02337nas a2200217   4500008004100000245008600041210006900127520164500196653002401841653000901865653002201874653002701896653002001923653001801943100001701961700001601978700002101994700002102015700002102036856006202057       2019                        eng d00aDoes bat response to traffic noise support the misleading cue hypothesis?Abstract0 aDoes bat response to traffic noise support the misleading cue hy3 a<p>The world has become a noisier place due to the increase in urbanization. Noise is generally considered an impediment, altering an animal&rsquo;s behavior through masking or distraction. But noise can also provide useful information about the environment. For animals that rely on natural environmental noise as an indicator of favorable foraging conditions, increasing levels of anthropogenic noise might mislead informed decision-making. Bats use rain noise, a natural environmental cue, to delay their emergence from the roost, presumably to avoid sensory and metabolic costs associated with foraging in heavy rain. Here we tested the &ldquo;misleading cue hypothesis,&rdquo; asking whether traffic noise is mistaken for rain noise by bats. Given the acoustic similarity between rain noise and traffic noise, we predicted that bats would confuse the two. We conducted a playback experiment using rain, traffic, and ambient noise at natural roosts of common big-eared bats (Micronycteris microtis, Phyllostomidae) and recorded bat emergence behavior. In contrast to their response to rain noise, the bats did not delay roost emergence in response to traffic noise. Thus, we found that bats were able to discriminate between traffic noise and rain noise and were not misled by similarity in acoustic parameters in the two noise types, when emerging from their roost. Emerging bats did show more exploration flights during traffic noise than during rain noise, but not during ambient noise, suggesting that they perceive traffic noise as a novel acoustic cue. Our data provide new insights into perception of traffic noise by bats.</p>
10aanthropogenic noise10abats10aevolutionary trap10aMicronycteris microtis10amisleading cues10aTraffic noise1 aGeipel, Inga1 aAmin, Bawan1 aPage, Rachel, A.1 aHalfwerk, Wouter1 aCandolin, Ulrika  uhttps://academic.oup.com/beheco/article/30/6/1775/557481102274nas a2200241   4500008004100000022001400041245009400055210006900149260001600218300001500234520143200249653000901681653002001690653001301710653002101723653001001744653000901754100001701763700002401780700002101804700002101825856018601846       2019                        eng d  a0022-094900aNoise as an informational cue for decision-making: the sound of rain delays bat emergence0 aNoise as an informational cue for decisionmaking the sound of ra  cSep-01-2020  ajeb.1920053 a<p>Background noise can have strong negative consequences on animals, reducing individual fitness by masking communication signals, impeding prey detection and increasing predation risk. While the negative impacts of noise across taxa have been well documented, the use of noise as an informational cue, providing animals with reliable information on environmental conditions has been less well studied. In the tropical rainforest, downpours can be intense and frequent. Strong rainfall may impede efficient orientation and foraging for bats that need echolocation to both navigate and detect prey, and can result in higher flight costs due to increased metabolic rates. Using playback experiments at natural roosts we tested whether two bat species, differing in their hunting strategies and foraging habitats, use rain noise as a cue to delay emergence from their roosts. We found that both species significantly delayed their emergence time during rain noise playbacks compared to silence and ambient noise controls. We conclude that bats can use background noise, here the acoustic component of rainfall, as a reliable informational cue to make informed decisions, here about whether to initiate foraging trips or remain in the shelter of their roosts. Our findings suggest that environmental background noise can sometimes be beneficial to animals, in particular in situations where other sensory cues may be absent.</p>
10abats10adecision-making10aforaging10ainformation cues10aNoise10arain1 aGeipel, Inga1 aSmeekes, Marcus, J.1 aHalfwerk, Wouter1 aPage, Rachel, A.  uhttp://jeb.biologists.org/lookup/doi/10.1242/jeb.192005https://syndication.highwire.org/content/doi/10.1242/jeb.192005https://syndication.highwire.org/content/doi/10.1242/jeb.192005