Detection distances in desert dwelling, high duty cycle echolocators: A test of the foraging habitat hypothesis

High Duty Cycle (HDC) echolocating bats use high frequency echolocation pulses that are clutter resistant, but their high frequencies give them limited range. Despite their unique ability to reject background clutter while simultaneously detecting fluttering prey, the frequency of their echolocation...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:PloS one 2022-05, Vol.17 (5), p.e0268138-e0268138
Hauptverfasser: Finger, Nikita M, Holderied, Marc, Jacobs, David S
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page e0268138
container_issue 5
container_start_page e0268138
container_title PloS one
container_volume 17
creator Finger, Nikita M
Holderied, Marc
Jacobs, David S
description High Duty Cycle (HDC) echolocating bats use high frequency echolocation pulses that are clutter resistant, but their high frequencies give them limited range. Despite their unique ability to reject background clutter while simultaneously detecting fluttering prey, the frequency of their echolocation pulses has a strong correlation with level of environmental clutter, lower frequency pulses of HDC bats being associated with more open environments. The Foraging Habitat Hypothesis (FHH) proposes that the ecological significance of these lower frequency pulses in HDC bats in open environments is that they allow longer prey detection distances. To test the FHH, we compared the frequencies, Source Levels (SLs) and detection distances of Rhinolophus capensis, a HDC bat that has been shown to vary its call frequency in relation to habitat structure. As a further test of the FHH we investigated the SLs and detection distances of Rhinolophus damarensis (a heterospecific species that occurs in the same open desert environment as R. capensis but echolocates at a higher dominant pulse frequency). In the open desert, R. capensis emitted both lower frequency and higher SL pulses giving them longer detection distances than R. capensis in the cluttered fynbos. SL contributed more to differences in detection distances in both R. capensis and R. damarensis than frequency. In a few instances, R. damarensis achieved similar detection distances to desert-inhabiting R. capensis by emitting much higher SLs despite their average SLs being lower. These results suggest that lower frequency echolocation pulses are not a prerequisite for open desert living but may increase detection distance while avoiding energetic costs required for high SLs.
doi_str_mv 10.1371/journal.pone.0268138
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_2686259113</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A704328318</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_232de6ae6d4f47869a4ed09e3b9eafce</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A704328318</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c585t-45e7e07e8c2f6e1fcf03d33192f7bd55ccec5c8c5f81c877e1173dda671855913</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkluP0zAQhSMEYpfCP0BgCQnxQEtsx5fwgFQtt5VW4gWeLdceJ67SuNgOqP8el2ZXXcRTEs83xzMnp6qe43qFqcDvtmGKox5W-zDCqiZcYiofVJe4pWTJSU0fnr1fVE9S2tY1o5Lzx9UFZUzKhrDLKnyEDCb7MCLrU9ajgYR8-YAEMSP7G4bBj91b1PuuR3bKB2QOZgAEpg9DMDqHmN6jNcqQMgoO5R6QC1F3pQv1euOzzqg_7EMpJJ-eVo-cHhI8m5-L6sfnT9-vvi5vvn25vlrfLA2TLC8bBgJqAdIQxwE742pqKcUtcWJjGTMGDDPSMCexkUIAxoJaq7nAkrEW00X18qS7H0JSs1dJFZs4KXVMC3F9ImzQW7WPfqfjQQXt1d-DEDulY_ZlV0UoscA1cNu4Rkje6gZs3QLdtKCdgaL1Yb5t2uzAGhhz1MM90fuV0feqC79UmaRl5bcsqjezQAw_p2Kl2vlkivd6hDAd5-ZCtITItqCv_kH_v91Mdbos4EcXyr3mKKrWom4okRTLQr0-o3rQQ-5TGKZjHtJ9sDmBJoaUIri73XCtjnG8HUId46jmOJa2F-e-3DXd5o_-AQ_J3mQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2686259113</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Detection distances in desert dwelling, high duty cycle echolocators: A test of the foraging habitat hypothesis</title><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Finger, Nikita M ; Holderied, Marc ; Jacobs, David S</creator><creatorcontrib>Finger, Nikita M ; Holderied, Marc ; Jacobs, David S</creatorcontrib><description>High Duty Cycle (HDC) echolocating bats use high frequency echolocation pulses that are clutter resistant, but their high frequencies give them limited range. Despite their unique ability to reject background clutter while simultaneously detecting fluttering prey, the frequency of their echolocation pulses has a strong correlation with level of environmental clutter, lower frequency pulses of HDC bats being associated with more open environments. The Foraging Habitat Hypothesis (FHH) proposes that the ecological significance of these lower frequency pulses in HDC bats in open environments is that they allow longer prey detection distances. To test the FHH, we compared the frequencies, Source Levels (SLs) and detection distances of Rhinolophus capensis, a HDC bat that has been shown to vary its call frequency in relation to habitat structure. As a further test of the FHH we investigated the SLs and detection distances of Rhinolophus damarensis (a heterospecific species that occurs in the same open desert environment as R. capensis but echolocates at a higher dominant pulse frequency). In the open desert, R. capensis emitted both lower frequency and higher SL pulses giving them longer detection distances than R. capensis in the cluttered fynbos. SL contributed more to differences in detection distances in both R. capensis and R. damarensis than frequency. In a few instances, R. damarensis achieved similar detection distances to desert-inhabiting R. capensis by emitting much higher SLs despite their average SLs being lower. These results suggest that lower frequency echolocation pulses are not a prerequisite for open desert living but may increase detection distance while avoiding energetic costs required for high SLs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268138</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35588425</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Acoustics ; Bats ; Biology and Life Sciences ; Clutter ; Desert environments ; Deserts ; Echolocation ; Echolocation (Physiology) ; Ecology and Environmental Sciences ; Engineering and Technology ; Evaluation ; Flutter ; Foraging behavior ; Foraging habitats ; Fynbos ; Habitats ; High frequencies ; Hypotheses ; Microphones ; Physical Sciences ; Prey ; Rhinolophus capensis ; Rhinolophus damarensis ; Social Sciences ; Vegetation</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2022-05, Vol.17 (5), p.e0268138-e0268138</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2022 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2022 Finger et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2022 Finger et al 2022 Finger et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c585t-45e7e07e8c2f6e1fcf03d33192f7bd55ccec5c8c5f81c877e1173dda671855913</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c585t-45e7e07e8c2f6e1fcf03d33192f7bd55ccec5c8c5f81c877e1173dda671855913</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5161-3646 ; 0000-0002-3243-8571</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9119505/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9119505/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,2096,2915,23845,27901,27902,53766,53768,79569,79570</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35588425$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Finger, Nikita M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holderied, Marc</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jacobs, David S</creatorcontrib><title>Detection distances in desert dwelling, high duty cycle echolocators: A test of the foraging habitat hypothesis</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>High Duty Cycle (HDC) echolocating bats use high frequency echolocation pulses that are clutter resistant, but their high frequencies give them limited range. Despite their unique ability to reject background clutter while simultaneously detecting fluttering prey, the frequency of their echolocation pulses has a strong correlation with level of environmental clutter, lower frequency pulses of HDC bats being associated with more open environments. The Foraging Habitat Hypothesis (FHH) proposes that the ecological significance of these lower frequency pulses in HDC bats in open environments is that they allow longer prey detection distances. To test the FHH, we compared the frequencies, Source Levels (SLs) and detection distances of Rhinolophus capensis, a HDC bat that has been shown to vary its call frequency in relation to habitat structure. As a further test of the FHH we investigated the SLs and detection distances of Rhinolophus damarensis (a heterospecific species that occurs in the same open desert environment as R. capensis but echolocates at a higher dominant pulse frequency). In the open desert, R. capensis emitted both lower frequency and higher SL pulses giving them longer detection distances than R. capensis in the cluttered fynbos. SL contributed more to differences in detection distances in both R. capensis and R. damarensis than frequency. In a few instances, R. damarensis achieved similar detection distances to desert-inhabiting R. capensis by emitting much higher SLs despite their average SLs being lower. These results suggest that lower frequency echolocation pulses are not a prerequisite for open desert living but may increase detection distance while avoiding energetic costs required for high SLs.</description><subject>Acoustics</subject><subject>Bats</subject><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Clutter</subject><subject>Desert environments</subject><subject>Deserts</subject><subject>Echolocation</subject><subject>Echolocation (Physiology)</subject><subject>Ecology and Environmental Sciences</subject><subject>Engineering and Technology</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Flutter</subject><subject>Foraging behavior</subject><subject>Foraging habitats</subject><subject>Fynbos</subject><subject>Habitats</subject><subject>High frequencies</subject><subject>Hypotheses</subject><subject>Microphones</subject><subject>Physical Sciences</subject><subject>Prey</subject><subject>Rhinolophus capensis</subject><subject>Rhinolophus damarensis</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Vegetation</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNptkluP0zAQhSMEYpfCP0BgCQnxQEtsx5fwgFQtt5VW4gWeLdceJ67SuNgOqP8el2ZXXcRTEs83xzMnp6qe43qFqcDvtmGKox5W-zDCqiZcYiofVJe4pWTJSU0fnr1fVE9S2tY1o5Lzx9UFZUzKhrDLKnyEDCb7MCLrU9ajgYR8-YAEMSP7G4bBj91b1PuuR3bKB2QOZgAEpg9DMDqHmN6jNcqQMgoO5R6QC1F3pQv1euOzzqg_7EMpJJ-eVo-cHhI8m5-L6sfnT9-vvi5vvn25vlrfLA2TLC8bBgJqAdIQxwE742pqKcUtcWJjGTMGDDPSMCexkUIAxoJaq7nAkrEW00X18qS7H0JSs1dJFZs4KXVMC3F9ImzQW7WPfqfjQQXt1d-DEDulY_ZlV0UoscA1cNu4Rkje6gZs3QLdtKCdgaL1Yb5t2uzAGhhz1MM90fuV0feqC79UmaRl5bcsqjezQAw_p2Kl2vlkivd6hDAd5-ZCtITItqCv_kH_v91Mdbos4EcXyr3mKKrWom4okRTLQr0-o3rQQ-5TGKZjHtJ9sDmBJoaUIri73XCtjnG8HUId46jmOJa2F-e-3DXd5o_-AQ_J3mQ</recordid><startdate>20220519</startdate><enddate>20220519</enddate><creator>Finger, Nikita M</creator><creator>Holderied, Marc</creator><creator>Jacobs, David S</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PHGZM</scope><scope>PHGZT</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PJZUB</scope><scope>PKEHL</scope><scope>PPXIY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQGLB</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5161-3646</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3243-8571</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220519</creationdate><title>Detection distances in desert dwelling, high duty cycle echolocators: A test of the foraging habitat hypothesis</title><author>Finger, Nikita M ; Holderied, Marc ; Jacobs, David S</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c585t-45e7e07e8c2f6e1fcf03d33192f7bd55ccec5c8c5f81c877e1173dda671855913</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Acoustics</topic><topic>Bats</topic><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Clutter</topic><topic>Desert environments</topic><topic>Deserts</topic><topic>Echolocation</topic><topic>Echolocation (Physiology)</topic><topic>Ecology and Environmental Sciences</topic><topic>Engineering and Technology</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Flutter</topic><topic>Foraging behavior</topic><topic>Foraging habitats</topic><topic>Fynbos</topic><topic>Habitats</topic><topic>High frequencies</topic><topic>Hypotheses</topic><topic>Microphones</topic><topic>Physical Sciences</topic><topic>Prey</topic><topic>Rhinolophus capensis</topic><topic>Rhinolophus damarensis</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Vegetation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Finger, Nikita M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holderied, Marc</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jacobs, David S</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic (New)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Research Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Health &amp; Nursing</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Applied &amp; Life Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Finger, Nikita M</au><au>Holderied, Marc</au><au>Jacobs, David S</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Detection distances in desert dwelling, high duty cycle echolocators: A test of the foraging habitat hypothesis</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2022-05-19</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>e0268138</spage><epage>e0268138</epage><pages>e0268138-e0268138</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>High Duty Cycle (HDC) echolocating bats use high frequency echolocation pulses that are clutter resistant, but their high frequencies give them limited range. Despite their unique ability to reject background clutter while simultaneously detecting fluttering prey, the frequency of their echolocation pulses has a strong correlation with level of environmental clutter, lower frequency pulses of HDC bats being associated with more open environments. The Foraging Habitat Hypothesis (FHH) proposes that the ecological significance of these lower frequency pulses in HDC bats in open environments is that they allow longer prey detection distances. To test the FHH, we compared the frequencies, Source Levels (SLs) and detection distances of Rhinolophus capensis, a HDC bat that has been shown to vary its call frequency in relation to habitat structure. As a further test of the FHH we investigated the SLs and detection distances of Rhinolophus damarensis (a heterospecific species that occurs in the same open desert environment as R. capensis but echolocates at a higher dominant pulse frequency). In the open desert, R. capensis emitted both lower frequency and higher SL pulses giving them longer detection distances than R. capensis in the cluttered fynbos. SL contributed more to differences in detection distances in both R. capensis and R. damarensis than frequency. In a few instances, R. damarensis achieved similar detection distances to desert-inhabiting R. capensis by emitting much higher SLs despite their average SLs being lower. These results suggest that lower frequency echolocation pulses are not a prerequisite for open desert living but may increase detection distance while avoiding energetic costs required for high SLs.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>35588425</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0268138</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5161-3646</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3243-8571</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1932-6203
ispartof PloS one, 2022-05, Vol.17 (5), p.e0268138-e0268138
issn 1932-6203
1932-6203
language eng
recordid cdi_plos_journals_2686259113
source Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry
subjects Acoustics
Bats
Biology and Life Sciences
Clutter
Desert environments
Deserts
Echolocation
Echolocation (Physiology)
Ecology and Environmental Sciences
Engineering and Technology
Evaluation
Flutter
Foraging behavior
Foraging habitats
Fynbos
Habitats
High frequencies
Hypotheses
Microphones
Physical Sciences
Prey
Rhinolophus capensis
Rhinolophus damarensis
Social Sciences
Vegetation
title Detection distances in desert dwelling, high duty cycle echolocators: A test of the foraging habitat hypothesis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-21T21%3A47%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Detection%20distances%20in%20desert%20dwelling,%20high%20duty%20cycle%20echolocators:%20A%20test%20of%20the%20foraging%20habitat%20hypothesis&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Finger,%20Nikita%20M&rft.date=2022-05-19&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=e0268138&rft.epage=e0268138&rft.pages=e0268138-e0268138&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0268138&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA704328318%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2686259113&rft_id=info:pmid/35588425&rft_galeid=A704328318&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_232de6ae6d4f47869a4ed09e3b9eafce&rfr_iscdi=true