Role of side-slip flight in target pursuit: blue-tailed damselflies (Ischnura elegans) avoid body rotation while approaching a moving perch

Original Paper

Abstract

Visually guided flight control requires processing changes in the visual panorama (optic-flow) resulting from self-movement relative to stationary objects, as well as from moving objects passing through the field of view. We studied the ability of the blue-tailed damselfly, Ischnura elegans, to successfully land on a perch moving unpredictably. We tracked the insects landing on a vertical pole moved linearly 6 cm back and forth with sinusoidal changes in velocity. When the moving perch changed direction at frequencies higher than 1 Hz, the damselflies engaged in manoeuvres that typically involved sideways flight, with minimal changes in body orientation relative to the stationary environment. We show that these flight manoeuvres attempted to fix the target in the centre of the field of view when flying in any direction while keeping body rotation changes about the yaw axis to the minimum. We propose that this pursuit strategy allows the insect to obtain reliable information on self and target motion relative to the stationary environment from the translational optic-flow, while minimizing interference from the rotational optic-flow. The ability of damselflies to fly in any direction, irrespective of body orientation, underlines the superb flight control of these aerial predators.

Keywords

Optic-flow Interception Tracking Flight control Zygoptera 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Zohar Yanai, Liron Goren and Michael Blecher for assistance with identifying damselflies. We thank Frida Matana Ben-Ami, Yoav Gothilf and Maor Knafo for providing live food for feeding the damselflies and Shira Holand for aiding us with the damselflies’ figures. We also thank the staff of the Meier I. Segals Garden for Zoological Research for logistical support. All experiments with animals were carried out in accord with the laws of Israel, and the guidelines outlined by Tel Aviv University.

Supplementary material

359_2018_1261_MOESM1_ESM.tif (922 kb)
Supplementary Table 1 Number of trials for each individual in each experiment (TIF 921 KB)
359_2018_1261_MOESM2_ESM.tif (660 kb)
Supplementary Figure 1 Frequency of occurrence of altitude change during the last 300 ms of the approach in the various experiments. Positive and negative altitude change values indicate on an approach from below and from above the final landing point, respectively (TIF 660 KB)

Supplementary Film 1 Stationary experiment. Straight flight towards the target. The trajectory an orientation of the insect is depicted in 3D in Fig. 3a of the main text (WMV 8049 KB)

Supplementary Film 2 Stationary experiment. The damselfly flies sideways without altering its body orientation towards the stationary target. The trajectory an orientation of the insect is depicted in 3D in Fig. 3b of the main text (WMV 2853 KB)

Supplementary Film 3 Experiment 2. The damselfly flies sideways while minimizing body orientation changes. The trajectory an orientation of the insect is depicted in 3D in Fig. 3c of the main text (WMV 11260 KB)

Supplementary Film 4 A damselfly landing on the moving perch moving at 2 Hz shown at actual speed (WMV 2853 KB)

