8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

1/30

The Microclimates and Characteristics of Roost Buildings of Bats (Chiroptera) In Urban

Area of West Coast Of Sabah

Ehsan Hadi1, Nurul Najmaini1, Abdul Hamid Ahmad1 and Azniza Mahyudin1

1Institute for Tropical Biology and Conservation, Universiti Malaysia Sabah.

Abstract

This study was design to identify species of bat that roost in building and to collect information

about the characteristics of the roosts in urban area of West Coast of Sabah. Bats were found

opportunistically and examined in six buildings with a total of 11 roosting sites. Three species of

bats were identified in the buildings, namely: 1) Taphozous melanopogon; 2) Taphozous

saccolaimus and 3) Scotophilus kuhlii. Among these three, Taphozous melanopogon is the most

abundant species. Bats were found roost in four types of buildings; commercial, mosque, tower

and residential house. They roost on walls, attics, crevice and ceiling. Generally, rooting sites are

situated high from ground and relatively covered from weather. Roosting sites also found located

within radius 1 km distance from water resource and forest remnant. At the temperatures scale,

roosting sites are characterized by warm temperature. However, the temperatures variables inside

roosting sites were varied suggest that structure of buildings influenced the temperature. The

roosting sites ofTaphozous melanopogon and Taphozous saccolaimus were significantly warmer

than Scotophilus kuhlii. Despite that, the temperatures occurred in Taphozous melanopogons and

Taphozous saccolaimusroosting siteswere relatively similar.

Keywords: Bats; Urban; Roost building; Roost characteristics; Roost temperature

1

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

2/30

1. Introduction

Bats utilize a wide variety of structures as roost. Naturally they use trees, caves and overhangs.

However, in urban environment where the natural roosts are scarce, bats might opt for many

different types of roost including man-made structures such as bridge, tower, attic and even the

hollow floor spaces of house as substitutes for tree cavities or caves (Altringham, 1996). Among

those structures, the used of building as roost by bats is the most well-documented (Riskin and

Pybus, 1998, Jenkins et. al, 1998, Kunz, 1982). During the past 40 years, evidences that certain

species of bats is well adapted to building were recorded in increasing amount of literatures. Many

species such as Taphozous melanopogon, Eptesicus fuscus and Pipistrellus pipstrellus whose

originally roost in the caves has been link almost exclusively to building (Kunz, 1982).

The roost selection in bats involves many mutually important factors. Generally, bats choose area

that has lower predation risk, reduced ectoparasite infection, higher from ground (Psyllakis and

Brigham, 2006), and relatively close to water resource (Evelyn et al., 2004) and foraging area

(Kunz, 1982). Thermal stability also one of the most important factor in bats roost selection.

Lausen and Barclay (2006) explained the main reason for bats occupied human settlements is

because of thermal advantages where warm temperatures can reduce energy expenditure and also

offer benefit in term of productivity.

Despite the consistency of published studies, there is still paucity of roosting characteristics for

many species especially around human settlement (Evelyn et al., 2004). Besides, far too little

attention has been paid to the roosting information of bats in tropics region (Rodriguez-Duran and

Soto-Centeno, 2003). Many studies have been conducted but mainly in temperate countries. Recent

2

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

3/30

research has identified roost as the most crucial element in bats conservation. Therefore, such

information is urgently needed as the bats remain unprotected in many parts in the world.

This research was conducted to identify the species of bats that occupy the buildings in

urban area of Kota Kinabalu, West Coast of Sabah. This study also examines the

characteristics and microclimate of the roost. More understanding about the animals needs and

their behaviour may be able to provide solution for human-bats conflicts since bats always

regarded as nuisance and frequently persecuted.

2. Material and Methods

Random surveys were conducted from April 2008 to June 2008 to locate possible bats roosting site

in Kota Kinabalu. Residents, or workers of buildings were interviewed to get the information about

bats occurrence. Positive feedback was then followed by examination of the roosting sites to

confirm the existence of bats in the buildings.

2.1 Buildings Characteristics

Seven variables were used to characterize roost site: temperature (C); building types, i.e house,

factory, commercial/ species (if trees); Wall material (wooden, bricks etc), canopy cover (%);

distance from brackish/ fresh water source (m); distance from forest remnant (m); roost height

from the ground (m).

3

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

4/30

2.2 Microclimate Variables

The microclimate of the sites was described with temperature used as a measurement.

Microclimate was recorded using data loggers (Onset HOBO H8 Pro series, temperature range

-30C to +50C). To reduce disturbance to roost, the data loggers were positioned 1 to 3 m away

from roost.

Data were averaged per hour and categorised into hourly intervals over each period of 24-h period.

To calculate variables that would show variation and pattern of 24-h temperatures, the hourly data

were used to calculate: average temperature, temperature fluctuation (hourly); maximum;

minimum; range of day; time of day maximum temperature occurred; and length of time maximum

temperature of a day was maintained. The readings for each roosting sites were then compared.

2.3 Data Analysis

Each variable was tested for normality using Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and most of variables were

not normally distributed and could not be transformed successfully. Thus non-parametric tests

were used in this study.

To test differentiation of temperatures between roosting sites, Kruskal-Wallis One Way Analysis

of Variance test was performed on five temperatures variables: average temperature, fluctuation,

range of temperature, time of maximum temperature occurs and length of time maximum

temperature was maintained.

4

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

5/30

Each of temperatures variables had expected to be different between roosting sites (at least one).

The differences were suspected to be influenced by the buildings construction materials.

Therefore, a comparison using Mann Whitney U-Test (p

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

6/30

Figure 1: Roost buildings in urban area of Kota Kinabalu, West Coast of Sabah

3.1 Roost Buildings

All roost buildings are older than 10 years. WLLT, WM and WK are classified as commercial

building, CM and SM as place for worship, while THC is a residential house. A higher proportion

of the 11 specific roosts were found in wall (45.5%), others in attic (36.4%), crevices (9%) and

ceiling (9%). All roost was communal and no solitary roost was found. Roosts are high from

ground (med=16.90), highly covered (med=100.00) and located within 1 km from water

(med=116.9) and forest remnants (med=268.89). Interestingly, all roost is surrounded by open

space. Table 1 described the physical characteristics of the buildings.

Table 1. The characteristics of the roost buildings found in Kota Kinabalu.

6

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

7/30

Roost sites Roost

type

Species Roost

height

Entrance

direction

Canopy

cover

Distance

from water

Distance

from forest

CM1 Wall T. melanopogon 5.6 SE 100 26.35 556.58

CM2 Wall T. melanopogon 9.3 SE 100 30.35 556.58

CM3 Ceiling T. melanopogon 45.4 SE 100 48.64 575.38

CM4 Wall T. melanopogon 20 SE 100 47.01 592.18

WK1 Wall T. melanopogon 21.6 SE 100 343.95 76.48

WK2 Wall T. melanopogon 16.9 SE 100 343.95 72.24

WM Crevice T. melanopogon 4.5 SE 40 872.91 268.89

SM Attic T. melanopogon 67.6 SE 80 297.46 574.74

WLLT AtticT. melanopogon

18 SE 100 30.17 260.75THC1 Attic T. saccolaimus 6.3 NW 100 219 33

THC2 Attic S. kuhlii 7.1 SW 100 222 33

SE=southeast, NW=Northwest and SW=southwest.

3.2 Temperatures

Overall, most site recorded temperature above 27C. Highest temperature was 51.04C while the

lowest was 23.24. Kruskal-Wallis Analysis showed that there were some variations of

temperatures variables between roosting sites. Among all roost, CM1 was regarded as most stable

site as it have lowest range (med=1.98) and maintained highest temperature longer (med=7:00)

(Table 2).

3.3 Concrete Buildings versus Wood

The temperature inside concrete roost buildings were more stable than wood building. The

temperature in concrete were fluctuated slower than wood. The range of temperature occurs in

concrete buildings were significantly lower and minimum temperature during night were

7

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

8/30

significantly warmer than wood building. Concrete roost buildings also reached maximum

temperature earlier and it can hold up maximum temperature much longer compare to wood

structures. Although, mean rank of temperature and maximum temperature during daylight

(between these two sites) was not significantly differed (Table 3).

Table 2. Comparison of Temperatures Variable Between Roosting Sites.

Temperature Fluctuation Range LMT TMO

CM1 27.91 (0.79) 0.30 (0.41) 1.98 (0.78) 7:00 (10:00) 11:00 (3:00)

CM2 27.91 (1.43) 0.32 (0.44) 2.36 (2.02) 5:00 (4:15) 11:00 (2:00)

CM3 27.5 (6.81) 1.18 (1.36) 23.17 (6.44) 1:00 (1:00) 10:00 (0:15)

CM4 27.91 (1.12) 0.25 (0.32) 2.36 (0.41) 5:00 (5:15) 12:00 (2:00)

WK1 28.31 (2.58) 0.75 (0.88) 4.80 (1.41) 3:30 (2:15) 12:00 (1:15)

WK2 26.67 (3.75) 0.72 (1.00) 6.73 (1.56) 2:00 (3:00) 12:00 (2:00)

THC1 27.85 (4.62) 0.65 (0.94) 8.24 (2.58) 2:00 (2:00) 11:00 (3:15)

THC2 27.39 (4.8) 0.72 (0.98) 8.47 (3.43) 2:00 (1:15) 13:00 (3:00)

WM 27.33 (4.29) 0.83 (1.42) 7.91 (2.11) 3:00 (3:00) 10:00 (3:15)

SM 27.56 (2.1) 0.70 (0.72) 3.57 (1.58) 4:00 (4:15) 13:00 (3:15)

WLLT 29.5 (1.61) 0.53 (0.70) 2.40 (1.19) 6:00 (4:15) 13:00 (3:00)

H 728.41 50.49 268.40 110.43 83.29

df 10 10 10 10 10

P value p

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

9/30

3.5 Species Roost Temperature

Overall, roost temperature ofS. kuhlii is significantly lower than the other two species. Despite

that, the roost temperature ofT. melanopogon and T. saccolaimus was not significantly differed

(Table 3).

4. Discussion

9

Table 3. Comparison of temperatures variables of construction materials and species

Materials Concrete Wood U p value Effect size (R )

Day (Max) 29.10 (2.40) 31.50 (4.47) 4494196 ns -0.014

Night (min) 27.12 (1.57) 26.34 (1.56) 4400301 p

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

10/30

In this study, roosts were found exclusively in buildings that shared common characteristics. All

roost building aged more than 10 years and historically, showed no sign of major modification.

The walls were not smooth with some cracks; allowing bats to cling. Bats accessed the interior

buildings through windows, doors or attic which were opened all the time. Moreover, the existence

of ruined rough bricks or concrete which comparable to crevices; create a good roosting habitat for

bats.

4.1 Species distribution

Only three species of bats were found in this study. The low number of species is expected as

species richness, abundance and activity of bats were reduced in disturbed habitats (Hourigan et

al., 2006; Lumsden and Bennett, 2002; Kirsten and Klomp, 1998). The species in urban ecosystem

are also dominated by one or a few abundant species (Furmankiewicz and Grniak, 2002). This is

because not many species of bats have the ability to survive in open and edge habitat. Therefore,

the community structure of bats may have changed; particularly for microchiropteran which have

narrower and specialize habitat requirements. This may also explain why the number of species

found in buildings was low (See Hourigan et al., 2006; Kurta and Teramino, 1992).

T. melanopogon was the most abundant species found in this research (>800). Discovered roost

buildings also dominated by this species revealed that T. melanopogon has successfully adapted to

the current environment in this city. Roost buildings which were occupied by T. melanopogon

were found distributed along coastal area. This record was different from study of Bates and

Harrison (1997) in India, which found T. melanopogon occur near fresh water areas such lakes,

rivers and ponds.

10

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

11/30

Conversely, T. saccolaimus and S. kuhlii showed a restrictive distribution in this study. This

finding is in contrast to what was found by previous studies. Both species are intimately associated

with modified habitats especially S. kuhlii which were known to occur in all type of mosaic

particularly urban or suburban parklands or rural areas (Pottie et al., 2005). A possible explanation

for this might be that both species prefer to roost in rural area rather than sub urban or urban

mosaic. This result also fit with population status of this species which is known to be in low

density in Sabah (Yasuma et al., 2003).

4.2 Roost Characteristics

The differences in roost distribution revealed that there are might be some flexibility and

preferences behaviour among these species. However, the roost characteristics might be

underestimated forT. saccolaimus and S. kuhlii because of the small sample size. Nevertheless, in

general rooting sites are located high from ground and relatively covered from weather. The

temperatures in all roosting sites were also warm. Roosting sites also found located within radius 1

km distance from water resource and forest remnant.

4.3 Temperature

Overall, all species found in this study roost in warm roosting site. Preference of bats toward

warmer temperature has been observed in several studies in other tropical area (Table 4).

However, the factors guiding bats in this study to roost in warm site are poorly known. To date, for

other species high roost temperatures offer several advantages to bats particularly reproductive

females. Roosting in warmer roost enables reproductive females to save energy maintaining their

body temperature and use them for reproduction purposes. It has been hypothesized that warm

11

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

12/30

roosts accelerate embryonic development (which resulted in early birth) and increase milk

production.

Table 4. Research investigating roost temperature in tropical bats.

Bat species Type Temperature (C) Country Source

T. melanopogon Building 28.3 2.7 Malaysia This study

T. saccolaimus Attic 28.7 2.9 Malaysia This study

S. kuhlii Attic 28.3 3.1 Malaysia This studyP. quadridens Cave 30.2 4.6 West Indies Rodriguez-Duran & Soto

Centeno (2003)E. sezerkoni Cave 28.2 2.3 West Indies Rodriguez-Duran & Soto

Centeno (2003)L. silvicolum Termite nest 27.9 1.0 Panama Dechmann et al., (2004)

C. brevicauda Cave 19.2 2.7 Mexico Avila Flores & Medellin

12

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

13/30

(2004)

B. plicata Cave 26.7 3.1 Mexico Avila Flores & Medellin

(2004)

A. jamaicensis Cave 21.9 2.6 Mexico Avila Flores & Medellin

(2004)

E. alba Tents 23.3 0.7 Costa Rica Rodriguez-Herera et al.,

(2008)Temperatures data presented in mean (SD).

The high temperature also benefits young bats which had low thermoregulating ability. During

early birth, when their mother was away warm roosts help them maintain their body temperature.

When they are able to regulate their body temperature, warm temperature lower the

thermoregulatory cost and will increase their growth rates (Lausen and Barclay, 2006; Kerth et al.,

2001). In temperate, this strategy was used to increase winter survival (Kunz, 1982).

4.3.1 Thermal Variation among Roost

The variation in microclimate found among roost buildings (Table 2) indicated that temperature

was influenced by the diverse microstructures or substrates of buildings; such as crevices, walls,

attics, wood, bricks or other features of the buildings architecture. Some structures may expose

more to solar radiation or can retain heat longer than others. Besides, the ventilation system also

contributed to temperature fluctuation in the buildings. The existence of vent-holes and peripherals

such as ventilator could avoid heat entrapment.

The bats also were most common roost in concrete buildings. One reason bats dwelled in this type

of buildings might be because of the compacted stable temperature and ability to retain heat longer.

13

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

14/30

Similarly, the bats preferences for bricks or concrete structures have been seen in several past

studies (Lausen and Barclay, 2006; Lance et al., 2001). In Sweden during winters, bats occupied

concrete bat boxes more common than wooden. The research of exposed roost in Alberta also

found that most bats roost on bricks which suggest bricks or concrete may have higher capacity of

trapping heat (Riskin and Pybus, 1998).

4.3.2 Temperatures Difference among Species

Microclimate variation also can encourage colonization by several species (Hill and Smith, 1985)

and may influence pattern association of bats in certain roosts (Rodriguez and Soto-Centeno,

2003). Despite wide range of temperatures recorded in many roost buildings, only T. saccolaimus

and Scotophlus kuhlii were found sharing roost. The reason anyhow might be related to the

condition site of study which concentrated around urban environment that known to have limited

number of species and the limited number of available roosts.

Roost selection is a complex processes. It influenced by many factors that mutually dependent

between each other. Rodriguez-Duran (1995) suggested the occurrence of certain species in a

given cave was determined by physiology of the bats which influenced by body mass, diet and

microclimate condition. For example, Baudinette (2000) found microchiropterans species in a cave

in Australia preferred different temperatures and humidities. Similarly, the study of bats in West

Indies also revealed that species ofPteronotus quadridens which is smaller species, roost in

warmer site compare to Erophylla sezekorni although they roost in the same cave (Rodriguez-

Duran and Soto-Centeno, 2003).

14

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

15/30

Suprisingly, the result of this study was inconsistent with the previous studies. S. kuhlii which is

smaller, roost in cooler site compare to T. saccolaimus and T. melanopogon. The inconsistency

maybe due to morphological features ofS. kuhlii. This species longer tail is probably significant in

conserving heat as seen in Lasiurus borealis (Davis and Reite, 1967). The comparison of other

temperatures variables also showed that T. saccolaimus is closely related to S. kuhlii. This

similarity maybe explained by the fact that they shared common preference for roost type; that is in

attic and hollow trees (Yasuma et al., 2003).

4.4 Canopy Cover and Surrounding Areas

The finding of this study indicated most roosting sites are situated in highly covered area (average

92.7 %). Most bats roost under roof except WM which is located in the narrow slit between two

buildings. In natural roosting site, several other bat species also have been shown to roost

preferentially in highly covered roost (Table 5).

Table 5. Research investigating roost canopy cover in tropical bats and other part of the world.

Bat species Canopy cover (%) Country Source

T. melanopogon 91.1 (n=9) Malaysia This study

T. saccolaimus 100 (n=1) Malaysia This study

S. kuhlii 100 (n=1) Malaysia This study

E. alba 83.1 (n=50) Costa Rica Rodriguez-Herera et al., (2008)

M. molossus 81 (n=5) Australia Aguirre et al., (2003)D. rotundus 62.7 (n=7) Bolivia Aguirre et al., (2003)

N. albiventris 95 (n=1) Bolivia Aguirre et al., (2003)

T. georgianus 53.5 (n=16) Australia Milne et al., (2005)

H. diadema 48.5 (n=1) Australia Milne et al., (2005)

H. ater 48.5 (n=6) Australia Milne et al., (2005)Data presented as mean, (n=number of roost).

15

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

16/30

A highly covered roost can protect bats from extreme weathers and avian predators. It also

provides bats with more stable temperature (Kunz, 1982). The finding of this study seems to be

consistent with the theory. The temperatures fluctuations of most roosting site were very low with

an average 0.51 C. Only CM3 were considered as less stable with high range of temperature

(Table 2).

On the other hand, the surrounding roosts are open areas. The reasons of this preference are not

fully understood. Studies for other species such as Chalinolobus tuberculatus, Eptesicus fuscus and

Myotis bechsteinii suggest the main reasons why bats prefer open space were due to their

ecomorphology, predator avoidance, ease at roost relocation and thermal benefits (Vonhof and

Gwilliam, 2007; Psyllakis and Brigham, 2006; Sedgeley and ODonnell, 1999).

Species that was found in this study is consistent with ecomorphological theory. All three species

in this study have been described as having high wing loadings (Yasuma et al., 2003). The

morphology allows these species to fly fast in open areas, above treetops and along forest gaps.

However, this feature reduced the flight maneuverability and may limit bats from accessing

cluttered habitats (Wei et al., 2008). Therefore, roosts which are far from ground in open spaces

would facilitate bats that lack maneuverability (Sedgeley and ODonnell, 1999).

Open spaces also allow bats to detect predators and this area most likely receive more direct

sunlight compared to dense area. Exposure to solar radiation produced warmer temperatures which

16

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

17/30

could benefit bats in many ways (Perry et al., 2007). The surrounding habitats might be the cause

dictating the temperatures in the roosting sites.

4.5 Higher from ground

Another important finding is those roosts located high from the ground (at least 4.5 m above the

ground). This characteristic was reviewed as one of main important variables in roost selection

(Agosta, 2002). High roost is commonly selected by bats because it can avoid terrestrial predators

such as snake, rats and etc. However, in urban area, cats and dogs are more abundant.

Domestic animals were known to prey bats in many studies (Sedgeley and ODonnell, 2004;

Riskin and Pybus, 1998). In this study, these animals were found abundant in the study sites. Cats

were also seen tried to catch bats when they forage close to ground and during bats-released from

mist nets in THC. Taller roost also accommodates bats to gain velocity during early flight. This

roosts characteristic is particularly important for bats that are in less maneuverable conditions

such as pregnant adults, adults moving non-volant young and young bats during their first flight

(Norberg and Rayner, 1987).

Roosts that have greater height from ground are also more exposed to solar radiations which offer

warmer condition to bats (Russo et al., 2004). The preference of bats for high roost to gain

microclimate advantage by choosing higher roost was confirmed in this study which was observed

in T. melanopogon in CM3. Many other research finding also has showed preference of bats to

roost in high roosting site. However, it is interesting to note that roost height in this study was

unusual. Mean roost height found is 20.2 m and the maximum roost height recorded is 67.6 m;

both exceeds those all recorded in other published studies (Table 6).

17

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

18/30

Table 6. Research investigating roost height in tropical bats and other part of the world.

Bat species Type Roost height (m) Country Source

T. melanopogon Building 23.2 (n=9) Malaysia This study

T. saccolaimus Attic 6.3 (n=1) Malaysia This study

T. saccolaimus Tree 7 (n=1) Australia Schulz & Thomson (2007)

S. kuhlii Attic 7.1 (n=1) Malaysia This study

S. kuhlii Building 12 (n=1) Philippines Rickert et al., (1989)

E. alba Tree 1.3 - 2.6 (n=26) Costa Rica Timm & Mortimer (1976)

S. lilium Tree 2.1 to 7.9 (n=8) Belize Fenton et al., (2000)

E. furinalis Tree 9.5 (n=2) Bolivia Aguirre et al., (2003)

N. albiventris Tree 8.4 (n=1) Bolivia Aguirre et al., (2003)

N. noctula Building 7.5 (n=131) Hungary Bihari (2004)

A. lituratus Tree 8.1 (n=15) Venezuela Munoz-romo et al., (2007)

Data presented as mean, (n=number of roost).

4.6 Distance from Water Source

Being close to permanent water resource is always associated with roost selection by many species

of bats (Rabe et al., 1998; Entwistle et al., 1997). The finding of this study seems to be consistent

with other research. Compare to other studies, roosting sites in this study are located relatively

close to water (

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

19/30

T. melanopogon 0.23 (n=9) Malaysia This study

T. saccolaimus 0.22 (n=1) Malaysia This study

S. kuhlii 0.22 (n=1) Malaysia This study

Myotis spp 0.48 (n=22) Canada Jung et al., (2004)

B. barbastellus 1.79 (n=33) Italy Russo et al., (2004)

M. yumanensis 0.13 (n=20) USA Evelyn et al., (2004)T. georgianus 2.7 (n=16) Australia Milne et al., (2005)

T. kapalgensis 6.6 (n=4) Australia Milne et al., (2005)

H. diadema 1.6 (n=1) Australia Milne et al., (2005)

H. ater 1.6 (n=1) Australia Milne et al., (2005)Data presented as mean, (n=number of roost).

Roost near water body offers bats benefit in several ways. First, the insect availability is usually

abundant of near water. Hence, by roosting near water, bats are close to prospective foraging

location (see Evelyn et al., 2004). Second, waterway provides bats open a flight passage which is

benefit most fast flier bat. However, water bodies that lack of vegetation are often avoided by bats.

