Structure of three subtropical bat assemblages (Chiroptera) in the Andean rainforests of Argentina

Abstract

I evaluated bat assemblages in terms of species richness, relative abundance, trophic guild structure, and seasonal changes at three sites along of the Southern Yungas forests. A total of 854 individuals were captured, representing 25 species of three families, with an effort of 27,138 m of mist net opened per hour. Subtropical assemblages showed a similar structure to those from tropical landmark, with a dominance of frugivorous Phyllostomid; in addition, a few species were abundant, followed by a long tail of less common species. However, subtropical sites differed due to the dominance of the genus Sturnira and the great contribution to richness of Vespertilionidae and Molossidae families. Contrary to my original expectations, the latitudinal gradient of species richness does not seem to produce significant differences in richness between the northern and the southern sites, with the central site being different. Furthermore, guild structure and captures did not change between seasons. However, I found a high variation in guild structure among sites due to changes in β diversity and latitudinal lack of species with tropical filiations. These changes generated great differences in functional structure among assemblages, with eight guilds in the north and only four in the remaining sites. Moreover, other variables, such as roost site and resource availability, climatic conditions, and particular attributes of each species, could also be important in determining local richness and guild structure.

Assemblage-level responses of Neotropical bats to forest loss and fragmentation

“…In general terms, we registered bat assemblages characterized by few abundant common species, along with a high number of rare and less abundant species. This structure is similar to those obtained in other studies conducted in the Yungas Forests in Argentina (Bracamonte 2010;Jayat & Ortiz 2010;Gamboa Alurralde et al 2016;Sánchez 2016).…”

Forelimb Bone Morphology and its Association with Foraging Ecology in Four Families of Neotropical Bats

“…Sample We analyzed bones from the forelimb and shoulder girdle from 180 specimens belonging to 22 genera and 37 species of four families of Neotropical bats (Noctilionidae, Phyllostomidae, Vespertilionidae, and Molossidae) that span a wide range of foraging behavior and flying types (Table 1). The taxonomic sample was restricted to those voucher specimens that were collected through successive field research projects (e.g., Sandoval et al 2010;Sánchez 2011Sánchez , 2016Sánchez et al 2019). Voucher specimens were all adults of both sexes preserved as skin, skull, and postcranial skeleton, and are deposited in the systematic collections listed in Online Resource 1.…”

“…Only a few authors have attempted to detect some relationship between forelimb bone morphology and ecology in bats in an assemblage context (e.g., López-Aguirre et al 2019). This lack of study is particularly evident for Neotropical regions like northern Argentina, where a rich bat fauna occurs and assemblages are characterized by species with a wide variety of foraging and feeding habits (see Sandoval et al 2010;Sánchez 2016).…”

Bat (Mammalia: Chiroptera) biodiversity in a subtropical inselberg ecosystem of Northeastern Argentina

“…Bat ecology: Trophic guilds were assigned following the criterion proposed by Sánchez et al, (2012a) and Sánchez (2016), based on the species diet, foraging habitat and type of flight of each taxon. The conservation status of each species was taken from the assessment of extinction risk of Mammals from Argentina (SAyDS-SAREM, 2019).…”

“…Bat diversity in Argentina comprises 67 species (Barquez, Díaz, Montani, & Pérez, 2020), with most species (~49) being distributed in the Northern portions of the country (Barquez, Díaz, & Ojeda, 2006). Accordingly, most of the available knowledge about these mammals is restricted to the forested areas of Northern Argentina, including the Yungas and the Paranense forests (Sánchez, 2016). However, more in general, our regional knowledge about bats is mostly historical and based on punctual records, with few studies focusing on entire assemblages (Sandoval, Sánchez, & Barquez, 2010;Barquez, Sánchez, & Sandoval, 2011;Sánchez, Carrizo, Giannini, & Barquez, 2012a;Sánchez, Giannini, & Barquez, 2012b;Idoeta, 2018).…”