Literature DB >> 26336176

Multimodal cues improve prey localization under complex environmental conditions.

F Rhebergen1, R C Taylor2, M J Ryan3, R A Page4, W Halfwerk5.   

Abstract

Predators often eavesdrop on sexual displays of their prey. These displays can provide multimodal cues that aid predators, but the benefits in attending to them should depend on the environmental sensory conditions under which they forage. We assessed whether bats hunting for frogs use multimodal cues to locate their prey and whether their use varies with ambient conditions. We used a robotic set-up mimicking the sexual display of a male túngara frog (Physalaemus pustulosus) to test prey assessment by fringe-lipped bats (Trachops cirrhosus). These predatory bats primarily use sound of the frog's call to find their prey, but the bats also use echolocation cues returning from the frog's dynamically moving vocal sac. In the first experiment, we show that multimodal cues affect attack behaviour: bats made narrower flank attack angles on multimodal trials compared with unimodal trials during which they could only rely on the sound of the frog. In the second experiment, we explored the bat's use of prey cues in an acoustically more complex environment. Túngara frogs often form mixed-species choruses with other frogs, including the hourglass frog (Dendropsophus ebraccatus). Using a multi-speaker set-up, we tested bat approaches and attacks on the robofrog under three different levels of acoustic complexity: no calling D. ebraccatus males, two calling D. ebraccatus males and five D. ebraccatus males. We found that bats are more directional in their approach to the robofrog when more D. ebraccatus males were calling. Thus, bats seemed to benefit more from multimodal cues when confronted with increased levels of acoustic complexity in their foraging environments. Our data have important consequences for our understanding of the evolution of multimodal sexual displays as they reveal how environmental conditions can alter the natural selection pressures acting on them.
© 2015 The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  eavesdropping; environmental complexity; localization; mixed-species chorus; multimodal communication

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26336176      PMCID: PMC4571703          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2015.1403

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8452            Impact factor:   5.349


  26 in total

1.  Cross-modal integration in a dart-poison frog.

Authors:  Peter M Narins; Daniela S Grabul; Kiran K Soma; Philippe Gaucher; Walter Hödl
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2005-01-26       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 2.  Pollution going multimodal: the complex impact of the human-altered sensory environment on animal perception and performance.

Authors:  Wouter Halfwerk; Hans Slabbekoorn
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 3.703

3.  Risky ripples allow bats and frogs to eavesdrop on a multisensory sexual display.

Authors:  W Halfwerk; P L Jones; R C Taylor; M J Ryan; R A Page
Journal:  Science       Date:  2014-01-24       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Internal models direct dragonfly interception steering.

Authors:  Matteo Mischiati; Huai-Ti Lin; Paul Herold; Elliot Imler; Robert Olberg; Anthony Leonardo
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2014-12-10       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  Low-frequency songs lose their potency in noisy urban conditions.

Authors:  Wouter Halfwerk; Sander Bot; Jasper Buikx; Marco van der Velde; Jan Komdeur; Carel ten Cate; Hans Slabbekoorn
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-08-29       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Risks of multimodal signaling: bat predators attend to dynamic motion in frog sexual displays.

Authors:  Wouter Halfwerk; Marjorie M Dixon; Kristina J Ottens; Ryan C Taylor; Michael J Ryan; Rachel A Page; Patricia L Jones
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2014-09-01       Impact factor: 3.312

7.  Echolocation intensity and directionality of perching and flying fringe-lipped bats, Trachops cirrhosus (Phyllostomidae).

Authors:  Annemarie Surlykke; Lasse Jakobsen; Elisabeth K V Kalko; Rachel A Page
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2013-06-28       Impact factor: 4.566

8.  The signaller's dilemma: a cost-benefit analysis of public and private communication.

Authors:  Heiner Römer; Alexander Lang; Manfred Hartbauer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-10-13       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Acoustic noise induces attention shifts and reduces foraging performance in three-spined sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus).

Authors:  Julia Purser; Andrew N Radford
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-02-28       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Multimodal signaling in the Small Torrent Frog (Micrixalus saxicola) in a complex acoustic environment.

Authors:  Doris Preininger; Markus Boeckle; Anita Freudmann; Iris Starnberger; Marc Sztatecsny; Walter Hödl
Journal:  Behav Ecol Sociobiol       Date:  2013-02-13       Impact factor: 2.980

View more
  3 in total

1.  The exploitation of sexual signals by predators: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Thomas E White; Tanya Latty; Kate D L Umbers
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 5.530

2.  Collateral damage or a shadow of safety? The effects of signalling heterospecific neighbours on the risks of parasitism and predation.

Authors:  Paula A Trillo; Ximena E Bernal; Michael S Caldwell; Wouter H Halfwerk; Mallory O Wessel; Rachel A Page
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2016-05-25       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 3.  The role of complex cues in social and reproductive plasticity.

Authors:  Alice A Dore; Laurin McDowall; James Rouse; Amanda Bretman; Matthew J G Gage; Tracey Chapman
Journal:  Behav Ecol Sociobiol       Date:  2018-07-07       Impact factor: 2.980

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.