Fossil cricket: Jurassic love song reconstructed

February 6, 2012, University of Bristol
Fossil cricket: Jurassic love song reconstructed
A present-day katydid

Some 165 million years ago, the world was host to a diversity of sounds. Primitive bushcrickets and croaking amphibians were among the first animals to produce loud sounds by stridulation (rubbing certain body parts together). Modern-day bushcrickets – also known as katydids – produce mating calls by rubbing a row of teeth on one wing against a plectrum on the other wing but how their primitive ancestors produced sound and what their songs actually sounded like was unknown – until now.

On discovering several insect fossils, a group of Chinese palaeontologists, including Jun-Jie Gu and Professor Dong Ren from the Capital Normal University in Beijing, contacted Dr Fernando Montealegre-Zapata and Professor Daniel Robert, both experts in the biomechanics of singing and hearing in insects, in Bristol's School of Biological Sciences. The group also teamed up with Dr Michael Engel of the University of Kansas, USA, a leading expert on insect evolution.

At dusk, A. musicus sings in a Jurassic forest of Northwest China. The 3D reconstruction of the forest is taken from Hinz et al. (1). The forest grew under humid conditions, probably close to the banks of an anastomosing river and consisted primarily of conifers, in particular Araucariaceae, and ferns. The song was processed to take into account slight echoes produced by the lightly cluttered environment of coniferous trees (such as Araucaria), and giant ferns (such as Angiopteris, Osmunda). (1). Hinz JK, Smith I, Pfretzschner H-U, Wings O, Sun G (2010) A high-resolution three-dimensional reconstruction of a fossil forest (Upper Jurassic Shishugou Formation, Junggar Basin, Northwest China). Palaeobiodivers Palaeoenviron

The Chinese researchers provided an exceptionally detailed bushcricket fossil from the Mid Jurassic period. The specimen had such well-preserved wing features that the details of its stridulating organs were clearly visible under an optical microscope. Such information has never been obtained before from insect fossils. It was identified as a new species and named Archaboilus musicus by the Beijing-Kansas team.

Dr Montealegre-Z and Professor Robert examined the anatomical construction of the fossil's song apparatus, and compared it to 59 living bushcricket species. They concluded that this animal must have produced musical songs, broadcasting pure, single frequencies.

Professor Robert said: "This discovery indicates that pure tone communication was already exploited by animals in the middle Jurassic, some 165 million years ago. For Archaboilus, as for living bushcricket species, singing constitutes a key component of mate attraction. Singing loud and clear advertises the presence, location and quality of the singer, a message that females choose to respond to – or not. Using a single tone, the male's call carries further and better, and therefore is likely to serenade more females. However, it also makes the male more conspicuous to predators if they have also evolved ears to eavesdrop on these mating calls."

The research, published today in PNAS, implies that the acoustic environment was already quite busy 165 million years ago with many animals (such as amphibians and other arthropods) singing at the same time, possibly chorusing, within the additional background noise produced by waterfalls, streams and wind.

Amazingly, based on the detailed morphology of Archaboilus' wings, Dr Fernando Montealegre-Z could reconstruct the songs emitted by these ancient insects.

Following biomechanical principles that he discovered some years ago, Dr Montealegre-Z established that A. musicus sang a tone pitched at 6.4kHz and that every bout of singing lasted 16 milliseconds. This turned out to be enough information to acoustically reconstruct the song itself, possibly the most ancient known musical song documented to date.

This paleobioacoustical analysis also provides a unique insight into the ecology of an extinct insect.

Dr Montealegre-Z said: "Using a low-pitched song, A. musicus was acoustically adapted to long-distance communication in a lightly cluttered environment, such as a Jurassic forest. Today, all species of katydids that use musical calls are nocturnal so musical calls in the Jurassic were also most likely an adaptation to nocturnal life. Being nocturnal, Archaboilus musicus probably escaped from diurnal predators like Archaeopterix, but it cannot be ruled out that Jurassic insectivorous mammals like Morganucodon and Dryolestes also listened to the calls of Archaboilus and preyed on them.

"This Jurassic bushcricket thus sheds light on the potential auditory capacity of other , and helps us learn a little more about the ambiance of a world long gone. It also suggests the evolutionary mechanisms that drove modern bushcrickets to develop ultrasonic signals for sexual pairing and for avoiding an increasingly relevant echolocating predator, but that only happened 100 million years later, possibly with the appearance of bats.

Explore further: 50 million year old cricket and katydid fossils hint at the origins of insect hearing

More information: 'Wing stridulation in a jurassic katydid (insecta, orthoptera) produced low-pitched musical calls to attract females' by Gu, J. J., Montealegre-Z, F., Robert, D., Engel, M. S., Qiao, G. X. and Ren, D. in Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA DOI:10.1073/pnas.111837210

Related Stories

Fruit fly antennae are tuned in

April 1, 2011

( -- The antennal ears of different fruit fly species are actively tuned to high-frequency components of their respective mating songs, according to new research led by University College London scientists.

Australian birds attract mates with 'scary movie effect'

January 18, 2011

Using a horror film to bring your date closer is a classic move in the teenage playbook. Now, a study of Australian birds finds that other animals use the same "scary movie effect" to attract female attention, by hitchhiking ...

Mysterious fossils provide new clues to insect evolution

July 19, 2011

German scientists at the Stuttgart Natural History Museum were leading in the discovery of a new insect order from the Lower Cretaceous of South America. The spectacular fossils were named Coxoplectoptera by their discoverers ...

Recommended for you

Unprecedented study of Picasso's bronzes uncovers new details

February 17, 2018

Musee national Picasso-Paris and the Northwestern University/Art Institute of Chicago Center for Scientific Studies in the Arts (NU-ACCESS) have completed the first major material survey and study of the Musee national Picasso-Paris' ...

Using Twitter to discover how language changes

February 16, 2018

Scientists at Royal Holloway, University of London, have studied more than 200 million Twitter messages to try and unravel the mystery of how language evolves and spreads.


Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

5 / 5 (1) Feb 06, 2012
Ah, I think we should be cautious about concluding that the song is exactly and correctly reproduced.

There are an awful lot of variables that I suspect could not be controlled. Temperature, for example, is known to affect insect songs; and we know little of the metabolism of this bushcricket, or its neural programming. It's impossible to say that a single note produced at regular intervals at a given frequency is the only solution that is feasible.

But even so, I'm awed that the attempt was made, and pleased at the result.
Feb 07, 2012
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
not rated yet Feb 07, 2012
Yes, Henrik, and fish still have fins. If it's not broke, evolution doesn't fix it.You should read about it some time.
Feb 07, 2012
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Feb 08, 2012
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
not rated yet Feb 08, 2012

Your ideas are trivially refuted:

- If the earth was created with modern animals, then it makes no sense that we never find any fossils of modern animals. There are no fossils of cats, dogs, wolves, foxes, horses, lions, elephants etc. None

- In fact there are no fossils of any mammals described in the bible. Quite the opposite: There are mostly fossils of animals that are not described in the bible.

- For that matter if 6,000 was enough to form fossils, then we should find fossils of humans. There aren't any. None.

- Also your genocidal flood is supposed to have extinguished the animal kingdom -millions and millions of animals. The world is full of marine fossils. They are not mixed with non-marine fossils that your flood is supposed to have sent to the bottom of the ocean. Not ever.

- etc etc etc.

You have the mind of a child.
Feb 09, 2012
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Feb 09, 2012
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.