Bats of Bangladesh—A Systematic Review of the Diversity and Distribution with Recommendations for Future Research
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper is very good and important for futher studies on Chiroptera in the region. I do hope that results could be checked in field. I wish possibity to continue study.
I would like point only one thing - it will be good to make small table with numebr of species in defined categories, to make the reading easier. For example - in the part (1) in table there are listed 46 species from which 31 are confirmed (1A and 1B). What about the rest of this list - 15 species seems to disappear. They are not included in group 2 (Higly Probable) or other. For me it will be more clear to make data about number of species with showing the descibed divisions
Author Response
The paper is very good and important for futher studies on Chiroptera in the region. I do hope that results could be checked in field. I wish possibity to continue study.
>> Thank you for the kind words and encouragement. We too hope this ill inspire people to conduct further work in Bangladesh
I would like point only one thing - it will be good to make small table with numebr of species in defined categories, to make the reading easier. For example - in the part (1) in table there are listed 46 species from which 31 are confirmed (1A and 1B). What about the rest of this list - 15 species seems to disappear. They are not included in group 2 (Higly Probable) or other. For me it will be more clear to make data about number of species with showing the descibed divisions
>> We now indicate in Table 1 the final designation of the 15 species that were not confirmed, using symbols in the table. In addition, we added the following to the methods
In addition. the species reported from Bangladesh that did not fit into either category of 1A or 1B were reviewed and classified as Highly Probable, Probable, and Possible.
And a clause and sentence to the results section…
An additional fifteen species were listed for Bangladesh based on experts’ opinion but lacked confirmation in Bangladesh (i.e., there was no specimen, image or observation), but were considered Highly Probable (8 species), Probable (4 species), and Possible (1). No locality records were found for Hipposideros galeritus and Rhinopoma microphyllum so they were not categorized (Table 1, Supplementary Materials Table S2).
Reviewer 2 Report
The present paper makes a thorough research on the bat fauna of Bangladesh, a country where bat surveys are limited and little information is available. The authors have surveyed numerous databases to collect data on occurrence and distribution of bat species in the country and have created a checklist that will set the foundations for further research in the area. The importance Bangladesh, apart from its habitat diversity, lies in its biogeographic position at the interface of south and southeast Asia. This highlights the importance of this well designed study.
To this end, the authors have done an excellent work, extensive reseacrh and have presented their results in a reasonable way. Moreover, they acknowledge the limitations of their study and they also suggest focused future studies that will improve the knowledge of the chiropteran fauna in the area.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your positive evaluation!
[no actions requested]
Reviewer 3 Report
Break text on page 3 to be clear paragraphs (now it runs on and on)
On page 7 section 2.3 point 2 should be indented (new line)
There are unusual breaks in text for example from pa14 to page 15
I was surprised that there is no mention of use of echolocation (best and most modern method of bat assessment). This should be addressed in discussion
Author Response
Break text on page 3 to be clear paragraphs (now it runs on and on).
>> we broke it into four paragraphs that reflect the political history of Bangladesh, the first two centuries of bat research, the beginning of this century, and then findings published after the 2015 IUCN Bangladesh assessment. Hopefully that makes it a bit more digestible!
On page 7 section 2.3 point 2 should be indented (new line)
Done!
There are unusual breaks in text for example from pa14 to page 15
Fixed!
I was surprised that there is no mention of use of echolocation (best and most modern method of bat assessment). This should be addressed in discussion
>> We added a few sentences on echolocation and how it helps to build a call library in the discussion. Moreover, we also recommend a few techniques that help record species in an appropriate manner.....
Regardless of method, many species are difficult to capture, but use high-intensity echolocation calls that can be detected acoustically, particularly insectivorous species that forage at forest edges, or in open spaces and above the canopy [78,88]. Although there is some overlap in parameters, generally echolocation signals emitted by bats when navigating and foraging are species-specific. Consequently, echolocation recordings can help confirm species identity, especially in the case of species that are morpho-logically cryptic but divergent in their echolocation calls [89,90]. Acoustic surveys can contribute to inventory completeness [91,92,93], and assessments of species associations with natural and modified habitats and land-uses [94,95,96,97]. However, it is essential to have a call library populated with recordings from individuals of confirmed species identity (reference calls) to cross-check with the recordings collected in field sites. We recommend researchers record echolocation calls and contribute the recordings to established call libraries (e.g., ChiroVox [98]). Recordings should ideally be made in settings that allow for the bat to use search phase calls. For ex-ample, free-flying after release for species that forage in open and edge habitats (e.g., Molossidae, many Vespertilionidae), flight cages or tents for species that use low-intensity calls in vegetatively cluttered habitats (e.g., Kerivoulinae, Murininae, Megadermatidae, Nycteridae). In the case of the Rhinolophidae and Hipposideridae, resting frequency is typically recorded from stationary bats (hand-held, or hanging in a flight tent) [88,99,100]. Bat acoustic data can enrich the global bat call database, ChiroVox. Out of 31 confirmed bat species in Bangladesh, call recordings of only 19 species are available in the ChiroVox database and none of these recordings were from bats captured in Bangladesh. Therefore, recordings of Bangaldesh’s bats can make a valuable contribution to regional coverage, and further under-standing of call structures of intra-specific variation in echolocation call structure [100] across species’ ranges.
