Possibilities for error during communication by neotropical frogs in a complex acoustic environment

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

Volumn 52, Issue 6, 2002, Pages 465-473

  Wollerman, Lori ^a,b   Wiley, R Haven ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^b HOOD COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Acoustic environment; Hyla ebraccata; Mate choice; Signal detection theory

Indexed keywords

BIOACOUSTICS; COMMUNICATION; DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; ERROR ANALYSIS; FROG; MATE CHOICE;

AMPHIBIA; ANURA; HYLA; HYLA EBRACCATA; LEPTODACTYLIDAE; REPTILIA;

EID: 0036872855     PISSN: 03405443     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00265-002-0534-7     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Bourne GR, York H (2001) Vocal behaviors are related to nonrandom structure of anuran breeding assemblages in Guyana. Ethol Ecol Evol 13:313-329
2. Clark PJ, Evans FC (1954) Distance to nearest neighbor as a measure of spatial relationships in populations. Ecology 35: 445-453
3. Dillon WR, Goldstein M (1984) Multivariate Analysis: Methods and Applications. Wiley, New York
4. Donnelly MA, Guyer C (1994) Patterns of reproduction and habitat use in an assemblage of neotropical hylid frogs. Oecologia 98:291-302
5. Drewry GE, Rand AS (1983) Characteristics of an acoustic community: Puerto Rican flogs of the genus Eleutherodactylus. Copeia 1983:941-953
6. Duellman WE (1967) Courtship isolating mechanisms in Costa Rican hylid frogs. Herpetologica 23:169-183
7. Duellman WE, Pyles RA (1983) Acoustic resource partitioning in anuran communities. Copeia 1983:639-649
8. Fouquette MJ (1960) Isolating mechanisms in three sympatric treefrogs in the canal zone. Evolution 14:484-497
9. Gerhardt HC (1991) Female mate choice in treefrogs: static and dynamic acoustic criteria. Anim Behav 42:615-635
10. Gerhardt HC (1994a) Selective responsiveness to long-range acoustic signals in insects and anurans. Am Zool 34:706-714
11. Gerhardt HC (1994b) The evolution of vocalizations in frogs and toads. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 25:293-324
12. Gerhardt HC, Doherty JA (1988) Acoustic communication in the gray treefrog, Hyla versicolor: evolutionary and neurobiological implications. J Comp Physiol A 162:261-278
13. Hödl W (1977) Call differences and calling site segregation in anuran species from Central Amazonian floating meadows. Oecologia 28:351-363
14. Krebs CJ (1989) Ecological Methodology. Harper and Row, New York
15. Littlejohn MJ (1977) Long-range acoustic communication in anurans: an integrated and evolutionary approach. In: Taylor DH, Guttman SI (eds) The reproductive biology of amphibians. Plenum Press, New York, pp 263-294
16. Littlejohn MJ, Harrison PA, MacNally RC (1985) Interspecific acoustic interactions in sympatric populations of Ranidella signifera and R. parinsignifera (Anura: Leptodactylidae). In: Grigg G, Shine R, Ehmann H (eds) Biology of Australasian frogs and reptiles. Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales, pp 287-296
17. McClelland BE, Wilczynski W, Rand AS (1997) Sexual dimorphism and species differences in the neurophysiology and morphology of the acoustic communication system of two neotropical hylids. J Comp Physiol A 180:451-462
18. Nelson DA, Marler P (1990) The perception of birdsong and an ecological concept of signal space. In: Stebbins WC, Berkley MA (eds) Comparative perception, vol 2. Complex signals. Wiley, New York, pp 443-478
19. Pfennig KS (2000) Female spadefoot toads compromise on mate quality to ensure conspecific matings. Behav Ecol 11:220-227
20. Robertson JGM (1986) Female choice, male strategies and the role of vocalization in the Australian frog Uperoleia rugosa. Anim Behav 34:773-784
21. Schwartz JJ (1987a) The importance of spectral and temporal properties in species and call recognition in a neotropical treefrog with a complex vocal repertoire. Anim Behav 35:340-347
22. Schwartz JJ (1987b) The function of call alternation in anuran amphibians: a test of three hypotheses. Evolution 41: 461-471
23. Schwartz JJ (1993) Male calling behavior, female discrimination and acoustic interference in the Neotropical treefrog Hyla microcephala under realistic acoustic conditions. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 32:401-414
24. Schwartz JJ, Wells KD (1984) Interspecific acoustic interactions of the neotropical treefrog Hyla ebraccata. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 14:211-224
25. Wells KD, Bard KM (1986) Vocal communication in a neotropical treefrog, Hyla ebraccata: responses of females to advertisement and aggressive calls. Behaviour 101:200-210
26. Wells KD, Schwartz JJ (1984) Vocal communication in a neotropical treefrog, Hyla ebraccata: advertisement calls. Anim Behav 32:405-420
27. Wiley RH (1994) Errors, exaggeration, and deception in animal communication. In: Real LA (ed) Behavioral mechanisms in evolutionary ecology. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 157-189
28. Wilkinson L (1989) SYSTAT: The system for statistics. SYSTAT, Evanston, Ill.
29. Wollerman L (1998) Stabilizing and directional preferences of female Hyla ebraccata for calls differing in static properties. Anim Behav 55:1619-1630
30. Wollerman L (1999) Acoustic interference limits call detection in a neotropical frog Hyla ebraccata. Anim Behav 57:529-536
31. Wollerman L, Wiley RH (2002) Background noise from a natural chorus alters female discrimination of male calls in a Neotropical frog. Anim Behav 63:15-22