|
| |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Home Help Feedback Subscriptions Archive Search Table of Contents | ||||
Journal of Experimental Biology, Vol 202, Issue 23 3359-3367, Copyright © 1999 by Company of Biologists
JOURNAL ARTICLES |
G Jones
School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Woodland Road, Bristol BS8 1UG, UK. Gareth.Jones@bris.ac.uk
I investigated the scaling of echolocation call parameters (frequency, duration and repetition rate) in bats in a functional context. Low-duty-cycle bats operate with search phase cycles of usually less than 20 %. They process echoes in the time domain and are therefore intolerant of pulse-echo overlap. High-duty-cycle (>30 %) species use Doppler shift compensation, and they separate pulse and echo in the frequency domain. Call frequency scales negatively with body mass in at least five bat families. Pulse duration scales positively with mass in low-duty-cycle quasi-constant-frequency (QCF) species because the large aerial-hawking species that emit these signals fly fast in open habitats. They therefore detect distant targets and experience pulse-echo overlap later than do smaller bats. Pulse duration also scales positively with mass in the Hipposideridae, which show at least partial Doppler shift compensation. Pulse repetition rate corresponds closely with wingbeat frequency in QCF bat species that fly relatively slowly. Larger, fast-flying species often skip pulses when detecting distant targets. There is probably a trade-off between call intensity and repetition rate because 'whispering' bats (and hipposiderids) produce several calls per predicted wingbeat and because batches of calls are emitted per wingbeat during terminal buzzes. Severe atmospheric attenuation at high frequencies limits the range of high-frequency calls. Low-duty-cycle bats that call at high frequencies must therefore use short pulses to avoid pulse-echo overlap. Rhinolophids escape this constraint by Doppler shift compensation and, importantly, can exploit advantages associated with the emission of both high-frequency and long-duration calls. Low frequencies are unsuited for the detection of small prey, and low repetition rates may limit prey detection rates. Echolocation parameters may therefore constrain maximum body size in aerial-hawking bats.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  D. R. Howard, A. C. Mason, and P. S. M. Hill Hearing and spatial behavior in Gryllotalpa major Saussure (Orthoptera: Gryllotalpidae) J. Exp. Biol., November 15, 2008; 211(22): 3613 - 3618. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. Li, J. Wang, S. J. Rossiter, G. Jones, J. A. Cotton, and S. Zhang The hearing gene Prestin reunites echolocating bats PNAS, September 16, 2008; 105(37): 13959 - 13964. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. Ulanovsky and C. F. Moss What the bat's voice tells the bat's brain PNAS, June 24, 2008; 105(25): 8491 - 8498. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. W. Holderied, C. Korine, M. B. Fenton, S. Parsons, S. Robson, and G. Jones Echolocation call intensity in the aerial hawking bat Eptesicus bottae (Vespertilionidae) studied using stereo videogrammetry J. Exp. Biol., April 1, 2005; 208(7): 1321 - 1327. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. Marsat and G. S. Pollack Differential Temporal Coding of Rhythmically Diverse Acoustic Signals by a Single Interneuron J Neurophysiol, August 1, 2004; 92(2): 939 - 948. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A.-H. Samson and G. S. Pollack Encoding of Sound Localization Cues by an Identified Auditory Interneuron: Effects of Stimulus Temporal Pattern J Neurophysiol, November 1, 2002; 88(5): 2322 - 2328. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S Parsons and G Jones Acoustic identification of twelve species of echolocating bat by discriminant function analysis and artificial neural networks J. Exp. Biol., January 9, 2000; 203(17): 2641 - 2656. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
