The following additional supporting material may be found in the online version of this article. from From resource to female defence: the impact of roosting ecology on a bat's mating strategy
2016-10-20T16:12:27Z (GMT) by
Table S1 Results from allele frequency calculations with CERVUS v. 3.0 (Kalinovski et al. 2007). Figure S2 Sketch of the main hypothesis regarding the differences in social dispersion in the roost between day and night. We assume that the clumped roosting of mixed sex groups during the day is a derived trait and the result of selection for cryptic behaviour on exposed roost structures. At night, we hypothesize to still observe an ancestral strategy, namely that male proboscis bats establish themselves at preferred sites in their roost where they are territorial or dominant. The blue bats represent males. The red bats represent females. Distances between the individual bats are true to scale, while distances between the sites are not to the scale. Figure S3 Top view of the roof of 'Cabina 5'. The extending roof is drawn in black with its grid (1-36) and the five defined sites. Table S4-S6 Detailed census data from different periods (postpartum oestrus mating period 'PEMP'; seasonal mating period 'SMP'; non-mating period 'NMP') between 2010 and 2014.