Skip to main content
Log in

Tuning of vibration sensitive neurons in the central nervous system of a wandering spider,Cupiennius salei Keys

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

Summary

  1. 1.

    The first steps of the central nervous integration of sensory input from vibration receptors in the spiderCupiennius salei Keys, take place in the subesophageal ganglionic mass. We describe ventro-medially located neurons which respond to vibrations reaching the spider through the substrate (SVSN, SubstrateVibration Sensitive Neurons).

  2. 2.

    These neurons differ with respect to the convergence of their sensory input. Some neurons (SVSN type 1) only respond to the vibration of the leg corresponding to the ganglion recorded from. Other neurons can be effectively stimulated by vibrating any of the four ipsilateral legs (SVSN type 2) or either one of the two legs of the same segment (SVSN type 4). Still another type receives input from all eight legs.

  3. 3.

    According to their tuning curves (10 Hz–1 kHz) all vibration sensitive neurons in the subesophageal ganglionic mass so far studied behave like bandpass filters. Their best frequencies are in the frequency range of courtship and prey signals encountered by the spider in its natural habitat. Whereas the best frequencies of SVSN type 1 are found at low frequencies (ca. 80 Hz–100 Hz), medium (ca. 400 Hz), and high frequencies (ca. 800 Hz), respectively (Fig. 1), SVSN type 2, 3, and 4 are more broadly tuned to 80 Hz–200 Hz (Figs. 2, 3).

  4. 4.

    SVSN type 2 are more sensitive by about 12 dB to front leg stimulation than to hind leg stimulation (Fig. 2), and SVSN type 4 are more sensitive (by ca. 7 dB) to simultaneous vibration of both segmental legs than to the stimulation of either one of them alone (Fig. 3).

  5. 5.

    Threshold values (displacement of tarsus) at the best frequencies are in the range of 0.1 to 1 μm. They decrease by up to ca. 20 dB if band limited ‘noisy’ stimuli (bandwidth ca. 1/3 octave) are applied instead of sinusoidal vibration (Fig. 4).

  6. 6.

    The relation between stimulus amplitude and spike response is sigmoid. The dynamic ranges of the responses differ in the various neuron types. The low and high frequency SVSN type 1 have a dynamic range of more than 46 dB; in SVSN type 4 it increases if the two segmental legs are stimulated simultaneously instead of alone (Fig. 5).

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

BF :

best frequency

SVSN :

substrate vibration sensitive neuron

References

  • Babu KS, Barth FG (1984) Neuroanatomy of the central nervous system of the wandering spider,Cupiennius salei (Arachnida, Araneida). Zoomorphology 104:344–359

    Google Scholar 

  • Babu KS, Barth FG, Strausfeld NJ (1985) Intersegmental sensory tracts and contralateral motorneurons in the leg ganglia of the spiderCupiennius salei Keys. Cell Tissue Res 241:53–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Barth FG (1982) Spiders and vibratory signals: sensory reception and behavioral significance. In: Witt PN, Rovner JS (eds) Spider communication: mechanisms and ecological significance. Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ, pp 67–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Barth FG (1985) Neuroethology of the spider vibration sense. In: Barth FG (ed) Neurobiology of arachnids. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokyo, pp 203–229

    Google Scholar 

  • Barth FG (1986) Vibrationssinn und vibratorische Umwelt von Spinnen. Naturwissenschaften 73:519–530

    Google Scholar 

  • Barth FG, Geethabali (1982) Spider vibration receptors. Threshold curves of individual slits in the metatarsal lyriform organ. J Comp Physiol 148:175–186

    Google Scholar 

  • Barth FG, Seyfarth E-A (1979)Cupiennius salei Keys. (Araneae) in the highlands of central Guatemala. J Arachnol 7:255–263

    Google Scholar 

  • Bleckmann H, Barth FG (1984) Sensory ecology of a semiaquatic spider (Dolomedes triton). II The release of predatory behavior by water surface waves. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 14:303–312

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohnenberger J, Seyfarth E-A, Barth FG (1983) A versatile feedback controller for electromechanical stimulation devices. J Neurosci Methods 9:335–341

    Google Scholar 

  • Dambach M (1972) Der Vibrationssinn der Grillen. II. Antworten von Neuronen im Bauchmark. J Comp Physiol 79:305–324

    Google Scholar 

  • Finck A (1972) Vibration sensitivity in an orb-weaver. Am Zool 12:539–543

    Google Scholar 

  • Finck A (1981) The lyriform organ of the orb-weaving spiderAraneus sericatus: Vibration sensitivity is altered by bending the legs. J Acoust Soc Am 70:231–233

    Google Scholar 

  • Hergenröder R, Barth FG (1983a) The release of attack and escape behavior by vibratory stimuli in a wandering spider (Cupiennius salei Keys.). J Comp Physiol 152:347–359

    Google Scholar 

  • Hergenröder R, Barth FG (1983b) Vibratory signals and spider behavior: How do the sensory inputs from the eight legs interact in orientation? J Comp Physiol 152:361–371

    Google Scholar 

  • Klärner D, Barth FG (1982) Vibratory signals and prey capture in web spiders (Zygiella x-notata, Nephila clavipes). J Comp Physiol 148:445–455

    Google Scholar 

  • Lachmuth M, Grasshoff M, Barth FG (1985) Taxonomische Revision der GattungCupiennius SIMON 1891 (Arachnida: Araneae). Senckenbergiana Biol 65:329–372

    Google Scholar 

  • Liesenfeld FJ (1961) Über Leistung und Sitz des Erschütterungssinnes von Netzspinnen. Biol Zentralbl 80:465–475

    Google Scholar 

  • Masters MW (1984a) Vibrations in the orb web ofNuctenea sclopetaria (Araneidae). I. Transmission through the web. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 15:207–215

    Google Scholar 

  • Masters MW (1984b) Vibrations in the orb web ofNuctenea sclopetaria (Araneidae). II. Prey and wind signals and the spider's response threshold. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 15:217–223

    Google Scholar 

  • Masters MW, Markl H (1981) Vibration signal transmission in spider orb webs. Science 213:363–365

    Google Scholar 

  • Reißland A, Görner P (1985) Trichobothria. In: Barth FG (ed) Neurobiology of arachnids. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokyo, pp 138–161

    Google Scholar 

  • Rovner JS, Barth FG (1981) Vibratory communication through living plants by a tropical wandering spider. Science 214:464–466

    Google Scholar 

  • Schüch W, Barth FG (1985) Temporal patterns in the vibratory courtship of a wandering spider (Cupiennius salei Keys.). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 16:263–271

    Google Scholar 

  • Speck J, Barth FG (1982) Vibration sensitivity of pretarsal slit sensilla in the spider leg. J Comp Physiol 148:187–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Suter RB (1978)Cyclosa turbinata (Araneae, Araneidae): Prey discrimination via webborne vibrations. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 3:283–296

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Dedicated to Professor Hansjochem Autrum on the occasion of his 80th birthday

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Speck-Hergenröder, J., Barth, F.G. Tuning of vibration sensitive neurons in the central nervous system of a wandering spider,Cupiennius salei Keys. J. Comp. Physiol. 160, 467–475 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00615080

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00615080

Keywords

Navigation