An evaluation of genetic analyses, skull morphology and visual appearance for assessing dingo purity: implications for dingo conservation

The introgression of domestic dog genes into dingo populations threatens the genetic integrity of 'pure' dingoes. However, dingo conservation efforts are hampered by difficulties in distinguishing between dingoes and hybrids in the field. This study evaluates consistency in the status of hybridisation (i.e. dingo, hybrid or dog) assigned by genetic analyses, skull morphology and visual assessments. Of the 56 south-east Queensland animals sampled, 39 (69.6%) were assigned the same status by all three methods, 10 (17.9%) by genetic and skull methods, four (7.1%) by genetic and visual methods; and two (3.6%) by skull and visual methods. Pair-wise comparisons identified a significant relationship between genetic and skull methods, but not between either of these and visual methods. Results from surveying 13 experienced wild dog managers showed that hybrids were more easily identified by visual characters than were dingoes. A more reliable visual assessment can be developed through determining the relationship between (1) genetics and phenotype by sampling wild dog populations and (2) the expression of visual characteristics from different proportions and breeds of domestic dog genes by breeding trials. Culling obvious hybrids based on visual characteristics, such as sable and patchy coat colours, should slow the process of hybridisation.

Fisheries Queensland Long Term Monitoring Program Underwater Visual Census of twenty-four reefs on the Great Barrier Reef between 1999 and 2004.

In 1999, the Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation (DEEDI), Fisheries Queensland undertook a new initiative to collect long term monitoring data of various important stocks including reef fish. This data and monitoring manual for the reef fish component of that program which was based on Underwater Visual Census methodology of 24 reefs on the Great Barrier Reef between 1999 and 2004. Data was collected using six 50m x 5m transects at 4 sites on 24 reefs. Benthic cover type was also recorded for 10m of each transect. The attached Access Database contains 5 tables being: SITE DETAILS TABLE Survey year Data entry complete REF survey site ID Site # (1-4) Location (reef name) Site Date (date surveyed) Observer 1 (3 initials to identify who estimated fish lengths and recorded benthic cover) TRANSECT DETAILS Survey ID Transect Number (1-6) Time (the transect was surveyed) Visibility (in metres) Minimum Depth surveyed (m) Maximum Depth surveyed (m) Percent of survey completed (%) Comments SUBSTRATE Survey ID Transect Number (1-6) then % cover of each of eth following categories of benthic cover types Dead Coral Live Coral Soft Coral Rubble Sand Sponge Algae Sea Grass Other COORDINATES (over survey sites) from -14 38.792 to -19 44.233 and from 145 21.507 to 149 55.515 SIGHTINGS ID Survey ID Transect Number (1-6) CAAB Code Scientific Name Reef Fish Length (estimated Fork Length of fish; -1 = unknown or not recorded) Outside Transect (if a fish was observed outside a transect -1 was recorded) Morph Code (F = footballer morph for Plectropomus laevis, S = Spawning colour morph displayed)

‘Ladd traps’ as a visual trap for male and female Queensland fruit fly, Bactrocera tryoni (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Bactrocera tryoni (Froggatt) is Australia's major horticultural insect pest, yet monitoring females remains logistically difficult. We trialled the ‘Ladd trap’ as a potential female surveillance or monitoring tool. This trap design is used to trap and monitor fruit flies in countries other (e.g. USA) than Australia. The Ladd trap consists of a flat yellow panel (a traditional ‘sticky trap’), with a three dimensional red sphere (= a fruit mimic) attached in the middle. We confirmed, in field-cage trials, that the combination of yellow panel and red sphere was more attractive to B. tryoni than the two components in isolation. In a second set of field-cage trials, we showed that it was the red-yellow contrast, rather than the three dimensional effect, which was responsible for the trap's effectiveness, with B. tryoni equally attracted to a Ladd trap as to a two-dimensional yellow panel with a circular red centre. The sex ratio of catches was approximately even in the field-cage trials. In field trials, we tested the traditional red-sphere Ladd trap against traps for which the sphere was painted blue, black or yellow. The colour of sphere did not significantly influence trap efficiency in these trials, despite the fact the yellow-panel/yellow-sphere presented no colour contrast to the flies. In 6 weeks of field trials, over 1500 flies were caught, almost exactly two-thirds of them being females. Overall, flies were more likely to be caught on the yellow panel than the sphere; but, for the commercial Ladd trap, proportionally more females were caught on the red sphere versus the yellow panel than would be predicted based on relative surface area of each component, a result also seen the field-cage trial. We determined that no modification of the trap was more effective than the commercially available Ladd trap and so consider that product suitable for more extensive field testing as a B. tryoni research and monitoring tool.