The vocal sac increases call rate in the túngara frog Physalaemus pustulosus

Physiological and Biochemical Zoology

Volumn 79, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 708-719

  Pauly, Gregory B ^a   Bernal, Ximena E ^a   Rand, A Stanley ^b   Ryan, Michael J ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

^b SMITHSONIAN TROPICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Panama)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTIC ARRAY; ACOUSTIC METHOD; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FROG; VOCALIZATION;

ACOUSTICS; ANIMAL; ARTICLE; FROG; HISTOLOGY; MALE; PHYSIOLOGY; VOCALIZATION;

ACOUSTICS; ANIMALS; MALE; RANIDAE; VOCALIZATION, ANIMAL;

ANURA; PHYSALAEMUS PUSTULOSUS;

EID: 33746276150     PISSN: 15222152     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/504613     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Andersson M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
2. Bosch J., A.S. Rand, and M.J. Ryan. 2000. Signal variation and call preferences for whine frequency in the túngara frog, Physalaemus pustulosus. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 49:62-66.
3. Bradbury J.W. and S.L. Vehrencamp. 1998. Principles of Animal Communication. Sinauer, Sunderland, MA.
4. Bucher T.L., M.J. Ryan, and G.A. Bartholomew. 1982. Oxygen consumption during resting, calling, and nest building in the frog Physalaemus pustulosus. Physiol Zool 55:10-22.
5. Capranica R.R. and A.J.M. Moffat. 1983. Neurobehavioral correlates of sound communication in anurans. Pp. 701-730 in J.P. Ewert, R.R. Capranica, and D.J. Ingle, eds. Advances in Vertebrate Neuroethology. Plenum, New York.
6. de Jongh H.J. and C. Gans. 1969. On the mechanism of respiration in the bullfrog, Rana catesbiana: a reassessment. J Morphol 127:259-290.
7. Dudley R. and A.S. Rand. 1991. Sound production and vocal sac inflation in the túngara frog, Physalaemus pustulosus (Leptodactylidae). Copeia 1991:460-470.
8. Gans C. 1973. Sound production in the Salientia: mechanism and evolution of the emitter. Am Zool 13:1179-1194.
9. Gerhardt H.C. 1994. The evolution of vocalization in frogs and toads. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 25:293-324.
10. Gerhardt H. C. and F. Huber. 2002. Acoustic Communication in Insects and Anurans: Common Problems and Diverse Solutions. University of Chicago Press, London.
11. Gridi-Papp M. 2003. Mechanism, Behavior, and Evolution of Calling in Four North American Treefrogs. PhD diss. University of Texas, Austin.
12. Hedges S.B. 1987. Vocalization and habitat preference of the Jamaican treefrog, Hyla marianae (Anura, Hylidae). Caribb J Sci 23:380-384.
13. Hödl W. and A. Amézquita. 2001. Visual signaling in anuran amphibians. Pp. 121-141 in M.J. Ryan, ed. Anuran Communication. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.
14. Jaramillo C., A.S. Rand, R. Ibáñez, and R. Dudley. 1997. Elastic structures in the vocalization apparatus of the túngara frog, Physalaemus pustulosus (Leptodactylidae). J Morphol 233:287-295.
15. Liu C.C. 1935. Types of vocal sac in the Salientia. Proc Boston Soc Nat Hist 41:19-40.
16. Lüddecke H. 1999. Behavioral aspects of the reproductive biology of the Andean frog Colostethus palmatus (Amphibia: Dendrobatidae). Rev Acad Colomb Cienc 23(suppl.):303-316.
17. Martin W.F. 1971. Mechanics of sound production in toads of the genus Bufo: passive elements. J Exp Zool 176:273-293.
18. -. 1972. Evolution of vocalization in the genus Bufo. Pp. 279-309 in W.F. Blair, ed. Evolution in the Genus Bufo. University of Texas Press, Austin.
19. Martin W.F. and C. Gans. 1972. Muscular control of the vocal tract during release signaling in the toad Bufo valliceps. J Morphol 137:1-27.
20. Narins P.M., W. Hödl, and D.S. Grabul. 2003. Bimodal signal requisite for agonistic behavior in a dart-poison frog, Epipedobates femoralis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:577-580.
21. Purgue A.P. 1995. The Sound Broadcasting System of the Bullfrog (Rana catesbiana). PhD diss. University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
22. Rand A.S. and R. Dudley. 1993. Frogs in helium: the anuran vocal sac is not a cavity resonator. Physiol Zool 66:793-806.
23. Rosenthal G.G., A.S. Rand, and M.J. Ryan. 2004. The vocal sac as a visual cue in anuran communication: an experimental analysis using video playback. Anim Behav 68:55-58.
24. Ryan M.J. 1985a. Energetic efficiency of vocalization by the frog Physalaemus pustulosus. J Exp Biol 116:47-52.
25. -. 1985b. The Túngara Frog: A Study in Sexual Selection and Communication. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
26. -. 2001. Anuran Communication. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.
27. Ryan M.J. and A. Keddy-Hector. 1992. Directional patterns of female mate choice and the role of sensory biases. Am Nat 139(suppl.):S4-S35.
28. Ryan M.J. and A.S. Rand. 2003. Sexual selection in female perceptual space: how female túngara frogs perceive and respond to complex population variation in acoustic mating signals. Evolution 57:2608-2618.
29. Savitzky A.H., K.A. Roberts, and A.S. Rand. 1999. Organization of elastic fibers in the vocal sacs of frogs. Am Zool 39:98A.
30. Schlaepfer M.A. and R. Figeroa-Sandí. 1998. Female reciprocal calling in a Costa Rican leaf-litter frog, Eleutherodactylus podiciferus. Copeia 1998:1076-1080.
31. Tyler M.J. 1971. The phylogenetic significance of vocal sac structure in hylid frogs. Univ Kans Publ Mus Nat Hist 19:319-360.
32. -. 1974. Superficial Mandibular Musculature and Vocal Sac Structure in the Anura. MS thesis. University of Adelaide.
33. Watkins W.A., E.R. Baylor, and A.T. Bowen. 1970. The call of Eleutherodactylus johnstonei, the whistling frog of Bermuda. Copeia 1970:558-561.
34. Wells K.D. 1977. The social behaviour of anuran amphibians. Anim Behav 25:666-693.
35. -. 2001. The energetics of calling in frogs. Pp. 121-141 in M.J. Ryan, ed. Anuran Communication. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC.