ArticleScientific reports2018
Recording animal vocalizations from a UAV: bat echolocation during roost re-entry.
Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Opportunities and challenges for monitoring terrestrial biodiversity in the robotics age.Nature ecology & evolution · 2025Article
- How swarming bats can use the collective soundscape for obstacle avoidance.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Acoustic monitoring with miniature drones shows reduced Myotis bat occurrence with altitude and drone movement.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- callsync: An R package for alignment and analysis of multi-microphone animal recordings.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Drone exploration of bat echolocation: A UAV-borne multimicrophone array to study bat echolocation.Ecology and evolution · 2022Article
- Possibilities of Using UAVs in Pre-Hospital Security for Medical Emergencies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
- Fewer bat passes are detected during small, commercial drone flights.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Remotely Piloted Aircraft System (RPAS)-Based Wildlife Detection: A Review and Case Studies in Maritime Antarctica.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) are rising in popularity for wildlife monitoring, but direct recordings of animal vocalizations have not yet been accomplished, likely due to the noise generated by the UAV. Echolocating bats, especially Tadarida brasiliensis, are good candidates for UAV recording due to their high-speed, high-altitude flight. Here, we use a UAV to record the signals of bats during morning roost re-entry. We designed a UAV to block the noise of the propellers from the receiving microphone, and report on the characteristics of bioacoustic recordings from a UAV. We report the first published characteristics of echolocation signals from bats during group flight and cave re-entry. We found changes in inter-individual time-frequency shape, suggesting that bats may use differences in call design when sensing in complex groups. Furthermore, our first documented successful recordings of animals in their natural habitat demonstrate that UAVs can be important tools for bioacoustic monitoring, and we discuss the ethical considerations for such monitoring.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.