Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Acoustic feature extraction by cross-correlation in crickets?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Comparative Physiology A Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Common concepts of acoustic feature extraction within the auditory pathway of vertebrates and insects assume temporal filters tuned to particular periodicities. Crickets respond selectively to the conspecific song pattern and reveal a bandpass characteristic, which is thought to arise from a matched filter for a restricted range of periods. Unexpectedly, females of the two sibling species Teleogryllus oceanicus and T. commodus differed in fundamental filter properties. While T. oceanicus revealed a period filter, T. commodus exhibited a pulse duration filter. This finding raises the question of how so distinct properties of homologous neuronal circuits for pattern analysis have evolved during speciation. Evidence is presented that signal analysis by cross-correlation offers a simple explanation for differences in pattern selectivity as well as for the evolutionary transition. By cross-correlation the similarity of an external pattern with an internal template is determined over a certain time window. A comparison of behavioural data and cross-correlation values suggested that both species have similar templates. However, time windows were significantly different between species (T. oceanicus: 180–400 ms, T. commodus: 90–160 ms). Consequently, solely a change in the evaluation time window is required to account for the observed differences in feature extraction that serve to maintain species isolation.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3A–F.
Fig. 4A–G.
Fig. 5A, B.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alder TB, Rose GJ (1998) Long-term temporal integration in the anuran auditory system. Nat Neurosci 1:519–523

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bentley DR, Hoy RR (1972) Genetic control of the neuronal network generating cricket (Teleogryllus Gryllus'') song patterns. Anim Behav 20:478–492

    Google Scholar 

  • Boer E de (1985) Auditory time constants: a paradox? In: Michelsen A (ed) Time resolution in auditory systems. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 141–158

  • Bradbury JW, Vehrencamp SL (1998) Principles of animal communication. Sinauer, Sunderland, MA

  • Carr CE, Konishi M (1990) A circuit for detection of interaural time differences in the brainstem of the barn owl. J Neurosci 10:3227–3246

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford JD (1997) Feature-detecting auditory neurons in the brain of a sound-producing fish. J Comp Physiol A 180:439–450

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dobler S, Heller KG, Helversen O von (1994) Song pattern recognition and an auditory time window in the female bushcricket Ancistrura nigrovittata (Orthoptera: Phaneropteridae). J Comp Physiol A 175:67–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Doherty JA (1985) Trade-off phenomena in calling song recognition and phonotaxis in the cricket, Gryllus bimaculatus (Orthoptera, Gryllidae). J Comp Physiol A 156:787–801

    Google Scholar 

  • Eggermont JJ (1990) The correlative brain: theory and experiment in neural interaction. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewert SD, Verhey JL, Dau T (2002) Spectro-temporal processing in the envelope-frequency domain. J Acoust Soc Am 112:2921–2931

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fonseca PJ, Münch D, Hennig RM (2000) How cicadas interpret acoustic signals. Nature 405:297–298

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerhardt HC, Huber F (2002) Acoustic communication in insects and anurans. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago

  • Heller KG, Helversen D von (1986) Acoustic communication in phaneropterid bushcrickets: species-specific delay of female stridulatory response and matching male sensory window. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 18:189–198

    Google Scholar 

  • Helversen D von, Helversen O von (1995) Acoustic pattern recognition and orientation in orthopteran insects: parallel or serial processing. J Comp Physiol A 177:767–774

    Google Scholar 

  • Helversen D von, Helversen O von (1998) Acoustic pattern recognition in a grasshopper: processing in the time or frequency domain? Biol Cybern 79:467–476

  • Helversen O von, Helversen D von (1994) Forces driving coevolution of song and song recognition in grasshoppers. In: Schildberger K, Elsner N (eds) Neural basis of behavioural adaptations. Fischer, Stuttgart, pp 253–284

  • Hennig RM, Weber T (1997) Filtering of temporal parameters of the calling song by cricket females of two closely related species: a behavioral analysis. J Comp Physiol A 180:621–630

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houtgast T (1989) Frequency selectivity in amplitude-modulation detection. J Acoust Soc Am. 85:1676–1680

  • Hoy RR, Hahn J, Paul RC (1977) Hybrid cricket auditory behavior: evidence for genetic coupling in animal communication. Science 195:82–84

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hutcheon B, Yarom Y (2000) Resonance, oscillation and the intrinsic frequency preferences of neurons. Trends Neurosci 23:216–222

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Langner G (1992) Periodicity coding in the auditory system. Hear Res 60:115–142

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Laurent G, Wehr M, Davidowitz H (1996) Temporal representations of odors in an olfactory network. J Neurosci 16:3837–3847

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marler P (1997) Three models of song learning: evidence from behavior. J Neurobiol 33:501–516

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Michelsen A, Larsen ON, Surlykke A (1985) Auditory processing of temporal cues in insect songs: frequency domain or time domain? In: Michelsen A (ed) Time resolution in auditory systems. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 3–27

  • Pollack G (2000) Who, what, where? Recognition and localization of acoustic signals by insects. Curr Opin Neurobiol 10:763–767

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pollack GS (2003) Sensory cues for sound localization in the cricket Teleogryllus oceanicus: interaural difference in response strength versus interaural latency difference. J Comp Physiol A 189:143–151

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pollack GS, El-Feghaly E (1993) Calling song recognition in the cricket Teleogryllus oceanicus: comparison of the effects of stimulus intensity and sound spectrum on selectivity for temporal pattern. J Comp Physiol A 171:759–765

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollack GS, Hoy RR (1979) Temporal pattern as a cue for species-specific calling song recognition in crickets. Science 204:429–432

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiss RF (1964) A theory of resonant networks. In: Reiss RF (ed) Neural theory and modeling. Stanford University Press, Stanford, pp 105–137

  • Ronacher B, Krahe R, Hennig RM (2000) Effects of signal duration on the recognition of masked communication signals by the grasshopper Chorthippus biguttulus. J Comp Physiol A 186:1065–1072

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose G (1986) A temporal-processing mechanism for all species ? Brain Behav Evol 28:134–144

  • Rose GJ, Capranica RR (1983) Temporal selectivity in the central auditory system of the leopard frog. Science 219:1087–1089

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rose GJ, Capranica RR (1984) Processing of amplitude-modulated sounds by the auditory midbrain of two species of toads: matched temporal filters. J Comp Physiol A 154:211–219

    Google Scholar 

  • Schildberger K (1984) Temporal selectivity of identified auditory neurons in the cricket's brain. J Comp Physiol A 155:171–185

    Google Scholar 

  • Schul J (1998) Song recognition by temporal cues in a group of closely related bushcricket species (genus Tettigonia). J Comp Physiol A 183:401–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmons JA, Moss CF, Ferragamo M (1990) Convergence of temporal and spectral information into acoustic images of complex sonar targets perceived by the echolocating bat, Eptesicus fuscus. J Comp Physiol A 166:449–470

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stabel J, Wendler G, Scharstein H (1989) Cricket phonotaxis: localisation depends on recognition of the calling song pattern. J Comp Physiol A 165:165–177

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber T, Thorson J (1989) Phonotactic behavior of walking crickets. In: Huber F, Moore TE, Loher W (eds) Cricket behavior and neurobiology. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, pp 310–339

  • Weber T, Thorson J, Huber F (1982) Auditory behaviour of the cricket. 2. Simplicity of calling-song recognition in Gryllus, and anomalous phonotaxis at abnormal carrier frequencies. J Comp Physiol 146:361–378

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I thank Heidrun Bamberg, Andreas Grabolle, Jannis Hildebrandt, Hans-Ulrich Kleindienst, Nils Schmeisser, Theo Weber and Sandra Wohlgemuth for help and assistance with the behavioural experiments; Sven Krackow for assistance with statistical treatment of data; Bernd Ronacher and Astrid Franz, Andreas Herz and Martin Stemmler for many discussions and comments on the manuscript. This work was supported by the DFG. The experiments comply with the Principles of animal care, publication No. 86-23, revised 1985 of the National Institute of Health and the current German laws.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Abt. Verhaltensphysiologie, Institut für Biologie, Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, Invalidenstr. 43, 10 115, Berlin, Germany

    R. M. Hennig

Authors
  1. R. M. Hennig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. M. Hennig.

Additional information

Dedicated to Franz Huber, who enriched neuroethology both by his pioneering studies as well as his infectious enthusiasm

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hennig, R.M. Acoustic feature extraction by cross-correlation in crickets?. J Comp Physiol A 189, 589–598 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00359-003-0438-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00359-003-0438-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation