ArticleThe Journal of animal ecology2025
Habitat heterogeneity and food availability in beaver-engineered streams foster bat richness, activity and feeding.
Article in The Journal of animal ecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Wetland landscape transformation by beavers: responses of biodiversity and functional indicators at multiple scales.Landscape ecology · 2026Article
- Habitat heterogeneity and food availability in beaver-engineered streams foster bat richness, activity and feeding.The Journal of animal ecology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As ecosystem engineers, Eurasian beavers (Castor fiber) modify aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, which can benefit the biodiversity and community composition of plant and animal species. However, in contrast to aquatic taxa, beaver engineering impacts on terrestrial taxa, like bats, are so far largely overlooked. While it has been shown that bats prefer beaver-engineered ecosystems, the reason for this choice is poorly understood. We hypothesized that this preference may be associated with beaver-related changes in habitat characteristics and food availability. To address this knowledge gap, we recorded bat species richness, activity and feeding activity in eight beaver-engineered ecosystems (pool) with paired control sites without beavers (control) along the same stream in Switzerland. In addition, we collected data on food availability (arthropods) with arthropod flight interception traps and characterized habitat suitability with deadwood volume and vegetation surveys, as well as assessing canopy heterogeneity based on different digital height models. The nighly bat species richness increased from four to five species between control and pool sites. Bat activity increased 1.6 times and bat feeding activity 2.3 times in beaver-engineered systems compared to controls. These increases in richness and activity were explained by higher volumes of standing deadwood, higher canopy heterogeneity and higher arthropod abundance in beaver systems compared to controls. Overall, the volume of standing deadwood, a critical resource for bat roosting and foraging, had a stronger effect on bat species richness than canopy heterogeneity or arthropod availability. Bat feeding guilds (short-, mid-, long-range echolocators) responded differently to beaver-engineered habitat changes, with edge-hunting mid-range species benefiting the most. Our findings suggest that beaver engineering created structurally diverse habitats that supported a broader range of bat species. By modifying both habitat structure and prey abundance, beaver engineering affected bat activity, richness, and feeding activity directly and indirectly. These changes operated across aquatic-terrestrial boundaries, highlighting the cross-ecosystem influence and ecological complexity of ecosystem engineering.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.