English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

Comparison between the movement detection systems underlying the optomotor and the landing response in the housefly

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons38770

Borst,  A
Former Department Information Processing in Insects, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;
Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons241993

Bahde,  S
Former Department Information Processing in Insects, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;
Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Borst, A., & Bahde, S. (1987). Comparison between the movement detection systems underlying the optomotor and the landing response in the housefly. Biological Cybernetics, 56(4), 217-224. doi:10.1007/BF00365216.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0004-E027-3
Abstract
Flies evaluate movement within their visual field in order to control the course of flight and to elicit landing manoeuvres. Although the motor output of the two types of responses is quite different, both systems can be compared with respect to the underlying movement detection systems. For a quantitative comparison, both responses were measured during tethered flight under identical conditions. The stimulus was a sinusoidal periodic pattern of vertical stripes presented bilaterally in the fronto-lateral eye region of the fly. To release the landing response, the pattern was moved on either side from front to back. The latency of the response depends on the stimulus conditions and was measured by means of an infrared light-beam that was interrupted whenever the fly lifted its forelegs to assume a preprogrammed landing posture (Borst and Bahde 1986). As an optomotor stimulus the pattern moved on one side from front to back and on the other side in the opposite direction. The induced turning tendency was measured by a torque meter (Götz 1964). The response values which will be compared are the inverse latencies of the landing response and the amplitude of the yaw torque.