2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108343
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bats in urbanising landscapes: habitat selection and recommendations for a sustainable future

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
10
0
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 70 publications
1
10
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…We rarely recorded Myotis bats in our study, which is similar to other studies carried out in urban parks [16,19,20]. Myotis bats are prone to negative effects of urbanization; they are usually recorded in suburban areas [48,49], particularly in the vicinity of rivers [11].…”
Section: Species Composition and Activitysupporting
confidence: 88%
“…We rarely recorded Myotis bats in our study, which is similar to other studies carried out in urban parks [16,19,20]. Myotis bats are prone to negative effects of urbanization; they are usually recorded in suburban areas [48,49], particularly in the vicinity of rivers [11].…”
Section: Species Composition and Activitysupporting
confidence: 88%
“…In our study, we were able to only explore the response of fast-flying species such as Pipistrellus species often described as light-tolerant at the street light scale (Lacoeuilhe et al, 2014), but the response of other bat groupssuch as slow-flying light-shy batsthat also rely on aquatic corridors as we tested here will be highly interesting as well. Such negative effects on Pipistrellus species thus raise numerous questions about less tolerant species, especially in more rural landscapes where light-shy bats are regularly more abundant than in urban landscape (Gili et al, 2020). In addition, P. pipistrellus and P. pygmaeus may respond differently to light as these species are smaller than P. kuhlii/ nathusii (Dietz et al, 2009), and hence have different flight characteristics (e.g.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This level of k was chosen through visual assessment of the residuals, to ensure sufficient smoothing while at the same time avoiding overfitting. To maintain relatively simple models for running the scenarios, and to minimize overfitting, smoothed terms were not used for the other continuous explanatory environmental variables (e.g., Gili et al 2020 ). The following predictor variables were included in the models to be tested: tree species, tree height, trunk diameter, trunk height, tree spacing, and distance to footpath.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%