PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

M Brock Fenton

Publications and source records attributed to M Brock Fenton.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

Animal behavior: who will croak next?

A recent study with the predatory bat Trachops cirrhosus has shown the importance for this species of social learning about novel prey using auditory, rather than visual or olfactory, cues.

Animals↗

Behavioral flexibility positively correlated with relative brain volume in predatory bats.

We investigated the potential relationships between foraging strategies and relative brain and brain region volumes in predatory (animal-eating) echolocating bats. The species we considered represent the ancestral state for the order and approximately 70% of living bat species. The two dominant foraging strategies used by echolocating predatory bats are substrate-gleaning (taking prey from surfaces) and aerial hawking (taking airborne prey). We used species-specific behavioral, morphological, and ecological data to classify each of 59 predatory species as one of the following: (1) ground gleaning, (2) behaviorally flexible (i.e., known to both glean and hawk prey), (3) clutter tolerant aerial hawking, or (4) open-space aerial hawking. In analyses using both species level data and phylogenetically independent contrasts, relative brain size was larger in behaviorally flexible species. Further, relative neocortex volume was significantly reduced in bats that aerially hawk prey primarily in open spaces. Conversely, our foraging behavior index did not account for variability in hippocampus and inferior colliculus volume and we discuss these results in the context of past research.

Adaptation, Psychological↗

Echolocation call intensity in the aerial hawking bat Eptesicus bottae (Vespertilionidae) studied using stereo videogrammetry.

Aerial hawking bats use intense echolocation calls to search for insect prey. Their calls have evolved into the most intense airborne animal vocalisations. Yet our knowledge about call intensities in the field is restricted to a small number of species. We describe a novel stereo videogrammetry method used to study flight and echolocation behaviour, and to measure call source levels of the aerial hawking bat Eptesicus bottae (Vespertilionidae). Bats flew close to their predicted minimum power speed. Source level increased with call duration; the loudest call of E. bottae was at 133 dB peSPL. The calculated maximum detection distance for large flying objects (e.g. large prey, conspecifics) was up to 21 m. The corresponding maximum echo delay is almost exactly the duration of one wing beat in E. bottae and this also is its preferred pulse interval. These results, obtained by using videogrammetry to track bats in the field, corroborate earlier findings from other species from acoustic tracking methods.

Animals↗

Dynamics of jamming avoidance in echolocating bats.

Animals using active sensing systems such as echolocation or electrolocation may experience interference from the signals of neighbouring conspecifics, which can be offset by a jamming avoidance response (JAR). Here, we report JAR in one echolocating bat (Tadarida teniotis: Molossidae) but not in another (Taphozous perforatus: Emballonuridae) when both flew and foraged with conspecifics. In T. teniotis, JAR consisted of shifts in the dominant frequencies of echolocation calls, enhancing differences among individuals. Larger spectral overlap of signals elicited stronger JAR. Tadarida teniotis showed two types of JAR: (i) for distant conspecifics: a symmetric JAR, with lower- and higher-frequency bats shifting their frequencies downwards and upwards, respectively, on average by the same amount; and (ii) for closer conspecifics: an asymmetric JAR, with only the upper-frequency bat shifting its frequency upwards. In comparison, 'wave-type' weakly electric fishes also shift frequencies of discharges in a JAR, but unlike T. teniotis, the shifts are either symmetric in some species or asymmetric in others. We hypothesize that symmetric JAR in T. teniotis serves to avoid jamming and improve echolocation, whereas asymmetric JAR may aid communication by helping to identify and locate conspecifics, thus minimizing chances of mid-air collisions.

Animals↗