ML18019A068
| ML18019A068 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/07/2017 |
| From: | Office of New Reactors |
| To: | |
| Vokoun P | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18019A036 | List: |
| References | |
| Download: ML18019A068 (53) | |
Text
Acoustic Monitoring of Bat Echolocation Calls on the Oak Ridge Reservation (Pilot Study) 2013 Environmental Monitoring Report Abstract Following emergence from winter hibernation, bats were monitored by conducting surveys to record echolocation calls using ultra-high frequency Anabat detectors. Bat call files obtained from the detectors were then analyzed with specialized bat identification software (i.e., BCID-East, Kaleidoscope PRO) to enable acoustic identification of species. A combination of active and passive ultrasonic field surveys were used beginning April 15, 2014, and continuing through October 31, 2014.
During 2013, TDEC processed 6,231 bat call files (out of >12,000 total files) collected from 75 nights of Anabat surveys at forty-seven (47) ORR sites. The Anabat files were analyzed using the automated software program: BCID-East (plus Kaleidoscope PRO for verification). Our analysis of identified calls suggests thirteen (13) bat species are present on the reservation including two federally endangered species (i.e., Gray Bat, Indiana Bat). Previous ORR bat studies were limited to 3-4 night mist-net and acoustic surveys. This study, along with a concurrent ORNL Environmental Science Division bat project, was the first comprehensive, large-scale (multi-nights) acoustic bat community investigation on the ORR.
Introduction Little information is available regarding the distribution and occurrence of bats in the southeastern United States, including knowledge of bat species on the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR). Although the presence of the federally endangered gray bat has been documented on the ORR, the status of the federally endangered Indiana bat and knowledge of the overall bat community is not well known. Previous ORR bat investigations have been limited to short term 2-4 night surveys of mist-netting and acoustic surveys, and thus no long term, intensive bat monitoring data is available. Our study is unique because the serious lack of bat community information was addressed by providing comprehensive, multi-night acoustic surveys thus allowing characterization of bat diversity and occurrence at numerous ORR sites.
Bats (Microchiropterans) are fundamental ecosystem components for insect suppression, pollination and seed dispersal (Britzke et al. 2011). Microchiropteran bats are also known as "echolocating bats" because they have the ability to use echolocation as a navigation tool in obstacle avoidance and hunting (Simmons and Conway 1997). Echolocating bats typically emit
an ultrasonic (over 15 kilohertz) pulse, and analyze the returning echo to determine the distance to the object as well as what type of object it is (Fenton 1992). Bats in the eastern United States use ultrasonic echolocation to locate prey and navigate in their surroundings. Echolocation calls of most bats are species specific. Ultrasonic detectors are widely used for bat censuses (i.e.,
inventory) and have improved conservation efforts by: (1) providing increased knowledge of bat ecology, and (2) characterizing bat communities (Britzke et al. 2011). Numerous researchers have used detectors to conduct bat species surveys and assess habitat use, and the method is especially valuable for species that are difficult to capture (Ahlen 1999, Murray et al. 1999, OFarrell and Gannon 1999, Duffy et al. 2000, Russo and Jones 2003). The application of bat ultrasonic monitoring devices such as the Anabat' SD-2 bat detector (Titley Scientific USA, Columbia, MO) has allowed ecologists to quickly and efficiently characterize and inventory bat communities at multiple areas (OFarrell and Gannon 1999, Owen et al. 2004), and transform those calls into frequencies which are audible to humans (Parsons et al. 2000).
Microchiropteran bats use tonal signals that show structured change in frequency over time (Fenton 1984). Humans listening to slowed-down recordings of echolocating microchiropterans can readily distinguish between different sounding pulses allowing them to recognize the calls of different species. People also can recognize feeding buzzes; attacks on prey that are signaled by high pulse repetition rates (Schnitzler & Kalko 2001).
The TDEC (Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation) Division of Remediation, DOE-Oversight Office (DOEO), initiated a pilot project in 2013 to investigate the bat community present on the ORR. The Tennessee Oversight Agreement mandates a comprehensive and integrated monitoring and surveillance program for all media (i.e., air, surface water, soil sediments, groundwater, drinking water, food crops, fish and wildlife, and biological systems) and the emissions of any materials (hazardous, toxic, chemical, radiological) on the ORR and environs. Accordingly, monitoring the ecological recovery progress of wildlife and environmental restoration of habitat are important aspects of remedial activities on the ORR.
Following emergence from winter hibernation, bats were monitored by conducting surveys to record echolocation calls using ultra-high frequency Anabat detectors. Bat call files obtained from the detectors were then analyzed with specialized bat identification software (i.e., BCID-East, Kaleidoscope PRO) to enable acoustic identification of species. A combination of active and passive ultrasonic field surveys were used beginning April 15, 2014, and continuing through October 31, 2014.
During 2013, TDEC processed 6,231 bat call files (out of >12,000 total files) collected from 75 nights of Anabat surveys at forty-seven (47) ORR sites. The Anabat files were analyzed using the automated software program: BCID-East (plus Kaleidoscope PRO for verification). Our analysis of identified calls suggests thirteen (13) bat species are present on the reservation including two
federally endangered species (i.e., Gray Bat, Indiana Bat). Previous ORR bat studies were limited to 3-4 night mist-net and acoustic surveys. This study, along with a concurrent ORNL Environmental Science Division bat project, was the first comprehensive, large-scale (multi-nights) acoustic bat community investigation on the ORR.
Study Site The study was conducted on the Oak Ridge Reservation, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, which consists of approximately 34,500 acres (14,000 ha) within Anderson and Roane counties. The reservation is bound on the north and east by residential areas of the City of Oak Ridge and on the south and west by the Clinch River. The reservation is underlain predominantly by thrust-faulted Cambro-Ordovician sedimentary rocks (e.g., limestone, dolostone, siltstones, etc.). More than 20 caves have been identified on the ORR and most are developed within dolostones of the Knox Group.
Mitchell et al. (1996) surveyed seven of the caves (Copper Ridge, Flashlight Heaven, Walker Branch, Big Turtle, Little Turtle, Pinnacle, and Bull Bluff), but no gray bats were found. There is an unverified report of ten gray bats roosting in Little Turtle Cave in September 1996 (Webb 2000).
Therefore, Anabat surveys of ORR cave entrances were also conducted on multiple nights to determine species, if present. It should be noted that ORR caves will not be entered at any time due to wildlife health concerns.
Temperate bat species are nocturnal and exhibit nightly and seasonal activity patterns that vary among species and individuals (Hirshfield et al. 1977, Anthony et al. 1981). Bats in the eastern United States typically enter hibernation in mid-September and emerge in mid-April (Britzske et al. 2006). During summer nights, bat roost-emergence activity commonly peaks immediately after sunset and can continue for several hours (Kunz 1973, Barcla 1982). Typically, a lesser activity peak occurs before sunrise as bats return to their diurnal roosts after foraging (Kunz 1973). During the night, bats roost at intervals, either at their diurnal roosts or at night-roosts nearer their foraging areas (Adam and Hayes 2000, Johnson et al. 2002, Daniel et al. 2008). For example, Myotis sodalis (Indiana bat) may forage in forests with intact canopies, near headwater streams (Menzel et al. 2005, Schirmacher et al. 2007), and within riparian zones (Webb 2000, Ford et al. 2005). The Indiana bat may form maternity roosts in shaggy-barked trees and snags with exfoliating bark during summer and then hibernates in caves during winter (Menzel et al.
2001, Timpone et al. 2010). Prior to 2013, the occurrence of the Indiana Bat had not been documented on the ORR since 1950.
Females of many bat species form maternity colonies in anthropogenic (e.g., buildings, bridges) and/or natural (e.g., tree or snag, caves) structures (Barbour and Davis 1969, Lewis 1995). During the maternity season, particularly during the lactation period, females return to their diurnal roosts several times during the night to nurse their young (Henry et al. 2002; Ormsbee et al.
2007). Accordingly, the USFWS has developed bat monitoring guidelines and criteria for site
selection in the Indiana Bat Summer Survey Plan (USFWS 2013). Bat acoustic monitoring sites were selected based upon satellite imagery / topographic maps, consultation with the ORNL Environmental Sciences Division and TWRA, following the USFWS criteria, and the literature (LaVal et al. 1977, Racey 1998, Grindal and Brigham 1999, Menzel et al. 2005) to include:
- Mature forest corridors
- Forest/field edge
- Powerline ROWs
- Rocky bluffs & outcrops
- Forest access roads, hiking trails
- Open fields
- Waterway corridors (streams, ponds, wetlands, riparian, river shoreline)
- Anthropogenic structures (abandoned buildings, bridges, large culverts)
- Trees with exfoliating bark or dead snags (minimum diameter of 5 inches at breast height) exposed to direct sunlight
- Caves and karst features Objectives
- Conducted passive overnight fixed-point Anabat surveys at multiple ORR sites
- Conducted active Anabat surveys for 4-5 hours, 30 minutes/station
- Focus on identifying the presence of federally endangered bats on the ORR
- Identify Indiana Bat roost trees and other roosting habitats (i.e., bridges, rock crevices, abandoned buildings, etc.)
Methods Anabat SD-2 (Titley Electronics, Ballina, Australia) broadband, frequency-division, bat detectors were used to passively and actively monitor for bat echolocation passes, i.e., a series of echolocation pulses, at carefully selected ORR sites before, during, and after the pregnancy and lactation periods (Sasse and Pekins 1996). Microchiropterans use a wide range of frequencies in echolocation, from around 10 kHz to over 200 kHz. Bat calls are produced by a single mode of vibration and consist of a series of harmonics which are multiples of the sound frequencies used by the bat, further assisting in pinpointing the location of prey (flying insects). Bats emit echolocation sounds in pulses that vary in properties depending on the species, and can be correlated with different hunting strategies and mechanisms of information processing (Grinnell 1995). Echolocation calls of bats consist of three phases: search, approach, and terminal (Griffin et al. 1960). Search phase calls are produced to locate prey, approach phase calls are produced to identify exact locations of prey, and terminal phase calls are produced just prior to capture.
Search phase calls are useful in the study of bat echolocation because they constitute a majority
(ca. 90%) of calls produced by bats, exhibit consistency in structure throughout the call sequence, and may possess species-specific characteristics (Betts 1998, Fenton and Bell 1981, OFarrell et al. 1999). Most bat families use short, downward frequency-modulated (FM) sounds that sweep through about an octave. An example of an FM bat is the Big Brown Bat. Another common echolocation signal pattern is constant-frequency (CF) signals. Long CF/FM pulses are a hybrid of the two and are used by a much smaller number of species belonging to three different families.
These signals have a long (10-100 ms) constant-frequency component preceding an FM sweep (Grinnell 1995).
The Anabat SD-2 uses an advanced form of frequency division without amplitude retention, to provide the cleanest output signals with the lowest possible data rate (Corben 2014). These are frequency dividing (FD) detectors which provide a broadband frequency down-conversion, which generates audio signals with frequencies directly related to those the bat is producing (Corben 2014). Furthermore, the nature of the data generated by Anabat detectors is ideally suited to analysis using Zero-Crossings Analysis (ZCA). The ZCA system counts incoming echolocation calls (pulses) along their oscillations between positive and negative values each time a sound wave passes the zero point at a present number of crossings (i.e., Division Ratio, often 8 or 16), and a time measurement (time-frequency) is made allowing representative species-specific frequencies to be recorded, thus providing efficient analysis of representative call parameters for species identifications (Corben 2014).
The quantity of echolocation passes recorded is an index of activity and does not necessarily reflect the quantity of bats being recorded, i.e., one bat can be recorded more than one time (Broders, 2003). Following the survey methods described by OFarrell et al. (1999) and Johnson et al. (2002), TDEC actively monitored sites with Anabat detectors for 30-min periods between the end of twilight up to 5 hrs. thereafter (Sherwin et al., 2000). Staff slowly swept the detector back and forth to scan for activity under a closed forest, within a forest canopy gap or forest harvest area, or along a stream. When bat activity was detected, the Anabat was oriented and followed the flight path to capture as complete a call sequence as possible. Acoustical sampling during evenings when bat activity was likely to be low due to meteorological conditions such as high winds, precipitation or temperatures below 10 °C was avoided (Wear 2004, Ford et al. 2005, Schirmacher et al. 2007).
Bat echolocation calls were recorded passively with 1-3 Anabat' SD-2 detectors at ORR study sites. It is recommended by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS 2011) that a project area of suitable bat habitat (phase II) would require at least 3 detector sites per 124-acre area over the course of at least two survey nights per area. The Titley Roost Logger' detector was also used to monitor bats at some ORR sites and usually deployed for 5-10 consecutive nights. The Anabat SD-2 unit (or its detached microphone) must be deployed on a tripod or on a long pole
so as to avoid ground surface clutter and insect ultrasonic clutter (Weller and Zabel 2002) whereas the Roost Logger can be easily strapped to a tree. Our passive Anabat surveys began approximately 30 minutes before sunset and ended 30 minutes after dawn (Martin and Britzke 2010). Anabat SD-2 detector systems placed into the field for remote, passive sampling are often housed in waterproof containers with an aperture through which the microphone can be fitted (Britzke et al. 2010).
This project will generally follow the bat monitoring guidance and protocols of Kuenzi and Morrison (1998), Murray et al. (1999), Jones et al. (2004), Szewczak 2004, Manley et al. (2006),
Britzke et al. (2011), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS 2011, 2013). This research will be in cooperation with the Division of Natural Areas (TDEC Bureau of Parks and Conservation),
Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency, the Forestry, Wildlife and Fisheries Department of the University of Tennessee, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Oak Ridge National Laboratory Environmental Sciences Division. Field work followed the guidance in the divisions health and safety plan (Yard 2013).
White Nose Syndrome White-nose Syndrome (WNS positive, WNS+) is a disease that has been implicated for the decimation of several million cave-hibernating bats in North America and is believed to be caused by the psychrophillic fungus, Geomyces destructans (Kannan et al. 2010, Figure 1). This pathogen first appeared in eastern New York in 2006 and has since spread throughout the Northeast (Ford et al. 2011), and unfortunately into cave populations of bats in several southern states including Tennessee. This fungus, which may appear as a white coating on the bat muzzle, invades the epidermis of the bats (causes damage to wing membranes), unlike many other fungal infections (Meteyer et al. 2009). A leading hypothesis is that G. destructans infections affect the arousal periods of hibernating bats, causing them to use their fat reserves prior to emergence, essentially starving the bats (TBWG 2014). Examples of East Tennessee hibernating cave bat colonies infected with WNS include: Grindstaff Cave (Carter County) and Worleys Cave (Sullivan County, Holliday 2012). Grindstaff Cave bat numbers were down 99.5% compared to 2010 when WNS was first discovered there. Worleys Cave hibernating bats were down 96.6% from 2011 (Holliday 2011). White Oak Blowhole Cave in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park is Tennessees largest Indiana bat hibernaculum and the bats have been found to be WNS-positive.
East Fork Saltpeter Cave in Fentress County has been surveyed and bats there have been documented to be WNS+ (Holliday 2012). Lastly, Figure 2 shows 33 Tennessee counties (red-shading) that contain WNS+ infected bats in caves (or other hibernacula).
Figure 1: Bat with wing damage due to WNS (Holliday 2012)
Figure 2: White Nose Syndrome Positive Counties 2013
Results and Discussion For purposes of this report, the ORR was subdivided into 10 study sections (with 2-10 Anabat monitoring stations per section):
- 1. Bearden Creek / Park City Section (ORNL; 2 bat monitoring stations)
- 2. Bear Creek Burial Grounds / EMWMF Section (Y-12; 4 bat monitoring stations)
- 3. Bull Bluff / Freels Bend Section (TWRA Three Bends; 4 bat monitoring stations)
- 4. Duct Island / ETTP Ponds / Grassy Creek Section (ETTP; 10 bat monitoring stations)
- 5. Horizon Center / Lower East Fork Poplar Creek / White Wing Section (7 stations)
- 7. Scarboro Disc Park / Turtle Park (City of Oak Ridge; 2 bat monitoring stations)
- 8. Solway Bend (TWRA Three Bends) / UT Arboretum Section (6 bat monitoring stations)
- 9. Walker Branch Section (ORNL; 3 bat monitoring stations)
- 10. West Bear Creek Valley Section (Y-12; 5 bat monitoring stations)
At the beginning of each section, a map of the site locations is provided plus a table is included summarizing the bat species detected at each Anabat survey station. In the summary tables, note that the numbers underneath each bat species represent number of bat calls, not the number of bats. The BCID-East and Kaleidoscope PRO software cannot quantify how many bats are present, but rather can only provide an analysis of the bat species that may be present at a site. The software programs utilize bat call libraries to analyze the Anabat files.
Following each section summary table, please find a representative graph detailing the bat species detected at each Anabat monitoring station. Some graphs represent passive overnight surveys (dusk until dawn) while others are active +/- 5 hour5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> surveys (dusk until 1-2 am).
- 1. BEARDEN CREEK / PARK CITY SECTION Figure 3: Bearden Creek / Park City Section (ORNL)
- The exact location of bat detector site #2 is not shown due to its ecological sensitivity.
Table 1: Summary Table of Bats Detected Bearden Creek / Park City Section Note: The numbers in each bat taxa detected column represent the number of bat calls recorded at each monitoring station, not the number of bats present. A call is the series of frequency sweeps which a bat emits for navigation or location of a prey item (McCracken et al. 2013). Pulses are a rapid series of echolocation vocalizations emitted during the search, approach and feeding buzz phases as a bat searches
and locates prey items. All Anabat files were processed using the BCID-East software program (validated with Kaleidoscope PRO program).
Taxonomic Codes: COTO = Corynorhinus townsendii (Townsends Big-eared Bat), EPFU = Eptesicus fuscus (Big Brown Bat), LABO = Lasiurus borealis (Eastern Red Bat), LACI = Lasiurus cinereus (Hoary Bat), LANO =
Lasionycteris noctivagans (Silver-haired Bat), MYGR = Myotis grisescens (Gray Bat), MYLE = Myotis leibii (Eastern Small-footed Bat), MYLU = Myotis lucifugus (Little Brown Bat), MYSE = Myotis septentrionalis (Northern Long-eared Bat), MYSO = Myotis sodalis (Indiana Bat), NYHU = Nycticeius humeralis (Evening Bat), PESU = Perimyotis subflavus (Tricolored Bat; Eastern Pipistrelle), TABR = Tadarida brasiliensis (Brazilian Free-tailed bat).
Figure 4: Bat Detector Site 1 Park City / Shagbark Hickory Site Anabat Data / 9-19-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species
Figure 5: Bat Detector Site 2 Park City Area (Pinnacle Cave entrance)
Anabat Data / 9-19-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species
- 2. BEAR CREEK BURIAL GROUNDS / EMWMF SECTION Figure 6: Bear Creek Burial Grounds / EMWMF (Y-12) Section
Table 2: Summary Table of Bats Detected Bear Creek Burial Grounds / EMWMF Section Note: The numbers in each bat taxa detected column represent the number of bat calls recorded at each monitoring station, not the number of bats present. A call is the series of frequency sweeps which a bat emits for navigation or location of a prey item (McCracken et al. 2013). Pulses are a rapid series of echolocation vocalizations emitted during the search, approach and feeding buzz phases as a bat searches and locates prey items. All Anabat files were processed using the BCID-East software program (validated with Kaleidoscope PRO program).
Taxonomic Codes: COTO = Corynorhinus townsendii (Townsends Big-eared Bat), EPFU = Eptesicus fuscus (Big Brown Bat), LABO = Lasiurus borealis (Eastern Red Bat), LACI = Lasiurus cinereus (Hoary Bat), LANO =
Lasionycteris noctivagans (Silver-haired Bat), MYGR = Myotis grisescens (Gray Bat), MYLE = Myotis leibii (Eastern Small-footed Bat), MYLU = Myotis lucifugus (Little Brown Bat), MYSE = Myotis septentrionalis (Northern Long-eared Bat), MYSO = Myotis sodalis (Indiana Bat), NYHU = Nycticeius humeralis (Evening Bat), PESU = Perimyotis subflavus (Tricolored Bat; Eastern Pipistrelle), TABR = Tadarida brasiliensis (Brazilian Free-tailed bat).
