Fig. 10. (A,C) Novelty responses (NRs) to stronger stimulus intensities. These intensities were more effective at eliciting NRs than the stimuli applied in the main body of evidence of the current paper. The object's minimum lateral distance was 1.9 cm and the DC field was >600 µVcm ^–1. A and C show the baseline-subtracted spike density functions (SDFs) during the rotation of a multimodal stimulus object and its component unimodal object stimuli. Some of the unisensory responses have nearly equivalent magnitude as their multisensory response. B and D show the actual and the calculated baseline-subtracted SDFs. The calculated NRs have a greater or approximately equal NR area and duration. Linear and sublinear multisensory integration probably results from the relatively high intensity of the unimodal stimuli. (E) Tub+Amp responses can be suppressed by the addition of a LL stimulus. Therefore, the multisensory response curve is dependent upon the relative strength of each component. (F) While LL stimulation can cause response suppression, ampullary responses remained directly related to DC stimulus strength. The progression in DC field strength is nonlinear. Tub, tuberous electrosense; Amp, ampullary electrosense; LL, mechanosensory lateral line.