Spy Crickets: Use (or not) of heterospecific acoustic cues for anti-predator responses

The ability of prey to eavesdrop on predator vocalizations is expected to increase survival by reducing detection and capture. Unfortunately, most research has been conducted in vertebrates, and little is known about this ability in invertebrates. We measured latency to emerge, overall activity, and shelter visits in wild-caught fall field crickets (Gryllus pennsylvanicus) in response to acoustic playback. Stimuli included multiple predator vocalizations, non-predator vocalizations, white noise, and a control. We predicted that crickets would reduce activity, spend more time in shelter, and freeze in response to stimuli representing greater risk. Contrary to our predictions, crickets traveled greater distances, spent more time moving, and spent less time in shelter in response to predator vocalizations versus controls. We did not, however, find clear differences in responses between predator vocalizations and other treatments. Our results suggest that crickets may not differentiate between the vocalizations of predators, non-predators, and other abrupt sounds. Consequently, eavesdropping may not be a viable method of assessing predation risk for this species and its general use remains unclear.