Top predators as biodiversity regulators: the dingo Canis lupus dingo as a case study
Abstract
Top-order predators often have positive effects on biological diversity owing to their key functional roles in regulating trophic cascades and other ecological processes. Their loss has been identified as a major factor contributing to the decline of biodiversity in both aquatic and terrestrial systems. Consequently, restoring and maintaining the ecological function of top predators is a critical global imperative. Here we review studies of the ecological effects of the dingo Canis lupus dingo, Australia's largest land predator, using this as a case study to explore the influence of a top predator on biodiversity at a continental scale. The dingo was introduced to Australia by people at least 3500 years ago and has an ambiguous status owing to its brief history on the continent, its adverse impacts on livestock production and its role as an ecosystem architect. A large body of research now indicates that dingoes regulate ecological cascades, particularly in arid Australia, and that the removal of dingoes results in an increase in the abundances and impacts of herbivores and invasive mesopredators, most notably the red fox Vulpes vulpes. The loss of dingoes has been linked to widespread losses of small and medium-sized native mammals, the depletion of plant biomass due to the effects of irrupting herbivore populations and increased predation rates by red foxes. We outline a suite of conceptual models to describe the effects of dingoes on vertebrate populations across different…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
When an apex predator occurs patchily, as wolves do in parts of the contiguous United States and dingoes do in Australia, competition's spatial effects may be lessened.
“where there is sporadic distribution of a top predator, like the wolf in the parts of the conterminous United States (Fig. 1) and the dingo in Australia (Letnic, Ritchie & Dickman 2012), we suggest that the spatial effects of competition might be reduced.”
From A continental scale trophic cascade from wolves through coyotes to foxes (2015) · cites this paper as Letnic, Ritchie & Dickman 2012
Cites
Pseudoreplication and the Design of Ecological Field Experiments
Hurlbert, S. H. (1984) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.2307/1942661 · Cited by 8,377 · see citing works
Wolves influence elk movements: Behavior shapes a trophic cascade in Yellowstone National Park
Fortin, D., Beyer, H. L., Boyce, M. S., Smith, D. W., Duchesne, T., & Mao, J. S. (2005) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/04-0953 · Cited by 1,351 · cited 3× · see citing works
“These effects on plant biomass may stem from changes in both the population density and behaviour of herbivores following the cessation of interactions with the predator (Fortin et al., 2005; Frank, 2008; Beschta & Ripple, 2009).”
BackgroundSea Otters and Kelp Forests in Alaska: Generality and Variation in a Community Ecological Paradigm
Estes, J. A., & Duggins, D. O. (1995) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.2307/2937159 · Cited by 798 · see citing works
Biodiversity loss, trophic skew and ecosystem functioning
Duffy, J. E. (2003) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1046/j.1461-0248.2003.00494.x · Cited by 516 · see citing works
Does interference competition with wolves limit the distribution and abundance of coyotes?
BERGER, K. M., & GESE, E. M. (2007) · Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2656.2007.01287.x · Cited by 398 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…suppress populations of smaller predators via several mechanisms including direct killing, interference competition, competition for food and shelter, and fear-mediated changes in habitat use and activity patterns (Crooks & Soulé, 1999; Switalski, 2003; Berger & Gese, 2007; Thompson & Gese, 2007).”
BackgroundLandscape heterogeneity shapes predation in a newly restored predator–prey system
Kauffman, M. J., Varley, N., Smith, D. W., Stahler, D. R., MacNulty, D. R., & Boyce, M. S. (2007) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01059.x · Cited by 350 · cited 2× · see citing works
“<2000 km2) spatial scales (Sinclair et al., 2000; Fortin et al., 2005; Beyer et al., 2007; Kauffman et al., 2007; Berger, Gese & Berger, 2008; Trewby et al., 2008) or in fragmented landscapes and island ecosystems (McLaren & Peterson, 1994; Crooks & Soulé, 1999; Terborgh et al.”
