Auditory modulation of wind-elicited walking behavior in the cricket, Gryllus bimaculatus

Abstract

Animals flexibly change their locomotion triggered by an identical stimulus depending on the environmental context and behavioral state. This indicates that additional sensory inputs in different modality from the stimulus triggering the escape response affect the neuronal circuit governing that behavior. However, how the spatio-temporal relationships between these two stimuli effect a behavioral change remains unknown. We studied this question, using crickets, which respond to a short air-puff by oriented walking activity mediated by the cercal sensory system. In addition, an acoustic stimulus, such as conspecific 'song' received by the tympanal organ, elicits a distinct oriented locomotion termed phonotaxis. In this study, we examined the cross-modal effects on wind-elicited walking when an acoustic stimulus was preceded by an air-puff and tested whether the auditory modulation depends on the coincidence of the direction of both stimuli. A preceding 10 kHz pure tone biased the wind-elicited walking in a backward direction and elevated a threshold of the windelicited response, whereas other movement parameters, including turn angle, reaction time, walking speed and distance were unaffected. The auditory modulations, however, did not depend on the coincidence of the stimulus directions. A preceding sound consistently altered the wind-elicited walking direction and response probability throughout the experimental sessions, meaning that the auditory modulation did not result from previous experience or associative learning. These results suggest that the cricket nervous system is able to integrate auditory and air-puff stimuli, and modulate the wind-elicited escape behavior depending on the acoustic context.

Losing without Fighting - Simple Aversive Stimulation Induces Submissiveness Typical for Social Defeat via the Action of Nitric Oxide, but Only When Preceded by an Aggression Priming Stimulus

“…This results in a mean stimulus velocity measured at the cercus of 0.36 m/s (standard error 0.06, n = 15). With this regime we never observed walking sequences, escape runs or jumps, which often occur at higher stimulus intensities (Gras and Hörner, 1992; Stevenson et al, 2005; Oe and Ogawa, 2013; Fukutomi et al, 2015). …”

“…Furthermore, the intensity of the AS was set to below that required to elicit escape walking jumps or runs (cf. Gras and Hörner, 1992; Oe and Ogawa, 2013; Fukutomi et al, 2015), and aggression was always evaluated 10 min after experiencing these stimuli. Notably, prior stimulation with a washed male, or female antennae was not effective (Figure 3), indicating that male cuticular pheromones (cf.…”

“…Importantly, this was achieved at a stimulus intensity far below that required to induce escape behavior (cf. Gras and Hörner, 1992; Stevenson et al, 2005; Oe and Ogawa, 2013; Fukutomi et al, 2015). Furthermore, the AS was only effective when applied immediately after winning, but not when delivered 3 min later.…”

Deep learning-assisted comparative analysis of animal trajectories with DeepHL

“…We also employed DeepHL to analyze context-dependent modulation of escape behavior in field crickets, Gryllus bimaculatus . Fukutomi et al 31 , 32 revealed that an acoustic stimulus at high frequency (>10 kHz) preceding an air puff alters crickets’ moving direction in wind-elicited escape behavior, suggesting that the crickets recognize the high-frequency sound as the echolocation signal of bats and change their behaviors in the presence of predators. Here, we adopted DeepHL to compare two groups of escape movement: prestimulated and control (no sound).…”

Crickets alter wind-elicited escape strategies depending on acoustic context

“…On the other hand, the cricket exhibits an escape response to a short air-puff detected by cerci, which is considered as a defensive behaviour against lunging predators such as spider 24 , 25 . In a previous study, we explored the auditory impact on the wind-elicited escape behaviour and reported that a preceding acoustic stimulus of a 10-kHz pure tone that evoked no response alone modulated moving direction and response threshold of wind-elicited walking 26 . This fact revealed that a cross-modal interaction between auditory and cercal sensory systems caused behavioural changes in escape strategy, suggesting that crickets perceived the acoustic signals and interpreted them as acoustic contexts.…”