New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

For Bats, Navigation Is a Problem of Statistics


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Bats, along with other animals that employ echolocation, rely on their ears more than their eyes for orientation and navigation. The creatures send out signals and then listen to the echo bouncing off an item. But just how the animals analyzed a spate of echoes coming off the same object, such as a leafy tree, has eluded scientists. New research suggests that bats are skilled statisticians. They appear to perform a type of statistical analysis on the sum of all the acoustical reflections in order to make sense of their complex surroundings.

When sonar emissions encounter an object, they form a characteristic signal that scientists call an impulse response (IR), which is essentially an acoustical picture. Simpler items result in straightforward IRs, whereas complex surfaces, such as foliage, lead to more chaotic ones. Lutz Wiegrebe of the Ludwig-Maximilians University in Munich and his colleagues tested the ability of lesser spear-nosed bats, Phyllostomus discolor (see image), to respond to computer-generated IRs for a variety of phantom objects. To do this, the researchers tweaked a statistical property known as roughness, which describes the amount of variation within the signal, and analyzed the bats¿ reactions.

They determined that bats can wade through some 4,000 reflected sonic emissions and distinguish among a variety of natural textures¿a conifer is smoother than a broad-leafed tree, for example¿without having to memorize specific reflection patterns. This ability to pick out particular trees has a notable benefit for P. discolor, which feeds on fruit, nectar, pollen and insects. The findings appear in a report published online this week by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe