In vitro infection of sheep lice (Bovicola ovis Schrank) by Steinernematid and Heterorhabditid nematodes.

Control of sheep lice with conventional pesticides can be compromised by difficulty in contacting lice in the dense water repellent fleeces of sheep, particularly when sheep have not been recently shorn. Entomopathogenic nematodes (ENs) are motile and are able to actively seek out insect hosts. They have particular advantages for the control of pests in cryptic habitats, such as the fleeces of sheep and avoid many of the problems frequently associated with chemical controls. This study investigated whether ENs were able infect and kill Bovicola ovis and compared the effectiveness of different species at different temperatures and when applied to wool. Four species of nematodes, Steinernema carpocapsae, Steinernema riobrave, Steinernema feltiae and Heterorhabditis bacteriophora were tested. All were shown to infect and kill lice in Petri dish assays at 30C. At 35C, the percent infection for S. carpocapsae and S. riobrave was significantly higher than for the other two species and percent infection by S. feltiae was significantly greater than for H. bacteriophora (P<0.05). At 37C the percent mortality induced by S. riobrave was significantly greater than for S. carpocapsae (P<0.05). All species were able to locate and infect lice in wool when formulated in water with 8% Tween 80. In wool assays the percent lice infected with nematodes was significantly greater for S. riobrave than H.bacteriophora at 25C, but there were no other differences between species (P=0.05). S. carpocapsae, S. riobrave and S. feltiae caused significantly higher lice mortality than H. bacteriophora at both 25 and 35C in wool assays, but mortality induced by the three steinernematid species did not differ significantly (P>0.05). It is concluded that of the ENs studied S. riobrave is likely to be most effective against B. ovis when applied to live sheep because of its greater tolerance to high temperatures and 'cruiser' foraging strategy .

Demographic and functional responses of wild dogs to poison baiting

Lethal control of wild dogs - that is Dingo (Canis lupus dingo) and Dingo/Dog (Canis lupus familiaris) hybrids - to reduce livestock predation in Australian rangelands is claimed to cause continental-scale impacts on biodiversity. Although top predator populations may recover numerically after baiting, they are predicted to be functionally different and incapable of fulfilling critical ecological roles. This study reports the impact of baiting programmes on wild dog abundance, age structures and the prey of wild dogs during large-scale manipulative experiments. Wild dog relative abundance almost always decreased after baiting, but reductions were variable and short-lived unless the prior baiting programme was particularly effective or there were follow-up baiting programmes within a few months. However, age structures of wild dogs in baited and nil-treatment areas were demonstrably different, and prey populations did diverge relative to nil-treatment areas. Re-analysed observations of wild dogs preying on kangaroos from a separate study show that successful chases that result in attacks of kangaroos by wild dogs occurred when mean wild dog ages were higher and mean group size was larger. It is likely that the impact of lethal control on wild dog numbers, group sizes and age structures compromise their ability to handle large difficult-to-catch prey. Under certain circumstances, these changes sometimes lead to increased calf loss (Bos indicus/B. taurus genotypes) and kangaroo numbers. Rangeland beef producers could consider controlling wild dogs in high-risk periods when predation is more likely and avoid baiting at other times.

Turf for tough times - keeping grass cover with less water, Proceedings of a seminar held at Redlands Research Station, Cleveland, Queensland, 6 June 2007.

Suitable for gaining some insights into important questions about the management of turf in dry times. Improve your product quality and avoid unnecessary losses. Can varieties help? How important are soils in conserving moisture and how do I measure my soil's condition? How can I make the best use of available water? Can water retaining amendments assist in establishing turf? Is recycled water a good option? Contains research results from turfgrass trials conducted by Queensland Government scientists for Queensland conditions.

Are we focussing wild dog control the wrong time of the year and going about it the wrong way?

Our evaluation of the predation of calves by wild dogs in the 1990s found that the number of calves killed and frequency of years that calf losses occurred, is higher in baited areas compared to adjoining, non-baited areas of similar size. Calf losses were highest with poor seasonal conditions, low prey numbers and where baited areas were re-colonised by wild dogs soon after baiting. We monitored wild dog “activity” before and after 35 baiting programs in southwest, central west and far north Queensland between 1994 and 2006 and found change in activity depends on the timing of the baiting. Baiting programs conducted between October and April show an increase in dog activity post-baiting (average increase of 219.1%, SEM 100.9, n=9, for programs conducted in October and November; an increase of 82.5%, SEM 54.5, n=7 for programs conducted in March and April; and a decrease in activity of 46.5%, SEM 10.2, n=19 for programs conducted between May and September). We monitored the seasonal activity and dispersal of wild dogs fitted with satellite transmitters 2006 to present. We have found that: • Activity of breeding males and females, whilst rearing and nurturing pups, is focussed around the den between July to September and away from areas of human activity. Activity of breeding groups appears to avoid locations of human activity until juveniles become independent (around late November). • While independent and solitary yearlings often have unstable, elliptically-shaped territories in less favourable areas, members of breeding groups have territories that appear seasonally stable and circular located in more favourable habitats. • Extra-territorial forays of solitary yearlings can be huge, in excess of 200 km. The largest forays we have monitored have occurred when the activity of pack members is focussed around rearing pups and juveniles (August to November). • Where wild dogs have dispersed or had significant territorial expansion, it has occurred within days of baiting programs and onto recently baited properties. • The wild dogs we have tracked have followed netting barrier fences for hundreds of kilometres and lived adjacent to or bypassed numerous grids in the barrier. Based on these studies, we conclude that a proportion of the perceived decline in dog activity between May and September, post baiting, is due to a decline in dog activity in areas associated with human activity. The increase in dog activity post-baiting between October and May (and increased calf predation on baited properties) is likely caused by wild dogs dispersing (juveniles and yearlings) or expanding (adults) their territory into baited, now ‘vacant’, areas. We hypothesise that baiting programs should be focussed in summer and autumn commencing late November as soon as juveniles become independent of adults. We also hypothesise that instead of large, annual or semi-annual baiting programs, laying the same number of baits over 4-6 weeks may be more effective. These hypotheses need to be tested through an adaptive management project.