Figure 7: EMWMF-1: East end of EMWMF access road @ barrier Anabat Data / 9-19-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species
Figure 8: Bear Creek Valley @ powerline ROW (E/NE of EMWMF)
Anabat Data / 9-24-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species Figure 9: BCBG-1 Bear Creek Burial Grounds / Walk-In-Pits Anabat Data / 9-17-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species
Figure 10: BCBG-2 Bear Creek Burial Grounds (West of EMWMF)
Anabat Data / 9-24-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species
- 3. BULL BLUFF / FREELS BEND SECTION Figure 11: Bull Bluff / Freels Bend (TWRA 3 Bends) Section
Table 3: Summary Table of Bats Detected Bull Bluff / Freels Bend (TWRA 3 Bends) Section Note: The numbers in each bat taxa detected column represent the number of bat calls recorded at each monitoring station, not the number of bats present. A call is the series of frequency sweeps which a bat emits for navigation or location of a prey item (McCracken et al. 2013). Pulses are a rapid series of echolocation vocalizations emitted during the search, approach and feeding buzz phases as a bat searches and locates prey items. All Anabat files were processed using the BCID-East software program (validated with Kaleidoscope PRO program).
Taxonomic Codes: COTO = Corynorhinus townsendii (Townsends Big-eared Bat), EPFU = Eptesicus fuscus (Big Brown Bat), LABO = Lasiurus borealis (Eastern Red Bat), LACI = Lasiurus cinereus (Hoary Bat), LANO =
Lasionycteris noctivagans (Silver-haired Bat), MYGR = Myotis grisescens (Gray Bat), MYLE = Myotis leibii (Eastern Small-footed Bat), MYLU = Myotis lucifugus (Little Brown Bat), MYSE = Myotis septentrionalis (Northern Long-eared Bat), MYSO = Myotis sodalis (Indiana Bat), NYHU = Nycticeius humeralis (Evening Bat), PESU = Perimyotis subflavus (Tricolored Bat; Eastern Pipistrelle), TABR = Tadarida brasiliensis (Brazilian Free-tailed bat).
Figure 12: Greenway Bull Bluff Greenway (Isthmus / Melton Lake backwater cove) Anabat Data / 4-26-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until Midnight)
Bat calls/hour per species
Figure 13: Greenway Bull Bluff Greenway (open field on ridge top at trail terminus) Anabat Data / 4-26-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until 2:00 am)
Bat calls/hour per species Figure 14: Clark Park (Carbide Park)
(McCoy Branch backwater causeway) Anabat Data / 10-26-12 (Active Survey: Dusk until Midnight)
Bat calls/hour per species
Figure 15: Freels Bend / Melton Lake backwater causeway (south of Freels cabin) Anabat Data / 6-23-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until Midnight)
Bat calls/hour per species
- 4. DUCT ISLAND/ETTP PONDS/GRASSY CREEK SECTION Figure 16: Duct Island / ETTP Ponds / Grassy Creek (ETTP) Section Table 4: Summary Table of Bats Detected Duct Island / ETTP Ponds / Grassy Creek Section Note: The numbers in each bat taxa detected column represent the number of bat calls recorded at each monitoring station, not the number of bats present. A call is the series of frequency sweeps which a bat emits for navigation or location of a prey item (McCracken et al. 2013). Pulses are a rapid series of echolocation vocalizations emitted during the search, approach and feeding buzz phases as a bat searches
and locates prey items. All Anabat files were processed using the BCID-East software program (validated with Kaleidoscope PRO program).
Taxonomic Codes: COTO = Corynorhinus townsendii (Townsends Big-eared Bat), EPFU = Eptesicus fuscus (Big Brown Bat), LABO = Lasiurus borealis (Eastern Red Bat), LACI = Lasiurus cinereus (Hoary Bat), LANO =
Lasionycteris noctivagans (Silver-haired Bat), MYGR = Myotis grisescens (Gray Bat), MYLE = Myotis leibii (Eastern Small-footed Bat), MYLU = Myotis lucifugus (Little Brown Bat), MYSE = Myotis septentrionalis (Northern Long-eared Bat), MYSO = Myotis sodalis (Indiana Bat), NYHU = Nycticeius humeralis (Evening Bat), PESU = Perimyotis subflavus (Tricolored Bat; Eastern Pipistrelle), TABR = Tadarida brasiliensis (Brazilian Free-tailed bat).
Figure 17: Poplar Creek (big bend south of Duct Island)
Anabat Data / 6-4-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until Midnight)
Bat calls/hour per species
Figure 18: Grassy Creek (TDEC surface water station)
Anabat Data / 5-25-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species Figure 19: Gallaher Cemetery/Powerline ROW (ETTP)
Anabat Data / 9-18-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until Midnight)
Bat calls/hour per species
Figure 20: K-901-1 (K-901 Pond)
(Weir outfall at Clinch River; ETTP) Anabat Data / 7-11-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until 2:00 am)
Bat calls/hour per species Figure 21: K-901-2 (K-901 Pond)
(North end of pond on hill above backwater area; ETTP)
Anabat Data / 7-11-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species
Figure 22: DUCT-1 (weir station on bluff above Clinch River / ETTP)
Anabat Data / 9-28-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until Midnight)
Bat calls/hour per species Figure 23: DUCT-2 (powerline ROW on Poplar Creek floodplain / ETTP)
Anabat Data / 9-28-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until 2:00 am)
Bat calls/hour per species
Figure 24: DUCT-3 (shoreline / duct crossing @ Poplar Creek / ETTP)
Anabat Data / 9-28-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until 2:00 am)
Bat calls/hour per species 1000 Bat Calls Detected (n) 100 109 LANO 67 10 23 LABO 9 17 1
1 1 NYHU 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 11:00 PM 12:00 AM 1:00 AM PESU Figure 25: Bear Creek Road Wetland Ponds/ETTP (north of HWY 58)
Anabat Data / 6-4-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until 2:00 am)
Bat calls/hour per species
Figure 26: P-1 Pond (Weir outfall at Clinch River / ETTP) Anabat Data / 7-9-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until 2:00 am)
Bat calls/hour per species
- 5. HORIZON CENTER / LEFPC / WHITE WING SECTION Figure 27: Horizon Center / Lower East Fork Poplar Creek / White Wing Section
Table 5: Summary Table of Bats Detected Horizon Center / Lower East Fork Poplar Creek / White Wing Section Note: The numbers in each bat taxa detected column represent the number of bat calls recorded at each monitoring station, not the number of bats present. A call is the series of frequency sweeps which a bat emits for navigation or location of a prey item (McCracken et al. 2013). Pulses are a rapid series of echolocation vocalizations emitted during the search, approach and feeding buzz phases as a bat searches and locates prey items. All Anabat files were processed using the BCID-East software program (validated with Kaleidoscope PRO program).
Taxonomic Codes: COTO = Corynorhinus townsendii (Townsends Big-eared Bat), EPFU = Eptesicus fuscus (Big Brown Bat), LABO = Lasiurus borealis (Eastern Red Bat), LACI = Lasiurus cinereus (Hoary Bat), LANO =
Lasionycteris noctivagans (Silver-haired Bat), MYGR = Myotis grisescens (Gray Bat), MYLE = Myotis leibii (Eastern Small-footed Bat), MYLU = Myotis lucifugus (Little Brown Bat), MYSE = Myotis septentrionalis (Northern Long-eared Bat), MYSO = Myotis sodalis (Indiana Bat), NYHU = Nycticeius humeralis (Evening Bat), PESU = Perimyotis subflavus (Tricolored Bat; Eastern Pipistrelle), TABR = Tadarida brasiliensis (Brazilian Free-tailed bat).
Figure 28: East Fork Road Wetlands (ED-1 Site)
Anabat Data / 7-19-13 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species
Figure 29: HC-1 Horizon Center expansion area (north of center)
Anabat Data / 9-27-12 (Active Survey: Dusk until 2:00 am)
Bat calls/hour per species Figure 30: HC-2 Horizon Center /Lower East Fork Poplar Creek (Near Novus Dr. bridge at record Sycamore) Anabat Data / 8-30-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until Midnight)
Bat calls/hour per species
Figure 31: Poplar Creek Bridge / North Boundary Greenway (confluence of EFPC with Poplar Creek) Anabat Data / 9-3-12 (Active Survey: Dusk until Midnight)
Bat calls/hour per species Figure 32: Lambert Quarry (west end ramp at shoreline)
Anabat Data / 9-11-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until Midnight)
Bat calls/hour per species
Figure 33: WW-1 White Wing open grassy fields /forest edge (City of Oak Ridge sludge application fields) Anabat Data / 9-24-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until 2:00 am)
Bat calls/hour per species Figure 34: WW-2 White Wing Cemetery (Forested hill above City Oak Ridge sludge fields) Anabat Data / 9-24-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species
Table 6: Summary Table of Bats Detected Jones Island / WAG 13 Section Note: The numbers in each bat taxa detected column represent the number of bat calls recorded at each monitoring station, not the number of bats present. A call is the series of frequency sweeps which a bat emits for navigation or location of a prey item (McCracken et al. 2013). Pulses are a rapid series of echolocation vocalizations emitted during the search, approach and feeding buzz phases as a bat searches and locates prey items. All Anabat files were processed using the BCID-East software program (validated with Kaleidoscope PRO program).
Taxonomic Codes: COTO = Corynorhinus townsendii (Townsends Big-eared Bat), EPFU = Eptesicus fuscus (Big Brown Bat), LABO = Lasiurus borealis (Eastern Red Bat), LACI = Lasiurus cinereus (Hoary Bat), LANO =
Lasionycteris noctivagans (Silver-haired Bat), MYGR = Myotis grisescens (Gray Bat), MYLE = Myotis leibii (Eastern Small-footed Bat), MYLU = Myotis lucifugus (Little Brown Bat), MYSE = Myotis septentrionalis (Northern Long-eared Bat), MYSO = Myotis sodalis (Indiana Bat), NYHU = Nycticeius humeralis (Evening Bat), PESU = Perimyotis subflavus (Tricolored Bat; Eastern Pipistrelle), TABR = Tadarida brasiliensis (Brazilian Free-tailed bat).
Figure 36: Jones Island Raccoon Creek at Jones Island Road Anabat Data / 5-31-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until 2:00 am)
Bat calls/hour per species Figure 37: Jones Island Unnamed Creek at Jones Island Road Anabat Data / 5-31-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until 2:00 am)
Bat calls/hour per species
Figure 38: Jones Island (Wylde site - Roost Logger-2)
Anabat Data / 8-21-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species Figure 39: Jones Island WAG 13 Area (near Clinch River)
Anabat Data / 5-31-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species
- 7. SCARBORO DISC PARK / TURTLE PARK SECTION Figure 40: Scarboro Disc Park / Turtle Park Section (City Oak Ridge) Section Table 7: Summary Table of Bats Detected Scarboro Disc Park / Turtle Park (City of Oak Ridge) Section Note: The numbers in each bat taxa detected column represent the number of bat calls recorded at each monitoring station, not the number of bats present. A call is the series of frequency sweeps which a bat emits for navigation or location of a prey item (McCracken et al. 2013). Pulses are a rapid series of echolocation vocalizations emitted during the search, approach and feeding buzz phases as a bat searches and locates prey items. All Anabat files were processed using the BCID-East software program (validated with Kaleidoscope PRO program).
Taxonomic Codes: COTO = Corynorhinus townsendii (Townsends Big-eared Bat), EPFU = Eptesicus fuscus (Big Brown Bat), LABO = Lasiurus borealis (Eastern Red Bat), LACI = Lasiurus cinereus (Hoary Bat), LANO =
Lasionycteris noctivagans (Silver-haired Bat), MYGR = Myotis grisescens (Gray Bat), MYLE = Myotis leibii (Eastern Small-footed Bat), MYLU = Myotis lucifugus (Little Brown Bat), MYSE = Myotis septentrionalis (Northern Long-eared Bat), MYSO = Myotis sodalis (Indiana Bat), NYHU = Nycticeius humeralis (Evening Bat), PESU = Perimyotis subflavus (Tricolored Bat; Eastern Pipistrelle), TABR = Tadarida brasiliensis (Brazilian Free-tailed bat).
Figure 41: Turtle Park / East Fork Poplar Creek Bridge (City of Oak Ridge) Anabat Data / 4-10-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until Midnight)
Bat calls/hour per species Figure 42: Scarboro Disc Park (City of Oak Ridge)
Anabat Data / 5-2-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until Midnight)
Bat calls/hour per species
- 8. SOLWAY BEND / UT ARBORETUM SECTION Figure 43: Solway Bend (TWRA 3 Bends) / UT Arboretum Section Table 8: Summary Table of Bats Detected Solway Bend (TWRA 3 Bends) / UT Arboretum Section Note: The numbers in each bat taxa detected column represent the number of bat calls recorded at each monitoring station, not the number of bats present. A call is the series of frequency sweeps which a bat emits for navigation or location of a prey item (McCracken et al. 2013). Pulses are a rapid series of echolocation vocalizations emitted during the search, approach and feeding buzz phases as a bat searches and locates prey items. All Anabat files were processed using the BCID-East software program (validated with Kaleidoscope PRO program).
Taxonomic Codes: COTO = Corynorhinus townsendii (Townsends Big-eared Bat), EPFU = Eptesicus fuscus (Big Brown Bat), LABO = Lasiurus borealis (Eastern Red Bat), LACI = Lasiurus cinereus (Hoary Bat), LANO =
Lasionycteris noctivagans (Silver-haired Bat), MYGR = Myotis grisescens (Gray Bat), MYLE = Myotis leibii (Eastern Small-footed Bat), MYLU = Myotis lucifugus (Little Brown Bat), MYSE = Myotis septentrionalis (Northern Long-eared Bat), MYSO = Myotis sodalis (Indiana Bat), NYHU = Nycticeius humeralis (Evening
Bat), PESU = Perimyotis subflavus (Tricolored Bat; Eastern Pipistrelle), TABR = Tadarida brasiliensis (Brazilian Free-tailed bat).
