Foraging-habitat selection by bats at an urban–rural interface: comparison between a successful and a less successful species

2004 ◽  
Vol 82 (7) ◽  
pp. 1157-1164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph E Duchamp ◽  
Dale W Sparks ◽  
John O Whitaker, Jr.

We compared habitat use of two sympatric species of bat in a rural area undergoing suburban development. The two species are similar in diet and foraging-habitat use but differ in current roosting habitat, and exhibit contrasting regional population trends. Evening bat, Nycticeius humeralis (Rafinesque, 1818), populations are declining in central Indiana, whereas big brown bat, Eptesicus fuscus (Beauvois, 1796), populations are increasing. We assessed habitat selection by 22 adult female bats using radiotelemetry and compositional analysis. Eptesicus fuscus used several roosts across the study area; all but one roosted in human-made structures. Nycticeius humeralis clustered roosts within a small group of woodlots; all roosted in tree cavities. Eptesicus fuscus foraged for longer periods of time and nonreproductive individuals of this species had larger foraging ranges than N. humeralis. Both species foraged primarily in agricultural and wooded areas. During foraging, N. humeralis showed greater foraging-site fidelity and a stronger selection for agricultural and wooded areas than E. fuscus. We suggest that N. humeralis in our study area is probably more sensitive to suburban development near their roosts than E. fuscus.

2002 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin D. Moore ◽  
Graeme Coulson ◽  
Sarah Way

We determined patterns of habitat selection in the winter–spring period by adult female eastern grey kangaroos (Macropus giganteus) at Yan Yean Reservoir Catchment near Melbourne, Victoria, during 1994–95. We assessed habitat selection at two levels by radio-tracking 11 adult female kangaroos. The 95% isopleth harmonic mean home-range size (mean = 62.3 ha) was the smallest recorded for female eastern grey kangaroos. No range encompassed all of the habitat types available in the study area, and the mix and rankings of habitats selected at this level varied amongst individuals when compared by compositional analysis with available habitats. Selection of habitats at the within-range level also varied among individuals and differed between night and day for many individuals, but not for the population mean. Individuals selected strongly for good foraging habitat within their ranges. In particular, grassy clearings were used by all individuals and were selected strongly by day, night or at both times.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. e53077 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Monsarrat ◽  
Simon Benhamou ◽  
François Sarrazin ◽  
Carmen Bessa-Gomes ◽  
Willem Bouten ◽  
...  

1998 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 489 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris R. Pavey

I examined habitat use by eastern horseshoe bats, Rhinolophus megaphyllus, in a fragmented woodland mosaic in south-east Queensland, Australia. I predicted that the species would forage within the remaining woodland remnants in the mosaic, because its flight pattern and auditory system are adapted for locating and capturing prey in cluttered habitat (i.e. close to and within vegetation). I studied habitat use by light-tagging and radio-tagging bats that roosted in a disused mine in a large woodland fragment. I observed bats within an area of 95 ha, which was composed of grassland (71% of area), woodland (14%), and edge habitat (boundary of woodland and grassland, and isolated trees in grassland – 15%). Bats foraged in woodland and edge habitat but not over grassland, and used woodland significantly more often than expected by its availability. Commuting bats left the woodland fragment in which the roost was located by one of two routes, both of which led into riparian woodland. One route was entirely within woodland, whereas the other route crossed 250 m of open ground. The study indicates that R. megaphyllus should respond negatively to the fragmentation of woodland and forest because this process will reduce the availability of its preferred foraging habitat.


Ecography ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (12) ◽  
pp. 1842-1858
Author(s):  
Juliet S. Lamb ◽  
Peter W. C. Paton ◽  
Jason E. Osenkowski ◽  
Shannon S. Badzinski ◽  
Alicia M. Berlin ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document