Salvato in:
Dettagli Bibliografici
Autori principali: Eghbali, Hojjat, Sharifi, Mozafar
Natura: Recurso digital
Lingua:
Pubblicazione: Zenodo 2020
Soggetti:
Accesso online:https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13479200
Tags: Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
_version_ 1866901173694365696
author Eghbali, Hojjat
Sharifi, Mozafar
author_facet Eghbali, Hojjat
Sharifi, Mozafar
contents (Uploaded by Plazi for the Bat Literature Project) Studies on the postnatal growth of free-ranging bats can be based on multiple recaptures of marked individuals of known age (longitudinal sampling) or derived from measurements of captured pups with unknown birth dates (cross-sectional sampling). We therefore used individuals of Geoffroy's bat Myotis emarginatus in a case study to test the hypothesis that these two methods yield similar data on growth rates and growth derivatives. We followed postnatal growth in body mass, forearm length, and total epiphyseal gap in 24 tagged neonates sampled 10 times (via 143 cases of longitudinal sampling) and compared finding with those deriving from cross-sectional sampling carried out on the same occasions among 138 non-tagged neonates of the same colony. A generalized estimating equation relating to the first 3 weeks of postnatal growth indicated that initial values (y-intercepts) for forearm length and body mass did not differ significantly between groups sampled in the two ways (P > 0.05), while rates of growth characterized by these parameters were found to differ significantly (P < 0.05). In relation to the length of total epiphyseal gap obtained for days 12–40, tests for equal intercepts and parallelism confirmed significant differences between the two sampling methods at P < 0.05. Specifically, cross-sectional sampling of the three growth parameters resulted in significant overestimation of ages among the studied bats. However, given the greater logistical challenges with longitudinal sampling, our demonstration of the relative value of the two sampling methods, and of their dependence for accuracy on the amount of variation found in growth variables, allows us to persist in advocating cross-sectional sampling in postnatal studies on bats.
format Recurso digital
id zenodo_https___doi_org_10_5281_zenodo_13479200
institution Zenodo
language
publishDate 2020
publisher Zenodo
record_format zenodo
spellingShingle Comparing longitudinal and cross-sectional sampling methods on growth variables and age estimation: lessons from postnatal growth of the Geoffroy's bat, Myotis emarginatus
Eghbali, Hojjat
Sharifi, Mozafar
Biodiversity
Mammalia
Chiroptera
Chordata
Animalia
bats
bat
(Uploaded by Plazi for the Bat Literature Project) Studies on the postnatal growth of free-ranging bats can be based on multiple recaptures of marked individuals of known age (longitudinal sampling) or derived from measurements of captured pups with unknown birth dates (cross-sectional sampling). We therefore used individuals of Geoffroy's bat Myotis emarginatus in a case study to test the hypothesis that these two methods yield similar data on growth rates and growth derivatives. We followed postnatal growth in body mass, forearm length, and total epiphyseal gap in 24 tagged neonates sampled 10 times (via 143 cases of longitudinal sampling) and compared finding with those deriving from cross-sectional sampling carried out on the same occasions among 138 non-tagged neonates of the same colony. A generalized estimating equation relating to the first 3 weeks of postnatal growth indicated that initial values (y-intercepts) for forearm length and body mass did not differ significantly between groups sampled in the two ways (P > 0.05), while rates of growth characterized by these parameters were found to differ significantly (P < 0.05). In relation to the length of total epiphyseal gap obtained for days 12–40, tests for equal intercepts and parallelism confirmed significant differences between the two sampling methods at P < 0.05. Specifically, cross-sectional sampling of the three growth parameters resulted in significant overestimation of ages among the studied bats. However, given the greater logistical challenges with longitudinal sampling, our demonstration of the relative value of the two sampling methods, and of their dependence for accuracy on the amount of variation found in growth variables, allows us to persist in advocating cross-sectional sampling in postnatal studies on bats.
title Comparing longitudinal and cross-sectional sampling methods on growth variables and age estimation: lessons from postnatal growth of the Geoffroy's bat, Myotis emarginatus
topic Biodiversity
Mammalia
Chiroptera
Chordata
Animalia
bats
bat
url https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13479200