Variations in male calls and responses to an unfamiliar advertisement call in a territorial breeding anuran, rana dalmatina: Evidence for a “dear enemy” effect

Ethology Ecology and Evolution

Volumn 14, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 287-295

  Lesbarreres D ^a   Lode T ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ D'ANGERS   (France)

Author keywords

Agile frog; Call; Tolerance; Variability

Indexed keywords

CALLING BEHAVIOR; DEAR ENEMY PHENOMENON; FAMILIARITY; TERRITORIALITY; VOCALIZATION;

AMPHIBIA; ANURA; RANA DALMATINA; REPTILIA;

EID: 0036976227     PISSN: 03949370     EISSN: 18287131     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08927014.2002.9522731     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Arntzen J.W. 1999. Sexual selection and male mate choice in the common toad, Bufo bufo. Ethology Ecology & Evolution 11: 407-414.
2. Bee M.A. & Gerhardt H.C. 2001a. Habituation as a mechanism of reduced aggression between neighboring territorial male bullfrogs (Rana catesbeiana). Journal of Comparative Psychology 115: 68-82.
3. Bee M.A. & Gerhardt H.C. 2001b. Neighbour-stranger discrimination by territorial male bullfrogs (Rana catesbeiana): I. Acoustic basis. Animal Behaviour 62: 1129-1140.
4. Bee M.A. & Gerhardt H.C. 2001c. Neighbour-stranger discrimination by territorial male bullfrogs (Rana catesbeiana): II. Perceptual basis. Animal Behaviour 62: 1141-1150.
5. Bosch J. & Marquez M. 1996. Acoustic competition in male Midwife toads Alytes obstetricans and Alytes cisternasii; response to neighbor size and calling rate. Implications for female choice. Ethology 102: 841-855.
6. Brenowitz E.A. & Rose G.J. 1999. Female choice and plasticity of male calling behaviour in the Pacific treefrog. Animal Behaviour 57: 1337-1342.
7. Brooks R.J. & Falls J.B. 1975. Individual recognition by song in white-throated sparrows. I. Discrimination of songs of neighbors and strangers. Canadian Journal of Zoology 53: 879-888.
8. Brzoska J. 1982. Vocal response of male European water frogs (Rana esculenta complex) to mating and territorial calls. Behavioural Processes 7: 37-47.
9. Brzoska J., Schneider H. & Nevo E. 1982. Territorial behavior and vocal response in male Hyla arborea savignyi (Amphibia: Anura). Israel Journal of Zoology 31: 27-37.
10. Burmeister S., Konieczka J. & Wilczynski W. 1999. Agonistic encounters in a cricket frog (Acris crepitans) chorus: behavioral outcomes vary with local competition and within the breeding season. Ethology 105: 335-347.
11. Cocroft R.B. & Ryan M.J. 1995. Patterns of advertisement call evolution in toads and chorus frogs. Animal Behaviour 49: 283-303.
12. Davis M.S. 1987. Acoustically mediated neighbor recognition in the North American bullfrog, Rana catesebiana. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 21: 185-190.
13. Geisselmann B., Flindt R. & Hemmer H. 1971. Studien zur Biologie, Ökologie und Merkmalsvariabilitat der beiden Braunfroscharten Rana temporaria L. und Rana dalmatina Bonaparte. Zoologisches Jahrbuch der Systematik 98: 521-568.
14. Gerhardt H.C. 1991. Female mate choice in treefrogs: static and dynamic acoustic criteria. Animal Behaviour 42: 615-635.
15. Gerhardt H.C. 1994. The evolution of vocalization in frogs and toads. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 25: 293-324.
16. Gerhardt H.C. & Davis M.S. 1988. Variation in the coding of species identity in the advertisement calls of Littoria verreauxi (Anura, Hylidae). Evolution 42: 556-565.
17. Gerhardt H.C., Roberts J.D., Bee M.A. & Schwartz J.J. 2000. Call matching in the quacking frog (Crinia georgiana). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 48: 243-251.
18. Gerhardt H.C. & Watson G.F. 1995. Within-male variability in call properties and female preference in the grey treefrog. Animal Behaviour 50: 1187-1191.
19. Horne R.S. 1994. Spectrogram. 5.1.6 Visualization Software LLC, Groningen, Netherlands.
20. Howard R.D. & Young J.R. 1998. Individual variation in male vocal traits and female mating preferences in Bufo americanus. Animal Behaviour 55: 1165-1179.
21. Krebs J.R. 1982. Territorial defense in the great tit Parus major: do residents always win? Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 11: 185-194.
22. Lodé T. 1996. Polecat predation on frogs and toads at breeding sites in western France. Ethology Ecology & Evolution 8: 115-124.
23. Lodé T. 2001. Character convergence in advertisement call and mate choice in two genetically distinct water frog hybridogenetic lineages (Rana kl esculenta, Rana kl grafi). Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research 39: 91-96.
24. Marquez R. & Bosch J. 1997a. Female preference in complex acoustical environments in the midwife toads Alytes obstetricans and Alytes cisternasii. Behavioral Ecology 8: 588-594.
25. Marquez R. & Bosch J. 1997b. Male advertisement call and female preference in sympatric and allopatric midwife toad. Animal Behaviour 54: 1333-1345.
26. Murphy C.G. & Gerhardt H.C. 1996. Evaluating the design of mate-choice experiments: the effect of amplexus on mate choice by female barking treefrogs, Hyla gratiosa. Animal Behaviour 51: 881-890.
27. O’Neill K.M. 1983. Territoriality, body size and spacing in males of the beewolf Philanthus basilaris (Hymenoptera, Sphecidae). Behaviour 86: 295-321.
28. Owen P.C. & Perrill S.A. 1998. Habituation in the green frog, Rana clamitans. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 44: 209-213.
29. Paterson H.E.H. 1992. Evolution and the recognition concept of species: collected writings. Baltimore, Maryland: University Press.
30. Reading C.J., Loman J. & Madsen T. 1991. Breeding pond fidelity in the common toad, Bufo bufo. Journal of Zoology, London 225: 201-211.
31. Resetarits W.J. & Wilbur H.M. 1991. Calling site choice by Hyla chrysoscellis: effect of predators, competitors, and ovoposition sites. Ecology 72: 778-786.
32. Ryan M.J. 1988. Energy calling and selection. American Zoologist 28: 885-898.
33. Ryan M.J. & Keddy-Hector A. 1992. Directional patterns of female mate choice and the role of sensory biases. The American Naturalist 139: 4-35.
34. Ryan M.J. & Wilczynski W. 1991. Evolution of intraspecific variation in the advertisement call of a cricketfrog (Acris crepitans, Hylidae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 44: 249-271.
35. Schneider H., Sofianidou T.S. & Kyriakopoulou-Sklavounou P. 1988. Calling behavior and calls of Rana dalmatina (Anura, Ranidae) in Greece. Zoologisches Jahrbuch der Physiologie 92: 231-243.
36. Schwartz J.J., Ressel S. & Leek M.R. 1995. Carbohydrate and calling: depletion of muscle glycogen and the chorusing dynamics of the neotropical treefrog Hyla mycrocephala. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 30: 125-135.
37. Specht R. 1998. Avisoft-Saslab Pro-Demo. 3.4 Avisoft, Berlin, Germany.
38. Temeles E.J. 1994. The role of neighbors in territorial systems: when are they “dear ennemies”? Animal Behaviour 47: 339-350.
39. Wagner W.E. 1989. Graded aggressive signals in Blanchard’s cricket frog: vocal responses to opponent proximity and size. Animal Behaviour 38: 1025-1038.
40. Welch A.M., Semlitsch R.D. & Gerhardt H.C. 1998. Call duration as an indicator of genetic quality in male gray tree frogs. Science 280: 1928-1930.
41. Wells K.D. 1988. The effect of social interactions on anuran vocal behavior., In: Fritzsch B. et al., Edits. The evolution of the amphibian auditory system. New-York: John Wiley, Sons, pp. 433-454.
42. Wells K.D. & Taigen T.L. 1986. The effect of social interactions on calling energetics in the gray treefrog Hyla versicolor. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 19: 9-18.