Call trait variation in morelett's tree frog, Agalychnis moreletii, of Belize

Herpetologica

Volumn 66, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 241-249

  Briggs, Venetia S ^a,b  

^a University of Miami   (United States)

^b USA   (United States)

Author keywords

Acoustic communication; Advertisement calls; Anurans; Leaf frogs; Vocalizations

Indexed keywords

BIOACOUSTICS; BODY SIZE; BREEDING POPULATION; FROG; MATE CHOICE; MATING SUCCESS; VOCALIZATION;

BELIZE [CENTRAL AMERICA];

AGALYCHNIS MORELETII; ANURA; HYLIDAE;

EID: 77956018298     PISSN: 00180831     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1655/HERPETOLOGICA-D-09-00011.1     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. ANDERSSON, M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
2. BEE, M. A. 2002. Territorial male bullfrogs (Rana catesbiana) do not assess fighting ability based on size related variation in acoustic signals. Behavioral Ecology 13:109-124.
3. BEE, M. A., C. E. K. KOZICH, J. BLACKWELL, AND H. C. GERHARDT. 2001. Individual variation in advertisement calls of territorial male green frogs, Rana clamitans: Implications for individual discrimination. Ethology 107:65-84.
4. BRIGGS, V. S. 2008. Mating patterns of red-eyed treefrogs, Agalychnis callidryas and A. moreletii. Ethology 114:489-498.
5. CASTELLANO, S., AND C. GIACOMA. 1998. Stabilizing and directional female choice for male calls in the European green toad. Animal Behaviour 56:275-287.
6. CASTELLANO, S., B. CUATTO, R. RINELLA, A. ROSSO, AND C. GIACOMA. 2002. The advertisement call of the European treefrogs (Hyla arborea): A multilevel study of variation. Ethology 108:75-89.
7. DUELLMAN, W. E. 1970. The hylid frogs of Middle America. Monographs of the Museum of Natural History, University of Kansas 1:1-753.
8. DYSON, M. L., S. L. BUSH, AND T. R. HALLIDAY. 1998. Phonotaxis by female Majorcan midwife toads, Alytes muletensis. Behaviour 135:213-230.
9. GERHARDT, H. C. 1976. Significance of two frequency bands in long distance vocal communication in the green treefrog. Nature 261:692-694.
10. GERHARDT, H. C. 1991. Female mate choice in treefrogs: Static and dynamic acoustic criteria. Animal Behaviour 42:615-635.
11. GERHARDT, H. C. 1994. Evolution of vocalizations in frogs and toads. Annual Review of Ecological Systems 25:293-324.
12. GERHARDT, H. C., AND F. HUBER. 2002. Acoustic Communication in Insects and Anurans: Common Problems and Diverse Solutions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
13. GERHARDT, H. C., M. L. DYSON, AND S. D. TANNER. 1996. Dynamic properties of the advertisement calls of gray tree frogs: Patterns of variability and female choice. Behavioral Ecology 7:7-18.
14. GERHARDT, H. C., S. D. TANNER, C. M. CORRIGAN, AND H. C. WALTON. 2000. Female preference functions based on call duration in the gray treefrog (Hyla versicolor). Behavioral Ecology 11:663-669.
15. GRAFE, U. 1996. Use of metabolic substrates in the gray treefrog, Hyla versicolor: Implications for calling behavior. Copeia 1997:356-362.
16. GRIDI-PAPP, M. 2007. SoundRuler Acoustic Analysis version 0.9.6.0. http://soundruler.sf.net.
17. HALLIDAY, T., AND M. TEJEDO. 1995. Intrasexual selection and alternative mating behavior. Pp. 419-468. In H. Heatwole and B. K. Sullivan (Eds.), Amphibian Biology, Social Behavior, Vol.2. Surrey Beatty and Sons, Chipping Norton, UK.
18. HOWARD, R. D., AND J. R. YOUNG. 1998. Individual variation in male vocal traits and female mating preferences in Bufo americanus. Animal Behaviour 55:1165-1179.
19. KLUMP, G. M., AND H. C. GERHARDT. 1987. Use of nonarbitrary acoustic criteria in mate choice by female gray tree frogs. Nature 326:286-288.
20. LEE, J. C. 1996. The Amphibian and Reptiles of the Yucatán Peninsula. Cornell University Press, New York, New York, USA.
21. LEE, J. C. 2001. Evolution of secondary sexual dimorphism in the toad, Bufo marinus. Copeia 2001:923-935.
22. LOPEZ, P. T., AND P. M. NARINS. 1991. Mate choice in the Neotropical frog, Eleutherodactylus coqui. Animal Behaviour 41:757-772.
23. MARTIN, W. F. 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, Texas, USA.
24. MAZZONNI, D. 2006. Audacity version 1.2.6. Available at: http://audacity.sourceforge.net. Free Digital Audio Editor.
25. MURPHY, C. G. 1999. Nightly timing of chorusing by male barking treefrogs (Hyla gratiosa): The influence of female arrival and energy. Copeia 1999:333-347.
26. MURPHY, C. G., AND H. C. GERHARDT. 2000. Mating preference functions of individual female barking treefrogs, Hyla gratiosa, for two properties of male advertisement calls. Evolution 54:660-669.
27. POUGH, F. H., W. E. MAGNUSSON, M. J. RYAN, AND K. D. WELLS. 1992. Behavioral energetics. Pp. 395-436. In M. E. Feder and W. W. Berggren (Eds.), Environmental Physiology of the Amphibians. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
28. PRÖHL, H. 2003. Variation in male calling behavior and relation to male mating success in the strawberry poison frog (Dendrobates pumilio). Ethology 109: 273-290.
29. ROBERTSON, J. G. M. 1990. Female choice increases fertilization success in the Australian frog, Uperoleia laevigata. Animal Behaviour 39:639-645.
30. RYAN, M. J. 1980. Female mate choice in a neotropical frog. Science 209:523-525.
31. RYAN, M. J. 1983. Sexual selection and communication in a neotropical frog, Physalaemus pustulosus. Evolution 39:261-272.
32. RYAN, M. J. 1985. The Túngara Frog. A Study in Sexual Selection and Communication. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
33. RYAN, M. J (Ed.). 2001. Anuran Communication. Smithsonian Institute Press, Washington, DC, USA.
34. RYAN, M. J., AND A. KEDDY-HECTOR. 1992. Directional patterns of female mate choice and the role of sensory biases. American Naturalist 139:S4-S35.
35. SAVAGE, J. M. 2002. Amphibians and Reptiles of Costa Rica: A Herpetofauna Between Two Continents, Between Two Seas. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
36. SULLIVAN, B. K. 1992. Sexual selection and calling behavior in the American toad (Bufo americanus). Copeia 1992:1-7.
37. SULLIVAN, B. K., AND S. H. HINSHAW. 1992. Female choice and selection on male calling behaviour in the grey treefrog, Hyla versicolor. Animal Behaviour 44: 733-744.
38. SULLIVAN, B. K., AND M. A. KWIATOWSKI. 2007. Courtship displays in anurans and lizards: Theoretical and empirical contributions to our understanding of costs and selection on males due to female choice. Functional Ecology 2007:1-7.
39. SULLIVAN, B. K., AND W. E. WAGNER, JR. 1988. Variation in advertisement and release calls, and social influences on calling behavior in the gulf coast toad (Bufo valliceps). Copeia 1988:1014-1020.
40. SULLIVAN, B. K., M. J. RYAN, AND P. VERRELL. 1995. Female choice and mating system structure. Pp. 469-517. In H. Heatwole and B. K. Sullivan (Eds.), Amphibian Biology, Social Behavior, Vol.2. Surrey Beatty and Sons, Chipping Norton, United Kingdom.
41. TÁRANO, Z. 2001. Variation in male advertisement calls in the Neotropical frog Physalaemus enesefae. Copeia 2001:1064-1072.
42. TÁRANO, Z., AND E. A. HERRERA. 2003. Female preferences for call traits and male mating success in the Neotropical frog Physalaemus enesefae. Ethology 109:121-134.
43. WELCH, A. M., R. D. SEMLITSCH, AND H. C. GERHARDT. 1998. Call duration as an indicator of genetic quality in male gray tree frogs. Science 280:1928-1930.
44. WELLS, K. D., AND T. L. TAIGEN. 1986. The effect of social interactions on calling energetics in the gray treefrog. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 19:9-18.
45. WITTE, K., M. J. RYAN, AND W. WILCZYNSKI. 2001. Changes in the frequency structure of a mating call decreases its attractiveness to females in the cricket frog Acris crepitans blanchardi. Ethology 107:685-699.