Note types and coding in parid vocalizations. I: The chick-a-dee call of the black-capped chickadee (Poecile atricapillus)

Canadian Journal of Zoology

Volumn 82, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 769-779

  Charrier, Isabelle ^a   Bloomfield, Laurie L ^a   Sturdy, Christopher I ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; FREQUENCY MODULATION; SENSORY PERCEPTION; SPEECH ANALYSIS;

ACOUSTIC FEATURES; BIOACOUSTIC ANALYSIS; BIRDS; VOCALIZATION;

SPEECH RECOGNITION;

PASSERINE; RECOGNITION; VOCALIZATION;

AVES; GALLUS GALLUS; PARIDAE; PARUS ATRICAPILLUS; PASSERIFORMES; POECILE; POECILE ATRICAPILLUS;

EID: 4544223599     PISSN: 00084301     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/Z04-045     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Aubin, T. 1989. The role of frequency modulation in the process of distress call recognition by the starling (Sturnus vulgaris). Behaviour, 108: 57-72.
2. Aubin, T., and Jouventin, P. 2002. How to vocally identify kin in a crowd: the penguin model. Adv. Study Behav. 31: 243-277.
3. Becker, P.H. 1982. The coding of species-specific characteristics in bird sounds. In Acoustic communication in birds. Edited by D.E. Kroodsman and E.H. Miller. Academic Press, New York. pp. 213-252.
4. Beer, C.G. 1979. Vocal communication between laughing gull parents and chicks. Behaviour, 78: 118-148.
5. Bloomfield, L.L., Sturdy, C.B., Phillmore, L.S., and Weisman, R.G. 2003. Open-ended categorization of chick-a-dee calls by black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapilla). J. Comp. Psychol. 117: 290-301.
6. Brémond, J.-C. 1986. Role of the carrier frequency in the territorial song of oscines. Ethology, 73: 128-135.
7. Catchpole, C.K., and Slater, P.J.B. 1995. Bird song: biological themes and variations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
8. Charrier, I., Jouventin, P., Mathevon, N., and Aubin, T. 2001a. Potentiality of individual identity coding depends on call type in the South Polar Skua Catharacta mccormicki. Polar Biol. 24: 378-382.
9. Charrier, I., Mathevon, N., Jouventin, P., and Aubin, T. 2001b. Acoustic communication in a Black-headed Gull colony: how do chicks identify their parents'? Ethology, 107: 964-974.
10. Charrier, I., Mathevon, N., and Jouventin, P. 2002. How does a fur seal mother recognize the voice of her pup? An experimental study of Arctocephalus tropicalis. J. Exp. Biol. 205: 603-612.
11. Charrier, L, Mathevon, N., and Jouventin, P. 2003. Vocal signature recognition of mothers by fur seal pups. Anim. Behav. 65: 543-550.
12. Dooling, R.J. 1982, Auditory perception in birds. In Acoustic communication in birds. Edited by D.E. Kroodsma and E.H. Miller. Academic Press, New York. pp. 95-130.
13. Doupe, A.J., and Kuhl, P.K. 1999. Birdsong and human speech: common themes and mechanisms. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 22: 567-631.
14. Engineering Design. 2003. SIGNAL. Version 4.0 [computer program]. Engineering Design, Belmont, Mass.
15. Falls, J.B. 1963. Properties of bird song eliciting responses from territorial males. Proc. Int. Ornithol. Congr. 13: 259-273.
16. Falls, J.B. 1982. Individual recognition by sounds in birds. Edited by D.E. Kroodsma and E.H. Miller. Academic Press, New York. pp. 237-278.
17. Ficken, M.S. 1981. Food finding in black-capped chickadees: altruistic communication? Wilson Bull. 93: 393-394.
18. Ficken, M.S., Ficken, R.W., and Witkin, S.R. 1978. Vocal repertoire of the black-capped chickadee. Auk, 95: 34-48.
19. Ficken, M.S., Hailman, E.D., and Hailman, J.P. 1994. The chick-a-dee call system of the Mexican chickadee. Condor, 96: 70-82.
20. Fitch, W.T. 1999. Acoustic exaggeration of size in birds by tracheal elongation: Comparative and theoretical analyses. J. Zool. (Lond.), 248: 31-49.
21. Freeberg, T.M., and Lucas, J.R. 2002. Receivers respond differently to chick-a-dee calls varying in note composition in Carolina chickadees (Poecile carolinensis). Anim. Behav. 63: 837-845.
22. Gaddis, P.K. 1985. Structure and variability in the vocal repertoire of the mountain chickadee. Wilson Bull. No. 97. pp. 30-46.
23. Griffiths, R. 2000. Sex identification using DNA markers. In Molecular methods in ecology. Edited by A.J. Baker. Blackwell Science, London. pp. 295-321.
24. Hailman, J.P., and Ficken, M.S. 1996. Combinatorial animal communication with computable syntax: chick-a-dee calling qualifies as 'language' by structural linguistics. Anim. Behav. 34: 1899-1901.
25. Hailman, J.P., Ficken, M.S., and Ficken, R.W. 1985. The 'chick-a-dee' calls of Parus atricapillus: a recombinant system of animal communication compared with written English. Semiotica, 56: 191-224.
26. Holland, J., Dabelsteen, T., and Paris, A.L. 2000. Coding in the song of the wren: importance of rhythmicity, syntax and element structure. Anim. Behav. 60: 463-470.
27. Hughes, M., Nowicki, S., and Lohr, B. 1998. Call learning in black-capped chickadees (Parus atricapillus): the role of experience in the development of 'chick-a-dee' calls. Ethology, 104: 232-249.
28. Insley, S.J. 1992. Mother-offspring separation and acoustic stereotypy: a comparison of call morphology in two species of pinnipeds. Behaviour, 120: 103-121.
29. Jouventin, P. 1982. Visual and vocal signals in penguins, their evolution and adaptive characters. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
30. Jouventin, P., Guillotin, M., and Cornet, A. 1979. Le chant du Manchot Empereur et sa signification adaptative. Behaviour, 70: 231-250.
31. Jouventin, P., Aubin, T., and Lengagne, T. 1999. Finding a parent in a king penguin colony: the acoustic system of individual recognition. Anim. Behav. 57: 1175-1183.
32. Kelemen, G. 1963. Comparative anatomy and performance of the vocal organ in vertebrates. In Acoustic behaviour of animals. Edited by R.G. Busnel. Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. pp. 489-521.
33. Keppel, G. 1991. Design and analysis, a researcher's handbook. Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
34. Lambrechts, M., and Dhondt, A. 1995. Individual voice discrimination in birds. In Current Ornithology. Edited by D.M. Power. Plenum Press, New York.
35. Lengagne, T., Lauga, J., and Jouventin, P. 1998. A method of independent time and frequency decomposition of bioacoustic signals: inter-individual recognition in four species of penguins. C.R. Acad. Sci. Ser. III Sci. Vie. 320: 885-891.
36. Lohr, B., Weisman, R., and Nowicki, S. 1994. The role of pitch cues in song recognition by Carolina chickadees (Parus carolinensis). Behaviour, 130: 1-15.
37. Mammen, D.L., and Nowicki, S. 1981. Individual differences and within-flock convergence in chickadee calls. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 9: 179-186.
38. Mathevon, N. 1996. What parameters can be used for individual acoustic recognition by the greater flamingo? C.R. Acad. Sci. Ser. III Sci. Vie. 310: 29-32.
39. Mathevon, N., and Aubin, T. 2001. Sound-based species-specific recognition in blackcap Sylvia atricapilla shows high tolerance to signal modifications. Behaviour, 138: 511-524.
40. Mathevon, N., Charrier, I., and Jouventin, P. 2003. Potential for individual recognition in acoustic signals: a comparative study of two gulls with different nesting patterns. C.R. Biol. 326: 329-337.
41. Moser, B.K., and Stevens, G.R. 1992. Homogeneity of variance in the two-sample means test. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 46: 19-20.
42. Moser, B.K., Stevens, G.R., and Watts, C.L. 1989. The two-sample t-test versus Satterthwaite's approximate F test. Commun. Stat. Theory Methods, 18: 3963-3975.
43. Naguib, M. 1995. Auditory distance assessment of singing conspecifics in Carolina wrens: the role of reverberation and frequency-dependent attenuation. Anim. Behav. 50: 1297-1307.
44. Nowicki, S. 1983. Flock-specific recognition of chickadee calls. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 12: 317-320.
45. Nowicki, S. 1989. Vocal plasticity in captive black-capped chickadees: the acoustic basis and rate of call convergence. Anim. Behav. 37: 64-73.
46. Nowicki, S., and Nelson, D.A. 1990. Defining natural categories in acoustic signals: comparison of three methods applied to 'chick-a-dee' call notes. Ethology, 86: 89-101.
47. Phillips, A.V., and Stirling, I. 2000. Vocal individuality in mother and pup South American fur seals, Arctocephalus australis. Mar. Mamm. Sci. 16: 592-616.
48. Phillmore, L.S., Sturdy, C.B., Turyk, M., and Weisman, R.G. 2002. Discrimination of individual vocalizations by black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapillus). Anim. Learn. Behav. 30: 43-52.
49. Phillmore, L., Sturdy, C., and Weisman, R.G. 2003. Does reduced social contact affect discrimination of distance cues and individual vocalizations? Anim. Behav. 65: 911-922.
50. Pyle, P. 1997. Identification guide to North American birds. Slate Creek, Bolinas, Calif.
51. Ratcliffe, L.M., and Weisman, R.G. 1985. Frequency shift in the fee-bee song of the black-capped chickadee. Condor, 87: 555-556.
52. Robisson, P., Aubin, T., and Brémond, J. 1993. Individuality in the voice of emperor penguin Aptenodytes forsteri: adaptation to a noisy environment. Ethology, 94: 279-290.
53. Slater, P.J.B. 2003. Fifty years of bird song research: a case study in animal behaviour. Anim. Behav. 65: 633-639.
54. Smith, S.M. 1991. The black-capped chickadee. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, N.Y.
55. SPSS, Inc. 2002. SPSS. Version 11.5 [computer program]. SPSS, Inc., Chicago.
56. Smith, S.T. 1972. Communication and other social behavior in Parus carolinensis. Publ. No. 11, Nuttall Ornithological Club, Cambridge, Mass.
57. Sokal, R.R., and Rohlf, F.J. 1995. Biometry. 3rd ed. W.H. Freeman and Co., New York.
58. StatSoft, Inc. 2002. STATISTICA for Windows. Version 6 [computer program]. StatSoft, Inc. Tulsa, Okla.
59. Stirling, I., and Warneke, R.M. 1971. Implications of a comparison of the airborne vocalizations and some aspects of the behaviour of the two Australian fur seals, Artocephalus ssp., on the evolution and present taxonomy of the genus. Aust. J. Zool. 19: 227-241.
60. Sturdy, C.B., Phillmore, L.S., and Weisman, R.G. 2000. Call-note discrimination in black-capped chickadees (Poecile atricapillus). J. Comp. Psychol. 114: 357-364.
61. Suthers, R.A. 1994. Variable asymmetry and resonances in the avian vocal tract: a structural basis for individually distinct vocalizations. J. Comp. Physiol. A Sens. Neural Behav. Physiol. 175: 457-466.
62. Toothaker, L.E. 1993. Multiple comparison procedures. Sage, Newbury Park, Calif.
63. Trillmich, F. 1981. Mutual mother-pup recognition in Galapagos fur seals and sea lions : cues used and functional significance. Behaviour, 78: 21-42.
64. Vicario, D.S., Raksin, J.N., Naqvi, N.H., Thande, N., and Simpson, H.B. 2002. The relationship between perception and production in songbird vocal imitation: what learned calls can teach us. J. Comp. Physiol. A Sens. Neural. Behav. Physiol. 188: 897-908.
65. Weisman, R.G., Njegovan, M., Sturdy, C.B., Phillmore, L.S., Coyle, J., and Mewhort, D. 1998. Frequency-range discriminations: special and general abilities in zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata) and humans (Homo sapiens). J. Comp. Psychol. 112: 244-258.
66. Weisman, R., Ratcliffe, L., Johnsrude, I., and Hurley, T.A. 1990. Absolute and relative pitch production in the song of the black-capped chickadee. Condor, 92: 118-124.
67. Welch, B.L. 1938. The significance of the differences between two means when the population variances are unequal. Biometrika, 29: 350-362.
68. Wiley, R.H., and Richards, D.G. 1978. Physical constraints on acoustic communication in the atmosphere: implication for the evolution of animal vocalizations. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 3: 69-94.
69. Wiley, R.H., and Richards, D.G. 1982. Adaptation for acoustic communication in birds: sound transmission and signal detection. In Acoustic communication in birds. Edited by D.E. Kroodsma, E.H. Miller, and H. Quellet. Academic Press, New York. pp. 131-181.