Fauna Spotters logo

Flinders Antichiropus Millipede (Antichiropus filiolus)

The Flinders Antichiropus millipede is a millipede species described in a review of the genus Antichiropus in the Pilbara. It is known from very limited records, and its habitat and ecology have not been documented. Its WA status is Priority 1, a DBCA priority category rather than a listing under the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016. Use precautionary survey and clearing practices for works in the region.

Conservation status

Western Australia, WA Threatened and Priority Fauna List: Priority 1.

Seasonal planning

Species-specific activity, breeding and movement months are not known. Schedule surveys and pre-clearance checks as needed for works planning, and do not treat any season as a known low-risk period.

Species-specific months: Not documented.

Interpretation: The planning row below is general guidance, not a documented activity period for this species.

No species-specific seasonal pattern is established.

  • Survey and pre-clearance planning: Planning window only. Arrange checks before disturbance when required by the project risk assessment; no species-specific seasonal window is known.

Identification: Appearance and size

The species is taxonomically identified, but field identification information is limited.

Colour, body form, distinguishing features and size have not been documented.

  • The species is a millipede in the genus Antichiropus.

Identification: Similar species

A review of the Pilbara describes 33 new Antichiropus species, but diagnostic characters for A. filiolus and comparisons with other species are not available.

  • Do not identify the species from general appearance alone. Seek expert confirmation if a possible specimen is found.

Identification: Field signs

Species-specific field signs have not been documented. No burrow, track, feeding sign or other sign is known.

Distribution: Known range

The species is associated with the Pilbara, but its known record base is very limited.

The species is included in a review of Antichiropus species from the Pilbara bioregion. Atlas of Living Australia records show one Western Australian record in one distinct 0.1-degree location, at latitude -22.1 and longitude 117.5.

  • The coordinates do not identify a named locality, and the type locality is not known.

Distribution: WA region and status

DBCA lists the species in the Pilbara region and assigns it Priority 1: poorly known, known from few locations, with none on conservation lands. The scientific name changed from Antichiropus sp. 'DIP008' to Antichiropus filiolus on 1 October 2024.

  • There is no national listing.

Distribution: Record limitations

The single coarse-scale atlas record is not enough to define the species’ full range or confirm its presence or absence at a particular work site.

  • Assess suitable-looking Pilbara sites rather than assuming they are occupied or unoccupied.

Habitat: Recorded habitat

Species-specific habitat information has not been documented.

Landforms, vegetation, soils, moisture conditions and other habitat used by A. filiolus are not known.

Habitat: Site assessment

Do not screen the species out based on an assumed habitat preference. Record the range of ground conditions and microhabitats within the proposed disturbance area.

  • Seek advice from a suitably experienced millipede specialist if habitat information is needed for a decision.

Foraging habitat: Diet and feeding

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

Food items, feeding behaviour and foraging habitat are not known for A. filiolus.

Foraging habitat: Precaution during surveys

As general millipede survey practice, inspect ground-level refuges and associated organic material carefully. These are not confirmed foraging habitats for this species.

  • Avoid removing or damaging potential refuges unnecessarily during searches.

Breeding habitat: Breeding information

Breeding behaviour and habitat are poorly known.

The breeding season, egg-laying site, clutch size, development period and parental behaviour have not been documented for A. filiolus.

Breeding habitat: Works planning

Do not assume there is a season when breeding risk is absent. Plan precautionary checks before clearing whenever the species could be present.

  • If a potential specimen or concentration of millipedes is found, pause local disturbance and obtain specialist advice.

Sheltering habitat: Known shelter use

Shelter type and refuging behaviour have not been documented for A. filiolus.

Shelters, refuge depths, seasonal refuges and other sheltering habitat are not known for this species.

Sheltering habitat: General search precautions

When searching for millipedes, check ground-level cover and refuges gently, and replace any material that is lifted. These are general group-level precautions, not confirmed shelter records for A. filiolus.

  • Do not excavate extensively unless the survey design and relevant approvals allow it.

Threats: Documented threats

Specific threats to this species have not been documented.

Species-specific threats, population trends and causes of decline are not known.

Threats: Potential work impacts

Clearing or ground disturbance could harm millipedes if they are present. This is a general work-related risk, not a documented species-specific threat to A. filiolus.

  • Use staged, supervised clearing and avoid unnecessary disturbance outside the approved footprint.

Survey methodology: 1. Desktop assessment

Species-specific detectability and survey methods are not known. Use precautionary methods and do not treat a non-detection as proof of absence.

Check current DBCA information, records and project data for the work area. Atlas of Living Australia information is coarse-scale and limited to one reported Western Australian record.

  • Document the search area, records checked and any uncertainty in the assessment.

Survey methodology: 2. Field inspection

As general millipede survey practice, search ground-level cover and refuges carefully within the proposed disturbance area. The microhabitats used by A. filiolus are not known.

  • Inspect systematically and gently, replacing lifted cover and limiting damage to the ground surface.

Survey methodology: 3. Identification and records

Field identification characters have not been documented. Refer possible specimens to a suitably qualified specialist.

  • Record coordinates, date, search effort, conditions, habitat observations and photographs where suitable.

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. Confirm the work area

Use a precautionary approach because the species is poorly known and site-level habitat and detectability are not established.

Review the clearing footprint against the limited distribution information and seek current DBCA advice where needed.

  • Mark approved disturbance limits and identify areas that can be avoided.

Before habitat disturbance: 2. Brief the crew

Explain that this is a poorly known Pilbara millipede and that field identification information is limited.

  • Provide a clear stop-work and escalation process for possible millipede finds.

Before habitat disturbance: 3. Check before clearing

Arrange a suitably experienced fauna survey or inspection before disturbance where the project risk assessment indicates potential exposure.

  • Do not rely on a single unsuccessful search to establish absence.

During habitat disturbance: 1. Control clearing

Keep disturbance controlled and respond cautiously to any possible millipede found during works.

Keep machinery and personnel within approved limits, and use staged clearing where practicable so the work area can be checked as it progresses.

  • Avoid unnecessary ground disturbance and retain any designated no-go areas.

During habitat disturbance: 2. Respond to a find

If a possible A. filiolus is found, pause work in the immediate area and prevent handling or further disturbance until the find has been assessed.

  • Contact the project ecologist or fauna spotter catcher and seek specialist identification.

During habitat disturbance: 3. Record and escalate

Record the location, photographs, circumstances of the find and any action taken. Follow project approvals and current agency advice.

After habitat disturbance: 1. Complete records

Document the outcome and use new information to improve future decisions.

Compile survey effort, non-detections, possible or confirmed records, disturbance extent and any incidents in the project fauna records.

  • Submit records through the relevant project and agency processes where required.

After habitat disturbance: 2. Review actions

Review whether the agreed controls were followed and whether changes are needed for remaining works.

  • Do not interpret a lack of observations as evidence that the species is absent from the wider area.

Rehabilitation actions: 1. Restore disturbed ground

Habitat requirements and rehabilitation outcomes for this species are not known.

Rehabilitate within the project scope and according to approved plans. Avoid claiming that a particular rehabilitation treatment benefits A. filiolus without species-specific evidence.

  • Minimise unnecessary soil and ground-cover disturbance during restoration.

Rehabilitation actions: 2. Monitor and adapt

Record rehabilitation actions and any millipede observations. Seek specialist advice before setting species-specific success criteria.

Sources