Neuroethology of female preference in the synchronously singing bushcricket Mecopoda elongata (Tettigoniidae; Orthoptera): Why do followers call at all?

Journal of Experimental Biology

Volumn 210, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 465-476

  Fertschai, Ismene ^a   Stradner, Jürgen ^a   Römer, Heiner ^a  

^a Inst Zool an Karl Franzens Univ   (Austria)

Author keywords

Acoustic synchrony; Bushcricket; Female choice; Neuroethology; Sensory bias; Simulation; Time intensity trading

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FEMALE; MALE; ORTHOPTERA; PHYSIOLOGY; SENSORY NERVE CELL; SEXUAL SELECTION; TIME; VOCALIZATION;

ANIMALS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FEMALE; MALE; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; NEURONS, AFFERENT; ORTHOPTERA; TIME FACTORS; VOCALIZATION, ANIMAL;

ORTHOPTERA; TETTIGONIIDAE;

EID: 33847380573     PISSN: 00220949     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1242/jeb.02655     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Arak, A. and Eiriksson, T. (1992). Choice of singing sites by male bushcrickets (Tettigonia viridissima) in relation to signal propagation. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 30, 365-372.
2. Backwell, P., Jennions, M., Passmore, N. and Christy, J. (1998). Synchronized courtship in fiddler crabs. Nature 391, 31-32.
3. Brumm, H. and Todt, D. (2002). Noise-dependent song amplitude regulation in a territorial songbird. Anim. Behav. 63, 891-897.
4. Buck, J. and Buck, E. (1966). Biology of synchronous flashing of fireflies. Nature 211, 562-564.
5. Dawkins, M. S. and Guilford, T. (1996). Sensory bias and the adaptiveness of female choice. Am. Nat. 148, 937-942.
6. Dyson, M. L. and Passmore, N. I. (1988). Two-choice phonotaxis in Hyperolius marmoratus (Anura: Hyperolidae): the effect of temporal variation in presented stimuli. Anim. Behav. 36, 648-652.
7. Galliart, P. L. and Shaw, K. C. (1996). The effect of variation in parameters of the male calling song of the katydid, Amblycorypha parvipennis (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae), on female phonotaxis and phonoresponse. J. Insect Behav. 9, 841-855.
8. Gerhardt, H. C. and Höbel, G. (2005). Mid-frequency suppression in the green tree frog (Hyla cinerea): mechanisms and implications for the evolution of acoustic communication. J. Comp. Physiol. A 191, 707-714.
9. Grafe, T. U. (1996). The function of call alternation in the African reed frog (Hyperolius marmoratus): precise call timing prevents auditory masking. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 38, 149-158.
10. Grafe, T. U. (1999). A function of synchronous chorusing and a novel female preference shift in an anuran. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 266, 2331-2336.
11. Greenfield, M. D. (1994). Synchronous and alternating choruses in insects and anurans: common mechanisms and diverse functions. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 25, 97-126.
12. Greenfield, M. D. and Rand, S. (2000). Frogs have rules: selective attention algorithms regulate chorusing in Physalaemus pustulosus (Leptodactylidae). Ethology 106, 331-347.
13. Greenfield, M. D. and Roizen, I. (1993). Katydid synchronous chorusing is an evolutionary stable outcome of female choice. Nature 364, 618-620.
14. Greenfield, M. D., Tourtellot, M. K. and Snedden, W. A. (1997). Precedence effects and the evolution of chorusing. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 264, 1355-1361.
15. Hardt, M. (1989). Zur Phonotaxis von Laubheuschrecken: Eine vergleichende verhaltensphysiologische und neurophysiologisch-anatomische Untersuchung. PhD thesis, Ruhr-University Bochum, Germany.
16. Hartbauer, M., Kratzer, S., Steiner, K. and Römer, H. (2005). Mechanisms for synchrony and alternation in song interactions of the bushcricket Mecopoda elongata (Tettigoniidae; Orthoptera). J. Comp. Physiol. A 191, 175-188.
17. Klump, G. M. and Gerhardt, H. C. (1992). Mechanisms and function of call-timing in male-male interactions in frogs. In Playback and Studies of Animal Communication (ed. P. K. McGregor), pp. 153-174. New York: Plenum Press.
18. Kotiaho, J. S., Alatalo, R. V., Mappes, J. and Parri, S. (2004). Adaptive significance of synchronous chorusing in an acoustically signalling wolf spider. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 271, 1847-1850.
19. Kratzer, S. (2000). Verhaltensuntersuchungen zu Gesangsinteraktionen bei der Laubheuschrecke Mecopoda elongata (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae). Diploma thesis, Karl-Franzens-University, Graz, Austria.
20. Lloyd, J. E. (1973). Model for the mating protocol of synchronously flashing fireflies. Nature 245, 268-270.
21. Molina, J. and Stumpner, A. (2005). Effects of pharmacological treatment and photoinactivation on the directional responses of an insect neuron. J. Exp. Zool. A 303, 1085-1103.
22. Murphey, R. M. and Zaretzky, D. (1980). Orientation to calling song by female crickets, Scapsipedus marginatus (Gryllidae). J. Exp. Biol. 56, 335-352.
23. Pollack, G. S. (1998). Neural processing of acoustic signals. In Comparative Hearing: Insects (ed. R. R. Hoy, A. N. Popper and R. R. Fay), pp. 139-196. New York, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
24. Römer, H. (1985). Anatomical representation of frequency and intensity in the auditory system of orthoptera. In Acoustic and Vibrational Communication in Insects (ed. K. Kalmring and N. Eisner), pp. 25-32. Hamburg: Paul Parey.
25. Römer, H. (1998). The sensory ecology of acoustic communication in insects. In Comparative Hearing: Insects (ed. R. R. Hoy, A. N. Popper and R. R. Fay), pp. 63-69. New York, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
26. Römer, H. and Lewald, J. (1992). High-frequency sound transmission in natural habitats: implications for the evolution of insect acoustic communication. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 157, 631-642.
27. Römer, H. and Rheinlaender, J. (1989). Hearing in insects and its adaptation to environmental constraints. In Biological Signal Processing (ed. H. C. Lüttgau and D. R. Necker), pp. 146-162. Weinheim: VBH Verlag.
28. Römer, H., Hedwig, B. and Ott, S. R. (1997). Proximate mechanism of female preference for the leader male in synchronizing bushcrickets (Mecopoda elongata). In Proceedings of the 25th Göttingen Neurobiology Conference. Vol. II (ed. N. Elsner and H. Wässle), p. 322. Stuttgart, New York: Thieme.
29. Römer, H., Hedwig, B. and Ott, S. R. (2002). Contralateral inhibition as a sensory bias: the neural basis for a female preference in a synchronously calling bushcricket, Mecopoda elongata. Eur. J. Neurosci. 15, 1655-1662.
30. Schildberger, K. (1994). The auditory pathway of crickets: adaptations for intraspecific acoustic communication. In Neural Basis of Behavioural Adaptations (ed. K. Schildberger and N. Elsner), pp. 209-226. Stuttgart, New York: Fischer.
31. Sismondo, E. (1990). Synchronous, alternating, and phase-locked stridulation by a tropical katydid. Science 249, 55-58.
32. Snedden, W. A. and Greenfield, M. D. (1998). Females prefer leading males: relative call timing and sexual selection in katydid choruses. Anim. Behav. 56, 1091-1098.
33. Tuttle, M. D. and Ryan, M. J. (1982). The role of synchronized calling, ambient light, and ambient noise, in anti-bat-predator behavior of a treefrog. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 11, 125-131.
34. von Helversen, D. and Rheinlaender, J. (1988). Interaural intensity and time discrimination in an unrestraint grasshopper: a tentative behavioural approach. J. Comp. Physiol. A 162, 333-340.
35. Walker, T. J. (1969). Acoustic synchrony: two mechanisms in the snowy tree cricket. Science 166, 891-894.
36. Webb, B. (1995). Using robots to model animals: a cricket test. Robot. Auton. Syst. 16, 117-134.
37. Webb, B. and Scutt, T. (2000). A simple latency-dependent spiking neuron model of cricket phonotaxis. Biol. Cybern. 82, 247-269.
38. Wells, K. D. (1988). The effects of social interactions on anuran vocal behavior. In The Evolution of the Amphibian Auditory System (ed. B. Fritsch, M. J. Ryan, W. Wilczynski, T. E. Hetherington and W. Walkowiak), pp. 433-454. New York: Wiley.
39. Wells, K. D. and Schwartz, J. J. (1982). The effect of vegetation on the propagation of calls in the neotropical frog Centrolenella fleischmanni. Herpetologica 38, 449-455.