Song function and the evolution of female preferences: Why birds sing, why brains matter

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

Volumn 1016, Issue , 2004, Pages 704-723

  Nowicki, Stephen ^a   Searcy, William A ^b  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Department of Biology   (United States)

Author keywords

Female choice; Indicator mechanism; Nutritional stress; Reliable signaling; Sexual selection; Song development

Indexed keywords

CORTICOSTERONE;

AUTOPSY; BRAIN DEVELOPMENT; BREEDING; CONFERENCE PAPER; COPULATION; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; COUPLING FACTOR; COURTSHIP; ENERGY; HATCHING; HYPOTHESIS; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LEARNING; MATE CHOICE; NONHUMAN; PERCEPTION; PHENOTYPE; PREDICTION; PROGENY; SEXUAL SELECTION; SINGING; SOCIAL INTERACTION; SONGBIRD; STRESS; TERRITORIALITY; THEORETICAL MODEL;

AVES; PASSERI;

EID: 3242734681     PISSN: 00778923     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1196/annals.1298.012     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (132)

1. CATCHPOLE, C.K. 1973. The functions of advertising song in the sedge warbler (Acrocephalus schoenobaenus) and reed warbler (A. scripaceus). Behaviour 46: 300-320.
2. SLAGSVOLD, T. 1977. Bird song activity in relation to breeding cycle, spring weather, and environmental phenology. Ornis Scand. 8: 197-222.
3. TODT, D. & M. NAGUIB. 2000. Vocal interactions in birds: the use of song as a model in communication. Adv. Study Behav. 29: 247-296.
4. HULTSCH, H. & D. TODT. 1982. Temporal performance roles during vocal interactions in nightingales (Luscinia megarhynchos). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 11: 253-260.
5. MCGREGOR, P.K., T. DABELSTEEN, M. SHEPHERD, et al. 1992. The signal value of matched singing in great tits: evidence from interactive playback experiments. Anim. Behav. 43: 987-998.
6. DABELSTEEN, T., P.K. MCGREGOR, M. SHEPHERD, et al. 1996. Is the signal value of overlapping different from that of alternating during matched singing in Great Tits? J. Avian Biol. 27: 189-194.
7. FALLS, J.B. & L.G. D'AGINCOURT. 1982. Why do meadowlarks switch song types? Can. J. Zool. 60: 3400-3408.
8. SEARCY, W. A., S. NOWICKI & C. HOGAN. 2000. Song type variants and aggressive context. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 48: 358-363.
9. LEMON, R.E. 1968. The relation between organization and function of song in cardinals. Behaviour 32: 158-178.
10. KREBS, J.R., R. ASHCROFT & K. V. ORSDOL. 1981. Song matching in the great tit Parus major L. Anim. Behav. 29: 918-923.
11. STODDARD, P.K., M.D. BEECHER, S.E. CAMPBELL, et al. 1992. Song-type matching in the song sparrow. Can. J. Zool. 70: 1440-1444.
12. PEEK, F.W. 1972. An experimental study of the territorial function of vocal and visual display in the male red-winged blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus). Anim. Behav. 20: 112-118.
13. SMITH, D.G. 1979. Male singing ability and territory integrity in red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus). Behaviour 68: 193-206.
14. MCDONALD, M.V. 1989. Function of song in Scott's seaside sparrow, Ammodramus maritimus pennisulae. Anim. Behav. 38: 468-485.
15. NOTTEBOHM, F. 1971. Neural lateralization of vocal control in apasserine bird. I. Song. J. Exp. Zool. 177: 229-262.
16. GÖRANSSON, G., G. HÖGSTEDT, J. KARLSSON, et al. 1974. Sångens roll för revirhållandet hos näktergal Luscinia luscinia - några experiment me play-back-teknik. Vår Fågelvärld 33: 201-209.
