Biodiversity Data Journal : Data Paper (Biosciences)
PDF
Data Paper (Biosciences)
Bats of Georgia - an occurrence dataset from 1835 through 2022
expand article infoIoseb Natradze‡, Alexander Buknikashvili‡, Giorgi Sheklashvili‡, Levan Mumladze‡
‡ Institute of Zoology of Ilia State University, Tbilisi, Georgia
Corresponding author: Ioseb Natradze (ioseb.natradze@iliauni.edu.ge)
Academic editor: Krizler Tanalgo
Received: 08 Mar 2023 | Accepted: 07 May 2023 | Published: 09 Jun 2023
© 2023 Ioseb Natradze, Alexander Buknikashvili, Giorgi Sheklashvili, Levan Mumladze
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation: Natradze I, Buknikashvili A, Sheklashvili G, Mumladze L (2023) Bats of Georgia - an occurrence dataset from 1835 through 2022. Biodiversity Data Journal 11: e103181. https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.11.e103181
 Open Access

Abstract

Background

In Georgia, currently, 30 species of bats are recorded from four families and eleven genera. Although the oldest record of bats is from 1835 and continues until today, there are no comprehensive data available for bat diversity and distribution in Georgia. Thus, we aimed to fill that gap and make complete, expertly curated literature and our own published data openly available (through GBIF) for researchers and conservationists.

New information

In this publication, out of 1987 records, 1243 (62.4%) are new and unpublished data. Generally, out of all records, 34% are literature and museum data and 66% are data collected by us. Additionally, for the first time in the history of the study of bats in Georgia, we initiated surveys in forested areas of the country.

Keywords

Bats, Chiroptera, dataset, distribution, Caucasus, Georgia

Introduction

Georgia is a part of the Caucasus biodiversity hotspot - one of 36 biodiversity hotspots recognised in the world, with incredible landscape and species diversity (Myers et al. 2000; Mittermeier et al. 2011; Noss et al. 2014). Although Georgia, as a part of the Caucasus, was distinguished as a biodiversity hotspot 22 years ago, the diversity and distribution of animal species remains poorly investigated (Mumladze et al. 2020). Even the inventory of vertebrate taxa (that were used by Myers et al. (2000) along with plants to delineate biodiversity hotspots) is not yet satisfactorily done, leaving room to improve the understanding of species diversity, distribution and ecological requirements.

The oldest documented record of bats in Georgia dates back to 1835 when Nordmann (1840) reported four species. This was followed by surveys conducted by Kolenati in 1843 (Kolenati 1860). After that and for nearly 40 years, no new data were collected until the beginning of the 20th century (Radde 1899; Satunin 1903; Satunin 1908; Satunin 1912; Satunin 1915). As a result, 16 species for Georgia were indicated. Bat research even in the 20th century was not active, rather was sporadic and information was scattered in different Georgian and Russian publications: Chkhikvishvili (1926); Ognev 1928; Kuzyakin (1950); Janashvili (1953); Janashvili (1963); and these publications report 22 species for Georgia. Sporadic information about bat species occurrence is also given in the publications by non-bat researchers including Papava 1949; Papava 1953; Papava 1960; Matsaberidze 1961; Avaliani (1963); Matsaberidze and Khotenovsky 1966; Matsaberidze and Khotenovskii 1967; Avaliani (1969a); Avaliani (1969b); Avaliani (1970); Avaliani (1973); Perov 1975; Avaliani (1976); Matsaberidze (1976); Perov 1980; Perov (1983); Strelkov (1983); Strelkov (1988); and Shidlovsky (2013).

Systematic surveys of the bat fauna of Georgia were started at the end of the 20th century and resulted in a number of publications (Bukhnikashvili and Kandaurov 2002; Ivanitsky 2002; Bukhnikashvili et al. 2004; Gazaryan and Bukhnikashvili 2005; Bukhnikashvili et al. 2008; Gazaryan et al. 2008; Yavruyan et al. 2008; Bukhnikashvili et al. 2009; Ivanitsky 2010; Gazaryan et al. 2017; Ivanitsky 2017; Ivanitsky 2018; Imnadze et al. 2020; Urushadze et al. 2021). As a result of these studies, the number of bat species recorded in Georgia increased to 26 (Bukhnikashvili 2004). However, a considerable part of the results of bat surveys conducted during the last 25 years are either published in grey literature (i.e. publicly unavailable project reports) or kept unpublished by the authors. In addition to distribution data for other species, our unpublished data also provides records of four additional species (Rhinolophus blasii, Myotis alcathoe, Myotis davidii and Tadarida teniotis) in Georgia that have not been previously documented in the literature. Thus, the goal of the present publication was to consolidate all available data about bat records of Georgia from 1835 through to 2022 into a comprehensive dataset and make it available through global and open-source databases such as GBIF (GBIF.org 2023) in order to facilitate further research and conservation of bats in Georgia.

Sampling methods

Description: 

The dataset, prepared by Natradze et al. (2023), contains information about 1987 records of 30 species of four families and 11 genera collected from 1835 through to 2023 in country of Georgia (Fig. 1).

Figure 1.  

Bat records in Georgia from 1835 through to 2023.

Sampling description: 

These records are based on literature published in Georgian, Russian and English languages, as well as data collected in the field by the authors during the last three decades. To collect field data, we employed various methods, including mist-netting, harp traps, visual inspection of both artificial and natural underground and overground habitats and other shelters (Dietz and Kiefer 2016). Additionally, we used hand-held bat detectors, specifically the Pettesson D240x ultrasound bat model. In our dataset, we use data obtained through hand-held bat detectors, which were validated by visually confirming the presence of the bat. To ensure high data quality, all recorded data were included only if bats were identified at the species level.

Quality control: 

In the dataset, 37.4% of records are based on literature. For each of the literature records, we retrieved as much information as possible, such as sampling date, location, closest populated area, habitat etc. For most of the literature data (especially old ones), no exact geographic coordinates were given. However, since the vernacular names of sampling areas (i.e. names of subterranean objects) along with habitat descriptions were provided in many cases, we were able to exactly georeference a large number of sampling locations for 55.9% of literature records. On the other hand, not all records in literature are supplied with sampling dates and we were able to retrieve information on sampling dates for only 81.6% of literature records.

In the dataset, we provide location common names for all records. Geographic coordinates with 4 m accuracy are given for most of the records (74%), while for 26% (all literature data) of records, we have coordinates without accurate information. Additionally, 9% of records are given without the collecting dates. Record summary by species is given in Table 1, while the species records with metadata are provided at the GBIF web portal (Natradze et al. 2023).

Table 1.
Download as
CSV
XLSX

Number of records for each species.

#

Species

Total Number of records

Literature & Museum data

Our published & unpublished data

Unpublished data

Chiroptera

Rhinolophidae

Rhinolophus

1

Rhinolophus ferrumequinum (Schreber, 1774)

185

58

127

84

2

Rhinolophus hipposideros (André, 1797)

167

83

84

53

3

Rhinolophus euryale Blasius, 1853

51

20

31

23

4

Rhinolophus blasii Peters, 1866

6

0

6

5

5

Rhinolophus mehelyi Matschie, 1901

5

5

0

0

Vespertilionidae

Myotis

6

Myotis blythii (Tomes, 1857)

120

34

86

61

7

Myotis bechsteinii Kuhl, 1817

25

4

21

21

8

Myotis daubentonii (Kuhl, 1817)

41

6

35

33

9

Myotis natereri (Kuhl, 1817)

65

12

53

51

10

Myotis emarginatus (Geoffroy, 1806)

72

15

57

35

11

Myotis alcathoe von Helversen & Heller, 2001

25

1

24

24

12

Myotis brandtii (Eversmann, 1845)

28

3

25

24

13

Myotis davidii (Peters, 1869)

3

0

3

3

14

Myotis mystacinus (Kuhl, 1817)

89

33

56

54

Nyctalus

15

Nyctalus noctula (Schreber, 1774)

89

16

73

72

16

Nyctalus leisleri (Kuhl, 1817)

87

10

77

68

17

Nyctalus lasiopterus (Schreber, 1780)

23

7

16

8

Eptesicus

18

Eptesicus nilssonii (von Keyserling & Blasius, 1839)

4

1

3

2

19

Eptesicus serotinus (Schreber, 1774)

160

48

112

105

Pipistrellus

20

Pipistrellus pipistrellus (Schreber, 1774)

289

64

225

218

21

Pipistrellus pygmaeus (Leach, 1825)

74

0

74

70

22

Pipistrellus kuhlii (Kuhl, 1817)

83

11

72

70

23

Pipistrellus nathusii (von Keyserling & Blasius, 1839)

17

15

2

2

Hypsugo

24

Hypsugo savii (Bonaparte, 1837)

23

4

19

17

Barbastella

25

Barbastella barbastellus (Schreber, 1774)

63

8

55

49

Plecotus

26

Plecotus auritus (Linnaeus, 1758)

60

29

31

29

27

Plecotus macrobularis Kuzyakin, 1965

14

5

9

8

Vespertilio

28

Vespertilio murinus Linnaeus, 1758

38

15

23

23

Miniopteridae

Miniopterus

29

Miniopterus schreibersii (Kuhl, 1817)

65

35

30

18

Molossidae

Tadarida

30

Tadarida teniotis (Rafinesque, 1814)

14

1

13

13

Our database contains several cases that require further clarification regarding the identity of certain species, including: (i) some records of Myotis nattereri may actually pertain to M. tschuliensis, as suggested by Çoraman et al. (2019) and Kruskop and Solovyeva (2020); (ii) the identification of M. davidii/mystacinus may be erroneous due to their cryptic nature; and (iii) the potential existence of another species, Miniopterus pallidus, in eastern Georgia, as proposed by Šrámek et al. (2012). However, additional research, including DNA analysis, is required to confirm the identity of these species. Any modifications resulting from these investigations will be reflected in the subsequent version of the dataset.

