Literature DB >> 16326950

The adaptive function of tiger moth clicks against echolocating bats: an experimental and synthetic approach.

John M Ratcliffe1, James H Fullard.   

Abstract

We studied the efficiency and effects of the multiple sensory cues of tiger moths on echolocating bats. We used the northern long-eared bat, Myotis septentrionalis, a purported moth specialist that takes surface-bound prey (gleaning) and airborne prey (aerial hawking), and the dogbane tiger moth, Cycnia tenera, an eared species unpalatable to bats that possesses conspicuous colouration and sound-producing organs (tymbals). This is the first study to investigate the interaction of tiger moths and wild-caught bats under conditions mimicking those found in nature and to demand the use of both aerial hawking and gleaning strategies by bats. Further, it is the first to report spectrograms of the sounds produced by tiger moths while under aerial attack by echolocating bats. During both aerial hawking and gleaning trials, all muted C. tenera and perched intact C. tenera were attacked by M. septentrionalis, indicating that M. septentrionalis did not discriminate C. tenera from palatable moths based on potential echoic and/or non-auditory cues. Intact C. tenera were attacked significantly less often than muted C. tenera during aerial hawking attacks: tymbal clicks were therefore an effective deterrent in an aerial hawking context. During gleaning attacks, intact and muted C. tenera were always attacked and suffered similar mortality rates, suggesting that while handling prey this bat uses primarily chemical signals. Our results also show that C. tenera temporally matches the onset of click production to the ;approach phase' echolocation calls produced by aerial hawking attacking bats and that clicks themselves influence the echolocation behaviour of attacking bats. In the context of past research, these findings support the hypotheses that the clicks of arctiid moths are both an active defence (through echolocation disruption) and a reliable indicator of chemical defence against aerial-hawking bats. We suggest these signals are specialized for an aerial context.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16326950     DOI: 10.1242/jeb.01927

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Biol        ISSN: 0022-0949            Impact factor:   3.312


  16 in total

Review 1.  Non-visual crypsis: a review of the empirical evidence for camouflage to senses other than vision.

Authors:  Graeme D Ruxton
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2009-02-27       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Sequential assessment of prey through the use of multiple sensory cues by an eavesdropping bat.

Authors:  Rachel A Page; Tanja Schnelle; Elisabeth K V Kalko; Thomas Bunge; Ximena E Bernal
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2012-05-17

3.  Convergent evolution of anti-bat sounds.

Authors:  Aaron J Corcoran; Nickolay I Hristov
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2014-07-01       Impact factor: 1.836

4.  Tempo and mode of antibat ultrasound production and sonar jamming in the diverse hawkmoth radiation.

Authors:  Akito Y Kawahara; Jesse R Barber
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-05-04       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Anti-bat ultrasound production in moths is globally and phylogenetically widespread.

Authors:  Jesse R Barber; David Plotkin; Juliette J Rubin; Nicholas T Homziak; Brian C Leavell; Peter R Houlihan; Krystie A Miner; Jesse W Breinholt; Brandt Quirk-Royal; Pablo Sebastián Padrón; Matias Nunez; Akito Y Kawahara
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2022-06-15       Impact factor: 12.779

6.  Experimental assessment of the impacts of northern long-eared bats on ovipositing Culex (Diptera: Culicidae) mosquitoes.

Authors:  Michael H Reiskind; Matthew A Wund
Journal:  J Med Entomol       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 2.278

7.  Tiger moths and the threat of bats: decision-making based on the activity of a single sensory neuron.

Authors:  John M Ratcliffe; James H Fullard; Benjamin J Arthur; Ronald R Hoy
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2009-03-25       Impact factor: 3.703

Review 8.  PRINCIPLES AND PATTERNS OF BAT MOVEMENTS: FROM AERODYNAMICS TO ECOLOGY.

Authors:  Christian C Voigt; Winifred F Frick; Marc W Holderied; Richard Holland; Gerald Kerth; Marco A R Mello; Raina K Plowright; Sharon Swartz; Yossi Yovel
Journal:  Q Rev Biol       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 4.875

9.  Adaptive auditory risk assessment in the dogbane tiger moth when pursued by bats.

Authors:  John M Ratcliffe; James H Fullard; Benjamin J Arthur; Ronald R Hoy
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2010-08-18       Impact factor: 5.349

10.  Optimal predator risk assessment by the sonar-jamming arctiine moth Bertholdia trigona.

Authors:  Aaron J Corcoran; Ryan D Wagner; William E Conner
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-05-06       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.