Journal of comparative physiology

, Volume 145, Issue 4, pp 431–435 | Cite as

Target-detection by the echolocating bat,Eptesicus fuscus

  • Shelley A. Kick


The long-range echo-detection capabilities of echolocating bats (Eptesicus fuscus) were studied in a two-choice psychophysical procedure.E. fuscus can detect 4.8 mm diameter spheres at a distance of 2.9 m, and 19.1 mm diameter spheres at a distance of 5.1 m. The threshold of echo-detection corresponds to the distance at which a target returns an echo amplitude in the region of 0 dB SPL. The results demonstrate that the maximum effective range of bat sonar is greater than previously indicated by obstacleavoidance and target-interception tasks.


Sonar Effective Range Diameter Sphere Psychophysical Procedure Eptesicus Fuscus 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ajrapetjantz AI, Konstantinov AI (1974) Echolocation in nature, 2nd ed. National Technical Information Service, Arlington, VA, Report Nos IPRS-63328-1 and -2Google Scholar
  2. Au WL, Snyder KJ (1980) Long-range target detection in open waters by an echolocating Atlantic bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus). J Acoust Soc Am 68:1077–1084Google Scholar
  3. Bradbury JW (1970) Target discrimination by the echolocating batVampyrum spectrum. Exp Zool 173:23–46Google Scholar
  4. Griffin DR (1958) Listening in the dark. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  5. Griffin DR, Webster FA, Michael CR (1960) The echolocation of flying insects by bats. Anim Behav 8:141–154Google Scholar
  6. Griffin DR, Friend JH, Webster FA (1965) Target discrimination by the echolocation of bats. J Exp Zool 158:155–168Google Scholar
  7. Grinnell AD (1963) The neurophysiology of audition in bats: Temporal parameters. J Physiol 167:67–96Google Scholar
  8. Grinnell AD (1967) Mechanisms of overcoming interference in echolocating animals. In: Busnel R-G (ed) Animal sonar systems. Lab Physiol Acoust, Jouy-en-Josas, pp 451–481Google Scholar
  9. Grinnell AD, Griffin DR (1958) The sensitivity of echolocation in bats. Biol Bull 114:10–22Google Scholar
  10. Henson OW (1965) The activity and function of the middle ear muscles in echolocating bats. J Physiol 180:871–887Google Scholar
  11. Morse PM (1948) Vibration and sound, 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Novick A, Vaisnys JR (1964) Echolocation of flying insects by the bat,Chilonycteris parnelli. Biol Bull 127:478–488Google Scholar
  13. Pye JD (1979) Why ultrasound? Endeavour 3:55–62Google Scholar
  14. Schnitzler HU (1968) Die Ultraschall-Ortungslaute der Hufeisen-Fledermäuse (Chiroptera-Rhinolophidae) in verschiedenen Orientierungssituationen. Z Vergl Physiol 57:376–408Google Scholar
  15. Simmons JA, Stein RA (1980) Acoustic imaging in bat sonar. J Comp Physiol 135:61–84Google Scholar
  16. Simmons JA, Vernon JA (1971) Echolocation: discrimination of targets by the bat,Eptesicus fuscus. J Exp Zool 176:315–328Google Scholar
  17. Sivian LJ, White SD (1933) On minimum audible fields. J Acoust Soc Am 4:288–321Google Scholar
  18. Stebbins WC, Green S, Miller FL (1966) Auditory sensitivity of the monkey. Science 153:1646–1647Google Scholar
  19. Suga N, Jen PH-S (1975) Peripheral control of acoustic signals in the auditory system of echolocating bats. J Exp Biol 62:277–311Google Scholar
  20. Suga N, Schlegel P (1973) Coding and processing in the nervous system of the FM signal producing bats. J Acoust Soc Am 84:174–190Google Scholar
  21. Webster FA, Brazier DG (1965) Experimental studies on target detection, evaluation, and interception by echolocating bats. TDR No AMRL-TR-65-172, Aerospace Medical Division, USAF Systems CommandGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shelley A. Kick
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BiologyUniversity of OregonEugeneUSA

Personalised recommendations