DOCSLIB.ORG

Bat Conservation Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bat Conservation Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions Bat Conservation Global evidence for the effects of interventions Anna Berthinussen, Olivia C. Richardson & John D. Altringham SYNOPSES OF CONSERVATION EVIDENCE SERIES Bat Conservation Global evidence for the effects of interventions Anna Berthinussen, Olivia C. Richardson & John D. Altringham Synopses of Conservation Evidence, Volume 5 Pelagic Publishing | www.pelagicpublishing.com Contents Advisory Board ......................................................................... 5 About the authors ..................................................................... 6 Acknowledgements .................................................................. 7 1. About this book ................................................................ 8 2. Threat: Residential and commercial development ........... 15 Key messages ............................................................................................................................ 15 2.1. Conserve existing roosts within developments ............................................................... 16 2.2. Retain or relocate access points to bat roosts ................................................................. 16 2.3. Create alternative roosts within buildings ....................................................................... 16 2.4. Change timing of building works ...................................................................................... 16 2.5. Conserve old buildings or structures as roosting sites for bats within developments .... 17 2.6. Maintain bridges and retain crevices for roosting ........................................................... 17 2.7. Protect brownfield sites ................................................................................................... 17 2.8. Provide foraging habitat in urban areas........................................................................... 18 2.9. Retain or replace existing bat commuting routes within developments ......................... 20 3. Threat: Agriculture .......................................................... 21 Key messages – Land use change .............................................................................................. 21 Key messages – Intensive farming ............................................................................................ 21 Land use change ........................................................................................................................ 22 3.1. Conserve old buildings or structures on agricultural land as roosting sites for bats ....... 22 3.2. Retain dead/old trees with hollows and cracks as roosting sites for bats on agricultural land .................................................................................................................................. 22 3.3. Retain or plant trees on agricultural land to replace foraging habitat for bats ............... 23 3.4. Protect or create wetlands as foraging habitat for bats .................................................. 24 3.5. Retain or replace existing bat commuting routes on agricultural land ............................ 25 Intensive farming ...................................................................................................................... 26 3.6. Convert to organic farming .............................................................................................. 26 3.7. Introduce agri-environment schemes .............................................................................. 28 3.8. Encourage agroforestry.................................................................................................... 29 4. Threat: Energy production – wind turbines ...................... 33 Key messages ............................................................................................................................ 33 4.1. Modify turbine design to reduce bat fatalities ................................................................ 34 4.2. Modify turbine placement to reduce bat fatalities .......................................................... 34 4.3. Leave a minimum distance between turbines and habitat features used by bats .......... 35 4.4. Deter bats from turbines using radar .............................................................................. 35 4.5. Deter bats from turbines using ultrasound ...................................................................... 36 4.6. Remove turbine lighting to avoid attracting bats ............................................................ 39 4.7. Switch off turbines at low wind speeds to reduce bat fatalities ...................................... 39 2 4.8. Automatically switch off wind turbines when bat activity is high ................................... 41 4.9. Close off nacelles in wind turbines to prevent roosting bats ........................................... 41 5. Threat: Energy production – mining ................................. 42 Key messages ............................................................................................................................ 42 5.1. Legally protect bat hibernation sites in mines from reclamation .................................... 42 5.2. Provide artificial hibernacula to replace roosts lost in reclaimed mines ......................... 42 5.3. Relocate bats from reclaimed mines to new hibernation sites ....................................... 43 6. Threat: Transportation and service corridors ................... 44 Key messages - Roads ............................................................................................................... 44 6.1. Install underpasses as road crossing structures for bats ................................................. 45 6.2. Install overpasses as road crossing structures for bats .................................................... 47 6.3. Install bat gantries or bat bridges as road crossing structures for bats ........................... 48 6.4. Install green bridges as road crossing structures for bats ............................................... 49 6.5. Install hop-overs as road crossing structures for bats ..................................................... 49 6.6. Divert bats to safe crossing points with plantings or fencing .......................................... 50 6.7. Deter bats with lighting .................................................................................................... 51 6.8. Replace or improve habitat for bats around roads .......................................................... 51 7. Threat: Biological resource use ........................................ 52 Key messages – Hunting............................................................................................................ 52 Key messages – Guano harvesting ............................................................................................ 52 Key messages – Logging and wood harvesting ......................................................................... 52 Hunting ...................................................................................................................................... 53 7.1. Introduce and enforce legislation to control hunting of bats .......................................... 54 7.2. Educate local communities about bats and hunting ........................................................ 54 7.3. Introduce sustainable harvesting of bats ......................................................................... 54 Guano harvesting ...................................................................................................................... 55 7.4. Introduce and enforce legislation to regulate harvesting of bat guano .......................... 55 7.5. Introduce sustainable harvesting of bat guano ............................................................... 55 Logging and wood harvesting ................................................................................................... 55 7.6. Use selective harvesting/reduced impact logging instead of clearcutting ...................... 55 7.7. Use shelterwood cutting instead of clearcutting ............................................................. 61 7.8. Thin trees within forests .................................................................................................. 63 7.9. Manage forest or woodland edges for bats ..................................................................... 65 7.10. Retain deadwood/snags within forests for roosting bats ................................................ 65 7.11. Replant native trees ......................................................................................................... 66 7.12. Retain residual tree patches in logged areas ................................................................... 66 7.13. Incorporate forested corridors or buffers into logged areas ........................................... 67 8. Threat: Human disturbance – caving & tourism ............... 71 Key messages ............................................................................................................................ 71 8.1. Use cave gates to restrict public access ........................................................................... 71 8.2. Maintain microclimate at hibernation/roost sites ........................................................... 76 8.3. Impose restrictions on cave visits .................................................................................... 76 8.4. Educate
Load more

Recommended publications
  • First Records of Nyctalus Noctula Social Calls in Portugal
    Vespertilio 17: 37–44, 2014 ISSN 1213-6123 First records of Nyctalus noctula social calls in Portugal Paulo BARROS, Luís BRAZ, Hélia Marisa vale-Gonçalves & João Alexandre Cabral Laboratory of Applied Ecology, Centre for the Research and Technology of Agro-Environmental and Biological Sciences (CITAB), University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro (UTAD), Quinta de Prados 5000-801, Vila Real, Portugal; [email protected] Abstract. The common noctule (Nyctalus noctula) is a large and fast flying Palaearctic migratory bat. The range of the species distribution extends in longitude from the Iberian Peninsula to Japan and in latitude from North Africa to the southern part of the Scandinavian countries. However, in the southern part of its distribution range, most of the potential maternity colonies are unknown or found only spo- radically. This note presents the first records of N. noctula social calls in Portugal. In fact, two types of N. noctula socials calls (C1 and D1) were recorded and identified at a site in the Sabor river valley in northern Portugal, which are usually associated with mating roosts. Therefore, these new data may contribute to improve and update the knowledge of the location of potential new mating, swarming and hibernation sites, as well as of the mating season length and behavioural patterns of this migratory species throughout its European range. Nyctalus noctula, social calls, bat swarming, Portugal Introduction The common noctule, Nyctalus noctula (Schreber, 1774), is a large and fast flying Palaearctic bat, with broad rounded ears, rufous-brown fur, which is slightly darker on the dorsum, and has long narrow wings covered with short hair on the underside of the membrane close to the body (Dietz et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Bat Conservation 2021
