{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01989730423620026, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007060333761232349, 'mean_word_length': 5.236, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Miniaturization eliminates detectable impacts of drones on bat activity

Advances in operational simplicity and cost efficiency have promoted the rapid integration of unoccupied aerial vehicles (UAVs) into ecological research, yet UAVs often disturb wildlife, potentially biasing measurements. Studies of UAV effects on wildlife to date have focused on UAV trajectory or distance; however, UAV size and noise could be critical variables influencing wildlife responses. Bats are cryptic aerial species that are difficult to survey using conventional means, and so we tested the effectiveness of drone‐based acoustic surveys for bats. We recorded the number of acoustic bat detections with and without a UAV present. We used three small, commercial rotary UAVs varying in size and noise intensity (249, 907, 1,380 g). Larger and louder UAVs deterred significantly more bats, with no effect of take‐off distance on bat activity. The smallest and quietest UAV model had a similar change in bat activity compared with control measurements. Drone noise increased with drone size, but all drones emitted in a similar range of frequencies that overlapped with the larger bat species that were also those most impacted by the UAV. During the 5‐minute surveys, there was no evidence of bat habituation to UAVs although bats returned quickly once the UAV survey ended. We urge wildlife researchers to consider drone size during wildlife surveys. Smaller and quieter models have negligible impacts on wildlife, eliminating the impact of drones on wildlife in some cases.