Skip Navigation



Behavioral Ecology Advance Access published online on June 16, 2004
Behavioral Ecology, doi:10.1093/beheco/arh103
© 2004 by International Society for Behavioral Ecology
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Lay Summary
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
15/6/1016    most recent
arh103v2
arh103v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Soutar, A. R.
Right arrow Articles by Fullard, J. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Soutar, A. R.
Right arrow Articles by Fullard, J. H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Received July 28, 2003
Revised March 1, 2004
Accepted March 5, 2004

Nocturnal anti-predator adaptations in eared and earless Nearctic Lepidoptera

Amanda R. Soutar 1 James H. Fullard 1*

1 Department of Biology, University of Toronto at Mississauga, 3359 Mississauga Rd., Mississauga, Ontario L5L 1C6, Canada

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: jfullard{at}utm.utoronto.ca.


  Abstract

Nocturnal flight exposes insects to selection pressures that include reduced light and the hunting behavior of insectivorous bats. Using a phylogenetically based selection of wild moths collected from a Nearctic site, we report that earless species fly less throughout the night than eared species. This supports the hypothesis that this behavior has evolved as a passive defense against the transient attacks of aerially foraging bats in insects that do not possess long-range auditory detection abilities. We measured the eyesize of a selection of moths whose 24-h flight activities are known and confirm that nocturnal lifestyle results in larger eyes. With the exception of hawkmoths, there is no eyesize difference between eared and earless moths, suggesting that earless moths do not preferentially use vision to detect the approach of bats.

Keywords: auditory state; bats; defense; eyesize; flight; moths
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Exp. Biol.Home page
J. H. Fullard, M. E. Jackson, D. S. Jacobs, C. R. Pavey, and C. J. Burwell
Surviving cave bats: auditory and behavioural defences in the Australian noctuid moth, Speiredonia spectans
J. Exp. Biol., December 15, 2008; 211(24): 3808 - 3815.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Exp. Biol.Home page
J. H. Fullard, J. M. Ratcliffe, and C. G. Christie
Acoustic feature recognition in the dogbane tiger moth, Cycnia tenera
J. Exp. Biol., July 15, 2007; 210(14): 2481 - 2488.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.