The design of artificial nestboxes for the study of secondary hole-nesting birds: a review of methodological inconsistencies and potential biases

The widespread use of artificial nestboxes has led to significant advances in our knowledge of the ecology, behaviour and physiology of cavity nesting birds, especially small passerines Nestboxes have made it easier to perform routine monitoring and experimental manipulation of eggs or nestlings, and also repeatedly to capture, identify and manipulate the parents However, when comparing results across study sites the use of nestboxes may also Introduce a potentially significant confounding variable in the form of differences in nestbox design amongst studies, such as their physical dimensions, placement height, and the way in which they are constructed and maintained However, the use of nestboxes may also introduce an unconsidered and potentially significant confounding variable clue to differences in nestbox design amongst studies, such as their physical dimensions, placement height, and the way in which they are constructed and maintained Here we review to what extent the characteristics of artificial nestboxes (e g size, shape, construction material, colour) are documented in the 'methods' sections of publications involving hole-nesting passerine birds using natural or excavated cavities or artificial nestboxes for reproduction and roosting Despite explicit previous recommendations that authors describe in detail the characteristics of the nestboxes used, we found that the description of nestbox characteristics in most recent publications remains poor and insufficient We therefore list the types of descriptive data that should be included in the methods sections of relevant manuscripts and justify this by discussing how variation in nestbox characteristics can affect or confound conclusions from nestbox studies We also propose several recommendations to improve the reliability and usefulness of research based on long-term studies of any secondary hole-nesting species using artificial nestboxes for breeding or roosting.

The tail plays a major role in the differing manoeuvrability of two sibling species of mouse-eared bats (Myotis myotis and Myotis blythii)

Two sympatrically occurring bat species, the greater mouse-eared bat (Myotis myotis (Borkhausen, 1797)) and the lesser mouse-eared bat (Myotis blythii (Tomes, 1857)) (Chiroptera, Vespertillionidae), share numerous similarities in morphology, roosting behaviour, and echolocation and are often difficult to distinguish. However, despite these similarities, their foraging behaviour is noticeably different. Our aim was to examine the extent to which these different foraging strategies reflect morphological adaptation. We assessed whether the morphology of the wing, body, and tail differed between M. myotis and M. blythii. In addition, in a laboratory experiment involving an obstacle course, we compared differences in manoeuvrability by relating them to our morphological measurements. The two species differed in their overall size, wing-tip shape, and tail-to-body length ratio. The generally smaller sized M. blythii performed better in the obstacle course and was therefore considered to be more manoeuvrable. Although differences in wing-tip shape were observed, we found the most important characteristic affecting manoeuvrability in both species to be the tail-to-body length ratio. Additionally, when we compared two bats with injured wing membranes with unharmed bats of the same species, we found no difference in manoeuvrability, even when the wing shape was asymmetric. We therefore postulate that morphometric differences between the two species in their overall size and, more importantly, in their tail-to-body length ratio are the main physical characteristics providing proof of adaptation to different foraging and feeding strategies.