Many aspects of animal behaviour are affected by real-time changes in the risk of predation. This conclusion holds for virtually all taxa and ecological systems studied, but does it hold for bats? Bats are poorly represented in the literature on anti-predator behaviour, which may reflect a lack of nocturnal predators specialized on bats. If bats actually experience a world with minimal anti-predator concerns, then they will provide a unique contrast within the realm of vertebrate ecology. Alternatively, such predator-driven behaviour in bats may not yet be fully understood, given the difficulties in working with these highly mobile and nocturnal animals. We provide a wide-ranging exploration of these issues in bat behaviour. We first cover the basic predator-prey information available on bats, both on potential predators and the ways in which bats might perceive predators and respond to attacks. We then cover work relevant to key aspects of bat behaviour, such as choice of daytime roosts, the nature of sleep and torpor, evening roost departures, moonlight avoidance, landscape-related movement patterns, and habitat selection. Overall, the evidence in favour of a strong influence of predators on bat behaviour is equivocal, with the picture clouded by contradictory results and a lack of information on potential predators and the perception of risk by bats. It seems clear that day-active bats run a considerable risk of being killed by diurnal raptors, which are able to capture bats with relative ease. Thus, bats taking advantage of a pulse of insects just prior to sunset are likely taking risks to gain much-needed energy. Further, the choice of daytime roosts by bats is probably strongly influenced by roost safety. Few studies, however, have directly addressed either of these topics. As a group, insectivorous temperate-zone bats show no clear tendency to avoid apparently risky situations, such as activity on moonlit nights. However, some observations are consistent with the idea that predation risk affects choice of movement paths and feeding areas by temperate-zone bats, as well as the timing of roost departures. The behaviour of tropical bats, on the other hand, seems more generally influenced by predators; this is especially true for tropical nectarivores and frugivores, but also for insectivorous bats. Presumably there are more serious predators on bats in the tropics (e.g. specialized raptors or carnivorous bats), but the identity of these predators is unclear. More information is needed to assess fully the influence of predators on bat behaviour. There is much need for work on the ways in which bats perceive predators via auditory, visual, and olfactory cues, and whether bats have some knowledge of the risks posed by different predators. Also needed is information on how predators attack bats and how bats react to attacking predators. Difficult to obtain, but of critical value, will be information on the nature of the predation risk experienced by bats while away from roosts and during the full darkness of night.

No abstract

Understanding microhabitat preferences of animals is critical for effective conservation, especially for temperate-zone bats, which receive fitness benefits from selecting optimal roost microhabitats. Artificial roost structures are increasingly being used in conservation efforts for at-risk bat species. To evaluate microhabitat differences in common artificial roost structures and determine if roost selection occurs based on structure type, we installed artificial roosts of three different styles (bat box, rocket box, and bark mimic) in six clusters. We compared size and measured temperature parameters (12 points/roost) while bats were excluded from one cluster. We simultaneously conducted census counts during the active season at five more clusters open to bats for 1–2 years. The rocket box style provided larger entrance area, surface area, and volume versus other roost types. Microclimate varied with roost design. More positions inside the bat box and rocket box stayed within critical temperature limits for bats (0–45°C)—i.e., were usable. The bark-mimic provided less usable space than the rocket box and, often, large proportions of the roost were > 45°C. The rocket box provided the widest temperature availability in a given hour (max range available 7°C) and was more stable than the bark mimic. A maternity colony of Indiana bats (Myotis sodalis) selected the rocket box style; four of five available rocket boxes became primary maternity roosts, with 2–210 bats emerging per night. Future work should aim to manipulate roost size, temperature availability, and temperature stability in isolation to identify which features drive roost microhabitat selection by bats. Comparative studies of artificial roosts account for some inherent irregularity in natural systems, allowing us to study the dynamics of roost microhabitats. We recommend season-long monitoring of microhabitat in novel artificial refuges and comparative studies of artificial and natural roosts, and urge managers to consider potential positive and negative effects when substituting artificial roosts for natural habitat.

White-nose syndrome (WNS) is an emerging fungal disease suspected to have infected Indiana caves in the winter of 2010–2011. This disease places energetic strains on cave-hibernating bats by forcing them to wake and use energy reserves. It has caused >5.5 million bat deaths across eastern North America, and may be the driving force for extinction of certain bat species. White-nose syndrome infection can be identified in hibernacula, but it may be difficult to determine whether bats in a particular area are affected if no known hibernacula exist. Thus, our aim was to use long-term monitoring data to examine changes in a summer population away from hibernacula that may be attributable to WNS effects during winter. We used capture data from a long-term bat-monitoring project in central Indiana with data from 10 repeatedly netted sites consistent across all reproductive periods. We modeled capture data by WNS exposure probability to assess changes in relative abundance of common species and reproductive classes as WNS exposure probability increases. We base exposure probability on a cokriging spatial model that interpolated WNS infection from hibernaculum survey data. The little brown bat Myotis lucifugus, the Indiana bat M. sodalis, and the tri-colored bat Perimyotis subflavus suffered 12.5–79.6% declines; whereas, the big brown bat Eptesicus fuscus, the eastern red bat Lasiurus borealis, and the evening bat Nycticeius humeralis showed 11.5–50.5% increases. We caught more nonreproductive adult females and postlactating females when WNS exposure probabilities were high, suggesting that WNS is influencing reproductive success of affected species. We conclude that, in Indiana, WNS is causing species-specific declines and may have caused the local extinction of M. lucifugus. Furthermore, WNS-affected species appear to be losing pups or forgoing pregnancy. Ongoing long-term monitoring studies, especially those focusing on reproductive success, are needed to measure the ultimate impacts of WNS.

Different second-generation sequencing technologies may have taxon-specific biases when DNA metabarcoding prey in predator faeces. Our major objective was to examine differences in prey recovery from bat guano across two different sequencing workflows using the same faecal DNA extracts. We compared results between the Ion Torrent PGM and the Illumina MiSeq with similar library preparations and the same analysis pipeline. We focus on repeatability and provide an R Notebook in an effort towards transparency for future methodological improvements. Full documentation of each step enhances the accessibility of our analysis pipeline. We tagged DNA from insectivorous bat faecal samples, targeted the arthropod cytochrome c oxidase I minibarcode region and sequenced the product on both second-generation sequencing platforms. We developed an analysis pipeline with a high operational taxonomic unit (OTU) clustering threshold (i.e., ≥98.5%) followed by copy number filtering to avoid merging rare but genetically similar prey into the same OTUs. With this workflow, we detected 297 unique prey taxa, of which 74% were identified at the species level. Of these, 104 (35%) prey OTUs were detected by both platforms, 176 (59%) OTUs were detected by the Illumina MiSeq system only, and 17 (6%) OTUs were detected using the Ion Torrent system only. Costs were similar between platforms but the Illumina MiSeq recovered six times more reads and four additional insect orders than did Ion Torrent. The considerations we outline are particularly important for long-term ecological monitoring; a more standardized approach will facilitate comparisons between studies and allow faster recognition of changes within ecological communities.