Maintaining acoustic communication at a cocktail party: Heterospecific masking noise improves signal detection through frequency separation

Journal of Experimental Biology

Volumn 216, Issue 24, 2013, Pages 4655-4665

  Siegert, M E ^a   Romer H ^a   Hartbauer, M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRAZ   (Austria)

Author keywords

Ambient noise; Auditory interneuron; Insect; Katydid; Novelty detection; Selective encoding

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTICS; AMBIENT NOISE; ANIMAL; ARTICLE; AUDITORY INTERNEURON; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; FEMALE; GRYLLIDAE; HEARING; INSECT; MALE; NOISE; NOVELTY DETECTION; PHYSIOLOGY; SELECTIVE ENCODING; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; TETTIGONIIDAE; VOCALIZATION;

AMBIENT NOISE; AUDITORY INTERNEURON; INSECT; KATYDID; NOVELTY DETECTION; SELECTIVE ENCODING;

ACOUSTICS; ANIMALS; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; FEMALE; GRYLLIDAE; MALE; NOISE; SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO; VOCALIZATION, ANIMAL;

EID: 84890767356     PISSN: 00220949     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1242/jeb.089888     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Amzquita, A., Hödl, W., Lima, A. P., Castellanos, L., Erdtmann, L. and de Arajo, M. C. (2006). Masking interference and the evolution of the acoustic communication system in the Amazonian dendrobatid frog Allobates femoralis. Evolution 60, 1874-1887.
2. Andersson, S. and McGregor, P. K. (1999). Animal communication: what is the signal to noise ratio?. Trends Ecol. Evol. 14, 174-175.
3. Bee, M. A. and Micheyl, C. (2008). The cocktail party problem: what is it? How can it be solved? And why should animal behaviorists study it?. J. Comp. Psychol. 122, 235-251.
4. Bibikov, N. G. (2002). Addition of noise enhances neural synchrony to amplitudemodulated sounds in the frog's midbrain. Hear. Res. 173, 21-28.
5. Bronkhorst, A. W. (2000). The cocktail party phenomenon: A review of research on speech intelligibility in multiple-talker conditions. Acustica 86, 117-128.
6. Brumm, H. (2006). Signalling through acoustic windows: nightingales avoid interspecific competition by short-term adjustment of song timing. J. Comp. Physiol. A 192, 1279-1285.
7. Capranica, R. R. and Moffat, A. J. M. (1983). Neurobehavioral correlates of sound communication in anurans. In Advances in Vertebrate Neuroethology (ed. J. P. Ewert, R. R. Capranica and D. Ingle), pp. 701-730. New York, NY: Plenum.
8. Cherry, E. C. (1953). Some experiments on the recognition of speech, with one and with two ears. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 25, 975-979.
9. Cokl, A., Kalmring, K. and Rössler, W. (1995). Physiology of atympanate tibial organs in forelegs and midlegs of the cave-living Ensifera, Troglophilus neglectus (Raphidophoridae, Gryllacridoidea). J. Exp. Zool. 273, 376-388.
10. Diwakar, S. and Balakrishnan, R. (2007). Vertical stratification in an acoustically communicating ensiferan assemblage of a tropical evergreen forest in southern India. J. Trop. Ecol. 23, 479-486.
11. Faure, P. A. and Hoy, R. R. (2000a). Neuroethology of the katydid T-cell. I. Tuning and responses to pure tones. J. Exp. Biol. 203, 3225-3242.
12. Faure, P. A. and Hoy, R. R. (2000b). Neuroethology of the katydid T-cell. II. Responses to acoustic playback of conspecific and predatory signals. J. Exp. Biol. 203, 3243-3254.
13. Frisina, R. D., Karcich, K. J., Tracy, T. C., Sullivan, D. M., Walton, J. P. and Colombo, J. (1996). Preservation of amplitude modulation coding in the presence of background noise by chinchilla auditory-nerve fibers. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 99, 475-490.
14. Gerhardt, V. H. C. and Huber, F. (2002). Acoustic Communication in Insects and Anurans: Common Problems and Diverse Solutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
15. Gogala, M. and Riede, K. (1995). Time sharing of song activity by cicadas in Temengor Forest Reserve, Hulu Perak, and in Sabah, Malaysia. Malay. Nat. J. 48, 297-305.
16. Greenfield, M. D. (1988). Interspecific acoustic interactions among katydids Neoconocephalus: inhibition-induced shifts in diel periodicity. Anim. Behav. 36, 684-695.
17. 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.
18. Hartbauer, M., Siegert, M. E., Fertschai, I. and Römer, H. (2012). Acoustic signal perception in a noisy habitat: lessons from synchronising insects. J. Comp. Physiol. A 198, 397-409.
19. Heller, K. G. (1988). Bioakustik der Europischen Laubheuschrecken. Weikersheim, Germany: Verlag Josef Margraf.
20. Henry, K. R. (1999). Noise improves transfer of near-threshold, phase-locked activity of the cochlear nerve: evidence for stochastic resonance?. J. Comp. Physiol. A 184, 577-584.
21. Jain, M. and Balakrishnan, R. (2012). Does acoustic adaptation drive vertical stratification? A test in a tropical cricket assemblage. Behav. Ecol. 23, 343-354.
22. Kalmring, K., Rössler, W., Ebendt, R., Ahi, J. and Lakes, R. (1993). The auditory receptor organs in the forelegs of bushcrickets: physiology, receptor cell arrangement, and morphology of the tympanal and intermediate organs of three closely related species. Zool. Jahrb. Allg. Zool. 97, 75-94.
23. Keuper, A., Kalmring, K., Schatral, A., Latimer, W. and Kaiser, W. (1986). Behavioural adaptations of ground living bushcrickets to the properties of sound propagation in low grassland. Oecologia 70, 414-422.
24. Korsunovskaya, O. S. (2008). Acoustic signals in katydids (Orthoptera, Tettigonidae). Communication I. Entomol. Rev. (Engl. Transl.) 88, 1032-1050.
25. Kostarakos, K., Hartbauer, M. and Römer, H. (2008). Matched filters, mate choice and the evolution of sexually selected traits. PLoS ONE 3, e3005.
26. Krobath, I. (2013). Complex signalling, song interaction, and mate choice in a trilling species of the Mecopoda complex (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae). MSc thesis, Karl-Franzens-University, Graz, Austria.
27. Latimer, W. (1981). Acoustic competition in bush crickets. Ecol. Entomol. 6, 35-45.
28. Levin, J. E. and Miller, J. P. (1996). Broadband neural encoding in the cricket cercal sensory system enhanced by stochastic resonance. Nature 380, 165-168.
29. Lewis, E. R. and Henry, K. R. (1995). Nonlinear effects of noise on phase-locked cochlear-nerve responses to sinusoidal stimuli. Hear. Res. 92, 1-16.
30. McKay, J. M. (1969). The auditory system of Homorocoryphus (Tettigonioidea, Orthoptera). J. Exp. Biol. 51, 787-802.
31. Morris, G. K., Mason, A. C., Wall, P. and Belwood, J. J. (1994). High ultrasonic and tremulation signals in neotropical katydids (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae). J. Zool. (Lond.) 233, 129-163.
32. Narins, P. M. and Zelick, R. (1988). The effects of noise on auditory processing and behavior in amphibians. In The Evolution of the Amphibian Auditory System (ed. B. Fritzsch, M. J. Ryan, W. Wilczynski, T. E. Hetherington, and W. Walkowiak), pp. 511-536. New York, NY: John Wiley.
33. Nityananda, V. and Balakrishnan, R. (2006). A diversity of songs among morphologically indistinguishable katydids of the genus Mecopoda (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae) from southern India. Bioacoustics 15, 223-250.
34. Nityananda, V. and Bee, M. A. (2011). Finding your mate at a cocktail party: frequency separation promotes auditory stream segregation of concurrent voices in multi-species frog choruses. PLoS ONE 6, e21191.
35. Otte, D. (1992). Evolution of cricket songs. J. Orthop. Res. 1, 25-49.
36. Paez, V. P., Bock, B. C. and Rand, S. (1993). Inhibition of evoked calling of Dendrobates pumilio due to acoustic interference from cicada calling. Biotropica 25, 242-245.
37. Pfeiffer, M., Hartbauer, M., Lang, A. B., Maass, W. and Römer, H. (2012). Probing real sensory worlds of receivers with unsupervised clustering. PLoS ONE 7, e37354.
38. Rheinlaender, J. (1984). Das akustische Orientierungsverhalten von Heuschrecken, Grillen und Fröschen: Eine Vergleichende Neuro-und Verhaltensphysiologische Untersuchung. Habilitation thesis, Ruhr-University Bochum, Germany.
39. Rheinlaender, J. and Römer, H. (1980). Bilateral coding of sound direction in the CNS of the bushcricket Tettigonia viridissima L. (Orthoptera, Tettigoniidae). J. Comp. Physiol. A 140, 101-111.
40. Rheinlaender, J. and Römer, H. (1986). Insect hearing in the field. I. The use of identified nerve cells as biological microphones'. J. Comp. Physiol. A 158, 647-651.
41. Rheinlaender, J., Kalmring, K. and Römer, H. (1972). Akustische Neuronen mit T Struktur im Bauchmark von Tettigoniiden. J. Comp. Physiol. A 77, 208-224.
42. Riede, K. (1998). Acoustic monitoring of Orthoptera and its potential for conservation. J. Insect Conserv. 2, 217-223.
43. Römer, H. (in press). Masking by noise in acoustic insects: problems and solutions. In Animal Communication and Noise (ed. H. Brumm). Berlin: Springer Verlag.
44. Römer, H. and Lewald, J. (1992). High-frequency sound transmission in natural habitats: Implications for the evolution of insect acoustic communication. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 29, 437-444.
45. Römer, H., Bailey, W. J. and Dadour, I. (1989). Insect hearing in the field. III. Masking by noise. J. Comp. Physiol. 164, 609-620.
46. 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.
47. Ryan, M. J. and Brenowitz, E. A. (1985). The role of body size, phylogeny, and ambient noise in the evolution of bird song. Am. Nat. 126, 87-100.
48. Schmidt, A. K. D. and Römer, H. (2011). Solutions to the cocktail party problem in insects: selective filters, spatial release from masking and gain control in tropical crickets. PLoS ONE 6, e28593.
49. Schmidt, A. K. D., Riede, K. and Römer, H. (2011). High background noise shapes selective auditory filters in a tropical cricket. J. Exp. Biol. 214, 1754-1762.
50. Schmidt, A. K. D., Römer, H. and Riede, K. (2013). Spectral niche segregation and community organization in a tropical cricket assemblage. Behav. Ecol. 24, 470-480.
51. Schul, J. (1997). Neuronal basis of phonotactic behaviour in Tettigonia viridissima: processing of behaviourally relevant signals by auditory afferents and thoracic interneurons. J. Comp. Physiol. A 180, 573-583.
52. Schul, J. (1998). Song recognition by temporal cues in a group of closely related bushcricket species (genus Tettigonia). J. Comp. Physiol. A 183, 401-410.
53. Schul, J. (1999). Neuronal basis for spectral song discrimination in the bushcricket Tettigonia cantans. J. Comp. Physiol. A 184, 457-461.
54. Schul, J. and Sheridan, R. A. (2006). Auditory stream segregation in an insect. Neuroscience 138, 1-4.
55. Schul, J., Matt, F. and von Helversen, O. (2000). Listening for bats: the hearing range of the bushcricket Phaneroptera falcata for bat echolocation calls measured in the field. Proc. R. Soc. 267, 1711-1715.
56. Schul, J., Mayo, A. M. and Triblehorn, J. D. (2012). Auditory change detection by a single neuron in an insect. J. Comp. Physiol. A 198, 695-704.
57. Schwartz, J. J. and Wells, K. D. (1983). An experimental study of acoustic interference between two species of neotropical treefrogs. Anim. Behav. 31, 181-190.
58. Shaw, S. R. (1994). Detection of airborne sound by a cockroach vibration detector': A possible missing link in insect auditory evolution. J. Exp. Biol. 193, 13-47.
59. Shaw, K. L. (1999). A nested analysis of song groups and species boundaries in the Hawaiian cricket genus Laupala. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 11, 332-341.
60. Siegert, M. E., Römer, H., Hashim, R. and Hartbauer, M. (2011). Neuronal correlates of a preference for leading signals in the synchronizing bushcricket Mecopoda elongata (Orthoptera, Tettigoniidae). J. Exp. Biol. 214, 3924-3934.
61. Sismondo, E. (1990). Synchronous, alternating, and phase-locked stridulation by a tropical katydid. Science 249, 55-58.
62. Spezia, S., Curcio, L., Fiasconaro, A., Pizzolato, N., Valenti, D., Spagnolo, B., Bue, P., Peri, E. and Colazza, S. (2008). Evidence of stochastic resonance in the mating behavior of Nezara viridula (L.). Eur. Phys. J. B 65, 453-458.
63. Stölting, H. and Stumpner, A. (1998). Tonotopic organization of auditory receptors of the bushcricket pholidoptera griseoaptera (Tettigoniidae, Decticinae). Cell Tissue Res. 294, 377-386.
64. Strau, J., Lehmann, G. U. C., Lehmann, A. W. and Lakes-Harlan, R. (2012). Spatial organization of tettigoniid auditory receptors: insights from neuronal tracing. J. Morphol. 273, 1280-1290.
65. Stumpner, A. (1996). Tonotopic organization of the hearing organ in a bushcricket. Naturwissenschaften 83, 81-84.
66. Stumpner, A. and Molina, J. (2006). Diversity of intersegmental auditory neurons in a bushcricket. J. Comp. Physiol. A 192, 1359-1376.
67. Sueur, J. (2002). Cicada acoustic communication: potential sound partitioning in a multispecies community from Mexico (Hemiptera: Cicadomorpha: Cicadidae). Biol. J. Linn. Soc. Lond. 75, 379-394.
68. Suga, N. and Katsuki, Y. (1961). Central mechanism of hearing in insects. J. Exp. Biol. 38, 545-558.
69. Ter Hofstede, H. M. and Fullard, J. H. (2008). The neuroethology of song cessation in response to gleaning bat calls in two species of katydids, Neoconocephalus ensiger and Amblycorypha oblongifolia. J. Exp. Biol. 211, 2431-2441.
70. ter Hofstede, H. M., Kalko, E. K. V. and Fullard, J. H. (2010). Auditory-based defence against gleaning bats in neotropical katydids (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae). J. Comp. Physiol. A 196, 349-358.
71. Tougaard, J. (2000). Stochastic resonance and signal detection in an energy detector-implications for biological receptor systems. Biol. Cybern. 83, 471-480.
72. Ulanovsky, N., Las, L. and Nelken, I. (2003). Processing of low-probability sounds by cortical neurons. Nat. Neurosci. 6, 391-398.
73. Walker, T. J. (1964). Cryptic species among sound-producing ensiferan Orthoptera (Gryllidae and Tettigoniidae). Q. Rev. Biol. 39, 345-355.
74. Walker, T. J., Forrest, T. G. and Spooner, J. D. (2003). The Rotundifolia complex of the genus Amblycorypha (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae): songs reveal new species. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 96, 433-447.
75. Wehner, R. (1987). Matched filters'neural models of the external world. J. Comp. Physiol. A 161, 511-531.
76. Wiesenfeld, K. and Moss, F. (1995). Stochastic resonance and the benefits of noise: from ice ages to crayfish and SQUIDs. Nature 373, 33-36.
77. Wong, S., Parada, H. and Narins, P. M. (2009). Heterospecific acoustic interference: effects on calling in Oophaga pumilio. Biotropica 41, 74-80.
78. Zeng, F. G., Fu, Q. J. and Morse, R. (2000). Human hearing enhanced by noise. Brain Res. 869, 251-255.
79. Zhang-Cai, L., Feng, S., Yan-Ping, Z. and You-Guo, Q. (2004). Lower hearing threshold by noise. Chin. Phys. Lett. 21, 757-759.