Cargando…

Does similarity in call structure or foraging ecology explain interspecific information transfer in wild Myotis bats?

ABSTRACT: 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 pe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hügel, Theresa, van Meir, Vincent, Muñoz-Meneses, Amanda, Clarin, B.-Markus, Siemers, Björn M., Goerlitz, Holger R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5661007/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29200602
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00265-017-2398-x
_version_ 1783274396679405568
author Hügel, Theresa
van Meir, Vincent
Muñoz-Meneses, Amanda
Clarin, B.-Markus
Siemers, Björn M.
Goerlitz, Holger R.
author_facet Hügel, Theresa
van Meir, Vincent
Muñoz-Meneses, Amanda
Clarin, B.-Markus
Siemers, Björn M.
Goerlitz, Holger R.
author_sort Hügel, Theresa
collection PubMed
description ABSTRACT: 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 STATEMENT: Animals 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 MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00265-017-2398-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5661007
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56610072017-11-30 Does similarity in call structure or foraging ecology explain interspecific information transfer in wild Myotis bats? Hügel, Theresa van Meir, Vincent Muñoz-Meneses, Amanda Clarin, B.-Markus Siemers, Björn M. Goerlitz, Holger R. Behav Ecol Sociobiol Original Article ABSTRACT: 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 STATEMENT: Animals 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 MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00265-017-2398-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017-10-29 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5661007/ /pubmed/29200602 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00265-017-2398-x Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Article
Hügel, Theresa
van Meir, Vincent
Muñoz-Meneses, Amanda
Clarin, B.-Markus
Siemers, Björn M.
Goerlitz, Holger R.
Does similarity in call structure or foraging ecology explain interspecific information transfer in wild Myotis bats?
title Does similarity in call structure or foraging ecology explain interspecific information transfer in wild Myotis bats?
title_full Does similarity in call structure or foraging ecology explain interspecific information transfer in wild Myotis bats?
title_fullStr Does similarity in call structure or foraging ecology explain interspecific information transfer in wild Myotis bats?
title_full_unstemmed Does similarity in call structure or foraging ecology explain interspecific information transfer in wild Myotis bats?
title_short Does similarity in call structure or foraging ecology explain interspecific information transfer in wild Myotis bats?
title_sort does similarity in call structure or foraging ecology explain interspecific information transfer in wild myotis bats?
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5661007/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29200602
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00265-017-2398-x
work_keys_str_mv AT hugeltheresa doessimilarityincallstructureorforagingecologyexplaininterspecificinformationtransferinwildmyotisbats
AT vanmeirvincent doessimilarityincallstructureorforagingecologyexplaininterspecificinformationtransferinwildmyotisbats
AT munozmenesesamanda doessimilarityincallstructureorforagingecologyexplaininterspecificinformationtransferinwildmyotisbats
AT clarinbmarkus doessimilarityincallstructureorforagingecologyexplaininterspecificinformationtransferinwildmyotisbats
AT siemersbjornm doessimilarityincallstructureorforagingecologyexplaininterspecificinformationtransferinwildmyotisbats
AT goerlitzholgerr doessimilarityincallstructureorforagingecologyexplaininterspecificinformationtransferinwildmyotisbats