The auditory system of cartilaginous fishes

Chapuis, Lucille; Collin, Shaun P.

doi:10.1007/s11160-022-09698-8

Cited by 21 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 192 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Compared to existing behaviourally derived audiograms of other piscivorous, actively swimming sharks, the peak sensitivity of S. lewini is similar to that of the lemon shark Negaprion brevirostris (Poey 1868) (320 Hz) (Nelson, 1967) but slightly shifted towards lower frequencies than the bull shark Carcharhinus leucas (Valenciennes 1839) (400-600 Hz) (Kritzler & Wood, 1961). The results of the current study show that S. lewini adapts to low-frequency hearing (<1000 Hz), like all other shark species that have been investigated (reviewed by Collin, 2022, andHiggs, 2022).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 66%

Operant conditioning as a tool to assess hearing abilities in sharks

Nieder,

Rapson,

Holland

et al. 2023

Journal of Fish Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sharks (elasmobranchs) are an ancient, diverse group of fishes, representing a basal stage in the evolution of vertebrate hearing. Yet, our understanding of behavioural measures of hearing abilities in sharks is limited. To address this, an operant conditioning paradigm was designed, and scalloped hammerhead Sphyrna lewini and rig (spotted estuary smooth hound) Mustelus lenticulatus were successfully trained to respond to pure-tone acoustic stimuli from an underwater speaker. After 2-3 weeks of training, both species showed distinctive responses to these acoustic stimuli and retained this behaviour when reinforced. S. lewini responded to a 400 Hz pulsed tone with an abrupt increase in tailbeat frequency (97 beats per 30 s vs. 69 beats for a 2 kHz control and 70 beats for no signal) and sustained vigorous swimming (arousal response) for at least 30 s. In response to a 200 Hz pulsed tone, M. lenticulatus visited a target area under the speaker significantly more frequently (13.4 ± 4.3 times per minute vs. 1.4 ± 1.5 times for a 1.2 kHz control and 0.9 ± 0.01 times for no signal) and swam circles under the speaker to search for food. The authors used S. lewini arousal responses to pure-tone stimuli of 40, 80, 200, 400, 600 and 800 Hz to generate a provisional hearing-threshold curve. The results show that S. lewini adapts to low-frequency hearing (greatest sensitivity at 200 Hz, upper limit 800 Hz), which is like other coastal pelagic sharks that have been investigated so far. Despite challenges operant acoustic conditioning studies are a viable method for revealing auditory capabilities of sharks.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 66%

Operant conditioning as a tool to assess hearing abilities in sharks

Nieder,

Rapson,

Holland

et al. 2023

Journal of Fish Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The bandwidth of the clicks produced by U. granulatus and P. ater examined here spanned the expected hearing range of elasmobranchs (40–1500 Hz; Chapuis & Collin, 2022 ), providing some evidence that their predators ( Carcharhinus melanopterus and Negaprion acutidens ; Kanno et al, 2019 ; Martins et al, 2020a , 2020b ) and conspecifics can hear these sounds, although peak frequencies of the clicks occurred at the top or above this hearing range (1031–1875 Hz). However, audiograms have only been produced for a few elasmobranch species, and none has been produced for U. granulatus , P. ater , or their known predators (Chapuis & Collin, 2022 ). Further assessment of the hearing abilities of these species is therefore necessary to clarify the role of the produced sounds in agonistic displays or predator avoidance.…”

mentioning

confidence: 74%

“…By comparison, the hearing capabilities of elasmobranchs have received much more attention (Mickle et al, 2020 ; Myrberg, 2001 ). Elasmobranchs are most sensitive to low‐frequency sounds between 40 and 1500 Hz, with peak sensitivities between 200 and 400 Hz, but audiograms have only been produced for 10 species (Chapuis & Collin, 2022 ). There is more evidence relating to behavioral responses to sounds.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence of sound production in wild stingrays

Fetterplace

Esteban²,

Pini-Fitzsimmons

et al. 2022

Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The endolymphatic duct tube is a lumen surrounded by a bony wall and narrowing deeper into the headshield. Its dorsal end opens into the funnel and through it extrinsic grains passed in and endolymph or seawater passed both out and in, as in sharks and ratfishes (Sahney and Wilson 2001;Chapuis et al 2022). In sharks, the endolymphatic duct opens into a broad, shallow fossa, which is a single indentation or depressed area of the posterior chondrocranium, surrounding both openings of the endolymphatic duct (Popper and Fay 1977).…”

Section: Terminologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Endolymphatic structures in headshields of the osteostracan genus Tremataspis (Agnatha) from the Silurian of Estonia

Märss¹,

Viljus²,

Wilson³

2022

EJES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Details of the endolymphatic structures are described for the first time in the headshields of the osteostracan genus Tremataspis from the Silurian of Estonia. Tiny platelets, here termed covering platelets, are located within the openings of the endolymphatic duct. The details of their shapes and arrangements differ among the four studied species. In Tremataspis schmidti Rohon and Tremataspis milleri Patten, the covering platelets are usually arranged in an oval or circular shape around the opening of the endolymphatic duct. These species can have smooth, flat covering platelets at the mouth of an irregularly funnel-shaped aperture in the dorsal shield; the funnel often has a posterior extension. In Tremataspis rohoni Robertson and Tremataspis mammillata Patten, a distinct circular arrangement of platelets does not occur; instead, their funnel was capped with a few (2-3) smooth, flat covering platelets. The funnel of T. milleri sometimes has a long postero-lateral extension, while that of T. mammillata can have a short extension; no extensions of the funnel have been observed in T. schmidti or T. rohoni. The diameter of the pores in the covering platelets is larger than that of the pores in the superficial layer of the headshield and much larger than the diameter of the pores in the porous fields (these are thin perforated bony septa subdividing the sensory canals horizontally into lower and upper parts). In T. milleri, the larger pores are located on the side of the covering platelets that is closer to the body midline. The discovered system of covering platelets possibly functioned as a sieve for allowing in suitable grains of material and preventing material that is too fine or too coarse, or not sufficiently dense, from entering the inner ear.

show abstract

The auditory system of cartilaginous fishes

Cited by 21 publications

References 192 publications

Operant conditioning as a tool to assess hearing abilities in sharks

Operant conditioning as a tool to assess hearing abilities in sharks

Evidence of sound production in wild stingrays

Endolymphatic structures in headshields of the osteostracan genus Tremataspis (Agnatha) from the Silurian of Estonia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About