1. Evolutionary Biology

How oscillating aerodynamic forces explain the timbre of the hummingbird’s hum and other animals in flapping flight

  1. Ben J Hightower
  2. Patrick W A Wijnings
  3. Rick Scholte
  4. Rivers Ingersoll
  5. Diana D Chin
  6. Jade Nguyen
  7. Daniel Shorr
  8. David Lentink  Is a corresponding author
  1. Stanford University, United States
  2. Eindhoven University of Technology, Netherlands
  3. Sorama, Netherlands
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.63107
Share this article
Cite this article
  1. Ben J Hightower
  2. Patrick W A Wijnings
  3. Rick Scholte
  4. Rivers Ingersoll
  5. Diana D Chin
  6. Jade Nguyen
  7. Daniel Shorr
  8. David Lentink
(2021)
How oscillating aerodynamic forces explain the timbre of the hummingbird’s hum and other animals in flapping flight
eLife 10:e63107.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.63107
  2. Download BibTeX
  3. Download .RIS

Abstract

How hummingbirds hum is not fully understood, but its biophysical origin is encoded in the acoustic nearfield. Hence, we studied six freely hovering Anna's hummingbirds, performing acoustic nearfield holography using a 2176 microphone array in vivo, while also directly measuring the 3D aerodynamic forces using a new aerodynamic force platform. We corroborate the acoustic measurements by developing an idealized acoustic model that integrates the aerodynamic forces with wing kinematics, which shows how the timbre of the hummingbird's hum arises from the oscillating lift and drag forces on each wing. Comparing birds and insects, we find that the characteristic humming timbre and radiated power of their flapping wings originates from the higher harmonics in the aerodynamic forces that support their bodyweight. Our model analysis across insects and birds shows that allometric deviation makes larger birds quieter and elongated flies louder, while also clarifying complex bioacoustic behavior.

Data availability

All data needed to evaluate the conclusions presented in the paper are available on Dryad, https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.73n5tb2vs.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Ben J Hightower

    Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.

  2. Patrick W A Wijnings

    Electrical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.

  3. Rick Scholte

    Engineering, Sorama, Eindhoven, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.

  4. Rivers Ingersoll

    Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7194-0911

  5. Diana D Chin

    Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.

  6. Jade Nguyen

    Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.

  7. Daniel Shorr

    Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.

  8. David Lentink

    Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    For correspondence
    dlentink@stanford.edu
    Competing interests
    David Lentink, Reviewing editor, eLife.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4717-6815

Funding

National Science Foundation (Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) Award,1552419)

  • David Lentink

National Science Foundation (Graduate Research Fellowship)

  • Ben J Hightower

Stanford University (Stanford Graduate Fellowship)

  • Ben J Hightower

Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (Research Program ZERO (P15-06))

  • Patrick W A Wijnings

Stanford University (Stanford Graduate Fellowship)

  • Diana D Chin

National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate (Graduate Fellowship)

  • Diana D Chin

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All bird training and experimental procedures were approved by Stanford's Administrative Panel on Laboratory Animal Care (APLAC-31426).

Copyright

© 2021, Hightower et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 3,630
    views
  • 376
    downloads
  • 6
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Ben J Hightower
  2. Patrick W A Wijnings
  3. Rick Scholte
  4. Rivers Ingersoll
  5. Diana D Chin
  6. Jade Nguyen
  7. Daniel Shorr
  8. David Lentink
(2021)
How oscillating aerodynamic forces explain the timbre of the hummingbird’s hum and other animals in flapping flight
eLife 10:e63107.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.63107

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.63107

Categories and tags

Further reading

    1. Evolutionary Biology

    Bioacoustics: Characterizing the hum of hovering animals

    Robert Niese
    Insight

    The sounds of flying animals, such as the hum of a hummingbird as it hovers, are influenced by the unique forces generated by the flapping of their wings.

  2. Listen to David Lentnik explain how the Hummingbird got its hum.

    Podcast

    Specific aerodynamic forces created by its wings explain the hum of the Hummingbird

    1. Evolutionary Biology

    Spatial and temporal distribution of ribosomes in single cells reveals aging differences between old and new daughters of Escherichia coli

    Lin Chao, Chun Kuen Chan ... Ulla Camilla Rang
    Research Article

    Lineages of rod-shaped bacteria such as Escherichia coli exhibit a temporal decline in elongation rate in a manner comparable to cellular or biological aging. The effect results from the production of asymmetrical daughters, one with a lower elongation rate, by the division of a mother cell. The slower daughter compared to the faster daughter, denoted respectively as the old and new daughters, has more aggregates of damaged proteins and fewer expressed gene products. We have examined further the degree of asymmetry by measuring the density of ribosomes between old and new daughters and between their poles. We found that ribosomes were denser in the new daughter and also in the new pole of the daughters. These ribosome patterns match the ones we previously found for expressed gene products. This outcome suggests that the asymmetry is not likely to result from properties unique to the gene expressed in our previous study, but rather from a more fundamental upstream process affecting the distribution of ribosomal abundance. Because damage aggregates and ribosomes are both more abundant at the poles of E. coli cells, we suggest that competition for space between the two could explain the reduced ribosomal density in old daughters. Using published values for aggregate sizes and the relationship between ribosomal number and elongation rates, we show that the aggregate volumes could in principle displace quantitatively the amount of ribosomes needed to reduce the elongation rate of the old daughters.