Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Wind-induced noise alters signaler and receiver behavior in vibrational communication

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Noise that masks communication signals can affect the evolution of signal form and decisions about when and where to communicate. For the many invertebrates that communicate using plant-borne vibrations, wind is considered to be the major source of environmental noise. However, the influence of wind-induced vibrations on signaling behavior has not been experimentally tested. We tested the hypothesis that wind-induced noise influences signaling behavior in a plant-feeding insect (the treehopper, Enchenopa binotata ‘Ptelea’) in which mating is preceded by a vibrational duet between females and mate-searching males. We first characterized the diel signaling patterns of males in the field to identify the wind conditions under which signaling typically takes place. We then experimentally tested two predictions of the hypothesis: (1) that males use gap detection to initiate signaling during relatively wind-free periods; and (2) that females respond less to signals given in the presence of wind-induced vibrations. Both predictions were met, indicating that wind-induced noise is an important influence on the behavior of insects that use plant-borne vibrations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andersson S, Rydell J, Svensson MGE (1998) Light, predation and the lekking behaviour of the ghost swift Hepialus humuli (L.) (Lepidoptera: Hepialidae). Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 264:1345–1351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atema J (1995) Chemical signals in the marine environment: dispersal, detection, and temporal signal analysis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 92:62–66

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Aubin T, Jouventin P (1998) Cocktail-party effect in king penguin colonies. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 265:1665–1673

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barth FG (1988) Spiders of the genus Cupiennius Simon 1891 (Araneae, Ctenidae) II. On the vibratory environment of a wandering spider. Oecologia 77:194–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bee MA (2008) Finding a mate at a cocktail party: spatial release from masking improves acoustic mate recognition in grey treefrogs. Anim Behav 75:1781–1791

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brenowitz EA (1986) Environmental influences on acoustic and electrical animal communication. Brain Behav Evol 28:32–42

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brown TJ, Handford P (2003) Why birds sing at dawn: the role of consistent song transmission. Ibis 145:120–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brumm H, Slabbekoorn H (2005) Acoustic communication in noise. Adv Study Behav 35:151–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buus S (1985) Release from masking caused by envelope fluctuations. J Acoust Soc Am 78:1958–65

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Casas J, Bacher S, Tautz J, Meyhöfer R, Pierre D (1998) Leaf vibrations and air movements in a leafminer-parasitoid system. Biol Control 11:147–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cocroft RB, Rodríguez RL (2005) The behavioral ecology of insect vibrational communication. Bioscience 55:323–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cocroft RB, Rodríguez RL, Hunt RE (2008) Host shifts, the evolution of communication, and speciation in the Enchenopa binotata species complex of treehoppers. In: Tilmon KJ (ed) Specialization, speciation, and radiation: the evolutionary biology of herbivorous insects. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, pp 88–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Cocroft RB, RodrÍguez RL, Hunt RE (2010) Host shifts and signal divergence: mating signals covary with host use in a complex of specialized plant-feeding insects. Biol J Linn Soc 99:60–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cokl A, Doberlet MV (2003) Communication with substrate-borne signals in small plant-dwelling insects. Annu Rev Entomol 48:29–50

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas HD III, Conner WE (1999) Is there a sound reception window in coastal environments? Evidence from shorebird communication systems. Naturwissenschaften 86:228–230

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Endler JA (1993) The color of light in forests and its implications. Ecol Monogr 63:1–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher HS, Wong BBM, Rosenthal GG (2005) Alteration of the chemical environment disrupts communication in a freshwater fish. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 273:1187–1193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foote AD, Osborne RW, Hoezel AR (2004) Whale-call response to masking boat noise. Nature 428:910

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Forrest TG (1994) From sender to receiver: propagation and environmental effects on acoustic signals. Am Zool 34:644–654

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuller RA, Warren PH, Gaston KJ (2007) Daytime noise predicts nocturnal singing in urban robins. Biol Lett 3:368–370

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gerhardt HC, Klump GM (1987) Masking of acoustic signals by the chorus background noise in the green tree frog: a limitation on mate choice. Anim Behav 36:1247–1249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenfield MD (1988) Interspecific acoustic interactions among katydids Neoconocephalus: inhibition-induced shifts in diel periodicity. Anim Behav 36:684–695

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenfield MD (1994) Synchronous and alternating choruses in insects and anurans: common mechanisms and diverse functions. Am Zool 34:605–615

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins CD (1973) Lightning as background noise for communication among electric fish. Nature 242:268–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt RE (1994) Vibrational signals associated with mating behavior in the treehopper, Enchenopa binotata Say (Hemiptera: Homoptera: Membracidae. J N Y Entomol Soc 102:266–270

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt RE, Morton TL (2001) Regulation of chorusing in the vibrational communication system of the leafhopper Graminella nigrifons. Am Zool 41:1222–1228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lengagne T, Slater PJB (2002) The effects of rain on acoustic communication: tawny owls have good reason for calling less in wet weather. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 269:2121–2125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNett GD, Cocroft RB (2008) Host shifts favor vibrational signal divergence in Enchenopa binotata treehoppers. Behav Ecol 19:650–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michelsen A, Fink F, Gogala M, Traue D (1982) Plants as transmission channels for insect vibrational songs. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 11:269–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okanoya K, Dooling RJ (1990) Detection of gaps in noise by budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus) and zebra finches (Peophila guttata). Hear Res 50:185–192

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ord TJ, Peters RA, Clucas B, Stamps JA (2007) Lizards speed up visual displays in noisy motion habitats. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 274:1057–1062

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parris KM, Velik-Lord M, North JMA (2009) Frogs call at a higher pitch in traffic noise. Ecol Soc 14:25

    Google Scholar 

  • Patricelli GL, Blickley JL (2006) Avian communication in urban noise: causes and consequences of vocal adjustment. Auk 123:639–649

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polajnar J, Čokl A (2008) The effect of vibratory disturbance on sexual behaviour of the southern green stink bug Nezara viridula (Heteroptera, Pentatomidae). Cent Eur J Biol 3:189–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez RL, Cocroft RB (2006) Divergence in female duetting signals in the Enchenopa binotata species complex of treehoppers (Hemiptera: Membracidae). Ethology 112:1231–1238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez RL, Ramaswamy K, Cocroft RB (2006) Evidence that female preferences have shaped male signal evolution in a clade of specialized plant-feeding insects. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 273:2585–2593

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Römer H (1993) Environmental and biological constraints for the evolution of long-range signalling and hearing in acoustic insects. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 340:179–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan MJ, Brenowitz EA (1985) The role of body size, phylogeny, and ambient noise in the evolution of bird song. Am Nat 126:87–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saxena KN, Kumar H (1980) Interruption of acoustic communication and mating in a leafhopper and a planthopper by aerial sound vibrations picked up by plants. Experientia 36:933–936

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider BA, Pichora-Fuller MK (1994) Gap detection and the precedence effect in young and old adults. J Acoust Soc Am 95:980–991

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz JJ, Gerhardt HC (1989) Spatially mediated release from auditory masking in an anuran amphibian. J Comp Physiol A Sens Neural Behav Physiol 166:37–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz JJ, Wells KD (1983) The influence of background noise on the behavior of a Neotropical treefrog, Hyla ebraccata. Herpetologica 39:121–129

    Google Scholar 

  • Seehausen O, Alphen JJMv, Witte F (1997) Cichled fish diversity threatened by eutrophication that curbs sexual selection. Science 277:1808–1811

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Slabbekoorn H, Peet M (2003) Birds sing at a higher pitch in urban noise. Nature 424:267

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Slabbekoorn H, Ripmeester EAP (2008) Birdsong and anthropogenic noise: implications and applications for conservation. Mol Ecol 17:72–83

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Slabbekoorn H, Smith TB (2002) Bird song, ecology and speciation. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 357:493–503

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan Beckers LE (2008) The ecology of mate choice: identifying the agents of sexual selection on mating signals in Enchenopa treehoppers. University of Missouri, Dissertation

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun JWC, Narins PM (2005) Anthropogenic sounds differentially affect amphibian call rate. Biol Conserv 121:419–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tishechkin DY (2007) Background noises in vibratory communication channels of Homoptera (Cicadinea and Psyllinea). Russ Entomol J 16:39–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Waser PM, Waser MS (1977) Experimental studies of primate vocalization: specializations for long-distance propagation. Z Tierpsychol 43:239–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiley RH, Richards DS (1982) Adaptations for acoustic communication in birds: sound transmission and signal detection. In: Kroodsma DE, Miller EH (eds) Acoustic communication in birds, vol I, Academic Press. New York, NY, pp 131–181

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank C. Galen, C. Gerhardt, R. Houseman, J. Schul, and three anonymous reviewers for comments on the manuscript. This research was supported by NSF IBN 0318326 to RBC and NSF DDIG IOB 0508642 to RBC and GDM.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Gabriel D. McNett

    Present address: Department of Biology and Environmental Science, Westminster College, 501 Westminster Avenue, Fulton, MO, 65251, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Biological Sciences, University of Missouri, 105 Tucker Hall University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA

    Gabriel D. McNett, Lucia H. Luan & Reginald B. Cocroft

Authors
  1. Gabriel D. McNett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lucia H. Luan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Reginald B. Cocroft
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gabriel D. McNett.

Additional information

Communicated by D. Gwynne

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McNett, G.D., Luan, L.H. & Cocroft, R.B. Wind-induced noise alters signaler and receiver behavior in vibrational communication. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64, 2043–2051 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-010-1018-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-010-1018-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation