Effect sizes and the integrative understanding of urban bird song: (A Reply to Slabbekoorn et al.)

American Naturalist

Volumn 180, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 146-152

  Nemeth, Erwin ^a   Zollinger, Sue Anne ^a   Brumm, Henrik ^a  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR ORNITHOLOGY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Acoustic communication; Bird song; Environmental acoustics; Lombard effect; Signal transmission; Traffic noise; Urbanization

Indexed keywords

AVES;

EID: 84862138352     PISSN: 00030147     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/665994     Document Type: Note

References (41)

1. Beckers, G. J. L., R. A. Suthers, and C. ten Cate. 2003. Mechanisms of frequency and amplitude modulation in ring dove song. Journal of Experimental Biology 206:1833-1843.
2. Brumm, H., and M. Ritschard. 2011. Song amplitude affects territorial aggression of male receivers in chaffinches. Behavioral Ecology 22:310-316.
3. Brumm, H., and D. Todt. 2002. Noise-dependent song amplitude regulation in a territorial songbird. Animal Behaviour 63:891-897.
4. Brumm, H., and S. A. Zollinger. 2011. The evolution of the Lombard effect: 100 years of psychoacoustic research. Behaviour 148:1173-1198.
5. Cooke, M., and Y. Y. Lu. 2010. Spectral and temporal changes to speech produced in the presence of energetic and informational maskers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 128:2059-2069.
6. Cynx, J., R. Lewis, B. Tavel, and H. Tse. 1998. Amplitude regulation of vocalizations in noise by a songbird, Taeniopygia guttata. Animal Behaviour 56:107-113.
7. Dabelsteen T. 1984. An analysis of the full song of the blackbird Turdus merula with respect to message coding and adaptations for acoustic communication. Ornis Scandinavica 15:227-239.
8. Dabelsteen, T., O. N. Larsen, and S. B. Pedersen. 1993. Habitatinduced degradation of sound signals: quantifying the effects of communication sounds and bird location on blur ratio, excess attenuation, and signal-to-noise ratio in blackbird song. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 93:2206-2220.
9. Dabelsteen, T., and S. B. Pedersen. 1992. Song features essential for species discrimination and behaviour assessment by male blackbirds (Turdus merula). Behaviour 121:259-287.
10. Elemans, C. P. H., R. Zaccarelli, and H. Herzel. 2008. Biomechanics and control of vocalization in a non-songbird. Journal of the Royal Society Interface 5:691-703.
11. Evans, K. L., B. J. Hatchwell, M. Parnell, and K. J. Gaston. 2010. A conceptual framework for the colonisation of urban areas: the blackbird Turdus merula as a case study. Biological Reviews 85: 643-667.
12. Goller, F., and B. G. Cooper. 2008. Peripheral mechanisms of sensorimotor integration during singing. Pages 99-114 in P. H. Zeigler and P. Marler, eds. Neuroscience of birdsong. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
13. Gould, S. J., and R. C. Lewontin. 1979. The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 205:581-598.
14. Halfwerk, W., S. Bot, J. Buikx, M. van der Velde, J. Komdeur, C. ten Cate, and H. Slabbekoorn. 2011. Low-frequency songs lose their potency in noisy urban conditions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 108:14549-14554.
15. Halfwerk, W., and H. Slabbekoorn. 2009. A behavioural mechanism explaining noise-dependent frequency use in urban birdsong. Animal Behaviour 78:1301-1307.
16. Jessen, M., O. Köster, and S. Gfroerer. 2005. Influence of vocal effort on average and variability of fundamental frequency. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 12:174-212.
17. Langemann, U., B. Gauger, and G. M. Klump. 1998. Auditory sensitivity in the great tit: perception of signals in the presence and absence of noise. Animal Behaviour 56:763-769.
18. Marten, K., and P. Marler. 1977. Sound transmission and its significance for animal vocalizations. I. Temperate habitats. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2:271-290.
19. McGregor, P. K., and T. Dabelsteen. 1996. Communication networks. Pages 409-425 in Ecology and evolution of acoustic communication in birds. D. E. Kroodsma and E. H. Miller, eds. Comstock, Ithaca, NY.
20. Mockford, E. J., and R. C. Marshall. 2009. Effects of urban noise on song and response behaviour in great tits. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 276:2979-2985.
21. Mockford E. J., R. C. Marshall, and T. Dabelsteen. 2011. Degradation of rural and urban great tit song: testing transmission efficiency. PLoS ONE 6:e28242.
22. Nelson, B. S. 2000. Avian dependence on sound pressure level as an auditory distance cue. Animal Behaviour 59:57-67.
23. Nemeth, E., and H. Brumm. 2009. Blackbirds sing higher-pitched songs in cities: adaptation to habitat acoustics or side-effect of urbanization? Animal Behaviour 78:637-641.
24. Nemeth, E., and H. Brumm. 2010. Birds and anthropogenic noise: are urban songs adaptive? American Naturalist 176:465-475.
25. Pohl, N. U., E. Leadbeater, H. Slabbekoorn, G. M. Klump, and U. Langemann. 2012. Great tits in urban noise benefit from high frequencies in song detection and discrimination. Animal Behaviour 83:711-721.
26. Reeve, H. K., and P. W. Sherman. 1993. Adaptation and the goals of evolutionary research. Quarterly Review of Biology 68:1-32.
27. Ripmeester, E. A. P., J. S. Kok, J. C. van Rijssel, and H. Slabbekoorn. 2010. Habitat-related birdsong divergence: a multi-level study on the influence of territory density and ambient noise in European blackbirds. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 64:409-418.
28. Ritschard, M., and H. Brumm. 2011. Effects of vocal learning, phonetics and inheritance on song amplitude in zebra finches. Animal Behaviour 82:1415-1422.
29. Ritschard, M., S. Laucht, J. Dale, and H. Brumm. 2011. Enhanced testosterone levels affect singing motivation but not song structure and amplitude in Bengalese finches. Physiology and Behaviour 102: 30-35.
30. Ritschard, M., K. Riebel and H. Brumm. 2010. Female zebra finches prefer high amplitude song. Animal Behaviour 79:877-883.
31. Ritschard, M., van Oers, K., Naguib, M. and H. Brumm. 2012. Song amplitude of rival males modulates the territorial behaviour of great tits during the fertile period of their mates. Ethology 118: 197-202.
32. Roselaar, C. S. 1993. Great tit (Parus major). Pages 255-281 in S. Cramp and C. M. Marler, eds. Handbook of the birds of Europe, the Middle East and Africa: the birds of the western Palearctic, Vol. 7. Flycatchers to shrikes. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
33. Searcy, W. A. 1996. Sound pressure levels and song preferences in female red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus) (Aves, Emberizidae). Ethology 102:187-196.
34. Slabbekoorn, H., and A. den Boer-Visser. 2006. Cities change the songs of birds. Current Biology 16:2326-2331.
35. Slabbekoorn, H., and M. Peet. 2003. Birds sing at a higher pitch in urban noise. Nature 424:267.
36. Slabbekoorn, H., and E. A. P. Ripmeester. 2008. Birdsong and anthropogenic noise: implications and applications for conservation. Molecular Ecology 17:72-83.
37. Slabbekoorn, H., X.-J. Yang, and W. Halfwerk. 2012. Birds and anthropogenic noise: singing higher may matter (a comment on Nemeth and Brumm, "Birds and anthropogenic noise: are urban songs adaptive?"). American Naturalist 180:142-145.
38. Suthers, R. A., and S. A. Zollinger. 2008. From brain to song: the vocal organ and vocal tract. Pages 78-98 in H. P. Zeigler and P. Marler, eds. Neuroscience of birdsong. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
39. Wang, C. Z. H., J. A. Herbst, G. B. Keller, and R. H. R. Hahnloser. 2008. Rapid interhemispheric switching during vocal production in a songbird. PLoS Biology 6:2154-2162.
40. Zollinger, S. A., and H. Brumm. 2011. The Lombard effect. Current Biology 21:R614-R615.
41. Zollinger, S. A., F. Goller, and H. Brumm. 2011. Metabolic and respiratory costs of increasing song amplitude in zebra finches. PLoS ONE 6:e23198.