Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29294159›Full record

ArticleJournal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology2018

Robustness of an innate releasing mechanism against degradation of acoustic communication signals in the grasshopper Chorthippus biguttulus.

Stefanie Krämer, Bernhard Ronacher

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 49% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stefanie KrämerBehavioural Physiology Group, Department of Biology, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 10099, Berlin, Germany.
Bernhard RonacherBehavioural Physiology Group, Department of Biology, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 10099, Berlin, Germany. Bernhard.ronacher@rz.hu-berlin.de.ORCID 0000-0001-8640-9007
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Noise is a challenge for animals that use acoustic communication to find a mate. A potent source of noise in animal communication is that arising from other conspecific signals, whose co-occurrence can result in extensive interference-evident as the so called "cocktail-party problem"-that may affect the receiver mechanisms to detect potential mates. We studied grasshopper females to explore how modifications of the song pattern influence song recognition. First, we degraded an attractive model song with random fluctuations of increasing amplitudes out of different frequency bands, and determined "critical degradation levels" at which the females ceased to respond. A masker band with frequencies between 0 and 200 Hz, which covers the frequency range of the natural song envelope, was by 3-5 dB more destructive in hampering signal recognition than frequencies above 200 Hz. As second approach, we applied temporal disturbances such as accentuations or gaps at different positions within the song subunits and observed how response behavior was affected. Accentuations at subunit start increased, whereas those in the midst or at the end of a subunit reduced attractiveness. Gaps at these positions had diverse effects. The results are discussed with respect to neuronal filtering.

Indexed as

Animal CommunicationGrasshoppersAcoustic StimulationAnimalsFemaleMalePerceptual MaskingSexual Behavior, AnimalAcoustic communicationMaskingMate choiceNoiseSignal degradation

Identifiers

PMID29294159
OpenAlexW2782511755

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.