The effectiveness of katydid (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Neoconocephalus ensiger</Emphasis>) song cessation as antipredator defence against the gleaning bat <Emphasis Type="Italic">Myotis septentrionalis</Emphasis>

Many nocturnal katydids (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae) produce intense calling songs, and some bat species use these songs to detect and locate prey. One Nearctic katydid species, Neoconocephalus ensiger, ceases or pauses singing in response to bat echolocation calls. We tested the hypothesis that song cessation is an effective defence against gleaning bats (i.e., bats that take prey from surfaces). We observed Myotis septentrionalis, a sympatric bat species that uses prey-generated sounds when gleaning, attack and feed on singing N. ensiger in an outdoor flight room. These bats demonstrated a preference for the calling song of N. ensiger over a novel cricket calling song when they were broadcast from a speaker in the flight room. Bats attacked speakers broadcasting N. ensiger calling song as long as the song was continuous and aborted their attack if the sound stopped as they approached, regardless of whether a katydid was present as a physical target on the speaker. Echolocation calls were recorded during attacks and no significant differences were found between continuous and interrupted song approaches for four call parameters, suggesting that M. septentrionalis may not use echolocation to locate silent prey. Therefore, song cessation by katydids in response to ultrasound is an effective defence against gleaning bats.     

Interindividual use of echolocation calls: Eavesdropping by bats

Summary The use of other individual's echolocation calls by little brown bats, Myotis lucifugus, was tested by observing the response of free-flying bats to presentations of recorded echolocation calls and artificial sounds. Bats responded by approaching conspecific calls while searching for food, night roosts, nursery colonies and mating/hibernation sites. Response was low or non-existant to other sounds. While searching for prey, M. lucifugus also responded to the echolocation calls of Eptesicus fuscus, a sympatric species with overlapping diet but distinctly different echolocation calls. Subadults were especially responsive to conspecific calls.All four situations in which the bats responded involve patchily distributed resources at which bats accumulate. Concentrations of echolocation calls thus likely serve as cues regarding the location of resources. Individuals approaching feeding groups, for example, could increase prey detection range by up to 50 times over individuals relying solely on their own echolocation.Although the costs associated with eavesdropping may be negligible for M. lucifugus, for other species, particularly territorial ones, being conspicuous may be a disadvantage and the possibility of being over-heard by other bats may have been one factor involved in the evolution of echolocation call design.     

Ecological niche and phylogeny: the highly complex echolocation behavior of the trawling long-legged bat, Macrophyllum macrophyllum

Bats produce echolocation signals that reflect the sensory tasks they perform. In open air or over water, bats encounter few or no background echoes (clutter). Echolocation of such bats is the primary cue for prey perception and varies with the stage of approach to prey, typically comprising search, approach, and terminal group calls. In contrast, bats that glean stationary food from rough surfaces emit more uniform calls without a distinct terminal group. They use echolocation primarily for orientation in space and mostly need additional sensory cues for finding food because clutter echoes overlap strongly with food echoes. Macrophyllum macrophyllum is the only Neotropical leaf-nosed bat (Phyllostomidae) that hunts in clutter-poor habitat over water. As such, we hypothesized that, unlike all other members of its family, but similar to other trawling and aerial insectivorous bats, M. macrophyllum can hunt successfully by using only echolocation for prey perception. In controlled behavioral experiments on Barro Colorado Island, Panamá, we confirmed that echolocation alone is sufficient for finding prey in M. macrophyllum. Furthermore, we showed that pattern and structure of echolocation signals in M. macrophyllum are more similar to aerial and other trawling insectivorous bats than to close phylogenetic relatives. Particularly unique among phyllostomid bats, we found distinct search, approach, and terminal group calls in foraging M. macrophyllum. Call structure, however, consisting of short, multiharmonic, and steep frequency-modulated signals, closely resembled those of other phyllostomid bats. Thus, echolocation behavior in M. macrophyllum is shaped by ecological niche as well as by phylogeny.     

