The aerodynamics and control of free flight manoeuvres in<i>Drosophila</i>

Dickinson, Michael H.; Muijres, Florian T.

doi:10.1098/rstb.2015.0388

Cited by 133 publications

(153 citation statements)

References 122 publications

(165 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

138

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, the extreme adjustments in wing motion we measured for damage compensation are more comparable with the large changes observed in tethered flies that are exposed to open-loop rotatory visual stimuli [13]. This suggests that the classic open-loop optomotor response is better interpreted as an adaptation to wing damage rather than a manifestation of steering responses [32].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 65%

“…Flies possess several sensory systems that might be used to regulate this motor system including the halteres, the ocelli and the vertical system (VS) cells in the lobula plate. The halteres, however, are poorly suited to detect the low angular velocity required to trim roll torque [31], and it is more likely that the feedback loop that compensates for roll torque caused by wing damage relies on vision [32]. Furthermore, to achieve adequate steady-state performance with zero error, the circuit that controls roll probably implements a form of proportional-integral (PI) feedback [32,33].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Flies compensate for unilateral wing damage through modular adjustments of wing and body kinematics

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using high-speed videography, we investigated how fruit flies compensate for unilateral wing damage, in which loss of area on one wing compromises both weight support and roll torque equilibrium. Our results show that flies control for unilateral damage by rolling their body towards the damaged wing and by adjusting the kinematics of both the intact and damaged wings. To compensate for the reduction in vertical lift force due to damage, flies elevate wingbeat frequency. Because this rise in frequency increases the flapping velocity of both wings, it has the undesired consequence of further increasing roll torque. To compensate for this effect, flies increase the stroke amplitude and advance the timing of pronation and supination of the damaged wing, while making the opposite adjustments on the intact wing. The resulting increase in force on the damaged wing and decrease in force on the intact wing function to maintain zero net roll torque. However, the bilaterally asymmetrical pattern of wing motion generates a finite lateral force, which flies balance by maintaining a constant body roll angle. Based on these results and additional experiments using a dynamically scaled robotic fly, we propose a simple bioinspired control algorithm for asymmetric wing damage.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 65%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flies compensate for unilateral wing damage through modular adjustments of wing and body kinematics

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…4M). This is most likely because of the limitations of our quasi-steady aerodynamic model which did not include several unsteady aerodynamic mechanisms, such as wake capture and added mass (Dickinson and Muijres, 2016). These unsteady aerodynamic mechanisms might thus become increasingly more important with greater force production; in particular, trailing-edge vortex lift, which was recently described in flying mosquitoes, might play an important role here (Bomphrey et al, 2017).…”

Section: Discussion Kinematics and Aerodynamics Of Blood-load Carryinmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…For the model, we used the functions of lift and drag coefficients versus angle of attack [C L (α) and C D (α), respectively] and the rotational lift coefficients (C rot =1.55) determined using a robotic insect wing model, as mosquitoes operate at a Reynolds number similar to that used in the robot (Sane and Dickinson, 2002). This quasi-steady model captures aerodynamic force production remarkably well in flapping fruit fly wings (Dickinson and Muijres, 2016;Sane and Dickinson, 2002), but it does not simulate unsteady aerodynamic effects, such as wake capture, added mass or the trailing-edge vortex lift that was recently identified as an important lift generator in flying mosquitoes (Bomphrey et al, 2017). This recent study on the aerodynamics of male Culex mosquitoes also developed a quasi-steady aerodynamic model (Bomphrey et al, 2017).…”

Section: Modeling Aerodynamic Force Production Based On Wingbeat Kinementioning

confidence: 99%

Escaping blood-fed malaria mosquitoes minimize tactile detection without compromising on take-off speed

Muijres

Chang

Veen

et al. 2017

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To escape after taking a blood meal, a mosquito must exert forces sufficiently high to take off when carrying a load roughly equal to its body weight, while simultaneously avoiding detection by minimizing tactile signals exerted on the host's skin. We studied this trade-off between escape speed and stealth in the malaria mosquito Anopheles coluzzii using 3D motion analysis of high-speed stereoscopic videos of mosquito take-offs and aerodynamic modeling. We found that during the push-off phase, mosquitoes enhanced take-off speed using aerodynamic forces generated by the beating wings in addition to leg-based push-off forces, whereby wing forces contributed 61% of the total push-off force. Exchanging legderived push-off forces for wing-derived aerodynamic forces allows the animal to reduce peak force production on the host's skin. By slowly extending their long legs throughout the push-off, mosquitoes spread push-off forces over a longer time window than insects with short legs, thereby further reducing peak leg forces. Using this specialized take-off behavior, mosquitoes are capable of reaching take-off speeds comparable to those of similarly sized fruit flies, but with weight-normalized peak leg forces that were only 27% of those of the fruit flies. By limiting peak leg forces, mosquitoes possibly reduce the chance of being detected by the host. The resulting combination of high take-off speed and low tactile signals on the host might help increase the mosquito's success in escaping from blood-hosts, which consequently also increases the chance of transmitting vector-borne diseases, such as malaria, to future hosts.

show abstract

“…the net upward force counteracting the insect's weight), thrust [the forward force perpendicular to the effective lift (Osborne, 1951)], and the control of yaw and roll (Heisenberg and Wolf, 1979). Many species of flies, which only have two wings, can only flap their wings in a fixed pattern, and therefore produce a flight force that is oriented along a single, fixed direction relative to their body axis (24 deg for Drosophila, and 29 deg for Musca) (Dickinson and Muijres, 2016;Götz and Wandel, 1984;Muijres et al, 2014). Because of this constraint, the forces that are generated along and perpendicular to the body axis are always proportional to each other, regardless of the flight conditions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flight control of fruit flies: dynamic response to optic-flow and headwind

Lawson

Srinivasan

2017

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Insects are magnificent fliers that are capable of performing many complex tasks such as speed regulation, smooth landings and collision avoidance, even though their computational abilities are limited by their small brain. To investigate how flying insects respond to changes in wind speed and surrounding optic flow, the open-loop sensorimotor response of female Queensland fruit flies (Bactrocera tryoni) was examined. A total of 136 flies were exposed to stimuli comprising sinusoidally varying optic flow and air flow (simulating forward movement) under tethered conditions in a virtual reality arena. Two responses were measured: the thrust and the abdomen pitch. The dynamics of the responses to optic flow and air flow were measured at various frequencies, and modelled as a multicompartment linear system, which accurately captured the behavioural responses of the fruit flies. The results indicate that these two behavioural responses are concurrently sensitive to changes of optic flow as well as wind. The abdomen pitch showed a streamlining response, where the abdomen was raised higher as the magnitude of either stimulus was increased. The thrust, in contrast, exhibited a counter-phase response where maximum thrust occurred when the optic flow or wind flow was at a minimum, indicating that the flies were attempting to maintain an ideal flight speed. When the changes in the wind and optic flow were in phase (i.e. did not contradict each other), the net responses (thrust and abdomen pitch) were well approximated by an equally weighted sum of the responses to the individual stimuli. However, when the optic flow and wind stimuli were presented in counterphase, the flies seemed to respond to only one stimulus or the other, demonstrating a form of 'selective attention'.

show abstract

The aerodynamics and control of free flight manoeuvres inDrosophila

Cited by 133 publications

References 122 publications

Flies compensate for unilateral wing damage through modular adjustments of wing and body kinematics

Flies compensate for unilateral wing damage through modular adjustments of wing and body kinematics

Escaping blood-fed malaria mosquitoes minimize tactile detection without compromising on take-off speed

Flight control of fruit flies: dynamic response to optic-flow and headwind

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About