spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


spacer gif
     Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents    

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Waters, D.
Right arrow Articles by Jones, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Waters, D.
Right arrow Articles by Jones, G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Journal of Experimental Biology, Vol 199, Issue 4 847-856, Copyright © 1996 by Company of Biologists

JOURNAL ARTICLES

The peripheral auditory characteristics of noctuid moths: responses to the search-phase echolocation calls of bats

D Waters and G Jones

The noctuid moths Agrotis segetum and Noctua pronuba show peak auditory sensitivity between 15 and 25 kHz, and a maximum sensitivity of 35 dB SPL. A. segetum shows a temporal integration time of 69 ms. It is predicted that bats using high-frequency and short-duration calls will be acoustically less apparent to these moths. Short-duration frequency-modulated (FM) calls of Plecotus auritus are not significantly less acoustically apparent than those of other FM bats with slightly longer call durations, based on their combined frequency and temporal structure alone. Long-duration, high-frequency, constant-frequency (CF) calls of Rhinolophus hipposideros at 113 kHz are significantly less apparent than those of the FM bats tested. The predicted low call apparency of the 83 kHz CF calls of R. ferrumequinum appears to be counteracted by their long duration. It is proposed that two separate mechanisms are exploited by bats to reduce their call apparency, low intensity in FM bats and high frequency in CF bats. Within the FM bats tested, shorter-duration calls do not significantly reduce the apparency of the call at the peripheral level, though they may limit the amount of information available to the central nervous system.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Exp. Biol.Home page
M. J. Rosen, E. C. Levin, and R. R. Hoy
The cost of assuming the life history of a host: acoustic startle in the parasitoid fly Ormia ochracea
J. Exp. Biol., December 15, 2009; 212(24): 4056 - 4064.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Exp. Biol.Home page
J. F. C. Windmill, J. H. Fullard, and D. Robert
Mechanics of a `simple' ear: tympanal vibrations in noctuid moths
J. Exp. Biol., August 1, 2007; 210(15): 2637 - 2648.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


© The Company of Biologists Ltd 1996