Long-term monitoring suggests bat boxes may alter local bat community structure

Griffiths, Stephen R.; Lumsden, Linda F.; Bender, Robert H.; Irvine, R. Justin; Godinho, Lisa N.; Visintin, Casey; Eastick, Danielle L.; Robert, Kylie A.; Lentini, Pia E.

doi:10.1071/am18026

Cited by 19 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The relative activity of each species or complex differed between the sites, with no clear or consistent patterns corresponding to the different treatments and survey periods. This suggests that, while use of bat boxes by widespread, adaptable species (such as C. gouldii) may have some influence on localised patterns of community composition 26 , it does not necessarily result in a consistent, widespread dominance of generalist species, or a reduction in overall bat diversity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nest boxes do not cause a shift in bat community composition in an urbanised landscape

Griffiths

Lumsden

Robert

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nest boxes are often used to provide supplementary roosts for cavity-dependent wildlife, but little is known about if they influence faunal community composition. Long-term monitoring of bat boxes in south-eastern Australia indicated that their use was dominated by one generalist species (Chalinolobus gouldii), causing concern that installing bat boxes could cause a shift toward less diverse bat communities. To test this, we conducted a large-scale before-after control-impact experiment at 18 sites, over five years. Sites were either: (1) those with existing bat boxes, (2) those where boxes were added during the study, or (3) controls without boxes. We used echolocation call data from 9035 bat detector nights to compare community composition, diversity, and species’ relative activity between the sites. Chalinolobus gouldii continued to dominate the use of existing boxes, but we found little difference in community composition between sites based on the presence, absence, or addition of boxes. Our study is the first to explore the influence installing artificial hollows has on localized faunal assemblages over spatio-temporal scales relevant to management. We conclude that there is cause for optimism that bat boxes might not have perverse outcomes on local community composition in the short- to medium-term, as we had feared.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nest boxes do not cause a shift in bat community composition in an urbanised landscape

Griffiths

Lumsden

Robert

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Anecdotal evidence documented two occasions where C. gouldii roosted together with N. geoffroyi in a box (unpublished data), which suggests that if C. gouldii is behaviorally dominant, it may be seasonally dependent or differ between sexes. More research is required to better understand the commonly reported box dominance by C. gouldii and its potential consequence for other species (Rueegger ; Griffiths et al ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Preliminary evidence suggests that few bat species readily take up boxes, although this may in part be due to a paucity of studies (Goldingay & Stevens ; Rueegger ). There is also concern that bat boxes may lead to some species becoming locally dominant (Rueegger ; Griffiths et al ). Microclimate within bat boxes may be an important cue for selection by bats (Goldingay & Stevens ); however, studies specifically testing for this are scarce in Australia (but see Doty et al ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Limited use of bat boxes in a rural landscape: implications for offsetting the clearing of hollow‐bearing trees

Rueegger

Goldingay

Law

et al. 2019

Restoration Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bat boxes frequently form part of hollow-bearing tree offsets; however, their effectiveness is poorly documented. We investigated the effectiveness of a bat box program designed to partially offset tree hollow loss from clearing for a coal mine. During the first year of monitoring, we detected bats in 5% of 1,308 box checks. Only 3 of 13 local tree cavity-roosting bat species/species groups used boxes and occupancy was not strongly associated with modeled box and site attributes. In the second year, we tested two hypotheses that may explain the relatively low box use: (1) solar exposure of boxes was inadequate for heterothermic bats and (2) available box designs were of low suitability. Relocating boxes to increase solar exposure did not increase use, or enhance the temperature profiles of relocated boxes. Introduction of a new box design led to 11 times higher use compared with existing designs for Nyctophilus spp. (long-eared bat). Overall, our data suggest that the bat box program was ineffective due to few bat species using boxes, infrequent box use by three species, and rarity of maternity roosting. The knowledge gap of species-specific box designs and roosting ecology limits the effectiveness of boxes to offset cleared hollow-bearing trees. Lack of knowledge and the widespread use of bat boxes to offset lost tree hollows highlights the need to (1) rigorously protect hollow-bearing trees and (2) advance our understanding of species-specific roost ecology, box design preferences and mechanical hollow creation into trees, before artificial hollows can be considered a meaningful offset measure.

show abstract

“…We collected all bats roosting in the boxes, identified them to species, and recorded a range of morphometric data for each individual. The bat boxes at the study site are predominantly occupied by the Gould's wattled bat (Chalinolobus gouldii; Griffiths et al 2017Griffiths et al , 2019Griffiths et al , 2020, which was the focus of this study. The Gould's wattled bat is a small, widespread and generalist insectivorous bat species, with an average body mass of 14 g and forearm length of 44 mm (Churchill 2008).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Native fauna includes 11 tree-roosting bat species (Griffiths et al 2020). Forty bat boxes were installed within the riparian zone of Jacksons Creek at OPNP, commencing in 1992 (Irvine and Bender 1995), and have since been monitored regularly as part of a larger ongoing study (Griffiths et al 2019(Griffiths et al , 2020Godinho et al 2015Godinho et al , 2020. The bat boxes were constructed from timber and based on the Stebbings and Walsh (1985) rectangular cuboid design (Godinho et al 2020).…”

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Low Rates of PIT‐Tag Loss in an Insectivorous Bat Species

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rate of loss of tags used to mark individuals is an important consideration in wildlife research and monitoring. Passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags (or microchips) generally have high retention rates; however, tag loss rates for small mammals such as insectivorous bats are poorly understood. We double-marked a population of Gould's wattled bats (Chalinolobus gouldii) with forearm bands and PIT tags (with the injection site sealed with surgical adhesive) in January and February 2020 to determine rates of subsequent tag loss over the short-(1-2 months) and medium-(13-14 months) term. Loss of PIT tags occurred in 4 (2.7%) of 146 recaptured individuals, all within 2 months of microchipping. We also recorded 1 occurrence of band loss 11 months after banding. Our study supports assertions that PIT-tag retention rates in small mammals are high, and suggests that rates of tag loss in small bat species are low when surgical adhesive is applied. Quantifying the rate of tag loss enables this variable to be incorporated into mark-recapture models.

show abstract

Long-term monitoring suggests bat boxes may alter local bat community structure

Cited by 19 publications

References 18 publications

Nest boxes do not cause a shift in bat community composition in an urbanised landscape

Nest boxes do not cause a shift in bat community composition in an urbanised landscape

Limited use of bat boxes in a rural landscape: implications for offsetting the clearing of hollow‐bearing trees

Low Rates of PIT‐Tag Loss in an Insectivorous Bat Species

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About