Table 1.
Species analysed in the two time periods and their life-history traits, diet, average length, and habitat associations.
The two time period columns indicate in which species we were able to analyse in each period. Species information from Michael et al. [52], Cogger [38], Brag et al. [36], Lunney et al. [53], Taylor et al. [54], and Howard et al. [37].
Fig 1.
The spatial location of Booderee National Park, and its land cover types as mapped by Taws [39].
Orange points show locations of study sites. The map has been created using the ‘ggplot2’ package [56] in R version 4.2.3 using data from Taws [39].
Table 2.
Predictor variables used in analysis.
Table 3.
Models fitted in our model selection procedure.
Regression coefficients β1 to βn are excluded from the model formulae. See Table 2 for variable abbreviations.
Table 4.
Species detected in field surveys.
Individuals is the total sum of detected individuals of that species, Surveys is the number of surveys in which the species was detected, and % is the percentage of surveys in which that species was detected (See S2 and S3 Tables in S1 File for information about surveys undertaken).
Fig 2.
Effect sizes (posterior estimates) for the best-fit models testing the response of detection rate in vegetation types or different trajectories over time within vegetation types (see S4 Table in S1 File for model selection results and S5 Table in S1 File for posterior model estimates tables).
Vegetation types (heathland, rainforest, sedgeland, shrubland, and woodland) are compared to forest. Spring and Summer are compared to Autumn. Error bars represent 95% credible intervals. We considered effects ‘significant’ if their 95% credible intervals did not cross the zero-effect line (larger points).
Fig 3.
Predicted plots of species that exhibited a change in detection rate between vegetation types or different trajectories over time within vegetation types.
Error bars represent 95% credible intervals. Only those effects considered significant (Fig 2) are plotted. See S5 Table in S1 File for posterior model estimates tables.
Fig 4.
Effect sizes (posterior estimates) for the best-fit models testing the response of detection rate to the fire and climate variables.
Vegetation types (heathland, rainforest, sedgeland, shrubland, and woodland) are compared to forest. Spring and Summer are compared to Autumn. Error bars represent 95% credible intervals. We considered effects ‘significant’ if their 95% credible intervals did not cross the zero-effect line (larger points). (see S6 Table in S1 File for model selection results and S7 Table in S1 File for posterior model estimates tables).
Fig 5.
C. nigrescens and L. delicata responses to time since fire and vegetation variables for the 2011–2022 time period.
See S7 Table in S1 File for posterior model estimates tables.
Fig 6.
Effect sizes (posterior estimates) for the best-fit models testing the response of detection rate to the climate variables.
A. Predicted plots of A. muricatus, C. taeniolatus, and L. delicata responses to annual mean monthly precipitation for the 2003–2010 time period. B. Predicted plot of L. delicata responses to previous year’s precipitation for the 2003–2010 time period. C. Predicted plot of L. delicata responses to mean maximum monthly temperature for the 2011–2022 time period. D. Predicted plot of L. delicata responses to mean minimum monthly temperature for the 2011–2022 time period. Only those effects considered significant are plotted. Error bands are 95% credible intervals. (see S6 Table in S1 File for model selection results and S7 Table in S1 File for posterior model estimates tables).