Unusual echolocation behavior in a small molossid bat, <Emphasis Type="Italic">Molossops temminckii,</Emphasis> that forages near background clutter

When searching for flying insects, Molossops temminckii uses unusual echolocation calls characterized by upward modulation of frequency vs time (UFM). Call frequency increases asymptotically in the relatively long (∼8 ms) pulses from a starting frequency of ∼40 kHz to a long narrowband tail at ∼50 kHz. When approaching a prey, the bat progressively increases the duration of calls and intersperses in the sequence broadband downwardly frequency-modulated signals with a terminal frequency of about 53 kHz, which totally replaces the UFM signals at the end of the approach phase. The sequence progresses to a capture buzz resembling those from other molossid and vespertilionid bats. The M. temminckii wing morphology is characterized by an average aspect ratio and a high wing loading, suggesting that it is more maneuverable than the typical Molossidae but less than typical Vespertilionidae. M. temminckii regularly forages near clutter, where it needs to pay attention to the background and might face forward and backward masking of signals. We hypothesize that the UFM echolocation signals of M. temminckii represent an adaptation to foraging near background clutter in a not very maneuverable bat needing a broad attention window. The broadband component of the signal might serve for the perception of the background and the narrowband tail for detection and perhaps classification of prey. Bats may solve the signal masking problems by separating emission and echoes in the frequency domain. The echolocation behavior of M. temminckii may shed light on the evolution of the narrowband frequency analysis echolocation systems adopted by some bats foraging within clutter.     

Echolocation behavior and signal plasticity in the Neotropical bat Myotis nigricans (Schinz, 1821) (Vespertilionidae): a convergent case with European species of Pipistrellus?

We used both field and flight cage observations to investigate the echolocation and foraging behavior of the seldom studied, small, aerial insectivorous bat Myotis nigricans (Vespertilionidae) in Panama. In contrast to its temperate congeners, M. nigricans foraged extensively in open space and showed an echolocation behavior well adapted to this foraging habitat. It broadcast narrowband echolocation signals of 7 ms duration that enhance the chance of prey detection in open space. Because of rhythmical alternations of signal amplitude from signal to signal in our sound recordings of search signals in open space, we conclude that the bats scanned their environment with head movements, thereby enlarging their search volume. In edge-and-gap situations, and in the flight cage, M. nigricans introduced an initial broadband component to its search calls. In the field and in the flight cage, M. nigricans hawked for prey in aerial catches; gleaning was never observed. M. nigricans demonstrates call structures, such as narrow bandwidth and rather long signals adapted to foraging predominantly in open space. Moreover, call structure is highly plastic, allowing M. nigricans to forage in edge-and-gap situations also. These adaptations in call structure and plasticity have evolved convergently at least twice within the genus Myotis. Finally, M. nigricans echolocation and foraging behavior parallels that of the small, aerial, insectivorous pipistrelle bats (Vespertilionidae), which are not closely related to M. nigricans but forage in similar habitats.     

Natterer’s bat (Myotis nattereri Kuhl, 1818) hawks for prey close to vegetation using echolocation signals of very broad bandwidth

We present a hitherto unknown prey perception strategy in bats: Myotis nattereri (Vespertilionidae, Chiroptera) is able to perceive prey by echolocation within a few centimeters of echo-cluttering vegetation, by using frequency-modulated search signals of very large bandwidth (up to 135 kHz). We describe the species’ search behavior and echolocation repertoire from the field and from experiments in a flight tent. In the field, bats varied signal parameters in relation to their distance from vegetation and usually flew close to vegetation. In the flight tent, M. nattereri detected and localized prey by echolocation alone as close as 5 cm from vegetation. Apparently, the bats were able to tolerate some overlap between prey and clutter echoes. Passive prey cues (vision, olfaction, prey-generated sounds) were not used in prey perception. The bats selected prey by size. The animals performed aerial catches and produced approach sequences typical for aerial hawking bats, but were able to do so within a few centimeters of the substrate. M. nattereri thus has access to silent, suspended prey very close to vegetation (e.g., spiders, and caterpillars on threads). Received: 29 September 1999 / Received in revised form: 12 February 2000 / Accepted: 12 February 2000     

The use of Doppler-shifted echoes as a flutter detection and clutter rejection system: the echolocation and feeding behavior of Hipposideros ruber (Chiroptera: Hipposideridae)

Summary Hipposideros ruber use CF/FM echolocation calls to detect the wing flutter of their insect prey. Fluttering prey were detected whether the insects were flying or sitting on a surface, and prey in either situation were captured with equal success (approximately 40% of capture attempts). Stationary prey were ignored. The bats did not use visual cues or the sounds of wing flutter to locate their prey. Wing flutter detection suggests that H. ruber exploit the Doppler-shifted information in echoes of their echolocation calls. These bats fed primarily upon moths, usually those of between 10 and 25 mm wingchord, although moths of less than 5 mm and greater than 40 mm wingchord were also attacked and captured. They showed no evidence of selecting moths on the basis of species or other taxonomic distinction, and occasionaly captured other insects.     

Flexible bat echolocation: the influence of individual,habitat and conspecifics on sonar signal design

Acoustic signals which are used in animal communication must carry a variety of information and are therefore highly flexible. Echolocation has probably such functions and could prove as flexible. Measurable variabitlity can indicate flexibility in a behaviour. To quantify variability in bat sonar and relate to behavioural and environmental factors, I recorded echolocation calls of Euderma maculatum, Eptesicus fuscus, Lasiurus borealis and L. cinereus while the bats hunted in their natural habitat. I analysed 3390 search phase calls emitted by 16 known and 16 unknown individuals foraging in different environmental and behvioural situations. All four species used mainly multiharmonic signals that showed considerable intra- and inter-individual variability in the five signal variables I analysed (call duration, call interval, highest and lowest frequency and frequency with maximum energy) and also in the shape of the sonagram. A nested multivariate analysis of variance identified the influences of individual, hunting site, close conspecifics and of each observation on the frequency with maximum energy in the calls, and on other variables measured. Individual bats differed in multiple comparisons, most often in the main call frequency and least often in call interval. In a discriminant function analysis with resubstitution, 56–76% of a species' calls were assigned to the correct individual. Distinct individual call patterns were recorded in special situations in all species and the size of foraging areas in forested areas influenced temporal and spectral call structure. Echolocation behaviour was influenced by the presence of conspecifics. When bats were hunting together, call duration decreased and call interval increased in all species, but spectral effects were less pronounced. The role of morphometric differences as the source of individually distinct vocalizations is discussed. I also examined signal adaptations to long range echolocation and the influence of obstacle distance on echolocation call design. My results allow to discuss the problems of echo recognition and jamming avoidance in vespertilionid bats.     

Echolocation in the notch-eared bat,Myotis emarginatus

Summary In Myotis emarginatus, the patterns of echolocation sounds vary with different foraging habitats: In commuting flights the echolocation sounds are linearly frequency modulated sweeps that start at about 100 kHz, terminate at 40 kHz, and have a duration of 1–3 ms. They consist of a loud first harmonic. The second and third harmonics are at least 15 dB fainter than the first one and often undetectable. A distinctly different type of sound is emitted when the bats search for flying insects in open spaces. The sounds are reduced in bandwidth and elongated by a constant frequency component that follows the initial frequency modulated part. Typically, sounds start at about 94 kHz and terminate in a constant frequency component at about 40–45 kHz. The average duration of the constant frequency tail is 2.8 ms; this approximately doubles the length of the pulse, with the longest recorded sound lasting 7.2 ms. When bats are foraging near and within foliage, and gleaning prey from foliage, echolocation sounds are brief (average 1 ms) frequency modulated pulses with a broad bandwidth. The pulses start at about 105 kHz and sweep down to 25 kHz. During gleaning within a building, the frequency range of the sounds is shifted to higher frequencies and extends from 124 to 52 kHz. When the bats forage for aireal insects in a confined area that creates echo-clutter, they emit sounds similar to those used during gleaning within buildings except that sound durations are extended to about 1.8 ms. In each foraging area, the echolocation sounds emitted during the search for and approach to prey are similar in structure. Sound and pause durations are reduced in the approach phase. Irrespective of foraging style and habitat, immediately before capture the bat emits a rapid and stereotyped sequence of 2-10 echolocation pulses (final buzz). These pulses are brief (0.2–0.5 ms), frequency modulated sounds with a reduced bandwidth. The sounds start at 45 kHz and sweep down to 35–20 kHz. The repetition rate is increased up to 200 pulses/s. Offprint requests to: G. Neuweiler     

