Boxplots of the number of bats crossing per survey at each underpass.

<p>Boxplots (median with upper and lower quartiles) for the number of bats crossing per survey (n = 10) at each underpass (numbers crossing using underpass, over the road above and at safe and unsafe heights over the road), and at the unmitigated commuting route on the A590 which was diverted to underpass A (numbers crossing over the road and at safe and unsafe heights).</p

Representative MaxEnt response curves.

<p>These graphs show the probability of a species’ presence at a location for a range of parameters. These graphs are based on univariate models to prevent interacting or collinear variables from affecting the relationships modelled. Variables found to have poor predictive power for a species (AUC ≤ 0.5 or test gain < 0.01) are not shown.</p

Habitat suitability maps made using each species’ pruned set of variables.

<p>HSI = Habitat Suitability Index. The Lake District National Park boundary is marked in white. Species roost locations are coloured by test subsets where appropriate. Crown database right 2010. An Ordnance Survey/EDINA supplied service.</p

Boxplots of the number of bats crossing per survey at each bat gantry.

<p>Boxplots (median with upper and lower quartiles) of the number of bats crossing per survey (n = 10) at the four bat gantries, together with data on total number crossing, the numbers crossing at safe and unsafe heights, numbers ‘using’ the gantry according to both estimates (within 2 and 5 m), and the numbers crossing at nearby, unmitigated, severed commuting route nearby.</p

The crossing behaviour of all bats from all surveys for each study site (NB the number of bats crossing at safe heights at the gantries includes those ‘using’ the gantry).

<p>The crossing behaviour of all bats from all surveys for each study site (NB the number of bats crossing at safe heights at the gantries includes those ‘using’ the gantry).</p

Distance to water and woodland edge response curves.

<p>These graphs show probability of a species’ roost <i>(p)</i> at a location based on these distances and are based on the results of univariate models to prevent any other interacting or collinear variables affecting the relationships found. Variables which were found to have poor predictive power for a species (AUC ≤ 0.5 or test gain < 0.01) are not shown.</p

Mean model performance from spatially constrained 5-fold cross validation.

<p>Mean = the mean distance between all spatially aggregated training and test data pairs; Min = the minimum distance between spatially constrained training and test data pairs; rSAC pairs = the percentage of all spatially constrained training and test data pairs that still fell within the rSAC lag; Train set = average number of training data; Test set = average number of test data; omission rates = average proportion of test data which fell outside of the suitable area; omission rates which are significantly lower than expected by chance alone are in bold type. Asterisks signify level of significance (* p<0.05); all mean values ± S.D.</p><p>rSAC lag = largest distance within which data pairs retained significant, positive spatial autocorrelation.</p

Variable performance.

<p>These graphs show the strength of association (as test AUC) between each species’ presence and individual environmental variables at different spatial scales. The average predictive power of the distance variables is shown as a dashed line: these were independent of scale. Environmental variables with a predictive power ≤ 0.5 are no better than random. Only variables retained in pruned models are shown. NB. The scale range is not linear for improved clarity at small scale.</p

Mean model performance.

<p>Train set = average number of training data; Test set = average number of test data; Test omission rates = average proportion of test data which fell outside of the suitable area. Omission rates which are significantly lower than expected by chance alone are in bold type. Asterisks signify level of significance (*** p<0.001), all values ± S.D.</p><p>Measured using random 5-fold cross validation <i>(P</i>. <i>pipistrellus</i>, <i>P</i>. <i>pygmaeus</i>, <i>M</i>. <i>daubentonii and P</i>. <i>auritus)</i>, or jackknife validation <i>(N</i>. <i>noctula</i>, <i>M</i>. <i>brandtii/mystacinus and M</i>. <i>nattereri)</i> tests.</p

Kernel intensity estimation of the density of crossing bats across the A66 site.

<p>Gaussian kernel and bandwidth of 1 m used (n = 1078). The section of severed woodland at the A66 site is shown. The gantry is located at distance 0 m (height marked by square), and the pre-construction commuting route at 10–15 m. ‘Unsafe’ crossing heights are located below the dashed line. The dotted line marked verge shows the decrease in verge height above the road from left to right.</p