Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38747686›Full record

ArticleBiology letters2024

Tiger beetles produce anti-bat ultrasound and are probable Batesian moth mimics.

Harlan M Gough, Juliette J Rubin, Akito Y Kawahara, Jesse R Barber

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biology letters, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

4 authors.

Harlan M GoughMcGuire Center for Lepidoptera and Biodiversity, Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida , Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8699-8104
Juliette J RubinMcGuire Center for Lepidoptera and Biodiversity, Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida , Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5143-308X
Akito Y Kawahara *McGuire Center for Lepidoptera and Biodiversity, Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida , Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3724-4610
Jesse R Barber *McGuire Center for Lepidoptera and Biodiversity, Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida , Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3084-2973

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Echolocating bats and their eared insect prey are in an acoustic evolutionary war. Moths produce anti-bat sounds that startle bat predators, signal noxiousness, mimic unpalatable models and jam bat sonar. Tiger beetles (Cicindelidae) also purportedly produce ultrasound in response to bat attacks. Here we tested 19 tiger beetle species from seven genera and showed that they produce anti-bat signals to playback of authentic bat echolocation. The dominant frequency of beetle sounds substantially overlaps the sonar calls of sympatric bats. As tiger beetles are known to produce defensive chemicals such as benzaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide, we hypothesized that tiger beetle sounds are acoustically advertising their unpalatability. We presented captive big brown bats (

Indexed as

ChiropteraColeopteraEcholocationMothsAnimalsBiological MimicryPredatory Behavioracoustic mimicryaposematismCicindelidaepalatabilitytiger moth

Identifiers

PMID38747686
PMCPMC11285850

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.