DOCSLIB.ORG

Bat Communities of Rancho Jamul Ecological Reserve and Santa Ysabel Open Space Preserve Before and After the 2003 Wildfires

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bat Communities of Rancho Jamul Ecological Reserve and Santa Ysabel Open Space Preserve Before and After the 2003 Wildfires Bat communities of Rancho Jamul Ecological Reserve and Santa Ysabel Open Space Preserve before and after the 2003 wildfires. Data Summary Prepared for: San Diego Association of Governments U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WESTERN ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH CENTER Bat communities of Rancho Jamul Ecological Reserve and Santa Ysabel Open Space Preserve before and after the 2003 wildfires. By: Carlton J. Rochester1, Adam R. Backlin2, Drew C. Stokes 3, Milan J. Mitrovich2, Cheryl S. Brehme1, and Robert N. Fisher1 U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WESTERN ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH CENTER Data Summary Prepared for: San Diego Association of Governments 1San Diego Field Station – San Diego Office USGS Western Ecological Research Center 4165 Spruance Road, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92101 2San Diego Field Station – Irvine Office USGS Western Ecological Research Center 320 Commerce Drive, Suite 150 Irvine, CA 92602 3San Diego Natural History Museum Department of Birds and Mammals 1788 El Prado San Diego, CA 92101 Sacramento, California 2010 ii U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR KEN SALAZAR, SECRETARY U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Marcia McNutt, Director Suggested citation: Rochester, C. J., A. R. Backlin, D. C. Stokes, M. J. Mitrovich, C. S. Brehme, and R. N. Fisher. 2010. Bat communities of Rancho Jamul Ecological Reserve and Santa Ysabel Open Space Preserve before and after the 2003 wildfires. U.S. Geological Survey-Data Summary prepared for San Diego Association of Governments. 57 pp. The use of firm, trade, or brand names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey. For additional information, contact: Center Director U.S. Geological Survey Western Ecological Research Center 3020 State University Drive East Modoc Hall, Room 3006 Sacramento, CA 95819 iii Table of Contents Abstract................................................................................................................................1 1. Introduction.....................................................................................................................2 2. Study Area .....................................................................................................................3 3. Materials and Methods....................................................................................................4 3.1 Field Methods .........................................................................................................4 3.1.1 Foraging Bat Surveys..................................................................................4 3.1.2 Roost Surveys .............................................................................................6 3.2 Statistical Analysis..................................................................................................7 4. Results and Discussion ...................................................................................................8 4.1 Foraging Bat Surveys..............................................................................................9 4.1.1 Active Anabat Surveys ...............................................................................9 4.1.2 Passive Anabat Surveys ............................................................................10 4.1.3 Mist-Net Surveys ......................................................................................10 4.1.4 Audible Surveys........................................................................................10 4.1.5 Visual Surveys ..........................................................................................11 4.2 Roost Surveys ........................................................................................................11 4.3 Statistical Results...................................................................................................11 5. Conclusions...................................................................................................................14 6. Acknowledgements.......................................................................................................14 7. Literature Cited .............................................................................................................15 Appendix 1. Examples of bat calls from reference library ...............................................35 Appendix 2. Species accounts...........................................................................................36 Pallid bat ......................................................................................................................36 Townsend’s big-eared bat............................................................................................36 Big brown bat...............................................................................................................37 Western mastiff bat......................................................................................................38 Western red bat ............................................................................................................38 Hoary bat......................................................................................................................39 Western yellow bat ......................................................................................................40 California myotis .........................................................................................................40 Western small-footed bat .............................................................................................41 Long-eared bat .............................................................................................................42 Yuma bat......................................................................................................................42 Pocketed free-tailed bat................................................................................................43 Big free-tailed bat ........................................................................................................44 Western pipistrelle .......................................................................................................44 Mexican free-tailed bat ................................................................................................45 Appendix 3. Alternate tables and figures for public release.............................................46 Table 1. Survey sites...................................................................................................47 Figure 2. Survey sites at Rancho Jamal Ecological Reserve ......................................48 Figure 3. Survey sites at Santa Ysabel Open Space Preserve.....................................49 Appendix 4. Sample data ..................................................................................................50 iv Tables Table 1. Survey sites.........................................................................................................18 Table 2. Anabat survey efforts at Rancho Jamul Ecological Reserve ..............................19 Table 3. Anabat survey efforts at Santa Ysabel Open Space Preserve.............................20 Table 4. Active-Anabat survey results..............................................................................21 Table 5. Passive-Anabat survey results ............................................................................23 Table 6. Mist-net survey results........................................................................................25 Table 7. Audible and Roost survey results .......................................................................27 Table 8. Species detection rates........................................................................................28 Figures Figure 1. Study area ..........................................................................................................29 Figure 2. Survey sites at Rancho Jamal Ecological Reserve ............................................30 Figure 3. Survey sites at Santa Ysabel Open Space Preserve...........................................31 Figure 4. Study area differences: Multidimensional scaling plot .....................................32 Figure 5. Differences in time period: Multidimensional scaling plot...............................33 Figure 6. Differences in fire condition: Multidimensional scaling plot............................34 v ABSTRACT We investigated the role of large-scale wildfires on the community composition and structure of foraging bats within San Diego County, California. In October and November of 2003, large–scale wildfires burned nearly 130,000 hectares of San Diego County. To assess the potential impacts of these fires on the native bat communities, we conducted surveys at eleven sites within each of our two study areas, Rancho Jamul Ecological Reserve - Hollenbeck Canyon Wildlife Area and Santa Ysabel Open Space Preserve. At each study area a subset of these sites was sampled before the fires (2001- 2003) and a subset after the fires (2005-2006). Our pre-fire sampling efforts included five survey techniques: active-Anabat, mist-netting, roost, visual, and audible. These same five techniques were employed during the first year of post-fire sampling, 2005. In 2006, we altered our survey methods by discontinuing mist-netting and began using passive-Anabat monitoring stations instead of an actively monitored station. In total, we detected 15 bat
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Do We Need to Use Bats As Bioindicators?
    biology Perspective Do We Need to Use Bats as Bioindicators? Danilo Russo * , Valeria B. Salinas-Ramos , Luca Cistrone, Sonia Smeraldo, Luciano Bosso * and Leonardo Ancillotto Wildlife Research Unit, Dipartimento di Agraria, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Via Università, 100, 80055 Portici, Italy; [email protected] (V.B.S.-R.); [email protected] (L.C.); [email protected] (S.S.); [email protected] (L.A.) * Correspondence: [email protected] (D.R.); [email protected] (L.B.) Simple Summary: Bioindicators are organisms that react to the quality or characteristics of the environment and their changes. They are vitally important to track environmental alterations and take action to mitigate them. As choosing the right bioindicators has important policy implications, it is crucial to select them to tackle clear goals rather than selling specific organisms as bioindicators for other reasons, such as for improving their public profile and encourage species conservation. Bats are a species-rich mammal group that provide key services such as pest suppression, pollination of plants of economic importance or seed dispersal. Bats show clear reactions to environmental alterations and as such have been proposed as potentially useful bioindicators. Based on the rel- atively limited number of studies available, bats are likely excellent indicators in habitats such as rivers, forests, and urban sites. However, more testing across broad geographic areas is needed, and establishing research networks is fundamental to reach this goal. Some limitations to using bats as bioindicators exist, such as difficulties in separating cryptic species and identifying bats in flight from their calls.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Distribution, Taxonomy and Karyology of the Genus Plecotus
    TurkJZool 27(2003)293-300 ©TÜB‹TAK OntheDistribution,TaxonomyandKaryologyoftheGenus Plecotus (Chiroptera:Vespertilionidae)inTurkey AhmetKARATAfi DepartmentofBiology,FacultyofScience-Art,Ni¤deUniversity,Ni¤de–TURKEY NuriY‹⁄‹T,ErcümentÇOLAK,TolgaKANKILIÇ DepartmentofBiology,FacultyofScience,AnkaraUniversity,Ankara-TURKEY Received:12.04.2002 Abstract: Plecotusauritus andPlecotusaustriacus wererecordedfrom8and3localitiesintheAsiaticpartofTurkey,respectively. Itwasdeterminedthatthelengthofthefirstpremolar,theshapeofthezygomaticarchesandbaculumdistinguishthesetaxaf rom eachother.Apartfromthesemorphologicalcharacteristics,thetibialengthof P.austriacus wasfoundtobesignificantlygreater thanthatof P.austriacus (P<0.05).Thediploidchromosomenumberswereidenticalinbothtaxa(2n=32).Thenumberof chromosomalarms(FN=54)andthenumberofautosomalchromosomalarms(FNa=50)werethesameasinpreviouslypublished papersonP.austriacus. KeyWords: Plecotusauritus,Plecotusaustriacus,Karyology,Turkey Türkiye’deYay›l›flGösterenPlecotus (Chiroptera:Vespertilionidae)CinsininYay›l›fl›, TaksonomisiveKaryolojisiÜzerineBirÇal›flma Özet: Plecotusauritus sekizvePlecotusaustriacus üçlokalitedenolmaküzereAnadolu’dankaydedildi.‹lkpremolarlar›nuzunlu¤u, zygomatikyay›nvebakulumunfleklininbutaksonlar›birbirindenay›rd›¤›saptand›.Bumorfolojikkarakterlerdenbaflka, P. autriacus’untibiauzunlu¤ununP.austriacus’tanistatistikiolarakdahabüyükoldu¤ubelirlendi(P<0.05).Diploidkromozomsay›s› herikitaksondabenzerbirflekilde2n=32dir. P.austriacus’unkromozomkolsay›lar›n›n(FN=54)veotosomalkromozomkol say›lar›n›n(FNa=50)literatüreuygunoldu¤ubulundu.
