Important areas and sites for bat conservation – AICOMs and SICOMs as strategies for conservation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37002/biodiversidadebrasileira.v14i4.2454Keywords:
Chiroptera , bat protection, Brazilian Program for Bat ConservationAbstract
Important Areas and Sites for Bat Conservation (AICOMs and SICOMs), recognized by the Red Latinoamericana y del Caribe para la Conservación de los Murciélagos (RELCOM), are relevant strategies for conservation of bats and whole communities as they are identified based on a set of scientifically sound criteria. These criteria can be both faunistic (taxonomic diversity) and ecological (distribution, endemism, rarity, vulnerability, dependence on certain types of shelter, importance for ecosystem functioning, and degrees of menace), which may also be applied to several other taxa. However, their effectiveness relies partly on the acceptance by the environmental authorities responsible for making and applying the legislation, including the creation of conservation units. Herein, we present the six AICOMs and four SICOMs so far proposed by the Brazilian Program for Bat Conservation (PCMBrasil) and certified by RELCOM. They are situated in different biomes, especially the Amazon, Caatinga, and Atlantic Forest, and subject to diverse impacts such as habitat loss, disturbance and destruction of shelters, urban expansion, and human-bat conflicts. Part of these areas are protected in national parks, areas of environmental protection and natural patrimony private reserves. The SICOMs include caves and bridges where exceptionally large bat colonies occur. We propose that the Brazilian environmental authorities recognize the strategic importance of AICOMs and SICOMs for ecosystem protection, promoting studies aiming the identification of such areas and using them as support for creating conservation units.
Downloads
References
1. Barquez RM, Aguirre LF, Nassar JM, Burneo SF, Mancina CA, Díaz MM (Eds.). Áreas y sitios de importancia para la conservación de los murciélagos en Latinoamérica y el Caribe. RELCOM, Yerba Buena, Tucumán, Argentina. 2022. 370p.
2. Kunz TH, Torrez EB, Bauer D, Lobova T, Fleming TH. Ecosystem services provided by bats. Annals New York Academy Sciences, Issue: The Year in Ecology and Conservation Biology. 2011; 1223: 1–38. DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06004.
3. Kasso M, Balakrishnan M. Ecological and Economic Importance of Bats (Order Chiroptera). ISRN Biodiversity, 2013: ID 187415. DOI:10.1155/2013/18741.
4. Ramírez-Fráncel AL, García-Herrera LV, Losada-Prado S, Reinoso-Flórez G, Sánchez-Hernández A, Estrada-Villegas S, Lim BK, Guevara G. Bats and their vital ecosystem services: a global review. Integrative Zoology. 2021; 17(1):2-23, 2021. DOI: 10.1111/1749-4877.12552.
5. Cleveland CJ, Betke M. Federico, Frank PJD, Hallam TG, Horn J, López Jr JD, McCracken GF, Medellín RM, Moreno-Valdez A, Sansone CG, Westbrook JK, Kunz TH. Economic value of the pest control service provided by Brazilian free-tailed bats in south-central Texas. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 2006; 4(5): 238–24. DOI: 10.1890/1540-9295(2006)004[0238:EVOTPC]2.0.CO;2
6. Gandara G, Sandoval ANC, Cienfuego CAH. Valoración económica de los servicios ecológicos que prestan los murciélagos Tadarida brasiliensis como controladores de plagas en el norte de México. Escuela de Graduados em Administracíon Pública y Política Pública. Working Paper 2006; 2006-5.
7. Boyles JG, Cryan PM, McCracken GF, Kunz TH. Economic Importance of Bats in Agriculture. Science. 2011; 332 (6025): 41-42. DOI: 10.1126/science.1201366.
8. Riccucci M, Lanza B. Bats and insect pest control: a review. Vespertilio. 2004; 17: 161–169.
9. Puig-Montserrat X, Torre I, López-Baucells A, Guerrieri E, Monti MM, Ràfols-García R, Ferrer X, Gisbert D, Flaquer C. Pest control service provided by bats in Mediterranean rice paddies: linking agroecosystems structure to ecological functions. Mammalian Biology. 2015; 80: 237–24. DOI: 10.1016/j.mambio.2015.03.008.
