Social Learning of a Novel Foraging Task by Big Brown Bats (Eptesicus fuscus)

Acquiring information via observation of others can be an efficient way to respond to changing situations or learn skills, particularly for inexperienced individuals. Many bat species are gregarious, yet few studies have investigated their capacity for learning from conspecifics. We tested whether big brown bats (Eptesicus fuscus) can learn a novel foraging task by interacting with knowledgeable conspecifics. In experimental trials 11 na?ve bats (7 juveniles, 4 adults) interacted freely with trained bats that were capturing tethered mealworms, while in control trials 11 na?ve bats (7 juveniles, 4 adults) flew with untrained bats. Na?ve bats were then assessed for their ability to capture tethered mealworms. While no bat in the control group learned the task, a significant number of experimental bats, including juveniles with little or no experience foraging, showed evidence of learning. Eighty-two per cent of experimental bats and 27% of control bats directed feeding buzzes (echolocation calls associated with prey capture) at the mealworm. Furthermore, seven experimental bats (64%) showed evidence of learning by attacking and/or capturing the mealworm, while no bat in the control group attacked or captured the prey. Analyses of high-speed stereo video recordings revealed increased interaction with demonstrators among bats attacking or capturing the mealworm. At the time they displayed evidence of learning, bats flew closer together during feeding buzzes than during other portions of trials. Our results demonstrate that social interaction with experienced bats, and listening to feeding buzzes in particular, may play an integral role in development of foraging skills in bats.     

Limited use of bat boxes in a rural landscape: implications for offsetting the clearing of hollow‐bearing trees

Bat boxes frequently form part of hollow‐bearing tree offsets; however, their effectiveness is poorly documented. We investigated the effectiveness of a bat box program designed to partially offset tree hollow loss from clearing for a coal mine. During the first year of monitoring, we detected bats in 5% of 1,308 box checks. Only 3 of 13 local tree cavity‐roosting bat species/species groups used boxes and occupancy was not strongly associated with modeled box and site attributes. In the second year, we tested two hypotheses that may explain the relatively low box use: (1) solar exposure of boxes was inadequate for heterothermic bats and (2) available box designs were of low suitability. Relocating boxes to increase solar exposure did not increase use, or enhance the temperature profiles of relocated boxes. Introduction of a new box design led to 11 times higher use compared with existing designs for Nyctophilus spp. (long‐eared bat). Overall, our data suggest that the bat box program was ineffective due to few bat species using boxes, infrequent box use by three species, and rarity of maternity roosting. The knowledge gap of species‐specific box designs and roosting ecology limits the effectiveness of boxes to offset cleared hollow‐bearing trees. Lack of knowledge and the widespread use of bat boxes to offset lost tree hollows highlights the need to (1) rigorously protect hollow‐bearing trees and (2) advance our understanding of species‐specific roost ecology, box design preferences and mechanical hollow creation into trees, before artificial hollows can be considered a meaningful offset measure.