1,720,966 research outputs found
Figure 2 in The Behavioral Ecology of Insect Vibrational Communication
No full textFigure 2. Examples of substrate-borne and airborne signals. Substrate-borne vibrational signals are shown for (a) the treehopper Vanduzea mayana, (b) the stinkbug Edessa rufomarginata, and (c) the lacewing Chrysoperla carnea. Airborne signals are shown for (d) the plumbeous pigeon, Columba plumbea; (e) the cicada Fidicina mannifera; and (f) the katydid Neoconocephalus retusus. Note the much higher range of frequencies used by the two insect species producing airborne sounds. Scale bars = 0.5 second.Published as part of <i>COCROFT, REGINALD B. & RODRÍGUEZ, RAFAEL L., 2005, The Behavioral Ecology of Insect Vibrational Communication, pp. 323-334 in BioScience 55 (4)</i> on page 326, DOI: 10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0323:tbeoiv]2.0.co;2, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/10066144">http://zenodo.org/record/10066144</a>
The Reconstruction of Ancestral Character States
Full text link32 pages, 1 article*The Reconstruction of Ancestral Character States* (Schultz, Ted R.; Cocroft, Reginald B.; Churchill, Gary A.) 32 page
Figure 6 in The Behavioral Ecology of Insect Vibrational Communication
No full textFigure 6. Frequency spectra of vibrational signals (a through f) predicted to evolve in response to different combinations of receiver frequency selectivity and average substrate filtering properties. For example, when the substrate filtering is unpredictable or flat, use of signals containing a broad range of frequencies may ensure that some energy reaches the signaler (a). However, this strategy will only be successful if receivers are also broadly tuned; if receivers are selective for a narrow band of frequencies, signals should likewise be narrowly tuned (b). Use of hosts with different filtering properties (such as lowpass vs. bandpass filters, or bandpass filters with different best frequencies) may favor the evolution of different signals, a process that could contribute to speciation.Published as part of <i>COCROFT, REGINALD B. & RODRÍGUEZ, RAFAEL L., 2005, The Behavioral Ecology of Insect Vibrational Communication, pp. 323-334 in BioScience 55 (4)</i> on page 330, DOI: 10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0323:tbeoiv]2.0.co;2, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/10066144">http://zenodo.org/record/10066144</a>
Figure 4 in The Behavioral Ecology of Insect Vibrational Communication
No full textFigure 4. Examples of complex vibrational signaling environments. (a) A male treehopper (Heteronotus trinodosus) producing advertisement signals in alternation with another male on the same stem. (b, c) Field recordings from two herbaceous plants in Soberanía National Park, Panama. Each recording contains signals of approximately four insect species, with one species signaling continuously (indicated with number 1 in panel b and number 3 in panel c). Scale bars = 1 second. It is difficult to gain from figures like these the impression one gets, when listening to vibrational signals in plants in the field, of an encounter with a mysterious and alien world of sound.Published as part of <i>COCROFT, REGINALD B. & RODRÍGUEZ, RAFAEL L., 2005, The Behavioral Ecology of Insect Vibrational Communication, pp. 323-334 in BioScience 55 (4)</i> on page 328, DOI: 10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0323:tbeoiv]2.0.co;2, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/10066144">http://zenodo.org/record/10066144</a>
Figure 3 in The Behavioral Ecology of Insect Vibrational Communication
No full textFigure 3. Wind as an agent of selection on insect vibrational communication through plants. (a) Hourly wind speeds, averaged over one month, recorded at a weather station in Corvallis, Oregon. Wind speeds were consistently lower in the morning. Wind-speed data were obtained from the AgriMet Program of the US Bureau of Reclamation, Pacific Northwest Region (www.usbr.gov/pn/agrimet/ webagdayread.html). (b) Short-term variation in the amplitude of wind-induced vibrations in a petiole of a black walnut tree, Juglans nigra. (c, d) Amplitude spectra (x ⎯ ± standard deviation) of wind-induced vibrations in petioles of two tree species, J. nigra and Robinia pseudoacacia, showing the predominance of low frequencies and the gradual roll-off at higher frequencies. Wind noise recordings were made at typical positions of treehoppers (Enchenopa binotata) on the two host plants, using a PCB U352B65 accelerometer attached to the leaf petiole and a PCB U480E09 amplifier connected to a Macintosh G3 laptop computer. Maximum wind velocity for these recordings, measured with a handheld anemometer, varied from 1 to 2 meters per second (n = 1 petiole per tree for 10 trees of each species).Published as part of <i>COCROFT, REGINALD B. & RODRÍGUEZ, RAFAEL L., 2005, The Behavioral Ecology of Insect Vibrational Communication, pp. 323-334 in BioScience 55 (4)</i> on page 327, DOI: 10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0323:tbeoiv]2.0.co;2, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/10066144">http://zenodo.org/record/10066144</a>
Figure 1 in The Behavioral Ecology of Insect Vibrational Communication
No full textFigure 1. Prevalence of various signaling modalities among insects that use mechanical communication (categories from Greenfield 2002). The pie chart above shows an estimate obtained by tallying the number of families for which evidence of signaling in any given modality exists. The chart below shows a more speculative estimate obtained by counting the number of species for which such evidence is available; for groups in which reports suggest the use of a modality is widespread, or for which few reports exist but all have found use of a particular modality, we tallied the total number of described species in the group. We excluded instances of detection of incidental cues produced by conspecifics (e.g., we did not count detection of water surface vibrations by gyrinid beetles or of near-field vibrations by culicids and chironomids). We also excluded instances in which the vibration might be perceived through direct bodily contact (e.g., during copulatory courtship). Files with the references used to generate this figure are available on request from the authors. The distribution of signaling modalities among insect orders (phylogenetic tree from Gullan and Cranston 2000) suggests that the use of substrate vibrations for communication may be ancestral for at least some insect groups at the supraordinal level.Published as part of <i>COCROFT, REGINALD B. & RODRÍGUEZ, RAFAEL L., 2005, The Behavioral Ecology of Insect Vibrational Communication, pp. 323-334 in BioScience 55 (4)</i> on page 325, DOI: 10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0323:tbeoiv]2.0.co;2, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/10066144">http://zenodo.org/record/10066144</a>
Conspecific Communication Functions of Vibrational Signals Produced by Immatures of Treehopper Tylopelgta gibbera (Hemiptera: Membracidae)
No full textiv, 31 p.Vibrational signaling is a common form of communication among insects. Substrate-borne vibrations serve many functions, such as predator avoidance, mate recognition, and communication within a group. Treehoppers (Hemiptera: Membracidae) are small sap-feeding insects that send vibrational signals through host plants on which they feed. In the treehopper Tylopelta gibbera, adults produce these signals to attract and locate mates; nymphs also produce signals, but their functions are unknown. We tested two hypotheses concerning the function of rattle-like vibrations frequently produced by moving T. gibberanymphs: (1) a movement function, where rattle-like signals warn feeding nymphs of a nearby poor feeding site, and (2) a soliciting function, where rattle vibrations serve to request information from feeding nymphs on locations of adequate feeding sites. We made playback recordings of vibrations produced by nymph movement with and without rattles, and while nymphs were stationary and silent on host plants. Recordings were played back to a single experimental nymph placed on a host plant. Movement and signaling responses of the experimental nymph were recorded to test the movement and soliciting hypotheses, respectively. There was a marginally significant difference in movement among playback treatments, but there was no significant effect of treatment on nymphal signaling rates. There is evidence, however, to suggest that rattle-like vibrations may serve an antipredator function to mask signals produced by walking.Division of Biological Sciences. University of Missouri. Colombia, Missouri
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
