Literature DB >> 1920158

Arctiid moth clicks can degrade the accuracy of range difference discrimination in echolocating big brown bats, Eptesicus fuscus.

L A Miller1.   

Abstract

Four big brown bats (Eptesicus fuscus) born and raised in captivity were trained using the Yes/No psychophysical method to report whether a virtual sonar target was at a standard distance or not. At threshold bats were able to detect a minimum range difference of 6 mm (a delta t of 36 microseconds). Following threshold determinations, a click burst 1.8 ms long containing 5 pulses from the ruby tiger moth, Phragmatobia fuliginosa (Arctiidae), was presented randomly after each phantom echo. The sound energy of the click burst was -4 dB relative to that of the phantom echo. Clicks presented for the very first time could startle naive bats to different degrees depending on the individual. The bats' performance deteriorated by as much as 4000% when the click burst started within a window of about 1.5 ms before the phantom echo. Even when one of ten phantom echoes was preceded by a click burst, the range difference discrimination worsened by 200%. Hence, clicks falling within the 1.5 ms time window seem to interfere with the bat's neural timing mechanism. The clicks of arctiid moths appear to serve 3 functions: they can startle naive bats, interfere with range difference determinations, or they can signal the moth's distastefulness, as shown in earlier studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1920158     DOI: 10.1007/bf00215079

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comp Physiol A            Impact factor:   1.836


  17 in total

1.  MOTH SOUNDS AND THE INSECT-CATCHING BEHAVIOR OF BATS.

Authors:  D C DUNNING; K D ROEDER
Journal:  Science       Date:  1965-01-08       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Clutter interference and the integration time of echoes in the echolocating bat, Eptesicus fuscus.

Authors:  J A Simmons; E G Freedman; S B Stevenson; L Chen; T J Wohlgenant
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1989-10       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Neural mechanisms of ranging are different in two species of bats.

Authors:  A Berkowitz; N Suga
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 3.208

4.  Temporal gaps in noise and sinusoids.

Authors:  D M Green; T G Forrest
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Time is traded for intensity in the bat's auditory system.

Authors:  G D Pollak
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1988-11       Impact factor: 3.208

6.  Toxic lepidoptera.

Authors:  M Rothschild; T Reichstein; J von Euw; R Aplin; R R Harman
Journal:  Toxicon       Date:  1970-11       Impact factor: 3.033

7.  Normal hearing thresholds for clicks.

Authors:  D R Stapells; T W Picton; A D Smith
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1982-07       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Echo detection and target-ranging neurons in the auditory system of the bat Eptesicus fuscus.

Authors:  A S Feng; J A Simmons; S A Kick
Journal:  Science       Date:  1978-11-10       Impact factor: 47.728

9.  Time and Frequency domain processing in the inferior colliculus of echolocating bats.

Authors:  R D Bodenhamer; G D Pollak
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  1981-11       Impact factor: 3.208

10.  Neural representation of target distance in auditory cortex of the echolocating bat Myotis lucifugus.

Authors:  W E Sullivan
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1982-10       Impact factor: 2.714

View more
  13 in total

1.  Acoustic mimicry in a predator-prey interaction.

Authors:  Jesse R Barber; William E Conner
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2007-05-21       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  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

3.  Echolocation of multiple targets in 3-d space from a single emission.

Authors:  M Yano; I Matsuo; J Tani
Journal:  J Biol Phys       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 1.365

4.  Sound strategy: acoustic aposematism in the bat-tiger moth arms race.

Authors:  Nickolay I Hristov; William E Conner
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2005-03-17

5.  The degradation of distance discrimination in big brown bats (Eptesicus fuscus) caused by different interference signals.

Authors:  W M Masters; K A Raver
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 1.836

6.  Private ultrasonic whispering in moths.

Authors:  Ryo Nakano; Yukio Ishikawa; Sadahiro Tatsuki; Niels Skals; Annemarie Surlykke; Takuma Takanashi
Journal:  Commun Integr Biol       Date:  2009-03

7.  Echo SPL influences the ranging performance of the big brown bat, Eptesicus fuscus.

Authors:  A Denzinger; H U Schnitzler
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 1.836

8.  Behavioral responses of big brown bats to dives by praying mantises.

Authors:  Kaushik Ghose; Jeffrey D Triblehorn; Kari Bohn; David D Yager; Cynthia F Moss
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.312

9.  Adaptive echolocation behavior in bats for the analysis of auditory scenes.

Authors:  Chen Chiu; Wei Xian; Cynthia F Moss
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 3.312

10.  Echolocation by the harbour porpoise: life in coastal waters.

Authors:  Lee A Miller; Magnus Wahlberg
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2013-04-15       Impact factor: 4.566

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.