Visitors   Views   Downloads

Mesquite bugs and other insects in the diet of pallid bats in southeastern Arizona

View preprint
208 days ago
Mesquite bugs and other insects in the diet of pallid bats in southeastern Arizona https://t.co/eNo6FUWZXg
NOT PEER-REVIEWED
"PeerJ Preprints" is a venue for early communication or feedback before peer review. Data may be preliminary.

A peer-reviewed article of this Preprint also exists.

View peer-reviewed version

Supplemental Information

Raw data drawing showing how to distinguish female from male mesquite bug legs

Camera lucida drawing of mesquite bug hind legs showing how female and male hind femurs and hind tibias can be distinguished.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.26944v1/supp-1

List of mesquite bug defensive chemicals and online sources

Thasus (mesquite bug) defensive chemicals and online sources.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.26944v1/supp-2

Raw data measurements of bat guano pellets

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.26944v1/supp-3

Raw data listing field observations and insect identifications

Identifications of Insects processed and eaten by Antrozous pallidus in soil-piping cavities at Cienega Creek Natural Preserve, Arizona.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.26944v1/supp-4

Additional Information

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author Contributions

Nicholas J Czaplewski conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Katrina L Menard performed the experiments, analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

William D Peachey conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Animal Ethics

The following information was supplied relating to ethical approvals (i.e., approving body and any reference numbers):

By design, in order to avoid disturbance to the bats, we chose a noninvasive method and collected insect remains at pallid bat night roosts that were not used by the bats during the daytime when we visited. (The bats day-roosted elsewhere.) No contact was made with live vertebrates during the study. Thus, IACUC approval was not required because we collected only discarded prey parts.

Field Study Permissions

The following information was supplied relating to field study approvals (i.e., approving body and any reference numbers):

The Arizona Game and Fish Commission provided permit no. I-96-024. We received oral permission to conduct fieldwork on the Cienega Creek Natural Preserve property from Gale Bundrick of the Pima County Parks and Recreation Department, Tucson, Arizona.

Data Deposition

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

Insect fragments are in the process of being accessioned and cataloged into the Recent Invertebrates Collection of the Oklahoma Museum of Natural History. Once cataloged, the relevant data will be provided through the GBIF and iDigBio online portals.

Funding

This work was supported in part by research and travel funding from the Director of the Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.


Add your feedback

Before adding feedback, consider if it can be asked as a question instead, and if so then use the Question tab. Pointing out typos is fine, but authors are encouraged to accept only substantially helpful feedback.

Some Markdown syntax is allowed: _italic_ **bold** ^superscript^ ~subscript~ %%blockquote%% [link text](link URL)
 
By posting this you agree to PeerJ's commenting policies