Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Moths' Long Tails Are Jammers for Bat Sonar

motherboard.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–9 of 9 posts

Re: Moths' Long Tails Are Jammers for Bat Sonar

#3

Post by Peaker »

Removing the tail caused them to be less effective at evading bats.

Maybe the tails have some other function crucial for their generic function like flight control, and losing that is responsible for evading bats less effectively? If the article is correct, it seems like a gap in reasoning.

Re: Moths' Long Tails Are Jammers for Bat Sonar

#5

Post by dynofuz »

Peaker wrote: post #3

Removing the tail caused them to be less effective at evading bats. Maybe the tails have some other function crucial for their generic function like flight control, and losing that is responsible for evading bats less effectively? If the article is correct, it seems like a gap in reasoning.

agreed, they should have looked at other moths (similar shape) without tails + these moths normal + these moths without tails.

Re: Moths' Long Tails Are Jammers for Bat Sonar

#6

Post by ambago »

Peaker wrote: post #3

Removing the tail caused them to be less effective at evading bats. Maybe the tails have some other function crucial for their generic function like flight control, and losing that is responsible for evading bats less effectively? If the article is correct, it seems like a gap in reasoning.

Possibly, but most of the Saturniid moths aren't aerial acrobats to begin with. None of them can fly with enough precision to really evade predators. One of the best behavioural defenses for flying insects (found so far) seems to be the Mantis' ability to take an immediate dive toward the ground upon detection of a bat.

edit: I should add that there actually are other well adapted behavioural defenses, such as this: Hawkmoths produce anti-sonar http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/9/4/20130161

Re: Moths' Long Tails Are Jammers for Bat Sonar

#8

Post by Agustus »

Peaker wrote: post #3

Removing the tail caused them to be less effective at evading bats. Maybe the tails have some other function crucial for their generic function like flight control, and losing that is responsible for evading bats less effectively? If the article is correct, it seems like a gap in reasoning.

Yes. The aerodynamics may throw off the moth; especially depending on when the wings were "removed." The wings could be an adaptive process to learn to work with, the importance of the tail is not mentioned; if a dog is born with three legs, it learns to live without it, if you "remove" a leg from a grown dog there is an adaptation process time. Also, the level of critical importance is not discussed; i.e. is it super critical like the tail on a plane or minor like my hair.
Post reply on HN