Literature DB >> 20053641

The energetic basis of acoustic communication.

James F Gillooly1, Alexander G Ophir.   

Abstract

Animals produce a tremendous diversity of sounds for communication to perform life's basic functions, from courtship and parental care to defence and foraging. Explaining this diversity in sound production is important for understanding the ecology, evolution and behaviour of species. Here, we present a theory of acoustic communication that shows that much of the heterogeneity in animal vocal signals can be explained based on the energetic constraints of sound production. The models presented here yield quantitative predictions on key features of acoustic signals, including the frequency, power and duration of signals. Predictions are supported with data from nearly 500 diverse species (e.g. insects, fishes, reptiles, amphibians, birds and mammals). These results indicate that, for all species, acoustic communication is primarily controlled by individual metabolism such that call features vary predictably with body size and temperature. These results also provide insights regarding the common energetic and neuromuscular constraints on sound production, and the ecological and evolutionary consequences of producing these sounds.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20053641      PMCID: PMC2871947          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2009.2134

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


  24 in total

1.  The neuromuscular control of birdsong.

Authors:  R A Suthers; F Goller; C Pytte
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  1999-05-29       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Comparative trends in shortening velocity and force production in skeletal muscles.

Authors:  Scott Medler
Journal:  Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 3.619

3.  A simple frequency-scaling rule for animal communication.

Authors:  Neville H Fletcher
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  [Influence of temperature on spontaneous interneuronal activity in grasshoppers Tettigonia cantas and Metrioptera roeselii (Orthoptera, Tettigoniidae)].

Authors:  R D Zhantiev; V S Chukanov; O S Korsunovskaia
Journal:  Zh Evol Biokhim Fiziol       Date:  2006 Nov-Dec

5.  The whistle and the rattle: the design of sound producing muscles.

Authors:  L C Rome; D A Syme; S Hollingworth; S L Lindstedt; S M Baylor
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1996-07-23       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Mechanics of sound production in toads of the genus Bufo: passive elements.

Authors:  W F Martin
Journal:  J Exp Zool       Date:  1971-03

7.  Factors influencing the evolution of acoustic communication: biological constraints.

Authors:  M J Ryan
Journal:  Brain Behav Evol       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 1.808

8.  Muscle contraction generates discrete sound bursts.

Authors:  F V Brozovich; G H Pollack
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  1983-01       Impact factor: 4.033

9.  Movement and sound generation by the toadfish swimbladder.

Authors:  M L Fine; K L Malloy; C B King; S L Mitchell; T M Cameron
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 1.836

10.  The metabolic cost of birdsong production.

Authors:  K Oberweger; F Goller
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 3.312

View more
  30 in total

Review 1.  Oxidative stress and condition-dependent sexual signals: more than just seeing red.

Authors:  Michael Garratt; Robert C Brooks
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2012-05-30       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Is sociality required for the evolution of communicative complexity? Evidence weighed against alternative hypotheses in diverse taxonomic groups.

Authors:  Terry J Ord; Joan Garcia-Porta
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2012-07-05       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  A conserved pattern of brain scaling from sharks to primates.

Authors:  Kara E Yopak; Thomas J Lisney; Richard B Darlington; Shaun P Collin; John C Montgomery; Barbara L Finlay
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2010-06-29       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Intraspecific scaling in frog calls: the interplay of temperature, body size and metabolic condition.

Authors:  Lucia Ziegler; Matías Arim; Francisco Bozinovic
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2015-11-09       Impact factor: 3.225

Review 5.  Acoustic allometry and vocal learning in mammals.

Authors:  Maxime Garcia; Andrea Ravignani
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2020-07-08       Impact factor: 3.703

Review 6.  The origins and diversity of bat songs.

Authors:  Michael Smotherman; Mirjam Knörnschild; Grace Smarsh; Kirsten Bohn
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2016-06-27       Impact factor: 1.836

7.  Internal states and extrinsic factors both determine monkey vocal production.

Authors:  Diana A Liao; Yisi S Zhang; Lili X Cai; Asif A Ghazanfar
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-03-26       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Comparative physiology of vocal musculature in two odontocetes, the bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) and the harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena).

Authors:  Nicole M Thometz; Jennifer L Dearolf; Robin C Dunkin; Dawn P Noren; Marla M Holt; Olivia C Sims; Brandon C Cathey; Terrie M Williams
Journal:  J Comp Physiol B       Date:  2017-05-31       Impact factor: 2.200

9.  A cervid vocal fold model suggests greater glottal efficiency in calling at high frequencies.

Authors:  Ingo R Titze; Tobias Riede
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2010-08-19       Impact factor: 4.475

10.  Brevity is prevalent in bat short-range communication.

Authors:  Bo Luo; Tinglei Jiang; Ying Liu; Jing Wang; Aiqing Lin; Xuewen Wei; Jiang Feng
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2013-02-02       Impact factor: 1.836

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.