A comparison of ultrasonic detectors and radiotelemetry for studying bat–habitat relationships

Abstract Ultrasonic bat detectors and radiotelemetry are 2 methods used to examine habitat selection for bats, but no one has empirically examined if conclusions drawn from these 2 methods are comparable and, although previous work has presented concerns regarding the basic assumptions of inferring...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Adam D. Morris, Darren A. Miller, L. Mike Conner
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2011-12-01
Series:Wildlife Society Bulletin
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.78
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850064463625977856
author Adam D. Morris
Darren A. Miller
L. Mike Conner
author_facet Adam D. Morris
Darren A. Miller
L. Mike Conner
author_sort Adam D. Morris
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Ultrasonic bat detectors and radiotelemetry are 2 methods used to examine habitat selection for bats, but no one has empirically examined if conclusions drawn from these 2 methods are comparable and, although previous work has presented concerns regarding the basic assumptions of inferring habitat selection with acoustic surveys, these assumptions have not been tested. Therefore, during summer 2008, we examined use of bat detectors and radiotelemetry to infer habitat selection among 4 forest habitat types in southwestern Georgia, USA by simultaneously radiotracking evening bats (Nycticeius humeralis; n = 14) and using stratified sampling to acoustically monitor bat activity (n = 95 sites). We used compositional analysis for radiotelemetry data and generalized linear models for acoustic data to assess habitat selection at Johnson's (1980) 2nd and 3rd order spatial scales. At the 3rd order scale, both acoustic sampling and radiotelemetry indicated preference of mature pine and open stands over hardwood stands and pine plantations. Radiotelemetry revealed hardwood stands were preferred at the 2nd order scale, which was not reflected in acoustic data. Qualitatively, conclusions about habitat selection are not consistent between these 2 techniques. We conclude that bat detector surveys may be appropriate for examining habitat selection at the stand‐level, although more work is needed to confirm this, but have limited or no inferential ability at larger scales. Our results support the general inability of acoustic surveys to infer habitat selection due to lack of adherence to underlying assumptions. Therefore, we recommend using radiotelemetry for habitat selection studies and that researchers limit habitat selection inferences derived from acoustic surveys. © 2011 The Wildlife Society.
format Article
id doaj-art-cacd6e5074a1429cb36d2faffb169780
institution DOAJ
issn 2328-5540
language English
publishDate 2011-12-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Wildlife Society Bulletin
spelling doaj-art-cacd6e5074a1429cb36d2faffb1697802025-08-20T02:49:17ZengWileyWildlife Society Bulletin2328-55402011-12-0135446947410.1002/wsb.78A comparison of ultrasonic detectors and radiotelemetry for studying bat–habitat relationshipsAdam D. Morris0Darren A. Miller1L. Mike Conner2Joseph W. Jones Research Center, Route 2, Box 2324, Newton, GA 39870, USATimberlands Technology, Weyerhaeuser NR Company, P.O. Box 2288, Columbus, MS 39704, USAW. Jones Research Center, Route 2, Box 2324, Newton, GA 39870, USAAbstract Ultrasonic bat detectors and radiotelemetry are 2 methods used to examine habitat selection for bats, but no one has empirically examined if conclusions drawn from these 2 methods are comparable and, although previous work has presented concerns regarding the basic assumptions of inferring habitat selection with acoustic surveys, these assumptions have not been tested. Therefore, during summer 2008, we examined use of bat detectors and radiotelemetry to infer habitat selection among 4 forest habitat types in southwestern Georgia, USA by simultaneously radiotracking evening bats (Nycticeius humeralis; n = 14) and using stratified sampling to acoustically monitor bat activity (n = 95 sites). We used compositional analysis for radiotelemetry data and generalized linear models for acoustic data to assess habitat selection at Johnson's (1980) 2nd and 3rd order spatial scales. At the 3rd order scale, both acoustic sampling and radiotelemetry indicated preference of mature pine and open stands over hardwood stands and pine plantations. Radiotelemetry revealed hardwood stands were preferred at the 2nd order scale, which was not reflected in acoustic data. Qualitatively, conclusions about habitat selection are not consistent between these 2 techniques. We conclude that bat detector surveys may be appropriate for examining habitat selection at the stand‐level, although more work is needed to confirm this, but have limited or no inferential ability at larger scales. Our results support the general inability of acoustic surveys to infer habitat selection due to lack of adherence to underlying assumptions. Therefore, we recommend using radiotelemetry for habitat selection studies and that researchers limit habitat selection inferences derived from acoustic surveys. © 2011 The Wildlife Society.https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.78acoustic surveysbat detectorevening batGeorgiahabitat preferencehabitat selection
spellingShingle Adam D. Morris
Darren A. Miller
L. Mike Conner
A comparison of ultrasonic detectors and radiotelemetry for studying bat–habitat relationships
Wildlife Society Bulletin
acoustic surveys
bat detector
evening bat
Georgia
habitat preference
habitat selection
title A comparison of ultrasonic detectors and radiotelemetry for studying bat–habitat relationships
title_full A comparison of ultrasonic detectors and radiotelemetry for studying bat–habitat relationships
title_fullStr A comparison of ultrasonic detectors and radiotelemetry for studying bat–habitat relationships
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of ultrasonic detectors and radiotelemetry for studying bat–habitat relationships
title_short A comparison of ultrasonic detectors and radiotelemetry for studying bat–habitat relationships
title_sort comparison of ultrasonic detectors and radiotelemetry for studying bat habitat relationships
topic acoustic surveys
bat detector
evening bat
Georgia
habitat preference
habitat selection
url https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.78
work_keys_str_mv AT adamdmorris acomparisonofultrasonicdetectorsandradiotelemetryforstudyingbathabitatrelationships
AT darrenamiller acomparisonofultrasonicdetectorsandradiotelemetryforstudyingbathabitatrelationships
AT lmikeconner acomparisonofultrasonicdetectorsandradiotelemetryforstudyingbathabitatrelationships
AT adamdmorris comparisonofultrasonicdetectorsandradiotelemetryforstudyingbathabitatrelationships
AT darrenamiller comparisonofultrasonicdetectorsandradiotelemetryforstudyingbathabitatrelationships
AT lmikeconner comparisonofultrasonicdetectorsandradiotelemetryforstudyingbathabitatrelationships