Fauna Spotters logo

Mesa A Ideoblothrus Pseudoscorpion (Ideoblothrus sp. 'Mesa A' (WAM T81374))

The Mesa A Ideoblothrus pseudoscorpion is an unnamed species known from a pisolitic mesa in the Pilbara. Its appearance, ecology and precise distribution are poorly documented, so works affecting mesa ground should be planned cautiously. It has DBCA Priority 1 status in Western Australia.

Conservation status

Western Australia, WA Threatened and Priority Fauna List: Priority 1. This listing covers only Ideoblothrus sp. 'Mesa A' (WAM T81374) (Priority 1).

Seasonal planning

Seasonal information for this taxon is unknown. Plan survey and works timing around project requirements and specialist advice rather than an assumed activity or breeding season.

Seasonal records: No months for activity, movement or breeding are recorded for this taxon.

No species-specific seasonal conclusions can be drawn.

  • Survey and works planning: Planning window only. No species-specific seasonal window is known; schedule assessment and works using project approvals and specialist advice.

Identification: Appearance and size

This is an unnamed species of Ideoblothrus. Taxon-specific identification details are limited, so a suitably qualified specialist should confirm identifications.

Its colour, body form, diagnostic features and size have not been documented. Descriptions of other Ideoblothrus species may not apply to this animal.

  • Record specimens or potential specimens carefully and seek expert identification rather than relying on appearance alone.

Identification: Similar species

Other Ideoblothrus species occur in Australia, but distinguishing field characters for Mesa A are not known. Other small arachnids may also occur in subterranean or rocky settings.

  • Treat an uncertain pseudoscorpion identification as unresolved and retain appropriate diagnostic material only where authorised.

Identification: Field signs

No distinctive surface signs, tracks, retreats or other field signs are known for this taxon. Its detectability in the field has not been established.

Distribution: Known range

The known distribution is very limited. The taxon is associated with Mesa A, and DBCA flags the Pilbara region for its priority listing.

The taxon is reported from a pisolitic mesa different from the mesa associated with Ideoblothrus pisolitus. No coordinates or additional confirmed localities are recorded.

  • Do not infer that records of other Ideoblothrus species, including records from near Pannawonica, are records of this taxon.

Distribution: WA listing and extent

DBCA lists the taxon as Priority 1 and identifies the Pilbara region. Priority 1 fauna are poorly known, known from few locations, and do not occur on conservation lands. This is a DBCA priority category, not a threatened species listing under the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016.

No national listing is recorded.

Habitat: Recorded setting

The taxon is associated with a pisolitic mesa. More detailed habitat requirements are unknown.

The taxon is reported from a pisolitic mesa. The particular rock layers, soil conditions, moisture conditions and landform features it uses are not known.

Habitat: Habitat uncertainty

It is not known whether the animal occupies soil, rock fissures, voids or another microhabitat. Not all parts of Mesa A can be assumed to provide suitable habitat, and suitable habitat may extend beyond the recorded point.

  • During planning, treat the recorded mesa and comparable potentially affected mesa ground cautiously until a suitably designed assessment has considered the site.

Foraging habitat: Taxon-specific information

The taxon's diet and foraging habitat have not been documented.

No prey, feeding observations or foraging locations are known for Ideoblothrus sp. 'Mesa A'.

Foraging habitat: General group context

Pseudoscorpions are predators. This general group information does not establish the prey or feeding habitat of the Mesa A taxon.

  • Avoid disturbing candidate habitat simply to search for prey or feeding signs, as none are documented for this taxon.

Breeding habitat: Known information

Breeding biology for this unnamed species is poorly known.

Adult specimens were not available for formal naming. Breeding sites, reproductive timing and young have not been documented.

Breeding habitat: Planning implication

Do not assign breeding periods or locations to this taxon based on information about other pseudoscorpions. Assessment and works planning should allow for suitable habitat outside any confirmed specimen location.

Sheltering habitat: Shelter information

The taxon is associated with a pisolitic mesa, but its precise sheltering place is unknown.

It is not known whether this pseudoscorpion shelters in soil, rock fissures, voids or another structure.

Sheltering habitat: Precaution

During site work, do not assume that apparently solid or unoccupied mesa material lacks fauna. If excavation exposes rock or subsurface features, have an appropriately experienced ecologist direct the fauna response.

Threats: Documented threats

No specific threat to this taxon has been identified. Its restricted known occurrence and Priority 1 status warrant careful consideration of works affecting the recorded mesa.

No particular threatening process or quantified impact on this species has been identified.

Threats: Potential works risks

Clearing, excavation or other ground disturbance at the recorded mesa could affect habitat if suitable habitat is present in the disturbance footprint. This is a precautionary risk for assessment, not a documented species-specific impact.

  • Confirm current DBCA requirements and project approvals before works proceed.
  • Do not assume the taxon is absent because its public coordinates are unavailable or a search fails to detect it.

Survey methodology: 1. Desktop assessment

Taxon-specific survey and detectability information are unknown. Use a specialist-led approach suited to the proposed disturbance and uncertainty about the animal's microhabitat.

Check current DBCA records, project reports and approvals, and confirm the location of the recorded Mesa A occurrence with the relevant data custodians. Public coordinates are not given.

  • Map the proposed disturbance against the mesa landform and identify areas where ground disturbance could affect potentially suitable habitat.

Survey methodology: 2. Field assessment

Engage a suitably experienced subterranean-fauna or pseudoscorpion specialist to design any targeted survey. Effective collection methods, season and sampling effort are not established for this taxon.

  • Record survey locations, effort, methods, conditions and identification confidence.
  • Do not interpret non-detection as proof of absence unless survey limitations and the method's ability to detect the taxon have been assessed.

Survey methodology: 3. Specimen handling

Follow permit, approval and project requirements for collection and handling. Maintain a clear chain of custody and refer uncertain material to an appropriate taxonomic specialist.

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 constraints

Before works, establish whether the proposal could affect the recorded mesa or other ground that warrants precautionary assessment.

Review the DBCA Priority 1 listing, current records and relevant approval conditions with the project environmental lead. Resolve the location and extent of the known Mesa A occurrence as far as records allow.

Before habitat disturbance: 2. Assess and plan

Have a suitably qualified ecologist assess the footprint and advise whether targeted survey or additional approvals are needed. The taxon's microhabitat and effective survey methods are not established.

  • Avoid or minimise disturbance to the recorded locality and any areas identified by the assessment as requiring precaution.
  • Brief clearing crews on stop-work and escalation procedures before ground disturbance begins.

During habitat disturbance: 1. Control the footprint

Use controlled, closely monitored work practices where disturbance proceeds in or near the recorded locality or other areas identified for precaution.

Keep clearing and excavation within approved, clearly marked boundaries. Do not extend the footprint or stockpile material on unapproved ground.

  • Ensure the spotter catcher or environmental representative can see the active work area and pause work when required.

During habitat disturbance: 2. Respond to finds

If a possible pseudoscorpion or relevant subsurface feature is encountered, stop work in the immediate area and notify the environmental lead. Have an appropriate specialist assess the find and follow approval and permit requirements before work resumes.

  • Record the location and circumstances of the find without assuming it is this taxon.
  • Do not release or relocate an animal unless this is authorised and directed by a suitably qualified person.

After habitat disturbance: 1. Record and report

After disturbance, document findings and check that approved limits and fauna procedures were followed.

Compile records of any fauna encountered, survey results, work pauses and environmental incidents. Submit records and notifications required by approvals or DBCA guidance.

After habitat disturbance: 2. Review outcomes

Review whether the disturbance differed from the approved footprint and whether new information changes the assessment of the locality. A lack of observations during works does not establish that the taxon is absent.

  • Retain records so they can inform future works and management decisions.

Rehabilitation actions: 1. Prevent further impacts

A rehabilitation method for this taxon has not been described, and it is not known whether disturbed habitat can be restored.

Rehabilitate disturbed areas in accordance with approval conditions and the project rehabilitation plan. Keep works and rehabilitation activity within authorised areas.

Rehabilitation actions: 2. Avoid unverified assumptions

Do not claim that rehabilitation recreates suitable pseudoscorpion habitat without evidence. Retain monitoring or rehabilitation observations that could inform future assessment of the mesa.

Sources