Sex differences in response to nonconspecific advertisement calls: receiver permissiveness in male and female túngara frogs

Animal Behaviour

Volumn 73, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 955-964

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

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

^b SMITHSONIAN TROPICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Panama)

Author keywords

acoustic communication; Physalaemus pustulosus; sexual selection; signal recognition; t ngara frog; vocal competition

Indexed keywords

CALLING BEHAVIOR; FITNESS; FOOTPRINT; FROG; MATING BEHAVIOR; SEX-RELATED DIFFERENCE; SEXUAL SELECTION; SIGNALING;

ANURA; PHYSALAEMUS PUSTULOSUS;

EID: 34250171234     PISSN: 00033472     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.10.018     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Allan S.E., and Simmons A.M. Temporal features mediating call recognition in the green treefrog, Hyla cinerea: amplitude modulation. Animal Behaviour 47 (1994) 1073-1086
2. Bee M.A. Experience-based plasticity of acoustically evoked aggression in a territorial frog. Journal of Comparative Physiology A 189 (2003) 485-496
3. Beletsky L.D., Chao S., and Smith D.G. An investigation of song-based species recognition in the red-winged blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus). Behaviour 73 (1980) 189-203
4. Bosch J., Rand A.S., and Ryan M.J. Acoustic competition in Physalaemus pustulosus, a differential response to calls of relative frequency. Ethology 106 (2000) 865-871
5. Bosch J., Rand A.S., and Ryan M.J. Signal variation and call preferences for whine frequency in the túngara frog, Physalaemus pustulosus. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 49 (2000) 62-66
6. Bosch J., Rand A.S., and Ryan M.J. Response to variation in chuck frequency by male and female túngara frogs. Herpetologica 58 (2002) 95-103
7. Boul K.E., and Ryan M.J. Population variation of complex advertisement calls in Physalaemus petersi and comparative laryngeal morphology. Copeia 2004 (2004) 624-631
8. Brenowitz E.A. Aggressive response of red-winged blackbirds to mockingbird song imitation. Auk 99 (1982) 584-586
9. Cannatella D.C., and Duellman W.E. Leptodactylid frogs of the Physalaemus pustulosus species group. Copeia 1984 (1984) 902-921
10. Cannatella D.C., Hillis D.M., Chippendale P.T., Weigt L.A., Rand A.S., and Ryan M.J. Phylogeny of frogs of the Physalaemus pustulosus species group, with an examination of data incongruence. Systematic Biology 47 (1998) 311-355
11. Capranica R.R. The Evoked Vocal Response of the Bullfrog: a Study of Communication by Sound (1965), MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts
12. Cynx J., and Nottebohm F. Role of gender, season, and familiarity in discrimination of conspecific song by zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata). Neurobiology 89 (1992) 1368-1371
13. Dabelsteen T., and Pedersen S.B. Do females blackbirds, Turdus merula, decode song in the same way as males?. Animal Behaviour 36 (1988) 1858-1860
14. Dabelsteen T., and Pedersen S.B. Song-based species discrimination and behaviour assessment by female blackbirds, Turdus merula. Animal Behaviour 45 (1993) 757-771
15. Gerhardt H.C., and Huber F. Acoustic Communication in Insects and Anurans (2002), University of Chicago Press, Chicago
16. Greenfield M.D., and Rand A.S. Frogs have rules: selective attention algorithms regulate chorusing in Physalaemus pustulosus (Leptodactylidae). Ethology 106 (2000) 331-347
17. Hillis D.M., and Wilcox T.P. Phylogeny of the New World true frogs (Rana). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 34 (2005) 299-314
18. Kroodsma D.E. Making ecological sense of song development by songbirds. In: Hauser M.D., and Konishi M. (Eds). The Design of Animal Communication (1999), MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts 319-342
19. La Marca E. Catálogo taxonómico, biogeográfico y bibliográfico de las ranas de Venezuela. Cuadernos Geograficos. Universidad de los Andes 1 (1992) 1-197
20. Littlejohn M.J., and Martin A.A. Acoustic interaction between two species of leptodactylid frogs. Animal Behaviour 17 (1969) 785-791
21. McGregor P.K., and Dabelsteen T. Communication networks. In: Kroodsma D.E., and Miller E.H. (Eds). Ecology and Evolution of Acoustic Communication in Birds (1996), Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York 409-425
22. Nelson D.A., and Soha J.A. Male and female white-crowned sparrows respond differently to geographic variation in song. Behaviour 141 (2004) 53-69
23. Penna M., Feng A.S., and Narins P.M. Temporal selectivity of evoked vocal responses of Batrachyla antartandica (Amphibia: Leptodactylidae). Animal Behaviour 54 (1997) 833-848
