The tuning of moth ears

Fullard, James H.

doi:10.1007/bf01940537

Cited by 75 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Regardless of the number of auditory afferents in different moth taxa, each afferent has the same frequency tuning as the others, meaning that moths are not capable of frequency discrimination (Fullard, 1988(Fullard, , 1998. Each afferent, however, has different sound level thresholds ( Fig.…”

Section: Substrate Gleaningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, bat avoidance is the sole function of ears in most moth species (Fullard, 1988), and sound-triggered evasive flight provides a survival advantage for moths under attack by bats (Roeder and Treat, 1962;Acharya and Fenton, 1999;Fullard, 2001). Other uses, such as detecting insect-eating birds or intraspecific communication, are likely to be derived (Conner, 1999;Jacobs et al, 2008;Fournier et al, 2013).…”

Section: Substrate Gleaningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Second, the relative insensitivity of moth ears suggests that they are adapted to detecting high-intensity ultrasound sources, such as bat calls (Waters and Jones, 1995;Holderied and von Helversen, 2003;Holderied et al, 2005;Surlykke and Kalko, 2008), rather than faint ambient sounds like crackling vegetation (Fullard, 1988). Third, moth ears are typically tuned to the frequencies of echolocation calls used by their sympatric bat community and not to other environmental sources of sound (Fullard, 1988(Fullard, , 1998. The auditory receptors also quickly exhibit sensory adaptation to constant sound, but remain sensitive to pulsed sounds like bat calls .…”

Section: Substrate Gleaningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regardless, we must consider the costs that select against ever more sensitive high-frequency hearing. For a moth, reacting to nonthreatening environmental sources of ultrasound, like crackling vegetation (Fullard, 1988) or bats that are too far away to be a viable threat, could result in missed mating or feeding opportunities, or even more dire consequences, such as being exposed to non-aerial predators as a result of evasive diving (Guignion and Fullard, 2004). In addition to such costs, species size, nocturnal activity level, phenology and aspects of the sympatric bat community are all Libersat and Hoy, 1991. correlated with moth auditory sensitivity -each of these aspects of life history is considered below.…”

Section: Moth Auditory Sensitivity: Cause and Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Evolutionary escalation: the bat–moth arms race

Hofstede

Ratcliffe

2016

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Echolocation in bats and high-frequency hearing in their insect prey make bats and insects an ideal system for studying the sensory ecology and neuroethology of predator-prey interactions. Here, we review the evolutionary history of bats and eared insects, focusing on the insect order Lepidoptera, and consider the evidence for antipredator adaptations and predator counter-adaptations. Ears evolved in a remarkable number of body locations across insects, with the original selection pressure for ears differing between groups. Although cause and effect are difficult to determine, correlations between hearing and life history strategies in moths provide evidence for how these two variables influence each other. We consider life history variables such as size, sex, circadian and seasonal activity patterns, geographic range and the composition of sympatric bat communities. We also review hypotheses on the neural basis for antipredator behaviours (such as evasive flight and sound production) in moths. It is assumed that these prey adaptations would select for counter-adaptations in predatory bats. We suggest two levels of support for classifying bat traits as counter-adaptations: traits that allow bats to eat more eared prey than expected based on their availability in the environment provide a low level of support for counter-adaptations, whereas traits that have no other plausible explanation for their origination and maintenance than capturing defended prey constitute a high level of support. Specific predator counter-adaptations include calling at frequencies outside the sensitivity range of most eared prey, changing the pattern and frequency of echolocation calls during prey pursuit, and quiet, or 'stealth', echolocation.

show abstract

Section: Substrate Gleaningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Substrate Gleaningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Substrate Gleaningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Moth Auditory Sensitivity: Cause and Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evolutionary escalation: the bat–moth arms race