17. KREBS, J.R. 1977. Song and territory in the great tit Parus major. In Evolutionary Ecology. B. Stonehouse & C. Perrins, Eds: 47-62. University Park Press. Baltimore.
18. YASUKAWA, K. 1981. Song repertoires in the red-winged blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus): a test of the Beau Geste hypothesis. Anim. Behav. 29: 114-125.
19. FALLS, J.B. 1988. Does song deter intrusion in white-throated sparrows (Zonotrichia albicollis)? Can. J. Zool. 66: 206-211.
20. NOWICKI, S., W.A. SEARCY & M. HUGHES. 1998. The territory defenses function of song in song sparrows: a test with the speaker occupation design. Behaviour 135: 615-628.
21. KREBS, J.R., M. AVERY & R.J. COWIE. 1981. Effect of removal of mate on the singing behavior of great tits. Anim. Behav. 29: 635-637.
22. OTTER, K. & L. RATCLIFFE. 1993. Changes in singing behavior of male black-capped chickadees (Parus atricapillus) following mate removal. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 409-414.
23. ERIKSSON, D. & L. WALLIN. 1986. Male bird song attracts females: a field experiment. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 19: 297-299.
24. MOUNTJOY, D.J. & R.E. LEMON. 1991. Song as an attractant for male and female European starlings and the influence of song complexity on their response. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 28: 97-100.
25. JOHNSON, L.S. & W.A. SEARCY. 1996. Female attraction to male song in house wrens (Troglodytes aedon). Behaviour 133: 357-366.
26. LEHRMAN, D.S. 1958. Effect of female sex hormones on incubation behavior in the ring dove (Streptopelia risoria). J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 51: 142-145.
27. LEHRMAN, D.S. 1964. Control of behavior cycles in reproduction. In Social Behavior and Organization among Vertebrates. W. Etkin, Ed: 143-166. University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
28. HINDE, R.A. & E. STEELE. 1976. The effect of male song on an oestrogen dependent behaviour in the female canary Serinus canarius. Horm. Behav. 7: 293-304.
29. WRIGHT, J. & I. CUTHILL. 1992. Monogamy in the European starling. Behaviour 120: 262-285.
30. KING, A.P. & M.J. WEST. 1977. Species identification in the North American cowbird: appropriate responses to abnormal song. Science 195: 1002-1004.
31. SEARCY, W.A. & P. MARLER. 1981. A test for responsiveness to song structure and programming in female sparrows. Science 213: 926-928.
32. ANDERSSON, M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton University Press. Princeton, NJ.
33. ZAHAVI, A. 1975. Mate selection - a selection for a handicap. J. Theor. Biol. 53: 205-214.
34. ENQUIST, M. 1985. Communication during aggressive interactions with particular reference to variation in choice of behaviour. Anim. Behav. 33: 1152-1161.
35. GRAFEN, A. 1990. Biological signals as handicaps. J. Theor. Biol. 144: 517-546.
36. JOHNSTONE, R.A. & A. GRAFEN. 1993. Dishonesty and the handicap principle. Anim. Behav. 46: 759-764.
37. VEHRENCAMP, S.L. 2000. Handicap, index, and conventional signal elements of bird song. In Animal Signals. Y. Espmark, T. Amundsen & G. Rosenqvist, Eds. Tapir Academic. Trondheim.
38. KIRKPATRICK, M. & M.J. RYAN. 1991. The evolution of mating preferences and the paradox of the lek. Nature 350: 33-38.
39. GRAFEN, A. 1990. Sexual selection unhandicapped by the Fisher process. J. Theor. Biol. 144: 473-516.
40. HOELZER, G.A. 1989. The good parent process of sexual selection. Anim. Behav. 38: 1067-1078.
41. HEYWOOD, J.S. 1989. Sexual selection by the handicap mechanism. Evolution 43: 1387-1397.
42. PRICE, T.D., D. SCHLUTER & N.B. HECKMAN. 1993. Sexual selection when the female directly benefits. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 48: 187-211.
43. ANDERSSON, M. 1986. Evolution of condition-dependent sex ornaments and mating preferences: sexual selection based on viability differences. Evolution 40: 804-816.
44. POMIANKOWSKI, A. 1987. Sexual selection: the handicap principle does work - sometimes. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 231: 123-145.
45. IWASA, Y., A. POMIANKOWSKI & S. NEE. 1991. The evolution of costly mate preferences. II. The "handicap" principle. Evolution 45: 1431-1442.
46. PETRIE, M. 1994. Improved growth and survival of offspring of peacocks with more elaborate trains. Nature 371: 598-599.
47. HILL, G.E. 1990. Female house finches prefer colorful males: Sexual selection for a condition-dependent trait. Anim. Behav. 40: 563-572.
48. HILL, G.E. 1991. Plumage colouration is a sexually selected indicator mechanism. Nature 350: 337-339.
49. HILL, G.E. 2003. A Red Bird in a Brown Bag: The function and evolution of colorful plumage in the house finch. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
50. HILL, G.E. 1992. Proximate basis of variation in carotenoid pigmentation in male house finches. Auk 109: 1-12.
51. SEARCY, W.A. & M. ANDERSSON. 1986. Sexual selection and the evolution of song. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 17: 507-533.
52. CATCHPOLE, C.K. & P.J.B. SLATER 1995. Bird Song: Biological themes and variations. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
53. EENS, M., R. PINXTEN & R.F. VERHEYEN. 1991. Male song as a cue for mate choice in the European starling. Behaviour 116: 210-238.
54. KEMPENAERS, B., G.R. VERHEYEN & A.A. DHONDT. 1997. Extrapair paternity in the blue tit (Parus caeruleus): female choice, male characteristics, and offspring quality. Behav. Ecol. 8: 481-492.
55. WASSERMAN, F.E. & J.A. CIGLIANO. 1991. Song output and stimulation of the female in white-throated sparrows. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 29: 55-59.
56. GOTTLANDER, K. 1987. Variation in the song rate of the male pied flycatcher Ficedula hypoleuca: causes and consequences. Anim. Behav. 35: 1037-1043.
57. ALATALO, R.V., C. GLYNN & A. LUNDBERG. 1990. Singing rate and female attraction in the pied flycatcher: an experiment. Anim. Behav. 39: 601-603.
58. COLLINS, S.A., C. HUBBARD & A.M. HOUTMAN. 1994. Female mate choice in the zebra finch - the effect of male beak colour and male song. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 35: 21-25.
59. OBERWEGER, K. & F. GOLLER. 2001. The metabolic cost of birdsong production. J. Exp. Biol. 204: 3379-3388.
60. EBERHARDT, L.S. 1994. Oxygen consumption during singing by male carolina wrens (Thryothorus ludovicianus). Auk 111: 124-130.
61. BUCHANAN, K.L. & C.K. CATCHPOLE. 1997. Female choice in the sedge warbler, Acrocephalus schoenobaenus: multiple cues from song and territory. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 264: 521-526.
62. CATCHPOLE, C.K. 1980. Sexual selection and the evolution of complex songs among European warblers of the genus Acrocephalus. Behaviour 74: 149-166.
63. HASSELQUIST, D., S. BENSCH & T. V. SCHANTZ. 1996. Correlation between male song repertoire, extra pair paternity and offspring survival in the great reed warbler. Nature 381: 229-232.
64. HASSELQUIST, D. 1998. Polygyny in great reed warblers: a long-term study of factors contributing to male fitness. Ecology 79: 2376-2390.
65. YASUKAWA, K., J.L. BLANK & C.B. PATTERSON. 1980. Song repertoires and sexual selection in the red-winged blackbird. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 7: 233-238.
