DOCSLIB.ORG

Resource Utilization by Foraging Eastern Red Bats (Lasiurus Borealis) in the Ozark Region of Missouri

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Resource Utilization by Foraging Eastern Red Bats (Lasiurus Borealis) in the Ozark Region of Missouri The Journal of Wildlife Management 78(3):483–493; 2014; DOI: 10.1002/jwmg.685 Habitat Relations Resource Utilization by Foraging Eastern Red Bats (Lasiurus borealis) in the Ozark Region of Missouri SYBILL K. AMELON,1 Northern Research Station, U.S.D.A. Forest Service, 202 Natural Resource Building, Columbia, MO 65211, USA FRANK R. THOMPSON III, Northern Research Station, U.S.D.A. Forest Service, 202 Natural Resource Building, Columbia, MO 65211, USA JOSHUA J. MILLSPAUGH, University of Missouri, 302 Natural Resource Building, Columbia, MO 65211, USA ABSTRACT Resource selection by animals influences ecological processes such as dispersal, reproduction, foraging, and migration. Little information exists regarding foraging resource selection by bats during the maternity season. We evaluated support for effects of landcover type, landform, and landscape pattern on resource selection by individual foraging female eastern red bats (Lasiurus borealis) during the maternity period and compared resource utilization for all individuals pooled (population level), individuals grouped by geographic location, and individuals grouped by stage of lactation (early, mid, and late). We used a resource utilization function (RUF) to relate landcover and landscape attributes to the utilization distributions of individual bats estimated by the fixed-kernel method. We radio-tracked 64 lactating red bats and estimated utilization distributions for 52 individuals. Mean home range size ranged from 1,041 to 1,588 ha from late to mid lactation. The global RUF model was significantly better than the null RUF model for 36 (70%) individuals and the magnitude and direction of coefficients varied among individuals. Resource utilization at the population level was, on average, positively related to ridges and upland drainage landforms, water landcover, and road density; and negatively related to urban and nonforest landcover and distance to edge. Resource use differed between geographic areas by canopy cover, water landcover, and road density. Canopy closure was positively related to RUF in both areas but was greater in the south area. Percent water negatively related to RUF in the north area and positively related in the south area. Road density had a positive relationship in the north and negative relationship in the south with RUF. We did not find a difference in mean RUF coefficients among lactation groups except for canopy cover. On average, canopy cover had a positive effect on use by bats during early and mid-lactation but a negative effect during late lactation. We suggest that management for red bats consider landscape components and provide a range of composition and structural diversity to enhance foraging use by red bats. In highly forested landscapes, gaps or openings may provide forest edges that are important for foraging and commuting. Published 2014. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA. KEY WORDS eastern red bat, foraging, Lasiurus borealis, resource utilization distribution. Insectivorous bats play key functional roles as predators of 2013), has resulted in large declines in hibernating species in insects in temperate ecosystems and declining populations the eastern United States and Canada (Langwig et al. 2012). of this diverse mammalian group have been a concern of Effective management for bat conservation is dependent on resource management and conservation agencies worldwide for our understanding associations between bat populations and several decades (Kunz and Racey 1998, Hutson et al. 2001, their use of resources. Resource selection is a multilevel, Racey and Entwistle 2003). Bat numbers are declining because hierarchical behavioral process used by a species to obtain, of direct persecution, habitat loss, roost disturbance, environ- directly or indirectly, elements needed to survive, reproduce, mental contaminants (Hutson et al. 2001), wind turbines and persist (Johnson 1980, Senft et al. 1987). Studies of (Horn et al. 2008), and climate change (Rebelo et al. 2010). resource selection generally assume that high quality Since 2006, a disease epidemic, white-nose syndrome (WNS) resources will be used more than low quality ones, that associated with the fungal pathogen Psuedogymnoascus destruc- availability is not uniform, and that use of a resource may tans (Geomyces) (Gargas et al. 2009, Minnis and Lindner change with availability (Manly et al. 2002). Despite the importance of such information, resource relationships are poorly understood for most bat species. Bats are highly mobile, which allows them access to a wide range Received: 15 February 2013; Accepted: 30 December 2013 of resources. Historically, foraging resource use has been Published: 21 March 2014 viewed as secondary to roost selection in terms of bat 1E-mail: [email protected] conservation (Kunz 1982). Loss or modification of roosting Amelon et al. Resource Utilization by Eastern Red Bats 483 and foraging habitat, or their juxtaposition, may affect Mager and Nelson 2001). Because red bats seem to use a critical life-history parameters, such as birth rate or adult variety of habitats for foraging, the landscape context and/or survivorship. Recent advances in radio-tracking have allowed foraging resources used at different life-history stages may be for significant progress in our understanding of bat–resource important to meet the diet requirements or other fitness relationships (Barclay and Brigham 1996, Fenton 2003), but characteristics. there continues to be a lack of information regarding use Our objectives were 1) to evaluate support for effects of of foraging habitat by bats (Lacki et al. 2007). Factors landcover type, landform, and landscape pattern on resource potentially influencing the areas used by foraging bats use by individual foraging female red bats during the include prey abundance (Barclay 1985), energetic costs maternity period and at a population level when individual associated with flight mechanics (Aldridge and Rautenbach bat RUFs are averaged (Marzluff et al. 2004, Millspaugh 1987, Brigham et al. 1997), ability to detect and locate prey et al. 2006) and 2) to compare resource use among individuals (Simmons and Stein 1980, Griffin and Thompson 1982, grouped by geographic area (north or south), and stage of Neuweiler 1989, Fenton and Griffin 1997), risk of predation lactation (early, mid, and late). We hypothesized that female (Lesin´ski et al. 2009), proximity of water, and level of human red bats would forage in locations that optimize conditions disturbance in the foraging area (Ford et al. 2006). for fast flight, including ridgetops and drainages, and along Resource selection is often determined by comparing used edges (nonforest next to forest) and/or in locations conducive to available resources, but in practice, it is often difficult to to obtaining water or commuting, including along linear assess availability from an animal’s point of view (Boyce features (such as rivers or roads; Salcedo et al. 1995, Saugey et al. 2002). Quantification of availability usually consists of a et al. 1998, Hutchinson and Lacki 1999). We hypothesized priori or a posteriori measure of the abundance of resources that diverse landcover types may increase use by either in a defined area using classification-based methods that creating additional edge or providing a wider variety of place animal locations into distinct habitat categories for resource options (Hutchinson and Lacki 1999, Elmore analysis (Conner et al. 2003, Miller et al. 2003). In contrast, et al. 2005). We also hypothesized foraging area would the resource utilization function (RUF) approach (Marzluff increase through lactation or at least might change from early et al. 2004, Millspaugh et al. 2006) uses a probability density to late lactation because foraging patterns of females would function (Silverman 1986) that quantifies an individual’s or potentially reflect changing needs of pup development. group’s use of space in a continuous and probabilistic way Specifically, that as females are able to leave pups for longer (Kernohan et al. 2001). The probability density function is periods between nursing bouts, they would use resources often a kernel-based utilization distribution (UD) and depicts farther from roosting sites (Barclay 1989). the probability of an animal occurring at each location within its home range as a function of relocation points (White and STUDY AREA Garrott 1990:146). The UD has been used to relate relative space use to resource attributes in a spatially explicit way using We studied red bats in 2 geographic areas within the Salem the RUF approach (Marzluff et al. 2004). Plateau physiographic region within the Ozark Highlands Widespread or abundant bat species, such as eastern red aquatic sub-region of Missouri (Sowa et al. 2005; Fig. 1). bats (Lasiurus borealis), may be the most ecologically and These areas were primarily within the administrative economically important species because of their role in boundaries of the Houston-Rolla and the Eleven Point ecosystem health (Pierson 1998). Eastern red bats (subse- Ranger Districts of the Mark Twain National Forest and quently referred to only as red bats) are a migratory, tree represent a range of management practices that result in dwelling species that roost singly in tree canopies where they savanna, woodland, and forest communities. The southern hang from leaf petioles or small branches (Perry and Thill 2003, Amelon 