10. Aguiar LMS, Bueno-Rocha ID, Oliveira G, Pires ES, Vasconcelos S, Nunes GL, et al. Going out for dinner—The consumption of agriculture pests by bats in urban areas. PLoS ONE, 2021; 16(10): e0258066. DOI: 10.1371/journal. pone.025806.
11. Fonseca RS, Mascarenhas MJO, Olímpio, Medeiros AP . Polinização e Dispersão de Sementes por Morcegos e a sua Importância na Manutenção dos Ecossistemas. Morcegos dos biomas Cerrado e Amazônia Maranhense: Conhecer para conservar. 1ed.: Atena Editora, 2021; 30-40.
12. Trejo-Salaza RE, Eguiarte LE, Suro-Piñera D, Medellin R. Save our bats, save our tequila: Industry and science join forces to help bats and agaves. Natural Areas Journal. 2016; 36(4):523-530. DOI: 0.3375/043.036.0417.
13. Foresta H, Charles-Dominique P, Erard C, Prevost MF. Zoochorie et premiers stades de la regeneration naturelle après coupe en forest Guyanaise Revue d´Ecologie. 1984; 39: 369 – 400.
14. Bernard E, Aguiar LMS, Brito D, Cruz-Neto AP, Gregorin, Machado RRB, Oprea M, Paglia AP, Tavares, VC. Uma análise de horizontes sobre a conservação de morcegos no Brasil, p. 19-35. In: T.R.O. Freitas TRO, Vieira EM (eds.). Mamíferos do Brasil: Genética, Sistemática, Ecologia e Conservação. Rio de Janeiro: Sociedade Brasileira de Mastozoologia. 2012; 2: 2-17.
15. Adams RA, Pedersen SC (Eds.). Bat Evolution, Ecology, and Conservation. Springer. 2013. 547p.
16. Voigt CC, Kingston T. (Eds.). Bats in the Anthropocene: Conservation of Bats in a Changing World. Springer Open. 2016; 606 pp.
17. Novaes RLM, Laurindo RF, Dornas RAP, Esbérard CE, Bueno C. On a collision course: the vulnerability of bats to roadkills in Brazil. Mastozoología Neotropical. 2018; 25(1):115-128. DOI: 10.31687/saremMN.18.25.1.0.11.
18. Frick WF, Kingston T, Flanders J. A review of the major threats and challenges to global bat conservation. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci., 2019. DOI: 10.1111/nyas.14045.
19. Trajano E. Brazilian lithophilous bats in danger. Boletín Red Latinoamericana y del Caribe para la Conservación de los Murciélagos. 2022; 13(2): 3-7.
20. Barclay RMR, Ulmer J, Cameron JA, MacKenzie M, Thompson LO, McCool J, Cropley E, Poll G. Variation in the reproductive rate of bats. Canadian Journal of Zoology. 2004; 82: 688–693. DOI: 10.1139/z04-057.
21. RELCOM (Red Latinoamericana y del Caribe para la Conservación de los Murciélagos). <https://relcomlatinoamerica.net>. Acesso em: 20/11/2022.
22. Trajano E. Ecologia de populações de morcegos cavernícolas em uma região cárstica do sudeste do Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Zoologia. 1985; 2(5): 255-320. DOI: 10.1590/S0101-81751984000100001.
23. Keeley ATH, Keeley BW. The mating system of Tadarida brasiliensis (Chiroptera: Molossidae) in a large highway bridge colony. Journal of Mammalogy. 2004; 85(1):113–119. DOI: 10.1644/BME-004.
24. Lee Y-F, McCracken GF. Timing and variation in the emergence and return of Mexican free-tailed bats, Tadarida brasiliensis mexicana. Zoological Studies. 2001; 40(4): 309-316.
25. Armstrong K. Brazilian free-tailed bat (Tadarida brasiliensis). Mammalian Species. 2008; 4:1-6.
26. Barros MAS. Interações entre morcegos e turbinas eólicas no Agreste do Rio Grande do Norte, Nordeste do Brasil. Tese (Doutorado em Biologia Animal) – Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife. 2019. 265pp.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Os autores mantêm os direitos autorais de seus artigos sem restrições, concedendo ao editor direitos de publicação não exclusivos.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Os artigos estão licenciados sob uma licença Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial-SemDerivações 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). O acesso é livre e gratuito para download e leitura, ou seja, é permitido copiar e redistribuir o material em qualquer mídia ou formato.
