Literature DB >> 15817440

Ambient noise and the design of begging signals.

Marty L Leonard1, Andrew G Horn.   

Abstract

The apparent extravagance of begging displays is usually attributed to selection for features, such as loud calls, that make the signal costly and hence reliable. An alternative explanation, however, is that these design features are needed for effective signal transmission and reception. Here, we test the latter hypothesis by examining how the begging calls of tree swallow (Tachycineta bicolor) nestlings and the response to these calls by parents are affected by ambient noise. In a field study, we found that call length, amplitude and frequency range all increased with increasing noise levels at nests. In the laboratory, however, only call amplitude increased in response to the playback of noise to nestlings. In field playbacks to parents, similar levels of noise abolished parental preferences for higher call rates, but the preference was restored when call amplitude was increased to the level that nestlings had used in the laboratory study. Our results show that nestling birds, like other acoustic signallers, consistently increase call amplitude in response to ambient noise and this response appears to enhance discrimination by receivers. Thus, selection for signal efficacy may explain some of the seemingly extravagant features of begging displays.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15817440      PMCID: PMC1564071          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2004.3021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8452            Impact factor:   5.349


  5 in total

1.  Acoustic interference limits call detection in a Neotropical frog Hyla ebraccata.

Authors: 
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 2.844

2.  Whale songs lengthen in response to sonar.

Authors:  P J Miller; N Biassoni; A Samuels; P L Tyack
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2000-06-22       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Ecology: Birds sing at a higher pitch in urban noise.

Authors:  Hans Slabbekoorn; Margriet Peet
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2003-07-17       Impact factor: 49.962

4.  Biological signals as handicaps.

Authors:  A Grafen
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  1990-06-21       Impact factor: 2.691

5.  Acoustic communication in noise: regulation of call characteristics in a New World monkey.

Authors:  Henrik Brumm; Katrin Voss; Ireen Köllmer; Dietmar Todt
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 3.312

  5 in total
  15 in total

1.  Lizards speed up visual displays in noisy motion habitats.

Authors:  Terry J Ord; Richard A Peters; Barbara Clucas; Judy A Stamps
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2007-04-22       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Ambient noise induces independent shifts in call frequency and amplitude within the Lombard effect in echolocating bats.

Authors:  Steffen R Hage; Tinglei Jiang; Sean W Berquist; Jiang Feng; Walter Metzner
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-02-19       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Parental favoritism in a wild bird population.

Authors:  Madison Brode; Kelly D Miller; Ashley J Atkins Coleman; Kelly L O'Neil; LeighAnn E Poole; E Keith Bowers
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2021-01-05       Impact factor: 3.084

4.  On the evolution of noise-dependent vocal plasticity in birds.

Authors:  Sophie Schuster; Sue Anne Zollinger; John A Lesku; Henrik Brumm
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2012-09-12       Impact factor: 3.703

5.  An experimental test of noise-dependent voice amplitude regulation in Cope's grey treefrog (Hyla chrysoscelis).

Authors:  Elliot K Love; Mark A Bee
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  2010-09-01       Impact factor: 2.844

6.  Context-dependent effects of noise on echolocation pulse characteristics in free-tailed bats.

Authors:  Jedediah Tressler; Michael S Smotherman
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2009-08-12       Impact factor: 1.836

7.  Bird song and anthropogenic noise: vocal constraints may explain why birds sing higher-frequency songs in cities.

Authors:  Erwin Nemeth; Nadia Pieretti; Sue Anne Zollinger; Nicole Geberzahn; Jesko Partecke; Ana Catarina Miranda; Henrik Brumm
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2013-01-08       Impact factor: 5.349

8.  Sheep in wolf's clothing: host nestling vocalizations resemble their cowbird competitor's.

Authors:  Katie Pagnucco; Liana Zanette; Michael Clinchy; Marty L Leonard
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2008-05-07       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Passerine birds breeding under chronic noise experience reduced fitness.

Authors:  Julia Schroeder; Shinichi Nakagawa; Ian R Cleasby; Terry Burke
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-07-11       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Poor prey quality is compensated by higher provisioning effort in passerine birds.

Authors:  Sarah Senécal; Julie-Camille Riva; Ryan S O'Connor; Fanny Hallot; Christian Nozais; François Vézina
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.