Skip to main content

Table 3 Sexual dimorphism in the CF in echolocation pulses of CF-FM bats

From: Sexual dimorphism in echolocation pulse parameters of the CF-FM bat, Hipposideros pratti

Species

Male

Female

Significances

Rhinolophidae

Rhinolophinae euryale

South Bulgaria (Siemers et al. 2005)

105.56 ± 0.43

106.63 ± 0.62

s

North Bulgaria (Siemers et al. 2005)

106.21 ± 0.84

105.83 ± 0.41

s

Italy (Russo et al. 2001)

104.32 ± 0.39

104.35 ± 0.33

n. s.

Rhinolophinae cornutus (Feng et al. 2003)

103.13 ± 1.95

106.71 ± 2.30

s

Rhinolophinae mehelyi (Russo et al. 2001)

108.10 ± 0.88

107.48 ± 0.94

n. s.

Hipposiderinae

Hipposideros rubber (Jones et al. 1993)

134.13 ± 1.84

131.85 ± 0.99

s

Hipposideros caffer (Jones et al. 1993)

138.83 ± 8.25

149.32 ± 4.35

s

Asellia tridens (Jones et al. 1993)

116.37 ± 1.42

118.77 ± 1.59

s

Hipposideros armiger (Feng et al. 2003)

77.52 ± 0.11

76.27 ± 0.78

s

Aselliscus wheeleri (Feng et al. 2003)

125.53 ± 0.22

123.33 ± 1.59

s

Hipposideros pratti (present study)

59.91 ± 0.43

59.28 ± 0.56

s

Mormoopidae

Pteronotus parnellii (Suga et al. 1987)

61.25 ± 0.534

62.29 ± 0.539

s

  1. Data displayed in the table are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation. Recording condition of the bat was hand-held (Jones et al. 1993; Russo et al. 2001; Siemers et al. 2005), flying (Feng et al. 2003), or sedentary (Suga et al. 1987; present study)
  2. s significant difference, n. s. not significant difference