Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSalsamendi Pagola, Egoitz
dc.contributor.authorGarín Atorrasagasti, Ignacio
dc.contributor.authorArostegui Madariaga, Inmaculada
dc.contributor.authorGoiti Ugarte, Urtzi
dc.contributor.authorAiartza Azurtza, José Ramón
dc.date.accessioned2013-05-30T10:53:29Z
dc.date.available2013-05-30T10:53:29Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.identifier.citationFrontiers in Zoology 9(30) : 2012es
dc.identifier.issn1742-9994
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10810/10172
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Our purpose was to assess how pairs of sibling horseshoe bats coexists when their morphology and echolocation are almost identical. We collected data on echolocation, wing morphology, diet, and habitat use of sympatric Rhinolophus mehelyi and R. euryale. We compared our results with literature data collected in allopatry with similar protocols and at the same time of the year (breeding season). Results:Echolocation frequencies recorded in sympatry for R. mehelyi (mean = 106.8 kHz) and R. euryale (105.1 kHz) were similar to those reported in allopatry (R. mehelyi 105–111 kHz; R. euryale 101–109 kHz). Wing parameters were larger in R. mehelyi than R. euryale for both sympatric and allopatric conditions. Moths constitute the bulk of the diet of both species in sympatry and allopatry, with minor variation in the amounts of other prey. There were no inter-specific differences in the use of foraging habitats in allopatry in terms of structural complexity, however we found inter-specific differences between sympatric populations: R. mehelyi foraged in less complex habitats. The subtle inter-specific differences in echolocation frequency seems to be unlikely to facilitate dietary niche partitioning; overall divergences observed in diet may be explained as a consequence of differential prey availability among foraging habitats. Inter-specific differences in the use of foraging habitats in sympatry seems to be the main dimension for niche partitioning between R. mehelyi and R. euryale, probably due to letter differences in wing morphology. Conclusions: Coexistence between sympatric sibling horseshoe bats is likely allowed by a displacement in spatial niche dimension, presumably due to the wing morphology of each species, and shifts the niche domains that minimise competition. Effective measures for conservation of sibling/similar horseshoe bats should guarantee structural diversity of foraging habitats.es
dc.language.isoenges
dc.publisherBiomed Centrales
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses
dc.subjectchiropteraes
dc.subjectcoexistence;es
dc.subjectdietes
dc.subjectforaging habitates
dc.subjectmorphologyes
dc.subjectsibling specieses
dc.subjectrhinolophuses
dc.titleWhat mechanism of niche segregation allows the coexistence of sympatric sibling rhinolophid bats?es
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees
dc.rights.holder© 2012 Salsamendi et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.es
dc.relation.publisherversionhttp://www.frontiersinzoology.com/content/9/1/30es
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/1742-9994-9-30
dc.departamentoesMatemática Aplicada, Estadística e Investigación Operativaes_ES
dc.departamentoesZoología y biología celular animales_ES
dc.departamentoeuMatematika aplikatua eta estatistikaes_ES
dc.departamentoeuZoologia eta animalia zelulen biologiaes_ES
dc.subject.categoriaECOLOGY, EVOLUTION, BEHAVIOR AND SYSTEMATICS
dc.subject.categoriaZOOLOGY


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record