Fewer bat passes are detected during small, commercial drone flights

Abstract Advances in technological capabilities, operational simplicity and cost efficiency have promoted the rapid integration of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) into ecological research, providing access to study taxa that are otherwise difficult to survey, such as bats. Many bat species are curre...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Gabrielle Ednie, David M. Bird, Kyle H. Elliott
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Nature Publishing Group 2021-06-01
Series:Scientific Reports
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-90905-0
id doaj-22ee7bdf16544e8f9dc9a9e9cf729d4a
record_format Article
spelling doaj-22ee7bdf16544e8f9dc9a9e9cf729d4a2021-06-06T11:37:19ZengNature Publishing GroupScientific Reports2045-23222021-06-011111810.1038/s41598-021-90905-0Fewer bat passes are detected during small, commercial drone flightsGabrielle Ednie0David M. Bird1Kyle H. Elliott2Department of Natural Resource Science, McGill UniversityDepartment of Natural Resource Science, McGill UniversityDepartment of Natural Resource Science, McGill UniversityAbstract Advances in technological capabilities, operational simplicity and cost efficiency have promoted the rapid integration of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) into ecological research, providing access to study taxa that are otherwise difficult to survey, such as bats. Many bat species are currently at risk, but accurately surveying populations is challenging for species that do not roost in large aggregations. Acoustic recorders attached to UAVs provide an opportunity to survey bats in challenging habitats. However, UAVs may alter bat behaviour, leading to avoidance of the UAV, reduced detection rates and inaccurate surveys. We evaluated the number of bat passes detected with and without the presence of a small, commercial UAV in open habitats. Only 22% of bat passes were recorded in the presence of the UAV (0.23 ± 0.09 passes/min) compared to control periods without the UAV (1.03 ± 0.17 passes/min), but the effect was smaller on the big brown bat/silver-haired bat (Eptesicus fuscus/Lasionycteris noctivagans) acoustic complex. Noise interference from the UAV also reduced on-board bat detection rates. We conclude that acoustic records attached to UAVs may inaccurately survey bat populations due to low and variable detection rates by such recorders.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-90905-0
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Gabrielle Ednie
David M. Bird
Kyle H. Elliott
spellingShingle Gabrielle Ednie
David M. Bird
Kyle H. Elliott
Fewer bat passes are detected during small, commercial drone flights
Scientific Reports
author_facet Gabrielle Ednie
David M. Bird
Kyle H. Elliott
author_sort Gabrielle Ednie
title Fewer bat passes are detected during small, commercial drone flights
title_short Fewer bat passes are detected during small, commercial drone flights
title_full Fewer bat passes are detected during small, commercial drone flights
title_fullStr Fewer bat passes are detected during small, commercial drone flights
title_full_unstemmed Fewer bat passes are detected during small, commercial drone flights
title_sort fewer bat passes are detected during small, commercial drone flights
publisher Nature Publishing Group
series Scientific Reports
issn 2045-2322
publishDate 2021-06-01
description Abstract Advances in technological capabilities, operational simplicity and cost efficiency have promoted the rapid integration of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) into ecological research, providing access to study taxa that are otherwise difficult to survey, such as bats. Many bat species are currently at risk, but accurately surveying populations is challenging for species that do not roost in large aggregations. Acoustic recorders attached to UAVs provide an opportunity to survey bats in challenging habitats. However, UAVs may alter bat behaviour, leading to avoidance of the UAV, reduced detection rates and inaccurate surveys. We evaluated the number of bat passes detected with and without the presence of a small, commercial UAV in open habitats. Only 22% of bat passes were recorded in the presence of the UAV (0.23 ± 0.09 passes/min) compared to control periods without the UAV (1.03 ± 0.17 passes/min), but the effect was smaller on the big brown bat/silver-haired bat (Eptesicus fuscus/Lasionycteris noctivagans) acoustic complex. Noise interference from the UAV also reduced on-board bat detection rates. We conclude that acoustic records attached to UAVs may inaccurately survey bat populations due to low and variable detection rates by such recorders.
url https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-90905-0
work_keys_str_mv AT gabrielleednie fewerbatpassesaredetectedduringsmallcommercialdroneflights
AT davidmbird fewerbatpassesaredetectedduringsmallcommercialdroneflights
AT kylehelliott fewerbatpassesaredetectedduringsmallcommercialdroneflights
_version_ 1721393810901041152