24. Ratcliffe L., and Otter K. Sex differences in song recognition. In: Kroodsma D.E., and Miller E.H. (Eds). Ecology and Evolution of Acoustic Communication in Birds (1996), Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York 339-355
25. Ron S.R., Cannatella D.C., and Coloma L.A. Two new species of Physalaemus (Anura: Leptodactylidae) from western Ecuador. Herpetologica 60 (2004) 261-275
26. Ron S.R., Santos J.C., and Cannatella D.C. Phylogeny of the túngara frog genus Engystomops (=Physalaemus pustulosus species group; Anura; Leptodactylidae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 39 (2006) 392-403
27. Ryan M.J. Female mate choice in a Neotropical frog. Science 209 (1980) 523-525
28. Ryan M.J. The Túngara Frog: a Study in Sexual Selection and Communication (1985), University of Chicago Press, Chicago
29. Ryan M.J., and Rand A.S. Phylogenetic patterns of behavioral mate recognition systems in the Physalaemus pustulosus species group (Anura: Leptodactylidae): the role of ancestral and derived characters and sensory exploitation. Linnean Society Symposium Series 14 (1993) 251-267
30. Ryan M.J., and Rand A.S. Sexual selection and signal evolution: the ghost of biases past. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B 340 (1993) 187-195
31. Ryan M.J., and Rand A.S. Female responses to ancestral advertisement calls in túngara frogs. Science 269 (1995) 390-392
32. Ryan M.J., and Rand A.S. Evoked vocal responses in male túngara frogs: preexisting biases in male responses?. Animal Behaviour 56 (1998) 1509-1516
33. Ryan M.J., and Rand A.S. Phylogenetic influence on mating call preferences in female túngara frogs, Physalaemus pustulosus. Animal Behaviour 57 (1999) 945-956
34. Ryan M.J., and Rand A.S. Sexual selection and female preference space: how female túngara frogs perceive and respond to complex population variation in acoustic mating signals. Evolution 57 (2003) 2608-2618
35. Ryan M.J., Rand W., Hurd P.L., Phelps S.M., and Rand A.S. Generalization in response to mate recognition signals. American Naturalist 161 (2003) 380-394
36. Schwartz J.J., and Wells K.D. An experimental study of acoustic interference between two species of Neotropical frogs. Animal Behaviour 31 (1983) 181-190
37. Schwartz J.J., and Wells K.D. The influences of background noise on the behavior of a Neotropical treefrog, Hyla ebraccata. Herpetologica 39 (1983) 121-129
38. Schwartz J.J., and Wells K.D. Interspecific acoustic interactions of the Neotropical treefrog Hyla ebraccata. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 14 (1984) 211-224
39. Schwartz J.J., and Wells K.D. Vocal behavior of the Neotropical treefrog Hyla phlebodes. Herpetologica 40 (1984) 452-463
40. Schwartz J.J., and Wells K.D. Intra- and interspecific vocal behavior of the Neotropical treefrog Hyla microcephala. Copeia 1985 (1985) 27-38
41. Searcy W.A., and Brenowitz E.A. Sexual differences in species recognition of avian song. Nature 332 (1988) 152-154
42. Searcy W.A., and Nowicki S. Male-male competition and female choice in the evolution of vocal signaling. In: Espmark Y., Amudsen T., and Rosenqvist G. (Eds). Animal Signals: Signaling and Signal Design in Animal Communication (2000), Tapir Academic Press, Trondheim, Norway 301-315
43. Searcy W.A., Balaban E., Canady R.A., Clark S.J., Runfeldt S., and Williams H. Responsiveness of male swamp sparrows to temporal organization of song. Auk 98 (1981) 613-615
44. Searcy W.A., Marler P., and Peters S.S. Species song discrimination in adult female song and swamp sparrows. Animal Behaviour 29 (1981) 997-1003
45. Trivers R.L. Parental investment and sexual selection. In: Campbell B. (Ed). Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man (1972), Aldine-Atherton, Chicago 136-179
46. Vicario D.S., Naqvi N.H., and Ranksin J.N. Sex differences in discrimination of vocal communication signals in a songbird. Animal Behaviour 61 (2001) 805-817
47. Walkowiak W., and Brzoska J. Significance of spectral and temporal call parameters in the auditory communication of male grass frogs. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 11 (1982) 247-252
48. Wiley R.H. Errors, exaggeration, and deception in animal communication. In: Real L.R. (Ed). Behavioral Mechanisms in Evolutionary Ecology (1994), University of Chicago Press, Chicago 157-189
49. Wilkinson L. SYSTAT: the System for Statistics (1991), SYSTAT, Evanston, Illinois
50. Witte K., Farris H.E., Ryan M.J., and Wilczynski W. How cricket frog females deal with a noisy world: habitat-related differences in auditory tuning. Behavioral Ecology 16 (2005) 571-579