DOI: 10.5061/dryad.3450r
title: Data from: Tempo and mode of antibat ultrasound production and sonar jamming in the diverse hawkmoth radiation

description: The bat–moth arms race has existed for over 60 million y, with moths
 evolving ultrasonically sensitive ears and ultrasound-producing organs to
 combat bat predation. The evolution of these defenses has never been
 thoroughly examined because of limitations in simultaneously conducting
 behavioral and phylogenetic analyses across an entire group. Hawkmoths
 include &gt;1,500 species worldwide, some of which produce ultrasound
 using genital stridulatory structures. However, the function and evolution
 of this behavior remain largely unknown. We built a comprehensive
 behavioral dataset of hawkmoth hearing and ultrasonic reply to sonar
 attack using high-throughput field assays. Nearly half of the species
 tested (57 of 124 species) produced ultrasound to tactile stimulation or
 playback of bat echolocation attack. To test the function of ultrasound,
 we pitted big brown bats (Eptesicus fuscus) against hawkmoths over
 multiple nights and show that hawkmoths jam bat sonar. Ultrasound
 production was immediately and consistently effective at thwarting attack
 and bats regularly performed catching behavior without capturing moths. We
 also constructed a fossil-calibrated, multigene phylogeny to study the
 evolutionary history and divergence times of these antibat strategies
 across the entire family. We show that ultrasound production arose in
 multiple groups, starting in the late Oligocene (∼26 Ma) after the
 emergence of insectivorous bats. Sonar jamming and bat-detecting ears
 arose twice, independently, in the Miocene (18–14 Ma) either from earless
 hawkmoths that produced ultrasound in response to physical contact only,
 or from species that did not respond to touch or bat echolocation attack.
description: Hawkmoth.202tx.BEAST.treBEAST tree file.Hawkmoth.202tx.nexNexus sequence dataset file for the 6 concatenated genes with charset block and MrBayes model specifications. This was the original file used to run analyses. Some taxon names changed during the study, thus, the names differ slightly from the trees presented in the main portion of the paper (which have the updated names).Hawkmoth.202tx.xmlXML input file for the BEAST analysis.r8s.commandfile.nexCommand file for the r8s analysis.r8s.treOutput tree file from the r8s analysis. This tree was used for the BEAST analysis.RAxML.constraint.treTopological constraint, based on published transcriptomic analyses, applied to several analyses in the current study.RAxML.constraint.txtHawkmoth.202tx.RAxML.ML.nt123.treML tree from RAxML analysis of the 6 concatenated gene dataset. Synonymous and non-synonymous changes for all codon positions included (nt123). Taxon names reflect the accepted taxonomic names when the paper was published.Hawkmoth.RAxML.202tx.ML.nt123.treHawkmoth.202tx.RAxML.ML.degen1.treML tree from RAxML analysis of the concatenated dataset using degeneracy coding (degen1, removing synonymous changes).Hawkmoth.202tx.fullnames.nexNexus sequence dataset file for the 6 concatenated genes with charset block and MrBayes model specifications. Taxon names reflect the accepted taxonomic names when the paper was published.Hawkmoth.202tx.MrBayes.treBayesian tree from the MrBayes analysis of the 6 concatenated gene dataset. Synonymous and non-synonymous changes for all codon positions included (nt123).