MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989526398 · doi:10.1242/jeb.211862

Hearing in Caterpillars of the Monarch Butterfly (<i>Danaus plexippus</i>)

2019· article· en· W2989526398 on OpenAlexafffund
Chantel Taylor, Jayne E. Yack

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Behavior and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDanausBiologyInsectButterflyOvipositorMonarch butterflyZoologyAnatomyLepidoptera genitaliaEcologyHymenoptera

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many species of caterpillars have been reported to respond to sound, but there has been limited formal study of what sounds they hear, how they hear them, and how they respond to them. Here we report on hearing in caterpillars of the Monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus). Fourth and fifth instar caterpillars respond to sounds by freezing, contracting, and flicking their thorax in a vertical direction. Behavioural responses were evoked by sound frequencies between 50 and 900 Hz, with best sensitivity at 100-200 Hz. The lowest mean threshold was 79 dBSPL (particle velocity 605 µm/s) at 150 Hz. When presented with a repeated 200 Hz sound tone, caterpillars habituate by no longer responding. A series of ablation experiments confirmed that the primary sensory receptors are a pair of long hairs, called trichoid sensilla, located on the upper prothorax. These sensilla are ∼450 µm long, rest in a socket, and are innervated by a single bipolar sensory neuron. Removal of these setae reduced responses significantly compared to controls. Other setae contributed minimally to hearing in response to 200 Hz tones, and tubercles and prothoracic shields played no apparent role in sound reception. We propose that hearing functions to prevent attacks by aerial insect predators and parasitoids, which produce flight sounds in the frequency range of the caterpillars’ sensitivity. This research lays the foundation for further investigations on the function and evolution of hearing in caterpillars, and has significance for conservation of threatened monarch butterfly larvae living near noisy urban environments and roadways.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations28
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental BiologySame topicAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207