The high-output singing displays of a lekking bat encode information on body size and individual identity

  • Cory A. Toth
  • Stuart Parsons
Original Article


A growing body of research suggests that songs are an important part of the courtship behavior of many bat species, however there is little information on the basic characteristics of these vocalizations, or how they may function as a courtship signal. Lekking male lesser short-tailed bats (Mystacina tuberculata) appear to use vocal displays as a primary method for attracting mates, but it is unclear if these vocalizations constitute songs, and what characteristics females may use for mate selection. We recorded 16 lekking males and described the frequency and temporal properties of their vocalizations. We identified four notes (upsweeps, downsweeps, trills, and tones) that comprise courtship vocalizations, and males produced these notes either singly, or combined them linearly to form composite syllables. We classified 51 distinct syllable types (with an average of 29 types per male), with four (trills, upsweep-trills, trill-downsweeps, and upsweep-trill-downsweeps) comprising 69% of all syllables produced. The duration of trill-downsweeps scaled negatively with forearm length (a proxy for body size in bats), and all four main syllable types showed evidence of individuality. Based on the behavioral characteristics and contexts of these courtship vocalizations, we posit that this behavior constitutes singing. Furthermore, M. tuberculata potentially has one of the highest sustained song outputs yet described. Our results suggest the singing displays of M. tuberculata are signals that provide useful, honest cues of male characteristics and identity to females, and are as complex as the songs of many passerines.

Significance statement

Male courtship displays are predicted to honestly advertise aspects of male traits. Like many birds, some bat species produce songs to attract mates, but the characteristics of these songs are not well understood within the context of sexual selection. We demonstrate that the courtship vocalizations of Mystacina tuberculata – a species that likely relies on singing as its primary method of mate attraction – are a complex set of signals. Males have large syllable repertoires, encode four of their most-common syllables with individual signatures, and have one of the highest recorded song outputs for either birds or bats. Moreover, the length of one of the most commonly used syllable types is inversely related to male size, providing females the opportunity to appraise male size by auditory cues alone. Our work is part of a growing body of research demonstrating singing behavior in bats.


Allometry Chiroptera Courtship Lek breeding Sexual selection Song 



We are grateful to the New Zealand Department of Conservation – particularly T. Thurley and D. Smith – for assistance and support. We thank R. Germain for statistical advice, and three anonymous reviewers for their comments on previous versions of this manuscript.


Funding was provided by the Australasian Society for the Study of Animal Behaviour, the Australasian Bat Society, Bat Conservation International, and the University of Auckland.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. The capture and marking of individuals was approved by both the University of Auckland Animal Ethics Committee (permit AEC#000920) and the New Zealand Department of Conservation (High Impact Research and Collection Permit WK-32184-RES).

Supplementary material

265_2018_2496_MOESM1_ESM.docx (19.8 mb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 20231 kb)


