Influences of scale on bat habitat relationships in a forested landscape in Nicaragua
- 602 Downloads
Scale dependence of bat habitat selection is poorly known with few studies evaluating relationships among landscape metrics such as class versus landscape, or metrics that measure composition or configuration. This knowledge can inform conservation approaches to mitigate habitat loss and fragmentation.
We evaluated scale dependence of habitat associations and scaling patterns of landscape metrics in relation to bat occurrence or capture rate in forests of southwestern Nicaragua.
We captured 1537 bats at 35 locations and measured landscape and class metrics across 10 spatial scales (100–1000 m) surrounding capture locations. We conducted univariate scaling across the 10 scales and identified scales and variables most related to bat occurrence or capture rate.
Edge and patch density, at both landscape and class levels, were the most important variables across species. Feeding guilds varied in their response to metrics. Certain landscape and configuration metrics were most influential at fine (100 m) and/or broad (1000 m) spatial scales while most class and composition metrics were influential at intermediate scales.
These results provide insight into the scale dependence of habitat associations of bat species and the influence of fine and broad scales on habitat associations. The effects of scale, examined in our study and others from fine (100 m) to broad (5 km) indicate habitat relationships for bats may be more informative at larger scales. Our results suggest there could be general differences in scale relationships for different groups of landscape metrics, which deserves further evaluation in other taxonomic groups.
KeywordsScale-dependent habitat selection Landscape metrics Landscape composition Landscape configuration Chiroptera Forest fragmentation FRAGSTATS Multi-scale habitat modeling
We thank the Bat Conservation International and the Percy Sladen Memorial Fund for financial support. Paso Pacífio provided logistic and field support. We thank landowners who provided access to their property for this work including Miguel Melendez and Miguel Soto. We thank J. Crouse for the study area map. Volunteers who helped capture, identify, and radio track bats included D. Brown, B. Burger, C. Corben, K. Day, A. Haskew, K. Livengood, A. McIntire, B. Noble, L. Piest, E. Rutherford, M. Siders, D. Sinton, T. Snow, B. Taubert, D. Taylor, S. Tuttle, and K. Williams-Guillén. The Associate Editor and 2 anonymous reviewers provided comments that greatly improved the manuscript.
- Clarke FM, Pio DV, Racey PA (2005) A comparison of logging systems and bat diversity in the Neotropics. Conserv Biol 19:1194–1204Google Scholar
- Cushman SA, McGarigal K, McKelvey K, Reagan C, Demeo T, Vojta C (2013b) Landscape analysis for habitat monitoring. In: Vojta C (ed) USFS Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide, chap 6Google Scholar
- Hutson AM, Mickleburgh SP, Racey PA (comp) (2001) Microchiropteran bats: global status survey and conservation action plan. IUCN/SSC Chiroptera Specialist Group. IUCN, GlandGoogle Scholar
- Kunz TH, Kurta A (1988) Capture methods and holding devices. In: Kunz TH (ed) Ecological and behavioral methods for the study of bats. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, pp 1–28Google Scholar
- McGarigal K, Cushman SA, Neel, MC, Ene E (2002) FRAGSTATS: spatial pattern analysis program for categorical maps. Computer Software Program produced by the authors at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. http://www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html
- McGarigal K, Cushman SA, Ene E (2013) FRAGSTATS v4: spatial pattern analysis program for categorical and continuous maps. Computer Software Program produced by the authors at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. http://www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html
- McGarigal K, Wan HI, Zeller KA, Timm BC, Cushman SA (2016) Multi-scale habitat modeling: a review and outlook. Landscape Ecol (in press)Google Scholar
- Medina-Fitoria A (2014) Murciélagos de Nicaragua. Guía de campo. Programa para la Conservación de los Murciélagos de Nicaragua (PCMN) y Ministerio del Ambiente y los Recursos Naturales (MARENA)Google Scholar
- Myers JL, Well AD, Lorch Jr RF (2010) Research design and statistical analysis, 3rd edn. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Reid FA (2009) A field guide to the mammals of Central America and southeast Mexico, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Rivas C, Stevens B, Wang O (2013) A spatial model of dominant vegetation types within the land of Paso del Istmo Corridor in southwestern Nicaragua. Final Summary Report to Paso Pacifico. Laboratory of Landscape Ecology and Conservation Biology, Northern Arizona University, FlagstaffGoogle Scholar
- Sesnie SE, Hagell S, Otterstrom S, Chambers CL, Dickson BJ (2008) SRTM-DEM and Landsat ETM+ data for mapping tropical dry forest cover and biodiversity assessment in Nicaragua. Rev Geogr Acad 2:53–65Google Scholar
- Sikes RS, Gannon WL, the Animal Care and Use Committee of the American Society of Mammalogists (2011) Guidelines of the American Society of Mammalogists for the use of wild mammals in research. J Mammal 92:235–253Google Scholar
- Timm RM, LaVal RK (1998) A field key to the bats of Costa Rica. Occasional Publication Series Center of Latin American Studies, The University of Kansas, No. 22, pp 1–30Google Scholar
- Wasserman TN, Cushman SA, Wallin DO, Hayden J (2012) Multi-scale habitat relationships of Martes americana in northern Idaho, USA. USDA Forest Service RMRS-RP-94Google Scholar
- Wilson DE, Ascorra CF, Solari TS (1996) Bats as indicators of habitat disturbance. In: Wilson DE, Sandoval A (eds) Manu. The biodiversity of Southeastern Peru. Editorial Horizonte, Lima, pp 613–625Google Scholar