In its diet, S. murina is similar to other small dasyurids that have been studied, being qualitatively
opportunistic in that it feeds on a wide range of the arthropod prey available to it. Quantitatively,
however, S, murina ingests significantly more Scarabaeidae, Blattodea, Coleoptera, Lepidoptera and
larvae, and fewer Formicidae, Orthoptera and Isopoda than are available in pitfall traps during
spring-summer, and so cannot be considered opportunistic in this sense. In autumn-winter it also takes
significantly more Araneida and fewer Diptera, while Lepidoptera, Orthoptera and larvae are consumed
only in the proportions in which they occur. A. stuartii consumes significantly more Coleoptera,
Araneida and larvae than expected during the spring-summer season. In autumn-winter, it consumes
significantly more Blattodea, Orthoptera and Arthropoda as well, but significantly fewer Formicidae
and Diptera.
Quantitatively, the two species differ significantly in the distribution of prey items for the
spring-summer diet, and also differ in the individual diet categories of Scarabaeidae and larva during
winter and for Arthropoda as well, in the total diet. The diet overlap is high (0.94) and there are
significant rank correlation coefficients for diet categories, indicating no difference in the order of prey
items in a qualitative sense. When the diets are analysed on the basis of habitat-season groups for each
'species' (including pitfall traps), neither habitat nor season is significant, but some of the samples are
quite small. The 'species' effect is significant but largely reflects a difference between the diet items
available (in pitfall traps) and those actually eaten by these two dasyurids. S. murina utilizes a wider
range of prey than A. stuurtii and has a greater niche breadth; however, neither species could be called a
diet specialist except in the broad sense ofinsectivores. Diet does not seem to be a significant component
of the strong, microhabitat-based, ecological separation of these species.