906 S. G. Aninta et al.
TABLE 1 Collated list of bat species recorded at nine locations on Siberut (Fig. 1), compiled from records spanning 1903–2017, from our 2013 field survey at Pungut Field Station, natural history collections and literature (see text for details), with IUCN Red List category (IUCN, 2020) and known distribution on the adjacent land masses of Sundaland.
Source Species
2013 field survey
Museum records
Literature X
Red List category
Cynopterus brachyotis XX LC Cynopterus sphinx XX
LC
Emballonura monticola XX LC Eonycteris spelaea XLC Hipposideros dyacorum XLC Hipposideros galeritus
XLC
Kerivoula hardwickii XX LC Kerivoula papillosa XX LC Kerivoula pellucida XNT Macroglossus minimus XLC Macroglossus sobrinus XX
X LC
Megaderma spasma XX LC Murina suilla XLC Myotis ater
XLC
Myotis muricola XX LC Philetor brachypterus XLC Pteropus hypomelanus Pteropus vampyrus Rhinolophus affinis
Rousettus amplexicaudatus
XX LC XNT XLC XLC
Occurrence in Sundaland Sumatra Malaya Borneo Java
X X X X
X X X X
X X X X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X X X X X X X
X X X X
X
X X X X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X X X
X X X X
X X X X X X X X
X X
X X X
are likely to be found using mist nets and harp traps with a standard ground-sampling protocol. All 20 species occur in other parts of Sundaland (Table 1). Information on locations within Siberut was not available for five species (Supplementary Table 3) but the records for which locality data are available show that previous inventories were from a total of eight locations, excluding our survey, in the south and north (Fig. 1, Supplementary Table 3). Eleven species of bats in amixed forest habitat iswithin the
expected number of species considering inventories in similar settings with longer sampling periods (e.g. Wiantoro et al., 2017). However, when we consider accounts of bat species found on Siberut in the past, from records of natural history collections (Supplementary Table 2), there is a steep species accumulation curve (Fig. 2), suggesting more bat species could be found with additional survey methods. Philetor bra- chypterus, recorded for the first time in our 2013 survey, for example,was captured using a non-standardmethod (stacked mist nets above a river). The other two new species records were obtained with harp traps, which have been available only from 1958 (Constantine, 1958). Although biodiversity data from earlier field research may provide biased informa- tion of species assemblages because of the subjective inter- ests of past collectors, such data is nevertheless useful for directing sampling in previously unsurveyed areas (Graham et al., 2004).
Although eighteen of the 20 bat species so far recorded
on Siberut are categorized on the IUCN Red list (IUCN, 2020) as Least Concern (Table 1), they are not necessarily less prone to extinction than threatened species (Tanalgo & Hughes, 2018). Neither bats on oceanic islands (Scanlon et al., 2014) nor those on islands near larger landmasses (Lane et al., 2006) are exempt from local extinction. Systematic biodiversity monitoring on small islands such as Siberut can indicate whether recent human activities, such as the logging concessions that were ongoing until at least 2018 (Saleleubaja et al., 2021), contribute to local extinc- tion. Considering the importance of small tropical islands such as Siberut for conservation, even outside protected areas, they should not be overlooked in either regional or global conservation efforts.
Acknowledgements Part of this work was conducted by SGA under the supervision of SN and DTI. Financial support for the field work in northern Siberut was provided by the Siberut Conservation Programme, a collaborative project between the German Primate Centre and Bogor Agriculture University. We thank Risel, Piator, Linda, Potan, Dwi Yandhi Febriyanti, Edith Sabara, and Agung Imansyah Albaar of the Siberut Conservation Programme for logis- tical and administrative support; the villagers of Politcoman for providing hospitality and information; the Wildlife Conservation Society for the loan of harp traps; and Kurnianingsih, Nanang, and Maharadatunkamsi of Museum Zoologicum Bogoriense for providing data. We acknowledge the input of the late Tony Whitten to the study
Oryx, 2022, 56(6), 904–907 © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S0030605321001022
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164
