Abstract
This study investigated how visual information about prey location and biomechanical constraints of the feeding apparatus influence the feeding behavior of the tomato frog, Dyscophus guineti. When feeding on prey at small azimuths (less than ± 40°), frogs aimed their heads toward the prey but did not aim their tongues relative to their heads. Frogs projected their tongues rapidly by transferring momentum from the lower jaw to the tongue. Storage and recovery of elastic energy by the mouth opening muscles amplified the velocities of mouth opening and tongue projection. This behavior can only occur when the lower jaw and tongue are aligned (i.e., within the range of motion of the neck). When feeding on prey at large azimuths (greater than ± 40°), frogs aimed both the head and tongue toward the prey and used a muscular hydrostatic mechanism to project the tongue. Hydrostatic elongation allows for frogs to capture prey at greater azimuthal locations. Because the tongue moves independently of the lower jaw, frogs can no longer take advantage of momentum transfer to amplify the speed of tongue projection. To feed on prey at different azimuthal locations, tomato frogs switch between alternative strategies to circumvent these biomechanical constraints.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 843-852 |
| Number of pages | 10 |
| Journal | Journal of Comparative Physiology A: Neuroethology, Sensory, Neural, and Behavioral Physiology |
| Volume | 195 |
| Issue number | 9 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 2009 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Amphibian
- Behavioral choice
- Biomechanical tradeoffs
- Feeding
- Frog
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Animal Science and Zoology
- Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
- Physiology
- Behavioral Neuroscience
- Medicine(all)
Cite this
Prey location, biomechanical constraints, and motor program choice during prey capture in the tomato frog, dyscophus guineti. / Monroy, Jenna A.; Nishikawa, Kiisa C.
In: Journal of Comparative Physiology A: Neuroethology, Sensory, Neural, and Behavioral Physiology, Vol. 195, No. 9, 2009, p. 843-852.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Prey location, biomechanical constraints, and motor program choice during prey capture in the tomato frog, dyscophus guineti
AU - Monroy, Jenna A.
AU - Nishikawa, Kiisa C
PY - 2009
Y1 - 2009
N2 - This study investigated how visual information about prey location and biomechanical constraints of the feeding apparatus influence the feeding behavior of the tomato frog, Dyscophus guineti. When feeding on prey at small azimuths (less than ± 40°), frogs aimed their heads toward the prey but did not aim their tongues relative to their heads. Frogs projected their tongues rapidly by transferring momentum from the lower jaw to the tongue. Storage and recovery of elastic energy by the mouth opening muscles amplified the velocities of mouth opening and tongue projection. This behavior can only occur when the lower jaw and tongue are aligned (i.e., within the range of motion of the neck). When feeding on prey at large azimuths (greater than ± 40°), frogs aimed both the head and tongue toward the prey and used a muscular hydrostatic mechanism to project the tongue. Hydrostatic elongation allows for frogs to capture prey at greater azimuthal locations. Because the tongue moves independently of the lower jaw, frogs can no longer take advantage of momentum transfer to amplify the speed of tongue projection. To feed on prey at different azimuthal locations, tomato frogs switch between alternative strategies to circumvent these biomechanical constraints.
AB - This study investigated how visual information about prey location and biomechanical constraints of the feeding apparatus influence the feeding behavior of the tomato frog, Dyscophus guineti. When feeding on prey at small azimuths (less than ± 40°), frogs aimed their heads toward the prey but did not aim their tongues relative to their heads. Frogs projected their tongues rapidly by transferring momentum from the lower jaw to the tongue. Storage and recovery of elastic energy by the mouth opening muscles amplified the velocities of mouth opening and tongue projection. This behavior can only occur when the lower jaw and tongue are aligned (i.e., within the range of motion of the neck). When feeding on prey at large azimuths (greater than ± 40°), frogs aimed both the head and tongue toward the prey and used a muscular hydrostatic mechanism to project the tongue. Hydrostatic elongation allows for frogs to capture prey at greater azimuthal locations. Because the tongue moves independently of the lower jaw, frogs can no longer take advantage of momentum transfer to amplify the speed of tongue projection. To feed on prey at different azimuthal locations, tomato frogs switch between alternative strategies to circumvent these biomechanical constraints.
KW - Amphibian
KW - Behavioral choice
KW - Biomechanical tradeoffs
KW - Feeding
KW - Frog
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=69849107195&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=69849107195&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00359-009-0463-2
DO - 10.1007/s00359-009-0463-2
M3 - Article
VL - 195
SP - 843
EP - 852
JO - Journal of Comparative Physiology A: Neuroethology, Sensory, Neural, and Behavioral Physiology
JF - Journal of Comparative Physiology A: Neuroethology, Sensory, Neural, and Behavioral Physiology
SN - 0340-7594
IS - 9
ER -