4 ha) that they returned to on successive nights. Core foraging areas (mean = 2.1 ha) were characterized by more cover and greater species diversity in the understorey layer than more peripheral areas. Hedgerows were also used for foraging in the late summer and autumn. HM781-36B manufacturer Most conservation activities for this species have focused on protecting roosts in houses and other buildings. While such protection is important for bat conservation, efforts should also be made to protect foraging habitats in woodlands by maintaining cover of native species in the understorey layer and hedgerows that provide connectivity between woodland patches. Common conservation management

practices, such as reinstating coppicing or grazing

in semi-natural broadleaved woodlands, could be detrimental for P. auritus and other woodland bats. Their impact on bats should be tested experimentally before they are widely promoted as a woodland conservation strategy. “
“Extension of the mesowear method to include the lower cheek teeth of ruminants will dramatically increase sample sizes and thus the statistical power of paleodietary inferences. However, the mesowear method of Fortelius and Solounias, which was designed for application to the upper molars, does not effectively separate ruminant species by diet when applied to the lower teeth. Upper and lower mesowear

scores have sometimes been compared among Navitoclax concentration non-analogous cusps (i.e. the buccal cusps of the maxillary teeth, which experience incursion and the buccal cusps of the mandibular teeth, which experience excursion during the chewing stroke). We therefore compare mesowear scores learn more between the buccal cusps of maxillary cheek teeth and the lingual cusps of mandibular cheek for a large sample of ruminants because both cusps experience incursion during the chewing stroke. Using the original mesowear scoring method, we find dietary signal in both the maxillary and mandibular cheek teeth and a high correlation between them using both non-phylogenetic and phylogenetic comparative methods. Noting unique patterns of mesowear among the mandibular teeth, we also propose a new scoring method with additional wear categories that improves dietary inference when applied to the lower teeth and is highly repeatable. We also find that mandibular mesowear scores are consistently lower than for their maxillary counterparts. Although differential wear among the upper and lower teeth is much less apparent when applying our new scoring method, wear differences might relate to anisodonty (i.e. mandibular cheek teeth are narrower). Overall, we recommend our new scoring method for application to the lingual cusps of the lower second molars of fossil ruminants.