2007). Red bats are being killed in high numbers at wind turbines across the continent (Kunz et al. 2007, Winhold et al. 2008). By 2020 an estimated 33,000 to 111,000 migratory bats will be killed annually by wind turbines in the Mid-Atlantic Highlands alone (Kunz et al. 2007). An improved understanding of important site and landscape resources may improve conservation efforts for this species. Red bats consume diverse prey species that include Lepidopterans, Coleopterans, Ephemeropterans, and Hymenopterans (Whitaker 1972, Carter et al. 1998, Clare et al. 2009). Red bats have been reported to use open habitats along the edge of forested areas, agricultural fields, roadways (Salcedo et al. 1995, Saugey et al. 1998), above the tree canopy (Barclay et al. 1999), upland and bottomland Figure 1.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Forest Management and Bats
    F orest Management a n d B a t s | 1 Forest Management and Bats F orest Management a n d B a t s | 2 Bat Basics More than 1,400 species of bats account for almost a quarter of all mammal species worldwide. Bats are exceptionally vulnerable to population losses, in part because they are one of the slowest-reproducing mammals on Earth for their size, with most producing only one young each year. For their size, bats are among the world’s longest-lived mammals. The little brown bat can live up to 34 years in the wild. Contrary to popular misconceptions, bats are not blind and do not become entangled in human hair. Bats are the only mammals capable of true flight. Most bat species use an extremely sophisticated biological sonar, called echolocation, to navigate and hunt for food. Some bats can detect an object as fine as a human hair in total darkness. Worldwide, bats are a primary predator of night-flying Merlin Tuttle insects. A single little brown bat, a resident of North American forests, can consume 1,000 mosquito-sized insects in just one hour. All but three of the 47 species of bats found in the United States and Canada feed solely on insects, including many destructive agricultural pests. The remaining bat species feed on nectar, pollen, and the fruit of cacti and agaves and play an important role in pollination and seed dispersal in southwestern deserts. The 15 million Mexican free-tailed bats at Bracken Cave, Texas, consume approximately 200 tons of insects nightly.
    [Show full text]
  • Nine Species of Bats, Each Relying on Specific Summer and Winter Habitats
    Species Guide to Vermont Bats • Vermont has nine species of bats, each relying on specific summer and winter habitats. • Six species hibernate in caves and mines during the winter (cave bats). • During the summer, two species primarily roost in structures (house bats), • And four roost in trees and rocky outcrops (forest bats). • Three species migrate south to warmer climates for the winter and roost in trees during the summer (migratory bats). • This guide is designed to help familiarize you with the physical characteristics of each species. • Bats should only be handled by trained professionals with gloves. • For more information, contact a bat biologist at the Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department or go to www.vtfishandwildlife.com Vermont’s Nine Species of Bats Cave Bats Migratory Tree Bats Eastern small-footed bat Silver-haired bat State Threatened Big brown bat Northern long-eared bat Indiana bat Federally Threatened State Endangered J Chenger Federally and State J Kiser Endangered J Kiser Hoary bat Little brown bat Tri-colored bat Eastern red bat State State Endangered Endangered Bat Anatomy Dr. J. Scott Altenbach http://jhupressblog.com House Bats Big brown bat Little brown bat These are the two bat species that are most commonly found in Vermont buildings. The little brown bat is state endangered, so care must be used to safely exclude unwanted bats from buildings. Follow the best management practices found at www.vtfishandwildlife.com/wildlife_bats.cfm House Bats Big brown bat, Eptesicus fuscus Big thick muzzle Weight 13-25 g Total Length (with Tail) 106 – 127 mm Long silky Wingspan 32 – 35 cm fur Forearm 45 – 48 mm Description • Long, glossy brown fur • Belly paler than back • Black wings • Big thick muzzle • Keeled calcar Similar Species Little brown bat is much Commonly found in houses smaller & lacks keeled calcar.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation and Management of Eastern Big-Eared Bats a Symposium
    Conservation and Management of Eastern Big-eared Bats A Symposium y Edited b Susan C. Loeb, Michael J. Lacki, and Darren A. Miller U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Southern Research Station General Technical Report SRS-145 DISCLAIMER The use of trade or firm names in this publication is for reader information and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture of any product or service. Papers published in these proceedings were submitted by authors in electronic media. Some editing was done to ensure a consistent format. Authors are responsible for content and accuracy of their individual papers and the quality of illustrative materials. Cover photos: Large photo: Craig W. Stihler; small left photo: Joseph S. Johnson; small middle photo: Craig W. Stihler; small right photo: Matthew J. Clement. December 2011 Southern Research Station 200 W.T. Weaver Blvd. Asheville, NC 28804 Conservation and Management of Eastern Big-eared Bats: A Symposium Athens, Georgia March 9–10, 2010 Edited by: Susan C. Loeb U.S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Southern Research Station Michael J. Lacki University of Kentucky Darren A. Miller Weyerhaeuser NR Company Sponsored by: Forest Service Bat Conservation International National Council for Air and Stream Improvement (NCASI) Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources Offield Family Foundation ContEntS Preface . v Conservation and Management of Eastern Big-Eared Bats: An Introduction . 1 Susan C. Loeb, Michael J. Lacki, and Darren A. Miller Distribution and Status of Eastern Big-eared Bats (Corynorhinus Spp .) . 13 Mylea L. Bayless, Mary Kay Clark, Richard C. Stark, Barbara S.
    [Show full text]
  • An Analysis of Population Structuring in the Eastern Red Bat (Lasiuras Borealis) Using the Mitochondrial D-Loop
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Supervised Undergraduate Student Research Chancellor’s Honors Program Projects and Creative Work 5-2001 An Analysis of Population Structuring in the Eastern Red Bat (Lasiuras Borealis) Using the Mitochondrial D-loop Julie Rose Hermann University of Tennessee-Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_chanhonoproj Recommended Citation Hermann, Julie Rose, "An Analysis of Population Structuring in the Eastern Red Bat (Lasiuras Borealis) Using the Mitochondrial D-loop" (2001). Chancellor’s Honors Program Projects. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_chanhonoproj/467 This is brought to you for free and open access by the Supervised Undergraduate Student Research and Creative Work at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Chancellor’s Honors Program Projects by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. UNIVERSITY HONORS PROGRAM SENIOR PROJECT - APPROV AL Name: :JUlie.. Humann College: Ar!b~ &:, ence.:S Faculty Mentor: qart1 Me ['.rae ;t.eYI PROJECT TITLE: Ao tlM',tYei5 Qf- PQf2~~tiaJ Snva.b..l.CLY'GJ jo...~~a. ~P&ci Uo..+ (Lo:;iUCV5- bo~~') \ri~ Jar tlfrmc.bcod.ocd b-1ocp I have reviewed this completed senior honors thesis with this student and certify that it is a project commensurate with honors level undergraduate research in this field. Signed: G~SVVl ukL , Faculty Mentor ~ ~ Date: m~1 q 'LO 0 ) r I Comments (Optional): AN ANALYSIS OF POPULATION STRUCTURING IN THE EASTERN RED BAT (LASIURUS BOREALIS) USING THE MITOCHONDRIAL D-LOOP Julie Hermann May 2001 Faculty Mentor: Gary McCracken ABSTRACT: Very little is known about the migration patterns of the eastern red bat, Lasiurus borealis.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cause and Effect of Bat Wing Tears in Common Pipistrelle Bats (Pipistrellus Pipistrellus)
    The Cause and Effect of Bat Wing Tears in Common Pipistrelle Bats (Pipistrellus pipistrellus) R O Khayat PhD 2019 The Cause and Effect of Bat Wing Tears in Common Pipistrelle Bats (Pipistrellus pipistrellus) Rana Osama S Khayat A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of Manchester Metropolitan University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Natural Sciences Manchester Metropolitan University 2019 i Abstract Bats represent a quarter of all mammalian species and play vital roles in many ecosystems. They are also are the only mammals capable of powered flight and have large, light, thin wings to enable flight. However, bats face many threats, including collisions with man-made structures, fungal infections and predator attacks, all of which can cause severe wing injuries. Hundreds of bats are admitted annually for care to treat torn and injured wings. This thesis aims to investigate the causes and effects of bat wing tears. In a series of studies, this thesis will: i) characterise wing tears in P. pipistrellus and other bat species in the UK; ii) explore the anatomy of the wing in P. pipistrellus, and see if knowledge of the anatomy is sufficient to understand wing tear placement and healing rates; iii) present a novel method for analysing flight from high-speed video data to assess the effect of tears on flight; and iv) develop a systematic forensic method to identify the presence of cat DNA on wing tears. Results from Chapter 2 indicate that most tears occurred in the Plagiopatagium wing section (section P), which is closest to the body.
    [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]
  • Bats of the Savannah River Site and Vicinity
    United States Department of Agriculture Bats of the Forest Service Savannah River Site and Vicinity Southern Research Station Michael A. Menzel, Jennifer M. Menzel, John C. Kilgo, General Technical Report SRS-68 W. Mark Ford, Timothy C. Carter, and John W. Edwards Authors: Michael A. Menzel,1 Jennifer M. Menzel,2 John C. Kilgo,3 W. Mark Ford,2 Timothy C. Carter,4 and John W. Edwards5 1Graduate Research Assistant, Division of Forestry, Wildlife and Fisheries, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26506; 2Research Wildlife Biologist, Northeastern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Parsons, WV 26287; 3Research Wildlife Biologist, Southern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, New Ellenton, SC 29809; 4Graduate Research Assistant, Department of Zoology, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901; and 5Assistant Professor, Division of Forestry, Wildlife and Fisheries, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26506, respectively. Cover photos: Clockwise from top left: big brown bats (photo by John MacGregor); Rafinesque’s big-eared bat (photo by John MacGregor); eastern red bat (photo by John MacGregor); and eastern red bat (photo by Julie Roberge). September 2003 Southern Research Station P.O. Box 2680 Asheville, NC 28802 Bats of the Savannah River Site and Vicinity Michael A. Menzel, Jennifer M. Menzel, John C. Kilgo, W. Mark Ford, Timothy C. Carter, and John W. Edwards Abstract The U.S. Department of Energy’s Savannah River Site supports a diverse bat community. Nine species occur there regularly, including the eastern pipistrelle (Pipistrellus subflavus), southeastern myotis (Myotis austroriparius), evening bat (Nycticeius humeralis), Rafinesque’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus rafinesquii), silver-haired bat (Lasionycteris noctivagans), eastern red bat (Lasiurus borealis), Seminole bat (L.
    [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]
  • Bats and Wind Turbines
    March 2017 ISSUE BRIEF Bats and Wind Energy Background About Bats Of the 47 bat species that occur in Canada and the U.S., all but two are voracious consumers of insects, including many agricultural and forestry pests.1,2 Pest control services provided by bats reduce both the number of pests and the amount of pesticides required to con- trol them, and these services have been valued at more than $3.7 billion USD/year.3,4,5 The other two bat species, mostly prevalent in the Southwestern U.S., feed on the nectar of agave cactuses com- monly used to produce tequila and are critical pollinators for these plants.6,7 Bats face numerous threats, including climate change, habitat loss and degradation, persecution, White Nose Syndrome (WNS) and other diseases, and fatalities at wind energy facilities.8,9 Some of these threats, such as climate change and habitat loss and degrada- tion, affect all species, whereas others, such as WNS, affect species with certain ecological and behavioral characteristics (e.g., hibernat- ing in cold caves). Bats are long-lived and reproduce slowly, typically only having one to two pups a year and not every year, which limits their ability to sustain such threats and puts them at increased risk of population decline. MEXICAN FREE-TAILED BATS EXITING BRACKEN BAT CAVE, PHOTO BY USFWS HEADQUARTERS, FLICKR Bats and Wind Turbines Throughout the 1990’s, wind energy facilities did not report bat fa- ally been highest in the deciduous forests of the Northeast and low- talities for a variety of reasons: 1) no bat fatalities occurred at fa- est in the open range desert of the Great Basin/Southwest.
