Do female frogs exploit inadvertent social information to locate breeding aggregations?

Canadian Journal of Zoology

Volumn 85, Issue 9, 2007, Pages 921-932

  Swanson, E M ^a   Tekmen, S M ^a   Bee, M A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTIC WAVES; BYPRODUCTS; DISTANCE MEASUREMENT; SENSORY PERCEPTION;

BREEDING AGGREGATIONS; CONSPICUOUS SIGNALS; PREDICTABILITY;

ANIMALS;

AUDITORY CUE; BREEDING SEASON; CALLING BEHAVIOR; FEMALE BEHAVIOR; FROG; REPRODUCTIVE BEHAVIOR; SIGNALING; SPATIAL COGNITION;

ANURA; BUFO AMERICANUS; HYLA; HYLA CHRYSOSCELIS;

EID: 37249031479     PISSN: 00084301     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/Z07-074     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Ahlering, M.A., and Faaborg, J. 2006. Avian habitat management meets conspecific attraction: If you build it, will they come? Auk, 123: 301-312. doi:10.1642/0004-8038(2006)123[301:AHMMCA] 2.0.CO;2.
2. Alatalo, R.V., Lundberg, A., and Bjorklund, M. 1982. Can the song of male birds attract other males: an experiment with the pied flycatcher Ficedula hypoleuca. Bird Behav. 4: 42-45.
3. Arak, A. 1983. Sexual selection by male-male competition in natterjack toad choruses. Nature (London), 306: 261-262. doi:10.1038/306261a0.
4. Bee, M.A. 2007a. Selective phonotaxis by male wood frogs (Rana sylvatica) to the sound of a chorus. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 61: 955-966. doi:10.1007/s00265-006-0324-8.
5. Bee, M.A. 2007b. Sound source segregation in grey treefrogs: spatial release from masking by the sound of a chorus. Anim. Behav. 74: 549-558. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.12.012.
6. Bee, M.A., and Swanson, E.M. 2007. Auditory masking of anuran advertisement calls by road traffic noise. Anim. Behav. In press.
7. Bogert, C.M. 1960. The influence of sounds on the behavior of amphibians and reptiles. In Animal sounds and communication. Edited by W.E. Lanyon and W.N. Tavolga. American Institute of Biological Sciences, Washington, D.C. pp. 137-320.
8. Bradbury, J.W., and Vehrencamp, S.L. 1998. Principles of animal communication. Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland, Mass.
9. Bush, S.L., Gerhardt, H.C., and Schul, J. 2002. Pattern recognition and call preferences in treefrogs (Anura: Hylidae): a quantitative analysis using a no-choice paradigm. Anim. Behav. 63: 7-14. doi:10.1006/anbe.2001.1880.
10. Clutton-Brock, T.H., and Albon, S.D. 1979. The roaring of red deer and the evolution of honest advertisement. Behaviour, 69: 145-170.
11. Danchin, E., Giraldeau, L.A., Valone, T.J., and Wagner, R.H. 2004. Public information: from nosy neighbors to cultural evolution. Science (Washington, D.C.), 305: 487-491. doi:10.1126/science.1098254.
12. Davies, N.B., and Halliday, T.R. 1978. Deep croaks and fighting assessment in toads Bufo bufo. Nature (London), 274: 683-685. doi:10.1038/274683a0.
13. Diego-Rasilla, F.J., and Luengo, R.M. 2004. Heterospecific call recognition and phonotaxis in the orientation behavior of the marbled newt, Triturus marmoratus. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 55: 556-560. doi:10.1007/s00265-003-0740-y.
14. Diego-Rasilla, F.J., and Luengo, R.M. 2007. Acoustic orientation in the palmate newt, Lissotriton helveticus. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 61: 1329-1335. doi:10.1007/s00265-007-0363-9.
15. Donahue, M.J. 2006. Allee effects and conspecific cueing jointly lead to conspecific attraction. Oecologia (Berl.), 149: 33-43. doi:10.1007/s00442-006-0419-y.
16. Fairchild, L. 1984. Male reproductive tactics in an explosive breeding toad population. Am. Zool. 24: 407-418.
17. Fisher, N.I. 1993. Statistical analysis of circular data. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
18. Fletcher, R.J. 2006. Emergent properties of conspecific attraction in fragmented landscapes. Am. Nat. 168: 207-219. doi:10.1086/505764.
19. Forester, D.C., and Thompson, K.J. 1998. Gauntlet behaviour as a male sexual tactic in the American toad (Amphibia: Bufonidae). Behaviour, 135: 99-119.
20. Forsman, A., and Hagman, M. 2006. Calling is an honest indicator of paternal genetic quality in poison frogs. Evolution, 60: 2148-2157.
21. Gerhardt, H.C. 1975. Sound pressure levels and radiation patterns of vocalizations of some North American frogs and toads. J. Comp. Physiol. 102: 1-12. doi:10.1007/BF00657481.
22. Gerhardt, H.C. 1995. Phonotaxis in female frogs and toads: execution and design of experiments. In Methods in comparative psychoacoustics. Edited by G.M. Klump, R.J. Dooling, R.R. Fay, and W.C. Stebbins. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, Switzerland, pp. 209-220.
23. Gerhardt, H.C. 2001. Acoustic communication in two groups of closely related treefrogs. Adv. Stud. Behav. 30: 99-167. doi:10.1016/S0065- 3454(01)80006-1.
24. Gerhardt, H.C., and Bee, M.A. 2006. Recognition and localization of acoustic signals. In Hearing and sound communication in amphibians. Edited by P.M. Narins, A.S. Feng, R.R. Fay, and A.N. Popper. Springer-Verlag, New York. pp. 113-146.
25. Gerhardt, H.C., and Huber, F. 2002. Acoustic communication in insects and anurans: common problems and diverse solutions. Chicago University Press, Chicago.
26. Gerhardt, H.C., and Klump, G.M. 1988. Phonotactic responses and selectivity of barking treefrogs (Hyla gratiosa) to chorus sounds. J. Comp. Physiol. A, 163: 795-802. doi:10.1007/BF00604056.
27. Greenhouse, S.W., and Geisser, S. 1959. On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika, 24: 95-112. doi:10.1007/BF02289823.
28. Holloway, A.K., Cannatella, D.C., Gerhardt, H.C., and Hillis, D.M. 2006. Polyploids with different origins and ancestors form a single sexual polyploid species. Am. Nat. 167: E88-E101. doi:10.1086/501079.
29. Howard, R.D. 1988. Sexual selection on male body size and mating behavior in American toads, Bufo americanus. Anim. Behav. 36: 1796-1808. doi:10.1016/S0003-3472(88)80119-2.
30. Howard, R.D., and Palmer, J.G. 1995. Female choice in Bufo americanus: effects of dominant frequency and call order. Copeia, 1995: 212-217. doi:10.2307/1446818.
31. Howard, R.D., and Young, J.R. 1998. Individual variation in male vocal traits and female mating preferences in Bufo americanus. Anim. Behav. 55: 1165-1179. doi:10.1006/anbe.1997.0683.
32. Johnson, J.R., and Semlitsch, R.D. 2003. Defining core habitat of local populations of the gray treefrog (Hyla versicolor) based on choice of oviposition site. Oecologia (Berl.), 137: 205-210. doi:10.1007/s00442- 003-1339-8.
33. Kovach Computing Services. 2006. Oriana. Version 2.02 [computer program]. Kovach Computing, Anglesey, Wales, UK.
34. Kruse, K.C. 1981. Mating success, fertilization potential, and male body size in the American toad (Bufo americanus). Herpetologica, 37: 228-233.
35. Loftus-Hills, J.J., and Littlejohn, M.J. 1971. Mating-call sound intensities of anuran amphibians. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 49: 1327-1329. doi:10.1121/1.1912503.
36. Mills, A.M., Rising, J.D., and Jackson, D.A. 2006. Conspecific attraction during establishment of Least Flycatcher clusters. J. Field Ornithol. 77: 34-38. doi:10.1111/j.1557-9263.2006.00009.x.
37. Murphy, C.G. 2003. The cause of correlations between nightly numbers of male and female barking treefrogs (Hyla gratiosa) attending choruses. Behav. Ecol. 14: 274-281. doi:10.1093/beheco/14.2.274.
38. Narins, P.M., and Zelick, R. 1988. The effects of noise on auditory processing and behavior in amphibians. In The evolution of the amphibian auditory system. Edited by B. Fritzsch, M.J. Ryan, W. Wilczynski, T.E. Hetherington, and W. Walkowiak. Wiley & Sons, New York. pp. 511-536.
39. Nocera, J.J., Forbes, G.J., and Giraldeau, L.A. 2006. Inadvertent social information in breeding site selection of natal dispersing birds. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 273: 349-355. doi:10.1098/rspb.2005.3318.
40. Oldham, R.S. 1966. Spring movements in the American toad, Bufo americanus. Can. J. Zool. 44: 63-100.
41. Oldham, R.S. 1967. Orienting mechanisms of the green frog, Rana clamitans. Ecology, 48: 477-491. doi:10.2307/1932683.
42. Penna, M., and Solis, R. 1998. Frog call intensities and sound propagation in the South American temperate forest region. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 42: 371-381. doi:10.1007/s002650050452.
43. Ptacek, M.B., Gerhardt, H.C., and Sage, R.D. 1994. Speciation by polyploidy in treefrogs: multiple origins of the tetraploid, Hyla versicolor. Evolution, 48: 898-908. doi:10.2307/2410495.
44. Ryan, M.J. 2001. Anuran communication. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
45. Schul, J., and Bush, S.L. 2002. Non-parallel coevolution of sender and receiver in the acoustic communication system of treefrogs. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 269: 1847-1852. doi:10.1098/rspb.2002.2092.
46. Sinsch, U. 1990. Migration and orientation in anuran amphibians. Ethol. Ecol. Evol. 2: 65-79.
47. Sinsch, U. 1991. The orientation behavior of amphibians. Herpetol. J. 1: 541-544.
48. Sinsch, U. 1992. Sex-biased site fidelity and orientation behavior in reproductive natterjack toads (Bufo calamita). Ethol. Ecol. Evol. 4: 15-32.
49. Sinsch, U. 2006. Orientation and navigation in Amphibia. Mar. Freshw. Behav. Physiol. 39: 65-71. doi:10.1080/10236240600562794.
50. Smith, M.A., and Green, D.M. 2005. Dispersal and the metapopulation paradigm in amphibian ecology and conservation: are all amphibian populations metapopulations? Ecography, 28: 110-128. doi:10.1111/j.0906-7590.2005. 04042.x.
51. StatSoft Inc. 2004. STATISTICA® Version 7.0 [computer program]. StatSoft Inc., Tulsa, Okla.
52. Sullivan, B.K. 1992. Sexual selection and calling behavior in the American toad (Bufo americanus). Copeia, 1992: 1-7. doi:10.2307/1446530.
53. Ward, M.P., and Schlossberg, S. 2004. Conspecific attraction and the conservation of territorial songbirds. Conserv. Biol. 18: 519-525. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00494.x.
54. Weir, L.A., and Mossman, M.J. 2005. North American amphibian monitoring prgram (NAAMP). In Amphibian declines: conservation status of United States species. Edited by M.J. Lannoo. University of California Press, Berkeley. pp. 307-313.
55. Welch, A.M., Semlitsch, R.D., and Gerhardt, H.C. 1998. Call duration as an indicator of genetic quality in male gray treefrogs. Science (Washington, D.C.), 280: 1928-1930. doi:10.1126/science.280.5371.1928.
56. Wells, K.D. 1977. The social behavior of anuran amphibians. Anim. Behav. 25: 666-693. doi:10.1016/0003-3472(77)90118-X.
57. Wells, K.D., and Schwartz, J.J. 2006. The behavioral ecology of anuran communication. In Hearing and sound communication in amphibians. Edited by P.M. Narins, A.S. Feng, R.R. Fay, and A.N. Popper. Springer-Verlag, New York. pp. 44-86.
58. Wells, K.D., and Taigen, T.L. 1984. Reproductive behavior and aerobic capacities of male American toads (Bufo americanus): Is behavior constrained by physiology? Herpetologica, 40: 292-298.
59. Zar, J.H. 1999. Biostatistical analysis. Prentice-Hall Inc., Upper Saddle River, N.J.