SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.27 número1IT WASN’T SO HARD TO FIND. . . NEW RECORDS OF Lyncodon patagonicus (DE BLAINVILLE, 1842) (MAMMALIA, CARNIVORA, MUSTELIDAE) IN LA RIOJA PROVINCE, ARGENTINAREPRODUCTIVE FLEXIBILITY IN SOUTH AMERICAN CAMELIDS: FIRST RECORDS OF ALTERNATIVE MATING TACTICS IN WILD GUANACOS (Lama guanicoe) índice de autoresíndice de materiabúsqueda de artículos
Home Pagelista alfabética de revistas  

Servicios Personalizados

Revista

Articulo

Indicadores

  • No hay articulos citadosCitado por SciELO

Links relacionados

Compartir


Mastozoología neotropical

versión impresa ISSN 0327-9383versión On-line ISSN 1666-0536

Mastozool. neotrop. vol.27 no.1 Mendoza  2020

 

NOTA

CAN Carollia perspicillata (CHIROPTERA: PHYLLOSTOMIDAE) INDUCE SEED GERMINATION OF Cecropia pachystachya?

Carollia perspicillata (Chiroptera: Phyllostomidae) pode induzir a germinação de sementes de Cecropia pachystachya?

Ademir Kleber M. de Oliveira1 

Atenisi Pulchério-Leite2 

Jonathan W. F. Ribeiro3 

Valtecir Fernandes4 

1Laboratório de Pesquisa em Sistemas Ambientais e Biodiversidade, Universidade Anhanguera-Uniderp, Programa de Pós- Graduação em Meio Ambiente e Desenvolvimento Regional

2Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Conservação, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul

3Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Biológicas (Biologia Vegetal), Universidade Estadual Paulista

4Laboratório de Pesquisa em Sistemas Ambientais e Biodiversidade, Universidade Anhanguera-Uniderp, Programa de Pós- Graduação em Meio Ambiente e Desenvolvimento Regional

Abstract

We tested if seed germination of the tree Cecropia pachystachya is induced after being consumed by the frugivorous bat Carollia perspicillata. We carried out two essays; in the first, we compared germination of seeds from C. perspicillata feces, seeds chemically scarified in acid solutions, and seeds from fresh C. pachystachya infructescences. In the second essay we evaluated seed viability after four months storage. Percentage of seed germination was reduced after C. perspicillata ingestion, but nevertheless remained high (76%). Seeds ingested by this bat also maintain their viability after storage, and C. perspicillata can be considered an effective seed disperser of C. pachystachya seeds.

Resumo

Desenvolvemos dois experimentos para testar se C. perspicillata pode agir como indutor da germinação de sementes de C. pachystachya. Primeiro comparamos a germinação das sementes retiradas das fezes do morcego, de sementes tratadas em soluções ácidas e sementes retiradas de infrutescências da planta. Avaliamos também a germinação das sementes após 4 meses de armazenamento. A porcentagem de germinação das sementes foi reduzida após a ingestão do morcego, entretanto, ainda com altas taxas de germinação (76%). Sementes ingeridas pelo morcego mantiveram sua viabilidade após o período de armazenamento. C. perspicillata pode ser considerado um dispersor eficiente de sementes de C. pachystachya.

Palavras-chave Cerrado; dispersão de sementes; endozoocoria; frugivoria; morcegos

Zoochory is one of the most important dispersal strategies of plants, with about 50 to 90% of trees dispersing their seeds by animals in tropical forests and savannas (Fleming 1987; Vieira et al. 2002; Jordano et al. 2006). Seed dispersal that occurs after passing through the digestive tract of an animal (en dozoochory) is an important mutualistic relationship, where animals remove energy from fruits and the plant’s propagules are dispersed (Van Der Pijl 1982; Galetti et al. 2006).

Seeds that pass through the digestive tract of frugivorous may improve their germination rates, due to the removal of germination inhibitors and the rehydration of tissues by chemical scarification (Traveset & Verdú 2002; Robertson et al. 2006).

Between the frugivorous vertebrates, bats are recognized as one of the most important in the Neotropics (Galetti et al. 2006; Jordano et al. 2006; Muscarella & Fleming 2007; Fleming et al. 2009). They are excellent seed disperser of pioneer and early secondary plant species, making them important for the secondary succession process, allowing the seeds flow from conserved to modified areas (Fleming 1987; Jordano et al. 2006; Galetti et al. 2006; Fleming et al. 2009).

The family Phyllostomidae is widely distributed in the Neotropics with 160 species; and 120 species recorded as frugivorous and/or nectivorous (Simmons 2005). Frugivorous phyllostomids are recognized as efficient seed disperser in tropical forests (Fleming 1987). Between them, Carollia perspicillata (Linnaeus 1758) is one of the most widely distributed bats in the neotropics. It is a medium-sized bat (forearm ± 42.0 mm; weight 10-23 g) (Peracchi et al. 2006) and an important frugivorous generalist, feeding mainly of Cecropia, Ficus, Piper and Solanum species (Garcia et al. 2000; Passos et al. 2003; Carvalho-Ricardo et al. 2014; Parolin et al. 2016).

Bats can maintain mutualistic relationships with these species (Fleming et al. 2009; Parolin et al. 2016), inducing seed germination rate (Heer et al. 2010) or increasing speed of seed germination (Bocchese et al. 2007). But in other cases, there is no effect or even a decrease over seed germination (Tang et al. 2008; Oliveira et al. 2013).

Considering the importance of frugivorous bats for the dispersal of pioneer species and their role in the regeneration of degraded environments, here we investigate if the Neotropical frugivorous bat C. perspicillata can act as a germination inducer of a pioneer tree species, Cecropia pachystachya Trec. (Urticaceae). The species C. pachystachya is a pioneer tree with fast growth, heliophite and selectively hygrophilous. It occurs frequently in disturbed areas or in initial stages of ecological succession (Pott & Pott 1994). We sought to answer the following questions: Are the seed germination induced or reduced after bat digestion? Are the seed viability maintained after storage?

The study was carried out in the Quinta do Sol Privately Owned Nature Reserve (PONR) (Latitude 19°46’34.81”; Longitude 55°14’46.28”), at Taboco region, municipality of Corguinho, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil (Fig. 1). The typical native vegetation of the region consists of savanna physiognomies, where the woodlands, with crown cover of 50% to 90%, made up of trees with 8 to12 m tall, predominate, and with gallery forest occurring along streams (Oliveira-Filho & Ratter 2002). However, most of the landscape region is composed by planted pastures with Brachiaria humidicola (Rendlle) Schweick, used for beef cattle raising.

In October 2010, two nets (7x3 m) were set up near the ground in a riparian area. The nets were deployed two consecutive nights at 6:00 pm, and stayed open during six hours long, being inspected every hour when necessary. The catching effort was calculated as Straube & Bianconi (2002), where E = 504 m2.h. Seven bats of Carollia perspicillata species were captured. The identification of the captured bats was made based on Vizotto & Taddei (1973) and Díaz et al. (2016); for the region under study only C. perspicillata was cited (Fischer et al. 2015), among the four Carollia species existing in Brazil (Simmons 2005).

In the same occasion of bat captures, we collected mature infructescences of Cecropia pachystachya from 10 individuals in different sites. The captured bat specimens were left for two hours in cotton bags for their feces disposal and then transported to the field laboratory and placed in cages (41x34x16 cm polypropylene) covered with dark cloth, containing the infructescence of C. pachystachya and a cotton ball moistened with water. Each bat was subjected to the experiment only once in individual cages. The animals were trapped until the following day and released at dusk at the same location where they had been captured. Feces samples on the cage floor were collected and packed in paper envelopes. Seeds from excreta as well as fresh seeds from infructescence (not digested by bat) were separated with the aid of tweezers and stereoscopic microscopes and stored in sterile petri dishes.

Analysis of the Ethics Committee for Animal was not necessary because the research was inserted inside the Laboratory of Chiroptera as standard procedures. Bat captures were allowed by license of capture - IBAMA License no. 14/2005.

To verify if C. perspicillata are a germination inducer of C. pachystachya seeds, we compare the germination of different treatments: (1) with fresh seeds (control); (2) seeds treated with pH 2 acid solution (pH 2); (3) seeds treated with pH 3 acid solution (pH 3) and (4) seeds collected from feces (digestive tract). For pH 2 and pH 3 groups, fresh seeds were subjected to chemical scarification through the seed immersion in hydrochloric acid (HCl) during 1 minute in pH 2 and pH 3 solutions respectively (Bocchese et al. 2007).

Fig. 1 Location of Environmental Estancia Quinta do Sol, Taboco region, municipality of Corguinho, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil. 

All treatments consisted of four replicates with 25 seeds each, which were placed in Petri dishes (seven centimeters in diameter) on two sheets of filter paper and moistened with a 0.2% aqueous solution of Rovral fungida (volume of solution equivalent to 2.5 times the weight of the substrate). The dishes were kept in a germination chamber at a constant temperature of 30°C, with periods of 12 hours of artificial lighting (fluorescent lamps). Germinated seeds, those with a minimum protrusion of two mm of primary root, were counted daily for six consecutive days (Oliveira et al. 2013).

The remained seeds not used in germination tests (fresh seeds and feces seeds) were placed in individual Petri dishes and stored under laboratory conditions (temperature of 28.5°C ± 1.0°C and relative humidity between 60 and 70%). To verify the seed viability (for both fresh seeds and feces seeds) along time, we carried out germination tests every 30 days after seed collection, from November 2010 to February 2011, following the same procedures described above.

For each replicate, in all experiments, we calculated final germination percentage G% = 100. Σ ni · N-1 and mean germination time MGT = Σ ni.ti.Σni -1 whereΣni is the amount of germinated seeds in relation to the number of seeds (N) placed to germinate and niis the number of germinated seeds within the time interval ti -1 and ti (Ranal & Santana 2006). The germination percentage and mean germination time data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and the germination percentage of storage essay was analyzed with two- way ANOVA. The Tukey test (p < 0.05) was used to compare means.

There were significant differences between treatments in germination percentage (F =99.6; p<0.001), and MGT (F =173.3; p<0.001) (Table 1). Seed germination from C. perspicillata feces was 24% lower than seeds from infructescence. There was no significant difference in germination among seeds from feces and pH 2 treatment. Seed germination from pH 3 treatment differed from feces’ seeds but was statistically equal to pH 2 treatment. MGT increased for all treatments in relation to control seeds (Table 1).

Table 1 Means (± standard error) of germination percentage (%) and mean germination time (MGT ) of Cecropia pachystachya seeds for fresh seeds (Control), seeds from Carollia perspicillata feces (Feces) and chemically scarified seeds (pH 2 and pH 3). 

There was significant interaction between treatment and storage time (F =144.0; p<0.001). Storage affected seed germination only in seeds from C. pachystachya infructescence, with germination percentage remaining smaller in seeds from feces in relation to seeds from infructescence even after four months of storage (Fig. 2).

Our results indicate that the bat C. perspicillata was not a germination inducer of C. pachystachya seeds. However, seed germination remained high after bat ingestion (76%). A similar study reported that seed germination percentage of C. pachystachya not differed between seeds from infructescence (48%) and from C. perspicillata feces (57.5%). However, seed germination of another Cecropia species (C. glaziovii) was increased after ingestion by C. perspicillata (from 51.5 to 98%) (Rossaneis et al. 2015).

Regarding to other bat species, seeds of C. pachystachya ingested by Artibeus lituratus, Platyrrhinus lineatus, and Sturnira lilium, had not their germination percentage changed in relation to seeds from infructescence (Bocchese et al. 2007; Oliveira et al. 2013; Rossaneis et al. 2015).

The Piper genus is indicated as the main food item of C. perspicillata (Parolin et al. 2016). Seeds of this genus that have been ingested by C. perspicillata not changed or increased their germination for Piper aduncum, P. hispidinervum, and P. amalago (Garcia et al. 2000; Rossaneis et al. 2015). Moreover, the germination percentage of Solanum americanum, S. mauritianum, S. granuloso-leprosum, and Ficuseximia seeds that are ingested by C. perspicillata,also did not differ from seeds extracted from fruits (Rossaneis et al. 2015).

Although MGT was in general around four days (Table 1), the slight increase in MGT for seeds from feces and pH treatments may indicate some physiological change in the germination process. Similar results were notice in other studies where C. pachystachya seeds have MGT increased after P. lineatus and S. lilium ingestion (Oliveira et al. 2013; 2018).

The increase of MGT of seeds after bat ingestion has been interpreted for some studies as being a good aspect. Because a longer MGT may represent a germination distribution in time (Tang et al. 2008), it may allow seedlings to reach suitable conditions for their establishment in different periods, which increases survival in environments that suffer temporal variations in their abiotic factors (Brancalion & Marcos Filho 2008).

The distinct results of seed germination responses after bat ingestion found here and in other studies may be result of several factors. Such as differences in the pH of the bat species’ digestive system, digestion time, the amount of food consumption, and fruit consumption behavior (e.g. chewing), among others. The statistic similarity of pH 2 treatment and the feces treatment may indicate that the reduction in germination percentage of seeds from C. perspicillata feces is a result of stomach acids from digestive tract of bats. In general, the stomach of most mammals has a pH around 2, because the enzyme pepsin, which together with hydrochloric acid-releasing cells, promotes acidification (Schmidt-Nielsen 2002).

Seed storage reduced germination of seeds from C. pachystachya fruits, while seeds from C. perspicillata feces were not affected by storage period tested. It may indicate that the passage through bat digestive tract affected only seeds that which had low quality. Moreover, the removal of the pulp by passage through digestive tract may also reduce predation risk by insects and/or decrease fungal infection (Tang et al. 2008; Heer et al. 2010).

Cecropia pachystachya, a tree characteristic of the early stages of succession is one of the most abundant tree species in soil seed bank (Holthuijzen & Boerboom 1982; Grombone-Guaratini & Rodrigues 2002). Therefore, the large proportion of viable seeds from C. perspicillata feces after four months of storage (68%) may indicate that these seeds can maintain their viability in soil seed bank even after bat dispersion during a period of time.

Fig. 2 Germination percentage means (± standard error) of Cecropia pachystachya seeds from fruits and Carollia perspcillata feces, just after collection (October) and after four months storage (February). Different letters indicate significant difference among means according to Tukey test (p<0.05). 

A recent study reported that C. perspicillata consumed 40.7% of plants recorded in that study, and presented the highest value of the dispersion index (DII = 1.536) and the highest abundance of seeds consumed (Casallas-Pabón et al. 2017). Therefore, C. perspicillata may be an important seed disperser of Cecropia species and another plant species in several areas of the Neotropics. In fact, our results confirm the evidences of Lobova et al. (2003) that the bat dispersal is not necessary for germination of Cecropia seeds, but it may increase seed survival. Like other frugivorous bats (Lobova et al. 2003), we conclude that C. perspicillata is an effective disperser of C. pachystachya seeds.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico Tecnológico (CNPq) for providing the Scientific Start-up Grant (PIBIC), present research grant (PQ2) and Regional Scientific Development (DCR). We would also like to thank Fundação de Apoio ao Desenvolvimento do Ensino, Ciência e Tecnologia do Estado de Mato Grosso do Sul (FUNDECT). Finally, we extend our thanks to University for funding the GIP project (Grupo Interdisciplinar de Pesquisa).

REFERENCES

B01 Bocchese, R. A., A. K. M. Oliveira, & E. C. Vicente. 2007. Taxa e velocidade de germinação de sementes de Cecropia pachystachya Trécul (Cecropiaceae) ingeridas por Artibeus lituratus (Olfers, 1818) (Chiroptera: Phyllostomidae). Acta Scientiarum. Biological Sciences 29(4):395-399. https://doi.org/10.4025/actascibiolsci.v29i4.879Links ]

B02 Brancalion, P. H. S., & J. Marcos Filho. 2008. Distribuição da germinação no tempo: causas e importância para a sobrevivência das plantas em ambientes naturais. Informativo Abrates 18(2):11-17. [ Links ]

B03 Carvalho-Ricardo, M. C., W. Uieda, R. C. B. Fonseca, & M. N. Rossi. 2014. Frugivory and the effects of ingestion by bats on the seed germination of three pioneering plants. Acta Oecologica 55:51-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actao.2013.11.008Links ]

B04 Casallas-Pabón, D., N. Calvo-Roa, & R. Rojas-Robles. 2017. Murciélagos dispersores de semillas en gradientes sucesionales de la Orinoquia. Acta Biológica Colombiana 22(3):348-358. https://doi.org/10.15446/abc.v22n3.63561Links ]

B05 Díaz, M. M., S. Solari, L. F. Aguirre, L. M. S. Aguiar, & R. M. Barquez. 2016. Clave de identificación de los murciélagos de Sudamérica. Publicación Especial Nº2, PCMA (Programa de Conservación de los Murciélagos de Argentina). https://doi.org/10.35537/10915/67189 [ Links ]

B06 Fischer, E. et al. 2015. Bat fauna of Mato Grosso do Sul, south-western Brazil. Biota Neotropica 15:1-17. https://doi.org/10.1590/1676-06032015006614Links ]

B07 Fleming, T. H. 1987. Patterns of tropical vertebrate frugivore diversity. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 18:91-109. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.18.1.91Links ]

B08 Fleming, T. H., C. Geiselman, & W. J. Kress. 2009. The evolution of bat pollination: a phylogenetic perspective. Annals of Botany 104(6):1017-1043. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcp197Links ]

B09 Galetti, M., M. A. Pizo, & P. C. Morellato. 2006. Fenologia, frugivoria e dispersão de sementes. Pp. 395-422. In Métodos de estudos em biologia da conservação e manejo da vida silvestre (Cullen Jr, L., R Rudran, & C. Valladares-Padua, C., eds.). Editora UFPr, Curitiba. [ Links ]

B10 Garcia, Q. S., J. L. P. Rezende, & L. M. S. Aguiar. 2000. Seed dispersal by bats in a disturbed area of Southeastern Brazil. Revista de Biologia Tropical 48(1):125-128. [ Links ]

B11 Grombone-Guaratini, M. T., & R. R. Rodrigues. 2002. Seed bank and seed rain in a seasonal semi-deciduous forest in south-eastern Brazil. Journal of Tropical Ecology 18: 759-774. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0266467402002493Links ]

B12 Heer, K., L. Albrecht, & E. K. V. Kalko. 2010. Effects of ingestion of neotropical bats on germination parameters of native free-standing and strangler figs (Ficus sp., Moraceae). Oecologia 163(2):425-435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-010-1600-xLinks ]

B13 Holthuijzen, A. M. A., & J. H. A. Boerboom. 1982. The Cecropia seedbank in the Surinam lowland rain forest. Biotropica 14(1):62-68. https://doi.org/10.2307/2387761Links ]

B14 Jordano, P., M. Galetti, M. A. Pizo, & W. R. Silva. 2006. Ligando frugivoria e dispersão de sementes à biologia da conservação. Pp. 411-436. In Biologia da conservação: essências (Duarte, C. F., H. G. Bergallo, M. A. Santos, & M. A. Va, eds.). Editora Rima, São Paulo. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0101-90742013000200003Links ]

B15 Lobova, T. A., S. A. Mori, F. Blanchard, H. Peckham, & P. Charles-Dominique. 2003. Cecropia as a food research for bats in French Guiana and significance for a fruit structure in seed dispersal and longevity. American Journal of Botany 90(3):388-403. https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.90.3.388 [ Links ]

B16 Muscarella, R., & T. H. Fleming. 2007. The role of frugivorous bats in tropical forest succession. Biological Reviews 82(4):573-590. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-185x.2007.00026.xLinks ]

B17 Oliveira, A. K. M., F. T. F. Lemes, & A. Pulchério-Leite. 2013. Consumo de frutos de Cecropia pachystahya Trécul e Ficus gomelleira Kunt & C.D. Bouché por Platyrrhinus lineatus (E. Geoffroy, 1810) e seu efeito sobre a germinação de sementes. Revista de Biologia Neotropical 10(2):1-8. https://doi.org/10.5216/rbn.v10i2.19096Links ]

B18 Oliveira, A. K. M., F. T. F. Lemes, & A. Pulchério-Leite. 2018. Are the germination and vigor of Ficusand Cecropia seeds affected by the digestion process of a frugivorous bat? Neotropical Biology and Conservation 13(1):2-9. [ Links ]

B19 Oliveira-Filho, A. T., & J. A. Ratter. 2002. Vegetation physiog- nomies and woody flora of the Cerrado biome. The Cerrados of Brazil: Ecology and Natural History of a Neotropical Savanna (Oliveira, P. S., & R. J. Marquis, eds.). Columbia University Press, New York. https://doi.org/10.7312/oliv12042-007 [ Links ]

B20 Parolin, L. C., G. V. Bianconi, & S. B. Mikich. 2016. Consistency in fruit preferences across the geographical range of the frugivorous bats Artibeus, Carollia and Sturnira (Chiroptera). Iheringia, Série Zoologia 106: e2016010. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-4766e2016010Links ]

B21 Passos, F. C., W. R. Silva, W. A. Pedro, & M. R. Bonin. 2003. Frugivoria em morcegos (Mammalia, Chiroptera) no Parque Estadual Intervales, sudeste do Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Zoologia 20(3):511-517. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0101-81752003000300024Links ]

B22 Peracchi, A. L., I. P. Lima, N. R. Reis, M. R. Nogueira, & H. Ortêncio-Filho. 2006. Ordem Chiroptera. Pp. 153-230. In Mamíferos do Brasil (Reis, N. R., A. L. Peracchi, W. A. Pedro, & I. P. Lima, eds.). Editora Universidade Estadual de Londrina, Londrina. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0101-81752002000300011 [ Links ]

B23 Pott, A., & V. J. Pott. 1994. Plantas do Pantanal. Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária, Centro de Pesquisa Agropecuária do Pantanal, Corumbá. https://doi.org/10.17138/tgft(1)121-122Links ]

B24 Ranal, M. A. & D. G. Santana. 2006. How and why to measure the germination process? Revista Brasileira de Botânica 29:1-11. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0100-84042006000100002 [ Links ]

B25 Robertson, A. W., A. Trass, J. J. Ladley, & D. Kelly. 2006. Assessing the benefits of frugivory for seed germination: the importance of the deinhibition effect. Functional Ecology 20(1):58-66. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2435.2005.01057.xLinks ]

B26 Rossaneis, B. K., N. R. Reis, E. Bianchini, & J. A. Pimenta. 2015. Seed germination after passing through gastrointestinal tract of bats (Chiroptera, Phyllostomidae). Semina 36(2):3-14. [ Links ]

B27 Schmidt-Nielsen, K. 2002. Fisiologia animal: adaptação e meio ambiente. 5ed. Santos, São Paulo. [ Links ]

B28 Simmons, N. B. 2005. Order Chiroptera. Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. (Wilson, D. E., & D. M. Reeder, eds.). Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press. https://doi.org/10.1108/09504120610673024Links ]

B29 Straube, F. C., & G. V. Bianconi. 2002. Sobre a grandeza e a unidade utilizada para estimar esforço de captura com utilização de redes-de-neblina. Chiroptera Neotropical 8(1-2):150-152. [ Links ]

B30 Tang, Z. H., M. Cao, L. X. Sheng, X. F. Ma, A. Walsh, & S. Y. Zhang. 2008. Seed dispersal of Morus macroura (Moraceae) by two frugivorous bats in Xishuangbanna, SW China. Biotropica 40(1):127-131. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7429.2007.00307.xLinks ]

B31 Traveset, A., & M. Verdú. 2002. A meta-analysis of the effect of gut treatment on seed germination. Pp. 339-350. In Seed dispersal and frugivory: ecology, evolution and conservation (Levely, D. J., & M. Galetti, eds.). CABI Publishing, Wallingford. https://doi.org/10.1079/9780851995250.0339 [ Links ]

B32 Van Der Pijl, L. 1982. Principles of dispersal in higher plants. Springer Verlag, Berlin/New York. [ Links ]

B33 Vieira, D. L. M., F. G. Aquino, M. A. Brito, C. Fernandes-Bulhão, & R. P. B. Henriques. 2002. Síndromes de dispersão de espécies arbustivo-arbóreas em cerrado sensu stricto do Brasil Central e savanas amazônicas. Revista Brasileira de Botânica 25:215-220. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0100-84042002000200009 [ Links ]

B34 Vizotto L. D., & V. A. Taddei. 1973. Chave para determinação de quirópteros brasileiros. Revista da Faculdade de Ciências e Letras de São José do Rio Preto, Boletim de Ciências 1:1-72. https://doi.org/10.17143/ciaed/xxiilciaed.2017.00398Links ]

Recibido: 05 de Abril de 2018; Aprobado: 30 de Noviembre de 2018