Selection of day roosts by red bats in mixed mesophytic forests.
By J. Hutchinson, M. Lacki. 2000
86 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Limited information exists on the choice of day roosts by red bats (Lasiurus borealis) in mature deciduous forests. We radiotracked 10 adult female and 4 adult male red hats as they used 44 day roosts in nived mesophytic forests in castern Kentucky during May through August 1996-97. On average (x ± SE). bats roosted 16.5 ± 0.3 to above ground in the outer foliage of the canopy of 13 different species of hardwood trees: no conifer or snag was used as a day roost. Roost trees were dominant and codominant trees averaging 10.5 1.9 cur dblt. Most roost trees 77.3% were on ridge tops of upland forests. Each hat used an average of 11 roost trees and switched roost trees every 2.3 days in an area <40 m 2 . Day roosts were 277 ± 30 m from lorest edge. with no roost located < 50 m from any edge. These data indicate that choice of day roosts In red bats inhabiting tracts of mature contiguous forest differs from those in fragmented habitats.
Subfields: Ecology, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Global and Planetary Change
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8a1f2305e4486c17877208994f0a58a590279523
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Ecology
In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
In Global and Planetary Change
Citations in the corpus
- Habitat Use by Forest Bats in South Carolina in Relation to Local, Stand, and Landscape Characteristics (2006, background): “In contrast, forest type is an important factor in the roosting behavior of many species including red bats and northern long-eared bats (Menzel et al. 1998, Hutchinson and Lacki 2000, Mager and Nelson 2001, Broders and Forbes 2004).”
- Positive effects of forest fragmentation, independent of forest amount, on bat abundance in eastern Ontario, Canada (2011, background): “These results support the assumption that abundance of L. borealis is limited by the availability of potential roosting sites (Hutchinson and Lacki 2000; Elmore et al. 2005), but do not support this assumption for P. subflavus and L. noctivagans.”
- Roost tree use by maternity colonies of Indiana bats and northern long-eared bats in southern Illinois (2005, background): “In many species of bats, individuals roost in a relatively small portion of their home (foraging) range (Menzel, 1998; Foster and Kurta, 1999; Menzel et al., 1999; Hutchinson and Lacki, 2000; Gumbert et al., 2002).”
- PHYSIOLOGICAL AND ECOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF ROOST SELECTION BY REPRODUCTIVE FEMALE HOARY BATS (LASIURUS CINEREUS) (2005, background): “…roost trees that we hypothesized could influence roost microclimate or that had been measured in previous studies of forest-roosting bats (Barclay and Brigham 1996; Hutchinson and Lacki 2000; Kalcounis and Brigham 1998; Mager and Nelson 2001; Sedgeley and O’Donnell 1999; Vonhof and Barclay 1996).”
- Movements and Resource Selection of the Northern Long-eared Myotis (Myotis septentrionalis) in a Forest–Agriculture Landscape (2008, background): “Northern long-eared myotis are forest dependent, generally relying on forest features for both roosting and foraging (Broders et al. 2006; Carter and Feldhamer 2005; Hutchinson and Lacki 2000; Sasse and Pekins 1996).”