Cricket Wind Receptors: Thermal Noise for the Highest Sensitivity Known

  • Tateo Shimozawa
  • Jun Murakami
  • Tsuneko Kumagai


The minimum amount of mechanical energy necessary to elicit a neuronal spike in the wind receptor cell of a cricket is determined to be in the order of kBT (4 x 10-21 Joules at 300°K). Insect mechanoreceptors are therefore bordering the range of thermal noise due to Brownian motion when working near to threshold. Evolution, however, has achieved a paradoxical solution for sensory signal transmission in the presence of thermal noise.

The estimation of mechanical energy is based on three measurements: deflection sensitivity of hair to air motion; sensory threshold of receptor cell in terms of air velocity; and mechanical resistance of hair support. The deflection sensitivity to air motion was measured by laser-Doppler velocimetry and Gaussian white noise analysis. Three mechanical parameters, i.e. the moment of inertia of hair shaft, the spring stiffness of hair support, and the torsional resistance within the support were estimated by applying Stokes’ theory for viscous force to the data of deflection sensitivity.

The mechanical energy consumed by the resistance provides a maximum estimate of the energy available to the receptor cell for stimulus transduction. The estimated energy threshold of the mechanoreceptor, is far below that of photoreceptors which can detect a single photon (ca. 3 × 10−19 Joules). The mechanoreceptor is 100 times more sensitive than a photoreceptor.

The spike train of the wind receptor cell fluctuates with time, when responding to weak stimuli near threshold. Simultaneous double recordings from two cells revealed that the fluctuations are uncorrelated between cells. An array of mechanoreceptors exposed to thermal noise is able to detect weaker signals, below the threshold, by a paradoxical use of the thermal noise as the seed of uncorrelated randomness for stochastic sampling.

Biological systems evolved under the inevitable presence of thermal noise teach us a design principle for future information systems that will be faced with the same noise. Future technology needs to be informed by the wide and sound bases of the natural sciences, not only those of physics, chemistry and mathematics, but also of biology.


Spike Train Thermal Noise Stochastic Resonance Spring Stiffness Sensory Threshold 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aertsen AMHJ, Gerstein GL, Habib MK, Palm G (1989) Dynamics of neuronal firing correlation: Modulation of “effective connectivity”. J Neurophysiol 61: 900–917PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Autrum H (1984) Comparative physiology of invertebrates: Hearing and vision. In: Dawson WW, Enoch JM (eds) Foundations of Sensory Science. Springer-Verlag Berlin, pp 1–23Google Scholar
  3. Baba Y, Shimozawa T (1997) Diversity of motor responses initiated by a wind stimulus in the freely moving cricket, Gryllus bimaculatus. Zool Sci 14: 587–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barth FG (2002) A Spider’s World. Senses and Behavior. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Barth FG, Blickhan R (1984) Mechanoreception. In: Bereiter-Hahn J, Matoltsy AG, Richards KS (eds) Biology of the Integument, Vol. 1 (Invertebrates), VIII (Arthropoda), Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 554–582Google Scholar
  6. Barth FG, Wastl U, Humphrey JAC, Devarakonda R (1993) Dynamics of arthropod filiform hairs. II. Mechanical properties of spider trichobothria (Cupiennius salei Keys.). Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 340: 445–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Collins JJ, Chow CC, Inhoff TT (1995) Stochastic resonance without tuning Nature 376: 236–238PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Denk W, Webb WW (1989) Thermal-noise-limited transduction observed in mechanosensory receptors of the inner ear. Phys Rev Lett 63: 207–210PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Douglass JK, Wilkens L, Pantazelou E, Moss F (1993) Noise enhancement of information transfer in crayfish mechanoreceptors by stochastic resonance. Nature 365: 337–340PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Feynman R, Leighton R, Sands M (1963) Ratchet and pawl. In: The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Vol. I, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, pp 46–1/46–9Google Scholar
  11. Gnatzy W, Heusslein R (1986) Digger wasp against crickets. I. Receptor involved in the antipredator strategies of the prey. Naturwissenschaften 73: 212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gnatzy W, Tautz J (1980) Ultrastructure and mechanical properties of an insect mechanoreceptor: Stimulus-transmitting structures and sensory apparatus of the cercal filiform hairs of Gryllus. Cell Tissue Res 213: 441–463PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Humphrey JAC, Devarakonda R, Iglesias I, Barth FG (1993) Dynamics of arthropod filiform hairs. I. Mathematical modeling of the hair and air motion. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 340: 423–444; Errata added in ditto (1997) 352: 1995CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Humphrey JAC, Barth FG, Reed M, Spak A (2002) The physics of arthropod medium-flow sensitive hairs: Biological models for artificial sensors. In: Barth FG, Humphrey JAC, Secomb TW (eds) Sensors and Sensing in Biology and Engineering. Springer, Wien New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Keil TA (1998) The structure of integumental mechanoreceptors. In: Harrison FW, Locke M (eds) Microscopic Anatomy of Invertebrates. Vol. 11B: Insecta, Wiley-Liss, New York, pp 385–404Google Scholar
  16. Kumagai T, Shimozawa T, Baba Y (1998a) Mobilities of the cercal wind-receptor hairs of the cricket, Gryllus bimaculatus. J Comp Physiol A 183: 7–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kumagai T, Shimozawa T, Baba Y (1998b) The shape of wind-receptor hairs of the cricket and cockroach. J Comp Physiol A 183: 187–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Laughlin S (1981) Neural principles in the peripheral visual systems of Invertebrates. In: Autrum H (ed) Vision in Invertebrates, Handbook of Sensory Physiology VII/6B, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 133–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Narins PM, Lewis ER (1984) The vertebrate inner ear as an exquisite seismic sensor. J Acoust Soc Amer 76: 1384–1387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Shimozawa T, Kanou M (1984a) Varieties of filiform hairs: range fractionation by sensory afferents and cercal interneurons of a cricket. J Comp Physiol A 155: 485–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Shimozawa T, Kanou M (1984b) The aerodynamics and sensory physiology of range fractionation in the cercal filiform sensilla of the cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. J Comp Physiol A 155: 495–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shimozawa T, Kumagai T, Baba Y (1998) Structural scaling and functional design of the cercal wind-receptor hairs of cricket. J Comp Physiol A 183: 171–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Shimokawa T, Rogel A, Pakdaman K, Sato S (1999) Stochastic resonance and spike-timing precision in an ensemble of leaky integrate and fire neuron models. Phys Rev E 59: 3461–3470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Stokes GG (1851) On the effect of the internal friction of fluid on the motion of pendulums. Trans Cambridge Philos Soc 9: 8ff. (Reprinted in Mathematical and physical papers, Vol. III, pp 1–14: Cambridge University Press, 1901)Google Scholar
  25. Thurm U (1983) Biophysics of mechanoreception. In: Hoppe W, Lohman W, Markl H, Ziegler H (eds) Biophysics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 666–671Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tateo Shimozawa
  • Jun Murakami
  • Tsuneko Kumagai

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations