ReviewJournal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology2015
Moth hearing and sound communication.
Review in Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cryptic Vocal Communication in the Proboscis Bat (Rhynchonycteris naso).Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2026Article
- Article
- Female moths incorporate plant acoustic emissions into their oviposition decision-making process.eLife · 2026Article
- Sex-Specific Response to Predator Auditory Cues in Asian Corn Borer (Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Article
- Tympanal ears mediate male-male competition, courtship and mating success inRoyal Society open science · 2024Article
- Tiny spies: mosquito antennae are sensitive sensors for eavesdropping on frog calls.The Journal of experimental biology · 2023Article
- Anti-bat ultrasound production in moths is globally and phylogenetically widespread.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- Discriminating predation attempt outcomes during natural foraging using the post-buzz pause in the Japanese large-footed bat, Myotis macrodactylus.The Journal of experimental biology · 2022Article
- Light might suppress both types of sound-evoked antipredator flight in moths.Ecology and evolution · 2020Article
- Extreme Duty Cycles in the Acoustic Signals of Tiger Moths: Sexual and Natural Selection Operating in Parallel.Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 2020Article
- Twittering Pupae of Papilionid and Nymphalid Butterflies (Lepidoptera): Novel Structures and Sounds.Annals of the Entomological Society of America · 2018Article
- Hearing diversity in moths confronting a neotropical bat assemblage.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2017Article
- Insect hearing: from physics to ecology.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Active echolocation enables bats to orient and hunt the night sky for insects. As a counter-measure against the severe predation pressure many nocturnal insects have evolved ears sensitive to ultrasonic bat calls. In moths bat-detection was the principal purpose of hearing, as evidenced by comparable hearing physiology with best sensitivity in the bat echolocation range, 20-60 kHz, across moths in spite of diverse ear morphology. Some eared moths subsequently developed sound-producing organs to warn/startle/jam attacking bats and/or to communicate intraspecifically with sound. Not only the sounds for interaction with bats, but also mating signals are within the frequency range where bats echolocate, indicating that sound communication developed after hearing by "sensory exploitation". Recent findings on moth sound communication reveal that close-range (~ a few cm) communication with low-intensity ultrasounds "whispered" by males during courtship is not uncommon, contrary to the general notion of moths predominantly being silent. Sexual sound communication in moths may apply to many eared moths, perhaps even a majority. The low intensities and high frequencies explain that this was overlooked, revealing a bias towards what humans can sense, when studying (acoustic) communication in animals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25261361What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.