Hofstede

Ratcliffe

2016

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moths are known for having ears adapted to detect the ultrasonic echolocation calls of their bat predators, to which they show a range of escape behaviors that substantially reduce the risk of predation (Roeder and Treat, 1957;Fullard, 1988;Pavey and Burwell, 1998;Miller and Surlykke, 2001). Therefore, the hearing sensitivity of most studied tympanate moths tends to reflect the characteristic frequencies and intensities of the local bat fauna (Fullard, 1987).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanical tuning of the moth ear: distortion-product otoacoustic emissions and tympanal vibrations

Mora

Cobo-Cuan

Macías-Escrivá

et al. 2013

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYThe mechanical tuning of the ear in the moth Empyreuma pugione was investigated by distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) and laser Doppler vibrometry (LDV). DPOAE audiograms were assessed using a novel protocol that may be advantageous for non-invasive auditory studies in insects. To evoke DPOAE, two-tone stimuli within frequency and level ranges that generated a large matrix of values (960 frequency-level combinations) were used to examine the acoustic space in which the moth tympanum shows its best mechanical and acoustical responses. The DPOAE tuning curve derived from the response matrix resembles that obtained previously by electrophysiology, and is V-shaped and tuned to frequencies between 25 and 45kHz with low Q 10dB values of 1.21±0.26. In addition, while using a comparable stimulation regime, mechanical distortion in the displacement of the moth's tympanal membrane at the stigma was recorded with a laser Doppler vibrometer. The corresponding mechanical vibration audiograms were compared with DPOAE audiograms. Both types of audiograms have comparable shape, but most of the mechanical response fields are shifted towards lower frequencies. We showed for the first time in moths that DPOAE have a pronounced analogy in the vibration of the tympanic membrane where they may originate. Our work supports previous studies that point to the stigma (and the internally associated transduction machinery) as an important place of sound amplification in the moth ear, but also suggests a complex mechanical role for the rest of the transparent zone.

show abstract

The mechanoreceptive origin of insect tympanal organs: A comparative study of similar nerves in tympanate and atympanate moths

Yack

Fullard

1990

J of Comparative Neurology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A chordotonal organ occurring in the posterior metathorax of an atympanate moth, Actias luna (L.) (Bombycoidea: Saturniidae), appears to be homologous to the tympanal organ of the noctuoid moth. The peripheral anatomy of the metathoracic nerve branch, IIIN1b1 was examined in Actias luna with cobalt-lysine and Janus Green B, and compared to its counterpart, IIIN1b (the tympanal branch), in Feltia heralis (Grt.) (Noctuoidea: Noctuidae). The peripheral projections of IIIN1b1 were found to be similar in both species, dividing into three branches, the second (IIIN1b1b) ending as a chordotonal organ. The atympanate organ possesses three sensory cell bodies and three scolopales, and is anchored peripherally via an attachment strand to the undifferentiated membranous region underlying the hindwing alula, which corresponds to the tympanal region of the noctuoid metathorax. Extracellular recordings of the IIIN1b1 nerve in Actias luna revealed a large spontaneously active unit which fired in a regular pattern (corresponding to the noctuoid B cell) and smaller units (corresponding to the noctuoid acoustic A cells) which responded phasically to low frequency sounds (2 kHz) played at high intensities (83-96 dB, SPL) and also responded phasically to raising and lowering movements of the hindwing. We suggest that the chordotonal organ in Actias luna represents the evolutionary prototype to the noctuoid tympanal organ, and that it acts as a proprioceptor monitoring hindwing movements. This system, in its simplicity (consisting of only a few neurons) could be a useful model for examining the changes to the nervous system (both central and peripheral) that accompanied the evolutionary development of insect tympanal organs.

show abstract

The tuning of moth ears

Cited by 75 publications

References 28 publications

Evolutionary escalation: the bat–moth arms race

Evolutionary escalation: the bat–moth arms race

Mechanical tuning of the moth ear: distortion-product otoacoustic emissions and tympanal vibrations

The mechanoreceptive origin of insect tympanal organs: A comparative study of similar nerves in tympanate and atympanate moths

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About