Literature DB >> 3430413

Electrolocation in the presence of jamming signals: behavior.

J Bastian1.   

Abstract

Electrolocation behavior of Apteronotus leptorhynchus was studied by monitoring the animal's ability to maintain orientation to a variety of moving electrolocation targets. The primary goal of this study was to determine the relative effectiveness of various types of electrical 'jamming signals' in disrupting electrolocation performance. 1. Two measures of electrolocation performance were used: The latency between the electrolocation target motion and the fish's following response, and the minimum distance separating the fish from the target during the target movement sequence. Latency increased and minimum fish-target distance decreased as target size was decreased, and when large diameter ceramic targets were used as control stimuli the fish were less able to avoid, and frequently collided with, these 'electrically transparent' objects. 2. Four types of jamming signals were used in attempts to mask the electrosensory input used for electrolocation. Broad-band noise and sinusoidal signals, different in frequency by a few Hz from the animal's personal electric organ discharge (DF stimuli), were used to jam the tuberous electroreceptors. Five Hz and 50 Hz sinusoidal signals were used to jam the low-frequency or ampullary receptor system. Both the noise and the DF stimuli were effective in reducing electrolocation performance, and the threshold intensity for behavior deterioration was about three-fold lower for DF stimuli as compared to the noise. The rate of change of response deterioration as a function of increasing jamming intensity was, however, not different for these two types of stimuli. Neither the 50 Hz nor the 5 Hz jamming signals caused electrolocation deterioration when presented alone. However, 5 Hz jamming, when added to either the noise or DF jamming, did result in significant increments in response deterioration. This suggests that the ampullary receptors can provide supplementary information for electrolocation. 3. Electrolocation performance deterioration was also studied with various difference frequencies between an animal's EOD and the sinusoidal jamming stimulus. Increasing DF results in decreased electrolocation deterioration, but even at the highest DF frequencies used (128 Hz) significant response degradation was observed. 4. The apparent differences in the effectiveness of noise and DF stimulation in reducing electrolocation performance are largely accounted for by the differential effects of the tuberous electroreceptor filter characteristics on these two types of signals.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1987        PMID: 3430413     DOI: 10.1007/BF00610223

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


  5 in total

1.  Deficit in object detection (electrolocation) following interruption of cerebellar function in the weakly electric fish, Apteronotus albifrons.

Authors:  R A Bombardieri; A S Feng
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  1977-07-15       Impact factor: 3.252

2.  Electrolocation in the presence of jamming signals: electroreceptor physiology.

Authors:  J Bastian
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A       Date:  1987-11       Impact factor: 1.836

3.  'Ancestral' neural mechanisms of electrolocation suggest a substrate for the evolution of the jamming avoidance response.

Authors:  G Rose; C Keller; W Heiligenberg
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A       Date:  1987-04       Impact factor: 1.836

4.  A real-time video system for tracking one-dimensional movements of two objects.

Authors:  T G Uter
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  1977-01       Impact factor: 4.538

5.  Electroreception.

Authors:  T H Bullock
Journal:  Annu Rev Neurosci       Date:  1982       Impact factor: 12.449

  5 in total
  14 in total

1.  Neuronal population codes and the perception of object distance in weakly electric fish.

Authors:  J E Lewis; L Maler
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2001-04-15       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 2.  Perception and coding of envelopes in weakly electric fishes.

Authors:  Sarah A Stamper; Eric S Fortune; Maurice J Chacron
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2013-07-01       Impact factor: 3.312

3.  Species-specific differences in sensorimotor adaptation are correlated with differences in social structure.

Authors:  Jörg Oestreich; Harold H Zakon
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2005-09-13       Impact factor: 1.836

4.  Effects of global electrosensory signals on motion processing in the midbrain of Eigenmannia.

Authors:  John U Ramcharitar; Eric W Tan; Eric S Fortune
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2005-09-13       Impact factor: 1.836

5.  The complexity of high-frequency electric fields degrades electrosensory inputs: implications for the jamming avoidance response in weakly electric fish.

Authors:  Aaron R Shifman; John E Lewis
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 4.118

6.  Electrolocation in the presence of jamming signals: electroreceptor physiology.

Authors:  J Bastian
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A       Date:  1987-11       Impact factor: 1.836

7.  Motion parallax in electric sensing.

Authors:  Federico Pedraja; Volker Hofmann; Kathleen M Lucas; Colleen Young; Jacob Engelmann; John E Lewis
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-01-02       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Pyramidal-cell plasticity in weakly electric fish: a mechanism for attenuating responses to reafferent electrosensory inputs.

Authors:  J Bastian
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 1.836

9.  How lesioning the nucleus praeeminentialis affects electrolocation behavior in the weakly electric fish, Apteronotus leptorhynchus.

Authors:  R L Green
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 1.836

10.  Tuning movement for sensing in an uncertain world.

Authors:  Chen Chen; Todd D Murphey; Malcolm A MacIver
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2020-09-22       Impact factor: 8.140

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.