"This study uses little data to create reasonable results"
I think the authors own words describe this the best. It is in fact a pretty good student MS Thesis. As an authorative and illuminating study of WNS infection and transport it was...not. Like Peter I thought the GIS was interesting, but in examining the methods it tended to greatly oversimplify or skew real world expectations. Interestingly, while some of her reasoning was badly flawed such as using # caves regardless of whether they had bats as a direct measure of susceptability...many actually ended up producing a reasonable end result. It was overall, a good summary of previous work with a lot of holes. Some were legitimately hers, but many were actually the result of her cited sources like Boyles.
I thought she actually correctly identified the OK north TX corridor as the best possible chance to stop WNS at least in the short term. I also think she did a good job of addressing the shortcomings of the work in the end. My first impression issues were:
largest issue is that as a predictor you should NEVER use existing data to weight the model, only to validate the results. therefore since the model was engineered for known variables in known cases the predictions for the west seem reasonable even though the variables are all actually quite different.
Did you know that closing caves eliminates the possibility of human transmission?
I'm not sure I would characterize the entire Eastern US bat population as "decimated" but thats minor.
statement that since spores have wider temp tolerance temp is not important for transmission...then uses temp as a main variable. Also, overlooks probable differing transmission scale between active GD and Spores in bat-bat.
The perpetuation of bats as insect control mythology really annoys me. Bugs have LOTS of predators and thinking the loss of bats over a 4-6 year span in an area will result in plagues and economic devastation is pure popycock.
Using #caves as a direct measure is a failure of logic and in fact you would expect more caves/county to disperse bat populations resulting in lower susceptability. Vermont is a good case for concentrated populations vs Kentucky.
Using surface temp instead of cave humidity was understandible given the data available but likely skewed the results...a lot. The West is in general a very dry place.
bats moving to entrances to collect passive warmth from the sun I found..... amusing.
Similiarly, bats drinking in winter has been going on a loong time before WNS.
WNS has evolved to be less deadly? in 7 years? really? Possible I suppose.
Using accessability by transport rather than actual caver activity.
# of species/site county should decrease values...monocultures are far more vulnerable and while more species might increase transmission pathways they also represent barriers (if imperfect ones) to transmission between species.