Conservation planning with spatially explicit models: a case for horseshoe bats in complex mountain landscapes
Context Bats are considered as an ecological indicator of habitat quality due to their sensitivity to human-induced ecosystem changes. Hence, we will focus the study on two indicator species of bats as a proxy to evaluate structure and composition of the landscape to analyze anthropic pressures driving changes in patterns.
This study develops a spatially-explicit model to highlight key habitat nodes and corridors which are integral for maintaining functional landscape connectivity for bat movement. We focus on a complex mountain landscape and two bat species: greater (Rhinolophus ferrumequinum) and lesser (Rhinolophus hipposideros) horseshoe bats which are known to be sensitive to landscape composition and configuration.
Species distribution models are used to delineate high-quality foraging habitat for each species using opportunistic ultrasonic bat data. We then performed connectivity analysis combining (modelled) suitable foraging habitat and (known) roost sites. We use graph-theory and the deviation in the probability of connectivity to quantify resilience of the landscape connectivity to perturbations.
Both species were confined to lowlands (<1000 m elevation) and avoided areas with high road densities. Greater horseshoe bats were more generalist than lesser horseshoe bats which tended to be associated with broadleaved and mixed forests.
The spatially-explicit models obtained were proven crucial for prioritizing foraging habitats, roost sites and key corridors for conservation. Hence, our results are being used by key stakeholders to help integrate conservation measures into forest management and conservation planning at the regional level. The approach used can be integrated into conservation initiatives elsewhere.
KeywordsSpecies distribution modelling Ensemble modelling Expert based knowledge Landscape connectivity Landscape structure Complex mountain landscapes Greater horseshoe bat Lesser horseshoe bat
This work was partly Funded by the French Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable Development and Energy, France in support of the development of the DEB-MOCHAB project (2013–2015) (Species distribution modelling: a tool for evaluation the conservation of species’ habitats and ecological continuities). We thank the LPO (League for the Protection of Birds), the Departments of Drôme and Isère, France and the National Forest Office for their interest, support, expertise of species ecology and time invested in this project. In particular, we would like to thank Tillon, L., Planckaert, O, Bouix, T and everyone who contributed in the data collection efforts and expertise. Santiago Saura for advice on landscape connectivity analysis. Damien Gorges for his work on Biomod2 package improvement and support. We would like to thank the Editor and the two anonymous reviewers for their valuable and very constructive comments and suggestions that helped improve the manuscript.
This work was also partially supported by the OpenNESS project funded from the European Union’s Seventh Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement n° 308428. The authors are solely responsible for the content of this publication. It does not represent the opinion of the European Union, nor is the European Union responsible for any use that might be made of information appearing herein.
- Archaux F, Tillon L, Fauvel B, Martin H (2013) Foraging habitat use by bats in a large temperate oak forest: importance of mature and regeneration stands. Le Rhinolophe 19:47–58Google Scholar
- Arthur L, Lemaire M (2009) Les chauves-souris de France, Belgique, Luxembourg et Suisse (Biotope Eds)Google Scholar
- Barataud M (2012) Ecologie acoustique des chiroptères d’Europe. Identification des espèces, études de leurs habitats et comportements de chasse (BIOTOPE ÉDITIONS)Google Scholar
- Breiman L, Friedman J, Olshen R, Stone C (1984) Classification and regression trees. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Entwistle A (2001) Habitat management for bats: a guide for land managers, land owners and their advisors (Peterborough: Joint Nature Conservation Committee (Great Britain))Google Scholar
- Holzhaider J, Kriner E, Rudolph B-U, Zahn A (2002) Radio-tracking a Lesser horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus hipposideros) in Bavaria: an experiment to locate roosts and foraging sites. Myotis 40:47–54Google Scholar
- Kokurewicz T (1990) The decrease in abundance of the lesser horseshoe bat Rhinolophus Hipposideros Bechstein, 1800 (Chiroptera: Rhinolophidae) in Winter Quarters in Poland. Myotis 109–118Google Scholar
- Le Roux M, Luque S, Vincent S, Planckaert O (2014) Integration de la connectivite dans la gestion et la conservation des habitats. Sciences Eaux et Territoires, 14: 20–25 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01071937
- Le Roux M, Redon M, Vincent S, Tillon L, Bouix T, Archaux F, Luque S (2016) La modélisation spatiale des habitats et des corridors: un outil pour la conservation et la gestion des chauves-souris Symbioses, nouvelle série, n° 34:28–34Google Scholar
- Lebrun F, Coudène M (2011) Vercors: un développement à deux vitesses (INSEE)Google Scholar
- Motte G, Libois R (2002) Conservation of the lesser horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus hipposideros Bechstein, 1800)(Mammalia: Chiroptera) in BelgiumA case study of feeding habitat requirements. Belg J Zool 132:49Google Scholar
- O’Shea TJ, Bogan MA, Ellison LE (2003) Monitoring trends in bat populations of the United States and territories: status of the science and recommendations for the future. Wildl Soc Bull 31:16–29Google Scholar
- Ransome RD, Hutson AM (2000) Action plan for conservation of the greater horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus ferrumequinum) in Europe (Council of Europe)Google Scholar
- Razgour O Rebelo H, Di Febbraro M, Russo D (2016) Painting maps with bats: species distribution modelling in bat research and conservation Hystrix, the Italian Journal of Mammalogy 27(1) ISSN 1825-5272Google Scholar
- Reiter G (2004) The importance of woodland for Rhinolophus hipposideros (Chiroptera, Rhinolophidae) in Austria. Mamm Mamm 68:403–410Google Scholar
- Roy HE, Pocock MJO, Preston CD, Roy DB, Savage J, Tweddle JC, Robinson LD (2012) Understanding Citizen Science & Environmental Monitoring. Final Report on behalf of UK-EOF. NERC Centre for Ecology & Hydrology and Natural History MuseumGoogle Scholar
- Saura S, Rubio L (2010) A common currency for the different way in which patches and links can contribute to habitat availability and connectivity in the landscape. Ecography 33:523–537Google Scholar
- Thuiller W, Georges D, Engler R, Breiner F (2016) biomod2: Ensemble platform for species distribution modeling. R package version 3.3–7. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=biomod2
- Thuiller W, Lafourcade B, Engler R, Araújo MB (2009) BIOMOD–a platform for ensemble forecasting of species distributions. 369–373Google Scholar
- UICN (2003) Lignes directrices pour l’application, au niveau régional, des critères de l’UICN pour la liste rouge (Gland [etc.]; Cambridge: UICN, Union mondiale pour la nature; disponible auprès du: Service des publications de l’UICN)Google Scholar