Difficulties of assessing the impacts of the 2019–2020 bushfires on koalas
The 2019–2020 Australian bushfires were unprecedented both in extent and severity, impacting wildlife through direct mortality as well as habitat damage. More than 10% of koala habitat is estimated to have been affected by fires. Estimating the number of koalas lost is crucial to assess koala conser...
Saved in:
Published in | Austral ecology Vol. 48; no. 1; pp. 12 - 18 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Richmond
Blackwell Publishing Ltd
01.02.2023
|
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | The 2019–2020 Australian bushfires were unprecedented both in extent and severity, impacting wildlife through direct mortality as well as habitat damage. More than 10% of koala habitat is estimated to have been affected by fires. Estimating the number of koalas lost is crucial to assess koala conservation status and to determine the appropriate management actions required. However, this is not a trivial task, as accurate data on koala distribution and population density before the fires is patchy.
Acknowledging this weakness, we sought to estimate fire impact on koalas at specific sites, by comparing habitat areas affected by the fire with habitat areas that were unaffected by the fire, pairing closely related study sites (based on geography and vegetation). To compare koala density, we deployed two koala detection methods; drone‐acquired thermal imagery and detection dogs coupled with genetic fingerprinting, in four fire‐affected sites paired with four control sites in New South Wales and Queensland.
Through drone surveys, we detected 140 koalas in 5,240 ha in New South Wales. The detection dogs found 144 scat samples corresponding to 79 unique koalas in 77 ha of transects in Queensland. Our preliminary results show many koalas were still present in fire‐affected areas after the 2019–2020 bushfire season. Koala density was 24 to 71% lower in fire‐affected sites compared with control sites in three of the habitat pairs, whereas unexpectedly, in the fourth pair, we observed a 317% higher koala density in the fire‐affected site. This underlined that koalas can be present in fire‐affected areas and that monitoring their health could be critical for months after the fires.
We deployed two koala detection methods to compare koala density; drone‐acquired thermal imagery and detection dogs coupled with genetic fingerprinting, in four fire‐affected and four control sites in New South Wales and Queensland. Our preliminary results show many koalas were still present in fire‐affected areas following the 2019‐2020 bushfire season. Koala density was 24 to 71% lower in fire‐affected sites compared to control sites in three out of four of the habitat pairs. |
---|---|
AbstractList | The 2019–2020 Australian bushfires were unprecedented both in extent and severity, impacting wildlife through direct mortality as well as habitat damage. More than 10% of koala habitat is estimated to have been affected by fires. Estimating the number of koalas lost is crucial to assess koala conservation status and to determine the appropriate management actions required. However, this is not a trivial task, as accurate data on koala distribution and population density before the fires is patchy.
Acknowledging this weakness, we sought to estimate fire impact on koalas at specific sites, by comparing habitat areas affected by the fire with habitat areas that were unaffected by the fire, pairing closely related study sites (based on geography and vegetation). To compare koala density, we deployed two koala detection methods; drone‐acquired thermal imagery and detection dogs coupled with genetic fingerprinting, in four fire‐affected sites paired with four control sites in New South Wales and Queensland.
Through drone surveys, we detected 140 koalas in 5,240 ha in New South Wales. The detection dogs found 144 scat samples corresponding to 79 unique koalas in 77 ha of transects in Queensland. Our preliminary results show many koalas were still present in fire‐affected areas after the 2019–2020 bushfire season. Koala density was 24 to 71% lower in fire‐affected sites compared with control sites in three of the habitat pairs, whereas unexpectedly, in the fourth pair, we observed a 317% higher koala density in the fire‐affected site. This underlined that koalas can be present in fire‐affected areas and that monitoring their health could be critical for months after the fires. The 2019–2020 Australian bushfires were unprecedented both in extent and severity, impacting wildlife through direct mortality as well as habitat damage. More than 10% of koala habitat is estimated to have been affected by fires. Estimating the number of koalas lost is crucial to assess koala conservation status and to determine the appropriate management actions required. However, this is not a trivial task, as accurate data on koala distribution and population density before the fires is patchy. Acknowledging this weakness, we sought to estimate fire impact on koalas at specific sites, by comparing habitat areas affected by the fire with habitat areas that were unaffected by the fire, pairing closely related study sites (based on geography and vegetation). To compare koala density, we deployed two koala detection methods; drone‐acquired thermal imagery and detection dogs coupled with genetic fingerprinting, in four fire‐affected sites paired with four control sites in New South Wales and Queensland. Through drone surveys, we detected 140 koalas in 5,240 ha in New South Wales. The detection dogs found 144 scat samples corresponding to 79 unique koalas in 77 ha of transects in Queensland. Our preliminary results show many koalas were still present in fire‐affected areas after the 2019–2020 bushfire season. Koala density was 24 to 71% lower in fire‐affected sites compared with control sites in three of the habitat pairs, whereas unexpectedly, in the fourth pair, we observed a 317% higher koala density in the fire‐affected site. This underlined that koalas can be present in fire‐affected areas and that monitoring their health could be critical for months after the fires. We deployed two koala detection methods to compare koala density; drone‐acquired thermal imagery and detection dogs coupled with genetic fingerprinting, in four fire‐affected and four control sites in New South Wales and Queensland. Our preliminary results show many koalas were still present in fire‐affected areas following the 2019‐2020 bushfire season. Koala density was 24 to 71% lower in fire‐affected sites compared to control sites in three out of four of the habitat pairs. The 2019–2020 Australian bushfires were unprecedented both in extent and severity, impacting wildlife through direct mortality as well as habitat damage. More than 10% of koala habitat is estimated to have been affected by fires. Estimating the number of koalas lost is crucial to assess koala conservation status and to determine the appropriate management actions required. However, this is not a trivial task, as accurate data on koala distribution and population density before the fires is patchy. Acknowledging this weakness, we sought to estimate fire impact on koalas at specific sites, by comparing habitat areas affected by the fire with habitat areas that were unaffected by the fire, pairing closely related study sites (based on geography and vegetation). To compare koala density, we deployed two koala detection methods; drone‐acquired thermal imagery and detection dogs coupled with genetic fingerprinting, in four fire‐affected sites paired with four control sites in New South Wales and Queensland. Through drone surveys, we detected 140 koalas in 5,240 ha in New South Wales. The detection dogs found 144 scat samples corresponding to 79 unique koalas in 77 ha of transects in Queensland. Our preliminary results show many koalas were still present in fire‐affected areas after the 2019–2020 bushfire season. Koala density was 24 to 71% lower in fire‐affected sites compared with control sites in three of the habitat pairs, whereas unexpectedly, in the fourth pair, we observed a 317% higher koala density in the fire‐affected site. This underlined that koalas can be present in fire‐affected areas and that monitoring their health could be critical for months after the fires. |
Author | Frère, Céline H Cristescu, Romane H McDonald, Kye Levengood, Alexis L. Gardiner, Riana Powell, Dan Terraube, Julien |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Romane H orcidid: 0000-0001-7071-5245 surname: Cristescu fullname: Cristescu, Romane H email: rcristes@usc.edu.au organization: University of the Sunshine Coast – sequence: 2 givenname: Riana orcidid: 0000-0001-7782-8664 surname: Gardiner fullname: Gardiner, Riana organization: University of the Sunshine Coast – sequence: 3 givenname: Julien surname: Terraube fullname: Terraube, Julien organization: University of the Sunshine Coast – sequence: 4 givenname: Kye surname: McDonald fullname: McDonald, Kye organization: University of the Sunshine Coast – sequence: 5 givenname: Dan surname: Powell fullname: Powell, Dan organization: University of the Sunshine Coast – sequence: 6 givenname: Alexis L. surname: Levengood fullname: Levengood, Alexis L. organization: University of the Sunshine Coast – sequence: 7 givenname: Céline H surname: Frère fullname: Frère, Céline H organization: University of the Sunshine Coast |
BookMark | eNp1kLtOAzEQRS0UJJJAwR-sRANFkvFjHy6jEB5SJBqoLa8zJg6bdVjvCqXjH_hDvoTNQxQRTDMzmnOvRrdHOqUvkZBLCkPa1kijGVJOGZyQLhWCDaSUvPM7Z_EZ6YWwBIAskbRLZrfOWmeaonYYIm8jHQKG4MrXqF5g5FZrberdYbsyoPL784sBgyhvwsK6aqsqozevCx3OyanVRcCLQ--Tl7vp8-RhMHu6f5yMZwPDOcAg5vOMY2qp4TqWmCdCo7QG54alORMgY8sNQsY0F8kcUsE00JxlOUUJJk55n1zvfdeVf28w1GrlgsGi0CX6JiiWUSqlgDhr0asjdOmbqmy_UyxNsoQxkbKWGu0pU_kQKrTKuFrXzpd1pV2hKKhtuqpNV-3SbRU3R4p15Va62vzJHtw_XIGb_0E1nk72ih9kn4ky |
CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1071_AM23054 crossref_primary_10_1111_avj_13413 crossref_primary_10_1111_geb_13458 crossref_primary_10_1080_13549839_2024_2449421 crossref_primary_10_1111_aec_13247 crossref_primary_10_3390_ani13182863 crossref_primary_10_1186_s40462_024_00519_0 crossref_primary_10_1007_s10592_025_01682_6 crossref_primary_10_1111_aec_13513 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_iot_2024_101474 crossref_primary_10_1111_csp2_13180 crossref_primary_10_1071_PC24019 crossref_primary_10_1002_eap_3062 crossref_primary_10_1111_csp2_12874 crossref_primary_10_3390_ani14071019 crossref_primary_10_1111_geb_13473 |
Cites_doi | 10.1155/2012/631856 10.1071/WF15171 10.1111/j.1442-9993.1988.tb00993.x 10.1111/emr.12458 10.1016/j.tree.2020.06.009 10.1073/pnas.1607171113 10.1111/acv.12455 10.1038/s41598-019-39917-5 10.1038/s41559-020-1251-1 10.1890/ES15-00327.1 10.1038/s41558-020-0716-1 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2010.05908.x 10.1111/1755-0998.12101 10.1016/j.biocon.2013.07.028 10.1038/srep08349 10.1126/science.abb0355 10.1111/1365-2664.13127 10.1038/s41559-020-1195-5 10.1071/WR06075 10.1111/mam.12151 10.1371/journal.pone.0242204 10.1071/AM14010 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | 2021 Ecological Society of Australia 2023 Ecological Society of Australia |
Copyright_xml | – notice: 2021 Ecological Society of Australia – notice: 2023 Ecological Society of Australia |
DBID | AAYXX CITATION 7QG 7QR 7SN 7SS 8FD C1K FR3 P64 7S9 L.6 |
DOI | 10.1111/aec.13120 |
DatabaseName | CrossRef Animal Behavior Abstracts Chemoreception Abstracts Ecology Abstracts Entomology Abstracts (Full archive) Technology Research Database Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management Engineering Research Database Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts AGRICOLA AGRICOLA - Academic |
DatabaseTitle | CrossRef Entomology Abstracts Technology Research Database Animal Behavior Abstracts Chemoreception Abstracts Engineering Research Database Ecology Abstracts Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management AGRICOLA AGRICOLA - Academic |
DatabaseTitleList | CrossRef AGRICOLA Entomology Abstracts |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Biology Ecology Geography |
EISSN | 1442-9993 |
EndPage | 18 |
ExternalDocumentID | 10_1111_aec_13120 AEC13120 |
Genre | article |
GeographicLocations | Queensland Australia Australia New South Wales Australia Queensland |
GeographicLocations_xml | – name: New South Wales Australia – name: Queensland Australia – name: Australia – name: Queensland |
GrantInformation_xml | – fundername: Animal Ethics funderid: AN/A/16/113; AN/A/15/94 – fundername: Scientific Permits funderid: WISP11677512; WITK16401215; TWB272015; SL101741 |
GroupedDBID | -~X .3N .GA .Y3 05W 0R~ 10A 1OB 1OC 23N 31~ 33P 3SF 4.4 50Y 50Z 51W 51X 52M 52N 52O 52P 52S 52T 52U 52W 52X 53G 5GY 5HH 5LA 5VS 66C 6J9 702 7PT 8-0 8-1 8-3 8-4 8-5 8UM 930 A03 AAESR AAEVG AAHBH AAHHS AAHQN AAMNL AANHP AANLZ AAONW AASGY AAXRX AAYCA AAZKR ABCQN ABCUV ABEML ABJNI ABPVW ACAHQ ACBWZ ACCFJ ACCZN ACGFS ACIWK ACPOU ACPRK ACRPL ACSCC ACXBN ACXQS ACYXJ ADBBV ADEOM ADIZJ ADKYN ADMGS ADNMO ADOZA ADXAS ADZMN ADZOD AEEZP AEGXH AEIGN AEIMD AENEX AEQDE AEUQT AEUYR AFBPY AFEBI AFFPM AFGKR AFPWT AFRAH AFWVQ AFZJQ AHBTC AITYG AIURR AIWBW AJBDE AJXKR ALAGY ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALUQN ALVPJ AMBMR AMYDB ASPBG ATUGU AUFTA AVWKF AZBYB AZFZN AZVAB BAFTC BDRZF BFHJK BHBCM BMNLL BMXJE BNHUX BROTX BRXPI BY8 CAG COF CS3 D-E D-F DCZOG DPXWK DR2 DRFUL DRSTM EBS ECGQY EJD ESX F00 F01 F04 FEDTE G-S G.N GODZA H.T H.X HF~ HGLYW HVGLF HZI HZ~ IHE IX1 J0M K48 LATKE LC2 LC3 LEEKS LH4 LITHE LOXES LP6 LP7 LUTES LW6 LYRES MEWTI MK4 MRFUL MRSTM MSFUL MSSTM MXFUL MXSTM N04 N05 N9A NF~ O66 O9- OIG P2W P2X P4D PQQKQ Q.N Q11 QB0 R.K RIWAO RJQFR ROL RX1 SUPJJ UB1 V8K W8V W99 WBKPD WIH WIK WNSPC WOHZO WQJ WRC WXSBR WYISQ XG1 ZZTAW ~02 ~IA ~KM ~WT AAYXX AEYWJ AGHNM AGQPQ AGYGG CITATION 7QG 7QR 7SN 7SS 8FD AAMMB AEFGJ AGXDD AIDQK AIDYY C1K FR3 P64 7S9 L.6 |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c3300-53d83e7f1c3a59eb64ae9fcedc27b24095f3ce082a346d0742a01b28b1e90c573 |
IEDL.DBID | DR2 |
ISSN | 1442-9985 |
IngestDate | Fri Jul 11 18:37:53 EDT 2025 Wed Aug 13 04:52:16 EDT 2025 Tue Jul 01 03:47:40 EDT 2025 Thu Apr 24 23:06:20 EDT 2025 Wed Jan 22 16:24:42 EST 2025 |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 1 |
Language | English |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c3300-53d83e7f1c3a59eb64ae9fcedc27b24095f3ce082a346d0742a01b28b1e90c573 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 content type line 23 |
ORCID | 0000-0001-7782-8664 0000-0001-7071-5245 |
PQID | 2768622472 |
PQPubID | 46239 |
PageCount | 18 |
ParticipantIDs | proquest_miscellaneous_2811994058 proquest_journals_2768622472 crossref_citationtrail_10_1111_aec_13120 crossref_primary_10_1111_aec_13120 wiley_primary_10_1111_aec_13120_AEC13120 |
ProviderPackageCode | CITATION AAYXX |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | February 2023 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2023-02-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 02 year: 2023 text: February 2023 |
PublicationDecade | 2020 |
PublicationPlace | Richmond |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: Richmond |
PublicationTitle | Austral ecology |
PublicationYear | 2023 |
Publisher | Blackwell Publishing Ltd |
Publisher_xml | – name: Blackwell Publishing Ltd |
References | 2019; 9 2015; 6 2020; 4 2015; 5 2012; 2012 2019; 22 2021 2013; 13 2020; 370 2016; 113 2013; 167 2019; 49 2020; 15 1988; 13 2016 2020; 35 2011; 34 2020; 10 2018; 55 2016; 38 2007; 34 2016; 25 e_1_2_7_6_1 e_1_2_7_5_1 e_1_2_7_4_1 e_1_2_7_3_1 e_1_2_7_9_1 e_1_2_7_8_1 e_1_2_7_7_1 e_1_2_7_19_1 e_1_2_7_18_1 e_1_2_7_17_1 e_1_2_7_16_1 e_1_2_7_2_1 e_1_2_7_15_1 e_1_2_7_14_1 e_1_2_7_25_1 e_1_2_7_13_1 e_1_2_7_24_1 e_1_2_7_23_1 e_1_2_7_11_1 e_1_2_7_22_1 e_1_2_7_10_1 e_1_2_7_21_1 e_1_2_7_20_1 Herbarium Q. (e_1_2_7_12_1) 2016 |
References_xml | – volume: 22 start-page: 314 year: 2019 end-page: 23 article-title: Environmental impact assessments can misrepresent species distributions: a case study of koalas in Queensland, Australia publication-title: Animal Conservation. – volume: 167 start-page: 137 year: 2013 end-page: 48 article-title: Fire severity and landscape context effects on arboreal marsupials publication-title: Biol. Cons. – volume: 34 start-page: 84 year: 2007 end-page: 93 article-title: Tree use by koalas (Phascolarctos cinereus) after fire in remnant coastal forest publication-title: Wildl. Res. – volume: 9 start-page: 3208 year: 2019 article-title: Automated detection of koalas using low‐level aerial surveillance and machine learning publication-title: Scientific Reports. – volume: 4 start-page: 898 year: 2020 end-page: 900 article-title: Recent Australian wildfires made worse by logging and associated forest management publication-title: Nature Ecology & Evolution – volume: 4 start-page: 1321 year: 2020 end-page: 6 article-title: Impact of 2019–2020 mega‐fires on Australian fauna habitat publication-title: Nature Ecology & Evolution – volume: 6 issue: 10 year: 2015 article-title: Fire severity and fire‐induced landscape heterogeneity affect arboreal mammals in fire‐prone forests publication-title: Ecosphere – volume: 13 start-page: 451 year: 1988 end-page: 61 article-title: A koala (Phascolarctos cinereus Goldfuss) population crash during drought and heatwave conditions in south‐western Queensland publication-title: Australian Journal of Ecology. – volume: 370 year: 2020 article-title: Fire and biodiversity in the Anthropocene publication-title: Science – volume: 38 start-page: 91 year: 2016 end-page: 104 article-title: Movement patterns of koalas in remnant forest after fire publication-title: Australian Mammalogy – volume: 35 start-page: 753 year: 2020 end-page: 7 article-title: After the Megafires: What Next for Australian Wildlife? publication-title: Trends Ecology & Evolution. – volume: 2012 start-page: 1 year: 2012 end-page: 12 article-title: Experimental Evaluation of Koala Scat Persistence and Detectability with Implications for Pellet‐Based Fauna Census publication-title: International Journal of Zoology – volume: 5 start-page: 1 year: 2015 end-page: 6 article-title: Accuracy and efficiency of detection dogs: a powerful new tool for koala conservation and management publication-title: Scientific Reports – year: 2021 – volume: 13 start-page: 634 year: 2013 end-page: 41 article-title: Reliable genotyping of the koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) using DNA isolated from a single faecal pellet publication-title: Molecular Ecology. Resources. – volume: 34 start-page: 141 year: 2011 end-page: 50 article-title: The consequences of using indirect signs that decay to determine species’ occupancy publication-title: Ecography – volume: 49 start-page: 189 year: 2019 end-page: 200 article-title: Prioritising research efforts for effective species conservation: a review of 145 years of koala research publication-title: Mammal Review – year: 2016 – volume: 25 start-page: 1048 year: 2016 end-page: 60 article-title: The role of weather, past fire and topography in crown fire occurrence in eastern Australia publication-title: International Journal of Wildland Fire – volume: 113 start-page: 11770 issue: 42 year: 2016 end-page: 11775 article-title: Impact of anthropogenic climate change on wildfire across western US forests publication-title: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences – volume: 10 start-page: 171 year: 2020 end-page: 2 article-title: Unprecedented burn area of Australian mega forest fires publication-title: Nature Climate Change – volume: 55 start-page: 1966 year: 2018 end-page: 75 article-title: Management of multiple threats achieves meaningful koala conservation outcomes publication-title: J. Appl. Ecol. – volume: 15 year: 2020 article-title: Real‐time drone derived thermal imagery outperforms traditional survey methods for an arboreal forest mammal publication-title: PLoS One – volume-title: Regional Ecosystem Description Database (REDD) year: 2016 ident: e_1_2_7_12_1 – ident: e_1_2_7_9_1 doi: 10.1155/2012/631856 – ident: e_1_2_7_21_1 doi: 10.1071/WF15171 – ident: e_1_2_7_11_1 doi: 10.1111/j.1442-9993.1988.tb00993.x – ident: e_1_2_7_19_1 doi: 10.1111/emr.12458 – ident: e_1_2_7_24_1 doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2020.06.009 – ident: e_1_2_7_2_1 doi: 10.1073/pnas.1607171113 – ident: e_1_2_7_10_1 doi: 10.1111/acv.12455 – ident: e_1_2_7_16_1 – ident: e_1_2_7_7_1 doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-39917-5 – ident: e_1_2_7_22_1 doi: 10.1038/s41559-020-1251-1 – ident: e_1_2_7_6_1 doi: 10.1890/ES15-00327.1 – ident: e_1_2_7_5_1 doi: 10.1038/s41558-020-0716-1 – ident: e_1_2_7_20_1 doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2010.05908.x – ident: e_1_2_7_23_1 doi: 10.1111/1755-0998.12101 – ident: e_1_2_7_14_1 doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2013.07.028 – ident: e_1_2_7_8_1 doi: 10.1038/srep08349 – ident: e_1_2_7_13_1 doi: 10.1126/science.abb0355 – ident: e_1_2_7_4_1 doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.13127 – ident: e_1_2_7_15_1 doi: 10.1038/s41559-020-1195-5 – ident: e_1_2_7_17_1 doi: 10.1071/WR06075 – ident: e_1_2_7_3_1 doi: 10.1111/mam.12151 – ident: e_1_2_7_25_1 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242204 – ident: e_1_2_7_18_1 doi: 10.1071/AM14010 |
SSID | ssj0008691 |
Score | 2.4323885 |
Snippet | The 2019–2020 Australian bushfires were unprecedented both in extent and severity, impacting wildlife through direct mortality as well as habitat damage. More... |
SourceID | proquest crossref wiley |
SourceType | Aggregation Database Enrichment Source Index Database Publisher |
StartPage | 12 |
SubjectTerms | conservation dog Conservation status detector dog DNA fingerprinting drone feces Fires Forest & brush fires Genetic fingerprinting Geography Habitats Image acquisition Impact damage mortality non‐invasive methods Phascolarctos cinereus Population density Queensland sniffer dog Sniffer dogs thermal imagery thermography vegetation Wildfires Wildlife Wildlife habitats Wildlife management |
Title | Difficulties of assessing the impacts of the 2019–2020 bushfires on koalas |
URI | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111%2Faec.13120 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2768622472 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2811994058 |
Volume | 48 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1LS8QwEA6yIHjxLa4vqnjw0qVN2iTFk-guIupBXPAglCRNEFa64u4e9OR_8B_6S5xJ2_WBgkgvKZm2aSaTmUky3xCybxIaq8LwUDuuw0S7OMxcIUIdW22yyNgownjni0t-2k_ObtKbGXLYxMJU-BDTBTeUDD9fo4ArPfok5MqaTsxiiv46ntVCg-jqAzpKcp8tD_wFGoJLkdaoQniKZ_rkV130YWB-NlO9nuktkNumhdXxkkFnMtYd8_wNvPGfv7BI5mv7MziqBswSmbHlMpmtMlI-QanrUayfVsj5Ca7mIDAH-NLB0AXKbw-DpgvAZgyq6Epfgbeg4LO3l1cKZmGgJ6M7BzMpVJbBYIiBmquk3-teH5-GdeqF0DAWRWHKCsmscLFhKs2s5omymTO2MFRoMAKy1DHgo6SKJbxA_1pFsaYSWAwMTgVbI61yWNp1EsjUSa4iaTl4kokQ2oLvC6-TCVwi421y0DAhNzUuOabHuM8b_wS6Kffd1CZ7U9KHCozjJ6KthpN5LY-jnAqMhKGJoG2yO60GScLtEVXa4QRoZIxAyVEqoUmebb9_JD_qHvvCxt9JN8kc5qqvjnxvkdb4cWK3waIZ6x0_dN8Bwrbu6g |
linkProvider | Wiley-Blackwell |
linkToHtml | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1fa9swED9Cx9he9rdl6brOG3vYi4Mt2ZIMewlpQtamfRgN5GUYSZYodDijTR66p32HfcN-kt7JdtqNDsbwi4zOtqzT6e4k3e8APtiMpbqyIjZemDgzPo0LX8nYpM7YIrEuSSje-fhETOfZ4SJf9OBTFwvT4ENsFtxIMsJ8TQJOC9J3pFw7O0h5ytBhf0AZvQk5_-DLLXiUEiFfHnoMLEanIm9xhegcz-bR37XRrYl511ANmmbyFL52bWwOmJwP1iszsD_-gG_83594Bk9aEzQaNmPmOfRc_QIeNkkpr7A0DkDWVy9hdkALOoTNge50tPSRDjvEqOwiNBujJsAyVNAt6vji-ucvhpZhZNaXZx4nU6yso_MlxWpuw3wyPh1N4zb7Qmw5T5I455XiTvrUcp0XzohMu8JbV1kmDdoBRe45slIxzTNRkYutk9QwhVxGHueS78BWvazdK4hU7pXQiXICnclMSuPQ_cXXqQwvWYg-fOy4UNoWmpwyZHwrOxcFu6kM3dSH9xvS7w0ex31Eex0ry1YkL0smKRiGZZL14d2mGoWJdkh07ZZrpFEpYSUnucImBb79_SPlcDwKhd1_J30Lj6anx7Ny9vnk6DU8ptT1zQnwPdhaXazdGzRwVmY_jOMbvujzBg |
linkToPdf | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV3NTtwwEB4hKiouLbRFXX7TqgcuWTm2YzvqCbG74q-oqkDiUCmyHVtIVFlUdg9w4h14Q56kYydZKGolhHJx5EnieDyeGdvzDcAXy2mmKytS44VJufFZWvhKpiZzxhbEOkJCvPO3Y7F3yg_O8rM5-NrFwjT4ELMFtyAZcb4OAn5Z-UdCrp3tZyyj6K-_4oIUIW_D4McDdpQSMV0eOgw0RZ8ib2GFwjGe2aN_K6MHC_OxnRoVzegt_Oya2JwvuehPJ6Zvb56gN77wH5bgTWuAJjvNiFmGOVe_g4UmJeU1loYRxvr6PRwNwnJOQOZAZzoZ-0TH_WFUdQkajUkTXhkrwi1q-OL-9o6iXZiY6dW5x6kUK-vkYhwiNT_A6Wh4sruXtrkXUssYIWnOKsWc9JllOi-cEVy7wltXWSoNWgFF7hkyUlHNuKiCg61JZqhCHiOHc8lWYL4e1-4jJCr3SmiiHDKJcymNQ-cXX6c4XrIQPdjumFDaFpg85Mf4VXYOCnZTGbupB59npJcNGse_iNY7TpatQF6VVIZQGMol7cGnWTWKUtgf0bUbT5FGZQEpmeQKmxTZ9v-PlDvD3VhYfT7pFrz-PhiVR_vHh2uwGPLWN8e_12F-8nvqNtC6mZjNOIr_AOvP8bU |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Difficulties+of+assessing+the+impacts+of+the+2019%E2%80%932020+bushfires+on+koalas&rft.jtitle=Austral+ecology&rft.au=Cristescu%2C+Romane+H&rft.au=Gardiner%2C+Riana&rft.au=Terraube%2C+Julien&rft.au=McDonald%2C+Kye&rft.date=2023-02-01&rft.issn=1442-9985&rft.volume=48&rft.issue=1+p.12-18&rft.spage=12&rft.epage=18&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111%2Faec.13120&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1442-9985&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1442-9985&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1442-9985&client=summon |