BackgroundJohnson, C. N., Isaac, J. L., & Fisher, D. O. (2007) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2006.3711 · Cited by 325 · cited 13× · see citing works
“Conversely, populations of species weighing less than 1 kg generally appear to increase in the presence of dingoes (Smith & Quin, 1996; Newsome et al., 2001; Johnson et al., 2007; Letnic et al., 2009b; Letnic & Koch, 2010; Wallach et al., 2010).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialRestoring Yellowstone’s aspen with wolves
Ripple, W. J., & Beschta, R. L. (2007) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2007.05.006 · Cited by 319 · see citing works
INDIRECT EFFECTS AND TRADITIONAL TROPHIC CASCADES: A TEST INVOLVING WOLVES, COYOTES, AND PRONGHORN
Berger, K. M., Gese, E. M., & Berger, J. (2008) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/07-0193.1 · Cited by 213 · cited 2× · see citing works
“…studies demonstrate that top predators can exert strong effects on ecosystems (Beyer et al., 2007; Ripple & Beschta, 2007; Berger & Conner, 2008; Berger et al., 2008), we still have a poor understanding of the extent to which these predators can structure ecosystems at larger spatial scales and…”
BackgroundCascading effects of predator richness
Bruno, J. F., & Cardinale, B. J. (2008) · Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment · doi:10.1890/070136 · Cited by 210 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…richness of predators, including genotypes, can have broader cascading effects within ecological systems than those of single predator species (Duffy et al., 2007; Bruno & Cardinale, 2008), so it is possible that mixed populations of hybrid and pure-bred animals have particularly strong impacts.”
BackgroundWILLOW ON YELLOWSTONE'S NORTHERN RANGE: EVIDENCE FOR A TROPHIC CASCADE?
Beyer, H. L., Merrill, E. H., Varley, N., & Boyce, M. S. (2007) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1890/06-1254.1 · Cited by 142 · cited 4× · see citing works
“<2000 km2) spatial scales (Sinclair et al., 2000; Fortin et al., 2005; Beyer et al., 2007; Kauffman et al., 2007; Berger, Gese & Berger, 2008; Trewby et al., 2008) or in fragmented landscapes and island ecosystems (McLaren & Peterson, 1994; Crooks & Soulé, 1999; Terborgh et al.”
BackgroundInfluentialYellowstone’s ungulates after wolves – expectations, realizations, and predictions
White, P. J., & Garrott, R. A. (2005) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2005.01.048 · Cited by 131 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Status and Ecological Effects of the World’s Largest Carnivores
Ripple, W. J., Estes, J. A., Beschta, R. L., Wilmers, C. C., Ritchie, E. G., Hebblewhite, M., Berger, J., Elmhagen, B., Letnic, M., Nelson, M. P., et al. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1241484 · Cited by 3,667 · see citing works
Self-citationTrophic cascades in Yellowstone: The first 15years after wolf reintroduction
Ripple, W. J., & Beschta, R. L. (2012) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2011.11.005 · Cited by 884 · see citing works
A continental scale trophic cascade from wolves through coyotes to foxes
Newsome, T. M., & Ripple, W. J. (2015) · Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.1111/1365-2656.12258 · Cited by 184 · see citing works
- Authors
- Letnic, M., Ritchie, E. G., & Dickman, C. R.
- Affiliations
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- Deakin University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Letnic, Mike
- Venue
- Biological Reviews
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-11-02
- Volume
- 87
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 390-413
- ISSN
- 0006-3231 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-7931
- 1469-185X
- OpenAlex
- W2000878308
- Cited by
- 331
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 20 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 36 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 17
- FWCI
- 2.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Biological reviews/Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Deakin Research Online (Deakin University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Animal Ecology and Behavior Studies
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
- Keywords
- dingo, Canis lupus dingo, top predators, trophic cascades, biodiversity regulation, red fox, mesopredator release, predator reintroduction, livestock depredation, arid Australia, biodiversity conservation
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Australia, Humans, Plants, Predatory Behavior, Wolves, Food Chain, Biodiversity
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
