Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Magnetic field detection is distinct from light detection in the invertebrates Tenebrio and Talitrus

Abstract

THE mechanism used by animals for geomagnetic field detection has long been discussed1. Leask2 has proposed that sensitivity to magnetic field might result from polarised light detection through optical pumping into the lowest level triplet state of (say) the rhodopsin molecule that possesses spin. Light detection, he suggests, might be a prerequisite for magnetic field detection and might result in an axial rather than a polar response in the animal. However, a unimodal reaction has been found3 with Tenebrio molitor L., the flour-beetle, in a horizontally directed magnetic field and a light field without directional features. This result was obtained when Tenebrio had been allowed to associate the geomagnetic field with the directional properties of the anisotropic light field in the culture container. The preferential direction in the horizontally directed magnetic field could be predicted from the ‘dark direction’ and from the relative humidity in the container (ref. 3, expt 43, page 429). I report here that Tenebrio and Talitrus saltator Mont., the sandhopper, can orientate in the Earth's magnetic field in complete darkness, and that in Tenebrio this orientation is essentially polar, not axial. These results are evidence that these two invertebrates do not require light for the detection of the magnetic field.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Viguier, C. Rev. Phil. 14, 1–36 (1882).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Leask, M. J. M. Nature 267, 144–145 (1977).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Arendse, M. C. & Vrins, J. C. M. Neth. J. Zool. 25, 407–437 (1975).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Batschelet, E. in Animal Orientation and Certain Biological Rhythms (American Institute of Biological Science, Washington, D. C., 1965).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Wiltschko, W. & Wiltschko, R. Science 176, 62–64 (1972).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Leask, M. J. M. (personal communication).

  7. Howland, H. C. Z Tierpsychol. 33, 295–312 (1973).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Wallraff, H. G. Z. Tierpsychol. 33, 313–318 (1973).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mardia, K. V. Statistics of Directional Data (Academic, London, 1972).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Reille, A. J. Physiol., Paris 60, 85–92 (1968).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Kreithen, M. L. & Keeton, W. T. J. comp. Physiol. 91, 355–362 (1974).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bookman, M. A. Nature 267, 340–342 (1977).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Emlen, S. T. et al. Science 193, 505–508 (1976).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Wiltschko, W. in Animal Orientation and Navigation (NASA SP-262), (U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, 1972).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Kalmijn, A. J. in Abstr. Symp, Animal Migration Navigation Homing, Tübingen (1977).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Keeton, W. T. Adv. Study Behav. 5, 47–132 (1974).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ercolini, A. & Scapini, F. Mon. zool. ital. (N.S.) 6, 75–84 (1972).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Scapini, F. & Ercolini, A. Mon. zool. ital. (N.S.) suppl. V, 23–30 (1973).

  19. Perttunen, V. & Lahermaa, M. Ann. Ent. Fenn. 29, 83–106 (1963).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Verheijen, F. J. & Brouwer, J. M. M. Verh. J. Zool. 22, 72–80 (1972).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

ARENDSE, M. Magnetic field detection is distinct from light detection in the invertebrates Tenebrio and Talitrus. Nature 274, 358–362 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1038/274358a0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/274358a0

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing