Animals can gain important information by attending to the signals and cues of other animals in their environment, with acoustic information playing a major role in many taxa. Echolocation call sequences of bats contain information about the identity and behaviour of the sender which is perceptible to close-by receivers. Increasing evidence supports the communicative function of echolocation within species, yet data about its role for interspecific information transfer is scarce. Here, we asked which information bats extract from heterospecific echolocation calls during foraging. In three linked playback experiments, we tested in the flight room and field if foraging Myotis bats approached the foraging call sequences of conspecifics and four heterospecifics that were similar in acoustic call structure only (acoustic similarity hypothesis), in foraging ecology only (foraging similarity hypothesis), both, or none. Compared to the natural prey capture rate of 1.3 buzzes per minute of bat activity, our playbacks of foraging sequences with 23–40 buzzes/min simulated foraging patches with significantly higher profitability. In the flight room, M. capaccinii only approached call sequences of conspecifics and of the heterospecific M. daubentonii with similar acoustics and foraging ecology. In the field, M. capaccinii and M. daubentonii only showed a weak positive response to those two species. Our results confirm information transfer across species boundaries and highlight the importance of context on the studied behaviour, but cannot resolve whether information transfer in trawling Myotis is based on acoustic similarity only or on a combination of similarity in acoustics and foraging ecology.Significance statementAnimals transfer information, both voluntarily and inadvertently, and within and across species boundaries. In echolocating bats, acoustic call structure and foraging ecology are linked, making echolocation calls a rich source of information about species identity, ecology and activity of the sender, which receivers might exploit to find profitable foraging grounds. We tested in three lab and field experiments if information transfer occurs between bat species and if bats obtain information about ecology from echolocation calls. Myotis capaccinii/daubentonii bats approached call playbacks, but only those from con- and heterospecifics with similar call structure and foraging ecology, confirming interspecific information transfer. Reactions differed between lab and field, emphasising situation-dependent differences in animal behaviour, the importance of field research, and the need for further studies on the underlying mechanism of information transfer and the relative contributions of acoustic and ecological similarity.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s00265-017-2398-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Many prey species overlap in time and space and are hunted by the same predators. A common anti‐predator behaviour is using evasive manoeuvres to escape an attacking predator. The escape‐tactic diversity hypothesis postulates that species‐specific differences in evasive behaviour will increase the overall unpredictability experienced by predators within a predator–prey community. Evolutionary, escape‐tactic diversity would be driven by the enhanced predator protection for each prey individual in the community. However, escape‐tactic diversity could also be a functional consequence of morphological differences that correlate with evasive capabilities. Echolocating bats and eared moths are a textbook example of predator–prey interactions. Moths exhibit evasive flight with diverse tactics; however, the variability of their evasive flight within and between species and individuals has never been quantified systematically. In addition, moth species show variation in size, which correlates with their flight capability. We recorded flight strength during tethered flight of eight sympatric moth species in response to the same level of simulated bat predation. Our method allowed us to record kinematic parameters that are correlated with evasive flight in a controlled way to investigate species‐specific differences in escape tactics. We show species‐specific and size‐independent differences in both overall flight strength and change of flight strength over time, supporting the escape‐tactic diversity hypothesis for eared moths. Additionally, we show strong interindividual differences in evasive flight within some species. This diversity in escape tactic between eared moths increases the overall unpredictability of evasive flight experienced by bat predators, likely providing increased protection against predatory bats for the single individual.

Urbanization exposes wild animals to increased levels of light, affecting particularly nocturnal animals. Artificial light at night might shift the balance of predator-prey interactions, for example, of nocturnal echolocating bats and eared moths. Moths exposed to light show less last-ditch maneuvers in response to attacking close-by bats. In contrast, the extent to which negative phonotaxis, moths' first line of defense against distant bats, is affected by light is unclear. Here, we aimed to quantify the overall effect of light on both types of sound-evoked antipredator flight, last-ditch maneuvers and negative phonotaxis. We caught moths at two light traps, which were alternately equipped with loudspeakers that presented ultrasonic playbacks to simulate hunting bats. The light field was omnidirectional to attract moths equally from all directions. In contrast, the sound field was directional and thus, depending on the moth's approach direction, elicited either only negative phonotaxis, or negative phonotaxis and last-ditch maneuvers. We did not observe an effect of sound playback on the number of caught moths, suggesting that light might suppress both types of antipredator flight, as either type would have caused a decline in the number of caught moths. As control, we confirmed that our playback was able to elicit evasive flight in moths in a dark flight room. Showing no effect of a treatment, however, is difficult. We discuss potential alternative explanations for our results, and call for further studies to investigate how light interferes with animal behavior.