Animals that rely on electrolocation and echolocation for navigation and prey detection benefit from sensory systems that can operate in the dark, allowing them to exploit sensory niches with few competitors. Active sensing has been characterized as a highly specialized form of communication, whereby an echolocating or electrolocating animal serves as both the sender and receiver of sensory information. This characterization inspires a framework to explore the functions of sensory channels that communicate information with the self and with others. Overlapping communication functions create challenges for signal privacy and fidelity by leaving active-sensing animals vulnerable to eavesdropping, jamming and masking. Here, we present an overview of active-sensing systems used by weakly electric fish, bats and odontocetes, and consider their susceptibility to heterospecific and conspecific jamming signals and eavesdropping. Susceptibility to interference from signals produced by both conspecifics and prey animals reduces the fidelity of electrolocation and echolocation for prey capture and foraging. Likewise, active-sensing signals may be eavesdropped, increasing the risk of alerting prey to the threat of predation or the risk of predation to the sender, or drawing competition to productive foraging sites. The evolutionary success of electrolocating and echolocating animals suggests that they effectively counter the costs of active sensing through rich and diverse adaptive behaviors that allow them to mitigate the effects of competition for signal space and the exploitation of their signals.

Bats face many sources of acoustic interference in their natural environments, including other bats and potential prey items that affect their ability to interpret the returning echoes of their biosonar signals. To be able to navigate and forage successfully, bats must be able to counteract this interference and one of the ways they achieve this is by altering the various parameters of their echolocation. We describe these changes in signal design within the context of a modified definition of the jamming avoidance response originally applied to the signal changes of weakly electric fish. Both of these groups use active sensory systems that exhibit similarities in function but we take this opportunity to highlight major differences each groups' response to signal interference. These discrepancies form the basis of our need for an expanded description of the jamming avoidance response in echolocating bats.

Studies have shown that bats are capable of using visual information for a variety of purposes, including navigation and foraging, but the relative contributions of visual and auditory modalities in obstacle avoidance has yet to be fully investigated, particularly in laryngeal echolocating bats. A first step requires a characterization of behavioral responses to different combinations of sensory cues. Here we quantify the behavioral responses of the insectivorous big brown bat, Eptesicus fuscus, in an obstacle avoidance task offering different combinations of auditory and visual cues. To do so, we utilize a new method that eliminates the confounds typically associated with testing bat vision and precludes auditory cues. We find that the presence of visual and auditory cues together enhances bats’ avoidance response to obstacles compared to cues requiring either vision or audition alone. Analysis of flight and echolocation behaviors, such as speed and call rate, did not vary significantly under different obstacle conditions, and thus are not informative indicators of a bat's response to obstacle stimulus type. These findings advance the understanding of the relative importance of visual and auditory sensory modalities in guiding obstacle avoidance behaviors.

Echolocating bats often forage in the presence of both conspecific and heterospecific individuals, which have the potential to produce acoustic interference. Recent studies have shown that at least one bat species, the Brazilian free-tailed bat (), produces specialized social signals that disrupt the sonar of conspecific competitors. We herein discuss the differences between passive and active jamming signals and test whether heterospecific jamming occurs in species overlapping spatiotemporally, as well as whether such interference elicits a jamming avoidance response. We compare the capture rates of tethered moths and the echolocation parameters of big brown bats () challenged with the playback of the jamming signal normally produced by Brazilian free-tailed bats and playback of deconstructed versions of this signal. There were no differences in the capture rates of targets with and without the jamming signal, although significant changes in both spectral and temporal features of the bats' echolocation were observed. These changes are consistent with improvements of the signal-to-noise ratio in the presence of acoustic interference. Accordingly, we propose to expand the traditional definition of the jamming avoidance response, stating that echolocation changes in response to interference should decrease similarity between the two signals, to include any change that increases the ability to separate returning echoes from active jamming stimuli originating from conspecific and heterospecific organisms. Flexibility in echolocation is an important characteristic for overcoming various forms of acoustic interference and may serve a purpose in interspecific interactions as well as intraspecific ones.

No abstract