78. Kingston, T. Response of Bat Diversity to Forest Disturbance in Southeast Asia: Insights from Long-Term Research in Malaysia. In Bat Evolution, Ecology and Conservation, 1st Ed.; Adams, R.A., Pedersen, S.C., Eds.; Springer, New York, USA, 2013; pp. 547.
88. Kingston, T. Bats. In Core Standardized Methods for Rapid Biological Field Assessment, Larsen, T.H., Eds.; Conservation International, Arlington, Virginia, USA, pp. 59 – 82.
89. Jones, G.; Van Parijs, S.M. 1993Bimodal Echolocation in Pipistrelle Bats: Are Cryptic Species Present? R. Soc. Lond. B. 1993, 251, 119–125.
90. Kingston, T.; Lara, M.C.; Jones, G.; Schneider, C.J.; Akbar, Z.; Kunz, T.H. Acoustic Divergence in Two Cryptic Hipposideros Species: A Role for Social Selection? R. Soc. Lond. B. 2001, 268, 1381–1386.
91. Murray, K.L.; Britzke, E.R.; Handley, B.M.; Robbins, L.W. Surveying Bat Communities: A Comparison Between Mist Nets and The Anabat II Bat Detector System. Acta Chiropterol. 1999, 1, 105 – 112.
92. O’Farrell, M.J.; Gannon, W.L. A Comparison of Acoustic Versus Capture Techniques for The Inventory of Bats. Mammal. 1999, 80, 24 – 30.
93. Milne, D.; Armstrong, M.; Fisher, A.; Flores, A.; Pavey, C. A Comparison of Three Survey Methods for Collecting Bat Echolocation Calls and Species-Accumulation Rates from Nightly Anabat Recordings. Res. 2004, 31, 57–63.
94. Wordley, C.F.R.; Sankaran, M.; Mudappa, D.; Altringham, J.D. Landscape Scale Habitat Suitability Modelling of Bats in the Western Ghats of India: Bats Like Something in Their Tea. Conserv. 2015, 191, 529–536.
95. Wordley, C.F.R.; Sankaran, M.; Mudappa, D.; Altringham, J.D. Bats in The Ghats: Agricultural Intensification Reduces Functional Diversity and Increases Trait Filtering in A Biodiversity Hotspot in India. Conserv. 2017, 210, 48–55.
96. Wordley, C.F.R.; Sankaran, M.; Mudappa, D.; Altringham, J.D. Heard but Not Seen: Comparing Bat Assemblages and Study Methods in A Mosaic Landscape in The Western Ghats of India. Evol. 2018, 8, 3883 – 3894.
97. Shapiro, J.T.; Monadjem, A.; Order, T.; McCleery, R.A. Response of Bat Activity to Land Cover and Land Use in Savannas is Scale-, Season-, and Guild-Specific. Conserv. 2020, 241, 108245.
98. Görföl, T.; Huang, J.C.; Csorba, G.; Győrössy, D.; Estók, P.; Kingston, T.; Szabadi, K.L.; McArthur, E.; Senawi, J.; Furey, N.M.; Tu, V.T.; Thong, V.D.; Khan, F.A.A.; Jinggong, E.R.; Donnelly, M.; Kumaran, J.V.; Liu, J.; Chen, S.; Tuanmu, M.; Ho, Y.; Chang, H.; Elias, N.; Abdullah, N.; Lim, L.; Squire, C.D.; Zsebők, S. ChiroVox: A Public Library of Bat Calls. PeerJ 10, e12445.
99. Siemers, B.M. Bats in the Field and in A Flight Cage: Recordings and Analysis of Their Echolocation Calls and Behavior. In Bat Echolocation Research: Tools, Techniques and Analysis, Brigham, R.M., Kalko, E.K.V., Jones, G., Parsons, S., Limpens, H.J.G.A., Eds.; Bat Conservation International: Austin, Texas, USA, 2004; pp. 107 – 120.
100. Fraser, E.E., Silvis, A., Brigham, R.M., Czenze, Z.J. Bat Echolocation Research: A Handbook for Planning and Conducting Acoustic Studies, 2nd ed.; Bat Conservation International: Austin, Texas, USA, 2020; pp. 122.
