Skip to main content
Powered by ShareScore

Find research datasets worth reusing

Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.

11

datasets available to search

ShareScore release 0.9.0

Reset

Dataset results

11 results for “insect communication”

Learn how ShareScore rates datasets ↗
zenodo40/100

Social signal learning of referential communication in a social insect

<p>This is the dataset for a paper showing that honey bees can use social learning to improve their waggle dancing.</p>

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2022View details →
dryad36/100

Effect of water availability on volatile-mediated communication between potato plants in response to insect herbivory

<p>Airborne plant communication is a widespread phenomenon in which volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from damaged plants boost herbivore resistance in neighbouring, undamaged plants. Although this form of plant signalling has been reported in more than 30 plant species, there is still a considerable knowledge gap on how abiotic factors (e.g., water availability) alter its outcomes.</p> <p>We performed a greenhouse experiment to test for communication between potato plants (<em>Solanum tuberosum</em>) in response to herbivory by the generalist insect <em>Spodoptera exigua</em> and whether communication was affected by water availability. We paired emitter and receiver potato plants, with half of the emitters damaged by S. exigua larvae and half serving as undamaged controls. Both emitter and receiver plants were subjected to one of two water availability treatments: high (i.e., well-watered) vs. low (i.e., reduced watering) availability, thus effectively teasing apart water availability effects on the emission and reception components of signalling. After four days of herbivore feeding, we collected emitter VOCs and receivers were subjected to feeding by <em>S. exigua</em> to test for effects of signalling on induced resistance.</p> <p>Herbivory by <em>S. exigua</em> led to increased VOCs emissions as well as changes in VOCs composition in emitter plants. Furthermore, emitters subjected to low water availability exhibited a weaker induction of VOCs in response to herbivory relative to well-watered emitters. Results from the feeding bioassay indicated that receivers exposed to VOCs from herbivore-induced emitters showed lower S. exigua damage (i.e. higher induced resistance) compared to receivers exposed to undamaged emitters. However, we did not observe a significant effect of water availability in either emitters or receivers on plant communication.</p> <p>Overall, our study contributes to the understanding of how the abiotic context affects plant communication by providing evidence of water availability effects on the induction of VOCs that may act as airborne signals between plants. The observed changes in induced VOCs had no visible consequences for plant communication. These findings thus suggest that the induction of key compounds mediating communication was not compromised by our experimental conditions.</p>

opencc-zeroDec 2021View details →
dryad36/100

Effect of water availability on volatile-mediated communication between potato plants in response to insect herbivory

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicAug 2022View details →
zenodo32/100

Figure 6 in The Behavioral Ecology of Insect Vibrational Communication

Figure 6. Frequency spectra of vibrational signals (a through f) predicted to evolve in response to different combinations of receiver frequency selectivity and average substrate filtering properties. For example, when the substrate filtering is unpredictable or flat, use of signals containing a broad range of frequencies may ensure that some energy reaches the signaler (a). However, this strategy will only be successful if receivers are also broadly tuned; if receivers are selective for a narrow band of frequencies, signals should likewise be narrowly tuned (b). Use of hosts with different filtering properties (such as lowpass vs. bandpass filters, or bandpass filters with different best frequencies) may favor the evolution of different signals, a process that could contribute to speciation.

opennotspecifiedMar 2005View details →
zenodo32/100

Figure 5 in The Behavioral Ecology of Insect Vibrational Communication

Figure 5. Female preference curve for signal frequency compared with the amplitude spectrum of a male advertisement signal for a treehopper (a member of the Enchenopa binotata species complex occurring on the host plant Ptelea trifoliata in central Missouri). (a) Amplitude spectrum of a male advertisement signal that closely matches the mean frequency for the population. The waveform of that signal is shown above. (b) Proportion of females (n = 15) that responded to digitally generated signals that varied in carrier frequency while keeping all other traits at the mean value for the population. Playback stimuli were delivered by means of a magnet attached to the host plant stem and an electromagnet placed 2 millimeters away from the magnet. The stimuli and the female response calls were monitored with a PCB U352B65 accelerometer and U480E09 amplifier connected to a recording computer. Playback intensity was set to the median peak acceleration of the signals of nine males recorded on the playback plant.

opennotspecifiedMar 2005View details →
zenodo32/100

Figure 4 in The Behavioral Ecology of Insect Vibrational Communication

Figure 4. Examples of complex vibrational signaling environments. (a) A male treehopper (Heteronotus trinodosus) producing advertisement signals in alternation with another male on the same stem. (b, c) Field recordings from two herbaceous plants in Soberanía National Park, Panama. Each recording contains signals of approximately four insect species, with one species signaling continuously (indicated with number 1 in panel b and number 3 in panel c). Scale bars = 1 second. It is difficult to gain from figures like these the impression one gets, when listening to vibrational signals in plants in the field, of an encounter with a mysterious and alien world of sound.

opennotspecifiedMar 2005View details →
zenodo32/100

Figure 1 in The Behavioral Ecology of Insect Vibrational Communication

Figure 1. Prevalence of various signaling modalities among insects that use mechanical communication (categories from Greenfield 2002). The pie chart above shows an estimate obtained by tallying the number of families for which evidence of signaling in any given modality exists. The chart below shows a more speculative estimate obtained by counting the number of species for which such evidence is available; for groups in which reports suggest the use of a modality is widespread, or for which few reports exist but all have found use of a particular modality, we tallied the total number of described species in the group. We excluded instances of detection of incidental cues produced by conspecifics (e.g., we did not count detection of water surface vibrations by gyrinid beetles or of near-field vibrations by culicids and chironomids). We also excluded instances in which the vibration might be perceived through direct bodily contact (e.g., during copulatory courtship). Files with the references used to generate this figure are available on request from the authors. The distribution of signaling modalities among insect orders (phylogenetic tree from Gullan and Cranston 2000) suggests that the use of substrate vibrations for communication may be ancestral for at least some insect groups at the supraordinal level.

opennotspecifiedMar 2005View details →
zenodo32/100

Figure 3 in The Behavioral Ecology of Insect Vibrational Communication

Figure 3. Wind as an agent of selection on insect vibrational communication through plants. (a) Hourly wind speeds, averaged over one month, recorded at a weather station in Corvallis, Oregon. Wind speeds were consistently lower in the morning. Wind-speed data were obtained from the AgriMet Program of the US Bureau of Reclamation, Pacific Northwest Region (www.usbr.gov/pn/agrimet/ webagdayread.html). (b) Short-term variation in the amplitude of wind-induced vibrations in a petiole of a black walnut tree, Juglans nigra. (c, d) Amplitude spectra (x ⎯ ± standard deviation) of wind-induced vibrations in petioles of two tree species, J. nigra and Robinia pseudoacacia, showing the predominance of low frequencies and the gradual roll-off at higher frequencies. Wind noise recordings were made at typical positions of treehoppers (Enchenopa binotata) on the two host plants, using a PCB U352B65 accelerometer attached to the leaf petiole and a PCB U480E09 amplifier connected to a Macintosh G3 laptop computer. Maximum wind velocity for these recordings, measured with a handheld anemometer, varied from 1 to 2 meters per second (n = 1 petiole per tree for 10 trees of each species).

opennotspecifiedMar 2005View details →
dryad32/100

Data from: Density of antennal sensilla influences efficacy of communication in a social insect

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicJul 2013View details →
geo20/100

Understanding cross-communication between aboveground and below ground plant via transcriptome analysis of a sucking insect whitefly-infested pepper plants

GEO Series GSE52661. Capsicum annuum. 8 samples. Type: Expression profiling by array.

openGEO-OpenJan 2014View details →
zenodo20/100

Figure 2 in The Behavioral Ecology of Insect Vibrational Communication

Figure 2. Examples of substrate-borne and airborne signals. Substrate-borne vibrational signals are shown for (a) the treehopper Vanduzea mayana, (b) the stinkbug Edessa rufomarginata, and (c) the lacewing Chrysoperla carnea. Airborne signals are shown for (d) the plumbeous pigeon, Columba plumbea; (e) the cicada Fidicina mannifera; and (f) the katydid Neoconocephalus retusus. Note the much higher range of frequencies used by the two insect species producing airborne sounds. Scale bars = 0.5 second.

opennotspecifiedMar 2005View details →

ScienceDex guides

Understand access before you commit

These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.

Compare curated datasets

Allen Brain Atlas

Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.

allen-brain-atlas
neuroscienceopenDocumentation, web resources, and API references are available online.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)

ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.

abode-home-cage
behavioral-neuroscienceopenThe DataShare record exposes download links for annotations, documentation, license text, and the zipped per-snippet data directory.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

DANDI Archive for NWB datasets

DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.

dandi-nwb
electrophysiologyopenPublished Dandiset metadata and archive endpoints are available through the production DANDI API.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

International Brain Laboratory public data

The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.

ibl
behavioral-neuroscienceopenPublic sessions can be searched and loaded from the IBL public data server through ONE.
Last verified 2026-04-29Open record

OpenNeuro

OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.

openneuro
neuroscienceopenPublished datasets are available on demand over the internet.
Last verified 2026-04-29Open record