ArticleBMC biology2020
Echolocating bats can adjust sensory acquisition based on internal cues.
Article in BMC biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Greater mouse-tailed bats use their tail as a tactile sensor when navigating backwards.iScience · 2025Article
- What determines the information update rate in echolocating bats.Communications biology · 2023Article
- By a whisker: the sensory role of vibrissae in hovering flight in nectarivorous bats.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
- Sensory error drives fine motor adjustment.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- Doppler shift compensation performance inFrontiers in systems neuroscience · 2022Article
- Hearing, echolocation, and beam steering from day 0 in tongue-clicking bats.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSensory systems acquire both external and internal information to guide behavior. Adjustments based on external input are much better documented and understood than internal-based sensory adaptations. When external input is not available, idiothetic-internal-cues become crucial for guiding behavior. Here, we take advantage of the rapid sensory adjustments exhibited by bats in order to study how animals rely on internal cues in the absence of external input. Constant frequency echolocating bats are renowned for their Doppler shift compensation response used to adjust their emission frequency in order to optimize sensing. Previous studies documented the importance of external echoes for this response.
resultsWe show that the Doppler compensation system works even without external feedback. Bats experiencing accelerations in an echo-free environment exhibited an intact compensation response. Moreover, using on-board GPS tags on free-flying bats in the wild, we demonstrate that the ability to perform Doppler shift compensation response based on internal cues might be essential in real-life when echo feedback is not available.
conclusionsWe thus show an ecological need for using internal cues as well as an ability to do so. Our results illustrate the robustness of one particular sensory behavior; however, we suggest this ability to rely on different streams of information (i.e., internal or external) is probably relevant for many sensory behaviors.
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.