Intra- and Interspecific Responses to Rafinesque's Big-Eared Bat (<i>Corynorhinus rafinesquii</i>) Social Calls

Loeb, Susan C.; Britzke, Eric R.

doi:10.3161/150811010x537909

Cited by 13 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, social foraging in the more omnivorous greater spear-nosed bat (Phyllostomus hastatus) does not seem to have an anti-predator function (Wilkinson & Boughman, 1998). Organized social feeding appears uncommon in insectivorous bats (see Dechmann et al, 2010), although such bats may benefit from eavesdropping on the feeding calls of nearby bats (Balcombe & Fenton, 1988;Dechmann et al, 2009; but see Loeb & Britzke, 2010). Social anti-predator warning systems, such as those involving vigilance in many other mammals and birds (Caro, 2005), appear completely unstudied in bats.…”

Section: (6) Sociality and Anti-predator Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do predators influence the behaviour of bats?

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many aspects of animal behaviour are affected by real-time changes in the risk of predation. This conclusion holds for virtually all taxa and ecological systems studied, but does it hold for bats? Bats are poorly represented in the literature on anti-predator behaviour, which may reflect a lack of nocturnal predators specialized on bats. If bats actually experience a world with minimal anti-predator concerns, then they will provide a unique contrast within the realm of vertebrate ecology. Alternatively, such predator-driven behaviour in bats may not yet be fully understood, given the difficulties in working with these highly mobile and nocturnal animals. We provide a wide-ranging exploration of these issues in bat behaviour. We first cover the basic predator-prey information available on bats, both on potential predators and the ways in which bats might perceive predators and respond to attacks. We then cover work relevant to key aspects of bat behaviour, such as choice of daytime roosts, the nature of sleep and torpor, evening roost departures, moonlight avoidance, landscape-related movement patterns, and habitat selection. Overall, the evidence in favour of a strong influence of predators on bat behaviour is equivocal, with the picture clouded by contradictory results and a lack of information on potential predators and the perception of risk by bats. It seems clear that day-active bats run a considerable risk of being killed by diurnal raptors, which are able to capture bats with relative ease. Thus, bats taking advantage of a pulse of insects just prior to sunset are likely taking risks to gain much-needed energy. Further, the choice of daytime roosts by bats is probably strongly influenced by roost safety. Few studies, however, have directly addressed either of these topics. As a group, insectivorous temperate-zone bats show no clear tendency to avoid apparently risky situations, such as activity on moonlit nights. However, some observations are consistent with the idea that predation risk affects choice of movement paths and feeding areas by temperate-zone bats, as well as the timing of roost departures. The behaviour of tropical bats, on the other hand, seems more generally influenced by predators; this is especially true for tropical nectarivores and frugivores, but also for insectivorous bats. Presumably there are more serious predators on bats in the tropics (e.g. specialized raptors or carnivorous bats), but the identity of these predators is unclear. More information is needed to assess fully the influence of predators on bat behaviour. There is much need for work on the ways in which bats perceive predators via auditory, visual, and olfactory cues, and whether bats have some knowledge of the risks posed by different predators. Also needed is information on how predators attack bats and how bats react to attacking predators. Difficult to obtain, but of critical value, will be information on the nature of the predation risk experienced by bats while away from roosts and during the full darkness of night.

show abstract

Section: (6) Sociality and Anti-predator Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do predators influence the behaviour of bats?

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Using acoustic surveys, researchers have documented increased activity levels of several species of bats in response to playbacks of echolocation calls, social calls, feeding buzzes, and distress calls (Barclay , Gillam , Arnold and Wilkinson , Carter et al ). However, only a few published studies have investigated acoustic lures as a means to increase bat captures in mist nets and the response has varied by species both in direction (attraction or avoidance) and magnitude (Hill and Greenaway , Loeb and Britzke , Lintott et al ). Furthermore, to our knowledge, the effect of lures on capture success has never been tested on high‐flying, aerial hawking species, often the most challenging bats to capture with mist nets.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Acoustic lure allows for capture of a high‐flying, endangered bat

Torrez

Samoray²,

Silas

et al. 2017

Wildl. Soc. Bull.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mist nets are commonly used to capture free-flying bats; however, some bat species are very difficult to capture because of their flight behavior, habitat preferences, and ability to avoid nets. High-flying, open-space foragers are especially underrepresented by mist-net surveys. Few studies have investigated the effectiveness of using acoustic lures (playbacks of conspecific vocalizations) to increase capture success of bats in mist nets. We tested the efficacy of an acoustic lure to capture a high-flying rare molossid, the endangered Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus), which had been captured only once away from a known roost prior to our research. We used a crossover experimental design with 2 lure treatments (nets with lures playing social call recordings from 2 different roosts) and 2 control nets (no lures) in 6 sites for 2 nights each. We captured 15 Florida bonneted bats in our treatment nets and 0 in our control nets. One lure had greater capture success (n ¼ 13) than the other (n ¼ 2), with a trend for greater captures of males (n ¼ 11) than females (n ¼ 4). We suggest that these differences were due to the social context in which the calls used in the lures were recorded. Our study demonstrated the utility of acoustic lures to capture Florida bonneted bats and expands research opportunities critical to the species' conservation, such as the ability to use radio telemetry to track captured bats to unknown roosting and foraging areas. Our study also lays the foundation for future research into social call playbacks as a technique to lure other high-flying and elusive bat species into mist nets. Ó 2017 The Wildlife Society.

show abstract

“…Morrison and Fox (), however, were successful in surveying for Townsend's big‐eared bats using the same basic equipment and analysis software as we used. Also, studies in Georgia and South Carolina (USA) have had success detecting echolocation calls of Rafinesque's big‐eared bats (A. Sherman, Bureau of Land Management, personal communication; Loeb and Britzke ). We detected calls of Rafinesque's big‐eared bats less commonly than those of other species, perhaps indicating they were less abundant in our study area.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of systematic roost searches and acoustic detection to determine occupancy of rare forest bats

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite recent increases in conservation interest, the distribution, habitat needs, and conservation priorities remain poorly understood for many animal species, including forest bats. In some cases, little quantitative information exists about appropriate survey methods to determine occupancy or abundance of bats in forest systems. We quantitatively compared detection probabilities between 2 commonly used survey techniques for 2 bat species that are closely associated with bottomland hardwood stands in the southeastern United States. Passive acoustic surveys of echolocation calls were more likely than systematic roost searches to detect both Rafinesque's big‐eared bats (Corynorhinus rafinesquii) and southeastern myotis (Myotis austroriparius) at 7 study areas in eastern Texas. Our results confirmed that numerous repeat visits (>15 acoustic‐survey‐nights) are necessary to have high confidence in detecting Rafinesque's big‐eared bats; however, southeastern myotis were easier to detect. Our results emphasize the importance of quantitatively assessing survey methods prior to designing or implementing widespread survey programs for bats. © 2013 The Wildlife Society

show abstract

Intra- and Interspecific Responses to Rafinesque's Big-Eared Bat (Corynorhinus rafinesquii) Social Calls

Cited by 13 publications

References 44 publications

Do predators influence the behaviour of bats?

Do predators influence the behaviour of bats?

Acoustic lure allows for capture of a high‐flying, endangered bat

Comparison of systematic roost searches and acoustic detection to determine occupancy of rare forest bats

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About