Skip to main content

Ecological Constraints for Sound Communication: From Grasshoppers to Elephants

  • Conference paper
Ecology of Sensing

Abstract

Sensory ecology is mainly concerned with the mechanisms that enable an animal to produce or utilize signals within its specific environment, and how the information about identity or location of the sender is transmitted to the receiver(s). Biotic and abiotic factors constrain the transmission of an acoustic signal and the performance of receivers in detection and location. Since animals use acoustic signals in a wide range of carrier frequencies — from infrasound to high ultrasound — with corresponding wavelengths spanning a range from tens of meters to a few millimeters, the rate of attenuation and degradation of sound signals varies largely in different communication systems. As a result, the active range of a sound signal covers probably hundreds of kilometers for marine mammals, several kilometers for elephants, to less than 1 m in some grasshoppers. This chapter examines some mechanisms by which these different animals achieve a maximum range of communication. In particular, I will show how sound interference in stratified environments can dramatically influence communication distance, and how animals adapt their timing and location of the site of their signaling to these environmental conditions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Arak A, Eiriksson T (1992) Choice of singing sites by male bushcrickets (Tettigonia viridissima) in relation to signal propagation. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 30: 365–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belwood J, Morris GK (1987) Bat predation and its influence on calling behavior in neotropical katydids. Science 238: 64–67

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cade WH (1975) Acoustically orienting parasitoids: fly phonotaxis to cricket song. Science 190: 1312–1313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cade WH (1981) Field cricket spacing, and the phonotaxis of crickets and parasitoid flies to clumped and isolated cricket songs. Z Tierpsychol 55: 365–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dusenbery DB (1992) Sensory Ecology. WH Freeman and Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Embleton TFW (1996) Tutorial on sound propagation outdoors. J Acoust Soc Am 100: 31–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garstang M, Larom D, Raspet R, Lindeque M (1995) Atmospheric controls on elephant communication. J Exp Biol 198: 939–951

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Geiger R, Aron RH, Todhunter P (1995) The Climate Near the Ground. Textbook Meteorology. Vieweg, Braunschweig, Wiesbaden

    Google Scholar 

  • Georges TM, Boden LR, Palmer DR (1994) Features of the Heard Island signals received at Ascension. JASA 96: 2441–2447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert F, Elsner N (2000) Directional hearing of a grasshopper in the field. J Exp Biol 203: 983–993

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Griffm DR (1971) The importance of atmospheric attenuation for the echolocation of bats (Chiroptera). Anim Behav 19: 55–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henwood K, Fabrik A (1979) A quantitative analysis of the dawn chorus: temporal selection for communicatory optimization. Am Nat 114: 260–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keuper A, Kühne R (1983) The acoustic behavior of the bushcricket Tettigonia cantans. II. Transmission of airborne sound and vibration signals in the biotope. Behav Processes 8: 125–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakes-Harlan R, Heller KG (1992) Ultrasound sensitive ears in a parasitoid fly. Naturwissenschaften 79: 224–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lang F (in press) Acoustic communication distances of a gomphocerine grasshopper. Bioacoustics

    Google Scholar 

  • Langbauer WR, Payne KB, Charif RA, Rapaport L, Osborn F (1991) African elephants respond to distant playbacks of low-frequency conspecific calls. J Exp Biol 157: 35–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Larom D, Garstang M, Payne K, Raspet R and Lindeque M (1997) The influence of surface atmospheric conditions on the range and area reached by animal vocalizations. J Exp Biol 200: 421–431

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Laundré JW (1981) Temporal variation in coyote vocalization. J Wildl Mgmt 45: 767–769

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marten K, Marier P (1977) Sound transmission and its significance for animal vocalizations. I. Temperate habitats. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 2: 271–290

    Google Scholar 

  • Michelsen A (1978) Sound Reception in Different Environments In: Ali MA (ed) Sensory Ecology. New York, London, Plenum, pp 345–373

    Google Scholar 

  • Michelsen A, Larsen ON (1983) Strategies for acoustic communication in complex environments. In: Huber F, Markl H (eds) Neuroethology and Behavioral Physiology. Berlin Heidelberg New York, Tokyo, Springer, pp 322–332

    Google Scholar 

  • Michelsen A (1998) Biophysics of sound localization in insects. In: RR Hoy, AN Popper, RR Fay (eds) Comparative Hearing: Insects. New York, Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer, pp 18–62

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Moore SW, Lewis EE, Narins PM and Lopez PT (1989) The call-timing algorithm of the white-lipped frog, Leptodactylus albilabris. J Comp Physiol A 164: 309–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris GK (1970) Sound analysis of Metrioptera sphagnorum (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae). Can Ent 102: 363–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris GK, Kerr, GE and Gwynne DT (1975) Calling song function in the bog katydid, Metrioptera sphagnorum (F.Walker) (Orthoptera, Tettigoniidae ): Female phonotaxis to normal and altered song. Z Tierpsychol 37: 502–514

    Google Scholar 

  • Morton ES (1975) Ecological sources of selection on avian sounds. Am Nat 108: 17–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munk W and Forbes AMG (1989) Global ocean warming: an acoustic measure. J Phys Oceanogr 19: 1765–1778

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munk W, Spindel RC, Baggeroer A, Birdsall TG (1994) The Heard Island feasability test: JASA 96: 2330–2342

    Google Scholar 

  • Narins P (1995) Frog communication. Sci Am 273: 62–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuweiler G (1989) Foraging ecology and audition in echolocating bats. TEE 4: 160–166

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Piercy JE, Embleton TFW, Sutherland LC (1977) Review of noise propagation in the atmosphere. J Acoust Soc Am 61: 1402–1418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popov AV, Shuvalov VF, Svetlogorskaya ID, Markovich AM (1972) Acoustic behavior and auditory system of insects. Rhein.-Westf. Akad Wiss 53: 281–306

    Google Scholar 

  • Rheinlaender J, Römer H (1986) Insect hearing in the field. I. The use of identified nerve cells as ‘biological microphones’. J Comp Physiol A 158: 647–651

    Google Scholar 

  • Riede K (1995) Diversity of sound producing insects of a Bornean lowland rain forest. Proc Int Conf Trop Rainforest Res. Brunei, Daressalam

    Google Scholar 

  • Römer H (1998) The sensory ecology of hearing in insects. In: RR Hoy, AN Popper, RR Fay (eds) Comparative Hearing: Insects. New York, Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer pp 63–96

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Römer H, Lewald J (1992) High-frequency sound transmission in natural habitats: implications for the evolution of insect acoustic communication. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 29: 437–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaller GB (1972) The Serengeti Lion. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. 480 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiesberger JL and Fristrup KM (1990) Passive localization of calling animals and sensing of their acoustic environment using acoustic tomography. Am Nat 135: 107–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staaden, van MJ, Römer H (1997) Sexual signalling in bladder grasshoppers: Tactical design for maximizing calling range. J Exp Biol 200: 2597–2608

    Google Scholar 

  • Urick RJ (1983) Principles of Underwater Sound. New York, McGraw-Hill

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiley RH, Richards DG (1982) Adaptations for acoustic communication in birds: Sound transmission and signal detection. In: Kroodsma DE, Miller EH, Quellet H (eds) Acoustic Communication in Birds. New York, Academic Press, pp 131–181

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Römer, H. (2001). Ecological Constraints for Sound Communication: From Grasshoppers to Elephants. In: Barth, F.G., Schmid, A. (eds) Ecology of Sensing. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-22644-5_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-22644-5_4

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-08619-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-22644-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics