Literature DB >> 12000805

Doppler-shift compensation behavior in horseshoe bats revisited: auditory feedback controls both a decrease and an increase in call frequency.

Walter Metzner1, Shuyi Zhang, Michael Smotherman.   

Abstract

Among mammals, echolocation in bats illustrates the vital role of proper audio-vocal feedback control particularly well. Bats adjust the temporal, spectral and intensity parameters of their echolocation calls depending on the characteristics of the returning echo signal. The mechanism of audio-vocal integration in both mammals and birds is, however, still largely unknown. Here, we present behavioral evidence suggesting a novel audio-vocal control mechanism in echolocating horseshoe bats (Rhinolophus ferrumequinum). These bats compensate for even subtle frequency shifts in the echo caused by flight-induced Doppler effects by adjusting the frequency of their echolocation calls. Under natural conditions, when approaching background targets, the bats usually encounter only positive Doppler shifts. Hence, we commonly believed that, during this Doppler-shift compensation behavior, horseshoe bats use auditory feedback to compensate only for these increases in echo frequency (=positive shifts) by actively lowering their call frequency below the resting frequency (the call frequency emitted when not flying and not experiencing Doppler shifts). Re-investigation of the Doppler-shift compensation behavior, however, shows that decreasing echo frequencies (=negative shifts) are involved as well: auditory feedback from frequencies below the resting frequency, when presented at similar suprathreshold intensity levels as higher echo frequencies, cause the bat's call frequency to increase above the resting frequency. However, compensation for negative shifts is less complete than for positive shifts (22% versus 95%), probably because of biomechanical restrictions in the larynx of bats. Therefore, Doppler-shift compensation behavior involves a quite different neural substrate and audio-vocal control mechanism from those previously assumed. The behavioral results are no longer consistent with solely inhibitory feedback originating from frequencies above the resting frequency. Instead, we propose that auditory feedback follows an antagonistic push/pull principle, with inhibitory feedback lowering and excitatory feedback increasing call frequencies. While the behavioral significance of an active compensation for echo frequencies below RF remains unclear, these behavioral results are crucial for determining the neural implementation of audio-vocal feedback control in horseshoe bats and possibly in mammals in general.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12000805     DOI: 10.1242/jeb.205.11.1607

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Biol        ISSN: 0022-0949            Impact factor:   3.312


  14 in total

1.  Fine control of call frequency by horseshoe bats.

Authors:  M Smotherman; W Metzner
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2003-05-22       Impact factor: 1.836

2.  Echolocation behavior of the Japanese horseshoe bat in pursuit of fluttering prey.

Authors:  Shigeki Mantani; Shizuko Hiryu; Emyo Fujioka; Naohiro Matsuta; Hiroshi Riquimaroux; Yoshiaki Watanabe
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2012-07-10       Impact factor: 1.836

Review 3.  Sensory acquisition in active sensing systems.

Authors:  M E Nelson; M A MacIver
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2006-01-28       Impact factor: 1.836

4.  On-board telemetry of emitted sounds from free-flying bats: compensation for velocity and distance stabilizes echo frequency and amplitude.

Authors:  Shizuko Hiryu; Yu Shiori; Tatsuro Hosokawa; Hiroshi Riquimaroux; Yoshiaki Watanabe
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2008-07-29       Impact factor: 1.836

5.  Ambient noise induces independent shifts in call frequency and amplitude within the Lombard effect in echolocating bats.

Authors:  Steffen R Hage; Tinglei Jiang; Sean W Berquist; Jiang Feng; Walter Metzner
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-02-19       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Echolocating bats rely on audiovocal feedback to adapt sonar signal design.

Authors:  Jinhong Luo; Cynthia F Moss
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-09-25       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 7.  Sensory feedback control of mammalian vocalizations.

Authors:  Michael S Smotherman
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  2007-03-14       Impact factor: 3.332

8.  Behavioural and neurobiological implications of linear and non-linear features in larynx phonations of horseshoe bats.

Authors:  Kohta I Kobayasi; Steffen R Hage; Sean Berquist; Jiang Feng; Shuyi Zhang; Walter Metzner
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 14.919

9.  Different auditory feedback control for echolocation and communication in horseshoe bats.

Authors:  Ying Liu; Jiang Feng; Walter Metzner
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-04-24       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Comparative cochlear transcriptomics of echolocating bats provides new insights into different nervous activities of CF bat species.

Authors:  Hui Wang; Hanbo Zhao; Xiaobin Huang; Keping Sun; Jiang Feng
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-10-29       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.