EcoLincNZ

Category: invasive species

  • The pines are invading! Planting non-native species increases re-invasion

    The pines are invading! Planting non-native species increases re-invasion

    Soil is life

    I’m not sure if you’re aware, as I was not aware of this before coming to Lincoln University, but soil is very much alive. There are millions of organisms in a single handful of soil. These critters perform the majority of the ecosystem services provided by soils.

    In New Zealand, these organisms range from burrowing animals, to soil-dwelling invertebrates, to fungi, to microscopic bacteria and much more. So next time you walk on soil, think about how much life is beneath your feet.

    For plants, a major component of successful growth and survivability is the soil microbiota, such as bacteria, fungi, viruses, nematodes (tiny worms), and many more. I have much love for fungi in the soil microbiota, especially mycorrhizal fungi that are essential for plant growth.

    Mycorrhizal fungi form mutualistic relationships (beneficial for both organisms) with plant roots. The fungi extend their network to increase the nutrient intake in exchange for carbohydrates that the fungi cannot produce itself.

    There are two major types of mycorrhizal fungi, ectomycorrhizal fungi, which infect the outside of plant roots, and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF or endomycorrhizal), which infect the inside of plant roots.

    I did a project on ectomycorrhizal fungi abundance on red beech tree roots for SCIE393 where I took this photo of an ectomycorrhizal fungal fruiting body (mushroom) under the microscope (which I thought was very cool). This is really where my love for mycorrhizal fungi started to blossom.

    Ectomycorrhizal fruiting body under the microscope – Photo by Lucas Watkin (CC-BY-NC)

    Exotic plants are strong invaders

    That’s enough about me for now, time to talk about invasions from non-native plants. As I’m sure everyone who lives in New Zealand is aware, we live in an invaded country, full of exotic predators, pests, and weeds.

    While everyone tends to think of the worst invaders are pests like possums and mustelids, the worst invaders are actually the weeds. Approximately half of all the vascular plants in the wild in New Zealand are non-native. There are around 25,000 exotic plant species that have been introduced to New Zealand, with around 2,700 of these becoming wild. Compared to around 2,500 native plants, this is an insane numbers of exotic plants and so to conserve our native species, we must do something about all of these exotic species.

    From grassland to pineland: The rapid invasion of black pine into well grazed high country pasture – Photo by Jon Sullivan (CC BY-NC 2.0)

    One of the worst exotic plant species are wilding pines, such as lodgepole pine and radiata pine. Lodgepole pine was introduced into New Zealand in 1880 to combat erosion. Burning of forests, overgrazing, and introduced browsers, such as deer, goats and rabbits, were clearing the hillsides of our native plants, leading to more slips. The New Zealand government decided to plant exotic plants, specifically Douglas-fir and lodgepole pine to cover the hillsides and reduce erosion.

    These pines did stop the erosion, however, what was not anticipated was the enormous dispersal ability of these wilding pines. Seeds of wilding pines can survive for a decade in their cones, grow roughly anywhere, and can travel kilometers from their parent. There is now roughly 800,000 hectares of wilding exotics in the South Island alone, two thirds of which is lodgepole pine!

    Wilding pines of Flock Hill Station: The very many wilding pines coming out from the experimental forestry plots in adjacent Craigieburn Forest Park – Photo by Jon Sullivan (CC BY-NC 2.0)

    Be careful what you plant!

    This paper headed by Joanna Green has contributions from my lovely thesis supervisor Lauren Waller. In it they describe the effects of planting non-native plants on the soil microbiota, and how that can impact what grows there afterwards. They were specifically looking at how well lodgepole pines grow in soils that have been used and conditioned by exotic plant species.

    Joanna and Lauren started by using soils that had already been conditioned by 19 native and 20 exotic plant species from another two experiments by Warwick Allen and Lauren Waller. The soil microbiota, the nutrients in the soil, and other factors, like the pH of the soil, had been changed to best suit the plant that had been grown in that soil.

    An example of part of the soil microbiota that was conditioned were the ectomycorrhizal fungi. These fungi are required for successful growth by some of our native species, such as our beech, mānuka, and kānuka species. However, exotic species use different species of ectomycorrhizal fungi than our native species. Therefore, when exotic species are grown in soil they will grow well with their species of ectomycorrhiza.

    Basically, think of it like this. If you owned a garden and really liked roses, you would grow a lot of roses. You might grow some other plants but the focus of the garden would be on roses. Now, if someone else came in and took over the garden for themselves, they might not like roses as much but might really like petunias. They will then plant petunias in place of where the roses used to be, altering the state of that garden.

    In terms of ectomycorrhiza, they require associations to survive, so the native ectomycorrhiza species that were in the soil will die after their native plant partners are gone. Exotic ectomycorrhiza species associated with exotic plant species will then survive. Due to this, it will become a lot more difficult for our native species to grow back in that soil due to a lack of ectomycorrhiza that they can grow with. Conversely, it will be a lot easier for exotic plant species to grow in partnership with a large number of exotic ectomycorrhiza.

    Anyway, back to the paper. The researchers found that lodgepole pine grew better in soils that had been conditioned by exotic species, such as black alder, cocks-foot, spear thistle, gorse, and many more. And this was regardless of whether pines had been planted there or not! Lodgepole pine will have a much easier time establishing and invading into areas that have previously had exotic species growing there.

    Lodgepole pine tree near Lake Benmore – Photo by abcdefgewing (CC-BY-NC)

    So why does this matter?

    To conserve our native plants, sometimes we must plant them in areas that have previously grown exotic species. Joanna and Lauren’s research shows that the soil will be conditioned to favour growth of exotic species, and so growing native plants will be more difficult. It will also be a lot easier for exotic species, such as lodgepole pine, to re-invade and take over the conservation site. Therefore, conservation managers must be aware of this soil legacy and decisions must be made in order to manage this re-invasion potential.

    So, next time you want to plant an exotic plant, think about the soil, and whether you would rather plant a native instead.

    This article was prepared by postgraduate student Lucas Watkin, Master of Science in Conservation and Ecology, for an assignment in ECOL608 Research Methods in Ecology.

    Green, J. L., Waller, L. P., Allen, W. J., Orwin, K. H., Pelser, P. B., Smaill, S., & Dickie, I. A. (2025). Plant-soil feedback from non-native communities increases pine invasion and re-invasion potential. Plant Soil, 514(2), 2461-2474. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-025-07528-x

    Featured image: Did somebody order pines? The rapid invasion of black pine into well grazed high country pasture – Photo by Jon Sullivan (CC BY-NC 2.0)

  • If friend-shaped, why not friend?

    If friend-shaped, why not friend?

    It’s a fair question.

    If an animal looks soft, furry, and, let’s be honest, kind of adorable… why wouldn’t we treat it like a friend? Picture a common brush-tailed possum, fluffy and wide-eyed, or a spiky little hedgehog snuffling through the undergrowth, both undeniably friend-shaped. They don’t exactly look like villains. In fact, they look like animals we might want to protect.

