An exception to the rule: common vampire bats do not learn taste aversions

Ratcliffe, John M.; Fenton, M. Brock; Galef, Bennett G.

doi:10.1006/anbe.2003.2059

Cited by 90 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our video footage taken during treatment trials suggested bats could detect the adulterated solutions and probably would not drink citric acid contaminated water pooled in operational areas. This interpretation is consistent with Ratcliffe's (2003) findings wherein bats with generalized diets acquired taste-aversions to citric acid. Bats sprayed with 5 ml of citric acid solution showed no evidence of intoxication.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…We were particularly concerned with this route of exposure since it has been a preferred method of delivering chiropteracides for control of bat populations (Barclay et al 1980;Mitchell 1986). Whitaker and Tomich (1983) found generalization of the insectivorous diet by the Hawaiian subspecies of this species; Ratcliffe et al (2003) reported that bats with insectivorous and frugivorous diets acquired taste-aversions to citric acid. Therefore, it is possible that Hawaiian hoary bats may avoid ingesting citric acid-contaminated water or insects and would not ingest material contaminating fur when grooming.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Potential citric acid exposure and toxicity to Hawaiian hoary bats (Lasiurus cinereus semotus) associated with Eleutherodactylus frog control

Pitt

Witmer

Jojola³

et al. 2014

Ecotoxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Potential citric acid exposure and toxicity to Hawaiian hoary bats (Lasiurus cinereus semotus) associated with Eleutherodactylus frog control

Pitt

Witmer

Jojola³

et al. 2014

Ecotoxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…bitter or sour), the more readily the signal is associated with a negative consequence (e.g. gastrointestinal malaise; reviewed in Ratcliffe et al, 2003). If this is also the case in the auditory domain, tiger moths producing more clicks per unit time may be more effective at training individual bats to avoid them in the future (Ratcliffe and Fullard, 2005).…”

Section: Box 2 Neural Basis For Evasive Flight In Mothsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolutionary escalation: the bat–moth arms race

Hofstede

Ratcliffe

2016

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Echolocation in bats and high-frequency hearing in their insect prey make bats and insects an ideal system for studying the sensory ecology and neuroethology of predator-prey interactions. Here, we review the evolutionary history of bats and eared insects, focusing on the insect order Lepidoptera, and consider the evidence for antipredator adaptations and predator counter-adaptations. Ears evolved in a remarkable number of body locations across insects, with the original selection pressure for ears differing between groups. Although cause and effect are difficult to determine, correlations between hearing and life history strategies in moths provide evidence for how these two variables influence each other. We consider life history variables such as size, sex, circadian and seasonal activity patterns, geographic range and the composition of sympatric bat communities. We also review hypotheses on the neural basis for antipredator behaviours (such as evasive flight and sound production) in moths. It is assumed that these prey adaptations would select for counter-adaptations in predatory bats. We suggest two levels of support for classifying bat traits as counter-adaptations: traits that allow bats to eat more eared prey than expected based on their availability in the environment provide a low level of support for counter-adaptations, whereas traits that have no other plausible explanation for their origination and maintenance than capturing defended prey constitute a high level of support. Specific predator counter-adaptations include calling at frequencies outside the sensitivity range of most eared prey, changing the pattern and frequency of echolocation calls during prey pursuit, and quiet, or 'stealth', echolocation.

show abstract

“…In terrestrial systems, generalist feeders such as polyphagous insects (Lee & Bernays 1988) and frugivorous bats (Ratcliffe et al 2003) learn to avoid food after a negative experience, while more specialist feeders such as oligophagous insects (Dethier & Yost 1979) and vampire bats do not (Ratcliffe et al 2003). By conducting comparative studies of learning among consumers, we can improve our understanding of how prey may exploit the learning behavior of their consumers, and we can better understand how interspecific variance in learned aversions of marine consumers may affect their impact on prey populations and marine community organization.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fishes learn aversions to a nudibranchs chemical defense

Long¹,

Hay²

2006

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The nudibranch Doriopsilla pharpa was rejected as food when tethered in the field and when offered to 2 species of co-occurring crabs (the lesser blue crab Callinectes similus and the mud crab Panopeus herbstii) and 2 species of co-occurring fishes (the mummichog Fundulus heteroclitus and the striped blenny Chasmodes bosquianus) in the laboratory. When the fishes were offered squid-based artificial food containing nudibranch extracts (i.e. defended food), both species initially consumed this food, but rapidly developed aversions in subsequent feedings. Although both fishes rapidly learned to reject the food, they learned using different cues. The striped blenny Chasmodes bosquianus regurgitated following the initial feeding and then avoided all food made of squid regardless of whether or not it contained the extract. In contrast, the mummichog Fundulus heteroclitus did not regurgitate, and learned to avoid only food containing the extract; it still consumed squid-based food without the extract. Thus, the mummichog detected the deterrent chemical and avoided only defended food while the striped blenny was a less effective feeder, avoiding both defended and undefended food that tasted like squid. Bioassay-guided separation using the mummichog demonstrated that the sesquiterpene polygodial was responsible for the deterrent effects of the nudibranch extract. This metabolite also resulted in the striped blenny avoiding either squid-or tunabased food treated with this metabolite. KEY WORDS: Fish behavior · Predator-prey interactions · Chemical ecology · Oyster reefResale or republication not permitted without written consent of the publisher

show abstract

An exception to the rule: common vampire bats do not learn taste aversions

Cited by 90 publications

References 28 publications

Potential citric acid exposure and toxicity to Hawaiian hoary bats (Lasiurus cinereus semotus) associated with Eleutherodactylus frog control

Potential citric acid exposure and toxicity to Hawaiian hoary bats (Lasiurus cinereus semotus) associated with Eleutherodactylus frog control

Evolutionary escalation: the bat–moth arms race

Fishes learn aversions to a nudibranchs chemical defense

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

An exception to the rule: common vampire bats do not learn taste aversions

Cited by 90 publications

References 28 publications

Potential citric acid exposure and toxicity to Hawaiian hoary bats (Lasiurus cinereus semotus) associated with Eleutherodactylus frog control

Potential citric acid exposure and toxicity to Hawaiian hoary bats (Lasiurus cinereus semotus) associated with Eleutherodactylus frog control

Evolutionary escalation: the bat–moth arms race

Fishes learn aversions to a nudibranchs chemical defense

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Fishes learn aversions to a nudibranchs chemical defense