spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


spacer gif
     Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents    

First published online February 1, 2008
Journal of Experimental Biology 211, 555-562 (2008)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2008
doi: 10.1242/jeb.005736
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Triblehorn, J. D.
Right arrow Articles by Yager, D. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Triblehorn, J. D.
Right arrow Articles by Yager, D. D.

Free-flight encounters between praying mantids (Parasphendale agrionina) and bats (Eptesicus fuscus)

J. D. Triblehorn1,*, K. Ghose1,2, K. Bohn1, C. F. Moss1,2,3 and D. D. Yager1,2

1 Department of Psychology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA
2 Neuroscience and Cognitive Science Program, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA
3 Institute for Systems Research, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA

* Author for correspondence at present address: Department of Biological Sciences, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, MO 65211, USA (e-mail: triblehornj{at}missouri.edu)

Accepted 29 November 2007

Through staged free-flight encounters between echolocating bats and praying mantids, we examined the effectiveness of two potential predator-evasion behaviors mediated by different sensory modalities: (1) power dive responses triggered by bat echolocation detected by the mantis ultrasound-sensitive auditory system, and (2) `last-ditch' maneuvers triggered by bat-generated wind detected by the mantis cercal system. Hearing mantids escaped more often than deafened mantids (76% vs 34%, respectively; hearing conveyed 42% advantage). Hearing mantis escape rates decreased when bat attack sequences contained very rapid increases in pulse repetition rates (escape rates <40% for transition slopes >16 p.p.s. 10 ms–1; escape rates >60% for transition slopes <16 p.p.s. 10 ms–1). This suggests that echolocation attack sequences containing very rapid transitions (>16 p.p.s. 10 ms–1) could circumvent mantis/insect auditory defenses. However, echolocation attack sequences containing such transitions occurred in only 15% of the trials. Since mantis ultrasound-mediated responses are not 100% effective, cercal-mediated evasive behaviors triggered by bat-generated wind could be beneficial as a backup/secondary system. Although deafened mantids with functioning cerci did not escape more often than deafened mantids with deactivated cerci (35% vs 32%, respectively), bats dropped mantids with functioning cerci twice as frequently as mantids with deactivated cerci. This latter result was not statistically reliable due to small sample sizes, since this study was not designed to fully evaluate this result. It is an interesting observation that warrants further investigation, however, especially since these dropped mantids always survived the encounter.

Key words: escape, hearing, insect, echolocation, predator–prey






© The Company of Biologists Ltd 2008