Fauna Spotters logo

Balladonia-Norseman Fairy Shrimp (Branchinella basispina)

Branchinella basispina is an Australian fairy shrimp in the crustacean family Thamnocephalidae. Its species-specific habitat and life history are poorly documented, while the genus is associated with temporary pools. It is listed as Priority 3 fauna in Western Australia, so works near suitable temporary waters warrant careful assessment.

Conservation status

Western Australia, WA Threatened and Priority Fauna List: Priority 3.

Seasonal planning

Species-specific activity, breeding and survey months have not been documented. Use this as a planning reminder only, not as a statement of seasonal biology.

Species-specific timing: Not recorded.

Planning approach: Consult an aquatic invertebrate specialist when potentially suitable water is present or could be affected.

The month groupings are planning categories only and do not indicate known activity months for Branchinella basispina.

  • Survey and works planning: General planning window only. Taxon-specific seasonal activity and survey timing are unknown.

Identification: Appearance and size

Species-level identification details are sparse. Confirm suspected records with a suitably experienced aquatic invertebrate specialist.

This is a fairy shrimp and a crustacean in the family Thamnocephalidae. Its appearance and body size have not been documented.

Identification: Similar species

Diagnostic features for distinguishing Branchinella basispina from other fairy shrimp have not been documented. A general fairy shrimp identification is not sufficient for a species-level determination.

Identification: Field signs

Species-specific field signs have not been documented. Document suspected fairy shrimp observations and have them checked by a specialist.

Distribution: Known range

Records indicate a restricted and poorly documented Western Australian occurrence, but do not establish the full range.

The species is endemic to Australia. Atlas of Living Australia records show six Western Australian records at one distinct 0.1-degree location, at latitude -32.5 and longitude 123.8. Records outside Western Australia were excluded as likely errors.

Distribution: Western Australian regions

The DBCA list flags the Wheatbelt and South Coast regions. The common-name descriptor refers to Balladonia-Norseman, but a verified site-level locality has not been identified.

Distribution: Record limitations

The DBCA category describes the fauna as poorly known and known from several locations. The atlas information represents one 0.1-degree location, so it should not be treated as a complete range map.

Habitat: Species information

Species-specific habitat requirements have not been documented. Genus-level information offers cautious context, not confirmation of this species’ site requirements.

The waterbody type, water chemistry, substrate and vegetation used by this species have not been documented.

Habitat: Genus-level context

Australian anostracans of the genus Branchinella typically occur in small, shallow temporary pools. They have also been recorded in permanent pools with variable water levels, and in a broader range of pool sizes and depths in northern Australia. These genus-level observations have not been confirmed for Branchinella basispina.

Foraging habitat: Diet and feeding

The species’ diet and feeding habitat have not been documented.

Information about its feeding method and food resources has not been documented.

Foraging habitat: Site checks

During assessment, record waterbody conditions and any observed aquatic fauna without assuming that a particular food source or waterbody feature is required by this species.

Breeding habitat: Breeding information

Breeding habitat and timing are poorly known.

Where Branchinella basispina breeds, when it breeds and how long its life cycle takes have not been documented.

Breeding habitat: Temporary-water context

Temporary pools are typical of the genus, but this does not establish that a particular pool is breeding habitat for this species. Treat potentially suitable waterbodies as requiring assessment until evidence is available.

Sheltering habitat: Shelter and persistence

Sheltering habitat and dry-period survival are poorly known.

Where the species shelters, how it persists when water is absent, and whether it uses particular sediments or refuges have not been documented.

Sheltering habitat: Precaution

Do not assume that a dry pool is unimportant. Where temporary aquatic habitat may be affected, seek specialist advice before disturbing the pool or its sediments.

Threats: Known status

No specific threats to Branchinella basispina have been identified. Its WA priority status reflects that it is poorly known, not that it is threatened or endangered.

DBCA lists the species as Priority 3, describing it as poorly known, known from several locations and not under imminent threat. It has no national listing.

Threats: Works-related risks

Species-specific effects of development have not been documented. As a precaution for aquatic invertebrates, avoid unassessed disturbance to potentially suitable pools, water flows and pool sediments.

Survey methodology: 1. Desktop assessment

Species-specific survey methods and detectability are poorly known. Use cautious aquatic survey practice and obtain specialist input where suitable temporary waters may be affected.

Check available fauna records, site mapping and proposed disturbance areas. Note the DBCA regions flagged for the species and the single atlas grid location reported for it.

Survey methodology: 2. Waterbody inspection

As general practice for aquatic invertebrate surveys, inspect potentially suitable waterbodies and record whether they are wet or dry, their extent and visible condition. The specific waterbody types used by this species are unknown.

Survey methodology: 3. Specialist survey

If targeted survey is warranted, have an aquatic invertebrate specialist select appropriate methods and timing. Record the methods, conditions and identification confidence. Do not interpret a non-detection as proof of absence because species-specific detectability is unknown.

Vegetation associations

Source-checked associations and automatically indexed candidates are separated below. An association does not establish site presence, preference or dependence.

No species-specific vegetation association has been indexed or source-checked in this evidence library. This is an evidence gap, not evidence of no association.

Ecosystem associations

Source-checked associations and automatically indexed candidates are separated below. An association does not establish site presence, preference or dependence.

No species-specific ecosystem association has been indexed or source-checked in this evidence library. This is an evidence gap, not evidence of no association.

Soil and substrate associations

Source-checked associations and automatically indexed candidates are separated below. An association does not establish site presence, preference or dependence.

No species-specific soil association has been indexed or source-checked in this evidence library. This is an evidence gap, not evidence of no association.

Water and wetland associations

Source-checked associations and automatically indexed candidates are separated below. An association does not establish site presence, preference or dependence.

No species-specific water association has been indexed or source-checked in this evidence library. This is an evidence gap, not evidence of no association.

Fauna records and mapped habitat: Not yet analysed

Record locations can be overlaid with mapping, but record frequency alone does not measure habitat preference. No species is excluded from desktop assessments by this analysis.

No quality-controlled record-to-map analysis has been completed for this species. The existing generalised distribution dots and indicative range polygons have not been treated as precise occurrence coordinates.

A defensible run needs dated, independently attributable records, coordinate uncertainty, duplicate and captive-record checks, layer versions and regional scope. Preference and absence require additional survey-effort and detection evidence.

Habitat limitations and contrary evidence: No supported exclusion recorded

Not recorded is not the same as cannot occur. Low suitability, resident habitat, breeding habitat and occasional movement are different conclusions.

This library has not established a vegetation, ecosystem or soil-type exclusion for this species. This does not mean all habitat is suitable; the evidence needed to justify an exclusion has not been assembled.

Habitat limitations and contrary evidence: Before using a negative association

  • Confirm the taxon, geographic region, life stage and habitat function covered by the evidence.
  • Check survey methods, season, repeated effort and detectability before interpreting non-detection.
  • Investigate credible contradictory records and microhabitats absent from broad mapping.
  • Do not convert a missing map class, low record count or failed data request into species absence.

Before habitat disturbance: 1. Map potential habitat

Plan works to avoid unassessed impacts to potentially suitable aquatic habitat and allow time for specialist advice.

Identify temporary and other potentially suitable pools within and near the proposed works area. Their suitability for this species is not established.

Before habitat disturbance: 2. Arrange assessment

Where works could affect a potential waterbody, seek advice from an aquatic invertebrate specialist and determine whether targeted survey is appropriate. Do not assume a dry waterbody has no conservation value.

Before habitat disturbance: 3. Brief the crew

Show crews the areas to avoid, agreed access routes and the process for reporting suspected fauna or unexpected waterbodies. Keep machinery and spoil outside any agreed exclusion areas.

During habitat disturbance: 1. Keep within limits

Follow approved work limits and avoid unnecessary changes to potentially suitable pools or their water supply.

Use marked access routes and work boundaries. Avoid entering, draining, filling or excavating potential habitat unless that action has been assessed and authorised.

During habitat disturbance: 2. Manage runoff

Use site controls to prevent sediment, waste or contaminated runoff from entering nearby waterbodies. These are general aquatic habitat precautions, not species-specific requirements.

During habitat disturbance: 3. Respond to finds

If suspected fairy shrimp are found, pause work in the immediate area where safe, avoid handling them, record the location and notify the environmental lead for specialist advice.

After habitat disturbance: 1. Inspect the site

Check that agreed avoidance and water-management measures remain effective after works are complete.

Check work boundaries and nearby waterbodies for unintended access, sediment deposition, drainage changes or other visible disturbance. Record findings and report any issues.

After habitat disturbance: 2. Retain records

Keep survey results, photographs, location records, identification notes and management actions with the project environmental records. Clearly distinguish confirmed identification from unverified observations.

Rehabilitation actions: 1. Restore affected areas

Rehabilitation should not assume that a particular waterbody design or sediment treatment benefits this species.

Where rehabilitation is required, use the approved site plan to stabilise disturbed ground and prevent sediment or polluted runoff from reaching nearby waterbodies.

Rehabilitation actions: 2. Check outcomes

Monitor agreed rehabilitation measures and report changes to nearby waterbodies to the environmental lead. Seek specialist advice before changing pool levels, drainage or sediments.

Sources