    Bat Conservation Global evidence for the effects of interventions 2021 Edition Anna Berthinussen, Olivia C. Richardson & John D. Altringham Conservation Evidence Series Synopses 2 © 2021 William J. Sutherland This document should be cited as: Berthinussen, A., Richardson O.C. and Altringham J.D. (2021) Bat Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions. Conservation Evidence Series Synopses. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. Cover image: Leucistic lesser horseshoe bat Rhinolophus hipposideros hibernating in a former water mill, Wales, UK. Credit: Thomas Kitching Digital material and resources associated with this synopsis are available at https://www.conservationevidence.com/ 3 Contents Advisory Board.................................................................................... 11 About the authors ............................................................................... 12 Acknowledgements ............................................................................. 13 1. About this book ........................................................... 14 1.1 The Conservation Evidence project ................................................................................. 14 1.2 The purpose of Conservation Evidence synopses ............................................................ 14 1.3 Who this synopsis is for ................................................................................................... 15 1.4 Background .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Information Synthesis on the Potential for Bat Interactions with Offshore Wind Facilities
    _______________ OCS Study BOEM 2013-01163 Information Synthesis on the Potential for Bat Interactions with Offshore Wind Facilities Final Report U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Office of Renewable Energy Programs www.boem.gov OCS Study BOEM 2013-01163 Information Synthesis on the Potential for Bat Interactions with Offshore Wind Facilities Final Report Authors Steven K. Pelletier Kristian S. Omland Kristen S. Watrous Trevor S. Peterson Prepared under BOEM Contract M11PD00212 by Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 30 Park Drive Topsham, ME 04086 Published by U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Herndon, VA Office of Renewable Energy Programs June 2013 DISCLAIMER This report was prepared under contract between the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) and Stantec Consulting Services Inc. This report has been technically reviewed by BOEM, and it has been approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of BOEM, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. It is, however, exempt from review and compliance with BOEM editorial standards. REPORT AVAILABILITY The report may be downloaded from the boem.gov website through the Environmental Studies Program Information System (ESPIS). You will be able to obtain this report from BOEM or the National Technical Information Service. U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Ocean Energy Management National Technical Information Service Office of Renewable Energy Programs 5285 Port Royal Road 381 Elden Street, HM-1328 Springfield, Virginia 22161 Herndon, VA 20170 Phone: (703) 605-6040 Fax: (703) 605-6900 Email: [email protected] CITATION Pelletier, S.K., K.
    [Show full text]
  • EU Action Plan for the Conservation of All Bat Species in the European Union
    Action Plan for the Conservation of All Bat Species in the European Union 2018 – 2024 October 2018 Action Plan for the Conservation of All Bat Species in the European Union 2018 - 2024 EDITORS: BAROVA Sylvia (European Commission) & STREIT Andreas (UNEP/EUROBATS) COMPILERS: MARCHAIS Guillaume & THAURONT Marc (Ecosphère, France/The N2K Group) CONTRIBUTORS (in alphabetical order): BOYAN Petrov * (Bat Research & Conservation Centre, Bulgaria) DEKKER Jasja (Animal ecologist, Netherlands) ECOSPHERE: JUNG Lise, LOUTFI Emilie, NUNINGER Lise & ROUÉ Sébastien GAZARYAN Suren (EUROBATS) HAMIDOVIĆ Daniela (State Institute for Nature Protection, Croatia) JUSTE Javier (Spanish association for the study and conservation of bats, Spain) KADLEČÍK Ján (Štátna ochrana prírody Slovenskej republiky, Slovakia) KYHERÖINEN Eeva-Maria (Finnish Museum of Natural History, Finland) HANMER Julia (Bat Conservation Trust, United Kingdom) LEIVITS Meelis (Environmental Agency of the Ministry of Environment, Estonia) MARNELl Ferdia (National Parks & Wildlife Service, Ireland) PETERMANN Ruth (Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, Germany) PETERSONS Gunărs (Latvia University of Agriculture, Latvia) PRESETNIK Primož (Centre for Cartography of Fauna and Flora, Slovenia) RAINHO Ana (Institute for the Nature and Forest Conservation, Portugal) REITER Guido (Foundation for the protection of our bats in Switzerland) RODRIGUES Luisa (Institute for the Nature and Forest Conservation, Portugal) RUSSO Danilo (University of Napoli Frederico II, Italy) SCHEMBRI
    [Show full text]
  • Index of Handbook of the Mammals of the World. Vol. 9. Bats
    Index of Handbook of the Mammals of the World. Vol. 9. Bats A agnella, Kerivoula 901 Anchieta’s Bat 814 aquilus, Glischropus 763 Aba Leaf-nosed Bat 247 aladdin, Pipistrellus pipistrellus 771 Anchieta’s Broad-faced Fruit Bat 94 aquilus, Platyrrhinus 567 Aba Roundleaf Bat 247 alascensis, Myotis lucifugus 927 Anchieta’s Pipistrelle 814 Arabian Barbastelle 861 abae, Hipposideros 247 alaschanicus, Hypsugo 810 anchietae, Plerotes 94 Arabian Horseshoe Bat 296 abae, Rhinolophus fumigatus 290 Alashanian Pipistrelle 810 ancricola, Myotis 957 Arabian Mouse-tailed Bat 164, 170, 176 abbotti, Myotis hasseltii 970 alba, Ectophylla 466, 480, 569 Andaman Horseshoe Bat 314 Arabian Pipistrelle 810 abditum, Megaderma spasma 191 albatus, Myopterus daubentonii 663 Andaman Intermediate Horseshoe Arabian Trident Bat 229 Abo Bat 725, 832 Alberico’s Broad-nosed Bat 565 Bat 321 Arabian Trident Leaf-nosed Bat 229 Abo Butterfly Bat 725, 832 albericoi, Platyrrhinus 565 andamanensis, Rhinolophus 321 arabica, Asellia 229 abramus, Pipistrellus 777 albescens, Myotis 940 Andean Fruit Bat 547 arabicus, Hypsugo 810 abrasus, Cynomops 604, 640 albicollis, Megaerops 64 Andersen’s Bare-backed Fruit Bat 109 arabicus, Rousettus aegyptiacus 87 Abruzzi’s Wrinkle-lipped Bat 645 albipinnis, Taphozous longimanus 353 Andersen’s Flying Fox 158 arabium, Rhinopoma cystops 176 Abyssinian Horseshoe Bat 290 albiventer, Nyctimene 36, 118 Andersen’s Fruit-eating Bat 578 Arafura Large-footed Bat 969 Acerodon albiventris, Noctilio 405, 411 Andersen’s Leaf-nosed Bat 254 Arata Yellow-shouldered Bat 543 Sulawesi 134 albofuscus, Scotoecus 762 Andersen’s Little Fruit-eating Bat 578 Arata-Thomas Yellow-shouldered Talaud 134 alboguttata, Glauconycteris 833 Andersen’s Naked-backed Fruit Bat 109 Bat 543 Acerodon 134 albus, Diclidurus 339, 367 Andersen’s Roundleaf Bat 254 aratathomasi, Sturnira 543 Acerodon mackloti (see A.
    [Show full text]
  • Nest Boxes: Creating Homes for Urban Wildlife
    Nest Boxes: Creating homes for urban wildlife Importance of Hollows Australia is home to over 350 species of land animals that depend on the hollows that form in old growth eucalyptus trees for shelter or reproduction. Hollows are formed through loss of limb, insect activity (like termites), decay and weathering. Suitable hollows taken a minimum of 80- 100 years and for larger animals it could be 150-250 years for a suitable hollow to form. Some of the many animals in Australia that rely on tree hollows include parrots, owls, kingfishers, ducks, possums, gliders, micro bats and even many reptiles, frogs and invertebrates. Within urban areas hollow bearing trees are found on public land (national parks, water ways, beach foreshore and streets) and on private land (front and back yards). Many hollow dependent species are in decline due to the widespread loss of hollow bearing trees. In urban areas hollows are removed for urban development (new houses, roads and factories) and for public safety reasons. Even if these trees are replanted, up to 100 years or more may pass before they begin to form hollows suitable for use by wildlife. If hollow dependent species are to continue to survive in urban and rural areas, urgent action is required to protect hollow bearing trees wherever possible. Nest boxes are needed in areas where hollows have already been lost. What are Nest Boxes? Nest boxes act as an artificial hollow that provide opportunities for hollow dependent fauna to survive in areas where their natural breeding habitat has been destroyed. Nest boxes are most useful in areas where hollows are lacking and other aspects of habitat are sufficient, such as food and water supply.
    [Show full text]
  • Chiropterology Division BC Arizona Trial Event 1 1. DESCRIPTION: Participants Will Be Assessed on Their Knowledge of Bats, With
    Chiropterology Division BC Arizona Trial Event 1. DESCRIPTION: Participants will be assessed on their knowledge of bats, with an emphasis on North American Bats, South American Microbats, and African MegaBats. A TEAM OF UP TO: 2 APPROXIMATE TIME: 50 minutes 2. EVENT PARAMETERS: a. Each team may bring one 2” or smaller three-ring binder, as measured by the interior diameter of the rings, containing information in any form and from any source. Sheet protectors, lamination, tabs and labels are permitted in the binder. b. If the event features a rotation through a series of stations where the participants interact with samples, specimens or displays; no material may be removed from the binder throughout the event. c. In addition to the binder, each team may bring one unmodified and unannotated copy of either the National Bat List or an Official State Bat list which does not have to be secured in the binder. 3. THE COMPETITION: a. The competition may be run as timed stations and/or as timed slides/PowerPoint presentation. b. Specimens/Pictures will be lettered or numbered at each station. The event may include preserved specimens, skeletal material, and slides or pictures of specimens. c. Each team will be given an answer sheet on which they will record answers to each question. d. No more than 50% of the competition will require giving common or scientific names. e. Participants should be able to do a basic identification to the level indicated on the Official List. States may have a modified or regional list. See your state website.
    [Show full text]
  • Bat Community Structure and Habitat Use Across Disturbance Regimes
    Bat community structure and habitat use across logging regimes in jarrah eucalypt forests of south-western Australia Paul W. Webala School of Biological Sciences Faculty of Sustainability, Environment and Life Sciences Murdoch University, Perth, Western Australia Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 2010 i Abstract In many parts of the world, the increasing demand for timber and other forest products has led to loss, fragmentation, degradation or modification of natural forest habitats. The consequences of such habitat changes have been well studied for some animal groups, however not much is known of their effects on bats. In Australia, logging of native forests is a major threat to the continent‘s biodiversity and while logging practices have undergone great changes in the past three decades to selective logging (including ecologically sustainable forest management), which is more sympathetic to wildlife, there is still concern about the effects of logging on the habitat of many forest-dwelling animals. The goal of this thesis was to investigate the effects of logging on the bat species assemblages at both community and individual species levels in terms of their foraging and roosting ecology in jarrah forests of south-western Australia. This information is necessary to strengthen the scientific basis for ecologically sustainable forest management in production forests. The outcome of this research may help in the formulation of policy and management decisions to ensure the long-term maintenance and survival of viable populations of forest-dwelling bats in these altered environments. Bats were selected because they comprise more than 25% of Australia‘s mammal species and constitute a major component of Australia‘s biodiversity.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Assessments for Five Forest Bat Species in the Eastern United States
    United States Department of Agriculture Conservation Forest Service Assessments for Five General Technical Report NC-260 Technical Guide Forest Bat Species in the 2006 Eastern United States Front Cover: Illustrations by Fiona Reid, Ontario, Canada ©. Species from top: Pipistrellus subflavus, Myotis leibii, Myotis austroriparius, Myotis septentrionalis, Nycticeius humeralis. United States Department of Agriculture Conservation Forest Service Assessments for Five General Technical Report NC-260 Technical Guide Forest Bat Species in the 2006 Eastern United States Edited by Frank R. Thompson, III Thompson, Frank R., III, ed. 2006. Conservation assessments for five forest bat species in the Eastern United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-260. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research Station. 82 p. Assesses the status, distribution, conservation, and management considerations for five Regional Forester Sensitive Species of forest bats on national forests in the Eastern United States: eastern pipistrelle, evening bat, southeastern myotis, eastern small-footed myotis, and northern long-eared bat. Includes information on the taxonomy, description, life history, habitat distribution, status, and population biology of each species. KEY WORDS: conservation status, habitat use, life history, Myotis austroriparius (southeastern myotis), Myotis leibii (eastern small-footed myotis), Myotis septentrionalis (northern long-eared bat), Pipistrellus subflavus (eastern pipistrelle), Nycticeius humeralis (evening bat), Region 9, USDA Forest Service Disclaimer The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program.
    [Show full text]
  • The Use of Wildlife Crossings by Bats
    The Use of Wildlife Crossings by Bats Msc Thesis- Forest and Nature Conservation Myotis bechsteinii Julia P Kamp The Use of Wildlife Crossings by Bats Assessing if and how frequent different bat species use wildlife overpasses in Germany Msc thesis Report – Forest and Nature Conservation Date: September 2016 Author E-Mail Student number Julia P. Kamp [email protected] 910507418080 Supervisors E-Mail Organization Pim van Hooft [email protected] Wageningen University Mathias Herrmann [email protected] ÖKO-LOG Freilandforschung Photo front page: Julia Kamp Summary Growing and expanding infrastructure, cities and agriculture increase habitat fragmentation. Roads and highways pose geographical barriers for all kind of wildlife and hamper animal movement and migration. Not only large mammals are affected by this type of habitat fragmentation, but also smaller mammals that have large home ranges. Especially bats are vulnerable to habitat fragmentation. Depending on their clutter adaptation, some bat species preferably fly along vegetation structures and rarely over open spaces. Therefore it has been suggested that bats rely on structures that safely guide them over highways and wide roads. Although the use of wildlife overpasses by wildlife is well studied, only little knowledge is available about bats using such crossings. Hence, the topic of my study was to investigate the use of over-road wildlife crossings by bats. The results would provide useful information about the importance of wildlife overpasses for bats and could make an important contribution to bat conservation. I investigated 7 different wildlife overpasses within Germany; 3 in the uplands in south west Germany (Rhineland-Palatinate) and 4 in the lowlands in north east Germany (Brandenburg and Mecklenburg-Hither Pomerania).
    [Show full text]
  • Barbastelle Bats in a Wind Farm: Are They at Risk?
    European Journal of Wildlife Research (2018) 64:43 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-018-1202-1 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Barbastelle bats in a wind farm: are they at risk? Grzegorz Apoznański1 & Sonia Sánchez-Navarro2,3 & Tomasz Kokurewicz1 & Stefan Pettersson4 & Jens Rydell2 Received: 13 December 2017 /Revised: 6 June 2018 /Accepted: 11 June 2018 # Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018 Abstract We need to know if and how western barbastelles Barbastella barbastellus are affected by wind farming in Sweden. This is because wind turbines are frequently constructed in barbastelle habitats and yet there is no national guideline on how the arising conflict should be handled. We studied the movement, behavior and mortality of a barbastelle population at a wind farm in southern Sweden, using radio-telemetry, automatic bat detectors and carcass searches. The tagged bats (6 males and 8 females) roosted mainly under loose bark of dead oak trees and foraged in patches of mature deciduous woodlands or pockets of mature spruce trees within 15 km of the roosts. Extensive areas of young spruce plantation, open farmland and lakes were not used for roosting or foraging but were crossed by commuting bats. Continuous recordings with bat detectors frequently picked up barbastelles at forest edges 30 m from the turbines, but rarely over the turbine pads within 10 m from the turbines and never at heights of 30 and 100 m at the turbine towers. Barbastelles were apparently not attracted to the wind turbines and did not seem to interact with them in any way. Carcass searches under 10 wind turbines at 1-week intervals over three summers did not reveal any dead barbastelles, although three other species were recovered.
    [Show full text]
  • Random Sampling of the Central European Bat Fauna Reveals the Existence of Numerous Hitherto Unknown Adenoviruses+
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Repository of the Academy's Library Acta Veterinaria Hungarica 63 (4), pp. 508–525 (2015) DOI: 10.1556/004.2015.047 RANDOM SAMPLING OF THE CENTRAL EUROPEAN BAT FAUNA REVEALS THE EXISTENCE OF NUMEROUS + HITHERTO UNKNOWN ADENOVIRUSES 1* 2 3 1,4 Márton Z. VIDOVSZKY , Claudia KOHL , Sándor BOLDOGH , Tamás GÖRFÖL , 5 2 1 Gudrun WIBBELT , Andreas KURTH and Balázs HARRACH 1Institute for Veterinary Medical Research, Centre for Agricultural Research, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Hungária krt. 21, H-1143 Budapest, Hungary; 2Robert Koch Institute, Centre for Biological Threats and Special Pathogens, Berlin, Germany; 3Aggtelek National Park Directorate, Jósvafő, Hungary; 4Department of Zoology, Hungarian Natural History Museum, Budapest, Hungary; 5Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research, Berlin, Germany (Received 16 September 2015; accepted 28 October 2015) From over 1250 extant species of the order Chiroptera, 25 and 28 are known to occur in Germany and Hungary, respectively. Close to 350 samples originating from 28 bat species (17 from Germany, 27 from Hungary) were screened for the presence of adenoviruses (AdVs) using a nested PCR that targets the DNA polymerase gene of AdVs. An additional PCR was designed and applied to amplify a fragment from the gene encoding the IVa2 protein of mastadenovi- ruses. All German samples originated from organs of bats found moribund or dead. The Hungarian samples were excrements collected from colonies of known bat species, throat or rectal swab samples, taken from live individuals that had been captured for faunistic surveys and migration studies, as well as internal or- gans of dead specimens.
    [Show full text]