It is believed that loss of buffer zone resulted in loss of invertebrate diversity and abundance (see

Russ and Montgomery, 2002).

In this study, all three species are described as fast fliers with high wing loadings and high aspect

ratios. It also means these species lack maneuverability. Therefore, the water bodies might be

useful as foraging site for these species as they prefer to forage in open space. However,

exploitation of water body as foraging site only has been seen in T. melanopogon near CM and

WLLT.

4.7 Distance from forest

To date, distance from forest plays a major role in roost selection. In general closer to forest offer

several benefits to roost dwellers. With more complex structure of vegetation, forest remnants offer

19

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

20/30

bats variation and abundant of insects. Even small or poor quality remnants harbour resource for

bats particularly where large forests are rare (see Law et al., 1999). Therefore, by being close to

forest bats could reduce energetic consumption during flight to the foraging sites (Jenkins et al.,

1998).

Roosting near forest also may protect bats from avian predators. The presences of trees in forest

allow bats to emerge with low detection of predators (Russo et al., 2007). There is several other bat

species have been shown to roost preferentially near forest remnant (Table 8).

Table 8. Research investigating distance of roost from forest resource in other studies.

Bat species Distance from forest (m) Country Source

T. melanopogon 392.6 (n=9) Malaysia This study

T. saccolaimus 33 (n=1) Malaysia This study

S. kuhlii 33 (n=1) Malaysia This study

C. tuberculatus 15 (n=1) New Zealand Sedgeley & O' Donnell (1999)Mystacinidae sp 220 to 530 (n=8) New Zealand O' Donnell et al., (1999)

M. sodalis 14.2 (n=47) USA Carter & Feldhamer (2005)

Data presented as mean, (n=number of roost).

During investigating period, T. melanopogon were seen forage in open space near forest edge in

two places: WK and WLLT while S. kuhlii also use the same space in THC. Unfortunately, this

20

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

21/30

study was unable to trace foraging site of T. saccolaimus. T. melanopogon and S. kuhlii which

known to forage in open habitats also seems cant utilized benefits of forest remnants to its fullest.

These two species might be gain advantage of food supply at the corridor but, they are most likely

not covered from predators because they are open space flier. The protection might just apply to

low wing loadings bats that have slow flight but better maneuverability (e.g, Russo et al., 2007).

5. Conclusion

Taken together, these results suggest that bats choose roost based on warmer temperature, high

level from ground and high percentage of canopy cover. An implication of this is the possibility

that any renovations done on the buildings should not change the microclimate. Human activities

near roost area also at least must not disturb the animals. The current findings add substantially to

our understanding that bats need certain type of roost which influences most aspect of their life.

This research will serve as a base for future studies and more investigations are needed.

Knowledge of bats metabolic rates relative to warmer roost will help to answer the questions that

unsolved in this study. Further research using radiotelemetry also could help tracking the bats and

consolidate the results of this study.

Acknowledgement

We gratefully acknowledge and thank Mr. Hairul Hafiz Mahsol for his statistics advice. We thank

Kota Kinabalu Health Office and manager of Wisma Merdeka for giving us permission to conduct

21

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

22/30

this research in their buildings. We also thank staff of City Mosque especially Hj. Gustin, Hj. Asli,

Abdullah, Mr. Mudim and Mr. Rosli for their incredible assistant all through the studies that we

did there. Further thank people who helped us during the fieldwork in Telipok Health Centre and

Wisma Kosan.

References

Altringham J D. 1996.Bats biology and behaviour. Oxford University Press, United State.

Agosta S J. 2002. Habitat use, diet and roost preferences of the big brown bats (Eptesicus fuscus)

in North America: a case of conserving an abundant species.Mammal Review 32: 179-198.

Aguirre L F, Lens L, Matthysen E. 2003. Patterns of roost use by bats in a neotropical savanna:

implications for conservation.Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History111: 435-443.

Avila Flores R, Medellin R A. 2004. Ecological, taxonomic and physiological correlates of cave

use by the mexican bats.Journal of Mammalogy85(4): 675-687.

22

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

23/30

Barclay R M R. 1991. Population structure of temperature zone insectivorous bats in relation to

foraging behaviour and energy demand.Journal of Animal Ecology 60: 165-78.

Bates P J J, Harrison D L. 1997. Bats of the Indian Subcontinent. Harrison Zoological Museum

Publications, 258.

Baudinette RV, Churchill S K, Christian K A, Nelson J E, Hudson P J. 2000. Energy, water

balance and the roost microenvironment in three australian cave-dwelling bats (microchiroptera).

Journal of Comparative PhysiolologyB 170: 439446.

Bihari Z. 2004. The roost preference ofNyctalus noctula (Chiroptera, Vespertilionidae) in summer

and the ecological background of their urbanization.Mammalia68(4): 329-336.

Carter T C, Feldhamer G A. 2005. Roost tree use by maternity colonies of indiana bats and

northern long-eared bats in southern Illinois.Forest Ecology and Management219: 259-268.

Chruszcz, B. J., and Barclay, R. M. R., 2003. Prolonged foraging bouts of a solitary gleaning /

hawking bat, Myotis evotis. Convergence, 826, 823-826.

Davis W H, Reite O L. 1967. Responses of bats from temperate regions to changes in ambient

temperature.Biological Bulletin 132: 320328.

23

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

24/30

Dechmann D K N, Kalko E K V, Kerth G. 2004. Ecology of an exceptional roost: energetic

benefits could explain why the bat Lophostoma silvicolum roosts in active termite nests.

Evolutionary Ecology: 1037-1050.

Entwistle A C, Racey P A, Speakman J R. 1997. Roost selection by the brown long-eared bat

Plecotus auritus.Journal of Applied Ecology Vol. 34 (2): 399-408

Evelyn M. 2004. Conservation of bats in suburban landscapes: roost selection by Myotis

yumanensis in a residential area in California.Biological Conservation115(3): 463-473

Fenton M B, Vonhof M J, Bouchard S, Gill S A, York N, Johnston D S, Reid F A, Riskin D K,

Standing K L, Taylor J R, Wagner R. 2000. Roosts used by Sturnira lilium

(Chiroptera:Phyllostomidae).Biotropica32: 729-733.

Furmankiewicz J, Grniak J. 2002. Seasonal changes in number and diversity of bat species

(Chiroptera) in the Stolec mine (SW Poland).Przyroda Sudetw Zachodnich Suplement 2: 49-70.

Hill J E, Smith J D. 1985.Bats, A Natural History. British Museum (Natural History), England, 53.

Hourigan C L, Johnson C, Robson S K A. 2006. The structure of a micro-bat community in

relation to gradients of environmental variation in a tropical urban area. Urban Ecosystems9(2):

67-82.

24

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

25/30

Hutson A M, Mickleburgh S P, Racey P A. 2001. Global Status Survey and Conservation Action

Plan Microchiropteran Bats. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, United Kingdom, 35-51.

Jenkins E V, Laine T, Morgan S E, Cole K R, Speakman J R. 1998. Roost selection in the

pipistrelle bat,Pipistrellus pipistrellus (Chiroptera:Vespertilionidae) in northeast Scotland.Animal

Behaviour56: 909917.

Jung T, Thompson I, Titman R. 2004. Roost site selection by forest-dwelling male in central

Ontario, Canada.Forest Ecology and Management202(1-3): 325-335.

Kerth G, Weissmann K, Konig B. 2001. Day roost selection in female Bechstein s bats

(Myotis:bechsteinii): a field experiment to determine the influence of roost temperature.

Oecologia, 126(1): 1-9.

Kirsten I, Klomp N. 1998. Microchiroptera in urban, rural and forest areas of southern NSW.

Australasian Bat

Kunz T H. 1982. Roosting Ecology of Bats. in Kunz, T. H. (ed.)Ecology of bats. 2-3.

Kurta A, Teramino J A. 1992. Bat community structure in an urban park.Ecography 15: 257-261.

25

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

26/30

Lance R F, Hardcastle B T, Talley A, Leberg P L. 2001. Day-roost selection by Rafinesques big-

eared bats (Corynorhinus Rafinesquii) in Louisiana Forests. Journal of Mammalogy, 82(1): 166

172.

Lausen C L, Barclay R M R. 2006. Benefits of living in a building: the big brown bats (Eptesicus

fuscus) in rocks versus buildings.Journal of Mammalogy87(2): 362-370.

Law B S, Anderson J, Chidel M. 1999. Bat communities in a fragmented forest landscape on the

south-west slopes of New South Wales, Australia.Biological Conservation: 88.

Lumsden L, Bennett A. 2005. Scattered trees in rural landscapes: foraging habitat for insectivorous

bats in south-eastern Australia.Biological Conservation122(2): 205-222.

Milne D J, Armstrong M, Fisher A, Flores T, Pavey C R. 2005. Structure and environmental

relationships of insectivorous bat assemblages in Tropical Australian Savannas. Austral Ecology

30: 906-919.

Munoz-Romo M, Herrera E A, Kunz T H. 2007. Roosting behavior and group stability of the big

fruit-eating bat Artibeus lituratus (Chiroptera:Phyllostomidae). Mammalian Biology 73(3): 214-

221.

26

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

27/30

Norberg U, Rayner J M V. 1987. Ecological morphology and flight in bats (Mammalia:

Chiroptera): wing adaptations, flight performance, foraging strategy and echolocation.

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, B 316: 335427.

