Fig 1.
Impact of time and relative humidity on the ability to successfully identify bat species from their guano.
Seventeen fecal pellets were tested for each time period in each location.
Fig 2.
Detection sensitivity of a rare bat species in a mock community of guano from three species.
When Eptesicus fuscus (EPFU) and Corynorhinus townsendii (COTO) were designated rare (at 1:192 ratio of DNA template), they were always or almost always detected (10 of 10 tests and 8 of 10 tests, respectively). Tadarida brasiliensis (TABR) was detected in 2 of 10 tests, which suggests a primer bias against this molossid species.
Fig 3.
Genetic detection of bat species in 41 mines across the U.S. Southwest, from samples that each contained up to 200 fecal pellets.
Species separated by slashes share a DNA mini-barcode.
Fig 4.
Impact of the number of sample replicates collected in each mine on the number of bat species detected.
N is the number of mines in which the indicated number of samples were collected. Error bars are the standard error of the mean for the number of bat species detected in each sampling group. The non-overlapping error bars between one and two pooled samples suggests that collection of two samples will maximize species detection while minimizing sequencing costs.
Fig 5.
The number of bat species identified in mines from visual surveys vs. genetic screening of guano.
Significantly more bat species were detected using genetic methods (z = 5.79, P < 0.00001, Mann-Whitney U test).
Fig 6.
Bat species genetically detected from guano samples collected in tunnels of archeological sites (Ka’kabiche and Lamanai) in Belize.