Abstract
Insects constitute the most species-rich radiation of metazoa, a success that is due to the evolution of active flight. Unlike pterosaurs, birds and bats, the wings of insects did not evolve from legs1, but are novel structures that are attached to the body via a biomechanically complex hinge that transforms tiny, high-frequency oscillations of specialized power muscles into the sweeping back-and-forth motion of the wings2. The hinge consists of a system of tiny, hardened structures called sclerites that are interconnected to one another via flexible joints and regulated by the activity of specialized control muscles. Here we imaged the activity of these muscles in a fly using a genetically encoded calcium indicator, while simultaneously tracking the three-dimensional motion of the wings with high-speed cameras. Using machine learning, we created a convolutional neural network3 that accurately predicts wing motion from the activity of the steering muscles, and an encoder–decoder4 that predicts the role of the individual sclerites on wing motion. By replaying patterns of wing motion on a dynamically scaled robotic fly, we quantified the effects of steering muscle activity on aerodynamic forces. A physics-based simulation incorporating our hinge model generates flight manoeuvres that are remarkably similar to those of free-flying flies. This integrative, multi-disciplinary approach reveals the mechanical control logic of the insect wing hinge, arguably among the most sophisticated and evolutionarily important skeletal structures in the natural world.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The data required to perform the analyses in this paper and reconstruct all the data figure are available in the following files: main_muscle_and_wing_data.h5, flynet_data.zip, robofly_data.zip, which are available from the Caltech Data website: https://doi.org/10.22002/aypcy-ck464. main_muscle_and_wing_data.h5 contains the time series of muscle activity and wing kinematics used to train the muscle-to-wing motion CNN and the encoder–decoder used in the latent variable analysis. flynet_data.zip contains a series of data files for training and running Flynet: (1) camera/calibration/cam_calib.txt (example camera calibration data); (2) movies/session_01_12_2020_10_22 (folder containing example movies); (3) labels.h5 and valid_labels.h5 (data for training); and (4) weights_24_03_2022_09_43_14.h5 (example weights). robofly_data.zip contains the MATLAB data files with force and torque data acquired using the dynamically scaled robotic fly.
Code availability
The code required to perform the analyses in this paper and reconstruct all the data figures are available at https://github.com/FlyRanch/mscode-melis-siwanowicz-dickinson. The software is organized into seven submodules: flynet, flynet-kalman, flynet-optimizer, latent-analysis, mpc-simulations, robofly and wing-hinge-cnn. The installation instructions, system requirements and dependency information are given separately in their respective folders. flynet is a neural network and GUI application that requires the dataset flynet_data.zip, and may be used to create Extended Data Fig. 2. An example demonstrating how to train the network can be found in the examples sub-directory and is called train_flynet.py. flynet-kalman is a Kalman filter Python extension used by Flynet. flynet-optimizer is a particle swarm optimization extension module used by Flynet. latent-analysis is a Python library and Jupyter notebook for performing latent variable analysis that requires the dataset main_muscle_and_wing_data.h5, and may be used to create Fig. 6 and Extended Data Fig. 8. mpc-simulations is a Python library and Jupyter notebook for MPC simulations, and may be used to create Fig. 5 and Extended Data Fig. 7. robofly is a Python library and Jupyter notebook for extracting force and torque data from the robotic fly experiments and plotting forces superimposed on 3D wing kinematics. It requires dataset robofly_data.zip, and may be used to create Extended Data Figs. 5 and 6. wing-hinge-cnn is a Python library and Jupyter notebook for creating the muscle-to-wing motion CNN. It requires main_muscle_and_wing_data.h5, and may be used to create Figs. 3 and 4 and Extended Data Fig. 3. An example demonstrating how to train the network can be found in the examples sub-directory as is called train_wing_hinge_cnn.py. The files containing the raw videos of the muscle Ca2+ images and high-speed videos of wing motion are too large to be hosted on a publicly accessible website. Example high-speed videos are provided in the folder movies/session_01_12_2020_10_22 mentioned in Data availability. Additional sequences are available upon request by contacting the corresponding author.
References
Grimaldi, D. & Engel, M. S. Evolution of the Insects (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2005).
Deora, T., Gundiah, N. & Sane, S. P. Mechanics of the thorax in flies. J. Exp. Biol. 220, 1382–1395 (2017).
Gu, J. et al. Recent advances in convolutional neural networks. Pattern Recognit. 77, 354–377 (2018).
Kramer, M. A. Nonlinear principal component analysis using autoassociative neural networks. AlChE J. 37, 233–243 (1991).
