Singing and mating success in water pipits: One specific song element makes all the difference

Animal Behaviour

Volumn 55, Issue 6, 1998, Pages 1471-1481

  Rehsteiner, Ueli ^a   Geisser, Hannes ^a   Reyer, Heinz Ulrich ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DOMINANCE; MALE BEHAVIOUR; REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS; TERRITORIALITY; VOCALIZATION;

ANIMALIA; ANTHUS SPINOLETTA; PASSERIFORMES;

EID: 0032104381     PISSN: 00033472     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/anbe.1998.0733     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Alatalo R. V. C., Glynn C., Lundberg A. Singing rate and female attraction in the pied flycatcher: an experiment. Anim. Behav. 39:1990;601-603.
2. Andersson M. Sexual Selection. 1994;Princeton University Press. Princeton.
3. Arak A. Male-male competition and mate choice in anuran amphibians. Mate Choice. 1983;Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. p. 181-210.
4. Arak A. Female mate selection in the natterjack toad: active choice or passive attraction. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 22:1988;317-327.
5. Aspey W. P., Blankenship J. E. Spiders and snails and statistical tales: application of multivariate analysis to diverse ecological data. Hazlett B. A. Quantitative Methods in the Study of Animal Behaviour. 1977;75-120 Academic Press. London.
6. Bauer F. Datenanalyse mit SPSS. 1986;Springer Verlag. Heidelberg.
7. Becker P. H. The coding of species-specific characteristics in bird sound. Kroodsma D. E., Miller E. H. Acoustic Communication in Birds. Vol. 1. 1982;213-252 Academic Press. London.
8. Bollmann, K. 1995, The mating system of the alpine water pipit Anthus spinoletta in a variable environment: ecological, demographic and fitness aspects. University of Zürich.
9. Bollmann K., Reyer H.-U., Brodmann P. A. Territory quality and reproductive success: can water pipitsAnthus spinoletta. Ardea. 85:1997;83-98.
10. Brackenbury J. H. The structural basis of voice production and its relationship to sound characteristics. Kroodsma D. E., Miller E. H. Acoustic Communication in Birds. Vol. 1. 1982;53-71 Academic Press. London.
11. Brodmann P. A., Reyer H.-U., Bollmann K., Schläpfer A. R., Rauter C. The importance of food quantity and quality for reproductive performance in alpine water pipits (Anthus spinoletta. Oecologia (Berl.). 109:1997;200-208.
12. Catchpole C. K. The evolution of bird sounds in relation to mating and spacing behaviour. Kroodsma D. E., Miller E. H. Acoustic Communication in Birds. Vol. 1. 1982;297-319 Academic Press. London.
13. Catchpole C. K. Bird song, sexual selection and female choice. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2:1987;94-97.
14. Davies N. B., Lundberg A. Food distribution and a variable mating system in the dunnock,Prunella modularis. J. Anim. Ecol. 53:1984;895-912.
15. Dooling R. J. Auditory perception in birds. Kroodsma D. E., Miller E. H. Acoustic Communication in Birds. Vol. 1. 1982;95-130 Academic Press. London.
16. Eens M., Pinxten R., Verheyen R. F. Male song as a cue for mate choice in the European starling. Behaviour. 116:1991;210-238.
17. Elfström S. T. Responses of territorial meadow pipits to strange and familiar song phrases in playback experiments. Anim. Behav. 40:1990a;786-788.
18. Elfström S. T. Individual and species-specific song patterns of rock and meadow pipits: physical characters and experiments. Bioacoustics. 2:1990b;277-301.
19. Frey-Roos F., Brodmann P. A., Reyer H.-U. Relationships between food resources, foraging patterns and reproductive success in the water pipit,Anthus spinoletta. Behav. Ecol. 6:1995;287-295.
20. Glutz von Blotzheim U. N., Bauer K. M. Handbuch der Vögel Mitteleuropas. Vol. 10/II. 1985;Aula-Verlag. Wiesbaden.
21. Gottlander K. Variation in the song rate of the male pied flycatcher (Ficedula hypoleuca. Anim. Behav. 35:1987;1037-1043.
22. Greig-Smith P. W. Song-rates and parental care by individual male stonechats (Saxicola torquata. Anim. Behav. 30:1982;245-252.
23. Halliday T. The study of mate choice. Bateson P. Mate Choice. 1983;3-32 Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
24. Hötker H. Der Wiesenpieper. Neue Brehbücherei. 1989;A. Ziemsen-Verlag. Wittenberg-Lutterstadt.
25. Johnstone R. A., Norris K. Badges of status and the cost of aggression. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 32:1993;127-134.
26. Lambrechts M. M., Dhondt A. A. The anti-exhaustion hypothesis: a new hypothesis to explain song performance and song switching in the great tit. Anim. Behav. 36:1988;327-334.
27. Lampe H. M., Espmark Y. O. Song structure reflects male quality in pied flycatchers,Ficedula hypoleuca. Anim. Behav. 47:1994;869-876.
28. Luiselli L. M., Anibaldi C. The diet of the adder (Vipera berus. Amphib.-Reptil. 12:1990;214-217.
29. Møller A. P. Parasite load reduces song output in a passerine bird. Anim. Behav. 41:1991;723-730.
30. Møller A. P., Kimball R. T., Erritzoe J. Sexual ornamentation, condition, and immune defence in the house sparrow,Passer domesticus. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 39:1996;317-322.
31. O'Loghlen A. L., Rothstein S. I. Culturally correct song dialects are correlated with male age and female song preferences in wild populations of brown-headed cowbirds. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 36:1995;251-259.
32. Otter K., Chruszcz B., Ratcliff L. Honest advertisement and song output during the dawn chorus of black-capped chickadees. Behav. Ecol. 8:1997;167-173.
33. Parker T. R. Mate quality and mating decisions. Bateson P. Mate Choice. 1983;141-164 Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
34. Radesäter T., Jakobson S., Andbjer N., Bylin A., Nyström K. Song rate and pair formation in the willow warbler,Phylloscopus trochilus. Anim. Behav. 35:1987;1645-1651.
35. Reid M. L. Costliness and reliability in the singing vigour of Ipswich sparrows. Anim. Behav. 35:1987;1735-1743.
36. Ryan M. J. The Tungara Frog: a Study in Sexual Selection and Communication. 1985;The University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
37. Ryan M. J. Energy, calling, and selection. Am. Zool. 28:1988;885-898.
38. Searcy W. A. Male characteristics and pairing success in red-winged blackbirds. Auk. 96:1979;353-363.
39. Searcy W. A. Song repertoire size and female preference in song sparrows. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 14:1984;281-286.
40. Searcy W. A., Andersson M. Sexual selection and the evolution of song. A. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 17:1986;507-533.
41. Slotow R., Alcock J., Rothstein S. I. Social status signalling in white-crowned sparrows: an experimental test of the social control hypothesis. Anim. Behav. 46:1993;977-989.
42. Sokal R. R., Rohlf F. J. Biometry. 1969;W. H. Freeman. San Francisco.
43. Vehrencamp S. L., Bradbury J. W., Gibson R. M. The energetic cost of display in male sage grouse. Anim. Behav. 38:1989;885-896.
44. Veiga J. P. Badge size, phenotypic quality, and reproductive success in the house sparrow: a study on honest advertisement. Evolution. 47:1993;1161-1170.
45. Veiga J. P., Puerta M. Nutritional constraints determine the expression of sexual traits in the house sparrow,Passer domesticus. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B. 263:1996;229-234.
46. Wiley R. H., Richards D. G. Adaptations for acoustic communication in birds: sound transmission and signal detection. Kroodsma D. E., Miller E. H. Acoustic Communication in Birds. Vol. 2. 1982;132-181 Academic Press. London.