1
|
Anderson NK, Preininger D, Fuxjager MJ. Physiological Basis of Convergent Evolution in Animal Communication Systems. Integr Comp Biol 2024; 64:1422-1436. [PMID: 38942486 DOI: 10.1093/icb/icae091] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2024] [Revised: 05/29/2024] [Accepted: 06/20/2024] [Indexed: 06/30/2024] Open
Abstract
To humans, the diverse array of display behaviors that animals use for communication can easily seem peculiar or bizarre. While ample research delves into the evolutionary principles that shape these signals' effectiveness, little attention is paid to evolutionary patterning of signal design across taxa, particularly when it comes to the potential convergent evolution of many elaborate behavioral displays. By taking a mechanistic perspective, we explore the physiological and neurobiological mechanisms that likely influence the evolution of communication signals, emphasizing the utilization of pre-existing structures over novel adaptations. Central to this investigation are the concepts of perceptual bias and ritualization that we propose contribute to the convergence of elaborate display designs across species. Perceptual bias explains a phenomenon where pre-existing perceptual systems of receivers, used for innate behaviors such as food and predator recognition, select for certain traits of a communication signal from a signaler. Ritualization occurs when traits with no functional role in communication are co-opted through selection and transformed into a new communicative signal. Importantly, susceptibility for ritualization can be brought about through physiological modifications that occurred early in evolutionary time. In this way, perceptual bias can be a selective force that causes the co-option of non-communicative traits into a new communication signal through ritualization involving pre-existing modifications to physiological systems. If the perceptual bias, non-communicative signal, and physiological modifications that increase susceptibility to ritualization are highly conserved, then we may see the convergent evolution of the new communication signal with unrelated taxa facing similar sensory constraints. We explore this idea here using the foot-flagging frog system as a theoretical case study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nigel K Anderson
- Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Organismal Biology, Brown University, Providence, RI 02912, United States of America
| | - Doris Preininger
- Vienna Zoo, Vienna 1130, Austria
- Department of Evolutionary Biology, University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria
| | - Matthew J Fuxjager
- Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Organismal Biology, Brown University, Providence, RI 02912, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Gough HM, Rubin JJ, Kawahara AY, Barber JR. Tiger beetles produce anti-bat ultrasound and are probable Batesian moth mimics. Biol Lett 2024; 20:20230610. [PMID: 38747686 PMCID: PMC11285850 DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2023.0610] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/10/2024] [Revised: 02/23/2024] [Accepted: 03/01/2024] [Indexed: 07/31/2024] Open
Abstract
Echolocating bats and their eared insect prey are in an acoustic evolutionary war. Moths produce anti-bat sounds that startle bat predators, signal noxiousness, mimic unpalatable models and jam bat sonar. Tiger beetles (Cicindelidae) also purportedly produce ultrasound in response to bat attacks. Here we tested 19 tiger beetle species from seven genera and showed that they produce anti-bat signals to playback of authentic bat echolocation. The dominant frequency of beetle sounds substantially overlaps the sonar calls of sympatric bats. As tiger beetles are known to produce defensive chemicals such as benzaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide, we hypothesized that tiger beetle sounds are acoustically advertising their unpalatability. We presented captive big brown bats (Eptesicus fuscus) with seven different tiger beetle species and found that 90 out of 94 beetles were completely consumed, indicating that these tiger beetle species are not aposematically signalling. Instead, we show that the primary temporal and spectral characteristics of beetle warning sounds overlap with sympatric unpalatable tiger moth (Arctinae) sounds and that tiger beetles are probably Batesian mimics of noxious moth models. We predict that many insect taxa produce anti-bat sounds and that the acoustic mimicry rings of the night sky are hyperdiverse.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harlan M. Gough
- McGuire Center for Lepidoptera and Biodiversity, Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL32611, USA
- Department of Biology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL32611, USA
| | - Juliette J. Rubin
- McGuire Center for Lepidoptera and Biodiversity, Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL32611, USA
- Department of Biology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL32611, USA
| | - Akito Y. Kawahara
- McGuire Center for Lepidoptera and Biodiversity, Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL32611, USA
| | - Jesse R. Barber
- McGuire Center for Lepidoptera and Biodiversity, Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL32611, USA
- Department of Biological Sciences, Boise State University, Boise, ID83725, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Drinkwater E, Allen WL, Endler JA, Hanlon RT, Holmes G, Homziak NT, Kang C, Leavell BC, Lehtonen J, Loeffler‐Henry K, Ratcliffe JM, Rowe C, Ruxton GD, Sherratt TN, Skelhorn J, Skojec C, Smart HR, White TE, Yack JE, Young CM, Umbers KDL. A synthesis of deimatic behaviour. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 2022; 97:2237-2267. [DOI: 10.1111/brv.12891] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/29/2021] [Revised: 07/17/2022] [Accepted: 07/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Eleanor Drinkwater
- Department of Animal Science Writtle University College Writtle Chelmsford CM1 3RR UK
| | - William L. Allen
- Department of Biosciences Swansea University Sketty Swansea SA2 8PP UK
| | - John A. Endler
- Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life & Environmental Sciences Deakin University Waurn Ponds VIC 3216 Australia
| | | | - Grace Holmes
- Biosciences Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences Newcastle University Newcastle upon Tyne NE2 4HH UK
| | - Nicholas T. Homziak
- McGuire Center for Lepidoptera and Biodiversity, Florida Museum of Natural History University of Florida Gainesville FL 32611 USA
- Entomology and Nematology Department University of Florida Gainesville FL 32611 USA
| | - Changku Kang
- Department of Biosciences Mokpo National University Muan Jeollanamdo 58554 South Korea
- Department of Agricultural Biotechnology Seoul National University Seoul 08826 South Korea
- Department of Agriculture and Life Sciences Seoul National University Seoul 08826 South Korea
| | - Brian C. Leavell
- Department of Biological Sciences Purdue University West Lafayette IN 47907 USA
| | - Jussi Lehtonen
- Faculty of Science, School of Life and Environmental Sciences The University of Sydney Sydney NSW 2006 Australia
- Department of Biological and Environmental Science University of Jyväskylä Jyväskylä 40014 Finland
| | | | - John M. Ratcliffe
- Department of Biology University of Toronto Mississauga Mississauga ON L5L 1C6 Canada
| | - Candy Rowe
- Biosciences Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences Newcastle University Newcastle upon Tyne NE2 4HH UK
| | - Graeme D. Ruxton
- School of Biology University of St Andrews St Andrews Fife KY16 9TH UK
| | - Tom N. Sherratt
- Department of Biology Carleton University Ottawa ON K1S 5B6 Canada
| | - John Skelhorn
- Biosciences Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences Newcastle University Newcastle upon Tyne NE2 4HH UK
| | - Chelsea Skojec
- McGuire Center for Lepidoptera and Biodiversity, Florida Museum of Natural History University of Florida Gainesville FL 32611 USA
- Entomology and Nematology Department University of Florida Gainesville FL 32611 USA
| | - Hannah R. Smart
- Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment Western Sydney University Penrith NSW 2751 Australia
| | - Thomas E. White
- Faculty of Science, School of Life and Environmental Sciences The University of Sydney Sydney NSW 2006 Australia
| | - Jayne E. Yack
- Department of Biology Carleton University Ottawa ON K1S 5B6 Canada
| | | | - Kate D. L. Umbers
- Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment Western Sydney University Penrith NSW 2751 Australia
- School of Science Western Sydney University Penrith NSW 2751 Australia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Anti-bat ultrasound production in moths is globally and phylogenetically widespread. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2022; 119:e2117485119. [PMID: 35704762 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2117485119] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Warning signals are well known in the visual system, but rare in other modalities. Some moths produce ultrasonic sounds to warn bats of noxious taste or to mimic unpalatable models. Here, we report results from a long-term study across the globe, assaying moth response to playback of bat echolocation. We tested 252 genera, spanning most families of large-bodied moths, and document anti-bat ultrasound production in 52 genera, with eight subfamily origins described. Based on acoustic analysis of ultrasonic emissions and palatability experiments with bats, it seems that acoustic warning and mimicry are the raison d'être for sound production in most moths. However, some moths use high-duty-cycle ultrasound capable of jamming bat sonar. In fact, we find preliminary evidence of independent origins of sonar jamming in at least six subfamilies. Palatability data indicate that jamming and warning are not mutually exclusive strategies. To explore the possible organization of anti-bat warning sounds into acoustic mimicry rings, we intensively studied a community of moths in Ecuador and, using machine-learning approaches, found five distinct acoustic clusters. While these data represent an early understanding of acoustic aposematism and mimicry across this megadiverse insect order, it is likely that ultrasonically signaling moths comprise one of the largest mimicry complexes on earth.
Collapse
|
5
|
Rubin JJ. Darwin’s Hawkmoth (
Xanthopan praedicta
) responds to bat ultrasound at sonar‐jamming rates. Biotropica 2022. [DOI: 10.1111/btp.13093] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Juliette J. Rubin
- Department of Biology University of Florida Gainesville Florida USA
- McGuire Center for Lepidoptera and Biodiversity Florida Museum of Natural History University of Florida Gainesville Florida USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Anderson NK, Schuppe ER, Gururaja KV, Mangiamele LA, Martinez JCC, Priti H, May RV, Preininger D, Fuxjager MJ. A Common Endocrine Signature Marks the Convergent Evolution of an Elaborate Dance Display in Frogs. Am Nat 2021; 198:522-539. [PMID: 34559606 DOI: 10.1086/716213] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
AbstractUnrelated species often evolve similar phenotypic solutions to the same environmental problem, a phenomenon known as convergent evolution. But how do these common traits arise? We address this question from a physiological perspective by assessing how convergence of an elaborate gestural display in frogs (foot-flagging) is linked to changes in the androgenic hormone systems that underlie it. We show that the emergence of this rare display in unrelated anuran taxa is marked by a robust increase in the expression of androgen receptor (AR) messenger RNA in the musculature that actuates leg and foot movements, but we find no evidence of changes in the abundance of AR expression in these frogs' central nervous systems. Meanwhile, the magnitude of the evolutionary change in muscular AR and its association with the origin of foot-flagging differ among clades, suggesting that these variables evolve together in a mosaic fashion. Finally, while gestural displays do differ between species, variation in the complexity of a foot-flagging routine does not predict differences in muscular AR. Altogether, these findings suggest that androgen-muscle interactions provide a conduit for convergence in sexual display behavior, potentially providing a path of least resistance for the evolution of motor performance.
Collapse
|
7
|
O’Reilly LJ, Harris BJ, Agassiz DJL, Holderied MW. Convergent Evolution of Wingbeat-Powered Anti-Bat Ultrasound in the Microlepidoptera. Front Ecol Evol 2021. [DOI: 10.3389/fevo.2021.648223] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Bats and moths provide a textbook example of predator-prey evolutionary arms races, demonstrating adaptations, and counter adaptations on both sides. The evolutionary responses of moths to the biosonar-led hunting strategies of insectivorous bats include convergently evolved hearing structures tuned to detect bat echolocation frequencies. These allow many moths to detect hunting bats and manoeuvre to safety, or in the case of some taxa, respond by emitting sounds which startle bats, jam their biosonar, and/or warn them of distastefulness. Until now, research has focused on the larger macrolepidoptera, but the recent discovery of wingbeat-powered anti-bat sounds in a genus of deaf microlepidoptera (Yponomeuta), suggests that the speciose but understudied microlepidoptera possess further and more widespread anti-bat defences. Here we demonstrate that wingbeat-powered ultrasound production, likely providing an anti-bat function, appears to indeed be spread widely in the microlepidoptera; showing that acoustically active structures (aeroelastic tymbals, ATs) have evolved in at least three, and likely four different regions of the wing. Two of these tymbals are found in multiple microlepidopteran superfamilies, and remarkably, three were found in a single subfamily. We document and characterise sound production from four microlepidopteran taxa previously considered silent. Our findings demonstrate that the microlepidoptera contribute their own unwritten chapters to the textbook bat-moth coevolutionary arms race.
Collapse
|
8
|
Krivoruchko K, Goldshtein A, Boonman A, Eitan O, Ben-Simon J, Thong VD, Yovel Y. Fireflies produce ultrasonic clicks during flight as a potential aposematic anti-bat signal. iScience 2021; 24:102194. [PMID: 33733061 PMCID: PMC7937554 DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2021.102194] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2020] [Revised: 11/29/2020] [Accepted: 02/10/2021] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Fireflies are known for emitting light signals for intraspecific communication. However, in doing so, they reveal themselves to many potential nocturnal predators from a large distance. Therefore, many fireflies evolved unpalatable compounds and probably use their light signals as anti-predator aposematic signals. Fireflies are occasionally attacked by predators despite their warning flashes. Bats are among the most substantial potential firefly predators. Using their echolocation, bats might detect a firefly from a short distance and attack it in between two flashes. We thus aimed to examine whether fireflies use additional measures of warning, specifically focusing on sound signals. We recorded four species from different genera of fireflies in Vietnam and Israel and found that all of them generated ultrasonic clicks centered around bats' hearing range. Clicks were synchronized with the wingbeat and are probably produced by the wings. We hypothesize that ultrasonic clicks can serve as part of a multimodal aposematic display.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ksenia Krivoruchko
- Department of Neuroscience, Rappaport Research Institute and Faculty of Medicine, Technion, Haifa, Israel
| | - Aya Goldshtein
- School of Zoology, Faculty of Life sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Arjan Boonman
- School of Zoology, Faculty of Life sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Ofri Eitan
- School of Zoology, Faculty of Life sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Jonathan Ben-Simon
- School of Zoology, Faculty of Life sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Vu Dinh Thong
- Institute of Ecology and Biological Resources, VAST, Cầu Giấy, Hà Nội, Vietnam
- Graduate University of Science and Technology, VAST, Cầu Giấy, Hà Nội, Vietnam
| | - Yossi Yovel
- School of Zoology, Faculty of Life sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
- Sagol School of Neuroscience, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Low ML, Naranjo M, Yack JE. Survival Sounds in Insects: Diversity, Function, and Evolution. Front Ecol Evol 2021. [DOI: 10.3389/fevo.2021.641740] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Insect defense sounds have been reported for centuries. Yet, aside from the well-studied anti-bat sounds of tiger moths, little is understood about the occurrence, function, and evolution of these sounds. We define a defense sound as an acoustic signal (air- or solid-borne vibration) produced in response to attack or threat of attack by a predator or parasitoid and that promotes survival. Defense sounds have been described in 12 insect orders, across different developmental stages, and between sexes. The mechanisms of defensive sound production include stridulation, percussion, tymbalation, tremulation, and forced air. Signal characteristics vary between species, and we discuss how morphology, the intended receiver, and specific functions of the sounds could explain this variation. Sounds can be directed at predators or non-predators, and proposed functions include startle, aposematism, jamming, and alarm, although experimental evidence for these hypotheses remains scant for many insects. The evolutionary origins of defense sounds in insects have not been rigorously investigated using phylogenetic methodology, but in most cases it is hypothesized that they evolved from incidental sounds associated with non-signaling behaviors such as flight or ventilatory movements. Compared to our understanding of visual defenses in insects, sonic defenses are poorly understood. We recommend that future investigations focus on testing hypotheses explaining the functions and evolution of these survival sounds using predator-prey experiments and comparative phylogenetics.
Collapse
|
10
|
Dowdy NJ, Conner WE. Characteristics of tiger moth (Erebidae: Arctiinae) anti-bat sounds can be predicted from tymbal morphology. Front Zool 2019; 16:45. [PMID: 31827571 PMCID: PMC6902478 DOI: 10.1186/s12983-019-0345-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/25/2019] [Accepted: 11/29/2019] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Acoustic signals are used by many animals to transmit information. Variation in the acoustic characteristics of these signals often covaries with morphology and can relay information about an individual's fitness, sex, species, and/or other characteristics important for both mating and defense. Tiger moths (Lepidoptera: Erebidae: Arctiinae) use modified cuticular plates called "tymbal organs" to produce ultrasonic clicks which can aposematically signal their toxicity, mimic the signals of other species, or, in some cases, disrupt bat echolocation. The morphology of the tymbal organs and the sounds they produce vary greatly between species, but it is unclear how the variation in morphology gives rise to the variation in acoustic characteristics. This is the first study to determine how the morphological features of tymbals can predict the acoustic characteristics of the signals they produce. RESULTS We show that the number of striations on the tymbal surface (historically known as "microtymbals") and, to a lesser extent, the ratio of the projected surface area of the tymbal to that of the thorax have a strong, positive correlation with the number of clicks a moth produces per unit time. We also found that some clades have significantly different regression coefficients, and thus the relationship between microtymbals and click rate is also dependent on the shared ancestry of different species. CONCLUSIONS Our predictive model allows the click rates of moths to be estimated using preserved material (e.g., from museums) in cases where live specimens are unavailable. This has the potential to greatly accelerate our understanding of the distribution of sound production and acoustic anti-bat strategies employed by tiger moths. Such knowledge will generate new insights into the evolutionary history of tiger moth anti-predator defenses on a global scale.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicolas J. Dowdy
- Department of Biology, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina USA
- Invertebrate Zoology, Milwaukee Public Museum, 800 W. Wells Street, Milwaukee, WI USA
| | - William E. Conner
- Department of Biology, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
O'Reilly LJ, Agassiz DJL, Neil TR, Holderied MW. Deaf moths employ acoustic Müllerian mimicry against bats using wingbeat-powered tymbals. Sci Rep 2019; 9:1444. [PMID: 30723216 PMCID: PMC6363749 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-37812-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/10/2018] [Accepted: 11/19/2018] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
Emitting ultrasound upon hearing an attacking bat is an effective defence strategy used by several moth taxa. Here we reveal how Yponomeuta moths acquire sophisticated acoustic protection despite being deaf themselves and hence unable to respond to bat attacks. Instead, flying Yponomeuta produce bursts of ultrasonic clicks perpetually; a striated patch in their hind wing clicks as the beating wing rotates and bends. This wing structure is strikingly similar to the thorax tymbals with which arctiine moths produce their anti-bat sounds. And indeed, Yponomeuta sounds closely mimic such arctiine signals, revealing convergence in form and function. Because both moth taxa contain noxious compounds, we conclude they are mutual Müllerian acoustic mimics. Yponomeuta's perpetual clicking would however also attract bat predators. In response, their click amplitude is reduced and affords acoustic protection just as far as required, matching the distance over which bat biosonar would pick up Yponomeuta echoes anyway - advanced acoustic defences for a deaf moth.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Liam J O'Reilly
- School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - David J L Agassiz
- Department of Life Sciences, Insect Division, Natural History Museum, London, UK
| | - Thomas R Neil
- School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Marc W Holderied
- School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Abstract
The wings of moths and butterflies are densely covered in scales that exhibit intricate shapes and sculptured nanostructures. While certain butterfly scales create nanoscale photonic effects, moth scales show different nanostructures suggesting different functionality. Here we investigate moth-scale vibrodynamics to understand their role in creating acoustic camouflage against bat echolocation, where scales on wings provide ultrasound absorber functionality. For this, individual scales can be considered as building blocks with adapted biomechanical properties at ultrasonic frequencies. The 3D nanostructure of a full Bunaea alcinoe moth forewing scale was characterized using confocal microscopy. Structurally, this scale is double layered and endowed with different perforation rates on the upper and lower laminae, which are interconnected by trabeculae pillars. From these observations a parameterized model of the scale's nanostructure was formed and its effective elastic stiffness matrix extracted. Macroscale numerical modeling of scale vibrodynamics showed close qualitative and quantitative agreement with scanning laser Doppler vibrometry measurement of this scale's oscillations, suggesting that the governing biomechanics have been captured accurately. Importantly, this scale of B. alcinoe exhibits its first three resonances in the typical echolocation frequency range of bats, suggesting it has evolved as a resonant absorber. Damping coefficients of the moth-scale resonator and ultrasonic absorption of a scaled wing were estimated using numerical modeling. The calculated absorption coefficient of 0.50 agrees with the published maximum acoustic effect of wing scaling. Understanding scale vibroacoustic behavior helps create macroscopic structures with the capacity for broadband acoustic camouflage.
Collapse
|
13
|
Early erratic flight response of the lucerne moth to the quiet echolocation calls of distant bats. PLoS One 2018; 13:e0202679. [PMID: 30125318 PMCID: PMC6101402 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202679] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/20/2018] [Accepted: 08/07/2018] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Nocturnal insects have evolved ultrasound-sensitive hearing in response to predation pressures from echolocating insectivorous bats. Flying tympanate moths take various evasive actions when they detect bat cries, including turning away, performing a steering/zigzagging flight and ceasing flight. In general, infrequent ultrasonic pulses with low sound intensities that are emitted by distant bats evoke slight turns, whereas frequent and loud ultrasonic pulses of nearby bats evoke erratic or rapid unpredictable changes in the flight path of a moth. Flight cessation, which is a freezing response that causes the moth to passively dive (drop) to the ground, is considered the ultimate last-ditch evasive behaviour against approaching bats where there is a high predation threat. Here, we found that the crambid moth Nomophila nearctica never performed passive dives in response to frequent and loud ultrasonic pulses of >60 dB sound pressure level (SPL) that simulated the attacking echolocation call sequence of the predominant sympatric insectivorous bat Eptesicus fuscus, but rather turned away or flew erratically, regardless of the temporal structure of the stimulus. Consequently, N. nearctica is likely to survive predation by bats by taking early evasive action even when it detects the echolocation calls of sympatric bats hunting other insects at a distance. Since aerially hawking bats can track and catch erratically flying moths after targeting their prey, this early escape strategy may be common among night-flying tympanate insects.
Collapse
|
14
|
Corcoran AJ, Moss CF. Sensing in a noisy world: lessons from auditory specialists, echolocating bats. J Exp Biol 2017; 220:4554-4566. [DOI: 10.1242/jeb.163063] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
ABSTRACT
All animals face the essential task of extracting biologically meaningful sensory information from the ‘noisy’ backdrop of their environments. Here, we examine mechanisms used by echolocating bats to localize objects, track small prey and communicate in complex and noisy acoustic environments. Bats actively control and coordinate both the emission and reception of sound stimuli through integrated sensory and motor mechanisms that have evolved together over tens of millions of years. We discuss how bats behave in different ecological scenarios, including detecting and discriminating target echoes from background objects, minimizing acoustic interference from competing conspecifics and overcoming insect noise. Bats tackle these problems by deploying a remarkable array of auditory behaviors, sometimes in combination with the use of other senses. Behavioral strategies such as ceasing sonar call production and active jamming of the signals of competitors provide further insight into the capabilities and limitations of echolocation. We relate these findings to the broader topic of how animals extract relevant sensory information in noisy environments. While bats have highly refined abilities for operating under noisy conditions, they face the same challenges encountered by many other species. We propose that the specialized sensory mechanisms identified in bats are likely to occur in analogous systems across the animal kingdom.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aaron J. Corcoran
- Department of Biology, Wake Forest University, Box 7325 Reynolda Station, Winston-Salem, NC 27109, USA
| | - Cynthia F. Moss
- Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, 3400 N. Charles Street, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Nakano R, Mason AC. Hearing sensitivity is more relevant to acoustic conspicuousness than to mechanical constraints in crambid moths. Biol J Linn Soc Lond 2017. [DOI: 10.1093/biolinnean/blw029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
|
16
|
|
17
|
Nakano R, Takanashi T, Surlykke A. Moth hearing and sound communication. J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol 2014; 201:111-21. [DOI: 10.1007/s00359-014-0945-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/17/2014] [Revised: 09/13/2014] [Accepted: 09/15/2014] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
|