Light-dependent magnetic compass orientation in amphibians and insects: candidate receptors and candidate molecular mechanisms

Phillips, John B.; Jorge, Paulo E.; Muheim, Rachel

doi:10.1098/rsif.2009.0459.focus

Cited by 80 publications

(93 citation statements)

References 98 publications

(222 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…According to current theory, birds may perceive the magnetic field as a three-dimensional pattern superimposed on their visual field (e.g. [80,81,86]). If PL reception takes place in parallel to magnetoreception, we would therefore expect an equally high resolution also for this system.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In several species of fish, responses to PL show a wavelength-dependent antagonistic mechanism that closely resembles antagonistic, wavelength-dependent effects on magnetic compass orientation in eastern red-spotted newts, Nothophthalmus viridescens [75,81]. These fish have a UV-sensitive mechanism with polarization sensitivity to a vertically aligned e-vector and a green-and red-sensitive receptor mechanism with maximum polarization sensitivity to a horizontally aligned e-vector [2,67,68,82,83].…”

Section: Parallels Between Polarized Light Reception and Light-dependmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this process, absorption of light leads to the formation of radical-pair intermediates whose lifetime is modulated depending on their alignments to an Earth-strength magnetic field. Cryptochromes have been proposed to be the photoreceptor molecules involved in magnetoreception, because of their unique ability to form persistent, spin-correlated radical pairs (for review, see [81]). As in PL receptors, the receptor molecules that underlie the light-dependent magnetic compass need to be fixed in an ordered array, making it intrinsically polarization sensitive.…”

Section: Parallels Between Polarized Light Reception and Light-dependmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Behavioural and physiological mechanisms of polarized light sensitivity in birds

Muheim

2011

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Polarized light (PL) sensitivity is relatively well studied in a large number of invertebrates and some fish species, but in most other vertebrate classes, including birds, the behavioural and physiological mechanism of PL sensitivity remains one of the big mysteries in sensory biology. Many organisms use the skylight polarization pattern as part of a sun compass for orientation, navigation and in spatial orientation tasks. In birds, the available evidence for an involvement of the skylight polarization pattern in sun-compass orientation is very weak. Instead, cue-conflict and cue-calibration experiments have shown that the skylight polarization pattern near the horizon at sunrise and sunset provides birds with a seasonally and latitudinally independent compass calibration reference. Despite convincing evidence that birds use PL cues for orientation, direct experimental evidence for PL sensitivity is still lacking. Avian double cones have been proposed as putative PL receptors, but detailed anatomical and physiological evidence will be needed to conclusively describe the avian PL receptor. Intriguing parallels between the functional and physiological properties of PL reception and light-dependent magnetoreception could point to a common receptor system.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Parallels Between Polarized Light Reception and Light-dependmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Parallels Between Polarized Light Reception and Light-dependmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Behavioural and physiological mechanisms of polarized light sensitivity in birds

Muheim

2011

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Alignments of the magnetic field that produce greater singlet } triplet mixing, reducing the singlet character of the radical pair, will decrease the rate of back transfer and increase the persistence of the radical form. Depending on which redox form of the flavin chromophore is the signaling state, the effect of the magnetic field can produce a corresponding increase or decrease in the response to light (see Phillips et al, 2010).…”

Section: The Radical Pair Mechanismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…light-dependent 90deg rotations in the direction of magnetic compass orientation) that appear to result, at least in part, from an antagonistic interaction of short-and longwavelength inputs (Phillips and Borland, 1992a;Deutschlander et al, 1999b;Phillips et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A behavioral perspective on the biophysics of the light-dependent magnetic compass: a link between directional and spatial perception?

