Reafferent or Redundant: Integration of Phonotaxis and Optomotor Behavior in Crickets and Robots

Adaptive Behavior

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 137-158

  Webb, Barbara ^a,b,c   Reeve, Richard ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Cricket; Efferent copy; Optomotor; Robot; Sensorimotor integration

Indexed keywords

ANIMALIA; GRYLLIDAE;

EID: 1642489084     PISSN: 10597123     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1059712303113001     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Arkin, R. C. (1989). Motor schema-based mobile robot navigation. International Journal of Robotics Research, 8(4), 92-112.
2. Böhm, H., Schildberger, K., & Huber, F. (1991). Visual and acoustic course control in the cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. Journal of Experimental Biology, 159, 235-248.
3. Chapman, T. (2001). Morphological and neural modelling of the orthopteran escape response. Ph.D. thesis, University of Stirling, Stirling, U.K.
4. Collett, T. (1980). Angular tracking and the optomotor response: an analysis of visual interaction in a hoverfly. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 140, 145-158.
5. Egelhaaf, M. (1987). Dynamic properties of two control systems underlying visually guided turning in house-flies. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 161, 777-783.
6. Gotz, K. G. (1975). The optomotor equilibrium of the drosphilia navigation system. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 99, 187-210.
7. Harrison, R. R. & Koch, C. (1998). An analog VLSI model of the fly elementary motion detector. In M. I. Jordan, M. J. K. & Solla, S. A. (Eds.) Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (vol. 10, pp. 880-886). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8. Harrison, R. R. & Koch, C. (1999). A robust analog VLSI motion sensor based on the visual system of the fly. Autonomous Robotics, 7(3), 211-224.
9. Hassenstein, B. & Reichardt, W. (1956). Systemtheoretische Analyse der Zeit-, Reihenfolgen-, und Vorzeichenauswertung bei der Bewungsperzeption des Rüsselkäfers. Chlorophanus. Z. Naturforschung, 11(b), 513-524.
10. Heisenberg, M. & Wolf, R. (1988). Reafferent control of optomotor yaw torque in Drosophila melanogaster. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 163(3), 373-388.
11. Horseman, G. & Huber, F. (1994). Sound localisation in crickets. I. Contralateral inhibition of an ascending auditory interneuron. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 175, 389-398.
12. Kirschfeld, K. (1994). Tracking of small objects in front of a textured background by insects and vertebrates - phenomena and neuronal basis. Biological Cybernetics, 70(5), 407-415.
13. Koch, C. (1999). Biophysics of computation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14. Lund, H. H., Webb, B., & Hallam, J. (1997). A robot attracted to the cricket species Gryllus bimaculatus. In P. Husbands and I. Harvey (Eds.) Proceedings of 4th European Conference on Artificial Life (pp. 246-255). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford Books.
15. Lund, H. H., Webb, B., & Hallam, J. (1998). Physical and temporal scaling considerations in a robot model of cricket calling song preference. Artificial Life, 4(1), 95-107.
16. McFarland, D. & Bosser, T. (1993). Intelligent behaviour in animals and robots. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17. Michelsen, A., Popov, A. V., & Lewis, B. (1994). Physics of directional hearing in the cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 175, 153-164.
18. Reeve, R. & Webb, B. (in press). New neural circuits for robot phonotaxis. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A.
19. Robert, D. & Rowell, C. H. F. (1992). Locust flight steering 2. Acoustic avoidance maneuvers and associated head movements, compared with correctional steering. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 171(1), 53-62.
20. Schildberger, K. (1984). Temporal selectivity of identified auditory interneurons in the cricket brain. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 155:171-185.
21. Schul, J. (1998). Song recognition by temporal cues in a group of closely related bushcricket species (genus tettigonia). Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 183, 401-410.
22. Srinivasan, M. S. & Bernard, G. D. (1977). The pursuit response of the housefly and its interaction with the optomotor response. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 115, 101-117.
23. von Holst, E. & Mittklstaedt, H. (1950) Das Reafferenzprinzip. Naturwissenschaften, 37, 464-476.
24. Wagner, H. (1986). Flight performance and visual control of the free-flying housefly (Musca domestica). III Interactions between angular movement induced by wide-and smallfield stimuli. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 312, 581-595.
25. Webb, B. (2000). What does robotics offer animal behaviour? Animal Behaviour, 60(5), 545-558.
26. Webb, B. & Harrison, R. (2000a). Eyes and ears: combining sensory motor systems modelled on insect physiology. In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.
27. Webb, B. & Harrison, R. R. (2000b). Integrating sensorimotor systems in a robot model of cricket behavior. In Sensor Fusion and Decentralised Control in Robotic Systems III. Boston: SPIE.
28. Webb, B. & Scutt, T. (2000). A simple latency dependent spiking neuron model of cricket phonotaxis. Biological Cybernetics, 82(3), 247-269.
29. Willis, M. A. & Carde, R. T. (1990). Pheromonemodulated optomotor response in male gypsy moths, lymantria-dispar 1 - upwind flight in a pheromone plume in different wind velocities. Journal of Comparative Physiology A, 167(5), 699-706.