» Articles » PMID: 29070593

Body Lift, Drag and Power Are Relatively Higher in Large-eared Than in Small-eared Bat Species

Overview
Date 2017 Oct 27
PMID 29070593
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Bats navigate the dark using echolocation. Echolocation is enhanced by external ears, but external ears increase the projected frontal area and reduce the streamlining of the animal. External ears are thus expected to compromise flight efficiency, but research suggests that very large ears may mitigate the cost by producing aerodynamic lift. Here we compare quantitative aerodynamic measures of flight efficiency of two bat species, one large-eared () and one small-eared (), flying freely in a wind tunnel. We find that the body drag of both species is higher than previously assumed and that the large-eared species has a higher body drag coefficient, but also produces relatively more ear/body lift than the small-eared species, in line with prior studies on model bats. The measured aerodynamic power of was higher than predicted from the aerodynamic model, while the small-eared species aligned with predictions. The relatively higher power of the large-eared species results in lower optimal flight speeds and our findings support the notion of a trade-off between the acoustic benefits of large external ears and aerodynamic performance. The result of this trade-off would be the eco-morphological correlation in bat flight, with large-eared bats generally adopting slow-flight feeding strategies.

Citing Articles

Aerodynamic efficiency explains flapping strategies used by birds.

Johansson L Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2024; 121(46):e2410048121.

PMID: 39503894 PMC: 11573650. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2410048121.


Strategic predatory pursuit of the stealthy, highly manoeuvrable, slow flying bat .

Bortoni A, Swartz S, Vejdani H, Corcoran A Proc Biol Sci. 2023; 290(2001):20230138.

PMID: 37357862 PMC: 10291723. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2023.0138.


Conversion efficiency of flight power is low, but increases with flight speed in the migratory bat .

Currie S, Johansson L, Aumont C, Voigt C, Hedenstrom A Proc Biol Sci. 2023; 290(1998):20230045.

PMID: 37132234 PMC: 10154928. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2023.0045.


Power requirements for bat-inspired flapping flight with heavy, highly articulated and cambered wings.

Fan X, Swartz S, Breuer K J R Soc Interface. 2022; 19(194):20220315.

PMID: 36128710 PMC: 9490335. DOI: 10.1098/rsif.2022.0315.


Mechanical power curve measured in the wake of pied flycatchers indicates modulation of parasite power across flight speeds.

Johansson L, Maeda M, Henningsson P, Hedenstrom A J R Soc Interface. 2018; 15(138).

PMID: 29386402 PMC: 5805985. DOI: 10.1098/rsif.2017.0814.


References
1.
Hubel T, Riskin D, Swartz S, Breuer K . Wake structure and wing kinematics: the flight of the lesser dog-faced fruit bat, Cynopterus brachyotis. J Exp Biol. 2010; 213(Pt 20):3427-40. DOI: 10.1242/jeb.043257. View

2.
Jen P, Chen D . Directionality of sound pressure transformation at the pinna of echolocating bats. Hear Res. 1988; 34(2):101-17. DOI: 10.1016/0378-5955(88)90098-6. View

3.
McCracken G, Safi K, Kunz T, Dechmann D, Swartz S, Wikelski M . Airplane tracking documents the fastest flight speeds recorded for bats. R Soc Open Sci. 2016; 3(11):160398. PMC: 5180116. DOI: 10.1098/rsos.160398. View

4.
Brooke A, Trewhella W . Soaring and non-soaring bats of the family pteropodidae (flying foxes, Pteropus spp.): wing morphology and flight performance. J Exp Biol. 2000; 203(Pt 3):651-64. DOI: 10.1242/jeb.203.3.651. View

5.
Gill R, Tibbitts T, Douglas D, Handel C, Mulcahy D, Gottschalck J . Extreme endurance flights by landbirds crossing the Pacific Ocean: ecological corridor rather than barrier?. Proc Biol Sci. 2008; 276(1656):447-57. PMC: 2664343. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2008.1142. View