Discrimination of vocal performance by male swamp sparrows

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

Volumn 65, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 717-726

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

^a Department of Biology   (United States)

^b DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Aggression; Birdsong; Communication; Reliable signaling; Vocal performance

Indexed keywords

AGGRESSION; SIGNALING; SONGBIRD; VOCALIZATION;

MELOSPIZA GEORGIANA;

EID: 79952702664     PISSN: 03405443     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00265-010-1073-2     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Ballentine B (2009) The ability to perform physically challenging songs predicts age and size in male swamp sparrows, Melospiza georgiana. Anim Behav 77: 973-978.
2. Ballentine B, Hyman J, Nowicki S (2004) Vocal performance influences female response to male bird song: an experimental test. Behav Ecol 15: 163-168.
3. Ballentine B, Searcy WA, Nowicki S (2008) Reliable aggressive signaling in swamp sparrows. Anim Behav 75: 693-703.
4. Bee MA, Perrill SA (1996) Responses to conspecific advertisement calls in the green frog (Rana clamitans) and their role in male-male communication. Behav 133: 283-301.
5. Bee MA, Perrill SA, Owen PC (1999) Size assessment in simulated territorial encounters between male green frogs (Rana clamitans). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 45: 177-184.
6. Beebee MD (2004) Variation in vocal performance in the songs of a wood-warbler: evidence for the function of distinct singing modes. Ethol 110: 531-542.
7. Cardoso GC, Atwell JW, Ketterson ED, Price TD (2007) Inferring performance in the songs of dark-eyed juncos (Junco hyemalis). Behav Ecol 18: 1051-1057.
8. Cardoso GC, Atwell JW, Ketterson ED, Price TD (2009) Song types, song performance, and the use of repertoires in dark-eyed juncos (Junco hyemalis). Behav Ecol 20: 901-907.
9. Charlton BD, Reby D, McComb K (2007) Female perception of size-related formant shifts in red deer, Cervus elaphus. Behav 74: 707-714.
10. Cramer ERA, Price J (2007) Red-winged blackbirds Ageliaus phoeniceus respond differently to song types with different performance levels. J Avian Biol 38: 122-127.
11. Davies NB, Halliday TR (1978) Deep croaks and fighting assessment in toads Bufo bufo. Nature 274: 683-685.
12. Dawkins R, Krebs JR (1978) Animal signals: information or manipulation? In: Krebs JR, Davies NB (eds) Behavioural ecology. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 282-309.
13. Draganoiu TI, Nagle L, Kreutzer M (2002) Directional female preference for an exaggerated male trait in canary (Serinus canaria) song. Proc R Soc Lond B 269: 2525-2531.
14. DuBois AL, Nowicki S, Searcy WA (2009) Swamp sparrows modulate vocal performance in an aggressive context. Biol Lett 5: 163-165.
15. Fitch WT (1997) Vocal tract length and formant frequency dispersion correlate with body size in rhesus macaques. J Acoust Soc Am 102: 1213-1222.
16. Fitch WT, Reby D (2001) The descended larynx is not uniquely human. Proc R Soc Lond B 268: 1669-1675.
17. Forstmeier W, Kempenauers B, Meyer A, Leisler B (2002) A novel song parameter correlates with extra-pair paternity and reflects male longevity. Proc R Soc Lond B 269: 1479-1485.
18. Grafen A (1990) Biological signals as handicaps. J Theor Biol 144: 517-546.
19. Hoese WJ, Podos J, Boetticher NC, Nowicki S (2000) Vocal tract function in birdsong production: experimental manipulation of beak movements. J Exp Biol 203: 1845-1855.
20. Holveck MJ, Riebel K (2007) Preferred songs predict preferred males: consistency and repeatability of zebra finch females across three test contexts. Behav 74: 297-309.
21. Hurd PL, Enquist M (2005) A strategic taxonomy of biological communication. Behav 70: 1155-1170.
