008 survey (Table 39).

Figure 107. Military Dragon (Ctenophorus isolepis) is one of the most frequently recorded reptile species in the Marqualpie Land System, and is often found in association with Spinifex ( sp.) (Photo: P. Canty).

84 Marqualpie Land System Biological Survey Table 39. Reptile species previously recorded in the area but not recorded on this survey.

Species Name Common Name Records Source Ctenotus strauchii Short-legged Ctenotus 2 Stony Deserts Survey butleri Spinifex Snake-lizard 5 Della & Marqualpie Survey Eremiascincus richardsonii Broad-banded Sandswimmer 4 Cooper Creek EA Survey Cooper Creek EA and Pseudonaja mengdeni Gwardar 2 Della & Marqualpie Surveys Strophurus ciliaris Northern Spiny-tailed Gecko 1 Cooper Creek EA Survey Strophurus elderi Jewelled Gecko 1 Della & Marqualpie Survey suta Curl Snake 1 SA Museum Total 16

These seven species account for a meagre total of only 16 records. The following possible explanations for their scarcity within the survey area are suggested.

Suta suta (Curl Snake) favours heavy loams and deeply cracking clays (Wilson and Swan 2003). Ctenotus strauchii (Short-legged Ctenotus) is generally associated with hard stony soils (Wilson and Swan 2003). Both these species favour which are peripheral to the dune system which dominates the Marqualpie Land System, and as such are not expected to be frequently recorded there.

Delma butleri (Spinifex Snake-lizard) and Strophurus Figure 109. The single record of the Northern elderi (Jewelled Gecko) are Triodia spp. (Spinifex) Spiny-tailed Gecko (Strophurus ciliaris) within the dwellers which rarely leave the shelter of this habitat, Marqualpie Land System was recorded at a sand and are generally only recorded by the dismantling of dune site near Mudcarnie Waterhole in 1983 Spinifex hummocks. Even though common in the (Photo: D. Armstrong). area, both species may not be detected if this sampling method is not employed. The only records of these It certainly seems that large elapid snakes are scarce, two species for the area were collected during the as both Pseudonaja mengdeni (Gwardar) records were Della and Marqualpie Land Systems’ Fauna small juveniles caught in pitfall traps. Despite Monitoring Program (1989-92), during which the considerable effort over more than two decades, herpetologist is known to have been particularly producing over 1,000 reptile records, no large elapids enthusiastic in the use of this sampling technique. of any species have been recorded and identified within the Marqualpie Land System.

All four records of Eremiascincus richardsonii (Broad-banded Sandswimmer) were made during the Cooper Creek Environmental Association Survey (Mollenmans et al. 1984). Conversely, there are a total of 94 records of Eremiascincus fasciolatus (Narrow-banded Sandswimmer) spread across several data sources. In fact the only survey which did not record E. fasciolatus was the Stony Deserts Survey (Brandle 1998). This survey sampled only three sites within the Marqualpie Land System, two of which were on hard stony soil, not usually inhabited by E. fasciolatus, which favours sandy areas with Triodia sp. Figure 108. Spinifex Snake-lizard (Delma butleri) (Wilson and Swan 2003). can be a difficult species to detect as it usually shelters in Spinifex (Triodia sp.) hummocks (Photo: In further examining the Eremiascincus spp. records it A. Robinson). was realised that both species were recorded at one site, which is an unlikely occurrence. This site and the Strophurus ciliaris (Northern Spiny-tailed Gecko) may other three at which Eremiascincus spp. were recorded also have avoided further detection by sheltering in in 1983 were all on sand dunes. Although both species Triodia hummocks. It is frequently caught in pitfall inhabit sandy areas with Triodia sp., it is E. fasciolatus traps when present however, so is therefore expected which uses this habitat exclusively, whilst E. to be genuinely scarce within the survey area. richardsonii is also found on heavy and stony soils

85 Marqualpie Land System Biological Survey (Wilson and Swan 2003). An attempt to re-examine the two specimens collected in 1983 to validate their identity was not possible, as they had been passed on live to a university research project and not been retained. It is possible that the four records of E. richardsonii may have been misidentified E. fasciolatus. However, with no way to confirm this, the records must stand, but the presence of E. richardsonii within the Marqualpie Land System is currently considered at least questionable.

New Species Records from the 2008 Survey Four reptile species previously not encountered within Figure 110. The Desert Skink (Liopholis inornata) the Marqualpie Land System were first recorded during the 2008 survey (Table 40). It is likely that was recorded for the first time in the Marqualpie Land System at four sites in 2008 (Photo: A. increased effort over a greater number of sites Robinson). providing an increased possibility of encountering these species. This certainly would be the case with especially in view of it being recorded at eight of 32 Cyclodomorphus venustus (Saltbush Slender (25%) relatively evenly distributed sites during this Bluetongue), a species which was only scientifically survey. Initially it was thought that lack of sites in its described in 1995, and possibly to some extent even preferred habitat of Zygochloa paradoxa (Sandhill with Morethia boulengeri (Common Snake-eye). Canegrass) on dune crests during earlier surveys may However, that the two remaining species remained have been the cause. However, vegetation data unknown in the area until 2008, despite earlier recorded during these earlier visits excluded this surveys, is unusual. possibility as similar numbers of sites with Sandhill

Canegrass on dune crests were sampled both prior to Liopholis inornata (Desert Skink) has characteristic and during the 2008 survey. multi-entrance burrow systems as conclusive evidence of its presence, even during times when the lizard is Annual activity peak in relation to average not active to be seen or caught in traps. That even temperatures was also considered, but earlier survey these were previously unrecorded probably indicates sampling times were well scattered throughout the the species has a limited occurrence in the dune system year, occurring in January, March, July and and that this survey sampled that limited area. This is September. It is possible that a lack of survey effort in supported by the four sites at which L. inornata was appropriate habitat at the right time of year may have recorded being within a relatively small 12 kilometre had a limited effect, but is unlikely to be a complete section of track at the southern end of the dune system, explanation for such an anomaly. Perhaps a number of to the north of Patchawara Bore. suitable seasons or rainfall events are required for D.

winneckei to reproduce successfully enough to be so The previous absence of records of abundant, and the lead-up period to this survey was winneckei (Canegrass Dragon) is harder to explain, suitable for this to occur.

Table 40. 2008 record and site frequency of reptile species not previously recorded in the Marqualpie Land System.

Species Common Name Records Sites Cyclodomorphus venustus Saltbush Slender Bluetongue 2 2 Canegrass Dragon 13 (2)* 8 Liopholis inornata Desert Skink 4 4 Morethia boulengeri Common Snake-eye 5 2 Total 26 Note: * = numbers in brackets are additional opportunistic sighting records.

Comparison of Pre-2008 and 2008 Records Desert Ctenotus), Diplodactylus conspicillatus (Fat- Evaluating the relative contributions of earlier records tailed Gecko) and Ctenophorus isolepis (Military against those of the 2008 survey by comparing the 10 Dragon) occur in both lists. Even then Eremiascincus most frequently recorded species from each period fasciolatus (Narrow-banded Sand-swimmer) and (Tables 41 and 42) shows considerable variation Ctenophorus isolepis (Military Dragon) have between the two, again illustrating the value of both exchanged positions, from first to tenth and vice-versa. datasets. However, when all records are combined (Table 43) they are still the four most frequently recorded overall. Only four species, Eremiascincus fasciolatus (Narrow- banded Sand-swimmer), Ctenotus regius (Eastern 86 Marqualpie Land System Biological Survey Conversely, the majority of records (67 of 94, or 71%) of another medium to small dragon, Ctenophorus isolepis (Military Dragon), were collected prior to 2008 during the Della and Marqualpie Land Systems’ Fauna Monitoring Program (Table 41). These biases most likely reflect differences in habitat at sample sites between surveys. and C. nuchalis prefer sand plain and swale habitats whilst C. isolepis favours dunes, particularly those vegetated with Triodia spp. (Spinifex).

Figure 111. Despite having not previously been found in the Marqualpie Land System the Canegrass Dragon (Diporiphora winneckei) was recorded at eight sites on the 2008 survey (Photo: A. Robinson).

In examining just the family Agamidae (Dragon Lizards) the variation between the two datasets is marked. One species, Diporiphora winneckei (Canegrass Dragon) with 15 records, was only recorded during this survey. In addition, this survey also obtained the vast majority of records of two other Figure 112. The Central Netted Dragon dragon species, Ctenophorus pictus (Painted Dragon) (Ctenophorus nuchalis) was one of the most widely and Ctenophorus nuchalis (Central Netted Dragon). recorded reptile species on the 2008 survey, being found at 17 sites (Photo: A. Robinson).

Table 41. Ten most frequently recorded reptile species prior to the 2008 survey.

Cooper Della & Stony SA Species Name Common Name Total Creek Marqualpie Deserts Museum Ctenophorus isolepis Military Dragon 67 8 2 77 Lerista labialis Eastern Two-toed Slider 2 55 57 Rhynchoedura ornata Beaked Gecko 54 54 Diplodactylus Fat-tailed Gecko 47 2 49 conspicillatus Ctenotus pantherinus Leopard Skink 43 1 44 Ctenotus regius Eastern Desert Ctenotus 2 24 1 27 Ctenotus schomburgkii Sandplain Ctenotus 1 20 2 23 Ctenotus ariadnae Pin-striped Ctenotus 22 22 Ctenotus brachyonyx Brown Ctenotus 1 10 5 16 Narrow-banded Eremiascincus fasciolatus 6 7 1 14 Sandswimmer Total 12 349 13 9 383

Table 42. Ten most frequently recorded species at sites during the 2008 survey.

Species Name Common Name Site Records OP Records Total Eremiascincus fasciolatus Narrow-banded Sandswimmer 63 17 80 Ctenotus regius Eastern Desert Ctenotus 67 3 70 Ctenophorus nuchalis Central Netted Dragon 39 5 44 Ctenotus leae Centralian Coppertail 30 30 Ctenotus taeniatus Eyrean Ctenotus 27 27 Diplodactylus conspicillatus Fat-tailed Gecko 16 10 26 Ctenophorus pictus Painted Dragon 20 1 21 Gehyra variegata Tree Dtella 19 19 Nephrurus levis Smooth Knob-tailed Gecko 15 3 18 Ctenophorus isolepis Military Dragon 16 1 17 Total 312 40 352

87 Marqualpie Land System Biological Survey Table 43. Ten most frequently recorded species when all records combined.

Species Name Common Name Pre 2008 2008 Survey Total Records Ctenotus regius Eastern Desert Ctenotus 27 70 97 Ctenophorus isolepis Military Dragon 77 17 94 Eremiascincus fasciolatus Narrow-banded Sandswimmer 14 80 94 Diplodactylus conspicillatus Fat-tailed Gecko 49 26 75 Lerista labialis Eastern Two-toed Slider 57 14 71 Rhynchoedura ornata Beaked Gecko 54 7 61 Ctenotus pantherinus Leopard Skink 44 5 49 Ctenophorus nuchalis Central Netted Dragon 2 44 46 Ctenotus taeniatus Eyrean Ctenotus 8 27 35 Ctenotus schomburgkii Sandplain Ctenotus 23 11 34 Total 355 301 656

The above variations between datasets, in terms of have ranges which extend into the temperate Bassian both the number of species recorded and the or tropical Torresian biogeographic regions. This differences in species dominance, represent variability small group of widely distributed species include between surveys in the geographical spread of sites Menetia greyii (Dwarf Skink), which is widespread in sampled and the range of habitats they covered. dry areas in many habitats and absent from only the Considering the limited access tracks into the wettest areas of the northern tropics, the eastern Marqualpie Land System this variation is critical in seaboard and Tasmania. obtaining the best possible overview of the biodiversity of the survey area. Other members of this group are Heteronotia binoei (Bynoe’s Gecko) and Lialis burtonis (Burton’s Legless Significant Species Lizard), which are absent from only Tasmania and the No reptile species with threatened status either within cool wet extreme south-east and south-west of the SA or nationally have been recorded within the continent. Ctenophorus pictus (Painted Dragon) also Marqualpie Land System. Although some species extends into parts of the temperate country in the occur as isolated populations within the survey area or south, usually the mallee and coastal areas. Two are at the eastern extreme of their range they are species of gecko, stenodactylum (Sandplain generally widely distributed throughout suitable Gecko) and Strophurus ciliaris (Northern Spiny-tailed habitat within arid parts of the continent (see below). Gecko), also extend into the north-west and northern sections of the tropical Torresian biogeographic The only species with any particular notoriety is region. Ctenotus ariadnae (Pin-striped Ctenotus), which was first recorded within South Australia in the Marqualpie dunefield in January 1989 during the Della and Marqualpie Land Systems’ Fauna Monitoring Program (Gillen and Reid 1990). It is currently known from three areas of central Australian sandy deserts vegetated with Triodia spp. (Spinifex). All three areas extend into the north of the state, widely separated in the north-west, central north and in the Marqualpie Land System in the north-east.

Of some interest are the two specimen records of Pygopus nigriceps (Black-headed Scaly-foot) within the MLS. They are currently the only South Figure 113. The only two records of Black-headed Australian records of this species on the eastern side of Scaly-foot (Pygopus nigriceps) in the north-east of the Eyrean Barrier, which is often the broad boundary the State are from the Marqualpie Land System between many similar eastern and western vertebrate (Photo: P. Canty). species. Although the distributions of the two species overlap considerably, the remaining records for the Despite these few relatively small (compared to the arid eastern side of the state are of Pygopus schraderi bulk of their distributions) incursions into other (Hooded Scaly-foot). biogeographic regions all are, as stated above,

predominantly Eyrean species. Within the arid region Biogeography there are some species that, within or near to the All 42 reptile species recorded for the Marqualpie Marqualpie Land System, appear to be at the eastern Land System are predominantly Eyrean with the extreme of their range. These are often sand dune majority having their entire distribution within arid desert specialist species. This is a habitat that is and semi-arid parts of the country. Less than a handful 88 Marqualpie Land System Biological Survey fragmented into small pockets in north-east South (Brown Ctenotus) and Varanus eremius (Desert Australia and south-west . These are also Pygmy Goanna). the eastern most extreme occurrences of this landform and isolated from the nearest large area of similar habitat, the Simpson Desert, by stony deserts and the black-soil channel country which drains into Lake Eyre.

Figure 115. Desert Pygmy Goanna (Varanus eremius) in the north-east of South Australia are isolated from other populations of this species (Photo: A. Robinson).

Figure 114. Bynoe’s Gecko (Heteronotia binoei) is a With a couple of exceptions all species extend over widespread species, being found throughout arid large portions of the arid interior. These exceptions and tropical areas of Australia (Photo: A. are Cyclodomorphus venustus (Saltbush Slender Robinson). Bluetongue) and Ctenotus ariadnae (Pin-striped Ctenotus) which, although exclusively Eyrean species, These species are generally isolated from other occur over a relatively small portion of arid Australia. populations, at least within South Australia. They Future surveys in the remote arid interior may locate include Ctenophorus isolepis (Military Dragon), further records of these species, expanding their Diplodactylus conspicillatus (Fat-tailed Gecko), currently known distributions. Lucasium stenodactylum (Sandplain Gecko), Pygopus nigriceps (Black-headed Scaly-foot), Ctenotus All 42 reptile species recorded in the MLS are listed in ariadnae (Pin-striped Ctenotus), Ctenotus brachyonyx Appendix 17 along with their biogeographical affinities.

89 Marqualpie Land System Biological Survey

90 Marqualpie Land System Biological Survey

FROGS D. Armstrong1

Species Present spotlights or around water bores during the day. Prior to the 2008 survey of the Marqualpie Land Thirty three were Litoria rubella (Desert Tree Frog), System (MLS) there were only three frog records for 32 of which were found while spotlighting at one site the area (of two species), which were collected (MON00201) on the northern side of the MLS prior to opportunistically during the Stony Deserts Survey in the storm, and one opportunistic record at Mulga Bore. 1996 (Table 44). These were found whilst spotlighting This species is widely distributed across northern along Candradecka Creek in the south-east of the area. Australia in both arid and tropical biogeographical zones. Within South Australia it extends as far south Even though a further 202 frog records were added by as Brachina Gorge in the central Flinders Ranges the 2008 survey (Table 44), there are still only two (Brandle 2001). The final record was a single N. species confirmed for the MLS. The overwhelming sudelli found in a small pool during the reconnaissance majority of records were of Neobatrachus sudelli trip in July. (Sudell’s Frog) with 168 caught in pitfall traps at standard survey sample sites, over a few days following a brief storm in the southern section of the MLS. This species is near the north-eastern extreme of its range within the MLS.

Figure 117. Most records of the Desert Tree Frog (Litoria rubella) collected on the 2008 survey were from one site (MON00201) in Coolibah (Eucalyptus Figure 116. Sudell’s Frog (Neobatrachus sudelli) is coolabah) Low Woodland in a floodout area of near the north-eastern extreme of its range in the Montkeleary Creek (Photo: A. Robinson). Marqualpie Land System (Photo: P. Canty). Records of the frog species recorded at sites during the The remaining frog records collected during the 2008 2008 Marqualpie Land System Biological Survey are survey were all found by searching, either with provided in Appendix 18.

Table 44. Summary of all Marqualpie Land System frog records and their sources.

Sandy Deserts 2008 Survey 2008 Survey Total Species Name Common Name (OP) (OP) (Sites) Records Litoria rubella Desert Tree Frog 2 1 32 35 Neobatrachus sudelli Sudell’s Frog 1 1 168 170 Number of Records 3 2 200 205

Other Possible Species The north-east of South Australia is the most frog rich boundaries. The most likely possibilities are Litoria region of the state, with 10 of the state’s currently caerulea (Green Tree Frog) and Cyclorana recognised 26 species. However, most are inhabitants platycephala (Water-holding Frog). Both are large, of the channel country and associated heavier soils, widespread species which have been recorded in close rather than the dune system which dominates the MLS. proximity to the MLS. Some may yet be recorded within the MLS

1 Science Resource Centre, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, GPO Box 1047, Adelaide SA 5001.

91 Marqualpie Land System Biological Survey The only South Australian record of Uperolia is possible that it may occur along other nearby capitulata (Small-headed Toadlet) was collected by drainage lines within the south-east section of the torch light in December 1989 on Patchawara Creek MLS, but in light of its rarity in SA, this can not be (Bird and Tyler 1990), less than five kilometres claimed without confirmation through collection of outside the extreme southern boundary of the MLS. It additional specimens.

