Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHourigan, CL
dc.contributor.authorCatterall, Carla P
dc.contributor.authorJones, Darryl
dc.contributor.authorRhodes, Martin
dc.contributor.editorCamilla Myers (Managing Editor)
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-03T11:23:15Z
dc.date.available2017-05-03T11:23:15Z
dc.date.issued2008
dc.date.modified2009-05-21T06:19:50Z
dc.identifier.issn1035-3712
dc.identifier.doi10.1071/WR07154
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/22510
dc.description.abstractObtaining adequate information for informed conservation-management decisions requires effective and costef !cient survey techniques. We compared the effectiveness of bat detectors and harp traps for surveying bat assemblages within an urban landscape in Brisbane, Australia, with respect to number and composition of species. Nine sites within each of three habitat types (remnant bushland, parkland, and low-density residential - a total of 27 sites) were sampled twice each. The bat detectors recorded 3628 calls, from which 13 taxa were identi!ed. The harp traps captured 17 individuals, from which !ve taxa were identi!ed. All species captured by harp trap were also detected by bat detector, with the possible exception of N. bifax. Bat detectors recorded signi!cantly more species per site than were captured by harp traps, both overall and within each of the three habitat types. And although a considerable amount of time and expense was required to identify the recorded echolocation calls to species, bat detectors were also the most cost-ef!cient sampling method. These results collectively show that bat detectors were the most effective and cost-ef!cient method for surveying the bat assemblage in this urban landscape.
dc.description.peerreviewedYes
dc.description.publicationstatusYes
dc.format.extent106938 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.languageEnglish
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherC S I R O
dc.publisher.placeAustralia
dc.publisher.urihttp://www.publish.csiro.au/journals/wr
dc.relation.ispartofstudentpublicationN
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom768
dc.relation.ispartofpageto774
dc.relation.ispartofjournalWildlife Research
dc.relation.ispartofvolume35
dc.rights.retentionY
dc.subject.fieldofresearchEnvironmental sciences
dc.subject.fieldofresearchBiological sciences
dc.subject.fieldofresearchTerrestrial ecology
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode41
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode31
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode310308
dc.titleA comparison of the effectiveness of bat detectors and harp traps for surveying bats in an urban landscape
dc.typeJournal article
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Articles
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articles
gro.facultyGriffith Sciences, Griffith School of Environment
gro.rights.copyright© 2008 CSIRO. This is the author-manuscript version of this paper. Reproduced in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the journal's website for access to the definitive, published version.
gro.date.issued2008
gro.hasfulltextFull Text
gro.griffith.authorCatterall, Carla P.
gro.griffith.authorJones, Darryl N.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record