4.5 Article

Intense echolocation calls from two 'whispering' bats, Artibeus jamaicensis and Macrophyllum macrophyllum (Phyllostomidae)

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BIOLOGY
卷 212, 期 1, 页码 11-20

出版社

COMPANY OF BIOLOGISTS LTD
DOI: 10.1242/jeb.023226

关键词

bats; echolocation; field recordings; intensity; phyllostomids; source levels

类别

资金

  1. Danish Natural Science Research foundation
  2. Oticon Foundation
  3. Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute ( STRI)
  4. German Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bats use echolocation to exploit a variety of habitats and food types. Much research has documented how frequency-time features of echolocation calls are adapted to acoustic constraints imposed by habitat and prey but emitted sound intensities have received little attention. Bats from the family of Phyllostomidae have been categorised as low intensity ( whispering) gleaners, assumed to emit echolocation calls with low source levels ( approximately 70dBSPL measured 10cm from the bat's mouth). We used a multi-microphone array to determine intensities emitted from two phyllostomid bats from Panama with entirely different foraging strategies. Macrophyllum macrophyllum hunts insects on the wing and gaffs them with its tail membrane and feet from or above water surfaces whereas Artibeus jamaicensis picks fruit from vegetation with its mouth. Recordings were made from bats foraging on the wing in a flight room. Both species emitted surprisingly intense signals with maximum source levels of 105dBSPLr.m.s. for M. macrophyllum and 110dBSPLr.m.s. for A. jamaicensis, hence much louder than a 'whisper'. M. macrophyllum was consistently loud ( mean source level 101dBSPL) whereas A. jamaicensis showed a much more variable output, including many faint calls and a mean source level of 96dBSPL. Our results support increasing evidence that echolocating bats in general are much louder than previously thought. We discuss the importance of loud calls and large output flexibility for both species in an ecological context.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据