Otoyol drenaj yapılarında yarasa İzlemesi için alternatif bir yöntem olarak fotokapan yöntemi

Year 2021, Volume: 14 Issue: 2, 249 - 257, 15.08.2021

Şirin Bahar Can , Abdullah Hasbenli

https://doi.org/10.46309/biodicon.2021.926740

Abstract

Yollar, habitatların parçalanmasına, tahrip edilmesine ve kaybına neden olarak birçok yaban hayvanın beslenme, üreme ve dağılımını engelleyebilirler. Yolların yaban hayatı üzerine olumsuz etkilerinin azaltmak için stratejiler geliştirmek gereklidir. Yol güzergâhında etki azaltmak amacıyla inşa edilmiş olmasa da, drenaj yapıları, bu olumsuzlukları azaltmada etkili olmaktadır. Bu yüzden drenaj yapılarını, yaban hayatı tarafından kullanımı anlayabilmek için izlemek önemlidir. Drenaj yapılarında yarasa geçişlerinin tespiti için uzun süreli izlemelerde alternatif bir metot olarak fotokapan yönteminin etkinliği araştırılmıştır. Fotokapan yönteminin etkin olduğu yapı ebatlarını belirleyebilmek için Anadolu Otoyolu’nun Kahramankazan Gerede arasında kalan bölümündeki 25 drenaj yapısında 2018-2019 yıllarında fotokapan çalışmaları yapılmıştır. Çalışmaların sonucunda bir drenaj yapısı hariç tüm drenaj yapılarında toplam 1727 yarasa geçişi kaydedilmiştir. Yarasa geçiş sayılarına göre en fazla geçiş 1. su kanalında olurken 3. dere geçişinde geçiş kaydedilmemiştir. Yapı ebatlarından yükseklik ve uzunluğun fotokapan etkinliğinde önemli bir değişken olmadığı ancak yapı eni arttıkça fotokapan etkinliğinin azaldığı belirlenmiştir. 3-4 metrekare kesit alanına sahip drenaj yapılarında fotokapan yöntemi etkin olarak kullanılabilir.

Keywords

Spearman korelasyonu, yaban hayatı geçitleri, menfez, HC-300A

Supporting Institution

Gazi Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma Projeleri (BAP)

Project Number

05/2019-10

Thanks

Bu araştırma Gazi Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma Projeleri (BAP) tarafından desteklenmiştir. Proje kodu 05/2019-10’dur. Saha çalışmaları sırasında bizden destek ve yardımlarını eksik etmeyen Karayolları 4. Bölge Müdürlüğü Çeltikçi Bakım İşletme Şefliği ve Karayolları 4. Bölge Müdürlüğü Cankurtaran Bakım İşletme Şefliğine teşekkür ederiz.

Camera Trap Method in Highway Drainage Structures as an Alternative Method for Bat Monitoring

Abstract

Roads can impede the feeding, breeding and distribution of many wild animals as they cause fragmentation, destruction and loss of habitats. It is necessary to develop strategies in order reduce the devastating effects of roads on wildlife. Although not built to reduce the impact on the road route, drainage structures are effective in limiting roads-related negativity on wildlife. Consequently, it is critical to monitor drainage structures in order to comprehend its usage by wildlife. The camera trap method and its effectiveness were investigated as an alternative method in long-term monitoring for detecting bat passing in drainage structures. In order to determine the size of the building where the camera trap method is effective, photo-trapping studies were carried out in 25 drainage structures in the section of the Anatolian Highway between Kahramankazan Gerede in 2018-2019. As a result of the studies, a total of 1727 bat passages were recorded in all drainage structures except one drainage structure. According to the number of bat passes, the maximum passage is in the drainage structure on the 1st water channel, while the passage in the drainage structure on the 3rd stream is not recorded. It has been determined that the height and length of the drainage structure dimensions are not an important variable in the camera trap efficiency, but the camera trap efficiency decreases as the width of the structure increases. Moreover, the camera trap method can be used effectively in drainage structures with a cross-sectional area of 3-4 square meters.

Keywords

Spearman correlation, wildlife passages, culvert, HC-300A

Project Number

05/2019-10

References

• Abbott, I. M., Berthinussen, A., Stone, E., Boonman, M., Melber, M., & John Altringham. (2015). Bats and Roads. In R. van der Ree, Daniel J. Smith, & C. Grilo (Eds.), Handbook of Road Ecology (pp. 290–299). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
• Bach, L., Burkhardt, P., & Limpens, H. J. G. A. (2004). Tunnels as a Possibility to Connect Bat Habitats. Mammalia, 68(4), 411–420. https://doi.org/10.1515/mamm.2004.041
• Barcelona Field Studies Centre. ' Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient Rs and Probability (p) Value Calculator'.Erişim: 20.04.2021. https://geographyfieldwork.com/SpearmansRankCalculator.html
• Bender, D. J., & Fahrig, L. (2005). Matrix Structure Obscures the Relationship Between Interpatch Movement And Patch Size And Isolation. Ecology, 86(4), 1023–1033. https://doi.org/10.1890/03-0769
• Bennett, V. J., & Zurcher, A. A. (2013). When Corridors Collide: Road-Related Disturbance in Commuting Bats. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 77(1), 93–101. https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.467
• Boonman, M. (2011). Factors Determining the Use of Culverts Underneath Highways and Railway Tracks by Bats in Lowland! Areas. Lutra, 54(1), 3–16.
• Clevenger, A. P., Chruszcz, B., & Gunson, K. (2001). Drainage culverts as habitat linkages and factors affecting passage by mammals. Journal of Applied Ecology, 38(6), 1340–1349. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0021-8901.2001.00678.x
• Cutler, T. L., & Swann, D. E. (1999). Using Remote Photography in Wildlife Ecology: A Review. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 27(3), 571–581.
• Dodd, N. L., Gagnon, J. W., Manzo, A. L., & Schweınsburg, R. E. (2007). Video Surveillance to Assess Highway Underpass Use by Elk in Arizona. Journal of Wildlife Management, 71(2), 637–645.
• Donaldson, B. (2007). Use of Highway Underpasses by Large Mammals and Other Wildlife in Virginia: Factors Influencing Their Effectiveness. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2011(1), 157–164. https://doi.org/10.3141/2011-17
• Fahrig, L. (2003). Effects of Habitat Fragmentation on Biodiversity. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 34(1), 487–515. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132419
• Fensome, A. G., & Mathews, F. (2016). Roads and Bats: A Meta-Analysis and Review of the Evidence on Vehicle Collisions and Barrier Effects. Mammal Review, 46(4), 311–323. https://doi.org/10.1111/mam.12072
• Grilo, C., Bissonette, J. A., & Cramer, P. C. (2010). Mitigation Measures to Reduce Impacts on Biodiversity. In S. R. Jones (Ed.), Highways: Construction, Management, and Maintenance (pp. 73–114).
• Grilo, C., Bissonette, J. A., & Santos-Reis, M. (2008). Response of carnivores to existing highway culverts and underpasses: Implications for road planning and mitigation. Biodiversity and Conservation, 17(7), 1685–1699. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-008-9374-8
• Highways Agency. (2006). Best Practice in Enhancement of Highway Design for Bats (p. 83) [Teknik]. Bat Conservation Trust and Highways Agency.
• Kerth, G., & Melber, M. (2009). Species-Specific Barrier Effects of a Motorway on the Habitat Use of Two Threatened Forest-Living Bat Species. Biological Conservation, 142, 270–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2008.10.022
• [17] Laurance, S. G. W., Stouffer, P. C., & Laurance, W. F. (2004). Effects of Road Clearings on Movement Patterns of Understory Rainforest Birds in Central Amazonia. Conservation Biology, 18(4), 1099–1109. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00268.x
• O’Connell, A. F., Nichols, J. D., & Karanth, K. U. (Eds.). (2011). Camera Traps in Animal Ecology: Methods and Analyses. Springer.
• Rydell, J., & Russo, D. (2015). Photography as a Low-Impact Method to Survey Bats. Mammalian Biology, 80(3), 182–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2014.11.003
• Spearman, C. (1904). ""General Intelligence," Objectively Determined and Measured". The American Journal of Psychology. 15 (2): 201–292.
• Yanes, M., Velasco, J. M., & Suárez, F. (1995). Permeability of roads and railways to vertebrates: The importance of culverts. Biological Conservation, 71(3), 217–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/0006-3207(94)00028-O