Heterospecific Vocal Interactions in a Frog from the Southern Temperate Forest, Batrachyla taeniata

Ethology

Volumn 117, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 63-71

  Penna, Mario ^a   Velásquez, Nelson ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHILE   (Chile)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOTIC FACTOR; CONSPECIFIC; FROG; SYMPATRY; TEMPERATE FOREST; VOCALIZATION;

CHILE;

ANIMALIA; ANURA; BATRACHYLA TAENIATA;

EID: 78650330871     PISSN: 01791613     EISSN: 14390310     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0310.2010.01847.x     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Barrio, A. 1967: Batrachyla antartandica n. sp. (Anura, Leptodactylidae). Descripción y estudio comparativo con la especie genotípica, Batrachyla leptopus Bell. Physis. 27, 153-157.
2. Bee, M. A. 2007: Selective phonotaxis by male wood frogs (Rana sylvatica) to the sound of a chorus. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 61, 955-966.
3. Bernal, X. E., Rand, A. S. & Ryan, M. J. 2007: Sex differences in response to nonconspecific advertisement calls: receiver permisiveness in male and female túngara frogs. Anim. Behav. 73, 955-964.
4. Brumm, H. 2004: The impact of environmental noise on song amplitude in a territorial bird. J. Anim. Ecol. 73, 434-440.
5. Brumm, H. 2006: Signalling through acoustic windows: nightingales avoid interspecific competition by short-term adjustment of song timing. J. Comp. Physiol. A. 192, 1279-1285.
6. Brumm, H. & Todt, D. 2002: Noise-dependent song amplitude regulation in a territorial songbird. Anim. Behav. 63, 891-897.
7. Cynx, J., Lewis, R., Tavel, B. & Tse, H. 1998: Amplitude regulation of vocalizations in noise by a songbird, Taeniopygia guttata. Anim. Behav. 56, 107-113.
8. Dubois, A. & Martens, J. 1984: A case of possible vocal convergence between frogs and a bird in Himalayan torrents. J. Ornithol. 125, 455-463.
9. Feng, A. S., Narins, P. M. & Xu, C-H. 2000: Vocal acrobatics in a Chinese frog, Amolops tormotus. Naturwissenschaften 89, 352-356.
10. Feng, A. S., Narins, P. M., Xu, C. H., Lin, W. Y., Yu, Z., L.Qiu, Q., Xu, Z. M. & Shen, J. X. 2006: Ultrasonic communication in frogs. Nature 440, 333-336.
11. Greenfield, M. D. 1988: Interspecific acoustic interactions among katydids Neoconocephalus: inhibition-induced shifts in diel periodicity. Anim. Behav. 36, 684-695.
12. Kaiser, K. & Hammers, J. L. 2009: The effect of anthropogenic noise on male advertisement call rate in the neotropical treefrog, Dendrosophus triangulum. Behaviour, 146, 1053-1069.
13. Lengagne, T. 2008: Traffic noise affects communication behaviour in a breeding anuran, Hyla arborea. Biol. Conserv. 141, 2023-2031.
14. Lengagne, T., Aubin, T., Lauga, J & Jouventin, P. 1999: How do king penguins (Aptenodytes patagonicus) apply the mathematical theory of information to communicate in windy conditions?. Proc. R. Soc. London B 266, 1623-1628.
15. Littlejohn, M. J. & Martin, A. A. 1969: Acoustic interaction between two species of leptodactylid frogs. Anim. Behav. 17, 785-791.
16. Narins, P. M., Feng, A. S., Lin, W., Schnitzler, H-U., Denzinger, A., Suthers, R. A. & Xu, Ch. 2004: Old world frog and bird vocalizations contain prominent ultrasonic harmonics. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 115, 910-913.
17. Páez, V., Bock, B. C. & Rand, A. S. 1993: Inhibition of evoked calling of Dendrobates pumilio due to acoustic interference from cicada calling. Biotropica 25, 242-245.
18. Penna, M. 1997: Selectivity of evoked vocal responses in the time domain by frogs Batrachyla (Leptodactylidae). J. Herpetol. 31, 30-45.
19. Penna, M. & Hamilton-West, C. 2007: Susceptibility of evoked vocal responses to noise exposure in a frog of the temperate austral forest. Anim. Behav. 74, 45-56.
20. Penna, M. & Solís, R. 1998: Frog call intensities and sound propagation in the South American temperate forest region. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 42, 371-381.
21. Penna, M. & Veloso, A. 1990: Vocal diversity in frogs of the South American temperate forest. J. Herpetol. 24, 23-33.
22. Penna, M., Feng, A. S. & Narins, P. M. 1997: Temporal selectivity of evoked vocal responses of Batrachyla antartandica (Amphibia, Leptodactylidae). Anim. Behav. 54, 833-848.
23. Penna, M., Pottstock, H. & Velásquez, N. 2005: Effect of natural and synthetic noise on evoked vocal responses in a frog of the temperate austral forest. Anim. Behav. 70, 639-651.
24. Pfennig, K. S., Rapa, K. & McNatt, R. 2000: Evolution of male mating behavior: male spadefoot toads preferentially associate with conspecific males. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 48, 69-74.
25. Phelps, S. M., Rand, A. S. & Ryan, M. J. 2006: The mixed-species chorus as public information: túngara frogs eavesdrop on a heterospecific. Behav. Ecol. 18, 108-114.
26. Popp, J. W. & Ficken, R. W. 1987: Effects of a non-specidfic singing on thesong of the ovenbird. Bird Behav. 7, 22-26.
27. Popp, J. W., Ficken, R. W. & Reinartz, J. A. 1985: Short-term temporal avoidance of interspecific acoustic interference among forest birds. Auk 102, 744-748.
28. Potash, L. M. 1972: Noise-induced changes in calls of the Japanese quail. Psychon. Sci. 26, 252-254.
29. Pytte, C. L., Rusch, K. M. & Ficken, M. S. 2003: Regulation of vocal amplitude by the blue-throated hummingbird, Lampornis clemenciae. Anim. Behav. 66, 703-710.
30. Römer, H., Bailey, W. & Dadour, I. 1989: Insect hearing in the field. III. Masking by noise. J. Comp. Physiol. A. 164, 609-620.
31. Schwartz, J. J. & Wells, K. D. 1983a: The influence of background noise on the behavior of a neotropical treefrog, Hyla ebraccata. Herpetologica 39, 121-129.
32. Schwartz, J. J. & Wells, K. D. 1983b: An experimental study of acoustic interference betweem two species of neotropical treefrogs. Anim. Behav. 31, 181-190.
33. Schwartz, J. J. & Wells, K. D. 1984: Interspecific acoustic interactions of the neotropical treefrog Hyla ebraccata. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 14, 211-224.
34. Schwartz, J. J. & Wells, K. D. 1985: Intra- and Interspecific vocal behavior of the neotropical treefrog Hyla microcephala. Copeia 1985, 27-38.
35. Sinnot, J. M., Stebbins, W. C. & Moody, D. B. 1975: Regulation of voice amplitude by the monkey. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 58, 412-414.
36. Slabbekoorn, H. & Peet, M. 2003: Birds sing at a higher pitch in urban noise. Nature 424, 267.
37. Solís, R. & Penna, M. 1997: Testosterone levels and evoked vocal responses in a natural population of the frog Batrachyla taeniata. Horm. Behav. 31, 101-109.
38. Sun, J. W. C. & Narins, P. M. 2005: Anthropogenic sounds differentially affect amphibian call rate. Biol. Conserv. 121, 419-427.
39. Wells, K. D. & Schwartz, J. J. 2007: The Behavioral Ecology of Anuran Communication. In: Hearing and Sound Communication in Amphibians (Narins, P. M., Feng, A. S., Fay, R. R. & Popper, A. N., eds). Springer, New York, pp. 44-86.
40. Wong, S., Parada, H. & Narins, P. M. 2009: Heterospecific acoustic interference: effects on calling in the frog Oophaga pumilio in Nicaragua. Biotropica 41, 74-80.