Advertisement

Journal of comparative physiology

, Volume 147, Issue 4, pp 485–493 | Cite as

Compensation for height in the control of groundspeed byDrosophila in a new, ‘barber's pole’ wind tunnel

  • C. T. David
Article

Summary

  1. 1.

    All experiments were performed on freely flyingDrosophila in a new, horizontal wind tunnel where the visual input was provided by the apparent axial movement of rotating helical patterns surrounding the cylindrical working section. The flies were flown upwind along a narrow plume of attractant odour in the mid-line of the tunnel so their visual input was specified.

     
  2. 2.

    When the pattern was at a constant distance from the flies they controlled their groundspeed by flying at an airspeed such that there was a constant angular velocity of image movement rather than a constant frequency of stripe alternation over their eyes. They thus flew at the same groundspeed regardless of wind speed.

     
  3. 3.

    When the distance of the pattern from the flies changed in a step, the flies adjusted their airspeed at the change so as to keep a relatively constant groundspeed. They did this by changing the angular velocity of image movement that they held constant.

     
  4. 4.

    When the distance of the pattern from the flies changed gradually, on a cone rather than in a step, the flies did not adjust the angular velocity of image movement that they held constant. Their groundspeed thus did not remain constant.

     
  5. 5.

    It is suggested that the flies used parallax cues, from the different apparent angular velocities visible juxtaposed on either side of a step in pattern distance, to adjust the angular velocity of image movement that they held constant.

     

Keywords

Wind Speed Angular Velocity Wind Tunnel Odour Visual Input 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Cardé RT, Hagaman TE (1979) Behavioural responses of the gypsy moth in a wind tunnel to air-borne enantiomers of disparlure. Environ Entomol 8:475–484Google Scholar
  2. Cartwright BA, Collett TS (1979) How honeybees know their distance from a near-by visual landmark. J Exp Biol 82:367–372Google Scholar
  3. Collett TS (1978) Peering — A locust behaviour pattern for obtaining motion parallax information. J Exp Biol 76:237–241Google Scholar
  4. David CT (1978) The relationship between body angle and flight speed in free-flyingDrosophila. Physiol Entomol 3:191–195Google Scholar
  5. David CT (1979a) Height control by free-flyingDrosophila. Physiol Entomol 4:209–216Google Scholar
  6. David CT (1979b) Optomotor control of speed and height by free-flyingDrosophila. J Exp Biol 82:389–392Google Scholar
  7. Daykin PN (1967) Orientation ofAedes aegypti in vertical air currents. Can Entomol 99:303–308Google Scholar
  8. Eriksson ES (1980) Movement parallax and distance perception in the grasshopper (Phaulacridium vittatum (Sjastedt)). J Exp Biol 86:337–340Google Scholar
  9. Götz KG (1964) Optomotorische Untersuchung des visuellen Systems einiger Augenmutanten der FruchtfliegeDrosophila. Kybernetik 2:77–92Google Scholar
  10. Götz KG (1970) Fractionation ofDrosophila populations according to optomotor traits. J Exp Biol 52:419–436Google Scholar
  11. Heran H (1956) Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach der Wahrnehmungsgrundlage der Entfernungsweisung der Bienen. Z Vergl Physiol 42:168–218Google Scholar
  12. Heran H, Lindauer M (1963) Windkompensation und Seitenwindkorrektur der Bienen beim Flug über Wasser. Z Vergl Physiol 47:39–55Google Scholar
  13. Kennedy JS (1940) The visual responses of flying mosquitoes. Proc Zool Soc Lond [A] 109:221–242Google Scholar
  14. Kennedy JS (1951) The migration of the desert locust (Schistocerca gregaria Forsk.). Philos Trans R Soc Lond [Biol] 235:163–290Google Scholar
  15. Kennedy JS, Marsh D (1974) Pheromone-regulated anemotaxis in flying moths. Science 184:999–1001Google Scholar
  16. Kennedy JS, Thomas AAG (1974) Behaviour of some low-flying aphids in wind. Ann Appl Biol 76:143–159Google Scholar
  17. Kennedy JS, Ludlow AR, Sanders CG (1981) Guidance system used in moth sex attraction. Nature 288:475–477Google Scholar
  18. Marsh D, Kennedy JS, Ludlow AR (1978) An analysis of anemotactic zig-zagging flight in male moths stimulated by pheromone. Physiol Entomol 3:221–240Google Scholar
  19. Moericke V, Prokopy RJ, Berkocher S, Bush GL (1975) Visual stimuli eliciting attraction ofRhagoletis pomonella (Diptera: Tephritidae) flies to trees. Entomol Exp Appl 18:497–507Google Scholar
  20. Siegel S (1956) Nonparametric statistics for the behavioural sciences. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Wallace GK (1959) Visual scanning in the desert locustSchistocerca gregaria Forskal. J Exp Biol 36:512–525Google Scholar
  22. Wehner R, Horn E (1975) The effect of object distance on pattern preferences in the walking fly,Drosophila melanogaster. Experientia 31:641–643Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. T. David
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Pure and Applied BiologyImperial College of Science and TechnologyLondon SW 7England

Personalised recommendations