  1. Bee MA, Kozich CE, Blackwell KJ, Gerhardt HC (2001) Individual variation in advertisement calls of territorial male green frogs, Rana clamitans: implications for individual discrimination. Ethology 107:65–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beecher MD (1989) Signalling systems for individual recognition: an information theory approach. Anim Behav 38:248–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beecher MD, Brenowitz EA (2005) Functional aspects of song learning in songbirds. Trends Ecol Evol 20:143–149CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Behr O, von Helversen O (2004) Bat serenades—complex courtship songs of the sac-winged bat (Saccopteryx bilineata). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 56:106–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Behr O, von Helversen O, Heckel G, Nagy M, Voigt CC, Mayer F (2006) Territorial songs indicate male quality in the sac-winged bat Saccopteryx bilineata (Chiroptera, Emballonuridae). Behav Ecol 17:810–817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bohn KM, Schmidt-French B, Schwartz C, Smotherman M, Pollak GD (2009) Versatility and stereotypy of free-tailed bat songs. PLoS One 4:e6746CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Bohn K, Montiel-Reyes F, Salazar I (2016) The complex songs of two Molossid species. In: Ortega J (ed) Sociality in Bats. Springer, Switzerland, pp 143–160Google Scholar
  8. Bradbury JW (1977) Lek mating behavior in the hammer-headed bat. Z Tierpsychol 45:225–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bradbury JW, Vehrencamp SL (1998) Principles of animal communication. Sinauer Associates Inc., Sunderland, MAGoogle Scholar
  10. Byers BE (2006) Extrapair paternity in chestnut-sided warblers is correlated with consistent vocal performance. Behav Ecol 18:130–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carter GG, Riskin DK (2006) Mystacina tuberculata. Mamm Species 790:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Catchpole CK, Slater PJB (2003) Bird song: biological themes and variations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  13. Charlton BD, Reby D (2016) The evolution of acoustic size exaggeration in terrestrial mammals. Nat Commun 7:12739CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. Charlton BD, Reby D, McComb K (2007) Female red deer prefer the roars of larger males. Biol Lett 3:382–385CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Charlton BD, Ellis WAH, Brumm J, Nilsson K, Fitch WT (2012) Female koalas prefer bellows in which lower formants indicate larger males. Anim Behav 84:1565–1571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Christie PJ, Mennill DJ, Ratcliffe LM (2004) Pitch shifts and song structure indicate male quality in the dawn chorus of black-capped chickadees. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 55:341–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Collins S (2004) Vocal fighting and flirting: the functions of birdsong. In: Marler P, Slabbekoorn H (eds) Nature's music: the science of birdsong. Academic Press, New York, pp 39–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Davidson SM, Wilkinson GS (2002) Geographic and individual variation in vocalizations by male Saccopteryx bilineata (Chiroptera: Emballonuridae). J Mammal 83:526–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Davidson SM, Wilkinson GS (2004) Function of male song in the greater white-lined bat, Saccopteryx bilineata. Anim Behav 67:883–891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Eckenweber M, Knörnschild M (2013) Social influences on territorial signaling in male greater sac-winged bats. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 67:639–648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ellis JMS (2008) Decay of apparent individual distinctiveness in the begging calls of adult female white-throated magpie-jays. Condor 110:648–657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. ESRI (2012) ArcMap 10. Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands, CAGoogle Scholar
  23. Ey E, Pfefferle D, Fischer J (2007) Do age-and sex-related variations reliably reflect body size in non-human primate vocalizations? A review. Primates 48:253–267CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Fenton MB (2013) Questions, ideas and tools: lessons from bat echolocation. Anim Behav 85:869–879CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Galeotti P, Sacchi R, Rosa DP, Fasola M (2005) Female preference for fast-rate, high-pitched calls in Hermann's tortoises Testudo hermanni. Behav Ecol 16:301–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gil D, Gahr M (2002) The honesty of bird song: multiple constraints for multiple traits. Trends Ecol Evol 17:133–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Godard R (1991) Long-term memory of individual neighbours in a migratory songbird. Nature 350:228–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gray DA (1997) Female house crickets, Acheta domesticus, prefer the chirps of large males. Anim Behav 54:1553–1562CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Höglund J, Alatalo RV (1995) Leks. Princeton University Press, PrincetonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jahelková H, Horáček I, Bartonička T (2008) The advertisement song of Pipistrellus nathusii (Chiroptera, Vespertilionidae): a complex message containing acoustic signatures of individuals. Acta Chiropterol 10:103–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jones G (1997) Differences in songflight calls and social calls between two phonic types of the vespertilionid bat Pipistrellus pipistrellus. J Zool 241:315–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jones G, Siemers BM (2011) The communicative potential of bat echolocation pulses. J Comp Physiol 197:447–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Knörnschild M, Behr O, von Helversen O (2006) Babbling behavior in the sac-winged bat (Saccopteryx bilineata). Naturwissenschaften 93:451–454CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Knörnschild M, Nagy M, Metz M, Mayer F, von Helversen O (2010) Complex vocal imitation during ontogeny in a bat. Biol Lett 6:156–159CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Kroodsma D (2005) The singing life of birds: the art and science of listening to birdsong. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Lardner B, bin Lakim M (2002) Animal communication: Tree-hole frogs exploit resonance effects. Nature 420:475–475CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Linhart P, Fuchs R (2015) Song pitch indicates body size and correlates with males' response to playback in a songbird. Anim Behav 103:91–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lloyd BD (2001) Advances in New Zealand mammalogy 1990–2000: short-tailed bats. J Roy Soc New Zeal 31:59–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Marler P (2004) Science and birdsong: the good old days. In: Marler P, Slabbekoorn H (eds) Nature's Music: the science of birdsong. Academic Press, New York, pp 1–38Google Scholar
  40. Marler P, Slabbekoorn H (2004) Nature's music: the science of birdsong. Elsevier Academic Press, San Diego, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  41. McGregor PK, Krebs JR (1982) Mating and song sharing in the great tit. Nature 297:60–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mennill DJ, Otter KA (2007) Status signaling and communication networks in chickadees: complex communication with a simple song. In: Otter KA (ed) Ecology and behavior of chickadees and titmice: an integrated approach. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 215–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Molles LE, Vehrencamp SL (1999) Repertoire size, repertoire overlap, and singing modes in the banded wren (Thryothorus pleurostictus). Auk 116:677–689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Morton ES, Young K (1986) A previously undescribed method of song matching in a species with a single song “type”, the Kentucky warbler (Oporornis formosus). Ethology 73:334–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mundry R, Sommer C (2007) Discriminant function analysis with nonindependent data: consequences and an alternative. Anim Behav 74:965–976CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Nordby JC, Campbell SE, Beecher MD (1999) Ecological correlates of song learning in song sparrows. Behav Ecol 10:287–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Nordby JC, Campbell SE, Burt JM, Beecher MD (2000) Social influences during song development in the song sparrow: a laboratory experiment simulating field conditions. Anim Behav 59:1187–1197CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Patel R, Mulder RA, Cardoso GC (2010) What makes vocalisation frequency an unreliable signal of body size in birds? A study on black swans. Ethology 116:554–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pfalzer G, Kusch J (2003) Structure and variability of bat social calls: implications for specificity and individual recognition. J Zool 261:21–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Podos J, Huber SK, Taft B (2004) Bird song: the interface of evolution and mechanism. Annu Rev Ecol Evol S 35:55–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Poesel A, Kunc HP, Foerster K, Johnsen A, Kempenaers B (2006) Early birds are sexy: male age, dawn song and extrapair paternity in blue tits, Cyanistes (formerly Parus) caeruleus. Anim Behav 72:531–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Pollak GD, Casseday J (2012) The neural basis of echolocation in bats. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  53. Puechmaille SJ, Borissov IM, Zsebok S, Allegrini B, Hizem M, Kuenzel S, Schuchmann M, Teeling EC, Siemers BM (2014) Female mate choice can drive the evolution of high frequency echolocation in bats: a case study with Rhinolophus mehelyi. PLoS One 9:e103452CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  54. R Core Team (2013) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.
  55. Revelle W (2018) Psych: Procedures for Personality and Psychological Research, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois.
  56. Rice WR, Gaines SD (1994) ‘Heads I win, tails you lose’: testing directional alternative hypotheses in ecological and evolutionary research. TREE 9:236–237Google Scholar
  57. Rivera-Gutierrez HF, Pinxten R, Eens M (2010) Multiple signals for multiple messages: great tit, Parus major, song signals age and survival. Anim Behav 80:451–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Russ JM, Racey PA (2007) Species-specificity and individual variation in the song of male Nathusius’ pipistrelles (Pipistrellus nathusii). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 61:669–677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Ryan MJ (1980) Female mate choice in a neotropical frog. Science 209:523–525CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Sachteleben J, von Helversen O (2006) Songflight behaviour and mating system of the pipistrelle bat (Pipistrellus pipistrellus) in an urban habitat. Acta Chiropterol 8:391–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. SAS Institute Inc. (2016) JMP Pro 13. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
  62. Schmidt S (2013) Beyond echolocation: emotional acoustic communication in bats. In: Altenmuller E, Schmidt S, Zimmermann E (eds) Evolution of emotional communication: from sounds in nonhuman mammals to speech and music in man. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 92–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sell A, Bryant GA, Cosmides L, Tooby J, Sznycer D, von Rueden C, Krauss A, Gurven M (2010) Adaptations in humans for assessing physical strength from the voice. Proc R Soc Lond B 277:3509–3518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Sibly RM, Nott HMR, Fletcher DJ (1990) Splitting behaviour into bouts. Anim Behav 39:63–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Smarsh GC, Smotherman M (2015) Singing away from home: Songs are used on foraging territories in the African megadermatid bat, Cardioderma cor. In: Proceeding of Meetings on Acoustics 25:010002. Acoustical Society of America, JacksonvilleGoogle Scholar
  66. Smarsh GC, Smotherman M (2017) Behavioral response to conspecific songs on foraging territories of the heart-nosed bat. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 71:142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Smotherman MS (2007) Sensory feedback control of mammalian vocalizations. Behav Brain Res 182:315–326CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  68. Smotherman M, Knörnschild M, Smarsh G, Bohn K (2016) The origins and diversity of bat songs. J Comp Physiol A 202:535–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1995) Biometry: The principles and practice of statistics in biological research. W.H. Freeman and Co., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  70. Spector DA (1992) Wood-warbler song systems. Curr Ornithol 9:199–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Toth CA, Parsons S (2013) Is lek breeding rare in bats? J Zool 291:3–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Toth CA, Cummings G, Dennis TE, Parsons S (2015a) Adoption of alternative habitats by a threatened, "obligate" deep-forest bat in a fragmented landscape. J Mammal 96:927–937CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Toth CA, Dennis TE, Pattemore DE, Parsons S (2015b) Females as mobile resources: communal roosts promote the adoption of lek breeding in a temperate bat. Behav Ecol 26:1156–1163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Toth CA, Santure AW, Holwell GI, Pattemore DE, Parsons S (2018) Courtship behaviour and display-site sharing appears conditional on body size in a lekking bat. Anim Behav 136:13–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Vehrencamp SL (2000) Handicap, index, and conventional signal elements of bird song. In: Espmark Y, Amundsen T, Rosenqvist GO (eds) Animal signals. Tapir Academic Press, Trondheim, Norway, pp 277–300Google Scholar
  76. Vignal C, Mathevon N, Mottin S (2004) Audience drives male songbird response to partner's voice. Nature 430:448–451CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Vignal C, Mathevon N, Mottin S (2008) Mate recognition by female zebra finch: analysis of individuality in male call and first investigations on female decoding process. Behav Process 77:191–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Voigt CC, Behr O, Caspers B, von Helversen O, Knörnschild M, Mayer F, Nagy M (2008) Songs, scents, and senses: sexual selection in the greater sac-winged bat, Saccopteryx bilineata. J Mammal 89:1401–1410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Wells KD (2010) The ecology and behavior of amphibians. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  80. Wildenthal JL (1965) Structure in primary song of the mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos). Auk 82:161–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Wilkinson GS, Boughman JW (1998) Social calls coordinate foraging in greater spear-nosed bats. Anim Behav 55:337–350CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Biological SciencesUniversity of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand
  2. 2.Department of Biological SciencesBoise State UniversityBoiseUSA
  3. 3.School of Earth, Environmental and Biological SciencesQueensland University of TechnologyBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations