Modeling an electrosensory landscape: behavioral and morphological optimization in elasmobranch prey capture.

Most biological sensory systems benefit from multiple sensors. Elasmobranchs (sharks, skates and rays) possess an array of electroreceptive organs that facilitate prey location, mate location and navigation. Here, the perceived electrosensory landscape for an elasmobranch approaching prey is mathematically modeled. The voltages that develop simultaneously in dozens of separate sensing organs are calculated using electrodynamics. These voltages lead directly to firing rate modifications in the primary afferent nerves. The canals connecting the sense organs to an elasmobranch's surface exhibit great variation of location and orientation. Here, the voltages arising in the sense organs are found to depend strongly on the geometrical distribution of the corresponding canals. Two applications for the modeling technique are explored: an analysis of observed elasmobranch prey-capture behavior and an analysis of morphological optimization. For the former, results in specific predator-prey scenarios are compared with behavioral observations, supporting the approach algorithm suggested by A. Kalmijn. For the latter, electrosensory performance is contrasted for two geometrical models of multiple sense organs, a rounded head and a hammer-shaped head.

[1]  Dynamic response characteristics of the ampullae of Lorenzini to thermal and electrical stimuli. , 1988, Progress in brain research.

[2]  Masakazu Konishi,et al.  Comparative Physiology of Sound Localization in Four Species of Owls (Part 1 of 2) , 1990 .

[3]  A. Kalmijn,et al.  Electro-perception in Sharks and Rays , 1966, Nature.

[4]  Kalmijn Aj,et al.  Electric and near-field acoustic detection, a comparative study. , 1997 .

[5]  J. Sisneros,et al.  Electrosensory optimization to conspecific phasic signals for mating , 1995, Neuroscience Letters.

[6]  L. Rayleigh,et al.  The theory of sound , 1894 .

[7]  H. M. Fishman,et al.  Interaction of apical and basal membrane ion channels underlies electroreception in ampullary epithelia of skates. , 1994, Biophysical journal.

[8]  B Waltman,et al.  Electrical properties and fine structure of the ampullary canals of Lorenzini. , 1966, Acta physiologica Scandinavica. Supplementum.

[9]  T. Tricas,et al.  Sensitivity and response dynamics of elasmobranch electrosensory primary afferent neurons to near threshold fields , 1997, Journal of Comparative Physiology A.

[10]  R. Kempter,et al.  Theory of arachnid prey localization. , 2000, Physical review letters.

[11]  L. M. Ward,et al.  Stochastic resonance enhances the electrosensory information available to paddlefish for prey capture. , 2000, Physical review letters.

[12]  K. Schäfer,et al.  Oscillation and noise determine signal transduction in shark multimodal sensory cells , 1994, Nature.

[13]  A. Kalmijn,et al.  Electric and magnetic field detection in elasmobranch fishes. , 1982, Science.

[14]  S. Volman,et al.  Comparative physiology of sound localization in four species of owls. , 1990, Brain, behavior and evolution.

[15]  A. Kalmijn,et al.  The electric sense of sharks and rays. , 1971, The Journal of experimental biology.

[16]  Ad. J. Kalmijn,et al.  Electro-Orientation in Sharks and Rays: Theory and Experimental Evidence , 1973 .

[17]  A. Kalmijn,et al.  Electric and near-field acoustic detection, a comparative study. , 1997, Acta physiologica Scandinavica. Supplementum.

[18]  T. Tricas The Neuroecology of the Elasmobranch Electrosensory World: Why Peripheral Morphology Shapes Behavior , 2001, Environmental Biology of Fishes.

[19]  John C. Montgomery Frequency response characteristics of primary and secondary neurons in the electrosensory system of the thornback ray , 1984 .

[20]  R. W. Murray,et al.  The response of the ampullae of Lorenzini of elasmobranchs to electrical stimulation. , 1962, The Journal of experimental biology.

[21]  M. A. MacIver,et al.  Prey capture in the weakly electric fish Apteronotus albifrons: sensory acquisition strategies and electrosensory consequences. , 1999, The Journal of experimental biology.

[22]  M. P. Friedman,et al.  HANDBOOK OF PERCEPTION , 1977 .

[23]  D. A. Dunnett Classical Electrodynamics , 2020, Nature.

[24]  S. Kajiura Head Morphology and Electrosensory Pore Distribution of Carcharhinid and Sphyrnid Sharks , 2001, Environmental Biology of Fishes.