Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 257

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Scaling of echolocation call parameters in bats

Jones, Gareth·1999·Journal of Experimental Biology

Abstract

I investigated the scaling of echolocation call parameters (frequency, duration and repetition rate) in bats in a functional context. Low-duty-cycle bats operate with search phase cycles of usually less than 20 %. They process echoes in the time domain and are therefore intolerant of pulse–echo overlap. High-duty-cycle (>30 %) species use Doppler shift compensation, and they separate pulse and echo in the frequency domain. Call frequency scales negatively with body mass in at least five bat families. Pulse duration scales positively with mass in low-duty-cycle quasi-constant-frequency (QCF) species because the large aerial-hawking species that emit these signals fly fast in open habitats. They therefore detect distant targets and experience pulse–echo overlap later than do smaller bats. Pulse duration also scales positively with mass in the Hipposideridae, which show at least partial Doppler shift compensation. Pulse repetition rate corresponds closely with wingbeat frequency in QCF bat species that fly relatively slowly. Larger, fast-flying species often skip pulses when detecting distant targets. There is probably a trade-off between call intensity and repetition rate because ‘whispering’ bats (and hipposiderids) produce several calls per predicted wingbeat and because batches of calls are emitted per wingbeat during terminal buzzes. Severe atmospheric attenuation at high frequencies limits the range of high-frequency calls. Low-duty-cycle bats that call at high frequencies must therefore use short pulses to avoid pulse–echo overlap. Rhinolophids escape this constraint by Doppler shift compensation and, importantly, can exploit advantages associated with the emission of both high-frequency and long-duration calls. Low frequencies are unsuited for the detection of small prey, and low repetition rates may limit prey detection rates. Echolocation parameters may therefore constrain maximum body size in aerial-hawking bats.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1242/jeb.202.23.3359

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 43 references

Cited by

See all 257

Metadata

Authors
Jones, G.
Venue
Journal of Experimental Biology
Published
1999-12-01
Volume
202
Issue
23
Pages
3359-3367
ISSN
  • 0022-0949 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-9145
OpenAlex
W2155278800
Cited by
257
References
43
FWCI
5.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Scaling of echolocation call parameters in bats. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1242/jeb.202.23.3359
The paper
Jones, G. (1999). Scaling of echolocation call parameters in bats. Journal of Experimental Biology. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.202.23.3359

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.