MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2788815781 · doi:10.1242/jeb.169466

Vocalization in caterpillars: a novel sound-producing mechanism for insects

2018· article· en· W2788815781 on OpenAlexafffund
Conrado A. Rosi-Denadai, Melanie Louise Scallion, Craig G. Merrett, Jayne E. Yack

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSound (geography)Mechanism (biology)Sound productionBiologyCommunicationAcousticsPsychologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Insects have evolved a great diversity of sound-producing mechanisms largely attributable to their hardened exoskeleton, which can be rubbed, vibrated or tapped against different substrates to produce acoustic signals. However, sound production by forced air, while common in vertebrates, is poorly understood in insects. We report on a caterpillar that ‘vocalizes’ by forcing air into and out of its gut. When disturbed, larvae of the Nessus sphinx hawkmoth (Sphingidae: Amphion floridensis) produce sound trains comprising a stereotyped pattern of long (370 ms) followed by multiple short-duration (23 ms) units. Sounds are emitted from the oral cavity, as confirmed by close-up videos and comparing sound amplitudes at different body regions. Numerical models using measurements of the caterpillar foregut were constructed to test hypotheses explaining sound production. We propose that sound is generated by ring vortices created as air flows through the orifice between two foregut chambers (crop and oesophagus), a mechanism analogous to a whistling kettle. As air flows past the orifice, certain sound frequencies are amplified by a Helmholtz resonator effect of the oesophagus chamber. Long sound units occur during inflation, while short sound units occur during deflation. Several other insects have been reported to produce sounds by forced air, but the aeroacoustic mechanisms of such sounds remain elusive. Our results provide evidence for this mechanism by showing that caterpillars employ mechanisms similar to rocket engines to produce sounds.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental BiologySame topicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207