    [Show full text]
  • Eastern Red Bat Lasiurus Borealis
    Appendix A: Mammals Eastern Red Bat Lasiurus borealis Federal Listing N/A State Listing SC Global Rank G4 State Rank S3 Regional Status Very High Justification (Reason for Concern in NH) Like other bat species, the eastern red bat’s life history is different from the typical life history of small mammals. Individuals are relatively long‐lived and have a low reproductive rate with a mean litter size of three young per year (Shump and Shump 1982). Habitat loss and degradation may lead to population declines, which, when coupled with their slow reproductive rate, could lead to a slow population recovery time. Eastern red bats are of conservation concern in New Hampshire for the above reasons and because of the lack of knowledge about the species’ population status in New Hampshire. Only 54 individuals have been captured in New Hampshire (NHFG unpublished data) from 7 counties. Ecolocation calls have been recorded in one additional county (Reynolds 1999). The above data indicate that eastern red bats may have a wide summer distribution in New Hampshire. The current lack of detailed data on the distribution, habitat use, and life history of eastern red bats in New Hampshire is largely due to a lack of research. The biggest threats to eastern red bats are wind turbines and habitat loss. Distribution Data on the current and historical ranges of eastern red bats in New Hampshire are too few to allow a regional population comparison. Available data indicate that eastern red bats may have a wide summer distribution in New Hampshire. Habitat Eastern red bats inhabit New Hampshire during the summer.
    [Show full text]
  • Bat Conservation Plan SOUTH CAROLINA
    SOUTH CAROLINA Bat Conservation Plan South Carolina Department of Natural Resources SOUTH CAROLINA BAT CONSERVATION PLAN Updated July 2019 Prepared by: Jennifer R. Kindel Wildlife Biologist South Carolina Department of Natural Resources 124 Wildlife Drive Union, SC 29379 This is the South Carolina Bat Conservation Plan. It has been revised and updated from the initial plan created in September 2015. This plan provides information on legal status, public health, conservation issues, natural history, habitat requirements, species-specific accounts, threats and conservation strategies for bat species known to occur in the state. The primary purpose of this plan is to summarize available information for these species and provide proactive strategies in order to help guide management and conservation efforts. Suggested citation: South Carolina Department of Natural Resources. 2019. South Carolina Bat Conservation Plan. Columbia, South Carolina. 204 pp. Cover photo by Mary Bunch Table of Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................. iv Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................... v Purpose .............................................................................................................................................................................. v Bat Species in South Carolina................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Auditory Opportunity and Visual Constraint Enabled the Evolution of Echolocation in Bats
    ARTICLE DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-02532-x OPEN Auditory opportunity and visual constraint enabled the evolution of echolocation in bats Jeneni Thiagavel1, Clément Cechetto 2, Sharlene E. Santana3, Lasse Jakobsen2 Eric J. Warrant 4 & John M. Ratcliffe 1,2,5,6 Substantial evidence now supports the hypothesis that the common ancestor of bats was nocturnal and capable of both powered flight and laryngeal echolocation. This scenario entails 1234567890():,; a parallel sensory and biomechanical transition from a nonvolant, vision-reliant mammal to one capable of sonar and flight. Here we consider anatomical constraints and opportunities that led to a sonar rather than vision-based solution. We show that bats’ common ancestor had eyes too small to allow for successful aerial hawking of flying insects at night, but an auditory brain design sufficient to afford echolocation. Further, we find that among extant predatory bats (all of which use laryngeal echolocation), those with putatively less sophis- ticated biosonar have relatively larger eyes than do more sophisticated echolocators. We contend that signs of ancient trade-offs between vision and echolocation persist today, and that non-echolocating, phytophagous pteropodid bats may retain some of the necessary foundations for biosonar. 1 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Toronto, 25 Willcocks Street, Toronto, ON M5S 3B2, Canada. 2 Department of Biology, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230, Odense C, Denmark. 3 Department of Biology and Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA. 4 Department of Biology, Lund University, Sölvegatan 35, 22362 Lund, Sweden. 5 Department of Biology, University of Toronto Mississauga, 3359 Mississauga Road, Mississauga, ON L5L 1C6, Canada.
    [Show full text]