Phillips

Muheim

Jorge

2010

Journal of Experimental Biology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary In terrestrial organisms, sensitivity to the Earth's magnetic field is mediated by at least two different magnetoreception mechanisms, one involving biogenic ferromagnetic crystals (magnetite/maghemite) and the second involving a photo-induced biochemical reaction that forms long-lasting, spin-coordinated, radical pair intermediates. In some vertebrate groups (amphibians and birds), both mechanisms are present; a light-dependent mechanism provides a directional sense or ‘compass’, and a non-light-dependent mechanism underlies a geographical-position sense or ‘map’. Evidence that both magnetite- and radical pair-based mechanisms are present in the same organisms raises a number of interesting questions. Why has natural selection produced magnetic sensors utilizing two distinct biophysical mechanisms? And, in particular, why has natural selection produced a compass mechanism based on a light-dependent radical pair mechanism (RPM) when a magnetite-based receptor is well suited to perform this function? Answers to these questions depend, to a large degree, on how the properties of the RPM, viewed from a neuroethological rather than a biophysical perspective, differ from those of a magnetite-based magnetic compass. The RPM is expected to produce a light-dependent, 3-D pattern of response that is axially symmetrical and, in some groups of animals, may be perceived as a pattern of light intensity and/or color superimposed on the visual surroundings. We suggest that the light-dependent magnetic compass may serve not only as a source of directional information but also provide a spherical coordinate system that helps to interface metrics of distance, direction and spatial position.

show abstract

Movement in the matrix: substrates and distance‐to‐forest edge affect postmetamorphic movements of a forest amphibian

Cline

Hunter

2016

Ecosphere

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Population persistence often depends on functional connectivity for animals that transit multiple vegetation types to acquire resources, particularly for dispersers navigating a landscape matrix fragmented by agriculture, forestry, or urbanization. For many pool‐breeding amphibians, population viability depends on the ability of juveniles to locate and reach suitable habitat in the terrestrial matrix. Thus, identifying the scale and orientation of movements is necessary to predict the consequences of landscape configuration for populations. We conducted three experiments to evaluate if different vegetation types alter the behavior of post‐metamorphic wood frogs (Lithobates sylvaticus). We measured the: (1) fine‐scale movement (velocity, latency, path length, net displacement, path tortuosity, and orientation) of individuals (n = 150) released on five substrates (asphalt, corn, forest leaf litter, hay, lawn); (2) directionality of frogs (n = 168) released at different distances from forest in two open‐cover types (lawns, hayfields); and (3) willingness of frogs (n = 240) to enter three land‐cover types (asphalt, lawn, forest) when released within artificial refugia islands at different distances from forest. Using fluorescent powder, we mapped 318 movement paths and performance differed. Frogs demonstrated straighter paths, and greater net movements, path lengths, and velocities through treatments with lower structural complexity (asphalt > lawn > corn > forest leaf litter > hay). Frogs also exhibited forest‐oriented directionality in asphalt, lawn, and corn but random orientation in forest control and hay. The willingness of individuals to leave a refugia island was lowest on asphalt (12% of released frogs), moderate on lawn (40%), and very high in forest (90%). Overall, results indicate that the quality of nonforest matrix may influence the ability of frogs to traverse open cover and orient toward forest from distances of ≥40–55 m. Thus, it is inaccurate to assume movement performance is uniform across all open‐matrix types, an important distinction because many landscape‐population models use expert‐based values that are a one‐size‐fits‐all measure for open cover. Our study provides field‐based, mechanistic approximations of juvenile movement that can be useful for predicting how matrix composition and configuration might be managed to maintain or restore functional connectivity.

show abstract

Light-dependent magnetic compass orientation in amphibians and insects: candidate receptors and candidate molecular mechanisms

Cited by 80 publications

References 98 publications

Behavioural and physiological mechanisms of polarized light sensitivity in birds

Behavioural and physiological mechanisms of polarized light sensitivity in birds

A behavioral perspective on the biophysics of the light-dependent magnetic compass: a link between directional and spatial perception?

Movement in the matrix: substrates and distance‐to‐forest edge affect postmetamorphic movements of a forest amphibian

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About