» Articles » PMID: 19376960

Adaptive Echolocation Behavior in Bats for the Analysis of Auditory Scenes

Overview
Journal J Exp Biol
Specialty Biology
Date 2009 Apr 21
PMID 19376960
Citations 28
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Echolocating bats emit sonar pulses and listen to returning echoes to probe their surroundings. Bats adapt their echolocation call design to cope with dynamic changes in the acoustic environment, including habitat change or the presence of nearby conspecifics/heterospecifics. Seven pairs of big brown bats, Eptesicus fuscus, were tested in this study to examine how they adjusted their echolocation calls when flying and competing with a conspecific for food. Results showed that differences in five call parameters, start/end frequencies, duration, bandwidth and sweep rate, significantly increased in the two-bat condition compared with the baseline data. In addition, the magnitude of spectral separation of calls was negatively correlated with the baseline call design differences in individual bats. Bats with small baseline call frequency differences showed larger increases in call frequency separation when paired than those with large baseline call frequency differences, suggesting that bats actively change their sonar call structure if pre-existing differences in call design are small. Call design adjustments were also influenced by physical spacing between two bats. Calls of paired bats exhibited the largest design separations when inter-bat distance was shorter than 0.5 m, and the separation decreased as the spacing increased. All individuals modified at least one baseline call parameter in response to the presence of another conspecific. We propose that dissimilarity between the time-frequency features of sonar calls produced by different bats aids each individual in segregating echoes of its own sonar vocalizations from the acoustic signals of neighboring bats.

Citing Articles

Information-seeking across auditory scenes by an echolocating dolphin.

Harley H, Fellner W, Frances C, Thomas A, Losch B, Newton K Anim Cogn. 2022; 25(5):1109-1131.

PMID: 36018473 DOI: 10.1007/s10071-022-01679-5.


Echo reception in group flight by Japanese horseshoe bats, .

Hase K, Kadoya Y, Takeuchi Y, Kobayasi K, Hiryu S R Soc Open Sci. 2022; 9(2):211597.

PMID: 35154795 PMC: 8825988. DOI: 10.1098/rsos.211597.


An assistive computer vision tool to automatically detect changes in fish behavior in response to ambient odor.

Banerjee S, Alvey L, Brown P, Yue S, Li L, Scheirer W Sci Rep. 2021; 11(1):1002.

PMID: 33441714 PMC: 7806584. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-79772-3.


A sensorimotor model shows why a spectral jamming avoidance response does not help bats deal with jamming.

Mazar O, Yovel Y Elife. 2020; 9.

PMID: 32718437 PMC: 7406351. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.55539.


How frequency hopping suppresses pulse-echo ambiguity in bat biosonar.

Ming C, Bates M, Simmons J Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020; 117(29):17288-17295.

PMID: 32632013 PMC: 7382275. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2001105117.


References
1.
Chiu C, Xian W, Moss C . Flying in silence: Echolocating bats cease vocalizing to avoid sonar jamming. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008; 105(35):13116-21. PMC: 2529029. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0804408105. View

2.
Gillam E, Ulanovsky N, McCracken G . Rapid jamming avoidance in biosonar. Proc Biol Sci. 2007; 274(1610):651-60. PMC: 2197216. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2006.0047. View

3.
Ulanovsky N, Fenton M, Tsoar A, Korine C . Dynamics of jamming avoidance in echolocating bats. Proc Biol Sci. 2004; 271(1547):1467-75. PMC: 1691745. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2004.2750. View

4.
Moss C, Surlykke A . Auditory scene analysis by echolocation in bats. J Acoust Soc Am. 2001; 110(4):2207-26. DOI: 10.1121/1.1398051. View

5.
Hulse S, MacDougall-Shackleton S, Wisniewski A . Auditory scene analysis by songbirds: stream segregation of birdsong by European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris). J Comp Psychol. 1997; 111(1):3-13. DOI: 10.1037/0735-7036.111.1.3. View