Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32093539›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2020

Thoracic scales of moths as a stealth coating against bat biosonar.

Thomas R Neil, Zhiyuan Shen, Daniel Robert, Bruce W Drinkwater, Marc W Holderied

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Buckling-induced sound production in the aeroelastic tymbals ofProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  4. Moth wings as sound absorber metasurface.Proceedings. Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2022
    Article
  5. New lessons for stealth technology.Nature materials · 2021
    Article
  6. Moth wings are acoustic metamaterials.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Thomas R NeilSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Zhiyuan ShenSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Daniel RobertSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Bruce W DrinkwaterDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Marc W HolderiedSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
University of Bristol · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/N009991/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many moths are endowed with ultrasound-sensitive ears that serve the detection and evasion of echolocating bats. Moths lacking such ears could still gain protection from bat biosonar by using stealth acoustic camouflage, absorbing sound waves rather than reflecting them back as echoes. The thorax of a moth is bulky and hence acoustically highly reflective. This renders it an obvious target for any bat. Much of the thorax of moths is covered in hair-like scales, the layout of which is remarkably similar in structure and arrangement to natural fibrous materials commonly used in sound insulation. Despite this structural similarity, the effect of thorax scales on moth echoes has never been characterized. Here, we test whether and how moth thorax scales function as an acoustic absorber. From tomographic echo images, we find that the thin layer of thoracic scales of diurnal butterflies affects the strength of ultrasound echoes from the thorax very little, while the thorax scales of earless moths absorbs an average of 67 ± 9% of impinging ultrasonic sound energy. We show that the thorax scales of moths provide acoustic camouflage by acting as broadband (20-160 kHz) stealth coating. Modelling results suggest the scales are acting as a porous sound absorber; however, the thorax scales of moths achieve a considerably higher absorption than technical fibrous porous absorbers with the same structural parameters. Such scales, despite being thin and lightweight, constitute a broadband, multidirectional and efficient ultrasound absorber that reduces the moths' detectability to hunting bats and gives them a survival advantage.

Indexed as

ButterfliesChiropteraEcholocationMothsAnimalsSoundbioacousticsbiophysicsbiosonarfibrous porous absorbersound absorberultrasound imaging

Identifiers

PMID32093539
PMCPMC7061704
OpenAlexW3007382887

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.