Quantitative analysis of the effects of ultrasound from an odor sprayer on moth flight behavior

Journal of Chemical Ecology

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 71-82

  Skals, Niels ^a,b   Plepys, Dainius ^a   El Sayed, Ashraf M ^c   Löfstedt, Christer ^a   Surlykke, Annemarie ^b  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

^c AGRICULTURE AND AGRI FOOD CANADA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Autographa gamma; Dispenser; Moth hearing; Odor application; Odor quantification; Olfactory stimulation; Piezoelectric sprayer; Silver Y moth; Ultrasound

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE; CHEMICAL ECOLOGY; EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS; FLIGHT BEHAVIOR; ULTRASONICS;

AEROSOL; ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; AUDIOGRAPHY; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; AUTOGRAPHA; AUTOGRAPHA GAMMA; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY; FEMALE; FLIGHT; HEARING ACUITY; MALE; MOTH; NONHUMAN; ODOR; PIEZOELECTRICITY; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; ULTRASOUND;

ANIMALS; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY; FEMALE; FLIGHT, ANIMAL; MALE; MOTHS; SEX ATTRACTANTS; SMELL; ULTRASONICS;

ANIMALIA; AUTOGRAPHA; AUTOGRAPHA GAMMA; HEXAPODA; LEPIDOPTERA; NOCTUIDAE;

EID: 0037267588     PISSN: 00980331     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1021924529533     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. EL-SAYED, A., GÖDDE J., and ARN, H. 1999. Sprayer for quantitative application of odor stimuli. Environ. Entomol. 28:947-953.
2. HOY, R. R. 1992. The evolution of hearing in insects as an adaptation to predation from bats, pp. 115-119, in D. B. Webster, R. R. Fay, and A. N. Popper (eds.). The Evolutionary Biology of Hearing. Springer-Verlag, New York.
3. JAFFE, B., COOK, W. R., and JAFFE, H. 1989. Piezoelectric Ceramics. Academic Press, London.
4. KINSLER L. E., FREY, A. R., COPPENS, A. B., and SANDERS, J. V. 2000. Fundamentals of Acoustics, 4th ed. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
5. MILLER, L. A. and SURLYKKE, A. 2001. How some insects detect and avoid being eaten by bats: tactics and countertactics of prey and predator. Bioscience 51:570-581.
6. ROEDER, K. D. 1966. Acoustic sensitivity of the noctuid tympanic organ and its range for the cries of bats. J. Insect Physiol. 12:843-859.
7. ROEDER, K. D. 1967. Nerve Cells and Insect Behavior. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
8. SCOBLE, M. J. 1992. The Lepidoptera: Form, Function and Diversity. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
9. SKALS, N. and SURLYKKE A. 2000. Hearing and evasive behavior in the greater wax moth, Galleria mellonella (Pyralidae). Physiol. Entomol. 25:354-362.
10. SURLYKKE, A., FILSKOV, M., FULLARD, J. H., and FORREST, E. 1999. Auditory relationships to size in noctuid moths: Bigger is better. Naturwissenschaften 86:238-241.
11. WERNER, T. 1981. Responses of nonflying moths to ultrasound: the threat of gleaning bats. Can. J. Zool. 59:525-529.
12. ZHU, J. W., LÖFSTEDT, C., and BENGTSSON, B. O. 1996. Genetic variation in the strongly canalized sex pheromone communication system of the European com borer. Genetics 144:757-766.