In the mating system of the bat Saccopteryx bilineata, bioacoustic constraints impede male eavesdropping on female echolocation calls for their surveillance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At night, bats utter loud echolocation calls at high repetition rates that may reveal the location and current behaviour of callers to eavesdropping bats. Given the strong attenuation of echolocation calls, we predicted that territorial males of a harem-polygynous species ought to forage at close distance to females to survey their movements by social eavesdropping. We estimated a maximum detection distance of 38 m for echolocation calls of Saccopteryx bilineata (Temminck, 1838) (Chiroptera; Emballonuridae) broadcasted within the forest under the sound transmission conditions of our study site and for an assumed signal detection threshold of 20 dB SPL (50 m for a threshold of 0 dB SPL). We then simultaneously radio-tracked the nocturnal movements of eight male–female pairs that each rested in the same harem territory during the day and measured the distances at which dyads foraged. Male–female pairs foraged at a median distance of 139 m. In the case of 90% of simultaneous bearings, males foraged at distances that prevented eavesdropping on 44 kHz echolocation calls (>38 m; 87% of radio fixes >50 m). Males and females of the same daytime territory roosted, on average, 226 ± 194 m apart from each other at night. Thus, males were most likely unaware of where females foraged as a result of the strong attenuation of female echolocation calls. In general, such acoustic constraints on social eavesdropping may promote extra-harem group paternities, female choice, and sperm competition in bats, and may therefore present an important selective force in the evolution of bat mating systems.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".