Conservation Genetics

, Volume 18, Issue 6, pp 1475–1480 | Cite as

Avoiding the last supper: parentage analysis indicates multi-generational survival of re-introduced ‘toad-smart’ lineage

  • Teigan CremonaEmail author
  • Peter Spencer
  • Richard Shine
  • Jonathan K. Webb
Short Communication


Invasive species are a leading cause of animal extinctions. It is difficult to eradicate established and widespread populations of invaders, so we need novel approaches to reduce their impact on imperilled wildlife. In Australia, the toxic cane toad Rhinella marina has caused local extinctions of northern quolls Dasyurus hallucatus. Quolls lack immunity to toad toxins, and die after attacking adult toads. Using a novel approach, we modified quoll behaviour by feeding them small, non-lethal toads laced with a nausea-inducing chemical. Quolls that consumed the baits became ill, and subsequently ignored toads. We reintroduced these ‘toad-smart’ quolls to Kakadu National Park to determine whether aversion training could be an effective conservation tool. To measure the success of our innovation, it was important that reintroduced quolls survived to reproduce in a toad-infested landscape. We used parentage analysis to confirm the maternity of 12 wild-born quolls. ‘Toad-smart’ female quolls not only survived to reproduce, but their children and grandchildren survived as well. Training a single cohort of quolls yielded a long-term conservation benefit, without requiring continued conservation effort or eradication of the toxic invader.


Maternity Conditioned taste aversion Reintroduction Marsupial Invasive 



We thank Damien Stanioch, Lynda Veyret, Dion Wedd, and the Territory Wildlife Park staff for raising quolls, training, and assistance in the field. We thank Stephanie O’Donnell for assisting with quoll training and the reintroduction to the field site. We particularly thank the Traditional Owners for supporting the project and allowing us to work in the East Alligator region. We are indebted to the Kakadu Rangers, trainees, and all the volunteers, especially Libby Dwyer, Belinda McCarthy, Sandra Riemer, and Tim Dempster, who provided assistance in the field. We thank Steve Winderlich, Anne O’Dea, Greg Sattler, Matthew Dunn, and Patrick Shaughnessy for advice and logistical support. We would also like to acknowledge the technical assistance of Mia Hillyer and the WA Department of Parks and Wildlife for processing of DNA samples. Financial assistance was kindly provided by the Federal Government’s Caring for Our Country grant scheme, the Australian Research Council, the Mazda Foundation, and the National Geographic Conservation Trust. We thank two anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback on an earlier draft of the manuscript, and the Flora and Fauna Division of the NT Department of Environment and Natural Resources for allowing us to use the image of the northern quoll.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Ethical approval

The study was conducted within Kakadu National Park in accordance with The Australian Code of Practice for the Care and Use of Animals for Scientific Purposes (1997). The area is jointly managed by traditional land-owners and the Australian federal government. Permission to undertake the study was obtained through Kakadu National Park (Permit Number: RK844). The research was approved by the University of Sydney Animal Ethics Committee (Protocol L04/7-2008/3/4823) and the University of Technology Sydney Animal Care and Ethics Committee (Protocol 2012-082A).


  1. Begg RJ (1981) The small mammals of Little Nourlangie Rock, N. T. III. Ecology of Dasyurus hallucatus, the Northern Quoll (Marsupialia: Dasyuridae). Aust Wildl Res 8:73–85. doi: 10.1071/WR9810073 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Braithwaite RW, Griffiths AD (1994) Demographic variation and range contraction in the northern quoll, Dasyurus hallucatus (Marsupialia : Dasyuridae). Wildl Res 21:203–217. doi: 10.1071/WR9940203 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bryant SL (1988) Seasonal breeding in the Eastern quoll Dasyurus viverrinus (Marsupialia: Dasyuridae). University of Tasmania, HobartGoogle Scholar
  4. Burnett S (1997) Colonizing cane toads cause population declines in native predators: Reliable anecdotal information and management implications. Pac Conserv Biol 3:65–72. doi: 10.1071/PC970065 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Caro TM, Hauser MD (1992) Is there teaching in nonhuman animals. Q Rev Biol 67:151–174. doi: 10.1086/417553 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Clavero M, Garcia-Berthou E (2005) Invasive species are a leading cause of animal extinctions. Trends Ecol Evol 20:110. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2005.01.003 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Dawkins R (1976) The selfish gene. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  8. Dickman CR, Doncaster CP (1984) Responses of small mammals to red fox (Vulpes vulpes) odour. J Zool 204:521–531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Francis DD, Szegda K, Campbell G, Martin WD, Insel TR (2003) Epigenetic sources of behavioral differences in mice. Nat Neurosci 6:445–446. doi: 10.1038/nn1038 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Galef BG, Giraldeau LA (2001) Social influences on foraging in vertebrates: causal mechanisms and adaptive functions. Anim Behav 61:3–15. doi: 10.1006/anbe.2000.1557 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Griffin AS (2004) Social learning about predators: a review and prospectus. Learn Behav 32:131–140. doi: 10.3758/BF03196014 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Jones PC, King RB, Stanford KM, Lawson TD, Thomas M (2009) Frequent consumption and rapid digestion of prey by the Lake Erie watersnake with implications for an invasive prey species. Copeia:437–445. doi: 10.1643/ch-08-119 Google Scholar
  13. Kalinowski ST (2006) hw-quickcheck: an easy-to-use computer program for checking genotypes for agreement with Hardy–Weinberg expectations. Mol Ecol Notes 6:974–979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kalinowski ST, Taper ML, Marshall TC (2007) Revising how the computer program CERVUS accommodates genotyping error increases success in paternity assignment. Mol Ecol 16:1099–1106. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294x.2007.03089.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Kearney M, Phillips BL, Tracy CR, Christian KA, Betts G, Porter WP (2008) Modelling species distributions without using species distributions: the cane toad in Australia under current and future climates. Ecography 31:423–434. doi: 10.1111/j.2008.0906-7590-05457.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Krutzen M, Mann J, Heithaus MR, Connor RC, Bejder L, Sherwin WB (2005) Cultural transmission of tool use in bottlenose dolphins. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102:8939–8943. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0500232102 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Marshall TC, Slate J, Kruuk LEB, Pemberton JM (1998) Statistical confidence for likelihood-based paternity inference in natural populations. Mol Ecol 7:639–655. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-294x.1998.00374.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Mirza SN, Provenza FD (1990) Preference of the mother affects selection and avoidance of foods by lambs differing in age. Appl Anim Behav Sci 28:255–263. doi: 10.1016/0168-1591(90)90104-l CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Myers JH, Simberloff D, Kuris AM, Carey JR (2000) Eradication revisited: dealing with exotic species. Trends Ecol Evol 15:316–320. doi: 10.1016/s0169-5347(00)01914-5 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. O’Donnell S, Webb JK, Shine R (2010) Conditioned taste aversion enhances the survival of an endangered predator imperilled by a toxic invader. J Appl Ecol 47:558–565. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01802.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Oakwood M, Foster P (2008) Monitoring extinction of the northern quoll. Aust Acad Sci Newsl 71:6Google Scholar
  22. Peakall R, Smouse PE (2012) GenAlEx 6.5: genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research—an update. Bioinformatics 28:2537–2539CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Rankmore BR et al. (2008) Island translocation of the northern quoll Dasyurus hallucatus as a conservation response to the spread of the cane toad Chaunus [Bufo] marinus in the Northern Territory. The Australian Government’s Natural Heritage Trust, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  24. Slate J, Marshall TC, Pemberton JM (2000) A retrospective assessment of the accuracy of the paternity inference program CERVUS. Mol Ecol 9:801–808. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-294x.2000.00930.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Soderquist TR, Serena M (2000) Juvenile behaviour and dispersal of chuditch (Dasyurus geoffroii) (Marsupialia : Dasyuridae). Aust J Zool 48:551–560. doi: 10.1071/ZO00029 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Spencer P, Cardoso M, How RA, Williams J, Bunce M, Schmitt LH (2007) Cross-species amplification at microsatellite loci in Australian quolls including the description of five new markers from the Chuditch (Dasyurus geoffroii). Mol Ecol Notes 7:1100–1103. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01791.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Webb JK, Brown GP, Child T, Greenlees MJ, Phillips BL, Shine R (2008) A native dasyurid predator (common planigale, Planigale maculata) rapidly learns to avoid a toxic invader. Austral Ecol 33:821–829. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-9993.2008.01847.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Webb J, Legge S, Tuft K, Cremona T, Austin C (2015) Can we mitigate cane toad impacts on northern quolls. Final report National Environmental Research Program. Northern Australia Hub Charles Darwin University, DarwinGoogle Scholar
  29. Woinarski JCZ et al. (2011) The disappearing mammal fauna of northern Australia: context, cause, and response. Conserv Lett 4:192–201. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2011.00164.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of the Life SciencesUniversity of Technology SydneySydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Research Institute for the Environment and LivelihoodsCharles Darwin UniversityDarwinAustralia
  3. 3.School of Veterinary & Life SciencesMurdoch UniversityPerthAustralia
  4. 4.School of Biological SciencesUniversity of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations