Advertisement

Biological Cybernetics

, Volume 91, Issue 3, pp 168–181 | Cite as

Tactile efficiency of insect antennae with two hinge joints

  • Andre F. KrauseEmail author
  • Volker Dürr
Article

Abstract

Antennae are the main organs of the arthropod tactile sense. In contrast to other senses that are capable of retrieving spatial information, e.g. vision, spatial sampling of tactile information requires active movement of the sense organ. For a quantitative analysis of basic principles of active tactile sensing, we use a generic model of arbitrary antennae with two hinge joints (revolute joints). This kind of antenna is typical for Orthoptera and Phasmatodea, i.e. insect orders that contain model species for the study of antennal movements, including cricket, locust and stick insect. First, we analyse the significance of morphological properties on workspace and sampling acuity. It is shown how joint axis orientation determines areas out of reach while affecting acuity in the areas within reach. Second, we assume a parametric set of movement strategies, based on empirical data on the stick insect Carausius morosus, and investigate the role of each strategy parameter on tactile sampling performance. A stochastic environment is used to measure sampling density, and a viscous friction model is assumed to introduce energy consumption and, thus, a measure of tactile efficiency. Up to a saturation level, sampling density is proportional to the range or frequency of joint angle modulation. The effect of phase shift is strong if joint angle modulation frequencies are equal, but diminishes for other frequency ratios. Speed of forward progression influences the optimal choice of movement strategy. Finally, for an analysis of environmental effects on tactile performance, we show how efficiency depends on predominant edge direction. For example, with slanted and non-orthogonal joint axis orientations, as present in the stick insect, the optimal sampling strategy is less sensitive to a change from horizontal to vertical edge predominance than with orthogonal and non-slanted joint axes, as present in a cricket.

Keywords

Frequency Ratio Sampling Density Strategy Parameter Tactile Sense Viscous Friction 
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.

Supplementary material

supp.pdf (83 kb)
Supplementary material

References

  1. 1.
    Barnes TG, Truong TQ, Adams GG, McGruer NE (2001) Large deflection analysis of a biomimetic lobster antenna due to contact and flow. ASME J Appl Mech 68:948–951Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brooks RA (1989) A robot that walks: emergent behavior from a carefully evolved network. Neural Comput 1(2):253–262Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Camhi JM, Johnson EN (1999) High-frequency steering manoeuvres mediated by tactile cues: antennal wall-following in the cockroach. J Exp Biol 202:631–643Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cowan NJ, Ma EJ, Cutkosky M, Full RJ (2003) A biologically inspired passive antenna for steering control of a running robot. In: Proceedings of the 11th international symposium on robotics research (ISRR 2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dürr V, König Y, Kittmann R (2001) The antennal motor system of the stick insect Carausius morosus: anatomy and antennal movement pattern during walking. J Comp Physiol A 187:131–144Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dürr V, Krause A, Schmitz J, Cruse H (2003) Neuroethological concepts and their transfer to walking machines. Int J Robot Res 22:151–167Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dürr V, Krause AF (2001) The stick insect antenna as a biological paragon for an actively moved tactile probe for obstacle detection. In: Berns K, Dillmann R (eds) Climbing and walking robots – from biology to industrial applications. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on climbing and walking robots (CLAWAR 2001). Professional Engineering Publishing, London, pp 87–96Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gaul L, Nitsche R (2001) Role of friction in mechanical joints. Appl Mech Rev 54(2):93–105Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gewecke M, Heinzel H-G (1980) Aerodynamic and mechanical properties of antennae as air-current sense organs in Locusta migratoria: I. Static characteristics. J Comp Physiol 139:357–366Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gewecke M, Heinzel H-G (1987) Aerodynamic and mechanical properties of antennae as air-current sense organs in Locusta migratoria: II. Dynamic characteristics. J Comp Physiol 161:671–680Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Godden DH (1974) The physiological mechanism of catalepsy in the stick insect Carausius morosus br. J Comp Physiol 89:251–274Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Honegger HW (1981) A preliminary note on a new optomotor response in crickets: antennal tracking of moving targets. J Comp Physiol A 142:419–421Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Horseman BG, Gebhardt MJ, Honegger H-W (1997) Involvement of the suboesophageal and thoracic ganglia in the control of antennal movements in crickets. J Comp Physiol A 181:195–204Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Imms AD (1939) On the antennal musculature in insects and other arthropods. Q J Microscop Sci 81:273–320Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kaneko M, Kanayma N, Tsuji T (1998) Active antenna for contact sensing. IEEE Trans Robot Automat 14:278–291Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kindermann T (2003) Positive rückkopplung zur kontrolle komplexer kinematiken am beispiel des hexapoden laufens: experimente und simulationen. Phd Thesis, Universität BielefeldGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Land MF (1981) Optics and vision in invertebrates. In: Autrum H (ed) Handbook of sensory physiology VII/6 B comparative physiology and evolution of vision in invertebrates. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 471–592Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Paul RP (1981) Robot manipulator: mathematics, programming and control. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pelletier Y, McLeod CD (1994) Obstacle perception by insect antennae during terrestial locomotion. Physiol Entomol 19:360–362Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Staudacher EM, Gebhardt M, Dürr V (2004) Antennal movements and mechanoreception: neurobiology of active tactile sensors. Adv Insect Physiol (in press)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Warrant EJ, McIntyre PD (1993) Arthropod eye design and the physical limits to spatial resolving power. Prog Neurobiol 40(4):413–461Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zakotnik J, Matheson T, Dürr V (2004) A posture optimisation algorithm for model-based motion capture of natural movement sequences. J Neurosci Meth 135(1–2):42–54Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zeil J, Sandeman R, Sandeman DC (2001) Tactile localisation: the function of active antennal movements in the crayfish Cherax destructor. J Comp Physiol A 157:607–617Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Abt. Biologische Kybernetik und Theoretische BiologieFakultät für Biologie, Universität BielefeldBielefeldGermany

Personalised recommendations