Literature DB >> 9318627

The peripheral auditory characteristics of noctuid moths: responses to the search-phase echolocation calls of bats

.   

Abstract

The noctuid moths Agrotis segetum and Noctua pronuba show peak auditory sensitivity between 15 and 25 kHz, and a maximum sensitivity of 35 dB SPL. A. segetum shows a temporal integration time of 69 ms. It is predicted that bats using high-frequency and short-duration calls will be acoustically less apparent to these moths. Short-duration frequency-modulated (FM) calls of Plecotus auritus are not significantly less acoustically apparent than those of other FM bats with slightly longer call durations, based on their combined frequency and temporal structure alone. Long-duration, high-frequency, constant-frequency (CF) calls of Rhinolophus hipposideros at 113 kHz are significantly less apparent than those of the FM bats tested. The predicted low call apparency of the 83 kHz CF calls of R. ferrumequinum appears to be counteracted by their long duration. It is proposed that two separate mechanisms are exploited by bats to reduce their call apparency, low intensity in FM bats and high frequency in CF bats. Within the FM bats tested, shorter-duration calls do not significantly reduce the apparency of the call at the peripheral level, though they may limit the amount of information available to the central nervous system.

Entities:  

Year:  1996        PMID: 9318627     DOI: 10.1242/jeb.199.4.847

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


  8 in total

1.  Auditory sensitivity and ecological relevance: the functional audiogram as modelled by the bat detecting moth ear.

Authors:  Matthew E Jackson; Navdeep S Asi; James H Fullard
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2010-05-07       Impact factor: 1.836

2.  No neural evidence for dynamic auditory tuning of the A1 receptor in the ear of the noctuid moth, Noctua pronuba.

Authors:  Navdeep S Asi; James Howard Fullard; Scott Whitehead; Jeff W Dawson
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 1.836

3.  Moth hearing in response to bat echolocation calls manipulated independently in time and frequency.

Authors:  G Jones; D A Waters
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2000-08-22       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  The cost of assuming the life history of a host: acoustic startle in the parasitoid fly Ormia ochracea.

Authors:  M J Rosen; E C Levin; R R Hoy
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.312

5.  Tympanal mechanics and neural responses in the ears of a noctuid moth.

Authors:  Hannah M ter Hofstede; Holger R Goerlitz; Fernando Montealegre-Z; Daniel Robert; Marc W Holderied
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2011-10-12

6.  The cercal organ may provide singing tettigoniids a backup sensory system for the detection of eavesdropping bats.

Authors:  Manfred Hartbauer; Elisabeth Ofner; Viktoria Grossauer; Björn M Siemers
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-09-13       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  The foraging ecology of the mountain long-eared bat Plecotus macrobullaris revealed with DNA mini-barcodes.

Authors:  Antton Alberdi; Inazio Garin; Ostaizka Aizpurua; Joxerra Aihartza
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-04-24       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Discrepancies in the spiking threshold and frequency sensitivity of nocturnal moths explainable by biases in the canonical auditory stimulation method.

Authors:  Herve Thevenon; Gerit Pfuhl
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2018-04-11       Impact factor: 2.963

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.