QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s):
Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents

This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Yager, D. D. Articles by Spangler, H. G. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Yager, D. D. Articles by Spangler, H. G. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Journal of Experimental Biology, Vol 200, Issue 3 649-659, Copyright © 1997 by Company of Biologists

JOURNAL ARTICLES

Behavioral response to ultrasound by the tiger beetle Cicindela marutha dow combines aerodynamic changes and sound production

DD Yager and HG Spangler
Department of Psychology, University of Maryland, College Park 20742-4411, USA. dy5@umail.umd.edu

Tethered flying tiger beetles, Cicindela marutha, respond to trains of bat-like ultrasonic pulses with a short-latency, multi-component behavior. The head rolls to one side, the metathoracic legs kick to the opposite side, the elytra swing backwards towards the hindwings and pronate, the hindwings increase their stroke excursion and frequency, and the plane of the hindwing motion tilts forward. In addition, the beetles produce trains of ultrasonic clicks typically containing 100-200 clicks in response to a 1 s stimulus. The clicks average 85-90 dB SPL at 2 cm. The latencies for hindwing changes and elytra swing in response to stimuli more than 10 dB over threshold are 90-110 ms; the latency to clicking is 120-150 ms. Neither the head roll nor the leg kick appears to be directional relative to the sound source. The behavioral response is broadly tuned with greatest sensitivity at 30-60 kHz and mean behavioral thresholds of 75-80 dB SPL. Physiological audiograms from the auditory afferents show substantially greater sensitivity and sharper tuning than the behavioral response, which suggests that tiger beetles may use their hearing in other contexts as well as during flight. The combination of aerodynamic components and arctiid-month-like clicking may provide these insects with a powerful defense against attack by echolocating bats.
CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. D. Triblehorn, K. Ghose, K. Bohn, C. F. Moss, and D. D. Yager Free-flight encounters between praying mantids (Parasphendale agrionina) and bats (Eptesicus fuscus) J. Exp. Biol., February 15, 2008; 211(4): 555 - 562. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. D. Triblehorn and D. D. Yager Implanted electrode recordings from a praying mantis auditory interneuron during flying bat attacks J. Exp. Biol., February 1, 2002; 205(3): 307 - 320. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Faure and R. Hoy Neuroethology of the katydid T-cell. I. Tuning and responses to pure tones J. Exp. Biol., January 11, 2000; 203(21): 3225 - 3242. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Gopfert and L. Wasserthal Hearing with the mouthparts: behavioural responses and the structural basis of ultrasound perception in acherontiine hawkmoths J. Exp. Biol., January 4, 1999; 202(8): 909 - 918. [Abstract] [PDF]