Phenotypic plasticity affects the response of a sexually selected trait to anthropogenic noise

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 342-348

  Montague, Mary J ^a   Danek Gontard, Marine ^a   Kunc, Hansjoerg P ^a  

^a QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Animal communication; Behavioral plasticity; Environmental change; Phenotypic plasticity

Indexed keywords

COMPLEXITY; ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE; NOISE; PHENOTYPIC PLASTICITY; SEXUAL SELECTION; SONG; SONGBIRD;

ANIMALIA; AVES; ERITHACUS RUBECULA;

EID: 84876560596     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/ars169     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Andersson M. 1994. Sexual selection. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
2. Badyaev AV. 2004. Integration and modularity in the evolution of sexual ornaments: an overlooked perspective. In: Pigliucci M, Preston K, editors. Phenotypic integration: studying the ecology and evolution of complex phenotypes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 50-79.
3. Basolo AL, Trainor BC. 2002. The conformation of a female preference for a composite male trait in green swordtails. Anim Behav. 63:469-474.
4. Bermúdez-Cuamatzin E, Ríos-Chelén AA, Gil D, Garcia CM. 2011. Experimental evidence for real-time song frequency shift in response to urban noise in a passerine bird. Biol Lett. 7:36-38.
5. Brumm H, Slabbekoorn H. 2005. Acoustic communication in noise. Adv Study Behav. 35:151-209.
6. Candolin U. 2003. The use of multiple cues in mate choice. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 78:575-595.
7. Candolin U, Heuschele J. 2008. Is sexual selection beneficial during adaptation to environmental change? Trends Ecol Evol (Amst). 23:446-452.
8. Candolin U, Salesto T, Evers M. 2007. Changed environmental conditions weaken sexual selection in sticklebacks. J Evol Biol. 20:233-239.
9. Cardoso GC. 2012. Paradoxical calls: the opposite signaling role of sound frequency across bird species. Behav Ecol. 23:237-241.
10. 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.
11. Catchpole CK. 1980. Sexual selection and the evolution of complex songs among European warblers of the genus Acrocephalus. Behaviour. 74:149-166.
12. Catchpole CK, Slater PJB. 2008. Bird song: biological themes and variation. 2nd ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
13. Cornwallis CK, Uller T. 2010. Towards an evolutionary ecology of sexual traits. Trends Ecol Evol (Amst). 25:145-152.
14. Cunnington GM, Fahrig L. 2010. Plasticity in the vocalizations of anurans in response to traffic noise. Acta Oecol. 35:463-470.
15. Darwin C. 1871. The descent of man, and selection on relation to sex. London: Murray.
16. Duckworth RA. 2006. Behavioral correlations across breeding contexts provide a mechanism for a cost of aggression. Behav. Ecol. 17:1011-1019.
17. Duckworth RA. 2009. The role of behavior in evolution: a search for mechanism. Evol Ecol. 23:513-531.
18. Duckworth RA, Kruuk LE. 2009. Evolution of genetic integration between dispersal and colonization ability in a bird. Evolution. 63:968-977.
19. Field A, 1998. A bluffer's guide to sphericity. Brit. Pschol. Soc. , MSC Newsletter. 6:13-24.
20. Francis CD, Ortega CP, Cruz A. 2011a. Different behavioural responses to anthropogenic noise by two closely related passerine birds. Biol Lett. 7:850-852.
21. Francis CD, Ortega CP, Cruz A. 2011b. Vocal frequency change reflects different responses to anthropogenic noise in two suboscine tyrant flycatchers. Proc Biol Sci. 278:2025-2031.
22. Freeman-Gallant CR, Taff CC, Morin DF, Dunn PO, Whittingham LA, Tsang SM. 2010. Sexual selection, multiple male ornaments, and age-and condition-dependent signaling in the common yellowthroat. Evolution. 64:1007-1017.
23. Fuller RA, Warren PH, Gaston KJ. 2007. Daytime noise predicts nocturnal singing in urban robins. Biol Lett. 3:368-370.
24. Gianoli E, Palacio-Lopez K. 2009. Phenotypic integration may constrain phenotypic plasticity in plants. Oikos. 118:1924-1928.
25. Gienapp P, Teplitsky C, Alho JS, Mills JA, Merilä J. 2008. Climate change and evolution: disentangling environmental and genetic responses. Mol Ecol. 17:167-178.
26. Gil D, Gahr M, 2002. The honesty of bird song: multiple constraints for multiple traits. Trends Ecol Evol. 17:133-141.
27. Gross K, Pasinelli G, Kunc HP. 2010. Behavioral plasticity allows shortterm adjustment to a novel environment. Am Nat. 176:456-464.
28. Halfwerk W, Bot S, Buikx J, van der Velde M, Komdeur J, ten Cate C, Slabbekoorn H. 2011. Low-frequency songs lose their potency in noisy urban conditions. Proc Natl Acad Sci. USA. 108:14549-14554.
29. Halfwerk W, Slabbekoorn H. 2009. A behavioural mechanism explaining noise-dependent frequency use in urban birdsong. Anim Behav. 78:1301-1307.
30. Hanna D, Blouin-Demers G, Wilson DR, Mennill DJ. 2011. Anthropogenic noise affects song structure in red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus). J Exp Biol. 214:3549-3556.
31. Hebets EA, Papaj DR. 2005. Complex signal function: developing a framework of testable hypotheses. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 57:197-214.
32. Heuschele J, Mannerla M, Gienapp P, Candolin U. 2009. Environment-dependent use of mate choice cues in sticklebacks. Behav Ecol. 20:1223-1227.
33. Hoelzel AR. 1986. Song characteristics and response to playback of male and female robins Erithacus rubecula. Ibis. 128:115-127.
34. Hu Y, Cardoso GC. 2010. Which birds adjust the frequency of vocalizations in urban noise? Anim Behav. 79:863-867.
35. Kaiser K, Hammers JL. 2009. The effect of anthropogenic noise on male advertisement call rate in the neotropical treefrog, Dendropsophus triangulum. Behav. 146:1053-1069.
36. Kaiser K, Scofield DG, Menemsha A, Jones RM, Marczak S, Martineau K, Oliva MA, Narins PM. 2011. When sounds collide: the effect of anthropogenic noise on a breeding assemblage of frogs in Belize, Central America. Behav 148:215-232.
37. Kirschel ANG, Blumstein DT, Cohen RE, Buermann W, Smith TB, Slabbekoorn H. 2009. Birdsong tuned to the environment: green hylia song varies with elevation, tree cover, and noise. Behav Ecol. 20:1089-1095.
38. Lengagne T. 2008. Traffic noise affects communication behaviour in a breeding anuran, Hyla arborea. Biol Conserv. 141:2023-2031.
39. Lohr B, Wright TF, Dooling RJ. 2003. Detection and discrimination of natural calls in masking noise by birds: estimating the active space of a signal. Anim Behav. 65:763-777.
40. Luther DA, Derryberry, EP. 2012. Birdsongs keep pace with city life: changes in song over time in an urban songbird affects communication. Anim Behav. 83:1059-1066.
41. Mockford EJ, Marshall RC. 2009. Effects of urban noise on song and response behaviour in great tits. Proc. Biol. Sci. 276:2979-2985.
42. Morton ES. 1975. Ecological sources of selection on avian sounds. Am Nat. 109:17-34.
43. Parris KM, Schneider A. 2009. Impacts of traffic noise and traffic volume on birds of roadside habitats. Ecol Soc. 14(1):29.
44. Parris KM, Velik-Lord M, North JMA. 2009. Frogs call at a higher pitch in traffic noise. Ecol Soc. 14(1):25.
45. Patricelli GL, Blickley JL. 2006. Avian communication in urban noise: causes and consequences of vocal adjustment. Auk. 123:639-649.
46. Pigliucci M. 2003. Phenotypic integration: studying the ecology and evolution of complex phenotypes. Ecol Lett. 6:265-272.
47. Pigliucci M. 2004. Studying the plasticity of phenotypic integration in a model organism. In: Pigliucci M, Preston K, editors. Phenotypic integration. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 155-175.
48. Pigliucci M, Kolodynska A. 2002. Phenotypic plasticity and integration in response to flooded conditions in natural accessions of Arabidopsis thaliana (L. ) Heynh (Brassicaceae). Ann Bot. 90:199-207.
49. Pigliucci M, Marlow ET. 2001. Differentiation for flowering time and phenotypic integration in Arabidopsis thaliana in response to season length and vernalization. Oecol. 127:501-508.
50. Pigliucci M, Preston K. 2004. Phenotypic integration. New York: Oxford University Press.
51. Podos J. 1997. A performance constraint on the evolution of trilled vocalizations in a songbird family (Passeriformes: Emberizidae). Evolution. 51:537-551.
52. Pohl NU, Slabbekoorn H, Klump GM, Langemann U, 2009. Effects of signal features and environmental noise on signal detection in the great tit, Parus major. Anim Behav. 78:1293-1300.
53. Potvin DA, Parris KM, Mulder RA. 2011. Geographically pervasive effects of urban noise on frequency and syllable rate of songs and calls in silvereyes (Zosterops lateralis). Proc Biol Sci. 278:2464-2469.
54. Price TD, Qvarnström A, Irwin DE. 2003. The role of phenotypic plasticity in driving genetic evolution. Proc Biol Sci. 270:1433-1440.
55. Ripmeester EA, Kok JS, van Rijssel JC, Slabbekoorn H. 2010. Habitatrelated birdsong divergence: a multi-level study on the influence of territory density and ambient noise in European blackbirds. Behav Ecol Sociobiol (Print). 64:409-418.
56. Ryan MJ, Brenowitz EA. 1985. The role of body size, phylogeny, and ambient noise in the evolution of bird song. Am Nat. 126:87-100.
57. Scheuber H, Jacot A, Brinkhof MW. 2004. Female preference for multiple condition-dependent components of a sexually selected signal. Proc Biol Sci. 271:2453-2457.
58. Schlichting CD, 1986. The evolution of phenotypic plasticity in plants. Ann Rev Ecol Syst. 17:667-693.
59. Schlichting CD. 1989a. Phenotypic integration and environmental change. What are the consequences of differential phenotypic plasticity of traits? Bioscience. 39:460-464.
60. Schlichting CD. 1989b. Phenotypic plasticity in Phlox. 2. Plasticity of character correlations. Oecol. 78:496-501.
61. Schlichting CD, Pigliucci M. 1998. Phenotypic evolution: a reaction norm perspective. Sunderland (MA): Sinauer.
62. Sih A. 2004. A behavioral ecological view of phenotypic plasticity. In: DeWitt TJ, Scheiner SM, editors. Phenotypic plasticity: functional and conceptual approaches. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 112-125.
63. Slabbekoorn H, den Boer-Visser A. 2006. Cities change the songs of birds. Curr Biol. 16:2326-2331.
64. Slabbekoorn H, Peet M. 2003. Ecology: birds sing at a higher pitch in urban noise-great tits hit the high notes to ensure that their mating calls are heard above the city's din. Nature. 424:267.
65. Slabbekoorn H, Ripmeester EA. 2008. Birdsong and anthropogenic noise: implications and applications for conservation. Mol Ecol. 17:72-83.
66. Slabbekoorn H, Smith TB. 2002. Habitat-dependent song divergence in the little greenbul: an analysis of environmental selection pressures on acoustic signals. Evolution. 56:1849-1858.
67. Stewart KA, MacDougall-Shackleton EA. 2008. Local song elements indicate local genotypes and predict physiological condition in song sparrows Melospiza melodia. Biol Lett. 4:240-242.
68. Tuomainen U, Candolin U. 2011. Behavioural responses to humaninduced environmental change. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 86:640-657.
69. Verzijden MN, Ripmeester EA, Ohms VR, Snelderwaard P, Slabbekoorn H. 2010. Immediate spectral flexibility in singing chiffchaffs during experimental exposure to highway noise. J Exp Biol. 213:2575-2581.
70. Wiley RH, Richards DG. 1982. Adaptations for acoustic communication in birds: sound transmission and signal detection. In: Kroodsma DE, Miller EH, editors. Acoustic communication in birds. New York: Academic Press. p. 131-181.
71. Wood WE, Yezerinac SM. 2006. Song sparrow (Melospiza melodia) song varies with urban noise. Auk. 123:650-659