Jump to content

Talk:Bat

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 65.216.235.42 (talk) at 18:58, 17 May 2007. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconMammals Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconSoftware: Computing Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Sacred

Bats are sacred in England? -- IHCOYC 14:34 25 Jun 2003 (UTC)

What sort of statement/question is that? I presume you are a none English speaker by it?

Bats (all species) are fully protected by law in the UK, not just in England ie, it is illegal to disturb them or even handle one without permission. Steve-nova

But sacred would mean they are revered, in a religious kind of way. That is not the case in the UK! Agree with Ihcoyc. Pcb21| Pete 15:19, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
And I quote from dictionary.com's description of the word Sacred: "properly immune from violence, interference, etc., as a person or office." and "secured against violation, infringement, etc., as by reverence or sense of right: sacred oaths; sacred rights.". Sacred is the right word and isn't *always* based in religion SmUX 13:07, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

are bats invertabrates? you guys dont tell people nothin! Notta thing!

20% of all mammals are bats?

This BBC article says that "Bats make up 20% of mammals." If someone can confirm this factoid, it might make an interesting addition to the article. --NeuronExMachina 00:23, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Some 1100 bats and some 5500 mammals makes exactly 20 percent. Ucucha 09:31, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I believe you, but where are those numbers from? --Acefox 05:04, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Mammal Taxonomy, and probably also MSW 3rd edition. It may be something more or less. In any case, the number of bat species is increasing with great speed. Ucucha|... 05:50, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's true. They're are the most numerous of all mammals next to rodents. Dora Nichov 03:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

any more information on how about a bat goes about making the chirp noises

how do the bats go about making the chirping sounds, all 3 animals do use echolocation, but each has different parts that are unique to the species that should be documented in some way.

Might also do to mention, the "chirp" lasts just 0.01sec (10 millisec), & all bats are said to have individual calls... Trekphiler 05:44, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Megabats vs microbats

There are some statements in the article which apply only to microbats, not all bats. If no one objects, I will modify or delete the incorrect statements, possibly moving the statements to the microbat article.

All bats are active at night or at twilight, so the eyes of most species are poorly developed

The eyes of megabats are highly developed.

The teeth resemble those of the insectivores.

The milk teeth of the two types of bats are distinct (http://www.uq.edu.au/nuq/jack/funeral.html). I suspect that the adult teeth are distinct as well, but I don't know.

Does anyone know whether one-way valves are in the arteries of megabats and microbats?

Nereocystis 00:01, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There are also some microbats, for example in the familie Phyllostomidae, that are active at days, I thought. Ucucha (talk) 19:05, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Referring to the separately evolved capacity for flight between megabats and microbats, the article says "if so, the Microchiroptera would have uncertain affinities." But it is unclear what "uncertain affinities" means. A link to a definition, or a brief explanation contained within the same paragraph, would be helpful. Robert K S 04:49, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

no bat has poorly developed eyes! It's a myth! Bats aren't blind! Dora Nichov 03:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Picture label wrong?

The image used, Image:Big-eared-townsend-fledermaus.jpg is described on its page as a Big eared townsend bat (Corynorhinus townsendii), yet this article calls it a Leaf-nosed bat in the hover text.

Leaf-nosed bats do not include Corynorhinus, according to the Leaf-nosed bat article. --Singkong2005 04:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be fixed now - I trust that it is indeed a Big eared townsend bat --Singkong2005 03:35, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why bat fly at night.

Is there any reason why bat fly during the night. Is it possible because as a warm blooded mammals, the temperature generated during flying can reach dangerous level if the bat fly under sunlight? Yosri 12:37, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's more likely to be related to having evolved from a nocturnal animal and to fill ecological niches not previously occupied by birds. --Aranae 20:32, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, there's less birds at night, so that's where a flying mammal could fit in. Dora Nichov 03:30, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

>> AND...there's plenty of nocturnal flying insects. I wonder what Darwin says about how food-supply drives evolution.

Number of species

I really want to see the number of species given in the article, as most people have no idea at all what a large percentage of mammal species the bats are. I used the figure from 20% of all mammals are bats? above on this page. We can tweak this as necessary, but as I say, I think it really belongs in the article (and in the introductory section, to boot). -- Writtenonsand 20:17, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There 1100+ species (1144 according to my own listing), but these numbers are in state of flux: last year 11 new species (and two new genera) were described, and some others have been resurrected. I think it'd be safe to say that there are 1100-1150 species of bats, which is about 20% of the total of 5500+ mammals. Ucucha (talk) 19:59, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many bats likely fly at night due to their food source is active at that time. Due to their ability to locate food through the use of ecolocation (insead of by sight), there is no advantage to fly during the day. www.crittercatchersinc.com

Torpor

I have read that bats enter a state of torpor during the day is this all bats (Mega & micro) this could do with mentioning some where.--SuperJ587 13:01, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I created the first article and then found that the second linked to it. However, it's a different type of bat (Hoary Wattled bat). One thing I did notice that several of the "Vespertilionidae" were listed as "Chanlinolobus" a quick (and I admit it's not always a relilable guid) search of Google would indicate that "Chalinolobus" is the more correct spelling. See the search results for "Chanlinolobus dwyeri" and "Chalinolobus dwyeri". I changed them based on that but would ask that someone else reveiw.

Also please review the Hoar bat article as I am basing it on a Canadian book printed in Nunavut yet the bat is found in other countries and needs that input. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 16:15, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bats evolved from civets

What source is this from as I haven't been able to find it anywhere147.188.27.81 12:28, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's crap. If it is in the article, it should be deleted as soon as possible. Ucucha 13:15, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chickens are NOT eaten by bats, they are to big.

Yes, I've looked at the article and I see no links to any proof of this. It sure sounds odd, but truth is stranger than fiction. The point is the statement needs support. --SafeLibraries 14:05, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently the oldest bat fossil is 60 million years old and civets didn't exist as a group that early. Although who knows with the recent shake up, but it's certainly a strong enough claim to need strong proof.

Most experts say microbats are descended from shrew-like animals and megabats from lemur-like ones. Dora Nichov 08:03, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not so anymore. Nowadays many mammalogists seem to accept the notion that bats are a monophyletic group, which apparently evolved from something near the ancestry of the Carnivora. Microbats are not monophyletic; the so-called "Yinochiroptera" (Rhinolophidae, Rhinonycteridae, Megadermatidae, Rhinopomatidae, Craseonycteridae and Nycteridae) are more closely related to Pteropodidae than to the other microbats ("Yangochiroptera"), although that may be a slightly more controversial position. Ucucha 10:12, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lot of bigs words there, Ucucha! I like animals and know a lot 'bout them, but those are big words even for me. *Whew!* Dora Nichov 09:01, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Longevity

Recently a Brandt's Bat Myotis brandtii at least 41 years old was discovered in Russia. [1] --Anshelm '77 22:33, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thin as a drink of water

I'm having a hard time believing "bat bathing".

Some people enjoy bat bathing; standing at an opening to a cave they wait until the bats leave, surrounding them in a 'sea' of bats.

A citation was requested and not forthcoming, then the [Bat bathing] article was deleted, and the material deleted here, re-added, re-deleted, re-added. There is not another reference to this anywhere Googlable except derived from here. And while I could imagine someone might think it delicious to stand in a stream of hungry bats, notwithstanding the note about clumsiness and rabidity, it doesn't seem important to the article as a whole. I'm removing this mention and the non-existent link, and assume that any actual citations will accompany re-introduction. Shenme 08:19, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I found this an interesting concept so decided to look it up. I found a few links on google but nothing conclusive. Try http://www.trendpediawiki.com/Bat_bathing
One thing I have noticed, and this is probably an important point...*EVERY* single site that mentions this phenomena uses the *exact* same words mentioned above (that "some people enjoy...") so it is feeling more and more like an urban myth to me. However, reading the above link I gave, I notice that the "danger" mentioned above (rabidity) would only be an issue if the person "bathing" were to move...it's obvious when you think about it, they'll find a way around you fairly easily using their sonar and will only be a danger if you move or if they're vampire bats (muahahahahah, scrub that last bit about vampire bats :-)) SmUX 13:22, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hipposideridae

This is a family mentioned in the German and Dutch wikipedias, apparently defined by Lydekker in 1891, that isn't on the list here. Is it missing or has it since been placed somewhere else in the taxonomy? Rigadoun (talk) 19:41, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some experts ("lumpers") classify hipposiderid bats as members of the family Rhinolophidae, whereas others ("splitters") break hipposiderids out into their own family, the Hipposideridae. The first method (considering hipposiderids to be within the family Rhinolophidae) is the more traditional approach I believe, whereas recent techniques (e.g. molecular systematics) indicate that hipposiderids may be distinct enough to warrant elevation to family status. Either way, these two groups of bats are each others' closest relatives, so the choice of names and who to include where is something of a taxonomic-semantic issue. Tomwithanh 01:46, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does bats leave their caves left way...

Is it true that bats leave their caves flying always the left way? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.92.81.83 (talk) 21:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Never heard of that before. Dora Nichov 08:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think they'd have to leave the caves the right way if they're going to manage to get out ;) -JC 03:50, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. Dora Nichov 01:04, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do bats only spiral left when they leave caves?

David Winkelaar

I did a nice long search on this piece of trivia, and it turns out that it has been asked and answered with silliness, many times. The big bat caves of North America always seem to have counter-clockwise exit spirals, but nobody has systematically confirmed it with every cave. There was even an unreferenced suggestion that they have different directions in the north and south hemispheres, just like bathtubs! (not!). --Zeizmic 01:11, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The air in a cave tends to be at a different temperature than the air just outside. If this air is warmer than the outside air, it generates a thermal. One of the best ways for flying animals to gain altitude is to spiral around in a thermal -- and guess what happens if a swarm of bats don't all spiral around in the same direction? --Carnildo 22:13, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This would make a nice addition to the article, if someone could find a reference. -- Beland 02:28, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What's this about vectors for pathogens?

"Bats are natural reservoirs or vectors for a large number of zoonotic pathogens including rabies, SARS, Henipavirus (ie. Nipah virus and Hendra virus), West Nile virus and possibly ebola virus."

Where are the references for this? Most mammals can carry rabies, so I think that's a given. But is there evidence of bats carrying SARS, West Nile, and ebola? Have there been instances when these viruses have been passed on to humans, and is it common enough to warrant being in this article? Sounds to me like this is just trying to give bats a bad name.

Nekopan 03:41, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve added references to this section. Bats are recognised as important vectors for many human pathogens. There is strong evidence that they the primary reservoir for rabies (preceding canine rabies) and a number of recently emerged pathogens, such as SARS and henipaviruses, originated from bats. Rhys 04:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

___

Vampirate: From what I understand bats are not more likely to transmit rabies than any other mammal, and in fact few cases are acturally caused by bat bites.

There's definitely some vandalism on this page. I don't know exactly how to deal with it, so I'll let the pros do it. Just pointing it out.

Bat gestation period?

I came here specifically looking for this info, but it's not part of the article. A quick search of google gives me http://members.fortunecity.com/anemaw/bat.htm which says 50-60 days although another site (http://www.desertusa.com/jan97/du_bats.html) says 60-240 days although reading down to "breeding" it says 50-60 again. Another site explains this a little more clearly, at http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Adventist_Youth_Honors_Answer_Book/Nature/Bats_-_Advanced ...which says it is between 44 days and 8 months dependant on species SmUX 13:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A bat is not an insect. 65.216.235.42 18:58, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]