Bat Echolocation Researc h - Bat Conservation International

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TABLE OF CONTENTS Designing Bat Activity Surveys Using Time Expansion and Direct Sampling of Ultrasound 83 Gareth Jones, Nancy Vaughan, Danilo Russo, Liat P. Wickramasinghe, and Stephen Harris Frequency Division: A Technical Overview 89 Tony Messina Time Expansion: Analysis Capabilities and Limitations and Field Design 91 Lars Pettersson Zero-Crossings Analysis For Bat Identification: An Overview 95 Chris Corben Bats in the Field and in a Flight Cage: Recording and Analysis of Their Echolocation Calls and Behavior 107 Björn M. Siemers Signal Processing Techniques for Species Identification 114 Stuart Parsons Advanced Analysis Techniques for Identifying Bat Species 121 Joseph M. Szewczak Wrap-Up: Using Bat Detectors for Species Identification 127 William E. Rainey RE S O U R C E S, RE S E A R C H, A N D ST U D Y US I N G BAT DE T E C T O R S F u t u re Dire c t i o n s Bat Specific Signal Analysis Software – BATSOUND 130 Lars Pettersson Reporting: Essential Information and Analysis 133 M. Brock Fenton European Agency Perspectives: Expectations from Bat Detector Studies 140 Peter Boye Geographic Variation in the Echolocation Calls of Bats: A Complication for Identifying Species by Their Calls 144 Robert M. R. Barclay and R. Mark Brigham Bat Call Libraries: Management and Potential Use 150 Dean A. Waters and William L. Gannon Designing Bat Activity Surveys for Inventory and Monitoring Studies at Local and Regional Scales 157 Allyson L. Walsh, Robert M. R. Barclay, and Gary F. McCracken Conference Wrap-Up: Where do we go from here? 166 Gareth Jones iv Bat Echolocation Research: tools, techniques & analysis
CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS Ingemar Ahlén Department of Conservation Biology, SLU, Box 7002, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden Ingemar.Ahlen@nvb.slu.se R o b e rt M. R. Barc l a y Department of Biological Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 1N4 barclay@ucalgary.ca Peter Boye Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, Konstantinstrasse 110, 53179 Bonn, Germany boyep@bfn.de R. Mark Brigham D e p a rtment of Biology, University of Regina, Regina, SK, Canada S4S 0A2 mark.brigham@uregina.ca Eric R. Britzke Department of Biology, Tennessee Technological University, Cookeville, TN 38505, United States erb8167@tntech.edu Chris Corben corben@hoarybat.com M. Brock Fenton D e p a rtment of Biology, University of We s t e rn Ontario, London, ON, Canada N6A 5B7 bfenton@uwo.ca William L. Gannon Department of Biology and Museum of Southwestern Biology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131, United States wgannon@unm.edu Donald R. Griffin Deceased Stephen Harris School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Woodland Road, Bristol BS8 1UG, United Kingdom Gareth Jones School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Woodland Road, Bristol BS8 1UG, United Kingdom Gareth.Jones@bris.ac.uk Herman J.G.A. Limpens Society for Study and Conservation of Mammals Eco Consult and Project Management, Roghorst 99, 6708 KD Wageningen, Netherlands herman.limpens@vzz.nl Elisabeth K. V. Kalko University of Ulm, Experimental Ecology, D – 89069 Ulm, Germany and Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Balboa, P. O. Box 2072, Panama Elisabeth.Kalko@biologie.uni-ulm.de Thomas H. Kunz Department of Biology, Boston University, Boston, MA 02215, United States kunz@bu.edux Gary F. McCracken Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996, United States gmccrack@utk.edu Tony Messina Nevada Bat Technology, Box 33941, Las Vegas, NV 89133, United States Tony@NevadaBat.com Bruce W. Miller The Wildlife Conservation Society, 2300 Southern Blvd., Bronx, New York 10460, United States bats@starband.net Stuart Parsons School of Biological Sciences, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand s.parsons@auckland.ac.nz Lars Pettersson Pettersson Elektronik AB, Tallbacksvägen 51, SE-756 45 Uppsala, Sweden lp@batsound.com William E. Rainey Department of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, 3060 Valley Life Sciences Building #3140, Berkeley, California 94720, United States rainey@socrates.berkeley.edu Danilo Russo Laboratorio di Ecologia Applicata, Dipartimento Ar.Bo.Pa.Ve., Facoltà di Agraria, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, via Università, 100, I-80055 Portici (Napoli), Italy Richard E. Sherwin Department of Biology and Museum of Southwestern Biology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87131, United States rsherwin@unm.edu Björn M. Siemers Animal Physiology, Zoological Institute, Tübingen University, Morgenstelle 28,72076 Tübingen, Germany bjoern.siemers@uni-tuebingen.de Joseph M. Szewczak Department of Biological Sciences, Humboldt State University, 1 Harpst St., Arcata, California 95521, United States joe@humboldt.edu Nancy Vaughan School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Woodland Road, Bristol BS8 1UG, United Kingdom Allyson L. Walsh Lubee Bat Conservancy, 1309 N.W. 192nd Avenue, Gainesville, Florida 32609, United States awalsh@lubee.org Dean A. Waters School of Biology, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, United Kingdom d.a.waters@leeds.ac.uk Liat P. Wickramasinghe School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Woodland Road, Bristol BS8 1UG, United Kingdom Bat Echolocation Research: tools, techniques & analysis v
Page 1 and 2: Bat Echolocation R esearc h tools,
Page 3: TABLE OF CONTENTS CO N T R I B U T
Page 7 and 8: I N T R O D U C T I O N Bat Echoloc
Page 9 and 10: BAT NATURAL HISTORY AND ECHOLOCATIO
Page 11 and 12: species (Thies et al. 1998). Before
Page 13 and 14: y the African bat Cardioderma cor (
Page 15 and 16: participants in this symposium. Sin
Page 17 and 18: INTRODUCTION Bat detectors convert
Page 19 and 20: less sensitive than a heterodyne de
Page 21 and 22: 14 advanced computer software made
Page 23 and 24: COMMUTING AND FORAGING BEHAVIOR Fig
Page 25 and 26: NIGHTLY ACTIVITY BASED ON CAPTURE W
Page 27 and 28: 20 Recordings of echolocation calls
Page 29 and 30: 22 and analyzing echolocation calls
Page 31 and 32: 24 Resource partitioning in rhinolo
Page 33 and 34: Section 2 ACOUSTIC INVENTORIES ULTR
Page 35 and 36: f tuned = f bat . As an example, wi
Page 37 and 38: The chance of detection also depend
Page 39 and 40: ent species. But in the field, it i
Page 41 and 42: Section 2: Acoustic Inventories Fig
Page 43 and 44: Suchflug und Richtungskarakteristik
Page 45 and 46: Journal N Percentage of total (%) A
Page 47 and 48: ential power of data. Hayes (1997)
Page 49 and 50: For instance, we recorded a single
Page 51 and 52: KALCOUNIS, M. C., K. A. HOBSON, R.
Page 53 and 54: and McCracken (this volume) discuss
Page 55 and 56:
using other methods (Fig. 4). Ident
Page 57 and 58:
Figure 6: Schematic diagram of diff
Page 59 and 60:
AMPLITUDE-RELATED PARAMETERS Loudne
Page 61 and 62:
tereri. Hand netting on the followi
Page 63 and 64:
flight in bats. Pp. 93-108 in Bat b
Page 65 and 66:
difficult to understand why the aut
Page 67 and 68:
Figure 5: Call sequence showing the
Page 69 and 70:
function analysis and artificial ne
Page 71 and 72:
species identifications. Echolocati
Page 73 and 74:
tially from calls emitted in the op
Page 75 and 76:
LITERATURE CITED BARCLAY, R. M. R.,
Page 77 and 78:
HETERODYNE AND TIME-EXPANSION METHO
Page 79 and 80:
74 QUANTIFYING SOUND FEATURES To qu
Page 81 and 82:
Figure 14: Pulse rhythm diagrams fo
Page 83 and 84:
A FINAL WORD Figure 21: Heterodyne
Page 85 and 86:
80 INTRODUCTION Ultrasonic detector
Page 87 and 88:
82 munity was uncovered when ultras
Page 89 and 90:
84 INTRODUCTION Being nocturnal, ba
Page 91 and 92:
A Figure 2: Surveys of bat activity
Page 93 and 94:
LITERATURE CITED Figure 5A: Pipistr
Page 95 and 96:
90 In order to set a foundation for
Page 97 and 98:
92 diagram, e.g., a spectrogram, fo
Page 99 and 100:
ecording time of the cassette. When
Page 101 and 102:
96 detail is not helpful for specie
Page 103 and 104:
tification, providing the immediate
Page 105 and 106:
spectrum, which is a graph of the e
Page 107 and 108:
since there is no evidence that the
Page 109 and 110:
104 Figure 5: Different modes in se
Page 111 and 112:
currently the case. Even at the sim
Page 113 and 114:
108 INTRODUCTION Much of our knowle
Page 115 and 116:
Figure 1: On-axis search call recor
Page 117 and 118:
112 SUMMARY To summarize, flight-ca
Page 119 and 120:
114 SIGNAL PROCESSING TECHNIQUES FO
Page 121 and 122:
al a situation as possible. Ideally
Page 123 and 124:
For all networks, correct identific
Page 125 and 126:
ety of London 69:111-128. JONES, G.
Page 127 and 128:
eveal species-specific vocal signat
Page 129 and 130:
Figure 6: Comparison of Myotis cili
Page 131 and 132:
ity of the two Myotis spp. calls (F
Page 133 and 134:
Section 4 RESOURCES, RESEARCH, AND
Page 135 and 136:
A The data extracted from the diffe
Page 137 and 138:
used. This theoretically makes it p
Page 139 and 140:
ple, will not show individual calls
Page 141 and 142:
Figure 10: Fast Fourier transform p
Page 143 and 144:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I thank the organi
Page 145 and 146:
munity (now called the European Uni
Page 147 and 148:
staff to collect all of the require
Page 149 and 150:
and van Parijs 1993). Early studies
Page 151 and 152:
Figure 5: Variation in the echoloca
Page 153 and 154:
47:60-69. JONES, G., and R. D. RANS
Page 155 and 156:
RECORDING TECHNIQUES Section 4: Res
Page 157 and 158:
monly observed with such broadband
Page 159 and 160:
ple sonograms and power spectra can
Page 161 and 162:
ences between Myotis californicus a
Page 163 and 164:
intensity). Our ability to detect m
Page 165 and 166:
• The detector is kept stationary
Page 167 and 168:
the number of bat passes in real ti
Page 169 and 170:
SHERWIN, R. E., W. L. GANNON, and S
Page 171:
tion trends, while they also raise
show all

Bat Echolocation Researc h - Bat Conservation International

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?