Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T11:34:48.670Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Appetitive responses to computer-generated visual stimuli by the praying mantis Sphodromantis lineola(Burr.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 June 2009

Frederick R. Prete and
Robert J. Mahaffey
Frederick R. Prete
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Denison University, Granville, Ohio
Robert J. Mahaffey
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Denison University, Granville, Ohio
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Tethered adult female praying mantises, Sphodromantis lineola (Burr.), were presented with various computer-generated visual stimuli that moved against patterned or homogeneous white backgrounds in predetermined patterns and at predetermined speeds. The degrees to which the stimulus configurations elicited appetitive behaviors (attempting to approach and/or striking) indicated the relative degrees to which the stimuli were classified as prey. Mantises readily struck at cartoon “crickets” that subtended visual angles as great as 24.5 deg x 62.5 deg, but response rate was suppressed if the stimuli were superimposed on horizontally moving patterned backgrounds. Mantises also displayed appetitive behaviors to moving black squares (edge lengths = 10–47 deg) that moved in predetermined “erratic” paths; however, their response rates were affected by several factors: (1) response rate declined as edge length increased over 10 deg; (2) striking was emitted to stimuli viewed from 23 mm (but not farther) away; and (3) both stimulus displacement rate (distance moved between video frames) and apparent speed (video frame rate) dramatically affected the releasing strength of the stimuli. Finally, mantises responded appetitively to random dot patterns moving synchronously against identically patterned backgrounds and to pairs of black squares moving synchronously against a white background. However, in the latter case, response rate declined as the squares were moved farther apart horizontally or vertically. These and previous results from our laboratory on mantises are congruent with behavioral results obtained from other insects such as flies (Diptera) and dragon flies (Odonata) and suggest that there are neuroanatomical similarities between these groups.

Keywords

Praying mantisVisionStimulus speedMotion detectionFigure-ground discrimination

Information

Type
Research Articles
Information
Visual Neuroscience , Volume 10 , Issue 4 , July 1993, pp. 669 - 679
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Barlow, H.B. (1953). Summation and inhibition in the frog’s retina Journal of Physiology (London) 119, 69–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barrows, E.M. (1984). Perch sites and food of adult Chinese mantids (Dictyoptera: Mantidae). Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington 86, 898–901.Google Scholar
Bartley, J.A. (1983). Prey selection and capture by the Chinese mantid (Tenodera sinensis, Saussure). Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Delaware.Google Scholar
Collett, T.S. (1978). Peering –a locust behavior pattern for obtaining motion parallax information. Journal of Experimental Biology 76, 237–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collett, T.S. & Paterson, C.J. (1991). Relative motion parallax and target localization in the locust, Schistocerca gregaria. Journal of Comparative Physiology 169, 615–621.Google Scholar
Egelhaaf, M. (1985 a). On the neuronal basis of figure-ground discrimination by relative motion in the visual system of the fly, I. Biological Cybernetics 52, 123–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egelhaaf, M. (1985 b). On the neuronal basis of figure-ground discrimination by relative motion in the visual system of the fly, II. Biological Cybernetics 52, 195–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egelhaaf, M. (1985 c). On the neuronal basis of figure-ground discrimination by relative motion in the visual system of the fly, HI. Biological Cybernetics 52, 267–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egelhaaf, M., Hausen, K., Reichardt, W. & Wehrhahn, C. (1988). Visual control in flies relies on neuronal computation of object and background motion. Trends in Neuroscience 11, 351–358.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holling, C.S. (1964). The analysis of complex population processes. Canadian Entomologist 96, 335–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horridge, G.A. (1987). The evolution of visual processing and the construction of seeing systems Proceedings of the Royal Society B (London) 230, 279–292.Google ScholarPubMed
Hurd, L.E. & Eisenbergh, R.M. (1984). Experimental density manipulations of the predator Tenodera sinensis (Orthoptera: Mantidae) in an old-field community. II. The influence of mantids on Arthropod community structure. Journal of Animal Ecology 53, 955–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ibbotson, M.R. & Goodman, L.J. (1990). Response characteristics of four wide-field motion-sensitive descending interneurons in Apis mellifera Journal of Experimental Biology 148, 255–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Julesz, B. (1971). The Foundations of Cyclopean Perception. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kevan, K. McE. (1985). The mantis and the serpent. Entomologist’s Monthly Magazine 121, 1–8.Google Scholar
Krombholz, P.H. (1977). Food consumption in female mantids. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Tufts University.Google Scholar
Lettvin, J.Y., Maturana, H.R., McCulloch, W.S. & Pitts, W.H. (1959). What the frog’s eye tells the frog’s brain. Proceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers of New York 47, 1940–1951.Google Scholar
Lettvin, J.Y., Maturana, H.R., McCulloch, W.S. & Pitts, W.H. (1961). Two remarks on the visual system of the frog. In Sensory Communication, ed. Rosenblith, W., pp. 757–776. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Maturana, W.S., Lettvin, J.Y., McCulloch, W.S. & Pitts, W.H. (1960). Anatomy and physiology of vision in the frog (Rana Pipens) Journal of General Physiology (Suppl. 2) 43, 129–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olberg, R.M. (1981). Object- and self-movement detectors in the ventral nerve cord of the dragonfly. Journal of Comparative Physiology 141, 327–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prazdny, K. (1985). Detection of binocular disparities. Biological Cybernetics 52, 93–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prete, F.R. (1990). Configural prey selection in the praying mantis, Sphodromantis lineola (Burr.). Brain, Behavior, and Evolution 36, 300–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prete, F.R. (1992 a). The discrimination of visual stimuli representing prey versus non-prey by the praying mantis, Sphodromantis lineola (Burr.). Brain, Behavior, and Evolution 39, 285–288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prete, F.R. (1992 b). The effects of background pattern and contrast on prey discrimination by the praying mantis, Sphodromantis lineola (Burr.). Brain, Behavior, and Evolution 40, 311–320.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prete, F.R. (1992 c). Predatory behavior of the praying mantids, Tenodera aridifolia sinensis (Sauss.) and Sphodromantis lineola (Burr.). Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Prete, F.R. & Wolfe, M.M. (1992). Religious supplicant, seductive cannibal, or reflex machine? In search of the praying mantis. Journal of the History of Biology 25, 91–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prete, F.R. & Mahaffey, R.J. (1993). A chamber for mass hatching and early rearing of praying mantids (Orthoptera: Mantidae). Entomological News 104, 47–52.Google Scholar
Prete, F.R., Klimek, C.A. & Grossman, S.P. (1990). The predatory strike of the mantis, Tenodera aridifolia sinensis Journal of Insect Physiology 36, 561–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prete, F.R., Lum, H. & Grossman, S.P. (1992 a). Non-predatory ingestive behaviors of the praying mantis, Sphodromantis lineola (Burr.). Brain, Behavior, and Evolution 39, 124–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prete, F.R., Placek, P.J., Wilson, M.A., Mahaffey, R.J. & Nemcek, R.R. (1992 b). Stimulus speed and order of presentation effect the visually released predatory behaviors of the praying mantis, Sphodromantis lineola (Burr.). Brain, Behavior, and Evolution (in press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rilling, S., Mittelstaedt, H. & Roeder, K.D. (1959). Prey recognition in the praying mantis. Behavior 14, 164–184.Google Scholar
Rossel, S. (1980). Foveal fixation and tracking in the praying mantis. Journal of Comparative Physiology 139, 307–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rossel, S. (1983). Binocular stereopsis in an insect. Nature 302, 821–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rossel, S. (1986). Binocular spatial localization in the praying mantis. Journal of Experimental Biology 120, 265–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rossel, S. (1992). Vertical disparity and binocular vision in the praying mantis. Visual Neuroscience 8, 165–170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rowell, C.H.F. (1971). The orthopteran descending movement detector (DMD) neurons: A characterization and review. Zeitschrift für Vergteichende Physiologie 73, 167–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuling, F.H., Mastebroek, H.A.K., Bolt, R. & Lenting, B.P.M. (1989). Properties of elementary movement detectors in the fly, Cal-liphora erythrocephala. Journal of Comparative Physiology 165, 179–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sobel, E.C. (1990). The locust’s use of motion parallax to measure distance. Journal of Comparative Physiology 167, 579–588.Google ScholarPubMed
Srinivasan, M.V. (1992). Distance perception in insects. Current Directions in Psychological Science 1, 22–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Srinivasan, M.V., Lehrer, M., Zhang, S.W. & Horridge, G.A. (1989). How honey bees measure their distance from objects of unknown size. Journal of Comparative Physiology 165, 605–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar