Artificial tree hollow creation for cavity-using wildlife – Trialling an alternative method to that of nest boxes

作者: Niels Rueegger

DOI: 10.1016/J.FORECO.2017.09.062

关键词: PetaurusAntechinusCormobates leucophaeaAntechinus stuartiiTree hollowEcologyFeathertail gliderEnvironmental scienceHydrologySugar gliderNest

摘要: Abstract Tree hollow scarcity is a threat to cavity-dependent vertebrate wildlife world-wide across many landscapes. Currently, only nest boxes are commonly used mitigate or offset lost cavity-bearing trees, with number of shortfalls reported using this technique. There need trial alternative techniques improve artificial cavity provisions. This preliminary study investigated the use carving hollows directly into tree trunks chainsaws. Sixteen two simple types were created in timber production forest south-eastern Australia. One type comprised basal entrance (38 mm diameter) which provided space above entrance, intended for bats, and other below 38 mm 76 mm marsupials birds. Five species over 15-month monitoring period; feathertail glider ( Acrobates pygmaeus ) (in 75% hollows), brown antechinus Antechinus stuartii (75%), sugar Petaurus breviceps (63%), long-eared bat Nyctophilus sp.) (50%) white-throated treecreeper Cormobates leucophaea (25%). Camera revealed inspection after one day post creation by treecreepers gliders, building three days. No host failure occurred either wall widths trialled years stability. Wound-wood formed partly enclosed hollows’ faceplates time, improving sturdiness likely resulted closely resembling natural cavities. Mechanically have broad application potential landscapes prospect overcome some drawbacks boxes. More research required document long-term performance effectiveness

参考文章(43)
Philip Gibbons, David Lindenmayer, Tree Hollows and Wildlife Conservation in Australia Tree hollows and wildlife conservation in Australia.. ,(2002) , 10.1071/9780643090033
Ross L. Goldingay, Temperature variation in nest boxes in eastern Australia Australian Mammalogy. ,vol. 37, pp. 225- 233 ,(2015) , 10.1071/AM14040
Philip Gibbons, Karen Ikin, David Blair, Lachlan McBurney, Adrian D. Manning, John A.R. Stein, David B. Lindenmayer, William F. Laurance, Jerry F. Franklin, Gene E. Likens, Sam C. Banks, Wade Blanchard, New Policies for Old Trees: Averting a Global Crisis in a Keystone Ecological Structure Conservation Letters. ,vol. 7, pp. 61- 69 ,(2014) , 10.1111/CONL.12013
Darren S. Le Roux, Karen Ikin, David B. Lindenmayer, Gideon Bistricer, Adrian D. Manning, Philip Gibbons, Enriching small trees with artificial nest boxes cannot mimic the value of large trees for hollow‐nesting birds Restoration Ecology. ,vol. 24, pp. 252- 258 ,(2016) , 10.1111/REC.12303
Ross L. Goldingay, Niels N. Rueegger, Matthew J. Grimson, Brendan D. Taylor, Specific nest box designs can improve habitat restoration for cavity‐dependent arboreal mammals Restoration Ecology. ,vol. 23, pp. 482- 490 ,(2015) , 10.1111/REC.12208
A. D. Manning, P. Gibbons, J. Fischer, D. L. Oliver, D. B. Lindenmayer, Hollow futures? Tree decline, lag effects and hollow-dependent species Animal Conservation. ,vol. 16, pp. 395- 403 ,(2013) , 10.1111/ACV.12006