Study

Better body condition of Artibeus lituratus in fragments of tropical dry forest associated with silvopastoral systems than in conventional livestock systems in Córdoba, Colombia

  • Published source details Chacón-Pacheco J.J. & Ballesteros-Correa J. (2019) Mejor condición corporal de Artibeus lituratus en fragmentos de bosque seco asociados a sistemas silvopastoriles que en sistemas convencionales de ganadería en Córdoba, Colombia. Oecologia Australis, 23, 589-605.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Reduce pesticide, herbicide or fertiliser use

Action Link
Bat Conservation

Retain or plant native trees and shrubs amongst crops (agroforestry)

Action Link
Bat Conservation
  1. Reduce pesticide, herbicide or fertiliser use

    A replicated, site comparison study in 2011–2012 of four tropical forest fragments in livestock farming areas in Córdoba, Columbia (Chacón-Pacheco & Ballesteros-Correa 2019) found that great fruit-eating bats Artibeus lituratus captured in ‘silvopastoral’ areas that used no chemicals, along with agroforestry, had higher body weights and body condition scores than those within conventional farming areas that used chemicals. Great fruit-eating bats captured in ‘silvopastoral’ areas had a higher average body weight (64 g) and body condition score (0.93) than those captured in conventional farming areas (59.5 g; 0.86). In August 2011–July 2012, great fruit-eating bats were captured at forest fragments within each of two ‘silvopastoral’ areas (total 260 bats) and two conventional farming areas (total 69 bats). ‘Silvopastoral’ areas grazed livestock amongst trees, shrubs, and crops, without chemicals. Conventional areas grazed livestock in monocultures with little tree or shrub cover, and used agrochemicals, pesticides, and herbicides. Each of four sites was sampled 15 times for three consecutive nights with mist nets (6 x 3 m) deployed within the forest fragment (nine nets) and surrounding area (five nets). Nets were deployed for 12 h/night (18:00–06:00 h) and checked every 45 minutes. Each captured bat was weighed, forearm length was measured, and body condition calculated (body weight/forearm length). Bats were marked before release.

    (Summarised by: Anna Berthinussen)

  2. Retain or plant native trees and shrubs amongst crops (agroforestry)

    A replicated, site comparison study in 2011–2012 of four tropical forest fragments in livestock farming areas in Córdoba, Columbia (Chacón-Pacheco & Ballesteros-Correa 2019) found that great fruit-eating bats Artibeus lituratus captured in ‘silvopastoral’ areas that used agroforestry, along with no chemicals, had higher body weights and body condition scores than those within conventional farming areas. Great fruit-eating bats captured in ‘silvopastoral’ areas had a higher average body weight (64 g) and body condition score (0.93) than those captured in conventional farming areas (59.5 g; 0.86). In August 2011–July 2012, great fruit-eating bats were captured at forest fragments within each of two ‘silvopastoral’ areas (total 260 bats) and two conventional farming areas (total 69 bats). ‘Silvopastoral’ areas grazed livestock amongst trees, shrubs, and crops, without chemicals. Conventional areas grazed livestock in monocultures with little tree or shrub cover, and used agrochemicals, pesticides, and herbicides. Each of four sites was sampled 15 times for three consecutive nights with mist nets (6 x 3 m) deployed within the forest fragment (nine nets) and surrounding area (five nets). Nets were deployed for 12 h/night (18:00–06:00 h) and checked every 45 minutes. Each captured bat was weighed, forearm length was measured, and body condition calculated (body weight/forearm length). Bats were marked before release.

    (Summarised by: Anna Berthinussen)

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust