Active acoustic interference elicits echolocation changes in heterospecific bats

High duty cycle moth sounds jam bat echolocation: bats counter with compensatory changes in buzz duration

Tiger moth species vary greatly in the number of clicks they produce and the resultant duty cycle. Signals with higher duty cycles are expected to more effectively interfere with bat sonar. However, little is known about the minimum duty cycle of tiger moth signals for sonar jamming. Is there a threshold that allows us to classify moths as acoustically aposematic versus sonar jammers based on their duty cycles? We performed playback experiments with three wild-caught adult male bats, Eptesicus fuscus. Bat attacks on tethered moths were challenged using acoustic signals of Bertholdia trigona with modified duty cycles ranging from 0 to 46%. We did not find evidence for a duty cycle threshold; rather, the ability to jam the bat's sonar was a continuous function of duty cycle consistent with a steady increase in the number of clicks arriving during a critical signal processing time window just prior to the arrival of an echo. The proportion of successful captures significantly decreased as the moth duty cycle increased. Our findings suggest that moths cannot be unambiguously classified as acoustically aposematic or sonar jammers based solely on duty cycle. Bats appear to compensate for sonar jamming by lengthening the duration of their terminal buzz and they are more successful in capturing moths when they do so. In contrast to previous findings for bats performing difficult spatial tasks, the number of sonar sound groups decreased in response to high duty cycles and did not affect capture success.

Communication with self, friends and foes in active-sensing animals

Animals that rely on electrolocation and echolocation for navigation and prey detection benefit from sensory systems that can operate in the dark, allowing them to exploit sensory niches with few competitors. Active sensing has been characterized as a highly specialized form of communication, whereby an echolocating or electrolocating animal serves as both the sender and receiver of sensory information. This characterization inspires a framework to explore the functions of sensory channels that communicate information with the self and with others. Overlapping communication functions create challenges for signal privacy and fidelity by leaving active-sensing animals vulnerable to eavesdropping, jamming and masking. Here, we present an overview of active-sensing systems used by weakly electric fish, bats and odontocetes, and consider their susceptibility to heterospecific and conspecific jamming signals and eavesdropping. Susceptibility to interference from signals produced by both conspecifics and prey animals reduces the fidelity of electrolocation and echolocation for prey capture and foraging. Likewise, active-sensing signals may be eavesdropped, increasing the risk of alerting prey to the threat of predation or the risk of predation to the sender, or drawing competition to productive foraging sites. The evolutionary success of electrolocating and echolocating animals suggests that they effectively counter the costs of active sensing through rich and diverse adaptive behaviors that allow them to mitigate the effects of competition for signal space and the exploitation of their signals.

Deep-diving beaked whales dive together but forage apart

Echolocating animals that forage in social groups can potentially benefit from eavesdropping on other group members, cooperative foraging or social defence, but may also face problems of acoustic interference and intra-group competition for prey. Here, we investigate these potential trade-offs of sociality for extreme deep-diving Blainville's and Cuvier's beaked whales. These species perform highly synchronous group dives as a presumed predator-avoidance behaviour, but the benefits and costs of this on foraging have not been investigated. We show that group members could hear their companions for a median of at least 91% of the vocal foraging phase of their dives. This enables whales to coordinate their mean travel direction despite differing individual headings as they pursue prey on a minute-by-minute basis. While beaked whales coordinate their echolocation-based foraging periods tightly, individual click and buzz rates are both independent of the number of whales in the group. Thus, their foraging performance is not affected by intra-group competition or interference from group members, and they do not seem to capitalize directly on eavesdropping on the echoes produced by the echolocation clicks of their companions. We conclude that the close diving and vocal synchronization of beaked whale groups that quantitatively reduces predation risk has little impact on foraging performance.

The jamming avoidance response in echolocating bats

Bats face many sources of acoustic interference in their natural environments, including other bats and potential prey items that affect their ability to interpret the returning echoes of their biosonar signals. To be able to navigate and forage successfully, bats must be able to counteract this interference and one of the ways they achieve this is by altering the various parameters of their echolocation. We describe these changes in signal design within the context of a modified definition of the jamming avoidance response originally applied to the signal changes of weakly electric fish. Both of these groups use active sensory systems that exhibit similarities in function but we take this opportunity to highlight major differences each groups' response to signal interference. These discrepancies form the basis of our need for an expanded description of the jamming avoidance response in echolocating bats.

The effect of jamming stimuli on the echolocation behavior of the bottlenose dolphin, Tursiops truncatus

Echolocating bats and odontocetes face the potential challenge of acoustic interference from neighbors, or sonar jamming. To counter this, many bat species have adapted jamming avoidance strategies to improve signal detection, but any such avoidance strategies in dolphins is unknown. This study provides an investigation into whether dolphins modify echolocation behavior during jamming scenarios. Recorded echolocation clicks were projected at different click repetition rates and at different aspect angles relative to two dolphins' heads while each dolphin was performing a target detection task. Changes in the timing, amplitude, and frequency of structure of the dolphin's emitted signals were compared to determine if and how dolphins modify echolocation when faced with potentially interfering conspecific echolocation signals. The results indicate that both dolphins demonstrated different responses when faced with jamming scenarios, which may reflect optimal strategies according to individual auditory perception abilities.

Bats adjust temporal parameters of echolocation pulses but not those of communication calls in response to traffic noise

Many studies based on acute short‐term noise exposure have demonstrated that animals can adjust their vocalizations in response to ambient noise. However, the effects of chronic noise over a relatively long time scale of multiple days remain largely unclear. Bats rely mainly on acoustic signals for perception of environmental and social communication. Nearly all previous studies on noise‐induced vocal adjustments have focused on echolocation pulse sounds. Relatively little is known regarding the effects of noise on social communication calls. Here, we examined the dynamic changes in the temporal parameters of echolocation and communication vocalizations of Vespertilio sinensis when exposed to traffic noise over multiple days. We found that the bats started to modify their echolocation vocalizations on the fourth day of noise exposure, with an increase of 42–91% in the total number of pulse sequences per day. Under noisy conditions, the number of pulses within a pulse sequence decreased by an average of 17.2%, resulting in a significantly slower number of pulses/sequence (P < 0.001). However, there was little change in the duration of a pulse sequence. These parameters were not significantly adjusted in most communication vocalizations under the noise condition (all P > 0.05), except that the duration decreased and the number of syllables/sequences increased in 1 type of communicative vocalization (P < 0.05). This study suggests that bats routinely adjust temporal parameters of echolocation but rarely of communication vocalizations in response to noise condition.

Adaptive frequency shifts of echolocation sounds in Miniopterus fuliginosus according to the frequency-modulated pattern of jamming sounds

When flying in a group, echolocating bats have to separate their own echoes from pulses and echoes belonging to other individuals to extract only the information necessary for their own navigation. Previous studies have demonstrated that frequency-modulated (FM) bats change the terminal frequencies (TFs) of downward FM pulses under acoustic interference. However, it is not yet clear which acoustic characteristics of the jamming signals induce the TF shift according to the degree of acoustic interference. In this study, we examined changes in the acoustic characteristics of pulses emitted by Miniopterus fuliginosus while presenting jamming stimuli with different FM patterns to the bat flying alone. Bats significantly altered their TFs when responding to downward (dExp) and upward (uExp) exponential FM sounds as well as to a constant-frequency (CF) stimulus, by approximately 1-2 kHz (dExp: 2.1±0.9 kHz; uExp: 1.7±0.3 kHz; CF: 1.3±0.4 kHz) but not for linear FM sounds. The feature common to the spectra of these three jamming stimuli is a spectrum peak near the TF frequency, demonstrating that the bats shift the TF to avoid masking of jamming sounds on the TF frequency range. These results suggest that direct frequency masking near the TF frequency range induces the TF shift, which simultaneously decreases the similarity between their own echolocation sounds and jamming signals.