Foraging behavior and echolocation of wild horseshoe bats Rhinolophus ferrumequinum and R. hipposideros (Chiroptera,Rhinolophidae)

Summary 1. Echolocation and foraging behavior of the horseshoe bats Rhinolophus ferrumequinum and R. hipposideros feeding under natural conditions are described. 2. The calls of both species consisted predominantly of a long CF segment, often initiated and terminated by brief FM sweeps of substantial bandwidth. 3. R. hipposideros typically flew close to vegetation, and fed by aerial hawking, gleaning and by pouncing on prey close to the ground. R. hipposideros called with a CF segment close to 112 kHz which is the second harmonic of the vocalization; its calls included low intensity primary harmonics, and had prominent initial and terminal FM sweeps of considerable bandwidth. When searching for prey on the wing it had longer interpulse intervals than R. ferrumequinum, but emitted shorter pulses at a higher repetition rate; overall it had a similar duty cycle to R. ferrumequinum. 4. R. ferrumequinum, calling with a CF segment close to 83 kHz, also used harmonics other than the dominant secondary in its calls, and modified its echolocation according to ecological conditions. This species showed certain parallels with R. rouxi of Asia. It was observed feeding by aerial hawking and by flycatching. When scanning for prey from a perch (perch hunting), calls were of shorter duration, and interpulse intervals were on average longer, than when bats were flying. Mean duty cycle was longer in flight, and the bandwidths and frequency sweep rates of the FM segments in the calls increased in comparison with perched bats. 5. FM information may facilitate determination of target range and the location and nature of obstacles; it may also be involved in the interpretation of echoes and the detection of moving targets among clutter. The rising FM sweep initiating the call in both species when flying (and to a lesser extent perch hunting) in the wild must have a significant adaptive role, and should be considered an essential component of the call; rhinolophids should be termed FM/CF/FM bats.Abbreviations CF constant frequency - FM frequency modulated - FM₁ initial rising frequency sweep - FM₂ terminal falling frequency sweep - PRR pulse repetition rate - SD standard deviation - SNR signal-to-noise ratio     

Ground gleaning in horseshoe bats: comparative evidence from<Emphasis Type="Italic"> Rhinolophus blasii</Emphasis>,<Emphasis Type="Italic"> R. euryale</Emphasis> and<Emphasis Type="Italic"> R. mehelyi</Emphasis>

The 71 species of horseshoe bat (genus Rhinolophus) use echolocation calls with long constant-frequency (CF) components to detect and localize fluttering insects which they seize in aerial captures or glean from foliage. Here we describe ground-gleaning as an additional prey-capture strategy for horseshoe bats. This study presents the first record and experimental evidence for ground-gleaning in the little-studied Blasius horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus blasii). The gleaning bouts in a flight tent included landing, quadrupedal walking and take-off from the ground. The bats emitted echolocation calls continuously during all phases of prey capture. Both spontaneously and in a choice experiment, all six individuals attacked only fluttering insects and never motionless prey. These data suggest that R. blasii performs ground-gleaning largely by relying on the same prey-detection strategy and echolocation behaviour that it and other horseshoe bats use for aerial hawking.We also studied the Mediterranean horseshoe bat (R. euryale) in the flight tent. All four individuals never gleaned prey from the ground, though they appeared to be well able to detect fluttering moths on the ground. It is not known yet whether ground-gleaning plays a role in Mehelys horseshoe bat (R. mehelyi). In a performance test, we measured the ability of these three European species of middle-sized horseshoe bats (R. euryale, R. mehelyi and R. blasii) to take-off from the ground. All were able to take flight even in a confined space; i.e. the willingness to ground-glean in R. blasii is not related to a superior take-off performance. In contrast to ground-gleaning bats of other phylogenetic lineages, R. blasii appears not to be a specialist, but rather shows a remarkable behavioural flexibility in prey-capture strategies and abilities. We suggest that the key innovation of CF echolocation paired with behavioural flexibility in foraging strategies might explain the evolutionary success of Rhinolophus as the second largest genus of bat.Communicated by T. Czeschlik     

The sensory basis of prey location by the California leaf-nosed bat Macrotus californicus (Chiroptera: Phyllostomidae)

Summary Macrotus californicus, an insectivorous bat, captures prey on the ground, and shows great sensory flexibility in hunting for prey: it uses high frequency, low intensity, frequency modulated echolocation to locate prey in total darkness, however data from this study suggest that it uses vision preferentially, and switches off its echolocation when adequate illumination is available. When souncs of prey are available it exploits these also. It uses echolocation only 50% of the time at 4.2x10^-2 mL, comparable to ground luminance on a brightly moonlit night, and employs vision even at 10^-3 mL.     

Fruit detection and discrimination by small fruit-eating bats (Phyllostomidae): echolocation call design and olfaction

We studied the role of echolocation and other sensory cues in two small frugivorous New World leaf-nosed bats (Phyllostomidae: Artibeus watsoni and Vampyressa pusilla) feeding on different types of fig fruit. To test which cues the bats need to find these fruit, we conducted behavioral experiments in a flight cage with ripe and similar-sized figs where we selectively excluded vision, olfaction, and echolocation cues from the bats. In another series of experiments, we tested the discrimination abilities of the bats and presented sets of fruits that differed in ripeness (ripe, unripe), size (small, large), and quality (intact(infested with caterpillars). We monitored the bats' foraging and echolocation behavior simultaneously. In flight, both bat species continuously emitted short (<2 ms), multi-harmonic, and steep frequency-modulated (FM) calls of high frequencies, large bandwidth, and very low amplitude. Foraging behavior of bats was composed of two distinct stages: search or orienting flight followed by approach behavior consisting of exploration flights, multiple approaches of a selected fruit, and final acquisition of ripe figs in flight or in a brief landing. Both bat species continuously emitted echolocation calls. Structure and pattern of signals changed predictably when the bats switched from search or orienting calls to approach calls. We did not record a terminal phase before final acquisition of a fruit, as it is typical for aerial insectivorous bats prior to capture. Both bat species selected ripe over unripe fruit and non-infested over infested fruit. Artibeus watsoni preferred larger over smaller fruit. We conclude from our experiments, that the bats used a combination of odor-guided detection together with echolocation for localization in order to find ripe fruit and to discriminate among them.     

Population and seasonal variation in response to prey calls by an eavesdropping bat

The fringe-lipped bat, Trachops cirrhosus, is an eavesdropping predator that hunts frogs and katydids by approaching these preys' sexual advertisement calls. In captivity, bats can rapidly learn to associate novel acoustic stimuli with food rewards. It is unknown how this learning ability is related to foraging behavior in the wild where prey and the calls that identify them vary over space and time. In two bat populations that differ in available prey species (Soberanía, Panama, and La Selva, Costa Rica), we presented wild-caught bats with frog calls, katydid calls, and control stimuli. Bats in Soberanía were significantly more responsive to complex calls and choruses of the túngara frog, Physalaemus pustulosus, than were bats in La Selva. La Selva bats were significantly more responsive to katydid calls (Steirodon sp.) than Soberanía bats. We also examined seasonal variation in bat response to prey cues. Bats were captured in Soberanía in dry and wet seasons and presented with the calls of a dry season breeding frog (Smilisca sila), a wet season breeding frog (P. pustulosus), and four katydid species. Bats captured in the dry season were significantly more responsive to the calls of S. sila than bats captured in the wet season, but there were no seasonal differences in response to the calls of P. pustulosus or the katydid calls. We demonstrate plasticity in the foraging behavior of this eavesdropping predator but also show that response to prey cues is not predicted solely by prey availability.     