Pringle, J. W. S. The excitation and contraction of the flight muscles of insects. J. Physiol. 108, 226–232 (1949).
Josephson, R. K., Malamud, J. G. & Stokes, D. R. Asynchronous muscle: a primer. J. Exp. Biol. 203, 2713–2722 (2000).
Gau, J. et al. Bridging two insect flight modes in evolution, physiology and robophysics. Nature 622, 767–774 (2023).
Boettiger, E. G. & Furshpan, E. The mechanics of flight movements in diptera. Biol. Bull. 102, 200–211 (1952).
Pringle, J. W. S. Insect Flight (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1957).
Miyan, J. A. & Ewing, A. W. How Diptera move their wings: a re-examination of the wing base articulation and muscle systems concerned with flight. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 311, 271–302 (1985).
Wisser, A. Wing beat of Calliphora erythrocephala: turning axis and gearbox of the wing base (Insecta, Diptera). Zoomorph. 107, 359–369 (1988).
Ennos, R. A. A comparative study of the flight mechanism of diptera. J. Exp. Biol. 127, 355–372 (1987).
Dickinson, M. H. & Tu, M. S. The function of dipteran flight muscle. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. A 116, 223–238 (1997).
Nalbach, G. The gear change mechanism of the blowfly (Calliphora erythrocephala) in tethered flight. J. Comp. Physiol. A 165, 321–331 (1989).
Walker, S. M., Thomas, A. L. R. & Taylor, G. K. Operation of the alula as an indicator of gear change in hoverflies. J. R. Soc. Inter. 9, 1194–1207 (2011).
Walker, S. M. et al. In vivo time-resolved microtomography reveals the mechanics of the blowfly flight motor. PLoS Biol. 12, e1001823 (2014).
Wisser, A. & Nachtigall, W. Functional-morphological investigations on the flight muscles and their insertion points in the blowfly Calliphora erythrocephala (Insecta, Diptera). Zoomorph. 104, 188–195 (1984).
Heide, G. Funktion der nicht-fibrillaren Flugmuskeln von Calliphora. I. Lage Insertionsstellen und Innervierungsmuster der Muskeln. Zool. Jahrb., Abt. allg. Zool. Physiol. Tiere 76, 87–98 (1971).
Fabian, B., Schneeberg, K. & Beutel, R. G. Comparative thoracic anatomy of the wild type and wingless (wg1cn1) mutant of Drosophila melanogaster (Diptera). Arth. Struct. Dev. 45, 611–636 (2016).
Tu, M. & Dickinson, M. Modulation of negative work output from a steering muscle of the blowfly Calliphora vicina. J. Exp. Biol. 192, 207–224 (1994).
Tu, M. S. & Dickinson, M. H. The control of wing kinematics by two steering muscles of the blowfly (Calliphora vicina). J. Comp. Physiol. A 178, 813–830 (1996).
Muijres, F. T., Iwasaki, N. A., Elzinga, M. J., Melis, J. M. & Dickinson, M. H. Flies compensate for unilateral wing damage through modular adjustments of wing and body kinematics. Interface Focus 7, 20160103 (2017).
O’Sullivan, A. et al. Multifunctional wing motor control of song and flight. Curr. Biol. 28, 2705–2717.e4 (2018).
Azevedo, A. et al. Tools for comprehensive reconstruction and analysis of Drosophila motor circuits. Preprint at BioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.12.15.520299 (2022).
Donovan, E. R. et al. Muscle activation patterns and motoranatomy of Anna’s hummingbirds Calypte anna and zebra finches Taeniopygia guttata. Physiol. Biochem. Zool. 86, 27–46 (2013).
Bashivan, P., Kar, K. & DiCarlo, J. J. Neural population control via deep image synthesis. Science 364, eaav9436 (2019).
Lindsay, T., Sustar, A. & Dickinson, M. The function and organization of the motor system controlling flight maneuvers in flies. Curr. Biol. 27, 345–358 (2017).
Reiser, M. B. & Dickinson, M. H. A modular display system for insect behavioral neuroscience. J. Neurosci. Meth. 167, 127–139 (2008).
Albawi, S., Mohammed, T. A. & Al-Zawi, S. Understanding of a convolutional neural network. In 2017 International Conference on Engineering and Technology (ICET) 1–6 https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEngTechnol.2017.8308186 (2017).
Kennedy, J. & Eberhart, R. Particle swarm optimization. In Proc. ICNN’95—International Conference on Neural Networks Vol. 4, 1942–1948 (1995).
