SUN HATS FOR BAT BOXES: MITIGATING THE RISK OF OVERHEATING AT NORTHERN LATITUDES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At northern latitudes, bats often use roosting structures provided by people. Conventional thinking suggests that bat boxes should be entirely black to absorb heat and assist bats with thermoregulation. However, with long periods of summer daylight in subarctic Canada, we suspected that risk of overheating might occur in black boxes. We investigated whether roost temperatures exceeded 42°C, the upper limit of the thermoneutral zone in Little Brown Myotis (Myotis lucifugus), and whether replacing the black roof with a white one, akin to a sun hat, would alleviate the risk of overheating without compromising roost temperatures especially at night. We also investigated whether bats used the boxes. The internal temperature of black boxes exceeded 42°C on some days in 2 summers. Substituting the black roof with a white one consistently reduced the maximum daily roost temperature to below 42°C, but this was also accompanied by a slightly lower minimum roost temperature at night and a cooler roost temperature regime overall. The reduction in maximum daily roost temperature by the white roof was more pronounced on days with higher maximum daily ambient temperatures. At 5 sites with paired white-roof and black-roof boxes, 4 had bat use of both boxes and 1 had no use of either box. Bats used 10 of 19 (53%) black-roof boxes in 2019, and 16 of 21 (77%) in 2020. Replacing a black roof with a white one can mitigate risk of overheating for boxes in subarctic latitudes, and likely through a range of temperate latitudes. However, completely black boxes are still necessary to enhance the thermal environment for roosting bats through most of the summer. We suggest that providing bats with roosting options, such as paired black-roof and white-roof boxes immediately adjacent to one another, is a better habitat enhancement option than just single black boxes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".