Geographic coverage

Description: 

The presented bat distribution dataset originated from the whole Georgian territory. Georgia (Fig. 1), covering an area of 69,700 km2, is located on the southern slopes of the Great Caucasus Mountain Range, Lesser Caucasus Mountains on the isthmus between the Black and Caspian Seas. It contains lowlands between the above-mentioned mountain ranges which include the Colchis lowland in the west (along the Black Sea Coast) and the Kura River lowland in the east. The land of Georgia covers an elevation range from sea level to approximately 5,184 m at Mount Shkhara. Two-thirds of the country is mountainous with an average height of 1200 m a.s.l.

Due to its diverse geography, the climate of the region varies greatly, from very humid lowlands and mountain forests in the west to dry forests and semi-deserts in the east and glaciated nival belts in the north. There are two zoogeographic subzones and three zoogeographic provinces in Georgia: the Circumboreal subzone (the Caucasus district of the European forest province) and Mediterranean subzone (the Anterior Asia district of the Mediterranean province and the Kura district of the Iran-Turan province) (Verestchagin 1959). Georgia has about 72 types of landscapes (Beruchashvili 2000): humid sub-tropic landscapes are in the western part; alpine landscapes are spread in the northern and north-eastern part; the typical Middle East treeless uplands are presented in the southern part; and semi-deserts of the Turanian type in the southeast part of the country.

The studied territory contains diverse bat habitats. Along with various kinds of forests (temperate broadleaf, evergreen and dry forests), particularly relevant are the western Great Caucasus slopes, which are represented by a number of Karst massifs that provide a large and diverse (yet only partly explored) subterranean environment suitable for bat species.

Coordinates: 

40.946 and 43.818 Latitude; 39.660 and 46.933 Longitude.

Temporal coverage

Notes: 

The dataset includes data collected from 1835 through to 2023. For all other records, time coverage could be divided into the following time periods, data collected in (i) 19th, (ii) 20th and (iii) 21st centuries. In the 19th century, there are 53 records which make up 2.7% of all records; in the 20th century, there are 231 records which make up 11.6% of all records and in the 21st century, there are 1523 records, which make up 76.7%. From the 1523 records, made in the 21st century, 1239 records are new, unpublished records, which make up 62.4% of all records.

Usage licence

Usage licence: 
Open Data Commons Attribution License

Data resources

Data package title: 
Bats of Georgia
Resource link: 
https://www.gbif.org/dataset/8e1c23ba-5618-4bba-8fbf-a195cce8dda0
Number of data sets: 
1
Data set name: 
batsofgeorgia
Data format: 
Excel table
Data format version: 
V1.2
Column label Column description
occurrenceID Unique identifier of record.
kingdom The full scientific name of the kingdom in which the taxon is classified.
phylum The full scientific name of the phylum in which the taxon is classified.
class The full scientific name of the class in which the taxon is classified.
order The full scientific name of the order in which the taxon is classified.
family The full scientific name of the subfamily in which the taxon is classified.
scientificName Species full scientific (Latin) name including authorship and year.
locality The specific description of the place of collection.
eventDate Collection event date.
countryCode Standard ISO 3166-1-alpha-2 country code
decimalLatitude The geographic latitude (in decimal degrees).
decimalLongitude The geographic longitude (in decimal degrees).
geodeticDatum Geographic coordinates reference system EPSG.
coordinateUncertaintyInMetres Coordinate measurement accuracy (metres in case of GPS recordings, NA - if manually georeferenced). However, see the field "dataGeneralisations" for furher details
minimumElevationInMetres Minimum elevation above sea level.
maximumElevationInMetres Maximum elevation above sea level.
associatedReferences Source for the particular record.
georeferenceSources The system used during the georeferencing.
dataGeneralisations According to the "Agreement on the Conservation of Populations of European Bats" (Eurobats, United Nations Environment Programme, Eurobats, May 2019), (Retrieved 7 August 2019), we intentionally reduced the precision of geographic coordinates in the dataset, while more precise information is available upon request.
basisOfRecord The specific nature of the data record.
institutionCode The code of the institution where data are stored.
collectionCode The code of the collection.

Additional information

Field data were collected under the permissions #2722/01; 2302/01; R/057-21, issued by the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Agriculture of Georgia.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Shota Rustaveli National Foundation of Georgia (SRNSFG) [FR-19-2295]. We would like to thank Mr. Andro Kandaurov (Institute of Zoology of Ilia State University) and Dr. Suren Gazaryan (UNEP/EUROBATS secretariat) for their input in the building of the dataset. We would like to thank Dr. David Bloom (VertNet: Sebastopol, California, US) who provided invaluable assistance with regard to GBIF IPT use and data preparation.

References

login to comment