4.2 Review

Patterns of praying mantis auditory system evolution based on morphological, molecular, neurophysiological, and behavioural data

Journal

BIOLOGICAL JOURNAL OF THE LINNEAN SOCIETY
Volume 94, Issue 3, Pages 541-568

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2008.00996.x

Keywords

acoustic startle; bat evasion; cyclopean ear; insect ear; insect hearing; molecular phylogeny; tympanum

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Some praying mantids have sensitive ultrasonic hearing arising from a unique 'cyclopean' ear located in the ventral metathorax. The present study explores the evolutionary history of the mantis auditory system by integrating large anatomical, neurophysiological, behavioural, and molecular databases. Using an 'auditory phylogeny' based on 13 morphological characters, we identified a primitively earless form of metathoracic anatomy in several extant taxa. In addition, there are five distinct mantis auditory systems. Three of these can be identified anatomically, and the other two can only be detected neurophysiologically. Superimposing these results onto a phylogenetic tree derived from molecular data from seven genes shows that the cyclopean mantis ear evolved once approximately 120 Mya. All the other auditory system types are either varying degrees of secondary loss, or are recent innovations that each occurred independently multiple times. The neurophysiological response to ultrasound is remarkably consistent across all taxa tested, as is the multicomponent, in-flight behaviour triggered by ultrasound. Thus, mantids have an ancient, highly conserved auditory neural-behavioural system. Although ultrasonic hearing in several insect groups evolved in response to bat predation, mantis hearing predates the appearance of bats (approximately 63 Mya) and must originally have functioned in communication, prey detection, or avoidance of nonbat predators. (C) 2008 The Linnean Society of London.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available