Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 412

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Feeding Strategies of the Little Brown Bat, Myotis Lucifugus, in Southern New Hampshire

Anthony, Edythe L. P., Kunz, Thomas H.·1977·Ecology

Abstract

Feeding strategies of the little brown bat, Myotis lucifugus, were investigated in southern New Hampshire USA from early May through late 1974. Nightly food consumption was estimated by comparing mean prefeeding body weights with postfeeding weights taken as individuals returned to the roost from their first feeding period (at 2200 to 2400h) and from a subsequent foraging period (at 0330 to 0500 h). Pregnant bats consumed an average of 2.5g of insects (2.72kJ/g prefeeding body weight) nightly. lactating females ate 3.7 g (4.23 kJ/g), and juveniles ingested 1.8 g (2.47 kJ/g). Increased food consumption in lactating bats accommodated reproductive energy demands and was facilitated by rising food availability. Increasing levels of independent food consumption in juveniles accompanied weaning. Fecal analysis revealed that diets of individual bats were diverse. All available insects 3 to 10 mm in body length were accepted as food items. Nematoceral Diptera were by far the most common insects taken in light—trap samples, and constituted a major portion of the diet throughout the summer. Coleoptera, Trichoptera, Lepidopter, Ephemeroptera, and Neuroptera were also consumed in appreciably numbers. Comparison of dietary composition with prey availability indicates that pregnant bats consumed 3—10 mm prey in approximate proportions encountered during June, when insect availability was low and unpredictable. However, lactating, postlactating, and nonproductive ♂ ♂ exhibited more selective feeding in July, when insects were more abundant. This increase in selectivity reflected exploitation of beetles and mayflies, which were uncommon in trap samples. In August, juveniles approximated random feeding patterns, as they learned to forage. We suggest that increased resource availability allowed selective feeding in adult bats during July, as predicted by presy selection models. However, reduced discriminatory abilities may prevent similar levels of prey selection in juveniles.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/1936213

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 412

Metadata

Authors
Anthony, E. L. P., & Kunz, T. H.
Venue
Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1977-07
Volume
58
Issue
4
Pages
775-786
ISSN
  • 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-9170
OpenAlex
W2333862484
Cited by
412
References
1
FWCI
8.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Feeding Strategies of the Little Brown Bat, Myotis Lucifugus, in Southern New Hampshire. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1936213
The paper
Anthony, E. L. P., & Kunz, T. H. (1977). Feeding Strategies of the Little Brown Bat, Myotis Lucifugus, in Southern New Hampshire. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/1936213

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.