MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988348383 · doi:10.1603/008.102.0420

Insect Sounds and Communication: Physiology, Behaviour, Ecology and Evolution

2009· article· en· W1988348383 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the Entomological Society of America · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicOrthoptera Research and Taxonomy
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyEcologyEvolutionary physiologyEvolutionary ecologyInsectChemical ecologyEvolutionary biologyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Insect Sounds and Communication: Physiology, Behaviour, Ecology and EvolutionSakis Drosopoulos and Michael F Claridge CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2005 532 pp., $145 (hardcover)ISBN 0-8493-2060-7 In Insect Sounds and Communication, Sakis Drosopoulos and Michael F. Claridge have put together a volume that summarizes the current state of the discipline in insect bioacoustics. This is a large and active field that has produced several monographs and edited volumes. Some have been more general, such as Arthropod Bioacoustics (Ewing 1989), whereas others, like The Tettigoniidae (Bailey and Rentz 1990) or Cricket Behavior and Neurobiology (Huber et al. 1989) have concentrated on particular taxa. What sets this book apart from its predecessors is the balanced taxonomic coverage. In the past, insect bioacoustics has been dominated by crickets, katydids, grasshoppers, and cicadas. These are some of the most obviously acoustic groups, with many species communicating via airborne sound and at frequencies audible to the human ear, and they have rightfully received much attention from biologists. Over the past couple of decades, there has been increasing interest in acoustic communication in a wider diversity of taxonomic groups, and Insect Sounds and Communication reflects this trend. This broadening of interests has been driven by a proliferation of off-the-shelf digital signal analysis software and the development of widely available and accessible tools for recording substrate-borne acoustic signals. It is now well known that substrateborne acoustic signals are even more widespread among insects than airborne sounds, and substrate-borne vibration signals are well represented in this book. Acoustic communication has now been documented in a wide range of insect taxa and this diversity is similarly well represented in the book, which includes chapters on Heteroptera, Auchenorrhyncha, Psylloidea, Diptera, Coleoptera, and Hymenoptera, among others. Cicadas and acoustic Orthoptera are not left out, but they do not receive a disproportionate coverage relative to other taxa. The 32 contributed chapters in the book are organized in two sections. The first section, “General aspects of insect sounds,” comprises brief reviews of theoretical and conceptual issues, such as the relationship between song evolution and speciation, the evolution of signal complexity, physical constraints on acoustic signals, heritability of song characteristics, and the taxonomic significance of acoustic characters. This section also includes several more conventional literature reviews of systems that have been more extensively studied, including hearing in katydids, vibration senses in bugs, and communication in lacewings. There is also an introductory primer (Chapter 2) on acoustics and techniques of recording and analysis of acoustic signals. Although some aspects of this techniques chapter will eventually become dated (e.g., it includes brief reviews of specific software packages), it is nevertheless a useful orientation for the newcomer to acoustic analyses, covering the basics of physical acoustics and digital signal processing in the context of recording natural sounds. The second section, “Sounds in various taxa,” surveys the signal repertoires and acoustic behaviors of select insect groups. This is a very useful compendium. More familiar acoustic groups, such as cicadas, are represented here, but there are also chapters on whiteflies, lantern flies, and nondrosophilid Diptera, among others. The contributions in this section are a handy reference on the structure, diversity, and production mechanisms of acoustic signals in these taxa. A DVD is included with the book that contains a number of useful features. The DVD is formatted as a self-contained website that includes figures, color images, media files, and supplemental information for many of the chapters. The full bibliography is also included and there are external links to the software packages reviewed in the Chapter 2 and several research websites on taxa covered in the book. This is a useful appendix to the book, particularly the sound and movie clips. Unfortunately, not all chapters are represented on the DVD, the formatting and content are not consistent among those that are included, and there is little or no indication in the text that additional information is available on the disc. But these are minor issues given how difficult it must have been to convince the numerous authors of this volume to deliver supplemental content in addition to their written contributions by publication time. As with any edited volume, there is some variation in the scope and depth of different contributions. This does not detract from the value of the book. It can be quite useful to have a brief review of a single question (such as body size-to-frequency relationships in acoustic signals, or acoustic segregation in grasshopper communities), and a volume such as this is the ideal forum. Likewise, those contributions covering a particular system in more detail provide a valuable digest of the diversity of insect acoustic communication. Drosopoulos and Claridge have put together a volume that will benefit anyone with an interest in insect bioacoustics and that I, for one, expect to return to frequently.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the Entomological Society of AmericaSame topicOrthoptera Research and TaxonomyFrench-language works237,207