spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


spacer gif
     Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents    

This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Surlykke, A.
Right arrow Articles by Tougaard, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Surlykke, A.
Right arrow Articles by Tougaard, J.
The Journal of Experimental Biology 206, 93-104 (2003)
doi: 10.1242/jeb.00049

Prey-capture success revealed by echolocation signals in pipistrelle bats (Pipistrellus pygmaeus)

Annemarie Surlykke*, Vibeke Futtrup and Jakob Tougaard

Centre for Sound Communication, Institute of Biology, University of Southern Denmark, Odense Campusvej 55, DK-5230 Odense M, Denmark

* Author for correspondence (e-mail: ams{at}dou.dk)

Accepted 23 September 2002

Three Pipistrellus pygmaeus bats were trained to capture prey on the wing while flying in the laboratory. The bats' capture behaviour and capture success were determined and correlated with acoustic analyses of post-buzz echolocation signals. Three acoustic parameters revealed capture success: in case of success, post-buzz pauses (pbP) were longer, interpulse intervals (IPI) of the post-buzz signals were longer and, most notably, the spectra of the echolocation signals showed a number of notches that were absent after unsuccessful attempts. If the bats touched the prey without seizing it, pbP was significantly increased, but by less than was seen following a successful capture. Thus, acoustic recordings can be used to determine the outcome of a capture attempt with 72-75% correct using IPI or pbP, and with 78% correct using notches. Even more trials (>85%) were classified correctly by using the first canonical discriminant factor from principal component analysis combining the three parameters. Four types of prey were used, of 7-22 mm length and 7-240 mg mass. After successful captures, interpulse intervals, post-buzz pause and notches all depended on prey type, but not in a way that was systematically related to size, indicating that acoustic parameters cannot reveal prey size.

Key words: dat, Pipistrellus pygmaeus, echolocation, prey capture, post-buzz phase, biosonar signals







© The Company of Biologists Ltd 2003