Vibratory communication in the soil: pupal signals deter larval intrusion in a group-living beetle Trypoxylus dichotoma
- 618 Downloads
Pupae of several insect species are known to generate air-borne sounds and/or substrate-borne vibrations, but the functions of the sounds/vibrations are not well understood. Here, we present the first evidence of vibratory communication between pupae and larvae of a group-living Japanese rhinoceros beetle Trypoxylus dichotoma which inhabits humus soil. The last-instar larvae of this beetle construct their own pupal cells to ensure normal pupation and eclosion. These cells are fragile and subject to damage from burrowing larvae because pupae and larvae co-inhabit the same patches of humus. In laboratory experiments, we demonstrated that pupal cells harboring live pupae were less likely to be broken by larvae than those harboring dead pupae. It was also demonstrated that pupae produced vibrations in response to larvae approaching the pupal cells. High-speed video and vibration analyses showed that pupae emitted 3–7 pulses at 1.3-s intervals by beating their pronotum against the inner wall of the pupal cell. The pupal vibration was of low frequency with a maximum energy at ≈ 100 Hz. The drumming behavior was more frequently observed in the presence of an approaching larva than in its absence. When pupal vibrations were played back near to vacant artificial pupal cells, these cells were rarely disturbed by the larvae. These results provide evidence that pupae generate vibrations to deter conspecific larvae, thereby preventing damage to the cells. This larval response to pupal vibrations may have evolved through preexisting anti-predator and/or sib-killing-avoidance behavior.
KeywordsVibration Rhinoceros beetle Pupae Altruism Predator avoidance
We thank A. Surlykke, H. Nishino, R. Nakano, and the two anonymous referees for invaluable comments on the manuscript, W. Ohmura and M. Jinkawa for the loan of the highspeed video and the vibration excitor, and R. Nakano for preliminary vibration recordings. This work was supported by Grants-in-Aid from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan (T.T., Y.I.).
- Cocroft RB (1999) Parent-offspring communication in response to predators in a subsocial treehopper (Hemiptera: Membracidae: Umbonia crassicornis). Ethology 105:553–568Google Scholar
- Cocroft RB, Hamel JA (2010) Vibrational communication in the “other” social insects: a diversity of ecology, signals, and signal function. In: O’Connell-Rodwell C (ed) The use of vibrations in communication: properties, mechanisms and function across taxa. Research Signposts, India, pp 47–68Google Scholar
- Gardner A, Griffin AS, West SA (2010) Altruism and cooperation. In: Westneat DF, Fox CW (eds) Evolutionary behavioural ecology. Oxford Univ Press, New York, pp 308–326Google Scholar
- Hinton HE (1948) Sound production in Lepidopterous pupae. Entomologist 81:254–269Google Scholar
- McIver SB (1985) Mechanoreception. In: Kerkut GA, Gilbert LI (eds) Comprehensive insect physiology, biochemistry and pharmacology VI. Pergamon, New York, pp 71–132Google Scholar
- R Development Core Team (2010) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
- Tsurumaki H (1987) Collecting and breeding of the Japanese rhinoceros beetle. Saishu To Shiiku 49:254–257 (in Japanese)Google Scholar