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

First published online November 28, 2008
Journal of Experimental Biology 211, 3808-3815 (2008)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2008
doi: 10.1242/jeb.023978

This Article Summary Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Related articles in JEB 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 Fullard, J. H. Articles by Burwell, C. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Fullard, J. H. Articles by Burwell, C. J. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Surviving cave bats: auditory and behavioural defences in the Australian noctuid moth, Speiredonia spectans

James H. Fullard^1,*, Matt E. Jackson¹, David S. Jacobs², Chris R. Pavey³ and Chris J. Burwell^4,5

¹ Department of Biology, University of Toronto, 3359 Mississauga Road, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada L5L 1C6
² Department of Zoology, University of Cape Town, Private Bag X3, Rondebosch 7701, South Africa
³ Biodiversity Conservation Division, Department of Natural Resources, Environment and the Arts, P.O. Box 1120, Alice Springs, 0871 Australia
⁴ Queensland Museum, P.O. Box 3300, South Brisbane, 4101 Australia
⁵ Griffith School of Environment, Griffith University, Nathan, 4111 Australia

View larger version (15K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Map of Australia showing locations of the study sites and the distribution of Speiredonia spectans based on specimen records from Australian insect collections and personal observations (C.R.P. and M. Braby, unpublished data).

View larger version (19K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 2. (A) Activity patterns, in mean passes per minute (N=4 nights, total of 36 h), of bats and S. spectans, in an abandoned mine at Camp Mountain, Australia. Inset: expanded view of the initial portion of the evening flight activities. (B) The frequency of S. spectans flight episodes observed for each number of bat passes per minute.

View larger version (13K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Auditory sensitivity of S. spectans (median, black line; open circles, individuals, N=14). Superimposed are the frequency power spectra of the echolocation calls of three bats that day roost in the same subterranean sites as this moth.

View larger version (14K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 4. S. spectans' maximum auditory nerve A1 receptor cell responses (A) to calls of the three bats (C) with their frequency spectrograms (B).

View larger version (14K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 5. (A) The mean (+ one standard error) numbers of S. spectans (N=7) A1 receptor spikes that were evoked to the calls of the three bats. (B) The percent (+ one standard error) of bat calls that exhibited any A1 spikes. (C) The mean percent (+ one standard error) of A1 spikes that possessed periods less than 2.6 ms compared with an equal amount of time with no sound. Significant differences (P<0.05, paired t-tests) indicated by asterisks, statistical comparisons were not done with the single moth response to the calls of H. ater.

View larger version (22K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Comparison of the auditory sensitivity of S. spectans with the echolocation assemblages of sympatric species of insectivorous bats (for which data exist) in three areas of the moth's distribution following a weighting of the echolocation frequencies by the relative commonness of each bat species. The peak frequencies of the three bats examined in the present study are indicated by arrows (Ma, Miniopterus australis; Rm, Rhinolophus megaphyllus; Ha, Hipposideros ater).

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

Twitter