Flying in silence: Echolocating bats cease vocalizing to avoid sonar jamming

Abstract

Although it has been recognized that echolocating bats may experience jamming from the signals of conspecifics, research on this problem has focused exclusively on time-frequency adjustments in the emitted signals to minimize interference. Here, we report a surprising new strategy used by bats to avoid interference, namely silence. In a quantitative study of flight and vocal behavior of the big brown bat (Eptesicus fuscus), we discovered that the bat spends considerable time in silence when flying with conspecifics. Silent behavior, defined here as at least one bat in a pair ceasing vocalization for more than 0.2 s (200 ms), occurred as much as 76% of the time (mean of 40% across 7 pairs) when their separation was shorter than 1 m, but only 0.08% when a single bat flew alone. Spatial separation, heading direction, and similarity in call design of paired bats were related to the prevalence of this silent behavior. Our data suggest that the bat uses silence as a strategy to avoid interference from sonar vocalizations of its neighbor, while listening to conspecific-generated acoustic signals to guide orientation. Based on previous neurophysiological studies of the bat's auditory midbrain, we hypothesize that environmental sounds (including vocalizations produced by other bats) and active echolocation evoke neural activity in different populations of neurons. Our findings offer compelling evidence that the echolocating bat switches between active and passive sensing to cope with a complex acoustic environment, and these results hold broad implications for research on navigation and communication throughout the animal kingdom.echolocation ͉ jamming avoidance ͉ passive listening ͉ spatial hearing A ctive sensing enables a wide range of animal species to orient and forage under conditions where light levels are low or absent (1). Self-produced acoustic or electric signals give rise to information about the environment that is used to guide a variety of behaviors. Echolocating animals produce ultrasonic signals and determine the direction, distance, and features of objects in the environment from the arrival time, amplitude, and spectrum of sonar reflections (2). Electric fish generate discharges from an electric organ in the tail, and sense the location and features of nearby objects from amplitude and phase changes in the electric field (3).With the benefits of active sensing also come challenges, namely the potential for interference from signals produced by neighboring conspecifics. Past research has uncovered strategies by which echolocating bats and electric fish avoid jamming through active adjustments in the signals they produce to probe the environment. Wave-type weakly electric fish modify the electric organ discharge frequency, and pulse-type weakly electric fish change the timing of electric organ discharge to avoid interference from the signals of neighbors (3). In echolocating bats, spectral and/or temporal adjustments in the characteristics of sonar vocalizations, which yield acoustic separation between s...

Effects of competitive prey capture on flight behavior and sonar beam pattern in paired big brown bats,Eptesicus fuscus

“…Several jamming avoidance strategies used by echolocating bats have been reported, and all of these strategies involve modification in temporal/spectral features of self-generated signals (Bates et al, 2008;Chiu et al, 2009;Gillam et al, 2007;Obrist, 1995;Ulanovsky et al, 2004) or timing of signals (Chiu et al, 2008). However, no research so far has measured the sonar beam axes of two bats flying together and whether they adapt the directional sonar beam control to avoid signal interference.…”

“…The flight behaviors of paired bats can be categorized into three types, converging, diverging and following flight, according to the inter-bat heading angle (the angle between each bat's velocity vectors), and the angle between the paired bats' separation vector and velocity vector (Table1). Detailed definitions of these flight behaviors were published in Chiu et al (Chiu et al, 2008). Following flight refers to the flight behavior when one bat was behind the other bat and both flew in a similar direction (i.e.…”

“…Six pairs of big brown bats [three pairs selected from previous study (Chiu et al, 2008) and three from this study] were chosen for sonar beam analysis, based on good signal-to-noise ratios of sonar call recordings with the U-shaped microphone array. A total of 93 trials were analyzed here.…”

A novel zinc‐binding alcohol dehydrogenase 2 from Arachis diogoi, expressed in resistance responses against late leaf spot pathogen, induces cell death when transexpressed in tobacco

“…AdZADH2 appears to support nitric oxide (NO) mediated HR cell death; NO production leads to the production of H 2 O 2 (instead of ROS), which in turn results in HR‐mediated PCD 54. Several lines of evidence have shown that the early nitric oxide (NO) burst in host plant cells after pathogen attack functions as a major defense response associated with resistance in plant pathogen interaction 55. NO is an interesting molecule that is used by microorganisms in pathogenesis and host cells to activate the immune system to counter the pathogen challenge 56, 57.…”

Dim ultraviolet light as a means of deterring activity by the Hawaiian hoary bat Lasiurus cinereus semotus

“…A possible explanation for the difference between acoustic and video detections is that some bats may have stopped calling while still approaching trees illuminated with UV. Insectivorous bats sometimes stop echolocating during flight in complex acoustic environments (Chiu et al 2008), and we speculate that they might also echolocate less frequently or even cease to echolocate when approaching visually unfamiliar objects (e.g. wind turbines; Cryan et al 2014).…”