Skip to main content
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 1997 Jan 22;264(1378):83–88. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1997.0012

Hearing and bat defence in geometrid winter moths.

J Rydell 1, N Skals 1, A Surlykke 1, M Svensson 1
PMCID: PMC1688226  PMID: 9061963

Abstract

Audiograms and behavioural responses to ultrasound reveal that male geometrid winter moths (Agriopis and Erannis spp.; Ennominae, and Alsophila aescularia; Oenochrominae), which have large wings and a slow flight, have good, broadly tuned ultrasonic hearing with best frequencies at 25-40 kHz, coinciding with the frequencies used by most sympatric aerial-hawking bats. Ultrasonic pulses (27 kHz 110 dB at 1 m) delivered at distances of 1-12 m evoked consistent reactions of free flying, male A. marginaria in the lab as well as in the field; those at < 5 m resulted in the moth spiralling or diving towards the ground, those at 5-12 m resulted in one or several changes in the flight path, but did not end on the ground. The differential reaction probably reflects whether the moth is likely to have been detected by the bat or not. The micropterous (and flightless), and hence cryptic, females have strongly reduced tympanic organs and are virtually deaf. Sexual dimorphism in hearing and behavioural reactions to ultrasound reflect differential natural selection on males and females by bats. Natural selection on the hearing of the males thus seems to occur although they fly in late autumn and early spring, when bat activity is much reduced.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (373.7 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Heinrich B., Mommsen T. P. Flight of Winter Moths Near 0{degrees}C. Science. 1985 Apr 12;228(4696):177–179. doi: 10.1126/science.228.4696.177. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Lawrence B. D., Simmons J. A. Measurements of atmospheric attenuation at ultrasonic frequencies and the significance for echolocation by bats. J Acoust Soc Am. 1982 Mar;71(3):585–590. doi: 10.1121/1.387529. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Roeder K. D. Responses of the less sensitive acoustic sense cells in the tympanic organs of some noctuid and geometrid moths. J Insect Physiol. 1974 Jan;20(1):55–66. doi: 10.1016/0022-1910(74)90123-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Waters D. A., Jones G. Echolocation call structure and intensity in five species of insectivorous bats. J Exp Biol. 1995 Feb;198(Pt 2):475–489. doi: 10.1242/jeb.198.2.475. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES