Search bioRxiv⌕ Search

bioRxiv · 10.1101/2024.10.16.618711

Why do bats fly into cave doors? Inattentional blindness in echolocating animals

Abstract

Echolocating bats can navigate complex 3D environments by integrating prior knowledge of spatial layouts and real-time sensory cues. This study demonstrates that inattentional blindness to sensory information undermines successful navigation in Egyptian fruit bats, Rousettus aegyptiacus, a species that has access to vision and echolocation to traverse natural environments. Bats flew over repeated trials to a perch at a fixed location in the light, allowing them to navigate using both vision and echolocation. The experiment was then repeated in the dark to exclude the bats use of vision. The perch was subsequently displaced by either 15 or 30 cm in one of six different directions (up, down, left, right, front, back). Echolocation behavior was recorded using a 25-channel microphone array, while flight paths were tracked using 13 motion capture cameras. The directional aim of echolocation clicks served as a metric for the bats spatial attention to locations in their environment. In the light, bats modified their flight paths to successfully land on a perch that was moved 15 cm but surprisingly, often failed to land on it when displaced by 30 cm. In the dark, bats often failed to land on the perch after it was moved by only 15 cm. Landing failures suggest that learned spatial priors invoked inattentional blindness to changes in the environment, which interfered with successful navigation. In both the light and dark, when bats failed to land on the perch at its new location, they directed their attention toward the original perch position. Performance differences in the light and dark suggest that the bats attentional spotlight may be narrower when it relies on echolocation than vision. To our knowledge, these findings provide the first evidence of inattentional blindness in a flying echolocating animal, demonstrating that spatial priors can dominate sensory processing during navigation.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Finger, N. M., Eveland, K. E., Yin, X., Moss, C. F.. 2024-10-18. Why do bats fly into cave doors? Inattentional blindness in echolocating animals. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.10.16.618711

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

Deconstructing Boldness: Latent behavioural structure across novelty, predation, and exploration in an endangered species translocation program

Risk-related behaviours including neophobia, exploration, and predator avoidance are often assumed to covary along a general boldness axis. Although some translocation studies have linked one or more of these behaviours with fitness, it is possible that the underlying behavioural structure varies under different selective environments. Conservation breeding programs provide a unique opportunity to evaluate the structure of behavioural correlations in a non-domestic species under artificial conditions. We tested whether risk-related behaviours represent a unified boldness syndrome in a captive population of the endangered Attwaters prairie chicken (APC; Tympanuchus cupido attwateri). We quantified the repeatable behaviours of 257 juveniles and compared 11 models of behavioural covariation structure using multivariate mixed models and confirmatory factor analysis. There was no support for a single risk-taking axis; instead, we found three dimensions representing responses to novelty and environmental stimuli (Engagement), predator avoidance (Threat Response), and maze exploration (Maze Progression). Our results indicate that these risk-related behaviours are not organized along a single axis in captive APCs, challenging assumptions that risk-taking represents a universal behavioural syndrome. To anticipate post-release success accurately, conservation managers should understand the exact behavioural architecture of the captive population rather than assume that the classical bold-shy structure occurs in all contexts.

animal behavior and cognition↗

Social costs of group life: Larger groups have less affiliative behavior and more social conflict

The costs and benefits of sociality depend in part upon the size of groups. Therefore, individual behavior should vary across groups of different sizes, reflecting group size-dependent costs and benefits. Here, we test this prediction using a long-term dataset on wild female baboons (Papio cynocephalus x P. anubis). We find that individuals who live in larger groups suffer social costs: compared to animals in smaller groups, they experience more agonistic interactions, fewer grooming interactions, and sparser social networks. These social costs arise, in part, from a pattern in which relationships within dyads become more agonistic as group size increases (i.e., a given dyad exhibits fewer grooming interactions relative to agonistic interactions when it is living in a larger group). While individuals in large groups generally maintain the same number of strong bonds as individuals in small groups, they tend to develop weak bonds with a greater number of social partners that results in, on average, weaker bonds overall. Our results demonstrate that, despite potential benefits to large groups in terms of predation risk and intergroup competition, the social lives of individuals in larger groups involve less affiliation and more conflict in this wild primate population.

animal behavior and cognition↗

Shared brain transcriptome signatures of social evolution and plasticity in shell-dwelling cichlid fishes

Inter-individual variability in phenotypic traits is widespread in nature both across and within species, with similar patterns of variation often occurring between and within species. Given that these two types of variation are generated by evolutionary and plasticity processes respectively, it raises the question to what extent the causal mechanisms underlying such variability at these two different levels are shared or not. To address this question, we studied the variation in brain transcriptomes in Tanganyikan cichlids that exhibit both intra- and interspecific variation in social behavior. We compared two facultatively social cichlid species, each containing naturally occurring solitary and social-living individuals, with a closely related obligatory solitary resembling the ancestral state. Differential gene expression and Gene Set Enrichment Analyses were performed in the telencephalon and diencephalon transcriptomes to investigate the molecular basis of both behavioral plasticity and the evolution of sociality. Behavioral plasticity involved few differentially expressed genes but extensive changes in biological pathways, supporting a highly polygenic architecture of social behavior. Across both species, social-living individuals consistently upregulated pathways involved in translation, protein homeostasis, and energy metabolism, whereas solitary individuals showed enrichment of neuronal morphogenesis, cell adhesion, and structural plasticity. Remarkably, these same functional programs were associated with the independent evolution of sociality, revealing a strong overlap between evolutionary and plastic transcriptional responses. This convergence was largely restricted to the telencephalon, while the diencephalon showed limited and inconsistent functional signatures. Together, our results support the repeated recruitment of gene regulatory programs during the evolution of sociality and demonstrate that behavioral plasticity and evolutionary transitions share common neurogenomic responses, consistent with a conserved genetic toolkit for social behavior.

animal behavior and cognition↗