• 1990 (Vol.4)
  • 1989 (Vol.3)
  • 1988 (Vol.2)
  • 1987 (Vol.1)

Volume 36 #3

Contents

  1. Dependence of the results of the assessment of fusion reserves on the measurement method, tools and parameters of test stimuli
  2. Ganglion cell regularity in the dolphin’s retina improves during
  3. Influence of spectral componentsof dayly lighting on eye structures formation for japanese quail coturnix japonica
  4. Mismatch between electrophysiological and behavioral measurements: example from auditory system of noctuid moths (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae)
  5. Interaural forward masking in the auditory system of a dolphin
  6. Radio-sensor technical diagnosis complex electronic assembly
  7. Accuracy of the coordinates for underlying surface based on photogrammetric measurements of the images with an oblique projection
  8. Simulation of signal repeator of radio pulses for radio-sensor authentication systems

Mismatch between electrophysiological and behavioral measurements: example from auditory system of noctuid moths (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae)

© 2022 D. N. Lapshin

Institute for information transmission problems (Kharkevich Institute) 127051 Moscow, Bolshoy Karetny per. 19, build. 1, Russia

Received 25 Mar 2022

Mismatch between the sensory thresholds measured in behavioral and physiological experiments is a common phenomenon. In audition, such difference may be present both in the absolute values of thresholds and in the shape of frequency- threshold curve. When the primary auditory neurons demonstrate lower thresholds then the mismatch may be attributed to the motivation of an animal in behavioral experiment. The reasons for the opposite difference are less clear. Here we present behavioral auditory measurements on noctuid moths Agrochola macilenta Hbn. and Scoliopteryx libatrix L. which were tested with series of acoustic pulses (10–140 kHz) similar to the echolocation calls of bats. In both species, the averaged frequency-threshold plots were similar in form to the physiological audiograms of the primary auditory neurons (A1 and A2), however, behavioral thresholds were by ca. 35 dB lower than the physiological ones. We discuss the possible mechanisms of adjustment of the acoustic sensitivity in intact moths, and also how the methods of recording of motor activity of a moth in behavioral experiment may affect the results.

Key words: Noctuidae, acoustic perception, frequency tuning, tympanic organ, flight

DOI: 10.31857/S0235009222030040

Cite: Lapshin D. N. Protivorechiya v dannykh elektrofiziologicheskikh i povedencheskikh eksperimentov na primere rezultatov testirovaniya slukhovoi sistemy babochek – sovok (lepidoptera, noctuidae) [Mismatch between electrophysiological and behavioral measurements: example from auditory system of noctuid moths (lepidoptera, noctuidae)]. Sensornye sistemy [Sensory systems]. 2022. V. 36(3). P. 234–243 (in Russian). doi: 10.31857/S0235009222030040

References:

  • Lapshin D.N. Ekholokatsionnaya sistema babochek [Echolocation system of nocturnal moths]. Moscow. Nauka, 2005. 207 s (in Russian).
  • Lapshin D.N. Tsentral’nyye mekhanizmy parallel’noy obrabotki informatsii v slukhovoy sisteme babochek (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae) [Central mechanisms of parallel information processing in the moth auditory system (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae)]. Sensornye sistemy [Sensory systems]. 2010. V. 24 (3). P. 242–254 (in Russian).
  • Lapshin D.N. Obrabotka summy dvukh ritmicheskikh potokov v tsentral’nykh otdelakh slukhovoy sistemy babochek (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae) [The processing of a mixture of two rhythmic signals by the auditory system in noctuid moths (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae)]. Sensornye sistemy [Sensory systems]. 2011. V. 25 (2). P. 143–155 (in Russian).
  • Lapshin D.N., Voroncov D.D. Chastotnaja nastrojka sluhovoj sistemy sovok (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae) v polete. Sensornye sistemy. 2000. T. 14. № 4. S. 304–313. (in Russian)
  • Lapshin D.N., Vorontsov D.D. Protsessy zakhvata i soprovozhdeniya akusticheskogo signala slukhovoy sistemoy sovok (Noctuidae, Lepidoptera) [Tuning to and following the acoustic signal by the auditory system in noctuid moths (Noctuidae, Lepidoptera)]. Sensornye sistemy [Sensory systems]. 2004. V. 18 (3). P. 265–272 (in Russian).
  • Lapshin D.N., Vorontsov D.D. Mekhanizmy dinamicheskogo formirovaniya chastotnykh kharakteristik slukhovoy sistemy sovok (Noctuidae, Lepidoptera) [The mechanism of dynamic frequency tuning in the hearing system of noctuid moths (Noctuidae, Lepidoptera)]. Sensornye sistemy [Sensory systems]. 2005. V. 19 (4). P. 322–331 (in Russian).
  • Adams W.B. Mechanical tuning of the acoustic receptor of Prodenia eridania (Cramer) (Noctuidae). J. Exp. Biol. 1972. V. 57. P. 297–304.
  • Agee H.R. Response of flying bollworm moths and other tympanate moths to pulsed ultrasound. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 1969a. V. 62. № 4. P. 801–807. https://doi.org/10.1093/aesa/62.4.801
  • Agee H.R. Response of Heliothis spp. (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) to ultrasound when resting, feeding, courting, mating, or ovipositing. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 1969b. V. 62. № 5. P. 1122–1128. https://doi.org/10.1093/aesa/62.5.1122
  • Bezrukov S.M., Vodyanoy I. Stochastic resonance in nondynamical systems without response threshold. Nature. 1997. V. 385. № 23. P. 319–321. https://doi.org/10.1038/385319a0
  • Bibikov N.G. Addition of noise enhances neural synchrony to amplitude-modulated sounds in the frog’s midbrain. Hearing Research. 2002. V. 173. P. 21–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-5955(02)00456-2
  • Callahan P.S., Carlysle T.C. Comparison of the epaulette and micronodules on the tympanic membrane of the corn earworm moth with those of the cabbage looper. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 1972. V. 65. P. 918–925. https://doi.org/10.1093/aesa/65.4.918
  • Fyodorova M.V., Lapshin D.N. Responses of moths to ultrasounds. Sensory System and Communication in Arthropods. Edit. F.G. Gribakin, K. Wiese, A.V. Popov. Basel. Birkhäuser Verlag. 1990. P. 178–182.
  • Madsen B.M., Miller L.A. Auditory input to motor neurons of the dorsal longitudinal flight muscles in a noctuid moth (Barathra brassicae L.). J. Comp. Physiol. 1987. V. 160. P. 23–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00613438
  • Payne R.S., Roeder K.D., Wallman J. Directional sensitivity of the ears of noctuid moths. J. Exp. Biol. 1966. V. 44. № 1. P. 17–32. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.44.1.17
  • Roeder K.D. The behavior of free flying moths in the presence of artificial ultrasonic pulses. Anim. Behav. 1962. V. 10. № 3. P. 300–304.
  • Roeder K.D. Acoustic sensitivity of the noctuid tympanic organ and its range for the cries of bats. J. Insect. Physiol. 1966. V. 12. P. 843–859. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1910(66)90035-7
  • Roeder K.D. Turning tendency of moths exposed to ultrasound while in stationary flight. J. Insect. Physiol. 1967. V. 13. P. 873–888. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1910(67)90051-0
  • Roeder K.D., Treat A.E. Ultrasonic reception by the tympanic organ of noctuid moths. J. Exp. Zool. 1957. V. 134. P. 127–158. https://doi.org/10.1002/jez.1401340107
  • Roeder K.D., Treat A.E. The detection and evasion of bats by moths. Am. Sci. V. 49. 1961. P. 135–148.
  • Schiolten P., Larsen O.N., Michelsen A. Mechanical time resolution in some insect ears. J. Comp. Physiol. A. 1981. V. 143. P. 289–295. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00611164
  • Suga N. Functional organisation of two tympanic neurons in noctuid moths. Jpn. J. Physiol. 1961. V. 11. P. 666–677. https://doi.org/10.2170/jjphysiol.11.666
  • Surlykke A., Miller L.A. Central branchings of three sensory axons from a moth ear (Agrotis segetum, Noctuidae). J. Insect. Physiol. 1982. V. 28. № 4. P. 357–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1910(82)90048-8
  • Windmill J.F.C., Jackson J.C., Tuck E.J., Robert D. Keeping up with bats: dynamic auditory tuning in a moth. Current Biology. 2006. V. 16. P. 2418–2423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2006.09.066