The EOD Sound Response in Weakly Electric Fish

1. A spontaneous EOD response to sound is described in two gymnotoids of the pulse Electric Organ Discharge (EOD) type, Hypopomus and Gymnotus, and in one mormyrid, Brienomyrus (Figs. 2-4). 2. In all three species, the EOD response to the sound onset was a transient EOD rate increase. In the low EOD rate Hypopomus (3-6 EODs/s at rest) the first, second, or third EOD interval following sound onset was significantly shorter than the average EOD interval before stimulation. The shortest latency found was 100 ms, the longest ca. 1.2 s. Gymnotus (around 50 EODs/s at rest) responded similarly, but the third interval after sound onset was the first to be affected even at highest intensities (shortest latencies approx. 60 ms; latencies >0.5 s at low sound intensities). In Brienomyrus (4-8 EODs/s at rest) the response occurred already at the first EOD interval after sound onset. 3. An EOD sound response was recorded in Hypoporous and in Gymnotus up to 5,000 Hz sound frequency (in one Gymnotus individual: up to 7,000 Hz). Due to technical limitations the low frequency limit of the response could not be exactly determined: the fishes responded well even below 100 Hz. Hypopomus had its maximum sensitivity around 500 Hz (Fig. 5), Gymnotus around 1,000 Hz (Fig. 6). 4. In all three species the EOD sound response was graded with sound intensity (Hypopomus: Fig. 7). 5. No EOD response to sound was found in two gymnotoids of the wave type, Eigenmannia and Apteronotus, and in the gymnotoid pulse fish Rhamphichthys. A criterion is proposed by which it should be possible to predict whether or not a weakly electric fish species will show the EOD sound response. 6. It is concluded that the EOD response to sound is similar to EOD responses to other kinds of stimulation (light, touch, vibration, food, and even electrical). The possible biological function is discussed

Laterality as an indicator of emotional stress in ewes and lambs during a separation test

We assessed motor laterality in sheep to explore species-specific brain hemi-field dominance and how this could be affected by genetic or developmental factors. Further, we investigated whether directionality and strength of laterality could be linked to emotional stress in ewes and their lambs during partial separation. Forty-three ewes and their singleton lambs were scored on the (left/right) direction of turn in a y-maze to rejoin a conspecific (laterality test). Further, their behavioural response (i.e. time spent near the fence, vocalisations, and activity level) during forced separation by an open-mesh fence was assessed (separation test). Individual laterality was recorded for 44.2 % ewes (significant right bias) and 81.4 % lambs (equally biased to the left and the right). There was no significant association in side bias between dams and offspring. The Chi-squared test revealed a significant population bias for both groups (p &lt; 0.05). Evolutionary adaptive strategies or stimuli-related visual laterality may provide explanation for this decision-making process. Absolute strength of laterality (irrespective of side) was high (Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, dams: D = 0.2; p &lt; 0.001; lambs: D = 0.36, p &lt; 0.0001). The Wilcoxon test showed that lateralised lambs and dams spent significantly more time near each other during separation than non-lateralised animals (p &lt; 0.05), and that lateralised dams were also more active than non-lateralised ones. Arguably, the lateralised animals showed a greater attraction to their pair because they were more disturbed and thus required greater reassurance. The data show that measures of laterality offer a potential novel non-invasive indicator of separation stress.</p