Skip to main content
Log in

Moth hearing and sound communication

  • Review
  • Published:
Journal of Comparative Physiology A Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Active echolocation enables bats to orient and hunt the night sky for insects. As a counter-measure against the severe predation pressure many nocturnal insects have evolved ears sensitive to ultrasonic bat calls. In moths bat-detection was the principal purpose of hearing, as evidenced by comparable hearing physiology with best sensitivity in the bat echolocation range, 20–60 kHz, across moths in spite of diverse ear morphology. Some eared moths subsequently developed sound-producing organs to warn/startle/jam attacking bats and/or to communicate intraspecifically with sound. Not only the sounds for interaction with bats, but also mating signals are within the frequency range where bats echolocate, indicating that sound communication developed after hearing by “sensory exploitation”. Recent findings on moth sound communication reveal that close-range (~ a few cm) communication with low-intensity ultrasounds “whispered” by males during courtship is not uncommon, contrary to the general notion of moths predominantly being silent. Sexual sound communication in moths may apply to many eared moths, perhaps even a majority. The low intensities and high frequencies explain that this was overlooked, revealing a bias towards what humans can sense, when studying (acoustic) communication in animals.

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

Access this article

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Acharya L, Fenton MB (1992) Echolocation behaviour of vespertilionid bats (Lasiurus cinereus and Lasiurus borealis) attacking airborne targets including arctiid moths. Can J Zool 70:1292–1298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alem S, Koselj K, Siemers BM, Greenfield MD (2011) Bat predation and the evolution of leks in acoustic moths. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 65:2105–2116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey WJ (1978) Resonant wing systems in the Australian whistling moth Hecatesia (Agarasidae, Lepidoptera). Nature 272:444–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belwood JJ, Morris GK (1987) Bat predation and its influence on calling behavior in neotropical katydids. Science 238:64–67

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Blest AD, Collett TS, Pye JD (1963) The generation of ultrasonic signals by a New World arctiid moth. Proc R Soc B 158:196–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conner WE (1999) ‘Un chant d’appel amoureux’: acoustic communication in moths. J Exp Biol 202:1711–1723

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Conner WE (2014) Adaptive sounds and silences: acoustic anti-predator strategies in insects. In: Hedwig B (ed) Insect hearing and acoustic communication, vol 1., Animal signals and communicationSpringer, Berlin, pp 65–79

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Conner WE, Corcoran AJ (2012) Sound strategies: the 65-million-year-old battle between bats and insects. Annu Rev Entomol 57:21–39

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Corcoran AJ, Conner WE (2012) Sonar jamming in the field: effectiveness and behavior of a unique prey defense. J Exp Biol 215:4278–4287

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Corcoran AJ, Hristov NI (2014) Convergent evolution of anti-bat sounds. J Comp Physiol A 200:811–821

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corcoran AJ, Barber JR, Conner WE (2009) Tiger moth jams bat sonar. Science 325:325–327

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Corcoran AJ, Conner WE, Barber JR (2010) Anti-bat tiger moth sounds: form and function. Curr Zool 56:358–369

    Google Scholar 

  • Endler JA, Basolo AL (1998) Sensory ecology, receiver biases and sexual selection. Trend Ecol Evol 13:415–420

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fullard JH (1998) The sensory coevolution of moths and bats. In: Hoy RR, Popper AN, Fay RR (eds) Comparative hearing: insects, vol 10., Springer handbook of auditory researchSpringer, New York, pp 279–326

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fullard JH (2001) Auditory sensitivity of Hawaiian moths (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and selective predation by the Hawaiian hoary bat (Chiroptera: Lasiurus cinereus semotus). Proc R Soc B 268:1375–1380

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fullard JH, Yack JE (1993) The evolutionary biology of insect hearing. Trend Ecol Evol 8:248–252

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fullard JH, Fenton MB, Simmons JA (1979) Jamming bat echolocation: the clicks of arctiid moths. Can J Zool 57:647–649

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fullard JH, Dawson JW, Otero LD, Surlykke A (1997) Bat-deafness in day-flying moths (Lepidoptera, Notodontidae, Dioptinae). J Comput Physiol A 181:477–483

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fullard JH, Ratcliffe JM, ter Hofstede HM (2007a) Neural evolution in the bat-free habitat of Tahiti: partial regression in an anti-predator auditory system. Biol Lett 3:26–28

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fullard JH, Ratcliffe JM, Christie CG (2007b) Acoustic feature recognition in the dogbane tiger moth, Cycnia tenera. J Exp Biol 210:2481–2488

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gerhardt HC, Huber F (2002) Acoustic communication in insects and anurans: common problems and diverse solutions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Göpfert MC, Surlykke A, Wasserthal LT (2002) Tympanal and atympanal “mouth–ears” in hawkmoths (Sphingidae). Proc R Soc B 269:89–95

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Greenfield MD (2014) Acoustic communication in the nocturnal Lepidoptera. In: Hedwig B (ed) Insect hearing and acoustic communication, vol 1., Animal signals and communicationSpringer, Berlin, pp 81–100

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Greenfield MD, Hohendorf H (2009) Independence of sexual and anti-predator perceptual functions in an acoustic moth: implications for the receiver biasmechanism in signal evolution. Ethology 115:1137–1149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenfield MD, Weber T (2000) Evolution of ultrasonic signalling in wax moths: discrimination of ultrasonic mating calls from bat echolocation signals and the exploitation of an antipredator receiver bias by sexual advertisement. Ethol Ecol Evol 12:259–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gwynne DT, Edwards ED (1986) Ultrasound production by genital stridulation in Syntonarcha iriastis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae): long-distance signalling by male moths? Zool J Linn Soc 88:363–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedwig B, Robert D (2014) Auditory parasitoid flies exploiting acoustic communication of insects. In: Hedwig B (ed) Insect hearing and acoustic communication, vol 1., Animal signals and communicationSpringer, Berlin, pp 45–63

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kindl J, Kalinová B, Červenka M, Jílek M, Valterova I (2011) Male moth songs tempt females to accept mating: the role of acoustic and pheromonal communication in the reproductive behaviour of Aphomia sociella. PLoS One 6:e26476

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miller LA, Surlykke A (2001) How some insects detect and avoid being eaten by bats: tactics and countertactics of prey and predator. Bioscience 51:570–581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minet J, Surlykke A (2003) Auditory and sound producing organs. In: Kristensen NP (ed) Lepidoptera, moths and butterflies, vol 2., Morphology and physiologyWalter de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 289–323

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakano R, Ishikawa Y, Tatsuki S, Surlykke A, Skals N, Takanashi T (2006) Ultrasonic courtship song in the Asian corn borer moth, Ostrinia furnacalis. Naturwissenschaften 93:292–296

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nakano R, Skals N, Takanashi T, Surlykke A, Koike T, Yoshida K, Maruyama H, Tatsuki S, Ishikawa Y (2008) Moths produce extremely quiet ultrasonic courtship songs by rubbing specialized scales. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:11812–11817

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nakano R, Ishikawa Y, Tatsuki S, Skals N, Surlykke A, Takanashi T (2009a) Private ultrasonic whispering in moths. Commun Integr Biol 2:123–126

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nakano R, Takanashi T, Fujii T, Skals N, Surlykke A, Ishikawa Y (2009b) Moths are not silent, but whisper ultrasonic courtship songs. J Exp Biol 212:4072–4078

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nakano R, Takanashi T, Skals N, Surlykke A, Ishikawa Y (2010) To females of a noctuid moth, male courtship songs are nothing more than bat echolocation calls. Biol Lett 6:582–584

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nakano R, Takanashi T, Ihara F, Mishiro K, Toyama M, Ishikawa Y (2012a) Ultrasonic courtship song of the yellow peach moth, Conogethes punctiferalis (Lepidoptera: Crambidae). Appl Entomol Zool 47:87–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakano R, Ihara F, Mishiro K, Toyama M (2012b) Male courtship ultrasound produced by mesothoracic tymbal organs in the yellow peach moth Conogethes punctiferalis (Lepidoptera: Crambidae). Appl Entomol Zool 47:129–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakano R, Takanashi T, Surlykke A, Skals N, Ishikawa Y (2013) Evolution of deceptive and true courtship songs in moths. Sci Rep 3:2003

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nakano R, Ihara F, Mishiro K, Toyama M, Toda S (2014) Double meaning of courtship song in a moth. Proc R Soc B 281:20140840

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Obara Y (1979) Bombyx mori mating dance: an essential in locating the female. Appl Entomol Zool 14:130–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratcliffe JM, Fullard JH, Arthur BJ, Hoy RR (2009) Tiger moths and the threat of bats: decision-making based on the activity of a single sensory neuron. Biol Lett 5:368–371

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez RL, Greenfield MD (2004) Behavioural context regulates dual function of ultrasonic hearing in lesser wax moths: bat avoidance and pair formation. Physiol Entomol 29:159–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roeder KD (1974) Acoustic sensory responses and possible bat-evasion tactics of certain moths. In: Burt MDB (ed) Proceedings of the Canadian society of zoologists annual meeting. University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, pp 71–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan MJ (1998) Sexual selection, receiver biases, and the evolution of sex differences. Science 281:1999–2003

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan MJ, Phelps SM, Rand AS (2001) How evolutionary history shapes recognition mechanisms. Trend Cogn Sci 5:143–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rydell J, Skals N, Surlykke A, Svensson M (1997) Hearing and bat defence in geometrid winter moths. Proc R Soc B 264:83–88

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sanderford MV, Coro F, Conner WE (1998) Courtship behavior in Empyreuma affinis Roths. (Lepidoptera, Arctiidae, Ctenuchinae): acoustic signals and tympanic organ response. Naturwissenschaften 85:82–87

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schlyter F (1992) Sampling range, attraction range, and effective attraction radius: estimates of trap efficiency and communication distance in coleopteran pheromone and host attractant systems. J Appl Entomol 114:439–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schnitzler H-U, Kalko EKV (2001) Echolocation by insect-eating bats. Bioscience 51:557–569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schnitzler H-U, Moss CF, Denzinger A (2003) From spatial orientation to food acquisition in echolocating bats. Trend Ecol Evol 18:386–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siemers BM, Kriner E, Kaipf I, Simon M, Greif S (2012) Bats eavesdrop on the sound of copulating flies. Curr Biol 22:R563–R564

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Skals N, Surlykke A (1999) Sound production by abdominal tymbal organs in two moth species: the green silver-line and the scarce silver-line (Noctuoidea: Nolidae: Chloephorinae). J Exp Biol 202:2937–2949

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spangler HG (1985) Sound production and communication by the greater wax moth (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Ann Entomol Soc Am 78:54–61

    Google Scholar 

  • Spangler HG (1988) Moth hearing, defense, and communication. Annu Rev Entomol 33:59–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spangler HG, Greenfield MD, Takessian A (1984) Ultrasonic mate calling in the lesser wax moth. Physiol Entomol 9:87–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoneman MG, Fenton MB (1988) Disrupting foraging bats: the clicks of arctiid moths. In: Nachtigall PE, Moore PWB (eds) Animal sonar., Processes and performancePlenum Press, New York, pp 635–638

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Surlykke A (1986) Moth hearing on the Faeroe Islands, an area without bats. Physiol Entomol 11:221–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Surlykke A, Fullard JH (1989) Hearing of the Australian whistling moth, Hecatesia thyridion. Naturwissenschaften 76:132–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Surlykke A, Gogala M (1986) Stridulation and hearing in the noctuid moth Thecophora fovea (Tr.). J Comp Physiol A 159:267–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Surlykke A, Kalko EKV (2008) Echolocating bats cry out loud to detect their prey. PLoS One 3:e2036

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Surlykke A, Miller LA (1985) The influence of arctiid moth clicks on bat echolocation; jamming or warning? J Comp Physiol A 156:831–843

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Surlykke A, Filskov M, Fullard JH, Forrest E (1999) Auditory relationships to size in noctuid moths: bigger is better. Naturwissenschaften 86:238–241

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Surlykke A, Yack JE, Spence AJ, Hasenfuss I (2003) Hearing in hooktip moths (Drepanidae: Lepidoptera). J Exp Biol 206:2653–2663

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Takanashi T, Nakano R, Surlykke A, Tatsuta H, Tabata J, Ishikawa Y, Skals N (2010) Variation in courtship ultrasounds of three Ostrinia moths with different sex pheromones. PLoS One 5:e13144

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • ter Hofstede HM, Ratcliffe JM, Fullard JH (2008) Nocturnal activity positively correlated with auditory sensitivity in noctuoid moths. Biol Lett 4:262–265

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • ter Hofstede HM, Goerlitz HR, Montealegre ZF, Robert D, Holderied MW (2011) Tympanal mechanics and neural responses in the ears of a noctuid moth. Naturwissenschaften 98:1057–1061

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • ter Hofstede HM, Goerlitz HR, Ratcliffe JM, Holderied MW, Surlykke A (2013) The simple ears of noctuoid moths are tuned to the calls of their sympatric bat community. J Exp Biol 216:3954–3962

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Staaden MJ, Römer H (1998) Evolutionary transition from stretch to hearing organs in ancient grasshoppers. Nature 394:773–776

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuk M, Kolluru GR (1998) Exploitation of sexual signals by predators and parasitoids. Q Rev Biol 75:415–438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuk M, Rotenberry JT, Tinghitella RM (2006) Silent night: adaptive disappearance of a sexual signal in a parasitized population of field crickets. Biol Lett 2:521–524

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Annemarie Surlykke.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nakano, R., Takanashi, T. & Surlykke, A. Moth hearing and sound communication. J Comp Physiol A 201, 111–121 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00359-014-0945-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00359-014-0945-8

Keywords

Navigation