02645nas a2200385 4500008004100000245007700041210006900118300001000187490000700197520153100204653001101735653000901746653001501755653001701770653002401787653001901811653003001830653002201860653001701882653001801899653002201917653002201939653002401961653002301985653002202008653002302030653002602053653002602079653001402105653002102119100002702140700002202167700002402189856004602213 1999 eng d00aQualitative Identification of Free-flying Bats Using the Anabat Detector0 aQualitative Identification of Freeflying Bats Using the Anabat D a11-230 v803 a

A variety of ultrasonic bat detectors have been used over the past 3 decades to identify freeflying bats. Analyses of recorded echolocation calls were slow and typically restricted to few calls and at a resolution obscuring details of call structure. The Anabat II detector and associated zerocrossings analysis system allows an immediate examination, via a laptop computer, of the timefrequency structure of calls as they are detected. These calls can be stored on the hard drive for later examination, editing, and measurement. Many North American bats can be identified to species by qualitatively using certain structural characteristics of calls, primarily approximate maximum and minimum frequencies and morphological aspects of calls e.g., linearity and changes in slope). To identify calls precisely, it is important to use a continuous sequence of calls from an individual in normal flight rather than from single isolated calls. All calls are not equally useful, and many fragmentary calls must be discarded before making a determination. Each sequence of calls must be examined to ensure that multiple bats have not been simultaneously recorded, which confounds correct identification. We found the percentage of nonusable calls within usable vocal sequences to be highest in vespertilionids 20-40%), whereas for other families this was frequently <10%. Active rather than passive collection of data maximizes quality and quantity of diagnostic calls and provides a contextual base for the investigator.

10aAnabat10abats10aChiroptera10aecholocation10aEptesicus furinalis10aidentification10aLasionycteris noctivagans10aLasiurus cinereus10aLasiurus ega10aMolossus ater10aMolossus molossus10aMolossus sinaloae10aMyotis californicus10aMyotis ciliolabrum10aMyotis yumanensis10aNoctilio leporinus10aSaccopteryx bilineata10aTadarida brasiliensis10atechnique10avocal signatures1 aO'Farrell, Michael, J.1 aMiller, Bruce, W.1 aGannon, William, L. uhttps://bio.acousti.ca/zh-hant/node/5805103094nas a2200397 4500008004100000022001300041245005700054210005700111260001600168520180000184653000801984653002301992653001702015653001302032653000802045653002102053653001502074653001702089100002202106700002202128700001802150700001902168700001602187700002502203700003402228700002402262700002302286700001602309700001802325700002602343700002602369700002602395700002502421700001702446856023302463 2018 eng d a0960982200aResource Ephemerality Drives Social Foraging in Bats0 aResource Ephemerality Drives Social Foraging in Bats cJan-11-20183 a

Observations of animals feeding in aggregations are often interpreted as events of social foraging, but it can be difficult to determine whether the animals arrived at the foraging sites after collective search [1, 2, 3, 4] or whether they found the sites by following a leader [5, 6] or even independently, aggregating as an artifact of food availability [7, 8]. Distinguishing between these explanations is important, because functionally, they might have very different consequences. In the first case, the animals could benefit from the presence of conspecifics, whereas in the second and third, they often suffer from increased competition [3, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13]. Using novel miniature sensors, we recorded GPS tracks and audio of five species of bats, monitoring their movement and interactions with conspecifics, which could be inferred from the audio recordings. We examined the hypothesis that food distribution plays a key role in determining social foraging patterns [14, 15, 16]. Specifically, this hypothesis predicts that searching for an ephemeral resource (whose distribution in time or space is hard to predict) is more likely to favor social foraging [10, 13, 14, 15] than searching for a predictable resource. The movement and social interactions differed between bats foraging on ephemeral versus predictable resources. Ephemeral species changed foraging sites and showed large temporal variation nightly. They aggregated with conspecifics as was supported by playback experiments and computer simulations. In contrast, predictable species were never observed near conspecifics and showed high spatial fidelity to the same foraging sites over multiple nights. Our results suggest that resource (un)predictability influences the costs and benefits of social foraging.

10abat10abehavioral ecology10aecholocation10aforaging10aGPS10amovement ecology10anavigation10asociobiology1 aEgert-Berg, Katya1 aHurme, Edward, R.1 aGreif, Stefan1 aGoldstein, Aya1 aHarten, Lee1 aM., Luis, Gerardo He1 aFlores-Martínez, José, Juan1 aValdés, Andrea, T.1 aJohnston, Dave, S.1 aEitan, Ofri1 aBorissov, Ivo1 aShipley, Jeremy, Ryan1 aMedellin, Rodrigo, A.1 aWilkinson, Gerald, S.1 aGoerlitz, Holger, R.1 aYovel, Yossi uhttps://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0960982218312909https://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:S0960982218312909?httpAccept=text/xmlhttps://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:S0960982218312909?httpAccept=text/plain02456nas a2200229 4500008004100000245007100041210006900112260001600181490000600197520170600203653002701909653001801936653001701954653001701971653003201988653003202020653001702052100003102069700002502100700002402125856007702149 2013 eng d00aInterspecific acoustic recognition in two European bat communities0 aInterspecific acoustic recognition in two European bat communiti cJan-01-20130 v43 a

Echolocating bats emit echolocation calls for spatial orientation and foraging. These calls are often species-specific and are emitted at high intensity and repetition rate. Therefore, these calls could potentially function in intra- and/or inter-specific bat communication. For example, bats in the field approach playbacks of conspecific feeding buzzes, probably because feeding buzzes indicate an available foraging patch. In captivity, some species of bats recognize and distinguish the echolocation calls of different sympatric species. However, it is still unknown if and how acoustic species-recognition mediates interspecific interactions in the field. Here we aim to understand eavesdropping on bat echolocation calls within and across species boundaries in wild bats. We presented playbacks of conspecific and heterospecific search calls and feeding buzzes to four bat species with different foraging ecologies. The bats were generally more attracted by feeding buzzes than search calls and more by the calls of conspecifics than their heterospecifics. Furthermore, bats showed differential reaction to the calls of the heterospecifics. In particular, <i>Myotis capaccinii</i> reacted equally to the feeding buzzes of conspecifics and to ecologically more similar heterospecifics. Our results confirm eavesdropping on feeding buzzes at the intraspecific level in wild bats and provide the first experimental quantification of potential eavesdropping in European bats at the interspecific level. Our data support the hypothesis that bat echolocation calls have a communicative potential that allows interspecific, and potentially intraspecific, eavesdropping in the wild.

10aacoustic communication10aeavesdropping10aecholocation10afeeding buzz10ainterspecific communication10aintraspecific communication10asearch calls1 aDorado-Correa, Adriana, M.1 aGoerlitz, Holger, R.1 aSiemers, Björn, M. uhttp://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fphys.2013.00192/abstract