Journal of Insect Behavior

, Volume 23, Issue 5, pp 348–363 | Cite as

Substrate-borne Vibrations as a Component of Intraspecific Communication in the Groundhopper Tetrix ceperoi

  • Petr Kočárek


Substrate-borne vibrational signals used in communication of Tetrix ceperoi (Orthoptera: Tetrigidae) are described for the first time. Among all studied Tetrix species, T. ceperoi use the richest repertoire of vibrational signals. These signals consist of isolated pulses or pulses united into rhythmically repeated or irregularly repeated groups and are used in rivalry, pre-copulation, and copulation behaviour (1st, 3rd, and 4th structural types of signals), and are also used by single males or females (2nd type of signal). A 5th type of vibrational signal is produced by wing tremulation, which was unknown Tetrigidae. Based on the results of this study, the vibrational signalisation seems to play an important role in species-specific mate recognition of T. ceperoi. The significance of individual signals is discussed based on results of manipulative contact experiments.


Tetrix Orthoptera vibrational communication behaviour 



I thank the four anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions, which significantly improved the quality of the publication, and Jan Beneš (Prague, Czech Republic) for technical help with sound recording equipment. The study was supported by grants No. 206/07/0811 of the Czech Science Foundation (GACR) and No. SGS2/PrF/2010 of the University of Ostrava.


