Literature DB >> 26276861

Insects modify their behaviour depending on the feedback sensor used when walking on a trackball in virtual reality.

Gavin J Taylor1, Angelique C Paulk2, Thomas W J Pearson2, Richard J D Moore2, Jacqui A Stacey2, David Ball3, Bruno van Swinderen2, Mandyam V Srinivasan4.   

Abstract

When using virtual-reality paradigms to study animal behaviour, careful attention must be paid to how the animal's actions are detected. This is particularly relevant in closed-loop experiments where the animal interacts with a stimulus. Many different sensor types have been used to measure aspects of behaviour, and although some sensors may be more accurate than others, few studies have examined whether, and how, such differences affect an animal's behaviour in a closed-loop experiment. To investigate this issue, we conducted experiments with tethered honeybees walking on an air-supported trackball and fixating a visual object in closed-loop. Bees walked faster and along straighter paths when the motion of the trackball was measured in the classical fashion - using optical motion sensors repurposed from computer mice - than when measured more accurately using a computer vision algorithm called 'FicTrac'. When computer mouse sensors were used to measure bees' behaviour, the bees modified their behaviour and achieved improved control of the stimulus. This behavioural change appears to be a response to a systematic error in the computer mouse sensor that reduces the sensitivity of this sensor system under certain conditions. Although the large perceived inertia and mass of the trackball relative to the honeybee is a limitation of tethered walking paradigms, observing differences depending on the sensor system used to measure bee behaviour was not expected. This study suggests that bees are capable of fine-tuning their motor control to improve the outcome of the task they are performing. Further, our findings show that caution is required when designing virtual-reality experiments, as animals can potentially respond to the artificial scenario in unexpected and unintended ways.
© 2015. Published by The Company of Biologists Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adaptive control; Closed-loop; Computer mouse sensor; FicTrac; Free-walking; Honeybee; Sensor accuracy; Tethered-walking; Visual fixation

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26276861     DOI: 10.1242/jeb.125617

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


  7 in total

Review 1.  Attention-like processes in insects.

Authors:  Vivek Nityananda
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2016-11-16       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Flyception: imaging brain activity in freely walking fruit flies.

Authors:  Dhruv Grover; Takeo Katsuki; Ralph J Greenspan
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2016-05-16       Impact factor: 28.547

3.  Anomalous diffusion on the servosphere: A potential tool for detecting inherent organismal movement patterns.

Authors:  Naohisa Nagaya; Nobuaki Mizumoto; Masato S Abe; Shigeto Dobata; Ryota Sato; Ryusuke Fujisawa
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Substrate texture affects female cricket walking response to male calling song.

Authors:  E J Sarmiento-Ponce; M P F Sutcliffe; B Hedwig
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2018-03-07       Impact factor: 2.963

5.  Sugar Intake Elicits Intelligent Searching Behavior in Flies and Honey Bees.

Authors:  Axel Brockmann; Pallab Basu; Manal Shakeel; Satoshi Murata; Naomi Murashima; Ravi Kumar Boyapati; Nikhil G Prabhu; Jacob J Herman; Teiichi Tanimura
Journal:  Front Behav Neurosci       Date:  2018-11-28       Impact factor: 3.558

6.  A motion compensation treadmill for untethered wood ants (Formica rufa): evidence for transfer of orientation memories from free-walking training.

Authors:  Roman Goulard; Cornelia Buehlmann; Jeremy E Niven; Paul Graham; Barbara Webb
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2020-12-22       Impact factor: 3.312

7.  Associative visual learning by tethered bees in a controlled visual environment.

Authors:  Alexis Buatois; Cécile Pichot; Patrick Schultheiss; Jean-Christophe Sandoz; Claudio R Lazzari; Lars Chittka; Aurore Avarguès-Weber; Martin Giurfa
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-10-10       Impact factor: 4.379

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.