66. SEARCY, W.A. 1984. Song repertoire size and female preferences in song sparrows. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 14: 281-286.
67. BAKER, M.C., T.K. BJERKE, H.U. LAMPE, et al. 1986. Sexual response of female great tits to variation in size of males' song repertoires. Amer. Nat. 128: 491-498.
68. CATCHPOLE, C.K., J. DITTAMI & B. LEISLER. 1984. Differential responses to male song in female songbirds implanted with oestradiol. Nature 312: 563-564.
69. CATCHPOLE, C.K., B. LEISLER & J. DITTAMI. 1986. Sexual differences in the responses of captive great reed warblers (Acrocephalus arundinaceus) to variation in song structure and repertoire size. Ethology 73: 69-77.
70. MARLER, P. & M. TAMURA. 1964. Culturally transmitted patterns of vocal behavior in sparrows. Science 146: 293-296.
71. MCGREGOR, P.K. 1980. Song dialects in the corn bunting (Emberiza calandra). Z. Tierpsychol. 54: 285-297.
72. SEARCY, W.A., S. NOWICKI, M. HUGHES, et al. 2002. Geographic song discrimination in relation to dispersal distances in song sparrows. Amer. Nat. 159: 221-230.
73. SEARCY, W.A. 1992. Measuring responses of female birds to male song. In Playback and Studies of Animal Communication. P.K. McGregor, Ed: 175-189. Plenum. New York.
74. SEARCY, W.A., S. NOWICKI & S. PETERS. 2003. Phonology and geographic song discrimination in song sparrows. Ethology 109: 23-35.
75. NOTTEBOHM, F. 1972. The origins of vocal learning. Amer. Nat. 106: 116-140.
76. BAKER, M.C. & M.A. CUNNINGHAM. 1985. The biology of bird-song dialects. Behav. Brain Sci. 8: 85-100.
77. BAKER, M.C., K.J. SPITLER-NABORS & D.C. BRADLEY. 1981. Early experience determines song dialect responsiveness of female sparrows. Science 214: 819-821.
78. BAPTISTA, L.F. & M.L. MORTON. 1988. Song learning in montane white-crowned sparrows: from whom and when? Anim. Behav. 36: 1753-1764.
79. SUTHERS, R.A. & F. GOLLER. 1997. Motor correlates of vocal diversity in songbirds. In Current Ornithology. J.V Nolan, Ed: 235-288. Plenum Press. New York.
80. VALLET, E., I. BEME & M. KREUTZER. 1998. Two-note syllables in canary songs elicit high levels of sexual display. Anim. Behav. 55: 291-297.
81. VALLET, E. & M. KREUTZER. 1995. Female canaries are sexually responsive to special song phrases. Anim. Behav. 49: 1603-1610.
82. FORSTMEIER, W., B. KEMPENAERS, A. MEYER, et al. 2002. A novel song parameter correlates with extra-pair paternity and reflects male longevity. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 269: 1479-1485.
83. BALLENTINE, B., J. HYMAN & S. NOWICKI. 2004. Singing performance influences female response to male bird song: an experimental test. Behav. Ecol. 15: 163-168.
84. WESTNEAT, M.W., J.H.J. LONG, W. HOESE, et al. 1993. Kinematics of birdsong: functional correlation of cranial movements and acoustic features in sparrows. J. Exp. Biol. 182: 147-171.
85. HOESE, W.J., J. PODOS, C. BOETTICHER NICHOLAS, et al. 2000. Vocal tract function in birdsong production: Experimental manipulation of beak movements. J. Exp. Biol. 203: 1845-1855.
86. PODOS, J. 1997. A performance constraint on the evolution of trilled vocalizations in a songbird family (Passeriformes: Emberizidae). Evolution 51: 537-551.
87. NOWICKI, S., S. PETERS & J. PODOS. 1998. Song learning, early nutrition and sexual selection in songbirds. Amer. Zool. 38: 179-190.
88. BUCHANAN, K.L., K.A. SPENCER, A.R. GOLDSMITH, et al. 2003. Song as an honest signal of past developmental stress in the European starling (Sturnus vulgaris). Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270: 1149-1156.
89. LOYE, J.E. & M. ZUK 1991. Bird-Parasite Interactions: Ecology, evolution, and behaviour. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
90. CLAYTON, D.H. & J. MOORE. 1997. Host-Parasite Evolution: General principles and avian models. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
91. SHELDON, B.C. & S. VERHULST. 1996. Ecological immunity: costly parasite defenses and trade-offs in evolutionary ecology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 11: 317-321.
92. BUCHANAN, K.L., C.K. CATCHPOLE, J.W. LEWIS, et al. 1999. Song as an indicator of parasitism in the sedge warbler. Anim. Behav. 57: 307-314.
93. ALVAREZ-BUYLLA, A., C. LING & W.S. YU. 1994. Contribution of neurons born during embryonic, juvenile and adult life to the brain of adult canaries: regional specificity and delayed birth of neurons in the song-control nuclei. J. Comp. Neurol. 347: 233-248.
94. DEVOOGD, T.J. 1994. The neural basis for the acquisition and production of bird song. In Causal Mechanisms in Behavioural Development. J.A. Hogan & J.J. Bolhuis, Eds: 49-81. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
95. BOTTJER, S.W., S.L. GLAESSNER & A.P. ARNOLD. 1985. Ontogeny of brain nuclei controlling song learning and behavior in zebra finches. J. Neurosci. 5: 1556-1562.
96. KONISHI, M. & E. AKUTAGAWA. 1985. Neuronal growth, atrophy and death in a sexually dimorphic song nucleus in the zebra finch brain. Nature 315: 145-147.
97. NORDEEN, E.J. & K.W. NORDEEN. 1988. Sex and regional differences in the incorporation of neurons born during song learning in zebra finches. J. Neurosci. 8: 2869-2874.
98. JOHNSON, F. & S.W. BOTTJER. 1992. Growth and regression of thalamic efferents in the song-control system of male zebra finches. J. Comp. Neurol. 326: 442-450.
99. MOONEY, R. & M. RAO. 1994. Waiting periods versus early innervation: the development of axonal connections in the zebra finch song system. J. Neurosci. 14: 6532-6543.
100. ALVAREZ-BUYLLA, A., M. THEELEN & F. NOTTEBOHM. 1988. Birth of projection neurons in the higher vocal center of the canary forebrain before during and after song learning. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 85: 8722-8726.
101. ALVAREZ-BUYLLA, A., C. LING & F. NOTTEBOHM. 1992. High vocal center growth and its relation to neurogenesis, neuronal replacement and song acquisition in juvenile canaries. J. Neurobiol. 23: 396-406.
102. NOTTEBOHM, F., M.E. NOTTEBOHM & L. CRANE. 1986. Developmental and seasonal changes in canary song and their relationship to changes in the anatomy of song-control nuclei. Behav. Neural Biol. 46: 445-471.
103. NORDEEN, K. W., P. MARLER & E.J. NORDEEN. 1989. Addition of song-related neurons in swamp sparrows coincides with memorization, not production, of learned songs. J. Neurobiol. 20: 651-661.
104. RICKLEFS, R.E. 1968. Patterns of growth in birds. Ibis 110: 419-451.
105. RICKLEFS, R.E. 1983. Avian postnatal development. In Avian Biology. D.S. Farner, J.R. King & K.C. Parkes, Eds: 1-83. Academic Press. New York.
106. O'CONNOR, R.J. 1984. The Growth and Development of Birds. Wiley & Sons. New York.
107. SULLIVAN, K.A. 1988. Age-specific profitability and prey choice. Anim. Behav. 36: 613-615.
108. LACK, D. 1966. Population Studies of Birds. Oxford University Press. Oxford.
109. RINGSBY, T.H., B.E. SAETHER & E.J. SOLBERG. 1998. Factors affecting juvenile survival in house sparrow Passer domesticus. J. Avian Biol. 29: 241-247.
110. DOBBING, J. 1981. Nutritional growth restriction and the nervous system. In The Molecular Basis of Neuropathology. R.H.S. Thompson & A.N. Davison, Eds. Arnold. London.
111. SMART, J.L. 1986. Undernutrition, learning and memory: review of experimental studies. In Proceedings of the 13th Congress of Nutrition. T.G. Taylor & N.K. Jenkins, Eds: 74-78. Libbey. London.
