Observations of Little Brown Myotis (<i>Myotis lucifugus</i>) Habitat Associations and Activity in the Chugach National Forest, Alaska

Loeb, Susan C.; Winters, Eric A.; Glaser, Marion; Snively, Marian L.; Laves, Kevin S.; Ilse, Jessica K.

doi:10.1898/13-04.1

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite reproductive delays, we did not acoustically detect little brown bats later than early October, consistent with hibernation in Alberta beginning in mid-to late September (Schowalter et al, 1979), approximately one month earlier than in more southern locations (e.g., Humphrey & Cope, 1976;Muthersbaugh et al, 2019). The challenges of successfully reproducing in a short season are apparent in our estimated reproductive rate of 30%, which is among the lowest values in the literature (e.g., Barclay et al, 2004;Frick et al, 2010;Loeb et al, 2014) and is in stark contrast to southern locations where rates consistently approach 100% (e.g., Humphrey & Cope, 1976;O'Farrell & Studier, 1975).…”

Section: Phenology and Reproductionsupporting

confidence: 81%

“…Bat captures in May were strongly female‐biased, consistent with adult females leaving hibernacula before males and yearlings to increase the time available for reproduction (Humphrey & Cope, 1976; Kunz et al, 1998; Norquay & Willis, 2014). Despite bats' seasonally early emergence from hibernation, juveniles were not volant until early August, one to four weeks later than other northern areas in Alberta and Alaska (e.g., Loeb et al, 2014; Olson, 2011; Schowalter et al, 1979), but comparable to the nearby Kananaskis Provincial Park (Monteiro, 2023) and to bats at higher latitudes in Yukon (e.g., Slough & Jung, 2008). These results are consistent with unfavorable conditions delaying juvenile development due to maternal use of torpor (e.g., Burles et al, 2009; Racey & Swift, 1981).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Female little brown bats require both building and natural roosts in a mountainous environment with short summers

Micalizzi,

Forshner,

Low

et al. 2023

Ecosphere

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The little brown bat (Myotis lucifugus) is an endangered species that occurs throughout most of North America. The recovery strategy for little brown bats in Canada identifies a need to understand habitat use and protect important bat habitat across the species' Canadian range; however, bat roosting habitat requirements have not been well studied in mountainous environments within the northern part of the species' range. Our objective was to understand the use of building and natural roosts by female little brown bats in the Canadian Rocky Mountains. Over two summers, we captured little brown bats in Banff, Yoho, and Kootenay National Parks, in Alberta and British Columbia, Canada, and tracked 49 females to their day roosts. Buildings were the only roost type used by radio‐tagged bats of all reproductive stages, the dominant roost type used throughout the reproductive period, and the only structures in which we located maternity colonies. Buildings also appeared to shape the distribution of foraging female and reproductive female bats such that few were captured at long distances from towns and building clusters. Compared with bats in more southern and in non‐mountainous areas, bats in our study area had delayed juvenile weaning and volancy, began hibernation early, and had low reproductive rates. We suggest that buildings are a key habitat for female little brown bats to persist at their current levels in our study area, by providing thermal conditions that promote overwinter survival; additional reproductive delays caused by torpor use in cool natural roosts would likely reduce juvenile and adult female overwinter survival below the levels required to sustain populations. Nevertheless, building colonies were unusually small, and bats had relatively low fidelity to particular building roosts, suggesting that building roosts may not consistently meet bats' needs. Some nonreproductive and pregnant females also frequently used natural roosts, particularly after colder nights; these roosts may be important in facilitating torpor and energy conservation for these bats. Because bats are long‐lived with low reproductive output and low juvenile survival, addressing the needs of both reproductive and nonreproductive individuals is important for population persistence.

show abstract

Section: Phenology and Reproductionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Female little brown bats require both building and natural roosts in a mountainous environment with short summers

Micalizzi,

Forshner,

Low

et al. 2023

Ecosphere

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Not only was Myyotis lucifugus the only species detected in our study area, but it was present at 23 out of the 24 locations we sampled, covering a large spatial extent, six habitat types, and a long temporal survey period. These data provide further evidence of how widespread and common MYLU are in southcentral Alaska(Loeb and Winters 2014;George 2021;Mullet et al 2021). Although we cannot con rm the absence of other bat species in KEFJ, given the spatial and temporal extent of our survey efforts, we conclude that if species other than MYLU are present, they are either rare or simply occur in areas that have yet to be explicitly surveyed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 59%

Landscape predictors and spatial distribution of little brown myotis (Myotis lucifugus) coastal foraging habitat along the Northern Gulf of Alaska

Mullet,

Burger

2023

Polar Biol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We conducted a spatially explicit study of bat foraging activity in the terrestrial coastal habitats of the eastern Kenai Peninsula along the northern Gulf of Alaska. We con rmed the species and presence of foraging bats within these coastal habitats using spectral analysis from 24 automated acoustic recording devices that captured 24,058 recordings of bat vocalizations across 1,332 acoustic survey nights between June and September (2018-2 022. We used machine learning (TreeNet) to model and map the spatial relationship of bat foraging behavior and six habitat types (conifer forest, subalpine shrubland, water, barren, herbaceous meadows, and alpine). Bats foraged in areas close to fresh waterbodies with moderately sloped terrain along southwestern to north-facing aspects ≤ 50 m from conifer forests, < 150 m from the coastline, and at elevations < 200 m above sea level. These coastal habitats were largely discontinuous, but extensively distributed as a patchwork along the eastern Kenai Peninsula. Our model highlights speci c areas where strategic planning and hypothesis-based research can be focused. Our results ll a fundamental data gap in this understudied region of Alaska that provides a foundation for proactive research, partnerships, and conservation as white-nose syndrome presents an eminent threat to bats inhabiting coastal habitats along the North Paci c.

show abstract

Little Brown Myotis Activity Patterns in South-Central Alaska

Snively

Pendleton

Christie

et al. 2021

Northwestern Naturalist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Observations of Little Brown Myotis (Myotis lucifugus) Habitat Associations and Activity in the Chugach National Forest, Alaska

Cited by 6 publications

References 54 publications

Female little brown bats require both building and natural roosts in a mountainous environment with short summers

Female little brown bats require both building and natural roosts in a mountainous environment with short summers

Landscape predictors and spatial distribution of little brown myotis (Myotis lucifugus) coastal foraging habitat along the Northern Gulf of Alaska

Little Brown Myotis Activity Patterns in South-Central Alaska

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About