92 Marqualpie Land System Biological Survey

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adams, M., Reardon, T.R., Baverstock, P.R. and Breed, W.G. and Ford, F. (2007). ‘Native Mice and Watts, C.H.S. (1988). “Electrophoretic resolution Rats’. (CSIRO Publishing). of species boundaries in Australian Microchiroptera. IV. The Molossidae Bureau of Meteorology (2010a). ‘Climate Statistics for (Chiroptera)”. Australian Journal of Biological Australian Locations – Summary Statistics - Science 41: 315-326. Moomba’ (date of access 6 May 2010). http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages/tables/cw Badman, F.J. (1987). Boredrains and the Birds of _017096.shtml. Inland South Australia: a study of the Relationships of Boredrains and Native Bird Bureau of Meteorology (2010b). ‘Climate Statistics for Populations in the Far North of South Australia. Australian Locations – Summary Statistics Nature Conservation Society of South Australia, Cordillo Downs’ (date of access 6 May 2010). Adelaide. http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/cdio/weatherData/a v?p_nccObsCode=136&p_display_type=dailyData Badman, F.J. (1989). The Birds of Middle and Lower File&p_startYear=2009&p_stn_num=017019. Cooper Creek in South Australia. Nature Conservation Society of South Australia, Adelaide. Churchill, S. (1998). ‘Australian Bats’. (New Holland Publishers Australia Pty. Ltd.). Badman, F.J. (1991). Birds. in ‘A Natural History of the Lake Eyre Region: a Visitor’s Guide’. (Eds. Chinnock, R.J. (2007). ‘Eremophila and Allied Badman, F.J., Arnold, B.K. and Bell, S.L. ), pp. Genera: A Monograph of the Plant Family 27–38, (The South Australian National Parks and Myoporaceae’. (Rosenberg, ). Wildlife Service’s Northern Consultative Committee). Cooke, D.A. and Carolin, R.C. (1986). Scaevola L. In ‘Flora of South Australia Part III: Polemoniaceae Barker, W.R. and Jessop, J.P. (1986). Sida L. In ‘Flora – Compositae’. (Eds. Jessop, J.P. and Toelken, of South Australia Part II: Leguminosae – H.R.), pp. 1407-1415, (Government Printer, Rubiaceae’. (Eds. Jessop, J.P. and Toelken, H.R.), Adelaide). pp. 841-848, (Government Printer, Adelaide). Cox, J.B. and Pedler, L.P. (1977). “Birds recorded Bean, A.R. (1999). “A revision of Stylidium sect. during three visits to the Far North-East of South Debilia Mildbr., S. sect. Floodia Mildbr. and S. Australia”. South Australian Ornithologist 27: 231- sect. Lanata A.R. Bean (Stylidiaceae)”. 250. Austrobaileya 5(3): 427-455. Cunningham, G.M., Mulham, W.E., Milthorpe, P.L. Bird, P. and Tyler, M.J. (1990). “First South and Leigh, J.H. (1992). ‘Plants of Western New Australian record of the fossorial Leptadactylidae South Wales’. (Inkata Press, Sydney). frog Uperolia Gray”. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Australia 114: 223-224. Department for Environment and Heritage (2008). ‘A Review of Innamincka Regional Reserve 1998 – Brandle, R. (1998). ‘A Biological Survey of the Stony 2008’. (Department for Environment and Deserts, South Australia 1994-1997’. (Heritage Heritage). and Biodiversity Section, Department for Environment, Heritage and Aboriginal Affairs, Department for Environment Heritage and Aboriginal South Australia). Affairs (1998). ‘A Review of Innamincka Regional Reserve 1988-1998’. (Government of South Brandle, R. (Ed.) (2001). ‘A Biological Survey of the Australia). Flinders Ranges, South Australia 1997-1999’. (Biodiversity Survey and Monitoring, National Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Parks and Wildlife, South Australia, Department Population and Communities (2010). ‘Australian for Environment and Heritage). Ramsar Wetlands’ (date of access 15 September 2010). http://www.environment.gov.au/water/ Breed, W.G. (2008). Spinifex Hopping Mouse. In ‘The topics/wetlands/database/ramsar.html. Mammals of Australia, 3rd Edition’. (Eds. Van Dyck, S. and Strahan, R.), pp. 596-597, (New Eichler, Hj. (1986). Zygophyllaceae. In ‘Flora of Holland Publishers Australia Pty. Ltd.). South Australia Part II: Leguminosae – Rubiaceae’. (Eds. Jessop, J.P. and Toelken, H.R.), pp. 724-733, (Government Printer, Adelaide). 93 Marqualpie Land System Biological Survey Fisher, A. (2008). Long-tailed Planigale. In ‘The Jessop, J.P. and Weber, J.Z. (1986). Cyperaceae. In Mammals of Australia, 3rd Edition’. (Eds. Van ‘Flora of South Australia Part IV: Alismataceae – Dyck, S. and Strahan, R.), pp. 110-111, (New Orchidaceae’. (Eds. Jessop, J.P. and Toelken, Holland Publishers Australia Pty. Ltd.). H.R.), pp. 2001-2053, (Government Printer, Adelaide). Foale, M.R. (Ed.) (1982). ‘The Far North East of South Australia: A Biological Survey Conducted by Johnson, R.W. (1986). Convolvulaceae. In ‘Flora of the Nature Conservation Society of South Australia South Australia Part III: Polemoniaceae – (Inc) 2nd-30th August 1975’. (Nature Conservation Compositae’. (Eds. Jessop, J.P. and Toelken, Society of South Australia, Adelaide). H.R.), pp. 1133-1145, (Government Printer, Adelaide). Foulkes, J.N. and Gillen, J.S. (Eds.) (2000). ‘A Biological Survey of the Murray Mallee, South Kemper, C.M. (1985). Mammals. In ‘A List of the Australia’. (Biological Survey and Research, Vertebrates of South Australia’. (Ed. Aslin H.J.), Department for Environment and Heritage and pp. 7–19, (Department of Environment and Geographic Analysis and Research Unit, Planning, Adelaide). Department for Transport, Urban Planning and the Arts). Kemper, C.M. (1990). Mammals. In ‘Natural History of the North East Deserts’. (Eds. Tyler M.J., Gillen, J.S. and Drewien, G.N. (1993). ‘A Vegetation Twidale M., Davies, M. and Wells C.B.), pp. 161– Survey of the Kanowana Wetlands Cooper Creek, 167, (Royal Society of South Australia Inc., South Australia’. (Department of Environment and Adelaide). Land Management). Laut, P., Heyligers, P.C., Keig, G., Loffler, E., Gillen, J.S. and Reid, J.R.W. (1990). Progress Report: Margules, C., Scott, R.M. and Sullivan, M.E., The Della and Marqualpie Landsystem’s Faunal (1977). ‘Environments of South Australia – Monitoring Programme for SANTOS Ltd. J.S. Province 6 Flinders Ranges’. (Division of Land Gillen and J.R.W. Reid Environmental Use Research, Commonwealth Scientific and Consultants. Industrial Research Organisation, Canberra, Australia). Heard, L. and Channon, B. (Eds.) (1997). ‘Guide to a Native Vegetation Survey (Agricultural Region) Leach, G.J. (1989). “Taxonomic revision of Bergia Using the Biological Survey of South Australia (Elatinaceae) in Australia”. Journal of the Adelaide Methodology’. (Geographic Analysis and Research Botanic Gardens 11(2): 75-100. Unit, Information and Data Analysis Branch, Department of Housing and Urban Development). Marree Soil Conservation Board (2004). ‘Marree Soil Conservation Board District Plan Revised 2004’. Higgins, P.J. (Ed.) (1999). ‘Handbook of Australian (Marree Soil Conservation Board). and New Zealand Birds. Volume 4: Parrots to Dollarbird’. (Oxford University Press, May, I.A. (1986). Appendix V. Birds of Innamincka Melbourne). Station. In ‘Rangeland Assessment Manual, Innamincka Station’, pp. 123-137, (South Higgins, P.J., Peter, J.M. and Steele, W.K. (Eds.) Australian Department of Lands, Adelaide). (2001). ‘Handbook of Australian and New Zealand Birds. Volume 5: Tyrant-flycatchers to Chats’. McAllan, I.A.W (1996). “The Flock Bronzewing (Oxford University Press, Melbourne). Phaps histrionica in New South Wales, with comments on its biology”. Australian Bird Jacobs, S.W.L. (1992). Callitrichaceae. In ‘Flora of Watcher 16: 175-204. New South Wales. Volume 3’. (Ed. Harden, G.J.), pp. 622-623, (New South Wales University Press, McCune, B. and Mefford, M.J. (1999). ‘PC-ORD. Sydney). Multivariate Analysis of Ecological Data, Version 4’. (MjM Software Design, Oregon, USA). Jessop, J.P., Dashorst, G.R.M. and James, F.M. (2006). ‘Grasses of South Australia: An illustrated Mollenmans, F.H., Reid, J.R.W., Thompson, M.B., guide to the native and naturalised species’. Alexander, L. and Pedler, L.P. (1984). ‘Biological (Wakefield Press, South Australia). Survey of the Cooper Creek Environmental Association (8.4.4), North Eastern South Jessop, J.P. and Toelken, H.R. (Eds.) (1986). ‘Flora of Australia’. (Report for the Survey and Research South Australia’. (Government Printer, Adelaide). Section, National Parks and Wildlife Service Division, Department of Environment and Planning, South Australia).

94 Marqualpie Land System Biological Survey Morton, S.R. (1990). “The impact of European Reid, J.R.W. (2000). “Waterbird, Riparian and settlement on the vertebrate of arid Floodplain Ecology of the Coongie Lakes System, Australia: a conceptual model”. Proceedings of the Cooper Creek, Central Australia”. (CSIRO Ecological Society of Australia 16: 201-213. Wildlife and Ecology and Arid Lands Environment Centre). Moseby, K.E., Owens, H., Brandle, R., Bice, J.K. and Gates, J. (2006). “Variation in population dynamics Reid, J.R.W. (2008). Central Short-tailed Mouse. In and movement patterns between two ‘The Mammals of Australia, 3rd Edition’. (Eds. Van geographically isolated populations of the dusky Dyck, S. and Strahan, R.), pp. 581–583, (New hopping mouse (Notomys fuscus)”. Wildlife Holland Publishers Australia Pty. Ltd.). Research 33: 223-232. Reid, J. and Gillen, J. (1988). ‘The Coongie Lakes National Parks and Wildlife Service (1988). Study’. (Department of Environment and Planning, ‘Innamincka Regional Reserve Management Plan’. South Australia). (Department of Environment and Planning, South Australia). Robertson, M.A. (1998). ‘A Biological Survey of the Grasslands and Grassy Woodlands of the Lofty Nicolle, D. (1997) ‘Eucalypts of South Australia’. Block Bioregion South Australia 1995-1996’. (Dean Nicolle, Adelaide). (Department for Environment, Heritage and Aboriginal Affairs, South Australia). Owens, H. (Ed.) (2000). ‘Guidelines for Vertebrate Surveys in South Australia Using the Biological Robinson, A.C., Casperson, K.D. and Hutchinson, Survey of South Australia’. (Biological Survey and M.N. (Eds.) (2000). ‘A List of the Vertebrates of Research Section, National Parks and Wildlife SA, South Australia’. (Department for Environment Department for Environment and Heritage). and Heritage and South Australian Museum).

Owens, H. and Graham, A. (Eds.) (2009) ‘Census of State Herbarium of SA (2010). ‘Census of SA Plants, South Australian Vertebrates’. (Department of Algae and Fungi’ (date of access May 2010) Environment and Natural Resources, South http://www.flora.sa.gov.au/census.html (State Australia and South Australian Museum). Herbarium of South Australia, Department for Environment and Heritage, Hackney, South Read, J., Copley, P.B. and Bird, P. (1999). “The Australia). distribution, ecology and current status of Pseudomys desertor in South Australia”. Wildlife Weber, J.Z. (1986). Papilionoideae. In ‘Flora of South Research 26: 453-462. Australia Part II: Leguminosae – Rubiaceae’. (Eds. Jessop, J.P. and Toelken, H.R.), pp. 569-709, Reid, J.R.W. (1984). Appendix S: Annotated list of (Government Printer, Adelaide). species of bird encountered in the Cooper Creek Environmental Association 8.4.4 previously or Whibley, D.J.E. and Symon, D.E. (1992). ‘Acacias of during the present survey, with an indication of South Australia’. (Government Printer, South status in the study area. In ‘Appendices to the Australia). Biological Survey of the Cooper Creek Environmental Association (8.4.4), North Eastern Wilson, K.L. (1993). Cyperaceae. In ‘Flora of New South Australia’. (Mollenmans, F.H., Reid, J.R.W., South Wales. Volume 4’. (Ed. Harden, G.J.), pp. Thompson, M.B., Alexander, L. and Pedler, L.P.), 293-396, (New South Wales University Press, pp. S1 - S41, (Report for the Survey and Research Sydney). Section, National Parks and Wildlife Service Division, Department of Environment and Wilson, P.G. (1986). Chenopodiaceae Planning, South Australia). (Dysphaniaceae). In ‘Flora of South Australia Part I: Lycopodiaceae – Rosaceae’. (Eds. Jessop, J.P. Reid, J.R.W. (1988). Birds. In ‘The Coongie Lakes and Toelken, H.R.), pp. 236-311, (Government Study’. (Reid, J. and Gillen, J.), pp. 179–226, Printer, Adelaide). (Department of Environment and Planning, South Australia). Wilson, S. and Swan, G. (2003). “A Complete Guide to Reptiles of Australia”. (New Holland Publishers Australia Pty. Ltd.).

95 Marqualpie Land System Biological Survey

96