Literature DB >> 7699316

Echolocation call structure and intensity in five species of insectivorous bats.

D A Waters1, G Jones.   

Abstract

Echolocation call intensity was measured in the laboratory for five species of British insectivorous bats in free flight and in the hand. All species showed similar call intensities of between 80 and 90 dB peSPL (peak equivalent SPL) at 1 m during flight except Plecotus auritus, whose call intensity was between 68 and 77 dB peSPL at 1 m. Calls from stationary bats were about 13 dB less intense than calls during flight. A method is proposed to measure the root mean square (rms) amplitude of echolocation calls and, hence, to calculate the energy flux density of the call. The constant-frequency calls of Rhinolophus hipposideros have energy flux densities approximately ten times higher than those of bats using frequency-modulated calls as a result of their longer durations and lower crest factors. It is argued that the low-intensity calls of P. auritus allow it to approach tympanate moths more closely before triggering their escape response.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7699316     DOI: 10.1242/jeb.198.2.475

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


  15 in total

1.  Hearing and bat defence in geometrid winter moths.

Authors:  J Rydell; N Skals; A Surlykke; M Svensson
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  1997-01-22       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Moth hearing in response to bat echolocation calls manipulated independently in time and frequency.

Authors:  G Jones; D A Waters
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2000-08-22       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Sensory ecology of predator-prey interactions: responses of the AN2 interneuron in the field cricket, Teleogryllus oceanicus to the echolocation calls of sympatric bats.

Authors:  James H Fullard; John M Ratcliffe; Cassandra Guignion
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2005-05-11       Impact factor: 1.836

4.  Persistence of bat defence reactions in high Arctic moths (Lepidoptera).

Authors:  J Rydell; H Roininen; K W Philip
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2000-03-22       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  Variability in echolocation call intensity in a community of horseshoe bats: a role for resource partitioning or communication?

Authors:  Maike Schuchmann; Björn M Siemers
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-09-17       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Listening in pheromone plumes: disruption of olfactory-guided mate attraction in a moth by a bat-like ultrasound.

Authors:  Glenn P Svenssona; Christer Löfstedt; Niels Skals
Journal:  J Insect Sci       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 1.857

7.  Specializations for aerial hawking in the echolocation system of Molossus molossus (Molossidae, Chiroptera).

Authors:  E C Mora; S Macías; M Vater; F Coro; M Kössl
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2004-04-27       Impact factor: 1.836

8.  Gleaning bat echolocation calls do not elicit antipredator behaviour in the Pacific field cricket, Teleogryllus oceanicus (Orthoptera: Gryllidae).

Authors:  Hannah M ter Hofstede; Joanne Killow; James H Fullard
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2009-06-16       Impact factor: 1.836

9.  The cercal organ may provide singing tettigoniids a backup sensory system for the detection of eavesdropping bats.

Authors:  Manfred Hartbauer; Elisabeth Ofner; Viktoria Grossauer; Björn M Siemers
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-09-13       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Evolutionary origins of ultrasonic hearing and laryngeal echolocation in bats inferred from morphological analyses of the inner ear.

Authors:  Kalina Tj Davies; Ibnu Maryanto; Stephen J Rossiter
Journal:  Front Zool       Date:  2013-01-30       Impact factor: 3.172

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.