Perception of warble song in budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus): Evidence for special processing

Animal Cognition

Volumn 15, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 1151-1159

  Tu, Hsiao Wei ^a,b   Dooling, Robert J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^b VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE AND STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Ordering; Perception; Sensitivity; Sequence; Warble

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; CANARY; FINCH; HEARING; INSTRUMENTAL CONDITIONING; MALE; PARAKEET; SINGING;

ANIMALS; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; CANARIES; CONDITIONING, OPERANT; FINCHES; MALE; MELOPSITTACUS; SINGING;

FRINGILLIDAE; MELOPSITTACUS; MELOPSITTACUS UNDULATUS; PSITTACIDAE; TAENIOPYGIA GUTTATA;

EID: 84867702155     PISSN: 14359448     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10071-012-0539-1     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Abe K, Watanabe D (2011) Songbirds possess the spontaneous ability to discriminate syntactic rules. Nat Neurosci 14: 1067-1074.
2. Berwick RC, Okanoya K, Beckers GJL, Bolhuis JJ (2011) Songs to syntax: the linguistics of birdsong. Trends Cogn Sci 15: 113-121.
3. Binder JR, Frost JA, Hammeke TA, Bellgowan PSF, Springer JA, Kaufman JN, Possing ET (2000) Human temporal lobe activation by speech and nonspeech sounds. Cereb Cortex 10: 512-528.
4. Bregman MR, Patel AD, Gentner TQ (2012) Stimulus-dependent flexibility in non-human auditory pitch processing. Cognition 122: 51-60.
5. Brockway BF (1964a) Ethological studies of the budgerigar: non-reproductive behavior. Behaviour 22: 193-222.
6. Brockway BF (1964b) Ethological studies of the budgerigar: reproductive behavior. Behaviour 23: 294-324.
7. Brockway BF (1965) Stimulation of ovarian development and egg laying by male courtship vocalization in budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus). Anim Behav 13: 575-578.
8. Brockway BF (1969) Roles of budgerigar vocalization in the integration of breeding behavior. In: Hinde RA (ed) Bird vocalizations. Cambridge University Press, London, pp 131-158.
9. Catchpole CK, Slater PJB (2008) Bird song: biological themes and variations, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, New York.
10. Corballis MC (2007) Recursion, language, and starlings. Cogn Sci 31: 697-704.
11. Dehaene-Lambertz G, Dehaene S, Hertz-Pannier L (2002) Functional neuroimaging of speech perception in infants. Science 298: 2013-2015.
12. Demirel S, Fortune B, Fan J, Levine RA, Torres R, Nguyen H, Mansberger SL, Gardiner SK, Cioffi GA, Johnson CA (2009) Predicting progressive glaucomatous optic neuropathy using baseline standard automated perimetry data. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 50: 674-680.
13. Doupe AJ, Kuhl PK (1999) Birdsong and human speech: common themes and mechanisms. Ann Rev Neurosci 22: 567-631.
14. Farabaugh SM, Brown ED, Dooling RJ (1992) Analysis of warble song of the budgerigar Melopsittacus undulatus. Bioacoustics 4: 111-130.
15. Galbraith GC, Amaya EM, de Rivera JMD, Donan NM, Duong MT, Hsu JN, Tran K, Tsang LP (2004) Brain stem evoked response to forward and reversed speech in humans. NeuroReport 15: 2057-2060.
16. Gentner TQ, Fenn KM, Margoliash D, Nusbaum HC (2006) Recursive syntactic pattern learning by songbirds. Nature 440: 1204-1207.
17. Goldstein MH, King AP, West MJ (2003) Social interaction shapes babbling: testing parallels between birdsong and speech. Proc Nat Acad Sci 100: 8030-8035.
18. Gourevitch V, Galanter E (1967) A significance test for one-parameter isosensitivity functions. Psychometrika 32: 25-33.
19. Gramza AF (1970) Vocal mimicry in captive budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus). Z Tierpsych 27: 971-998.
20. Hauser MD, Chomsky N, Fitch WT (2002) The faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science 298: 1569-1579.
21. Kastak D, Schusterman RJ (1999) Loss of hearing sensitivity with depth in a free diving California sea lion (Zalophus californianus). Paper presented at the 13th biennial conference on the biology of marine mammals, Maiu, HI.
22. Kirby S (2002) Learning, bottlenecks and the evolution of recursive syntax. In: Briscoe T (ed) Linguistic evolution through language acquisition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 173-204.
23. Macmillan NA, Creelman CD (2005) Detection theory: a user's guide, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah.
24. Marler P (1970) Birdsong and speech development: could there be parallels? Am Sci 58: 669-673.
25. Marler P (2000) Origins of music and speech: insights from animals. In: Wallin NL, Merker B, Brown S (eds) The origins of music. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, pp 31-48.
26. Marler P (2004) Science and birdsong: the good old days. In: Marler P, Slabbekoorn H (eds) Nature's music: the science of birdsong. Elsevier Academic Press, San Diego, pp 1-38.
27. Okanoya K (2004) The bengalese finch: a window on the behavioral neurobiology of birdsong syntax. Ann NY Acad Sci 1016: 724-735.
28. Todt D, Hultsch H (1998) How songbirds deal with large amount of serial information: retrieval rules suggest a hierarchical song memory. Biol Cybern 79: 487-500.
29. Tu H-W, Osmanski MS, Dooling RJ (2011a) Learned vocalizations in budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus): the relationship between contact calls and warble song. J Acoust Soc Am 129: 2289-2297.
30. Tu H-W, Smith EW, Dooling RJ (2011b) Acoustic and perceptual categories of vocal elements in the warble song of budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus). J Comp Psychol 125: 420-430.
31. van Heijningen CAA, de Visser J, Zuidema W, ten Cate C (2009) Simple rules can explain discrimination of putative recursive syntactic structures by a songbird species. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106: 20538-20543.
32. Wilbrecht L, Nottebohm F (2003) Vocal learning in birds and humans. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev 9: 135-148.