Literature DB >> 18998148

Variability of the approach phase of landing echolocating Greater Mouse-eared bats.

Mariana L Melcón1, Hans-Ulrich Schnitzler, Annette Denzinger.   

Abstract

The approach phase of landing vespertilionid bats ends with a group of calls, which either consists of buzz I alone or buzz I and buzz II. To understand the possible role of buzz II, we trained Myotis myotis to land on a vertical grid, and compared the flight and echolocation behavior during approach in trials with and without buzz II. During the approach, we did not find any differences in the echolocation behavior until the end of buzz I which indicated whether buzz II was emitted or not. However, bats flying from the periphery of the flight channel, such that they had to make a small turn at the very last moment, finished the sequence with a buzz II. Bats flying on a rather stereotyped trajectory near the center of the flight channel without last instant corrections emitted buzz I alone. Our results indicate that buzz II occurred only on trajectories that implied a higher risk to fail at landing. The information delivered by buzz II reaches the bat too late to be used for landing. Therefore, we hypothesize that buzz II may help the bats to evaluate unsuccessful attempts and to eventually react adequately.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18998148     DOI: 10.1007/s00359-008-0383-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol        ISSN: 0340-7594            Impact factor:   1.836


  19 in total

1.  Localization of a pontine vocalization-controlling area.

Authors:  U Jürgens
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Effect of acoustic clutter on prey detection by bats.

Authors:  R Arlettaz; G Jones; P A Racey
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2001-12-13       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Periaqueductal gray and the region of the paralemniscal area have different functions in the control of vocalization in the neotropical bat, Phyllostomus discolor.

Authors:  T Fenzl; G Schuller
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 3.386

4.  Neural control of vocalization in bats: mapping of brainstem areas with electrical microstimulation eliciting species-specific echolocation calls in the rufous horseshoe bat.

Authors:  G Schuller; S Radtke-Schuller
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  On the role of the pontine brainstem in vocal pattern generation: a telemetric single-unit recording study in the squirrel monkey.

Authors:  Steffen R Hage; Uwe Jürgens
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2006-06-28       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Echolocation and passive listening by foraging mouse-eared bats Myotis myotis and M. blythii.

Authors:  Danilo Russo; Gareth Jones; Raphaël Arlettaz
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 3.312

7.  On the search for the vocal pattern generator. A single-unit recording study.

Authors:  F Düsterhöft; U Häusler; U Jürgens
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  2000-06-26       Impact factor: 1.837

8.  Substrate-gleaning versus aerial-hawking: plasticity in the foraging and echolocation behaviour of the long-eared bat, Myotis evotis.

Authors:  P A Faure; R M Barclay
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 1.836

9.  Aerial hawking and landing: approach behaviour in Natterer's bats, Myotis nattereri (Kuhl 1818).

Authors:  Mariana L Melcón; Annette Denzinger; Hans-Ulrich Schnitzler
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 3.312

10.  The gleaning attacks of the northern long-eared bat, Myotis septentrionalis, are relatively inaudible to moths.

Authors:  P A Faure; J H Fullard; J W Dawson
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 3.312

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Click-based echolocation in bats: not so primitive after all.

Authors:  Yossi Yovel; Maya Geva-Sagiv; Nachum Ulanovsky
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2011-04-05       Impact factor: 1.836

2.  How greater mouse-eared bats deal with ambiguous echoic scenes.

Authors:  M L Melcón; Y Yovel; A Denzinger; H-U Schnitzler
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2010-07-23       Impact factor: 1.836

3.  Reduction of emission level in approach signals of greater mouse-eared bats (Myotis myotis): No evidence for a closed loop control system for intensity compensation.

Authors:  Tobias Budenz; Annette Denzinger; Hans-Ulrich Schnitzler
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-03-15       Impact factor: 3.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.