Does Rhinolophus mehelyi, the species that calls "too high" for its body size, compensate for the detection range loss by using especially high call intensities?
Note: Rm, the species that calls "too high" for its body size, does clearly not compensate for frequency-dependent loss in detection distance by using especially high call intensities.
Females of many species often show a preference for call properties that involve higher energy expenditure, with males with faster call rates, higher call intensities and low frequencies calls having greater mating success [4], [5], [6], [7].
Rh females had higher call intensities (p = 0.048; mean difference 8 dB) and also used on average 3 kHz higher call frequencies (t-test, p = 0.035) than Rh males.
Whether the higher call intensities in Rh females play a role for communication or serve to (over) compensate the range loss resulting from the higher female call frequency (compare [70]) clearly deserves further study.
In the case of echolocating bats, small or low condition individuals might increase foraging efficiency by using higher echolocation call intensities than conspecifics in better condition.
We found that call intensity was higher in R. capensis flying alone, when compared to when flying in conspecific pairs.
Still, the smallest cities were characterized by a noticeably higher call-kilometer intensity than demographically larger quantiles (Q2 to Q4).
Our measurements of peak call intensity were all obtained from the highest pitched expirations of the call climax, demonstrating that intensity and frequency are correlated in the great call, and likely interdependent.
To get a measure of intra-individuals variation in call intensity we selected the six call sequences with the highest intensity calls from all call sequences per animal.
