Abstract
A piezoelectric sprayer was recently developed for precision release of odor stimuli in olfactory research. The device replaces conventional dispensers used to release semiochemicals in studies of moth flight toward odor sources. However, the device generates high-frequency sounds in the range that some moths can hear. Ultrasound from the standard set-up sprayer had a considerable impact on flight behavior of the silver Y moth, Autographa gamma, tested in a flight tunnel. It was affected at all behavioral stages when the dispenser was driven at 120 kHz. Only 5% of the moths reached the source when exposed to 120-kHz sound from the dispenser compared to 65% in the control group without sound. The proportion taking flight was also reduced. Hearing threshold curves obtained electrophysiologically revealed that moths were sensitive to the frequency range at which the sprayer was operated and that sound intensity from the sprayer was up to 40 dB above the moths' electrophysiological hearing threshold. The audiogram for A. gamma was similar to audiograms obtained for other noctuids. Hearing sensitivity was highest at around 15 kHz, where the threshold was 35 dB SPL (sound pressure level). The threshold increased with frequency up to 94 dB SPL at 160 kHz. We improved the sprayer to operate at 300 kHz, which is beyond the hearing ability of most insects with ears. At this high frequency, the moths' sensitivity to ultrasound is reduced considerably, and we did not observe any effect on flight behavior compared to a control group without sound. Accordingly, this new piezoelectric sprayer can be used with ultrasound-sensitive insects and insensitive insects alike.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
El-Sayed, A., GöddeJ., and Arn, H. 1999. Sprayer for quantitative application of odor stimuli. Environ. Entomol. 28:947-953.
Hoy, R. R. 1992. The evolution of hearing in insects as an adaptation to predation from bats, pp. 115-119, in D. B. Webster, R. R. Fay, and A. N. Popper (Eds.). The Evolutionary Biology of Hearing. Springer-Verlag, New York.
Jaffe, B., Cook, W. R., and Jaffe, H. 1989. Piezoelectric Ceramics. Academic Press, London.
KinslerL. E., Frey, A. R., Coppens, A. B., and Sanders, J. V. 2000. Fundamentals of Acoustics, 4th ed. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Miller, L. A. and Surlykke, A. 2001. How some insects detect and avoid being eaten by bats: tactics and countertactics of prey and predator. Bioscience 51:570-581.
Roeder, K. D. 1966. Acoustic sensitivity of the noctuid tympanic organ and its range for the cries of bats. J. Insect Physiol. 12:843-859.
Roeder, K. D. 1967. Nerve Cells and Insect Behavior. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Scoble, M. J. 1992. The Lepidoptera: Form, Function and Diversity. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Skals, N. and SurlykkeA. 2000. Hearing and evasive behavior in the greater wax moth, Galleria mellonella (Pyralidae). Physiol. Entomol. 25:354-362.
Surlykke, A., Filskov, M., Fullard, J. H., and Forrest, E. 1999. Auditory relationships to size in noctuid moths: Bigger is better. Naturwissenschaften 86:238-241.
Werner, T. 1981. Responses of nonflying moths to ultrasound: the threat of gleaning bats. Can. J. Zool. 59:525-529.
Zhu, J. W., Löfstedt, C., and Bengtsson, B. O. 1996. Genetic variation in the strongly canalized sex pheromone communication system of the European corn borer. Genetics 144:757-766.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Skals, N., Plepys, D., El-Sayed, A.M. et al. Quantitative Analysis of the Effects of Ultrasound from an Odor Sprayer on Moth Flight Behavior. J Chem Ecol 29, 71–82 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021924529533
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021924529533