Ashes to ashes: Intense fires extinguish populations of urban short-range endemics

Assessing the impact of fire on spiders through a global comparative analysis

In many regions fire regimes are changing due to anthropogenic factors. Understanding the responses of species to fire can help to develop predictive models and inform fire management decisions. Spiders are a diverse and ubiquitous group and can offer important insights into the impacts of fire on invertebrates and whether these depend on environmental factors, phylogenetic history or functional traits. We conducted phylogenetic comparative analyses of data from studies investigating the impacts of fire on spiders. We investigated whether fire affects spider abundance or presence and whether ecologically relevant traits or site-specific factors influence species' responses to fire. Although difficult to make broad generalizations about the impacts of fire due to variation in site- and fire-specific factors, we find evidence that short fire intervals may be a threat to some spiders, and that fire affects abundance and species compositions in forests relative to other vegetation types. Orb and sheet web weavers were also more likely to be absent after fire than ambush hunters, ground hunters and other hunters suggesting functional traits may affect responses. Finally, we show that analyses of published data can be used to detect broad-scale patterns and provide an alternative to traditional meta-analytical approaches.

Fire as a driver and mediator of predator-prey interactions

Both fire and predators have strong influences on the population dynamics and behaviour of animals, and the effects of predators may either be strengthened or weakened by fire. However, knowledge of how fire drives or mediates predator–prey interactions is fragmented and has not been synthesised. Here, we review and synthesise knowledge of how fire influences predator and prey behaviour and interactions. We develop a conceptual model based on predator–prey theory and empirical examples to address four key questions: (i) how and why do predators respond to fire; (ii) how and why does prey vulnerability change post‐fire; (iii) what mechanisms do prey use to reduce predation risk post‐fire; and (iv) what are the outcomes of predator–fire interactions for prey populations? We then discuss these findings in the context of wildlife conservation and ecosystem management before outlining priorities for future research. Fire‐induced changes in vegetation structure, resource availability, and animal behaviour influence predator–prey encounter rates, the amount of time prey are vulnerable during an encounter, and the conditional probability of prey death given an encounter. How a predator responds to fire depends on fire characteristics (e.g. season, severity), their hunting behaviour (ambush or pursuit predator), movement behaviour, territoriality, and intra‐guild dynamics. Prey species that rely on habitat structure for avoiding predation often experience increased predation rates and lower survival in recently burnt areas. By contrast, some prey species benefit from the opening up of habitat after fire because it makes it easier to detect predators and to modify their behaviour appropriately. Reduced prey body condition after fire can increase predation risk either through impaired ability to escape predators, or increased need to forage in risky areas due to being energetically stressed. To reduce risk of predation in the post‐fire environment, prey may change their habitat use, increase sheltering behaviour, change their movement behaviour, or use camouflage through cryptic colouring and background matching. Field experiments and population viability modelling show instances where fire either amplifies or does not amplify the impacts of predators on prey populations, and vice versa. In some instances, intense and sustained post‐fire predation may lead to local extinctions of prey populations. Human disruption of fire regimes is impacting faunal communities, with consequences for predator and prey behaviour and population dynamics. Key areas for future research include: capturing data continuously before, during and after fires; teasing out the relative importance of changes in visibility and shelter availability in different contexts; documenting changes in acoustic and olfactory cues for both predators and prey; addressing taxonomic and geographic biases in the literature; and predicting and testing how changes in fire‐regime characteristics reshape predator–prey interactions. Understanding and managing the consequences for predator–prey communities will be critical for effective ecosystem management and species conservation in this era of global change.

Introduced cats eating a continental fauna: invertebrate consumption by feral cats (Felis catus) in Australia

Abstract ContextRecent global concern over invertebrate declines has drawn attention to the causes and consequences of this loss of biodiversity. Feral cats, Felis catus, pose a major threat to many vertebrate species in Australia, but their effect on invertebrates has not previously been assessed. AimsThe objectives of our study were to (1) assess the frequency of occurrence (FOO) of invertebrates in feral cat diets across Australia and the environmental and geographic factors associated with this variation, (2) estimate the number of invertebrates consumed by feral cats annually and the spatial variation of this consumption, and (3) interpret the conservation implications of these results. MethodsFrom 87 Australian cat-diet studies, we modelled the factors associated with variation in invertebrate FOO in feral cat-diet samples. We used these modelled relationships to predict the number of invertebrates consumed by feral cats in largely natural and highly modified environments. Key resultsIn largely natural environments, the mean invertebrate FOO in feral cat dietary samples was 39% (95% CI: 31–43.5%), with Orthoptera being the most frequently recorded order, at 30.3% (95% CI: 21.2–38.3%). The highest invertebrate FOO occurred in lower-rainfall areas with a lower mean annual temperature, and in areas of greater tree cover. Mean annual invertebrate consumption by feral cats in largely natural environments was estimated to be 769 million individuals (95% CI: 422–1763 million) and in modified environments (with mean FOO of 27.8%) 317 million invertebrates year−1, giving a total estimate of 1086 million invertebrates year−1 consumed by feral cats across the continent. ConclusionsThe number of invertebrates consumed by feral cats in Australia is greater than estimates for vertebrate taxa, although the biomass (and, hence, importance for cat diet) of invertebrates taken would be appreciably less. The impact of predation by cats on invertebrates is difficult to assess because of the lack of invertebrate population and distribution estimates, but cats may pose a threat to some large-bodied narrowly restricted invertebrate species. ImplicationsFurther empirical studies of local and continental invertebrate diversity, distribution and population trends are required to adequately contextualise the conservation threat posed by feral cats to invertebrates across Australia.