Interpreting bat data viewed in Kaleidoscope (1 Viewer)

[ColinD]

Hi
Last night I went out to my local patch in Merseyside with an EM3 bat detector. There were bats everywhere, I thought Soprano and Common Pipistrell, Daubenton's and Noctule. I've downloaded the data collected and am in the process of analysing it. This is the first time I've used Kaleidoscope, and I wondered if anybody could take a look at the attached images and advise me how they would interpret them. It was a very busy night, with several bats flying at all times, some over the water, some around the trees.

The 3 images are all from the same .wav file. Kaleidoscope has automatically assigned ESPE (Serotine bat) to the file, but as you can see there was lots of other activity. So I can see on the first image PIPI.0 (Common Pipistrelle), RHHI.4 (Lesser Horseshoe!), MYsp.2 (Mytois species, Daubenton's??), BABA.3 (Western Barbastelle). On the second image NYLE.3 (Lesser Noctule), NYNO.3 (Common Noctule) and ESPE.0 (Serontine). I notice that ESPE is highlighted.
Finally, the third image is very busy with lots of overlap, but ESPE is highlighted again.

Is Kaleidoscope saying that Serotine is the strongest signal, and all of the others were present but not as strong? Does the number after each species indicate the likelyhood? e.g. ESPE.0 = almost definate Serontine, RHHI.4 = possible Lesser Horseshoe.

If it is saying that Serotine is the strongest signal, then presumably on a busy night, probably the only way to prove that Brown long-eared bat was present, would be to go through each file manually and look for PLAUR.0, because that species would drowned out on most occasions?

Thanks for any help

Colin

 

[llewodowells]

hi

Hi Colin

Ive used Kaleidoscope on alot of bat data over the summer and to be honest i didnt find it very accurate. I found it identified several bats wrongly and like you say only picked out the strongest signal, so although for example i had barbs, lhs and common pips in the one file, Kaleidoscope only picked out the common pip as it had the strongest call.

I wont be using Kaleidoscope to assess my bat data in the future until more work has been carried out on solving these issues.

I also dont see any horseshoes on your first image because this species echo locate at a higher frequency than you have showing in the pic.

 

[ColinD]

Thanks for the reply. Since I posted the original message I've used Kaleidoscope on several other occasions and have spoken to several experienced bat workers.

Whilst I like the idea of Kaleidoscope and hope that it does improve in the next few years, I have to say that I have very little faith in it at present. It's ok for pips, but I've seen and heard (on the heterodyne) lots of Noctules, only to find that Kaleidoscope tells me that only one has been recorded. Likewise, I see lots of Daubenton's feeding low over the water, even rippling the water on occasions, yet Kaleidoscope tells me that there was only one myotis sp. present. Yet on the same night it might tell me that there were 2 Serotines and a Barabastelle, both very rare (or even absent) species in my area!

I'm thinking of getting the new bat app for iPhone when it comes out (later this year). Hopefully that will take Kaleidoscope to a new level (a higher level I hope!).

 

[dantheman]

I think what you actually need is a collider-scope. A device which produces a thin web of microfilaments which break upon impact of a flying bat (the bat flies through unharmed), leaving a dark central void which can then be used to identify which bat species was involved in the collision.

eg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_WT8nMcBd9YQ/TCTxCip8d2I/AAAAAAAAAQE/BHSNDZeRq4Q/s200/batman+signal.jpg

or http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._1989_film.jpg/220px-Bat-signal_1989_film.jpg