Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40927318›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2025

Mitigating Fox Predation on Freshwater Turtle Nests: Comparing Effectiveness of Three In Situ Protection Methods.

Christina Hunter, Deborah S Bower, Richard A Peters, Ricky-John Spencer, Ligia Pizzatto, James U Van Dyke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Christina HunterDepartment of Ecological, Plant & Animal Sciences Centre for Freshwater Ecosystems, School of Agriculture, Biomedicine and Environment, La Trobe University, Albury-Wodonga Campus West Wodonga Victoria Australia.
Deborah S BowerSchool of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England Armidale New South Wales Australia.
Richard A PetersDepartment of Ecological, Plant & Animal Sciences School of Agriculture, Biomedicine and Environment, La Trobe University, Bundoora Campus Bundoora Victoria Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5825-3591
Ricky-John SpencerWestern Sydney University, School of Science Penrith New South Wales Australia.
Ligia PizzattoDepartment of Ecological, Plant & Animal Sciences Centre for Freshwater Ecosystems, School of Agriculture, Biomedicine and Environment, La Trobe University, Albury-Wodonga Campus West Wodonga Victoria Australia.
James U Van DykeDepartment of Ecological, Plant & Animal Sciences Centre for Freshwater Ecosystems, School of Agriculture, Biomedicine and Environment, La Trobe University, Albury-Wodonga Campus West Wodonga Victoria Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3933-111X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Freshwater turtles in the Murray-Darling Basin (MDB), Australia, have declined since the 1970s. Intense nest predation by introduced foxes likely contributes to these declines, disrupting juvenile recruitment needed to sustain populations. Traditional lethal control methods, such as baiting and shooting, have proven inadequate, highlighting the need for innovative conservation strategies. We tested three nest protection methods-fenced nesting beaches, artificial floating islands (artificial nesting habitat), and individual mesh covers-for reducing fox predation. Using artificial turtle nests across protected and unprotected plots, we monitored nest predation with remote cameras and confirmed nest status through excavation. On average, nest predation was lowest on artificial islands (17%), followed by fences (37%) and mesh (40%). All protection methods significantly reduced depredation compared to unprotected controls (85% destroyed). Unprotected nests were almost exclusively depredated by foxes, while protected nests saw more predation from native animals. Native predator species did not differ among protection treatments. Our findings underscore the potential for artificial floating islands as a valuable conservation tool. Further research into optimizing nest protection and understanding ecological impacts is critical for improving recruitment and reversing declines of freshwater turtle species.

Indexed as

anti‐predator fencingendangered speciesfloating islandinvasive speciespredator managementrecruitment

Identifiers

PMID40927318
PMCPMC12416911

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.