Dana, H. et al. High-performance calcium sensors for imaging activity in neuronal populations and microcompartments. Nat. Methods 16, 649–657 (2019).
Muijres, F. T., Elzinga, M. J., Melis, J. M. & Dickinson, M. H. Flies evade looming targets by executing rapid visually directed banked turns. Science 344, 172–177 (2014).
Gordon, S. & Dickinson, M. H. Role of calcium in the regulation of mechanical power in insect flight. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103, 4311–4315 (2006).
Nachtigall, W. & Wilson, D. M. Neuro-muscular control of dipteran flight. J. Exp. Biol. 47, 77–97 (1967).
Heide, G. & Götz, K. G. Optomotor control of course and altitude in Drosophila melanogaster is correlated with distinct activities of at least three pairs of flight steering muscles. J. Exp. Biol. 199, 1711–1726 (1996).
Balint, C. N. & Dickinson, M. H. The correlation between wing kinematics and steering muscle activity in the blowfly Calliphora vicina. J. Exp. Biol. 204, 4213–4226 (2001).
Elzinga, M. J., Dickson, W. B. & Dickinson, M. H. The influence of sensory delay on the yaw dynamics of a flapping insect. J. R. Soc. Interface 9, 1685–1696 (2012).
Dickinson, M. H., Lehmann, F.-O. & Sane, S. P. Wing rotation and the aerodynamic basis of insect flight. Science 284, 1954–1960 (1999).
Lehmann, F. O. & Dickinson, M. H. The changes in power requirements and muscle efficiency during elevated force production in the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster. J. Exp. Biol. 200, 1133–1143 (1997).
Lucia, S., Tătulea-Codrean, A., Schoppmeyer, C. & Engell, S. Rapid development of modular and sustainable nonlinear model predictive control solutions. Control Eng. Pract. 60, 51–62 (2017).
Cheng, B., Fry, S. N., Huang, Q. & Deng, X. Aerodynamic damping during rapid flight maneuvers in the fruit fly Drosophila. J. Exp. Biol. 213, 602–612 (2010).
Collett, T. S. & Land, M. F. Visual control of flight behaviour in the hoverfly, Syritta pipiens L. J. Comp. Physiol. 99, 1–66 (1975).
Muijres, F. T., Elzinga, M. J., Iwasaki, N. A. & Dickinson, M. H. Body saccades of Drosophila consist of stereotyped banked turns. J. Exp. Biol. 218, 864–875 (2015).
Syme, D. A. & Josephson, R. K. How to build fast muscles: synchronous and asynchronous designs. Integr. Comp. Biol. 42, 762–770 (2002).
Snodgrass, R. E. Principles of Insect Morphology (Cornell Univ. Press, 2018).
Williams, C. M. & Williams, M. V. The flight muscles of Drosophila repleta. J. Morphol. 72, 589–599 (1943).
Wootton, R. The geometry and mechanics of insect wing deformations in flight: a modelling approach. Insects 11, 446 (2020).
Lerch, S. et al. Resilin matrix distribution, variability and function in Drosophila. BMC Biol. 18, 195 (2020).
Weis-Fogh, T. A rubber-like protein in insect cuticle. J. Exp. Biol. 37, 889–907 (1960).
Weis-Fogh, T. Energetics of hovering flight in hummingbirds and in Drosophila. J. Exp. Biol. 56, 79–104 (1972).
Ellington, C. P. The aerodynamics of hovering insect flight. VI. Lift and power requirements. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 305, 145–181 (1984).
Alexander, R. M. & Bennet-Clark, H. C. Storage of elastic strain energy in muscle and other tissues. Nature 265, 114–117 (1977).
Mronz, M. & Lehmann, F.-O. The free-flight response of Drosophila to motion of the visual environment. J. Exp. Biol. 211, 2026–2045 (2008).
Ristroph, L., Bergou, A. J., Guckenheimer, J., Wang, Z. J. & Cohen, I. Paddling mode of forward flight in insects. Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 178103 (2011).
Takemura, S. et al. A connectome of the male Drosophila ventral nerve cord. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.06.05.543757 (2023).
Cheong, H. S. J. et al. Transforming descending input into behavior: The organization of premotor circuits in the Drosophila male adult nerve cord connectome. Preprint at BioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.06.07.543976 (2023).
Martynov, A. B. Über zwei Grundtypen der Flügel bei den Insecten und ihre Evolution. Z. Morph. Ökol. Tiere 4, 465–501 (1925).
Wipfler, B. et al. Evolutionary history of Polyneoptera and its implications for our understanding of early winged insects. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 3024–3029 (2019).
Hasenfuss, I. The evolutionary pathway to insect flight—a tentative reconstruction. Arthr. System. Phylog. 66, 19–35 (2008).
Willkommen, J. & Hörnschemeyer, T. The homology of wing base sclerites and flight muscles in Ephemeroptera and Neoptera and the morphology of the pterothorax of Habroleptoides confusa (Insecta: Ephemeroptera: Leptophlebiidae). Arthro. Struc. Develop. 36, 253–269 (2007).
Willmann, R. in Arthropod Relationships (eds Fortey, R. A. & Thomas, R. H.) 269–279 (Springer, 1998); https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-4904-4_20.
Shao, L. et al. A neural circuit encoding the experience of copulation in female Drosophila. Neuron 102, 1025–1036.e6 (2019).
Suver, M. P., Huda, A., Iwasaki, N., Safarik, S. & Dickinson, M. H. An array of descending visual interneurons encoding self-motion in Drosophila. J. Neurosci. 36, 11768–11780 (2016).
Götz, K. G. Course-control, metabolism and wing interference during ultralong tethered flight in Drosophila melanogaster. J. Exp. Biol. 128, 35–46 (1987).
Klambauer, G., Unterthiner, T., Mayr, A. & Hochreiter, S. in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems Vol. 30 (Curran Associates, 2017).
Grewal, M. S. & Andrews, A. P. Kalman Filtering: Theory and Practice with MATLAB (John Wiley & Sons, 2014).
Fischler, M. A. & Bolles, R. C. Random sample consensus: a paradigm for model fitting with applications to image analysis and automated cartography. Commun. ACM 24, 381–395 (1981).
Birch, J. M. & Dickinson, M. H. The influence of wing–wake interactions on the production of aerodynamic forces in flapping flight. J. Exp. Biol. 206, 2257–2272 (2003).
Kouvaritakis, B. & Cannon, M. Model Predictive Control: Classical, Robust and Stochastic (Springer, 2016).
Acknowledgements
The authors thank W. Dickson for extensive expertise in instrumentation, programming, data analysis, formatting all the data and code for public repositories, and creating the animations of free flight data in Supplementary Videos 3–8; T. Lindsay for assistance in the design of the epifluorescence microscope and data acquisition software used for muscle imaging; A. Erickson for helpful comments on the manuscript and Supplementary Information; A. Huda for assistance in the construction of genetic lines; J. Omoto for collecting confocal images of wings to visualize resilin using autofluorescence; J. Tuthill and T. Azevedo for a tomographic dataset of the Drosophila wing hinge that was collected at the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility in Grenoble, France; S. Whitehead for analysis of this tomography data to provide a preliminary reconstruction of the hinge sclerites, and for critical feedback on the manuscript text and data presentation; and B. Fabian and R. G. Beutel for providing μ-CT data from their publication on the morphology of the adult fly body. The research reported in this publication was supported by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke of the NIH (U19NS104655). I.S. was supported through the AniBody Project Team at HHMI’s Janelia Research Campus for this work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
J.M.M. collected all the data presented in the manuscript and developed the software for data analysis. J.M.M. and M.H.D. collaborated on planning the experiments, preparing figures, and writing the manuscript. I.S. collected the high-resolution morphological images of the Drosophila thorax and created Supplementary Video 1.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review
Peer review information
Nature thanks the anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Extended data figures and tables
Extended Data Fig. 1 Automated setup for simultaneous recording of muscle fluorescence and wing motion.
a, Illustration of experimental apparatus, created using Solidworks (www.solidworks.com). High-speed cameras, equipped with 0.5X telecentric lenses and collimated IR back-lighting capture synchronized frames of the fly from three orthogonal angles at a rate of 15,000 frames per second. An epi-fluorescence microscope with a muscle imaging camera records GCaMP7f fluorescence in the left steering muscles at approximately 100 frames per second, utilizing a strobing mechanism triggered every other wingbeat. A blue LED provides a brief, 1 ms illumination of the fly’s thorax during dorsal stroke reversal. A camera operating at 30 fps captures a top view of the fly for the kinefly wing tracker. b, Image of the flight arena featuring the components of the setup: LED panorama, IR diode and wingbeat analyzer for triggering the muscle camera and blue LED, prism for splitting the top view between the high-speed camera and kinefly camera, IR backlight, 4X lens of the epi-fluorescence microscope, and a tethered fly illuminated by the blue LED.
Extended Data Fig. 2 Flynet workflow and definitions of wing kinematic angles.
a, The Flynet algorithm takes three synchronized frames as input. Each frame undergoes CNN processing, resulting in a 256-element feature vector extracted from the image. These three feature vectors are concatenated and analyzed by a fully connected (dense) layer with Scaled Exponential Linear Unit (SELU) activation, consisting of 1024 neurons. The output of the neural network is the predicted state (37 elements) of the five model components represented by a quaternion (q), translation vector (p), and wing deformation angle (ξ). Subsequently, the state vector is refined using 3D model fitting and particle swarm optimization (PSO). Normally distributed noise is added to the predicted state, forming the initial state for 16 particles. During the 3D model fitting, the particles traverse the state-space, maximizing the overlap between binary body and wing masks of the segmented frames (Ib) and the binary masks of the 3D model projected onto the camera views (Ip). The cost function (Ib ∆Ip)/(Ib∪Ip) is evaluated iteratively for a randomly selected 3D model component. The PSO algorithm tracks the personal best cost encountered by each particle and the overall lowest cost (global best). After 300 iterations, the refined state is determined by selecting the global best for each 3D model component. See Supplementary Information for more details. b, Training and validation error of the Flynet CNN as a function of training epoch.
Extended Data Fig. 3 CNN-predicted wing motion for example flight sequences.
a, The top five traces show activity of the steering muscles in the four sclerite groups as well as wingbeat frequency during a full, 1.1 second recording. The bottom four traces indicate comparison between the tracked (black) and CNN-predicted (red) wing kinematic angles throughout the sequence. Expanded plots of a 100-ms sequence (0.5 to 0.6 seconds) are plotted on the right. b, c, d. Same as but for a different flight sequences.
Extended Data Fig. 4 Correlation analysis of steering muscle fluorescence and wingbeat frequency.
Linear models (colored lines) fitted to wingbeats in the entire dataset of 72,219 wingbeats from 82 flies. Gray dots represent the normalized baseline muscle activity level, while colored dots represent the normalized maximum muscle activity level. The correlation coefficients associated with these plots are provided in Extended Data Table 1. For more detail on regression methods, see Supplementary Information.
Extended Data Fig. 5 Aerodynamic force measurements and inertial force calculations.
a, Dynamically scaled flapping fly wing model immersed in mineral oil. b, Non-dimensional forces and torques in the strokeplane reference frame (SRF) for the baseline wingbeat. The four traces in each panel correspond to the total (black: Ftotal, Ttotal), aerodynamic (blue: Faero, Taero), inertial components due to acceleration (green: Facc, Tacc), and inertial components due to angular velocity (red: Fangvel; Tangvel). See Supplementary Information for more details. c, Representation of total forces during the baseline wingbeat, viewed from the front, left, and top. Gray trace represents the wing trajectory; cyan arrows represent instantaneous total force on the wing. At the wing joint, three arrows depict the total mean force, half the body weight, and half the estimated body drag.
Extended Data Fig. 6 Aerodynamic and inertial forces for maximum muscle activity wingbeats.
Figures depict the CNN-predicted wing motion for maximum muscle activity patterns, viewed from the front, left, and top. Instantaneous vectors depicting the sum of aerodynamic and inertial forces are shown in cyan. The wingbeat-averaged force vector is indicated by the color corresponding to the specific steering muscle set to maximum activity. Note that the scaling for the wingbeat-averaged forces differs from that for the instantaneous forces. The black gravitational force and blue body drag force are plotted as in Extended Data Fig. 5c.
Extended Data Fig. 7 Simulation of free flight maneuvers using the state-space system and Model Predictive Control.
a, Schematic of the state-space system and MPC loop, including system matrix (A), control matrix (B), the state vector (x), temporal derivative (\(\dot{x}\)) left and right steering muscle activity (uL, uR), initial state (xinit) and goal state (xgoal). b, Forward flight simulation with wingtip traces in red and blue. c, Wing motion during forward flight simulation plotted in stationary body frame. d, Backward flight simulation. e, Wing motion during backward flight simulation plotted in stationary body frame. f, Left and right steering muscle activity during the forward flight manoeuvre. g, State vector during forward flight manoeuvre. h, Steering muscle activity for the backward flight manoeuvre. i, State vector for the backward flight maneuver. j, CNN-predicted left (red) and right (blue) wing kinematics for the forward flight manoeuvre. Note that because this is a bilaterally symmetric flight manoeuvre, the model generates left and right wing kinematics that are identical. The left wing kinematics are displayed underneath the right kinematics,and thus cannot be seen. A baseline wingbeat is shown to emphasize the relative changes in wing motion. k, CNN-predicted wing motion for the backward flight manoeuvre.
