Diet breadth of a critically endangered owl presents challenges for invasive rodent management: a conservation conundrum

ABSTRACT

Trophic interactions between threatened species complicate management. Similarly, interactions between threatened species and pest species present management challenges, given that pest control can lead to non-target impacts (e.g. trophic cascades or secondary poisoning). There are records of the critically endangered Norfolk Island Morepork Ninox novaeseelandiae undulata consuming both threatened songbirds and invasive rodents that are subject to management interventions. Nevertheless, the diet of the morepork remains largely unknown. We visually screened regurgitated pellets using a microscope, alongside environmental DNA (eDNA) screening of pellets and scats, to investigate the diet of the Norfolk Island Morepork. A total of 113 pellets and 19 scats were collected between October 2020 and June 2021. All moreporks screened with eDNA metabarcoding had consumed invasive rodents and at least one-third of samples contained rodents. The owls were also found to have consumed four of five endemic songbirds and possibly an endemic parrot, most of which are threatened. Environmental DNA metabarcoding detected more taxa overall, but visual screening identified a greater richness of Orthoptera and Coleoptera in the diet. The frequency with which the Norfolk Island Morepork consumed rodents presents a conundrum for conservation managers. Control of invasive rodents is considered essential to support threatened songbirds, yet this same action places the species at risk of secondary poisoning. Urgent investigations are needed to identify effective control methods for invasive rodents that are safe for non-target species.

KEYWORDS:

• Anticoagulant rodenticide
• secondary poisoning
• eDNA
• Norfolk Island Morepork
• diet
• conservation management

Acknowledgments

We pay our respect to the Norf’k Ailen Kaunsl’ Eldas and extend our recognition to all Pitkern descendants who call Norf’k home. We acknowledge the contribution of Parks Australia and Norfolk Island National Park, Norfolk Island Regional Council and the Norfolk Island community for their cooperation and assistance during this research. Particular thanks go to Nigel Greenup, Margaret Christian, Mark Hallam and Jolene Oliver. Rohan Bilney and the CSIRO Insect Collections team provided invaluable assistance with visual taxa identification. We thank Anthony van Rooyen for eDNA metabarcoding. Penny Olsen, Allie Nance, Rebecca Pirzl and three anonymous referees provided valuable feedback on the manuscript. This research was funded through the National Environmental Science Program and by Director of National Parks. All research was approved by Parks Australia and conducted under Monash University Animal Ethics approval 2021-25691. FS was supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship. The authors report there are no competing interests to declare.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed at https://doi.org/10.1080/01584197.2024.2335397.

Additional information

Funding

This work was carried out on Norfolk Island -[29.030116, 167.953828].