References

  1. Alexander DE (1986) Wind tunnel studies of turns by flying dragonflies. J Exp Biol 122:81–98PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Baird E, Boeddeker N, Ibbotson MR, Srinivasan MV (2013) A universal strategy for visually guided landing. Proc Natl Acad Sci 110:18686–18691CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Baird E, Fernandez DC, Wcislo WT, Warrant EJ (2015) Flight control and landing precision in the nocturnal bee Megalopta is robust to large changes in light intensity. Front Physiol 6:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boeddeker N, Hemmi JM (2010) Visual gaze control during peering flight manoeuvres in honeybees. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 277:1209–1217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boeddeker N, Kern R, Egelhaaf M (2003) Chasing a dummy target: smooth pursuit and velocity control in male blowflies. Proc Biol Sci 270:393–399CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Bomphrey RJ, Nakata T, Henningsson P, Lin H-T (2016) Flight of the dragonflies and damselflies. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 371:20150389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borst A (1990) How do flies land. Biosciences 40:292–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Borst A (2014) Fly visual course control: behaviour, algorithms and circuits. Nat Rev Neurosci 15:590–599CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Borst A, Bahde S (1986) What kind of movement detector is triggering the landing response of the housefly? Biol Cybern 55:59–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Collett TS, Land MF (1975) Visual control of flight behaviour in the hoverfly Syritta pipiens L. J Comp Physiol A 99:1–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Collett TS, Land MF (1978) How hoverflies compute interception courses. J Comp Physiol 125:191–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Combes SA, Rundle DE, Iwasaki JM, Crall JD (2012) Linking biomechanics and ecology through predator-prey interactions: flight performance of dragonflies and their prey. J Exp Biol 215:903–913CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Combes SA, Salcedo MK, Pandit MM, Iwasaki JM (2013) Capture success and efficiency of dragonflies pursuing different types of prey. Integr Comp Biol 53:787–798CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Corbet PS (1962) A biology of dragonflies, 1st edn. H. F. & G. Witherby Ltd, BurleyGoogle Scholar
  15. Evangelista C, Kraft P, Dacke M et al (2010) The moment before touchdown: landing manoeuvres of the honeybee Apis mellifera. J Exp Biol 213:262–270CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Ghose PK, Horiuchi TK, Krishnaprasad PS, Moss CF (2006) Echolocating bats use a nearly time-optimal strategy to intercept prey. PLoS Biol 4:e108CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Gibson JJ (1951) The perception of the visual World. Am J Psychol 64:440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gilbert C (1997) Visual control of cursorial prey pursuit by tiger beetles (Cicindelidae). J Comp Physiol A 181:217–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Golding YC, Ennos ARR, Edmunds M (2001) Similarity in flight behaviour between the honeybee Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera: Apidae) and its presumed mimic, the dronefly Eristalis tenax (Diptera: Syrphidae). J Exp Biol 204:139–145PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Goodman LJ (1960) The landing responses of insects. J Exp Biol 37:854–878Google Scholar
  21. Grabow K, Rüppell G (1995) Wing loading in relation to size and flight characteristics of european Odonata. Odonatologica 24:175–186Google Scholar
  22. Gravish N, Peters JM, Combes SA, Wood RJ (2015) Collective flow enhancement by tandem flapping wings. Phys Rev Lett 115:188101CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Greeter JSM, Hedrick TL (2016) Direct lateral maneuvers in hawkmoths. Biol Open 5:72–82CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Hedrick TL (2008) Software techniques for two- and three-dimensional kinematic measurements of biological and biomimetic systems. Bioinspir Biomim 3:34001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jantzen B, Eisner T (2008) Hindwings are unnecessary for flight but essential for execution of normal evasive flight in Lepidoptera. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:16636–16640CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Kane SA, Fulton AH, Rosenthal LJ (2015) When hawks attack: animal-borne video studies of goshawk pursuit and prey-evasion strategies. J Exp Biol 218:212–222CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Kassner Z, Dafni E, Ribak G (2016) Kinematic compensation for wing loss in flying damselflies. J Insect Physiol 85:1–9CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Koenderink JJ (1986) Optic flow. Vision Res 26:161–179CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Lanchester BS, Mark RF (1975) Pursuit and prediction in the tracking of moving food by a teleost fish (Acanthaluteres spilomelanurus). J Exp Biol 63:627–645PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Land MF (1999) Motion and vision: why animals move their eyes. J Comp Physiol A 185:341–352CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Land MF, Collett TS (1974) Chasing behaviour of houseflies (Fannia canicularis). J Comp Physiol 89:331–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lee DN (1976) A theory of visual control of braking based on information about time-to-collision. Perception 5:437–459CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Lee DN, Reddish PE (1981) Plummeting gannets: a paradigm of ecological optics. Nature 293:293–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lee DN, Reddish PE, Rand DT (1991) Aerial docking by hummingbirds. Naturwissenschaften 78:526–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lee DN, Davies MNO, Green PR, Weel D (1993) Visual control of velocity of approach by pigeons when landing. J Exp Biol 180:85–104Google Scholar
  36. Lin H-T, Leonardo A (2017) Heuristic rules underlying dragonfly prey selection and interception. Curr Biol 27:1124–1137CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Mischiati M, Lin H-T, Herold P et al (2014) Internal models direct dragonfly interception steering. Nature 517:333–338CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Mizutani A, Chahl JS, Srinivasan MV (2003) Motion camouflage in dragonflies. Nature 423:604–605CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Nordström K, Bolzon DM, O’Carroll DC (2011) Spatial facilitation by a high-performance dragonfly target-detecting neuron. Biol Lett 7:588–592CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. Olberg RM (1981) Object- and self- movement in the ventral nerve cord of the dragonfly. J Comp Physiol 334:327–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Olberg RM (2012) Visual control of prey-capture flight in dragonflies. Curr Opin Neurobiol 22:267–271CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Olberg RM, Worthington AH, Venator KR (2000) Prey pursuit and interception in dragonflies. J Comp Physiol A 186:155–162CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Olberg RM, Worthington a H, Fox JL et al (2005) Prey size selection and distance estimation in foraging adult dragonflies. J Comp Physiol A 191:791–797CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Olberg RM, Seaman RC, Coats MI, Henry AF (2007) Eye movements and target fixation during dragonfly prey-interception flights. J Comp Physiol A 193:685–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pfau HK (1991) Contributions of functional morphology to the phylogenetic systematics of Odonata. Adv Odonatol 5:109–141Google Scholar
  46. Rayner JMV, Aldridge HDJN. (1985) Three-dimensional reconstruction of animal flight paths and the turning flight of microchiropteran bats. J Exp Biol 118:247–265Google Scholar
  47. Reichardt W, Wenking H (1969) Optical detection and fixation of objects by fixed flying flies. Naturwissenschaften 56:424–424CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Ribak G, Egge AR, Swallow JG (2009) Saccadic head rotations during walking in the stalk-eyed fly (Cyrtodiopsis dalmanni). Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 276:1643–1649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sherk TE (1978) Development of the compound eyes of dragonflies (Odonata). III. Adult compound eyes. J Exp Zool 203:61–79CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Silsby J (2001) Dragonflies of the world. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  51. Sprayberry JDH, Daniel TL (2007) Flower tracking in hawkmoths: behavior and energetics. J Exp Biol 210:37–45CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Srinivasan MV, Davey M (1995) Strategies for active camouflage of motion. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 259:19–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Srygley RB, Chai P (1990) Flight morphology of Neotropieal butterflies: palatability and distribution of mass to the thorax and abdomen. Oecologia 84:491–499CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Tammero LF, Dickinson MH (2002) The influence of visual landscape on the free flight behavior of the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster. J Exp Biol 205:327–343PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Taylor GK, Krapp HG (2008) Sensory systems and flight stability: what do insects measure and why? Adv Insect Physiol 34:232–316Google Scholar
  56. Tillyard RJ (1917) The biology of dragonflies (Odonata or Paraneuroptera). Cambridge university press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. van Breugel F, Dickinson MH (2012) The visual control of landing and obstacle avoidance in the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster. J Exp Biol 215:1783–1798CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. van Achterberg K, Durán JM (2011) Oviposition behaviour of four ant parasitoids (Hymenoptera, Braconidae, Euphorinae, Neoneurini and Ichneumonidae, Hybrizontinae), with the description of three new European species. Zookeys 125:59–106Google Scholar
  59. van Hateren JH, Schilstra C (1999) Blowfly flight and optic flow. II. Head movements during flight. J Exp Biol 202 11:1491–1500Google Scholar
  60. van Praagh JP, Ribi W, Wehrhahn C, Wittmann D (1980) Drone bees fixate the queen with the dorsal frontal part of their compound eyes. J Comp Physiol 136:263–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wagner H (1982) Flow-field variables trigger landing in flies. Nature 297:147–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wakeling JM, Ellington CP (1997) Dragonfly flight. II. Velocities, accelerations and kinematics of flapping flight. J Exp Biol 200:557–582PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Wardill TJ, Fabian ST, Pettigrew AC et al (2017) A novel interception strategy in a miniature robber fly with extreme visual acuity. Curr Biol 27:854–859CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  64. Zhang SW, Xiang W, Zili LIU, Srinivasan MV (1990) Visual tracking of moving targets by freely flying honeybees. Vis Neurosci 4:379–386CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Life Sciences, School of ZoologyTel Aviv UniversityTel AvivIsrael
  2. 2.Sagol School of NeuroscienceTel Aviv UniversityTel AvivIsrael

Personalised recommendations