Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26336176›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2015

Multimodal cues improve prey localization under complex environmental conditions.

F Rhebergen, R C Taylor, M J Ryan, R A Page, W Halfwerk

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. The effect of group size on sleep in a neotropical bat, Artibeus jamaicensis.Journal of experimental zoology. Part A, Ecological and integrative physiology · 2024
    Article
  4. The role of complex cues in social and reproductive plasticity.Behavioral ecology and sociobiology · 2018
    Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

F RhebergenBehavioral Biology, Institute of Biology (IBL), Leiden University, PO Box 9516, Leiden 2300 RA, The Netherlands.
R C TaylorDepartment of Biology, Salisbury University, Salisbury, MD 21801, USA Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Apartado 0843-03092 Balboa, Ancón, Republic of Panama.
M J RyanSmithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Apartado 0843-03092 Balboa, Ancón, Republic of Panama Department of Integrative Biology, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712, USA.
R A PageSmithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Apartado 0843-03092 Balboa, Ancón, Republic of Panama.
W HalfwerkSmithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Apartado 0843-03092 Balboa, Ancón, Republic of Panama Department of Integrative Biology, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712, USA halfwerkw@si.edu.
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute · PALeiden University · NLSalisbury University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Predators often eavesdrop on sexual displays of their prey. These displays can provide multimodal cues that aid predators, but the benefits in attending to them should depend on the environmental sensory conditions under which they forage. We assessed whether bats hunting for frogs use multimodal cues to locate their prey and whether their use varies with ambient conditions. We used a robotic set-up mimicking the sexual display of a male túngara frog (Physalaemus pustulosus) to test prey assessment by fringe-lipped bats (Trachops cirrhosus). These predatory bats primarily use sound of the frog's call to find their prey, but the bats also use echolocation cues returning from the frog's dynamically moving vocal sac. In the first experiment, we show that multimodal cues affect attack behaviour: bats made narrower flank attack angles on multimodal trials compared with unimodal trials during which they could only rely on the sound of the frog. In the second experiment, we explored the bat's use of prey cues in an acoustically more complex environment. Túngara frogs often form mixed-species choruses with other frogs, including the hourglass frog (Dendropsophus ebraccatus). Using a multi-speaker set-up, we tested bat approaches and attacks on the robofrog under three different levels of acoustic complexity: no calling D. ebraccatus males, two calling D. ebraccatus males and five D. ebraccatus males. We found that bats are more directional in their approach to the robofrog when more D. ebraccatus males were calling. Thus, bats seemed to benefit more from multimodal cues when confronted with increased levels of acoustic complexity in their foraging environments. Our data have important consequences for our understanding of the evolution of multimodal sexual displays as they reveal how environmental conditions can alter the natural selection pressures acting on them.

Indexed as

CuesVocalization, AnimalAnimalsAnuraChiropteraCourtshipEcholocationMaleMovementPredatory BehaviorSexual Behavior, Animaleavesdroppingenvironmental complexitylocalizationmixed-species chorusmultimodal communication

Identifiers

PMID26336176
PMCPMC4571703
OpenAlexW1251787328

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.