MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367052777 · doi:10.7717/peerj.14772

Out of thin air: surveying tropical bat roosts through air sampling of eDNA

2023· article· en· W4367052777 on OpenAlexaff
Nina R. Garrett, Jonathan Watkins, Charles M. Francis, Nancy B. Simmons, Amanda M. Naaum, Andrew G. Briscoe, Rosie Drinkwater, Elizabeth L. Clare

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationBiodiversityEcologyGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding roosting behaviour is essential to bat conservation and biomonitoring, often providing the most accurate methods of assessing bat population size and health. However, roosts can be challenging to survey, e.g ., physically impossible to access or presenting risks for researchers. Disturbance during monitoring can also disrupt natural bat behaviour and present material risks to the population such as disrupting hibernation cycles. One solution to this is the use of non-invasive monitoring approaches. Environmental (e)DNA has proven especially effective at detecting rare and elusive species particularly in hard-to-reach locations. It has recently been demonstrated that eDNA from vertebrates is carried in air. When collected in semi-confined spaces, this airborne eDNA can provide remarkably accurate profiles of biodiversity, even in complex tropical communities. In this study, we deploy novel airborne eDNA collection for the first time in a natural setting and use this approach to survey difficult to access potential roosts in the neotropics. Using airborne eDNA, we confirmed the presence of bats in nine out of 12 roosts. The identified species matched previous records of roost use obtained from photographic and live capture methods, thus demonstrating the utility of this approach. We also detected the presence of the white-winged vampire bat ( Diaemus youngi ) which had never been confirmed in the area but was long suspected based on range maps. In addition to the bats, we detected several non-bat vertebrates, including the big-eared climbing rat ( Ototylomys phyllotis ), which has previously been observed in and around bat roosts in our study area. We also detected eDNA from other local species known to be in the vicinity. Using airborne eDNA to detect new roosts and monitor known populations, particularly when species turnover is rapid, could maximize efficiency for surveyors while minimizing disturbance to the animals. This study presents the first applied use of airborne eDNA collection for ecological analysis moving beyond proof of concept to demonstrate a clear utility for this technology in the wild.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.219 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207