No abstract

No abstract

In October 1984 foraging areas and foraging behaviour of the rufous horseshoe bat, Rhinolophus rouxi, were studied around a nursery colony on the hill slopes of Sri Lanka. The bats only foraged in dense forest and were not found in open woodlands (Fig. 1). This strongly supports the hypothesis that detection of fluttering prey is by pure tone echolocation within or close to echo-cluttering foliage. During a first activity period after sunset for about 30-60 min, the bats mainly caught insects on the wing. This was followed by a period of inactivity for another 60-120 min. Thereafter the bats resumed foraging throughout the night. They mainly alighted on specific twigs and foraged in flycatcher style. Individual bats maintained individual foraging areas of about 20 x 20 m. They stayed in this area throughout the night and returned to the same area on subsequent nights. Within this area the bats generally alighted on twigs at the same spots. Foraging areas were not defended against intruders. The bats echolocated throughout the night at an average repetition rate of 9.6 + 1.4 sounds/s. While hanging on twigs they scanned the surrounding area for flying prey by turning their bodies continuously around their legs. On average they performed one brief catching flight every 2 min and immediately returned to one of their favourite vantage points. Echolocation sounds may consist of up to three parts, a brief initial frequency-modulated (FM) component, a long constant frequency (CF) part lasting for about 40-50 ms, and a final FM part again (Fig. 4b, c).

No abstract

Single-unit responses to tonal stimulation with interaural disparities were recorded in the nuclei of the superior olivary complex (SOC) and the central nucleus of the inferior colliculus (ICC) of the echolocating bat, Molossus ater. Seventy-six units were recorded from the ICC and 74 from the SOC; of the SOC units, 31 were histologically verified in the medial superior olive (MSO), 10 in the lateral superior olive (LSO), and 33 in unidentified areas of the SOC. Best frequencies (BFs) of the units ranged from 10.3 to 89.6 kHz, and Q10 dB values ranged from 2 to 70 dB. Most ICC neurons responded phasically to stimulus onset and were either inhibitory/excitatory [I/E; (53)] or excitatory/excitatory [E/E; (21)] units. In the MSO, 23 units responded tonically and 7 phasically on, 18 were E/E or E/OF (facilitatory for other input) units, and 11 were I/E neurons. All LSO neurons responded in a "chopper" fashion, and the binaural neurons were E/I units. In E/E units the excitatory response to binaural stimulation was frequently larger than the sum of the monaurally evoked responses. Many neurons with E/I or I/E inputs had very steep binaural impulse-count functions and were sensitive to small interaural intensity differences. Twenty-eight units (24%) responded with a change in firing rate of at least 20% to interaural time differences of +/- 500 microseconds. Within this sample, 11 units (8 from ICC, 2 from MSO, and 1 from SOC) were sensitive to interaural time differences of only +/- 50 microseconds. Of these 11 units, 10 were I/E units responding phasically only to stimulus onset and were also sensitive to intensity differences (delta I), being suppressed completely by the inhibitory input over a delta I range of 20 dB or less. Of 117 units tested in the ICC and SOC nuclei, 86 units (76%) were not sensitive to interaural time disparities within +/- 500 microseconds. Because the BFs of these units sensitive to interaural transient time differences (delta t) ranged between 18 and 90 kHz, responses were elicited by pure tones, and responses did not change periodically with the period equal to that of the stimulus frequency, we conclude that the neurons reacted to interaural differences of stimulus-onset time (transient time difference) but not to phase differences (ongoing time difference). Sensitivity to interaural time differences was also correlated with interaural intensity differences.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)