22. Illes AE, Hall MH, Vehrencamp S (2006) Vocal performance influences male receiver response in the banded wren. Proc R Soc Lond B 273: 1907-1912.
23. Koivula K, Lahti K, Orell M, Rytkönen S (1993) Prior residency as a key determinant of social dominance in the willow tit (Parus montanus). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 33: 283-287.
24. Leadbeater E, Goller F, Riebel K (2005) Unusual phonation, covarying song characteristics and song preferences in female zebra finches. Behav 70: 909-919.
25. Martin WF (1972) Evolution of vocalization in the genus Bufo. In: Blair WF (ed) Evolution in the Genus Bufo. University of Texas, Austin, pp 279-309.
26. Maynard Smith J, Harper D (2003) Animal signals. New York, Oxford.
27. Nowicki S (1987) Vocal tract resonances in oscine bird sound production: evidence from birdsongs in a helium atmosphere. Nature 325: 53-55.
28. Nowicki S, Marler P (1988) How do birds sing? Music Percept 5: 391-426.
29. Podos J (1997) A performance constraint on the evolution of trilled vocalizations in a songbird family (Passeriformes: Emberizidae). Evolution 51: 537-551.
30. Podos J (2001) Correlated evolution of morphology and vocal signal structure in Darwin's finches. Nature 409: 185-188.
31. Podos J, Nowicki S (2004a) Beaks, adaptation, and vocal evolution in Darwin's finches. BioSci 54: 501-510.
32. Podos J, Nowicki S (2004b) Performance limits on birdsong. In: Marler P, Slabbekorn H (eds) Nature's music. Elsevier, San Diego, pp 318-342.
33. 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.
34. Reby D, McComb K, Cargnelutti B, Darwin C, Fitch WT, Clutton-Brock TH (2005) Red deer stags use formants as assessment cues during intrasexual agonistic interactions. Proc R Soc Lond B 272: 941-947.
35. Richner H (1989) Phenotypic correlates of dominance in carrion crows and their effects on access to food. Anim Behav 38: 606-612.
36. Ryan MJ (1985) The Tungara frog: a study in sexual selection and communication. University of Chicago, Chicago.
37. Sandell M, Smith HG (1991) Dominance, prior occupancy, and winter residency in the great tit (Parus major). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 29: 147-152.
38. Searcy WA (1979) Morphological correlates of dominance in captive male red-winged blackbirds. Condor 81: 417-420.
39. Searcy WA, Beecher MD (2009) Song as an aggressive signal in songbirds. Anim Behav 78: 1281-1292.
40. Searcy WA, Nowicki S (2005) The evolution of animal communication: reliability and deception in signaling systems. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
41. Searcy WA, Podos J, Peters S, Nowicki S (1995) Discrimination of song types and variants in song sparrows. Anim Behav 49: 1219-1226.
42. Searcy WA, Nowicki S, Peters S (1999) Song types as fundamental units in vocal repertoires. Anim Behav 58: 37-44.
43. Vehrencamp S (2000) Handicap, index, and conventional signal elements of bird song. In: Espmark Y, Amundsen T, Rosenqvist G (eds) Signalling and signal design in animal communication. Tapir, Trondheim, pp 301-315.
44. Wagner WE (1989a) Fighting, assessment, and frequency alteration in Blanchard's cricket frog. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 25: 429-436.
45. Wagner WE (1989b) Social correlates of variation in male calling behavior in Blanchard's cricket frog, Acris crepitans blanchardi. Ethol 82: 27-45.
46. Wagner W (1992) Deceptive or honest signaling of fighting ability? A test of alternative hypotheses for the function of changes in call dominant frequency by male cricket frogs. Anim Behav 44: 449-462.
47. Westneat MW, Long JH, Hoese W, Nowicki S (1993) Kinematics of birdsong: functional correlation of cranial movements and acoustic features in sparrows. J Exp Biol 182: 141-171.
48. Yamaguchi N, Kawano KK (2001) Effect of body size on the resource holding potential of male varied tits Parus varius. Jpn J Ornithol 50: 65-70.