112. LEVITSKY, D.A. & B.J. STRUPP. 1995. Malnutrition and the brain: changing concepts, changing concerns. J. Nutrition 125: 2212S-2220S.
113. SCHEW, W.A. & R.E. RICKLEFS. 1998. Developmental plasticity. In Avian Growth and Development. J.M. Starck & R.E. Ricklefs, Eds: 288-304. Oxford University Press. New York.
114. NOWICKI, S., W.A. SEARCY & S. PETERS. 2002. Quality of song learning affects female response to male bird song. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 269: 1949-1954.
115. NOWICKI, S., W.A. SEARCY & S. PETERS. 2002. Brain development, song learning and mate choice in birds: a review and experimental test of the "nutritional stress hypothesis." J. Comp. Physiol. A 188: 1003-1014.
116. DOUTRELANT, C., J. BLONDEL, P. PERRET, et al. 2000. Blue tit song repertoire size, male quality and interspecific competition. J. Avian Biol. 31: 360-366.
117. NOWICKI, S., D. HASSELQUIST, S. BENSCH, et al. 2000. Nestling growth and song repertoire size in great reed warblers: evidence for song learning as an indicator mechanism in mate choice. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 267: 2419-2424.
118. MOUNTJOY, D.J. & R.E. LEMON. 1996. Female choice for complex song in the European starling: a field experiment. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 38: 65-71.
119. SPENCER, K.A., K.L. BUCHANAN, A.R. GOLDSMITH, et al. 2003. Song as an honest signal of developmental stress in the zebra finch (Taeniopygia guttata). Horm. Behav. 44: 132-139.
120. CLAYTON, N. & E. PRÖVE. 1989. Song discrimination in female zebra finches and Bengalese finches. Anim. Behav. 38: 352-354.
121. SEARCY, W.A., S. PETERS & S. NOWICKI. 2004. Effects of early nutrition on growth rate and adult size in song sparrows. J. Avian Biol. In press.
122. BIRKHEAD, T.R., F. FLETCHER & E.J. PELLATT. 1999. Nestling diet, secondary sexual traits and fitness in the zebra finch. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 266: 385-390.
123. OHLSSON, T.H.G.S. 2001. Early nutrition causes persistent effects on pheasant morphology. Physiol. Biochem. Zool. 74: 212-218.
124. BUMPUS, H.C. 1899. The elimination of the unfit as illustrated by the introduced sparrow, Passer domesticus. Biol. Lect. Woods Hole Mar. Biol. Station 6: 209-226.
125. BOAG, P.T. & P.R. GRANT. 1981. Intense natural selection in a population of Darwin's finches (Geospizinae) in the Galapagos. Science 214: 82-85.
126. PUGESEK, B.H. & A. TOMER. 1996. The Bumpus house sparrow data: a reanalysis using structural equation models. Evol. Ecol. 10: 387-404.
127. WEATHERHEAD, P.J. & P.T. BOAG. 1995. Pair and extra-pair mating success relative to male quality in red-winged blackbirds. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 37: 81-91.
128. METCALFE, N. & P. MONAGHAN. 2001. Compensation for a bad start: grow now, pay later? Trends Ecol. Evol. 16: 254-260.
129. WATERLAND, R. & C. GARZA. 1999. Potential mechanisms of metabolic imprinting that lead to chronic disease. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 69: 179-197.
130. FARRELL, A., W. BENNETT & R. DEVLIN. 1997. Growth-enhanced transgenic salmon can be inferior swimmers. Can. J. Zool. 75: 335-337.
131. IMMELMANN, K. 1969. Song development in the zebra finch and other estrilid finches. In Bird Vocalizations. R. A. Hinde, Ed: 61-74. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
132. SLATER, P.J.B., L.A. EALES & N.S. CLAYTON. 1988. Song learning in zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata): Progress and prospects. Adv. Study Behav. 18: 1-34.