Abstract

Automated recording units are commonly used by consultants to assess environmental impacts and to monitor animal populations. Although estimating population density of bats using stationary acoustic detectors is key for evaluating environmental impacts, estimating densities from call activity data is only possible through recently developed numerical methods, as the recognition of calling individuals is impossible.We tested the applicability of generalized random encounter models (gREMs) for determining population densities of three bat species (Common pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus, Northern bat Eptesicus nilssonii, and Natterer's bat Myotis nattereri) based on passively collected acoustical data. To validate the results, we compared them to (a) density estimates from the literature and to (b) Royle–Nichols (RN) models of detection/nondetection data.Our estimates for M. nattereri matched both the published data and RN‐model results. For E. nilssonii, the gREM yielded similar estimates to the RN‐models, but the published estimates were more than twice as high. This discrepancy might be because the high‐altitude flight of E. nilssonii is not accounted for in gREMs. Results of gREMs for P. pipistrellus were supported by published data but were ~10 times higher than those of RN‐models. RN‐models use detection/nondetection data, and this loss of information probably affected population estimates of very active species like P. pipistrellus.gREM models provided realistic estimates of bat population densities based on automatically recorded call activity data. However, the average flight altitude of species should be accounted for in future analyses. We suggest including flight altitude in the calculation of the detection range to assess the detection sphere more accurately and to obtain more precise density estimates.

Highlights

  • Automated recording units (ARUs) have become valuable tools to investigate insectivorous bats, which communicate and orientate using acoustic signals

  • In contrast to Royle– Nichols (RN)-models, generalized random encounter modeling is very promising for estimating bat population densities based on automated recordings of calling activity

  • We suggest a simple yet effective modification of generalized random encounter models (gREMs) as a first step for improving its accuracy when the average flight altitude of bats is higher than the level of the recording detectors

Read more

Summary

| INTRODUCTION

Automated recording units (ARUs) have become valuable tools to investigate insectivorous bats, which communicate and orientate using acoustic signals. Kloepper et al (2016) estimate the colony size of emerging cave-dwelling bats using only one ARU This approach is only useful if all individuals narrowly pass a recording site (the cave entrance) and fly in one direction (out of the cave). The Kloepper et al (2016) method is not applicable in these settings Another promising approach to estimate population densities of foraging bats using single ARUs is described by Lucas, Moorcroft, Freeman, Rowcliffe, and Jones (2015). They extend the random encounter models (REMs) often used in camera trap studies (Rowcliffe, Field, Turvey, & Carbone, 2008) to make them suitable for acoustic data (“generalized random encounter models,” referred below as “gREM”). To validate the obtained density estimates, we compared our results to (a) published density estimates based on roost surveys and (b) the output of Royle and Nichols (2003) models that use repeated detection/nondetection data

| MATERIALS AND METHODS
| DISCUSSION
| CONCLUSION
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call