Back

Visual cue properties determine innate orientation strategy in Monarch butterflies

Hanslin, F.; Gayler, M.; Franzke, M.; el Jundi, B.

2026-06-22 animal behavior and cognition
10.64898/2026.06.16.732693 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Animals rely on a wide range of environmental signals, including celestial and terrestrial cues for navigation. While celestial cues, such as the sun, play a major role in maintaining a constant heading during long-distance migration and dispersal, terrestrial cues provide an animal with a short-range navigation system, ideal to pinpoint highly specific locations. In Monarch butterflies, the simulation of a terrestrial landmark, i.e. a vertical stripe, induces an attraction behavior (all animals head toward the stimulus) while a small green light spot, simulating the sun, elicits menotactic orientation (animals adopt individual-specific headings relative to the stimulus). However, the mechanisms underlying how the animal distinguishes between a stimulus as a terrestrial landmark versus a celestial cue remains unclear. To explore this, we tested non-migratory Monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus) in a flight simulator. The inner surface of simulator was equipped with an area of LEDs, allowing to present different visual stimuli to the butterflies during tethered flight. By systematically manipulating the stimulus width, height, brightness, and elevation we found that Monarch butterflies exhibited attraction behavior to high contrast areas, like stripe edges. Menotactic behavior was not achieved by solely decreasing the stimulus to a small light spot but also required for the stimulus to be presented at higher elevation to be interpreted as a sun stimulus. These findings suggest that multiple parameters, inherently set by the butterflys navigation system, are critical to interpret a visual stimulus as celestial cue or terrestrial landmark, producing dynamic switches between different orientation strategies during navigation.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Experimental Biology
259 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
22.7%
2
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 1%
15.3%
3
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 21%
8.0%
4
Royal Society Open Science
214 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
4.4%
50% of probability mass above
5
Journal of Comparative Physiology A
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.4%
6
iScience
1154 papers in training set
Top 4%
4.1%
7
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
393 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.1%
8
Biology Letters
76 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.3%
9
Biology Open
156 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
3.2%
10
The Journal of Experimental Biology
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.8%
11
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 40%
2.5%
12
Animal Behaviour
73 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.4%
13
Animal Cognition
23 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.2%
14
Integrative and Comparative Biology
20 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.4%
15
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
69 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
16
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
235 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
17
Behavioural Brain Research
77 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
18
Behavioural Processes
18 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
19
Current Biology
665 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.9%
20
Ecology and Evolution
267 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
21
Integrative Organismal Biology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.6%
22
PeerJ
308 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.6%