    [Show full text]
  • Coral Mountain Resort Draft Eir Sch# 2021020310
    CORAL MOUNTAIN RESORT DRAFT EIR SCH# 2021020310 TECHNICAL APPENDICES Focused Bat Survey Report Appendix D.2 June 2021 CARLSBAD FRESNO IRVINE LOS ANGELES PALM SPRINGS POINT RICHMOND May 6, 2021 RIVERSIDE ROSEVILLE Garret Simon SAN LUIS OBISPO CM Wave Development, LLC 2440 Junction Place, Suite 200 Boulder, Colorado 80301 Subject: Results of Focused Bat Surveys for the Proposed Wave at Coral Mountain Development Project in La Quinta, Riverside County, California Dear Mr. Simon: This letter documents the results of focused bat surveys performed by LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) for the proposed Wave at Coral Mountain Project (project). The study area for the proposed project site comprises approximately 385 acres and is situated south of 58th Avenue and directly west of Madison Street in the City of La Quinta, in Riverside County, California. In order to determine whether the proposed project could result in potential adverse effects to bat species, a daytime bat-roosting habitat assessment was conducted to locate any suitable bat-roosting habitat within the study area. Follow-up nighttime acoustic and emergence surveys were performed in April 2021 at locations that were identified as having the potential to house roosting bats. In addition to discussing the results of the focused bat surveys, this document also provides recommendations to minimize potential project-related adverse effects to roosting bats. It should be noted that the focused nighttime survey results and the associated recommendations provided in this document are preliminary, and will be updated following the completion of additional nighttime acoustic and emergence surveys in June 2021. Performing the surveys in June, during the peak period of the maternity season when all local bat species can be expected to occupy their maternity roosts, will maximize the probability of detection for all bat species that may maternity roost within the study area.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix G Final SCR Panther Grove 05152020
    LWEG Tiers 1 and 2 Site Characterization Report Panther Grove Wind Energy Project Woodford County, Illinois May 15, 2020 Prepared for: Panther Grove Wind, LLC 17300 N. Dallas Parkway, Ste. 2020 Dallas Texas 75248 Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 2300 Swan Lake Blvd., Suite 202 Independence, IA 50644 Phone: (319) 334-3755 Fax: (319) 334-3780 Project #193706902 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................. 1 1.2 REGULATORY BACKGROUND .................................................................................... 1 1.3 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................... 2 2.0 METHODS ..................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 PRELIMINARY SITE EVALUATION (TIER 1) ................................................................. 4 2.1.1 Land Cover and Use ...................................................................................... 4 2.1.2 Wetlands and Waterways ............................................................................... 4 2.1.3 Migratory Birds ...............................................................................................4 2.1.4 Eagles and Other Raptors .............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bat Rabies and Other Lyssavirus Infections
    Prepared by the USGS National Wildlife Health Center Bat Rabies and Other Lyssavirus Infections Circular 1329 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Front cover photo (D.G. Constantine) A Townsend’s big-eared bat. Bat Rabies and Other Lyssavirus Infections By Denny G. Constantine Edited by David S. Blehert Circular 1329 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2009 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Constantine, D.G., 2009, Bat rabies and other lyssavirus infections: Reston, Va., U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1329, 68 p. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Constantine, Denny G., 1925– Bat rabies and other lyssavirus infections / by Denny G. Constantine. p. cm. - - (Geological circular ; 1329) ISBN 978–1–4113–2259–2 1.
    [Show full text]
  • BAT FIELD TECH WORKSHOP.Pmd
    Gathering evidence of the utility of bats: Training in Field Techniques for Ecological Studies of Chiroptera C. Srinivasulu* and Sally Walker** The Chiroptera Conservation and Information Network of South Asia (CCINSA) and the IUCN SSC Chiroptera Threatened bats of India Specialist Group joined with the College of Forestry, Kerala Agricultural University, Thrissur to conduct its second field Fruit bats (Megachiroptera) -- total 5 techniques training workshop, from 28 July – 1 August 2003 Latidens salimalii Thonglongya, 1972 -- EN sponsored by Chester Zoo and Marwell Zoo, U.K at Thrissur. Pteropus faunulus Miller, 1902 -- EN Pteropus hypomelanus Temminck, 1853 -- EN The first such workshop was conducted at Madurai Pteropus melanotus Blyth, 1863 -- VU Kamaraj University, School of Biological Sciences almost Pteropus vampyrus (Linnaeus, 1758) -- EN two years ago, ably led by Dr. Paul Bates from U.K. and author of the definitive book on bats of this region Bats of Insectivorous bats (Microchiroptera) -- total 24 the Indian Subcontinent, (1997). He was assisted by Dr. M. Hipposideros diadema (E. Geoffroy, 1813) -- VU S. Pradhan and Dr. Y. P. Sinha from the Zoological Survey of Hipposideros durgadasi Khajuria, 1970 -- EN India. This workshop focused on general field techniques Hipposideros hypophyllus Kock & Bhat, 1994 -- EN and taxonomy with a day spent on the IUCN Red List Ia io Thomas, 1902 -- EN Criteria and Categories and the C.A.M.P. Workshop Process Miniopterus pusillus Dobson, 1876 -- VU in order to prepare CCINSA members for the impending Murina grisea Peters, 1872 -- CR Chiroptera C.A.M.P. which was held last year in January. Myotis annectans (Dobson, 1871) -- VU Myotis blythii (Tomes, 1857) -- VU The South Asian Chiroptera C.A.M.P.
    [Show full text]
  • Bats and Wind Energy: Impacts, Mitigation, and Tradeoffs
    WHITE PAPER Bats and Wind Energy: Impacts, Mitigation, and Tradeoffs Prepared by: Taber D. Allison, PhD, AWWI Director of Research Novermber 15, 2018 AWWI White Paper: Bats and Wind Energy: Impacts, Mitigation, and Tradeoffs American Wind Wildlife Institute 1110 Vermont Ave NW, Suite 950 Washington, DC 20005 www.awwi.org For Release November 15, 2018 AWWI is a partnership of leaders in the wind industry, wildlife management agencies, and science and environmental organizations who collaborate on a shared mission: to facilitate timely and responsible development of wind energy while protecting wildlife and wildlife habitat. Find this document online at www.awwi.org/resources/bat-white-paper/ Acknowledgements This document was made possible by the generous support of AWWI’s Partners and Friends. We thank Pasha Feinberg, Amanda Hale, Jennie Miller, Brad Romano, and Dave Young for their review and comment on this white paper. Prepared By Taber D. Allison, PhD, AWWI Director of Research Suggested Citation Format American Wind Wildlife Institute (AWWI). 2018. Bats and Wind Energy: Impacts, Mitigation, and Tradeoffs. Washington, DC. Available at www.awwi.org. © 2018 American Wind Wildlife Institute. Bats and Wind Energy: Impacts, Mitigation, and Tradeoffs Contents Purpose and Scope .............................................................................................................................................. 3 Bats of the U.S. and Canada ..............................................................................................................................
    [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]
  • BAT-WATCHING SITES of TEXAS Welcome! Texas Happens to Be the Battiest State in the Country
    BAT-WATCHING SITES OF TEXAS Welcome! Texas happens to be the battiest state in the country. It is home to 32 of the 47 species of bats found in the United States. Not only does it hold the distinction of having the most kinds of bats, it also boasts the largest known bat colony in the world, Bracken Cave Preserve, near San Antonio, and the largest urban bat colony, Congress Avenue Bridge, in Austin. Visitors from around the world flock BAT ANATOMY to Texas to enjoy public bat-viewing at several locations throughout the state. This guide offers you a brief summary of what each site has to offer as well as directions and contact information. It also includes a list of the bat species currently known to occur within Texas at the end of this publication. Second Finger We encourage you to visit some of these amazing sites and experience the Third Finger wonder of a Texas bat emergence! Fourth Finger Thumb Fifth Finger A Year in the Life Knee of a Mexican Free-tailed Bat Upper Arm Foot Forearm Mexican free-tailed bats (also in mammary glands found under each Tail known as Brazilian free-tailed bats) of her wings. Wrist are the most common bat found The Mexican free-tailed bats’ milk is throughout Texas. In most parts of so rich that the pups grow fast and are Tail Membrane the state, Mexican free-tailed bats ready to fly within four to five weeks of Ear are migratory and spend the winters birth. It is estimated that baby Mexican in caves in Mexico.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecosystem Services Provided by Bats
    Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. ISSN 0077-8923 ANNALS OF THE NEW YORK ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Issue: The Year in Ecology and Conservation Biology Ecosystem services provided by bats Thomas H. Kunz,1 Elizabeth Braun de Torrez,1 Dana Bauer,2 Tatyana Lobova,3 and Theodore H. Fleming4 1Center for Ecology and Conservation Biology, Department of Biology, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts. 2Department of Geography, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts. 3Department of Biology, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia. 4Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona Address for correspondence: Thomas H. Kunz, Ph.D., Center for Ecology and Conservation Biology, Department of Biology, Boston University, Boston, MA 02215. [email protected] Ecosystem services are the benefits obtained from the environment that increase human well-being. Economic valuation is conducted by measuring the human welfare gains or losses that result from changes in the provision of ecosystem services. Bats have long been postulated to play important roles in arthropod suppression, seed dispersal, and pollination; however, only recently have these ecosystem services begun to be thoroughly evaluated. Here, we review the available literature on the ecological and economic impact of ecosystem services provided by bats. We describe dietary preferences, foraging behaviors, adaptations, and phylogenetic histories of insectivorous, frugivorous, and nectarivorous bats worldwide in the context of their respective ecosystem services. For each trophic ensemble, we discuss the consequences of these ecological interactions on both natural and agricultural systems. Throughout this review, we highlight the research needed to fully determine the ecosystem services in question. Finally, we provide a comprehensive overview of economic valuation of ecosystem services.
    [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]
  • Listeria Monocytogenes Infection of Bat Pipistrellus Nathusii Epithelial Cells Depends on the Invasion Factors Inla and Inlb
    pathogens Article Listeria monocytogenes Infection of Bat Pipistrellus nathusii Epithelial Cells Depends on the Invasion Factors InlA and InlB Olga Povolyaeva 1, Yaroslava Chalenko 2,3,* , Egor Kalinin 3, Olga Kolbasova 1, Elena Pivova 1, Denis Kolbasov 1 , Sergey Yurkov 1 and Svetlana Ermolaeva 2,3 1 Federal Research Center for Virology and Microbiology (FRCVM), 601125 Volginsky, Russia; [email protected] (O.P.); [email protected] (O.K.); [email protected] (E.P.); [email protected] (D.K.); [email protected] (S.Y.) 2 Federal Research Center for Virology and Microbiology (FRCVM), Nizhny Novgorod Research Veterinary Institute Branch, Laboratory of Molecular Microbiology, 603022 Nizhny Novgorod, Russia; [email protected] 3 Gamaleya Research Center of Epidemiology and Microbiology, Laboratory of Ecology of Pathogenic Bacteria, 123098 Moscow, Russia; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +7-92-5936-7317 Received: 13 September 2020; Accepted: 21 October 2020; Published: 22 October 2020 Abstract: L. monocytogenes is a widespread facultative intracellular pathogen. The range of natural hosts that supporting L. monocytogenes persistence in the environment has not been fully established yet. In this study, we were interested in the potential of L. monocytogenes to infect cells of bats, which are being increasingly recognized as a reservoir for microorganisms that are pathogenic to humans and domestic animals. A stable epithelial cell line was developed from the kidneys of Pipistrellus nathusii, a small bat widely distributed across Europe. The wild-type L. monocytogenes strain EGDe infected this cell line with an invasion efficiency of 0.0078 0.0009%. Once it entered bat cells, L.
    [Show full text]