A cryptic elapid snake persists in thewake of catastrophic wildfires


MIT C H E L L J. HODGSO N * 1 , 2 , 3 ,ALEXAND RA K. ROS S 2 , 3 , 4 ,YIN G Y O D LAPWONG5 , 6 SANTIAGO CUARTA S 5,BRI D G ET ROBE R TS 7,OWEN P RICE 7 ,JONA T H A N WEB B 5


NICOLA S EN TI NE LL A 2 , 3 ,J OSHUA L EE 2 , 3 ,SHAWN W. L AFF A N 8,HUGH M. BURLEY 8 F INLA Y MC I NTO S H 8 and MIKE L ETN I C 2


Abstract The increased severity and frequency of bushfires accompanying human-induced global warming have dire implications for biodiversity conservation. Herewe investigate the response of a cryptic, cool-climate elapid, the mustard- bellied snake Drysdalia rhodogaster,tothe extensiveBlack Summer fires of 2019/2020 in south-eastern Australia. The species is categorized as Least Concern on the IUCN Red List (last assessed in 2017), butbecausealarge partofits range was burnt during the Black Summer and little was known about its ecology, D. rhodogaster was identified as a priority species for post-fire impact assessment. We evaluated three lines of evidence to assess the impact of the Black Summer fires on D. rhodogaster. Habitat suitability modelling indicated that c. 46%of the predictedrange of the species was affected by bushfire. Field surveys conducted 9–36 months post-fire and collation of records from public databases submitted 0–24 months post-fire indicated that D. rhodogaster persisted in burnt landscapes. Fire severity and proportion of the landscape that was burnt within a 1,000-m radius of survey sites were poor predictors of site occupancy by D. rhodogaster.Although conclusions regarding theeffectsoffireon D. rhodogaster are limited because of the lack of baseline data, it is evident that the species has persisted across the landscape in the wake of extensive bushfires. Our work highlights the need for baseline knowledge on cryptic species even when they are categorized as Least Concern, as otherwise assessments of the impacts of catastrophic events will be constrained.


*Corresponding author, mitchell.hodgson@sydney.edu.au 1School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney,


Australia 2Evolution & Ecology Research Centre, School of Biological, Earth and


Environmental Sciences, University of New SouthWales, Sydney, Australia 3Centre for Ecosystem Science, School of Biological, Earth and Environmental


Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia 4Australian Wildlife Conservancy Yookamurra Wildlife Sanctuary, Fisher,


Australia 5School of Life Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Technology Sydney,


Sydney, Australia 6Division of Biological Science, Faculty of Science, Prince of Songkla University,


Hat Yai, Thailand 7University of Wollongong, School of Earth, Atmosphere and Life Sciences,


Wollongong, Australia 8Earth and Sustainability Science Research Centre, School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia


Received 19 April 2023. Revision requested 13 June 2023. Accepted 5 January 2024. First published online 22 November 2024.


Keywords Black Summer, bushfire, Drysdalia rhodogaster, habitat suitability model, mustard-bellied snake, occupancy, reptile, species distribution


The supplementary material for this article is available at doi.org/10.1017/S0030605324000048


Introduction


2009) and is crucial in maintaining the health of many eco- systems. Yet wildfires can lead to long-lasting changes in ecosystem structure, species distributions and species per- sistence (Haslem et al., 2011; Lovich et al., 2017; Merrick et al., 2021; Smith et al., 2021). At a regional scale, the extent, frequency and severity of fires can shift because of land-use changes such as human settlement (Spyratos et al., 2007) and logging (Lindenmayer et al., 2020). At a global scale, human-induced global warming is driving shifts in fire regimes, with forecasts and correlative studies predicting increases in the extent, frequency and severity of wildfires (Pitman et al., 2007; Canadell et al., 2021; van Oldenborgh et al., 2021). This increased prevalence of megafires has resulted in some authors referring to the contemporary period as the Pyrocene (Nimmo et al., 2021). Determining how different fire regimes directly and


F


indirectly affect species is a central research priority in contemporary conservation science (Driscoll et al., 2010). Although species in fire-prone landscapes have probably adapted to cope with the effects of fires, increased severity and frequency of fires could exceed the capacity of these adaptations to facilitate population persistence (Pausas & Parr, 2018; Nimmo et al., 2021). For example, in a fire- adapted landscape, a survey conducted 20 years after an extreme fire found only 7.9%of 1,630 shrubs showed any resprouting (Nicholson et al., 2017). Beyond direct mortal- ity, fire can have species-specific effects on habitat structure (Costa et al., 2020), fecundity (Smith et al., 2012) and preda- tion pressure (Leahy et al., 2016) that can cause shifts in eco- system dynamics. Because these effects are species-specific, comprehensive information across a range of taxa is re- quired to obtain a clear understanding of how ecosystems


This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited. Oryx, 2024, 58(6), 769–778 © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S0030605324000048


ire is a natural process that has shaped landscapes glo- bally for more than 420 million years (Bowman et al.,


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140