- UID
- 489561
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2009-11-12
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
Echolocation in bats and hearing in moths
Moths are eaten by a variety of different animals but it is with bats that they may have their most interesting predator-prey relationship. All species of British bats incorporate Lepidoptera into their diet. Many bats are specialised predators of night-flying moths and hence possess a highly sophisticated echolocation system to enable them to detect and catch moths and other flying insects. Bats echolocate by producing and projecting ultrasonic sounds from their mouths or noses and then detecting the echoes that return from any solid object within range. This allows them to not only avoid stationary objects and habitat features such as trees and buildings, but also to identify and target night-flying insects as food. Bats echolocate over a range of different frequencies, which may differ between species. It seems that bats are able to recognise moths amongst many different returning echoes as moths are thought to have a characteristic ‘fluttering’ signal, produced by the action of their wings during flight. Some moths, night-flying species in particular (including most Noctuid species of which there are approximately 400 in Britain, including familiar moths like the Darts, Yellow-underwings and Clays), possess hearing organs comparable in function to our ears.
Square-spotted Clay – David Green/Butterfly Conservation
It is thought that these hearing organs may have developed to help moths to detect and evade predatory bats. Scientists have analysed the sounds that moth ears are sensitive to and it seems that moths are able to detect the range of sounds usually produced by hunting bats. Interestingly, in areas where bats are frequent predators of moths, moths often have better hearing than in areas where bats are scarce. (c) Merlin D. Tuttle, Bat Conservation International
Hearing moths are also thought to be able to judge the direction of a bat’s approach because a moth’s two ‘ears’ receive the sounds of an approaching bat at slightly different times. This ability to detect a potential predator can greatly increase the moth’s chances of escaping. There are several reactions of moths to the detection of a bat, such as changing their flight path if the bat is some distance away. If however, the bat has been detected at very close range, moths have been seen to suddenly fall out of the sky, sometimes doing loops and spirals, either through strong powered flight or simply by using the forces of gravity. The escape attempts of moths with hearing abilities can significantly reduce the predatory success rate of bats, with the result that their catches of hearing moths may be less than half those of moths without ears. It may be the sheer variety of the moths’ escape tactics that is the secret of their success: if bats are unable to predict the moths’ next move, they are less likely to be able to catch them.
Even though the use of escape tactics by moths may reduce their chances of being caught by bats, their safety is by no means guaranteed. Bats are very capable fliers and are sometimes able to track the moths in their aerial dive and catch them in their mouth or even on their wing, from which they are scooped into the bat’s waiting mouth!
Moths that do not possess hearing organs, and therefore cannot detect the presence of bats in the same ways, exhibit avoidance tactics of their own. Some species restrict their flying time to a short period at dusk, before bats are numerous, or they may fly more irregularly and unpredictably to make catching them much harder and to discourage bats from attempting to pursue them. Some moths may also fly close to other objects or the ground to make them harder to detect through echolocation. All of these tactics serve to reduce the risk of predation by bats. Some species of moth possess even more impressive defences against their bat predators. It is known that some moths from the Arctiid family (to which familiar species such as the Garden Tiger belong) are able to produce their own sounds (clicks), which may in turn be heard by the bats. There are several theories that attempt to explain why some moths are able to do this. In some cases it seems that sound acts as an indication of unpalatability: the moths are communicating that they are not a tasty or nutritious meal to discourage the bats from eating them. This tactic is functionally similar to the warning colours exhibited by many different poisonous animals. Another theory is that the sounds produced by the moths startle the bats and give the moths a chance to get away. But in addition, it seems that the clicks exhibited by Arctiid moths can disrupt a bat’s ranging ability, preventing the bat from accurately assessing the distance to its prey. This could give the moth a greater chance to escape but for this tactic to be successful the timing of the clicks is crucial.
Remarkably, it has also been observed that one species of moth, the Dogbane Tiger Moth from North America (Cycnia tenera), is able to produce the same sounds that are made by a predatory bat species as it advances on its moth prey. These sounds are thought to interfere with the bat’s echolocation system, or to confuse the bat into thinking it is hearing its own echo bouncing off a solid object. This confusing tactic may cause the bat to give up the chase, leaving the moth with the chance to live to see another day.
This struggle for survival between bats and moths as predator and prey is the subject of ongoing consideration and debate. It has been suggested that bats and moths are locked in an evolutionary ‘arms race’, in which moths evolve new tactics in response to the bats’ highly developed prey detection abilities, and bats in turn evolve new tactics to overcome moths’ defences. There is some support for this theory, as it seems that some bats have evolved low-frequency calls specifically to prey upon moths that have evolved hearing organs. Because these moths have limited sensitivity to low frequency sounds, bats that use these frequencies are less likely to be detected and are subsequently more likely to be successful in catching the moths.
Although many questions remain to be answered, these observations provide a fascinating insight into the complex and intriguing relationship between moths and bats that goes on, largely unseen, after dark. |
|