    But here’s the uncomfortable truth: in Aotearoa/New Zealand, these “friend-shaped” animals are responsible for some of the most devastating environmental damage across the country.

    A curious little hedgehog (Erinaceus europaeus). It doesn’t look dangerous, but they are surprisingly harmful predators.
    Copyright CC BY-SA 3.0, by Tony Willis, from Wikimedia Commons

    Early in my veterinary career, I realised just how complicated it can be to care about the environment. I’d signed up to help animals, not to think about how their populations should be controlled. But here in Aotearoa, even the cutest animals can be a big environmental problem.

    The scale of the problem means pest management is essential. Conservationists must find a balance between the effectiveness of pest control techniques and animal welfare. This article explores how emerging technologies may help meet this challenge.

    Cute… but catastrophic

    Aotearoa’s wildlife is unique because it evolved for millions of years without land mammals. The only land mammals native to Aotearoa are, in fact, two species of bats. This isolation means many native birds nest on the ground, can’t fly well, and have limited natural defences against mammalian predators.

    When humans arrived, they brought mammals, like hedgehogs, rats, stoats, and possums, with them. This is when everything changed. A stoat might seem sweet and harmless, but it will kill more than it needs. Possums, while wide-eyed and cuddly, can change the types of trees in native forests.

    The stoat (Mustela erminea) is an adorable but efficient killer.
    Copyright CC BY-SA, 2.0 by Soumyajit Nandy, from Wikimedia Commons

    Introduced mammals have had a significant impact, contributing to widespread loss of biodiversity (variety of animals and plants) across Aotearoa. They have had a hand to play in the extinction of many native bird species and continue to threaten many more.

    So, while these mammals might look adorable and harmless, their impact is anything but. It’s not that these animals are bad, they’re just in the wrong place.

    Why we can’t just leave them alone

    It’s tempting to think, “can’t we just let nature take its course?” The problem is, this isn’t how nature originally worked here. These species were suddenly introduced by humans, and native birds didn’t have time to adjust. So the decline in bird species isn’t natural, it’s our fault, and without intervention, many more native species will be lost.

    The huia (Heteralocha acutirostris). A bird now extinct, lost in part to predation by introduced mammal predators.
    Copyright public domain (CC0-style, no known copyright restrictions in place), by Johannes Keulemans, from Wikimedia Commons

    This is why pest control is necessary. It’s not because we don’t like these animals, but rather we are trying to protect something even more vulnerable and important to Aotearoa’s history.

    The challenges of traditional methods

    Traditionally, pest control has relied on traps and toxins. While these methods are effective, they are not without their downsides. They can be costly, need regular checking and resetting, and pests often return quickly once control efforts stop.

    These methods have been under scrutiny for several reasons. One concern is how humane these methods are. Animal welfare remains an important consideration even when trying to reduce or eliminate pest populations. There are also concerns about their environmental impact, including whether the toxins are retained in the soil and waterways. In addition, is the risk of harm to non-target animals, including native birds and other wildlife not intended to be affected.

    Traditional DOC 200 trap. Using traditional traps requires substantial staff time, meaning that ongoing funding is needed to maintain them.
    Copyright CC BY-SA 4.0, by Kimberley Collins, from Wikimedia Commons

    Looking for better solutions

    The good news is that things are changing in some really exciting ways! A 2014 study by Dr Helen Blackie and her team reviewed a range of emerging technologies and research for long-term mammalian pest management, several of which are discussed below. The team brought together scientists, university researchers, commercial pest management organisations and iwi (indigenous Māori tribal groups) who worked collaboratively to design new tools that are more humane, better targeted to specific pest species, and more effective over long timeframes.

    Helen and her team develop new toxins to minimise animal distress. Some are even based on natural toxins derived from native plants, blending science with mātauranga Māori (traditional knowledge).

    Highly poisonous Tutu plant (Coriaria arborea) has been investigated as a potential source of new toxins.
    Copyright CC BY-SA 3.0 by Rudolph89, from Wikimedia Commons

    Another innovation presented in the study is “set and forget” traps. While these devices have existed for some time. Newer versions use artificial intelligence (AI) to ensure only target pest species activate them. Once installed, these traps can remain in place for long periods without the need for frequent checks or bait replacement, a big advantage over traditional traps.

    Smart trap that uses AI to target pest species while avoiding non-target species.
    Photograph by Dr Helen Blackie, used with permission.

    In the study, the group also helped develop traps that utilise new toxins in a clever way. When the specific pest interacts with the trap, a small dose of toxin is placed onto its coat. The animal then ingests it through grooming, reducing the risk of environmental contamination.

    In addition, the group is learning more about pest behaviour, specifically how animals move, feed, and interact at different population numbers. This helps determine the best places for traps, increasing the likelihood that pests will interact with them.

    People power in action

    As this study has shown, pest control isn’t just about technology. It’s about how people work together to protect the environment. In Aotearoa, pest control programmes rely on collaboration between iwi, conservation groups, and scientists. Each group brings different expertise to the work, from scientific knowledge to local and cultural understanding.

    When I discussed the new innovations with Dr Helen Blackie, she highlighted that some of the most successful pest control initiatives come from community-led groups. She emphasised that even though these groups may have fewer resources than larger programmes, they are still often highly effective. They work closely together with a strong commitment, enabling them to share ideas and adapt their approaches as needed. At the end of the day, pest control only works if people are willing to take part!

    So…why not friend?

    It’s okay to think these introduced mammals are cute, and the instinct to care about all animals is a good one. But, in Aotearoa, protecting native birds and plants requires managing introduced mammals. Not because they’re bad, not because they don’t deserve compassion, but because the balance has already been tipped, and without action, the consequences could be irreversible.

    With better tools, smarter strategies, and more collaboration, we’re moving toward a future where pest control is more effective, more humane, and more sustainable.

    And maybe that’s the real answer to the question, “if friend-shaped, why not friend?” Because sometimes, protecting one part of nature means making hard choices about another.

    Tough decisions need to be made in order to protect tiny native birds like the titipounamu (Acanthisitta chloris).
    Copyright CC BY-SA 4.0  by Melissa Boardman, from Wikimedia Commons

    How can you help?

    Looking after our environment is a shared effort, the more each of us does, the bigger the impact we can make. If you’re keen to take it further, organisations like Predator Free 2050, Department of Conservation, and Forest & Bird offer opportunities to get involved right across the country. Tools like Trap.NZ can also help you protect your own backyard and track your impact. Karawhiua!

    Written by veterinarian and animal lover, Kim Telford, a student at Te Whare Wānaka o Aoraki/Lincoln University. Inspired by a curiosity for how humans and animals intersect, as part of the ECOL 608 Research Methods in Ecology course.

    Explore the science: Blackie H, M., MacKay J.W., Allen W.J., Smith D.H., Barrett B., Whyte B.I., Murphy E.C., Ross J., Shapiro L., Ogilvie S., Sam S., MacMorran D., Inder S., Eason C.T. (2014) Innovative developments for long-term mammalian pest control. Pest Management Science, 70(3), 345-51. doi: 10.1002/ps.3627.

  • More than teeth: mouth microbiomes of stoats and possums

    More than teeth: mouth microbiomes of stoats and possums

    Like most people, I hate going to the dentist. Every time I have a check-up, they poke and prod around my mouth, trying to find something wrong. Most of the time, they end up telling me the same thing: I don’t floss enough.

    Despite all those check-ups and the money that went into braces, I rarely find myself thinking about what actually goes on inside our mouths. They are the first point of contact for everything, from breaths of fresh air to the good (and bad) choices about what we eat. But our mouths have a lot more going on than we credit them with.

    Our mouths are home to over 700 different species of microbes – tiny microscopic organisms that can be anything from bacteria to fungi to viruses. While that might sound like a bad thing, these microbial communities contain both helpful and harmful organisms. Many beneficial microbes assist with digestion and help regulate harmful microbes, even in food!

    Our mouths are home to hundreds of different microorganisms. Image from Tjandrawinata et al., (2025) licensed under CC BY 4.0

    These diverse oral communities exist in almost all animals, and their roles go far beyond digestion. They can also influence immune responses and even host behaviour. In turn, oral microbiomes themselves are shaped by a host’s genetics, physiology, environment, and diet. As microbiomes co-evolve with their hosts, we can potentially understand genetic variation and evolutionary processes in host species by looking at these small passengers.

    Common Brushtail Possum (Trichosurus vulpecula) – JJ Harrison (CC-BY-SA-2.5)

    These interesting, yet poorly understood, communities were studied by a group of nine scientists, including researchers from Lincoln University. They wanted to understand the oral microbiomes of two invasive to New Zealand mammals: the stoat and the common brushtail possum. Stoats and possums are both notorious pests in Aotearoa. They disrupt our vulnerable ecosystems, killing native plants and animals. While extensive research has examined the species themselves, little attention has been given to their microbiomes, let alone their oral microbiomes.

    Stoat (Mustela erminea) – James Lindsey (CC BY-SA 3.0)

    Led by Arsalan Emami-Khoyi, the researchers aimed to characterise the diversity, content, and variation of oral microbiota in the animals. With ethics approval from the Lincoln University Animal Ethics Committee, they live-captured five stoats and five possums from Banks Peninsula. Unlike a typical trip to the dentist, the animals were sedated before researchers swabbed their mouths. The researchers then used a DNA technique called 16S rRNA metabarcoding to discover and record microbial communities. This complex technique identifies the abundance of different groups of microbes.

    All of the animals captured were healthy apart from gum inflammation – my dentist would be horrified by how little they brush their teeth. As published in the journal Diversity, the researchers identified 19 different major microbial groups (phyla), and 51 known species in the animals’ mouths. Despite this high diversity, a small number of microbes dominated each mouth fauna in both animals. These same groups are abundant across other mammal species, representing a ‘core’ set of microbes across mammals. Some of these core groups are Proteobacteria and Firmicutes.

    The researchers also found clear differences in microbial composition between stoats and possums. This suggested a link between diet and microbes, with omnivorous possums having plant-metabolising bacteria, such as Treponema sp., which were completely absent in the carnivorous stoat. At the same time, the high diversity in both species suggests that other factors, such as genetics, environment and physiology, also play an important role in shaping oral microbiomes.

    The variation of the five core oral bacteria in stoats and possums found in the study (CC BY 4.0).

    This high variation in the oral microbiome could help us understand evolutionary responses of introduced species to new environments. Because of their short lifespan and fast reproduction, microbial communities can change more rapidly than their host genetics. So focusing on them could teach us about how much these invasive species have adapted to New Zealand’s environment.

    Understanding the oral microbiomes of these invasive mammals could also have practical applications in pest control. Microbes can influence how animals process toxins and other chemicals, which may influence how well poisons work. In New Zealand, we often rely on poisons, such as 1080 and brodifacoum, to control our mammalian populations. Future research on this could help us improve the effectiveness of control tools.

    Work has already been done beyond this study. The lead author and colleagues have developed a device that collects DNA from possums in the field, allowing us to sample DNA without capturing the animal directly. Alongside collecting host DNA, this approach can also provide insights into possum health by analysing oral microbial DNA.

    The device developed by Arsalan Emami-Khoyi and colleagues for capturing DNA in the field (Arsalan Emami-Khoyi et al., 2021)(CC BY 4.0).

    Personally, I think this study could help us understand population connectivity. Comparing microbial samples from different locations could provide a new way to understand population connectivity and how invasive species spread.

    There is a wide range of potential applications from this research, and microbiomes will likely play an increasingly important role in future pest management.

    It turns out we can learn a lot from what’s happening inside an animal’s mouth. So maybe my dentist is right to look so closely after all.

    This article was prepared by Master of Bioprotection student  Sam Bonney as part of the ECOL608 Research Methods in Ecology course

    Emami-Khoyi, A., Benmazouz, I., Paterson, A. M., Ross, J. G., Murphy, E. C., Bothwell, J., Alizadeh, H., van Vuuren, B. J., & Teske, P. R. (2020). Oral Microbiome Metabarcoding in Two Invasive Small Mammals from New Zealand. Diversity, 12(7), 278. https://doi.org/10.3390/d12070278

  • The shrubland invasion: What’s driving it?

    The shrubland invasion: What’s driving it?

    Plant communities dominated by mānuka/kāhikatoa (Leptospermum species)or kānuka (Kunzea species) are an extremely common feature of New Zealand’s native biodiversity. They are found in all manner of shapes, sizes, and habitats – dry and wet, high and low, warm and cold. We’ll call these communities ‘shrublands‘ throughout this text. Reality is much more complex with other types of native shrublands made up of different plant species as well as kānuka and mānuka also forming forests or scrub. There’s a great piece here if you want some more details.

    If you’ve ever bashed through young, dense, mānuka/kānuka shrublands whilst out tramping you might have noticed they aren’t very diverse. That’s because during this young phase they form such a thick canopy and dense shade that other plants find it difficult to establish. Once these stands age the canopy opens up and lets light in allowing other species to take off.

    A natural landscape featuring a mixture of shrubs and grassy terrain, with a mountainous background under a cloudy sky.
    The weed Spanish heath (Erica lusitanica), the lighter yellow-brown plants near the ground, invading gaps in mānuka (Leptospermum scoparium var. scoparium) shrubland on Bealey Spur. Photo Will Todhunter

    These shrublands are important for our native biodiversity. Some are remnants from before humans arrived. Others have expanded following human induced forest clearance and subsequent regeneration. These regenerating shrublands are what we call seral, an intermediate stage in ecological succession.

    Succession occurs when an intact ecosystem is disturbed and doesn’t immediately go back to its final climax vegetation. Instead subsequent vegetation communities gradually replace one another until a climax, or stable, state is reached. Under the right set of conditions kānuka and mānuka can shade out introduced grass species and support a transition of landscapes back to native forest.

    Banks Peninsula has many classic examples of this phenomenon, and if you go for a walk up Bowenvale Valley, in Christchurch, you should be able to spot large areas of planted kānuka where Christchurch City Council is trying to jumpstart this process.

    Including these shrubland species, Aotearoa has a grand total of 2,522 native vascular plant species. This total is far outnumbered by the staggering amount of introduced plant species, with at least 24,744.

    In many cases introduced plants can establish in the wild and invade natural ecosystems, including native shrublands. We will call these invasive introduced species weeds. These exotic weeds can negatively impact our biodiversity, displacing native plants and changing the ways our ecosystems function. Weed invasion has been well studied in forest and grassland ecosystems in New Zealand, but less so in shrublands. It is important to understand what drives weeds to invade shrublands, as this can help guide us when considering actions to protect these habitats.

    Laureline Rossignaud and Philip Hulme are researchers from Lincoln University who focus their research efforts on biological invasions, including weeds. They looked at information from 247 monitoring plots placed within shrublands across the country to better understand weed invasion into these habitats. Many studies have already investigated whether the number of native plant species in an ecosystem is related to weed invasions, but few studies have also considered the influence of climate, landscape features and the structure of the plant community in question. So, when this pair dived deeper into this topic, what did they find?

    Both the number of different species (species richness) and the size of the area covered by a species (its cover) play a role, but they don’t always align. Some shrublands had high numbers of species with low cover, whilst others had low numbers of exotic species but these were high in cover. This second example can be seen when a few aggressive weeds dominate.

    Dense forest scene with bare trees and lush green undergrowth.
    Shrubland on Banks Peninsula. Photo by Will Todhunter CC BY

    Low species richness, high species cover. The above image captures this, showing vegetation in a mature kānuka stand on Banks Peninsula. An open canopy of kānuka sits above a lower tier of native saplings of māhoe (Melicytus ramiflorus subsp. ramiflorus), poroporo (Solanum laciniatum) and kawakawa (Piper excelsum subsp. excelsum), and a dense ground cover of the highly invasive exotic veldt grass (Ehrharta erecta). The veldt grass forms such dense mats that it limits the establishment of most other plants and was once voted NZ’s worst weed!

    A clear takeaway from the study was that the physical structure of shrublands plays a big role in determining how susceptible they are to exotic plants. Shrublands with dense canopies and multiple layers of vegetation act like a shield, limiting open ground and leaving less space for weeds. Shrublands with open areas let in more sunlight and have more available options for weeds to gain a foothold.

    The surrounding land cover and land use heavily influenced weed invasions. Where shrublands were close to human modified landscapes ,weed invasion increased, and the same when shrublands were close to rivers. Modified landscapes typically had a higher number of weed species, providing a seed source that can then move into more natural areas.

    Size and shape of shrublands matters. Shrublands with long edges experienced higher levels of weed invasion, with edges often having more disturbance and being more accessible to invaders. This is known as an “edge effect“. Topography is another contributor, with lower and flatter areas more invaded than those that are steep and/or at higher elevation

    Unsurprisingly, climate also played a major role. Warmer temperatures were shown to increase weed invasion, and many introduced plants thrived in mild conditions. The expansion of suitable habitat ranges of weeds through a warming climate is yet another reason to be concerned about climate change!

    Scrubland on Onawe Peninsula, Banks Peninsula. Photo by Adrian Paterson

    Lastly, these researchers found that no single factor could fully explain weed invasion, it’s all about a combination of various factors. Something that readers might have expected.

    Through my work in conservation I’ve been lucky enough to spend time in a range of shrublands. Some of the most special are the fragmented remains of the once extensive kanuka drylands of the Canterbury Plains, such as Motukānuka Scientific Reserve. Research has found that intensive land use change adjacent to these remnants has strongly contributed to increased weed invasion on the edges. Irrigation changing water availability and increased nitrogen availability from surrounding farms were attributed as two of the main drivers here.

    There’s a couple things we can learn from these studies when thinking about protecting shrublands. To reduce the impacts of exotic plant invasion, the larger the area of shrubland the better. Dense, structurally rich vegetation is going to be more resilient to invasion. However, often small fragments of biodiversity are all that are left to work with, so factoring in a buffer from surrounding land use then becomes important.

    In many situations active management of weeds, such as physical control using herbicide, is essential to protect native species and ecosystem function’s from their impacts.

    So now that you know a bit more about shrublands, keep an eye out for some of the features discussed here. Keep learning about the native and introduced plants of New Zealand, and get out there with the right people and deal to some weeds!

    This article was prepared by Will Todhunter, Postgraduate Diploma in Applied Science student, for an assignment in ECOL608 Research Methods in Ecology.

    Rossignaud, L., & Hulme, P. E. (2023). Native vegetation structure, landscape features and climate shape non-native plant richness and cover in New Zealand native shrublands. Diversity and Distributions, 29(8), 1009–1020. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.13713

  • The genetic mystery behind “clonal” plants

    The genetic mystery behind “clonal” plants

    Hey plant lovers! Let me share something incredible with you about the plant world. Some clever plants have discovered a super cool way to multiply without needing seeds or pollen from other plants. It is called apomixis. Think of it as nature’s way of letting plants create mini-me versions of themselves. These amazing plants can thrive and spread their families far and wide, even when life throws them some challenges.

    Want to meet one of these botanical wonders? Say hello to Pilosella, which includes the common hawkweed. These remarkable plants are not just special because of their unique family-growing style, they also teach us lessons about how plants adapt and stay strong when their world changes around them.

    Apomixis: Nature’s Reproductive Shortcut

    In Pilosella, scientists found that this cloning trick is actually controlled by three special gene regions, kind of like switches on a circuit board:
    Switch 1: LOA – avoids meiosis, the normal gene-splitting step,
    Switch 2: LOP – avoids fertilisation, so eggs grow into plants without needing pollen,
    Switch 3: AutE – lets the plant build the food-filled tissue (endosperm) that supports the developing seed.
    Together, these three “super switches” turn regular sexual reproduction into a smooth, pollen-free process.

    The LOP locus: the key to clonal reproduction

    Let’s zoom in on one of those switches: the LOSS OF PARTHENOGENESIS locus, or LOP. It’s the part of the genome that tells the plant, “Hey, go ahead and make a seed, even without any pollen.” That means the egg cell doesn’t need fertilisation to start developing into a full plant.

    Using some clever genetic detective work, Ross Bicknell (former Plant and Food scientist), Chris Winefield (Lincoln University), and five other researchers mapped this LOP region to a small section of the genome, 654 thousand base pairs long (which is small, considering plant genomes can be billions of bases in total length). They did this using a special technique involving polyhaploids — basically, plants that carry only a single set of chromosomes, which helps make genetic signals easier to read.

    Click here if you would like to read the original paper.

    The role of the PAR gene and jumping DNA

    One especially interesting gene in the LOP region is called PARTHENOGENESIS, or PAR for short. This gene is a key player in apomixis, and it shows up in other plants like dandelions, too.

    Dandelion flower (left) and a seed head (right). From learn.colincanhelp.com/know-your-weeds-dandelions/

    Here’s where it gets wild: scientists found that the active version of PAR (the one that triggers cloning) carries a little hitchhiker — a transposable element, or “jumping gene”, stuck in its promoter region (the bit that controls when the gene turns on). This jumping gene acts like a sneaky switch that flicks PAR into high gear, telling the plant: “Start cloning!”

    Even cooler? This transposable element-based activation seems to have happened independently in different plant groups — dandelions, hawkweeds, and their cousin Hieracium all show this trick, but with slightly different transposable elements in different spots. It’s like nature reinvented the same superpower in different ways, a phenomenon known as convergent evolution.

    Check this review article if you want dig deeper on the “jumping gene”.

    So, are these plants just cloning machines?

    Not quite! For a while, scientists thought apomixis might be an evolutionary dead-end — after all, if you keep making copies of yourself, you might miss out on helpful mutations or adaptability and you steadily pick up flaws that you can’t get rid of. But Pilosella proves that’s not always the case. These plants can reproduce both ways: by cloning or by mixing genes with other plants. That means they can pass on their tried-and-true genetic blueprints or shuffle the deck when times get tough.

    In nature, this flexibility is a huge bonus. It lets them survive droughts, colonise poor soils, and hang in there when pollinators are scarce, and still adapt to new environments when needed. It’s the best of both worlds.

    Why this matters for the environment

    These clever plants are like nature’s survivalists. Their ability to reproduce without pollination means that they can spread quickly, especially in harsh places like dry grasslands or alpine meadows.

    But here’s the twist: sometimes they’re too good at it. In places like New Zealand, hawkweeds can become aggressive invaders, crowding out native plants. My own mother, for example, considers them total pests in her lawn!

    Scientists want to understand the genetic switches behind apomixis (like the LOP locus) to figure out how to manage or even control these fast-spreading plants, or perhaps one day harness apomixis for crop breeding.

    What this means for the future of plants and food

    Building on our exploration of the Pilosella plant and its unique LOP locus, let us dive into how plant genetics deepens our understanding of the natural world. As scientists examine these complex genetic blueprints, they uncovered valuable insights about:

    • How our green friends cleverly adapt to our changing climate
    • The super-smart ways that plants figure out how to survive and flourish in tough spots
    • Cool possibilities for helping crops grow better, even when the weather gets tricky

    But wait, there is more! This exciting research is not just about one plant, it is opening doors to better farming methods, helping protect our precious plant species, and finding clever ways to help plants weather the storms ahead.

    Let’s wrap this up

    Our exploration of Pilosella and its powerful LOP locus shows that even a so-called “weed” can teach us big lessons about evolution, resilience, and the future of farming.

    So next time you’re out for a walk and spot a humble hawkweed or dandelion, take a second look — you’re staring at a tiny miracle of plant reproduction, a living clue in one of nature’s greatest puzzles.

    This article was prepared by Bachelor of Science with Honours student Sienna Zeng as part of the ECOL608 Research Methods in Ecology course.

    References

  • Kiwi Hedgehogs : A Journey of Curiosity and Connection

    Kiwi Hedgehogs : A Journey of Curiosity and Connection

    Curiosity often starts with a sense of wonder and a desire to understand the world around us. If you are a parent, I hope you have noticed and observed this in your children. Their endless questions and fascination with the world are a beautiful reminder of the joy and excitement that comes with learning and discovery.

    I have four lovely daughters, among them four-year-old Arshifa Gul is a bundle of curiosity and always gives me a tough time replying to all her unexpected questions. She also loves watching animated movies, stories and travelling. Back in 2023, I took her to the Pakistan Museum of Natural History for the first time. She was shocked by seeing the animal models and skeleton structures, especially the huge dinosaurs and their roaring, Asiatic lions and their growling, and the realistic models of sharks and dolphins. At first, she was quiet, observing closely, making sure they couldn’t attack. Then, her surprising questions began. “Why is the dolphin here? Who made the dinosaur roar? How did they get so big? When did they live?”

    As a wildlife biologist, I’ve worked with animals for years, but her questions confused me! It was the first time that I struggled to explain my own field. Her curiosity pushed me to think deeper and find ways to explain complex concepts in simple terms. Our trip ended but Arshifa Gul’s questions did not. Her curiosity shifted to linking the roars and growls to the human voice of the animals she heard in the animated movies

    AI-generated image (Grok) of Arshifa Gul standing in awe before a towering dinosaur skeleton in a museum, her eyes wide with wonder, surrounded by animal models like lions and dolphins.

    The next morning at breakfast, Arshifa Gul excitedly shared her thoughts about the characters from her favourite animated movie, “Allahyar and the Legend of Markhor”, set in Pakistan. She talked about the boy Allahyar and his animal friends, then asked where these animals lived, how big they were in real life, what their calls sounded like, and if we could visit them. I said yes we could, but explained that Khunjerab National Park, home to the markhor and snow leopard, was seven hours away.

    Landscape of Khunjrab National Park, Pakistan © Nisar Ahmed

    Her curiosity turned our breakfast into an adventure planning session. I gathered information on the park’s history, species like snow leopards, ibex, and Marco Polo sheep, and conservation efforts, including a trophy hunting program initiated by IUCN and WWF. 80% of the total benefits from this hunting initiative goes to the local communities while the remaining 20% is invested in habitat protection and improvement.

    We visited the site, and she enjoyed the trip thoroughly and I answered most of her questions and her confusion cleared regarding voices and the original habitat of different species. Answering her is always tough, but it makes me see the world through her bright, wondering eyes, full of love for animals. She makes me realise how important it is to nurture this curiosity, not just in her, but in all children.

    Curiosity is a powerful force that drives us to explore, learn, and grow. Arshifa Gul’s curiosity inspired me to write about the introduction of European hedgehogs into New Zealand. The European hedgehog, also known as the West European hedgehog, is a charming little creature native to Europe.

    Hedgehogs can live in a variety of terrestrial habitats and are mostly active at night. They have a slow, hesitant way of walking and often stop to sniff the air. Unlike other hedgehog species that 

    Hedgehogs have fascinated people for centuries. Their spiky charm has made them popular in history, from ancient amulets to modern pop culture icons, like Sonic the Hedgehog. Did you know that New Zealand is the only country outside Europe where European hedgehogs have successfully been established in the wild? This fascinating story of how these spiky little creatures made their way to both the North and South Islands of New Zealand is filled with twists and turns.

    Back in the 1869, acclimatisation societies in New Zealand introduced European hedgehogs to control pests. For a long time, it was believed that hedgehogs were first introduced to the South Island and later spread to the North Island. However, a molecular study in 2013 challenged this view and suggested that hedgehogs were independently introduced to both the islands directly from Europe. This means that the North Island had its own separate introduction of hedgehogs, rather than receiving them from the South Island.

    To uncover the truth, researchers from various universities, including Lincoln University, turned to historical records, especially old newspaper articles. They discovered that there were at least four independent shipments of hedgehogs into the North Island before 1900 (which were not documented in the first publication back in 1975). These findings confirmed that the North Island’s hedgehog population did not originate from the South Island. This study highlights the importance of combining observational data, molecular studies, and historical records to understand the introduction pathways of species.

    Hedgehog searching for food © Author

    The European hedgehog population thrived well in NZ, too well, as it has now become problematic for native wildlife. For example, they prey on ground-nesting birds and compete with native species for food. Leading conservationists have classified them as a pest, and the Department of Conservation New Zealand has launched a campaign to protect native species from hedgehogs.

    Arshifa Gul’s questions and the hedgehog share a common thread. Curiosity drives us to explore and learn. Whether it’s a child marvelling at a museum exhibit or scientists unravelling ecological puzzles, curiosity bridges wonder and action. It reminds us that conservation isn’t just about saving species—it’s about nurturing the spark that makes us care. As parents, educators, or stewards of the planet, or a teacher we can foster curiosity by encouraging, sharing stories, and exploring nature together by using interactive technologies.

    The author, Muhammad Waseem, is a postgraduate student in the Master of Science at Te Whare Wānaka o Aoraki Lincoln University. This article was written as an assessment for ECOL 608 Research Methods in Ecology.

    Reference: Pipek, P., Pysek, P., Bacher, S., Cerna Bolfikova, B., & Hulme, P. E. (2020). Independent introductions of hedgehogs to the North and South Island of New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Ecology, 44(1), 3396. https://doi.org/10.20417/nzjecol.44.7

  • Pesty plastics: Removing a problem from wildlife management

    Pesty plastics: Removing a problem from wildlife management

    We often put up with bad situations because they stop something worse happening. This can be as big as having nuclear weapons to stop major wars occurring. Paying taxes is a burden but it keeps a society healthy and connected. Not eating so much chocolate seems wrong but will give you better long-term health.

    And then we have plastic. Plastic must rank as one of the most successful of human inventions. It can be used in myriads of applications, keeps foods hygienic for longer, and allows more people to have the luxuries of the modern world. Plastic also causes incredible waste and we are still learning about the ongoing and long-lasting impacts that occur from the breakdown of plastics into smaller and smaller molecules.

    One of the biggest shifts in day to day life over the last decade or so is the movement away from plastic where possible. Many countries have banned (or are banning) single use plastics. I would doubt that there is anyone unaware of plastics as an issue for our sustainable future.

    Plastic figures from Cthulhu: Death May Die! A great game with great plastic figures (but some guilt comes with it!). Image from Adrian Paterson.

    One of my hobbies is in collecting and playing board games. Historically there has been a lot of plastic in games. Lately, there has been a real effort by gaming companies to make as much as possible from cardboard and wood and to remove stuff like shrink-wrap. (Although I do love me some great detailed plastic miniatures some of the time. I try to add use by painting them. Unfortunately, there is still nothing quite as good for sculpting as plastic. Hopefully that will change (see this approach using mostly wood shavings as a building matrix called re-wood).)

    As we have mentioned many times on EcoLincNZ, we do a lot of research on vertebrate pest management, especially in monitoring and detecting mammals, like stoats, deer, possums, hedgehogs (even elephants and leopards). Controlling these pests is vital for conserving New Zealand’s endemic biodiversity. We are very good at doing this and improving all of the time. Unfortunately, we use a lot of plastic.

    Our tracking tunnels, chew cards and wax tags all have significant plastic components. Some of these are single use, some can be used a few times, but there are always some that get left in the environment. Also, many of the places that we are interested in monitoring are, by definition, in areas that have low human impacts and very little exposure to plastic. And here we are bringing the plastic there.

    Tracking tunnels are made of plastic. Typically they can be used multiple times but many are left in the monitoring areas. Image from Adrian Paterson.

    Now, you could argue that a few negatives of using a relatively small amount of plastic is far outweighed by the good that using these devices does. And you would be correct. But what if we could have our cake and eat it too?

    Katie Pitt is a PhD student at Lincoln University. She and her supervisors, James Ross and Adrian Paterson, have just published a paper in New Zealand Journal of Zoology where they question the use of plastic in wildlife management and ask whether we can do better.

    Katie looked at how much plastic is munched up by species, like rats and mice, when they interact with chew cards placed in various habitats. These bits of plastic remain in the rats and then the environment even if the cards are retrieved. The plastic fragments are also much reduced in size by the nibbling and can move around much easier, through wind, rain and rodent stomachs. The removed chew card will also end up in landfills.

    Katie found that chew cards in Canterbury and Taranaki typically left 15% of their volume behind in the environment as nibbled bits. Given the scale of monitoring throughout New Zealand this can quickly add up to a lot of plastic in areas that typically have no plastics.

    A well nibbled chew-card. All that missing plastic is now on the forest floor or in the faeces of rodents. Image from Katie Pitt.

    There may be an alternative. Katie tested some new chew cards made from wood pulp, and so fully biodegradable. Of course we don’t want to use a product that is inferior to what we already use, especially for something as important as protecting our biodiversity. Katie tested the use of wood pulp chew cards alongside plastic models. She consistently found that they performed just as well in a range of conditions (including with a lot of rain!). Katie also found that prices per chew card were similar with scope for the wood pulp cards to eventually become cheaper.

    Is this a problem that people want to solve? Katie asked individuals from 30 organisations that work in pest monitoring and found that 97% were keen to move away from single-use plastics, as long as there was no major reduction in functionality and cost.

    So we have a problem, people want to solve this problem, we have an alternative, and this alternative seems to work as well as what we already have. Eat that cake and have it as well!

    There is still a bit of work to do to scale this up to the levels that we need if this is to replace the status quo. Katie is also looking at how we would replace tracking tunnels. But the future is looking bright. And plastic-free.

    Adrian Paterson is a lecturer in the Department of Pest-management and Conservation at Lincoln University. As a Twin Peaks fan from way back, he really wanted to use “She’s dead, wrapped in plastic” in this article.

  • Enemies with benefits

    Enemies with benefits

    The idea of ‘friends with benefits’ is reasonably widespread and understood. Having good interactions with others will often lead to even more productive outcomes. But what about ‘enemies with benefits’? Are there times where your enemy can give you some positive benefits?

    Invasive species cause ecological harm worldwide, threatening biodiversity, disrupting nutrient cycling and displacing native species. Pacific islands, with their characteristically high rates of endemism, experience out-sized effects from plant invasions (Bellard et al. 2014). In biodiversity hotspots, such as New Zealand, exotic invasive plant species now outnumber native species in area and in number.

    But, how do they do it?

    New Zealand habitats are prone to invasion by exotic plant species. Why is this?

    A study by Lauren Waller and other Lincoln University and University of Canterbury colleagues, published in Journal of Ecology attempts to find some answers. Lauren shows that exotic plants may gain their competitive edge by accumulating enemies in the soil and sharing them with neighbouring native plants, a phenomenon that plant ecologists call pathogen spillover.

    Lauren set up a large mesocosm (self-contained area) experiment. These were areas where new species could be added to a known group of native species in a very manageable process. The health and growth of all plants could be measured and microorganisms both present at the start and brought in on the introduced plants could be identified.

    Lauren expected exotic plants to experience improved growth due to escape from pathogens (leaving the burden of enemies behind when they come to NZ). This assumption comes in large part from two well-known hypotheses, the Enemy Release Hypothesis and the Evolution of Increased Competitive Ability (EICA) Hypothesis. Enemy Release states that exotic plants can gain incredible success when they move to a new location lacking the enemy pressure they experienced in their home range, particularly co-evolved specialist enemies. EICA goes a step further to suggest that if exotic plants can escape enemy pressure in their new range, those plants will have more resources to allocate to growth over defence.

    Somewhat supporting Enemy Release, exotic plants did not appear to suffer much from specialist fungal pathogens. However, exotic plants did associate with generalist pathogens. Also, in support of Enemy Release, exotic plants did not appear to allocate resources to defence. Instead, exotic plants appeared to tolerate generalist pathogen pressure without reducing their growth.

    Native Poa grown in a native versus exotic dominated plot.

    Lauren did not expect to see big impacts by exotic plants on native plants, and boy, did they! Native plants just wasted away when grown with exotic plants. It was very sad to watch. This photo shows an example of a native bunch-grass, grown with all native neighbours (left) or in communities dominated by exotic plants (right).

    What explained the out-sized effect of exotic plants on native plant growth? Our network analysis showed that exotics not only accumulated and tolerated generalist pathogens, but they shared their pathogens with native plants. Native plants did not appear to have the same tolerance for this enemy pressure like the exotic plants did. 

    We started by asking ‘are there times where your enemy can give you some positive benefits?’. It turns out that yes there are times when your enemies can help you a lot. In this case if species cause you problems it will be OK for you if they cause competing species even more problems! With invasive species, your microbial enemies can do you a good turn but taking out the opposition.

    Now that’s a real enemy with benefits!

    Lauren Waller and Adrian Paterson wrote this together (and not as enemies!). They are lecturers in the Department of Pest-management and Conservation.

    Bellard, C., Leclerc, C., Leroy, B., Bakkenes, M., Veloz, S., Thuiller, W., & Courchamp, F. (2014). Vulnerability of biodiversity hotspots to global change. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 23(12), 1376-1386

  • Echoes of misunderstanding: Invasive species or welcome guests?

    In a new age of ‘fake news’, the exponentially growing ChatGPT, and being talked at by your climate change-denier uncle at the dinner table, how do we know who to trust? Well, the scientists obviously. But what happens when the scientists get it wrong?

    An article released in January of 2024 “Systematic and persistent bias against introduced species” by Patricio Pereyra and colleagues, ruthlessly called out conservation biologists for demonstrating a bias against introduced species. Researchers were accused of shedding a negative light on introduced species no matter their taxonomy, habitat, time of introduction, and regardless of their attributed harm.

    Photo: Amelia Geary / Design: Archi Banal

    Pereyra speculated that the invasion of zebra mussels in North America had a strong impact on the establishment of the bias. Most cases of negative framing in publications were from North America.

    A month later, a counterargument article, led by Dan Simberloff and including Phil Hulme from Lincoln University, was submitted to the same journal. This response tore Pereyra’s article to shreds. For example, there is so much more published material labelling invasive species as harmful simply because most research is driven by funding to deal with harmful species.

    The “guilty until proven innocent” was seen by Pereyra as a bias, whereas Simberloff argued that it was the safest approach. Better to prevent outbreaks first rather than assume innocence and scramble to clean up the mess later.

    The validity of Pereyra’s research methods was also called into question. In their assessment of 300 publications, Pereyra and colleagues based their assessments on only the introduction of each paper, the section where no current research is reported. Pereyra stated that no non-native species have caused any type of extinction, by citing a study that only assessed their impact on native plants. This would be news to those in New Zealand dealing with the impacts of introduced mammalian predators. In addition, all of the assessments made in this article were made by two authors, with a third brought in when those two disagreed.

    Photo: Author

    Pereyra and colleagues continued to selectively use evidence that matched their hypothesis by making continual reference to the ‘tens rule’. This states that only 1% of non-native species will become pests. As more research on more diverse taxa was undertaken, this rule became a misleadingly low estimate. In fact, it is estimated that 50% of invasive vertebrates lead to harm. So while modern conservationists are able to recognise that the tens rule is outdated, the average person reading at home will not.

    This is just a tiny example of a much larger problem science is facing right now; the power of a harmful narrative in science and its implications for the general public. The science world has been struggling for a while now with issues like P-hacking (selecting data analyses that produce results aligning with their hypothesis), fraudulent scientific papers making it to publication (fabricating research that has not taken place to boost career accolades and experience in industry), and like the mentioned article, lack of rigorous scientific procedure.

    False science can turn certain areas of science into a debate to be had by those who are not fully equipped enough to have it. By now I believe just about everyone in the Western World knows about the reports that vaccines cause autism, an idea that originated from two academic physicians in the 1950s.

    Image: outtacontext

    Over 70 years later there is a massive group of people who still believe this to be true, despite countless modern scientists disproving this idea. Not only do scientists have to conduct research to further the field, they now have to spend countless years using countless resources trying to prove to the public that the beliefs they are so desperately holding on to are, in fact, not accurate.

    While the article accusing scientists of holding a bias against non-native species may not have such a wide reach as the vaccine debacle, it does have the ability to change the minds of people. It can change the environmental beliefs they hold, the way they look at conservation, and the future research they conduct, as well as aligning with their personal beliefs outside the world of science. It creates issues that would otherwise not have arisen; spreading misinformation, fostering unwarranted skepticism, and contributing to the polarisation of environmental issues.

    For example, the Pereyra paper could cause shifts in perception, such as questioning established ecological principles, potentially undermining conservation efforts aimed at preserving native biodiversity. This can have a ripple effect, influencing policy decisions, funding allocations, and public support for important conservation initiatives. While openness and debate in the scientific community is important and should be encouraged, you simply have to get your facts right.

    So again I ask, what happens when even the scientists get it wrong? Actually, it happens all the time. Trial and error are the engine of science! Scientific theories are tested to be disproven to ensure we actually have a full understanding of whatever it is we are studying.

    People at home can also look to disprove scientific theories. Pay attention to the transparency of the method and study size, credibility of sources, and citations from reputable journals and research institutions. It may not save your life, but it will save you from a lifetime of ill-informed conversation around the dinner table. You don’t want to be that relative.

    This article was prepared by Master of International Nature Conservation student Alexandra Paish as part of the ECOL608 Research Methods in Ecology course.

  • Sonic science to eradicate the hedgehog

    Helpful gardeners or destructive beasts? Hedgehogs could be the last thing standing in the way of restoring native wildlife.

    Most New Zealanders are aware of the current predator problem, with possums, rats and stoats taking the cake for the biggest pains, but what about cute little hedgehogs? Are they really as innocent as they look or are they discretely unravelling the very fabric of our treasured native wilderness? Some scientists went on a hedgehog hunt to find out.

    Now imagine the magnificent Ōtamahua: an 80 hectare island smack in the middle of the flooded volcanic crater of Lyttleton Harbour, completely uninhabited by people, but instead populated by some weird mini chickens with fancy hairdos. Back in the day, European explorers hadn’t decimated local wildlife populations yet, and the island was teeming with now extinct koreke New Zealand quails, inspiring them to call this place Quail Island.

    Quail Island is a recreation reserve run by the Department of Conservation (DOC) and is being restored to a natural landscape after being formerly farmed. In this programme, the Quail Island Trust and DOC teamed up with a plan to eradicate all exotic pest mammals from the island. Scientists were ready to restore the island to its original splendour by bringing back native insects, lizards and birds, but one thing could be standing in the way of this; the island is dominated by European hedgehogs, and they’re not going down without a fight.

    Photo by Flickr user nutmeg66 CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

    So what’s the deal with hedgehogs? Everyone seems on board with killing every invasive pest mammal out there like it’s a glorified action movie. Oddly, people tend to feel very differently about these freaky little spike balls. Unlike other mammals that were introduced in New Zealand, people love them. This is because they can be seen helping around the garden, happily munching on slugs and snails, which are considered pests. But it’s difficult to understand exactly how these slug-munchers are impacting native wildlife, all we know is that we have gravely underestimated them.

    What else is on the dinner menu for these hedgehogs? Aside from the snails and slugs in your garden, they enjoy eating native beetles of all sizes, with a side of millipedes, and then moth larvae and earthworms for dessert. Some have even developed a taste for weta. Hedgehogs also snack on lizards and the eggs and chicks of ground-nesting birds. The hedgehogs are hungry and this is a bad situation for these vulnerable species.

    In the distant future, the year 2000, researchers from Lincoln University decided to go to war with the hedgehogs. They did so using their most powerful weapon of all: science and the pursuit of knowledge. They tested their techniques on local hedgehogs before heading into battle on Ōtamahua Quail island. The scientists discovered that they could entice the hedgehogs with a feast of their favourite foods. They tested baits like “kitekat chunky fish cat food” and quail eggs.

    (It is worth noting that while the original quail island quails went extinct, they were replaced by introduced California quails, which is convenient because the island didn’t have to renamed.)

    Once the scientists got to Quail Island and came face to face with these adorable monsters, they realized that unlike other invasive mammals, hedgehogs were pretty chilled out. They didn’t mind being caught and released again, which meant that it would be possible to remove them from the island without bloodshed. At this point, the animal rights activists may be cheering and the conservationists may be booing. Not killing them means putting them somewhere else. Instead of removing the problem, we are just relocating it.

    Photo of Ōtamahua Quail Island by Jon Sullivan CC BY-NC 2.0

    So the Lincoln researchers got to work running around the island, setting up 53 hedgehog traps. Since there was actually no such thing as a hedgehog trap at this point, they used their smart brains and decided to use traps for other pests which were known to catch hedgehogs by accident. The systematic trials led the scientists to the conclusion that one of the most effective baits for catching hedgehogs was something called “Chunks of Tasti Dinner Dog Roll”. You just can’t make this stuff up. Cat food and peanut butter were similarly popular among hedgehog audiences but surprisingly, quail eggs were not!

    Here’s the bad news: hedgehogs had made themselves at home across every kind of habitat on the island. Also, the number of hedgehogs being caught each night didn’t decrease over the course of the 11-day study, leading the scientists to conclude that there were far more hedgehogs on the island than they had previously thought.

    The baited traps were placed across all habitat types on the islands, but had much less success around pine and macrocarpa forests. The traps had the most success in catching hedgehogs in grassy and scrubby areas. Could this be the hedgehog headquarters?

    This research provided some important insights into the possibilities of eradicating hedgehogs. They figured out which food is preferred and which types of cages work best. They found that the hedgehogs didn’t hang out in pine and macrocarpa forests as much because there weren’t as many insect snacks for them in there.

    Quail Island in the centre. Image from Adrian Paterson.

    This study found that live trapping hedgehogs is possible but it is inefficient. The project took 75 hours of work and only managed to remove 24 hedgehogs, that’s 3 hours per hedgehog! The scientists suggested switching to lethal traps because these Houdinis are clever masterminds and they could be escaping from the live traps.

    Are there other options? Some have suggested recruiting the help of our best friends, dogs. On another island, dogs were used to find and kill possums. Hedgehogs are smelly and hunting dogs can find them easily without even being trained. The only caveat is that dogs do have to be trained to ignore other species, especially native birds like the precious little white-flippered penguin, another resident of Quail Island.

    On the mainland of Aotearoa New Zealand, hedgehogs were found in densities of 5 hedgehogs per 1 hectare of land (which is the size of 2 rugby fields). This is probably not the case on Quail Island because it is so dry, but nonetheless it will take a lot of effort to remove these destructive little creatures.

    This is one case study for the eradication of hedgehogs. While the current focus is on eradicating other predator species, may this serve as a warning that we can’t forget about the humble hedgehog when we talk about predator control.

    This article was prepared by Master of International Nature Conservation student Lindsay Wood as part of the ECOL608 Research Methods in Ecology course.

    Research Article Source: Kavermann, M., Bowie, Michael H., Paterson, Adrian M. (2003) The eradication of mammalian predators from Quail Island, Banks Peninsula, Canterbury, New Zealand. Lincoln University Wildlife Management Report series. https://hdl.handle.net/10182/683