Extended Data Fig. 8 Latent variable analysis reveals sclerite function using an encoder–decoder.
a, The network architecture consists of an encoder (red), muscle activity decoder (green), and wing kinematics decoder (blue). The encoder splits the input data into five streams corresponding to different muscle groups and frequency. Feature extraction is performed using convolutional and fully connected layers with SELU activation. Each stream is projected onto a single latent variable. In the muscle activity decoder, the latent variables are transformed back into the input data. A backpropagation stop prevents weight adjustments in the encoder based on the muscle activity reconstruction. The wing kinematics decoder predicts the Legendre coefficients of wing motion using the latent variables. See Supplementary Information for more details. b, Predicted muscle activity (replotted from Fig. 6) and normalized wingbeat frequency as a function of each latent parameter varied within the range of −3σ to +3σ. Color bar indicates the latent variable value in panels (c) and (e). c, Predicted wing motion by the wing kinematics decoder for the five latent parameters. d, Absolute angle-of-attack (|α|), wingtip velocity (utip) in mm s−1, non-dimensional lift (L mg−1), and non-dimensional drag (D mg−1). The non-dimensional lift and drag were computed using a quasi-steady model as described in Supplementary Information.
Extended Data Fig. 9 Flexible wing root facilitates elastic storage during wingbeat and allows wing to passively respond to changes in lift and drag throughout stroke.
a, Top view of ventral stroke reversal in free flight. Red circles mark the estimated position of the wing hinge, dotted lines indicate the expected position of the wing if a chord-wise flexure line was not present. Images are reproduced from previously publish data32 from Drosophila hydei. b, Composite confocal image of the wing base on Drosophila melanogaster, indicating a bright blue band of auto-fluorescence consistent with the presence of resilin and existence of a chord-wise flexure line (dashed arrows). The image shown is characteristic of the 4 wings (from 4 individual female flies) that we processed for confocal microscopy.
Supplementary information
Supplementary Information
This file contains Supplementary Information, including Supplementary Figs. 1–4.
Supplementary Video 1
The left side of a Drosophila thorax, annotated to illustrate the arrangement of wing sclerites and associated musculature. The colour scheme used for the sclerites and muscles are consistent with Fig. 1.
Supplementary Video 2
Animations of seven simulated flight maneuvers shown in world and body frames (forward acceleration, backward acceleration, upward acceleration, downward acceleration, left saccade, right saccade, and sideways flight) generated using the CNN model of the wing hinge and state-space model operating with a MPC loop (see Fig. 5 and Extended Data Fig. 7).
Supplementary Video 3
A previously published free flight maneuver of D. hydei (Mujires et al., 2014), animated in the same format as that used to depict the simulated flight maneuvers in Supplementary Video 2. The sequence provides examples of slow and fast saccades and forward acceleration.
Supplementary Video 4
A previously published free flight maneuver of D. hydei (Mujires et al., 2014), animated in the same format as that used to depict the simulated flight maneuvers in Supplementary Video 2. The sequence provides examples of slow ascent, slow descent, and fast ascent.
Supplementary Video 5
A previously published free flight maneuver of D. hydei (Mujires et al., 2014), animated in the same format as that used to depict the simulated flight maneuvers in Supplementary Video 2. The sequence provides examples slow ascent with sideslip and a saccade.
Supplementary Video 6
A previously published free flight maneuver of D. hydei (Mujires et al., 2014), animated in the same format as that used to depict the simulated flight maneuvers in Supplementary Video 2. The sequence provides an example of a very fast saccade.
Supplementary Video 7
A previously published free flight maneuver of D. hydei (Mujires et al., 2014), animated in the same format as that used to depict the simulated flight maneuvers in Supplementary Video 2. The sequence provides an example of backwards flight.
Supplementary Video 8
A previously published free flight maneuver of D. hydei (Mujires et al., 2014), animated in the same format as that used to depict the simulated flight maneuvers in Supplementary Video 2. The sequence provides examples of forward flight with ascent and descent.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Melis, J.M., Siwanowicz, I. & Dickinson, M.H. Machine learning reveals the control mechanics of an insect wing hinge. Nature 628, 795–803 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07293-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07293-4
This article is cited by
-
An exploration of how the insect-wing hinge functions
Nature (2024)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.