Echolocation Calls of Pteronotus davyi (Chiroptera: Mormoopidae) from Panama

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. American Society of Mammalogists is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Mammalogy.We studied echolocation signals broadcast by free-flying naked-backed bats (Pteronotus davyi) from Panama. Calls consisted of a segment of constant frequency, followed by a downward frequency modulated sweep, and ended with a short segment of quasi-constant frequency. Up to three harmonics were detectable. The second harmonic usually was more intense, and mean frequencies in the constant and quasi-constant segments were 68.0 and 58.0 kHz, respectively. Most pulses showed the highest intensity in the frequency corresponding to the constant segment of the second harmonic, but sometimes bats allocated most energy to the quasi-constant segment of that same harmonic or even to the constant or the quasi-constant segment of the fundamental harmonic. Pulses averaged 6.6 ms in duration and were repeated every 70.8 ms. The segment of constant frequency was always present, and its frequency changed little across extremely different behavioral situations. Mammalogy, 80(3):924-928, 1999 924 Journal of

Doppler-shift compensation behavior by Wagner’s mustached bat, Pteronotus personatus

“…The echolocation pulses of each of the Pteronotus species were essentially identical to previous descriptions in the literature ͑Griffin and Novick, 1955;Novick and Vaisnys, 1964;O'Farrell and Miller, 1997;Ibanez et al, 1999;Macias and Mora, 2003͒. Echolocation pulses of restrained P. parnellii averaged 19.7Ϯ 6.2 ms long ͑n = 1000͒ and had a mean CF2 value of 64.9Ϯ 0.9 kHz.…”

“…Figure 2 illustrates the orientation sounds emitted by the four species of bats included in this study in free flight as they exited the cave. Since previous reports have provided reliable descriptions of the echolocation pulse structures of flying Pteronotus davyi, Pteronotus personatus, and Pteronotus parnellii ͑Griffin and Novick, 1955;Novick and Vaisnys, 1964;O'Farrell and Miller, 1997;Ibanez et al, 1999;Macias and Mora, 2003͒, we restrict our description here to the vocal behavior of these animals on the pendulum. P. parnellii was included in the study because its DSC behavior on a pendulum is already well documented and thus could serve as a point of reference between these and prior experiments ͑Gaioni et al ., 1990;Keating et al, 1994͒.…”

Bats (Mammalia, Chiroptera) from Yuscarán in Eastern Honduras: Conservation and acoustic characterization for the insectivorous species

“…In general, the calls we recorded were multi-harmonic, the FME is in the second harmonic and the pulses have at least one CF section. Pteronotus fulvus differs 7 kHz below the range documented in Belize and in Mexico by O'Farrell & Miller (1997), Miller (2003 and Ibáñez et al (1999) (cited as, P. davyi Gray, 1838. Pteronotus psilotis, fits with respect to the frequencies previously described in the region, (Fmax between 72-87 kHz and Fmin between 60-69 kH), (O'Farrell & Miller, 1997;Miller, 2003) (cited as P. personatus (Wagner, 1843)).…”

Evolution of the heteroharmonic strategy for target-range computation in the echolocation of Mormoopidae

“…FM calls are emitted by the two species of the genus Mormoops , long CF-FM calls are emitted by P. parnellii and sCF-FM and FM-sCF calls are emitted by the other five species of the genus Pteronotus : P. personatus , P. davyi , P. gymnonotus , P. macleayi , and P. quadridens (Fenton, 1994; O'Farrell and Miller, 1997; Ibañez et al, 1999, 2000; Kössl et al, 1999; Macías and Mora, 2003; Macías et al, 2006; Smotherman and Guillen-Servent, 2008; Mora and Macías, 2011) (Figure 3A). For ranging, the following parameters of signal design are expected to be of special importance: (1) the number of harmonics, (2) the frequency overlap of harmonics, (3) the bandwidth of the FM component, (4) the duration and curvature of the FM component, and (5) the frequency range and intensity of each FM-component.…”

“…Call period is independent of body size and signal design. Data was taken from: Silva-Taboada (1979), Herd (1983), Adams (1989), Rodríguez-Durán and Kunz (1992), Rezsutek and Cameron (1993), Lancaster and Kalko (1996), O'Farrell and Miller (1997), Ibañez et al (1999), Ibañez et al (2000), Macías et al (2006), Smotherman and Guillen-Servent (2008), MacSwiney et al (2008), de la Torre and Medellin (2010), and Mancina et al (2012). …”