Interactions between chuditch (Dasyurus geoffroii) and introduced predators: a review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The chuditch is a carnivorous marsupial that has suffered catastrophic decline since European settlement in Australia. The impacts of introduced foxes and feral cats are thought to have contributed to this decline. Although chuditch populations appear to respond favourably to fox control, ecological theory predicts that other predators, including feral cats, are also likely to increase in abundance when foxes are removed. The flow-on effects of these predicted increases are not known, but are potentially significant for chuditch and for other native fauna. Here, we review the evidence for limiting effects of foxes and feral cats on chuditch populations. We also discuss the likely effects on chuditch populations (direct and indirect) of current fox control practices. Using recent advances in carnivore community ecology, we make testable predictions regarding likely interactions within the predator guild. Experiments should adopt a whole-of-community approach, seeking to clarify the effects of fox control on the entire suite of native and introduced predators, as well as on the abundance and diversity of prey.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".