Endangered Myotis bats forage in regeneration openings in a managed forest

Divoll, Timothy J.; Aldrich, Stephen; Haulton, G. Scott; O’Keefe, Joy M.

doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2021.119757

Cited by 10 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The dietary niche conservatism we detected and presumed behavioral flexibility in pursuit strategy between M. sodalis and M. septentrionalis (i.e., similar wing shapes, Farney & Fleharty, 1969) make their coexistence in the same forested landscapes especially intriguing. Varied foraging strategies (i.e., space and habitat use, Divoll et al, 2022) and slight differences in ecomorphology (i.e., echolocation, Fenton & Bell, 1981; jaw morphology, Belwood, 1979) may allow these sister taxa to coexist and share the same dietary resources by at least two of the modes suggested for East African bats by O'Shea and Vaughan (1980): pursuit strategy and prey size.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These observations suggest that M. sodalis visits wetland habitats for high‐density fly hatches. Myotis sodalis also uses more space when foraging in the HEE landscape (Divoll et al, 2022); covering more spatial area and seeking specific microhabitats may lead to higher stochasticity of prey encounters as they travel among numerous patches (see Clare, 2014). Encounters in more patches may explain the greater taxonomic richness we observed in that species (Figure 5, Table S2).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, both species can forage among clutter and open spaces (Norberg & Rayner, 1987). Myotis sodalis forages across a larger area (Divoll et al, 2022), which combined with differences in echolocation and wing morphology, could drive fine-scale differences in diet.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Prey size is more representative than prey taxa when measuring dietary overlap in sympatric forest bats

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Prey size is more representative than prey taxa when measuring dietary overlap in sympatric forest bats

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Foraging habitat for these bats is broad-based [5], including areas near and within forests, such as edges and small openings, open woodlands, solitary trees, space above the canopy, and sometimes agricultural lands [6][7][8][9][10][11][12]. Nevertheless, foraging habitat may be as essential to maternity colonies as roosts [13]. Fidelity to foraging areas can determine roosts use [14] and limited roost availability may force bats to commute farther to forage [15], impacting reproductive success.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the eastern U.S., water is typically considered readily available, even ubiquitous, to maternity colonies of the Indiana bat [5]. Its availability is rarely factored into mitigation, although the Indiana bat uses areas with water disproportionate to availability [13,16], as do congeners [17]; small and ephemeral water bodies may be important habitat components [18]. Carter [19] stated that maternity colonies of the Indiana bat are associated with bottomland, riparian, wetland, or other hydric forest types in the midwestern U.S., whereas in the Appalachian Mountains, where such areas are limited, maternity colonies in uplands are small and ephemeral.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Case Study: Upland Ponds Provide On-Site Mitigation for Bat Habitat along American Electric Power’s 765-kV Powerline ROW in the Appalachian Mountains, USA

Brack¹,

Sparks²,

Kennedy³

2024

New Insights Into Protected Area Management and Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Initially, mitigation for protected species in the United States was project-specific, in-kind, and on-site, benefiting local populations of focal species. Recent mitigation policy uses in-lieu fees and mitigation banks, consolidating mitigation at large off-site locations, targeting regional population. This is true for the Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis), a species that roosts in trees and forages along many types of woodland edges. Drinking water is essential but considered ubiquitous and rarely factored into mitigation. In high-relief areas, runoff is rapid, precipitation is low, and evapotranspiration is high in late summer, limiting drinking pools for lactating females and juveniles. In Virginia’s Ridge and Valley region, our on-site mitigation paired ponds, roost boxes, and edge foraging habitat along a new electric transmission line right-of-way (ROW). During mitigation, white-nose syndrome (a fungal disease) decimated populations of this and four additional species of bats, which we included in analyses. Mitigation metrics were abundance, presence of focal species, species richness, and species diversity. The Indiana bat was known regionally, and an adult male was captured pre-construction along the ROW but not at mitigation sites; the species was recoded acoustically at a mitigation site post-construction. For other focal species, abundance (total and reproductive females), was dramatically greater post-mitigation. Species richness and diversity increased severalfold post-mitigation.

show abstract

Acoustic monitoring yields informative bat population density estimates

Hoggatt,

Starbuck,

O'Keefe

2024

Ecology and Evolution

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bat population estimates are typically made during winter, although this is only feasible for bats that aggregate in hibernacula. While it is essential to measure summer bat population sizes for management, we lack a reliable method. Acoustic surveys should be less expensive and more efficient than capture surveys, and acoustic activity data are already used as indices of population size. Although we currently cannot differentiate individual bats by their calls, we can enter call counts, information on signal and detection angles, and weather data into generalized random encounter models to estimate bat density. We assessed the utility of generalized random encounter models for estimating Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) population density with acoustic data collected at 51 total sites in six conservation areas in northeast Missouri, 2019–2021. We tested the effects of year, volancy period, conservation area, and their interactions on estimated density. Volancy period was the best predictor, with average predicted density increasing 60% from pre‐volancy (46 bats/km2) to post‐volancy (74 bats/km2); however, the magnitude of the effect differed by conservation area. We showed that passive acoustic surveys yield informative density estimates that are responsive to temporal changes in bat population size, which suggests this method may be useful for long‐term monitoring. However, we need more information to choose the most appropriate values for the density estimation formula. Future work to refine this approach should include assessments of bat behavior and detection parameters and testing the method's efficacy in areas where population sizes are known.

show abstract

Endangered Myotis bats forage in regeneration openings in a managed forest

Cited by 10 publications

References 43 publications

Prey size is more representative than prey taxa when measuring dietary overlap in sympatric forest bats

Prey size is more representative than prey taxa when measuring dietary overlap in sympatric forest bats

Case Study: Upland Ponds Provide On-Site Mitigation for Bat Habitat along American Electric Power’s 765-kV Powerline ROW in the Appalachian Mountains, USA

Acoustic monitoring yields informative bat population density estimates

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About