High‐throughput sequencing offers insight into mechanisms of resource partitioning in cryptic bat species

Abstract

Sympatric cryptic species, characterized by low morphological differentiation, pose a challenge to understanding the role of interspecific competition in structuring ecological communities. We used traditional (morphological) and novel molecular methods of diet analysis to study the diet of two cryptic bat species that are sympatric in southern England ( Plecotus austriacus and P. auritus ) ( Fig. 1 ). Using Roche FLX 454 (Roche, Basel, CH) high‐throughput sequencing (HTS) and uniquely tagged generic arthropod primers, we identified 142 prey Molecular Operational Taxonomic Units (MOTUs) in the diet of the cryptic bats, 60% of which were assigned to a likely species or genus. The findings from the molecular study supported the results of microscopic analyses in showing that the diets of both species were dominated by lepidopterans. However, HTS provided a sufficiently high resolution of prey identification to determine fine‐scale differences in resource use. Although both bat species appeared to have a generalist diet, eared‐moths from the family Noctuidae were the main prey consumed. Interspecific niche overlap was greater than expected by chance ( O jk = 0.72, P < 0.001) due to overlap in the consumption of the more common prey species. Yet, habitat associations of nongeneralist prey species found in the diets corresponded to those of their respective bat predator (grasslands for P. austriacus , and woodland for P. auritus ). Overlap in common dietary resource use combined with differential specialist prey habitat associations suggests that habitat partitioning is the primary mechanism of coexistence. The performance of HTS is discussed in relation to previous methods of molecular and morphological diet analysis. By enabling species‐level identification of dietary components, the application of DNA sequencing to diet analysis allows a more comprehensive comparison of the diet of sympatric cryptic species, and therefore can be an important tool for determining fine‐scale mechanisms of coexistence. (a) The grey long‐eared bat, Plecotus austriacus , and (b) the brown long‐eared bat, Plecotus auritus . image

Shown for reading. Its publisher allows quoting it, not republishing it.

References 83

1. 1.

   Aldridge HDJN, Rautenbach IL. Morphology, echolocation and resource partitioning in insectivorous bats. J. Anim. Ecol. 1987;56:763-778.

   Not in our library

2. 2.

   Alexandrou MA, Oliveira C, Maillard M, McGill RAR, Newton J, Creer S, Taylor MI. Competition and phylogeny determine community structure in Mullerian co-mimics. Nature. 2011;469:84-88.

   Not in our library10.1038/nature09660

3. 3.

   Anderson ME, Racey PA. Feeding behaviour of captive brown long-eared bats, Plecotus auritus. Anim. Behav. 1991;42:489-493.

   Not in our library

4. 4.

   Arlettaz R. Habitat selection as a major resource partitioning mechanism between the two sympatric sibling bat species Myotis myotis and Myotis blythii. J. Anim. Ecol. 1999;68:460-471.

   Not in our library

5. 5.

   Arlettaz R, Perrin N, Hausser J. Trophic resource partitioning and competition between the two sibling bat species Myotis myotis and Myotis blythii. J. Anim. Ecol. 1997;66:897-911.

   Not in our library

6. 6.

   Ashrafi S, Bontadina F, Kiefer A, Pavlinic I, Arlettaz R. Multiple morphological characters needed for field identification of cryptic long-eared bat species around the Swiss Alps. J. Zool. 2010;281:241-248.

   Not in our library

7. 7.

   Barlow K. The diet of the two phonic types of the bat Pipistrellus pipistrellus in Britain. J. Zool. 1997;243:597-609.

   Not in our library

8. 8.

   Bauerova Z. Contributions to the trophic ecology of the grey long-eared bat, Plecotus austriacus. Folia Zool. 1982;31:113-122.

   Not in our library

9. 9.
   The Use of Coded PCR Primers Enables High-Throughput Sequencing of Multiple Homolog Amplification Products by 454 Parallel Sequencing · 2007

   No notice
10. 10.

    Bogdanowicz W, Fenton MB, Daleszczyk K. The relationships between echolocation calls, morphology and diet in insectivorous bats. J. Zool. 1999;247:381-393.

    Not in our library

11. 11.
    Molecular Diet Analysis of Two African Free-Tailed Bats (Molossidae) Using High Throughput Sequencing · 2011

    No notice
12. 12.

    Chandler P. A Dipterist's handbook. 2010.

    Not in our library

13. 13.

    Chesson P. Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 2000;31:343-366.

    Not in our library

14. 14.

    Chinery M. Complete British insects. 2005.

    Not in our library

15. 15.

    Clare EL. Cryptic species? Patterns of maternal and paternal gene flow in eight Neotropical bats. PLoS One. 2011;6:e21460.

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0021460

16. 16.

    Clare EL, Fraser EE, Braid HE, Fenton MB, Hebert PDN. Species on the menu of a generalist predator, the eastern red bat (Lasiurus borealis): using a molecular approach to detect arthropod prey. Mol. Ecol. 2009;18:2532-2542.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1365-294x.2009.04184.x

17. 17.

    Clare EL, Lim BK, Fenton MB, Hebert PDN. Neotropical bats: estimating species diversity with DNA barcodes. PLoS One. 2011a;6:e22648.

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0022648

18. 18.

    Clare EL, Barber BR, Sweeney BW, Hebert PDN, Fenton MB. Eating local: influences of habitat on the diet of little brown bats (Myotis lucifugus. Mol. Ecol. 2011b;20:1772-1780.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1365-294x.2011.05040.x

19. 19.

    Coles RB, Guppy A, Anderson ME, Schlegel P. Frequency sensitivity and directional hearing in the gleaning bat, Plecotus auritus (Linnaeus 1758). J. Comp. Physiol. A. 1989;165:269-280.

    Not in our library10.1007/bf00619201

20. 20.

    Corbet GB. The grey long-eared bat, Plecotus austriacus, in England and the Channel Islands. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1964;143:511-515.

    Not in our library

21. 21.

    Davidson-Watts I, Walls S, Jones G. Differential habitat selection by Pipistrellus pipistrellus and Pipistrellus pygmaeus identifies distinct conservation needs for cryptic species of echolocating bats. Biol. Conserv. 2006;133:118-127.

    Not in our library

22. 22.

    Dayan T, Simberloff D. Ecological and community-wide character displacement: the next generation. Ecol. Lett. 2005;8:875-894.

    Not in our library

23. 23.

    Deagle BE, Tollit DJ, Jarman SN, Hindell MA, Trites AW, Gales NJ. Molecular scatology as a tool to study diet: analysis of prey DNA in scats from captive Steller sea lions. Mol. Ecol. 2005;14:1831-1842.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1365-294x.2005.02531.x

24. 24.
    Quantification of damage in DNA recovered from highly degraded samples – a case study on DNA in faeces · 2006

    No notice
25. 25.

    Deagle BE, Kirkwood R, Jarman SN. Analysis of Australian fur seal diet by pyrosequencing prey DNA in faeces. Mol. Ecol. 2009;18:2022-2038.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1365-294x.2009.04158.x

26. 26.

    Deagle BE, Chiaradia A, McInnes J, Jarman SN. Pyrosequencing faecal DNA to determine diet of little penguins: is what goes in what comes out? Conserv. Genet. 2010;11:2039-2048.

    Not in our library

27. 27.

    Dietz C, von Helversen O, Nill D. Bats of Britain, Europe and Northwest Africa. 2009.

    Not in our library

28. 28.

    Entwistle AC, Racey PA, Speakman JR. Habitat exploitation by a gleaning bat, Plecotus auritus. Philos. Transac. R. Soc. Lond. B. 1996;351:921-931.

    Not in our library

29. 29.

    Faure PA, Barclay RMR. The sensory basis of prey detection by the long-eared bat, Myotis evotis, and the consequences for prey selection. Anim. Behav. 1992;44:31-39.

    Not in our library

30. 30.

    Fenton MB. The foraging behaviour and ecology of animal-eating bats. Can. J. Zool. 1990;68:411-422.

    Not in our library

31. 31.

    Findley JS, Black H. Morphological and dietary structuring of a Zambian insectivorous bat community. Ecology. 1983;64:625-630.

    Not in our library

32. 32.

    Goerlitz HR, Hofstede HMter, Zeale MRK, Jones G, Holderied MW. An aerial-hawking bat uses stealth echolocation to counter moth hearing. Curr. Biol. 2010;20:1568-1572.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cub.2010.07.046

33. 33.

    Harris S, Morris P, Wray S, Yalden D. A review of British mammals: population estimates and conservation status of British mammals other than Cetaceans. 1995.

    Not in our library

34. 34.

    Heath J, Emmet M. The moths and butterflies of Great Britain and Ireland. 1983.

    Not in our library

35. 35.

    Hollyfield AM. 1993.

    Not in our library

36. 36.

    Husar SL. Behavioral character displacement: evidence of food partitioning in insectivorous bats. J. Mammal. 1976;57:331-338.

    Not in our library

37. 37.

    Jacobs DS, Barclay RMR. Niche differentiation in two sympatric sibling bat species, Scotophilus dinganii and Scotophilus mhlanganii. J. Mammal. 2009;90:879-887.

    Not in our library

38. 38.

    Jones G. Prey selection by the greater horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus ferrumequinum): optimal foraging by echolocation? J. Anim. Ecol. 1990;59:587-602.

    Not in our library

39. 39.

    Jones G. Acoustic signals and speciation: the roles of natural and sexual selection in the evolution of cryptic species. Adv. Stud. Behav. 1997;26:317-354.

    Not in our library

40. 40.

    Jones G, Rydell J, Kunz TH, Fenton MB. Attack and defence: interactions between echolocating bats and their insect prey. Bat ecology. 2003;301-345.

    Not in our library

Cited by papers we hold 2

• From Benchtop to Desktop: Important Considerations when Designing Amplicon Sequencing Workflows · 2015
  No notice
• Molecular detection of trophic interactions: emerging trends, distinct advantages, significant considerations and conservation applications · 2014
  No notice

Reads

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.