Advertisement

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 66, Issue 11, pp 1493–1502 | Cite as

Echolocation beam shape in emballonurid bats, Saccopteryx bilineata and Cormura brevirostris

  • Lasse Jakobsen
  • Elisabeth K. V. Kalko
  • Annemarie Surlykke
Original Paper

Abstract

The shape of the sonar beam plays a crucial role in how echolocating bats perceive their surroundings. Signal design may thus be adapted to optimize beam shape to a given context. Studies suggest that this is indeed true for vespertilionid bats, but little is known from the remaining 16 families of echolocating bats. We investigated the echolocation beam shape of two species of emballonurid bats, Cormura brevirostris and Saccopteryx bilineata, while they navigated a large outdoor flight cage on Barro Colorado Island, Panama. C. brevirostris emitted more directional signals than did S. bilineata. The difference in directionality was due to a markedly different energy distribution in the calls. C. brevirostris emitted two call types, a multiharmonic shallowly frequency-modulated call and a multiharmonic sweep, both with most energy in the fifth harmonic around 68 kHz. S. bilineata emitted only one call type, multiharmonic shallowly frequency-modulated calls with most energy in the second harmonic (~46 kHz). When comparing same harmonic number, the directionality of the calls of the two bat species was nearly identical. However, the difference in energy distribution in the calls made the signals emitted by C. brevirostris more directional overall than those emitted by S. bilineata. We hypothesize that the upward shift in frequency exhibited by C. brevirostris serves to increase directionality, in order to generate a less cluttered auditory scene. The study indicates that emballonurid bats are forced to adjust their relative harmonic energy instead of adjusting the fundamental frequency, as the vespertilionids do, presumably due to a less flexible sound production.

Keywords

Bat Emballonuridae Echolocation Beam shape Directionality 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Ali Shekarchi for help with development of the energy compensation method, John Ratcliffe, Frants Havmand Jensen, Maria Wilson, Brock Fenton, and an anonymous reviewer for valuable comments on the manuscript. The study was funded by the Carlsberg foundation (to L.J.), The Danish Council for Natural Sciences (FNU to A.M.S.), and the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (STRI) and the German Science Foundation (DFG; to E.K.V.K.).

Guidelines

The research adhered to the legal requirements of Panamá in which the work was carried out and all institutional guidelines as well as the Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour/Animal Behaviour Society Guidelines for the Use of Animals in Research (published on the Animal Behaviour website).

References

  1. ANSI (1995) American National Standard. Method for the calculation of the absorption of sound by the atmosphere. American Institute of Physics for the Acoustical Society of America, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Brinkløv S, Jakobsen L, Ratcliffe JM, Kalko EKV, Surlykke A (2011) Echolocation call intensity and directionality in flying short-tailed fruit bats, Carollia perspicillata (Phyllostomidae). J Acoust Soc Am 129:427–435PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brüel & Kjær (1982) Condenser microphones and microphone preamplifiers for acoustic measurements. Data handbook. Brüel & Kjær, Nærum, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  4. Hartley DJ, Suthers RA (1987) The sound emission pattern and the acoustical role of the noseleaf in the echolocating bat, C. perspicillata. J Acoust Soc Am 82:1892–1900PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hartley DJ, Suthers RA (1989) The sound emission pattern of the echolocating bat, Eptesicus fuscus. J Acoust Soc Am 85:1348–1351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Henze D, O’Neill WE (1991) The emission pattern of vocalizations and directionality of the sonar system in the echolocating bat, Pteronotus parnelli. J Acoust Soc Am 89:2430–2434PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hiryu S, Katsura K, Lin LK, Riquimaroux H, Watanabe Y (2006) Radiation pattern of echolocation pulse in Taiwanese leaf-nosed bat, Hipposideros terasensis. Acoust Sci Technol 27:108–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jakobsen L, Surlykke A (2010) Vespertilionid bats control the width of their biosonar sound beam dynamically during prey pursuit. P Natl Acad Sci USA 107:13930–13935CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jones G (1999) Scaling of echolocation call parameters in bats. J Exp Biol 202:3359–3367PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Jung K, Kalko EKV, von Helversen O (2007) Echolocation calls in Central American emballonurid bats: signal design and call frequency alternation. J Zool 272:125–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Madsen PT, Wahlberg M (2007) Recording and quantification of ultrasonic echolocation clicks from free-ranging toothed whales. Deep-Sea Res I 154:1421–1444Google Scholar
  12. Mogensen F, Møhl B (1979) Sound radiation patterns in the frequency domain of cries from a Vespertilionid bat. J Comp Physiol A 134:165–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Moss CF, Chui C, Surlykke A (2011) Adaptive vocal behavior drives perception by echolocation in bats. Curr Opin Neurobiol 21:645–652PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ratcliffe JM, Jakobsen L, Kalko EKV, Surlykke A (2011) Frequency alternation and an offbeat rhythm indicate foraging behaviour in the echolocating bat, Saccopteryx bilineata. J Comp Physiol A 197:413–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Reid F (2009) A field guide to the mammals of Central America & Southeast Mexico. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Schnitzler H-U, Grinnell AD (1977) Directional sensitivity of echolocation in the horseshoe bat, Rhinolophus ferrumeqiunum. J Comp Physiol A 116:51–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Schnitzler H-U, Kalko EKV (2001) Echolocation by insect-eating bats. Bioscience 51:557–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Schnitzler H-U, Kalko EKV, Denzinger A (2004) Evolution of echolocation in bats. In: Thomas J, Moss CF, Vater M (eds) Echolocation in bats and dolphins. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 331–339Google Scholar
  19. Simmons JA (1969) Acoustic radiation patterns for the echolocating bats Chylonycteris rubiginosa and Eptesicus fuscus. J Acoust Soc Am 46:1054–1056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Simmons NB (2005) Order Chiroptera. In: Wilson DE, Reeder DM (eds) Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference, 3rd edn. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 312–529Google Scholar
  21. Simmons JA, Stein RA (1980) Acoustic imaging in bat sonar: echolocation signals and the evolution of echolocation. J Comp Physiol A 135:61–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Strother GK, Mogus M (1970) Acoustical beam patterns for bats: some theoretical considerations. J Acoust Soc Am 48:1430–1432PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Surlykke A, Kalko EKV (2008) Echolocating bats cry out loud to detect their prey. PLoS One 3:e2036PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Surlykke A, Moss CF (2000) Echolocaton behavior of big brown bats, Eptesicus fuscus, in the field and the laboratory. J Acoust Soc Am 108:2419–2429PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Surlykke A, Pedersen SB, Jakobsen L (2009) Echolocating bats emit a highly directional sonar sound beam in the field. Proc R Soc Lond B 276:853–860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Teeling EC, Springer MS, Madsen O, Bates P, O’Brien SJ, Murphy WJ (2005) A molecular phylogeny for bats illuminates biogeography and the fossil record. Science 307:580–584PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lasse Jakobsen
    • 1
  • Elisabeth K. V. Kalko
    • 2
    • 3
  • Annemarie Surlykke
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of BiologyUniversity of Southern DenmarkOdenseDenmark
  2. 2.Institute of Experimental EcologyUniversity of UlmUlmGermany
  3. 3.Smithsonian Tropical Research InstitutePanama CityRepublic of Panama

Personalised recommendations