SUPPORTING INFORMATION. Supplementary Text

Transcription

1 Hintze, F. V. Duro, J. C. Carvalho, C. Eira, P. C. Rodrigues, and J. Vingada Influence of reservoirs created by small dams on the activity of bats. Acta Chiropterologica, 18(2): SUPPORTING INFORMATION Supplementary Text Considering the similarity of the acoustic characteristics between some taxa (Vaughan et al., 1996; Rebelo and Rainho, 2009), we assembled them into the following groups: 1) Pipistrellus pygmaeus/miniopterus schreibersii: It may be difficult to distinguish P. pygmaeus and M. schreibersii acoustically (Rainho, 2007; Rainho et al., 2013). Pipistrellus pygmaeus is common in Portugal (Salgueiro et al., 2002); M. schreibersii may also be common in the area and its important hibernaculum is located within the study area (Rebelo, 2001). In our analysis, these two species were pooled together (P. pygmaeus/m. schreibersii). 2) Pipistrellus spp.: The vocalizations of P. pipistrellus and P. pygmaeus are similar and nearly indistinguishable when the characteristic frequency is between 49 and 51 khz (Rainho et al., 2013). According to Salgueiro et al. (2002), P. pygmaeus is less abundant northern of Portugal compared to P. pipistrellus. In our study region, Barros (2012) confirmed the occurrence of the two species and his results also showed that P. pygmaeus is less abundant than P. pipistrellus. All recordings with the above characteristics were identified as Pipistrellus sp, although it is likely that the majority of these recordings are from P. pipistrellus. 3) Nyctalus leisleri/eptesicus serotinus: Given the similar acoustic characteristics of N. leisleri and E. serotinus (Russo and Jones, 2002; Obrist et al., 2004; Rainho et al., 2013), all recordings consistent with these species were identified as N. leisleri/e. serotinus. Eptesicus isabellinus was recently described in Portugal (Rainho et al., 2013), however its distribution in Portugal is only described to the south of the country (Santos et al., 2014; Horta et al., 2015). Therefore, E. isabelinus was disregarded in our analysis. 4) Plecotus spp.: It is very difficult to distinguish P. auritus from P. austriacus by acoustic analysis (Russo and Jones, 2002; Obrist et al., 2004; Rainho et al., 2013). All

2 records with acoustic characteristics that fit into this group are referred to as Plecotus spp. 5) Nyctalus lasiopterus/n. noctula: It is very difficult to distinguish between N. lasiopterus and N. noctula by acoustic analysis (Russo and Jones, 2002; Obrist et al., 2004; Rainho et al., 2013), as the acoustic characteristics of these vocalizations are highly similar. 6) Myotis myotis/m. blythii: M. myotis and M. blythii are nearly impossible to distinguish by acoustic analysis with full confidence (Russo and Jones, 2002; Obrist et al., 2004; Rainho et al., 2013). Therefore, a group was formed consisting of these two Myotis species. 7) Myotis spp.: M. daubentonii, M. emarginatus, M. escalerai, M. mystacinus and M. bechsteinii are very difficult to identify at the species level in some recordings (Russo and Jones, 2002; Obrist et al., 2004; Rainho et al., 2013). However, M. bechsteinii and M. emarginatus rarely feed on aquatic insects, and they are related to mature forests (Vaughan et al., 1996; Dietz et al., 2009). Myotis escalerai can often be easily identified due to its distinctive large bandwidth calls (Rainho et al., 2013). Myotis daubentonii can be acoustically distinguished in certain situations, and among all of the Myotis species it is the most abundant in the region as it is well adapted to feed over bodies of water (Vaughan et al., 1996; Dietz et al., 2009; Barros, 2012; Rainho et al., 2013; Nardone et al., 2015). Therefore, most of the recordings in this group probably are of M. daubentonii. 8) Rhinolophus euryale/r. mehelyi: Although in Italy it is possible to distinguish acoustically these two species with a good level of confidence (Russo et al., 2001), in Portugal R. euryale and R. mehelyi are pooled together in a species group (Rainho et al., 2013). Therefore, these two species were also pooled together in our study. LITERATURE CITED [omitted in the main text] HORTA, P., H. RAPOSEIRA, H. SANTOS, P. ALVES, J. PALMEIRIM, R. GODINHO, G. JONES and H. REBELO Bats echolocation call characteristics of cryptic Iberian Eptesicus species. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 61:

3 REBELO, H Inventariação dos morcegos e determinação dos biótopos de alimentação no Parque Natural do Douro Internacional e Parque Natural do Vale do Guadiana. Relatório final. Instituto da Conservação da Natureza, 61 pp. SALGUEIRO, P., A. RAINHO, and J. M. PALMEIRIM Pipistrellus pipistrellus e P. pygmaeus em Portugal. Revisão do Livro Vermelho dos Vertebrados de Portugal. Relatório técnico final. Instituto da Conservação da Natureza, unpaged. Supplementary Tables Table S1. Mixed models results showing the effects of the dam sites (points) on bat activity and foraging activity across dams (streams). Points were treated as fixed effects and streams were treated as random effects to control for variation among them (F F-statistic value, P significance for the global model). Pairwise comparisons were also performed (diff differences of means between points; p adj adjusted P-value for multiple comparisons). Factor F 3,12 P points diff p adj Bat activity < R 2 -R C D -R C U -R C D -R C U -R C U -C D Foraging activity < R 2 -R C D -R < C U -R < C D -R < C U -R < C U -C D

4 Table S2. Spearman s rank correlation coefficient (ρ) for each pair of species at R 1 points. Significant correlations (P < 0.05) are in bold B. barbastellus (Bb) P. kuhlii (Pk) R. hipposideros (Rh) T. teniotis(tt) N. leisleri/e. serotinus (Nl/Es) P. pipistrellus (Pp) P. pygmaeus/m. schreibersii (Ppy/Ms) Pipistrellus spp. (Pipi sp) Myotis daubentonii (Md) M. myotis/m. blythii (Mm/Mb) Plecotus spp. (Plec sp)

5 Table S3. Spearman s rank correlation coefficient (ρ) for each pair of species at R 2 points. Significant correlations (P < 0.05) are in bold B. barbastellus (Bb) P. kuhlii (Pk) R. hipposideros (Rh) T. teniotis(tt) N. leisleri/e. serotinus (Nl/Es) P. pipistrellus (Pp) P. pygmaeus/m. schreibersii (Ppy/Ms) Pipistrellus spp. (Pipi sp) Myotis daubentonii (Md) M. myotis/m. blythii (Mm/Mb) Plecotus spp. (Plec sp)

6 Table S4. Spearman s rank correlation coefficient (ρ) for each pair of species at C D points. Significant correlations (P < 0.05) are in bold B. barbastellus (Bb) P. kuhlii (Pk) R. hipposideros (Rh) T. teniotis(tt) N. leisleri/e. serotinus (Nl/Es) P. pipistrellus (Pp) P. pygmaeus/m. schreibersii (Ppy/Ms) Pipistrellus spp. (Pipi sp) Myotis daubentonii (Md) M. myotis/m. blythii (Mm/Mb) Plecotus spp. (Plec sp)

7 Table S5. Spearman s rank correlation coefficient (ρ) for each pair of species at C U points. Significant correlations (P < 0.05) are in bold B. barbastellus (Bb) P. kuhlii (Pk) R. hipposideros (Rh) T. teniotis(tt) N. leisleri/e. serotinus (Nl/Es) P. pipistrellus (Pp) P. pygmaeus/m. schreibersii (Ppy/Ms) Pipistrellus spp. (Pipi sp) Myotis daubentonii (Md) M. myotis/m. blythii (Mm/Mb) Plecotus spp. (Plec sp)