Preventing unintentional bat captures in canopy traps used for insect surveys
Aurélien SalléiD, Laurent Arthur, Guillem ParmainiD, David Williams, Amélie Chrétien, Elodie Le SouchuiD, Carl Moliard, Alain Roques BiD, Christophe BougetiD
Abstract
There is growing interest in deploying insect traps in forest canopies for ecological research, invasive species surveillance, and biodiversity monitoring. However, forest canopies also harbor a diverse and abundant bat community, which may be incidentally trapped and killed by these devices. In this study, we investigated the impact of flight interception traps and multi-funnel traps deployed in oak canopies on incidental bat captures, and evaluated whether trap modifications could reduce this bycatch. We also examined how these modifications influenced the species richness, abundance, and mean body size of several beetle taxa, including Buprestidae, Cerambycidae, Cetoniinae, and Scolytinae. Both trap types captured bats. Flight interception traps accidentally caught seven species - Myotis bechsteinii, Myotis daubentonii, Myotis mystacinus, Nyctalus noctula, Nyctalus leisleri, Plecotus auritus, and Pipistrellus pipistrellus - with an average of 0.42 bats per trap. Multi-funnel traps primarily caught males of P. pipistrellus, with an average of 0.29 bats per trap. Adding a 13-mm mesh above the collection container significantly reduced bat bycatch to 0.02 and 0.05 bats per trap in flight interception traps and multi-funnel traps, respectively. This modification had no significant effect on insect species richness or mean body size, although it did reduce Cerambycidae and Scolytinae abundance in black multi-funnel and flight interception traps, respectively. This was likely due to more frequent clogging by twigs and leaves. We recommend modifying flight interception and multi-funnel traps deployed in forest canopies to prevent unintentional harm to protected bat species.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.66
- Field percentile
- top 6%
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Comparing the efficiency of monofilament and traditional nets for capturing bats
S. Chaves Ramirez, C. Castillo Salazar, … G. Chaverri·bioRxiv·Aug 28, 2021
- Differential Capture Modalities of Insect Traps Produce Contrasting Biodiversity Patterns
Thomas P. Franzem, Sophia Carmichael, … Christie A. Bahlai·bioRxiv·Sep 17, 2025
- Automated flight interception traps for interval sampling of insects
J. Bolliger, M. Collet, … M. K. Obrist·bioRxiv·Feb 10, 2020
- Malaise trap samples of 1000 individuals per week suggest 4 million insects per hectare in the boreal zone
Luisa Fernanda Serralde Rodríguez, Viktor Gårdman, … Otso Ovaskainen·bioRxiv·Jun 8, 2026
- Flight height patterns of a critically endangered insectivorous bat, impacted by wind turbine collision
Amanda Bush, Linda F. Lumsden, Thomas A. A. Prowse·bioRxiv·May 23, 2025
- The impact of lure, trap type, and Fluon application on the capture of longhorned beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) in the subtropical forests of southeastern Louisiana, USA
Chiranjivi Sharma, Winter Sheline, … Todd D. Johnson·bioRxiv·Aug 19, 2026