O Donnell F J, Christie J, Corben C, Sedgeley J A, Simpson W. 1999. Rediscovery of short-tailed

bats (mystacina sp.) In Fiordland, New Zealand : preliminary observations of taxonomy,

echolocation calls, population size, home range and habitat use. Society23: 21-30.

Perry R W, Thill R E. 2007. Roost selection by male and female northern long-eared bats in a pine

dominated landscape.Forest Ecology and Management 247: 220-226.

Pottie S A, Lane D J W, Kingston T, Lee Y H. 2005. The microchiropteran bat fauna of Singapore.

Acta Chiropterologica7(2): 237-247.

Psyllakis J, Brigham R. 2006. Characteristics of diurnal roosts used by female Myotis bats in sub-

boreal forests.Forest Ecology and Management223(1-3): 93-102.

Rabe M J, Morrell T E, Green H, deVos J C, Miller C R. 1998. Characteristics of ponderosa pine

snag roosts used by reproductive bats in Northern Arizona. Journal Wildlife Management62: 612

621.

Rancourt S, Rule M, O Connell M. 2007. Maternity roost site selection of big brown bats in

ponderosa pine forests of the Channeled Scablands of Northeastern Washington State, USA.

Forest Ecology and Management248(3): 183-192.

27

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

28/30

Rickert E A, Heideman P D, Utzurrum R C B. 1989. Tents roosting by Scotophilus kuhlii in the

Philippines.Journal of Tropical Ecology 5: 433-436.

Riskin D K, Pybus M J. 1998. The Use of Exposed Diurnal Roosts in Alberta by The Little Brown

Bat,Myotis lucifugus. Canadian Journal of Zoology 76, 767-772.

Rodrguez-Durn A. 1995. Metabolic rates and thermal conductance in four species of neotropical

bats roosting in hot caves. Comparative biochemistry and physiology. Part A, Physiology110(4):

347-55.

Rodriguez-Duran A, Soto-Centeno J A. 2003. Temperature selection by tropical bats roosting in

caves.Journal of Thermal Biology28(6-7): 465-468.

Rodrguez-Herrera B, Medelln R A, Gamba-Rios M. 2008. Roosting requirements of white tent-

making batEctophylla alba (Chiroptera:Phyllostomidae).Acta Chiropterologica10(1): 89-95.

Russ J M, Montgomery W I. 2002. Habitat associations of bats in Northern Ireland : implications

for conservation.Journal of Wildlife Management108: 49-58.

Russo D, Jones G, Migliozzi A. 2002. Habitat selection by the Mediterranean horseshoe bat,

Rhinolophus euryale (Chiroptera: Rhinolophidae) in rural area of Southern Italy and implication

for conservation.Biological Conservation107: 71-81.

28

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

29/30

Russo D, Cistrone L, Jones G, Mazzoleni S. 2004. Roost selection by Barbastelle Bats

(Barbastella barbastellus, Chiroptera:Vespertilionidae) in Beech Woodlands Of Central Italy:

Consequences For Conservation.Biological Conservation117(1): 73-81.

Russo D, Cistrone L, Jones G. 2007. Emergence time in forest bats: the influence of canopy

closure.Acta Oecologica31(1): 119-126.

Schulz M, Thomson B. 2007. National recovery plan for the bare-rumped sheathtail bat

Saccolaimus saccolaimus nudicluniatus. Report of Department of the Environment and Water

Resources, Canberra. Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service, Brisbane.

Sedgeley J A, O Donnell C F J. 1999. Roost selection by the long-tailed bat, Chalinolobus

tuberculatus, in temperate New Zealand rainforest and its implications for the conservation of bats

in managed forests.Biological Conservation88 (2): 261-276.

Sedgeley J A, O Donnell C F J. 2004. Roost use by long-tailed bats in South Canterbury:

examining predictions of roost-site selection in a highly fragmented landscape. Society Newsletter

11: 28-30.

Timm R M, Mortimer J. 1976. Selection Of roost sites by honduran white bats, Ectophylla alba

(Chiroptera: Phyllostomatidae).Ecology 57: 385389.

29

8/2/2019 Paper 1 10

30/30

Vonhof M J, Gwilliam J C. 2007. Intra- and interspecific patterns of day roost selection by three

species of forest-dwelling bats in Southern British Columbia. Forest Ecology and Management,

252(1-3): 165-175.

Wei L, Han N, Zhang L, Helgen K M, Parsons S, Zhou S, Zhang S. 2008. Wing morphology,

echolocation calls, diet and emergence time of black-bearded tomb bats (Taphozous melanopogon,

Emballonuridae) from Southwest China.Acta Chiropterologica Vol.10 (1): 51-59.

Yasuma S, Azniza M, Bernard H, 2005. The Bornean Mammals Vol. 2 & 3. Research and

Education Component, BBEC Programme c/o Institute for Tropical Biology and Conservation,

Kota Kinabalu.

30