Search for: All records

Most mosquito and midge species use hearing during acoustic mating behaviors. For frog-biting species, however, hearing plays an important role beyond mating as females rely on anuran calls to obtain blood meals. Despite the extensive work examining hearing in mosquito species that use sound in mating contexts, our understanding of how mosquitoes hear frog calls is limited. Here, we directly investigated the mechanisms underlying detection of frog calls by a mosquito species specialized on eavesdropping on anuran mating signals: Uranotaenia lowii. Behavioral, biomechanical and neurophysiological analyses revealed that the antenna of this frog-biting species can detect frog calls by relying on neural and mechanical responses comparable to those of non-frog-biting species. Our findings show that in Ur. lowii, contrary to most species, males do not use sound for mating, but females use hearing to locate their anuran host. We also show that the response of the antennae of this frog-biting species resembles that of the antenna of species that use hearing for mating. Finally, we discuss our data considering how mosquitoes may have evolved the ability to tap into the communication system of frogs.

1. Resource partitioning is a critical component in competing species that coexist in a community. The biting behaviour of coexisting frog‐biting mosquito species associated with a tropical anuran community is investigated.

2. Monthly samplings were taken for 2 years at two study sites in central Sri Lanka to collect frog‐biting mosquitoes, anuran abundance, environmental data, and interactions between mosquitoes and anuran hosts. Mosquitoes were collected using mouth‐operated aspirators and sound traps broadcasting anuran calls. Mosquitoes were identified using taxonomic keys and DNA barcodes.

3. A total of 1079 frog‐biting mosquitoes from four species belonging to two genera were collected [Uranotaenia rutherfordi(5%),Ur.morphotype1(67%),Ur.morphotype2(21%), andMansonia uniformis(7%)]. Species‐specific interactions betweenUranotaeniamosquitoes and their anuran host were found.Uranotaeniamorphotype1, the most common species, was mainly attracted (99%) toDuttaphrynus melanostictus. Uranotaenia rutherfordiwas mainly attracted (95%) toPseudophilautus rus, whileUr.morphotype2was attracted (97%) toPolypedates cruciger. TheseUranotaeniaspecies are active at different hours at night that correspond to the peak calling activity of their anuran host. EachUranotaeniaspecies was active at heights that coincide with the calling sites of their host. In contrast,Ma. uniformiswas non‐specific in host choice and was equally distributed in space and time with respect to host feeding.

4. Here, previously unknown feeding patterns of co‐occurring frog‐biting mosquito species and their interactions with anurans present in their community are reported, highlighting the existence of complex behavioural patterns of these mosquito communities.