Antennal hearing in insects – New findings, new questions

Nadrowski, Björn; Effertz, Thomas; Senthilan, Pingkalai R.; Göpfert, Martin C.

doi:10.1016/j.heares.2010.03.092

Cited by 49 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 111 publications

(134 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To increase the probability that the female hears his song, the male could continually sing at maximal intensity, but this runs the risk of saturating her auditory system and consequently making his communication signal less effective. By dynamically adjusting his song intensity to compensate for changes in her distance as he chases her, the male not only keeps his song within the dynamic range of her auditory receiver (Nadrowski et al, 2010), but also likely conserves his own energy. Since Drosophila males often court females for upwards of 10 minutes and sing thousands of pulses before copulating (Coen et al, 2014) performing AMD is likely to be energy efficient (although the energetic cost of fly song has yet to be quantified).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensorimotor Transformations Underlying Variability in Song Intensity during Drosophila Courtship

Coen

Xie

Clemens

et al. 2016

Neuron

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Diverse animal species, from insects to humans, utilize acoustic signals for communication. Studies of the neural basis for song or speech production have focused almost exclusively on the generation of spectral and temporal patterns, but animals can also adjust acoustic signal intensity when communicating. For example, humans naturally regulate the loudness of speech in accord with a visual estimate of receiver distance. The underlying mechanisms for this ability remain uncharacterized in any system. Here, we show that Drosophila males modulate courtship song amplitude with female distance, and we investigate each stage of the sensorimotor transformation underlying this behavior, from the detection of particular visual stimulus features and the timescales of sensory processing, to the modulation of neural and muscle activity that generates song. Our results demonstrate an unanticipated level of control in insect acoustic communication, and uncover novel computations and mechanisms underlying the regulation of acoustic signal intensity during communication.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensorimotor Transformations Underlying Variability in Song Intensity during Drosophila Courtship

Coen

Xie

Clemens

et al. 2016

Neuron

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While the sensitivity of mosquito antennae to sounds in the far field has not been investigated, anecdotal evidence has been invoked to suggest that they may perceive sounds in the far field (Borkent, 2008;Roth, 1948). Given that studies of antennal hearing in mosquitoes have recently challenged common assumptions of antennal sensitivity (Cator et al, 2009;Nadrowski, Effertz, Senthilan, & G€ opfert, 2011), it is possible that the antennae and the associated Johnston organ of mosquitoes and frog-biting midges are more sensitive than previously thought. Ongoing studies investigating the sensory mechanisms underlying the response of frog-biting midges to conspecific wing beats and anuran calls will determine how they hear and will further evaluate the pre-existing sensory bias hypothesis for eavesdropping in this group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of acoustic signals in mating in an eavesdropping frog-biting midge

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Johnston's organ (JO), the antennal ear of the fruit fly (Göpfert and Robert, 2003; Tauber and Eberl, 2003; Kamikouchi et al, 2006; Albert et al, 2007; Nadrowski et al, 2011), serves as a sensor for various types of mechanosensory stimuli, i.e., sound, gravity, and wind (Kamikouchi et al, 2009; Yorozu et al, 2009). These types of mechanosensory stimuli induce particular behavioral responses in the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster , e.g., exposure to male courtship songs leads to behavioral changes in males and females; when agitated, fruit flies show negative-gravitaxis behavior; and when faced with gentle air currents, fruit flies stop walking (Kamikouchi et al, 2009; Yorozu et al, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of novel vibration- and deflection-sensitive neuronal subgroups in Johnston's organ of the fruit fly

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster responds behaviorally to sound, gravity, and wind. Johnston's organ (JO) at the antennal base serves as a sensory organ in the fruit fly to detect these mechanosensory stimuli. Among the five anatomically defined subgroups of sensory neurons in JO, subgroups A and B detect sound vibrations and subgroups C and E respond to static deflections, such as gravity and wind. The functions of subgroup-D JO neurons, however, remain unknown. In this study, we used molecular-genetic methods to explore the physiologic properties of subgroup-D JO neurons. Both vibrations and static deflection of the antennal receiver activated subgroup-D JO neurons. This finding clearly revealed that zone D in the antennal mechanosensory and motor center (AMMC), the projection target of subgroup-D JO neurons, is a primary center for antennal vibrations and deflection in the fly brain. We anatomically identified two types of interneurons downstream of subgroup-D JO neurons, AMMC local neurons (AMMC LNs), and AMMC D1 neurons. AMMC LNs are local neurons whose projections are confined within the AMMC, connecting zones B and D. On the other hand, AMMC D1 neurons have both local dendritic arborizations within the AMMC and descending projections to the thoracic ganglia, suggesting that AMMC D1 neurons are likely to relay information of the antennal movement detected by subgroup-D JO neurons from the AMMC directly to the thorax. Together, these findings provide a neural basis for how JO and its brain targets encode information of complex movements of the fruit fly antenna.

show abstract

Antennal hearing in insects – New findings, new questions

Cited by 49 publications

References 111 publications

Sensorimotor Transformations Underlying Variability in Song Intensity during Drosophila Courtship

Sensorimotor Transformations Underlying Variability in Song Intensity during Drosophila Courtship

Use of acoustic signals in mating in an eavesdropping frog-biting midge

Identification of novel vibration- and deflection-sensitive neuronal subgroups in Johnston's organ of the fruit fly

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About