Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31945139›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Faecal analyses and alimentary tracers reveal the foraging ecology of two sympatric bats.

Sydney Moyo, David S Jacobs

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Bats, Pathogens, and Species Richness.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Sydney MoyoDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-9286-6578
David S JacobsDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-3243-8571

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We used three complementary methods to assess the diet of two insectivorous bat species: one an obligate aerial hunter, Miniopterus natalensis, and the other Myotis tricolor whose morphology and taxonomic affiliation to other trawling bats suggests it may be a trawler (capturing insects from the water surface with its feet and tail). We used visual inspection, stable isotope values and fatty acid profiles of insect fragments in bat faeces sampled across five sites to determine the contribution of aquatic and terrestrial arthropods to the diets of the two species. The niche widths of M. tricolor were generally wider than those of Miniopterus natalensis but with much overlap, both taking aquatic and terrestrial insects, albeit in different proportions. The diet of M. tricolor had high proportions of fatty acids (20:5ω3 and 22:6ω3) that are only obtainable from aquatic insects. Furthermore, the diet of M. tricolor had higher proportions of water striders (Gerridae) and whirligig beetles (Gyrinidae), insects obtainable via trawling, than Miniopterus natalensis. These results suggest both species are flexible in their consumption of prey but that M. tricolor may use both aerial hawking and trawling, or at least gleaning, to take insects from water surfaces. The resultant spatial segregation may sufficiently differentiate the niches of the two species, allowing them to co-exist. Furthermore, our results emphasize that using a combination of methods to analyse diets of cryptic animals yields greater insights into animal foraging ecology than any of them on their own.

Indexed as

CarnivoryAnimal DistributionAnimalsChiropteraFatty AcidsFecesFemaleInsectaMalePredatory BehaviorSouth AfricaSpatial AnalysisSpecies SpecificitySympatryFatty Acids

Identifiers

PMID31945139
PMCPMC6964858

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.