Do echolocation calls of wild colony-living Bechstein's bats (Myotis bechsteinii) provide individual-specific signatures?

Social animals often use vocal communication signals that contain individual signatures. As bats emit echolocation calls several times per second to orient in space, these might seem ideal candidates for conveying the caller's individual identity as a free by-product. From a proximate perspective, however, coding of caller identity is hampered by the simple acoustic structure of echolocation signals, by their task-specific design and by propagation loss. We investigated the occurrence of individual signatures in echolocation calls in individually marked, free-living Bechstein's bats (Myotis bechsteinii) in a situation with defined social context in the field. The bats belonged to two different colonies, for both of which genetic data on relatedness structure was available. While our data clearly demonstrate situation specificity of call structure, the evidence for individual-specific signatures was relatively weak. We could not identify a robust and simple parameter that would convey the caller's identity despite the situation-specific call variability. Discriminant function analysis assigned calls to call sequences with good performance, but worsened drastically when tested with other sequences from the same bats. Therefore, we caution against concluding from a satisfactory discrimination performance with identical training and test sequences that individual bats can reliably be told apart by echolocation calls. At least the information contained in a single call sequence seems not to be sufficient for that purpose. Starting frequencies did give the best discrimination between individuals, and it was also this parameter that was correlated with genetic relatedness in one of our two study colonies. Echolocation calls could serve as an additional source of information for individual recognition in Bechstein's bats societies, while it is unlikely that a large number of individuals could be reliably identified in different situations based on echolocation alone.     

Orientation and navigation in bats: known unknowns or unknown unknowns?

Bats have been extensively studied with regard to their ability to orient, navigate and hunt prey by means of echolocation, but almost nothing is known about how they orient and navigate in situations such as migration and homing outside the range of their echolocation system. As volant animals, bats face many of the same problems and challenges as birds. Migrating bats must relocate summer and winter home ranges over distances as far as 2,000 km. Foraging bats must be able to relocate their home roost if they range beyond a familiar area, and indeed circumstantial evidence suggests that these animals can home from more than 600 km. However, an extensive research program on homing and navigation in bats halted in the early 1970s. The field of bird navigation has advanced greatly since that time and many of the mechanisms that birds are known to use for navigation were not known or widely accepted at this time. In this paper I discuss what is known about orientation and navigation in bats and use bird navigation as a model for future research in bat navigation. Technology is advancing such that previous difficulties in studying orientation in bats in the field can be overcome and so that the mechanisms of navigation in this highly mobile animal can finally be elucidated.     

Echolocation,development, and vocal communication in the lesser bulldog bat,Noctilio albiventris

Summary Foraging and echolocation behavior and its ontogeny in the lesser bulldog bat, Noctilio albiventris, were studied in Panama under field and captive conditions. The vocalizations utilized for echolocation and communication were monitored. Adult N. albiventris captured insect prey from the water surface employing various combinations of CF/FM (constant frequency and frequency modulated) signals. The proportions of CF/FM and the repetition rate were a function of the bat's activity. Most adults exhibited post-sunset and pre-dawn foraging activity, although several telemetered lactating females foraged for only the half hour after dusk, spending the rest of the night with their babies in the roost. When the juveniles began to leave the roost at the age of two months, they appeared to accompany their mothers on initial flights.Captive infant Noctilio developed slowly, and did not fly until about 5–6 weeks postnatally. They continued to nurse for almost 3 months, even though they were capable of eating solid food at about 6 weeks. Previous to weaning, mothers fed their infants with masticated food from their cheekpouches.At birth, Noctilio emit a combination of long FM isolation calls and shorter CF/FM pulses. Mothers nurse only their own babies which they appear to recognize by a vocal signature contained in the infants' isolation calls. The individual isolation calls, as well as the mother's communication sounds, appear to be variations of an FM sinusoidal wave. The periodicity and amplitude change, and different portions including harmonics are added or deleted. The short CF/FM signals of the infant evolve into the adult orientation type signals as the CF component increases in frequency and the repetition rate increases. These sounds appear to serve a dual function in communication and echolocation. Mother-young pairs were observed to call antiphonally, utilizing CF/short FM signals in retrieval situations. This duetting was also observed in bats flying over the Chagras River after the time the juveniles began to fly, and may function to maintain vocal contact during initial foraging flights.Deceased     

The role of synchronized calling,ambient light,and ambient noise,in anti-bat-predator behavior of a treefrog

Summary Male treefrogs, Smilisca sila (Hylidae), produce calls of varying complexity and demonstrate a remarkable ability to synchronize their calls with those of neighbors. The bat Trachops cirrhosus eats frogs and uses the frogs' advertisement calls as locational cues. The bats are less likely to respond to synchronous calls than to asynchronous calls, and when given a choice prefer complex calls to simple calls.Experiments with bat models indicate that, like other frogs, S. sila probably uses visual cues to detect hunting bats. In response to bat models the frogs decreased both the number and the complexity of their calls. The calling behavior of the frogs was sampled in the field during periods with and without artificial illumination. The frogs produced fewer and less complex calls, and they tended to call from more concealed sites, during the period without illumination, when presumably it would have been more difficult for the frogs to detect hunting bats. S. sila tended to call from sites with higher ambient noise level, the noise primarily originating from waterfalls. The frequencies of the dominant energies in the waterfall sounds completely overlapped the frequency range of the S. sila call; thus waterfalls might mask the frog calls. When given a choice between calls produced near and away from waterfall sounds, bats preferred the latter.     

Similar is not the same: Social calls of conspecifics are more effective in attracting wild bats to day roosts than those of other bat species

Many bat species regularly need to find new day roosts as they require numerous shelters each breeding season. It has been shown that bats exchange information about roosts among colony members, and use echolocation and social calls of conspecifics in order to find roosts. However, it is unclear if wild bats discriminate between social calls of conspecifics and other bat species while searching for roosts. Furthermore, the extent that bats are attracted to potential roosts by each of these two call types is unknown. We present a field experiment showing that social calls of conspecifics and other bat species both attract bats to roosts. During two summers, we played back social calls of Bechstein’s bats (Myotis bechsteinii) and Natterer’s bats (Myotis nattereri) from different bat boxes that can serve as roosts for these species. All experimental bat boxes were monitored with infrared video to identify the approaching bat species. Three species (M. bechsteinii, M. nattereri, and Plecotus auritus) approached the boxes significantly more often during nights when bat calls were played compared to nights without playbacks. Bechstein’s bats and Natterer’s bats were both more attracted to social calls of conspecifics than of the other species, whereas P. auritus did not discriminate between calls of either Myotis species. Only Bechstein’s bats entered experimental boxes and only at times when calls from conspecifics were played. Our findings show that wild bats discriminate between social calls of conspecifics and other bat species although they respond to both call types when searching for new roosts.     

Echolocation call design and limits on prey size: a case study using the aerial-hawking bat Nyctalus leisleri

The echolocation calls used by Nyctalus leisleri during search phase in open air space are between 9 and 14 ms long, with the peak energy between 24 and 28 kHz. The pulses are shallowly frequency-modulated with or without an initial steep frequency-modulated component. The diet consists primarily of small flies (Diptera), including many chironomids (wingspan 9–12 mm) and yellow dung flies (Scatophaga; wingspan 24 mm), but also of some larger insects such as dung beetles (Coleoptera; Scarabaeoidea), caddis-flies (Trichoptera) and moths (Lepidoptera). The echo target strength of some prey items was measured. Contrary to models based on standard targets such as spheres or disks, the echo strength of real insects was found to be virtually independent of the emitted frequency within the 20–100 kHz frequency range. A model was used to calculate probable detection distances of the prey by the bat. Using narrow-band calls of 13.7 ± 2.7 ms duration, a bat would detect the two smallest size classes of insect at greatest range using calls of 20 kHz. The results may therefore explain why many species of large and medium sized aerial-hawking bats use low-frequency calls and still eat mostly relatively small insects. The data and model challenges the assumption that small prey are unavailable to bats using low-frequency calls.