Correction: Mitigating the Impact of Bats in Historic Churches: The Response of Natterer's Bats Myotis nattereri to Artificial Roosts and Deterrence

Zeale, Matt R.K.; Bennitt, Emily; Newson, Stuart E.; Packman, Charlotte; Browne, William J.; Jones, Gareth; Stone, Emma L.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0152531

Cited by 5 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many human structures and activities put species at risk, for example by inducing changes in behaviour, degrading habitats or by producing a direct mortality risk [4][5][6]. Conservation research has therefore focussed on mitigation strategies that exclude animals from areas where they may come to harm, or where they may impact or cause damage to human activities/structures, for example using deterrence [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bats are one group for which deterrence has been suggested as a potential mitigation method for reducing human impacts and conservation conflicts [12,[16][17][18][19]. Protecting bat species is a key conservation concern for many European countries and many species have legal protection and/or are listed as 'Endangered' [20].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bats can also cause damage and a cleaning burden in historic buildings where they roost [12] and in some cases pose a human health hazard in workplaces, schools and places of worship [29,30]. Conservation conflicts can therefore arise between those wishing to conserve bat populations and people using a building where bats are roosting and causing problems (usually with their urine and faeces) [12,29]. In some cases, this leads to exclusion of bats from buildings, which if carried out unlawfully or without careful consideration, can be detrimental to a colony's survival [30].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Potential deterrence methods for bats include light, radar and sound [12,16,18,[33][34][35]. Some bat species are deterred by certain types of lighting, for example streetlights or flood-lights [33,[36][37][38].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some bat species are deterred by certain types of lighting, for example streetlights or flood-lights [33,[36][37][38]. Lighting has recently been tested as a potential bat deterrent for use in churches where urine and faeces can cause damage and a cleaning burden [12,39]. Illumination of 'nofly zones' within churches limited use of those areas, but bats became entombed in roosts that were directly lit, causing the authors to caution against using this method without careful consideration and further investigation [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Comparing acoustic and radar deterrence methods as mitigation measures to reduce human-bat impacts and conservation conflicts

Gilmour

Holderied

Pickering³

et al. 2020

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Where humans and wildlife co-exist, mitigation is often needed to alleviate potential conflicts and impacts. Deterrence methods can be used to reduce impacts of human structures or activities on wildlife, or to resolve conservation conflicts in areas where animals may be regarded as a nuisance or pose a health hazard. Here we test two methods (acoustic and radar) that have shown potential for deterring bats away from areas where they forage and/ or roost. Using both infrared video and acoustic methods for counting bat passes, we show that ultrasonic speakers were effective as bat deterrents at foraging sites, but radar was not. Ultrasonic deterrents decreased overall bat activity (filmed on infrared cameras) by~80% when deployed alone and in combination with radar. However, radar alone had no effect on bat activity when video or acoustic data were analysed using generalised linear mixed effect models. Feeding buzzes of all species were reduced by 79% and 69% in the ultrasound only treatment when compared to the control and radar treatments, but only the ultrasound treatment was significant in post-hoc tests. Species responded differently to the ultrasound treatments and we recorded a deterrent effect on both Pipistrellus pipistrellus (~40-80% reduction in activity) and P. pygmaeus (~30-60% reduction), but not on Myotis species. However, only the ultrasound and radar treatment was significant (when compared to control and radar) in post-hoc tests for P. pipistrellus. Deterrent treatment was marginally nonsignificant for P. pygmaeus, but the ultrasound only treatment was significant when compared to radar in post-hoc tests. We therefore suggest that acoustic, but not radar methods are explored further as deterrents for bats. The use of acoustic deterrence should always be assessed on a case-by-case basis, with a focus on bat conservation.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Comparing acoustic and radar deterrence methods as mitigation measures to reduce human-bat impacts and conservation conflicts

Gilmour

Holderied

Pickering³

et al. 2020

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Acoustic deterrents influence foraging activity, flight and echolocation behaviour of free-flying bats

Gilmour

Holderied

Pickering³

et al. 2021

Journal of Experimental Biology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acoustic deterrents have shown potential as a viable mitigation measure to reduce human impacts on bats, however, the mechanisms underpinning acoustic deterrence of bats have yet to be explored. Bats avoid ambient ultrasound in their environment and alter their echolocation calls in response to masking noise. Using stereo thermal videogrammetry and acoustic methods, we tested predictions that i) bats would avoid acoustic deterrents and forage and social call less in a ‘treated airspace’; ii) deterrents would cause bats to fly with more direct flight paths akin to commuting behaviour and in line with a reduction in foraging activity, resulting in increased flight speed and decreased flight tortuosity; iii) bats would alter their echolocation call structure in response to the masking deterrent sound. As predicted, overall bat activity was reduced by 30% and we recorded a significant reduction in counts of Pipistrellus pygmaeus (27%), Myotis spp. (probably M. daubentonii) (26%) and Nyctalus and Eptesicus spp. (68%) passes. P. pygmaeus feeding buzzes were also reduced by the deterrent in relation to general activity (by 38%), however social calls were not (only 23% reduction). Bats also increased their flight speed and reduced the tortuosity of their flight paths and P. pygmaeus reduced echolocation call bandwidth and start frequency of calls in response to deterrent playback, probably due to the masking effect of the sound. Deterrence could therefore be used to remove bats from areas where they forage, for example wind turbines and roads, where they may be under threat from direct mortality.

show abstract

The Itinerant Natterer: Dynamics of Summer Roost Occupancy by Myotis nattereri (Chiroptera, Vespertilionidae)

Smith

Racey

2019

Acta Chiropterologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Correction: Mitigating the Impact of Bats in Historic Churches: The Response of Natterer's Bats Myotis nattereri to Artificial Roosts and Deterrence

Cited by 5 publications

References 1 publication

Comparing acoustic and radar deterrence methods as mitigation measures to reduce human-bat impacts and conservation conflicts

Comparing acoustic and radar deterrence methods as mitigation measures to reduce human-bat impacts and conservation conflicts

Acoustic deterrents influence foraging activity, flight and echolocation behaviour of free-flying bats

The Itinerant Natterer: Dynamics of Summer Roost Occupancy by Myotis nattereri (Chiroptera, Vespertilionidae)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About