  1. Benediktov AA (1998) Akusticheskaya signalizatsiya pryamokrylykh roda Tetrix (Orthoptera, Tetrigidae). Zool Zhurnal 77:1021–1025Google Scholar
  2. Benediktov AA (2002) Novye dannye o vibrosignalizatsiyi pryamokrylykh semeystva Tetrigidae (Orthoptera). In: Trudy VII Ubsunurskogo simpoziya (20–24 September 2001, Kyzyl), M. Slovo, pp 97–106Google Scholar
  3. Benediktov AA (2005) Vibracionnye signaly pryamokrylykh nasyekomykh semeystva Tetrigidae (Orthoptera). Proc Rus Ent Sci 76:131–140Google Scholar
  4. Benediktov AA (2009) Vibrational communication in orthopteroid insects (Orthoptera) from suborder Caelifera. Moscow Univ Biol Sci Bull 64:126–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cocroft RB, Rodríguez RL (2005) The behavioral ecology of insect vibrational communication. BioScience 55:323–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Eberhard MJB, Picker MD (2008) Vibrational communication in two sympatric species of Mantophasmatodea (Heelwalkers). J Insect Behav 21:240–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Faber A (1953) Laut-und Gebärdensprache bei Insekten, Orthoptera (Geradflügler). Mitt Staatl Mus Naturkd Stutt 287:1–198Google Scholar
  8. Gridy-Papp M (2004) Sound Ruler ver. 0.941.
  9. Gröning J, Krause S, Hochkirch A (2007a) Habitat preferences of an endangered insect species, Cepero’s Ground-hopper (Tetrix ceperoi). Ecol Res 22:767–773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gröning J, Lücke N, Finger A, Hochkirch A (2007b) Reproductive interference in two ground-hopper species: testing hypoteses of coexistence in the field. Oikos 116:1449–1460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hill PSM (2001) Vibration and animal communication: a review. Amer Zool 41:1135–1142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hill PSM (2008) Vibrational communication in animals. Harward Univ. Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  13. Hill PSM (2009) How do animals use substrate-borne vibrations as an information source? Naturwissenschaften 96:1335–1371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hochkirch A, Deppermann J, Gröning J (2006) Visual communication behaviour as a mechanism behind reproductive interference in three pygmy grasshoppers (genus Tetrix, Tetrigidae, Orthoptera). J Insect Behav 19:559–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hochkirch A, Gröning J, Bücker A (2007a) Sympatry with the devil—Reproductive interference could hamper species coexistence. J Anim Ecol 76:633–642CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Hochkirch A, Gröning J, Krause S (2007b) Intersexual niche segregation in Cepero’s Ground-hopper, Tetrix ceperoi. Evol Ecol 21:727–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hochkirch A, Bücker A, Gröning J (2008) Reproductive interference between the Common Ground-hopper Tetrix undulata and the Slender Ground-hopper Tetrix subulata (Orthoptera, Tetrigidae). B Entomol Res 98:605–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ingrisch S, Köhler G (1998) Die Heuschrecken Mitteleuropas. Westarp Wissenschaften, MagdeburgGoogle Scholar
  19. Jacobs W (1953) Verhaltensbiologische Studien an Feldheuschrecken. Z Tierpsychol, Beiheft 1:1–230Google Scholar
  20. Kanmyia K (2006) Mating behaviour and vibratory signals in whiteflies (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). In: Drosopoulos S, Claridge MF (eds) Insect sounds and communication. Physiology, behaviour, ecology and evolution. Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton, pp 365–379Google Scholar
  21. Kočárek P, Grucmanová Š, Filipcová Z, Bradová L, Plášek V, Holuša J (2008) Bryophagy in the groundhopper Tetrix ceperoi (Orthoptera: Tetrigidae): analysis of alimentary tract contents. In: Kočárek P, Plášek V, Malachová K, Cimalová Š (eds) Environmental changes and biological assessment IV. Scripta Facultatis Rerum Naturalium Universitas Ostraviensis 186, Ostrava, pp 348–352Google Scholar
  22. Kočárek P, Grucmanová Š, Filipcová Z, Bradová L, Plášek V, Drozd P (2009) Food composition of two European groundhoppers (Orthoptera: Tetrigidae: Tetrix tenuicornis, Tetrix ceperoi): bryophagy or detritophagy? In: 10th International Congress of Orthopterology (21–25 June 2009, Antalya, Turkey). Orthopterists’ Society and Akdeniz University, Antalya, pp 123–124Google Scholar
  23. Lock K, Durwael L (1999) One day activity pattern of the grasshopper species Paratettix meridionalis (Orthoptera: Tetrigidae). Entomol Gen 24:177–183Google Scholar
  24. Paranjape SY, Bhalerao AM, Naidu NM (1987) On etho-ecological characteristics and phylogeny of Tetrigidae. In: Bacetti BM (ed) Evolutionary biology of Orthopteroid insects. Ellis Horwood, New York, pp 386–395Google Scholar
  25. Podgornaya LI (1983) Pryamokrylye nasyekomye semeystva Tetrigidae (Orthoptera) fauny SSSR. Trudy Zoologicheskogo Instituta AN SSSR 112, MoskvaGoogle Scholar
  26. Pushkar TI (2009) Tetrix tuerki (Orthoptera, Tetrigidae): distribution in Ukraine, ecological characteristic and features of biology. Vestnik Zoologii 43:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ragge DR, Reynolds WJ (1998) The Songs of the Grasshoppers and Crickets of Western Europe. Harley Books, ColchesterGoogle Scholar
  28. Stumpner A, von Helversen O (1994) Song production and song recognition in a group of sibling grasshopper species (Chorthippus dorsatus, Ch. dichrous and Ch. loratus: Orthoptera, Acrididae). Bioacustics 6:1–23Google Scholar
  29. Virant-Doberlet M, Čokl A (2004) Vibrational communication in insects. Neotrop Entomol 33:121–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Virant-Doberlet M, Čokl A, Zorović M (2006) Use of substrate vibrations for orientation: from behaviour to physiology. In: Drosopoulos S, Claridge MF (eds) Insect sounds and communication. Physiology, behaviour, ecology and evolution. Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton, pp 81–97Google Scholar
  31. von Helversen D, von Helversen O (1997) Recognition of sex in the acoustic communication of the grasshopper Chorthippus biguttulus (Orthoptera, Acrididae). J Comp Physiol A 180:373–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biology and EcologyUniversity of OstravaOstravaCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations