Structural Design Principles of Complex Bird Songs: A Network-Based Approach

PLoS ONE

Volumn 7, Issue 9, 2012, Pages

  Sasahara, Kazutoshi ^a   Cody, Martin L ^b   Cohen, David ^b,c   Taylor, Charles E ^b  

^a NAGOYA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL COMMUNICATION; ARTICLE; BIRD; CALIFORNIA TRASHER; COMPLEX BIRD SONG; COMPUTER NETWORK; CONTROLLED STUDY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; MUSIC; NOISE; NONHUMAN; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; SAMPLE SIZE; SONG DIRECTED NETWORK; SONG UNDIRECTED NETWORK; STRUCTURAL DESIGN PRINCIPLE;

ANIMALS; BIRDS; FEMALE; MALE; VOCALIZATION, ANIMAL;

ANIMALIA; AVES; TOXOSTOMA REDIVIVUM;

EID: 84866657402     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0044436     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Catchpole CK, Slater PJB (2008) Bird Song: Biological Themes and Variations. Cambridge University Press, 2nd edition.
2. Marler P, Tamura M, (1962) Song 'dialects' in three populations of white-crowned sparrows. Condor 64: 368-377.
3. Zann RA (1996) The Zebra Finch: A Synthesis of Field and Laboratory Studies. Oxford University Press.
4. Lemon RE, Dobson CW, Clifoton PG, (1993) Songs of American redstarts (Setophaga ruticilla): sequencing rules and their relationships to repertoire size. Ethology 93: 198-210.
5. Okanoya K, (2004) Song syntax in Bengalese finches: proximate and ultimate analyses. Advances in the Study of Behavior 34: 297-346.
6. Kroodsma DE (2005) The Singing Life of Birds: The Art and Science Listening to Birdsong. Houghton Mifflin.
7. Byers BE, Kroodsma DE, (2009) Female mate choice and songbird song repertoires. Animal Behaviour 77: 13-22.
8. Marler P, Slabbekoorn H, editors (2004) Nature's Music: The Science of Birdsong, Academic Press. 39-79.
9. Searcy WA, Nowicki S (2005) The Evolution of Animal Communication: Reliability and Deception in Signaling Systems. Princeton University Press.
10. Kipper S, Kiefer S, (2010) Age-Related Changes in Birds' Singing Styles: On Fresh Tunes and Fading Voices? Advances in the Study of Behavior 41: 77-118.
11. Garamszegi LZ, Balsby TJS, Bell BD, Borowiec M, Byers BE, et al. (2005) Estimating the complexity of bird song by using capture-recapture approaches from community ecology. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 57: 305-317.
12. Chatfield C, Lemon RE, (1970) Analysing Sequences of Behavioural Events. Journal of Theoretical Biology 29: 427-445.
13. Dobson WC, Lemon ER, (1979) Markov sequences in songs of American thrushes. Behaviour 68: 86-105.
14. Todt D, Hultsch H, (1998) How songbirds deal with large amounts of serial information: retrieval rules suggest a hierarchical song memory. Biological Cybernetics 79: 487-500.
15. Kakishita Y, Sasahara K, Nishino T, Takahasi M, Okanoya K, (2009) Ethological data mining: an automata-based approach to extract behavioral units and rules. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 18: 446-471.
16. Jin DZ, Kozhevnikov AA, (2011) A compact statistical model of the song syntax in Bengalese finch. PLoS Computational Biology 7: e1001108.
17. Cody ML (1998) California Thrasher (Toxostoma redivivum). The Birds of North America Online; (A Poole, Ed) Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online http://bnabirdscornelledu/bna/species/323 doi:102173/bna323.
18. Cortes C, Vapnik V, (1995) Support-vector networks. Machine Learning 20: 273-297.
19. Newman MEJ, (2003) The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM Review 45: 167-256.
20. Milo R, Shen-Orr S, Itzkovitz S, Kashtan N, Chklovskii D, et al. (2002) Network motifs: simple building blocks of complex networks. Science 298: 824-827.
21. Bollobás B (2001) Random graphs. Cambridge University Press.
22. Watts DJ, Strogatz SH, (1998) Collective dynamics of 'small-world' networks. Nature 393: 440-442.
23. Jeong H, Tombor B, Albert R, Oltvai ZN, Barabási AL, (2000) The large-scale organization of metabolic networks. Nature 407: 651-654.
24. Jeong H, Mason SP, Barabási AL, Oltvai ZN, (2001) Lethality and centrality in protein networks. Nature 411: 41-42.
25. Lusseau D, (2003) The emergent properties of a dolphin social network. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 270: S186-S188.
26. Humphries MD, Gurney K, (2008) Network 'small-world-ness': a quantitative method for determining canonical network equivalence. PLoS ONE 3: e0002051.
27. Ferrer i Cancho R, Sole RV, (2001) The small world of human language. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 268: 2261-2265.
28. Wey T, Blumstein DT, Shen W, Jordan F, (2008) Social network analysis of animal behaviour: a promising tool for the study of sociality. Animal Behaviour 75: 333-344.
29. Fehér O, Wang H, Saar S, Mitra PP, Tchernichovski O, (2009) De novo establishment of wild-type song culture in the zebra finch. Nature 459: 564-568.
30. SearcyWA (1984) Song repertoire size and female preferences in song sparrows. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 14: 281-286.
31. Baker MC, Bjerke TK, Lampe H, Espmark Y, (1986) Sexual-response of female great tits to variation in size of males' song repertoires. The American Naturalist 128: 491-498.
32. Hiebert SM, Stoddard PK, Arcese P, (1989) Repertoire size, territory acquisition and reproductive success in the song sparrow. Animal Behaviour 37: 266-273.
33. Catchpole CK, (1980) Sexual Selection and the Evolution of Complex Songs Among European Warblers of the Genus Acrocephalus. Behaviour 74: 149-165.
34. Sasahara K, Ikegami T, (2007) Evolution of Birdsong Syntax by Interjection Communication. Artificial Life 13: 259-77.