Swamp sparrows modulate vocal performance in an aggressive context

Biology Letters

Volumn 5, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 163-165

  DuBois, Adrienne L ^a   Nowicki, Stephen ^b   Searcy, William A ^a  

^a Department of Biology   (United States)

^b DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Aggressive signalling; Bird song; Vocal performance

Indexed keywords

AGGRESSION; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; SIGNALING; SONGBIRD; SWAMP; VOCALIZATION;

AGGRESSION; ANIMAL COMMUNICATION; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; FREQUENCY MODULATION; MALE; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPARROW; VOCALIZATION; ANIMAL;

AVES; MELOSPIZA GEORGIANA;

AGGRESSION; ANIMALS; MALE; SPARROWS; VOCALIZATION, ANIMAL;

EID: 65349114163     PISSN: 17449561     EISSN: 1744957X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2008.0626     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Ballentine, B., Hyman, J. & Nowicki, S. 2004 Vocal performance influences female response to male bird song: an experimental test. Behav. Ecol. 15, 163-168.
2. Bee, M. A. & Perrill, S. A. 1996 Responses to conspecific advertisement calls in the green frog (Rana clamitans) and their role in male-male communication. Behaviour 133, 283-301.
3. Cramer, E. R. A. & Price, J. J. 2007 Red-winged blackbirds Agelaius phoeniceus respond differently to songs types with different performance levels. J. Avian Biol. 38, 122-127.
4. Davies, N. B. & Halliday, T. R. 1978 Deep croaks and fighting assessment in toads Bufo bufo. Nature 274, 683-685.
5. Hurd, P. L. & Enquist, M. 2005 A strategic taxonomy of biological communication. Anim. Behav. 70, 1155-1170. (doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.02.014) (Pubitemid 41505443)
6. Illes, A. E., Hall, M. L. & Vehrencamp, S. L. 2006 Vocal performance influences receiver response in the banded wren. Proc. R. Soc. B 273, 1907-1912.
7. Maynard Smith, J. & Harper, D. 2003 Animal signals. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
8. Podos, J. 1997 A performance constraint on the evolution of trilled vocalizations in a songbird family (Passeriformes: Emberizidae). Evolution 51, 537-551. (doi:10.2307/2411126) (Pubitemid 27201506)
9. Podos, J. & Nowicki, S. 2004 Beaks, adaptation, and vocal evolution in Darwin's finches. BioScience 54, 501-510. (doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2004) 054[0501:BAAVEI]2.0.CO;2) (Pubitemid 38751836)
10. Price, J. J., Earnshaw, S. M. & Webster, M. S. 2006 Montezuma oropendolas modify a component of song constrained by body size during vocal contests. Anim. Behav. 71, 799-807.
11. Reby, D. & McComb, K. 2003 Anatomical constraints generate honesty: acoustic cues to age and weight in the roars of red deer stags. Anim. Behav. 65, 519-530.
12. Reby, D., McComb, K., Cargnelutti, B., Darwin, C., Fitch, W. T. & Clutton-Brock, T. H. 2005 Red deer stags use formants as assessment cues during intrasexual agonistic interactions. Proc. R. Soc. B 272, 941-947. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2004.2954) (Pubitemid 40956763)
13. Searcy, W. A. & Nowicki, S. 2005 The evolution of animal communication: reliability and deception in signaling systems. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
14. Searcy, W. A., Anderson, R. C. & Nowicki, S. 2006 Bird song as a signal of aggressive intent. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 60, 234-241. (doi:10.1007/s00265-006-0161-9) (Pubitemid 43846650)
15. Wagner, W. E. 1989 Fighting, assessment, and frequency alteration in Blanchard's cricket frog. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 25, 429-436.
16. Westneat, M. W., Long, J. H., Hoese, W. & Nowicki, S. 1993 Kinematics of birdsong: functional correlation of cranial movements and acoustic features in sparrows. J. Exp. Biol. 182, 147-171.