↓ Skip to main content

Out of phase: relevance of the medial septum for directional hearing and phonotaxis in the natural habitat of field crickets

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Comparative Physiology A, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
Title
Out of phase: relevance of the medial septum for directional hearing and phonotaxis in the natural habitat of field crickets
Published in
Journal of Comparative Physiology A, November 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00359-013-0869-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stefan Hirtenlehner, Heiner Römer, Arne K. D. Schmidt

Abstract

A modified tracheal system is the anatomical basis for a pressure difference receiver in field crickets, where sound has access to the inner and outer side of the tympanum of the ear in the forelegs. A thin septum in the midline of a connecting trachea coupling both ears is regarded to be important in producing frequency-dependent interaural intensity differences (IIDs) for sound localization. However, the fundamental role of the septum in directional hearing has recently been challenged by the finding that the localization ability is ensured even with a perforated septum, at least under controlled laboratory conditions. Here, we investigated the influence of the medial septum on phonotaxis of female Gryllus bimaculatus under natural conditions. Surprisingly, even with a perforated septum, females reliably tracked a male calling song in the field. Although reduced by 5.2 dB, IIDs still averaged at 7.9 dB and provided a reliable proximate basis for the observed behavioural performance of operated females in the field. In contrast, in the closely related species Gryllus campestris the same septum perforation caused a dramatic decline in IIDs over all frequencies tested. We discuss this discrepancy with respect to a difference in the phenotype of their tracheal systems.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 19%
Researcher 7 19%
Student > Master 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 10 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 57%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Unknown 12 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 January 2014.
All research outputs
#19,221,261
of 23,815,455 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Comparative Physiology A
#1,225
of 1,450 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,106
of 311,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Comparative Physiology A
#11
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,815,455 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,450 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 311,301 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.