The promise and perils of engineering cave climates: response to Turner et al.

A Palearctic view of a bat fungal disease

The fungal infection causing white-nose disease in hibernating bats in North America has resulted in dramatic population declines of affected species, since the introduction of the causative agent Pseudogymnoascus destructans. The fungus is native to the Palearctic, where it also infects several bat species, yet rarely causes severe pathology or the death of the host. Pseudogymnoascus destructans infects bats during hibernation by invading and digesting the skin tissue, resulting in the disruption of torpor patterns and consequent emaciation. Relations among pathogen, host, and environment are complex, and individuals, populations, and species respond to the fungal pathogen in different ways. For example, the Nearctic Myotis lucifugus responds to infection by mounting a robust immune response, leading to immunopathology often contributing to mortality. In contrast, the Palearctic M. myotis shows no significant immunological response to infection. This lack of a strong response, resulting from the long coevolution between the hosts and the pathogen in the pathogen's native range, likely contributes to survival in tolerant species. After more than 15 years since the initial introduction of the fungus to North America, some of the affected populations are showing signs of recovery, suggesting that the fungus, hosts, or both are undergoing processes that may eventually lead to coexistence. The suggested or implemented management methods of the disease in North America have encompassed, for example, the use of probiotics and fungicides, vaccinations, and modifying the environmental conditions of the hibernation sites to limit the growth of the pathogen, intensity of infection, or the hosts' responses to it. Based on current knowledge from Eurasia, policy makers and conservation managers should refrain from disrupting the ongoing evolutionary processes and adopt a holistic approach to managing the epizootic.

Effective conservation of subterranean-roosting bats

Bats frequently inhabit caves and other subterranean habitats and play a critical role in subterranean food webs. With escalating threats to subterranean ecosystems, identifying the most effective measures to protect subterranean-roosting bats is critical. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of conservation and management interventions for subterranean-roosting bats. We used network analyses to determine to what extent interventions for bats overlap those used for other subterranean taxa. We conducted our analyses with data extracted from 345 papers recommending a total of 910 conservation interventions. Gating of roost entrances was applied to preserve bat populations in 21 studies, but its effectiveness was unclear. Habitat restoration and disturbance reduction positively affected bat populations and bat behavior, respectively, in ≤4 studies. Decontamination was assessed in 2 studies and positively affected bat populations, particularly in studies focused on reducing fungal spores associated with white-nose syndrome in North America. Monitoring of bat populations as an effective conservation strategy was unclear and infrequently tested. Only 4% of bat studies simultaneously considered other subterranean organisms. However, effective interventions for bat conservation had similarities with all other organisms. If other subterranean organisms are considered when applying interventions to conserve bats, they might also benefit.

Towards evidence-based conservation of subterranean ecosystems

Subterranean ecosystems are among the most widespread environments on Earth, yet we still have poor knowledge of their biodiversity. To raise awareness of subterranean ecosystems, the essential services they provide, and their unique conservation challenges, 2021 and 2022 were designated International Years of Caves and Karst. As these ecosystems have traditionally been overlooked in global conservation agendas and multilateral agreements, a quantitative assessment of solution-based approaches to safeguard subterranean biota and associated habitats is timely. This assessment allows researchers and practitioners to understand the progress made and research needs in subterranean ecology and management. We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature focused on subterranean ecosystems globally (terrestrial, freshwater, and saltwater systems), to quantify the available evidence-base for the effectiveness of conservation interventions. We selected 708 publications from the years 1964 to 2021 that discussed, recommended, or implemented 1,954 conservation interventions in subterranean ecosystems. We noted a steep increase in the number of studies from the 2000s while, surprisingly, the proportion of studies quantifying the impact of conservation interventions has steadily and significantly decreased in recent years. The effectiveness of 31% of conservation interventions has been tested statistically. We further highlight that 64% of the reported research occurred in the Palearctic and Nearctic biogeographic regions. Assessments of the effectiveness of conservation interventions were heavily biased towards indirect measures (monitoring and risk assessment), a limited sample of organisms (mostly arthropods and bats), and more accessible systems (terrestrial caves). Our results indicate that most conservation science in the field of subterranean biology does not apply a rigorous quantitative approach, resulting in sparse evidence for the effectiveness of interventions. This raises the important question of how to make conservation efforts more feasible to implement, cost-effective, and long-lasting. Although there is no single remedy, we propose a suite of potential solutions to focus our efforts better towards increasing statistical testing and stress the importance of standardising study reporting to facilitate meta-analytical exercises. We also provide a database summarising the available literature, which will help to build quantitative knowledge about interventions likely to yield the greatest impacts depending upon the subterranean species and habitats of interest. We view this as a starting point to shift away from the widespread tendency of recommending conservation interventions based on anecdotal and expert-based information rather than scientific evidence, without quantitatively testing their effectiveness.