Journal Article
Electroreception, electrogenesis and electric signal evolution
Crampton, W.G.R.
Record Number:
4620
Year:
2019
Journal:
Journal of Fish Biology
Pages:
92-134
Volume:
95
Abstract:
Electroreception, the capacity to detect external underwater electric fields with specialised
receptors, is a phylogenetically widespread sensory modality in fishes and amphibians. In passive
electroreception, a capacity possessed by c. 16% of fish species, an animal uses low-frequency-
tuned ampullary electroreceptors to detect microvolt-range bioelectric fields from
prey, without the need to generate its own electric field. In active electroreception (electrolocation),
which occurs only in the teleost lineages Mormyroidea and Gymnotiformes, an animal
senses its surroundings by generating a weak (< 1 V) electric-organ discharge (EOD) and
detecting distortions in the EOD-associated field using high-frequency-tuned tuberous electroreceptors.
Tuberous electroreceptors also detect the EODs of neighbouring fishes, facilitating
electrocommunication. Several other groups of elasmobranchs and teleosts generate weak
(< 10 V) or strong (> 50 V) EODs that facilitate communication or predation, but not electrolocation.
Approximately 1.5% of fish species possess electric organs. This review has two aims.
First, to synthesise our knowledge of the functional biology and phylogenetic distribution of
electroreception and electrogenesis in fishes, with a focus on freshwater taxa and with emphasis
on the proximate (morphological, physiological and genetic) bases of EOD and electroreceptor
diversity. Second, to describe the diversity, biogeography, ecology and electric signal
diversity of the mormyroids and gymnotiforms and to explore the ultimate (evolutionary) bases
of signal and receptor diversity in their convergent electrogenic–electrosensory systems. Four
sets of potential drivers or moderators of signal diversity are discussed. First, selective forces
of an abiotic (environmental) nature for optimal electrolocation and communication performance
of the EOD. Second, selective forces of a biotic nature targeting the communication
function of the EOD, including sexual selection, reproductive interference from syntopic heterospecifics
and selection from eavesdropping predators. Third, non-adaptive drift and, finally,
phylogenetic inertia, which may arise from stabilising selection for optimal signal-receptor
matching.
KEYWORDS
ampullary electroreceptor, electric-organ discharge, sensory ecology, tuberous electroreceptor
Times Cited:
4