Figure 44: Arbor-1 (UT Arboretum)
Anabat Data / 6-3-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until 2:00 am)
Bat calls/hour per species Figure 45: Arbor-2 (UT Arboretum)
Anabat Data / 7-8-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species
Figure 46: Arbor-3 (UT Arboretum)
Anabat Data / 9-13-12 (Active Survey: Dusk until Midnight)
Bat calls/hour per species Figure 47: SB-1 (Solway Bend)
Anabat Data / 8-25-2013 (Active Survey: Dusk until Midnight)
Bat calls/hour per species
Figure 48: SB-2 (Solway Bend)
Anabat Data / 10-11-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species Figure 49: SB-3 (Solway Bend)
Anabat Data / 8-15-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species
- 9. WALKER BRANCH SECTION Figure 50: Walker Branch (ORNL) Section Table 9: Summary Table of Bats Detected Walker Branch (ORNL) Section Note: The numbers in each bat taxa detected column represent the number of bat calls recorded at each monitoring station, not the number of bats present. A call is the series of frequency sweeps which a bat emits for navigation or location of a prey item (McCracken et al. 2013). Pulses are a rapid series of echolocation vocalizations emitted during the search, approach and feeding buzz phases as a bat searches and locates prey items. All Anabat files were processed using the BCID-East software program (validated with Kaleidoscope PRO program).
Taxonomic Codes: COTO = Corynorhinus townsendii (Townsends Big-eared Bat), EPFU = Eptesicus fuscus (Big Brown Bat), LABO = Lasiurus borealis (Eastern Red Bat), LACI = Lasiurus cinereus (Hoary Bat), LANO =
Lasionycteris noctivagans (Silver-haired Bat), MYGR = Myotis grisescens (Gray Bat), MYLE = Myotis leibii (Eastern Small-footed Bat), MYLU = Myotis lucifugus (Little Brown Bat), MYSE = Myotis septentrionalis (Northern Long-eared Bat), MYSO = Myotis sodalis (Indiana Bat), NYHU = Nycticeius humeralis (Evening Bat), PESU = Perimyotis subflavus (Tricolored Bat; Eastern Pipistrelle), TABR = Tadarida brasiliensis (Brazilian Free-tailed bat).
Figure 51: WB-1 Walker Branch (west fork; 100 yards north of weir)
Anabat Data / 6-21-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species Figure 52: WB-2 Walker Branch (Powerline ROWaccess road/forest edge)
Anabat Data / 7-24-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species
Figure 53: Meteorological / ATDD Station (open field)
Anabat Data / 6-21-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species 10.WEST BEAR CREEK VALLEY SECTION Figure 54: West Bear Creek Valley (Y-12) Section
Table 10: Summary Table of Bats Detected West Bear Creek Valley (Y-12) Section Note: The numbers in each bat taxa detected column represent the number of bat calls recorded at each monitoring station, not the number of bats present. A call is the series of frequency sweeps which a bat emits for navigation or location of a prey item (McCracken et al. 2013). Pulses are a rapid series of echolocation vocalizations emitted during the search, approach and feeding buzz phases as a bat searches and locates prey items. All Anabat files were processed using the BCID-East software program (validated with Kaleidoscope PRO program).
Taxonomic Codes: COTO = Corynorhinus townsendii (Townsends Big-eared Bat), EPFU = Eptesicus fuscus (Big Brown Bat), LABO = Lasiurus borealis (Eastern Red Bat), LACI = Lasiurus cinereus (Hoary Bat), LANO =
Lasionycteris noctivagans (Silver-haired Bat), MYGR = Myotis grisescens (Gray Bat), MYLE = Myotis leibii (Eastern Small-footed Bat), MYLU = Myotis lucifugus (Little Brown Bat), MYSE = Myotis septentrionalis (Northern Long-eared Bat), MYSO = Myotis sodalis (Indiana Bat), NYHU = Nycticeius humeralis (Evening Bat), PESU = Perimyotis subflavus (Tricolored Bat; Eastern Pipistrelle), TABR = Tadarida brasiliensis (Brazilian Free-tailed bat).
Figure 55: BCV-1Bear Creek Wetland (SS-6 spring)
Anabat Data / 8-9-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species
Figure 56: BCV-2 Bear Creek at Reeves Road bridge Anabat Data / 8-9-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species Figure 57: BCV-3Bear Creek Wetland (east side BCK 4.5 km @ SS-7 spring) Anabat Data / 7-26-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species
Figure 58: BCV-4Bear Creek Wetland (West side BCK 4.5 km @ old weir) Anabat Data / 9-28-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species Figure 59: BCV-5 Haul Road (West of HWY 95 overpass/pipeline ROW) Anabat Data / 8-30-2013 (Passive Survey: Dusk until Dawn)
Bat calls/hour per species
Results Summary During 2013, DOEO processed 6,231 bat call files (167,001 total pulses) collected from 47 Anabat monitoring sites on the ORR. Although we monitored bats for 75 survey nights (between April 15-October 31), and due to the tremendous volume of bat files about 50% of the data is actually recorded (>12,000 bat call files). Twenty-three (23) survey sites were passively monitored from dusk until dawn and 24 sites were actively monitored between dusk until midnight (or dusk until 2:00 am). DOEO used the automated software program: BCID-East (plus Kaleidoscope PRO for verification) for analysis of the Anabat files. Our analysis of identified calls suggests thirteen (13) bat species are present on the reservation including two federally endangered species (i.e., Gray Bat, Indiana Bat). DOEO also detected Myotis leibii (Eastern Small-footed bat) and Myotis septentrionalis (Northern Long-eared Bat) which have been under consideration by the USFWS for listing as federally endangered species. Although M. leibii has been temporarily dropped from consideration for listing, M. septentrionalis continues in the process of becoming listed as federally endangered. Moreover, DOEO collected 4 bat calls identified as Corynorhinus townsendii (Townsends Big-eared Bat) recorded at Lambert Quarry and Walker Branch, and a single call identified as Tadarida brasiliensis (Brazilian Free-tailed Bat) recorded at Solway Bend.
Approximately 66% of all bat calls recorded were mid frequency calls. Perimyotis subflavus (Tri-colored Bat) calls represented 56% (3423 calls) of all bat calls recorded followed by Lasionycteris noctivagans (Silver-haired Bat) = 9% (525 calls), Myotis grisescens (Gray Bat) = 8% (480 calls),
Eptesicus fuscus (Big Brown Bat) = 7% (413 calls), Myotis lucifugus (Little Brown Bat) = 6% (356 calls), Lasiurus borealis (Eastern Red Bat) = 5% (312 calls), Nycticeius humeralis (Evening Bat) =
4% (268 calls), and Myotis sodalis (Indiana Bat) = 3% (181 calls). This study, along with a concurrent ORNL Environmental Science Division bat project, was the first long term, large-scale acoustic bat community investigation on the ORR.
Table 11: Summary Table (Combined Bat Calls for All Taxa)
Taxonomic Codes: COTO = Corynorhinus townsendii (Townsends Big-eared Bat), EPFU = Eptesicus fuscus (Big Brown Bat), LABO = Lasiurus borealis (Eastern Red Bat), LACI = Lasiurus cinereus (Hoary Bat), LANO =
Lasionycteris noctivagans (Silver-haired Bat), MYGR = Myotis grisescens (Gray Bat), MYLE = Myotis leibii (Eastern Small-footed Bat), MYLU = Myotis lucifugus (Little Brown Bat), MYSE = Myotis septentrionalis (Northern Long-eared Bat), MYSO = Myotis sodalis (Indiana Bat), NYHU = Nycticeius humeralis (Evening Bat), PESU = Perimyotis subflavus (Tricolored Bat; Eastern Pipistrelle), TABR = Tadarida brasiliensis (Brazilian Free-tailed bat).
Figure 60: Summary Pie Chart Combined 2013 Anabat Data (Total Bat Calls Per Taxon)
Taxonomic Codes: COTO = Corynorhinus townsendii (Townsends Big-eared Bat), EPFU = Eptesicus fuscus (Big Brown Bat), LABO = Lasiurus borealis (Eastern Red Bat), LACI = Lasiurus cinereus (Hoary Bat), LANO =
Lasionycteris noctivagans (Silver-haired Bat), MYGR = Myotis grisescens (Gray Bat), MYLE = Myotis leibii (Eastern Small-footed Bat), MYLU = Myotis lucifugus (Little Brown Bat), MYSE = Myotis septentrionalis (Northern Long-eared Bat), MYSO = Myotis sodalis (Indiana Bat), NYHU = Nycticeius humeralis (Evening Bat), PESU = Perimyotis subflavus (Tricolored Bat; Eastern Pipistrelle), TABR = Tadarida brasiliensis (Brazilian Free-tailed bat).
Figure 61: Summary Pie Chart Combined 2013 Anabat Data (Total Bats Per Frequency)
Although the federally endangered M. sodalis (Indiana Bat) has not been documented on the ORR since 1950, DOEO detected this bat at 16 of our 47 study sites during 2013 Anabat surveys.
Further supporting our analysis, a male Indiana Bat was captured on the ORR during a mist-net survey at Freels Bend in June 2013 (McCracken et al. 2013). DOEO also detected the federally endangered Myotis grisescens (Gray Bat) at 38 of 47 sites and Myotis septentrionalis (Northern Long-eared Bat) at 11 of 47 sites during 2013 Anabat surveys. The Northern Long-eared Bat is currently under consideration by the US Fish & Wildlife Service for listing as a federally endangered species.
References Adam, M. D., and J. P. Hayes. Use of bridges as night roosts by bats in the Oregon coast range. Journal of Mammalogy 81: 402-407. 2000.
Ahlén, I. and H. J. Baagøe. Use of ultrasonic detectors for bat studies in Europe: Experiences from field identifications, surveys and monitoring. Acta Chiropterologica 1:137-150. 1999.
Anthony, E. L. P, M. H. Stack, and T. H. Kunz. Night roosting and the nocturnal time budget of the little brown bat, Myotis lucifugus: effects of reproductive status, prey density, and environmental conditions. Oecologia (Berlin), 51:151-156. 1981.
Barbour, R. W., and W. H. Davis. Bats of America. University Press of Kentucky, Lexington, 312 pp. 1969.
Barclay, R. M. R. Interindividual use of echolocation calls: Eavesdropping by bats. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 10:271-275. 1982.
Betts, B. J. Effect of inter-individual variation in echolocation calls on identification of big brown and silver-haired bats. Journal of Wildlife Management 62:1003-1010. 1998.
Britzke, E. R. Use of ultrasonic detectors for acoustic identification and study of bat ecology in the eastern United States. Dissertation. Tennessee Technological University, Cookeville, Tennessee. 2003.
Britzke, E. R., A. C. Hicks, S. L. Von Oettinger and S. R. Darling. Description of spring roost trees used by female Indiana bats (Myotis sodalis) in the Lake Champlain Valley of Vermont and New York. American Midland Naturalist 155:181-187. 2006.
Britzke, E. R., B. A. Slack, M. P. Armstrong and S. C. Loeb. Effects of orientation and weatherproofing on the detection of bat echolocation calls. Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management 1:136-141. 2010.
Britzke, E. R., J. E. Duchamp, K. L. Murray, R. K. Swihart and L. W. Robbins. Acoustic identification of bats in the eastern United States: a comparison of parametric and nonparametric methods. Journal of Wildlife Management 75:660-667. 2011.
Broders, H. G. Another quantitative measure of bat species activity and sampling intensity considerations for the design of ultrasonic monitoring studies. Acta Chiropterologica 5:235-241. 2003.
Corben, C. Hoary Bat. http://users.lmi.net/corben/ 2014.
Daniel, S., C. Korine, and B. Pinshow. Central-place foraging in nursing, arthropod-gleaning bats. Canadian Journal of Zoology 86: 623-626. 2008.
Duffy, A. M., L. F. Lumsden, C. R. Caddle, R. R. Chick, and G. R. Newell. The efficacy of Anabat ultrasonic detectors and harp traps for surveying microchiropterans in south-eastern Australia.
Acta Chiropterologica 2:127-144. 2000.
Fenton, M. B. and G. P. Bell. Recognition of species of insectivorous bats by their echolocation calls. Journal of Mammalogy 62:233-243. 1981.
Fenton, M. B. Bats. Revised Edition. Facts on File, New York, NY, USA. 207 pp. 1992.
Ford, W. M., M. A. Menzel, J. L. Rodrique, J. M. Menzel and J. B. Johnson. Relating bat species presence to simple habitat measures in a central Appalachian forest. Biological Conservation 126:528-539. 2005.
Ford, W. M., E. R. Britzke, C. A. Dobony, J. J. Rodrigue and J. B. Johnson. Patterns of acoustical activity of bats prior to and following white nose syndrome occurrence. Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management 2:125-134. 2011.
Griffin, D. R., F. A. Webster, and C. R. Michael. The echolocation of flying insects by bats. Animal Behaviour 8:141-154. 1960.
Grindal, S. D. and R. M. Brigham. Impacts of forest harvesting on habitat use by foraging insectivorous bats at different spatial scale. Ecoscience 6:25-34. 1999.
Grinnell, A.D. Hearing in Bats: An Overview. In: Hearing in Bats. Popper, A.N. and Fay, R.R.
(eds.). Springer Verlag. New York. pp. 1-36. 1995.
Henry, M., D. W. Thomas, R. Vaudry, and M. Carrier. Foraging distances and home range of pregnant and lactating little brown bats (Myotis lucifugus). Journal of Mammalogy 83: 767-774. 2002.
Hirshfeld, J. R ., Z. C. Nelson, and W. G. Bradley. Night roosting behavior in four species of desert bats. The Southwestern Naturalist, 22:427-433. 1977.
Holliday, C. 2012 white nose syndrome disease surveillance and bat population monitoring report: A report of the Tennessee WNS response cooperators. Tennessee Chapter of the Nature Conservancy. 2012.
Jones, G., N. Vaughan, D. Russo, L.P. Wickramasinghe, and S. Harris. Designing bat activity surveys using time expansion and direct sampling of ultrasound. Pp. 64-70 in Bingham, R. M.,
E.K.V. Kalko, G. Jones, S. Parsons, and H.J.G.A. Limpens, eds. Bat Echolocation Research: tools, techniques and analysis. Bat Conservation International. Austin, Texas. 2004.
Johnson, J. B. Spatial and predictive foraging models for gray bats in northwest Georgia and a comparison of two acoustical bat survey methods. Masters thesis. West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV. 2002.
Kannan, K., S. H. Yun, R. J. Rudd and M. Behr. High concentrations of persistent organic pollutants including PCBs, DDT, PBDEs and PFOS in little brown bats with white-nose syndrome in New York, USA. Chemosphere 80:613-618. 2010.
Kuenzi, A.J., and M.L. Morrison. Detection of bats by mist-nets and ultrasonic sensors. Wildlife Society Bulletin 26:307-311. 1998.
Kunz, T. H. Resource utilization: temporal and spatial components of bat activity in central Iowa. Journal of Mammalogy 54: 14-32. 1973.
Laval, R. K., R. L. Clawson, M. L. Laval and W. Caire. Foraging behavior and nocturnal activity patterns of Missouri bats, with emphasis on the endangered species Myotis grisescens and Myotis sodalis. Journal of Mammalogy 58:592-599. 1977.
Lewis, S. E. Roost fidelity of bats: a review. Journal of Mammalogy 76:481-496. 1995.
Manley, P.N., B. Van Horne, J. K. Roth, W. J. Zielinski, M. M. McKenzie, T. J. Weller, F. W.
Weckerly, and C. Vojta. Multiple species inventory and monitoring technical guide. General Technical Report WO-73. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington Office. 204 pp. 2006.
McCracken, K., N. Giffen, A. Haines and J. Evans. Bat summer survey report for ORNL: Bat species distribution on the Oak Ridge Reservation with emphasis on the endangered Indiana bat. Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 2013.
Menzel, M. A., W. M. Ford, J. M. Menzel, T. C. Carter and J. W. Edwards. Review of the forest habitat relationships of the Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis). Research Note NE-284. United States Department of Agriculture, US Forest Service, Newtown Square, Pennsylvania. 22 pp. 2001.
Menzel. J. M., W. M. Ford, M. A. Menzel, T. C. Carter, J. E. Gardner, J. D. Garner and J. E.
Hofmann. Summer habitat use and home-range analysis of the endangered Indiana bat.
Journal of Wildlife Management 69:430-436. 2005.
Meteyer, C.U., E. L. Buckles, D. S. Blehert, A. C. Hicks, D. E. Green, V. Shearn-Bochsler, N. J.
Thomas, A. Gargas, and M. J. Behr. Pathology criteria for confirming white-nose syndrome in bats. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory Investigations v. 21, no. 4. 2009.
Mitchell, J. M., E. R. Vail, J. W. Webb, J. W. Evans, A. L. King and P. A. Hamlett. Survey of protected terrestrial vertebrates on the Oak Ridge Reservation, final report. ES/ER/TM-188-R1.
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. 1996.
Murray, K.L., E.R. Britzke, B. Hadley and L.W. Robbins. Surveying bat communities: a comparison between mist nets and the Anabat II bat detector system. Acta Chiropterologica 1:105-111. 1999.
OFarrell, M. J. and W. L. Gannon. A comparison of acoustic versus capture techniques for the inventory of bats. Journal of Mammalogy 80:24-30. 1999.
Ormsbee, P. C., J. D. Kiser, and S. I. Perlmeter. Importance of night roosts to the ecology of bats. Pp. 129-151, in Bats in forests: conservation and management (M. Lacki, J. Hayes, and A.
Kurta, eds.). The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 329 pp. 2007.
Owen, S. F., M. A. Menzel, J. W. Edwards, W. M. Ford, J. M. Menzel, B. R. Chapman, P. B. Wood and K. V. Miller. Bat activity in harvested and intact forest stands in the Allegheny mountains.
Northern Journal of Applied Forestry 21:154-159. 2004.
Parsons, S., A. M. Boonman, M. K. Obrist. Advantages and disadvantages of techniques for transforming and analyzing chiropteran echolocation calls. Journal of Mammalogy 81: 927-938.
2000.
Racey, P.A. Ecology of European bats in relation to their conservation. Pp. 249-260 In: Bat biology and conservation (T. H. Kunz and P. A. Racey, eds.). Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. 1998.
Russo, D. and G. Jones. Use of foraging habitats by bats in a Mediterranean area determined by acoustic surveys: Conservation implications. Ecography 26:197-209. 2003.
Sasse, D. B. and P. J. Perkins. Summer roosting ecology of northern long-earedbats (Myotis septentrionalis) in the White Mountain National Forest. In: Barclay, R.M.R.; Brigham, R. M. eds.
Bats and forest symposium, Working Paper 23/1996. Victoria, BC: British Columbia Ministry of Forests. 91- 101. 1996.
Schirmacher, M. R., S. B. Castleberry, W. M. Ford and K. V. Miller. Habitat associations of bats in south-central West Virginia. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies 61:46-52. 2007.
Schnitzler H. U. and E. K. V. Kalko. Echolocation by insect-eating bats. Bioscience 51, 557-569.
2001.
Simmons, Nancy B. and Tenley Conway. Chiroptera: Bats. Version 01 January 1997. http://tolweb.org/Chiroptera/15966/1997.01.01 in The Tree of Life Web Project, http://tolweb.org/ 1997.
Szewczak, J. M. Advanced analysis techniques for identifying bat species. Pp. 121-127 In Bat echolocation research: tools, techniques and analysis. Bat Conservation International, Austin, Texas. 2004.
Timpone, J. C., J. G. Boyles, K. L. Murray, D. P. Aubrey and L. W. Robbins. Overlap in roosting habits of Indiana bats (Myotis sodalis) and northern bats (Myotis septentrionalis). American Midland Naturalist 163:115-123. 2010.
TBWG. Tennessee Bat Working Group. http://www.tnbwg.org/index.html. 2014.
USFWS. Indiana bat survey guidance for Kentucky. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Kentucky Field Office, Frankfurt, Kentucky, and the Kentucky Department for Fish and Wildlife Resources, Frankfurt, Kentucky. 2011.
USFWS. 2014 range-wide Indiana Bat summer survey guidelines. http://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/inba/surveys/pdf/2014IBatSu mmerSurveyGuidelines13Jan2014.pdf. U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service. January 2014.
Webb, W. Appendix G. Gray and Indiana Bats: Assessment and Evaluation of Potential Roosting and Foraging Habitats. Anderson and Roane Counties, Tennessee. In: Environmental Assessment for Selection and Operation of the Proposed Field Research Centers. US DOE, Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN. 2000.
Weller, T. J. and C. J. Zabel. Variation in bat detections due to detector orientation in a forest.
Wildlife Society Bulletin 30:922-930. 2002.
Yard, C.R. Health and Safety Plan. Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Department of Energy Oversight Office. Oak Ridge, Tennessee. 2013.